Prometheus (2012)

Let’s be clear: this is a film with problems, and some of them are pretty big. Yet the fact remains that they just don’t make sci-fi like this very often: grand and inquisitive, poking a big stick into bigger ideas and seeing what kind of horrifying monstrosity of an answer comes tumbling out. For the first half of the film, it’s almost as good as you want it to be. The setup is immediately compelling: an invitation to a faraway planet written on ancient cave walls across the world. We wonder what answers wait in the far reaches of space. This is a horror-thriller, however—wonder will soon give way to dread, and unfortunately once things inevitably start to go sideways the plot and pacing do the same. The second half is frankly a bit of a mess. Character motivations get lost in the shuffle, traumatic events pass with hardly a moment of reflection given to the victim, and developments that should be startling are met with a strange sense of apathy. Horror exists almost entirely on the premise of characters making poor decisions, but some of these are particularly cringe-worthy. And yet this is still a film worth seeing. For one: it’s absolutely gorgeous from start to finish, with barely a shot that is anything less than beautiful, even when it’s grotesque. For another: Michael Fassbender’s performance as the android David is absolutely riveting. And there are still those questions it’s keen on fiddling with, dangling like a carrot on a stick. This may not be a perfect film by a very long shot, but there’s more than enough here warrant recommending. Especially if you’re a fan of the Alien franchise.

7 out of 10.

Drag Me To Hell (2009)

Going back to your roots is always a risky proposition. As directors grow, the things that made them able to make the kind of experience that sparked their career fade. It's nice to see that Sam Raimi doesn't really have that problem. In some of the best possible ways this shows that Raimi may not have evolved at all since the days of Evil Dead. It's every bit the cheesy, crowd-pleasing scarefest that he cut his teeth on. The story of a woman cursed to be, of course, dragged off to Hell, has plenty of easy hooks and evenly placed jumps, but is also remarkably direct with its intentions. It knows exactly what kind of movie it is, and gives off clever smiles as often as demonic fright. In the end, it's nothing more than is standard for the genre, but is so much fun that it hardly matters.

8 out of 10.

My Name Is Bruce (2007)

Unfortunately, this is probably about as close as Bruce Campbell will ever get to doing another Evil Dead. Pity too, as this film definitely shows he still has the badass side of that character in him. Here Bruce Campbell directs Bruce Campbell playing Bruce Campbell, kidnapped by a devoted fan to do battle an ancient demon unleashed in a small mining town. It's a B-movie with an oversized B, filled with loving fan-service and covered in a thick layer of good natured cheese. It's a film for Campbell's fans, featuring bits plucked from all his best stuff, wrapped in the attitude of Army of Darkness, and stuffed with self-parody. If you have a hearty respect for Campell's more egomaniacal characters, there's a lot to enjoy here. If you don't already have some love for the man with the infinite chin, this might not be your cup of tea.

6 out of 10.

The Evil Dead (1981)

You can just tell watching this film that the director was destined for bigger things. To be able to take so very little and, through the use of some extremely clever camera work and expert sound design, make something so near to a horror masterpiece is just incredible. At some point between the margarita toast and someone having their head lopped off with a shovel, this tale of teenagers in a haunted house goes from grinning B-movie cheese to legitimate horror with such ease and such simple grace that there's little to do but sit back and enjoy the gory spectacle. In many ways it's a perfect party movie; the silly and outdated stupidity is up front and ready for commentary, but just when the crowd runs out of things to say it's suddenly a legitimately scary movie. The origins, the movies that built the careers of both writer-director Sam Raimi, and B-movie staple Bruce Campbell, definitely stand the test of time.

8 out of 10.

Evil Dead II: Dead by Dawn (1987)

Calling this a sequel is horribly misleading. Though it technically picks up with the final camera shot of the first film, the greater majority of this so-called follow-up contains scene after scene lifted and repurposed from the first. And you can't rely on the earlier movie for a bit of a leg up, either. All but the most basic premise of the first is immediately jettisoned by a heavily altered retelling of the plot so far. However all these transgressions are quickly forgiven when, out of the ashes of a horror classic, a terrific horror-comedy creeps its way out of hiding. It's still the same cabin in the woods and the same demonic ghost possessor, but now instead of accidentally falling in to B-movie cheese it revels in it, all the while delivering terrible acting and over-the-top blood and gore. The resulting mess of a movie is a manic trip into a nightmare, told with a wink and a smile and a friendly jab in the ribs. It's not the horror classic that the first is, but as a great non-sequitor and a bloody bucket of laughs it certainly holds its own.

7 out of 10.

Repo! The Genetic Opera (2008)

So that happened. It's difficult to determine where to start on this one; I mean, it's a musical about a repo man collecting organs as payment. Think along the lines of Sweeny Todd, but more gruesome, trading in period gothic for future industrial gothic, where the music settles between terrible and neutral. There's an air of cult all over the film, from the casting to the generally emo and screamo style music, to the bloody, yet-comically fake, gore. And it's clear that the producers knew where it was headed as well, with some obscure casting decisions featuring faces you would never have heard of unless you weren't already deep down the rabbit hole. The shame here is that most of them are not very good singers, or are at least not properly equipped to try their hand at the styles of music being thrown at them. Not that it matters with such inconsistent quality in the composition. Strictly as a film, then, it's a frustrating mess. Maybe with the right company and the right mindset there is some energy and verve to be gleaned—there certainly seems to be a feeling of “almost!” throughout—but without the right mental state this whole damn thing will probably just make most people walk away.

3 out of 10.

Bubba Ho-tep (2002)

Honestly, how could anyone not want to see a movie in which a still-living, geriatric Elvis teams up with a black JFK to fight a mummy haunting a retirement home? There's no reason you can possibly come up with to pass this film over. I mean yea, the pace is a bit off at points, slow enough to keep pace with its protagonists, and the film's sense of humor comes and goes with the tide, but for sheer B-movie novelty alone this kind of film is gold. Bruce Campbell plays his caricature of Elvis with enough foulmouthed gusto and wit to make it a beautiful tribute to The King, while Ossie Davis does himself proud in one of his final roles. It may not be anything more than a bit of cheesy, low budget comedy-thriller fun, but for concept, for execution, and for the sheer gall of it, this is absolutely worth the effort.

7 out of 10.

House of the Dead (2003)

Don't get me wrong, I love bad movies. Not only do they remind you why you like the good ones, but sometimes there's enough camp value in trying to obliterate good cinematic taste that the whole thing comes off as an unintentional comedy. Not so here. Uwe Boll's first attempt at sullying the already troubled landscape of videogame-to-film adaptations is an abomination of poorly shot violence, superfluous plot mechanics, and Clint Howard. On the surface, that doesn't sound any worse than the average B-movie flop, but Uwe Boll takes himself so seriously with this steaming pile that almost all camp value is lost, giving you an disappointing “horror” movie that is neither interesting nor scary. I mean really, how hard is it to fail to at least be an amusing failure? Many other, less talented directors have done it, Dr. Boll, why can't you?

None out of 10.

Grindhouse (2007)

guest review by Phineas Gopher

More than a few people complained when Quentin Tarantino's Kill Bill was broken up into two volumes which were then released months apart. Those people felt they were paying for the same movie twice. In a welcome twist, Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez have teamed up to deliver just the opposite: two movies for the price of one. Each director offered a full-length feature shot in the style of 70s exploitation cinema, billed jointly under the name Grindhouse, with hilarious fake movie trailers linking the films. Rodriguez's Planet Terror is an over-the-top take on the zombie and military disaster genres. The poster image of actress Rose McGowan with a machine gun for a leg sums up its gritty, campy tone. Parts of it are funny, a lot of it is gross, but the whole thing is wild and action-packed. Tarantino's offering, Death Proof is more meditative, and is this reviewer's favorite of the two. It starts as a buddy movie with a bunch of bar-hopping girls drinking and talking before introducing a unique serial killer in the form of Stuntman Mike (a perfectly cast Kurt Russell). The tone and genre shift several times, arguably offering the equivalent of two small films that happen to be related (take that, Kill Bill naysayers). Tarantino's culturally relevant dialogue is in top-form, and his CGI-less approach to the stuntwork gives us car-on-car action that seems straight out of the 70s (in a good way). It's a shame the two films were broken up and released separately in most places outside the U.S., but a special edition DVD (or Blu-Ray, or something) should correct this in the future.

8 out of 10.

Cloverfield (2008)

Break out the dramamine, this one's a winner! Mixing elements of Blair Witch Project, Godzilla and the Korean monster masterpiece The Host, Cloverfield provides a terrifying first hand, first person account of a giant monster's decimation of Manhattan, its inhabitants and the military sent in to stop it. Done entirely from the perspective of a survivor toting a camera, the shaky, improvised camera work gives the film an air of frightening authenticity, spontaneity, and intimacy. When an off-camera explosion causes a band of survivors to panic, the cameraman starts swearing and trying to see what's going on while everyone around him screams and flees, the sense of disastrous dread can be utterly chilling. You feel like you're there. The confusion remains intact as well, with the film only giving vague hints to the larger picture in between piles of molasses-thick suspense. What problems the movie has are almost all to do with the character holding the camera—his incessant nagging and naïve questioning can be grating at times, but when it hits the fan he mostly just shuts up and shoots. Also of concern is the way the film seems to make use of a similar kind of terror and hysteria from 9/11, which will likely have some people thinking “too soon.” Still, if you can put the parallels of real-life disaster out of your head, what's on offer is one hell of a wild ride.

9 out of 10.

AVPR: Aliens vs Predator - Requiem (2007)

After Paul W.S. Anderson’s failed attempt at bringing two of sci-fi’s most respected franchises together in the first Alien vs Predator, the mythology and prestige associated with both storylines was in ruins. Things fare much better this time out, and even though it continues the narrative from the previous film it manages to not only make up for the sins of its father, but actually repairs the damage done to both franchises’ respective sagas. Sure, it’s still just barely better a B-movie (thanks only to its pedigree), but the film is a fun little creature feature with enough of a brain not to offend its audience and fan base, and a body count so utterly ruthless it almost comes off as an apology for the previous film’s PG-13 rating. That said, the acting ranges from so-so to just plain bad, the editing is a bit spastic, and the cinematography is so dark in places you won’t be able to tell which horrible beast you’re looking at. But it’s still an improvement over the previous chapter. Perhaps it takes a lot of compromise to gladly accept such a low-brow entry into the company of these revered films, but if nothing else it’s nice to see these heavyweights on screen and not leave the theater angry. In short: it doesn’t suck.

6 out of 10.

The Mist (2007)

Note: Since I deem myself incapable of being objective with regards to this movie, I have asked my regular guest contributor, Phineas Gopher, to write up a more balanced review of the film to follow mine.

a biased fanboy's review:
Had it not been for the short story upon which this movie was based, I would never have started reading. The story was the first ever in text that pulled me in to a point where I realized that words on a page had power. So there is no possible way I can review this movie objectively—reading it was a seminal moment in my development. What I can do is review it on its quality as an adaptation, and as a fan of the novella. Well it doesn't disappoint, but then again I went in already sold on its wares. For almost 120 minutes, this is as close to what was in the short story as could possibly be depicted, minus an unnecessary sex scene. It is slavishly loyal to its source, to interesting effect. The language is intact, the violence is nearly identical, people die in the right order and in exactly the same way they die in the book, and best of all the things that are left vague and fuzzy in the story remain so. Your imagination gets to run wild in the white in all the ways it needs to. Even the little bits that go off the page work, including the best homage to Aliens since Aliens. It's more unnerving than directly frightening, and has a lot more to say about human nature than was originally there, but it all serves to keep what's on screen intact. In the closing few minutes, it jumps off the source a little more, but even the new material here feels like what would have been written. Except the last sixty seconds, which pretty much just pisses all over everything. It's not that I have a problem with the style of ending it was going for, just that what had been built as a horrific journey for our hero ends on such a sour note. I won't spoil it of course (this is Zero Spoilers, after all) but it will leave you a bit miffed. So what does an unswerving fanboy rate a movie that is a deeply satisfying interpretation of a personal classic for 119 minutes, but absolutely awful for one?

8 out of 10.

Note: If it's available to you, grab the Black & White cut from the 2nd disc of the DVD release. It lets the movie be what it is--a throwback--without any problems whatsoever suspending disbelief. Most everything is made better by the lack of color; the ending is more believable, the special effects have some of their flaws glossed over, the creepy scenes are creepier, and the gore is less graphic while somehow being more disturbing. Even the acting is magically made better! For the black and white cut, I'd happily slop on another point. B&W cut = 9.

a more balanced review by Phineas Gopher:

First off, when a billowing white cloud of smoke rolls into town and covers everything in sight, what do you call that? I think the answer worth most points on Family Feud would be fog. I guess that name was taken. Stupid John Carpenter. Anyway, titular disputes aside, The Mist is a solid genre offering that has less gore, yet bigger cajones, than many of its horror-film peers. Drawing from Greek tragedy, H.P. Lovecraft, and oh yeah, the Stephen King story of the same name, it examines how people would react to being trapped by a completely unexplainable catastrophe. With jabs at the government, religion, and perhaps humanity in general, it is not a happy picture. But it is an emotional one, a cathartic one, and one that demands to be seen in theaters. The only glaring flaws are the special effects looked half-finished (or more likely, half-funded) in places... good enough to get you there but no cuddle afterward. Also, one of the main characters (the "villain" if there is one) is over-the-top in a way that stretches credibility. Sure, she had the theater audience voicing their hatred audibly throughout the film, but her vulgarity clashes with her piety in a way that is very black-and-white, amidst characters that are otherwise subtle and realistic. Despite this, The Mist is a well-crafted little nightmare of a film.

7 out of 10.

Fido (2007)

Ladies and gentlemen, the first Zombie Satire! This is just a great idea done right. Take 1950s industrial enthusiasm, mix in domesticated undead, squeeze in some excellent script work that takes full advantage of a ludicrous concept, and pepper with just a dash of blood and guts. The result is delightfully twisted, frequently hilarious, and even just a little bit touching in a morbid sort of way. The deadpan (no pun intended) humor is spot on, while the acting takes full advantage of the very quirky nature of both the era and the concept, particularly Carrie-Ann Moss as the socially conscious mother and Billy Connolly as titular zom-pet Fido. If anything works against the film, it would be it's generally middle budget trappings. Some big ideas are tossed about but are either poorly realized or not shown at all. Still, that's no reason to bite into this great little flick about a boy's love for his reanimated best friend.

8 out of 10.

1408 (2007)

They really don't make horror films like this anymore. It's not sadistic, not particularly gory, nobody gets chopped up slowly into little pieces while they gargle their last scream—it's just a good, old fashioned scary picture. It's almost Hitchcockian. The sense of dread and unpredictability that the first half builds is almost balletic, reaching a perfect rolling boil that carries throughout the rest of the film, while the surprisingly thick plot (for a horror movie) has a few exceptional cards to play. It's not quite all good news, however. Samuel L. Jackson's overly insistent hotel manager character feels both under- and mis-used, while the occasional corny wink from John Cusack still manages to sneak in from time to time, and some of the plot's twists are overly elaborate and contrived. But for the most part the movie focuses on the character of the room itself, generating one nerve wracking situation after another to wonderful effect. It may not be the finest horror flick out there, but it's hard to argue when the haunted house scares on offer are this much fun.

8 out of 10.

Saw 4 (2007)

guest review by Phineas Gopher

The latest in a franchise that's become an October staple, Saw IV has the look and feel of the first three movies, but only three-fourths of the charm. The series is beginning to sag under the weight of a plot that has gone from likably eccentric to distractingly convoluted. Viewers who haven't seen Saws uno, dos, and tres will be lost, and even viewers who have would do well to bring a notepad if they want to keep up with who is who. Too many characters doing too many unbelievable things...hmm, sounds like your typical horror movie sequel. What makes Saw IV distinct is the same thing that made the series stand out in the first place: horrible, horrible deathtraps out of which (somewhat) innocent people must find a way. This isn't a spoiler: most don't. The film is never better than when it is making you ask, arms crossed nervously over your chest, "What would I do in that situation?" Unfortunately, it doesn't do this as often as its predecessors.

6 out of 10.

Silent Hill (2006)

Perhaps the best of the videogame-to-film conversions yet, Silent Hill is still a movie at odds with itself. Some of the imagery at work, and the general mood of things when the lights go out are the stuff of beautiful Lovecraftian nightmare. The gore present is not only the gooey-bloody stuff, but also effective and disturbing; the way it ought to be. And the audio design is spot on (which it should be, since it's from the same person who made the games' soundscapes so damn frightening). It's scary the way a good horror flick should be scary. But the plot? Just sub-par. It's told in an overly simplistic, ham-fisted style that still manages not to make sense. To be fair, the games weren't much better, but that's not an excuse. This film has got the scare-factor down in spades, with thick atmosphere and excellent pacing, but it can't surmount its mismanaged script. I give it serious points for effort, but a bad story is still a bad story.

4 out of 10.

BloodRayne (2005)

Start with a director who has a track record of Z-grade box office flops, add in an A-list cast who are clearly in need of a paycheck, digest, squat, and out squeezes this deformed monstrosity. Seriously, what were Kristanna Loken, Ben Kingsly, Michael Madsen, Michelle Williams, Meat Loaf, and Billy Zane's agents smoking?! How could an ultra-violent movie about a smoking hot vampire vixen turn out this awful? It's not even novelty bad! For the most part it's just boring, with occasional trips into painfully poor. Director Uwe Boll takes a lot of flack for being incapable of making movies with any redeeming qualities, and after four misbegotten failures I'm inclined to say that he should never be allowed to make movies ever again. If only it were that simple. The saddest part is that of his films, this is easily his best. And it's still intolerable! Everyone, do me a favor: if you come across a steaming pile directed by Uwe Boll, don't step in it.

None out of 10.

The Descent (2005)

Newsflash: avoid this film at all costs if you are even slightly claustrophobic. If you do not know if you are claustrophobic, you will by the time the credits start rolling. The combination of deep, dark cave diving and girl-power adventure gone awry turns this into something of a post-Saw version of Deliverance with all the trimmings. It's got pitch perfect tension, nerve destroying atmosphere and that deeply unsettling brand of the creepy-crawlies present in most of the best horror flicks. So basically it's a fine piece of pants-destroying terror; how is it otherwise? The story has a few vicious twists in it, while the decisions made by our heroines mostly make sense. Also, the lighting is fairly creative, being as it's almost entirely done with headlamps and flares. Meanwhile, the characters as a whole are mostly interesting, though a bit interchangeable. But you care when the chosen few meet their fates, and that's important. This movie is pretty much the complete package. If you're a fan of the horror genre, it could prove a new classic for you. For the rest, it's an extremely effective way to make you soil yourself.

8 out of 10.

'American Gods' by Neil Gaiman (Book - 2001)

Don't take this as being anything more than a literal statement: this book successfully finds the middle ground between Stephen King and H. P. Lovecraft, making a successful, though flawed, entry into a genre that I will call “Horror Americana.” On the King side, this book has obscure music references, relatable characters in relatable circumstances, and that hard-to-identify straight forwardness inherent to his novels. Meanwhile on the Lovecraft end of things you've got horrific sacrifices, ancient deities, a delightful sense of constant unease, and the ever-present freaky dream sequences. There's nothing wrong with cribbing from the successful if you can add a new bend to it, and author Neil Gaiman keeps his twisted tale fresh by relying on the results of an abundance of research on middle-America, creating a remarkably honest and real impression of life in the “fly-over states.” It's not all sun and roses, however. Despite a few eerie moments, and a general feeling of danger throughout every chapter, there's hardly any real horror across its 600 pages. Likewise, the motivations for the larger struggle are hardly fleshed out in terms understandable by mere mortals, or at least to me. But I don't care. Maybe it's because almost every place described in the book is a place I've actually been to in my travels, but I say this is an excellent book for anyone looking to stray off the bloody, beaten path.

7 out of 10.

Black Sheep (2007)

guest review by Phineas Gopher

In the spirit of New Zealand horror/comedy hits such as Braindead and Meet the Feebles comes a genre-bending tail...um, tale...of docile sheep going stark raving, flesh-craving mad. Not to be confused with the 1996 Chris Farley vehicle of the same name, Black Sheep features a Kiwi cast on a rural farm trying not to become dinner for genetically-altered supersheep. Part vampire, part werewolf, part zombie flick, but mostly tongue-in-cheek splatstick comedy, this is best viewed with friends and alcohol, not in that order. The SFX are impressive, unsurprising since they are by Richard Taylor (of The Lord of the Rings fame). Not nearly as clever as other horrorcom imports such as Shaun of the Dead, Black Sheep is still a fun, if forgettable, novelty offering for the genre.

7 out of 10.