Monday, April 6, 2009

More Capsule Reviews

Pumpkinhead (d. Stan Winston) - Prior to yesterday, I had seen this film once before, an eternity ago, and the only thing I remembered about it is that, at one point, Pumpkinhead stabbed a guy with a rifle. It seemed ridiculous to me back then, but now, after catching the film again, I feel that, if anyone is going to not only be able to stab someone with a rifle, but want to do so, it's Pumpkinhead. And really, this film is a cut above most 80s horror. It's a tight little fable about revenge -- to better get across the fable vibe, Winston ends up going a little too heavy on the blues and reds, but by and large the film feels the way he must have intended. Along with "fable" and "horror", Winston has also made an effective Southern Gothic thriller, steeped in swamps and heat and grief, the latter provided by a very good Lance Henriksen, who unleashes the titular demon after his son is accidentally killed by a group of city kids. Winston and the screenwriters up the horror by showing that not only are not all of those city kids all bad, but very few of them actually did anything wrong. So this is pretty solid, I was surprised to find. This is the only film the late Stan Winston directed, but why is that? He had a nice eye.

Quarantine (d. John Erick Dowdle) - First thing's first: I have not seen REC, the Spanish film of which Quarantine is a remake, so I can't say whether John Erick Dowdle, in re-jiggering that much praised film, raped my last Spring or not. All I can say is that this American film is pretty damn effective. A group of people, including a TV reporter and her cameraman, suddenly find themselves locked inside a gloomy apartment building after the CDC learns that an especially nasty, rabies-like virus is running through the building's inhabitants. The film is shot -- as an increasing number of horror films these days seem to be -- as though one of the characters is actually the one holding the camera, but as this character is part of a TV news crew, this film (and, presumably, REC) has a better, built-in excuse for that camera continuing to roll than most such movies do. And the chaos generated by the hand-held camera is disorienting, but in a good way. When one of the rabies zombie monsters comes shrieking out of nowhere to attack somebody, the fact that we don't always know who the creature was before getting infected often works. "Who is that?" I thought, or, "When did they get bitten??" This isn't a matter of sloppy filmmaking, but rather a case of pumping up the terrible havoc of the situation. Also, Jennifer Carpenter, as the reporter, was, I thought, very good. She doesn't have the standard "horror film heroine" (that's called the "final girl" now, I think somebody told me) trajectory, and reacts quite believably to the increasingly bizarre, grotesque and hopeless situation she suddenly finds herself in, just because she was given the wrong story to cover on the wrong night.

Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog (d. Joss Whedon) - I'm late to the game in praising this short film by the man behind TV shows such as Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Firefly. I'm late to Joss Whedon in general, really, but I've liked what I've seen of Firefly, and really thought Whedon's theatrical film sequel to that show, Serenity, was damn good. Now, this somewhat mistitled film (there's not really that much blogging to be seen), which debuted on-line and is now available on DVD, has shown me just how creative this guy can be. The 45-minute film is a deliberately cheap-looking musical superhero story (or supervillain story, actually) about Dr. Horrible (a superb Neil Patrick Harris) and his plan to rule the world and win the heart of Penny (Felicia Day), who has fallen in love with Horrible's nemesis, the vain and obnoxious hero, Captain Hammer (Nathan Fillion). The songs are almost uniformly good, with one particular stand-out, "Brand New Day", coming at the end of Act II, quietly setting up the audience for a wild tonal shift, without us ever being aware of what Whedon has in mind. This is really good stuff: funny, catchy, and other things that I shouldn't mention.

26 comments:

  1. I want to see that sing-along blog thing. I wasn't even aware of it until now, thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You're welcome, and I think you'll like it. It's funny and clever, but, as I hinted, it's not just a lark.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm gonna sue those Quarantine people for copyright infringement. Everyone knows I own the exclusive rights to both the words 'Medfly' and 'Quarantine'.

    And when I see them in court, I'll tell 'em Bill R. sent me.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Who issued you the copyright on those words, Ryan? Because there are a lot of two-bit, fly-by-night copyright office swindle-jobs springing up all over the country these days (what with the economy, and all), and I feel as though you may have been had.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Bill-

    I agree with you that Quarantine (and [REC]) isn't sloppy filmmaking, but I still found it to be irritating filmmaking. We can't really argue that though.

    You make a good point that this movie has the best excuse for using shaky-cam, unlike, say, 28 Days Later which I just found unwatchable at times, but I find that I'm much less affected by scares that are shot in such a chaotic way.

    I'm not a fan of either film, but I will say that I've found it perplexing that some fans protest/despise the remake in favor of the original. There really isn't a significant artistic difference bewteen the two. There are subtle differences - the endings, for example - but for someone to hate one and love the other seems strange to me. There's probably just "loyalty" and "purist" issues at play.

    ReplyDelete
  6. there are a lot of two-bit, fly-by-night copyright office swindle-jobs springing up all over the country these days (what with the economy, and all), and I feel as though you may have been had

    I tell ya, it's the last time I trust a copyright issued by a firm called Copyrightz 'R' Us. Unfugginbelievable. Only in America.

    ReplyDelete
  7. but I find that I'm much less affected by scares that are shot in such a chaotic way.

    Well, it all depends, doesn't it? I know you weren't asking a question there, but the only time shakey-cam really and truly bothers me is when it's used for its own sake. If there's a good reason for it, as there is in Quarantine, and technically it's handled well, then I can roll with it pretty easily. And in the case of this film, the sense of immediacy that is supposed to be the point of the shakey-cam really comes through. Although I will admit that, once it's clear that they're no longer acting really as journalists, but more as people simply trying to survive, I was still able to accept the camera being on, but I was no longer clear why the cameraman kept filming Jennifer Carpenter. I mean, she's pretty and everything, but she stopped reporting anything pretty quickly.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I have never had any problem at all with shaky cam, which I think puts me against the vast majority of film lovers apparently. I would hate for it to become the one and only way of filming, but at times it's used expressively and artistically. I would argue that Rachel Getting Married would have proven that well enough, but even that seems to have caused headaches across the country.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I have never had a problem with handheld shots, just not when they feel extraneous or tacked on. Like all other techniques, it flourishes in the hands of good artists, and falters in the hands of poor ones It's a fine line.

    For instance, Paul Greengrass simply has no clue how to put a movie together. Quick cutting and lots of handheld shots does not mean geography is suddenly non-existent. His cuts are random, disjointed, and lack a meaningful whole. I would make similar criticisms of Christopher Nolan.

    But Spielberg has used handheld shots to visceral and often incredible effect. And Spielberg gives you a real sense of space in the frame with things like matches on action. These things do make a difference.

    ReplyDelete
  10. For instance, Paul Greengrass simply has no clue how to put a movie together.

    That's pretty...extreme. You don't think, for instance, that Bloody Sunday is a well put-together film?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Krauthammer doesn't like Cinema Styles anymore. Just thought I'd add that.

    ReplyDelete
  12. For instance, Paul Greengrass simply has no clue how to put a movie together.

    I gotta agree with Ryan here. I haven't seen Bloody Sunday, but I am constantly shocked at the praise this guy gets. The Bourne Ultimatum was one of the worst looking, worst shot films I'd seen in quite some time.

    ReplyDelete
  13. See Bloody Sunday, Fox. Don't judge the guy on one film.

    ReplyDelete
  14. That's pretty...extreme. You don't think, for instance, that Bloody Sunday is a well put-together film?

    I confess, I have not seen it. The only films of his I've seen are his Bourne pictures and the odious United 93. Ultimatum was one of the worst put together films I've ever seen.

    I've been meaning to catch up with Bloody Sunday, and your recommendation makes me all the more curious. I don't want to dislike everything I've seen that the man directed, it just kind of worked out that way...

    ReplyDelete
  15. the odious United 93

    Boy, I'm really not in the mood for that one, so I'll leave it alone. But I really disagree.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I've seen the two Bourne's and United 93, but I will see Bloody Sunday to see if I have the same problems with it as well.

    So far, Greengrass is 0-3 with me.

    ReplyDelete

  17. Boy, I'm really not in the mood for that one, so I'll leave it alone. But I really disagree.


    It's okay, bill, you have every right to be wrong. =P

    I kid, of course, and if you're up to it look very forward to hearing a defense of it. Perhaps this is even post worthy? I've been meaning to do something in regards to 9/11 and movies, it's one of those long-gestating things...

    ReplyDelete
  18. In short, Fox and I seem to be on exactly the same page.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Fox is frequently wrong, Ryan, so I wouldn't go bragging about thinking along the same lines as him.

    No offense, Fox!

    I don't know if I'll write about United 93. Maybe some day, but not any time soon. If you write about it, I could just attack you on your home turf.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Bill,
    Glad you liked DR. HORRIBLE-- I think it's really well-done, especially for all the tonal ground it covers in 45 minutes. If you like Whedon's other stuff, you owe it to yourself to watch BUFFY-- I think you'd like the spin-off, ANGEL, even more (especially with your interest in superhero stuff), but it makes a lot more sense (or at least is more resonant) if you've seen BUFFY first.

    And I liked UNITED 93, although I found it hard to watch.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I could just attack you on your home turf

    I look forward to the day, and will hold you to your word when it comes. However, this is a piece that's gonna be published sometime between a long time from now and never, so you may be waiting a while.

    And you shouldn't pick on Fox so, he's very sensitive. Your actions have repercussions, yaknow.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I could just attack you on your home turf.

    Yikes! Creepy 9/11 humor!

    J/k... I know you didn't mean it that way. Actually, I'm creepy for reading it that way.

    I think maybe Bill & I talked about United 93 before (maybe??), but my problem with it (outside of the Greengrass technique that I don't like) was that I thought that it was exploiting the tragedy of that day in favor of making a kinetic action movie.

    My own wife told me I was wrong about that, so I don't expect agreement here, but I wanted to toss that in as my say.

    I am curious to hear y'alls futher thoughts on the movie though. "Odious" is an awesome word (I used it alot when Borat was out), but I wouldn't use it to describe United 93.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Brian - I do plan on checking out Buffy. I resisted it forever, because I didn't think it looked good, and because everyone I knew who liked it had bad taste, but that last part is changing, and I've liked everything else I've seen by Whedon.

    And yes, United 93 is very hard to watch.

    Ryan - Your actions have repercussions, yaknow.

    Yak now?

    Fox - I can't remember if we've talked about United 93 before or not. It's possible. Anyway, I agree with your wife, not you!

    "Odious" is an excellent word, when used correctly. A friend of mine recently used it in relation to Bill Maher, and I thought, "Yes. That's why that word exists."

    ReplyDelete
  24. Bill,
    Cool-- the first three seasons of BUFFY are up for free viewing on Hulu. You have to watch the occasional ad, but it's still not as bad as commercials on TV (and this way you don't have to worry about overloading your netflix queue).

    ReplyDelete
  25. "Odious" is a beautiful word to attribute to Maher. It would be fun to go down the alphabet and pick words to describe him from each letter.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Brian - I might just go the Hulu route. Or at least start there.

    Fox - The letter "A" should be really easy.

    ReplyDelete