Nightmare on Elm Street (2010)

There is no disputing that the original Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) is a classic. Wes Craven did a spectacular job at taking what we hold sacred, which is of course our sleep, and made us terrified of it. He made us afraid to sleep or the burned man will take his revenge.

In 2010 though, Hollywood thought that we were due for Freddy Kruger to hit the big screen again. His last time on the big screen was in 2004 with Freddy VS. Jason and his last solo movie was in 1994 with Wes Craven's New Nightmare. 

If you have never seen or heard of the plot of A Nightmare film, it is about a bunch of kids who whenever they go to sleep start to see a burned man, in a green and red sweater and a glove with knives on it. Eventually the character, known as Freddy, starts to kill them in their dreams which then kills them in real life.

The remake keeps some of the same themes and elements but also expands on a lot of them. For instance, and this will be a SPOILER ALERT. They decided to make him a full blown pedofile. In the original he was a a child murderer pedofile who was let free on a technicality but in this one they went all out with the sick factor, including some of the dialogue as well as showing some pictures he took of the kids (out of focus). This turn for the character was okay but I do not think that it was necessarily needed. It was better to leave the viewer with an imagination of what he did instead of putting the social commentary on justice against pedofiles up front.

Jackie Earle Hayley (Watchman, Shutter Island) does a decent job at playing Freddy but Robert Englund ruined the roll. The rest of the actors in it are just there, not necessarily bringing anything to the story. The audience is just waiting for the next person to die, you just don't care about any of the characters. But that is what these new remakes were trying to accomplish. A high body count with no substance.

There isn't really much to this movie. If I were to choose whether to watch this or the original it is really no contest. But if you are looking to have something on that includes gory deaths as you are making dinner, then feel free to watch this. I only wish that if they are going to try and reboot the franchise again, that they try an add a little more back into the story, make the characters actual characters and create a film that is not only fun but has substance as well.

Grade: D

Genre: Horror

Cast: Jackie Earle Hayley, Rooney Mara, Kyle Gallner

Rated: R for strong bloody horror violence, disturbing images, terror and language

Director: Samuel Bayer

Dead By Dawn: Looking Back at The Evil Dead

The Evil Dead. Even just by saying the film's name: gore and giggles come flooding back. If you're even a mild fan of horror genre, seeing this film is almost a right of passage. An initiation is a better word for it. The fact that this low-budget horror film - made by a group of high school friends - became such a commercial and cultural success just proves that when it comes to the horror genre, The Evil Dead is a pioneer.

37 years after its initial release, On October 15th 1981 at the Redford Theatre, The Evil Dead has spawned two sequels, a reboot, comics, video games, merchandise, a television series and a stage musical. The film shows no signs of succumbing anytime soon.

CONCEPT

A group of friends travel to Tennessee to stay at a cabin in the woods. The previous tenant had conjured up demons by reading from the 'Book of the Dead' (in the sequels it becomes known as the Necronomicon). When a tape's played with the incantation on it, the demons come back to terrorize the friends. Violence, gore and brutality ensue. Especially when the only way to kill your possessed friends is by bodily dismemberment  - and they do not shy away from losing limbs. Sounds pretty amazing right?

"I believe I have made a significant find in the Kandarian ruins, a volume of ancient Sumarian burial practices and funerary incantations. It is entitled "Naturum De Montum", roughly translated: Book of the Dead. The book is bound in human flesh and inked in human blood. It deals with demons and demon resurrection and those forces which roam the forest and dark bowers of Man's domain. The first few pages warn that these enduring creatures may lie dormant but are never truly dead. They may be recalled to active life through the incantations presented in this book. It is through the recitation of these passages that the demons are given license to possess the living."

THE MEN WHO STARTED THE CURSE

Now two names come to mind when thinking about The Evil Dead, and those are of course Sam Raimi and Bruce Campbell. Sam Raimi went on to have a huge career - with directing films like the original Spider-man Trilogy (2002-2007), Drag Me To Hell (2009) and Oz the Great and Powerful (2013).  Bruce Campbell went to star in films like Maniac Cop (1988) and Bubba Ho-Tep (2002). But what these two did was amazing especially since they were both in their 20's. They were able to create a film that has withstood time and was so terrifying that people still remember the first time they watched it.

FILMING

Although made on a shoestring budget of only $350,000, The Evil Dead is spectacular. Especially during the tough filming conditions, which included freezing nights and multiple injuries. Many of the actors were stabbed or thrown into objects during principal photography. Campbell recalls it as "12 weeks of mirthless exercise in agony". While nearing the ending of shooting, the cast and crew started burning the furniture in the house to stay warm. Raimi is known to have abused his actors on set especially Campbell. He said "if everyone was in extreme pain and misery, that would translate into a horror." Many times they would bring in Raimi's brother, Ted Raimi to be a stand in for the actors when they were busy doing something else, mainly because of the tight budget and who better to get free labor from than your brother.

RECEPTION

Raimi had his premiere showing at Detroit's Redford theater because that is where Campbell watched movies as a kid. Audiences were excited and loved the film but they still needed to get a distributor. Raimi was willing to show it to anyone who would watch it. Eventually he was able to show it to Irvin Shapiro, who distributed George A. Romero's Night of the Living Dead among other films. Shapiro loved it and saw the possible of commercial success. Because Shapiro was one of the founders of Cannes film festival he showed it in the 1982 lineup. But, when it received a recommendation from the legendary writer Stephen King, the film's popularity exploded overnight. Because of his approval, as well as many other respected critics, New Line Cinema decided to pick up the film and distribute it.

New Line took a different approach when it came to a domestic release and decided to release the film in theaters and on VHS at the same time. This made it accessible to anyone who wanted to watch it.

RELEASE

When it was first released it received an X rating for substantial graphic horror violence and gore. The MPAA rating helped with its notoriety and it became the highest selling VHS the year it came out. I think that the tree scene helped cement its place in history let alone the rest of the violence. In the UK it was placed on the "Video Nasties" list.  It maintains a 95% approval rating on Rottentomatoes.com and earned $29.4 million dollars at the box office. Everything within the universe of The Evil Dead is iconic from the outfits to the quotes. Even years later it is held in such high esteem as being one of the greats of the horror genre.

Bug (2006)

William Friedkin's psychological thriller Bug is something. I believe that is the best way to describe it. I have seen this movie about 3 or 4 times before and every time I watch it, I keep wanting to find something that I like about it. I mean, this comes from the director of The French Connection, The Exorcist and Killer Joe. There has to be some redeeming factor to this movie. But no matter how hard I search I still cannot find it.

Bug is about a single bartender Agnes (Ashley Judd) who eventually invites a military veteran Peter (Michael Shannon) to stay with her in her hotel apartment. But little does she know that it turns out that Peter believes that he has been put through military experiments, and now is on the run from the government. He also is infected with some sort of parasite (or as he calls them, aphids). I just don't know what to think with this movie. When I had initially saw this on the shelf of Blockbuster I was hoping for maybe a Starship Troopers type of bug movie but instead I got this. I was quite disappointed.

Do not get me wrong. This film is really well done. The acting is top notch. Judd and Shannon work really well together and the chemistry they have just works. Friedkin does a great job here. The problem with this movie is that it just doesn't know what it is. Is it a horror film? Body horror? Psychological thriller? There are so many unanswered questions left at the end that they fail to deliver on. I am all for the audience making up their own minds about a movie but this one is so bizarre and just contradictory of itself, it is hard to see anything beyond what's on the screen. This includes the random cuts of insects that flash on the screen like I am watching the cursed tape from The Ring.

Now I do not know how this movie actually ends up at the climax, but it is so far off the original context of this movie that it is almost like I am watching a something different. I doubt that anyone who is reading this cares about the ending of a 12 year old movie but long story short they commit suicide. By burning themselves. Then cut to black. Roll credits. This movie was a bug movie without any actually bugs in it. Quite boring and anti climatic if you ask me. Just more of a "WTF did I just watch" feeling.

This movie does come in at only 1 hour and 42 minutes which is a godsend because I don't know how I keep making my way back to it. I just see it on a streaming platform and I just decide to re-watch it. Maybe I'm the one who just isn't understanding what this film is trying to bring. Maybe it has to deal with the insecurities that follow our American Veterans when they try to acclimate back into society or eventually coming to terms with your life and realizing what your true purpose is. Either way it's very farfetched. This movie at the end of the day is just about paranoia and manipulation. I can honestly say that I wouldn't recommend this to anyone.

Grade: D

Genre: Horror, Drama

Cast: Ashley Judd, Michael Shannon, Harry Connick Jr.

Rated: R for some strong violence, sexuality, nudity, language and drug use.

Director: William Friedkin

Veronica (2017)

I had recently heard that the new horror film on Netflix Veronica was supposed to be so scary that the majority of people who watched it, had to turn it off half way through. Now it did have it's scary moments but it was not as bad as all that. It was a very put together and thought out film that delivered on both scares and competency. Paco Plaza's based on true events film was a very welcome surprise that I was not that well aware of. It was not covered in cliches which always is a nice touch in modern day horror.

At it's roots Veronica is a Ouija board experiment gone wrong. This has come up multiple times in movies, including Paranormal Activity as well as it's own two movies based just on the Hasbro game. But what Veronica does different is it involves different elements into it. Veronica (played by Sandra Escacena) and her friends decide to try to contact her dead father and a deceased boyfriend on the solar eclipse back in Madrid, Spain 1991. After the seance, it seems that Veronica has brought something back from the nether-realm and it has attached itself to her.  Now it is up to her to try to save herself and her siblings from certain death and damnation. Not a bad little story right? Especially when at the beginning it gives the "Based on a True Story" disclaimer.

What makes this movie work so well is the use of atmosphere. It really does not do a whole lot of explaining what has followed her or why it is doing these things. It seems like Plaza knew that everyone is already aware of this type of movie so why waste time on things we already know. The use of shadows and music really helps this film. It's almost as if you start to search for things to jump out but when nothing does you still feel that satisfaction of your body tensing up. Sure this movie had its fair amounts of jump scares in it but I feel that it was able to maintain a level of uneasiness all throughout.

What Veronica also does well is as the movie is setting up the story with exposition, it still maintains a really good pace and keeps you intrigued throughout the whole thing. You are already shown the situation the house becomes at the very beginning but it is almost as if, even though you know the end, you are interested in the journey. I did not see the the ending coming though. They changed it up and only showed enough at the beginning to where you wanted to know what happened.

Does this film have a deeper meaning to it though? What was Plaza trying to tell the audience? I personally believe he just wanted to make a scary movie loosely based on a true story. I looked up the original story and the only thing that this is based on is names and a few pictures basically. Although that was a little disappointing, I was still really thrilled by how much I enjoyed this movie. Especially after most of the moronic horror movies that have come out of late. Definitely a recommend but don't expect for this to be unwatchable because it's so scary. Just a fun delight in its 1 hour and 45 minute runtime.

Grade: B+

Genre: Horror

Cast: Sandra Escacena, Bruna Gonzales, Claudia Placer

Rated: MA

Director: Paco Plaza

Jurassic Park: Fallen Kingdom

Jurassic Park is one of my all time favorite movies. I could honestly not wait to see it's return to the big screen with Jurassic World. Sadly my cravings for dinosaurs was not fulfilled. Now when Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom was announced I couldn't help but hold onto hope. Could this be the return? Sadly and frustratingly I can say that this was nowhere close. The series has now hit an all time low. I can honestly say this has been one of the worst movies I have seen in awhile and it hurts my heart to say that.

Fallen Kingdom starts some time after the ending of Jurassic World with the park being shut down. Both Clare (Bryce Dallas Howard) and Owen ( Chris Pratt) have gone their separate ways. Suddenly nature decides to take matters into it's own hands and have a volcano become active on Isla Nublar. Now it is up to our two heroes to go and save some of the dinosaurs from the island to bring to a sanctuary that the unknown partner of John Hammond, Mr. Lockwood ( James Cromwell) has created for them. It just turns out that their are other nefarious motives at work.

Now not only is this movie just a cut and paste of the others in the series, it lacks everything that you want in a Jurassic Park movie. First the characters aren't really that enjoyable. I remember back in the original when you were concerned for all of them. This one features new characters with names I didn't even bother to remember because they were so insignificant. For example the character Franklin Webb (Justice Smith) was only put into this movie for comedic relief and if thats what they want to call it, thats a huge stretch. Everything that he says or does is so eye rollingly bad that its difficult to watch. It was almost as everyone else in the movie knew it was a joke as well. Nobody seems to really be trying.

What this movie does have is incredible CGI. Everything on that front is really well done. The actions are fluid and everyone does okay acting against a blank screen. But that is where the magic falls flat. Being a huge fan of practical effects and Stan Winston's work, it still holds up so well. This just feels extremely stylized and almost video game like. I realize that with a lot of what they wanted to do with this movie could only be done with CGI but the entire movie and every dinosaur was done that way. But lets get on to the most ridiculous part of this movie. The Indo-Raptor. I still do not understand the reason why in these series reboots they have to create new dinosaurs? There are plenty of other ones that they could have chosen but instead they want to just ignore real dinosaurs or throw their name in just for exposition. Finally they decided to have carnosaurus and a baryonx thrown in but for basic cameos. Plus now the movie has taken the villains of the first movie, the raptors and have turned them into man's best friend. It just doesn't make sense.

The first act of this movie is a repeat of The Lost World: Jurassic Park. Go back onto the island to "save" the dinosaurs but they get taken but the big bad corporation and brought to the main land. Act two changes into exposition of the true reason why this is happening and the bad guy emerges out of the shadows twirling his mustache like a Bond villain. We find out there is no sanctuary and the advisor wants to hold an auction and sell the dinosaurs to private bidders. Third act is just boring nonsense. Lets just say that the "Jurassic Park" has now been replaced by a surprisingly huge mansion. It's almost like playing Clue and finding out how someone got murdered in the study. I don't want to tell the ending but let me just say that I could not have been more disappointed with the twist. The whole thing just has no heart.

Now before everyone accuses me of being too hard on this movie, I am aware that it was just a cash cow going to set up a sixth movie in the franchise. I know that. I really tried hard to like this movie. Who doesn't like to see dinosaurs brought to the big screen? Who doesn't love to hear the roar of the king of the dinosaurs, Tyrannosaurus Rex? Now the snippets where they just had the dinosaurs eating people were fun. The cold open was pretty awesome and a few moments throughout were very exciting. There was too much drama from the people here and not enough of the dinosaurs. The cinematography was boring. Just pointing and clicking the record button and when substance was brought in, it just felt like a John Woo slow motion fight without the pigeons. It really hurts my heart but if the series continues on this path I am afraid of how much further it will sink.

Grade: F

Genre: Action

Cast: Chris Pratt, Bryce Dallas Howard, Rafe Spall

Rated: PG-13 for intense sequences of science fiction violence and peril.

Director: J.A. Bayona

City Of God (2002)

2002's City of God is a movie that isn't so much a film, but a story that has to be experienced and then digested. An experience full of heartbreak, murder, corruption, greed, and poverty. Fernando Meirelles with co-director Katia Lund, bring the real life trauma of living in the City of God to the big screen in fantastic form. Now, is this approach of showing the depravity of their living conditions over the top or explicit? I would disagree. It gets into the nitty and gritty of life.

The film's plot follows a group of impoverished children who grew up in the City of God, Brazil, during the 60's and 70's and all of the trials and tribulations that come with it. The two characters we follow are Rocket (Alexandre Rodrigues) and Lil Ze (Leandro Firmino) who started out their lives in the very beginning of the City of God. Rocket follows the more honest, stay out of trouble lifestyle, which includes hanging out with friends, doing photography and occasionally smoking a joint. Lil Ze on the other hand has embraced the violence and drug lifestyle. I don't want to give too much away but Lil Ze's introduction to his future endeavors is pretty intense. Lil Ze's story is almost like a Brazilian version of Michael Corleone's rise to power in Godfather Part II. He starts off small until he gets a huge gang of thugs and eventually takes over all the other businesses besides one section whom he leaves Carrot (Matheus Nachtergaele) in charge.

This movie, first and foremost, is about the characters. There are so many different stories being told within the grand scheme but Meirelles carefully makes sure that you understand each character's motivations, who they are, and why they are pertinent. It is so easy to tell if you are watching a movie and you cannot remember any of the characters names, that is because you don't care what happens to them. This movie is very different. Watching it I was concerned with each character's life and what they were doing to stay alive, watching how everyone adjusted to this lifestyle, and why they wanted to stay in it or leave it.

The movie eventually takes a different turn (following some very unfortunate events) and becomes an all out war between the two factions of Lil Ze and Carrot for control of the City of God. This is where the brutality of the characters starts to shine. A very powerful scene is where a group of kids, known as The Runts, have been thieving and doing hold ups to the different stores in Lil Ze's territory. Eventually he becomes fed up with it and decides to take matters into his own hands. Lil Ze, Steak and Fries (a young kid who hangs out with Lil Ze sometimes) and some thugs go to the Runts hang out. The older thugs catch two of the Runts and Lil Ze gives them a choice. Choose to either be shot in the hand or in the foot. Considering these kids are around the age of 6-10 it is very traumatic for them. Both of the runts agree to be shot in the hands after deliberation and coming to terms with their decisions. Of course Lil Ze shoots them both in the foot instead. As the younger one is crying and screaming out for help Lil Ze brings over "Steak and Fries" (approximately 12 years old) and tells him in order to become one of them he has to shoot and kill one of the Runts. This scene is so incredibly deep and telling because it shows how these kids get trapped into this lifestyle and decide to accept it. Eventually Steak makes his decision and a little boy is dead while the other is crying and bleeding his way home.

But in the end what is this movie trying to tell us? That this life exists? To count our lucky stars that not all of us are in these conditions? Or trying to show what true human nature can turn into with poverty, neglect and a dash of drugs? The most insane part is at the very end when those five words jump up onto the screen "Based On A True Story". Personally I think it was trying to show how depending on the decisions that are placed in front of you, your life can go one of two ways. This is one of those stories that reflects the Boys In The Hood afternoon specials, the "if you stay on the right path" you can escape hell story. But sadly both show that no matter how much you try and stay on the straight and narrow your surroundings do have an impact on you and majority of the time it does not work out in your favor. Overall a very deep, emotional and impactful story that has stayed with me.

Grade: A-

Genre: Drama

Cast: Alexandre Rodrigues, Leandro Firmino, Matheus Nachtergaele

Rated: R for strong brutal violence, sexuality, drug content and language

Directed by: Fernando Meirelles, Katia Lund

Wish Upon

Wish Upon is your typical PG-13 horror movie with typical ideas, tropes and cliches. While watching it, it does enough to keep you interested in it but not enough for you to actually care about anything. There aren't really any scares that come along with this movie so the most it can become is a immature thriller with thoughts of grandeur and excitement.

John R. Leonetti creates the tone for the movie right at the very beginning showing a mother hanging herself in the attic and then having her young daughter find her. Now I will say this movie does have all the right elements, even though most of them have already been played out. It follows a high school girl Clare (Joey King) who after the fallout of her mothers suicide is having a difficult time in school and life. She is one of the "nerds" with her two friends and gets picked on by the popular group whom she has a crush on one the jocks. Sounds pretty familiar? Thats because you already saw this movie back in 1996 with The Craft. Her father played by Ryan Phillippe (who is always fun to watch) is a dumpster diver and eventually comes across this mystic sound box. Well it just so happens that this cursed sound box will deliver you seven wishes but upon each wish that you ask for, someone in your life is going to die.

Now I will not fault this movie completely for all of its cliches. It is adequately done. The acting isn't really there yet but what can you ultimately expect. The deaths are pretty interesting and well done but the real problem with this movie is the character development. The main character just becomes so detestable that the viewer does not even care what happens to them. She becomes so selfish that she is willing to put everyone she knows and loves at risk. It is ridiculous. Let alone the totally predictable ending but if you choose to watch this movie you will know whats going to happen before it gets there.

This movie at the end of the day is trying to say "enjoy what you have because when its gone you will miss it. Just enjoy life. Do not take your life for granted." Now there are plenty of other movies that are competent enough to get this point across but I guess for the young generation now, this is the way. You have to throw stereotypes at them and shove it in their faces. I may be getting preachy but this film brings nothing to the table and all I was waiting was for the next death during its 90 minute runtime. I can honestly say that is one of the positives of this movie. Overall it's just a boring movie that the viewer has seen before. I know I had.

Grade: D

Genre: Horror

Cast: Joey King, Ryan Phillippe, Ki Hong Lee

Rated: PG-13 for violent and disturbing images, thematic elements and language.

Director: John R. Leonetti