By the time Rob Zombie's reboot of the seminal slasher classic Halloween had come out Michael Myers was a household name. For lovers of slasher films he is the King. Like Elvis he came from meager background and slashed the competition. Years later, when Zombie decided to remake this classic Myers had already impacted the majority of horror viewers.
That is why it is such an interesting choice to begin his film with Michael Myers' back story. In the original we meet Laurie (Jamie Lee Curtis), Michael's younger sister who knows that her estranged older brother was taken to Juvenile Hall years ago for the murder of her family. In Zombie's reimagining we meet Myers as a troubled ten year old who kills animals for fun and on one Halloween sets out to kill everyone who has ever wronged him. As we watch him grow we learn that his appetite for murder grows as well and he later kills without any remorse or reason. He even kills one of the guards who watched after him for twenty years proving that he is, as Dr. Loomis (Malcolm McDowell) describes him, heartless.
Unlike the original, Zombie's film feels like a tribute, however ill-advised, to the killer Michael Myers. I don't mean that it advocates for his actions but rather it celebrates the character who has impacted cinematic history so gruesomely. Characters watch scenes from various horror movies of the past, among them the horror hound favorite Dracula reminding the viewer that despite its gore Halloween is a movie and Michael Myers is a character.
And what a character he is. In a transformed film that focuses on Michael's love for Laurie, Michael is practically a superhero. He defies logic by taking bullets and surviving and he lifts up a gravestone single handedly. There is even a possible reference to another superhero with healing abilities when Myers kills a trucker with muttonchops seen only before on Wolverine.
The movie itself is a strong horror movie, if not for one or two killings too many. The sound of knives scraping together echo throughout the film. Tyler Mane makes a good Myers. And Malcolm McDowell, no stranger to psychopathic killers, makes a strong Dr. Loomis.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Saturday, May 9, 2009
Escape from the Planet of the Apes
What feels like a middle ground in a larger story Escape from the Planet of the Apes fails to decide whether it is a drama or a comedy. I couldn't help but watch this movie and be reminded of Roberto Benini's Life is Beautiful, the other Holocaust comedy I have seen. Bear with me. Escape from the Planet of the Apes takes place after the Nuclear holocaust of Beneath the Planet of the Apes but in present day Los Angeles which to them is the past. How the three apes, Zira, Cornelius and Dr. Miles managed to escapes escapes me, suffice to say before the atomic bomb goes off they make it off the planet and somehow make their way back to Col. Taylor's time. I like movies and I am always willing to suspend disbelief to enjoy fantasy/sci-fi genre films but this one makes no apologies for its transgression and continues in a nonsensical fashion. The apes are at first welcomed to the planet even going on an early staged eighties montage shopping spree. Despite the awe and astonishment that the humans would feel they readily welcome the apes. On a side note the apes have only encountered two speaking humans before and do not seem at all daunted that all humans speak now. Everything is great for the apes and humans and full of laughs making the far-fetched plot acceptable for a sci/fi comedy. But do not be deceived, Escape from the Planet of the Apes is not a comedy but a deeply tragic drama. After Zira reveals that they are from the future and will eventually be experimenting on humans the fascist government takes a turn and decides to dehumanize the apes and execute them. The movie transforms into a chase story complete with a subtext of World War Two history.
The apes are persecuted for their role in the Holocaust of the future. They are responsible for the experiments on the humans and the persecution of their kind. As a result Zira and Cornelius are hunted down and forced into hiding to avoid execution for their kind. Perhaps there is a German retaliation in this film with the apes taking the role of Nazis on the run in Brazil who when no longer in power are hunted down for their wrongs. That may be a stretch but the movie turns into a drama out of nowhere and the beginning becomes inexcusable. Worse, there is a subplot of the apes having a child making the drama all the more personal and occasionally ridiculous. This movie could be a blast if it didn't take itself so seriously. It would be less tragic were it directed more poorly but it is actually directed well making the emotional moments if not absurd somewhat touching. This makes the movie frustrating because it is neither here nor there. Neither a comedy nor a drama. And ultimately it makes no greater plea like the best science fiction does. It stands for nothing and therefore rests in a place with great distance between it and its predecessors.
The apes are persecuted for their role in the Holocaust of the future. They are responsible for the experiments on the humans and the persecution of their kind. As a result Zira and Cornelius are hunted down and forced into hiding to avoid execution for their kind. Perhaps there is a German retaliation in this film with the apes taking the role of Nazis on the run in Brazil who when no longer in power are hunted down for their wrongs. That may be a stretch but the movie turns into a drama out of nowhere and the beginning becomes inexcusable. Worse, there is a subplot of the apes having a child making the drama all the more personal and occasionally ridiculous. This movie could be a blast if it didn't take itself so seriously. It would be less tragic were it directed more poorly but it is actually directed well making the emotional moments if not absurd somewhat touching. This makes the movie frustrating because it is neither here nor there. Neither a comedy nor a drama. And ultimately it makes no greater plea like the best science fiction does. It stands for nothing and therefore rests in a place with great distance between it and its predecessors.
Friday, May 8, 2009
Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
In anticipation of the new Star Trek movie I decided to go where many men have gone before... to embark on the final frontier... to watch star trek. Without having the dvds of the original series I started with what I have been told is the best film, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. In Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan admiral James T. Kirk's nemesis, a genetically reproduced human named Khan, wants revenge for the death of his wife and the imprisonment on a foreign planet. He will stop at nothing to get it and as the Klingons say "revenge is a dish that is best served cold". And he delivers in an adventurous romp through the icy cold of space Khan enacts his revenge by assuming control of two of Kirk's men, imprisoning Kirk and having a photon battle between their respective ships. Though the hero of course wins the battle, it is not without some loss.
As a newbie to the Trek universe, I was unaware of the strength best friends and colleagues Kirk and Spock have but was relieved to discover that their depth of character strengthens the otherwise melodramatic script. Admiral James T. Kirk is the impulsive commander who works on instinct. While this strength is also his vulnerability he is smooth enough to make it seem flawless. His counter part is the Vulcan Spock. Not a human he lacks the emotion that makes Kirk so eruptive. He works on logic and will do anything to keep things cool and is full of wise aphorisms. These characters take us where no man has gone before by asking the question when does it best serve us to be cool and logical and when to be hot and emotional.
In exploring this question the film raises another through the Kobiyashi Maru test. Putting the taker between a rock and a hard place the test forces the taker to ask when is death an acceptable option and to realize how we face death is at least as important as how we face life.
As a newbie to the Trek universe, I was unaware of the strength best friends and colleagues Kirk and Spock have but was relieved to discover that their depth of character strengthens the otherwise melodramatic script. Admiral James T. Kirk is the impulsive commander who works on instinct. While this strength is also his vulnerability he is smooth enough to make it seem flawless. His counter part is the Vulcan Spock. Not a human he lacks the emotion that makes Kirk so eruptive. He works on logic and will do anything to keep things cool and is full of wise aphorisms. These characters take us where no man has gone before by asking the question when does it best serve us to be cool and logical and when to be hot and emotional.
In exploring this question the film raises another through the Kobiyashi Maru test. Putting the taker between a rock and a hard place the test forces the taker to ask when is death an acceptable option and to realize how we face death is at least as important as how we face life.
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Rio Bravo
One of the strongest Westerns out there doesn't deal with the concept of the Frontier or wilderness; instead, it functions as an action movie with strong characters and a story that underlines the violence and terror that lurks behind every corner. Rio Bravo is Howard Hawkes' response to High Noon, in which the sheriff needs the help of the townspeople to fight the bad guys. In Rio Bravo sheriff John T. Chance, played by John Wayne, doesn't need the help from the locals but he enlists the help of his misfit friends. The strongest moments come from the music in the movie. One songm sung by Dean Martin and Rickey Nelson , gathers all the misfits together as they are holed up in a jail cell not much smaller than the town they are protecting. Tarantino probably learned a thing or two about the sound of a Mexican song about no quarter or no mercy til the end. Played at the Alamo, this type of Mexican song, whose name escapes me, is reminiscent of the song that plays when Beatrix Kiddo is bashing her way through the coffin in Kill Bill . Among the misfits is Carlos the hotel worker who, while a stereotype, provides comic relief. Most of all Rio Bravo is about a team that knows they can rely on each other to do what is right and in a world where so much is wrong that is a nice relief.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Why Oscars are Meaningless
Like many film fans I recall leaning my elbows on the floor and propping up my chin less than two feet away from the television, which, despite decent eyesight, I always wondered if it was perhaps too close. The event that laid me down in front of the box was the Academy Awards, or the Oscars as we all call them. They were filled with honor and celebration of the things I valued best, the films of the year. UP until 1997 I had agreed with the choices, chances are I hadn't seen most of them and so I could predict, based on who had advertised the most who would win the Oscars. This trend disappointed me when Titanic won over L.A. Confidential, the far superior film of the year. The Oscars then went downhill from there.
Perhaps I was too naive to ever realize this before but the Oscars are bought honors, not achieved. They are awarded to the person that gives the most money to his or her company's campaign so that their film can win the most awards and yield the most return. A sensible practice if not a bit disillusioning.
This past week I saw the best film of the year. As the previous paragraphs have alluded, it was not Slumdog Millionaire. No, it was a tiny little film that too was released by Fox's subsidary Fox Searchlight. It did not win awards however, because despite boasting a brilliant song by the Boss Bruce Springsteen and a brilliant performance by Mickey Rourke, who was nominated, it was released by the same company that released Danny Boyle's winner Slumdog Millionaire.
Slumdog Millionaire was a quality film that, despite a small budget, reeked of old Hollywood sensibilities. It was the Dickensian story of a poor underdog who defies the system and wins his true love. It was essentially a sweet film which proclaimed that the underdog could win.
Despite the fact that it was almost released straight to DVD and its modest budget of 15 million, at a budget of 6 million the Wrestler lands a more powerful punch.
Does that make it a better movie? By traditional Oscar standards, yes. But I am willing to consider that Slumdog is perhaps still a "better" movie because it showcased Boyle's flair for music and editing that otherwise have been shy to awards. The issue at hand, however, is that both films are strong. Both films are of considerable better quality than the Weinstein company's release the Reader which it seems earned its nominations through financial strengths. In ten years people will still watch the Wrestler and nobody will remember the Reader but the problem is that Fox Searchlight only had the money to promote one picture. I liked it better when the awards stood for something as opposed to the meaningless trophy of a film company's marketing department.
Perhaps I was too naive to ever realize this before but the Oscars are bought honors, not achieved. They are awarded to the person that gives the most money to his or her company's campaign so that their film can win the most awards and yield the most return. A sensible practice if not a bit disillusioning.
This past week I saw the best film of the year. As the previous paragraphs have alluded, it was not Slumdog Millionaire. No, it was a tiny little film that too was released by Fox's subsidary Fox Searchlight. It did not win awards however, because despite boasting a brilliant song by the Boss Bruce Springsteen and a brilliant performance by Mickey Rourke, who was nominated, it was released by the same company that released Danny Boyle's winner Slumdog Millionaire.
Slumdog Millionaire was a quality film that, despite a small budget, reeked of old Hollywood sensibilities. It was the Dickensian story of a poor underdog who defies the system and wins his true love. It was essentially a sweet film which proclaimed that the underdog could win.
Despite the fact that it was almost released straight to DVD and its modest budget of 15 million, at a budget of 6 million the Wrestler lands a more powerful punch.
Does that make it a better movie? By traditional Oscar standards, yes. But I am willing to consider that Slumdog is perhaps still a "better" movie because it showcased Boyle's flair for music and editing that otherwise have been shy to awards. The issue at hand, however, is that both films are strong. Both films are of considerable better quality than the Weinstein company's release the Reader which it seems earned its nominations through financial strengths. In ten years people will still watch the Wrestler and nobody will remember the Reader but the problem is that Fox Searchlight only had the money to promote one picture. I liked it better when the awards stood for something as opposed to the meaningless trophy of a film company's marketing department.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Army of Darkness
An apt title for a film about the death of superstitious ancient worlds. With the advent of the technological age the days of witchcraft and sorcery have come to an end, Army of Darkness celebrates this transformation by proclaiming every man king in the new technological era. Buoyed by a chainsaw for a hand Ash works at an appliance store, the most diverse celebration of the new age where he hawks items for a daily low price. The store, quite aptly, is called S mart or combined to create a thesis about technology: smart. Ash's gadgets first save him when a wizard throws him his chainsaw to battle a demon. After showing off his slasher film prowess Ash illustrates the uses of a shotgun and tells you where you can find it at S mart, an advertisment for these people of the promising future. Ash then defeats the ancient army of the dead, itself a reference to mysticism being a dead art form through teh use of bullets and gunpowder the uses of which are found in Ash's college level chemistry book. They defeat the army of dead mystics and Ash without looking back returns to his time where he can sell appliances to anyone who is interested and retell his tale. When a demon follows him and shows up at S mart he kills he quickly with his shotgun and proclaims the victory speech of contemporary man. "I am king," he says. "All hail the king." With his shotgun Ash is the ruler of the new world, just as everyman can be in a world without superstition (because the person he was telling his story to didn't believe him)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)