ScarTrek

Insane Mexican wrestler brutalizes people before ripping their faces off with his bare hands. Really, nobody watching this expects Tolstoy. But for what it is, a lowbudget slasher flick, it's top stuff.

First of all, the premise. Part homage to the ridiculous luchadore movies of Santo, Blue Demon et al, it's hilarious on paper. Yet in choosing Rey Misterio Sr. for the role, they've made an inspired choice. He's not a 7' monster who towers unbelievably over the protagonists, but a short, squat guy who looks like he really could snap your spine with his bare hands. Clever lighting make his mask highly creepy on top of that, leading to a genuinely menacing presence.

Gorewise, this is a movie about faces being torn off. It's the movie's tagline, it's even on the front of the DVD case and the promo posters. You're teased with it, and when you finally see it, man it's nasty. Double thumbs up to the effects team, peeled faces haven't looked this good since Texas Chainsaw, though at a couple of specific points the blood seemed a little too light in tone and too opaque. It's highlighted further by the contrast with the rest of the movie, when it's that wonderous slick dark blood you expect from a horror these days. El Mascarado himself is pretty much permanently covered in great-looking gore. I'm surprised this movie walked away with only a 15 rating in the UK.

The sets are really something else. Much of the time they're really bordering on the kind of quality expected from a bigbudget Hollywood horror. They get re-used with some consistency, but then considering the setting is a small Mexican town, that's somewhat forgivable.

Acting, there's not much to say except that it's great. The characters start out as stereotypes, but they're really brought to life by a surprisingly solid cast. Unusual for the genre, but certainly not unwelcome. Troma this ain't.

The quality of the directing is a touch inconsistent. Sometimes it feels like a homage to other B-grade slashers, with cheesy PoV shots, camera blur, and other fun clichés, but at other times there's proof that these guys are capable of taking it to another level of quality, with some great twists and unexpected, original scenes. Oh, and some gratuitous softcore thrown in too, and played entirely for laughs, which actually works. If they'd stuck with one direction or the other, this would have turned out a cult classic. A little too scary to be funny, a little too funny to be truly scary.

Sound is the real department where issues arise. The music is fantastic, with authentic Mexican tunes on the DVD menu and across the opening credits, and the general score is mood-enhancing without being intrusive. But this is some atrocious dubbing. A constant re-use of El Mascarado growling, regular tinny sound effects, and people sounding far off and distant when they're supposed to be 3 feet offscreen, it's a bit of a shame, the sound lacks the kind of punch the action deserves.

Still, this is definitely one of the better slashers I've seen in the past few years. It's silly fun in parts, crafts some great chilling moments and has more than it's fair share of gorebuckets thrown in. And really, who can resist seeing Rey Misterio Sr. as a murderous psychopath? If you like slashers, see this movie. I give it 8/10.

I never liked people who proclaim "the original is always best". I also tend to dislike people who view all things Japanese as being automatically superior to all things western. So it's with great trepidation that I find myself saying that the original is the best, and Hollywood massacred this movie.

2003's Ju-On: The Grudge succeeded because of it's low-key nature. There were no extravagant effects, no musical build-ups (in fact almost no music at all, save a sombre piano piece that's used sparingly), no "jump" scares, no cliché'd "haunted house" setting with creaking floorboards in the dead of night, the whole feel made it almost seem more like a documentary. And when you can almost believe a horror movie is actually happening, that's when it'll scare the pants off you.

The Grudge (2004 remake) seems to have completely ignored all of this. It's unfair to blame Hollywood specifically, since Takashi Shimizu was responsible for this movie as much as the original, but it's obvious this movie is aimed at an entirely different audience, apparently one that's many IQ points lower, or so they seem to think. Give us Westerners at least a little credit, please.

Gone is the subtlety of seeing a figure move past a window that the main character doesn't see. Gone is the subtlety of seeing stark horror happen in a mundane home in the middle of a bright, sunny day. In it's place is a buildup of generic "creepy" music thirty seconds before every attack, plenty of belief-defying CGI effects, "spooky" dark houses with creaking floorboards, and a pointless loud jump-scare every few minutes. This is a movie for American teenagers with ADD, with nothing to recommend it over any of a dozen other low-grade Hollywood horror movies of the past half-decade.

It's not all bad though. On the plus side, it didn't carry over the needless complexity of the original's chronological disorder. There's still a few scenes showing what happened at different times in the past, but nothing like the confusion that a couple of scenes in the original caused. And thankfully, despite the complete (and in my opinion, terrible) overhaul to the style of the movie, the actual subject matter is treated respectfully. Gellar doesn't "pull a Buffy" and start kicking butt, or anything so trite as that, the story follows the original remarkably well, with quite a few scene-for-scene remakes in there.

It's just a shame that all the impact of the scares are lost by the bland, uninteresting setups. See it if you've got nothing better to do, but don't expect miracles. Fans of the original, just stay well clear.

Of all the DVDs in my collection, there is only a very small handfull that I've watched more often than Blade II. I can explain my love of the movie very simply. It's a huge, over-the-top, indulgent, immature comic-book/cartoon brought into live action, packed onto a rollercoaster that careens along wildly from start to finish.

What a ride.

The action is the first thing anyone will notice. Mainly because once it starts, it pretty much doesn't stop. Everything is slightly exaggerated, everyone pulls off moves that should be impossible. But the cast pull it off with such style, that you barely need to suspend your disbelief. Snipes is excellent as a physical actor, Perlman has a classy Lee Marvin style to him. Goss, who I'll forever remember as a "teen heartthrob" back when I was a kid, surprised the hell out of me with some extremely competent fighting. His brutal, straight-to-the-point streetfighting style impresses, turning the UK's version of Justin Timberlake of the early 90's into one of the most physically threatening antagonists I've seen in the past decade of movies. Even Kris Kristofferson gives someone a good head-stomping. If you're worried this will consist of a couple of vampires standing 10 feet apart and firing at each other, a la Underworld, have no fear. This is far more ferocious and much more entertaining.

The special effects are integral to this. For the most part, they hold up. The action looks stylized and unique, not only due to the massive mix of unconventional styles used (listen to Snipes' commentary on the DVD as he reels out a list of 9 or 10 styles he uses in a single fight sequence as they happen), but also due to the "L-Cam", which lets the camera woosh around the battleground in a way never before seen (but seen since in Spider-Man, the effect used to follow his webswinging through the streets). The CGI holds up for the most part. In combat, it enables the crazy cartoony action del Toro was looking for, and it really works. It's not QUITE over the top, but pushes it. Monster effects are top-notch though. The Reapers in particular were enough to unsettle even me, a hardened veteran of the worst Video Nasties the 70's had to offer. Many subtle uses of CGI are dotted throughout, and the movie makes no attempt to showcase them, which makes them very effective. There's only one real duff moment, which is a fight scene taking place in front of a wall of lights, a horrible decision, as lighting is one of the main reasons CGI often looks unrealistic.

But it's not all fighting. There's a nice dollop of humour, which director Guillermo del Toro understood perfectly, and Snipes pulled off without a hitch. The characters in this movie are "cool", they're calm, collected, never have a hair out of place. So when they throw out a witty one-liner at the most unexpected of moments, it plays off the "straight guys" perfectly. Yet this doesn't undercut the drama. Admittedly, it's due to the physical nature of most of the drama, but that's a matter of semantics. It doesn't change the fact that the undercurrent of humour fails to lessen the severity of the situation, or three brilliant, emotional deaths (including what is presently my favourite villain death ever).

The plot is nice and tight, for the most part. There are definately moments where the more observant will stop to wonder, but there's no time for that, the movie just moves too fast. And that's perhaps the one thing that will turn many people off this movie. If you don't like action, and you don't like fast-paced movies, you'll be in a nightmare of rushed-over plot points and blurred secondary characters whizzing by in the background. For people who just want some fun though, who cares about the backstory of a character who accomplishes little and dies after 30 minutes of screentime? Many characters are there solely to die and further the plot. You don't notice, the rest of the characters are too damned cool to take your eyes off of.

Unless you like your movies grounded firmly in reality (if you thought The Matrix was a bunch of sillyness, stay away), or hate action movies in general, hunt this one down. I'd strongly recommend picking it up on DVD in fact, as the two audio commentary tracks are both utterly hilarious, yet highly informative at the same time, a rare thing.

The Addams Family are one of the more recognisable families in TV history. With that in mind, let's skip the introductions and get straight to the chase.

The performances in this movie are superb. It's a black, black comedy, and as such, it requires a certain kind of actor. The kind who has the right look, the perfect comedic timing, and the ability to deliver lines so deadpan it almost hurts.

Raul Julia, Anjelica Huston, and a young Christina Ricci somehow ALL manage to deliver. They're truly a delight to watch, delivering the most macabre lines without even coming close to cracking a smile, yet having me in stitches every time. Even Christopher Lloyd, playing a far more energetic character, manages to bring in a maniacal edge to the performance. I don't think there's an actor in the movie who doesn't understand the role they play.

The script is great material for them to work with too, extremely witty, rarely if ever falling on it's face, and complemented with some fantastic sets. And let's not forget the music. From the legendary theme tune, to the harpsichord jingles accompanying the visual gags, to the booming organs during the heavier moments, it's spot-on. The whole movie works as one to capture *THE* Addams atmosphere, macabre as it's ever been.

Sure, there's a plot too, but while it drives the movie on, you'd watch this movie for the wonderful theme, not for an intriguing plotline.

It's a classic, and you're doing yourself a disservice if you haven't seen it, or if you think you're too sensible for this kind of movie.

Bad acting, awful hair, horrible plot, cheesy action, hokey characters.

Still reading? Good. My brother picked this movie up for me on DVD, because he knows of my love of horror movies. My first thoughts as I inserted the disc was that it'd be a cheesy, laughable pile of 80's horror rubbish. So I was in for a pleasant surprise. If you can get past the initial presentation of the movie (it feels every bit as low-budget as it is), you'll find it to be creepy, intriguing, and above all, great fun. The puppets themselves could have been a whole lot worse. The effects are hardly Lord Of The Rings, but through a strange combination of live-action and extremely well-animated stop-motion, the puppets don't make you cringe every time they show up on screen. They're probably better actors than some of the live actors even, it's difficult to tell who's more wooden. But it's hardly a character-driven story. It's an unusual story nontheless, and it definitely interested me enough to watch it right through - and then pick up the first sequel!

If you ever saw the movie Child's Play, with which comparisons are inevitable, you'll know already whether you can suspend your disbelief enough to enjoy a movie about killer puppets. If you can, and don't mind horrific 80's haircuts, I'd strongly suggest giving this one a rental, you could do a lot worse.

Alright, to start with, I'll go on record as saying I enjoyed the original movie. That's important for a moment's time.

I think the best way of describing this movie is that the producers took Blair Witch, and remade the movie to appeal to the MTV generation.

What do I mean by that? Well, the first movie had a very deliberate style of horror. It was rooted in the grainy realism of the whole thing, which felt so realistic because of how the movie was produced (most of the time, the actors weren't acting, they genuinely WERE so scared). The horror was not about what you could see, but what you COULDN'T see.

Of course, in today's fast-food quick-fix world, subtlety like that just doesn't sell. The original movie The Haunting was a genuine classic, a horror movie based entirely around sound. The remake was a CG special FX-laden snorefest without the slightest scare. This movie is much the same thing. It seems that people today don't want horror, they want to see a big ugly computer-rendered monster on screen ripping people apart. The first movie had none of that, so when it had been hyped up, everyone went to see the movie expecting this. When they got a subtle and genuinely creepy movie instead, they complained, it wasn't blatant and dumbed-down enough for them. I know I sound like some artfag movie critic who wants to sound like he's above everyone else, I'm not, I'm just a semi-intelligent guy who loves horror movies. I love a dumb horror movie if it's just plain fun instead. Sadly, this one isn't, it's just dumb.

So that, and the huge profits the first movie made, seem to be the reason this movie exists. Atmosphere is stripped away, and replaced with a bodycount. Surely the kids would lap it up, the people who hated the first one for not having blatant visuals and scares would love this one, it's much more in line with movies like Scream, which is today's youth's idea of horror? Correct. It's almost universal that everyone who liked this movie hated the first one too. The people who liked both tend to be people who just enjoyed the mythos and setting. I'm almost one of those people.

The plot's been outlined many times, so let's get down to business. The characters are a horrible bunch. Stereotypical goth girl who hangs out in a graveyard, is constantly bitchy and depressed with snappy comebacks, and thinks she's psychic. Token Wiccan girl, because thanks to Buffy, they're trendy these days. She's another walking stereotype. Barely 5 minutes go by without her pointing out how witches aren't all evil and they're unfairly persecuted. Her wiccanism is really forced down the viewer's throat. Then there's the wizecracking, goofy crazy streetwise guy who's all about beer and pot. The cast so far seems specifically DESIGNED for the MTV generation. Then throw in a couple of slightly older folks, who feel rather out of place in the movie. I'm not sure why they were put in, their relationship works great in the plotline, but their characters just don't sit with the rest of the whole movie.

The method of storytelling wants to be edgy. Tell it with flashbacks and chronological jumps, fill us in on backstory as we go. Whatever. This is a horror movie, it's impossible to build suspense for what's about to happen by telling us how someone's life was two years earlier, or letting us know that they survive to the end of the movie. It's mildly confusing for most of the film, and does far more harm than interest. Should really have stuck with a more conventional style.

And the nature of the horror itself? It's largely a matter of personal preference, but most people with an IQ above 70 and an age larger than their shoe size just isn't scared by "OMG A DEAD BODY!!!". CG special effects and really blatant, laboured horror are the order of the day here. No doubt groups of fratboys or alternative metallers hanging around with popcorn and soda will be cheering on every death and consider this a cinematic masterpiece. With a rock/nu-metal soundtrack, it seems to be the kind of demographic this is marketed at anyway. People who prefer slightly more intelligence from their movies will be left rolling their eyes at the "suspenseful buildup" that you can see coming a mile off every time.

I sound like I'm really giving this movie a panning, and hate it. In some respects, I don't mean to. In others, I do. I love horror movies. Some of them take themselves seriously and succeed. Others don't take themselves seriously in the slightest, and they're just fun. This movie wants to take itself very seriously, and falls so flat on it's face that it's not funny. It constantly references the first movie, but if it'd instead referenced itself a couple of times, to let the viewer know they should be having fun instead of trying to be scared, it would have worked a great deal better. Another bad idea, this movie wants to be a scary horror, when it would have been so much more fitting as a silly horror. The characters, effects, scares and even subject matter all seem absolutely perfect for some kind of self-referential parody. But nope.

I guess that's the core of why I didn't enjoy the movie. It tried too hard, and tried to reinvent a great horror movie into a dumbed-down but still entirely serious revision.

I'm a fair person though. The characters may have been hopelessly cliche'd, but the actors did a great job. They played what they were given very convincingly. The visuals of the movie were great, the forest and the area most of the movie takes place around (I really wish they'd used lower-quality, TV-style cameras for the mock documentaries at the start though, another example of it taking itself too seriously). The soundtrack was out of place for a horror movie, but it's still good music in it's own right. And finally, the Blair Witch setting kicks ass. I've seen the movies and played the games, and it's a great setting with an incredible backstory that's weaved together through all these different mediums. This movie doesn't let down on that front. Shame it does on all the rest.

Overall verdict, if you're willing to turn your brain off for a couple of hours to be only mildly impressed, or if you've got a short attention span and hated the first movie, go rent. Otherwise, give it a miss.

**Warning, contains spoilers**

Wow. I just saw the movie twice in two days, which is saying something. But where to begin?

Obviously, the Matrix comparison. Yes, this movie was made first, so calling it a Matrix rip-off is a sign that you should work on pumping up your IQ a few notches. Back to the point, they're similar, but yet so different. What am I talking about? Well, I'd say it's the style.

There's no denying that both movies are stylish. The Matrix actually changed fashion when it was released. Dark City has a wonderful amalgamation of Film Noir and sci-fi, a weird juxtaposition that leads to a visual treat for the viewer. And it sets the movies miles apart. The plots have familiar elements. An artificial reality, subjective to those who are aware of it, an inhuman controlling race, a saviour character who learns to manipulate the reality better than the controllers. Yet they go about them in completely different ways.

The Matrix is an action movie, first and foremost. Dark City is a mishmash of styles, with the old Noir detective mystery being one of the frontrunning feels of the movie. Do yourself a favour if you haven't seen it yet; skip the first two minutes of the movie. It explains a large part of the plot which is uncovered later on anyway, and it's much more satisfying if it's not just handed to you.

The movie has pace, which again is at odds with its mood, yet somehow they work together brilliantly. A dark, dreary night with a fast-moving orchestral piece playing behind it as a character searches for answers, it's not what you'd expect, but it works. It's only heightened by the setting, the Dark City itself, which is a blending of many different architectural styles, though predominantly I was thinking of prohibition-era Chicago. Maybe it was the hats. Whatever, the end result is that it's an attractive movie, and beyond the surface similarities it doesn't feel at all like the Matrix.

Also, I'd like to respond to "mbredeck's" comments. The movie is subtle, and I'd suggest repeated viewing, because you can miss an awful lot, like this person did. He asked a series of questions in his comment, claiming they didn't have answers, yet they did, right there in the movie.

"Why do the bad guys try so hard to kill the protagonist?" When they realise what he's capable of, they don't, they try to capture him. Like they manage during the end. "How can they have so little knowledge of his whereabouts and activities during the story if they are supposed to be observing him?" They observe by pausing the city at midnight, and taking the memories. They don't have surveillance cameras set up everywhere. "The cop has a gun, why don't they have guns?" Well how many times have they had to deal with anyone they'd regard as dangerous? None. "Why don't they all get sucked out into space when they (improbably) break a hole in the wall and see outer space?" There's a blue barrier a distance from the spaceship which marks the "outside" of the ship, presumably what holds in the oxygen. You see the detective and stranger pass through it as they fall, and see it again at the end when the ocean fills up. "Why do we only see them shutting everything down at midnight--wouldn't there still be daylight hours that follow the tunings?" Like the good Doctor says, they control even the Sun. As John does at the end. "If they can tune the whole environment, why do they not use this ability to overcome the hero when they are trying to detain him?" It looks like they need to put their abilities together to do this, and as they're in the machine, not able to see where John is, it'd be impossible. "If the Strangers are a group mind, they would not need to converse with each other the way they do." They have a collective memory, not mind. They act on their own, they just can't remember their own past. "If they designed the machine that changes the environment based on their telepathic powers, why can't they control it as well as the hero, or at least prevent him from using it?" They didn't anticipate the need to stop a human using it, they didn't even believe he could Tune when they found out. As for the level of control, it's one thing that's not explained. Speculating, these things are the size of squids. The human brain is about as large as their entire body. There's a hell of a lot more potential there.

See, the movie is subtle, there's a lot to pick up if you pay attention.

But despite everything I've said about the movie, there's one main point to it. It's fun. If nothing else, you have a bunch of aliens chasing around a guy with psychic powers. And that's just good fun to watch.