For Flying Servants Only…….

The Wicker Man (2006)0
Administrator posted in Reviews on October 11th, 2007

The Wickerman- Deliverance for Pagans
By Kristin Battestella
 

            I indulged my honey and spent the Labor Day holiday at the cinema.  On tap, The Wicker Man- the latest thriller starring Oscar winner Nicholas Cage.  Based on the preview alone, we settled in for mystery, intrigue, and crazy tractor trailer wrecks.
            Cage stars as Ed Malus-a cop who questions himself and his job after failing to save a mother and daughter from a terrible accident.  A strange letter from his former fiancée Willow (Kate Beahan) arrives, and Ed packs up for Summersisle- an isolated, seemingly peaceful honey farming commune.  Unfortunately, Willow has summoned Ed on grave business-her daughter Rowan is missing, and the island’s ritualistic ways may be the cause. Summersisle’s population is largely women-the men don’t speak, and the women are interested in the Harvest Festival and the coming of the wicker man more than Ed’s investigation of a missing child.  Oh boy!
 

            Director Neil LaBute (Nurse Betty) handles Cage well.  The versatile actor keeps the film light with sardonic jabs and teasing regarding the Summersisle ways.  Some of the silly practices of the Summersisle women are, however, unintentionally funny.  From bear suits to crow masks- even the site of  ‘Sister Honey’ Leelee Sobieski chopping wood and flirting with Cage is somehow humorous to me.  Ellen Burstyn (The Exorcist) plays the matriarch Summersisle with grace and poise, but her character also falls with silly make up and kinky hand maidens galore.  The bee hive parallels are evident, and Willow’s lips look like she’s been stung one too many times. 
            Humor aside, the supporting cast in fine in its support of Cage.  The women offer snippets of information and weird bits for Ed to chew on.  Even Willow doesn’t tell Ed everything.  Why would she not tell the man who is trying to find her daughter everything?
 

            After Ed’s visions of the missing Rowan, I suspected he was dreaming the whole thing.  Ed awakes from missing child and love lost to find himself in a hospital bed-fresh from the crash that started the film. Ha!  I won’t spoil the ending, but my superior scenario isn’t it.  I’ve not seen the 1973 The Wicker Man starring horror alum Christopher Lee, nor can I say what the rewatchibility of this version is.  Will the twist ending become as classic as The Sixth Sense?  It’s possible, but unlikely.  Despite the humor and tongue in cheek nature of the rituals portrayed, hints to the film’s outcome are evident.  It didn’t come out of the blue, but I was surprised by the closing events.  If LaBute hadn’t dropped clues to intrigue the viewer, The Wicker Man would be a complete lost cause.
 

            Modern witches and pagans I suspect will be displeased with LaBute’s portrayal of Summersisle and its commune.  Surely not all witches are interested in sacrifices and breeding programs or creepy animal getups.  At the same time, Christian groups might dislike the old fashioned earthy witches with sinister notions at heart. 
            The Wicker Man is for intelligent fans of the cooky and spooky.   Perhaps not The Sixth Sense, but The Wicker Man appeals to newer fans of twisters like The Ring.  Is the unexpected worth the hokey rituals? I would not pay to see The Wicker Man again in the theater.  Look for the DVD instead.  I’m sure LaBute will present a complete version with deleted scenes and alternate footage which is now the norm.  Maybe the Lee version could be packaged with it.  That would be a good buy.

Wolf Creek0
Administrator posted in Reviews on October 11th, 2007

Wolf Creek The Aussie Deliverance
By Kristin Battestella
 

            We bought Wolf Creek not knowing anything about the film besides what the blurb on the back cover.  3 friends go exploring in the Australian outback, and bad things ensue.  That’s good enough for me!
            It took a few minutes adjusting to the Australian accents and dialogue, but the exotic locale is part of the film’s charm.  (Close captioned subtitles that include birds chirping are not, but I digress.)  Debut director Glenn McLean shoots some lovely Outback scenery and landscapes.  His setup, attention to detail, and real characters give Wolf Creek that road trip coming of age feel.  This mood and the fact that Wolf Creek is based on true events help the film achieve more than today’s other run of the mill slasher flicks.
 

            When British vacationers Liz and Kristy (Cassandra Magrath, Kestie Morassi) set out to see the Wolf Creek Crater Park with Aussie friend Ben (Nathan Phillips) all seems fun.  After the breathtaking experience of hiking the crater, the trio finds their car dead.  Low and behold, the seemingly lovable Mick(John Jarratt) comes along and offers to help the stranded tourists.  Of course, Mick has a penchant for automotive torture not seen since the likes of Leatherface and his chainsaw. All the horror clichés are here.  You’re not supposed to follow the creepy Bushman in the middle of the Australian desert, just like you aren’t supposed to go down the into the dark basement.  We know something bad awaits this group, but we are captivated and eagerly watch the doom unfold. 
Naturally I’ve never heard of any of these people, but the acting is spot on.  Two girls and one guy-they are all friends, but there’s naturally some sexual tension.  In the opening scenes, all three party and have questionable encounters.  They are real and complete people, and it is totally refreshing to see Mclean take the time to develop them as such.  Somehow we expect all three to make it, and when they don’t, it’s heartbreaking.  The audience knows it’s all a bad idea.  You yell at the TV the whole time-telling Liz to find a damn weapon.  You know they cannot possibly escape, but the sadistic fortress of Mick is enough to make you root for anyone.  Get the heck out of there!
 

McLean writes, directs, and produces his debut here. He makes expert use of the Australian locales-yes for their stunning beauty, but also for their wildness and danger.  Many parts of Australia remain unexplored, so indeed this true story of a sadistic Crocodile Dundee gone wild is absolutely believable.  Like Hannibal Lector or even the real life Natalie Holloway mystery-I can suspect something like this happened to her. This reality is more terrifying then any pretend monster.  I feel bad for the tourism authorities  in Australia.  If I ever go there I sure as heck won’t be straying from Sydney.  Wolf Creek scares the outback out of us just like Deliverance squealed us away from the south.
I purchased the unrated DVD, so I am unsure where it differs from the limited theatrical release.  I’m also not sure which version was screened at Sundance, where McLean was nominated for the Grand Jury Prize.  I can imagine more gore and offensive language is added, but even then the obscenities aren’t extreme.  These Aussies seem to use the f-bomb more than most, but I would too in their situation.  Even Mick’s gore house isn’t loaded with excessive blood and body parts.  Kristy wears enough blood and staggers just enough to imply bodily harm-and Mick’s talk of rubbers grimly sums that up for us. Just enough leftovers adorn his lair.  With Wolf Creek, again it’s what you don’t see that makes it stand out and rise above.

 Not for the faint of heart or children by any means, Wolf Creek is for fans of the beautiful and the horrid-if that makes any sense.  If you can’t remember the last time you saw an intelligent horror film, then Wolf Creek is a must see. 

House On Haunted Hill(s)0
Administrator posted in Reviews on October 11th, 2007

Original House on Haunted Hill Still A Must See
By Kristin Battestella
 

            Ah, ‘Tis the season for horror movie marathons, is it not? On tap for my black and white movie challenged man, House on Haunted Hill- the 1959 original mind you.  Even if its slightly dated and not as scary as it used to be, this classic is a must see for any horror buff.
            Master of horror Vincent Price stars as Frederick Loren- a bored millionaire throwing a party for his young, jealous, and greedy wife Annabelle (Carol Omhart)- complete with a haunted house, plenty of scotch, and revolvers in mini coffins as favors.  Five guests are invited by Loren-although none have met the mysterious millionaire.  Lance, the test pilot (Richard Long), Ruth the reporter (Julie Mitchum), The Doctor (Alan Marshal), Nora a sweet girl of course (Carolyn Craig), and the drunk owner of the house Watson Pritchard (Elisah Cook Jr.).  These financially challenged guests must spend the night locked in the haunted house-those who survive until morning will walk away with $10,000.
 

            While that’s hardly a lot of money today, and other aspects of the film have not stood the test of time, Vincent Price is near perfection.  The husky voiced veteran of such horror classics as House of Usher, The Raven, The Pit and The Pendulum, and my favorite The Masque of Red Death-not to mention mainstream roles in The Ten Commandments and Laura-Price proves his worth here.  The multifaceted actor chews up Loren and thoroughly enjoys the cheeky interplay between Loren and his fourth wife.  Their introductory scene is full of jealously, love of money, and reminiscing about poison.
            The rest of the cast is standard in its support.  Sure some of the drama and hysterics is over the top now, but each actor fits his or her part perfectly.  Lance the bravado pilot and Nora can really scream-but more importantly, they serve their purpose.  A classic star like Jimmy Stewart or Cary Grant-they come with a preconceived notion of who they are and what their character must be about.  With a cast of relative unknowns, director William Castle succeeds in reaching his audience.  The party guests are indeed regular people who need Loren’s money-desperate people to endure this house for money.  Average Joes like you and me.  Although it is firmly placed in its fifties mentality, Castle and writer Robb White touches a timeless concept with House on Haunted Hill-greed.  What would you do for $10,000?
 

            Unfortunately, Castle’s promotional ideas for House on Haunted Hill were touch and go.  Although the low budget film succeeded at the box office, the idea of skeletons zooming across the theater at selected parts of the film was technically difficult and got out of hand with audiences.  The film’s bloody heads, dangling bodies, pools of acid, and the like are also bound to the movie making techniques of the time.  Observant fans will spot the flying wires and proverbial smoke and mirrors in the film.  At the wrong volume, the music and screaming-and there is a lot of screaming-can be a toe towards annoying as well.
            Hokeyness aside, House on Haunted Hill still provides one or two heart pounding jump in your seat scares.  The first time I saw House on Haunted Hill, it wasn’t a dark and stormy night.  The lights were on and it wasn’t even near Halloween.  I tuned in for Vincent Price, but I thought the opening was convoluted and slow.  When the first BOO moment came, I was caught totally off guard.  I’ve been hooked on this little film that could since. 
 

            In 1999, House on Haunted Hill was updated by director William Malone with gore, gore, and more gore.  Castle’s original is just silly enough and clean enough for a spooky night in with the kids.  The remake focuses more on the actual haunting and back story of the house, but its gear toward modern fan boys with short attention spans is fleeting at best.
The updated House on Haunted Hill stars Geoffrey Rush as amusement monger Stephen Price and Famke Janssen as his greedy wife Evelyn.  As in the original, the woefully wealthy couple needs to add spice to their relationship by holding a party-a party in a haunted house of course.  Five unsuspecting guests are lured to the fiesta, and whoever survives the entire night at the house receives a one million dollar voucher-just to keep it real for today’s audiences. 
Writer Dick Beebe added a psycho insane asylum  back story to the house, but the plot does little.  Chopped up parts, naked women, and crazy experiments try to explain the house’s evil, but in truly frightening fashions- not knowing the how or why is better.  Knowing the rather weak source of your evil can make things a bit…lame.
 

            Contrary to Malone’s belief, my favorite part of the revived House on Haunted Hill is not the opening herky jerky, cut ‘em up flashbacks, nor the subsequent roller coaster ride and stunt casting of singer Lisa Loeb and Spike alum James Marsters.  My individual creepy came midway through the film, when Price views crazy psychiatrist ghost Dr. Vannacutt (Jeffery Combs) on his TV monitors.  The otherworldly, stop motion, unnatural movements are the best part of the film, and they only last a few seconds.  The shock value of chopped heads and good old fashioned shock therapy treatments do nothing to scare modern audiences. 
            Chris Kattan has a few memorable scenes as the neurotic owner of the industrial and contemporary haunt.  He plays the exact same funny man as always, but it’s intriguing to see the humor in a spooky setup.  Although I doubt all the humor is intentional. So if the movie isn’t meant to be funny, and it isn’t scary-who is the film for?  It is rare for any medium today to not have a strict  marketing campaign.  Vincent Price fans will not like this new House on Haunted Hill, and teeny bopper fans will quickly dismiss it for others in this new inferior slasher genre- Thirteen Ghosts immediately comes to mind.  When I tried to tell a friend about this new House on Haunted Hill, she responded, “The one with Catherine Zeta-Jones?”  Of course that’s The Haunting-another remake inferior to the original. 
 

            What makes films like the original House on Haunted Hill classics is the effects-bad effects or simply the lack there of.  My favorite part of Price’s version involves an old lady.  I swear she is riding a skateboard to create that ghostly walk ambiance.  It’s a catch-22.  The effects are hokey and often as bad as hell-which of course tunes out spoiled CGI viewers.  However, since old time film making effects were so bad-the story, actors, and directing needed to hold their own.  The remake, however, adds nothing but bad gore and bad gimmicks.  If a film must be remade, the redo must adhere to all the original’s strengths and them some.  The new House on Haunted Hill is only for die hard cheese fans.  
 

            In a day and age where a film has to be rated R to be good, its amazing to recall that films like the original House on Haunted Hill  succeeded with little violence, bad props, and cheeky dialogue.  Kids might get genuinely spooked, and boomers might remember their first viewing at that special drive-in.  House on Haunted Hill is what it is, but its old B flick fashion should not be taken at face value.  Castle’s little movie is for fans young and old who appreciate good film.  Clearly something was done right-we’re still watching over forty years later. 
 

            Fortunately both House on Haunted Hills aren’t over the top in price range.  Check the bargain bin at your local video store for the new colorized version of the original, check the budget collections at any department store, or browse the used for a copy of the 1999 release.  Hill can be found in classic sets, individually, as a double feature-even budget DVDs with cartoon shorts like the good old days.  Priced at $9.99 or under-$5 or less if you know where to look-my edition contains a Superman short and the John Carradine classic Bluebeard.  Two for the price of one!
            Skip the remake and go with the classic House on Haunted Hill. It appeals to everyone, and you can’t call yourself a horror film buff without it!

The Exorcist0
Administrator posted in Reviews on October 11th, 2007

The Exorcist Still Terrifying Today
By Kristin Battestella
 

            I was born in 1981, so I missed the initial fear fest brought on by the 1973 thriller The Exorcist.  Based on the novel by William Peter Blatty, film going audiences were terrorized in their seats, vomiting in the aisles, and fainting before the theater screens. Since then, The Exorcist has frightened a whole new generation-and then some.
            The Exorcist stars Linda Blair as young Regan, a 13 year old girl who begins to act strangely after her and her actress mother Chris (Ellen Burstyn) move to Washington DC for a film shoot.  Psychiatrists, other doctors, and specialists have no answer for Regan’s unrest.  Freaky accidents, violence, and more disturbing behavior from Regan lead Chris to Father Damien Karras (Jason Miller).  Even the troubled Priest is baffled by Regan’s ability to speak in ancient languages; the physical abuse on her body-including etchings from the inside of her stomach that says ‘Help me’; and of course the infamous, horrifying, and despicable masturbation with a crucifix. 
            Father Damien Brings in Father Lankester Merrin (Max Von Sydow), an elderly Priest who has fought this kind of evil before.  Two prequels were even made detailing Merrin’s first encounter with the devil, but both miss the mark and cannot compare to the ultimate battle here.  The Priests tie Regan to the bed and begin the Rites of Exorcism.  Before the devil is contained, however, he pulls out all the stops, including taunting Father Damien With his dead mother’s words and the now oft parodied projectile vomit. 
 

Despite our society’s desensitization, The Exorcist remains one of the most disturbing films ever made.  I was a teenager when I saw the re-released edition with the additional footage.  It was the middle of the day and clear as a bell outside, yet I was spooked for weeks afterward.  The extra scenes on the DVD ‘The Version You’ve Never Seen’ include a creepy spiderwalk and more scenes of Father Merrin in Africa.  Even after the numerous parodies and spoofs, the initial experience of viewing The Exorcist is tough to beat.   After 4 sequels and prequels, several video releases and re-releases, how is it The Exorcist still scares the split pea soup out of us? 
The effects are cool, but nothing spectacular.  The chills presented by director William Friedkin come from the psychological and sociological themes shown.  Many of the early audiences had never heard foul language in a wide release, much less F-bombs from a 13 year old girl.  Both the religious and demonic imagery presented are unique and frightening.  Shocking as it is to see such blasphemous uses of Christian symbols, Friedkin showcases the devil as a living breathing evil force.  This is both engrossing and terrifying.  The Exorcist is enough to scare anyone straight from their malignant ways.  Here a young, innocent little girl was possessed.  Imagine the torment the devil could bring to those who deserve it.  Exceptional makeup and an impressive performance from Blair solidify the movie’s insistence that the devil is real.
 

This is how horror films should be.  Realistic in the scarys they portray-no matter how fantastic.  If art imitates life, then The Exorcist is a photographic reminder of good versus evil and how careful we should be in our temptations.  None of The Exorcist films are suitable for children, and I only recommend viewing for the most mature teens, otherwise the between the lines material is lost.  The latest DVD release of The Exorcist has a few extras, but the film speaks for itself.  Some of the sequels are worthy interpretations, especially The Exorcist III, based on Blatty’s own book sequel, Legion.  If you’re seeking one of the best films ever made-not just thee most exceptional horror movie-The Exorcist is unbeatable.
 

Halloween (2007)0
Administrator posted in Reviews on October 11th, 2007

New Halloween Not for Everyone
By Kristin Battestella
 

            I’ve been mulling over my thoughts on Rob Zombie’s new Halloween remake for days.  After finally taking in the horror update at the matinee, my feelings remain mixed.  This version of Halloween is not for everyone.
            A host of familiar faces appear for musician turned director Zombie’s fourth feature film.  Zombie’s wife Sherrie Moon stars as  Deborah Myers, a stripper struggling with a drunkard abusive man, slutty teen daughter, and young son Michael-who likes to torture small animals.  After one too many taunts and insults, masked Mike kills the school bully and murders his family on Halloween.  Psychologist Samuel Loomis (Malcolm McDowell) works with Mike Myers at a mental institution, but when he breaks free 15 years later, its up to Loomis to stop Mike from repeating his Halloween rampage- and finding his now grown baby sister Laurie (Scout-Taylor Compton).
            Zombie’s remake both rises and falls on the actors involved.  Moon is perfect as the do gooder stripper mom, and young Mike Myers actor Daeg Faerch is also stunning.  His silent looks and creepy eyes sell the sociopathy of young Mike. The strength of the film is in its extended opening sequences.  Unlike John Carpenter’s original 1978 Halloween, we have the time to explore what makes Mike do what he does, how it effects his mother and others around him. 
 

I would have preferred the movie stay this way, but unfortunately we jump to teenage Laurie and her friends dying in gruesome, sexy ways.  These boys and girls are a dime a dozen, and after the build up of unusual attachment to Mike Myers, the audience cares little for these expendable boobs.  Compton cries, screams, and makes all the wrong moves for a horror movie.  Not only is she a far cry from Jamie Lee Curtis, but this girl looks ugly when she wails.
            The supporting cast helps give Halloween its edge more than the sex and nudity.  Brad Dourif as Sheriff Lee Brackett and Danny Terjo as  Orderly Cruz give a sense of credibility to the production, and perhaps Zombie should have again veered from the original film and brought more to these adults.  Perhaps it would be intriguing to see how adults respond to the sex and death these teens put up with, how an adult would deal with the psycho killer.  Sybil Danning and Dee Wallace are also used all too briefly in key scenes that are surprisingly well scripted.   
 

            Zombie veers none from the essential elements established in the original Halloween script penned by Carpenter and Debra Hill, yet the redressed ending leaves much to be desired.  Where the extra Michael opening was oddly fascinating, I couldn’t wait for the Laurie versus Mike Myers ending to be over.  Overlong, near constant screaming in dark dirty places, Zombie is certainly appealing to slasher fans of yore, but mainstream audiences won’t be impressed.
Rated R for lots of language, sex, and nudity, Halloween offers little scares or gore.  Zombie shoots odd angles and plays with light versus dark effects, but in a franchise where this is essentially the ninth film, there’s little to spook anyone.  I suspect its more about what looks cool or sexy-even though I didn’t find anything particularly sexy either.  It’s a horror movie.  You do it, you’re done in!  Our theater showing had about twenty people, and I wasn’t the only one voicing predictions or commenting how stupid the characters seemed.   
 

Zombie should have taken Halloween more on the  dark psyche established, instead the film deteriorates into fan boy sex and visuals.  Certainly there’s an audience for that, but Halloween had more intelligent potential than just a slasher movie. Pity.