Recent DVD Views

I have watched some movies that have recently been released on DVD and just thought I would write a little about them.

Michael Clayton - A bunch of high profile Hollywood forces got together, had sex, and 9 months later we get this infantile movie that is well acted, but has boring, redundant subject matter. If you get your jollies watching grown men pat themselves on the back, this is the movie for you.

American Gangster - I only watched the Theatrical Cut, and it was good for what it was. Denzel is solid, Russell is good, and Ruby Dee is old.

The Darjeeling Limited - I am wholeheartedly in love with this movie. And watching the short film first, which to my delight is included on the DVD, makes the movie that much more fun. Despite what the critics say, this is not just one for Wes Anderson fans. It is a great movie. And on a side note, I watched Bottle Rocket last weekend, and that was great too.

Indiefag FTW

I really expected Diablo Cody's speech to go alot more like this..."Oh my buddha (0r jeezie)! Dude! Dude, this is totally Wizard! I mean, I don't even know where I'm gonna put this naked gold guy! I mean, dude, I assume it's a dude. I mean, he doesn't have a pork-sword, but he's lackin' in the milk-sack department, too! Dude. At least we know he won't be preggo-in up anybody's egg-o anytime soon! Get it? He can't impregnate a woman because he doesn't have a penis. Egg-o is like egg, but it's also like a waffle, and it's funny because you usually wouldn't think about half of the word "pregnant" with an "o" on the end rhyming with the word "egg" with an "o" on the end, which is a type of waffle kids eat. Dude, everything we did as kids was totally Wizard! Does anybody remember Dungeons and Dragons, or Thundercats? What about Power Rangers? I'd totally trade this Oscar for a Green Ranger Megazord! Hahahahah. Okay dudes, ttyl! Keep it realz gangstaz!"

Also, as much as I loved No Country for Old Men, Julian Schnabel got robbed. I know he's annoying in RL, but The Diving Bell and the Butterfly was beautiful.

Last thing. Daniel Day Lewis and Javier Bardem's faces don't look like they're made of the same stuff normal human faces are made of. Just saying.

Original vs. Remake #1

Hey everyone. I'm hoping for this to be an article that I reprise from time to time. Over the past few years, there have been many different remakes of many classic films. Most of them have been horrible. But, every now and then, there can be a gem that comes out of this process. In this topic, we will explore the good and the bad of this trend. This first post explores Rob Zombie's recent remake of John Carpenter's horror classic Halloween. I originally wrote this for my film class, but it has been re-edited for the site. Enjoy.

*Warning: Spoilers for both films*

Halloween: Original vs. Remake

"Was that the Boogeyman?"

In 1978, John Carpenter’s low budget horror film Halloween burst onto the screen and became an over night box office phenomenon. Produced on a minimal budget of $325,000, Halloween went on gross $47 million at the box office, becoming one of the most profitable independent films of all time. Throughout the years, Carpenter’s film proved to be inspiration and the blueprint for the future of the slasher film sub genre of the horror genre. In 2006, the film was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress for being culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant. Despite the popularity, significance, and influence of the film, the villain of Michael Myers has been run into the ground throughout the years in many empty sequels. Finally, in 2006, shock rocker and rookie filmmaker Rob Zombie was approached to remake Carpenter’s 1978 classic. Zombie agreed to do so, hoping to make Michael Myers not only scary again but a more realistic psychopath with a solid background story. Zombie’s version was released in 2007 and, although the box office return was strong, the critical response was not kind. Still, Zombie offered an interesting take on Myers and the type of horror the original Halloween inspired. Although Zombie uses various film and story techniques to create a tragic Myers figure, it is Carpenter’s original boogeyman take and atmospheric style that made Halloween a powerful and important horror film.

Although both films focused on the same villain, Carpenter’s pure evil story interpretation is more effective in horror than Zombie’s tragic hero story take on the character. In his original 1978 film, Carpenter presents a Michael Myers that becomes anything but human. From the moment he murders his older sister Judith on Halloween night, Myers becomes someone else entirely. He becomes what Carpenter referred to in his screenplay as “The Shape.” He becomes just a vessel or a hollow shell for pure evil. All personality, compassion, and being are wiped from him. To further represent this soulnessness, Carpenter gives him a faceless white mask to wear- something that is devoid of all personality and character. What has started as a six year old boy that murdered his older sister has become something equivalent of the boogeyman himself. Myers is now an unstoppable force of mythical portions. He lives in the shadows, behind your closet door. He cannot be stopped, breaking through locked doors with his bare hands. After being shot six times by his former taker Dr. Loomis and falling off a second story balcony, Myers disappears into the dark Halloween night. As he does so, the haunting sound of his muffled breathing against his mask fills the audience’s eardrums. He could be anywhere, living in the shadows with the rest of the evil of the night. Due to Carpenter’s careful story building elements, Myers has become the boogeyman, something that is echoed by a traumatized Laurie’s last line. Although Zombie has his Laurie repeat the same line, it is under ironic circumstances.

Michael Myers in Rob Zombie’s Halloween is much different than the one created by Carpenter in the 1970’s. Unlike Carpenter’s normal child turned evil representation, Zombie presents Myers as a child raised under a rough roof- his mother is a stripper, his stepfather an abusive cripple, and his sister a tramp. He only finds comfort in the presence of his infant baby sister Laurie and, in rare moments, with his down and out, but kindhearted mother. Zombie also has Myers deal with other obstacles as a child such as loneliness, neglect, and being bullied at school. Unlike Carpenter’s Myers that wears a mask to symbolize his emptiness, Zombie’s Myers creates various masks starting at childhood to hide behind because he believes he is ugly, mostly due to the unhealthy environment he is being raised in. Still, Zombie portrays Michael as having an evil growing from within him early on. When alone, he mutilates little animals that he catches and, after school, catches up with a bully and beats him to death with a large stick. Finally, pushed to the edge on Halloween night, Michael kills not only his older sister Judith, but also his stepfather and Judith’s promiscuous boyfriend. After the murders, Zombie presents Michael as unaware of what he has done. In his first interview session with a youthful Dr. Loomis in the Smith’s Grove Sanitarium, Michael is shy and playful at the microphone. In some moving scenes, he shares a silent but understood friendship with an affable and encouraging janitor. As time passes in the asylum, however, he becomes agitated, depressed, and unruly. My favorite shot in the entire film shows Michael, his mother and Dr. Loomis all sitting at table in the asylum. They are exhausted and not talking. Moments after this, Michael finally descends into madness by killing a nurse that baby-sits him, further falling into his doomed, silent state. Much like in the original film, Myers breaks out of the sanitarium years later and makes it back to Haddonfield, most likely to murder his sister Laurie. However, in a rare quiet scene with his captured sister, Michael pulls out a photograph of him holding her as a child, something that she doesn’t understand since her past has been hidden from her. In a stark move, Zombie makes the underlying meaning to Myers’ murderous homecoming just to reach his baby sister, one of the few that shared a meaningful relationship with him. As Myers goes through Laurie’s licentious friends, he becomes a villain very different from Carpenter’s interpretation. Unlike a hollow evil shape that lurks only in the shadows, Myers is front and center in every take. Suddenly, he has more personality than his teenage victims, all of which just seem to be a waste of space. Now, Michael is the main character. However, due to this, the horror is gone. Zombie does manage to create some disturbing scenes and some effective jumps, but his version of Halloween is something other than a horror film. As the audience sees Michael kill off each of Laurie’s friends, family, or anyone that really gets in his way, they see that the film has taken the form of what one could call Greek tragedy. Suddenly, Myers is just a doomed individual who is cursed to follow the path of a misunderstood serial killer. In the end, Michael is killed by the hand of his once beloved baby sister, something that was implausible in Carpenter’s version. As she sits on top of his dead body, covered with blood and screaming her head off, Zombie immediately cuts to an poignant set of family home video footage of a young Michael lovingly holding her in his arms to further his point. Still, despite this valiant effort, Zombie creates a film that is not as scary or ingraining as Carpenter’s classic.



Much like their different approaches to the story, both Carpenter and Zombie use strikingly different film techniques, styles, and music to create horror and their vision of Halloween. In his 1978 film, Carpenter uses a very atmospheric approach to his directing. From the start of the film, he uses an incredibly long take that is a first person P.O.V. from Michael Myers’ eyes. Looking through Michael’s eyes, we see him go into his house, grab a kitchen knife, put on a clown mask, and kill his older sister Judith. It’s all presented in a single take, putting the viewer into the killer’s shoes. This also gives the audience a shock as Michael’s parents pull the mask off, causing the shot to end and a new shot to start that shows Michael just to be a six-year-old boy. Carpenter then pulls the camera back with a long crane shot, elevating the state of surreal shock that is overcoming the viewer. With just two inventive shots, Carpenter creates one of the most imaginative openings in film history that would be ripped off by various future horror films in an assortment of ways. Throughout the film, Carpenter continues to use this type of atmospheric direction, using long tracking shots and long takes to create a building sense of tension and dread. He films the character of Myers mostly in the shadows, lurking in the background, or obscured by another object. He learned quickly that, the less you show the monster, the more effective he will be when he comes out of the shadows. It is only at the end of the film that Myers comes out into the lime light, becoming the epitome of the boogeyman character. In one moment, he slowly emerges out of a dark corner behind Laurie, his white mask glowing blue in the dim light of the house. In this scene alone, he appears to be more of a monster than a man. Unlike Zombie, Carpenter does not rely on the use of blood or gore. Most of the kills in his Halloween are quick, uninventive, and nearly bloodless. Carpenter instead focuses his horror on the unending build to the kills. Carpenter’s original score only adds to sense of unending dread and horror. Composed mostly on a piano in a short amount of time, the score is simple, easy to remember, and full of ambiance. Over time, it gets under the viewer’s skin and is, at times, scarier than the images on screen. As mentioned earlier, Carpenter uses a majority of blue hues during the night scenes in his cinematography. He also uses warm orange colors, creating a real sense of the Halloween spirit in other scenes.

Zombie’s direction, on the other hand, is more fast paced and hard hitting than atmospheric. He uses extreme close ups on his characters in moments of tension, causing discomfort in the viewer. In his murder scenes, the camera is usually shaky and uneven, attempting to create a documentary feel that is contradicted by his lush cinematography. His cinematography also is used to distinguish the three main sections of the film: the origin of Michael, the asylum days, and the homecoming. The scenes of Michael’s childhood are very handheld and shaky (much like the murder sequences throughout the film) to suggest the chaotic nature of his upbringing. In a stark contrast, the asylum scenes are very clean and static, hinting to the oppressive and boring nature of Michael’s new home. The homecoming setting starts off warm and fuzzy, but as Michael comes into the picture, it becomes more shaky and handheld like the beginning of the film. Unlike Carpenter, Zombie shows all the brutality in the murder sequences. However, he never glorifies the murders, but just shows how atrocious they can be. His extreme attention to the murder of the bully that Michael commits as a child manages to create one of the most disturbing sequences put to film in a long time. Unfortunately, Zombie never really focuses on the build to these things and they just happen. Therefore, no real horror is created other than a feeling of being disturbed, something that furthers one to see his film as more of a tragedy than horror film. Also unlike Carpenter, Zombie uses some intercutting between scenes to create some unique sequences. As Michael is abandoned to trick or treat by himself on that fateful Halloween night as a child, images of him sitting on a sidewalk alone are intercut with images of his mother stripping at a local strip club. It is Michael’s last moment of loneliness before he descends into the murder of his family. He is shot in a beautiful green hue as the leaves blow by in the background while the strip club carries a vibrant red glow that is full of sin. As this occurs, Nazareth’s “Love Hurts” plays in the background. This scene was highly criticized as being blatant in its intensions, but overall, works to an extent. As hinted at, Zombie employs many 70’s rock songs in the film to create a 1970’s vibe to movie, something he did much more successfully in his previous effort The Devil’s Rejects. In an ambitious move, he starts the film to Kiss’s “God of Thunder” instead of Carpenter’s famous Halloween theme. He also uses “Don’t Fear the Reaper” by Blue Oyster Cult (which was the one rock song that Carpenter used in his original film) before two murder sequences. Carpenter’s music is still used in the movie, but to various moments of success. Unlike Carpenter’s less vibrant effort, Zombie has some beautiful cinematography employed in the film. By doing this, he creates a stunning nightmare vision of Halloween, but destroys the sense of reality that Carpenter withheld in his film.



In the end, Carpenter’s version of Halloween is much more important to film and effective in the realm of horror than Zombie’s effort. He creates a film that is atmospheric and overwhelming in its sense of anxiety. His version of Myers is the stuff that nightmares are made of, rooting itself into the brains of the audience, keeping them from sleep at night. However, that does not mean Zombie has made a bad film. Despite his original intentions to make Myers scary again, he makes a film that serves a decent telling of Myers as a tragic figure than of a monster. The film he creates suffers from the occasional bad dialogue and acting, contradictions in writing and film techniques, and, at times, obscure characterizations. Still, overall, it serves as a decent love letter to Carpenter’s original horror masterpiece. Zombie knew that he could never make a better version of Halloween than John Carpenter could. Instead, he did his best to make a version that was his own as well as a nice little tribute to the classic film. Many remain split on the effectiveness of this effort, but it is a valiant one nonetheless.

Halloween (1978)- 9/10
Halloween (2007)- 7/10

Format War Over...Blu-Ray Wins!

I admit it, I am a PS3 fanboy. I don't own one personally, but I mooch off my friend's console systems from time to time, and my main experience with the PS3 is its Blu-Ray player. A couple months ago, Wal-Mart was having a secret sale, and my friend Daniel got the top of the line PS3 with 10 free Blu-Ray movies, right then and there. We could not wait to hook it up to his new 46' LCD and watch all the 1080p glory.
All that said, yeah I was pulling for Blu-Ray. I love Sony, I love Playstation, and I didn't want Daniel to be on the wrong side of the war.
Today, Toshiba announced they would stop producing HD-DVD capable players, and suffer millions of dollars in losses as a result. After Warner's exclusive backing of Blu-Ray, Netflix and Best Buy also put all of their weight behind format. Then, just last week, Wal-Mart, the king of all retailers, announced it would no longer support both formats, and decided to exclusively endorse Blu-Ray.
The Toshiba announcement is the final straw. Buy a Blu-Ray player, if you want, and may I recommend the PS3, because it is the most capable player on the market. R.I.P. HD-DVD, and congrats to Sony for finally winning a format war.

Writer's Strike is Over!

I was just looking around this morning, and found this on just one of the sites I frequently visit. I guess movie news sites just shut down once the weekend begins. But according to this mile long, tentative agreement, the writers strike is well on its way to being over with. Here is a link to Comingsoon.net, where I first found the news. The agreement allows for resumption of work through May 1, 2011.

Caleb's Lies

For the three people that read this blog, a little bit of information on our friend and contributor, Caleb. Caleb hates this blog. He thinks me and Wesley stole his idea for a website, and that we have since ruined his master plan. This is not true. Me and Wesley dreamed of the idea for a great website honoring our favorite movies. Caleb only came up with the name. So don't believe Caleb's lies. I know the website is lacking right now. But give us time. School is back in full force, the writer's strike is still going strong, exceptional DVD releases are scarce, and this is Hollywood's dead time in the theater circuit. I promise the website will be awesome soon
(I hope).









I love you Caleb.

Superbowl Ads

So, wanna be movie fans. As most of you who have lives know, the Superbowl was last night. And you know what that means, Movie Trailers!
Now, the first movie trailer we saw, was for a little assassin movie called Wanted. Let me just say that, if you want to see this movie, you are a retard (Thomas). Don't go see this. I beg you. For my own personal faith in the human race.
The second trailer was for the awesome Iron Man. Going opposite on the same pattern, if you don't want to see this, you are a retard. Awesome trailer. Jon Favreau Directs, Peter Billingsly (Yep, that's Ralphie from A Christmas Story) Executive Produces, and Robert Downey Jr. stars. This movie is bound to kick the summer off the right way.
Next, Semi-Pro. Don't really know. Could go either way.
Next, Wall-E. Pixar can do no wrong.
Last, Jumper. See what I said about Wanted (Especially you Thomas, you need to read that at least 3 times).

Overall Analysis. Not good. And it is especially disappointing that more than one studio spent that kind of money on ads for terrible movies. I wish all of you fans would wise up and stop eating the force-fed crap that Hollywood gives you. Stop being a moron like our faithful reader above and go rent something good. You people piss me off.

Wesley's Rambo Review

*Warning: Spoilers*

I was first exposed to Rambo the same day that I was exposed to martial arts legend Bruce Lee. It was 1997. I was 10 years old. My dad and I had just gotten out of a screening of Jackie Chan’s Rumble in the Bronx. After the film, we talked about martial arts in general and my dad quickly realized that I had never seen a Bruce Lee film. On the way home, we stopped by Alpha video (our awesome local video store at the time) and rented a copy of Return of the Dragon (a.k.a. Way of the Dragon). It’s the Bruce Lee film where he battles Chuck Norris in the Roman Coliseum at the end. On the way out of the video store, I saw my dad pick up another movie to watch. It was a copy of First Blood.

When we got home, we watched Return of the Dragon first. Instantly, I was hooked and my Bruce Lee obsession had begun. We then watched First Blood. I thought it was cool but, by that time, I was still in Bruce Lee mode. So, on that fateful day, Rambo was just a side note. But who knows how my life would be different if we watched First Blood…well…first.

As years have gone by, I have really begun love First Blood as a movie. It’s one of Stallone’s best and most emotional performances. Slowly, I got into the Rambo sequels. I loved Rambo: First Blood Part II for it’s over the top, 80’s action movie vibe. Rambo was bigger than life itself and it was a really fun watch. Rambo III tested my patience and just wasn’t as memorable as the first two, pushing it’s Afghanistan propaganda agenda more than I wanted it too.

So, here’s where Rambo (the newest entry) comes in.

Rambo III began to annoy me with its Afghanistan propaganda but Rambo takes this to new heights. This movie is all about Burma and how horrible the civil war is over there. Now, there’s nothing wrong with informing us of this. But I’m still not sure all of this belongs in a Rambo movie. It felt out of place (at least from what I can remember- it’s been awhile) in Rambo III and it really feels out of place here. The first hour of this movie makes you just feel plain awful as an audience member as you watch genocide occur over and over again in Burma. People get mowed down with machine gun ammo, blown up with C4s, and babies get thrown into fires…it’s messed up. Then Rambo shows up and takes out the bad guys like a 1980’s action movie. What? We went from extremely horrible, realistic genocide sequences to Rambo coming in and ripping a guy’s throat out with his bare hands. I’m confused on how I’m supposed to feel. I usually see Rambo movies (well, maybe not the first one- obviously it’s more realistic and serious in tone) as the fun, ultimate guy’s movie. Rambo is displayed as that in all the trailers and, yes, it becomes that at the end of the film. But everything leading up to that moment is completely different in tone. Yeah, I get the message that Stallone is going for. Obviously, he cares very much about what he is doing and the message he is trying to get out. I really respect that. But it just doesn’t match. It’s wrong in tone. It doesn’t work, man.

Now, let’s get to what’s really wrong with this movie: the dialogue. I really enjoyed Stallone’s come back with Rocky Balboa. It wasn’t the perfect film, but it was really enjoyable, respectable, and had some of the best speeches I’ve heard in a Rocky film. Rambo is the polar opposite. This movie has some of the worst dialogue I’ve ever heard. The scene with Rambo and Sarah (played by Julie Benz) on the dock in the rain is painfully bad to watch. In fact, pretty much every conversation in the entire film is awful.

And how about those mercenaries? I really liked the stereotypical badass merc that dropped an f-bomb every two seconds. Oh wait, no I didn’t. I hated him. I hated all the mercenaries. What a boring, uninteresting group of characters. All the characters in this movie sucked. The mercenaries, the missionaries…I guess Rambo is the only one I really cared about…and his face looked like it was made out of silly putty.

That’s another thing. Stallone really needs to lay off the HGH. He doesn’t look normal. At all. After the movie, my friend Amy commented on how he had muscles in places that didn’t even make sense. Like his cheeks. Seriously, I think if I took as much HGH that he’s been taking I could sprout a muscle on my pinky knuckle. Lay off, Stallone. I didn’t think you looked that bad in Rocky Balboa, but you’re looking pretty scary now. I know these movies require a muscular physical appearance, but you’re starting to get me worried, man.

Here’s another thing I had a problem with: that strange, out of place flash back sequence. It kind of looked cool, but it ended up being cheesy and pointless. Hey, there’s that part from Rambo: First Blood Part II where he blew that guy up with that explosive bow and arrow. What? Why’s that in the flash back? What does that have to do with Rambo’s emotional state? Heck, he even throws the deleted original ending of First Blood in there (the one where he is killed). Yeah, it’s kind of cool to see that on the big screen, but it is sort of pointless.

I guess I should talk some more about the violence in this movie. I touched upon it earlier, but this may be one of, if not the most, violent movies I’ve ever seen. It felt like 400 people were killed in this movie. As previously discussed, most of the violence was not fun to watch. The genocide was plain awful, which it should have been. Stallone had a point and, yes, I get it. But then Rambo comes in as a one-man army and it gets all silly like the last two sequels. Yes, it was fun. But, as stated over and over again, it just didn’t match the tone of the rest of the film. I’m watching villagers being raped and blown up with C4s one minute and Rambo cutting off heads and ripping throats out the next. Just doesn’t match up. However, some of the stuff towards the end was hilarious. Like that guy that was sniped on the boat- his head comes off but his body keeps standing up. What? Is that how it happens? At one point, Rambo stabs a guy in the stomach with his huge machete and pauses. I turned to my friend Blossom and said, “Now, Rambo should do something badass.” It was if Stallone could hear me because he followed my comment with cutting the guy in half. Hilarious stuff. I just wished either the rest of the movie had been that silly or at least a good film.

I really think that if they just had guys come out of the woods with signs saying “bad guy” taped to them and Rambo destroying them for an hour and a half this would have been a better movie.

So, if you’re still wondering, no, I didn’t think Rambo was good movie. Too much hammering of Burma’s awful situation down my throat, too much awful dialogue and useless characters, and an ending sequence that didn’t match the rest of the film in tone. Plus there was that part where Rambo sets that huge bomb off in the forest and then survives what appears to be a nuclear blast. Oh yeah, and that ridiculous 3 minutes of eye contact / dramatic face posturing by him and Sarah at the end. Can you get any cheesier? Really, Stallone? Still, I wanted to like some of this movie. After all, it’s been forever since we’ve gotten to see an 1980’s action movie. I really miss those “one-man army on a mission” type of action movies. It’s just too bad that this wasn’t a good one.

I still love Sylvester Stallone though. I’ve been a fan of the guy since I latched on to the Rocky films as a kid. This is definitely the miss step that Rocky Balboa wasn’t, but that doesn’t mean his career is over. I hear Rambo V isn’t far away, but I hope he finds other projects to sink his teeth into. That and I hope he lays off the HGH. You can do it, Sly!

Just so you know where I stand:

First Blood- 8/10
Rambo: First Blood Part II- 7/10
Rambo III- 5/10
Rambo- 3/10