Calvaire (2005)

Finally, a disappointing French horror movie. Sure, it was shocking at times, but it seemed more interested in creating atmosphere than the brutal, bloody thriller it claimed to be. On the other hand it did have a couple of moments that left me scratching my head and wondering if I was totally missing something or not (e.g. the Piano-And-Penguin-Dancing scene). It's comforting to know that even the French are capable of making mundane, hillbilly horror.

The Cottage (2008)

Dumb, lame slapstick comedy has never been my thing. I was hoping to watch a horror movie, but The Cottage thwarted these intentions, causing me to turn it off at the 20-minute mark.

Slither (2006)

Some of the effects are cool, and the lines are hilarious; but overall this isn't a very good movie.

To clarify: Yes, my "review" is purposely one sentence long. Thanks.

Irreversible (2002)

Based on cinematography, direction, acting, and overall structure alone, this is a masterpiece. But I will never watch it again. Its depictions are so realistic, gritty, disturbing, I can hardly bear to think about it today. This is literally the most disturbing movie I've ever seen, including Martyrs. There were times when I had to look away for minutes at a time.

The first twenty minutes or so were hard to watch, not only because of some of the unnerving sights, but because of the camera flip-flopping all over the place. At one point I had to look away for a minute or so just to regain my sense of equilibrium. And throughout the movie the camera does some roller-coaster activity that sometimes heightens the calamity, and sometimes just makes your stomach lurch.

The best part about Irreversible is the philosophy behind the story: the future is already written and that preordained future is irreversible. If you've read other reviews, you probably know that it works in reverse-chronological order; this structure adds weight to the philosophy by showing you the future first, which makes for an intriguing experience, but it causes the film to haunt you even more without the typical closure delivered at the end of a revenge movie.

For me, this concerned a difficult subject matter that I am extremely sensitive to. View at your own discretion.

From Within (2008)

Much better than the recent Slaughter. This flick offered a well-developed plot, strong characters, taut pacing, and visualyl stimulating thrills. Sure, there are a multitude of films out there based on the "religious zealotry" plot, but something about From Within just worked--I was glued to the movie from beginning to end. More than anything else, I enjoyed the strong lead by Elizabeth Rice and the redneck antics of Adam Goldberg.

The Baby's Room (2006)

The plot was deeper than I expected, and the "creepiness" intended seemed lost among the humor. It is more of a satire involving the nuclear family than a horror movie, but certain supernatural gags keep it in the genre. Overall, it was entertaining, but forgettable.

Slaughter (2009)

Introducing the movie that broke the streak. That's right. Sadly, I can no longer say that every entry from this year's After Dark Horrorfest has satisfied. This is the first out of the six I've seen so far (From Within and Butterfly Effect III are the only two left now) that felt like an ADH movie. Not only was the acting rigid, the scares nonexistent, and details left unattended to--this movie was just plain boring. And on top of it all, Lola's (Lucy Holt) accent seriously grated on my nerves!

(1) Continuity / Attention to Detail - Call me picky, but there were blatant flaws with garments, blemishes, and restraints (e.g. shoestrings).

(2) Pacing - This movie had so may lulls it tugged on my eyelids and caused me to consider forgoing the rest of the movie more than a few times.

(3) Scares / Thrills / Suspense - You can't show pig carcasses and (sort of show) the removal of teeth and call it a horror movie. This movie seriously lacked suspense or legitimate scares--I never once felt the prick of horrific visual stimulation.

So, it is with great disappointment that I retire for the night having concluded a busy day of work and school with a lame snoozefest.

Ginger Snaps (2000)

People have been telling me about Ginger Snaps for a long time--well, since its release in 2000 at least. Finally, nine years later, I have seen this gem; and I can say that I had a blast! The two sisters are brilliant little actresses who pull you into their macabre world. I haven't seen a lot of werewolf movies, but this was a good take on the genre in my opinion.

Deep Red (1975)

Thanks to starting this blog, I met some knowledgeable horror movie fanatics. These fanatics (you know who you are) pointed me to Dario Argento, whom, I humbly admit, I had never heard of prior to starting this blog. You see, in my naïveté, I used to think I was a fairly well-versed horror movie buff. So, a big thanks to everyone out here in the blogosphere who helped me find the path!

The first thing that caught me with Deep Red was the music by Goblin. As in Suspiria, and as a musician myself, Goblin is a real treat. I also had the pleasure of basking in the stylization and direction that I've come to learn is "pure Argento." On top of superb auditory and visual stimulation (though visual stimulation reaches new heights in Suspiria) Deep Red caused me to laugh more than a few times. Good plot, good acting, good script, good direction, good soundtrack: A+.

This is one of the only who-did-it movies, complete with classic red herrings, that actually kept me wondering until the very end. Even after the "reveal," I had immediate disputes; but those disputes where taken care of masterfully. In fact, the movie gives the viewer the chance to go back to the "scene in question" and see what they missed--it was right there in front of my eyes! Never before has that happened in a movie, that I can think of.

So, despite it being slow in places, and despite all of the high expectations I had going into the experience, Deep Red still won me over. I understand why Dario is king of the hill when it comes to the giallo.

The Haunting in Connecticut (2009)

What's with the DVD menus these days? I purposefully abstain from reviews and trailers before watching a movie because too much is given away. Now, with the DVD menus in movies like The Unborn and The Haunting in Connecticut, I am forced into an onslaught of all the mood and thrills of the movie, delivered in a rapid--yet comprehensive--collage that plays before AND after I select play movie.

Tonight, as I encountered this, I looked away from the screen until it was over. Extreme behavior? I've been known to exhibit extreme behavior at times, sure; but why throw away the mood and horrific imagery before the movie even starts? I don't want to see any of it. I want to be scared for the same reason the characters are: because they are witnessing things for the first time. Anyway, I haven't even started the movie yet--had to vent out my frustration.

On with the show...

Well, that was disappointing. This movie offered nothing new to the audience: one of the family members see "frightening" visions, the family becomes concerned, the doctors confirm that nothing is wrong, a priest attempts to expel the evil from the house, some library research is done, and so on and so on. I thought The Amityville Horror remake did a better job than this movie. The only deviation from the format we've all been subjected to time and time again is the multiplied number of "scares." Seriously! I couldn't even keep count of how many times this movie used the exact same scare tactic.

Boo.

You may argue, but I recommend The Exorcism of Emily Rose (2005) above this movie.