Month: July 2021

Released: June 1982

Director: John Carpenter

Rated R

Run Time: 109 Minutes

Distributor: Universal Pictures

Genre: Science Fiction/Horror

Cast:
Kurt Russell: MacReady
Keith David: Childs
Wilford Brimley: Dr. Blair
Richard Dysart: Dr. Copper
Richard Masur: Clark
Charles Hallahan: Norris
Peter Maloney: Bennings
Donald Moffat: Garry
Joel Polis: Fuchs
Thomas G. Waites: Windows
T.K. Carter: Nauls
David Clennon: Palmer

Cult Classic: Something, typically a movie or book, that is popular or fashionable among a particular group or section of society.  I’ve been on a horror movie binge lately.  I recently reviewed the 2005 version of House of Wax, which I mentioned had gotten me back into the genre, but I also watched Spiral, Jigsaw, and recently, A Quiet Place Part II.  I’ve also watched lesser known indie horror films like Girl Next, which I thoroughly enjoyed, and I feel that it will become a cult classic of its own.  I’m a huge fan of old cult classics like Evil Dead, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and DeepStar Six.  I’ve reviewed a lot of horror movies, but to my eternal shame, there’s one movie that I haven’t reviewed on this site yet: John Carpenter’s The Thing.  Certain names are associated with certain movies, because those names are directly responsible for the existence of those films.  Sean S. Cunningham was responsible for Friday The 13th.  Wes Craven: Nightmare on Elm Street.  Tobe Hooper: The Texas Chainsaw Massacre.  Sam Raimi: Evil Dead.  These names are forever etched in the minds and hearts of many a horror fan.  But there is one name that nobody should ever forget: John Carpenter.

The Thing follows a group of scientists and workers in the isolated Outpost 31 in Antarctica.  It’s the beginning of winter, but the scientists witness a lone dog being chased by a Norwegian helicopter.  One of the Norwegians gets out of the helicopter and begins shooting at the dog, hitting Bennings in the process before being shot by the group’s leader, Garry.  Mystified as to why the Norwegians appeared to to be insane, helicopter pilot MacReady and resident physician Dr. Copper head to the Norwegians’ outpost, only to find it completely destroyed.  Discovering an empty ice block and the remnants of a horrendously disfigured body, they head home.  Meanwhile, the lone dog is put into the kennel with the other dogs and it begins to change.  After burning the creature, the scientists discover that the organism has the ability to perfectly imitate any life-form that it absorbs.  Soon, they begin to realize that not everybody is who they appear to be.  The story is remarkably simple, but compelling.  You have a vicious alien life-form that can take the shape of anyone that it comes into contact with and you have an atmosphere rampant with paranoia and suspicion.  The movie drops you in without telling you what’s going on, so you’re discovering things at the same time as the crew of Outpost 31 is.  Some people refer to John Carpenter’s movie as a remake of The Thing From Another World from the 50s.  In point of fact, The Thing more closely resembles its source material, which is Who Goes There? by John W. Campbell.  It’s a great story, and John Carpenter’s film is a wonderful adaptation.

When this movie was released in June of 1982, it was torn to shreds.  You see, two weeks earlier, Steven Spielberg’s family-friendly E.T.: The Extraterrestrial was released.  So, most people were not willing to go see a vicious alien terrorizing a group of isolated scientists.  The movie bombed at the box office.  Yet, when VHS became widely available, more and more people discovered The Thing and began to appreciate it more.  John Carpenter’s The Thing is the very definition of a cult classic.  Yet now, it’s considered to be more than just a cult classic.  It’s widely regarded as one of the best sci-fi/horror movies ever made.  There’s a reason why I said that John Carpenter is a name that should never be forgotten.  This guy helped revolutionize the slasher genre with 1978’s Halloween, and crafted another cult classic that he did with Kurt Russell called Escape From New York.  The Thing is the first film in what Mr. Carpenter calls his “Apocalypse Trilogy.”  The second film being Prince of Darkness and the final one being In the Mouth of Madness.  The reason he calls these films his Apocalypse Trilogy is that they all deal with events that could lead to the end of the world.  The Thing works brilliantly in so many different ways.  It’s atmospheric, it’s intense, and for us gore-hounds, it’s a bloody good time.

Let’s start off with the effects.  The special effects in The Thing were incredibly revolutionary for 1982.  CGI was extremely rudimentary, so that obviously wasn’t considered.  No, they had to rely on practical effects, prosthetics, and puppets for this movie.  They brought in Rob Bottin, who became a special effects superstar overnight and put in the same category as Stan Winston.  It’s gruesome, gory, and slimy.  The creature designs are nightmarish to say the least, and the funny thing is: We don’t actually get to see the true form of this monster.  We see glimpses of it and what it can do, but we never actually see the whole thing, even at the end of the movie.  It works better when left to the imagination, because what I think the actual beast looks like may very well differ from what YOU would think it originally looked like.  Most monster movies make the mistake of showing you the creature too early, but The Thing mixes it up by never keeping it the same shape.  Half the time, it’s disguised as a human being, and that’s where the atmosphere comes in.  In combination with the claustrophobic and isolated setting, it’s a lot easier for paranoia to spread, because not only does this thing imitate the looks, but also their memories and behaviors, right down to their little quirks, so the characters never know who is who.

Speaking of characters, we got a real motley crew of diverse folks here.  At helm is MacReady, the resident helicopter pilot and all-around bad-ass, played to perfection by Kurt Russell.  David Clennon plays Palmer, the resident stoner and conspiracy theorist.  The late Wilford Brimley plays Dr. Blair, the resident surgeon and the guy that figures out how dangerous this creature is later on, and while he’s level-headed for most of the movie, when he goes crazy, he goes crazy.  Thomas G. Waites plays Windows, the high-strung communications guy who can’t seem to get a hold of anybody in Antarctica.  Keith David just knocks it out of the park as Childs.  In fact, The Thing was David’s first real big role in a movie, which is outstanding.  All the actors do an outstanding job.  There isn’t one weak link in the casting here.  One of the best things about this movie is the score by famed composer Ennio Morricone.  It’s never over-the-top bombastic.  It’s very low-key and minimalist which really adds to the atmosphere.  There’s a lot of simple beats and synthesized elements that fit incredibly well with the film’s tone.

As a matter of fact, there’s very little to complain about with this movie, if anything.  It’s very rare to see a horror movie that works on every single level and doesn’t falter, even at the end.  It’s a credit John Carpenter and his team that The Thing works as well as it does.  While it wasn’t well-received when it was first released, it has since garnered a HUGE following since the advent of home video.  Horror fans around the world have claimed that The Thing is one of the best movies of its kind, with amazing practical effects that hold up after nearly 40 years.  The tension, the paranoia and the overall atmosphere of the film makes it a classic.  If you’re a huge fan of horror and haven’t seen this yet, what’s wrong with you?  John Carpenter’s film would get a follow-up movie called…The Thing in 2011.  It was more of a prequel than anything, as it followed the events of what happened at the Norwegian camp.  It’s not a bad movie, but the over-use of CGI for the creatures was very disappointing.  It’s still worth checking out at least, but John Carpenter’s film is an absolute must-own/must-see by any self-respecting horror movie enthusiast.

It generally brings me no joy to report on the cancellation of a film project of any kind.  It happens all the time, actually.  Sometimes a script doesn’t get picked up by a movie studio, or they don’t get money for the project, or something tragic happens, but movie projects can get cancelled for many reasons.  Anybody who knows me, knows how much of an action movie junkie I am.  One of my favorite action movies of ALL TIME was Die Hard.  The original movie starred Bruce Willis as New York cop John McClane as he finds himself in a high-rise building taken over by terrorists.  Said terrorists are lead by the charismatic, yet enigmatic Hans Gruber, played to eloquent perfection by the late great Alan Rickman.  Die Hard was the movie that shot Bruce Willis into superstardom as the next big action hero.  Die Hard is a true action classic by any fan of movies.  Die Hard 2 took place in an airport, and while it wasn’t as good as the first, it was still wildly entertaining.  Die Hard With A Vengeance was the third film, and reunited Bruce Willis with director John McTiernan, and brought Jeremy Irons on board as Simon Gruber, the brother of Hans Gruber, and introduced Samuel L. Jackson as Zeus, a pawn shop owner.  Again, this was a legitimately great action film, and one of the better sequels to come out in the early 90s.  Live Free or Die Hard was the first in the franchise to receive a PG-13 rating, but it was still a lot of fun, but an R-rated version was later released on DVD.  That brings me to the last Die Hard film to be released: A Good Day to Die Hard.  Despite what many people say about the movie, I enjoyed it to a certain extent, but the fact was not lost on me that this movie is one of the most generic action movies ever made.  That’s not something you want to hear about a Die Hard movie.  Die Hard 5 was generic in every single way.  The Russian villains were generic, the plot surrounding a nuclear device was generic, and even the action sequences were incredibly generic.  There was NOT an aspect of this movie that hasn’t been done better.  Olympus Has Fallen was a better Die Hard movie, and it wasn’t a Die Hard movie.

That brings us to Die Hard 6, or McClane as it was initially announced.  A couple years back, it was announced that a 5th sequel to Die Hard would involve the story of John McClane jumping back and forth between when the character was a rookie cop, to present day.  It sounded interesting, but considering how phoned in that Bruce Willis’ performance was in the last movie, I had no real expectations that this was going to be any good.  Well, according to Polygon, the Die Hard prequel is no more.  Why?  Well, when Disney bought 20th Century Fox, a lot of the franchises that belonged to Fox, were now under the Disney umbrella.  While some franchises appear to have survived, others have been put on the back burner.  Die Hard is apparently one of those that’s been shelved.  I’m not surprised.  The response to the previous two films was not positive, although Live Free or Die Hard fared a bit better, but number 5 got torn to shreds, with critics labeling Bruce Willis’ performance as one of the worst of his career.  So, where do I stand on this?  I’m a huge fan of the franchise.  I always have been.  I’ve even given the last two movies a lot of lee-way in terms of entertainment, but Die Hard 5 was so aggressively generic, that I couldn’t muster up the energy to hate it.  And it breaks my heart that Bruce Willis is at the point where he just doesn’t even care anymore.  Between 1988 and 2007, his career was at an all-time high.  He had roles all over the place from The Jackal, The Whole Nine Yards, The Sixth Sense, The Fifth Element, and Unbreakable.  He was one of the most versatile and bankable stars in Hollywood.  He was Hollywood royalty.  But over the last decade, he’s been phoning in his performances more and more, to the point where it is clear that he cares more about getting a paycheck than the art.  So, I’m actually glad that they decided NOT to proceed with another Die Hard movie.  The last thing the fans need is another entry in a franchise that has been dragged through the mud by an actor that no longer cares.

Does the cancellation of Die Hard 6 mean the end of Die Hard in general?  Maybe, maybe not.  It’s been nearly a decade since the last film, but even so, I think it’s time to lay it rest.  When people are asked about Die Hard, they don’t remember the last two movies.  No, they go back to the original three?  Some will say, “that one at the airport,” which is Die Hard 2, or “that one with Samuel L. Jackson.”  The original trilogy is a group of movies that have stood the test of time and are the ones that people remember most.  Not just for being awesome action movie, but for the way they were made.  The first three movies were done in an era where CGI was still in an experimental stage.  They had barely begun to grasp the power of CGI.  The first three Die Hard movies didn’t use CGI, or at least very little in the third film.  It was mostly done practically, and you can feel the danger that John McClane was getting himself into.  He was the everyman that you could relate to.  In Die Hard 5, he was just an ass that punched random people and stole their cars.  THAT’S not the McClane that audiences rooted for.  Could Disney bring back Die Hard at some point?  Possibly, but I don’t think they would, since movies like John Wick and Olympus Has Fallen have taken the genre to new heights.  It’s time to move on from Die Hard.

Released: June 2021

Director: Larry Wade Carrel

Not Rated

Run Time: 102 Minutes

Distributor: Gravitas Ventures

Genre: Horror/Thriller

Cast:
Marcus Jean Pirae: Heinrich
Paula Marcenaro Solinger: Misha
Lacey Cofran: Lorian West
Rachel Alig: Charlotte
Larry Wade Carrel: Sheriff Maddox

It’s very rare for a movie to take me completely by surprise.  Sometimes certain start off interesting enough, but they devolve into what ends up being a more generic action/thriller kind of movie.  Sometimes it’s satisfying, other times it’s not.  It generally depends on how well it’s written.  When it comes to kidnap thrillers or movies that deal with human trafficking, they tend to follow a very similar pattern:  1.Victim gets kidnapped. 2.Loved ones panic when the victim doesn’t come home. 3. Father/husband/brother leaves to find out what’s happened 4. Insidious plot discovered with a serious time crunch. 5. Hero finds victim only for them to be stolen away again or killed. 6. Hero hunts down kidnappers and takes revenge.  That’s most of those movies in a nutshell.  It’s not always a bad thing if it’s done well.  But after Taken came out, a lot of copy-cat movies attempted to do exactly what Taken did.  Even Rambo went down that road.  But every once in a blue moon, I come across a thriller that looks fairly generic on the DVD cover, but the movie itself is so much more.  That is exactly what I got with Girl Next.

From the DVD summary: “A young woman, Lorian West, is abducted by a strange group of human traffickers who use drug and trauma based mind control to turn women into sex slaves called “Sofia” dolls.  Trapped in a waking nightmare Lorian fights to resist the programming.  She searches for a way to escape her fate, to avoid becoming Girl Next.”  While that summary seems pretty simple, you’ll find out 30 minutes into the movie that nothing is as it seems.  This is the kind of story that I like.  It starts off in a very familiar way, but pretty soon, it veers off into left field, and Girl Next goes all the into left field.  We meet these two people, Henrich and Misha, who run this barn where they turn women into these “dolls.”  They use drugs and torture to get the women to obey, so they can be sold, but the money they get from a corrupt sheriff, they use to develop a new kind of hallucinogenic drug.  At this point, the movie basically becomes a bit of an acid trip.  The way it’s filmed, you’re never clear as to what’s real and what isn’t.  I love the fact that the movie kept me guessing the whole way through.  While there are moments in the story that are uncomfortable and brutal, you’re constantly left asking, “what the hell am I watching?”  The entire story and film are one big WTF, and I was NOT expecting it.  That’s a very good thing.

I have to say that the acting in this film is surprisingly pretty decent.  The two main villains played by Marcus Jean Pirae(Heinrich)and Paula Marcenaro Solinger(Misha)are pretty good.  They aren’t particularly likable but their antics throughout the film make them entertaining to watch.  The film’s director, Larry Wade Carrel plays the sleazy sheriff Maddox, and he’s good at making that guy a creepy sumbitch.  I have to give credit to newcomer Lacy Cofran as Lorian West because her character definitely gets put through the wringer, but Lacy is clearly committed to the role, and she hits every note that she’s supposed.  I want to see more from this actress.  The real stand-out of the film, though, is Rachel Alig as Charlotte.  Every time she’s on the screen, she commands it.  Her character is just so bizarre and crazy, you’re never quite sure what she’s all about.  Again, that’s one of the film’s neat tricks about keeping you guessing.  Is Charlotte an ally of Lorian’s, or is she something else entirely?  It really isn’t until the end of the movie that you finally figure what’s happening…mostly, but even then, you’re left with questions.  I love the unpredictability of movies like this.  That also comes down to the film’s writing, and it’s pretty strong.  The dialogue’s not the greatest, but the twists and the turns throughout the film are the result of a writer that knows what he’s doing.

Because there’s a lot of drug use in the film, the imagery is often hallucinogenic and downright bizarre.  Once again, you’re never 100 percent sure of the film’s reality.  Some of the stuff that you see including the giant clown heads that appear out of nowhere make you question if YOU’RE the one that’s on drugs.  In terms of visual effects, the CGI blood is painfully obvious, but thankfully, a lot of the gore and special effects appear to be practical.  It’s not until the final act that things really start getting bloody.  It’s incredibly satisfying when it does happen.  I also have to say that some of the cinematography isn’t too shabby.  Truthfully, though, this does NOT have the look of a theatrical release.  It’s definitely got the look of a VOD-style movie, but again, that’s not really a bad thing, considering the film was made for close to a million bucks.  That’s pretty good actually.

There are a couple of issues here that mar the experience a bit.  For instance, the pacing of the film is all over the place.  There are moments when it feels like it drags, and others where it goes full steam.  That causes issues with tension and the suspension of disbelief.  The other is the over-reliance on the sex scenes for shock value.  If they were attempting to turn this into some kind of erotic thriller, they didn’t succeed, because the subject of human trafficking doesn’t lend itself to the idea of an erotic thriller.  Not very well, at least.  Again, I have to credit to Miss Cofran for willing to put herself through all that.  That takes guts.  She was able to handle the physicality and emotional bits very well.  Ultimately, I found Girl Next to be a lot smarter and better than I was anticipating.  I blind-bought the DVD, and I was honestly expecting another run-of-the-mill human trafficking thriller.  Let me tell you, there’s nothing run-of-the-mill about this one.  This is one of the rare indie films that took me by surprise in the best ways.  I will warn you that the overt sexuality and some of the torture scenes may be a little much for some, but what we really have here is a solid and unpredictable little thriller that could…and did.  I have to recommend it, especially to fans of thrillers and acid trips.  Check it out.  It’s currently available on DVD/Blu-Ray and VOD.

I was debating whether or not I should actually do this, but with the release of Kevin Smith’s Masters of the Universe: Revelation Part 1 on Netflix, I have some thoughts.  Those thoughts are mostly going to deal with the fan reaction to the show and Kevin Smith’s reaction to the fans.  Before I go any further, I want to preface this by saying that I’m coming at this from the perspective of a fan.  I’m not necessarily a fan of the He-Man franchise, but a fan of cartoons, TV shows, and movies in general.  The reaction to the launch trailer of Masters of the Universe was fairly well-received if memory serves.  The actual fan reaction to the show itself is brutal with a 30 percent on Rotten Tomatoes and an even worse 1.9 on Metacritic.  It’s absolutely savage.  There are positive audience scores out there, but the negative ones completely outweigh the positive.  I wanted to watch the show myself before commenting on the Kevin Smith vs. the fans controversy.  What did I think of the show?  It wasn’t bad.  I liked the animation and art style, and I felt that some of the story choices were ballsy for a show like this, but the voice acting was not great, and other story elements just weren’t that great.  I would honestly that the show is more average than anything.  But a lot of people didn’t feel that way at all.  In a lot of the reviews that I saw, people had accused Kevin Smith of lying to the audience about the show and pulling a “bait-and-switch.”  YouTubers like Geeks + Gamers, Clownfish, and others all piled on.  Kevin Smith in turn, lashed out at his critics, accusing the fans of being fake and not actually understanding the source material.

The thing about being a fan of something is our passion for the particular subject, be it a movie, video game, or a book.  If we really like something, we do whatever we can to make sure other people know about it.  At the same time, when someone doesn’t like it as much as we do, we have a tendency to lash out and accuse the naysayer of being negative for the sake of being negative.  It happens all the time, it doesn’t matter what the medium is.  On the other side of the coin, if there’s something we hate, we tear it to shreds, but when somebody likes it when we don’t, then they’re called a “shill” or servant of whatever production studio that produced the thing.  With fans, it’s almost always all or nothing, very little in between, and that presents a serious problem, because when there’s pushback, any and all civility is thrown out the window.  It becomes a mud-sling contest.  This situation with fans against Kevin Smith is a prime example.  Should Mr. Smith have been more straight-forward about what he had intended to do with Masters of the Universe: Revelation?  Maybe, but that doesn’t give people the right to personally attack the man and call him a liar.  How do you think that somebody like Kevin Smith would react?  Do you think somebody like him would take that lying down?  It doesn’t matter if he didn’t fully represent his product.  Calling him names and accusing him of stuff is counter-productive.  Kevin Smith is clearly a reactionary kind of guy, and he reacted.  Not smartly, but he reacted, as would anybody trying to defend their creation.  But the problem with Kevin is that he responds by accusing the fans of not being real fans and just trying to stir up trouble.  Kevin Smith is a film-maker.  He should know better than to engage the fan-base on that level.  People have opinions and some of them are going to be very strong.  He needs to learn to take it on the chin and keep on truckin’.  But he doesn’t, and that’s getting him into trouble, and because he won’t shut up, it’s going to cause damage to Mattel and the Masters of the Universe brand.

Would you want to be partnered with a film-maker that’s more than willing to go toe-to-toe with the fans that made your brand what it is?  This is toxicity feeding toxicity making more…toxicity.  It’s a vicious cycle and it demeans everybody involved.  I’m not going to go out there and say that I haven’t done some of that, because I have.  We all have.  And before somebody jumps in with the whole “woke is broke” bullshit…just don’t.  Anybody who uses the term “woke” instead of constructive criticism should be ignored.  It’s a term that’s been misused by both the left and the right, and is a convenient term for when you don’t want to explain why you don’t like movies or shows with messages.  I will not take you seriously if you use that term.  It’s okay to be a fan of something.  It demonstrates a passion for certain topics or movies or whatever.  It’s something to be celebrated, actually.  I’m a fan of a great many things, but I’m also not a fan of others and that’s perfectly fine.  Having a different perspective for a discussion can be healthy and invigorating.  There’s nothing like a good debate to get the juices flowing.  But when the fandom starts crossing over into mud-slinging, people need to be aware of how far they’re going.  The moment you start calling somebody names, you’ve lost the argument before it even began.  I’ve had to learn that the hard way.  So, who is to truly blame for this situation: The fans or Kevin Smith?  If I had to point fingers, it would be at both sides.  It sounds non-committal, I know, but the situation isn’t as simple as some people would have you believe, and it’s not something I’m really prepared to dive further into.  These are basically “surface” thoughts about the whole thing.