YellowBrickRoad (2010)

It's a slow burn, and about an hour in it goes in a million bizarre directions. The acting and dialogue become laughable. The lead looks amusingly similar to Dane Cook at times. The ending did not have the payoff the preceding 90 minutes required. I'm bored and hungry.

Troll 2 (1986)

The town is called Nilbog (very creative), boasting a population of (if I remember correctly) 25. Enough said.

I Sell the Dead (2008)

Entertainment abounds in I Sell the Dead.

[REC] 2 (2009)

When the original [REC] (known to American audiences as Quarantine, the remake) was over I wanted more. In fact, I wanted the movie to continue from exactly where it left off. Well, little did I know the franchise would continue as desired. And there's a third installment on the way! I really like what they did with this one. The action begins immediately and the filmmakers make use of multiple character/plot POVs and fancy PIP (picture in picture) cameras to keep the movie interesting (we know the real deal at this point after all). Plus, we get another great ending that has become the trademark of a great new horror series. Well done, Spaniards!

Insidious (2011)

It's been a while since I've seen a new release. Or, rather, it seems as if it's been a while--probably more like a month. I just haven't been blogging. Anyway, I've managed to steer clear of reviews, trailers, and other spoilers, diligently taking note of upcoming release titles and filling my Netflix queue, waiting patiently for DVDs to arrive. There are a lot of titles I've been waiting for: Cropsey, Stake Land, YellowBrickRoad, Serbian Film, The Ward. And as with Insidious, I know nothing or almost nothing about these films.

The problem is that I can't tell if being caught off guard was a good thing or not this time around. Typically I stave off all hype because I don't want my imagination to start shaping the movie, potentially resulting in a huge let-down when I realize that the movie "isn't what I expected." I don't want to expect anything, and this usually secures the fun and entertainment of experiencing someone else's creativity. With Insidious, however, I don't think I could have prepared for its often bonkers antics at all. I was caught completely off guard, and I'm not sure I liked it.

SPOILERS AHEAD!

The scares are not really scares, and there's very little of the subtly that viewers will expect since Paranormal Activity is plastered on the marketing material. After the opening montage, which itself has a really odd tone, the viewer knows the deal: it's a haunted house without the mysteriousness of invisible entities. Every entity is placed right there for the viewer/character to see. Halfway through it gets very old. How many more ways can they show me another entity, I found myself thinking. So, again, I'm caught in this weird state of not knowing whether I liked being caught off guard by the nonchalance of the merging of the two dimensions, the matter-of-fact manner in which entities appeared, or not.

Not to mention the array of cliché devices that were halfheartedly deployed. In an attempt at brevity I'll stick with three. First and most obvious, the police are never involved. But reading Richard Laymon novels has rid me of my incessant need for characters to call the cops! Then again, the alarm is going off in the house, the front door is open, the wife and kids are upstairs, and this dude decides to wield a firepoker and mosey around for himself? Later in the film, the husband refers to himself as the "voice of reason," but he moves them out of the house (a first in haunted-house genre history?) and entertains the trio of paranormal investigators.

Second, the allusion to a husband with a big secret. This was the strangest portrayal I've ever seen. He's a (high school?) teacher who works until nearly midnight, telling his wife he's been grading tests and working late to pay medical bills. Two things here: teachers don't stay at work that late to grade papers, and they certainly don't get paid extra for it. Plus, just in case we're wondering about an affair, we get shots of him in an empty schoolroom doing nothing but flashing to the same bland shot of a kid in bed, which is used later.

And third, the exposition underpinning the husband's vague visions and the little quip about how he's terrified of having his picture taken. What was supposed (I think) to be a shocking revelation was delivered in yet another pattern of casual storytelling. I found myself thinking, Oh, okay, figures. Then, in the end we realize that it's another means of being able to show more entities in creative ways. Oh, and a setup for the ending.

Speaking of the ending, the crazy musical sting behind the bold red-lettered INSIDIOUS is so strange in the beginning but a good confirmation at the end. It was then that I realized I should've viewed the bizarre, off-centered opening montage as a staging of the entire pattern of the movie: a normal haunted-house movie slightly skewed at an attempt to be unique. Not sure if I can call it unique or not, actually; I'm not even sure I can consider it a good movie; but it's definitely entertaining if only for the interesting manner in which it is delivered. I can't help but feel the filmmakers took the two biggest complaints of Paranormal Activity (we never see anything, and, they never attempt to leave the house) and addressed them in the extreme.

My Soul to Take (2010)

Rating: D-

I'm pretty sure this is a joke. Wes Craven was at a party talking with friends, and they bet him he couldn't rattle off an entire movie idea, complete with exposition, stock characters, and several convoluted twists, in 10 minutes. Well he did, and he took the bet to the next level: he made the movie. The dialogue we get is taken directly from the unedited (save for some minor grammatical and spelling errors) first draft. Thanks, Wes! And to make the joke even better, Craven's only real device is making sure you can't tell whether the movie intends to be serious or funny or both or neither.

Paranormal Activity 2 (2010)

I wondered to myself how in the world one would make a sequel of this movie. Well, here it is, and it wasn't a bad effort. Nothing amazing, but it worked. At times it feels like more of the same, but overall, seeing as how a sequel was inevitable after the enormous success of Paranormal Activity, it was a fine effort.

Outpost (2007)

Had its moments, but nothing amazing.

Let Me In (2010)

Rating: A

Seeing as how I picked the original Swedish film, Låt den rätte komma in, as the #1 DVD Release for 2009, I had vehemently sided with the group who truculently cried foul about an American remake...a year after the original...for seemingly no other reason than the "language barrier." So, yeah, I began the film with my arms folded, stubborn, bordering on disgusted. I might have muttered once or twice about how pointless the effort was. But, man, was this an excellent movie, let alone the absolute best remake I've ever seen, bar none.

And to think: Let Me In is helmed by Matt Reeves, director of Cloverfield, which I truly did not care for. Could be, I was at the end of my tolerance for overly shaky hand-held cam movies, but Cloverfield just didn't do it for me. Enough about that, though; I'm a Matt Reeves fan now. Just like that! Two new favorite directors within one week: first Adam Green and now Matt Reeves. This is some of the best cinematography I've seen in American horror. Terrific angles, superb lighting. Reeves captures and maintains the snow-laden bleakness and the 1980s setting of the novel (surely by now it's well known that this is a remake of a movie that was an adaptation of a novel), despite moving the locale from Sweden to Los Alamos, New Mexico. The only visual design I wish had been omitted was Abby's (i.e. Eli's) ocular effects and her erratic X-Menesque movements, both of which took a bathetic dip toward cheesy.

Aside from being beautifully shot, Reeves did a great job with the tone of the film. Somehow (and this is something I was worried about) the film tends more toward a darker, more horror genre film without losing the slow-burn coming-of-age character drama. The two genres are well balanced. There are moments, especially during the procurement of lifeblood, that are brilliantly chilling. And the tension between Owen and the bullies at school is so perfectly depicted, that, by the end, I felt terrified for Owen, the tension was palpable in a way I actually did not feel with the original. Furthermore, the film renders the sadness of Abby's harrowing existential situation and Owen's disheartening filial dilemmas. It's been a while since I've seen a horror movie that can both chill my skin and and genuinely tug at my emotions.

This is absolutely worth checking out. A big thank-you to Carl over at I Like Horror Movies for talking me into watching Let Me In with his recent review. Even if you're an Original Film Puritan, get a copy and give it a chance. This is a remake done right!

Hatchet II (2010)

Rating: A+
Experience Vitals: Neflix DVD

I can tell you already, this is probably going to be at the top of my end-of-year list. It's been a while since I awarded a Netflix movie the highly-sought-after 5-star rating, but this one saw me not only clicking that right-most star but taking pride in the act to boot. And to think: I didn't really care for the cheesiness of Hatchet. Perhaps I just wasn't ready for Adam Green's tone and style. But I was reawakened with last year's Frozen, and now, after this masterpiece, it's safe to say that I am, in fact, yet another Adam Green fan.

I can't say I've seen such a great mix of horrific (creative) gore and humor in a movie, save for, maybe, Feast. But Feast isn't the best comparison, because I honestly had much more fun with Hatchet II. The only other movie I can think of that was in this vein of fun is Behind the Mask (which a Hatchet II character alluded to!), though it was sans gore. There were times that I had to pause the movie while I laughed, so as to not miss anything--two scenes in particular are worth the 90-minute treat above all else: the "chicken and biscuits and gravy" bit and the "that's just inappropriate" scene! Worth the whole effort.

And, on top of the incessant, brutal, gratuitous gore; on top of the brilliantly executed humor; Hatchet II has a spectacular setup--even better than the preceding installment, which is usually not the case. It is typical that a sequel be mere fluff that attempts to ride the coattails of its predecessor. Not so here! In fact, parts of the first act's exposition were quite chilling despite the jocundity and over-the-top horror. Kind of reminds me of one of my favorite writers, David Foster Wallace, who has the ability to shift gears and dip in and out of different (and sometimes conflicting) emotions within a single page.

The Hatchet Army has a motto that Hatchet II exemplifies: "Here to Save Horror."