Change Your Image
mylucylumpkins
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
The Blair Witch Project (1999)
What do I like to do on Sundays? Watch horror films from my childhood!
The reason I enjoyed this film in it original theatrical release and continue to enjoy it today can be summed up by one childhood story. A friend at the time had an uncle who was on the police force. After we saw the film and debated about its authenticity he claimed that, although we live no where close to where the film takes place, he had seen the official police records of this incident. He was a police officer and I had no reason to doubt him, but it was really the film that sold me on the idea that it was all found footage and that these folks were really dead.
Of course latter I realized the truth, but to be caught in the Blair Witch whirlwind was fantastic! People always try to look back at the excitement they had for this film, and others like it, and belittle the film because of the hype. This film really did live up to the hype for me. Of course there were problems, but it was the first successful film of it's kind. I still feel like it is the best found footage film to date and I can attribute some of that to the hype surrounding it.
Just to point out a few things to address common issues with the film: the acting is exactly where it should be. These people are clearly not reading from a script, and although people criticize their improvisational skills, they are believable as average people. Another issue that people have is that a person being so concerned with getting lost kicks the map into the river. He gives a very valid human explanation, the map wasn't doing anything to help them, and he just got mad and kicked it into the stream. Of course it was stupid, but for that reason I find it believable. The last is the idea that when in trouble, people will stop filming and the fact that the whole thing is supposedly on film is ridiculous. My answer to this is simple, people film life threatening situations so that if they survive they have proof and can relive it. If you don't believe me, look into how many people film tsunamis, or tornadoes, or robberies, or anything else that may have killed them.
The Omen (2006)
"it's all for..." Nothing
The best part was knowing that nearly everyone was going to die. The filmmakers took the worst aspects of the original film and based their film around them. There are the same existing plot holes from the original (like if it's the end of the world and only the Catholics knew it, why did't they send backup to the one man who has to kill his adopted son?), but none of the great creepiness.
One of the most jaw-dropping moments of the original were attempted to be recreated for this film, but unfortunately really just missed the mark. A prime example of this being the suicide of the nanny. That scene was incredibly realistic and powerful in the original, as was the dynamic between mother and nanny. The remake covered it briefly, and while I see what they were trying to do with it, it fell flat.
The actors were terrible for the most part, especially the entire Thorn family. I could actually see Liev Schreiber's Robert Thorn being able to kill his child because Schreiber himself cannot portray personality or emotions. Immediately when seeing Julia Stiles I had to frantically reassure myself that she would be the first of the Thorn family to die. Most disappointing was Damien. There is just no way to compete with the equal amounts of innocent and creepiness of the child from the original film, but this little boy did not even come close. The best part was Mia Farrow, and it was obvious that she would be.
The Frighteners (1996)
Frighten-ingly Disappointing
This film did not live up to it's hype or its potential. I missed it's initial release and just watched it very recently, having heard of it for years and really buying into the hype, I found that there just wasn't really much to it. The main issue I have is that it is not successfully horror or comedy. The over the top and sometimes slap-stick comedy was ridiculous. There was not a single point in the film when I felt the urge to laugh out loud. As far as horror, there really wasn't much. Of course there were ghosts, put they were more or less just characters in a murder mystery.
My next gripe pertains to casting. Michael J. Fox was the only person considered for the role, and for obvious reasons. He does good with the slightly self deprecating roles. The audience finds it easy to sympathize with his characters because he portrays them slightly pathetically. Also, I have issue with Dee Wallace. Peter Jackson has said that she was cast because of her overwhelming sense of innocence, especially recently coming off of E.T., unfortunately that effect is lost with the years. She is now a major player in numerous B-Horror films, roles which I identify her from more so than E.T.. It is more that E.T. was the exception and roles like Patricia Bradley are the norm. As soon as I saw her I thought to myself "she is in someway responsible for all of this."
Moving on from casting there are the obvious issues with the special effects. 1996 was a big year for special effects and CGI releases, but this one really missed the mark. If you look at other films released around the same time (Independence Day, Twister, Mars Attacks), although they are not perfect, they are a whole class better than the the effects from this one. CGI shadows didn't match the direction of the light source, the main threat was just a blanket of muddy CGI, and there was no real quality threshold for the ghosts, they really varied from one to another.
The last and most apparent fail was the title. I get the\at he has the ghosts that work for him (although their compensation for their services is not readily explained) and the are frighteners because he uses them to haunt potential clients. That being said, they really took backseat to all of the other story lines of the film. The title makes you expect things that the film is not going to follow through on.
Although I did not care much for it and it did not meet my expectations, I was not bored while watching it, which counts for something. It was entertaining while it was on, though I doubt I would watch it again. The best thing about the film was cameo of Peter Jackson looking absolutely hilarious.
School Ties (1992)
1 in 10,000
One in ten thousand films concerning discrimination against Jewish people that did not end tragically. Unfortunately it is also about one in ten thousand films of the sort that is not based directly on actual events. The question then becomes is it better to have an unlikely story that ends happily or a truthful one that ends tragically, it is up to the individual viewer to decide. Personally I love a great victory story, the oppressed gaining ground over the regime which oppresses it, no matter how unlikely. It presents a sobering message cloaked in the guise a coming of age story filled with the up and coming actors of the time, making it all the more accessible to various audiences and thereby spreading the message of equality further than other related films due to the seriousness of the subject matter. There were plenty of great zingers and the spot on acting of the main cast makes many scenes of the film memorable.
Star Trek (2009)
Volumes Could be written about what a disgrace this film was...
Honestly, I could fill university text books with how this film is not only terrible as a stand-alone film, but also an insult to the Star Trek legacy. For purposes of efficiency I have itemized the major downfalls based mainly on the lack of clear conceptualization of plot and character rather than the lack of a talented cast, although in all fairness horrible acting did contribute to my overall disdain for the film. The absolute main concern I have with the film, and I feel the majority of TOS fans have, is that nothing about the films uphold the ideals and values of Star Fleet or the United Federation of Planets. I know it sounds oober nerdy, but stick with me here, Star Trek owes most of it's success to these elements of peaceful quests for knowledge and a responsibility of Star Fleet personnel on behalf of an advanced human civilization on Earth and Earth colonies on other planets. It is a character driven show whose greatness is amplified by fantastic stories as told by master storytellers. As great as the science fiction sets and effects were for the time, they were merely tools implemented by the storytellers. All of this being said, it is clear what direction this review will follow:
*Captain Kirk: Captain Kirk is an honorable man. He is occasionally mischievous, but always in a calculated and clever way in order to benefit the greater good (The Enterprise Incident). He is in no way a common street thug, as portrayed in this film. His bravery and passion for adventure is due to his deep devotion to the Prime Directive, not a deep urge to rebel and cause chaos.
*Mr. Spock: Mr. Spock is a fan favorite for many obvious reasons. His expansive knowledge combined with a quick wit and a rare emotion makes him a very likable character. Also, he is an alien, a friendly alien who is not feared but respected by his counterparts. Occasionally there are characters with a dislike for him, but that is generally turned around within the span of an episode. The new Mr. Spock is seeping emotion, even when he is trying not to emote, he is projecting anger.
*Dr. McCoy: I know I said I would not bring up acting, but really, there is no way not to on this one. As bad as the others were, this role was not essential enough in this film to focus on anything but this horrible acting. DeForest Kelley actually had a southern drawl, naturally, it was not just part of the character, it is what he brought to the character. Karl Urban has very forced emotion and an extremely forced southern accent. Even down to facial gestures and body movement, it is like watching a high school play with an overzealous lead.
*Lieutenant Uhura: This was just... a tragedy. Lieutenant Uhura is a strong, self-assured woman. She is usually the only female and only African American aboard the bridge of the Enterprise, yet she strives in this environment. She is occasionally playful, but all within the realm of respect to her duties aboard the ship and the role she plays in the productiveness of the bridge. She is a leader and an inspiration. The new film managed to take all of the meaning from this role. In this film, she is nothing but a love interest. By playing up the (ridiculous) relationship she has with (an over- emotional) Spock, it belittles the importance of her individual character.
*Story Vs. Effects: A film should never have these two factors playing against each other, bidding for favorites in a battle for popularity. In that respect, the story lost. I would love to do a survey, right after closing credits, "In your own words, what was this film about? What were the details of the plot and the main focuses of the film?". I am positive most of the answers would be somewhere in the ballpark of "not quite sure". It was the major complaint I've heard about the film. Story faults aside, the filmmakers spared no expense in the visual effects department. It was all top of the line, most advanced, and completely useless computer generated effects. By making the focus of the film the science fiction favorite effects of phasers, space crafts, and outer space, creators lead the film even farther from what Star Trek stands for and what it means to fans.
As well-received and possible well-liked as this film is, I think that it failed among true fans. There were simply too many flaws in too many essential aspects of Star Trek mythology. It is a black hole in the Star Trek universe, but fortunately for it, it is not a lone failure. As generation after generation try in vain to recreate the success of Star Trek The Original Series, this franchise reboot will most likely go on until it is not longer profitable. Even after this chapter is closed, true fans will always have TOS.
Once Upon a Time (2011)
The villains steal the show
Although the acting, sets, effects, costumes, story, etc. are all above par for cable television Robert Carlyle and Lana Parrilla really carry the show. Their portrayal of both fairy tale villains and modern world villains is so perfect, so creepy, yet so alluring. That aside, I really love this show, in all of it's essence of pure fantasy. The story of a magical world's punishment being our dreary reality, well, that is plausible, but to create a whole fairy tale world and place it smack in the middle of rural USA, love it. The twists in the plot, and the inclusion of so many different fairy tale creatures into one comprehensible storyline is amazing. The icing on the cake is really the costumes, sets, and effect. If the crew had not done such a great job at making the physical fantasy so convincing and captivating, then the story would have flopped. I look forward to many more seasons!
Django Unchained (2012)
Django Unimpressive
I am not a Quentin Tarantino fan. I am not a Jamie Foxx fan. Christoph Waltz gives me the creeps. All of the pre-film cons aside, I still didn't like it. It was actually not bad for Tarantino, not too gritty and over-the-top. Jamie Foxx was not ridiculously over-acting for once, and you actually get used to him after a little while. Christoph Waltz played a really good guys and you end up rooting for him till the end. I still didn't like it. I can't say exactly what it was. The story too far-fetched, or maybe too much just rubbing me the wrong way. I think parts of it may have been played to casual and others too dramatic. I watched it, and I am not disappointed because I expected to hate it. I just dislike it. Leonardo DiCaprio, stellar performance as always, even as the bad guy, and thanks Tarantino for blowing yourself up, I could watch that scene again and again!
Silver Linings Playbook (2012)
And the award goes to...
Not this group. I remember flipping through the television through some award season to see this film up for everything. It was for this reason that I rented the film. I have no direct criticism, nor do I have any direct praise. There really just wasn't much to this film, mediocre at best. Yes, adults dealing with adult problems, over and over. Yes, we are all angry, we are all sluts, and so it goes on and on until human extinction. There was nothing incredible about the filmmaking, or extraordinary about the acting. Everything went along smoothly, actors engaged well, no great flaws, but no great accomplishments. Perhaps I would think more highly of this film had it not been hyped beyond it's means.
True Blood (2008)
Sex, blood, and rotting foes
I must say, I have seen more of each and every actor on this show than I ever cared to see, and I fast-forward through most of the sex scenes (which is about 30 minutes of each episode). Having read the Southern Vampire Mystery Series first, then looking into True Blood, I am really disappointed. There must have been a group that converged in the writing room that said "let's take the character names, the town names, the basic idea, and pervert it into something to please the masses." And please the masses it must because it just keeps going and going. I try to keep up with it because I love Sookie Stackhouse from the novels, and I like her interactions with other characters. For the most part, the novels pan out, only occasionally are they so over dramatic that I am dissatisfied when I reach the end. In this series there really is no light at the end of the tunnel. All of the depressing characters carry on with their bleak existence, and always, always, having tons and tons of sex. I have no idea whose idea it was to include sex scenes in almost every single episode, but that person should not only be fired, they should be tried in court. I love the interviews with Charlaine Harris where she says that she is always surprised at what comes next in the show because it is so different than what she had written... she is really saying "I am not responsible for this!"
The Perks of Being a Wallflower (2012)
"Teenage angst has paid off well, now I'm bored and old.."
Nirvana had it right. This film, set in the grunge heyday, was full of the teenage angst that sells films and albums, but that leaves a empty space when life moves on. Sure, it is an interesting coming of age story, but I am bored with it's redundancies. Not much has changed from then to now so there is not so much a kudos on it being a period piece, as many reviews had suggested, and in the places where it should have shown a difference in that age and this, it was not so accurate. Also, as much as I love Emma Watson, she seemed timid and her American accent was flimsy. The best part of this film was the character of Patrick, which is a given. The book seemed so much more profound when I read it in my teens, but I can't say if it is the story that had changed for the film, or just me changing with age.
The House of the Devil (2009)
Great candidate for Roe vs. Wade
I'll start off by commending everyone involved on the essence of late 70's early 80's horror film. Not just the costume and set, but really the film-making and overall feeling of the film was spot on; had it not been for the recognizable actors, I may have been fooled. That being said, I didn't actually care too much for the film. The plot was ripped right from that age in the horror genre, but really, that is where is should have stayed. Also, though I am a fan of the methodical move into crescendo of a film, this one performed very poorly. Instead of spending the time creating the appropriate mood for the climax, it was just a series of long, drawn-out scenes resulting in about fifteen minutes of the film being dedicated to the action sequence.
Evil Dead (2013)
This one hurt, really
There is nothing nice to say about this film. It is yet another modern mutilation of a classic cult horror film. What were they thinking? The over-the-top gore was sickening and took away from the underlying plot, which was pretty non-existent. There also doesn't seem to be a clear time line presented. It had nothing from the original Evil Dead, save the nature-rape scene, which Sam Raimi has admitted he was ashamed of. So they decided to take away the campiness, the humor, the original low-budget horror feeling, and they leave in the one scene the original creator is embarrassed by. And then there is the whole drug withdraw storyline which muddles up the film even more. There is no work done in creating a bond with the characters, and what little effort is put into it just makes you like them even less. Great job guys, not. What a waste of time.
Secret Origin: The Story of DC Comics (2010)
I wept like a child when Superman died
I may just be biased (since DC makes the best superheroes of all time), but I found this documentary moving. I think that it included so many great aspects of the DC journey and that it was put together in a fan pleasing or comic novice friendly way. If you went in knowing nothing, you at least know the major markers on the comic time line. If you are well schooled in comic book lore, you get to relive it all, through the voices of the creators. I have seen a lot of comic documentaries in my time, and this one was the best. While I was watching the part about Doomsday and the death of Superman, the tears swelled up in my eyes. I tried to control myself, thinking about how idiotic it is to cry during a comic book documentary, and even over something that has came and gone, but the narration puts in those emotions. Superman did not just die in the comics, we killed him. The empathic mindlessness of our society killed the last virtuous defender of hope. Of course they brought him back, but the fact he had to be killed to show people that they had strayed to far from moral and wholesome living... wow. They actual had others in the documentary crying over the loss of Kal-El of Krypton. Wrapping it up was a look to the future of comics. I thought the very last sentiment was great. No matter how we receive our media in 100 years, kids will still know who Superman is!
The Devil Inside (2012)
Run of the mill modern horror
I rented this film thinking about how long it has been since I have seen a well made demonic possession film, and I guess I'll have to wait a little longer. Possession films are always a challenge for me because I am honestly frightened by the concept, so I kind of dared myself to watch. This film was ridiculously cheesy. I knew exactly how it would end by the first clip of the film. I think that they gave the slower following members of the audience to many little slight suggestions as to where they were going that, for the average genre fan, it was to blatant and undermined anything they tried to accomplish. The fact that the main subject in the "Exorcism Seminar" was about multiple possession and transfer, and the danger to priest... come on now... a chimp could but that ending together. Then you think, "why watch the rest?" The answer is simple, I want to seem some really freaky scenes that will haunt me forever! Sorry, not that either. I can honestly say that I have seen dancers on televised talent shows performing dance routines with the same moves. The story got to the point to where is was so lacking that they instituted startle tactics. Throwing things in front of the camera and making noises to get any kind of reaction from the audience... just making sure we're still awake. I would never watch it again. I was bored to death and not frightened at all!
The Woman in Black (2012)
Time to buy a night-light.
I had high hopes, and low expectations. I liked the story idea, a hint of a more classic ghost story, but just knew in my heart that modern film making can no longer pull that off. I was pleasantly surprised. There were a lot of wide angle shots where you can just barely catch a ghostly figure looming in the background. You sit for a minute and think "is that a person, or a shadow?" I love ghost stories, especially those creepy kid ones like The Changeling and Haunting of Julia. This one meets that mark, though not exactly in the same league, but the closest of any modern movie in a while. I like the fact that the overall concept of the film and the camera work is scary enough to stand on it's own with very little use of the startle effect that is so predominate in what is considered horror today. Although there are a few scenes where the loud noise and abrupt insert is used, it was properly placed within the story, not just to get the audience moving. There were a couple downfalls that I noted. Mainly the fact that the woman in black was c.g. which is disappointing. Also, Daniel Radcliffe is not a bad actor,yet he is not a great one either. I just couldn't buy it. It may be because he just looks too young for the part, or the fact it follows too close to Harry Potter to see him any differently. I would have preferred a more aged and mature actor. I did like it a lot and enjoyed the residual creepy feeling afterward.
Red State (2011)
I should have known better
Let me just say I do like Kevin Smith. He is what I would consider a kindred spirit and an all-around entertaining fellow. That being said, I can not stand his movies. His earlier movies are something that can be enjoyed up to a certain age, but I thought he, being an adult and well respected entrepreneur, might churn out a decent horror film. I should have known better. The story line was horrible, vulgar, incredibly disorienting, so on and so forth. Even for someone in the audience that enjoys that type of story, it was poorly executed. The camera is here and there, and the actors (apart from the religious fanatics) were lifeless and boring. I think there needed to be an over-all spark of enthusiasm, and it just wasn't there. It looked a little thrown together and sloppy.
Colombiana (2011)
It is was it is...
This is one of those films that were chosen by another person and I was forced to watch. It is what it is, an action film. Weak character development, even weaker plot, attractive woman with guns, violence... like I said, and action film. I was not disappointed because I did not expect anything, or should I say, it lived up to it's trailer. A young child witnessed their loved ones killed and goes on a killing spree. Never heard that one before.. or maybe yes, just about a million times. Everyone is either dead or happy in the end so it will leave the left over Die Hard fans happy. There really just isn't much to say about this film, I guess cause there really wasn't much to the film.
Apollo 18 (2011)
Yet another missed opportunity.
I had mixed feelings of watching this film in the first place. On one hand, you have the concept of an alien invader in the classical John Carpenter's The Thing way, which leads one to believe that you might cough up the big bucks and see it in theater. Then, you sit back and try to think of when the last time you saw anything good in theater was, and it makes you change your mind. I did rent this one with low expectations, and I was not disappointed. I knew it was most likely not going to be a strong enough plot, nor cast, nor film making to be the least bit intriguing, and I was right. The film is another one of those that could have been a great film if the concept was put into the right hands, unfortunately it wasn't. The actors were a little over the top on more of a solider character kick instead of one which is science based. Not to mention that it took so long to get into anything remotely interesting that I felt that I was traveling the light-years. Also, I understand that it was supposed to be the 'lost footage,' but there was still room for improvement in the camera movement. Then, the big reveal... an aaallliiieeeennn.... spider? Really? What a waste of $1.07.
Monster House (2006)
If this film had come out when I was a kid...
There is something really spooky about this animated film for children. I think that if this film had come out during my own childhood, it would have scared me away from even going outside. The entire film is centered around a humiliated and abused old man who is haunted my his beloved wife, who was actually his abuser. Her evil spirit then takes control of the house, which harms children because of her own hatred for children, which comes from years of children harassing and demeaning her because of weight issues. All of this seems pretty heavy for it's target audience. With the whole storyline aside, I can still imagine it from a child's perspective, it's a creepy house that comes to life and eats children. That, all on it's own, is enough to scare any child. It was well put together, the score was great, and I would consider it a good film. It seems like perhaps an older child's stepping stone from kiddie movies to horror films, and I love that concept.
Drag Me to Hell (2009)
Has anyone ever seen Thinner?
Let me know when this starts to sound familiar. A stuck-up white person does something wrong to a gypsy, who in turn, places a curse upon said white person. We watch at least an hour or more of this person battling to rid themselves of the gypsy curse. So on and so forth... Stephen King could take legal action against them for plagiarism. Well, maybe not... Though it is not word-for-word, the similarities are apparent to anyone familiar with the genre.
I'm not exactly sure where the comparison to The Evil Dead originates, but that person must be out of their mind. It takes more than Sam Raimi's slap-stick comedy and some campy horror to compare to The Evil Dead. Talent, for instance, is a major component. Talent is what this film lacked throughout. Of coarse The Evil Dead was funny, yet frightening, but where would it be without Bruce Campbell? Do you see where I'm going with this? A film trying to pull off comedy and horror needs to be able to stand on the shoulders of it's lead roles, whom in this film, failed under pressure.
The Exorcist (1973)
The review I'm even too scared to write!
I can not say anything about the initial impact of the film, as it is I was not around in 1973, but I can testify to the lasting effect this film has had. By the time I came around, the film had already been around a couple of decades, but each time it is introduced to a new generation it becomes brand new all over again. I remember that sinking feeling, deep down in my soul, when I realized what was going on in the film. I can never remember being that petrified by any other film before it, or since. I can watch that film today and still get that same feeling I got when I was seven-years-old. No one person can claim all the credit due to how creepy this film is. The voices, noises, and dialogue are a major part. Also, the completely terrifyingly realistic make-up and effects are possible more important. Yet I believe that the part that eats away at us year after year is the subject matter.
We are all scared of what lurks in the dark, whether we admit it or not. What if that creature or being that we are so afraid of was to enter our bodies and steal our souls. It really is absolutely horrifying! The way that this film was made was just perfectly so. It created exactly the atmosphere necessary yo convey the story in all of it's entirety. I am giving myself the creeps just writing about it. Just thinking on it to write a review, little Linda Blair's face scratched and mutilated from the demon inside her, creeped out. Will I sleep with the light on tonight after writing this review? Of coarse.
The Road (2009)
I went ahead and filled the tub with water...
Just when you think that you've seen all that can be done with the genre, this film pops up. It was one of the greatest, if not the greatest, post-apocalyptic film ever made! That being said, I have my doubts if I will ever watch it again. It was so realistic and horribly bleak that I might just have to seek therapy. The reaction that this film got out of me is probably precisely what the film-makers intended. I think that everyone who worked on this film deserves the awards that it was nominated and more (not to mention a couple sessions with the best psychiatrist money can buy). The acting was unbelievably perfect, I felt like I was there, suffering with these people. When I saw the box, I thought to myself "Here they go again, taking a great concept and putting it into the wrong hands... Viggo Moertensen... tisk!" I will admit I was proved wrong. Such a film, such great actors, such a great story, such a great set... just terrifying. Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to go hoard some food in my basement.
Let's Scare Jessica to Death (1971)
"It's blood Jessica, it's blood!"
This film is, hands down, my favorite film of all time. It is not the most frightening film that I have ever seen, nor is it the best made, but it created a resonating terror, which grabbed me at a very early age. I think that all children have that one place where all of the frightening images of their imagination comes from, mine were drawn from this film. Whenever I find myself in the country side, or around a small body of water, or just alone listening to my thoughts, I always come back to this film.
Jessica's psychological torment cause by her mental disorder is enough to make a film from by itself. I could not imagine looking directly at someone sitting across from me as they are talking and laughing and seeing that they are verbal engaged in conversation, yet hearing their voice taunting me within my own mind. Not only does she have to deal with the fact that she is hearing these voices, she also has to pretend that she is not. The stability of her life, as well as that of her husband and her roommate, depends on her sanity. Even if she were to reach out to them with her suspensions they would never believe her because she has been clinically proved to be insane.
On top of the internal struggles, there are the added factors of the paranormal and fantastic, mixed in with a healthy amount of personal drama. If everyone already believes that she is crazy, and she is forced to believe that she is crazy, she can no longer trust her own perception. It could all be her imagination, or, this person is really some kind of creature returning from the dead. Her husband admitted to an attraction to Emily, so was the goodbye kiss just another creation from her disturbed mind? Unfortunately for Jessica, she's not crazy.
The separation, or lack there of, between fantasy and reality is the most frightening concept I can imagine. It seems like in whatever situation you are thrown in, you can always trust yourself. This has already been taken from Jessica before the beginning of the film, and her inner-dialogue as she tries to rely on her sanity is not only frightening, but heartbreaking. The whole film finds all of the most universal human characteristics and fears and plays off of them. I think because of it's ability to reach those primal fears in every person, it transports it's viewers to a different place and time. I can feel the fear that Jessica feels of Abigail Bishop, and of her own thoughts.
To put it plainly, I love this film. I love the creepiness and the nostalgic feeling every time I see it. Zohra Lampert's performance as Jessica was flawless, so much so that you could believe that she was really insane. I love when Emily goes in the water and comes out as Abigail Bishop back from the dead. I love the farm, and the town, and even the hippie hearse. There honestly is not one thing that I would change about this film.
Staunton Hill (2009)
Apparently the ability to direct films is not hereditary
My first glimpse of how this film would turn out was while still browsing at the video store. I saw the name Romero and thought to myself "Could that be the son of George Romero?" I flipped it over to read the back thinking how silly of me expecting to see some reference to George Romero, that would just be cheesy and unprofessional, but there it was. Great big bold letters that said "Son of the legendary George Romero!" My heart sank. I saw this as a sign that the son, as a director, and the film could not stand on it's own without the support of the name of his father. Being pressed for time I rented it and took it home, hoping for the best. It was just as bad as I feared it would be.
I'll start of with the dialogue. It seems like the writing was done before deciding to set the film in the 1960's. It is throughout the film awkward and badly written, with a couple of 1960's slang phrases thrown in here and there. Then, as if the bold outline of his family ties printed on the back was not enough for the audience to make a connection to George Romero, the "hippies" had to bring up 'Night of the Living Dead.' The acting falls short of a that you would find on a television soap opera. I was waiting for the commercials to interrupt, and there definitely were enough pauses in the filming to insert them. It's as if he had a thought for a scene, then another thought for a scene further down in the sequence, but couldn't really think of what could go in between to connect them. Instead of filling in the plot holes he just faded out and faded into another scene. That not only looks terrible, it is leads to a non-cohesive storyline. Even with all of the inconsistencies in the story, it was clear at the beginning what the end would be.
After watching it, I realize where the bulk of the effort went... gore, gore, and more gore. Disgusting, useless, and at times, clearly fake. I feel that I could recreate most of the torture and mutilation scenes with some fake body parts from a prop shop and about 30 gallons of fake blood, but who would want to recreate that? It seems that all of the violence and blood spill has become a universal cover-up for lack of creative thought. If you know an audience is not going to be interested in your story, try to add the most over-the-top gore and hopefully they wont notice how lame your story is. But if all else fails, drop the name of your famous father and it will be sure to get at least a bit of circulation.
Fact or Faked: Paranormal Files (2010)
One of the most educational programs for young film-makers on television.
I honestly love watching this show! I know that these people have nothing to credit themselves as experts of anything, and that the videos are faked, but that is the beauty of it. It is like watching a step-by-step video on how to recreate low-budget effects, and you can even see the end result in the film that they are "investigating." It had me trying all kinds of things that I had never thought of and realizing that most of the effects from the show that I did try to duplicate worked.
It is just sad to me that this show gets such harsh user reviews. What are you really expecting from the SyFy Channel? The saddest part of all is that this show is being compared to Ghost Hunters and other shows of "paranormal research," as if any of these shows are real. I do like the show for what it is, a flimsy SyFy piece of weekly entertainment. Anyone who is looking at SyFy for scientific evidence of anything is clearly a lunatic, not to mention unfamiliar with acronyms. The acronym Sci-Fi means Science Fiction, which, for those of you who still don't get it, means imaginary stories created with a scientific or technological subject matter.