Showing posts with label Film. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Film. Show all posts
Thursday, November 8, 2012
Wednesday, October 31, 2012
Halloween Countdown (Day 31: Game Over)
Well, I finally made it to Day 31, albeit a few shortcuts here and there. But hey, at least I managed to create 31 blog posts this month. So without further ado, here is the final film of the SAW franchise: "Saw 3D: The Final Chapter" (for the purpose of this article, I'll be referring to it as "SAW 7").
All together now: Oh yes, there will be spoilers.
What a f**king mess of a movie! How the hell could they ruin such a great ending to the series?
What a f**king mess of a movie! How the hell could they ruin such a great ending to the series?
Okay, if you read any of my previous entries this month, you would have figured out that this was my least favourite installment of the SAW series. I wasn't sure how I was going to approach this. In my "Wrestlemaniac" entry, I had a habit of rambling on whenever it came to issues I had in terms of logic, whether it be from the actual film, or from what decisions the filmmakers had made. Now, that was just one very short movie. Imagine if I did the same to not only this film, but in the context of the whole series?
So, in order to tighten this article the best I can, I will go through ten reasons why I hate this movie, in chronological order as per film, to give an idea as to what was going through my mind while watching it.
I was going to mention the opening credits for this one, but I'm saving that for later.
When I watched this film for the first time, I had a feeling the film was going to be a disaster, right from the get go. The other sequels start off with an opening game/trap, as per usual. And these are usually set in abandoned warehouses, buildings and other similar desolate surroundings. Which makes sense, in relation to the rest of the series.
So the first game/trap we are introduced to is where two guys have to choose whether to kill each other, or decide to kill a woman that's been cheating on both of them, via buzzsaws. Which is pretty standard fare in terms of the SAW series. Just one problem.....they are in a glass box, in broad daylight, outside a shopping centre, in view of the public.
So in the first three minutes, I'm already asking questions. How did anyone manage to sneak those three people inside without anyone watching? Wouldn't anyone working near the shopping centre have enquired about that glass box outside? Wouldn't it be risky for Hoffman (or anyone for that matter) to construct this elaborate setup in a public area? How was it even built without anyone's knowledge? Did they get planning permission beforehand?
As you can tell from the title, this was shown in 3D in the cinema, so the shots with the effects in mind are noticeable onscreen. And as a result, they come off as stupid and distracting. It's like watching "Friday 13th Part 3" or "Jaws 3-D", so watching scenes where things are coming towards the screen (such as spikes, blades, internal organs) in 2D just comes off as ridiculous.
But the worst thing is, while this was actually filmed in 3D, the effects were barely noticeable throughout the entire film. And I even asked myself back then, why bother filming it in 3D when it may as well be in 2D? So for the sake of the two or three scenes in the entire movie, 3D effects were utilised?
I'm just gonna call this guy "Dick" since I can't be bothered looking up his name at this time, and it suits the personality of the character onscreen. Granted Agent Strahm from the previous movies had an attitude, but then again he was involved in the Jigsaw investigation, his partner was injured, and he was close to finding out the truth, hence his hard nosed attitude.
But Dick here is just as the name applies. From the first words of dialogue he utters, he is instantly unlikable, especially his dialogue is poor itself. Using terms like "crazy as a bag of cats" (or something like that) when talking about Jill Tuck, and his "crazy crazy crazy" speech to her in the safe house, I wasn't sure if it was the dialogue was poor, or whether it was the actor himself. His words seem poorly written when you compare them to the other characters in the film. Hell, even Jigsaw's cameo had better lines than this Dick.
I usually find that dream sequences or false visions in horror films are just a cheap attempt to muster up scares from the audience. While some of them can be effective, there are others where they do nothing more than just become extra padding. In the third film where Dina Meyer looks into a mirror and sees Donnie Wahlberg behind her, it's for a split second, and while it does come off as cliched, it's still effective.
Here, it just seems like the makers were looking for an excuse to throw in another 3D scene, so why not have Jill Tuck in a nightie tied up in a suggestive pose? The scene comes off as lazy and cheap, especially with the disappointing "just a dream" pay-off afterwards.
While the idea of the next contestant in a Jigsaw game being someone pretending to have been a victim in the past was an interesting one, on the other hand, it just seemed very unlikely. Granted he could fake the scars, but I found it hard to believe that nobody would have called him out on his ruse. I'm sure any police officer or investigative journalist would have uncovered the fact that he was a fake, what with an ongoing police investigation, not to mention media coverage. Personally, I found it hard to suspend my disbelief for the sake of the film, especially one as lousy as this.
Granted John Kramer must have had a pretty big shit list even after his death, but while all the other major games/traps in the sequels were in some way linked to the plot, this one seemed to have no actual purpose. It may as well be on a par with the shopping mall trap. I know I had a problem with the main game/trap in the fifth film, but they did try to connect those people to Agent Strahm in the sixth one, so I was willing to let that one slide, no matter how "convenient" it may have seemed. Whereas here, it seems like nothing but something to pass the time. And while I'm on the subject.....
This is where I could go off on a rant about what would have worked better, and I admit, it is pretty much nitpicking. As I said, if it wasn't for the holes in logic, the story of a dishonest self help guru would have been interesting, especially as there was a scene where it featured a few of the survivors from the previous sequels.
I could go on about "what could have been", coming up with different scenarios, such as moving this story to the sixth film, and replacing the burning building five from SAW 5 with the insurance executive from SAW 6. Hell, maybe instead of the burning building five, you could have the other survivors in the support group go through another game/trap, for not moving on with their lives (from the Jigsaw point of view anyway). But of course, it's like trying to rearrange the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle (no pun intended.....okay I lied).
I was going to mention a certain part of the support group scene, but I'm saving that for later.
With all the elaborate traps included in the SAW series, there are very few scenes where guns are used, such as the tripwire shotguns in SAW 1, and the gun attached to the peephole in SAW 2. With those scenes, at least they are basic in their function, in relation to the trap in place. But in this movie, a turret gun mows down Dick and a few police officers. I know Hoffman may be different in his approach to the games Jigsaw started, but this just comes off as stupid and pathetic.
So Dick dies, Bobby fails his final test, and Hoffman confronts Jill in the police station. And so we come to a similar scene from the beginning of the movie where Jill is running away from Hoffman, only this time she gets caught, and falls victim to the infamous bear trap. After this conclusion, one question was burning in my mind.....
Because of the similarities of the beginning and closing chase scenes between Hoffman and Jill, the events that took place in-between have been rendered pointless. It felt like the final confrontation should have been the ending of the last film, instead of an excuse to put together a shoddy, misguided sequel that lacked the excitement, suspense and writing of the films before it. The self help guru story is a good one, but it comes off as run of the mill.
When I saw this in the cinema, I was wondering how this series was actually going to end. It was after the death of Jill that, while I did get a bad feeling that they were trying to get more mileage from the series however they can, I didn't feel that the film was going to end like this.
Not to mention that there were two scenes that I made reference to without going into detail. In the cinema I questioned the inclusion of these scenes, and came to the logical conclusion. But it seemed too predictable, the writers couldn't have made it that predictable. But of course, as with every SAW movie, there is.....
The guy that takes down Hoffman in the end, and the (possible) successor to John Kramer turns out to be.....this guy.
Before this film came out, I read somewhere that Cary Elwes was going to reappear in SAW 7 as Dr. Gordon. Which was surprising at the time, as I knew he and the producers of the SAW series had a dispute over royalties from the first film, hence why he never appeared in the sequels, not even in flashback sequences. I was more surprised by his inclusion than to even consider his role in the movie.
During the opening credits where Dr. Gordon escapes the disused bathroom from the first film, I was wondering why they were showing this scene earlier on. I had an idea.....but I thought that would be too easy of a conclusion. Then he appears in the support group acting creepy and cryptic.....which reminded me of another creepy, cryptic guy from the previous films.....but again, I thought that would be too easy to come up with that conclusion. So when the man behind the pig mask this time happened to be Dr. Gordon.....two thoughts crossed my mind.
The first one was that this was a great ending to the series. Not only was it the one character you haven't seen since the first film, but it made sense when you see how he's connected to certain parts of the entire series via flashback sequences, from the surgical procedures on Jigsaw's victims, to the secret envelopes traded between characters. It was a great way to end the series.
But then there's the second thought, which was what I said earlier in this article.....how the hell could they ruin such a great ending to the series?
The twist was so obvious that even Scooby Doo and the gang could have figured it out. The inclusion of those two scenes ruined the impact of the finale. The connection Dr Gordon had to the other sequels was, if you're a fan of the series, actually quite ingenious. But it was a shame that this clever twist was wasted on the "crazy, crazy, crazy" pile of crap that came before it. And it just made me think why they should have just tacked on the last 15 minutes of this film onto SAW 6?
To top it off, it raises more questions. Is Dr. Gordon the leader now? How many people are now part of the Jigsaw gang? Who recruited them? Were they the people who set up the shopping mall game/trap at the beginning of the film? If so, wouldn't Hoffman be a bit suspicious about who was setting them up? But if it was Hoffman, how did he do it all by himself. At least with the Jigsaw gang, it makes sense because if.....
That's it, I'm done! I'm gonna wrap this up for my own sanity. This movie is a very disappointing addition to the series, which is nothing more than an attempt at a final cash-in on a movie franchise that was on its last legs. Instead of coming up with a decent script to wrap it up, it just became another cheap thrill 3D horror flick, focusing more on cartoonish effect shots than the ongoing story of the series.
This is the second time I've seen SAW 7, and this article gives you an idea why this is the only film from the SAW series that I don't own on DVD. I couldn't bring myself to pay more than a McDonalds double cheeseburger for this movie. I settled on watching it on Netflix, so unless it goes down to 2 euro in HMV next year, I'll settle for that option next Halloween.
Since there's not a lot of redeemable qualities to SAW 7, I'd have to think back to the traps/games themselves. Some were pretty good, others were passable, but the only memorable one was the KKK death scene (and yes it included Chester Bennington, but I don't hate Linkin Park, so I'm not gonna rip on him or the band as a result). Hoffman's plan to sneak into the police, while more in tone of a slasher movie, was pretty inventive, and it suited his menacing persona. And while I'm pulling at straws here, I liked this song during the end credits.
Now that I've finished reviewing films related to the horror genre, I can go back to other activities I've ignored, such as playing computer games. Before I took on this 31 day challenge, I was planning on completing this game before Halloween. I tried playing it last year, but I was stuck on one section at the very beginning, so I haven't played it since. After watching this clip, I now how to get past that part, so hopefully I'll be able to do better the second time around.
.....oh, and Happy Halloween of course.
All together now: Oh yes, there will be spoilers.
 |
| While an attempt at wordplay, this one is actually fitting (see below). |
Back then.....
What a f**king mess of a movie! How the hell could they ruin such a great ending to the series?
And now.....
What a f**king mess of a movie! How the hell could they ruin such a great ending to the series?
Okay, if you read any of my previous entries this month, you would have figured out that this was my least favourite installment of the SAW series. I wasn't sure how I was going to approach this. In my "Wrestlemaniac" entry, I had a habit of rambling on whenever it came to issues I had in terms of logic, whether it be from the actual film, or from what decisions the filmmakers had made. Now, that was just one very short movie. Imagine if I did the same to not only this film, but in the context of the whole series?
So, in order to tighten this article the best I can, I will go through ten reasons why I hate this movie, in chronological order as per film, to give an idea as to what was going through my mind while watching it.
 |
| This reminds me of the Michael Jackson statue from HIStory. |
The opening game/trap
I was going to mention the opening credits for this one, but I'm saving that for later.
When I watched this film for the first time, I had a feeling the film was going to be a disaster, right from the get go. The other sequels start off with an opening game/trap, as per usual. And these are usually set in abandoned warehouses, buildings and other similar desolate surroundings. Which makes sense, in relation to the rest of the series.
So the first game/trap we are introduced to is where two guys have to choose whether to kill each other, or decide to kill a woman that's been cheating on both of them, via buzzsaws. Which is pretty standard fare in terms of the SAW series. Just one problem.....they are in a glass box, in broad daylight, outside a shopping centre, in view of the public.
So in the first three minutes, I'm already asking questions. How did anyone manage to sneak those three people inside without anyone watching? Wouldn't anyone working near the shopping centre have enquired about that glass box outside? Wouldn't it be risky for Hoffman (or anyone for that matter) to construct this elaborate setup in a public area? How was it even built without anyone's knowledge? Did they get planning permission beforehand?
3D scenes
As you can tell from the title, this was shown in 3D in the cinema, so the shots with the effects in mind are noticeable onscreen. And as a result, they come off as stupid and distracting. It's like watching "Friday 13th Part 3" or "Jaws 3-D", so watching scenes where things are coming towards the screen (such as spikes, blades, internal organs) in 2D just comes off as ridiculous.
But the worst thing is, while this was actually filmed in 3D, the effects were barely noticeable throughout the entire film. And I even asked myself back then, why bother filming it in 3D when it may as well be in 2D? So for the sake of the two or three scenes in the entire movie, 3D effects were utilised?
The detective is, well, a dick
I'm just gonna call this guy "Dick" since I can't be bothered looking up his name at this time, and it suits the personality of the character onscreen. Granted Agent Strahm from the previous movies had an attitude, but then again he was involved in the Jigsaw investigation, his partner was injured, and he was close to finding out the truth, hence his hard nosed attitude.
But Dick here is just as the name applies. From the first words of dialogue he utters, he is instantly unlikable, especially his dialogue is poor itself. Using terms like "crazy as a bag of cats" (or something like that) when talking about Jill Tuck, and his "crazy crazy crazy" speech to her in the safe house, I wasn't sure if it was the dialogue was poor, or whether it was the actor himself. His words seem poorly written when you compare them to the other characters in the film. Hell, even Jigsaw's cameo had better lines than this Dick.
The dream sequence
I usually find that dream sequences or false visions in horror films are just a cheap attempt to muster up scares from the audience. While some of them can be effective, there are others where they do nothing more than just become extra padding. In the third film where Dina Meyer looks into a mirror and sees Donnie Wahlberg behind her, it's for a split second, and while it does come off as cliched, it's still effective.
Here, it just seems like the makers were looking for an excuse to throw in another 3D scene, so why not have Jill Tuck in a nightie tied up in a suggestive pose? The scene comes off as lazy and cheap, especially with the disappointing "just a dream" pay-off afterwards.
Bobby's backstory
While the idea of the next contestant in a Jigsaw game being someone pretending to have been a victim in the past was an interesting one, on the other hand, it just seemed very unlikely. Granted he could fake the scars, but I found it hard to believe that nobody would have called him out on his ruse. I'm sure any police officer or investigative journalist would have uncovered the fact that he was a fake, what with an ongoing police investigation, not to mention media coverage. Personally, I found it hard to suspend my disbelief for the sake of the film, especially one as lousy as this.
Why go for Bobby now?
Granted John Kramer must have had a pretty big shit list even after his death, but while all the other major games/traps in the sequels were in some way linked to the plot, this one seemed to have no actual purpose. It may as well be on a par with the shopping mall trap. I know I had a problem with the main game/trap in the fifth film, but they did try to connect those people to Agent Strahm in the sixth one, so I was willing to let that one slide, no matter how "convenient" it may have seemed. Whereas here, it seems like nothing but something to pass the time. And while I'm on the subject.....
Maybe this story would have worked better in SAW 5 or 6
This is where I could go off on a rant about what would have worked better, and I admit, it is pretty much nitpicking. As I said, if it wasn't for the holes in logic, the story of a dishonest self help guru would have been interesting, especially as there was a scene where it featured a few of the survivors from the previous sequels.
I could go on about "what could have been", coming up with different scenarios, such as moving this story to the sixth film, and replacing the burning building five from SAW 5 with the insurance executive from SAW 6. Hell, maybe instead of the burning building five, you could have the other survivors in the support group go through another game/trap, for not moving on with their lives (from the Jigsaw point of view anyway). But of course, it's like trying to rearrange the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle (no pun intended.....okay I lied).
I was going to mention a certain part of the support group scene, but I'm saving that for later.
Turret gun.....really?
With all the elaborate traps included in the SAW series, there are very few scenes where guns are used, such as the tripwire shotguns in SAW 1, and the gun attached to the peephole in SAW 2. With those scenes, at least they are basic in their function, in relation to the trap in place. But in this movie, a turret gun mows down Dick and a few police officers. I know Hoffman may be different in his approach to the games Jigsaw started, but this just comes off as stupid and pathetic.
So Dick dies, Bobby fails his final test, and Hoffman confronts Jill in the police station. And so we come to a similar scene from the beginning of the movie where Jill is running away from Hoffman, only this time she gets caught, and falls victim to the infamous bear trap. After this conclusion, one question was burning in my mind.....
WHAT WAS THE WHOLE F**KING POINT OF THIS MOVIE?
Because of the similarities of the beginning and closing chase scenes between Hoffman and Jill, the events that took place in-between have been rendered pointless. It felt like the final confrontation should have been the ending of the last film, instead of an excuse to put together a shoddy, misguided sequel that lacked the excitement, suspense and writing of the films before it. The self help guru story is a good one, but it comes off as run of the mill.
When I saw this in the cinema, I was wondering how this series was actually going to end. It was after the death of Jill that, while I did get a bad feeling that they were trying to get more mileage from the series however they can, I didn't feel that the film was going to end like this.
Not to mention that there were two scenes that I made reference to without going into detail. In the cinema I questioned the inclusion of these scenes, and came to the logical conclusion. But it seemed too predictable, the writers couldn't have made it that predictable. But of course, as with every SAW movie, there is.....
The final twist
The guy that takes down Hoffman in the end, and the (possible) successor to John Kramer turns out to be.....this guy.
Before this film came out, I read somewhere that Cary Elwes was going to reappear in SAW 7 as Dr. Gordon. Which was surprising at the time, as I knew he and the producers of the SAW series had a dispute over royalties from the first film, hence why he never appeared in the sequels, not even in flashback sequences. I was more surprised by his inclusion than to even consider his role in the movie.
During the opening credits where Dr. Gordon escapes the disused bathroom from the first film, I was wondering why they were showing this scene earlier on. I had an idea.....but I thought that would be too easy of a conclusion. Then he appears in the support group acting creepy and cryptic.....which reminded me of another creepy, cryptic guy from the previous films.....but again, I thought that would be too easy to come up with that conclusion. So when the man behind the pig mask this time happened to be Dr. Gordon.....two thoughts crossed my mind.
The first one was that this was a great ending to the series. Not only was it the one character you haven't seen since the first film, but it made sense when you see how he's connected to certain parts of the entire series via flashback sequences, from the surgical procedures on Jigsaw's victims, to the secret envelopes traded between characters. It was a great way to end the series.
But then there's the second thought, which was what I said earlier in this article.....how the hell could they ruin such a great ending to the series?
 |
| The only thing that was "mind-blowing" was the stupidity of the creators of this movie. |
The twist was so obvious that even Scooby Doo and the gang could have figured it out. The inclusion of those two scenes ruined the impact of the finale. The connection Dr Gordon had to the other sequels was, if you're a fan of the series, actually quite ingenious. But it was a shame that this clever twist was wasted on the "crazy, crazy, crazy" pile of crap that came before it. And it just made me think why they should have just tacked on the last 15 minutes of this film onto SAW 6?
To top it off, it raises more questions. Is Dr. Gordon the leader now? How many people are now part of the Jigsaw gang? Who recruited them? Were they the people who set up the shopping mall game/trap at the beginning of the film? If so, wouldn't Hoffman be a bit suspicious about who was setting them up? But if it was Hoffman, how did he do it all by himself. At least with the Jigsaw gang, it makes sense because if.....
 |
| ENOUGH!!!!! |
That's it, I'm done! I'm gonna wrap this up for my own sanity. This movie is a very disappointing addition to the series, which is nothing more than an attempt at a final cash-in on a movie franchise that was on its last legs. Instead of coming up with a decent script to wrap it up, it just became another cheap thrill 3D horror flick, focusing more on cartoonish effect shots than the ongoing story of the series.
This is the second time I've seen SAW 7, and this article gives you an idea why this is the only film from the SAW series that I don't own on DVD. I couldn't bring myself to pay more than a McDonalds double cheeseburger for this movie. I settled on watching it on Netflix, so unless it goes down to 2 euro in HMV next year, I'll settle for that option next Halloween.
And finally, was there ANYTHING I liked about the film?
Since there's not a lot of redeemable qualities to SAW 7, I'd have to think back to the traps/games themselves. Some were pretty good, others were passable, but the only memorable one was the KKK death scene (and yes it included Chester Bennington, but I don't hate Linkin Park, so I'm not gonna rip on him or the band as a result). Hoffman's plan to sneak into the police, while more in tone of a slasher movie, was pretty inventive, and it suited his menacing persona. And while I'm pulling at straws here, I liked this song during the end credits.
And on a final note.....
Now that I've finished reviewing films related to the horror genre, I can go back to other activities I've ignored, such as playing computer games. Before I took on this 31 day challenge, I was planning on completing this game before Halloween. I tried playing it last year, but I was stuck on one section at the very beginning, so I haven't played it since. After watching this clip, I now how to get past that part, so hopefully I'll be able to do better the second time around.
.....oh, and Happy Halloween of course.
Monday, October 29, 2012
Halloween Countdown (Day 28: Horrorthon Day Four)
I reached my quota of films on Sunday (ie. Day Four), where I hit the 14 mark before the final movie of the evening. As I write this, I am probably going to end up watching one or two films, and head home for more sleep, as I have work on Tuesday. So I better get this done quickly before I go.
I was hungover at the time, so I was in no shape or form to be heading into town. I don't know much about the movie, other than it's a children's classic. So instead of the trailer, I'm gonna post a graphic that was part of my childhood, and the final film.
This was introduced by lead actress Danielle Harris, and from what I gather, I got the impression that even she knew this was a bad movie. It's too weird to be in anyway scary, some parts of it were awful in their direction and the quality of acting, and just when I thought it was over, it just kept going on, getting even more ridiculous. I'm sure in the hands of another director, this might have worked.
The biggest laugh I had that day was when the trailer for "The Shining" came up, as I made a joke that this would be the surprise film. I thought that I was right until I realised it was just the trailer. One of the organisers came onstage to introduce the film, assuring us that it's not "Trespass 2", in relation to last year's godawful movie, "Trespass". At least that got a laugh.
I have never heard of Chained before the screening, and I can't figure out where I've seen the lead actor before, but he played a good role, projecting his creepiness by his attitude and voice. The film was interesting, at times perverse, and I could nitpick some elements of character motivation and the plot, especially the last ten minutes or so, but once you look past them, it's a pretty decent movie.
This is a very quirky film that comes across as a Napoleon Dynamite style movie, if it was redone by David Lynch and John Waters (who happens to have a cameo in this movie also). John Waters also comes to mind with the inclusion of Traci Lords (who starred in his film "Cry Baby") as the main character's mother. Other cameos include Ray Wise and Malcolm McDowell, in which this is the third film this long weekend that I've seen Malcolm McDowell in (the others being Antiviral and Silent Hill: Revelation).
The visuals are bizarre, it can be really funny at times, and the female lead is an interesting character, albeit sadistic, which makes the film intriguing to watch, especially with her mindset, in relation to her dreams and her view of the world.
The only original Halloween films I've seen are the first one and this. And in a few hours, I'll be watching the fourth one, once again introduced by Danielle Harris. I'm half tempted to go home and watch Rob Zombie's "Halloween 2" afterwards. Or maybe "The Victim". But I digress.
Because I haven't watched the whole series, I don't have any dislike for this film because of its deviation from the Michael Myers character. Sure the movie is a bit rubbish, but its unintentional comedic value makes it a joy to watch. Also I actually liked the somewhat cheesy 80s horror score by John Carpenter.
While the film does have a loose Irish connection, the main reason this film stuck with me was the "Silver Shamrock" jingle, and what happens when you look at the magic pumpkin. It creeped me out as a kid, and for years I couldn't remember if it was a Halloween movie or not, because it didn't have Michael Myers in it.
Well, it's one way to inspire me to learn Japanese.....
The Monster Squad
I was hungover at the time, so I was in no shape or form to be heading into town. I don't know much about the movie, other than it's a children's classic. So instead of the trailer, I'm gonna post a graphic that was part of my childhood, and the final film.
Shiver
This was introduced by lead actress Danielle Harris, and from what I gather, I got the impression that even she knew this was a bad movie. It's too weird to be in anyway scary, some parts of it were awful in their direction and the quality of acting, and just when I thought it was over, it just kept going on, getting even more ridiculous. I'm sure in the hands of another director, this might have worked.
Surprise Film: Chained
The biggest laugh I had that day was when the trailer for "The Shining" came up, as I made a joke that this would be the surprise film. I thought that I was right until I realised it was just the trailer. One of the organisers came onstage to introduce the film, assuring us that it's not "Trespass 2", in relation to last year's godawful movie, "Trespass". At least that got a laugh.
I have never heard of Chained before the screening, and I can't figure out where I've seen the lead actor before, but he played a good role, projecting his creepiness by his attitude and voice. The film was interesting, at times perverse, and I could nitpick some elements of character motivation and the plot, especially the last ten minutes or so, but once you look past them, it's a pretty decent movie.
Excision
This is a very quirky film that comes across as a Napoleon Dynamite style movie, if it was redone by David Lynch and John Waters (who happens to have a cameo in this movie also). John Waters also comes to mind with the inclusion of Traci Lords (who starred in his film "Cry Baby") as the main character's mother. Other cameos include Ray Wise and Malcolm McDowell, in which this is the third film this long weekend that I've seen Malcolm McDowell in (the others being Antiviral and Silent Hill: Revelation).
The visuals are bizarre, it can be really funny at times, and the female lead is an interesting character, albeit sadistic, which makes the film intriguing to watch, especially with her mindset, in relation to her dreams and her view of the world.
Halloween 3: Season Of The Witch
The only original Halloween films I've seen are the first one and this. And in a few hours, I'll be watching the fourth one, once again introduced by Danielle Harris. I'm half tempted to go home and watch Rob Zombie's "Halloween 2" afterwards. Or maybe "The Victim". But I digress.
Because I haven't watched the whole series, I don't have any dislike for this film because of its deviation from the Michael Myers character. Sure the movie is a bit rubbish, but its unintentional comedic value makes it a joy to watch. Also I actually liked the somewhat cheesy 80s horror score by John Carpenter.
While the film does have a loose Irish connection, the main reason this film stuck with me was the "Silver Shamrock" jingle, and what happens when you look at the magic pumpkin. It creeped me out as a kid, and for years I couldn't remember if it was a Halloween movie or not, because it didn't have Michael Myers in it.
And on a final note.....
Well, it's one way to inspire me to learn Japanese.....
Saturday, October 27, 2012
Halloween Countdown (Day 26: Horrorthon Day Two)
It's been a long day, but I'm glad I took the day off work for this. For the price of the five day pass, if I get to see at least 14 films, I'd have gotten my money's worth. I've seen 8 in the past two days, so I'm doing really well.
Every Horrorthon there is at least one movie that is so bad, that it's hilarious to watch. Birdemic in 2010, Troll 2 in 2011, and this year, the title goes to Manborg. I really think this should have been kept towards the end of the night, as it's absolutely hilarious. Think Robocop fighting with the cast of Mortal Kombat against Nazi demons from Hell. All in front of a green screen. A must see for those who love their films as bad as The Room.
The film seems like an interesting take on the vampire genre, which is no mean feat considering the budget the makers had. However, looking at the main character having hunger pains lead me to leaving after 30 minutes to get brunch. I couldn't find a trailer for this one, so I'm just gonna stick a picture of Mina from "Manborg" in its place.
It's like a French version of a Jason Statham movie, with added supernatural elements. Action packed, ridiculous, violent, and with moments of stylish direction, This film was lot of fun to watch, and exceeded any expectation I had from a movie about a gun possessed by the soul of a dead prostitute.
I think this movie, along with Savage, should be used by the Irish Tourism Board to show people what Ireland is really like. Very well directed, with effective use of sound to go along with the visuals. The scariest thing about this is that even if you took the supernatural elements away from the story, it would make no difference. That's what scared me, to be honest. Best Irish film I've seen this year.
My god, this has got to be one of the worst movies I have ever seen. Please note that I didn't actually get to watch the first film beforehand, but even I know that it was a lot better than this. It was obvious by some of the shots that it was filmed for 3D, and it really comes off as stupid when shown in 2D. At least this had more laughs than Resident Evil: Retribution.
But before the movie, there was an awkward moment where Jennifer Blanc-Biehn had to walk after hecklers in the crowd mocked the short film Connection, in which she stars. After a moment of silence, one person in the crowd says out loud "Y'see this is why we can't have nice things". Admittedly it was funny at the time, but it's very true. Still, that's the nature of the work for anyone promoting films, I suppose.
At this point of the night, I was starting to feel a bit rundown, so I'm surprised I managed to go through them. ZFL had some really weird bits in the first half that kept me amused (ie. bad acting, bizarre camera angles, a sequence which involved a naked scuba diver, an underwater zombie and a shark), but in the second half it did tend to drag in places.
I didn't know that RD was directed by David Argento, so the style of this film and the strange choice in music numbers reminded me of another film I saw at Horrorthon in 2010, which was Phenomena. The story was hard to grasp at times, but then again, I was zoning in and out for the first half, especially when the drunken guy was onscreen. But it's the aforementioned music and odd scenes that kept me conscious from time to time.
It's a shame the organisers of Horrorthon don't do the double bill showings during the year anymore.
If you play the live version after the studio version, it seems to flow seamlessly.....or maybe it's just me.....
Manborg
Every Horrorthon there is at least one movie that is so bad, that it's hilarious to watch. Birdemic in 2010, Troll 2 in 2011, and this year, the title goes to Manborg. I really think this should have been kept towards the end of the night, as it's absolutely hilarious. Think Robocop fighting with the cast of Mortal Kombat against Nazi demons from Hell. All in front of a green screen. A must see for those who love their films as bad as The Room.
Midnight Sun
The film seems like an interesting take on the vampire genre, which is no mean feat considering the budget the makers had. However, looking at the main character having hunger pains lead me to leaving after 30 minutes to get brunch. I couldn't find a trailer for this one, so I'm just gonna stick a picture of Mina from "Manborg" in its place.
 |
| Reminds me of Frost from Mortal Kombat for some reason. |
Calibre 9
It's like a French version of a Jason Statham movie, with added supernatural elements. Action packed, ridiculous, violent, and with moments of stylish direction, This film was lot of fun to watch, and exceeded any expectation I had from a movie about a gun possessed by the soul of a dead prostitute.
Citadel
I think this movie, along with Savage, should be used by the Irish Tourism Board to show people what Ireland is really like. Very well directed, with effective use of sound to go along with the visuals. The scariest thing about this is that even if you took the supernatural elements away from the story, it would make no difference. That's what scared me, to be honest. Best Irish film I've seen this year.
Silent Hill: Revelation
My god, this has got to be one of the worst movies I have ever seen. Please note that I didn't actually get to watch the first film beforehand, but even I know that it was a lot better than this. It was obvious by some of the shots that it was filmed for 3D, and it really comes off as stupid when shown in 2D. At least this had more laughs than Resident Evil: Retribution.
But before the movie, there was an awkward moment where Jennifer Blanc-Biehn had to walk after hecklers in the crowd mocked the short film Connection, in which she stars. After a moment of silence, one person in the crowd says out loud "Y'see this is why we can't have nice things". Admittedly it was funny at the time, but it's very true. Still, that's the nature of the work for anyone promoting films, I suppose.
Zombie Flesh Eaters/Deep Red
At this point of the night, I was starting to feel a bit rundown, so I'm surprised I managed to go through them. ZFL had some really weird bits in the first half that kept me amused (ie. bad acting, bizarre camera angles, a sequence which involved a naked scuba diver, an underwater zombie and a shark), but in the second half it did tend to drag in places.
I didn't know that RD was directed by David Argento, so the style of this film and the strange choice in music numbers reminded me of another film I saw at Horrorthon in 2010, which was Phenomena. The story was hard to grasp at times, but then again, I was zoning in and out for the first half, especially when the drunken guy was onscreen. But it's the aforementioned music and odd scenes that kept me conscious from time to time.
It's a shame the organisers of Horrorthon don't do the double bill showings during the year anymore.
And on a final note.....
If you play the live version after the studio version, it seems to flow seamlessly.....or maybe it's just me.....
Friday, October 26, 2012
Halloween Countdown (Day 25: Horrorthon Day One)
Okay, today was the first day of the Horrorthon Film Festival, so I'm just going to do mini updates of what I saw, and those I missed, keeping with the day to day nature that I tend to insert into these blog updates. It's been a long day, and I have four more to go.
So without further ado, here's what I thought of each movie, along with a trailer for it (whenever possible).
Antiviral
It was a beautifully shot film with a great score and atmosphere throughout, but the story was hard to follow at times, the social message of the "celebrity culture" seemed a bit force, and the film had a distracting amount of pretentiousness to it.
Room 237
The theories and interpretations of The Shining are so ridiculous and off the wall, that at times they are convincing. It would be like me describing how The Matrix is a complete rip-off of Dumbo.
Detention Of The Dead
It's not a bad film for what it is, which is basically "The Breakfast Club (with zombies)". It can be a bit silly at times, but I find it's best that you don't watch it while in a sober state of mind. Plus the goth chick in it was pretty hot.
And on a final note.....
It was Katy Perry's birthday during Day 25.....what? I like Katy Perry.....a lot.....
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
Halloween Countdown (Day 24: Seedy Till(y) Death)
I find myself running behind with the blog posts, as I took a break from the horror motif when a mate of mine called to my gaff, and he wanted to watch "Quantum Of Solace", as he was a big James Bond fan, and he hadn't seen it yet. And I thought I may as well do with a refresher course on the story so far, since "Skyfall" may be the second or third time that I would go to the cinema to watch a James Bond film (I know I went to see "The World Is Not Enough", but I can't remember if I saw "Goldeneye" in the cinema).
Because of the short amount of time I have, what with Horrorthon starting on Thursday evening, I thought I'd watch "Saw 3D: The Final Chapter", and write about it, finishing my articles on the SAW series. But it was so bad the second time I watched it, I knew I had to save that for the final blog entry of the month. And because I wanted to watch something that was at least better than "SAW 7" (or whatever it's called), I picked a film I was going to watch another time, as I only bought it today.
As I said in my "Bride Of Chucky" blog entry, I saw this film before the preceding one. I remembered it being very strange, as I didn't see the other films except the beginning of "Child's Play" all those years ago. But I did catch on to the fact that the series was taking a weird turn anyway, so even if I didn't see the previous films in the series, I didn't need to, as I guessed the "seed" was conceived in the last film. Which is handy, as you can jump right in without worrying about an ongoing plotline. I thought it was silly, but entertaining all the same.....oh and it has this actress in it.....
Back then I knew "Seed Of Chucky" was different compared to the rest of the "Child's Play" series. But I never knew it was that bit different, when compared to the twisted carnage that was "Bride Of Chucky". While the film does have some comedic gore throughout, it plays off as a weird gothic tale of the unification of the Chucky family, thrown in with a parody of Jennifer Tilly, in which self mocking jokes are made of her weight, age, and her declining status as a respected Hollywood actress.
While the film itself does make a self referential sarcastic comment about her as "perfect casting" by the dolls themselves, it's still a fun concept to have the original actress tormented by them. Plus she must have a sense of humour about herself when there are so many jokes that are made at her expense, so we do know that this is only an exaggerated image of the image of Jennifer Tilly. So we can get the irony of her auditioning for the role as the Virgin Mary in rapper Redman's religious flick. Plus she's in the movie a lot longer than in "Bride Of Chucky", vocal work for Tiffany aside. Which means.....erm.....oh just look at the picture above, you get my drift.
Along with Jennifer Tilly and Redman playing as themselves, we also get two familiar faces (well, one if you happen to live on the other side of the Atlantic) who meet their doom in this flick. There is cult director John Waters playing a nosy paparazzi, and it even has Hannah from S-Club-7.....they were a British pop band in the late 90s/early '00s, so I don't think they ever made it big in the States. Although they did have a film based around them, so I'm not sure if it was released over there. Hell, I don't even know the name. But I digress.....
While the domestic disputes that Chucky and Tiffany had in the previous film were just a few brief scenes that were interspersed among the scenes of violence for comedic effect, it's now one of the main focal points of the film, alongside the Jennifer Tilly storyline. While it is funny in a sense to see Chucky and Tiffany getting used to raising their boy or girl; Glen or Glenda (again, I must watch that Ed Wood film), trying to set a good example by quitting their murderous ways, and the usual bickering that they do, it does however slow down the movie at times.
At times it looks and feels more like an odd Tim Burton clone than an over the top comedic slasher. And while it is a fun way of looking at the characters, you do at times wish they would just kill somebody instead of watching some (twisted) soap opera storyline. It does take a while to get used to, and it has some laugh out moments, along with the gruesome, weird, or twisted scenes (I think those three describe the Chucky "cup filler" scene), it doesn't have the same level of fun as "Bride Of Chucky" did.
The humour seems to be a bit hit and miss, and I'm not sure if it's to do with the semi-serious tone that's played out onscreen, or if whether it is just forced at times. The "Britney" scene was just a poor attempt at a pop culture reference, with a forced punchline that not even the inclusion of the real Britney Spears could make it funny. Although the reference to "The Shining" was actually funny.
The character of Glen/Glenda/Shithead (the latter being the name the doll gave on the first meeting with the parents) wasn't too bad. Shithead does take a bit of getting used to, but does provide some comic relief as playing the innocent one in the family, who then turns into a psychotic, gender confused maniac later on. But like I said, the focus on the drama does make the film tedious at times.
The film sets look like it was made on a smaller budget (it was filmed in England and Romania, which explains some of the English actors, including Hannah from S-Club), the CGI effects do look a bit cheap and stupid, especially with the doll walking movements, and overall it wasn't as gory as previous installments. But it's a fun little film regardless, where we get to see how the "Seed Of Chucky" would have turned out. Speaking of which, I haven't even posted a pic of the Shithead yet.
After a search on YouTube, I now know that "Seeing Double" was the name of the S-Club-7 movie. S-Club to be precise, as one of them left the band before its release. Not that you would care.....or me for that matter.
Because of the short amount of time I have, what with Horrorthon starting on Thursday evening, I thought I'd watch "Saw 3D: The Final Chapter", and write about it, finishing my articles on the SAW series. But it was so bad the second time I watched it, I knew I had to save that for the final blog entry of the month. And because I wanted to watch something that was at least better than "SAW 7" (or whatever it's called), I picked a film I was going to watch another time, as I only bought it today.
 |
| There was some joke about "Made In Japan" in the film..... |
As I said in my "Bride Of Chucky" blog entry, I saw this film before the preceding one. I remembered it being very strange, as I didn't see the other films except the beginning of "Child's Play" all those years ago. But I did catch on to the fact that the series was taking a weird turn anyway, so even if I didn't see the previous films in the series, I didn't need to, as I guessed the "seed" was conceived in the last film. Which is handy, as you can jump right in without worrying about an ongoing plotline. I thought it was silly, but entertaining all the same.....oh and it has this actress in it.....
 |
| Okay now I got that out of the way.....for now..... |
87 minutes later.....
Back then I knew "Seed Of Chucky" was different compared to the rest of the "Child's Play" series. But I never knew it was that bit different, when compared to the twisted carnage that was "Bride Of Chucky". While the film does have some comedic gore throughout, it plays off as a weird gothic tale of the unification of the Chucky family, thrown in with a parody of Jennifer Tilly, in which self mocking jokes are made of her weight, age, and her declining status as a respected Hollywood actress.
While the film itself does make a self referential sarcastic comment about her as "perfect casting" by the dolls themselves, it's still a fun concept to have the original actress tormented by them. Plus she must have a sense of humour about herself when there are so many jokes that are made at her expense, so we do know that this is only an exaggerated image of the image of Jennifer Tilly. So we can get the irony of her auditioning for the role as the Virgin Mary in rapper Redman's religious flick. Plus she's in the movie a lot longer than in "Bride Of Chucky", vocal work for Tiffany aside. Which means.....erm.....oh just look at the picture above, you get my drift.
Along with Jennifer Tilly and Redman playing as themselves, we also get two familiar faces (well, one if you happen to live on the other side of the Atlantic) who meet their doom in this flick. There is cult director John Waters playing a nosy paparazzi, and it even has Hannah from S-Club-7.....they were a British pop band in the late 90s/early '00s, so I don't think they ever made it big in the States. Although they did have a film based around them, so I'm not sure if it was released over there. Hell, I don't even know the name. But I digress.....
 |
| Hannah (far left) |
While the domestic disputes that Chucky and Tiffany had in the previous film were just a few brief scenes that were interspersed among the scenes of violence for comedic effect, it's now one of the main focal points of the film, alongside the Jennifer Tilly storyline. While it is funny in a sense to see Chucky and Tiffany getting used to raising their boy or girl; Glen or Glenda (again, I must watch that Ed Wood film), trying to set a good example by quitting their murderous ways, and the usual bickering that they do, it does however slow down the movie at times.
At times it looks and feels more like an odd Tim Burton clone than an over the top comedic slasher. And while it is a fun way of looking at the characters, you do at times wish they would just kill somebody instead of watching some (twisted) soap opera storyline. It does take a while to get used to, and it has some laugh out moments, along with the gruesome, weird, or twisted scenes (I think those three describe the Chucky "cup filler" scene), it doesn't have the same level of fun as "Bride Of Chucky" did.
The humour seems to be a bit hit and miss, and I'm not sure if it's to do with the semi-serious tone that's played out onscreen, or if whether it is just forced at times. The "Britney" scene was just a poor attempt at a pop culture reference, with a forced punchline that not even the inclusion of the real Britney Spears could make it funny. Although the reference to "The Shining" was actually funny.
 |
| Is it just me, or does this look like an alternate version of "The Exorcist"? |
The character of Glen/Glenda/Shithead (the latter being the name the doll gave on the first meeting with the parents) wasn't too bad. Shithead does take a bit of getting used to, but does provide some comic relief as playing the innocent one in the family, who then turns into a psychotic, gender confused maniac later on. But like I said, the focus on the drama does make the film tedious at times.
The film sets look like it was made on a smaller budget (it was filmed in England and Romania, which explains some of the English actors, including Hannah from S-Club), the CGI effects do look a bit cheap and stupid, especially with the doll walking movements, and overall it wasn't as gory as previous installments. But it's a fun little film regardless, where we get to see how the "Seed Of Chucky" would have turned out. Speaking of which, I haven't even posted a pic of the Shithead yet.
 |
| .....okay that's a little bit weird..... |
And on a final note.....
After a search on YouTube, I now know that "Seeing Double" was the name of the S-Club-7 movie. S-Club to be precise, as one of them left the band before its release. Not that you would care.....or me for that matter.
Monday, October 22, 2012
Halloween Countdown (Day 22: Film Reviewer For A Day)
In a way, deviating from the horror movie review formula for this month's blog posts does give me ideas to try out a few things, even if it is just trying to keep up with the daily quota. Okay, maybe it is cheating when I use a film review I wrote six years ago, as part of a college assignment where I had to contribute to a group effort in producing a magazine. But then again, it gives me an idea for a blog entry. Not to mention the rare chance of writing an article before I watch the movie in question, which I also haven't seen in six years.
I will get the chance to watch the sequel to "Silent Hill" at this year's Horrorthon (entitled "Silent Hill: Revelation", taking a cue from the "Resident Evil" school of sequel naming). I believe the film is also in 3D, but given the cinema where it's screened, I'm guessing it will be a 2D fare. But hey, at least I'll get a chance to watch it before its release date.
As I stated in the opening paragraph, the review below was part of an ongoing assignment in college, where I "studied" journalism. There was this guy in our class who actually worked for a local newspaper where he's from, so he actually had the necessary contacts to get potential work, such as reviewing films before their release date. There were two opportunities in the class for one of the students to review movies, one of which was some Antonio Banderas film that sounded rubbish (and apparently it was) but I can't remember the title, nor the other one.
To this day, I don't know why I didn't volunteer for these jobs, as I always wanted to be a film reviewer. I did have aspirations to be a music reviewer, but years of disillusionment with the state of the music industry knocked that on the head. But I always had a love for film, as you can tell with these blog entries this month. If I was to hazard a guess, I guess it was a combination of reluctance, lack of self confidence, and, as stupid as it sounds, the films themselves were uninteresting.
Apparently I wasn't the only one that thought that. During one class, our lecturer was notified that the students who agreed to review those two movies never showed up to the screening. So the class had one last chance to take up an offer to attend a press only screening, and if nobody turned up to that, no more will be given. While I was hard on myself for not volunteering in the first place, I thought it was stupid for the others to no-show these screenings. So I was willing to put my hand up to volunteer, no matter what movie was up for grabs. To my surprise, that film turned out to be "Silent Hill". I immediately volunteered for the job.
The screening took place on a Tuesday morning, where I was to wait outside the Savoy Cinema, along with a handful of journalists at around 10 o'clock. I mentioned my name to the guy with the guest list, and I took a seat in the main screening room, of which I've never seen so empty, in comparison to the many times I've sat there as a paying customer. It was a weird feeling to be around members of the press, as I look at them with their notebooks and pens with lighters attached. The surreal nature of this did make me feel out of place, but at the same time, I got a kick out of it. Especially as I was about to watch a movie that not only was yet to be released, but it was the type of movie that I would have paid to see anyway.
Granted, I didn't think it was a particularly good movie, but I didn't care. I got to see it before anyone else. And it was the only time that I ever felt like a proper journalist. I never did pursue a career in that field, for a variety of reasons, and what with the downturn in print media, and the rise of the internet, it would have been difficult to make a living doing that. Again it could be to do with confidence, but I don't feel my opinions have that much weight, in comparison to the hundreds of people writing their views in blogs such as this one.
I may never get the chance to do something as cool as that again, although I do get the chance to see films before their release date, through film festivals and such. But looking back at the article below, it reminded me of the joy I used to have in writing about films, no matter how good or bad they were. I guess that passion could be seen in the amount of articles I've dedicated myself to this month. So at least I know it's still there.
Above is a link to the full "Silent Hill" (which may or may not be taken off YouTube by the time you read this).
Below is the review I wrote around March 2006, which I found on an external hard drive, along with other articles and notes I saved from my college days. No alterations were made to the text below. I would post a screenshot of the article itself, but I don't know where I would have kept the magazine it was used for. Not to mention I'm too lazy to go and look for it.
As with the "Resident Evil" series, my knowledge of the "Silent Hill" games are limited, and the only one I ever completed was "Silent Hill: Shattered Memories" for the PSP. This was apparently a remake of the first game, so at least I can move onto the second and third games if I ever get the chance. Anyways, I found this short video funny, especially towards the end.
I will get the chance to watch the sequel to "Silent Hill" at this year's Horrorthon (entitled "Silent Hill: Revelation", taking a cue from the "Resident Evil" school of sequel naming). I believe the film is also in 3D, but given the cinema where it's screened, I'm guessing it will be a 2D fare. But hey, at least I'll get a chance to watch it before its release date.
As I stated in the opening paragraph, the review below was part of an ongoing assignment in college, where I "studied" journalism. There was this guy in our class who actually worked for a local newspaper where he's from, so he actually had the necessary contacts to get potential work, such as reviewing films before their release date. There were two opportunities in the class for one of the students to review movies, one of which was some Antonio Banderas film that sounded rubbish (and apparently it was) but I can't remember the title, nor the other one.
To this day, I don't know why I didn't volunteer for these jobs, as I always wanted to be a film reviewer. I did have aspirations to be a music reviewer, but years of disillusionment with the state of the music industry knocked that on the head. But I always had a love for film, as you can tell with these blog entries this month. If I was to hazard a guess, I guess it was a combination of reluctance, lack of self confidence, and, as stupid as it sounds, the films themselves were uninteresting.
Apparently I wasn't the only one that thought that. During one class, our lecturer was notified that the students who agreed to review those two movies never showed up to the screening. So the class had one last chance to take up an offer to attend a press only screening, and if nobody turned up to that, no more will be given. While I was hard on myself for not volunteering in the first place, I thought it was stupid for the others to no-show these screenings. So I was willing to put my hand up to volunteer, no matter what movie was up for grabs. To my surprise, that film turned out to be "Silent Hill". I immediately volunteered for the job.
The screening took place on a Tuesday morning, where I was to wait outside the Savoy Cinema, along with a handful of journalists at around 10 o'clock. I mentioned my name to the guy with the guest list, and I took a seat in the main screening room, of which I've never seen so empty, in comparison to the many times I've sat there as a paying customer. It was a weird feeling to be around members of the press, as I look at them with their notebooks and pens with lighters attached. The surreal nature of this did make me feel out of place, but at the same time, I got a kick out of it. Especially as I was about to watch a movie that not only was yet to be released, but it was the type of movie that I would have paid to see anyway.
Granted, I didn't think it was a particularly good movie, but I didn't care. I got to see it before anyone else. And it was the only time that I ever felt like a proper journalist. I never did pursue a career in that field, for a variety of reasons, and what with the downturn in print media, and the rise of the internet, it would have been difficult to make a living doing that. Again it could be to do with confidence, but I don't feel my opinions have that much weight, in comparison to the hundreds of people writing their views in blogs such as this one.
I may never get the chance to do something as cool as that again, although I do get the chance to see films before their release date, through film festivals and such. But looking back at the article below, it reminded me of the joy I used to have in writing about films, no matter how good or bad they were. I guess that passion could be seen in the amount of articles I've dedicated myself to this month. So at least I know it's still there.
Above is a link to the full "Silent Hill" (which may or may not be taken off YouTube by the time you read this).
Below is the review I wrote around March 2006, which I found on an external hard drive, along with other articles and notes I saved from my college days. No alterations were made to the text below. I would post a screenshot of the article itself, but I don't know where I would have kept the magazine it was used for. Not to mention I'm too lazy to go and look for it.
SILENT HILL (16)
Director: Christophe Gans
Starring: Radha Mitchell, Sean Bean
Release Date: 21st April 2006
Movies based on popular computer games are hit and miss affairs. While
some have turned out to be rubbish (Doom and Resident Evil: Apocalypse for
example), there are others who do manage to capture the essence of the video
game.
The movie starts off with Rose (Radha Mitchell) bringing her daughter
to a place called Silent Hill, a place that she mentions every time she
sleepwalks. After a near collision with someone on the road, Rose is knocked
out when her car swerves out of the way. When she wakes up, she sees that her
daughter has disappeared.
When she begins to look for her, Rose finds a fog drenched town that is
completely deserted and raining ash, and she is chasing after a figure that
resembles her daughter. Once the town goes into complete darkness, the scenery
changes and she comes face to face with its ghoulish inhabitants. Not only does
she set out to find her daughter, she also learns more about what is going on
around her.
The film captures the atmosphere and the tension of the computer game.
What makes the film work is that it tries to disturb you as opposed to give you
sudden shocks. This is accomplished with the mixture of the monsters and the
special effects used to create the hellish surroundings when the light goes
out.
The main problem with the film, as with most films based on games, is
with some of the characters and the dialogue, which uses cryptic messages and
bible passages which sound wooden and hammy when delivered.
The movie goes downhill once police officer Cybil, (Laurie Holden)
comes into play. Her performance is deplorable and as a result, you begin to
care less about the main character. After a battle with a demon wielding a huge
knife, when Rose says: “Hey, it’s going to be alright”, you can’t help but
burst out laughing!
The subplot involving worried husband Chris (Sean Bean), where he finds
out more about the mystery of Silent Hill, works well along with the main
story. Unfortunately, for someone who is the more recognisable of the cast, he
is underused in this film.
After a promising start and interesting story, it is a shame that the
movie finishes with a vague ending that can only serve as a means for a sequel.
I’m sure this movie will please its fans, but for those who are not in the know
to begin with, may feel that it could have been better.
Alan
Stacey
And on a final note.....
Sunday, October 21, 2012
Halloween Countdown (Day 20: The Screaming Brain)
Ugh, I thought I'd get at least one good night's sleep this weekend, but it hasn't worked out that way. And the fact that I went into town for a good friend's birthday celebration, I once again am worse for wear. I'm gonna take yet another shortcut in the blog entries because, I admit, writing up on movies is time consuming in itself. If I was ever to do this again, I'd write some of these in advance.
I did find time to go into the cinema last week. Granted my choice in film is questionable, but it was the last showing of its cinema run, so I thought I'd catch it before it goes. Plus I was in the mood for a brainless action flick in 3D. As this was a recent release in the cinema, I will refrain from using any spoilers if possible, and just give my general opinion, and not go into too much detail about what happens in the film.
First of all, I actually don't mind the "Resident Evil" series. Sure they have nothing in common with the style of the games, although I hear "Resident Evil 6" is more of a shooter than a survival horror game, so now the movies are in line with the games, But then again, I've only really played the first two, meant to have a go at the fourth one, and the fifth one annoyed the hell outta me after less than 30 minutes. So I'm usually not up to speed on some of the characters and zombie side effects.
Because of my recent reviews of other movies, I never got the chance to watch the others again. Sure a brief outline of the events of the previous films is used at the beginning of each sequel, but I tend to forget certain characters and parts of the (questionable) plot. With that, I'll just give a quick opinion of each film, to give an idea as to my thoughts on the series to date:
I admit the films in the RE series are not great, but to me they are at least watchable, and have some entertainment value. But after watching "Resident Evil: Retribution", not only was this the worst movie of the series by far (and that's saying something), it is also one of the worst movies I've seen this year. And of course, it only strengthens the belief that a 3D movie is not worth watching.
The film is roughly 90 minutes long, but the feeling I had at towards the end of it was.....that's it? It felt like a section of a movie that was originally 30 to 45 minutes long, but was extended with pointless characters (such as the little girl), stupid scenarios (which involves the little girl), blatantly ripping of better movies (the opening sequence is almost identical to the beginning of the "Dawn Of The Dead" remake), and boring, extended action sequences (which comes near the end of the movie).
I might as well get the good parts out of the way, since there's not many to begin with. The first proper fight scene with Alice against a group of zombies was fun to watch. There's not many films where there's strong female protagonists, so it's always refreshing to see women who kick ass instead of being dumb damsels in distress, or as part of a forced love subplot. And of course, it helps when they're easy on the eye.....hey, I'm a bloke. What do you expect?
Oh, and there's the obligatory scene where Milla Jovovich is in the nip, but you don't really see anything.. Then again, these films were produced and mainly directed by her husband.
I was confused throughout the movie for a variety of reasons. Because of my lack of knowledge of the game series after the second one, I posted a question up on Facebook, as to whether there were "armed" zombies in the RE games, or if it was just a rip-off of the "Nazi Zombies" trend in film and games. The poster for the film has the tagline "Evil Goes Global", but the whole movie takes place in an underground facility. And according to the third movie, the virus has already spread around the globe, so that tagline makes no sense.
I guess it's something to do with the Red Queen from the first movie taking over Umbrella or something. Even that wasn't explained clearly, so I just had to swallow the fact that Wesker is genuinely trying to help Alice, despite taking her powers in the last installment. While it was a little distracting to see another child actress playing the Red Queen, I have to remember that the first film came out ten years ago, so of course they had to change the look of her.
Speaking of casting, and please note I'm too lazy to check character/actor names, whoever played Ada Wong has to be one of the worst actresses I've seen in a long time. At least whoever played Jill Valentine had the excuse of acting like a drone, hence the wooden delivery. And it doesn't help that the script is so bad, not even the other characters that at least make an effort onscreen, can help make the dialogue sound convincing.
I found it weird that I only knew the names of some of the characters towards the end of the movie (Leon Kennedy and Barry Burton, who are actual RE characters), as I don't remember them being introduced as such throughout the film. Because I didn't watch the other films to refresh my memory, some of the recurring characters were lost on me. And I have to say, I still find Michelle Rodriguez annoying and bland as usual (although to be fair, she was okay in the Grindhouse flick "Planet Terror"). But it was nice to see Colin Salmon (okay, I checked online for that one) from the first movie, who was also in.....wait for it.....
But the worst part of the film comes at the end, but for a different reason. I already mentioned the feeling of "that's it?" towards the end of the film, but what annoyed me was, without giving it away, the hint of another sequel. Not only that it gave the impression that nothing was really accomplished in this film, but it set up a movie that not only would I be interested in watching, but of what I wish I was watching instead of this waste of celluloid.
That annoyed the hell outta me. Judging from what I just watched, I got the feeling that the next one could very well be the last. And despite the fact that this movie was terrible, even by the film franchise's already low standards, I know I'll watch the next one. But at this point, I think it's about time that the series took a bullet to the head, and come to an end.
Speaking of how the series should end, this is an amusing short about the first game in the "Resident Evil" series.
I did find time to go into the cinema last week. Granted my choice in film is questionable, but it was the last showing of its cinema run, so I thought I'd catch it before it goes. Plus I was in the mood for a brainless action flick in 3D. As this was a recent release in the cinema, I will refrain from using any spoilers if possible, and just give my general opinion, and not go into too much detail about what happens in the film.
First of all, I actually don't mind the "Resident Evil" series. Sure they have nothing in common with the style of the games, although I hear "Resident Evil 6" is more of a shooter than a survival horror game, so now the movies are in line with the games, But then again, I've only really played the first two, meant to have a go at the fourth one, and the fifth one annoyed the hell outta me after less than 30 minutes. So I'm usually not up to speed on some of the characters and zombie side effects.
Because of my recent reviews of other movies, I never got the chance to watch the others again. Sure a brief outline of the events of the previous films is used at the beginning of each sequel, but I tend to forget certain characters and parts of the (questionable) plot. With that, I'll just give a quick opinion of each film, to give an idea as to my thoughts on the series to date:
- Resident Evil - I thought it was okay, once you get over the fact that it has nothing in common with the game.
- Resident Evil: Apocalypse - It's okay, but it is a little bit stupid in parts.
- Resident Evil: Extinction - The "Mad Max" setting is a little strange, but at this point, you get what you pay for when you watch it.
- Resident Evil: Afterlife - It wasn't too bad, and since it was shot in 3D, it looked great. And of course it was nice to see Ali Larter again.....this time in 3D.....
 |
| Infact, I don't even remember if she survived at the end of "Resident Evil: Afterlife", since she's not in the new one. |
Before I get to the film itself, I just want to mention that was nice to see a movie that uses 3D technology instead of the post conversion from 2D, which not only looks like crap, but is damaging the reputation of 3D films, which is already under fire for reasons such as price, use of glasses, dark screen tones, and the gimmick label. It doesn't help when the major blockbusters (such as The Avengers and The Amazing Spider Man) go the post conversion route, and the ones that actually use the technology are either not that popular or are rubbish to begin with, which adds more confusion as to the merits of 3D technology.
I could go on more about it, but this article from Cracked should suffice. Otherwise, I'll just go off topic.
And the verdict is in.....
I admit the films in the RE series are not great, but to me they are at least watchable, and have some entertainment value. But after watching "Resident Evil: Retribution", not only was this the worst movie of the series by far (and that's saying something), it is also one of the worst movies I've seen this year. And of course, it only strengthens the belief that a 3D movie is not worth watching.
The film is roughly 90 minutes long, but the feeling I had at towards the end of it was.....that's it? It felt like a section of a movie that was originally 30 to 45 minutes long, but was extended with pointless characters (such as the little girl), stupid scenarios (which involves the little girl), blatantly ripping of better movies (the opening sequence is almost identical to the beginning of the "Dawn Of The Dead" remake), and boring, extended action sequences (which comes near the end of the movie).
I might as well get the good parts out of the way, since there's not many to begin with. The first proper fight scene with Alice against a group of zombies was fun to watch. There's not many films where there's strong female protagonists, so it's always refreshing to see women who kick ass instead of being dumb damsels in distress, or as part of a forced love subplot. And of course, it helps when they're easy on the eye.....hey, I'm a bloke. What do you expect?
Oh, and there's the obligatory scene where Milla Jovovich is in the nip, but you don't really see anything.. Then again, these films were produced and mainly directed by her husband.
 |
| If only the director of the Underworld series would do the same with his wife's films. At least it would distract me from Kate Beckinsale's lack of acting skills. |
I was confused throughout the movie for a variety of reasons. Because of my lack of knowledge of the game series after the second one, I posted a question up on Facebook, as to whether there were "armed" zombies in the RE games, or if it was just a rip-off of the "Nazi Zombies" trend in film and games. The poster for the film has the tagline "Evil Goes Global", but the whole movie takes place in an underground facility. And according to the third movie, the virus has already spread around the globe, so that tagline makes no sense.
I guess it's something to do with the Red Queen from the first movie taking over Umbrella or something. Even that wasn't explained clearly, so I just had to swallow the fact that Wesker is genuinely trying to help Alice, despite taking her powers in the last installment. While it was a little distracting to see another child actress playing the Red Queen, I have to remember that the first film came out ten years ago, so of course they had to change the look of her.
Speaking of casting, and please note I'm too lazy to check character/actor names, whoever played Ada Wong has to be one of the worst actresses I've seen in a long time. At least whoever played Jill Valentine had the excuse of acting like a drone, hence the wooden delivery. And it doesn't help that the script is so bad, not even the other characters that at least make an effort onscreen, can help make the dialogue sound convincing.
I found it weird that I only knew the names of some of the characters towards the end of the movie (Leon Kennedy and Barry Burton, who are actual RE characters), as I don't remember them being introduced as such throughout the film. Because I didn't watch the other films to refresh my memory, some of the recurring characters were lost on me. And I have to say, I still find Michelle Rodriguez annoying and bland as usual (although to be fair, she was okay in the Grindhouse flick "Planet Terror"). But it was nice to see Colin Salmon (okay, I checked online for that one) from the first movie, who was also in.....wait for it.....
 |
| This is now the third reference this month. Seriously, that was unintentional. |
But the worst part of the film comes at the end, but for a different reason. I already mentioned the feeling of "that's it?" towards the end of the film, but what annoyed me was, without giving it away, the hint of another sequel. Not only that it gave the impression that nothing was really accomplished in this film, but it set up a movie that not only would I be interested in watching, but of what I wish I was watching instead of this waste of celluloid.
That annoyed the hell outta me. Judging from what I just watched, I got the feeling that the next one could very well be the last. And despite the fact that this movie was terrible, even by the film franchise's already low standards, I know I'll watch the next one. But at this point, I think it's about time that the series took a bullet to the head, and come to an end.
And on a final note.....
Speaking of how the series should end, this is an amusing short about the first game in the "Resident Evil" series.
Saturday, October 20, 2012
Halloween Countdown (Day 19: Good Luck Chuck)
I mentioned in a previous blog entry that I was looking for two DVDs in town, and since I couldn't find them anywhere, I went on the net to purchase them. One of them was Rob Zombie's "Halloween 2", and the other is the subject of this blog post. Oh yes, there will be spoilers.
There were two reasons why I wanted to watch this. The first of which is that it's the only Chucky movie that I haven't seen. The second is that the soundtrack looked awesome. Granted not every soundtrack album features songs from the film, but it was enough to make me check it out. However, I was never really a fan of the "Child's Play" series. Sure they were entertaining enough to watch, but I never really took to the horror aspect of it because, let's face it, it's a psychotic "My Buddy" doll killing people.
Before I move on, I just want to mention that my brother and I had this doll when we were children. So my godmother rented this for us to watch, along with my mother, but when Chucky started killing people, they both quickly turned it off. I'm guessing it was my godmother, as she was the one who rented Robocop for me and my brother, and we were left alone to watch it. My mum was horrified when she actually watched it herself afterwards.
Along with the reasons earlier on in this article, I had also seen "Seed Of Chucky" a few years ago, and I remembered it being cheesy and quite entertaining to watch. I preferred this to the rest of the "Child's Play" series, so I wanted to see "Bride Of Chucky" since I gathered it was along the same lines. Surprised that it has taken this long to get around to, now that I think about it.
I posted on my Facebook page that I was about to watch this, and I got this mini review from someone on my friends list:
"It's contrived, childish, cliched and completely lacking in any redeeming factors whatsoever...I highly recommend it :)"
As if I needed any more convincing, really.
The verdict is in: hands down, this is my favourite Chucky flick.
I have read that fans of the "Child's Play" series didn't like the direction of this film, but it's the self referential, pisstake, slapstick horror that I think suits the character. I've always thought Chucky was too witty, funny and ridiculous to be horrifying as a movie villain.
The film already won me over in the first five minutes with glimpses of movie monster mementos in a police evidence room (Jason's hockey mask, Freddy's glove, Myers' white William Shatner mask), Jennifer Tilly as a cop killer in an eye popping.....I mean, catching outfit, and Rob Zombie's "Living Dead Girl" playing during the opening credits. This sets the tone of the movie, letting the viewer know what to expect for its 90 minute duration.
I also didn't know the late John Ritter and Katherine Heigl had roles in this movie. Now that I think about it, has Katherine Heigl been an any notable movies since "Knocked Up"? I don't even know what she's doing nowadays. Is she still on "Grey's Anatomy"? But I digress.....
Speaking about the characters, they are.....well, I guess I have nothing much to say about the supporting cast. I suppose Katherine Heigl did a good enough job, considering the type of movie she's in, and John Ritter is an interesting throwback to family films in the 80s and early 90s. Other than that, the rest of the cast are nothing to talk about. Hell, even Kathy Najimy was more memorable than the rest of them. And I bet most of you are going to check the net to see who the hell is Kathy Najimy.....I did just to get her actual name.
But why have a strong supporting cast when most of them meet their end by killer dolls in gruesome but hilarious ways. And that of course is the whole point of this film. The film pokes fun at itself in relation to the nature of violence in previous films, along with Chucky's previous status as a horror icon. And of course, we now have Tiffany, who is just as crazy and demented as her undead boyfriend.
Their relationship is a twisted one, which goes back and forth from love and hate, via twisted actions and normal everyday domestic strife. The characters are fun to watch, and of course Brad Dourif does a good job bringing Chucky to life with his recognisable voice, bringing menace and humour to the character, which is helped now that the series has gone the comedy route.
As for the "Bride Of Chucky" herself, Jennifer Tilly was a good casting choice, as her squeaky voice is well suited to the Tiffany doll. Also she is fun to watch.....and before you start fining some innuendo in that statement, what I mean is her treatment of Chucky in the first part of the film, along with her twisted mindframe, which is compatible with the love of her life. And it was around the point where she gets murdered onscreen by Chucky that my hand was out of my pants.....no no no, it's not what you think.....
I couldn't remember how long it was meant to be between the events of "Child's Play 3" and this film, but at first I questioned whether Tiffany would have been old enough to be Chucky's squeeze when he was alive. But then again, Jennifer Tilly is now in her 50s, and old enough to be a love interest to Kelsey Grammar in an episode of "Fraiser", so I guess her looks defy her age. Hell, she doesn't look that much different nowadays to when she was in the likes of this and "Bound".....what? "Bound" was a good movie, you sick freaks.
Moving swiftly on, the film was fun, and gave me the inspiration to have a look at "Seed Of Chucky", as I don't remember much of it, other than the "adorable" couple's son, and a certain actress who turns out to be Tiffany's idol. You don't need to rack your brains to guess who that would be.....and yes, that was a terrible pun.
And now onto the part of the blog entry where I add extra padding: my top five tracks from the film. There were actually a fair few tracks from the soundtrack CD which were used in the movie (notable exceptions for me were Type O Negative and Motorhead). Not only was I surprised by that, but I got a kick out of recognising tunes that were relevant at a time when my musical tastes moved on from indie to hard rock. I would buy the CD if it wasn't for the fact that not only I own half the tracks elsewhere in my CD collection, but it's expensive to buy nowadays.
There were two reasons why I wanted to watch this. The first of which is that it's the only Chucky movie that I haven't seen. The second is that the soundtrack looked awesome. Granted not every soundtrack album features songs from the film, but it was enough to make me check it out. However, I was never really a fan of the "Child's Play" series. Sure they were entertaining enough to watch, but I never really took to the horror aspect of it because, let's face it, it's a psychotic "My Buddy" doll killing people.
Before I move on, I just want to mention that my brother and I had this doll when we were children. So my godmother rented this for us to watch, along with my mother, but when Chucky started killing people, they both quickly turned it off. I'm guessing it was my godmother, as she was the one who rented Robocop for me and my brother, and we were left alone to watch it. My mum was horrified when she actually watched it herself afterwards.
Okay, WHY did you pick this film?
Along with the reasons earlier on in this article, I had also seen "Seed Of Chucky" a few years ago, and I remembered it being cheesy and quite entertaining to watch. I preferred this to the rest of the "Child's Play" series, so I wanted to see "Bride Of Chucky" since I gathered it was along the same lines. Surprised that it has taken this long to get around to, now that I think about it.
I posted on my Facebook page that I was about to watch this, and I got this mini review from someone on my friends list:
"It's contrived, childish, cliched and completely lacking in any redeeming factors whatsoever...I highly recommend it :)"
As if I needed any more convincing, really.
 |
| Well, Jennifer Tilly would also do. |
89 minutes later.....
The verdict is in: hands down, this is my favourite Chucky flick.
I have read that fans of the "Child's Play" series didn't like the direction of this film, but it's the self referential, pisstake, slapstick horror that I think suits the character. I've always thought Chucky was too witty, funny and ridiculous to be horrifying as a movie villain.
The film already won me over in the first five minutes with glimpses of movie monster mementos in a police evidence room (Jason's hockey mask, Freddy's glove, Myers' white William Shatner mask), Jennifer Tilly as a cop killer in an eye popping.....I mean, catching outfit, and Rob Zombie's "Living Dead Girl" playing during the opening credits. This sets the tone of the movie, letting the viewer know what to expect for its 90 minute duration.
I also didn't know the late John Ritter and Katherine Heigl had roles in this movie. Now that I think about it, has Katherine Heigl been an any notable movies since "Knocked Up"? I don't even know what she's doing nowadays. Is she still on "Grey's Anatomy"? But I digress.....
 |
| And now I'll throw in a screenshot of Kath.....I mean "Bride Of Chucky", for good measure. |
Speaking about the characters, they are.....well, I guess I have nothing much to say about the supporting cast. I suppose Katherine Heigl did a good enough job, considering the type of movie she's in, and John Ritter is an interesting throwback to family films in the 80s and early 90s. Other than that, the rest of the cast are nothing to talk about. Hell, even Kathy Najimy was more memorable than the rest of them. And I bet most of you are going to check the net to see who the hell is Kathy Najimy.....I did just to get her actual name.
But why have a strong supporting cast when most of them meet their end by killer dolls in gruesome but hilarious ways. And that of course is the whole point of this film. The film pokes fun at itself in relation to the nature of violence in previous films, along with Chucky's previous status as a horror icon. And of course, we now have Tiffany, who is just as crazy and demented as her undead boyfriend.
Their relationship is a twisted one, which goes back and forth from love and hate, via twisted actions and normal everyday domestic strife. The characters are fun to watch, and of course Brad Dourif does a good job bringing Chucky to life with his recognisable voice, bringing menace and humour to the character, which is helped now that the series has gone the comedy route.
As for the "Bride Of Chucky" herself, Jennifer Tilly was a good casting choice, as her squeaky voice is well suited to the Tiffany doll. Also she is fun to watch.....and before you start fining some innuendo in that statement, what I mean is her treatment of Chucky in the first part of the film, along with her twisted mindframe, which is compatible with the love of her life. And it was around the point where she gets murdered onscreen by Chucky that my hand was out of my pants.....no no no, it's not what you think.....
 |
| Why do motorboats suddenly come to mind? |
I couldn't remember how long it was meant to be between the events of "Child's Play 3" and this film, but at first I questioned whether Tiffany would have been old enough to be Chucky's squeeze when he was alive. But then again, Jennifer Tilly is now in her 50s, and old enough to be a love interest to Kelsey Grammar in an episode of "Fraiser", so I guess her looks defy her age. Hell, she doesn't look that much different nowadays to when she was in the likes of this and "Bound".....what? "Bound" was a good movie, you sick freaks.
Moving swiftly on, the film was fun, and gave me the inspiration to have a look at "Seed Of Chucky", as I don't remember much of it, other than the "adorable" couple's son, and a certain actress who turns out to be Tiffany's idol. You don't need to rack your brains to guess who that would be.....and yes, that was a terrible pun.
And now onto the part of the blog entry where I add extra padding: my top five tracks from the film. There were actually a fair few tracks from the soundtrack CD which were used in the movie (notable exceptions for me were Type O Negative and Motorhead). Not only was I surprised by that, but I got a kick out of recognising tunes that were relevant at a time when my musical tastes moved on from indie to hard rock. I would buy the CD if it wasn't for the fact that not only I own half the tracks elsewhere in my CD collection, but it's expensive to buy nowadays.
 |
| And not once did I mention the love scene between the two dolls.....well, except now of course..... |
Top 5 Soundtrack Picks (in no particular order)
Living Dead Girl - Rob Zombie
Bled For Days - Static-X
Blood Stained - Judas Priest
So Wrong - Stabbing Westward
See You In Hell - Monster Magnet
And on a final note.....
I came across this clip on YouTube. What a stupid way to promote your movie. But then again, it was WCW.
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Halloween Countdown (Day 16: 6...6...6...)
Thanks to a weekend of staying in, I've caught up on the scheduled blog posts, so even if I'm a day late for whatever reason, I have one ready to post. Nice to be on a roll, of some sorts. With that in mind, let's jump into SAW 6.
Oh yes, there will be.....well, if you don't know the answer to that, then check the beginning of the other blog posts.
Yeah it's a good film. I'm surprised how they're still able to connect it to the other sequels. But why do I get the feeling the next sequel will either never happen, or will just end up crap?
As I mentioned in the SAW 5 blog post, I thought this was better than its previous installment. After tonight's viewing, along with its relevance to the ongoing story threads in the whole series, it's no better or worse than the last movie. Nevertheless, I still enjoyed the movie, and I noticed a few things that I never picked up on until now.
In the blog entry for SAW 5, I made a point where the five people involved in the burning building deaths were in no way connected to any of the main characters of the series. But it turns out they were all investigated by FBI agent Strahm. While it does seem a little forced, because of the open narrative of the SAW series, you have to make allowances for strange twists, whether they make sense or not, or whether they're just convenient.
Like the fact that FBI agent Perez actually survived the exploding doll trap in the fourth movie, or that Amanda was an accomplice to the man who caused the death of John and Jill's unborn son in the fifth movie, which was known to Hoffman, who blackmailed her with this information with the envelope that had Amanda's name on it in the third movie.
These are the types of twists where you either buy into them, or you think they're a whole load of rubbish. But I think credit is due to whoever the writers were of these installments, for actually tying up loose trends, some of which created with no explanation at all. Like the envelope Jill drops off at the hospital. It's an obvious nod to a potential sequel, but depending on the viewer, that would either be enticing, or just illicit groans.
The film has the usual characteristics of a SAW movie; an opening game with an inventive way of pitting people against each other, a lead player in a game who happens to be connected to Jigsaw (an insurance executive who denied to help John with his cancer problem), tests that put other people's lives on the line, and a twist that befalls onto him, which was hinted at throughout the movie, but only lead to the bait and switch as to what family he was aiming to save.It even included a reporter that was briefly shown at a press conference in the last film.
Again it has all the elements of the SAW series, it's around the 90 minute mark, so it's easy to digest, and at least it involved a game where the unwilling participant is actually connected to the characters instead of just put there for what seems like the sake of it, which was why I had an issue with the fifth movie. Sure it may have been explained at the beginning here, but it does seem a bit too convenient.
And again we see the work of Hoffman, from creating evidence that Strahm was behind the killings, to orchestrating the demise of Amanda, and being a spectator to the investigation where he is on both sides of the law. We also see the flaws in Hoffman that Jigsaw would find distasteful, in his attitude to the victims, and his apparent blood lust coupled with arrogance, especially in a heated exchange with Amanda.
Of course the revelation that Perez survived has him on his toes, and there is suspense as to whether he would get caught, or find a way out. But it turns out to be John's ex-wife, Jill, who is given the task to stop him. Whether she knew he had knowledge of Amanda's involvement with the death of her son, or whether Jigsaw knew, is open to interpretation (as it is with all the sequels).
In the end, he escapes the infamous "bear trap" attached to his head, and it's apparent that there will be at least one more film. While I didn't have a problem with the movie ending like that, as at this point I enjoyed the yearly October release of a SAW movie, as it gave me an opportunity to watch them all over again. But at the same time, I still didn't know how much more they can squeeze out of the series. I had been proved wrong many times, as there would always be a new twist. But I couldn't help but think maybe they should just wrap this up.
Now that I watched it again, with the knowledge of what came afterwards, I wish that they just ended the series right there, even taking the ending of the final movie, and sticking it at the end of this film. I will have plenty of time to explain this in a future blog post concerning "Saw: The Final Chapter".
I mentioned earlier about things I never picked up on in previous viewings until now. Another part involved how the FBI agents working on the case suspected Hoffman, without the aid of gaining knowledge from Strahm's investigation in the previous film. Sure he used the "inferior" blades that Jigsaw mentioned in the fifth film, and there was the residue coming from the fingerprint of Strahm. And even Perez told him everyone knew who he was while Hoffman stabbed her. But there was one more scene that not only had I not seen, but I never knew of its existence until now.
I've made a habit of letting the credits roll to the end after watching the previous installments, just to hear the music itself. But what caught me by surprise was an extra scene where Amanda is walking to a locked door, and talking to the daughter of Jeff through the keyhole, during the events of the third and fourth movie. She warns her not to believe the man who saves her, which of course turns out to be Hoffman.
That scene, for want of a more dignified term, blew my mind. The fact that I own the DVD and watched it in the lead up to the release of the sixth and seventh film, not once have I ever thought to check the very end of the disc. I'm still gobsmacked.
In the SAW 5 blog post, I talked about the use of instrumentals instead of the rock songs during the credits. Funny that I should talk about the music videos included on the SAW 6 DVD, which include videos from Mushroomhead, Suicide Silence, Memphis May Fire (admittedly I've never heard of the last two bands) and this one from Hatebreed.
Oh yes, there will be.....well, if you don't know the answer to that, then check the beginning of the other blog posts.
 |
| I surprise myself sometimes. |
Back then.....
Yeah it's a good film. I'm surprised how they're still able to connect it to the other sequels. But why do I get the feeling the next sequel will either never happen, or will just end up crap?
And now.....
As I mentioned in the SAW 5 blog post, I thought this was better than its previous installment. After tonight's viewing, along with its relevance to the ongoing story threads in the whole series, it's no better or worse than the last movie. Nevertheless, I still enjoyed the movie, and I noticed a few things that I never picked up on until now.
In the blog entry for SAW 5, I made a point where the five people involved in the burning building deaths were in no way connected to any of the main characters of the series. But it turns out they were all investigated by FBI agent Strahm. While it does seem a little forced, because of the open narrative of the SAW series, you have to make allowances for strange twists, whether they make sense or not, or whether they're just convenient.
Like the fact that FBI agent Perez actually survived the exploding doll trap in the fourth movie, or that Amanda was an accomplice to the man who caused the death of John and Jill's unborn son in the fifth movie, which was known to Hoffman, who blackmailed her with this information with the envelope that had Amanda's name on it in the third movie.
 |
| "The game comes full circle".....whether the story does depends on the demand for another sequel. |
These are the types of twists where you either buy into them, or you think they're a whole load of rubbish. But I think credit is due to whoever the writers were of these installments, for actually tying up loose trends, some of which created with no explanation at all. Like the envelope Jill drops off at the hospital. It's an obvious nod to a potential sequel, but depending on the viewer, that would either be enticing, or just illicit groans.
The film has the usual characteristics of a SAW movie; an opening game with an inventive way of pitting people against each other, a lead player in a game who happens to be connected to Jigsaw (an insurance executive who denied to help John with his cancer problem), tests that put other people's lives on the line, and a twist that befalls onto him, which was hinted at throughout the movie, but only lead to the bait and switch as to what family he was aiming to save.It even included a reporter that was briefly shown at a press conference in the last film.
Again it has all the elements of the SAW series, it's around the 90 minute mark, so it's easy to digest, and at least it involved a game where the unwilling participant is actually connected to the characters instead of just put there for what seems like the sake of it, which was why I had an issue with the fifth movie. Sure it may have been explained at the beginning here, but it does seem a bit too convenient.
And again we see the work of Hoffman, from creating evidence that Strahm was behind the killings, to orchestrating the demise of Amanda, and being a spectator to the investigation where he is on both sides of the law. We also see the flaws in Hoffman that Jigsaw would find distasteful, in his attitude to the victims, and his apparent blood lust coupled with arrogance, especially in a heated exchange with Amanda.
Of course the revelation that Perez survived has him on his toes, and there is suspense as to whether he would get caught, or find a way out. But it turns out to be John's ex-wife, Jill, who is given the task to stop him. Whether she knew he had knowledge of Amanda's involvement with the death of her son, or whether Jigsaw knew, is open to interpretation (as it is with all the sequels).
In the end, he escapes the infamous "bear trap" attached to his head, and it's apparent that there will be at least one more film. While I didn't have a problem with the movie ending like that, as at this point I enjoyed the yearly October release of a SAW movie, as it gave me an opportunity to watch them all over again. But at the same time, I still didn't know how much more they can squeeze out of the series. I had been proved wrong many times, as there would always be a new twist. But I couldn't help but think maybe they should just wrap this up.
Now that I watched it again, with the knowledge of what came afterwards, I wish that they just ended the series right there, even taking the ending of the final movie, and sticking it at the end of this film. I will have plenty of time to explain this in a future blog post concerning "Saw: The Final Chapter".
 |
| Let me put it this way: I still don't own a copy of Saw 7. |
I mentioned earlier about things I never picked up on in previous viewings until now. Another part involved how the FBI agents working on the case suspected Hoffman, without the aid of gaining knowledge from Strahm's investigation in the previous film. Sure he used the "inferior" blades that Jigsaw mentioned in the fifth film, and there was the residue coming from the fingerprint of Strahm. And even Perez told him everyone knew who he was while Hoffman stabbed her. But there was one more scene that not only had I not seen, but I never knew of its existence until now.
I've made a habit of letting the credits roll to the end after watching the previous installments, just to hear the music itself. But what caught me by surprise was an extra scene where Amanda is walking to a locked door, and talking to the daughter of Jeff through the keyhole, during the events of the third and fourth movie. She warns her not to believe the man who saves her, which of course turns out to be Hoffman.
That scene, for want of a more dignified term, blew my mind. The fact that I own the DVD and watched it in the lead up to the release of the sixth and seventh film, not once have I ever thought to check the very end of the disc. I'm still gobsmacked.
 |
| Shawnee Smith (aka. Amanda).....yikes. |
And on a final note.....
In the SAW 5 blog post, I talked about the use of instrumentals instead of the rock songs during the credits. Funny that I should talk about the music videos included on the SAW 6 DVD, which include videos from Mushroomhead, Suicide Silence, Memphis May Fire (admittedly I've never heard of the last two bands) and this one from Hatebreed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)