| |||
The Woman in the Dunes (1964) A brilliant, modernized re-telling of the tale of Sisyphus, with fantastic cinematography and acting. The close-ups of skin speckled by grains of sand mixed with sweat is enough to make me totally uncomfortable than a lot of what I see in horror films, that might sound silly, but being sweaty and dirty is the most annoying feeling in the world to me. I recommend this movie to anyone interested in Japanese cinema. |
| ||||
The Hills Have Eyes 2 (2007) BOMB A piece of good news: this is neither a remake of Craven’s 1985 second desert film nor a real sequel to the poor 2006 film. No matter how hard I try, this is the only positive thing I can say about this abysmal flick. Implausible characters performing ridiculous acts in the middle of the desert – apart from the mutants’ obviously strong need to reproduce, the story is non-existent. Many really disgusting scenes, stupid lines, and unsympathetic characters: watching this film was an extremely disappointing experience. Although I almost couldn’t believe it, it’s a fact that this film was written by Wes Craven and his son Jonathan. Avoid at all costs. Michael Bay’s Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003) * * * There are people who dislike remakes simply for being remakes. Generally, I am part of that group. I especially don’t see the point in remaking a classic, as experience has shown that such an endeavour is almost always doomed to fail. This 2003 Horror film is an exception. Although the plot is almost identical to Hooper’s 1974 masterpiece, director Nispel's version makes several small changes which allow his film to stand on its own feet. A surprising alteration of the original hitchhiker scene, a pretty good showdown in an abattoir, and some new characters (especially Sheriff Hoyt and Monty Hewitt) definitely justify this remake. Although some gory scenes were added, this flick still relies more on terror than on blood. R. Lee Ermey stands out as Hoyt in a good cast that also includes a convincing final girl (J.Biel). Once more, excellent cinematography by Daniel Pearl. Halloween H20: Twenty Years Later (1998) * * ½ After the horrible Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers, I didn’t expect much of this seventh part of the Halloween franchise. Whilst not a patch on the original and still not as good as the first two sequels (NB: Halloween III: Season of the Witch is part of the franchise), this is a big step forward, and a pretty good film. Jamie Lee Curtis is still stalked by her demented brother, and the concept of a killer that cannot die (‘Evil Personified’) still seems to work. The film itself is a bit anaemic, but because of the uncompromising ending, Curtis’ presence, and a cameo of her real-life mother Janet Leigh it is worth watching all the same. Halloween: Resurrection (2002) * * * Considered by many to be the worst part of the series, I was pleasently surprised by this final film of the original franchise. This film, shot by Halloween II director Rick Rosenthal, adapts to a new generation of film buffs and includes modern phenomena like the World Wide Web and reality television with ease. Busta Rhymes and Bianca Kajlich shine in their roles as likeable wannabe producer Freddie Harris and shy college chick Sara Moyer. Quite a few clever scenes, and above-average direction. Also includes a nice cameo of Jamie Lee Curtis. Recommended. I Spit On Your Grave (1978) * * * Roger Ebert obviously hated this rape and revenge flick, the pervert 1980 audience he watched the film with may have loved it – I don’t care. All I know is that most people read lots of things into Meir Zarchi’s brutal little film. When I first saw ISOYG a few years ago, I was as open-minded as possible. I only knew that it had been banned or heavily cut in many countries, and that some called it a cult classic. Back then, I found the film distressing and impressive at the same time. The lack of a score, the low-key mise-en-scène with little dialogue, the sheer violence of both the rape and the revenge part - it sometimes felt like watching a documentary or even real footage. Having watched this film for the second time, I can only say that the feelings were exactly the same. “As it was, at the film's end I walked out of the theater quickly, feeling unclean, ashamed and depressed.” Yes, Ebert is right. This is not really a film to enjoy as it only evokes negative emotions like hate, disgust, and anger. There is, however, no room for indifference. There aren’t many films that really get to me and make me feel uncomfortable – this is one of them. Recommended. |
| ||||
The whip and the body Great chilling and atmopsheric gothic horror from Bava. Only downside the dumbing of Lees voice will have to watch the extras to find out why this was done and the poor remastering done by odeon, had a couple of other odeon blu Rays and the picture quality of those is just as dispointing. 8/10 Watching blood and black lace and the picture quality is amazing words can't do it justice. Bravo arrow . This a film everyone needs in their collection those without a blu Ray player need to rush out and buy one just for this, it is that good |
| ||||
Unearthly Stranger (1963) Things begin to go wrong for scientist John Neville when his beautiful but otherworldly wife becomes of interest to his superiors in the government, meaning both he and his wife are in great danger. Definitely of it's time and possibly too talky for a modern audience, Unearthly Stranger is quietly compelling viewing. The film is intriguing and thought provoking and nicely atmospheric thanks to it's stark black and white photography. The cast headed by Neville also includes Jean Marsh and Warren Mitchell and the lovely Gabriella Licudi as Neville's wife. Long unseen, Unearthly Stranger is recommended for those into sci-fi or with an appreciation of British films. |
Like this? Share it using the links below! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
| |