Pi reviews PARANORMAL ACTIVITY 2 (2010)

So, a couple of years ago, this little film called Paranormal Activity came out. It started off as a typical indie release, only opening in a few cities. Then, this alleged grass-roots internet campaign began, where you could demand to see it in your city. Nevermind that they didn’t show you shit about the film. All they showed you was the audiences terrified reaction to watching it. Internet sheep the world over fell for it hook, line and sinker and before long, Paranormal Activity was in every multiplex across the country and making money hand over fist. They didn’t get mine.

It reeked of Blair Witch to me, which is the only film I can ever remember making me so angry that I literally wanted to burn the theatre down. The camcorder footage, the groundswell of public demand, it was all too similar. I ended up seeing the flick with my teenage daughter a year later on DVD. We watched it alone in the dark, late at night and it scared the shit out of me. I couldn’t sleep and I had to turn all the lights in the house on. I watch horror movies like bitches drink Starbucks. Every. Goddamn. Day. They don’t scare me. I can count on one hand the movies that have actually scared me into losing sleep. One hand that’s missing a digit. So needless to say, I had respect for the film after that. When Paranormal 2 was announced, I rolled my eyes. I didn’t see how they could capture lightning in a bottle twice. I had to see it though and what did I get.

An experience that was very different and yet very much the same.

First things first, if you didn’t like Paranormal Activity, you’re not going to like the sequel. It’s essentially the same film. PA2 follows Kristie, who is the sister of Katie, the woman from the first film. Kristie lives in Carlsbad with her tool of a husband, his teenage daughter and her newborn son. Already, tool mate is a recurring theme. My strongest feelings regarding the first film was that Micah, Katie’s boyfriend, was the biggest douchebag in recent memory. I didn’t mourn his passing. Kristie’s husband is a tool as well, but not nearly as annoying as Micah. The film opens with their home seemingly being burglarized. Nothing is missing, but the house is trashed. This leads tool-husband to install security cameras throughout the house, which gives us our footage. It also creates one of the films flaws.

I understand that what makes a scary movie scary is building tension. Slow builds are usually the best, but molasses is another thing. There are way too many static shots of the family pool and the stairwell. Every night in the movie, the film switches between the six cameras in the house. Throughout the ENTIRE movie, nothing ever happens at the pool. It’s an annoying red herring, especially considering how many times you see that fucking pool. I would say the same thing about the staircase, but something happens there. Once. Out of about 45 shots.

My other problems with the security cameras is that they’re not consistent. Now the family also has a camcorder, but there are shots and angles in this film that come from neither the fixed cameras or the family handheld. There’s not a lot of them, but there are a few and when you’re gonna do the whole “found footage” type film, you need to stick to your premise. Most people won’t discover it though if they buy into the film.

I think that’s what it comes down to. Can you buy in? Maybe that’s why I’m so immune to horror films. I just can’t see them ever happening. Even slasher movies with realistic killers are proposterous to me. For some reason I bought into Paranormal one on some level because it scared me. I bought into this film as well, because once I got home, all the lights came on and I stayed up all night until the sun came up. What scared me? I HAVE NO IDEA.

The movie’s not really all that scary. I don’t think it’s paced nearly as well as the first film and honestly, it plods along for the first hour with barely anything happening. When the “scary” stuff goes down, it’s almost the same notes as the first film. They tie in the first film, explain the possible origins of the entity and then proceed to a [REC]/Paranormal Activity mash-up of a finale. Go figure though, I was scared. Maybe it’s the fact that I sleep with women and the thought of them getting possessed and swaying above the bed while I’m asleep is something I can actually see happening having experienced the real-life horror of demonic women. Maybe it’s because everything in these films is all so normal and mundane until it isn’t.

Watching both films in two different ways was an experience as well. I honestly thought the reason I got so freaked out on the first one was all alone at home, lights off, late at night and my daughter was freaked out, so I had some sort of sympathy scare. This time though, I saw it in a packed theatre, where most of the theatre was FLAT OUT TALKING the whole time. And even crazier, it didn’t bother me at all. Usually it makes me homicidal, but this was one of those events where it seemed okay. Like we were all just reminding ourselves it was just a stupid movie and we were all safe because we were in a big public place and those stupid people on the screen were trapped in their haunted house. Like maybe we all wanted to forget that eventually we were going to have to go home.

Or maybe, since it was midnight on a Friday, the whole theatre was just drunk,

In any event, it worked both ways. At home and in the theatre and that in and of itself is rare. Paranormal Activity 2 is not a good movie. It’s paced shitty and it’s really unnecessary. It breaks very little new ground and basically uses the same devices as the original with different characters. But….

It scared me. And isn’t that what it’s supposed to do?

My Grade: C+

Sabbath Reviews: ThanksKilling (2009)

Directed by: Jordan Downey
Written by: Jordan Downey, Bradly Schulz, Kevin Stewart, Anthony Wilson, Grant Yaffee

Does this film look like it’s about a murderous turkey? Does it? THAT’S BECAUSE IT FUCKING IS.

I’ve saved this review for the end of October because Thanksgiving will be upon us soon enough and we might as well usher in November with an up close look at the world of B-horror movies. As a filmmaker who operates on out-of-pocket cash, it’s always interesting to see what other filmmakers in my situation put out there that actually gets accepted by festivals … Netflix … sometimes even On Demand services.

Apparently the winning formula is to not give a fuck about story and just be an asshat. ThanksKilling was made on a budget of $3,500 and was shot during the director’s summer break and really is about a necromanced talking turkey who axes off children during their Thanksgiving break. At this time I would like to point out that the filmmakers credit a whopping total of FIVE writers for this script. Five. Five writers worked on this script — a script about a killer turkey. Let that sink in while I … try … to get down to business and explain this movie.

Literally the first shot of the film is a pair of pilgrim titties. I’m not going to lie … it had me at hello for a bit. They never explain why this pilgrim broad has her tits just on display. I’m guessing when you have a killer turkey stalking your big-titted pilgrim, minor details really don’t need to be explained. The pilgrim is played by Wanda Lust, a porn star, and I know that had to make the filmmakers giddy to say they nabbed a celebrity of some sort. I digress.

Tits McGee is running through the woods, only to fall and trip and we get our first look at her predator — a rubber turkey that’s obviously being operated as a hand puppet. “Nice tits, bitch!” I believe was the turkey’s first line before he raised an axe in the air and we cut to the opening title sequence. I’m willing to bet a good half of the film’s budget went to the CGI title sequence alone, because it went nowhere else.

Now in the present we get the standard slasher movie about teens opener — shots of a high school building, the trees, a kid riding a bike, etc. and then we get introduced to our main cast. The jock, the Mary Sue, the slut, the geek …. and the big fat hick? That’s a new one. For some reason they all hang out together and they’re off to celebrate Thanksgiving break like it’s not over in a couple of days … really, they’re overly excited about an extended weekend.

Meanwhile, an old dude with a shotgun and his dog are in the woods for some reason and the dog runs off. Rover finds a spot to take a piss which happens to be right on top of a figurine of a totem. The ground shakes and opens up and … IT’S THE KILLER TURKEY! Apparently dog urine summons him forth and we get our next witty line, obviously crafted by at least 3 out of the 5 writers: “I’m pissed!” … damn fine writing. He kills the dog.

I’m going to stop right there because reliving the plot is sort of killing me. Let me just sum up the rest of the film. There’s some lore about an Indian necromancing a turkey because the white man offended him and now every 505 years it comes back for vengeance … said turkey goes on a killing spree, the teenagers are all Scary Movie-levels of retarded (as in the horror parody series), turkey kills their parents and nobody seems to care, blah blah blah. Did I mention at some point the turkey becomes radioactive and comes back with a vengeance? Yeah, that happens. Or did I mention the turkey kills the Mary Sue’s father, dons his face as a mask and the teens don’t realize that its a turkey in a fake daddy disguise?

Yeah, that all happened.

Am I being too harsh? Do I sound like I loathed this movie? I think what worries me the most is I don’t and I don’t know what that says about me. The filmmakers seem to know they’re being retarded and some of the dialogue and actions definitely emphasize that, but every once in a while the actors try to play it serious and I think that’s what bothers me. The Director clearly didn’t direct because the actors bounce around from completely retarded to taking themselves actually somewhat seriously … and it’s ALL bad.

The actors are some of the worst I’ve ever seen. Clearly they were all locals and friends … that’s OK, I know how that is. I fully understand! But ee-fucking-GAD, some of them were just too awful for words. Okay, all of them were, but some of them seemed to be trying to do worse than the others. Slut Character — whatever your name was — you win. You win. Now stop trying.

On a technical level, this film fails as well. They say if you have bad actors, you can sometimes cover it up with good direction and vise versa. This is a case where nobody in front or behind the camera knew what they were doing. Some of the shots are fine — they follow the rules and look passable. Some of the shots are so jarringly bad though that it sucks you out of it. Yeah, it sucks you right out of the premise of a talking turkey killing teenagers. Shut up. You know what I mean. The lighting is often also poorly thought out, but I can’t talk … lighting is one of my weak spots. I hate lighting. That topic will be for another day.

The writing … the writing … where do I begin on the writing? Five writers, most of which supposedly worked on crafting dialogue, and the dialogue is single-handedly the worst thing about this film. The “serious” moments are so badly worded and unnatural that you wonder if any of them have heard another human being talk. It doesn’t help that they’re delivered with all the awkwardness these actors could muster. Sometimes the humor is actually pretty funny though in its absurdity, which makes things possibly worse because it contrasts so much with all the badly-written dialogue. It shows that too many people worked on this script.

I really don’t know. I’ll be honest. I think part of me is jealous that somebody made this and it actually got added to Netflix. Not only was it added to Netflix, but it was under the “Horror” section on Netflix Instant. You don’t have to even search for it. It’s right there! That’s how I found it. So, yes, part of me is jealous because this movie is so bad and at least made it that far.

Plus, you can’t outright hate a movie that has a scene of a turkey killing a guy mid-doggy styling a chick, takes over, only to finish inside of her and exclaim “YOU JUST GOT STUFFED!”.

If you’re the type who enjoys watching bad horror movies — I mean really bad — I’d say give this movie a view. It’s sort of one of those things just “to say you did”. It’s absurd. Ridiculous. Poorly shot. Badly acted. And it has some genuinely amusing, stupid moments that let you know at least one of the writers was probably pretty funny after a few drinks. It clocks in at 66 minutes long, so it won’t take a huge chunk out of your lives. Plus, I’ll put my jealousy aside and say you should support these guys because as bad as they are … they had the balls to try, and according to them, ThanksKilling 2 — IN SPACE — is on their to-do list. You’ve got to admire their persistence.

— Sabbath

Super Carnitas reviews Observe and Report

Writer – Jody Hill

Director – Jody Hill

A funny thing happened in 2009…there were two mall cop movies. I’m pretty sure, in the entire history of mainstream, American film….there had never been a mall cop movie, and in 2009 we got two. One was a light-hearted, marginally successful, cookie-cutter…family…comedy. The other was Observe and Report.

If this film was advertised to show what it actually was…I would have seen it in theaters. But no, the clips and commercials I’d seen made it look like just another Seth Rogen comedy. Which isn’t really a bad thing..I just was in no rush to see it. So I ended up not seeing it…until a couple of days ago. Holy shit.

Now I have to admit…my friend Conor once said to me..something like…”Hey…you should see Observe and Report. It’s pretty dark…I think you’d like it.” That comment has always lingered in my head…but still…I never really made an effort to see it….until a couple of days ago. Holy shit.

Seth Rogen is pitch-perfect as Ronnie…head security guard at the local mall. His role is established early on as we see him dressing down a couple of co-workers and in another scene where he is being interviewed by a local news reporter. The news reporter disrespects him and it leads to the movies first hilarious line…”I’m standing here with this doctor.”.

The story starts off with a flasher exposing himself to women in the mall parking lot. This gives Ronnie something to focus on. A case. It also sets up our introduction to Brandi (Anna Faris)….the makeup girl in the department store. The most beautiful girl in the entire mall…according to Ronnie. And me. Ronnie promises to keep her safe from the perverted flasher. She’s uninterested at best.

So far..it’s pretty much your run of the mill comedy. But then we get a peek at what this movie really is. A tiny peek. Ronnie….and the two Asian twin security guards that work with him…are at a shooting range. They are firing off a variety of assault weapons with deadly accuarcy…and complaining about not being allowed to carry guns as mall security guards. Tazers and mace is all they are allowed to carry. Jody Hill brilliantly sets the tone for the film with this scene.

From here the movie is delivered to us through a series of events. Of course most movies unfold through a series of events, but the events in this movie come at us like the ticks of a ticking time bomb. With each scene we get another tick. With each tick comes a greater sense of unease. With each tick our impending doom becomes more real. Our every instinct tells us to brace for the inevitable explosion…but does it come? Hmmm. I’m not sure it does. Let’s see.

A detective (Ray Liotta) arrives to investigate the flasher case after Brandi….the hottest girl in the mall…is flashed. Ronnie, who has a huge crush on Brandi, promised to keep her safe. He didn’t. His attempts to console Brandi fail simply because he doesn’t have the skill set to console another human being. The detective steps in and manages to calm Brandi’s nerves.

(Tick)

A store in the mall is robbed…after hours. Ronnie arrives on the scene…as does the detective. Ronnie starts tossing out accusations without anything to back them up. In the process he reveals himself to be racist and simple-minded. His intentions are good, but they are clearly lining his road to hell.

(Tick)

Ronnie befriends Nell. A woman in a wheelchair who works at a coffee shop in the mall. She greets him each morning with a free cup of coffee.

(Tick)

Ronnie…in an effort to recapture some of his rapidly dwindling stature…decides to join the police force. He learns that he should take a “ride along” with a police officer to see if it’s really for him. He decides to take an impromptu “ride along” with the very same detective that has been encroaching on his territory at the mall. The detective ends up dropping Ronnie off at a very dangerous street corner where he is confronted by a half-dozen, violent, crack dealers. Ronnie  brutally deals with the crack dealers and returns to the police station. There he hugs the detective and thanks him for the opportunity.

(Tick)

The layers are peeling away from Ronnie.

(Tick)

Ronnie convinces Brandi to go on a date with him. Seth Rogen is at his best here. His intentions are sweet and true. Childlike. We learn that Ronnie was a special needs child….and his special needs drove his father to leave him and his mother. We assume his special needs drove his mother to alcoholism.

(Tick)

The date is hard to watch. It begins with Brandi not even remembering it in the first place, trying to blow it off…then reluctantly going along. She drinks her way through dinner and only remotely shows interest in Ronnie when she learns that he has prescription meds on him. In a seemingly chivalrous gesture, Ronnie gives the remainder of his meds to Brandi…who indulges in them without hesitation. The drugs and the booze render Brandi incapacitated. She pukes as Ronnie leads her to her front door. The date ends with Ronnie essentially raping Brandi. There is a line thrown in to make it seem consentual…but he’s raping her.

I’m pretty sure there wasn’t a rape scene in Paul Blart Mall Cop.

(Tick)

It’s time for the pivotal scene in the movie. Ronnie’s psych exam. Ronnie must pass this psych exam to be considered a candidate for the police force. During the interview process Ronnie tells us about a dream he has “most nights”. In this dream he’s happy and joyful until a “cloud of bad things” approaches. He takes it upon himself to systematically blow away everyone and everything that stands in his way with his trusty shotgun. In his dream he saves the day and becomes everyone’s hero. He ends the telling of this dream by mockingly shooting his shotgun repeatedly at the interviewer..and smiling.

(Tick)

Ronnie leaves the mall and goes to the police station where he learns he failed his psych exam and didn’t make the force. The detective attempts to mock him while delivering the news by having another officer hide in the closet and listen in. In a rare example of a character summing up an entire movie in one line…the officer, as he exits the closet, says “i thought this was going to be funny…but it’s just sad.”

(Tick)

Ronnie, defeated, goes back to his job at the mall. The girl he gets coffee from every morning is being harassed by her manager. Ronnie steps in and defends her.

(Tick)

It’s close now. The bomb is about to go off. Ronnie…near the end of his rope…connects with Dennis (Michael Pena)…his top security guard. The pair bond through drugs and mayhem. At the peak of their bonding…Dennis reveals himself to be a criminal. He offers Ronnie a chance to be his partner in crime. Ronnie refuses…and is knocked out for his decision. Dennis escapes.

(Tick)

Ronnie…at his lowest point, decides to go undercover to catch the flasher in an attempt to redeem himself. Instead he discovers Brandi and the detective having sex in her car. He confronts Brandi in the mall and smashes a jewelry case to illustrate his frustration. Ronnie loses his job….and refuses to leave the mall…the police arrive..

(Tick)

(Tick….Tick…..boom?)

The police try to subdue Ronnie and he attacks them violently. VIOLENTLY. Taking out at least 6 of them with a flashlight before being taken down and arrested.

(Boom)

In my opinion the movie ends here. I won’t reveal the ending, but I believe the conclusion only exists inside Ronnie’s head. It’s his dream…made real. It’s too good to be true. Ronnie gets arrested…he sits in jail…and we’re treated with his delusions to wrap it all up with a nice little bow. The ticking time bomb that was Ronnie didn’t explode in the end…but fizzled out and failed.

I loved this movie. It was mostly sad…but also really hilarious. Really dark too. Taxi Driver in a mall isn’t much of a stretch. Rogen, Faris, and Liotta were all solid in their roles. And the cameos by Patton Oswalt, Danny McBride, and Aziz Ansari were all golden. There are times when this movie almost starts mocking itself…it kinda walks the line but never really crosses it.

In ten years…people should still be talking about this movie. If they aren’t, then there’s something wrong with people.

“I thought this was going to be funny, but instead it’s just sad.”

 

 

 

 

 

Tigris Rose reviews “Star Trek” (2009)

Star Trek (2009)
Director: J.J. Abrams
Writer: Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman
Original Writer/Creator: Gene Roddenberry

I will be honest with you, I was a little frightened when I found out that they were making a Star Trek prequel. So scared in fact I didn’t even want to see it. Which I didn’t until it came out to DVD. I’m not a big fan of prequels, especially prequels that happen to re-tell my favorite franchises. When you see a prequel come up, one of two things happen. Either the prequel is good and it restarts or continues a franchise. Or it kills the franchise all together and pisses off their fans.

Thank god this prequel wasn’t a bomb. I think I would have cried, and my soul would have died just a little if it did. This was a prequel that Gene Roddenberry himself would be proud of.

One nice thing about this movie is that it doesn’t matter if you are a diehard trekkie that knows that October 24 2010 is really star date 2010.297. Whether you’re a casual fan that loves sci-fi or one who just isn’t into the events with the enterprise. That’s ok because there is something for everyone. You don’t have to be a fan or even like the franchise to love this movie. My own husband, who hates, Star Trek, yes I question that decision myself not marrying a Trekkie. However, he hates the fact that he has to admit to liking this movie.

J.J. Abrams did a good job keeping as much of the personal story line in the movie. For example Sulu fencing experience. And the feelings between Spock and Uhura that they had for each other. Though it wasn’t blatant on the show there was defiantly a past between them.

The actors did a great job portraying their predecessors. There was some change with Kirk since the time line got screwed up by the Romulans. But Kirk was still a flirt, always hitting on the girls. But he was more raw and rebel than the original. Since Kirk’s father died before he was supposed to.

Simon Pegg was the perfect Scotty. And I’m not just talking about the accent. He was cocky about his work, and took offense to anyone who said he couldn’t do something. Then of course yelling at his little minion was just funny.

“Spock Prime: What if I told you that your transwarp theory was correct, that is is indeed possible to beam onto a ship that is traveling at warp speed?
Scotty: I think if that equation had been discovered, I’d have heard about it.
Spock Prime: The reason you haven’t heard of it, Mr. Scott, is because you haven’t discovered it yet.
Scotty: Are you from the future?
James T. Kirk: Yeah, he is. I’m not.
Scotty: Well, that’s brilliant. Do they still have sandwiches there?”

Now the Trekkie in me will chime in. I hate it when the writers mess with the space time continuum. Even “Back to the Future” couldn’t keep to their own rules. Granted “Old Spock” pokes fun and jokes about disproving the fact they broke the rule of no contact. I hate time travel!

One of my biggest beef with the movie is that Pavel Chekov is there, graduating with the other from the academy. Any watcher even to the lowest fan knows that Chekov was younger than everyone. He didn’t even come into play till the second season of the original series. Yes I am that geeky. In the movie he graduates with the others.

Having Leonard Nimoy on as Spock Prime was awesome. I loved Spock, he and Scotty were always my favorite from the original series. I know that there was a lot of stink about not letting the other characters especially Shatner come in. But it was understandable for anyone with half a brain. There wasn’t many scenes away from the main cast in the movie. So unless they wanted to play extras at the academy or ceremony at the end. There was no place for them to go in the movie. Not to mention they wouldn’t be able to reprise their roles, because at the time Spock left his time from the present to the past, the other characters were already dead. So I understand not asking the others back.

I would have like to see more of McCoy and Spock’s rivelry as they try to understand each other. I don’t like the physical attraction out in public with Spock and Uhura. That is a big no-no with me. Even this early in his career he was still a very disciplined Vulcan. That kind of display was not allowed even for him.

Leonard ‘Bones’ McCoy: Yeah. Well, I got nowhere else to go, the ex-wife took the whole damn planet in the divorce. All I got left is my bones.

I’m still torn about the space time f-up. Because the Romulans came through and killed Kirk’s father. As James T. Kirk grows up without the father that was so much a part of his life in the series story line. I think they did a good job of showing how Spock and Kirk grew up with their new paths. However with those events, plus the destruction of Vulcan, half of what the crew knew, understands, and participated in Spock’s life as a Vulcan was gone.

They were able to get the story lines back on the same page by the end of the movie but some of the key episodes moments won’t technically happen. Which means these experiences and life lessons they learned might not happen. Damn I hate time travel!

I think it sucks that Spock’s mother dies. She was a key link to Spock’s humanity even as an adult. She was also the link that kept Spock and his father Sarek together. I hope that the near anialation of their people would give them that bond now that his mother is dead. Though I do love the moment at the end with the two Spocks.

Spock notices a elder Vulcan walking in the docking bay]
Spock: Father!
[the elder Vulcan turns and is revealed as Spock Prime]
Spock Prime: I am not our father.
[Young Spock, now recognizing who he is, approaches]
Spock Prime: There are so few Vulcans left. We cannot afford to ignore each other.
Spock: Then why did you send Kirk aboard, when you alone could have explained the truth?
Spock Prime: Because you needed each other. I could not deprive you of the revelation of all that you could accomplish together, of a friendship that will define you both in ways you cannot yet realize.
Spock: How did you persuade him to keep your secret?
Spock Prime: He inferred that universe-ending paradoxes would ensue should he break his promise.
Spock: You lied.
Spock Prime: I… I implied.
Spock: A gamble.
Spock Prime: An act of faith. One I hope that you will repeat in your future in Starfleet.
Spock: In the face of extinction, it is only logical that I resign my Starfleet commission and help rebuild our race.
Spock Prime: And, yet, you can be in two places at once. I urge you to remain in Starfleet. I have already located a suitable planet in which to establish a Vulcan colony. Spock, in this case, do yourself a favor: Put aside logic. Do what feels right.
[Spock Prime turns and leaves]
Spock Prime: Since my customary farewell would appear oddly self-serving, I shall simply say…
[Shows Vulcan hand salute]
Spock Prime: Good luck.

I am a Trekkie, I love Star Trek original and next generation. Anything after just suck. I hate Deep Space Nine, Voyager, and Enterprise. The stories for those just suck!

I believe that anyone would love this movie. Not just the Star Trek Trekkies and fans. It is a very good Sci-Fi movie, great special effects. Really good acting. You don’t need to know the franchise to understand what’s going on. Which makes it a good prequel. Although if you are a fan you get the inside jokes! J.J. Abrams did a great job keeping Gene Roddenberry vision alive.

As a blogger and a Trekkie I’ll give J.J. Abrams Star Trek a solid A!

“Live Long and Prosper!”

Chainsaw Cheerleader Reviews: Love Object (2004)

Directed by: Robert Parigi

Written by: Robert Parigi

Cast: Desmond Harrington, Melissa Sagemiller, Udo Kier, Rip Torn

Genre: Horror, Psychological Thriller

 

In the early 1990’s I began to watch horror films. It was during this time that I started to understand the connection between the company who distributed the film and the quality of that film. As with any movie, the logo of the distributor is displayed at the beginning of the film. It was during this time that I would understand the worth of the film I was about to view. Lionsgate Home Entertainment is a company that I am very familiar with. In the early 1990’s the majority of Lionsgate Home Entertainment horror movies were almost guaranteed to be awful. This is the company that brought you Leprechaun 5: In the Hood after all. This reason alone is why I was surprised by how much I enjoyed the movie Love Object. While certainly not perfection, Love Object is a twisted little tale about the horror of one man’s search for love.

Kenneth Winslow (Desmond Harrington) is a socially awkward and shy man who does not understand how to interact with women. After developing feelings for a co-worker named Lisa (Melissa Sagemiller), Kenneth orders a realistic rubber sex doll named Nikki that looks like Lisa. Nikki is first used as a device to help Kenneth overcome his fears about women. As Kenneth begins to form a relationship with Nikki, his behavior begins to change. Kenneth talks to Nikki and at times argues with her. It is at this point that Kenneth starts to believe that Nikki, the rubber sex doll, is talking back. Kenneth does in fact have sex with Nikki. While incredibly awkward to watch, the beginning of their physical relationship could only be described as normal. Soon the missionary position is not enough and bondage is introduced. Kenneth and Nikki’s relationship quickly becomes violent. Believing that Nikki is stalking him, Kenneth shows genuine fear of his lover. It is during this time that Kenneth has grown the courage to talk to Lisa and shortly after this a relationship forms. After their relationship turns serious, Lisa becomes aware of Nikki and is completely freighted by the fact that Nikki looks just like her. After ending their relationship, Lisa is kidnapped by Kenneth. After restraining Lisa in his apartment, Kenneth begins the process of transferring Nikki (who he believes is alive) into Lisa’s body.

Love Object is a film that benefits from many of the great decisions that were made by its director, Robert Parigi. One such decision is that Nikki does  not talk or is even seen moving. Kenneth is the only one that can hear her and replies to her was if it was a normal conversation. Another decision that the film benefits from is the choice to limit the number of actors in the film. With a limited cast, the director is able to show the viewer just how lonely Kenneth is. With no extras, each actor is given the opportunity to act to their very best and they do.

Desmond Harrington is amazing as Kenneth. If an actor can make it seem believable that he is truly having sex with a rubber sex doll and then argue with it, this actor can most likely accomplish any role that is given to him/her. It is Harrington’s acting that gives life to Nikki. It is his acting that makes it believable that a very lonely man could travel to a very dark place within himself. There are very few films where the viewer finds the bad guy as a sympathetic character. Harrington makes it almost easy to root for Kenneth.

Love Object is an odd quirky film that feels very original. After watching the film, the viewer is given the impression that the writer of the film’s script actually sat down and gave it genuine thought. As the black comedy of the first half of the film easies the viewer into the horror of the second half, the movie can be seen as truly well written, well paced, and well directed.

The true test of any good film is after watching it would the viewer see it again. On my own I would not watch this film again but with a friend who hasn’t seen it, yes. Love Object is a great movie, one that I highly recommend. It is the oddness of the quirkiness that makes this film enjoyable. To watch it again one may risk finding that quirkiness less odd as the first viewing may desensitize you to it.

Love Object receives 3 1/2 rubber sex dolls out of 5

Guillaume de Sade Reviews: Moving (1988)

Directed by: Alan Metter
Written by: Andy Breckman

Stir Crazy…Bustin’ Loose…Brewster’s Millions…Silver Streak…Hear No Evil, See No Evil…Harlem Nights…any of his stand up comedy movies…any one of these might come to mind when you think of a Richard Pryor movie. My personal favorite, however, is Moving. Pryor plays a man who loses his job and his only job offer comes with one condition: He must move from New Jersey to Boise, Idaho.

This is one of those movies that crosses the line from awful to awesome and never looks back! This was far from his best work and definitely done for a paycheck, but sometimes that’s what it takes. This film crosses Chevy Chase’s Funny Farm with Micheal Douglas’ Falling Down, only done years before.

Allow me to go off on a short tangent here and discuss Eddie Murphy. Eddie Murphy gained fame and super-stardom starting with a stint on SNL and then his comedy special “Delirious”. From there he was on fire and could do no wrong…until he started doing wrong. From there he retreated from the spotlight for a while and when he came back he came back as a softer, more family friendly actor. He has stated often that Richard Pryor was one of his main influences when it came to comedy. He wrote a part in Harlem Nights specifically for him.

Richard was at this family friendly part of his career when this movie was made. Four years prior (no pun intended), he even tried his hand at a children’s show on CBS, called “Pryor’s Place”. Yes…the same Richard Pryor who named one comedy album “That Nigger’s Crazy” and another “Bicentennial Nigger” had a children’s show with puppets done by Sid and Marty Kroft!! But I digress…

Back to the movie. Alan Metter directed a handful of feature films, but nothing that really rates a mention in this review. They were all about the relative same caliber as “Moving” which isn’t saying an awful lot.

Writer Andy Breckman on the other hand has written a few other movies, but had much greater success in television, specifically as the co-creator and executive producer of “Monk”.

In addition to Richard Pryor, this film boasts Randy Quaid as the annoying neighbor, Dana Carvey in a role that I actually found him funny and King Kong Bundy as a mover. There were also a couple of notable cameos by Morris “motherfucking” Day and Rodney Dangerfield. Last but not least is ridiculously hot and apparently non-aging Stacey Dash. I mean damn! Stacey Dash goddamn it!!
She’s so ho I don’t mind looking at her with her clothes on!

So all in all this movie really amounts to nothing more than a guilty pleasure, but a highly recommended guilty pleasure.

-Guillaume de Sade

Chainsaw Cheerleader Reviews: After.Life (2009)

Directed by: Agniezka Wojtowicz-Vosloo

Written by: Agniezka Wojtowicz-Vosloo

Cast: Liam Neeson, Christina Ricci, Justin Long

Genre: Supernatural, Thriller

 

One of the saddest aspects of film is the movie that had great potential but fell short of that possibility. After.Life is a film that most likely read great as a script but failed  to translate well onto the big screen. While not brilliant and at times predictable, After. Life feels like a movie that mainly suffered at the hands of its inexperienced director.  After.Life is Agniezka Wojtowicz-Vosloo’s first film. By no means a masterpiece, the film is weighed down by Wojtowicz-Vosloo’s choice in pacing, cutting away to quickly from one scene to the next while only conveying blurred bits of information, and poor casting. Often at times these bits of information went by so quickly or were hidden in the background so well that they went by unnoticed.

The storyline of After.Life follows  Anna Taylor (Christina Ricci), a school teacher who is unhappy with her life and her relationships. After meeting her boyfriend, Paul (Justin Long) for dinner he informs her that he is being transferred to another city. Mistaking this information as a means to break up with her, Anna storms out of the restaurant. As Anna drives distracted by her cell phone she rams her car into another vehicle. The crash scene is implied and not shown as Anna closes her eyes and opens them to find she is laying on a slab in a funeral home. Upon waking, Anna is greeted by the funeral homes owner, Eliot Deacon (Liam Neeson). Deacon informs Anna that he can see the dead and it is his job to help them cross over from life into death. Not believing him, Anna fights for her release. Deacon argues that just because dead people claim they are alive because they can,  “breath and piss and shit.” they are mistaken and he will help her accept her death. Deacon often injects Anna with a chemical stating that it will help relax her muscles and keep rigor mortis from setting in.

After having escaped  from the basement of the funeral home, Anna tries to call Paul. As she stands in front of a window in the funeral home a student she used to teach sees her. While being a child that is fascinated by death, he hangs around the funeral home and watches those who enter and leave. Believing that he can see the dead, the student approaches Deacon and tells him he saw Anna. Deacon tells the child that he sees corpses walking around all the time with no life left in them. Deacon then takes the child under his wing and teaches him his philosophy about death and who deserves to die. After seeing Anna, the student tells Paul he saw her. It is at this point that Paul begins to believe that Anna may still be alive.

After.Life tries to be seen as a thriller by making the viewer wonder if Anna is really dead or alive and can Deacon really see spirits or is he making Anna think she is dead while slowly cutting off all her clothes and injecting her with drugs for his own twisted pleasure. The issue with this is that the plot devices given in the first half of the movie are so obvious that the viewer can already answer those questions. The suspense is lost when from the very beginning the viewer knows if Deacon can really talk to the dead or is a serial killer. The anxiety of what will happen to Anna is lost by the fact that she continually complains about her life. Christina Ricci hurts more then she helps the role of Anna. Ricci often speaks in a whiny tone and whimpers. Ricci makes you hope that Anna really is dead. Ricci is also almost completely nude throughout the entire film. Her being nude is not the issue but the length in time that she is nude. At first the nudity seems normal for the situation but it distracts from what is going on because at some point you ask yourself why isn’t she wearing clothes. When you have to start questioning nudity you know something if very off with a scene.

With a name such as Liam Neeson attached to a project one would assume that the movie cannot be all that bad. Sadly, even Neeson can only polish this turd of a film so much. While watching him you get the impression that at some point during the shooting of this film, Neeson just stopped caring. Neeson seems like he is just regurgitating the script instead of acting what has been written. Normally when one sees Neeson attached to a film you know that even if the movie is terrible that he will be enjoyable to watch. After all this is the same man who in the film Breakfast on Pluto played a priest in conservative Ireland with an illegitimate child who has grown up to be a transvestite and was brilliant regardless of how off the wall the plot of the movie seemed. If Neeson can play a priest with a love why can he not play an undertaker who may or may not be crazy?

After.Life suffered greatly at the hands of the director. His inexperience and casting actors who did not care or were just plan awful suffocated any chance that this film could have had at being a solid thriller. The director seemed to have relied to heavily on our own natural fear of death rather than actually trying to tell a scary story.

After.Life receives 2  1/2  naked Christina Riccis out of 5

Sabbath Reviews: Harry Brown (2009)

Directed by: Daniel Barber
Written by: Gary Young

I’m going to try and sound like an actual reviewer and not just gush about this film, but excuse me if I completely fail.

Harry Brown is a 2009 British film starring Michael Caine and directed by Daniel Barber (in his feature length debut) and written by Gary Young who only has a handful of writing credits to his name. I recognized only one of those scripts — The Tournament — which I saw the trailer to and looked like it could be a good dumb action movie or a bad dumb action movie. It didn’t give me the indication that Young was capable of something as deep and wonderful as Harry Brown.

With Caine in the titular role, I expected to see good acting. I wasn’t so sure on the story — but I love me some revenge stories. This could have gone the same way of a lot of brutal revenge flicks, but it was more thoughtful than that. I didn’t know if this writer/director duo had it in them or if they would be completely relying on Caine to carry a bad plot and bad direction. Not a clue.

Let’s talk briefly about Michael Caine though. I’m twenty-two years old. I can’t lie and say I’ve followed his career since its infancy, or that I’ve looked extensively into his back catalog. Hell, my first introduction to him was in Goldmember. I’ve seen him as Alfred in the Batman series and loved him there, and I knew he was well-respected. Harry Brown showed me why. The eponymous character is a Northern Ireland vet who is growing old and finding himself completely alone.

In a short span of time, his comatose wife and his last remaining friend pass away (natural causes and murder, respectively). He is an old man with nobody left in this world to love or love him. The concept alone is thoroughly chilling — I’m not going to lie, my brain often tunes out the finer points of a film’s intellectual concepts and I have to go back and watch it again for it to hit. This one snagged me right away and made me think of my family, my friends — what would I do if they were all gone? If I were in the twilight of my life with nobody around who cared about me, who I cared about? Too late to start making new friends … you’re alone. It truly is a frightening thought and Michael Caine plays the role so well. Yes, I expected him to, but I was blown away.

When he is informed of his best friend’s death and declines the offer of the Detective to call someone he knows, or perhaps social services, and then waits for them to leave before breaking down — it’s powerful. This is a man with truly nothing left in life. What do you do when you have no purpose left? There’s two options really: end it, or find a purpose.

Revenge may not be the most noble of purposes, but it’s a purpose and that’s exactly what Harry Brown sets out to do. His best friend had confided in him that he was being harassed by youths in the area, youths that Harry has noticed too. Drugs, prostitution, and general cultural decay is taking over the area and it’s shown with such realism that it’s hard not to feel like this place is out there … that this is happening … and Michael Caine isn’t happy about it.

The film doesn’t seek to turn him into a superhero. It doesn’t show an elderly man suiting up for war Rambo-style. It’s very careful to show the fact that his health is withering and despite the training he received in his youth, he is STILL an old man. As such, the threat is always there. He doesn’t have witty one-liners, catchphrases, and he can’t ricochet bullets off of several metal surfaces to hit his mark. At one point he stabs someone and turns with the gun to shoot someone else action movie style — only to find he’s way too slow and his target had ample time to move and now has the gun on him.

The violence itself can be brutal, but not over the top. The blood is always and obviously digital effects which is a strange choice as it contrasts the realism of the film. I don’t see it as a detraction, and I can’t help feeling like that kind of stylized bloodshed has become so common in action and revenge films that its the Director’s way of grabbing his crotch and saying ‘I’ve got your revenge film conventions right here!’. I don’t pretend to know, but I don’t give a crap either ’cause the film was just GOOD. Really fucking good.

The supporting cast all do a good job as well. The cops are cops and the youth … well, they’re just filthy, disgusting animals and you want them to be annihilated. I did, anyway. I really get into my revenge fantasies. Sue me. As good as the villains were, especially for their ages, this film really and truly is about Michael Caine. I can’t say enough about his performance, so I’m going to just hop off his liver-spotted dick for a bit.

This film is really about loneliness and finding a purpose … which really is the most frightening thing any human has to deal with. It’s not the slasher waiting around the corner. It’s not the ghost in your attic or the monster under your bed. It’s not the thing from outer space or Satan coming to reclaim the world. Hell, it’s not even about the giant asteroid that could hit the planet and send it spiraling out of its orbit. The thought of losing everybody you love, which could happen to any or all of us … or possibly, we’ll be the last part of someone’s life before we pass and leave them alone in this world … that is legitimately spooky to me. I don’t want to do that to someone I love. I don’t want to be alone without the people I love and the only thing I can think of is to avenge their deaths, which in most case is going to be a one-man crusade against anyone who didn’t donate a $1 at the local movie theater to support … whatever .. research.

I’m sure I’ve overhyped this film and some of you might not like it, or hell, have watched it and didn’t like it. For the first time in a long, long time a film has got to be on some kind of level. It didn’t hurt that it delivered it with a side of revenge fantasy either. I motion that each and every one of you goes out and buys this DVD and/or get down and fellate Michael Caine. The line starts behind me. (No homo?)

“You heard the man. Make with the blowing, mate.”

— Sabbath

Pi reviews JACKASS 3D (2010)

Let me help you kids, it’s Jackass. Do you really need to read a review about it? What are you expecting? To hear about artistic vision, daring cinematography? Perhaps the clever socio-political commentary in the midget stunt? Or how Pontius is bringing environmental issues to light by putting a woodpecker on his dick? It’s fucking Jackass and you can only fall into one of two camps.

1.) You find people getting hit in the balls funny.

2.) You don’t.

Since those are the only two options, choose one. If you choose one, go see Jackass 3D. Preferably with a bunch of friends, because you’ll laugh your ass off. If you choose two, you’re gay.

What I really wanna talk about is 3D. That’s the common question I get from everyone about this flick. “Do I really need to see it in 3D?” My answer is simple.

No, you don’t.

With the exception of the opening and closing montages and a scattered few scenes, the 3D really adds nothing to this film and the aforementioned scenes are all watchable without 3D. Honestly, is 3D necessary in any film? I saw Avatar for the first time a couple of months ago on my regular, old HDTV. I didn’t need 3D and I appreciated the movie for the overrated CGI puppet show that it is. 3D is not only a transparant Get Rich Quick scheme by film studios, but it’s a fucking insult to all of you.

I don’t know how many people here have kids, but to take an average family of four to go see a flick nowadays is 60-80 bucks nowadays. No bullshit. Add in the added fees of 3D, you’re pushing 100. They know exactly what they’re doing, which is why all the fucking kids movies that come out are in 3D. They know that kids will beg their parents, they know that insipid moms will insist it’s something for the whole family to do and dad’s out a Hundo.

Studio greed never ceases to amaze me. They cried about people downloading movies cutting into their profits. The actual reality of that isn’t even close to MP3s versus CDs. This 3D bullshit is going to blow up in their face, because they’re pricing the average filmgoer out of the theatre. Rather than take my family to see a couple flicks a month, it’s gonna be one and I sure as Hell ain’t paying 100 dollars to see G-Force. Kids or no kids, I refuse. On top of it, part of these extra fees are for the glasses, which they urge you to give back after the movie. Sure, you can say “Fuck that. I paid for these, I’m keeping ’em.” Go ahead. They’re useless outside of the movie, because even though the glasses don’t change film to film, they make you buy them again next time you get suckered into a 3D movie, whether you have the ones left over from the previous flick or not. FUCK YOU.

So why did I break my 3D boycott to see Jackass? See my original statement. It’s funny. Flying Porta-Potties, Dildo Bazookas, Midget Bar Brawls, Stun Guns, Bulls A-Goring, Rams A-Smashing, Tooth Pulling, Dick Torture, Snake Pits, Face Field Goals and much, much more. Seriously, I laughed my ass off for most of the 90 minutes. The editing of Jackass is great. It’s no narrative, stunt, stunt, stunt. There’s little to no setup and my only real criticism is there’s no real break in the film to allow you to process all the fucked up shit you’ve just seen. You’ll have to do that afterwards. The second is that it doesn’t need to cost 15 bucks, because it’s not any funnier in 3D. I can’t really give a lettergrade or rating to this film. Like I said in my opener, it is what it is. It’s either for you or it’s not.

Sabbath Reviews: House of 9 (2005)

Directed by: Steven R. Munroe
Written by: Philippe Vidal

Earlier in the week my fellow reviewer Dub Cee did a write-up of The Mist. I commented on how films where a group of people are put in a bad situation always seem to make for good entertainment. Coincidentally, I had just finished watching House of 9 a day earlier. Directed by Steven R. Munroe (if you don’t know who he is, don’t worry. Nobody does), this film starring Dennis Hopper and a cast of unknowns has the premise of nine people being placed in a sealed off mansion. They are told they are being recorded for a sick game and that only one of them will walk out alive and $5 million dollars richer.

Already the concept isn’t something new and exciting. We’ve seen similar concepts played out in My Little Eye, Cube, Series 7: The Contender, and most notably Saw II (though House of 9 beat them to the punch by a few months). In fact, what struck me the most was how when the mysterious voice comes over the speakers to tell them what the deal was, it sounded like he was purposely trying to differentiate this game from the Saw games. He tells them not to bother looking for a connection, who they are doesn’t matter. They were chosen for ‘what’ they are and I believe the word “random” is used, which ends up being horseshit because a few of them have run into each other at some point or another.

In either case, the Watcher’s speech (the only time he talks at all) and his, what I considered, attempt to differentiate him from Jigsaw told me I had just picked the wrong film. I was expecting a shit sandwich of a movie, but what I got … was actually pretty entertaining.

This film isn’t groundbreaking in concept. You have some of the archetypal characters. Dennis Hopper plays an Irish priest, as in the character of the group who has sworn to do no harm but is being told he must murder for survival. The character of Jay is a cop, a good cop apparently, who truly believes he is sworn to protect and keep the piece. Asher D. (apparently a real British rapper) plays Al B., a … British rapper with a short temper, a distaste for cops, and more than a hint of racism. The main girl is easy to pick out from the bunch and the rest of the cast is rounded out with a couple of socialites, a criminal, and so on. All the usual suspects have been rounded up.

At first order remains as Jay tries to organize the group into being productive; trying to find a means of escape, rationing the food they are given, and laying down the law when it comes to the liquor cabinet. When hope fades, so does order. At which time Jay gives them the key to the liquor cabinet and a night of partying ensues where everybody decides to just get wasted, and as one can deduce, things deteriorate from that point on.

One accidental death leads to tensions and distrust mounting. Soon people are offing each other for various reasons and though Jay had sworn nobody was going to play the Watcher’s game, soon they all are.

Do any of those beats sound unpredictable? That’s because they aren’t. It doesn’t really bring anything new to the genre or stray from the path. If House of 9 was part of a kid’s coloring book, it would definitely be one of the paint-by-number pages. However, I can’t say it wasn’t entertaining. It might not be high-art on the story front, but the concept is strong enough that even though I’ve seen it repeatedly … my brain tunes in. Is it that the decline of society is such an interesting concept, even the most basic of its representations still amuse me? Possibly. It’s just good fun.

On a technical aspect, the film is actually pretty damn good. I’m not sure if Munroe is to credit, or his editor but as the tensions raise and the stakes get higher they do a nifty little thing with the editing. The audio goes out of sync for a couple of frames before switching to the appropriate shot and it’s a big jarring. It heightens the tension at the right moments and lets you feel the decline. Some of the shots of the mansion are also pretty beautiful and help show the fractured relationships by isolating certain individual or groups. For that, I’ll give the guy credit. He might not have a lot under his belt in the way of Directing but he shows promise.

The acting really isn’t bad at all. I’ve seen other reviewers knock the acting, but Dennis Hopper doesn’t phone it in and the majority of the actors are really convincing. Despite being a rapper primarily, Asher D. does show some acting chops and Raffaello Degruttola (Jay) comes across consistently genuine in his desire to protect and serve. In these types of situations, you always wonder if the cop will end up being true blue or if he’ll succumb to the same desperation as every one else and the answer might surprise you. I really have no gripes with most of the acting, but you might not see any Awards being handed out either.

Don’t see this movie because you expect it to be genius. See it because it is what it is: a pretty damn entertaining movie that follows convention but at least that convention is something entertaining. This movie is about a very fundamental truth of humanity … and for that, I am going to turn to a very wise man to explain what that truth is.

“You see, their morals, their code, it’s a bad joke. Dropped at the first sign of trouble. They’re only as good as the world allows them to be. I’ll show you. When the chips are down, these… these civilized people, they’ll eat each other.”

— Sabbath