Friday, October 29, 2010

Saw VII.... errr Saw 3D

Directed by:  Kevin Greutert
Written by:  Patrick Melton & Marcus Dunstan
Starring: Tobin Bell, Costas Mandylor, Betsy Russell, Chad Donella, Sean Patrick Flanery


Another Halloween means another Saw movie.  This time, I was hoping my seventh annual Halloween weekend trip to the theaters would be better than the previous two trips.  As it turns out, the latest Saw movie is much better than the previous 2 films, but that’s not saying much.

Saw VII… I mean Saw 3D, is the supposed ‘final’ chapter in the successful Saw series.  Those of you familiar with the series should be anticipating this movie, whether it be for reasons of curiosity, or because of shear relief that this franchise if finally over.  While not a die hard fan of the series, I have found them all enjoyable.  Very rarely does a horror franchise come along that spawns more than 3 movies.  When they do, you couldn’t ask for a better collection of films than the Saw series.  Even if you despise all the torturing and twists that occur throughout, you honestly cannot tell me any of these movies is worse than Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan, or Halloween III: Season of the Witch.  Simply put, this series has been consistently engaging and highly watchable, no matter what your final opinions may be.

This time around, the formula stays pretty much the same.  We follow a man named Bobby (Sean Patrick Flanery, Boondock Saints) going through a series of traps trying to save people closest to him.  The plot is pretty much exactly the same as Saw VI, except this time the character is not an insurance agent, he is a self-proclaimed Jigsaw survivor who has made millions off a self-help book.  As expected, there are numerous other story lines intertwined as well.  Jigsaw’s apprentice Detective Hoffman (Costas Mandylor) is hunting down Jigsaw’s wife Jill Kramer (Betsy Russell, as seen in a plastic surgeon’s office) because of how she left him to end the last film.  She ends up hiding out in a ‘safe house’ under supervision of Internal Affairs Agent Gibson (Chad Donella, Final Destination).  Meanwhile, Gibson is trying to track down Hoffman before he kills any more people. 

There is nothing new to offer here, except that there are more traps in this movie than any other entry in the series with 11.  Most of these traps are clever and original, while some are rehashed.  More importantly, the aftermath of all these traps are quite gory, except one or two.  I would say that this is the bloodiest one of the bunch, and that is saying a lot given how gruesome most of these are.  If you don't cringe at a few of these death scenes, you may want to check your pulse.  While some of the bodies ended up looking like plastic dummies, I still applaud the effort put in.  Since the death scenes might be the only things in this movie that had any effort put into.

One of the worst aspects of this movie is that the majority of the characters had no background or connection to previous entries in the series.  Yes, they brought in most of the survivors of past movies for a few scenes, but this movie should have been more about them, while containing a more original plot.  Instead, we have to follow around Bobby.  Why the hell is newcomer Bobby the main character in the final movie of the series?!?  Who cares about him, or the singer of Linkin Park that appears in the junkyard game?  The one person who definitely belongs in it the most is Jigsaw (Tobin Bell), and he is in this film for maybe 5 minutes.  That is unacceptable, especially for the finale.  As hard as the writers have tried to make each movie connect, I was let down by the final product here.

Another disappointing thing about Saw 3D is the fact that the main killer, Hoffman, doesn’t really follow the Jigsaw recipe the entire movie.  He chooses random people to ‘test’ and most games are not survivable.  Plus, he turns into a Terminator towards the end and just slices and dices his way to Jill.  Also, the chase scenes through the hallways looked incredibly staged and extremely cheesy.  Decent slasher action, but Saw is not, and never was, a slasher movie. 

Another thing that bothered me is that most of the traps were pointless, even more than usual.  For instance, why was there a public ‘game’ at the beginning?  This was completely out of place and had no connection to the rest of the movie.  There seemed to be too much left unanswered for it to be considered a conclusion.  Unless there is another movie being planned down the line, in which case it might answer all the remaining questions.  But if that happened, it would be a cheap marketing move to lie to the public to get them to see the ‘final’ movie.  Just like how the Rolling Stones have been stealing people’s money by putting on ‘farewell’ tours every other year for the past decade.  I’m a believer in the idea that some things just need to die so they can be remembered for when they were still relevant and successful (I’m looking at you Mick).

Many of these negatives could be accounted to the fact the director didn’t even want to do this movie.  He wanted to do Paraboring Activity 2, but Lionsgate had a clause in his contract to do another movie, so he was dragged back a week before shooting!  Plus he tried to rework the script, blah blah blah.  Just seemed doomed from the beginning, which is sad knowing this is the conclusion to a legendary series.

In conclusion, the filmmakers could have done way better job here, being that this is the ‘final’ movie.  However, this movie was a lot better than Saw V and VI, but not as good as the first 4 movies.  Yet again, the 3D was a disappointing gimmick.  While some scenes involved body parts flying at the screen, it was mostly tacky and largely forgettable.  Overall, I recommend this movie to fans or anyone who has seen the others, mostly because Saw 3D does offer some closure on a few characters and story lines.  If you don't like any of the Saw movies and don't care how the series ends, don't feel bad about skipping it.  Besides some great traps and death scenes, the plot contains most of the same ole tricks and the end doesn't blow your mind, 3D or not.


Total Score:  5/10
Buckets:  4.5/5

Saturday, October 16, 2010

The Crazies

Directed by:  Breck Eisner
Written by:  Scott Kosar, Ray Wright
Starring:  Timothy Olyphant, Radha Mitchell, Joe Anderson, Danielle Panabaker


Timothy Olyphant...
Not Josh Duhame
l

Since October began, I’ve been trying to watch at least one horror movie per night until Halloween.  Lately, I have found it increasingly hard to keep up so I’ve just been watching them as often as I can.  Anyways, the next movie down the pipe was The Crazies.  In my opinion, this is one of the best horror remakes since The Hills Have Eyes.  I have not seen the original 1973 George A. Romero film, but after seeing this one, I am going to assume the new one is better.  Being a fan of Timothy Olyphant (Deadwood, Live Free or Die Hard), I was excited to see this when it came out.  Since it was released in FeBOOary, many people missed it, but not me.  After seeing it for a second time now that it is out on DVD, it easily proved to be worth revisiting.   

The Crazies is about a small town in Iowa whose citizens mysteriously get sick and start acting a little ‘crazy.’  Once infected, they turn into violent, zombie-like shells of their former self and eventually die, either from the sickness or from the top secret quarantine the military sets up.  Acting out against this quarantine is the towns Sheriff (played by Timothy Olyphant), his wife (Radha Mitchell), and two others (Joe Anderson and Danielle Panabaker).  Not only do they have to avoid being killed by both ‘the crazies’ and the military, but they are also trying to figure out what the hell is going on.

The production here is top notch for a horror film.  The director uses satellite feeds as segues between some scenes that, at first, seem out of place, but they end up being a pretty smart, unique addition.  It has a great pace to it, and the vibe is very intense throughout.  It is not the type of horror film that relies on a big reveal ending that either saves it or loses it for audiences.  Instead, it is just a genuinely entertaining film lead by strong acting and a great storyline.

The violence in this film is also very well done.  It is not an over-the-top violent movie with zombie heads getting cut off by helicopter blades, but it definitely isn’t PG-13 either.  There are some creative death scenes involved and quite a few good splatters.  Both are very important ingredients for the best horror movies.  The only negative thing in this entire movie that bothered me is that the business end of a pitchfork seems to double in size in different shots.  Other than that minor blunder, they did a bloody good job.

Not only is The Crazies an effective horror remake, but it is also one of the better horror movies in recent memory.  The action starts right at the beginning and doesn’t let up until the credits roll.  Timothy Olyphant continues to literally strut his stuff as the town Sheriff character which is great.  I’m still in the dark to why he walks so stiff (past back problems…?).  Regardless, I love all of his work and this is no exception.  Do yourself a favor and snag a copy of The Crazies before Halloween.  Highly recommended.


Total Score:  8/10
Buckets: 2.5/5

Thursday, October 7, 2010

Let Me In

Written and Directed by:  Matt Reeves
Starring:  Kodi Smit-McPhee, Chloe Moretz, Elias Koteas

Sorry for the delay between posts folks.  I have just got back from a pair of vacations and have been rather busy.  So, my first day back, I treated myself to a double feature at the local movie theater.  I went to go see The Social Network and Let Me In for the price of one (don't tell AMC!), both of which were great films.  Being a hardcore David Fincher fan, the greatness of The Social Network came to no surprise to me.  Its 2 hour runtime flew by quicker than I could look at my watch (if I wore a watch). However, I'm here today to write about the latter of my double feature, Let Me In.

2008's Swedish Version
As most of you should know, it is a remake of 2008's critically-acclaimed Swedish adaptation, Let the Right One In.  I remember hearing a lot of buzz about it when it first came out so I decided to check it out.  All I knew was that it was based off a book about a loner 12 year old boy who meets a girl vampire and she helps protects him.  Kind of sounded like something out of a Twilight crapfest, but this movie actually turned out to done the correct way.  Like most highly successful foreign films, Hollywood decided to pounce on it right away while it was hot.  Being one of the many skeptics at first, I wasn't thrilled in seeing an extremely well-done foreign film get turned into a glossy, Americanized moneymaker. However, the more I learned about who was involved and the reception it was getting, the more excited I got about seeing it. 


2010's US Remake
The 2010 version, Let Me In, was an excellent film, but I didn't feel like it was a necessary remake (shocker).  While many hail the original being a 'masterpiece,' I found it to be just 'good.'  While I may have set my expectations too high, it didn't blow me away.  Like most vampire movies, there is an element of romance involved.  However, in this movie, the romantic aspect is heavily prevalent throughout.  I found the story in this movie to be absolutely great, but it tends to be a little slow at times. It is this reason why I find it undeserving of a 'masterpiece' label.  Going into the new one, I was expecting the pace to be a little higher, especially with the director of Cloverfield behind the camera.  Instead, it was very similarly paced and didn't really have anything new to offer.  It just seemed like the same movie, just with different actors and a higher budget.  While this is not a bad thing, I was just hoping for a slightly different take on it (besides the fact it took place in New Mexico).

I thought the acting in this remake was outstanding.  The fact that none of the cast are household names really added to quality of the movie in my opinion.  Elias Koteas (Zodiac, Shutter Island) continues to nail the greasy Policeman role.  While not given as much screen time as the children, his presence was always a bright spot.  Kodi Smit-McPhee (The Road) plays the physically and socially awkward boy brilliantly.  I can't think of another young male actor that looks as alien-like as him, with as much acting talent as him.  However, the true star of this movie was really Chloe Moretz (Hit-Girl from Kick-Ass), playing the female vampire known as Abby.  She might very well be taking the place of the older Dakota Fanning as the best young female actress today.  Chloe has definitely nailed the cute, innocent looking girl with a bad side routine.  Both leads out-act their age by a long shot.  Both give deeply emotional performances worthy of an Oscar, but they will most likely have to settle for a Teens Choice Award for now.  I am looking forward to seeing both of them in more films in the future. 

In the director's chair is Matt Reeves, fresh off his successful shaky-cam movie Cloverfield.  While I generally hate that style of movie, that may have been the best of the bunch, along with REC.  He also was in charge of the screenplay adaptation, which ultimately remained unchanged as mentioned before.  However, I felt this movie was much better looking than the previous version.  This should always be the case in a remake, and it rings true here.  There is one scene in particular that I enjoyed involving the camera being planted in the backseat of a car as it is flying all over the place.  However, the worst part of the movie is that Abby tends to turn into a cheesy computer character a lot and jump all over the place unnaturally.  While the people getting thrown around didn't actually look fake, you were still distracted by it knowing it was.

As for the blood aspect, most fans will not be disappointed.  The first murder in the movie literally contains a bucket of blood being poured out of one's neck into an actual bucket.  After this, each death provides the viewer with plenty of red, sticky necks to enjoy.  As for the most memorable splatter, it occurs near the end, before the infamous pool scene finale.

On to my recommendation, I would say wait to rent it if you've seen the original since both versions are far too similar.  If you haven't seen the Swedish version, it is definitely worth seeing in theaters.  I would say this one is better than the original, but mainly by default.  The acting and story alone are worth the price of admission.  Even though it is slow at times, most great character studies are.  Its just that one of these characters happens to be a vampire, which makes this a refreshing take on the genre.  Sorry Twilight, but this is how a vampire love story should be told.


Total Score:  8/10
Buckets:  3.5/5



Speaking of successful Swedish film remakes, who else is excited about next year's remake of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, helmed by none other than my boy David Fincher?  After seeing the whole trilogy, Fincher seems like the perfect man to do it and it very well could be his next masterpiece alongside Se7en, Fight Club, and Zodiac.  Should be a great Christmas present in 2011.