While the original film was far from a classic it earned a place in my heart as a kid . I was surprised this was even made , but as the flux of re-makes go this was a decent blend of staying reasonable true to the source while given that modern spin hollywood loves as they think kids can't relate to anything that does not resemble their lives.
Collin Ferrel as the vampire was the weakest performance of the ensemble, the mother and son dynamic for some reason felt more like lost boys to me. the under current of sexy was not present in this version, which with the true blood trend of sexy vamps , this surprises me , though i did enjoy the more monstrous take on the myth, i think micheal c hall would have pulled off the sociopath role better , and his range as an actor i'm sure he could have pulled it off in away that made people forget for a minute he's Dexter .
The cgi effects , got no complaints , with the exception of the arm lost by Christopher Plasse, who played the red mist in kick ass, as he take the turn to the undead as evil ed, i think in the original this character was handle more effectively
the other problem with the movie lies in the way it was paced was not as effective as the original either much like let me in, it tried to be different for the sake of being different than building any sort of tension.
the peter vincent character who is a criss angel type performer rather than a creature feature host was the only area where being different worked . the character had a real charm . Much like the original , i can't say this movie would be considered scary to any one who is out of diapers. i think most horror fans can appreciate the fact it is well made and the general lack of horror on screen this year we are taking what ever we can get unfortunatly it's sequels to tepid franchises like final destination...none of those movies will ever grace this blog as they are little more than cw teen dramas.
If you have 11 dollars to burn this movie is entertaining if nothing else, though less blood the true blood. It at least was a good timekiller as i wait for decent copy of don't be afraid of the dark to pop up online.
Friday, August 26, 2011
Sunday, August 14, 2011
Troll Hunter
While it will be lumped in with horror films, in the same manner Cloverfeild is i have a hard time with it as a horror movie, though the running through the woods using night vision might be scary to some, bringing us back to the psychology of what scare people. I for don't have a fear of giant monsters, Godzilla and King Kong are icons of the genre but are they scary, i would like to meet some one who is scared by a godzilla movie.
This movie like cloverfeild , a comparison very easy to make though , i found Troll Hunter the superior film, never for once did i buy the disaster movie element to cloverfeild, or Monsters for that matter , which might have beaten Trollhunter to the theater , i might even have like Monsters better than Cloverfield and i think it has a higher fear factor than all three. While we are on giant monsters it should og on the record that the Host is the superior movie of the new wave of monster movies.
Where troll hunter excels is painting the picture , the suspension of disbelief and for having the balls to put those goats on the bridge but not make the gag too heavy handed .. or hoofed. i could also raised to a toast to the fact any under used monster appears on the screen, i think minotaurs are due a better shake than the narnia movies . Up until this point lotr and the 80's comedy-ish troll series were the only trolling on screen.
The acting in troll hunter succeeded in the sense , you believed thats what these people were really doing , despite the cgi troll, i think for realism and the aiding of the suspension of disbelief the trolls could have been shorter. I doubt it will make it onto my top ten horror list though i suppose it's bubbling under as the competition isn't very stiff , see next post for the mid year report card. i think with trolls the scene on the bridge was handled best because less was more, in other scenes the trolls looked more like the creatures from the where the wild things are movie, losing their menace , when you are trapped in a cave by ugly teddy bears. so i will conclude it by saying , i was entertained , kinda like a band who wears there influences on their sleeve but does such a good job in the execution you let it slide. recommended to those willing to keep their expectation low and then they will be pleasantly surprised. so while i am not on the fence about if this is a good movie or not i am trying to figure out how good was it , good not great .
This movie like cloverfeild , a comparison very easy to make though , i found Troll Hunter the superior film, never for once did i buy the disaster movie element to cloverfeild, or Monsters for that matter , which might have beaten Trollhunter to the theater , i might even have like Monsters better than Cloverfield and i think it has a higher fear factor than all three. While we are on giant monsters it should og on the record that the Host is the superior movie of the new wave of monster movies.
Where troll hunter excels is painting the picture , the suspension of disbelief and for having the balls to put those goats on the bridge but not make the gag too heavy handed .. or hoofed. i could also raised to a toast to the fact any under used monster appears on the screen, i think minotaurs are due a better shake than the narnia movies . Up until this point lotr and the 80's comedy-ish troll series were the only trolling on screen.
The acting in troll hunter succeeded in the sense , you believed thats what these people were really doing , despite the cgi troll, i think for realism and the aiding of the suspension of disbelief the trolls could have been shorter. I doubt it will make it onto my top ten horror list though i suppose it's bubbling under as the competition isn't very stiff , see next post for the mid year report card. i think with trolls the scene on the bridge was handled best because less was more, in other scenes the trolls looked more like the creatures from the where the wild things are movie, losing their menace , when you are trapped in a cave by ugly teddy bears. so i will conclude it by saying , i was entertained , kinda like a band who wears there influences on their sleeve but does such a good job in the execution you let it slide. recommended to those willing to keep their expectation low and then they will be pleasantly surprised. so while i am not on the fence about if this is a good movie or not i am trying to figure out how good was it , good not great .
Monday, August 8, 2011
Rise of the Planet of the Apes
While this isn't a horror movie , the movie's tone darkens through out and reminded me of the man vs nature horror movies of the sixties and seventies , so i am sure horror fans can definitely appreciate this even if they were born after 1980 and lack a fondness for the original file. As a kid the planet of apes movies were my favorite series right along side of the Frankenstein, Tarzan and Sinbad series. The original series served as metaphor for civil rights issues at the times . That tone is absent here, instead we get a science gone wrong flick. Well acted and shot the cgi apes are the stars James Franco earned his paycheck.
The film gives many blatant winks at the first film, but takes it's self seriously other wise. My only complaint is the actual rise of the apes is in the last twenty minutes of the , though the movie didn't drag , it could have been paced a little differently to have afforded the apes big day. With out being a major spoilers i can say they left another room to wedge a sequel to this in between where the film leaves off and Planet of the apes begins, one promising little tidbit is this makes no illusions to the awful tim burton remake and is directly related to the original series, so no Micheal Jackson looking Zeera's.
Other recent movies i have made and attempt to watch have not keep me this wrapped up in it , so even with the lacking build of the apes takeover , i was highly entertained , it was respectful to the source material , though different in tone .
The film gives many blatant winks at the first film, but takes it's self seriously other wise. My only complaint is the actual rise of the apes is in the last twenty minutes of the , though the movie didn't drag , it could have been paced a little differently to have afforded the apes big day. With out being a major spoilers i can say they left another room to wedge a sequel to this in between where the film leaves off and Planet of the apes begins, one promising little tidbit is this makes no illusions to the awful tim burton remake and is directly related to the original series, so no Micheal Jackson looking Zeera's.
Other recent movies i have made and attempt to watch have not keep me this wrapped up in it , so even with the lacking build of the apes takeover , i was highly entertained , it was respectful to the source material , though different in tone .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)