Movie Review -- It: Chapter 2

  Has it really been two years since the remake of It came out? I remember it being a well-put together picture with plenty of good scares, some good acting, and a charmingly creepy setting. I also remember that it was only half the story told in the novel (and TV miniseries), showing only the Loser Club's harrowing struggle against a supernatural evil in 1989 as children. So how does the modern-day second outing stack up against the retro one? Let's find out.

  It is 2016 and a new string of It-pattern murders are popping up which prompts Loser Club member Mike to gather the other, now grown-up losers (who are all rich now) back to Derry, Maine, to finish off the killer clown Pennywise once and for all. It's a story that ties in nicely with the first with a lot of flashbacks. However, a lot of these flashbacks end up retconning the previous film, railroading in a bunch of the kids' confrontations with It that weren't shown or even mentioned in the first It. But that's nothing compared to It: Chapter 2's biggest problem: it's way too long! If you're going to make me pay to sit still in one place for nearly three hours then you'd better deliver something that'll make my resisting of going to the bathroom that whole time worth it (or perhaps an intermission like the good old days?). Instead there's not one but two generic inspirational speeches, each Loser has to go searching for old tokens, the ending takes forever to wrap up, and the characters all split up and confront It alone... twice! They could have easily trimmed 45 minutes off and the film would have been better for it.

  Tone is everything in a horror movie and the tone in It: Chapter 2 is sometimes unfocused. Don't get me wrong, there are a bunch of decent scares, Pennywise's kills are rather brutal, and the visual design and effects on the film's various monsters are freaky. But unlike the last film comedy pervades almost every scene. Oftentimes just as something frightening is about to happen somebody does something that ends up being funny rather than unsettling, thus ruining the tone. In other scenes the jokes work fine – and they're downright hilarious at times – but overall It: Chapter 2 is far less scary than its predecessor.

  What Chapter 2 does copy from the first is a great cast that all have good chemistry together. While Bill Skarsgard does just as good a job as before in the role of Pennywise, new faces such as Jessica Chastain, James McAvoy, and Bill Hader give splendid performances of their own. Stephen King himself even makes a cameo appearance as a pawnshop owner who is disappointed in novels that have lousy endings. Henry Bowers, the bully from the last film, returns to menace the Losers some more but his presence in this film is kind of wasted.

  I also couldn't help but notice that there's some gaps in logic. For example it's established early on that since she previously saw It's deadlights Beverly knows how each of the Losers is going to die. But after the first death, this ability never comes into play nor is it mentioned again. Also, we see that in 2016 body parts are washing up in Derry's river and has made front page news in that town. So why has it not made national news? And when you think about it It kind of sucks at catching people. He wastes time messing around with his prey and as long as you can run and avoid falling for his tricks then you'll be fine, even if you're just a kid.

  Regardless, It: Chapter 2 is simply OK, a far cry from the one we got two years ago. It runs for much too long, the script could have used another edit or two, and the experience isn't as scary as the one before it. Basically a handful of good scares, a bunch of laughs, and a few standout performances are all that keep this one afloat.

Grade:

Movie Review -- Us

  Us. Yes, another movie with an incredibly short and non-descriptive title has been bequeathed unto the general public so that the good people can ask one another “which one is that?” whenever it is mentioned in conversation. So what is Us? Is it as good as the critics say it is? And is this really my 100^th movie review? Let's take a look.

  Written and directed by Jordan Peele, Us follows Adelaide Wilson, her husband, and her two children who vacation at their beach house in Santa Cruz where Adelaide once had a frightening experience as a child. Her fears come back to haunt her as the Wilsons are attacked by doppelgangers of themselves known as the Tethered. Think of it as The Purge meets a zombie apocalypse movie, and you've got a pretty clear idea of what Us is like. As far as home-invasion movies go, it's decent; it's only towards the end where Us starts to lose steam. Although some of the kills come a little too easily, the film has a good amount of tension and suspense, especially during its opening scene. It also has a commendable sense of humour, with quick little jokes poking fun at the situation the characters find themselves in, and yet these jokes avoid distracting or clashing with the scene's tone.

  However one moment that really didn't work was the pointless twist ending; not only does it add absolutely nothing to the story but it makes no sense whatsoever. Without spoiling too much, let's just say that this twist completely screws up some backstory.

  That's not the only plothole here; Us has loads of them! How did the Tethered know how to mimic their true counterparts? Are they psychic? What's up with their names? What is their goal? Why did some attack the Wilsons but not the others? There's also a Bible verse that's referenced several times throughout, but the film doesn't have the courtesy of actually letting the audience know what it is. It's something I had to look up myself and since doing so this verse's significance to Us is just as dubious as before. Perhaps Jordan Peele simply tried cramming too many ideas into one film.

  The acting is done rather well. Winston Duke gives a fun performance as the enthusiastic try-hard dad, Gabe. And of course Lupita Nyong'o is riveting in her dual role as Adelaide and her doppelganger, Red.

  All in all, Us is alright but it's not as glorious as the critics say it is. From the reviews I've glanced at it seems as if critics are projecting grander themes upon the film that aren't truly there (at least, not in any substantial or meaningful way). The only argument I got from Us is that we need to support the proliferation of firearms – seriously, there isn't a single gun in this whole movie! But no, Us is an adequately entertaining thriller with a good sense of humour, decent acting, and professional direction but also a script riddled with logical fallacies that would have benefited from another round of editing. I can see why it'd be easy to fall in love with it if you don't think too hard about it... but you know me by now. We've been over this one hundred times, you know.

Grade:

Movie Review -- Overlord

  Remember Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter? Wasn't that movie cool? Don't you wish there were more historical-fantasy movies like that that didn't take themselves so seriously and instead just focused on being fun? Fear not, comrades, because Overlord has got you covered. Covered in the blood and guts of Nazi scum, that is!

  Overlord takes place on the eve of D-Day and follows a squad of American paratroopers dropping into France to assist with the Allied invasion at Normandy. After an exhilarating opening scene – that reminds me of Band of Brothers, but way more scary – the men find themselves approaching their objective, but they soon stumble upon a more gruesome discovery. Gruesomeness and violence follows, the good old typical Nazisploitation stuff.

  Julius Avery directs this frightening adventure and he does horror well. The tone shifts handily between exciting action, mild humour, uneasy suspense, and gripping tension in this film that carries itself seriously but not too seriously. Overlord is also a rather gory film and its special effects get the point across nicely.

  Needless to say, a film about Nazi supersoldier experiments gone wrong requires a little suspension of disbelief. Overlord isn't a historically accurate film by any means, especially when you consider that (A) the US Army in this film isn't segregated, (B) it apparently only took these troops three months to go from unenlisted civilians to fully trained, combat-ready soldiers on the front lines, and (C) wounded troops are seemingly left on the front lines to just tough it out.

  The film also leaves us with a few unanswered questions, such as why paratroopers in the middle of enemy territory aren't being quiet. What happened to the experimented people that weren't in the church, like the aunt? Or was the aunt the only one the Germans released? Why did that German motorcyclist return to his comrades when he knew he really shouldn't have?

  In spite of these shortcomings, Overlord remains a thrilling experience well worth the time of anyone who likes horror movies, war movies, science fiction movies, B-movies, or any combination thereof. It's a lot of fun and it's the closest we're going to get to a Wolfenstein movie. I try not to publish really short reviews like this but there really isn't much else to say about Overlord. It's a good film and if it sounds interesting to you then you oughta watch it.

Grade:

Movie Review -- Halloween (2018)

  Happy Halloween, folks. It's that time of year when greedy kids are given candy, when lazy adults sit around and watch horror movies, and it's also the night he came home!... for the tenth time. Yes, this year we get to see the eleventh film (Michael Myers wasn't in the third movie) of the legendary Halloween franchise of slasher films, and I'm psyched. For over a decade I've been a fan of the Halloween movies and this is the first one I've gotten to see in theatres. The Halloween films are infamous for their nonsensical chronology – in fact this is the third film in the franchise simply entitled “Halloween” – but can the 2018 instalment make you forget about all that and keep you entertained while honouring the series' legacy? Let's find out!

  So the deal with Halloween (2018) is that it is the only film taking place after the 1978 original Halloween (making this at least the fifth possible timeline in the series. I'm writing an article on this!) and is appropriately set 40 years later. As such the only recurring characters from the first film are Laurie Strode and Michael Myers and it suits this film just fine. This film more-or-less serves as a return to form for the series. Gone is the weird cult stuff, gone are the unimaginative backstories, and gone are the reality shows and celebrity guest appearances. Halloween is a back to basics approach to slasher movies which doesn't quite nail the chilling atmosphere of the original but it at least tries. I'd say its tone and (to some extent) story are comparable to Halloween (1978) and Halloween 4 (1988).    After 40 years in a mental institution Michael escapes and continues his murderous ways, but fortunately Laurie Strode, the sole survivor of his 1978 killing spree, has been spending the past 40 years meticulously preparing for his return, much to the detriment of her personal life. It's a film that includes plenty of nods to the original as well as some unique setups of its own, such as a killing in a yard covered in motion-activated lights or Michael hiding in a room full of mannequins. It's a film full of tense scenes, from the opening scene to the final battle. This is helped by the uneasy musical scoring from John Carpenter himself, solidly building upon the established classic sound of the series. All this combines to make this year's Halloween one of the scariest entries of the series. Rob Zombie's two Halloween films (2007 and 2009) were pretty scary but they suffered from excessive violence and gore whereas this new one has the benefit of not being so over the top (though it is brutal at times).

  As mentioned before, there are two returning characters. The first, Laurie, is marvellously played once again by Jamie Lee Curtis. A slightly unhinged badass, she's let her 1978 experience drive her into obsession. Taking on an air of creepiness similar to Michael's in the first film, she's now a grandmother who will do anything to protect her family from the masked killer. Nick Castle returns to the role of Michael Myers after 40 years in a chilling, silent performance. I like how the film acknowledges that Myers has aged but without showing his full face. After all these years Michael is still a creatively freaky and effective murderer. The other character of note is Dr. Ranbir Sartain (played by Haluk Bilginer), Myers' psychiatrist. He's the obsessed, intense doctor who knows Michael too well. In the words of Laurie, he's basically the new Loomis... sort of.

  So that's Halloween, the one one from 2018. It's a thrilling addition to the franchise which pays homage to what made the classic entries in the series so great to begin with. While not as great as the original that started it all, I would say Halloween is possibly the best sequel of this undying franchise. Much like its star killer, Halloween will take you straight to the point and leave you speechless.

Grade:

Movie Review -- A Quiet Place

  There's enough horror movies out there that are loud and in-your-face with cheap jump scares, but every once in a while there's one that comes out that emphasizes its atmosphere by making the audience focus on every little sound and movement. A Quiet Place is one of those films.

  A Quiet Place follows a family of four as they survive in a world ravaged by mysterious blind monsters that hunt by sound, killing anyone who makes all but the faintest of noises. This is especially challenging when (1) the mother of the family, Evelyn, is pregnant and (2) the daughter, Regan, is deaf. So as you can imagine, there's not a whole lot of spoken dialogue in this film, perhaps two solid minutes' worth. The rest is all done in sign language. And yet the film still produces a decent amount of drama thanks to its fine writing and capable acting. In the moments when the film isn't leaving you on the edge of your seat the plot portrays what it means to be a responsible parent in difficult times.

  While the characters are nothing we haven't seen before, they are well portrayed. Interestingly, I don't recall ever learning their names so I had to look them up. Writer/director/star John Krasinski brings his everyman sensibility to the role of Lee, the dad trying to keep his family safe. The other character of note is Regan, the rebellious teenager who is actually played by deaf actress Millicent Simmonds.

  Krasinski's direction makes A Quiet Place a film that's sleek, concise, and tense. During the stalking scenes you might find yourself keeping as silent as the characters onscreen.

  However, there are a few plotholes that may disrupt your experience. First and foremost, what are these monsters and where are they from? One could argue that since this is a film told from the perspective of one family that we're not supposed to know all the details of such overarching things. But that doesn't keep me from wondering who the elderly people in the woods were. Or why there was a nail sticking out of the top of the stairs. Or where the leaking water in the barn was coming from.

  Regardless, A Quiet Place manages to be an entertaining flick with a frighteningly original premise. It reminds me of last year's high-concept thriller, Split, though between the two of them I would recommend A Quiet Place for its more thrilling setup and more heartfelt story. Enjoy the silence.

Grade:

Movie Review Repost -- World War Z (2013)

So guess what: I'm in the middle of packing/moving again, which means that I haven't had much time to spare for writing lately. Sorry about that. I've got ideas for new material, but it may be a week or two before I can get any of them written and posted. In the meantime let's take a look back at the review I wrote in 2013 for the action-horror flick World War Z. I liked it. I know a lot of people didn't think much of it and I don't fully understand why. It was alright; perhaps an In Defence Of article is in order?

  Is it just me or are there, like, a ton of zombie shows nowadays? I wonder why people like them. Is it because these stories demonstrate how fragile civilization is? Or do people like seeing mindless walkers being shot by the hundreds? Rejoice, zombie fans; World War Z has both of these elements!

  World War Z's story follows Gerry Lane (Brad Pitt), a UN inspector, in his worldwide search to find and halt the rapid spread of a rabies-like virus that turns people into zombies. This highly suspenseful plot wastes no time getting straight to the action; zombies appear within the movie's first five minutes. Conversely, one thing you might notice about World War Z is that there's actually a lot of pointless stuff. There's pointless locations (South Korea), pointless characters (Thomas and Dr. Fassbach), and pointless plotlines (Gerry's family having to leave the navy ship). However, even though the movie is nearly two hours, the story never feels like it's dragging on and manages to be entertaining throughout. One thing that you might find disappointing is that the climax isn't as impressive as the rest of the film might condition you to expect. It's hard to explain; let's just say that you may be surprised at where the film decides to end.

  There's only a handful of characters that get any significant fleshing-out, but the acting is good from one end to the other, especially from Brad Pitt. Just remember to stay away from him if a zombie apocalypse ever does break out. Pretty much everyone around him ends up dying; he's like a bad luck charm. But to be fair that's partially because he's surrounded by clumsy characters who take forever to learn basic things like not making noise or how to not shoot yourself.

  As you've probably seen from the trailers, there are some impressive long shots from this film's action scenes. Unfortunately some of the fight scenes (not all, but some) suffer from the menace that is shaky cam. (Also the 3D in this movie is pointless. Don't bother with it.) And like so many other zombie apocalypse shows we don't learn where or how the zombie virus originated. Also, why don't the humans just let the zombies starve to death? Or would that be double death, I guess? Whatever.

  Anyways, World War Z is a fine addition to the zombie horror genre. For a movie about a zombie apocalypse it's relatively bloodless, which is fine if you're like me and prefer suspense to gore. Both horror and action fans will be able to enjoy this film.

Rating: three stars out of five.

Movie Review Repost -- Apollo 18 (2011)

All Hallows Eve approaches. I'm sorry I haven't got anything new for you this weekend, so I figured I should look back at one of the few horror movie reviews I did in my early days of reviewing (and it's not the greatest review I've ever written). This is the sci-fi found footage film Apollo 18. It was mediocre and didn't leave much of an impression on me. I've not seen it since and I've barely thought about it since. So I guess my opinions are unchanged...

  The summer is at an end and last weekend I tried to fit in one more movie viewing. I chose Apollo 18, a horror/sci-fi flick set in the early seventies about the supposed last lunar mission.

  This movie is filmed in found-footage style, meaning that the cinematography is similar to grainy, staticy late-sixties video camera footage, so get used to seeing cameras malfunction and flicker around and go offline; it happens every five minutes. I can't help but wonder if that was even necessary. Anyways, don't expect to see a masterpiece of film here. The plot is very cliched and unoriginal and somewhat predictable. The film has a noticeably slow start as well as a few slow moments throughout.

  What did I like about this movie? Well the special effects look great, but with the grainy, low-res footage, making good looking special effects on this film couldn't have been that difficult. The acting is better than average, but the actors' best efforts are inhibited by the underdeveloped characters. By the end of the film you still won't really know that much about the three characters.

  During those slow boring parts, you'll find yourself thinking of plotholes and other weird stuff. Like why did Commander Walker want to be saved even though five minutes earlier he didn't want to go back to Earth fearing he'd infect the whole planet? And how come the aliens attacked on this mission but not the other moon missions? Unless the producers... And then it hits you: you're watching a hippie movie! Think about it, the pieces of the puzzle are all there: faked moon landings, the government being portrayed as evil, indigenous creatures fighting back (AKA environmentalism/anti-racism), technology being portrayed as useless, the USSR being depicted in a sympathetic manner...

  Wow. I've got to go warn people of this. Meanwhile, you should stay away from this crazy movie unless you really want to kill some brain cells. (And to think I chose this instead of My Idiot Brother!)

Rating: Two stars out of five

Movie Review -- It

  This weekend I saw It, a creepy clown horror movie based on Stephen King's novel of the same name. I've never read the book – nor any Stephen King book, for that matter – though I am somewhat fond of the 1990 miniseries even if it was kind of silly.

  This rendition of It isn't as funny as the previous one (though it's far from humourless), but it is significantly scarier. I don't watch too many modern horror movies, but it seems to me like most of them suck. But It doesn't, and here's why. For one thing the scares feel warranted. Most horror films today bombard the viewer with cheap and spontaneous jump scares to get some kind of reaction. Instead, It only uses jump scares after the proper tone has been set for the given scene. Not only that, but only a fraction of the scares found in this film are of the jumpy, computer-generated type; there's plenty of horrifying imagery and sounds throughout. In fact, the scene that I thought was scariest didn't even have a “Boo!” moment.

  Another thing that sets It apart from most modern horror is that it doesn't dump a load of unlikable characters whom you want to see dead. These characters are very well-acted and even better-written. I feel as is I knew each of these kids in real life when I was a kid. (At one point in life, I was the kid who constantly made “your mom” jokes.) Each of these kids has something up that you want to see resolved. And of course there's the evil clown himself, Pennywise, played by Bill Skarsgard. Needless to say this rendition of him is much creepier than Tim Curry's from 1990. I think it's in the unsettling way he moves about as well as his CG enhancements. It's a welcome update, even if he does kind of suck at catching the kids.

  And of course, when the audience cares about the characters, they'll care about the story. This one's story is more or less the same as the miniseries'. A group of seven outcast kids in a small town are terrorized not just by bullies but also an evil supernatural clown who exploits each of their greatest fears. With themes that deal with growing up, overcoming fear, and maintaining friendships, it's a horror movie that's got heart. The major difference is that the second timeline with the adults fighting It has been jettisoned and presumably left for the sequel.

  One last thing I'd like to mention is the setting. Instead of 1960, the setting's been updated to 1989. I'm guessing it's so that the sequel can take place roughly in the present day. I'm down with that; the late 80's were cooler than the early 60's! While It doesn't exactly hit you over he head with how 80's it is, it does manage to mix in a sweet cleanup montage! (The one thing that would've made that scene complete is Jules Winnfield and Vincent Vega.)

  So that's It, an engaging update of a classic supernatural horror. It hits all the right notes for this type of horror film. Is it the best Stephen King adaptation out there? I have no clue, but based on the ones I've seen I'd say that's no difficult feat. Can't wait for the sequel!

Grade: