Day 232: Hollow Man

Hollow Man

Is that Jason Vorhees? Michael Myers? Ken Dryden?

Dracula, Frankenstein, The Wolfman, The Mummy. Everyone knows these classic monsters from the Golden Era of horror movies. They have had countless adaptations, remakes, and re-imaginings. One monster, though, has been looked over more than the Creature From The Black Lagoon. I'm talking about the Invisible Man. Perhaps it's because the Invisible Man is, well, a man or maybe he is not as visually appealing as the other monsters, but for whatever reason, the Invisible Man is just not very popular. Maybe a modern take on the story would breathe new life into the character just like The Mummy series with Brendan Frasier. Having Kevin Bacon involved is a good start.

Hollow Man is a 2000 science-fiction horror movie inspired by the H.G. Wells story, The Invisible Man. The movie stars Kevin Bacon (Tremors, Apollo 13) as Dr. Sebastian Caine and Elisabeth Shue (Adventures In Babysitting, The Karate Kid) as Dr. Linda McKay. They are part of a team of scientists, including Dr. Matt Kensington (Josh Brolin, No Country For Old Men, W.), working on an invisibility serum for the Pentagon. They test their serum on animals and are capable of turning them invisible, but cannot return them to their visible state. Sebastian has a breakthrough and injects an invisible gorilla with the new serum, making it visible again. When asked by his government superiors about his progress, Sebastian does not tell them about the breakthrough. He believes that in order to keep control of his work he must test the serum on himself. Sebastian asks Matt and Linda to lie to the rest of the team for him in order to convince them to test the serum himself. Unbeknownst to him, Matt and Linda are secretly seeing each other romantically. With his group's help, Sebastian, through a great deal of physical pain and psychological stress, becomes invisible. Unfortunately, they are unable to turn him back, and the added power of being able to go anywhere undetected affects Sebastian's already fragile mental stability. Sebastian begins to harass his co-workers and people out in public, even molesting Linda in her sleep. When Linda and Matt tell their superior, Dr. Kramer, about what has happened, Sebastian drowns him in a pool. With his sanity slipping, Sebastian begins killing the members of his team one by one. How will Linda and Matt be able to stop someone they can't even see?

Six degrees of Kevin Bacon looking like a Jack O'Lantern

Most incarnations of the Invisible Man suffer from a lack of visuals. They show nothing and we just have to take their word for it that someone is there. They have to rely on bandages and clothing to show the Invisible Man, even thought there is no real point for him to have clothes on. Hollow Man uses modern special effects to actually make that weakness into it's greatest strength. The effects used throughout the movie look great, from highly detailed muscles and nervous systems to Kevin Bacon's transparent eyes when he wears synthetic skin. Special effects can only go so far, though. The movie starts out promising with good character development and a believable basis in science. The movie slows down once Sebastian becomes invisible, exactly where the movie should speed up. It takes too long for things to happen and when they finally do, it's very predictable. This is also around the same time that the movie goes from interesting and suspenseful to typical horror movie, complete with a race against time to stop an explosion. The movie poses interesting questions about absolute power corrupting absolutely and then just kind of forgets about them.

Director Paul Verhoeven is no stranger to science fiction/action movies with a resume including Total Recall, Starship Troopers, and Robocop. The action isn't the issue as there is plenty of it, with a good amount of blood and violence. The science fiction is fine, but not great as the movie loses it's direction in favor of action and special effects. It doesn't help that the movie is at least 20 minutes too long for no particular reason. The horror is pretty straightforward, which is unfortunate, because the Invisible Man has the potential to be scary in a cerebral way. Why not have him whisper in someone's ear rather than just charge at them with a weapon? That's just lazy writing. Kevin Bacon makes for a very good villian as the he is able to capture the egomaniacal nature and rage of Sebastian. Elisabeth Shue is good as well, pulling off the vulnerable yet confident Linda. Josh Borlin is fine, though he is just kind of “there” throughout the movie. 

"You spilled my cranberry juice! I'll kill you!"

It's always nice to see a horror movie use a classic character, especially one that doesn't receive much attention. Hollow Man gives the Invisible Man a modern spin, basing it in the modern world and giving it a heavy dose of science. The special effects are fantastic, even 12 years later. The violence is good and there is enough action to keep things interesting. The movie is a bit too long and tends to slow down in the middle. There are some missed opportunities for good scares as the movie goes for a more straightforward horror feel. The acting is good, but the story laves something to be desired. The movie did very well at the box office, and I can see the appeal. It's a good popcorn flick, but it is missing that something special to make it memorable.

6/10

Day 231: The Crazies

The Crazies

If you lived in Iowa, you'd  be crazy too

In previous reviews, I've talked about how horror remakes are not necessarily a bad thing. Many horror remakes nowadays are a simple cash-grab, piggybacking off mostly well-known movies in hopes of making a buck. A great example of this is Michael Bay's Platinum Dunes production company, who have remade the decent A Nightmare on Elm St, the passable Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and the horrendous The Hitcher. For every 5 terrible horror remakes, though, there lies a great one, bringing a lesser-known movie to a new audience with an updated take. The 1982 version of The Thing was probably the best example of an a horror movie remake being better than the original. Can the same be said for a remake of a lesser-known George Romero film?

The Crazies is a 2010 remake of the 1973 horror movie by George Romero (Night Of The Living Dead, Monkey Shines). This version stars Timothy Olyphant (Deadwood, Justified) as David, the local sheriff in the small town of Ogden Marsh, Iowa. During a high school baseball game, when Rory Hamill, a local resident, wanders onto the field brandishing a shotgun. David clears the field and approaches Rory while his deputy, Russell Clank (Joe Anderson, The Ruins, Across The Universe) covers him. Rory, unresponsive to demands to stop, raises his gun and David shoots him dead. David is shaken, but comforted by his wife Judy (Radha Mitchell, Silent Hill, Pitch Black) the local doctor. Other townspeople begin to exhibit strange behavior, including Judy's brother-in-law, who kills her sister and nephew and sets their house on fire. The next day, David and Russell are called out to a swamp where a dead pilot was found by hunters. David discovers the pilot's military plane submerged underwater, the same body of water that supplies the town. David manually shuts down the water after being denied by the mayor. When he returns to town, he finds it deserted, save for a black SUV that speeds off when he gets close. The town is then swarmed by the military and scientists, quarantining the area and separating the townspeople by who is infected and who is not. Judy is deemed infected despite explaining her fever is due to her being pregnant. David and Russell are able to rescue Judy and Becca, her assistant, before an infected person, or Crazy, is able to kill them. On the run, the group has to hide from the soldiers and fight off the Crazies. Becca is killed when they get stuck inside an automatic car wash and their car is blown up by a helicopter. Russell becomes more agitated and aggressive as the continue on and uses spike strips to stop an oncoming SUV, causing it to flip repeatedly. David questions the official inside and learns that the town is infected with a biological weapon called “Trixie”. Enraged, Russell shoots him in the head. Between the military and a now infected Ruseell, how will David and Judy escape and survive.

Wizard of Oz gets grim and gritty

While this version of The Crazies does have the same basic story, names, and overtones as the original, it really is it's own movie. The original had a subplot involving government officials and delved into some other themes that the remake skipped over for the better. This version is more streamlined with an easily to follow story, likable characters, and better action. The Crazies is essentially a zombie movie without the traditional zombies, but still maintains the political and social commentary. The movie smartly raises the question of government involvement, suppression, and biological war. The infected people can no longer control their actions and almost anybody could become one, pitting neighbors against neighbors. We the audience are conflicted because while we want David and Judy to escape the containment, but put the rest of the world at risk. It's this conflict that makes the movie both thrilling and compelling.

The movie is highly entertaining thanks to solid action and great acting. There is danger around every corner in The Crazies making for some very good scares. There is a good amount of violence with lots of blood and some gore. The Crazies look very good with specific, believable makeup. Director Breck Eisner (Sahara, Fear Itself) made sure that the makeup for the Crazies came from real-life diseases. This attention to detail made the movie more believable and maintained the Crazies human traits. As someone who has seen a lot of zombie movies, it was a little weird to hear the Crazies speak and be coherent, but since this isn't a traditional zombie movie, it's fine. Breck does a good job of capturing both the action and fear in the movie, making for a fast-paced and exciting watch. Timothy Olyphant is great in his role, which should be no surprise since he plays a law officer in Deadwood, Gone In Sixty Seconds, and Justified. This isn't new ground for him. Radha Mitchell is good as well, exuding confidence and love. Joe Anderson puts in the best performance as Russell, becoming more and more unhinged as the movie progresses. As someone who has spent an extended period of time in Iowa, the location for the movie is a great choice. It is isolated, plain and boring, an unsuspecting “All American” place where nothing can seemingly go wrong.

"Uh, I'll just ask someone else for directions."

The Crazies is able of breaking the horror remake curse by bringing a lesser-known horror movie to a new audience while improving upon the original. This version maintains the strong social commentary and the heart of the original movie. It is essentially a zombie movie without all the brain-eating and head shooting. The action is much better thanks to a bigger budget and effects. There is a good amount of blood and gore with lots of variation. Timothy Olyphant, Radha Mitchell, and Joe Anderson all put in very good performances which help make the movie believable. When a movie is as good as The Crazies, it's hard to completely be against horror remakes.

8.5/10

Day 230: Eraserhead

Eraserhead

Crazy is as crazy does

There's weird, there's crazy, and then there is David Lynch. As the creator of such mind-melting media as Twin Peaks and Lost Highway, Lynch has been able to forge an entire career based on being insanely weird, yet amazingly compelling. Nothing is ever quite what it seems when it comes to his work. I knew all of this prior to watching today's review and this prior knowledge did absolutely nothing for me. I was ready to stare into the abyss, but not ready to see something staring back at me.

Eraserhead is a 1977 surrealist movie, which can be interpreted as horror, starring Jack Nance (Twin Peaks, Blue Velvet) as Henry Spencer. Henry lives in an urban wasteland, currently on vacation from his job as a printer. A deformed man inside a planet pulls levers and we see something float out of Henry's mouth. Henry goes to his girlfriend Mary X's (Charlotte Stewart, Twin Peaks, Tremors) house to have dinner with her strange family. Mary's mother corners Henry and asks him if he has had sexual relations with Mary. Henry is incredibly uncomfortable especially when she tries to kiss him. She reveals that Mary has given birth extremely prematurely and that Henry must marry her. Mary and the baby, which is extremely deformed and almost lizard-like, move into Henry's tiny one-room apartment. The baby cries incessantly, causing Mary to flee, leaving Henry to care for it. The baby becomes sick and Henry begins to have strange and inexplicable experiences. He sees the “Lady In The Radiator,” a woman with an abnormally puffed-out face dancing on a stage and singing, “In Heaven, everything is fine.” He also sees the Man In The Planet and dreams that his head falls off, replaced by the head of his deformed baby. While Mary is gone, Henry has a brief affair with a woman from across the hall. Later, is crushed when he sees the woman with another man and the visions continue. What does this all mean?

I wish this hairstyle caught on instead of that swoopy, emo Zelda haircut

I did my best to explain what happens in Eraserhead, but honestly, there are some things that can't be described and do not make sense unless you see them for yourself. David Lynch has never revealed exactly what the movie is about or what certain scenes are supposed to mean. I am hesitant to interpret them, not for fear of being wrong, but there are just so many surreal scenes that it's hard to pinpoint exactly what is happening. Is Henry's story all a dream or a nightmare? Is he dead and this is some sort of limbo? Is the Man In The Planet a god or a devil? While it's not a traditional horror movie, it is scary on a cerebral level. The movie is incredibly unsettling and disturbing. Nothing ever really makes sense, making everything far more creepier than it appears.

Despite the movie being incredibly weird, Eraserhead is still an important film, showcasing David Lynch's earliest work and earning a place in the National Film Registry. The black and white aesthetic appeals to the off-the-wall nature of the movie. Sound is an important part of the movie as the audience is constantly bombarded with countless noises. Howling wind is a big constant throughout, along with the whining cry of the baby and the hissing of the radiator. While our sight is assailed with bizarre and often times baffling imagery, the noises attack our hearing, leading to a full auditory assault. All of this makes for a difficult viewing experience, forcing some people to take a break from viewing. The acting is good for what it is, although I have no idea if bad acting would actually hurt the film. 

In Heaven, everything is AAAAAAHHHH!!!!

Eraserhead is a mesmerizing and mysterious film that can shock, scare, and baffle people. I'm not totally sure if I enjoyed the movie, but I felt compelled to watch it. Eraserhead is an experience unto itself with crazy visuals, interesting sounds, and a story that goes nowhere and everywhere at the same time. You will leave with more questions than answers and unsure of what you've just seen. Film school students will enjoy this as well as fans of horror. It shows how something can be scary without having monsters or violence. Eraserhead is a unique experience worth your time, but it does take a considerable amount of effort to get through and absorb. I have no idea what I just watched, but I'm OK with that.

7/10

Day 229: Graveyard Shift

Graveyard Shift

Sure he's missing his eye and skin, but he still has his smile

Stephen King is a household name. While the mainstream audience knows him from his work on The Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile, and Stand By Me, we horror fans love him for his work on such classics as Children Of The Corn, Cujo, The Stand, and The Shining. King is able to create horror movies in believable setting and weave tales that are both compelling and horrifying. His stories are full of suspense yet we cannot look away. Being a superstar writer whose movies have also become big hits, I find it strange when I come across a movie based on his work that I've never heard of before. What could possibly be the reason?

Graveyard Shift is a 1990 horror movie based on the short story of the same name by Stephen King. The movie stars David Andrews (Fight Club, Apollo 13) as John Hall, a drifter who has just arrived in a small town in Maine. He goes to the local textile mill and is able to procure a job from the manager, Mr. Warwick (Stephen Macht, General Hospital, The Monster Squad), a sadistic man that enjoys verbally abusing and punishing his workers. John works the graveyard shift, 11 pm to 7am, pulling cotton from a separating machine. The mill is infested with rats and John tries to scare them off by throwing empty soda cans at them with a slingshot. Warwick employs Tucker Cleveland (Brad Dourif, Deadwood, The Lord Of The Rings: The Two Towers), a disturbed Vietnam veteran, as the mill's exterminator, but he is unable to keep the population under control. The mill should be closed down due to the infestation and potential fire hazards, but Warwick is able to bribe inspectors and keep it open. Workers sent down to clean up the basement start to disappear. When the exterminator goes into the graveyard next to the mill to kill rats, something pulls him down into the ground. Warwick send Hall and several other workers to clean up the basement. They discover a subterranean maze beneath the mill that leads into the adjacent graveyard. They also realize that they are not alone. Something is done their with them, picking them off one by one and eating them. Hall, an unraveling Warwick, and the rest try to flee onto to come across a mound of bones, belonging to missing workers and the graveyard. What is this horrible monster and how will they survive?

"Oh yeah, you're going to need that tooth removed."

Well, there's a good reason why I've never heard of this Stephen King movie: it's just not good. Graveyard Shift is a simple monster movie that takes way to long to get to the point, forcing the audience to sit through a whole lot of nothing. There are a few hints at the monster living beneath the mill, barely enough to keep things interesting. Despite John Hall being the main character of the movie, more time is spent on Mr. Warwick. He's the most developed and entertaining character in the movie, so I understand why, but then why bother with focusing on the background of Hall when it really doesn't matter. There's no need to make him a drifter if it really makes no difference. He could have just as easily been a regular worker. They tried to make him interesting and set him up as a hero, but it feels too hollow, mostly due to the story being stretched out. As a short story, I can see the appeal of Graveyard Shift, but as a full-length movie it doesn't work. The plot is very basic and when you stretch it out over and hour and a half, you realize how thin it really is.

The movie tries to make up for the lack of entertainment by cramming in a lot of excitement and violence in the last twenty minutes or so. When it finally becomes a horror movie, Graveyard Shift becomes far more watchable and fun to watch. The sets used for the underground tunnels look adequately creepy and the dark atmosphere plays nicely with the violence. The monster looks pretty good when it was finally revealed as some kind of giant, mutated bat. Making the monster a bat does beg the question of why were rats a big focus for most of the movie. Shouldn't the big monster be a rat? The inclusion of rats made me hope that the movie would be similar to H.P. Lovecraft's “The Rats In The Walls,” one of my favorite Lovecraft stories. While the stories are separate, the scene where Hall is climbing a huge pile of human bones in an underground labyrinth is straight out of “The Rats In The Walls” and was very cool to see. One thing that wasn't a problem in the movie was the acting. Everyone plays their part well with Stephen Macht and Brad Dourif putting in the best performances. 

"Have I ever told you about the time I was a doctor in the Old West?"

Graveyard Shift is a good short story, but as a full-length movie, it just doesn't work. Some short stories have enough going on with them that they can be stretched out and easily fill an hour and a half of screen time. The acting is good, so that's not the problem. Unfortunately, Graveyard Shift is unable to do this, leading to boring scenes and weak character development. Nothing of real importance happens until the last twenty minutes or so, which is a shame, because they are a pretty entertaining twenty minutes. They have action, suspense, scares, lots of blood, and even a fight between Hall and Warwick in which they hit each other with skeletons and bones. It's just not enough to make for a better movie.

5/10

Day 228: Shocker

Shocker

It's electric, boogie-woogie-woogie!

Do horror and comedy ever truly mix well? I'm hard-pressed to find a movie that fits both genres well. The closest I can think of are spoofs of well-known horror movies such as Repossessed and the Scary Movie series. Those movies are really just comedies with some horror tropes and references, so I suppose they don't really count. The character of Freddy Kruger is funny throughout the Nightmare on Elm Street movies, but they are certainly not comedic in nature. Scream had it's funny moments, but they were more self-aware clever remarks than straight comedy. Comedy is a science, needing the right amount of wit, timing, and delivery. Horror is broad with lots of variables that can make a movie disturbing or scary. For whatever reason, the two genres are like water and oil, but that doesn't stop people from trying to mash them together.

Shocker is a 1989 horror comedy written and directed by Wes Craven (Scream, The Last House On The Left). The movie stars Peter Berg (Cop Land, Fire In The Sky) as Jonathan Parker and Mitch Pileggi (The X-Files, Sons of Anarchy) as Horace Pinker. A series of brutal murders has gripped a small California suburb with no clues as to who is committing the crimes. Jon Parker is a college football player who has a strange dream-like vision of a bald man murdering his mother, brother, and sister. He see's the man's van outside the house, revealing he is a TV repair man named Horace Pinker. Jon tries to stop the killer by when he lunges at him, he awakens in bed with his girlfriend, Allison (Camille Cooper). When he returns home, Jon discovers that his family has in fact been murdered. His father, Lt. Don Parker (Michael Murphy, X:Men:The Last Stand, Batman Returns) had been working on the serial killer cases, and the killer murdered his family when he got too close. The police go to arrest him, but he escapes, and kills Allison. Jon uses his strange connection to Pinker to help his father and the police force find him again. Pinker kills a few police officers before being arrested and given the electric chair. Before dying, Pinker reveals that he is Jonathan's biological father and that, as a child, Jonathan shot him in the leg to stop him from murdering his mother. Pinker also reveals that he sold his soul to the devil and when the switch is flipped, Pinker becomes pure energy. His new powers allow him to travel through electricity as well and possess people. Pinker, through other people, tries to kill Jonathan through various means, murdering his friends along the way. How will Jonathan be able to stop this supernatural serial killer who can become anyone at any time?

Being executed by the state is a laugh riot. Well, at least in Texas

I really wasn't sure if Shocker was supposed to be a comedy or not because it is simply not funny. It tries some slapstick with Jonathan running into the goalpost during football practice and tries to have funny one-liners ala Freddy Krueger. Both fail miserably. If the movie wanted to be a comedy, it should have focused on that because the horror is not much better. The basic premise of the story is fine with Jonathan having a supernatural connection to a supernatural killer. Unfortunately, the execution of the events in the movie is so clunky that nothing really makes sense. Nothing is ever really explained with things getting progressively weirder. Why are the police so inept? Why does Jonathan continue to run head-long into danger? How is Jonathan able to have the weird visions of both Pinker and his dead girlfriend? Pinker can now jump from person to person, even though he's supposed to be made of energy? And he can now jump out of televisions? What? How? Why? When? It's amazing that this was written by Wes Craven who has a long track record of great horror movies. It's like he took 10 ideas for different movies, threw them in a blender, and then spit it out onto the screen while giving everyone the finger.

While the movie lacks in humor and logic, it does have a good amount of violence. It has lots of gun play, stabbings, and a few explosions. There is nothing particularly gory about the violence, which is surprising considering it's a movie about a supernatural serial killer. The acting throughout is very questionable. Both Peter Berg and Mitch Pileggi have had long careers in show business, so it's not like they didn't know how to act. I chalk up their bad performances to terribly written dialogue and poor direction. Pinker's lines mostly revolve around horrendous one-liners and and curse words. Jonathan spends most of the movie running and looking shocked, but in the last 10 minutes or so, he is all sorts of confident in knowing how to fight Pinker. The special effects used in the movie are decent for the time, but many scenes are obviously in front of a blue screen. The movie is entrenched in the 80's, complete with it's own theme song performed by Paul Stanley from Kiss with members of Def Leppard, Whitesnake, Van Halen, and Motley Crue. It also had an unintentionally funny cover of Alice Cooper's “No More Mr. Nice Guy” performed by Megadeth.

Comedy!

Shocker has very little in the way of comedy and the horror portion of the movie is poorly done. There is nothing particularly funny in the movie, and if there was, I completely missed it. The story is all over the place, leaving logic and reason by the wayside in favor of 80's special effects and chase scenes. It's amazing that Wes Craven was at the helm of this movie and downright shocking (sorry, couldn't help it) that he actually believed this movie would be the start of a series. The dialogue is horrendous and the acting is pretty bad. If you're looking for something to laugh at instead of laugh with, Shocker is your movie.

3/10

Day 227: Alice, Sweet Alice

Alice, Sweet Alice

I don't know, Mitt Romney as president would scare me

“People believe what they want to believe.” That is one of the truest statements ever, not just in a horror movie. The line comes from today's review, Alice, Sweet Alice, but it could pertain to just about anything. Whether it's politics, religion, or even education, people are going to believe what suits their needs or opinions. Global warming is a prime example. We just had the hottest July on record, and I mean ever, and there are some people that still claim climate change is a “myth”. Of course, many of those people have an agenda and need to be taken with a grain of salt when they appear on a news or “news” channel. The used to be the saying “Seeing is believing,” but a more accurate statement would be “Believing is believing”. In horror, the audience is required to believe in what they're seeing, no matter how fantastic or ridiculous. That's all part of the fun.

Alice, Sweet Alice (also known as “Communion” and “Holy Terror” is a 1976 horror movie starring Paula E. Sheppard as Alice Spages and Linda Miller as her mother, Catherine. Set in New Jersey in the 1960's, Catherine's young daughter Karen (Brooke Shields, The Blue Lagoon, Suddenly Susan) is preparing for her first communion. Karen's older sister Alice is extremely jealous of Karen and begins acting out, scaring the housekeeper Mrs. Tredoni, with a bizarre mask. Alice lures Karen out to an abandoned warehouse where she scares her with the same mask and locks her in a room. When she lets Karen out, Alice warns her that if she tells anyone, she'll hide her doll. On the day of the communion, Karen is murdered by someone in a yellow raincoat and the same translucent mask that Alice had been wearing. Her body is dumped into a bench and the crucifix, given to her by Father Tom, and set on fire. Alice is seen walking into the church wearing the same yellow raincoat when a nun smells the smoke and discovers Karen's body. Alice's father Dominick returns for the funeral and reconnects with both Alice and her mother. Catherine's sister Annie also visits, but is constantly berating Alice. One day while going down some stairs, Annie is repeatedly stabbed by the same person who killed Karen. She believes Alice is the attacker, despite having no definitive proof. Alice is given a lie detector test and passes despite saying the killer is Karen. After an evaluation, she is placed in a mental institution against her will. Dom receives a phone call that someone has Karen's crucifix, so he goes to an empty warehouse to claim it. He is stabbed by the masked figure and bashed in the head with a brick. The killer is revealed to be Mrs. Tredoni, who is using her religious fervor as the basis for the attacks. Who will stop Mrs. Tredoni and what will happen to Karen?

Waaaassssuuuuuuuup?!

Alice, Sweet Alice has shades of Hitchcock in it's scope and style. The movie is initially presented as a cut-and-dry slasher movie about a deranged child killing people she doesn't like. The quote from above, though, should obviously lead you to believe otherwise. The characters in the movie and the audience can't help but believe that Alice is the killer even though all the evidence is circumstantial. We want to believe that Karen is the killer because that is the simplest answer. I appreciate the misdirection, but felt a little more foreshadowing would have made the big reveal more believable. While it was a good surprise, once the killer is revealed, I feel that the movie switches gears and becomes a different movie. The heavily religious commentary didn't do much for me because there was a good chunk of the movie where it wasn't addressed. Of course, the previous movie titles “Communion” and the later title “Holy Terror” make more sense in this regard than the more popular name “Alice, Sweet Alice”.

The music used throughout the movie is wonderfully diverse, setting both the tone of the movie and, in certain scenes, juxtaposing the violence with jaunty sounds. When Dom is killed, I noticed there was no music at all, just the sounds of violence and his screams. It was truly unsettling and fit in well with a movie that, while having some scares, is far more uncomfortable than anything else. The acting is pretty good with Paula Sheppard putting in the best performance. This was also the very first movie that Brooke Shields appeared in, and while only appearing briefly, she played her part well. If you need a laugh, listen to her recent appearance on NPR's “Wait, Wait Don't Tell Me” where she discusses the movie with comedian Bobcat Goldthwait. There is a decent amount of blood and violence in the movie, made more effective by the belief that a child is committing the crimes. Director Alfred Sole is able to capture the fear and suspense very well for the movie and it's a surprise he only made one other horror movie before calling it quits.

Take that, Tom Cruise

Alice, Sweet Alice is an entertaining horror movie that gets the audience to question their beliefs in terms of how they perceive things. The religious commentary, while good, fades in and out, occasionally losing focus in favor of Alice's story. The action is solid with some good scares and plenty of unsettling moments. There is some blood and violence with enough suspense to keep the audience on edge. The music is excellent and the directing is competent, complimented by good acting. The movie is a little long and gets a little muddled once the killer is revealed, hurting the flow and momentum. Still, Alice, Sweet Alice is a fun and startling horror movie.

8/10

Day 226: Monsters

Monsters

Looks like a fun horror movie, right? WRONG!

Political commentary is an important part of horror. Most movies have it, even the classics, though you may not notice it. This commentary can range from social issues such as women's rights and racial equality to political issues like healthcare and immigration. Most movies use this commentary as an undercurrent for the story itself, helping, but not overshadowing the horror itself. Dawn Of The Dead is a prime example of making many social points while still putting on an entertaining and fun zombie movie. Other movies, though, put the commentary front and center with less focus on horror.

Monsters is a 2010 science fiction horror movies starring Whitney Able (Remarkable Power, All the Boys Love Mandy Lane) as Samantha Wynden and Scoot McNairy (Bones, My Name Is Earl) as Andrew Kaulder. A few years ago, a NASA deep-space probe crash landed in Mexico, exposing the area to alien life forms. These life forms, which look like a giant octopus with insect legs, spread throughout the area, leading the United States to build a giant wall and quarantining the northern half of Mexico. Andrew is a photographer taking pictures in Mexico of the monster's devastation when he is hired by his wealthy employer to help his daughter Samantha escape Mexico. At first Andrew resists, but is pressured into taking the journey by Samantha's father. Samantha is engaged to be married, but has serious reservations about the man who is to be her husband. Andrew has a young son whom he loves, but rarely gets to see. Samantha plans to take a ferry back to the United States, but after forking over $5,000, they realize that their passports have been stolen. She gives her engagement ring in exchange for help crossing the border. Samantha and Andrew have to take various illegal means to get close to the border while dodging dangerous terrain and the monsters. As their journey continues, they grow close together, confiding in each other. When they reach the border, they find it deserted. As the cross into the States, they find an empty town that appears to have been hit by an air raid. Have the monsters made it across the wall and what will happen to Andrew and Samantha.

Smile! Your life has been ruined!

Monsters is probably more closely associated with science-fiction than horror, but there are just enough horror themes and tropes for it to make the cut. As I said before, it's important for a horror movie to have social commentary. Monsters decides to take that social commentary, shove entertainment out of the way, and bash the audience over the head with it. Believe me, I like social commentary. I studied political science and have worked in politics. I get it and appreciate it when it is done properly. The commentary in the movie is smart and well-thought out, but presented in such a way that made it difficult to sit through. I know what Writer/Director Gareth Edwards was going for, remarking on such things as immigration, the Drug War, Homeland Security, and the U.S. Government, but it's in such a heavy-handed way that professional wrestler Ronnie “Hands of Stone” Garvin should have gotten a production credit.

All of this commentary takes away from most of the scares in the film. The movie was made incredibly cheap which may explain why we rarely see the monsters. They look good, but we really should have seen them a lot more. I mean, the movie is called “Monsters”. Beyond the clever little commentary via the title, I want to see some fucking monsters, not skinny white people talking about their feelings. Most of the movie is just Samantha and Andrew wandering around, almost like a road/buddy movie without the humor. The scenery is pretty fantastic allowing the audience to at least look at something pretty while they're waiting for something to happen. It doesn't really occur as there is very little in the way of action. I found the characters of Samantha and Andrew fairly unpleasant, but not too annoying. Their blossoming love was far too convenient and not particularly believably. On the acting side, both Whitney Able and Scoot McNairy were fine. Not great, but fine.

Hey, put 'Jersey Shore' on!

Monsters is the type of movie other filmmakers love; All talk and very little action. I wish the budget had been bigger for this movie with more scenes of the monsters. It lacked the proper amount of action necessary for it to be entertaining. There are a few scary scenes and some suspense, but not nearly enough. The social commentary is smart, but there is just way too much of it. You are constantly slammed on all sides at all times by the messages. If you're not politically active, you may miss some of the references and ideas, but I don't have that luxury. As far as the story itself goes, it's nothing special and should have had more action. If you're a film school student, you'll probably appreciate it, but if you're looking for good horror and science fiction, look elsewhere.

4.5/10