The Damned Thing

Ah, what can I say? I was rooting for Tobe Hooper, as a longtime fan of the man's work, to hit one out of the park this time around, since his episode "THE DAMNED THING" opens Season Two of MOH. Last season, his entry, "DANCE OF THE DEAD" had its sketchy moments, yet still (at least for me) managed to compel me to stick with it...with a lot of motivation coming from Robert Englund's bravura performance as the "M.C."

I'm sorry to say that this time around, Tobe and writer Richard Christian Matheson fall far short of the mark. And I think a lot of the problem comes from the source material. It's a commendable ambition to attempt to adapt material as classic and timeless as the stories of a well-known author like Ambrose Bierce, but the chilling terror from his stories lies in the brevity and the strong imagery they evoke.

Set basically in the past, via a series of journal-like entries, the original story would've proved problematic to adapt on a limited budget, so I can understand why Matheson brings the scenario into modern times. But given that there's only an hour to tell the tale, no matter what you do with it, there's just not enough time to do the kind of set-up that Hooper has done in the past...getting us all comfy with the characters and their relationships, so that our concern for their welfare magnifies the horror of their grisly fates that much more. Sorry to say that I sensed none of that going on here at all.

The other signature Hooper touches are here: the oppressive sense of oncoming doom, the extreme gore (although it's more literal than psychological here, which dilutes a lot of the shock value), and an atypical ending to the story. But Sean Patrick Flanery, who is usually pretty good, underplays the lead character almost to the point of being catatonic, while the supporting players are all stock characters, (except for Ted Raimi, whose priest seems to be a complete loon from the get-go, so his later rampage comes as no surprise to the audience whatsoever.)

Just like there are certain songs that some singers should never attempt, there are some contemporary American authors whose work shouldn't be adapted by some writers or directors. I wish Tobe and Richard better luck on their next endeavor, since this one really didn't work.

(Honestly...maybe Don Coscarelli should've tried this one, while Hooper and Matheson could've been given a Joe Lansdale story to tackle. Now THAT might hold some great possibilities...)

This episode of Masters of Horror has some excellent aspects and some rather dubious ones as well. Now, I am not one of those Hooper haters. I actually think much of his work - mostly early am afraid - is quite good - and some even amazing. He definitely has talent. But this episode's faults are mostly with the script not the direction. Hooper got me interested early and the performances were all very adequate - some a bit over-the-top undoubtedly. The story concerns a man who as a child witnessed some inexplicable force taking over his father and "making" him execute the boy's mother and try to kill the boy. Thirty Years later the force rises again and haunts the boy and the town - as we discover that the force not only had changed the boy's father but also caused the townsfolk to go mad and on a killing spree. Well, things go fairly fluidly until the last fifteen minutes or so where all hell breaks looses both figuratively and literally. I like the way Hooper shot the scenes, but the story dissolves really at the end into one big "What just happened?".Sean Patrick Flannery does a good job in the lead and Sam Raimi's brother Ted gives an overblown yet fun performance as a local priest. Although Hooper shows he still has touches, he needs to find better material to work his craft with.

So many movies Such small amounts of pleasure... Or perhaps the pleasure is just too spread out eh? Anywayzz; I really enjoy movies and shows like this one. They don't pretend to be anything more than what they are like a whole lot of flicks these days.(I don't trust trailers anymore, and no, not the kind with wheels). If you want reality i get it i really do, but i don't want reality when i sit down to watch a movie.(just me i guess) I just want to be entertained for a couple of hours, and to sort of remove myself for a bit eh. This flick let me do just that I AM HAPPY TO SAY! I enjoyed the actors and i liked the story which even made me giggle a few times as well!(shhh!) Here here, and jolly good shoooe, and all that! Enjoy your time at the movies!!(I did:-))

Sean Patrick Flanery plays the sheriff in a small town. As a child he saw his father kill his mother and then be killed by a thing (never shown). He grows up in total fear of that thing coming back for him. It destroys his marriage...and then it seems it's come back for him...

That may sound sort of vague but you should see the movie! Good acting by everybody (especially Flanery) can not save this confusing, pointless tale. At the end a slew of impressive special effects are shoved in the audiences face...but it doesn't make any sense about what exactly is going on. Director Tobe Hooper has done worse but he's certainly done better. The only part that got to me is when we see a man attacking himself with a hammer! Confusing and dull.

Much like many other commentators, I am a Bierce fan and was very much excited to see one of his stories put to film. Alas, like so many others who have abused the great early horror writers, Tobe Hooper and friends were unable to even approach the greatness of Bierce and his short story. In fact, the script had so little connection with Bierce's mini-masterpiece that I would have to say the creators of this film are guilty of name-dropping to sell the show. Perhaps what started out as an honest attempt to adapt the story somehow went wrong in the screenplay writing (which is mediocre at best, but has next to no connection with the original story) and they had no choice but see it through. That however is giving them the benefit of the doubt and then some.

So about half way through the film, I realized my hope of seeing a Bierce story on screen was not to be and I had to un-suspend and then re-suspend my disbelief in order to wince through the rest of the movie. And I mean literally, I was wincing due to the pervasive flashy strobe light effects and the jittery jump shots that left me wondering if they were in the middle of a caffeine bender or if they edited it that way on purpose. Seriously, I felt at times as though I was watching a documentary about raves. The film did have some good moments, though few and far between. It's a decent little production if you factor in that they only had 10 days to film it, and if you aren't expected a film based on an Ambrose Bierce short story of the same name.