Wednesday, October 6, 2010

The Human Centipede: First Sequence (2009)

Wow. I wavered on the fence with this one, but just fell into the liked-it yard. This movie is bizarre in more ways than the obvious plot premise: it is a collage of parodic horror irony combined with cringe-eliciting gags, a superb female lead (whose dialogue ends at the beginning of Act II), and one of the creepiest mad surgeons I've (possibly ever) seen on film. The overall tone came across, at least to me, as I understand that this plot is over-the-top, so I won't take myself too seriously; but, at the same time, I can deliver just enough raw edge to please 'mature' horror fans. And sure, there are some jarring oversights (GPS units? A secret ground-level door that the surgeon uses?), but overall this is a fine movie that goes from parodic camp to nihilism.

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

Frozen (2010)

Hey guys! I'm back after a long hiatus, during which I successfully completed my master's degree (thank you, thank you). So, what's to say? I'm back to checking out some fresh horror DVD releases. First post-grad school movie is, officially, Adam Green's Frozen. And I've gotta say, right off the bat, it is much better than Hatchet. (I'll pause for a moment while you boo me and throw various rotted fruits at the screen.) It is much more mature filmmaking and exemplifies Adam Green's ability to do more than mediocre camp (I still eagerly anticipate Hatchet II). One thing is certain about Frozen: Green takes a simple idea that, at first, may seem largely implausible, and delivers a tight film of escalating tension and despair. This horror fan had a blast!

Monday, June 14, 2010

Shutter Island (2010): Perhaps You Can Sway Me

What is great about this movie? It has become a rule to use this "twist" in nearly every mainstream psychological thriller out there, so why the emphasis on the so-called mindbending twist the movie boasts? Everything pointed toward the ending, e.g. the disjointed perspective of the protagonist; and if you've seen one, you've seen 'em all. So, help me if I'm missing something. Perhaps you can sway me to watch this one again. Or perhaps you agree that this is mediocre at best. (And, yes, I realize that this is not a horror movie, though it was marketed as such.)

HorrorBlips: vote it up!

Monday, April 5, 2010

The Fourth Kind (2009)

Rating: F
This is like watching someone try to be cool and fit in. The movie tries harder than any other film out there in terms of making the viewer understand that THIS IS BASED ON TRUE EVENTS! I get it for cryin' out loud! Actual footage, actual voices, juxtaposition of the dramatization and actual footage here and there with an annoying split-screen. What's the point? This is largely boring with maybe two small flickers of potential, somewhere, I think, maybe.

HorrorBlips: vote it up!

Monday, March 29, 2010

Hidden (2009)

Rating: __
I can't give this a rating since I didn't finish it, but suffice it to say I couldn't make it through 90 minutes. This was noting more than a mash-up of every scare tactic and horror movie gimmick out there.

HorrorBlips: vote it up!

Sunday, March 28, 2010

Lake Mungo (2008)

Rating: A-
Behold, a conscious contradiction. I berated Paranormal Activity based largely on grounds that nothing really happened--it erred on the side of boring, in my opinion--yet I love Lake Mungo, despite the fact that even less happens! It creeped me out far more than Paranormal, while also throwing some unexpected and thoroughly interesting twists into the mix. As the story unfolded and beautiful cinematography created an ominous sense of dread and harm, I was pulled into a perpetual state of uneasiness. This is a great After Dark entry!

HorrorBlips: vote it up!

Friday, March 26, 2010

The Reeds (2009)

Rating: D
I have all eight of this year's ADH films on hand now, and I certainly hope The Reeds is no indication of the overall performance. Last year gave me hope, and I'm looking for the positive trend to continue. The Reeds, which I'm hoping is just a misfire, a poor first pick on my part, is trite and anticlimactic. Trite because the only element that makes it "original" or "fresh" is that the film takes place in a secluded expanse of reeds (but with telephone lines just in the background, I might add). Anticlimactic because of the two "twists." The first "reveal" is completely obvious because, like a gifted Vegas gambler, I employed cast-counting! The second "reveal" is just plain lame. The only thing that saves this film from the dreaded F-rating is decent acting.

HorrorBlips: vote it up!

Monday, March 22, 2010

TRANSCRIPT REVIEW: Antichrist (2009)

HorrorBlips: vote it up!

: Jason, Lucas, Rex, Chris

(Credits roll. Everyone sits in stunned silence.)

LUCAS: That was stupid.

(Everyone laughs.)

REX: [Lars von Trier] was clearly a little depressed.

LUCAS: I don’t know. That was just…stupid. I think my expectations were set ridiculously high. It was just boring.

REX: What do you think Chris?

(Chris sits quietly, staring at the credits, his fingers steepled under his chin. Finally, exhales.)

LUCAS: Still absorbing it all?

CHRIS: I just. Wow. Well. Uh—there was a lot of sexual symbolism. That’s for sure.

(Rex agrees.)

CHRIS: Every time the movie put the male phallus triumphantly on display, femininity would dominate. For example, in the last chapter before the epilogue, everything is in grayscale except for the tree, a stout, glowing phallic symbol. But, then, a legion of women overcomes him.

REX: Definitely a lot of psychological investigation of human nature.

LUCAS: Man. I didn’t get any of that.

CHRIS: The one part I absolutely despised and I wish they’d removed was the talking fox.

(Everyone chuckles.)

REX: Yeah, I didn’t understand the point of that at all. It didn’t add anything to the movie.

JASON: I don’t think the fox was actually talking so much as Williem Defoe was imagining the voice and the fox mouthing the words. I liked the audio of the voice, but it didn’t really work right there. Maybe Lars wanted to break up the mood.

CHRIS: True. I still hated it. It took an otherwise serious, ominous tone and made it comical.

LUCAS: That was my favorite part! I thought, finally something is happening.

JASON: It’s obvious that he [Lars von Trier] was pissed off at women when he wrote this.

(Everyone agrees.)

CHRIS: I liked how it was an Adam and Eve story in reverse. We started in present day and traveled back to the advent of original sin in the Garden of Eden. And it was as if the movie’s Eve realized that it would be in the best interest of humanity if Eve were to remove the part of her that drove her sexuality.

(Everyone, including Chris, cringes.)

LUCAS: When she drove that bar through his leg, I was just thinking, yes, we don’t have to watch ugly people do it anymore. (Laughs.) I would’ve been fine if I didn’t see Williem Defoe’s junk.

REX: Well, that wasn’t actually Williem Defoe. It was mostly likely a porn-double or a prosthetic.

CHRIS: I’d say prosthetic. Did you see how unrealistically smooth it was?

REX: (Laughs.) And rodlike!

JASON: Speaking of that part [the immobilization scene]. I couldn’t help but notice that Williem was so concerned with his leg. That was pretty bad, but I would be worried about my aching nuts!

REX: He never checked them!

(Laughter and agreement.)

REX: I think it’ll be a while before the next handjob.

CHRIS: I was surprised at the level of detail given us by the camera during the castration scene. I thought the scene from Penance was the worst, but this topped that.

JASON: The female castration bothered me so much more, too.

CHRIS: There’s a notable essay concerning that. About how men cringe more at the sight of female genital mutilation versus male.

REX: As if we don’t want the womb, our starting point in life, our home, destroyed.

CHRIS: Saw that symbol, too, when he took refuge in the fox hole.

REX: Plus it was all tastefully, artistically executed. You could tell the film’s intention wasn’t to see how far they could go with something. Everything was displayed for a purpose, not for shallow shock value.

(Silence. Reflection.)

CHRIS: The point definitely wasn’t to define a superior gender.

LUCAS: Yeah, just like in the books she was studying for her thesis, she seemed to decide that women needed to be punished.

REX: He’s right. Women deserve or require the bondage, mutilation they suffered.

LUCAS: But, man, that was about a nine out of ten on the weird-o-meter.

CHRIS: One thing’s for sure. The film was well made. It’s been a while since I’ve seen a good arthouse film.

REX: The opening scene was outstanding.

LUCAS: Yeah, it was good.

JASON: The cinematography was painfully beautiful in the sense that the film was translated effortlessly.

(Collective agreement.)

JASON: The super slow-mo was akin to the dullness of a stomachache—tolerable yet uncomfortable nevertheless. He combined slowness with super-detailed close-ups that were almost too in-focus, and the contrast of the two were remarkable in the push-pull that it created within.

REX: Absolutely.

(Jason continues. Chris and Rex further engage. Lucas thumbs at his iPhone.)

JASON: Camera angles created a sense of softness and dread at the same time; the overhead shots of her walking gave the vantage point of some ethereal being, Satan, or just plain stark loneliness from minute to minute.

CHRIS: Especially in the metaphysical sequences.

JASON: The overexposed lighting technique again somehow was able to merge the dichotomy of good and evil in the same frame. Bright halos formed around her face and head at times emulating an angel, yet inside she was losing the battle with the evil that was consuming her. Brilliant play.

REX: One thing I noticed was that she didn’t really have any care-level guilt or remorse [concerning the child]. In fact, they were both mostly unremorseful. There was some superficial guilt, but for her it was more like recognition, clinical recognition, than remorse.

JASON: She was busy gettin’ it! (Laughs.) Seriously, though. Yes, and she felt her own guilt because she wasn't feeling as much remorse as she thought she should, so she targeting him for it. In addition that fact caused her physical and psychological condition to worsen, not because of the loss directly.

CHRIS: That makes sense if you compare Freud and Jung. The movie even took an explicit stab at Freud. In that light, I see the movie as entertaining the notion of Carl Jung’s shadow theory. She got upset with him, accusing him of being indifferent. But it seemed that he was projecting her shadow. As Jung says, people rarely like seeing their shadow in others.

REX: I subscribe to Jungian psychology.

CHRIS: And, like Jason said, if we don’t embrace and accept our shadow, it tears us apart.

LUCAS: You guys are reading way into it.

(Jason, Rex, and Lucas begin to depart. Chris gets up, turns off the TV.)

CHRIS: I’m definitely going to watch that again. There’s tons of symbolism going on.

LUCAS: I’m never watching that again.

(Group departs. Conversation continues next day.)

Monday, March 8, 2010

Dead Snow (2009)

Rating: A+
Død Snø. Listen up, everyone [STOP] There is no excuse for omitting this one [STOP] It is highly entertaining [STOP] À la Trick 'r Treat, you will have a darn good time joining in on this celebration of horror [FULL STOP]

HorrorBlips: vote it up!

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Sorority Row (2009)

Rating: D-
I would really hate to know how much money was spent on this movie, and I would be shocked if it took more than a weekend to make. Unlike the Stepfather remake, I was mostly bored and hard-pressed to find something pleasing: no suspense, no likable characters (the characters we were supposed to like were paper thin, weak), trite twists, and pitiful red herrings! A complete waste of time. No one put any effort into this film unless you consider the viewer's effort to get through it. The only reason I am not giving it an F is due to a few tongue-in-cheek remarks from Jessica (Leah Pipes).

HorrorBlips: vote it up!

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Feast III: The Happy Finish (2009)

Rating: D
Just over an hour in duration, Feast III managed to put me to sleep by the 35-minute mark. What happened to this series? I had a blast with Feast and Feast II. Then this installment comes along and spoils the fun. It's tough to say exactly how it went sour, as the very elements I detested were utilized in the previous installments: bloody gimmicks, unexpected deaths, humor. But, unlike the previous films, the way in which these elements were utilized faulted the overall experience. Just a bizarre, rushed conclusion to an otherwise pleasing franchise.

HorrorBlips: vote it up!

Monday, February 22, 2010

Feast II: Sloppy Seconds (2008)

Rating: A
This series is just plain fun. I'm so glad I gave in to Netflix's personal campaign to make me rent these movies, even though everything about the franchise looks stupid, lame, corny, ridiculous! For a sequel, this is game. Halfway through, I caught on to the pattern of the particular people who are killed (yeah, I'm slow). You get all the same gimmicks from Feast, but with better cinematography, higher production value, and a larger cast. If you want to witness Raimiesque character abuse and buckets of fluids galore, check this out!

HorrorBlips: vote it up!

Sunday, February 21, 2010

Feast (2005)

Rating: A
Now here's a break from the ordinary that works! Netflix has been shoving the Feast trilogy in my face for a while now, and I finally obliged. Didn't expect much; in fact, I expected it to be yet another lame American attempt at horror-comedy. Lo, the humor is on-target and perfectly mixed with frenetic camera movement and quality gore effects. This is that perfect mix that is for some reason so difficult for me to find. Though the entire film--not that it's a lengthy film by any means--takes place in the same dilapidated western bar, it kept me entertained all the way through. And I can't say I've seen such a great use of on-screen profiles in a horror movie before, ever! Good thing I went ahead and snagged the next two installments: Sloppy Seconds and The Happy Finish. Hats off to John Gulager for this first installment.

HorrorBlips: vote it up!

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Cabin Fever 2: Spring Fever (2009)

Rating: A
I'm not sure where, exactly, this film falls in the chronology of Ti West's releases, but it only carries with it shades of Ti West's directorial imprint. It has the quickest pacing of all his films by far, and contains the most special effects of, well, a lot of films! After watching the over-the-top, cheap (thanks for the adjective Gore-Gore Girl) effects of Tokyo Gore Police, Cabin Fever 2 was a breath of fresh air. Fingernail gore, for instance, has always managed to "get" me, but this film pushed me to the limit! And that's just the beginning of its gruesome antics. In addition to pleasing bloody (and other fluid) gags, the film keeps a consistent balance between comedy and gore that is just plain fun. Plus, it contained a bunch of familiar horror faces including Noah Segan (Deadgirl), Michael Bowen (Autopsy, The Lost), and Marc Senter, who basically reprises his role from The Lost (2005). I will definitely be watching this again and again. I will not spoil it for those who are for some reason reading this without having seen the film first, but they couldn't have picked a better character to open the film! The rare great sequel has been achieved.

HorrorBlips: vote it up!

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

Tokyo Gore Police (2008)

Rating: C-
It had been a while since I'd watched any J-horror, but then again, I got bored with vengeful spirit-inhabited electronics and houses. So, the compromise: a movie that promised shock cinema in the form of a satirical gore-fest, Tokyo Gore Police. And it was just that. At the beginning of each fight sequence, I swear I heard someone yell, Mooortaaaaal Kooooombaaaaat! Then, the movie gave way to all out splatter-punk. Unfortunately, it isn't my thing. For me, there is a very fine line when it comes to gore. In the case of this film, it was too over-the-top, and while it was sometimes laughable by design, everything about the movie became too gratuitous and redundant à la Ichi the Killer (sorry Miike die-hards; I do like his other work though). What saved the film from being a complete flop? Eihi Shiina, who beautifully executed her role in Audition, and the hilarious social satire commercials.

HorrorBlips: vote it up!

Monday, February 15, 2010

Paranormal Entity (2009)

Rating: B
When people see this title, they're going to scoff, as I did, and dismiss it as a poorly done Paranormal Activity knockoff. Well, I'm here to tell you that, while it is a knock-off, it's not a bad little film. In fact, it's pretty good. Sure, it capitalizes on Activity's success--the characters even reference the film as a means of capitalization (though not of Activity directly), which wins points from me--but the suspense is effective, and the film obviously decided to mollify those who denounced Activity by addressing their complaints. The chief complaint being that nothing (physically) threatening really happens in Activity. Entity isn't without some holes despite decent editing, but the acting is mostly good when the mother isn't around, and the end works for me. One of my gripes with Activity was the addition of CGI, which Entity omits. Any horror fan would do well to check this one out. If you're wondering where this "mockbuster" came from, check out The Asylum.

HorrorBlips: vote it up!

Sunday, February 14, 2010

Dog Soldiers (2002)

Rating: B-
A unique take on the werewolf genre that is equal parts entertaining and dull. Long lulls and attempts at near philosophical inquiry forced me to watch in the middle of the day so as not to fall asleep, which I have done twice trying to watch this at night. Some of the humor, however, was spot on, and the werewolf costume design was superb. Great blood spatters, too! Neil Marshall's second film, The Descent, is much better (one of my all-time favorites). I look forward to the next watch of The Descent whereas this one will fade from my memory.

Friday, February 12, 2010

Orphan (2009)

Rating: D
I basically just finished watching Vera Farmiga reprise her role in Joshua (2007). The more I think about it, the more I realize that Orphan was the exact same story, even, but with a completely insulting twist. When the realization scene unfolded, I was irritated, annoyed, and, as I said, insulted. And this coming from the guy who loves and defends High Tension (don't worry, it's not the same twist). I almost gave Orphan an F, but in light of Born, I'll stick with a D; it did have a few tense moments and fairly good acting if you like watching hours of mostly bothersome domestic quarrels. I might have considered a C- if it hadn't taken 120 minutes from my life!

HorrorBlips: vote it up!

Thursday, February 11, 2010

Born (2007)

Rating: F
This is a big day, folks! The first F of 2010 goes to Born, a movie about a bunch of stuff where people do things and say whatever comes to mind. Every time my brain tries to process everything that occurs in this movie, I get a migraine. Sure, it has Kane Hodder thrown into the mix, and his lines are mostly hilarious, but the horror icon is easily overlooked. The script is atrocious; certainly no one really wrote the nonsense that comes out of the characters' mouths. The CGI is a joke: laughable lightening bolts and a baby demon who mashes its Transformer-like face against the main girl's stomach. This baby demon also manages to pop out of her stomach via a belly-button hatch every now and then. At no point did I feel the movie had something worthwhile to offer. I really couldn't tell what it wanted to be. At times it was humorous, but for long stretches it took itself way too seriously for a movie that includes a death scene in which the heroine kills someone by scrubbing their back in the tub. And there are scenes in which the heroine is possessed by the demon baby in her womb that have to be seen to be believed.

HorrorBlips: vote it up!

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

The Stepfather (2009)

Rating: C-
To be clear, I didn't have any false illusions of this being a great, or even a good movie. I even thought to myself, Why am I doing this? But I'll give the movie this: For a thriller, it wasn't too bad. In fact, the interaction between all of the characters, save for the boyfriend and girlfriend, and the creepiness of Dylan Walsh as the stepfather kept me engaged. What brought the movie down, ultimately, besides a lack of action between the five-minute mark and the ninety-minute mark, was the utter nonsense generated between The Boyfriend Who Knows Something Isn't Quite Right and The Girlfriend Who Is Immediately Ticked About It. Now, this is nothing new; having a character that gets suspicious, only to be seen as crazy or obsessive by those around him is an exhausted device. But this had to be the poorest execution in recent film. Other than that, this one is okay for an "edgy" family night unless of course you own the game Skip-Bo, in which case I'd go with playing Skip-Bo.

HorrorBlips: vote it up!

Sunday, February 7, 2010

Zombieland (2009)

Rating: C-
Until now the only exposure to Zombieland I'd had was a short theatrical trailer that ran when I checked out District 9 back in August. I remember thinking, Oh, cool, a zombie-comedy with two Superbad stars, Michael Cera and Emma Stone. Well, it took me twenty minutes to realize two things: (1) the lead was not Michael Cera but, rather, a sordid knockoff of Cera, and (2) the movie was headed downhill. After the strong opening twenty minutes, Zombieland turns the viewer into a lethargic zombie for another sixty minutes with boring subplots and a farewell to clever humor. Even the surprise cameo bit doesn't bring the movie or the audience back to life.

HorrorBlips: vote it up!

Saturday, February 6, 2010

The House of the Devil (2009)

Rating: A+
I am going to try to keep my emotions out of this review. (I LOVED THIS MOVIE!) Even though it is impossible, I'm going to do the best I can to provide the most objective review possible. (TI WEST NAILED IT!) I don't want to ruin it for anyone else by setting their expectations too high. (MY ALREADY HIGH EXPECTATIONS WERE EXCEEDED!) So, without further ado, here is a tame, calculated account of my thoughts on The House of the Devil. (PROBABLY MY NEW FAVORITE MOVIE!)

If you've been following Horror Dose this past week, you've seen that I decided to work my way up to this film by watching Ti West's preceding two feature-length releases in chronological order. I chose to do this because I didn't want to be disappointed by The House of the Devil, as every blog out here has been heralding this movie as a sensation, and I wanted to witness West's progression, good or bad, as a director. While The Roost had some glaring blemishes, Trigger Man took those blemishes (e.g. dead-time), polished them, and made them work. In fact, that was pretty much the pattern with every aspect of the two movies: Trigger Man effectively polished and redelivered all of the film-making elements of The Roost, proving to me that West was headed in the right direction (no pun intended).

The Roost and Trigger Man behind me, it came time to watch the movie I was dreading and anxiously awaiting. Dreading because of my unreasonable expectations; anxiously awaiting because of, well, my unreasonable expectations. West instantly shattered all expectations! I can't describe it, but something about the masterful throw-back 80s set and the "feel" of the movie caused me to relinquish my expectations and enjoy what was given to me, scene-by-scene. The film had that same down-time, or slow-burn, but it wasn't bothersome in the least. The stonewashed jeans, the classic Coca-Cola paper cups in the pizzeria, the enormous "portable" tape player; it all worked to create this atmosphere that I couldn't help by love. And it exhibited a wit that I've seen in Chan-wook Park's work and cannot properly explain, but it occurs, for example, during the payphone scene early in the film.

When the name Jocelin Donahue, the lead, appeared, I knew I had seen the name somewhere recently. Then it occurred to me that she played Maryanne Stewart in The Burrowers, which I had just watched the night before. I don't think she had more than three minutes in the movie, but after witnessing her performance and on-screen charm in The House of the Devil, I eagerly anticipate her next movie. Donahue, in my opinion, lit up the screen and carried the role masterfully. By the time West started hitting us with "it" I really cared for Donahue's character. Thus, all that dead-time equated to a Dickensian character development act that set the stage for the third and final act, which locked me in as a fan for life--a fan not only of Ti West and Jocelin Donahue, but of The House of the Devil.

If you haven't seen this movie, I would suggest watching West's other films first to get a sense of his style. Yes, it is a slow-burn as others are pointing out. West takes his time acquainting you the character(s), setting the mood, and building up the suspense. I refuse to describe what happens at the end, but I will say that I enjoy the abrupt ending common to all three West movies I've seen now. Each movie follows a slow-build-into-a-strong-ending-and-CUT! structure that I love. Who really needs to know what happens next? The House of the Devil is unlike any movie I've seen in a long time. Horror, lately, has delivered either extreme splatter-punk, torture, or extra (t00) sharp cheese. The House of the Devil strikes a chord that hasn't been struck in quite some time. It delivers everything I want in a horror movie.

HorrorBlips: vote it up!

Friday, February 5, 2010

The Burrowers (2008)

Rating: B
Not only my first J. T. Petty film, but also the first western-themed horror I've seen (I think), The Burrowers did not disappoint. It didn't wow me with anything, but it didn't leave me bored or put-off in any way either. Great pace, solid acting, decent creature design and a perfect blend of western settlers-versus-Indians and creature-feature horror. In the words of Last Blog on the Left's Maven, "We need more western-themed horror movies." William Mapother was spot-on, and I've been a fan of Clancy Brown since Pet Sematary II, though I am NOT a fan of the movies Pet Sematary or Pet Sematary II. So, check out The Burrowers and try to forget about Tremors while watching!

HorrorBlips: vote it up!

Thursday, February 4, 2010

Trigger Man (2007)

Rating: B
Back to the rating system after having ditched it for The Roost. Why? Because I feel Trigger Man deserves to be rated alongside all of the other big-budget movies. This was a far cry from his first feature-length film, not only due to the fact that it takes place entirely during the day, but because of the superior acting, pacing, suspense, and effects. Hats-off to Reggie Cunningham for masterfully carrying the movie and for his hilarious composure at the Q&A featured on the DVD.

A lot of people are complaining about the pointless "walking around" again, but it didn't bother me at all this time. In fact, I thought this added to the sense of three friends quietly hunting deer in the secluded woods. What did bother me, however, was the experimental camerawork, the constant shaking, jumping, zoom-in/zoom-out, extreme close-ups. I had to look away several times. But, Trigger Man proves to me that Ti West is headed the right direction. Filmed in his backyard on a shoestring budget, he chose to do something completely different and it worked. Plus, the Q&A in the DVD's bonus features was enough to make me a West fan for life. This is worth a watch, or a listen. He loves what he does and is doing it well.

I am now ready to indulge in the film everyone is raving about: The House of the Devil! And then, in two weeks, Cabin Fever 2! If West follows the progression evinced between The Roost and Trigger Man, these are sure to be some worthy films.

HorrorBlips: vote it up!

Wednesday, February 3, 2010

Trouble Every Day (2001)

Rating: B-
Having seen such French delicacies as Them (2007), Frontiers (2007), Inside (2007), and (of course) Martyrs (2008), I was interested to see how French horror stacked up at the beginning of the last decade. A bit of searching around led to Trouble Every Day, and when I saw Béatrice Dalle listed in the cast, I didn't hesitate. If you thought Dalle was sinister in Inside, I urge you to check her out in this one. Zut Alors!

Unfortunately, Dalle's superb execution of a dangerously troubled woman doesn't save the film as a whole. The pace is reminiscent of In My Skin (2002); nothing happens until fifty-eight minutes have dragged by. And, yeah, those minutes drag because the film is creating a mood of discomfort while slowly leading to the big shock scenes; but the lead-up was severely damaged in that we are shown exactly what everything will culminate to at roughly the twenty-five minute mark. Not that I was hoping for some big twist or anything, but it's kind of hard to enjoy a slow-burn when you're shown at the beginning what it all leads to.

I still give it a B- not just on merit of Dalle, but also because the film showcased an ability to perfectly mix hyper-realism, splatter, and discomfort evinced in more recent French fare. There were only two scenes that put the film in the horror genre, and those two scenes were strong, hinting at what was to come. Had I watched Trouble Every Day before all the others, I might have been more impressed. Oh, well. I'm looking forward to whatever the French have in store for us this decade, wondering whether a movie will ever affect me the way Martyrs did.

HorrorBlips: vote it up!