Memory (2006) review

(7/10)

   Memory is probably one of the most underrated horror movies of its kind. Stellar acting, an enthralling mystery, and some truly creepy imagery kept this semi-confusing and somewhat slow movie afloat. It's a poor man's psychological thriller at best.

PLOT: After accidentally ingesting a hallucinogenic powder being tested on lab rats, Dr. Taylor Briggs (Billy Zane) starts to have strange daydreams, lining up with real murders and tragedies that happened before he was born. After some intense research, things start to get more and more peculiar as Taylor starts to think he's witnessing the past of one of his relatives. Everyone begins to think he's gone crazy, except his lover, artist Stephanie (Tricia Helfer), his mother, Carol (Ann-Margret), and his father-in-law, Max (Dennis Hopper). However, as Taylor and Stephanie start getting to the bottom of these weird visions, they start to notice it may be the missing link in Taylor's family timeline. The plot is essentially a combination of the premise of Altered States and the mechanics of Memento. The plot, at its bare bones, is preposterous and confusing, but by the end of the movie, you'll be impressed to see how they pulled it off. The moments of horror are filmed excellently and the writers, though they got carried away, succeeded in tying up all loose ends.

ACTING: The performances in this movie are very well done. Billy Zane does justice to the part of frantic Dr. Briggs, Tricia Hefler does a great job as the "sidekick", Stephanie. Dennis Hopper and Ann-Margret did an excellent job as the parents, especially Ann-Margret near the end. Everyone does a pretty great job with their parts.

SCORE: The score and soundtrack definitely has potential. The main theme is pretty haunting yet simple, and the alternative soundtrack almost enhances the movie.

OTHER CONTENT: Memory is basically an expected disaster turned good. The movie has its faults, like a preposterous mystery, unnecessary side-conversations, and several confusing turns of events. As evidence is tossed at us and pieced together, the mystery becomes more and more confusing, but just as much enthralling. The victory in this movie is that it succeeded in pulling off a mystery so unrealistic. If the unintentionally-good mystery isn't enough to save this movie, then the horror scenes will. The horror sequences, especially near the movie's finale, are expertly done and very well filmed. I would believe them to be the best sequences in the movie. They're memorable and very unsettling, both respectable factors for a true horror.

   Memory would probably be the biggest expected disaster that somehow saved itself. It may be preposterous, confusing, and unnecessary at times, but it saves itself by sucking you into the mystery and chilling you with the sequences of horror. Most horror fans may end up despising the movie, but I think it's an underrated gem of modern independent horror.

Roman (2006) review

(6/10)

   Offbeat horror director, Lucky McKee, makes his acting debut in this independent, post-May psychological horror, which, though lacking much scare factor and budget, contains much substance.

PLOT: Roman (Lucky McKee) is a recluse of a sort with no friends, no TV and nothing to do but work and watch The Girl (Kristen Bell) pass by his apartment window everyday around 5:30 PM. Roman clearly has a kind of creepy, shy obsession with this girl. One day when Roman decides to get out of the house for a bit, he finally meets this girl. They start to have a few conversations and become friends. Next day, Roman meets the girl outside his apartment after work and invites her in. Things get a little exciting for Roman before she says she has to leave. Roman, in a fit of excitement, doesn't let her leave and accidentally smothers her trying to keep there and keep her quiet. When Roman realizes what he's done, he's distraught and doesn't want to let go of her for anything. In turn, Roman dumps her body in his bathtub and starts to preserve it under ice, as he doesn't want to lose her or have anybody find out. Roman's life continues normally until a new girl moves into the empty apartment. Her name is Eva (Nectar Rose) and she's a very strange character similar to Roman. Roman's life with his "two girlfriends" starts to get better but also very confusing in trying to let go of one obsession and begin with another. The plot is simple but executed pretty decently. Though McKee actually doesn't direct in this one, it still contains a flair of offbeat, disturbing horror through the telling of Roman's obsession with his corpse and his sheltering from the world. It's not perfect, but it could be done so much worse.

ACTING: The acting here is hit-and-miss for the most part. All of the performances are the equivalent to an everyday conversation with the person. Lucky McKee did a decent job as Roman, pulling out all the stops at the end of the movie. Nectar Rose also stood out a bit with her role as the visionary Eva. She took the part as if it came natural. The rest of the performances are just kind of plain, even Kristen Bell as The Girl. The murder scene was pretty much the highlight of her performance.

SCORE: The soundtrack is a weird mix of different kinds of alternative music. Though not too pleasant to hear, it sets the mood quite well for Roman's "dates" and fantasies.

EFFECTS: The only special effects involve the steady-rotting corpse of Roman's obsession. They're very cheap and inexpensive, but I like the fact that they tried to show the passage of time in this manner.

OTHER CONTENT: This movie is definitely a strange one, but for an obscure indie horror, it kind of works. Haunting atmosphere, a well-written script, surreal editing, and a prying look at a the life of an inexperienced recluse help this movie kind of float into the safe zone. This horror is by far not the best, but it would have to be an independent favorite for me. McKee and director Angela Bettis come together to make a very neat little psych horror, with a surprising amount of heart and realism.

   Though McKee isn't in the director's chair this time around, I'd still group it with all of his other works easily. Roman is a haunting, disturbing, and surreal psychological horror that is very underrated. Though the performances and scare factors aren't rock solid, the mood is still set accurately with all other factors falling decently into place. It's nowhere near perfect, but definitely the right touch of offbeat.

We Need to Talk About Kevin (2011) review

(8/10)

This intense drama keeps you on the edge of your seat with compelling performances from the lead actors and a contagious story.

PLOT:Eva (Tilda Swinton) has been a troubled soul since her son, Kevin (Ezra Miller) was born. Kevin has never liked her and has always tried to defy her from toddler years to teen years, running to his dad, Franklin (John C. Reilly). However, things start to change when Kevin grows even more violent and his baby sister is born. Kevin's rebellion and resistance may end up leading the family into the ground. It's a great plot executed brilliantly.



ACTING:The performances in this film are excellent. Tilda Swinton and Ezra Miller both played excellent roles as Eva and Kevin. I really saw a characterized personality in each of their performances and actions. John C. Reilly also played a great part as loving father Franklin. All performances were good and fitting. Even the child actors such as Jasper Newell and Rocky Duer as young Kevin did a great job.

SCORE:The score in this film is pretty cool. It fit the mood very well. It wasn't anything too special though.



OTHER CONTENT:This film is very intense in every sense of the word. As Kevin gets more and more violent and defiant, we get more and more involved in the story until the climactic ending with a single line that expresses so much muddled emotion. However, with all of the vague muddle of the reasoning, we never really find out why Kevin was so mean all of these years. It seems to leave an open hole of opinion to the reason of why Kevin was the way he was. Also, this film could come off as confusing to those who don't understand its form, making it not as widely accepted by everyone. However, this is still a brilliantly done film by director Lynne Ramsay.

OVERALL,a great film with a great plot, excellent performances, cool score, intense twists, and a bunch of emotion hidden, but the reasoning can seem lost and the format of direction could confuse some people.

The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974) review

(10/10)

This original horror classic tops almost all horror films I've seen to date. The emotions captured in this film are amazingly shown with amazing performances and visionary horror direction by Tobe Hooper.

PLOT:A group of friends, including brother and sister Sally (Marilyn Burns) and Franklin (Paul A. Partain), go on a road trip through Texas to visit Sally and Franklin's deceased grandfather's old house. However, weird and disturbing things start happening, including picking up a freaky hitchhiker that looks a lot like Dracula (Edwin Neal). Things get even stranger, especially with the news of graves being robbed and "artwork" of decomposing bodies is being made close by. After their encounter with the strange hitchhiker, the group stop at the house for a while and spot another house out in the distance, which is believed to have gasoline for their van. Upon visiting the house, however, the group finds that the residents aren't your typical neighbors, specifically a psychotic killer brandishing a chainsaw (Gunner Hansen). Now the group must get away or fall victim to the chainsaw. It's a great horror plot executed brilliantly.



ACTING:The acting in this film is excellent. I could see the fear and insanity in each person's eyes during the horrific scenes. The best performances I could mention would be Marilyn Burns as Sally and Gunner Hansen as Leatherface, or the chainsaw killer. I could see perfect horror and insanity in her eyes and actions that it seemed real. Hansen's iconic performance of  Leatherface was just brutal and frightening with beauty in its own ways. Every performance was great because emotion and insanity itself was captured perfectly. The other performances I'd like to mention would be Allen Danziger as Jerry, Paul A. Partain as Franklin, William Vail as Kirk, Teri McMinn as Pam, and Edwin Neal as the hitchhiker.

SCORE:There wasn't much background score in the film except for the music on the radio, which was mainly southern-type. The one memorable theme with the scraping sound effect, however, was very creepy and good in its minimalism. The sound effects worked above everything else because they were insane.

EFFECTS:The effects here were really good for being low-budget in the seventies. The make-up and prop effects for Leatherface and the house were very creepy and well done. The blood effects for the kills and cuts we see are also quite realistic in itself, while not being too brutal.



OTHER CONTENT:This horror film is one of the king's of all horror films. This film captures the feeling of insanity above anything. For more than a couple scenes in the film, I was actually scared due to the scary silences and horrific portrayals of the characters. It takes a lot for a film to really scare me, and this one did just that. I was very convinced. Also, this film is shot so artfully for a horror film, even with some of its flaws. Hooper knew what he was doing going into this boat by angling the camera just right from the beginning to the end. Every thing I believe Hooper wanted to capture was truly captured. Even all of the flaws this film may have make it even better.

OVERALL,an epic horror film with a brilliantly-executed plot, excellent acting, creepy sound-effect score, well done effects, a thundering feeling of insanity that it even scared me, and artful capturing of the film itself.

American Mary (2013) review

(5/10)

This medical horror movie is a bit stylish and scares with a few intense moments, but for the most part, this movie is pretty bland and not entertaining.

PLOT:A medical student named Mary Mason (Katharine Isabelle) is running out of money to live on and is getting bored with medical school in general. One day, Mary comes up with an idea to get easy money by applying for strip club. However, something goes wrong and Mary is led to do her first real surgery for a large amount of money. Since that night, people have been coming to her asking for over-the-top body modifications, starting with the Betty Boop-like, Beatress Johnson (Tristan Risk). However, the more she gets into this weird art of body modification, the more twisted her mind becomes. It's a great plot executed decently.

ACTING:The acting in here is okay. It's good at some moments and bad at others. Katharine Isabelle played a pretty alright part as the young, twisted Mary Mason. She could have added more emotion to the part, but she was decent enough to settle with. The other performances were just okay and no one truly stood out, I'd say, except for some of the victims and past surgeries.

SCORE:The score was pretty good. There were some normal, freaky horror themes, but there were also some really beautiful piano themes as well as a few indie songs for the soundtrack.

EFFECTS:The effects in here had me convinced for the most part. The blood effects looked pretty real for the most part up to the end. The effects of the surgeries and their aftermaths were pretty good. There were a few scenes where the effects really failed, however. I enjoyed seeing the end results of some of these weird body modifications.

OTHER CONTENT:This body horror movie was just pretty bland overall. The suspense didn't build up to much, the story seemed a bit too generic and unrealistic (even for a horror movie), and the movie didn't entertain but in a few scenes were the girls are present and the violence occurs. However, there were a few key moments that I was convinced that Mary was really insane, and it almost scared me. The more intense parts were well done but seemed to be almost a shock after the rising suspense that was unconvincing. The movie was pretty bland overall, but it had a few key points and moments in it to save it from sucking much worse.

OVERALL,a neutral body horror movie with a great plot, okay acting, pretty good score, almost-convincing effects, and a few key moments that tied the movie in, but the suspense didn't build up to much, the story seemed too generic and unrealistic for a body horror, and the movie wasn't real entertaining.

Naked (1993) review

(8/10)

This was a peculiar film in my opinion. I enjoyed most of it, but a lot of the humor and theme didn't seem to click with me. On the brighter side, I enjoyed a lot of the script and emotional depiction.

PLOT:Johnny (David Thewlis) is a man from Manchester with an ear for philosophy and a bad attitude. At the beginning of the film, we see him committing the nasty act of sexual assault to a young lady. He immediately steals a car and flees from his Manchester home to London to live with his old girlfriend, Louise (Lesley Sharp). This film documents his journey wandering the streets and meeting random people as he deals with his life and the deeds that have been done. It's a great plot executed excellently.



ACTING:The performances in here were pretty brilliant. David Thewlis played a solid and entertaining part as the nasty English criminal, Johnny. The script really seemed to connect with him. Another couple of really satisfying performances would be Lesley Sharp as Louise and Katrin Cartlidge as Sophie. They really did a good job. The other shiners would be Greg Cruttwell as Jeremy, Claire Skinner as Sandra, Peter Wight as Brian, and Ewen Bremner as Archie. There really wasn't a bad performance in the film though.

SCORE:The score wasn't too important and not too memorable either. but it satisfied and got the job done.



OTHER CONTENT:This film was very interesting. I liked a lot about it. The script had to be one of the best parts due to the dark humor, emotional study, and philosophical thoughts. The dark humor inspires a few shallow chuckles, the philosophical thoughts give people something to really think about, and the emotional study is just the root of the whole film, honestly. This is an intense film study and narrative of one man's life and emotions. It really was good. However, there were a few things that I didn't agree with. The film's main emotions are sadness and depression as well as anger. If you're in a happy mood, this wouldn't be the film to watch. It's very down-bringing for the most part; you have to be in the right viewing mood. Also, a bit of the humor and script I didn't seem to get or understand, which just put me off a bit more. It was a really great film, but I have just a couple problems with it.

OVERALL,a great film with an excellent plot, brilliant acting, satisfying score, good dark humor, thoughtful philosophy, and an intense study of emotions, but it's really depressing and has a few things I didn't get.

Persepolis (2007) review

(8/10)

This animated biography about this girl's life explores the culture of an oppressive government in a touching and accurate way.

PLOT:Marjane Satrapi (Chiara Mastroianni) is an Iranian girl who constantly speaks out against the oppressive government she lives in. She loves music, rebels, and her family. This film chronicles her life from her childhood to her early adulthood through the Islamic revolution and covers most every rule from the dark veil she must wear everywhere to the restriction of media interference. It's a good plot executed brilliantly.



VOICES:The voice acting in here was pretty good. Even though I watched the French version and couldn't understand the language (I used subtitles), I still found the voices very well done. Chiara Mastroianni played a great part as Marjane Satrapi, speaking out emotionally, as if she was Marjane. The other shiners would be Catherine Deneuve as Tadji, Simon Abkarian as Ebi, Francois Jerosme as Uncle Anouch, and Danielle Darrieux as Marjane's grandmother. Danielle specifically did a great job among this bunch, due to the script she was given.

SCORE:The background score in this film was very touching and soft, matching the exact mood of the film. This also contained a rather comedic appearance of Iron Maiden and rendition of "Eye of the Tiger". I enjoyed it.

ANIMATION:The animation in here is unique and very accurate emotionally to the film. Though it was very detailed, it didn't cover some scenes as well as I believe a live-action film could've done.



OTHER CONTENT:For the most part, this film was emotionally and factually accurate. It left a fairly good emotional impact on me and made me thankful for the freedoms I have. However, I think a few of the things in the film were exaggerated outside the facts, and I didn't understand this as much as I think I should've. I think this film was mainly made for a certain crowd, and a bit of it didn't catch my attention. It did leave a big emotional impact and had a lot of good parts to it, but I feel that it had just these couple of mistakes.

OVERALL,a great animated film with a brilliant plot, pretty good voice acting, touching score, unique animation, a good emotional impact, and a lot of good parts, but I think some things are exaggerated, and I don't understand it as well as I thought I should've

Bully (2012) review

(8/10)

I've been looking forward to seeing this for a long time, and now that I have seen it, I have to say that it is a very good documentary and proves its point to its audience with little to no effort.

SUBJECT:The subject of this documentary is based on five different families that have kids that are being bullied in school. They focus on the family of a girl being persecuted because she's lesbian, the family of a son who hung himself at 17 because of his classmates' pressure, the family of a daughter who brought a gun to school to scare her bullies, the family of a son who's picked on everyday because of how he looks, and the family of a boy who also committed suicide and is dedicated to the stopping bullying all over the world. It's very good subject matter executed and explored brilliantly.



PEOPLE:The dedication and heart of the people in and behind this documentary is very strong and touching to the purpose of it all. I appreciate their journey to stop bullying, for I've been in that place before. There are some really good kids out there getting abused.

SCORE:The soundtrack is mainly made up of alternative rock and pop, but is used very well.



OTHER CONTENT:This documentary really sheds light on the world of bullying and the effect it has on students and entire towns. I appreciate the goal behind it all, but I have a questionable problem with the documentary. The documentary has caught kids bullying other kids on camera via the camera crew, but I believe that had an impact on the kids on tape. What if the kids only acted up this way because they were on camera? What if they never did it until now? I find that questionable.

OVERALL,a great documentary with a brilliantly explored subject matter, very strong dedication and heart, score used very well, and a needed light shed on the world of bullying, but I wonder if the camera had an impression on how the kids acted or not and how accurate it all actually was.

From Dusk Till Dawn (1996) review

(7/10)

This movie is a lot of fun; the quirkiness of Quentin Tarentino with the grindhouse-camp feeling of Robert Rodriguez make a very entertaining film with plenty of scare and comedy to go around.

PLOT:Seth (George Clooney) and Richard (Quentin Tarentino) Gecko are two notorious criminals in their area and are on the run to a deal in Mexico that could get them rich. On the way, the stop at a hotel looking to rest a little until they get the idea to hi-jack an RV across the border. The RV in question belongs to ex-pastor Jacob Fuller (Harvey Keitel) and his children, Kate (Juliette Lewis) and Scott. They make it across the border and to a bar/strip club and stop in to have a drink and wait for the deal at dawn. However, the bar's clientelle isn't so desirable; in fact, they almost seems like vampires. If that's the case, will our friends survive until dawn? It's a great plot executed pretty well.



ACTING:The performances in this movie range from very good to alright. For the most part, they're very good. George Clooney and Quentin Tarentino do a great job as Seth and Richard Gecko. They played off of each other rather well. Along with these two, Harvey Keitel and Juliette Lewis both played a really good part as Jacob and Kate Fuller. The other shiners would be Fred Williamson as Frost, Tom Savini as Sex Machine, Salma Hayek as Satanico Pandemonium, Danny Trejo as Razor Charlie and Cheech Marin in multiple roles.

SCORE:The score is made up of some creepy and action themes but mainly a killer soundtrack. The soundtrack contains some classic rock and blues mixed with some smooth bar songs from artists such as ZZ Top, Stevie Ray Vaughan, Tito & Tarantula, The Blasters and more.

EFFECTS:The effects in here range to many things. There are vampires exploding, decomposing, bursting into flame, and plenty of blood and guts to go around. The effects range from cheap blood and gore to computer-generated effects. Either way, the effects are campy and very well done for a movie like this. It really adds horror to it all.



OTHER CONTENT:This movie is a lot of fun. With two great directors at the chair (Quentin Tarentino of Pulp Fiction and Robert Rodriguez of Machete), you can expect at least something good out of this movie. What we get is a no-holds-barred, gritty, campy vampire flick/crime drama. This movie is mainly for fun, however, and not for substance, for it has some trouble with character development, cheesy jokes, and any sentimentality. This movie was made for laughs and grindhouse fun and not much else, but that doesn't make it all bad.

OVERALL,a good horror movie with a well-done plot, very good performances, a killer soundtrack, campy effects, and a fun time, but it has a few problems with development, humor, and other emotions. It's just not what I'd call the best movie ever anymore.

V/H/S (2012) review

(7/10)

I've heard many mixed reviews for this one, but in the end, I believe it to be a pretty good horror anthology. It definitely isn't the best and is very flawed, but it entertained.

PLOT:This group of friends make money off doing bad things and putting them on film for others to see, such as breaking into houses and molesting women. However, one night they're asked to do a job where they break in a house and steal one VHS tape. They break in and find upstairs an old man's corpse surrounded by TV's and VHS tapes. One by one they choose to go through them, not knowing what's on the tape. What they find is horrifying footage of a date with buddies gone wrong, a second honeymoon with mysterious results, a trip to a peculiar lake with a bunch of friends, a webchat session between boy-and-girl gone wrong, and a Halloween night in peril. It's a decent plot executed decently.



ACTING:The acting in here wasn't the best I've seen and was kind of hit-or-miss, but some of it was actually good. The best performances I believe were Joe Swanberg as Sam, Sophia Takei as Stephanie, Calvin Reeder as Gary, Helen Rogers as Emily, Hannah Fierman as Lily, Mike Donlan as Shane, and Norma C. Quinones as Wendy, as well as other actors I can't place the name of. Most of the time, however, it depended on the moment.

EFFECTS:There wasn't really any score, so I'll move on to effects. The effects in here were pretty cool. They weren't totally realistic, but they looked really cool. The best effects would have to be in the first video (even if they were unrealistic) or the third video. The worst were definitely in the fourth video.



OTHER CONTENT:This wasn't as bad as some people say it was, but it also wasn't as good as some people thought it was. Besides the hit-or-miss acting and the unrealistic effects, this really didn't have any character development in any of the shorts. The characters are really one-dimensional and almost don't matter unless it's by their one personality trait that's dominant. Also, the execution in some of the shorts is really hit-or-miss. The first video? Great. The second? Okay. The third? Not so much. The fourth? Decent. The fifth? Good. The overall execution? Just enough to be decent. I believe a lot more could have been done to make this better, but it still has some positives. This succeeds to build suspense for certain scares so you don't know what will happen, and the scares are pretty shocking when they do come. The execution needs some work, but otherwise it's pretty good. It's definitely a stereotypical horror movie (blood, guts, jump scares, swearing, drugs, sex), but it does some of it oh-so-right.

OVERALL,a good horror anthology with a decent plot, some good but hit-or-miss acting, cool but unrealistic effects, little character development at all, execution problems, suspenseful moments, good scares, and the stereotypes of a horror movie.

The Evil Dead (1981) review

(10/10)

If there was such a thing as a perfect horror film, this would be the top contender for me. It's scary, dark, and perfectly set-up.

PLOT:Ash (Bruce Campbell), his girlfriend, Linda (Betsy Baker), his best friend, Scott (Richard Demanincor), his sister, Cheryl (Ellen Sandweiss), and his best friend's girl, Shelly (Theresa Tilly) travel to Tennesse to a hidden cabin in the woods with party on their mind. The cabin is freaky, old, and located across an unsafe bridge. Once they get settled in, strange things start happening causing Ash and Scott venture down in the cellar. They find a tape recorder, a spooky sword, and an old book. They listen to the recordings later and find out this used to be a site for Kandarian demon possessions caused by reading the Book of the Dead aloud. One transcript reads off a passage and it summons the demons. Strange things start to happen involving trees, possession, and dismemberment and now the teens must try and make it out of the house alive. It's a great plot executed brilliantly.



ACTING:The acting in here was pretty good. Because of the way this movie was made (low-budget and campy), the acting was supposed to be overdone, but it comes off as just right to evoke the right senses of insanity and horror in the characters. Bruce Campbell did a great job as the main protagonist, Ash. He definitely lead the pack. The other shiners were Betsy Baker as Linda, Ellen Sandweiss as Cheryl, and Richard Demanincor as Scott.

SCORE:The score was only there to set the mood right and unnerve the person watching, which it did. The creepy feel of the movie combined with the score to make a truly unnerving set of scenes.



EFFECTS:The effects had to be cheap, considering this was a low-budget film, but they got the job done well. From chocolate syrup as blood, to green cottage cheese as oozing pus, to painted eyelids, every effect was done basically. However, these effects made it much more real and scary compared to today's CG effects.

ANIMATION:The animation in here is used like part of the special effects, but it's still claymation. Some very detailed claymation was used for the ending sequence to enhance the rotting flesh of the demons. I loved this part most because of the artistic view put into it all.

CAMERAWORK:Though the film was low-budget, the director definitely had a vision for cinematography, for he captured each shot to the fullest extent and feeling. Some shots alone freaked me out. Thank you, Raimi.



OTHER CONTENT:Every thing about this film as a horror came together to make the formula for a perfect horror film. It's scary, funny, unforgiving, campy, dark, simple, well-crafted, controversial, and even creatively executed. The effects and mood of the film just unnerve the viewer and possibly sends shivers down their spines. Even in the latter scenes all the way up to the climactic battle at the end, the feeling of true horror and the rarely captured feeling of pure insanity is seen in here, beautifully created by the actors. I also liked how they experimented with sound to make the demon voices just right to scare. It's just a perfect horror film becuase it has everything it needs.

OVERALL,an epic horror film with a basic plot executed to the best degree, acting that fit the mood of the film, unnerving score, working low-budget effects, beautifully gruesome claymation animation, full extent camerawork, the feeling of insanity and pure horror, just right demon voices, and all it takes to make a perfect horror film.

Salvage (2005) review

(1/10)

Sometimes I wonder why I even bother with these independent, low-budget horrors. Almost none of them are good anymore.

PLOT:Claire Parker (Lauren Currie Lewis) is a normal, 19-year-old girl. She works as a night clerk at a convenience store, goes to school in religious study, can't drive, lives with her mother, and has a jerky boyfriend (Cody Darbe) who works down at the salvage yard. One day, when Claire's waiting for her boyfriend to come and get her from the store, a strange man named Duke (Chris Ferry) pulls up in her boyfriend's truck. She reluctantly accepts the ride, but this guy starts to give her the creeps. When she gets home, she locks herself in her house, but Duke tries to get in to return an earring she "left" in the truck. After a brief argument, he sets it down and goes away. Everything's back to normal until Claire notices that she forgot to lock the back door. In a scramble, Duke sneaks up behind her, knocks her down, and drags her into the basement. We then cut to the next morning at the store; Claire believes it all to be a dream. However, each day starts to go the same and she keeps having visions of this Duke guy killing her and her boyfriend. Little does she know, she's reliving a memory. It's a decent idea for a plot executed horribly.



ACTING:The acting in here was purely terrible. Every performance was overracted as it seemed. Lauren C. Lewis' acting sucked, but she looked great. I think she would have worked better as a model than an actress. As for the other two leads, they sucked as well. However, a few of the minor characters did a decent job, such as the male convience store clerk.

SCORE:The score was just generic. It sounded like it tried to copy and mesh that of other horror films altogether. For example (I know it's not a horror), I could sense a mockery being made of the theme from "Eyes Wide Shut" in one scene. The score? Truly generic.

EFFECTS:The effects were pretty bad as well. It looked just like strawberry jello spread all over the place. It aggrivates me when even a low-budget movie can't even get the effects right.



OTHER CONTENT:This movie's formula is that of a psychological horror. The twist in it not only doesn't make sense, but is muddled and confused within the whole generic-horror formula. There's almost nothing good about this movie except for the couple minor characters and the humor. This supposed horror movie actually had a few clever jokes intertwined with in the failed terror. The right word to describe this movie is either terrible or horrible.

OVERALL,a horrible psychological horror with a horribly executed plot, terrible acting, generic horror score, pretty bad effects, an illogical and confused twist, and failed scares, but there were a few decent minor roles and a few clever jokes snuck in.

Mortuary (2005) review

(3/10)

Tobe Hooper gave us two really great horror films, but in his more modern attempt, he gave us something really bad.

PLOT:A small family that has just experienced a loss moves to a new town and into what used to be the Fowler Funeral Home as a job opportunity. As the family is looking around, they notice the house is disgusting with an overflowing septic tank and mold growing on the walls. Things go normal for a while until the son, Jonathan (Dan Byrd) finds out about the legend of the inhabitants that used to live there, and how they tortured their son, poor Bobby Fowler. They say he's still alive today and roaming through the grave yard, not to mention there are weird things starting to happen already. Also, the fungus that has been growing on the walls has been becoming more lively and widespread these days. Are these two connected? What will happen? I'll leave you there. It's an interesting plot executed horribly.



ACTING:The acting for the main characters was actually pretty good, but all minor characters sucked big time. The shiners were Dan Byrd as Jonathan Doyle, Denise Crosby as Leslie Doyle, Stephanie Patton as Jamie Doyle, and Lee Garlington as Rita with an honorable mention to Courtney Peldon as Tina. Byrd might actually have a future in acting, for he was pretty good. Though Patton was just a little girl, she acted pretty well. Everyone else sucked horribly.

SCORE:The score was nothing special. It was just generic horror-score.

EFFECTS:The effects were ok. I've seen tons better, but they weren't the worst I've ever seen. Half is done with computer and half with make-up and props. Most of the props looked like Halloween decorations out of a bargain bin, but the make-up and computer effects actually looked pretty cool at times. At others, they looked cheap, but it wasn't the worst I've honestly seen.



OTHER CONTENT:If you don't know the great horror director Tobe Hooper, he's the one who gave us "The Texas Chainsaw Masssacre (1975)" and "Poltergeist". With these two fine films under his belt, you'd expect this to be great. Alas, this movie is real bad. Besides the acting and plot execution, all the twists are cheesy, the storyline is often rushed and jumbled up, and the ending is illogical and a true downer. Hooper must have somewhere in between lost his mind. This isn't all bad, however. Besides the worthy performances and the effects that weren't totally squandered, this might have worked as one of two things: a book or an attraction. The story would probably sound better on pages than it would look on-screen. I even had a few ideas. It also could have worked as a haunted attraction with all the Halloween decorations, hidden passages, and chasing zombies. Yet, this movie could not be passed off as a zombie film by far.

OVERALL,a bad horror movie with a horribly executed plot, sucjy acting for the minor characters, generic horror score, ok effects, cheesy twists, a jumbled storyline, and an illogical downer ending, but the main characters were acted rather well, and this might have worked as a book or attraction.

Live Animals (2008) review

(2/10)

Just another, twisted, low-budget, Saw-wannabe that isn't even good.

PLOT:A group of teens go out partying at the lake and are suddenly ambushed and tranquelized in the night. When they wake up, they find themselves in a stable chained to the wall. As it turns out, an evil livestock baron (John Still) has captured them and is planning on selling them in the human-trafficing business to the white trade, like cattle on a farm. It's an interesting horror plot executed horribly.

ACTING:The acting in here was purely mediocre. I could hardly believe anyone's screams or terror. The only actors that I believe did a pretty good job are John Still as the livestock baron and Christian Walker as the main guy character. No, names do not seem to matter that much in here.

SCORE:The score was mainly to set the mood, but it was more dramatic, so it wasn't terrible. I liked it a little bit.

EFFECTS:They could have paid ME to use better effects than they did in here. Each bit of blood and gore was cheap and over-the-top and NOT in a good way. They made a simple cut look like a rotten burn. The low-budget feel in here is VERY easy to see..

CAMERAWORK:I have two things to say about the camerawork, and they're a bit more constructive. They got some good shots and angles in here, but the camera's own quality was so low everything looked digital and lagged. If you're going to be artistic and attempt to capture some good angles, at least use a camera fit for the job.

OTHER CONTENT:This low-budget, indie horror is just another "Saw" mock-up with a different plot to make it seem new. There's hardly anything good about this movie except a couple performances and the plot idea. Besides all I've named, it's also pointless, has no character development whatsoever, steps over the line of horror by killing off a young child, and has just stupidly cheesy twists. This is definitely just a regular, wannabe indie movie.

OVERALL,a sucky indie horror with a interesting but horribly-executed plot, mainly mediocre acting, dramatic score, cheaply overdone effects, good shots yet bad camera quality, pointless violence, no character development, a step too far over the line of horror, and stupid twists.

3 (2010) review

(6/10)

I see a lot of potential here, but the film doesn't seem to know what it wants.

PLOT:Anchorwoman Hanna (Sophie Rois) and engineerng artist Simon (Sebastian Schipper) have been in love for at least 20 years and living with each other. They're real, down-to-earth, childless people that have been through a lot as a couple. Things are going pretty well with their romance until they each meet stem cell doctor, Adam (David Striesow) and fall in love with him. It's a intersting plot executed artisicly, but it is has a few development problems which I'll get to later on.

ACTING:The acting was pretty good throughout. I believe the best performances came from Sophie Rois as Hanna and David Striesow as Adam, but disagreeabley, I thought Sebastian Schipper was kind of bland as Simon. I didn't see true emotion come out through him as I did with Sophie and David.



SCORE:The score was made up of a few calm, mood-setting peices and a few notable songs. It was good, I'd say.

EFFECTS:I don't know if the effects were done in real time, considering this is an indie film, or if they were done through make-up and such, but they were good because they looked real and were even cringe-worthy, which I'll explain in the next section.



OTHER CONTENT:I am new to Tom Tykwer's films and direction styles, but I can already see a lot of pontential in his style. He starts off the film with a passing car and a voice explaining the life of Hanna and Simon, along with an interpretive dance of the film's main events. It also had multiple screen shots at one time, a brief animation, and the notable scene of the three main characters lying naked fading against a white background. He has earned my respect with his unique direction and editing style for sure, but this had a couple major problems. The plot isn't real well developed; some of the events (such as Simon's mother's death and his testicular operation) have so little to do with the plot that it distracts from the main idea of the plot. It really just ends up as unneeded. Also, the character development as a small problem. Tykwer tries to incorporate accurate character development by filming that little scene in the beginning with the passing car and putting those unneeded events in the film, but it doesn't make up for how we see their personalities shine. They end up looking like karma-stricken victims in a horror film due to the problems. This film wasn't really my cup of tea, to be truthful. At times it grossed me out and made me want to stop watching. I think that's another reason why I didn't favor it due to the wonderful direction...

OVERALL,an ok indie film with an intersting and artistic plot, pretty good acting, just good score, real-looking effects, and a visionistic direction by Twyker, but the plot isn't real well developed, the character development has a few problems, and the film just wasn't my type.