I Watch 'Em So You Don't Have To

Watching Movies For The Hell Of It

Since I've been a little more down than usual and am trying out my new Netflix, I decided to take a little break from reviewing and just see whatever just for the sake of watching it. That doesn't mean I won't have a review or two, but I'm not going to pontificate on every movie I've watched in the past couple of days. Be glad for that, because there have been some real stinkers. And Original Sy Fy movies, which instantly means don't even try to make it sound good because it just isn't - no matter who they get to be in them. So.... I've been revisiting movies I've seen a long time ago, some I was curious about, and some because of who was in them. Wow. What a pile.

Saw The Final Chapter: Okay number one you know that they're gonna make more of these cash cow things so saying Final Chapter is always bogus (see any other movie franchise) but I will say that for this supposing to be a 3D movie, you guys who paid for that got ripped off royally, 'cause I saw it in 2D and there was NOTHING that 3D could add to that thing. And the premise was massive duh. The only part about it I liked is they brought back Cary Elwes (from the original and best) as part of the movie with a good twist. That's it.

Paranormal Activity II: They didn't have the first one but I figured that they are all pretty interchangeable, so I had to see what the fuss was about. And just like when they showed The Blair Witch Project (scariest film ever - NOT) on TV and I realized it was nothing but three teenagers screaming at each other, being scared over little piles of rocks and ending abruptly with no explanation, this was - pretty much the same. They showed security camera footage each night and I swear all they did was use the same shots and changed the dates. AND NOTHING HAPPENS. A door opens <gasp> a pot falls <oh my> and so on until the last minute of the movie when.... DUH. In other words, if you've shelled out 8 bucks to see this (probably at least 20 if you bought your popcorn, soda and Milk Duds) and you've done it for all, what is there four now? You should be ashamed.

Anything from the Tales From The Crypt Series: These are uneven, you really don't know if you're going to get something decent or not. After all, TFTC are stories mostly written in the 50's (William Gaines being the editor, you know, the MAD guy?) and one actually says it's a remake of a 40's movie (which it was very little like) so you know, if you watch anything from this series, don't expect a whole lot. If I were to pick one I would suggest Demon Knight. It was my first Billy Zane movie and he's just terrific in it, as is Jada Pinkett (before Will Smith) and William Sadler, a great character actor who's been in stuff I've seen and never even known he was in it - but that's my fault, not his. If you try others, just turn your brain off 'cause there's not a lot to them.

House Of Bones: An original Sy Fy so don't expect too much but there was a little creativity here - it's a swipe at all those ghost shows that usually, to quote the movie, 'show grainy footage of us scaring each other'. So since they don't take themselves seriously, we don't have to either. It does of course turn out to be something more sinister, and there was some twists and turns, but not a whole lot.

Haunted High: Another original Sy Fy first called Ghostquake (which I like better) it has several of the stars from the House Of Bones movie but they last about 2 minutes (They were definitely there as a kind of in-joke because one student had DVD's of Sinister Sites, which was the name of the reality show spoofed in House Of Bones). Griff Furst makes a brief appearance (he's one of the producers too) before he's splatted, but I was kind of irritated - the movie is pushed as 'starring' Danny Trejo (yes, I will watch him in anything) but he plays - say it with me - a janitor. Really? They have to stereotype that badly? He has three major motion pictures he's starred in under his belt with another coming and he's still playing janitors? (For a goof, see how many you can list.) So this movie is just - pffft. Trap a bunch of kids you don't like in a high school (I know for a fact that one 'kid' was actually 27) and kill them off one by one. Same old formula, Danny gets to do a little extra but still... a janitor? Really?

Inkubus: Starred Robert Englund, only reason I bothered. Basic premise: Robert is an Inkubus (spelled with a backward K because he 'wants to be special') having a lot of fun screwing around with people's heads and killing them off one by one in an old police precinct. Trouble? It also stars Joey Fatone, who was also one of the producers. Ah. That was definitely a buzz kill. Joey plays a cop in a mental ward trying to explain what happened the night Inkubus came to the precinct and why he thinks his (now deceased) wife had a demon for a baby. Aaaaand if you watch it, do it for Robert who proves that even without the makeup, hell he was even better and more menacing than Freddy ever was. He talks low, reasonable and creepy as all get out. Oh and he can do anything he wants of course. But Joey Fatone? I just couldn't get past that.

Tucker And Dale vs. Evil: Woof. Ten minutes into this movie and I knew a review would be more of a waste of time than watching this horrid thing was. Basically you have two rednecks who go on vacation and are mistaken by a group of college kids for serial killers. Not funny, not smart, not even interesting in the slightest. You just want everybody to die.

Lord Of Illusion: I thought cool a Clive Barker movie I haven't seen - it just was that I forgot about it. Again taking a short story and making a movie means a lot of padding and some muddled up ideas, but the premise is interesting, the cast not bad, and it was worth a second look.

Labyrinth: What could be cooler than David Bowie as a Goblin King in a kingdom full of muppets? Good stuff, good songs, he's cooler than hell, and I enjoyed watching it - I think this was the fourth time for me. 

Play Misty For Me: So my now-grown-up eyes have seen what my little kid eyes interpreted in my head about this movie. It's basically kind of unique for its time (1971) - a reverse stalker movie (think Fatal Attraction but with a lot less going on). Jessica Walter (you might know her from the voice-over of Archer's mother on Archer) is obsessed with Clint Eastwood, a disc jockey of all things (and not very good at it I must say) because, being a 70's guy, he met and immediately slept with her. So now she figures they're hooked for life. She's obviously bonkers and he can't seem to get her meathooks out of him so he can spend time with his 'real' girlfriend Donna Mills (looking very nice freckles and all). The 'big ax chopping scene' I've had in my head all my life turned out to be a mildly violent (no injuries showing, that fake pink tinged type blood goop) scene of Jessica slashing at Clint's maid with a knife. AND the maid lived. So that's another memory blown way out of proportion. I THOUGHT this was a double feature with Wait Until Dark with Audrey Hepburn but that came out in 1967 so it may have been another time. That's the movie that my young mind determined that if you left refrigerator doors open, they kill you (in the movie the bad guy gets stabbed and she's hiding behind the refrigerator door, in front of which he dies before he can reach her). Lesson to the parents: Leave the kiddies at home if you're going to watch this kind of stuff. Yeah, today's kids are more savvy, and probably wouldn't have a single twitch if they saw stuff like Nightmare On Elm Street or something like that, but why have a kid with warped memories... let them make their own when they're of age. Okay, lecture over.

I Spit On Your Grave: A cult classic from 1978. Why exactly? This is a cool title for some type of zombie or monster flick, or even a psycho killer - not a brutal rape and revenge movie that goes on forever, just for the sake of being more violent and... icky. Originally known as Day Of The Woman (that's a little bit closer), then changed to I Hate Your Guts (okay), then The Rape And Revenge Of Jennifer Hill (wordy but to the point) for the 1980 release we get ISOYG. Not relevant in the least. And horrific as some misogynistic men's attitudes may be, and the horrible amount of violence toward women, was this film really necessary? Did it empower women at all? Nope, just showcased a bunch of horrible things happening to a (we guess) nice lady who then turns into a horrible lady doing things back. Not necessary or worthy of film. AND they had to remake it in 2010 why exactly? My only thought is that they wanted to show just how much MORE violence/sex/nudity they can get away with in the 21st century. Because this movie says nothing, proves nothing, and teaches nothing. Entertaining? Only if you're a sick, sick moo cow.

Hostel Part III: Remember when I said Hostel I and II worked because it was in Slovakia, a foreign country, the kids were backpackers going through Europe and most had lied to their parents so no one had any idea where they really were? And that Hostel Part III being in Las Vegas kind of kills that whole setup and how the heck could anyone get away with that in the US? Well, it came up on my selection and I started to watch it... but Eli Roth, the mind behind the first two was not involved in the third, so after about 15 minutes I peeked at the wiki page to see what I was in for. Oh man, do they reach way out there and this scenario would so not work - despite the supposed cleverness they think they put into it. It's still a hunting club, all members have their tattoos, and it being Las Vegas they gamble money over certain aspects of each victim, like how they'll plead for their life, how long it will take them to die, etc. And the main character is, of course, betrayed by his 'best' friend - massive duh since that 'friend' would be the first suspect in any investigation. But I'm going on too long about a movie I just will not watch. The first two examined the cruelty of men who had the money and the location to get away with that kind of thing. That was brutal, but interesting and a lesson of man's inhumanity toward his fellow man. This just takes Eli's work and turns it into The Hangover with lots of blood. No thank you. I won't even watch The Hangover.

The Ward aka John Carpenter's The Ward: Okay so this movie wasn't so bad - put it down mostly as a thriller more than horror movie. Carpenter still knows how to keep the suspense up, but he also still knows how to stretch out thin material to make a 45 minute movie into 90 minutes. It is supposed to take place in the 60's in North Bend, Oregon (real place) at the North Bend Psychiatric Hospital (fake place). Not the first time we've had a whacko picture filmed in Oregon - in 1975 One Flew Over A Cuckoo's Nest was filmed at the Oregon State Hospital in Salem. But I digress. At first this appears to be your standard 'haunted hospital but nobody believes because the girls are all nuts' kind of movie but finally starts to turn interesting, keeping the really good stuff for almost near the end. That means you can expect the first 3/4 of the movie trying to stay interested to find out what happens in the last quarter. Hard to do, but he does put a unique twist on things and the ending shocker is not really a shocker, but still all around Carpenter hasn't lost much of his touch.

Hellraiser IV Bloodline: What have I said about franchises? Okay I broke my own rule for two reasons - one this is Clive Barker, one of my fave horror writers, and two, this was supposed to be a prequel-sequel which explains the origins of the whole storyline behind the Cenobites, the Box, the configurations and everything. Unfortunately, apparently nobody could agree on just how much explanation could be carried in this movie, and there are no less than four different versions (read director's cuts and more than one director quitting) of this damn thing. Now, the first movie was great, the second - okay I guess. The third was a waste of time. I thought that's all there was, but a savvy movie watcher let me know there were about eight or nine of these damn things - sheesh! I did watch a couple to my own distaste, one only because Lance Henricksen was in it - but again I digress. This fourth installment was the last one Clive Barker was involved with. See, even writers have limits with their own creations. I'm sure he got money from the... rest of this mess, but at least he didn't have to watch them. Sooo... only if you've read the book or seen the first movie would this movie have any interest to you. I say prequel-sequel because it actually starts in the year 2127 but shoots back to the 18th century when the very first box was built. Of course how they explain the rest of them after this is probably why they're a bunch of garbage... but then again, Clive didn't have to worry about that. And neither do you.

Season Of The Witch: Purely for curiosity's sake - I can't stand Nicolas Cage, haven't been able to stomach him since Peggy Sue Got Married - but the movie kind of sounded interesting... until I tried following the plot, which is two weary Holy Crusaders are charged with bringing in a witch accused of starting the black plague. It goes from battle to battle until two of them quit and end on the coast of Styria. That's when I thought - wait, I'm totally geographically ignorant but even I didn't think that sounded right. Now, I haven't watched it all yet but I found a review site that lists this movie as the number one most historically inaccurate movie (I'm guessing of recent years) because of the following facts (bear with me, I thought this was funny so I'm passing it on.): If You Wrote a History Paper Based on This: Expect a D. You'd know better than to mention the demons and zombie monks at the end, but even using just the first three-quarters of the movie, when they're still pretending to be historical, you'd go wrong in a lot of ways. Technically, there were no Crusades after 1291, when the last Crusader city fell; so it's a little difficult to believe that main characters Behmen and Felson are Crusader knights between 1335-1344. Regular knights, sure, but they would have been there to protect pilgrims, or on pilgrimages themselves, rather than trying to take over anything. It's also geographically inaccurate. One of the seemingly endless captions says they're on the "Coast of Styria", but Styria is landlocked. Maybe they meant Syria? One fight in the midst of a desert is captioned "Gulf of Edremit", except the Gulf of Edremit is actually a temperate, entirely non-desert spot in Turkey. They grow olives. Most jarring for me, though, is the way it depicts the Black Death. They show a character dying of the plague, with this huge, misshapen, oddly colored lump of flesh above his eyebrow. According to the imdb, this is because the filmmakers went with an alternate plague theory proposed in 2001, saying that the plague was not the bubonic plague at all, but an Ebola-like virus. Researching the Ebola virus, however -- a thoroughly unpleasant task, I assure you -- hasn't turned up any such symptom, though, so I'm still not sure what's up with that. Maybe they wanted to jar us, so that we'd think less about the dubious plot. - The Movie Critic Next Door    So while I'm going to plug away at this thing to see if there's anything interesting (and try to ignore Cage which will be difficult as he's top billed) I'm not too thrilled or expectant that this will be anything but garbage. Aaaand I was right. Behman and Felson's Bogus Journey was just that... a movie long trek to a monk's castle to deliver this supposed witch - who turns out is not a witch, but a demon. Or at least the girl is demonized. After a protracted (and massive duh) battle to end the thing they finally destroy it, and the girl is 'human' again. And I wasted another 90 minutes. And I think the critic was too generous. You'd get nothing but an 'F' for freaking dumb.

Waxwork: After I finished giggling about all the 'wax' figures that could not keep still to save their lives, even for the few seconds of close ups (fingers wiggle, heads bob, arms shake) I endured this throw-away of a movie that basically takes your 'was museum' horror theme, somehow throw in a little voodoo and Satan worshiping and turns it into a mess of silliness that I can't believe was called 'horror'. Those that die - well, they're college kids, you don't care. The rally of old people at the end coming in to strike down the 'resurrected' evil wax figures - just a big HUH? to try to end the movie with. If you bother with this one, go for giggles because the scares aren't scary, the gore isn't gory, and nobody in this movie can act worth a darn (except of course for wonderful actor David Warner, a pleasure to watch and it's a real head scratcher how he ended up in this mess) and the whole thing is beyond silly, with the fakest special effects ever devised. Meh.

Oh yeah, I also found out why the 'suggested' movies Netflix has been throwing at me have been so... off. You know when you rate movies? Well, if they call movies like Back To The Future III a Western, Sixteen Candles a First Love movie and The Breakfast Club means you like high school movies, then your 'suggestions' aren't even going to be close. I've done much better just looking and picking out my own stuff.