Movie Review - The Watermen (2011)

The Watermen, 2011.

Written and Directed by Matt L. Lockhart.
Starring Jason Mewes, Richard Riehle, Floyd Abel, Luke Guldan and Tyler Johnson.


SYNOPSIS:

A group of sport fishermen and their attractive lady friends go on a fishing trip, but they soon get captured by some murderous watermen and must fight for their lives.


What worse place is there to be stranded than the middle of the ocean? With the boat engine tampered with and the flares missing, the dodgy watermen who filled the tank and sold the group interesting looking bait are of course to blame. The group are starving, deprived of drinking water and desperate. So when a large fishing boat comes along with aid, their desperation clouds their judgement. The water they glug so aggressively is laced with some sort of drug, and the group soon literally hit the deck unconscious.

The Watermen have got them right where they want them – ready to off them one by one to use their flesh for their bait-selling business, because fish of course can’t get enough of the taste of tasty, tasty human. These men of the sea are completely psychotic, well equipped on their island with a whole host of ways to maim the beautiful people and make a profit.

This low budget horror follows the conventions of the genre pretty rigidly, and unfortunately it does suffer a little for it. Of course, the tension is still there as you get behind the group and wish for their escape – but parts of The Watermen are painfully predictable, including the ending. You’ve got the pretty people, our victims, you’ve got the typical gore, and of course the mandatory nudity. The recipe for a decent budget horror is there, but it never rises above average. It dares to throw in a bit of rape, and complete exploitation of women, but it’s really nothing new, is it?

In terms of the film making, there are some well-crafted shots in The Watermen, and some interesting deaths (one, for example being a hook through a truck roof), but the most frustrating element of this film is the amount of pointless filler. The number of panning establishing shots that just waste time, and fade out into other panning establishing shot, is excruciatingly annoying. These, alongside a few other shots dotted throughout the film are completely fruitless and distracting.

The other failed element of The Watermen is the actual watermen themselves. They speak in an accent and tone that is pretty much impossible to work out. It’s difficult to feel threatened by killers that mumble in a way that makes them sound a bit…simple? It also makes what should be an interesting (but overused) speech by the ‘leader’ to one of the victims pretty pointless. The victim asks the waterman why they’re attacking innocent people, and from what I could make out, his response was that they ain’t so innocent at all. It always makes me cringe when this sort of dialogue is thrown into horror, it’s clearly some weak message about a society of sinners. Blah blah blah. It’s embarrassing.

All in all, The Watermen is not a terrible film. It’s average at best to be honest. It sticks to conventions and very rarely strays away from them. Modern horror has pretty much taken us in so many directions in terms of plot twists, that there’s little point in trying to create something new and unique – as proven by this entry to the genre.

Cat Fyson

Movie Review - Megan is Missing (2011)

Megan is Missing, 2011.

Directed by Michael Goi.
Starring Amber Perkins, Rachel Quinn and Dean White.


SYNOPSIS:

Megan is an outgoing, confident 14-year-old whilst her best friend, Amy, 13, is not so self-assured. Megan meets a boy online, Josh, and agrees to meet him. Next thing Amy knows, Megan is gone. In pursuit of finding her best friend, Amy tells the police about Josh – but then Amy goes missing too…


Megan is Missing has caused some controversy since its release, banned in New Zealand for ‘glorifying young sexuality’. Elsewhere, mothers are taking away their children’s computers, outright banning them from spending time on the Internet.

The debate about protecting children from the Web is pretty controversial in itself. We have come to rely on technology and connecting to the Internet for all manner of reasons, be them completely innocent, like checking a fact for homework, or something a lot more sinister like ‘Josh’ has in mind. However, whatever anyone’s views on letting their children access the world wide web, Megan is Missing is a shocking story to make you think.

We follow the 14 year old Megan, not particularly a likeable character – but we see she does have a nicer side which she hides to avoid tarnishing her popularity with the ‘cool kids’ who drink, smoke drugs and have a good time. Megan is introduced to Josh, a faceless online ‘friend’ who claims his webcam is busted by his brother, and then chewed by his dog. You’d be sceptical right? Ok, well set your mind back to your early teens and tell me you wouldn’t just carry on chatting to kill the time. It’s a worrying thing, many of us may have chatted to any sort of person when we went through that phase of chatting to people online – and if you think I’m being unrealistic, just look at the popularity of Chat Roulette and other such forums.

Anyway, Megan agrees to meet with Josh – he seems shy, after seeing her at a party and being too nervous to say hello. The two arrange to meet behind a diner – and that’s the last Amy hears from her best friend. Anxious to find out the truth, she chats to Josh who very quickly turns aggressive, and before long is tailing Amy to teach her a lesson for blabbing to the police.

Megan is Missing works to a pretty strong degree in telling us that chatting to strangers is definitely not safe online. It may seem harmless, but meeting up with them is also not a particularly wise move. No one would like to think they are naïve enough to agree to meet someone they’ve spoken to online, but the sad truth is that it happens all the time. Megan’s character may seem a little emphasised and quite unlike anyone you know – but Megan’s do exist, and even those less confident, and less damaged by their past, are still willing to agree to meet with seemingly harmless online friends, who could be as perverted as the predator in this film.

Preaching aside, the film takes an interesting stance on technology. Acting as a compilation of mobile phone video footage (a la IPhones Facetime), alongside news reports and video camera footage, Megan is Missing creates a documentary that takes you to pretty dark places. It’s mostly well-thought out and put together, but a minor gripe I have with this film is its dealings with news reports. I have a limited idea on how US news reports are put together – they do tend to use more visual elements like graphics and cheesy transition effects, but the use of them in the film looks more like parody as opposed to replication, which doesn’t really sit well alongside the sinister subject matter.

The acting in the film is great, Amber Perkins as Amy Herman is a particular highlight. Although some scenes seem to linger a little too long and not seemingly with the intention to discomfort, generally the story plays out effectively. The marketing of Megan is Missing is quite interesting too, as it claims to be a fictional drama ‘based on real events’ – whether this is an amalgamation of cases of child abduction, or replicates a particular case, I am unsure.

Get hold of this DVD and watch for a thought-provoking look at the web, and check out the extras for a shocking statement from Marc Klaas, the owner of Klaas Kids, a foundation which aids parents with missing children – as he himself had a young daughter abducted, raped and killed.

Cat Fyson

Thoughts on... Deadgirl (2008)

Deadgirl, 2008.

Directed by Marcel Sarmiento and Gadi Harel.
Starring Shiloh Fernandez, Noah Segan and Candice Accola.


SYNOPSIS:

Two high school boys bunk off school to go drink beers in the local abandoned insane asylum - what could possibly go wrong? How about discovering a bound and gagged naked (un)dead woman…


Rickie and JT are two best friends, the typical horny teenagers often seen in your run-of-the-mill teen movie. One, Rickie, is lusting after his childhood crush Joann (Candice Accola) who has the jock boyfriend and the stupidly high standards. JT however is a bit different. JT is downright obsessed with sex, to the point where on discovering the ‘dead girl’, his reaction is to get down and dirty with her.

The two as central characters are enough to carry the movie - but initially I was sceptical as the acting is a little wooden. It can be forgiven once the story plays out, and we come to know the ‘dead girl’ (Jenny Spain) who does an incredible job of playing the part of a naked, dirty play thing for JT, and a couple of other high school hornies.

Jenny Spain has the difficult job of portraying so many emotions, leaving the audience wondering who she is, what she is, and how she got there. Ultimately however, none of these questions are really answered. Well, what she is is hinted at, as when she bites someone they become infected (in one case, a rather unfortunate jock gets a dodgy belly and ends up passing out his intestines), and the only way to kill someone infected is to remove their head. The ‘z’ word is never used, but it’s pretty obvious that it is implied.

Deadgirl certainly addresses some pretty interesting themes derived from the objectification of women. The dead girl is essentially a sex slave, held against her will and used for the men’s needs. Although dirty and infected, she has a slim figure, a fairly attractive face when she’s not feeling bitey. Even JT comments on her figure being akin to a porn star. Within that she becomes perhaps a symbol of the male desire, and although Rickie is disgusted by JT’s obsession, a rather weak tagged-on ending even disgraces our ‘hero’.

Ultimately, Deadgirl is not a bad movie. It deals with the undead, rape and possible necrophilia (depending on your view of whether this woman is really ‘alive’), it takes the use of sex in horror to another level, and also adds a darkness to the sex-crazed testosterone-fuelled Hollywood teen male. However, it doesn’t do any of these things particularly well. Although the direction is not bad, the film is let down by some of the shoddy acting and unfeasible plot twists - which is a shame, because the premise had a lot of promise. The music is well done, and the atmosphere is created well, but something stinks - and it’s not the dead girl.

Cat Fyson

DVD Review - Outrage (2010)

Outrage (Japan: Autoreiji), 2010.

Directed by Beat Takeshi (aka Takeshi Kitano).
Starring Takeshi Kitano, Kippei Shiina and Ryo Kase.


SYNOPSIS:

A Japanese Yakuza (mafia) action film, following two opposing drug syndicates. The boss of one of these syndicates, Sekiuchi orders his lieutenant Kato, and right-hand man Ikemoto to bring down the competition, a job that Ikemoto hands over to Otomo (played by director Takeshi Kitano) who runs his own gang.


Call me simplistic, but just writing the synopsis alone was hard work here. This is a film that requires a great amount of attention - not only to read the subtitles, which I have no issue with, but to also keep up with what the hell is going on.

Takeshi Kitano, also known as Beat Takeshi (the name he uses exclusively to credit his work as a director), has created a film which has impressed a fair few crowds. I have seen and read a couple of reviews that cite this film as a 3 star film (including Total Film). I have to disagree. I’d probably give it 2 stars at the most - and what follows here, is why.

Kitano previously ventured the yakuza genre around ten years ago with Brother, a film which I have never seen, and probably won’t after seeing Outrage. My main issue with Outrage is the relentless violence - and no, I’m not being a sissy. I like a violent film as much as the next person, but the violence has to mean something, it has to be there for a reason. After some research half way through my viewing of the film (I had to watch it in two parts, more on that later), I discovered that Kitano had initially come up with the scenes of violence - including a dentistry torture scene, and the cutting off of a finger with a blunt instrument, before coming up with the plot to string the scenes together. Had I not known this information, I could have easily guessed it. What’s interesting though, is that many of the deaths in Outrage are really quite unoriginal, with only a small handful (in a large bunch) really standing out.

Outrage relishes in these sometimes creative violent scenes to the point where the parts in between feel pointless. It is a classic example of a filmmaker coming up with some ideas they find brilliant, and realising they have to draw them together somehow, so come up with a plot which is not only tedious, but confusing. Perhaps the culture difference played a part in my misunderstanding of the film, but the number of characters, and how often the focus shifted, must also play a part. Introducing several ‘gangs’ and quickly interchanging between them makes for a narrative which is near impossible to cling on to. There’s no character you feel any compassion for, which means the film drags on relentlessly for it’s 109 minutes runtime which may not sound like a lot, but it feels like a lifetime when you’re left lost.

In its merit, Outrage is shot fantastically. Kitano may seemingly be lacking in writing skill here, but his direction is wonderfully done. With creative camera angles, and a variation of showing violence quite graphically as well as teasing the audience by keeping distance, the ride may be long but the view is bearable. On a second watch, Outrage may make some more sense, and be all the more appreciated, but having to stop a film from boredom half way through does not make for much hope of a second chance.

With Outrage 2 rumoured to be released next year, Kitano will hopefully have considered the storyline and characters with greater precision than the violent deaths that will inevitably come to them.

Cat Fyson

DVD Review - The Woman (2011)

The Woman, 2011.

Directed by Lucky Mckee.
Starring Pollyanna McIntosh, Angela Bettis, Sean Bridgers, Lauren Ashley Carter, Zach Rand, Shyla Molhusen.


SYNOPSIS:

A lawyer and family man captures a feral woman and chains her up in his cellar hoping to tame and civilize her, but the task proves more difficult than he anticipated.


The Woman is certainly an interesting film, and was under a fair bit of discussion after its screening at FrightFest concerning its attitudes towards women. It opens with a woman, covered in dirt, who clearly resides in her surroundings – a forest. It’s not made apparent in the film, but she is in fact one of the last surviving members of a tribe. She hears an animal in distress, finds it, and kills it. She’s a relentless savage it would seem.

After a bit of a confusing montage which combines lots of footage of the woman running about a bit, then standing over a baby being nursed by a wolf (yeah, I was a bit confused too), the screen fades to black, and transitions to what I assume is the modern day. We see a girl, automatically determined as an outcast, and we’re quickly introduced to her family through the means of a neighbourhood party. All of them seem a little off but none more so than the father.

Played by Sean Bridgers, the father character, Chris Gleek, is certainly an interesting one. It doesn’t take us long to discover that he is a dark person, a dictator who orders his family around beyond the authoritative manner. He is a bizarre overlord who seems to get kicks from wearing the trousers and asserting his power over the family – in particular his meek and rather pathetic wife.

Mr Gleek is the first family member to encounter the savage woman whilst hunting in the woods. He leers over her, watching her clean herself in a river through the scope of his gun. It’s not long before he catches her and has her imprisoned in the family cellar. He is extraordinarily open with the family, and expects their support rather than asking for it. Sean Bridgers does an absolutely phenomenal job with the part, being utterly believable in his characters questionable morals.

It is clear after watching The Woman that it is easy to read into the film as being lathered in misogyny. From the very nature of the woman being trapped in a basement and at one point, literally used as a sex object, to the way that Mr Gleek is so conditioned to feeling it is acceptable to hit not only his wife, but any woman. He enslaves women, and it’s clear as the film develops just how much he despises them. This darkness is gradually leaked as the plot unravels – you know it’s there, you know he’s a wrong ‘un, but The Woman revels in building up to the point where the very extremity of his behaviour unfolds.

Credit must be given to the other characters in the film. The whole family do an excellent job at portraying a sense of instilled fear towards the father, but a particularly interesting character is the youngest daughter Darlin’. As a young child she has only a fraction of understanding over the ‘real world’, and her naivety is a fascinating addition to the strange family dynamic. She is sent to her room if arguments break out, and is led to believe that the imprisonment of the woman is nothing out of the ordinary. She is at an age where she trusts anyone, and anything. The woman herself, played by actress Pollyanna McIntosh, is also done very well, with some human qualities, but some very animalistic ones too.

The music used in The Woman seems unconventional, it seems more fitting in a teen drama a la The O.C., but surprisingly it works very well. It helps us explore the individual characters basic emotions, and really aids, and often contrasts the visuals laid before us.

Despite the controversial misogynistic overtones of the film, The Woman is a fascinating look at an extreme opinion of women, perhaps a bite back at feminists – but more likely an attempt to gauge a reaction. In terms of the film as a horror, it uses tension very well and doesn’t cop out on cheap scares. It’s very psychological, and ultimately a thrilling watch as it makes you think – like all cinema should. It is debatable however whether the films intention is to make you react strongly to the attitudes towards women in the film as ‘disgusting’ and ‘vile’, or to the actual film making skill itself, which is actually rather impressive. There is a little lack of clarity to some elements of the plot here, which avoids pushing the film from an average horror, to something to watch again.

Cat Fyson

DVD Review - Last Night (2010)

Last Night, 2010.

Written and Directed by Massy Tadjedin.
Starring Keira Knightley, Sam Worthington, Eva Mendes, Guillaume Canet, Anson Mount and Griffin Dunne.


SYNOPSIS:

A married couple spend the night away from each other, the husband taking a business trip with a colleague he is attracted to, and the wife encountering a past love.


It’s obvious from the get go that the conception of the movie was female-led. Saying that, Tadjedin does make her female lead a bit of a bunny boiler to begin with, what with suspecting her husband of having an affair purely for chatting to a woman that he works with at a party. Instantly I disliked this female lead, purely for being so paranoid. But then again I also disliked the male lead, so unfortunately there was no connection to either party, which makes the next hour quite dull as the inevitable plot unravels. There is a slight attempt at giving some depth to the couple, but it’s too little to establish any connection or chemistry between them. This is two actors performing a scene, in an apartment that looks fresh out of a catalogue - it lacks any realism.

Following an argument and a vague sort-of make up, the husband, Michael, is off on a business trip with a woman that his wife, Joanna is very suspicious of with reason - he’s clearly attracted to her. So already it’s pretty obvious that something is going to happen. Oh, and when the husband leaves, a past love of the wife’s suddenly turns up. How convenient. Joanna oddly keeps photographs of this past love, and yet she has the audacity to moan at her husband for chatting to an attractive co-worker. This plot is boringly predictable, and despite the fact that Tadjedin does her best to write in some ‘twists’ and create some sense of uncertainty within the audience, it falls flat. With scenes that drag on, and inevitable outcomes, the 1 hour 28 minutes of Last Night feel considerably longer. The consistent ‘will they, won’t they’ situation gets tired early on - if the characters had been more likeable or at least relatable, then the plot may perhaps be a little more compelling.

The most confusing element of Last Night is how it switches and changes its mind about gender. Initially, the woman character is painted as someone who overreacts and is seemingly unnecessarily dramatic, then the man is seen as a pig and the woman reasonable. The supposed ‘cliff-hanger’ ending of the film is also a little contradictory.

In the film's credit, it does have a nice subtle soundtrack which sneaks in and out of scenes with little notice. It aids the scenes that it inhabits, but doesn’t overtake them or define them. It is also interesting at which stages Michael and Joanna begin to feel tempted by their respective flames, but it’s not the least bit surprising. This film may resonate with those that are in a relationship but have feelings for another person, but it was lost on me.

Overall, watch Last Night if you fancy someone who isn’t your partner. Then tell me whether it had an impact on you, because I’d like to know whether its capable of affecting anyone.

Cat Fyson

Thoughts on... Bronson (2008)

Bronson, 2008.

Directed by Nicolas Winding Refn.
Starring Tom Hardy, Kelly Adams, Matt King, James Lance, Amanda Burton and Jonathan Phillips.


SYNOPSIS:

An artistic biopic of Michael Peterson, a.k.a. Charles Bronson, the man who was sentenced to 7 years in prison for robbing a Post Office, but over 30 years on remains behind bars for his violent behaviour.


Despite being placed under the umbrella of ‘biopic’, it is clear that Bronson is in fact Nicolas Winding Refn’s interpretation – focusing not on being completely factually accurate, but instead concentrating on a man’s desire to be known, to be famous. Back in the 70s when the film is set; you couldn’t just file in a Big Brother audition tape to get yourself known. No, Charles Bronson felt the best way to become famous was to cause chaos. By attacking prison guards and taking hostages, Charles Bronson is highly feared, and even just a tiny ounce of respect should be owed to him for being so determined to build such a reputation.

Back to the film itself, there’s a certain detachment from reality with some cuts in between sections of the film where Bronson, played by the excellent Tom Hardy, addresses an audience onstage, often with mime-style make-up, and here is where Hardy is at his best. Performing so theatrically in a way that is utterly convincing but also utterly mad, these sections of the film are particularly interesting, as the audience in the theatre are essentially fans of Charles Bronson, loyal followers who clap and laugh as needed, but once ol’ Charles’ voice is raised, they snap back to silence with adoration and awe.

As a fan of Tom Hardy, having first discovered him in Martina Cole TV drama, The Take, I was so impressed by his performance in Bronson, that it came as no surprise that he had in fact met the man on several occasions. I have huge respect for actors who do their utmost to understand a character, and although it is difficult to know what the real Charles Bronson is like, I’m pretty convinced that Tom Hardy had a damn good idea. His performance is phenomenal and terrifying, and although most of the film concentrates on Bronson as basically a lunatic, when the softer and more awkward side of him comes to fruition, it is utterly believable and gives real dimension to a character that most would assume has only one dimension – a violent one.

The order of the film does not always appear to be chronological. There is a small confusion when Bronson’s manager (played by Matt King) comes to the decision that his client should refer to himself as Charles Bronson, as opposed to his birth name Michael Peterson, however he has in fact already referred to himself as Charles Bronson earlier in the film. Other than that though, there is little to say in terms of flaws in this film. The orchestral and often operatic soundtrack is fantastic, and truly contrasts the violence of what we see. The whole film is artful, and some may say it is a drawback – but dig beneath the arty graphics that at one point dance across the screen, and dig beneath some of the directorial decisions, and you’ll find a film that is a little bit ‘in your face’ (Hardy’s cursing is as loud and threatening as if he was there with you on the sofa), but very engaging and a profoundly interesting example of one man’s will power and drive to become known in a time where celebrity was actually less important than today.

Cat Fyson

Movie Review Archive

DVD Review - Shiver (2008)

Shiver (Spanish: Eskalofrío), 2008.

Directed by Isidro Ortiz.
Starring Junio Valverde, Mar Soupe and Blanca Suarez.


SYNOPSIS:

Santi has a serious case of photophobia, to improve his health him and his mother are forced to move to a shadowed village in the Spanish mountains but not all is quite right about their new hometown.


In case you hadn’t gathered by now, Shiver is a Spanish horror film. My experience of Spanish horror is somewhat limited, but I expected more from this movie.

The film opens with Santi, the titular character, running across an open space which is lit heavily by the sun. As he runs, his skin begins to sore, and as he is about to reach his destination, he bursts into flame. Quite an opening, huh? Shame it’s just a dream sequence then. Dream sequences are used several times in Shiver, and they are a technique which I personally cannot stand. So to start the movie this way was a bitter disappointment at the offset.

We quickly discover that Santi is allergic to sunlight, but we also find out his front teeth are growing to look like fangs. Groan, not another vampire movie! Well, it isn’t quite – or at least it’s not presented as one other than the touches of Santi’s appearance and health. It’s odd to toy with such an idea, but not expand upon it. Anyway – Santi is bullied at school, and so when his doctor tells him and his mother to move somewhere with less sunlight, it’s hardly a bother for him to uproot. His mother is initially sceptical, but soon warms to the idea for her son’s safety.

As soon as they move to the isolated village, all does not seem right. The mother receives some odd advice from a local, and Santi hears bumps in the night. Soon livestock end up being gutted, and a couple of murders occur – both of which Santi has been around to witness the aftermath – i.e. the corpses with their throats ripped out. Naturally, the townsfolk are suspicious of him but not all is as it seems.

The problem with Shiver for the most part is that it throws in some odd twists and turns, some of which do not seem feasible. Of course, I’m not expecting realism here, but I am expecting a sense of the believable in terms of captivating me as the viewer, but I’m left wondering why things are happening, rather than your typical horror response of “Oh no, that person is about to die!” or other such phrases which run through your mind when there’s some sort of creature on the loose. Seeing as I’ve given a fair bit of the film away already, it hardly seems fair to dwell on this without revealing a mass of the plot.

Having only watched the film last night, it’s almost entirely forgettable. It has some interesting plot points, and at times I was admittedly a little creeped out, for example when the ‘creature’ (not giving too much away here…) is in Santi’s house, but from early on the film has some embarrassing directorial flaws which include flicking from one shot, to a completely irrelevant shot, which I can only assume is meant to be ‘artistic’.

Shiver, really should have taken some more guidance from Pan’s Labyrinth, seeing as the artistic director of Shiver also worked on that film. Sure, the two films are completely different in almost all aspects, but a fantastical element to Shiver could have made it a more pleasurable watch. Failing that just a tidier, more engaging storyline would have clinched the deal and made this an enjoyable horror, as opposed to one that gathers a response that is little more than ‘meh’.

Shiver is released on DVD on October 17th.

Cat Fyson

Movie Review Archive

DVD Review - Stake Land (2010)

Stake Land, 2010.

Directed by Jim Mickle.
Starring Connor Paulo, Nick Damici, Danielle Harris and Kelly McGillis.


SYNOPSIS:

A vampire epidemic has swept across the nation and its up to vampire hunter Mister to escort young Martin to Canada, the New Eden where they can be safe.


Stake Land is like Zombieland with vampires instead of zombies. Oh, and darkness and sinister tones instead of any funnies. The similarities really lie in the lead characters. A young guy, somewhat misguided and a bit lost (you’ll find out why pretty quickly), and a badass older man who has the knowledge of the world, and a kickass technique to get rid of the bogeymen. The dynamic between them draws so close to Zombieland that it’d be very surprising if there was no inspiration from there.

Stake Land begins with a voiceover. A method I’m not particularly a fan of, and unfortunately a method used repeatedly throughout the film. The voiceover gives us a little context into how the world has all gone wrong, and how most of the people who were in it are now dead due to an outbreak of vampires - whose origins aren’t really ever discussed. But that’s fine, we can just about live with that. Our lead character, Martin, tells us he met Mister, the badass guy I discussed earlier, back in a time only a flashback (which would have worked better at the absolute beginning of the film) could explain. The two have been travelling for some time apparently, but it’s not really inherently clear how long - because one minute it seems to be that they have spent months together, but then you get the impression its much less because Mister is actively training Martin to fend off the vampire horde.

The vampires themselves are quite a sight. No sparkle in the sun, no attractive humanly deceptive appearance. These guys look like zombies, with fangs. There’s nothing human about them, and they certainly don’t transform from a beautiful form like some might expect from previous vamp flicks. The special effects and make up people have really done a great job here, although perhaps would have benefited from lessening the similarity to undead brain-munchers. Afterall these guys are here to suck your blood. Although, it does seem to be suggested that they enjoy feasting on a bit of flesh too. It’s definitely worth noting here that the gore effects are also quite good.

What’s quite interesting about Stake Land though is some of the commentaries it attempts to make. There’s religion, a tinsy bit of politics, and of course the expected social commentary on the break down of civilisation. Nothing terribly unique here really, and some of the comments are a little lacklustre and seem pointless.

It’s take on religion though is a little more complex, and quite flawed. A group, named the brotherhood are a sort of secondary enemy to our lead group of heroes (which steadily grows as the film progresses). They are basically a group of religious nuts, even referred to as ‘Christian crazies’ by one of the lead characters. However, they appear to be more of a cult group - a group which represent the negative pockets of society who in a pot-apocalyptic situation such as the one presented to us, take it upon themselves to rule the land, and make people suffer. They even force a nun to have sex with them. As society has essentially fallen apart, there’s no one to stop them. On the other side of it, there are some hopeful pockets of society addressed, with small towns barricading themselves, in a little mecca of sorts. However, naturally the brotherhood disrupt this heaven in a particularly interesting way.

Generally, Stake Land struggles a little to flesh out all its characters. Some actions of particular characters are not always justifiable on the information we do know about them. For example, Mister is mostly seen as a stern character, but randomly becomes softer, without any real reason as to why. It’s a small problem, but it does make you question one of the actions he takes towards the end of the film. Several of the characters we come to know over the film, of course will not make it to the credits. Some unexpected killings are actually a credit to the making of the film, as it’s a welcome change to being able to predict who gets to live.

The style of film making here is quite simplistic, with no arty attempts, heavily relying on the plot, which brings a suitable amount of twists and turns. The soundtrack is quite good, with melancholy piano tones, which adds very well to the atmosphere, but as the piece of music played it so short, and often repeated, it is seen to be lazy, as some more interesting instrumentation could have done nicely in certain scenes.

Overall, Stake Land is an interesting take on what some (including myself) would call a bit of a dead genre. It brings plot, gore and good ideas - but something is missing, and it feels like it could be a heart.

Stake Land is released on DVD on October 17th.

Cat Fyson

Movie Review Archive

DVD Review - Episode 50 (2011)

Episode 50, 2011.

Directed by Joe Smalley and Tess Smalley.
Starring Josh Folan, Chris Perry, Natalie Wetta, Keithen Hergott and Eleanor Wilson.


SYNOPSIS:

A group of paranormal inspectors who dispel hauntings are sent to explain the happenings of a haunted insane asylum.


Recently I have began to realise that sometimes it’s better to go into a movie having no idea what it’s about. This is what I did with Episode 50. I had no idea of its genre (although I had a hunch it was a horror), and no plot summary to go by. Unfortunately, instead of being a pleasant surprise, Episode 50 was a bit of a let down. Please be warned, there are spoilers in this review, albeit it terribly revealing ones.

The film opens with some definitions of the different types of haunting, e.g. poltergeist, written in white text on a black screen. This is promising, and had me excited about the movie. However, as the definitions disappear, a bizarre twist had me quite disappointed. A TV show begins called The Paranormal Inspectors, about people who are dispelling the chances of a haunting in an old couples house. How? Well, they explain to the couple that the noises they are hearing are rats, and the visions they are seeing are induced by paint fumes. It seems a little farfetched, and seem to be reasons any right thinking person would discover themselves. But whatever.

After the typically cheesy fast-scrolling American credits roll for this TV show, the film actually begins. Sort of. Already from this mock TV show opening, there is some wooden acting and a bitter taste in my mouth. I’m already not looking forward to where this is going. And it gets worse, as the TV show team are properly introduced to us as being the main characters of the movie. There isn’t a likeable guy or gal amongst them. This is a shame, because it becomes a chore having to get to know the group, as they go and meet another incredibly unlikeable character who requests that they go and film Paranormal Inspectors in the most haunted building around - the West Virginia Insane Asylum. Ooo, creepy! The film gets its title from the fact that the show to be filmed is going to be the 50th episode special, which itself seems a bizarre angle to take. Why not call it the same name as the TV show? Or the asylum?

The film then gives us a few talking head segments, with students and scientists and the like all justifying why hauntings are fake. Their reasons should really be plentiful to make it a valid argument, but this section of the film sort of falls flat. It doesn’t really debunk anything, and seems a little try hard in its attempt to set up what is clearly going to be the rest of the films intention of making us feel that ghosts and ghouls are in fact real.

Next, the black screens and white text appears again, and again, and again. It gets very tedious, even if it is attempting to set up an atmosphere as it tells us that episode 50 of Paranormal Inspectors never made it public viewing - until now. So now, the movie is technically a found footage film, a la Cloverfield. I’m a fan of some found footage films, but this didn’t have the grittiness you’d hope for. It seemed too polished, like too much money was spent attempting to create the same sort of creepy atmosphere - and really failing.

We return to the team, who have arrived at the asylum, to discover that their ‘rivals’, a group which are deeply (and annoyingly) religious, are there to prove the stories of the asylum true. Having two extremes could have worked well, what with the P.I’s being sceptical of ghosts existence, but unfortunately this too falls a little flat and creates another group of unlikeable and unrelatable characters. A good horror movie, should on the whole make you feel a bit bad for all these people who are probably going to die horrifically, or on the other end of the scale they are so bad you want them to die as soon as possible. But alas, these characters lack dimension and you’re really left not caring which way it goes.

I will leave the events of what happens when they cross the threshold of the asylum for you to discover if you wish - what I will say, is that in the film’s credit there are some spooky moments, but equally there are some truly silly ones too. The real problem with this film is that it is too busy which is only emphasised by its short run time. With the two groups splitting up to smaller groups, it becomes quite difficult to put up with the quick changes of location and events. There are also several plot holes in this story, and a bizarre attempt at a back story for our lead characters which never really gets enough attention to be explained fully. There’s also some confusion caused by some of the camera work - in a found footage film, there is some expectation that the film should stick to the P.O.V of a handheld camera, and that the camera man should be established as a character. Spanish zombie flick Rec does this particularly well and is a fantastic piece of horror, but Episode 50 is quite frankly to be forgotten. See this movie out of curiosity and for small, cheap thrills - but not if you’re expecting atmosphere, suspense, or really any other staples of an above average horror, then give it a miss.

Cat Fyson

Movie Review Archive

Thoughts on... The Beast Must Die (1974)

The Beast Must Die, 1974.

Directed by Paul Annett.
Starring Calvin Lockhart, Peter Cushing, Marlene Clark, Charles Gray and Michael Gambon.


SYNOPSIS:

The Beast Must Die is a twist on the murder-mystery genre, where a group of people are brought together under the suspicion that one of them is a werewolf. It is up to the viewer to guess who it is.


It’s not often you hear the term ‘werewolf break’. It’s not exactly a term that enters everyday conversation. That is unless you are discussing this 1970’s horror murder-mystery, where us, the audience, are given the choice to decide who we think is the werewolf out of a group of assumingly well-to-do British folk, amongst them, the great Michael Gambon.

The film opens with a man, seemingly running away from authorities. This goes on for some time, until we realise that’s not quite what’s going on. Almost every time the man is caught, he is released and set off to run and hide in the woods once again. So automatically the viewer is left with some sense of what-the-fuckery. Soon we discover that our run-away friend is in fact a particularly wealthy individual, who has bugged the wood surrounding his mansion with cameras and microphones, and is putting the technology to the test. An interesting premise to begin, that only gets more intriguing as we discover that the man has rounded up a group of people whom he suspects of being a werewolf. And so, the murder mystery begins as he begins to gather the required ‘equipment’ for detecting who is the beast.

The Beast Must Die is a fascinating twist on the murder mystery, the leading man as the detective, setting up the suspicions of each of his guests. Some guests are made out to be more likely than others, but as the ‘werewolf break’ begins (the viewer is given 30 seconds to decide who is the beast), it truly could be anyone. Well, almost anyone.

Aside from the excellent plot devices, the film is shot well too. Some tactical camera shots include a well positioned perspective, showing a character’s reflection in a remaining mirror shard after the mirror is smashed. This is just one example of a few which separate this film from other less impressive directorial efforts even in modern day. However, these arty shots are not always one so well, and become very deliberate and thus less effective.

An aspect of the movie which consistently impresses is the soundtrack. Combining music which can only be described as ‘funky’, with a typical 70s vibe (think Starsky and Hutch), with the typical tension-building orchestration of many other horror films. The Beast Must Die is far from a typical horror though, driven by a captivating plot rather than scares. The fear factor is low, instead the film is steered by playing the guessing game. The gore is few, which makes its use all the more effective, and aesthetically impressive. Modern horrors could learn a lot about utilising, or rather over-utilising gory effects for cheap thrills.

Despite its merits, The Beast Must Die has its flaws. Primarily, unfortunately the actual werewolf leaves a lot to be desired. Fair enough, back in the 70s they hardly have the technology to create a CGI masterpiece, or the knowledge to create a werewolf transformation to match An American Werewolf In London (1981), but a particular scene where the werewolf fights a dog really highlights the fact that the werewolf is in fact, just a dog too. It’s not too distracting thankfully, and it can easily be forgiven. Something that is slightly less forgivable is some of the acting abilities. Notably, one of the female characters, seems to have learnt her acting skills from someone with a megaphone. We can forgive her though, because there are some better performances, including the wonderful Michael Gambon, as Jan. The film is carried by Calvin Lockhart, who plays Tom Newcliffe and acts as our host. His performance is utterly believable, even in persuading us as his audience that not only are werewolves real, but it could be any one of the shady characters presented to us.

With its twists and suspense, The Beast Must Die does an excellent job at whittling down the suspects at an appropriate pace but remains ambiguous until the very end. Although from early on I made a blind (but correct) guess at who the werewolf was, it still comes as a surprise. See this film if you want to see something creative, innovative and incredibly enjoyable.

Cat Fyson

Movie Review Archive