Review: SANTA CLAUS: THE MOVIE!

SANTA CLAUS: THE MOVIE
1985
Directed by Jeannot Szwarc


Mmm, McDonald's! I could really go for some Big Mac's and fries and nuggets! Also, some Coke! Delicious, delicious Coke!

Speaking of Coke, the producers of the 1985 flop SANTA CLAUS: THE MOVIE were probably snorting a tone of cocaine when they came up with this holiday "classic."

Basically it broke down to this: the producers of the box office smash SUPERMAN thought they could translate that same success onto another character, one in the public domain that they didn't have to pay rights to. And Santa Claus is sort of like Superman, in that they both fly, and that they both can see through women's clothes with X-Ray Vision.

"I wish they had just let us freeze to death."

Unfortunately, Santa didn't quite adapt as well to the Hero treatment, and what resulted was a fever dream of bright colors, possible musical numbers that never start but seem like they should, blatant product placement (by McDonald's, Coke, and, of all things, Pabst Blue Ribbon), and John Lithgow chewing so much scenery he must have dislocated his jaw.

SANTA CLAUS: THE MOVIE decides to give Santa (the Big Lebowski himself, David Huddleston) a backstory. It seems before he became the jolly old elf the world knows and fears  loves, he was a simple toymaker living in some undisclosed century. He and his wife and his two reindeer would ride around in the snow and give wooden toys to kids. How charming!

Well not so fast, because in the first fifteen minutes of this film, Santa, his wife, and his two reindeer freeze to death. Merry Christmas!

I'm gonna burn this mother fucker down!!!!

Riding back home, they get caught in a blizzard and all die. But wait! Luckily for them, they happen to die at the spot where a magical Christmas tree appears, and out of this glowing magic tree come elves!

The elves bring them all back to life, and the head elf announces himself by saying "I am the one called Dooley!" All the elves introduce themselves that way; it's a weird elf thing, I guess. Also, one of the elves is named Patch, and played by lovable drunk Dudley Moore, who does NOT look good with lipstick.

The elves make Santa a job offer: they'll make toys, and he'll deliver them to all the boys and girls of the world, in ONE NIGHT! How can this be? I don't know, there's some bullshit prophecy at play and Santa is the chosen one, and he can control time, or something. It's all very weird. Also, the elves dance.

As the centuries tick on, Santa entrusts the elf Patch with coming up with bigger, better ways to make toys, so Patch pulls a Henry Ford and constructs an assembly line. Unfortunately, it produces really shoddy toys that fall apart, which gives Santa a bad name. So, uh, I guess in the universe this film takes place in everyone is aware that Santa Claus is real? I mean, kids get into fist-fights over the subject, and say things like "My dad says he's all washed up!" which implies parents are sitting around discussing the productive merits of Santa Claus.

Santa promptly fires Patch, and Patch heads to New York City (for reasons unknown), and he also brings with him the magical gold dust that makes the reindeer fly. Also, I am making none of this up--this is exactly what happens.

Anyway, Santa befriends a little street urchin named Joe. Joe is always dirty, wears a leather jacket, has no family, and he really wants to eat some fucking McDonald's. In one scene, he stares through a window and longingly watches as families shove fist-fulls of fries into their faces. Joe has a friend name Cornelia, whom he refers to as "Corny."

Corny, like Joe, has no parents. But unlike Joe, she lives in a big mansion, which is owned by her cartoonishly evil uncle, B.Z., played by John Lithgow with such gleeful over-the-top-ness that you can't help become enchanted as Lithgow glowers and snarls and cackles and chomps on cigars.

Lithgow is a big-shot toymaker. So, wait--everyone is aware of Santa Claus, yet there is still a need for toymakers? Whatever. Anyway, Lithgow has just gotten in trouble with Congress because his toys catch fire, and he sells teddy bears stuffed with nails and glass (????). He needs some good P.R., and he gets it in the form of Patch, who shows up and offers to help B.Z. create something AWESOME for Christmas. Their awesome idea? Lollipops that make people FLY!!

"I want you to get nude with me in a bathtub, and then I'll cut you femoral artery." 

This is bad news for Santa. Kids love these magic lollipops so much that Santa sinks into a Sylvia Plath-like depression, where he mopes around and probably contemplates sticking his head into the gingerbread man oven.

Meanwhile, Lithgow wants to keep the success going by launching CHRISTMAS 2, and selling magic candy canes this time. There's a catch: these candy canes can explode and KILL PEOPLE. Street urchin McDonald's loving Joe overhears this, and ends up held captive by Lithgow and co., until he is rescued by Patch.

Then it's time for a "thrilling" chase across the skies as Santa and Corny and Patch and Joe ride in their respective flying sleighs and try to avoid exploding.

Did I mention this movie is fucking insane?

There's a weird charm to SANTA CLAUS: THE MOVIE. It's just so weird and off the walls that you can't help but sitting through it. It has a real train wreck effect--there's something more productive you could be doing with your time, but it's much more fun to watch the carnage.

It's so god damn magical!

Also, the film has such wonderfully tone-deaf dialog exchanges such as this:

SANTA: Next Christmas, you and I will have a date!
JOE: Really?
SANTA: Santa Claus never lies, Joe!

It's worth mentioning for a film called SANTA CLAUS: THE MOVIE, Santa Claus is barely featured. He takes a back-seat to Patch, but I guess PATCH: THE DRUNK ELF wouldn't be as good as a title (wait, yes it would...).

The film also features a rather horrifying comeuppance for Lithgow's character: in an effort to avoid being arrested, Lithgow eats a whole bundle of the magic candy canes, and ends up flying up into the cold, dead wasteland of space, where he will likely suffocate to death, after his eyeballs explode out of his head.

Merry Christmas!

SANTA CLAUS: THE MOVIE is a bad, bad movie, but it's so bad you have to see it; also, it gets major points for being a Christmas movie and not once mentioning or even hinting at Christ or Christianity--and therefor I give the film

Four out of Four Lithgows:

Review: KILL LIST

WTF???

End of review.






Okay, I guess I should review it for real....

KILL LIST

2011

Directed by Ben Wheatley

There has been a lot of buzz about KILL LIST. Several websites I follow went out of their way to applaud the film and call it one of the best horror films of 2011. 

As is always the case when horror movies have good buzz, I was skeptical. It's not because I'm such a cynical bastard (which I am); it's just that everyone's view of what constitutes "good horror" is different. Horror, like comedy, is a very subjective genre. One fan's masterpiece is another's pile of steaming shit.

So I waited and kind of forgot about KILL LIST. And then, for some reason, it popped into my head, so I gave it a watch. 

There's no real way to review this movie without giving away spoilers, since the movie is one twist after another, so be forewarned, HERE THERE BE SPOILERS.

KILL LIST is about Jay (Neil Maskell), who has been out of work for eight months, much to the chagrin of his wife Shel (MyAnna Buring). One night, the couple has a dinner party, where Jay's old partner Gal (Michael Smiley, who is wonderful here) shows up with a date named Fiona (Emma Fryer).

During dinner, Jay has a bit of a breakdown, flipping over plates and getting into a violent argument with his wife. This is the first indication we have that Jay is not really "right in the head."

Gal takes Jay aside and tells him of a potential job, that will pay well. Jay is hesitant at first, but relents. And then we find out what kind of work these guys do: they're contract killers. 

The job seems simple, at least simple in hitman terms: kill three people: a priest, a librarian and an M.P. 

Jay and Gal have been hired by some mysterious old man who lives in a mysterious hotel and it's all very mysterious. And things get weirder from there. 

Jay finds his victims thanking him just before he kills them. He also goes off the deep-end, turning what should be simple hits into bloodbaths, much to the chagrin of Gal. 

Both men have a bad feeling about this job, and they want to back out. The mysterious old man says no: if they back out, not only will they be killed, but their families will be killed also. 

So Jay and Gal go off to kill the last person on the list, the M.P., who lives in a secluded mansion. While camping out at night, waiting for the right moment to strike, the guys witness a bizzarre cultish ritual, with naked people in masks sacrificing a young woman by hanging. It's not up until this point that KILL LIST becomes a "horror" movie. Everything preceding thi. s scene is more like a British gangster thriller. 

But when the scary stuff starts happening, it's pretty unnerving. Things slowly go batshit insane, and Jay retreats to a cabin with his wife and son to try to avoid the spooky cultists--to no such luck. 

I won't describe what happens at the end for two reasons: one is because it's much more effective if you have no idea what's coming and two is because I have no idea what the hell it means.

I'm not the type of movie-goer who needs everything spelled out for them. Sometime ambiguity can enhance a viewing experience. One of the greatest horror films of all time, Kubrick's THE SHINING, leaves a lot to the imagination, and it works.

KILL LIST is a different story. I'm not really sure if it succeeds. It's ending is shocking, and disturbing, but it also makes very little sense. I don't need all my questions answered, but a few hints might've helped. 

The film is well made; director Ben Wheatley knows how to frame a shot for maximum creep effect. The violence is brutal and graphic. The acting is good across the board, with Michael Smiley as Gal stealing every scene he's in. But KILL LIST is such an uneven film that it's hard to recommend. It doesn't seem to know what it wants to be, and suffers as a result.

I think a lot of the positive press from the film resulted in the fact that people were so caught off guard by the ending that they thought they had seen something truly remarkable, when really there's not much to KILL LIST beyond some graphic violence and one or two creepy scenes.

Review: V/H/S

V/H/S

2012. Directed by: Adam Wingard, David Bruckner, Ti West, Glenn McQuaid, Joe Swanberg, Radio Silence

The horror anthology film has always been a favorite of mine. And, unlike a lot of horror fans, I don’t mind the “found footage” genre of horror films. V/H/S combines both of these things and tries to breathe new life into both.

V/H/S has a fairly simply plotline: a group of Jackass-type thieves break into a spooky house to find a videotape. Instead, they find a dead old man and SEVERAL videotapes. One by one, our bumbling thieves watch a tape, each one revealing a different scary story.

Like most anthology films, it’s hit or miss. Despite being a fan of this particular subgenre, I don’t think I’ve seen a single anthology film where I’ve liked all of the stories told. So let’s break this baby down by its segments.

TAPE 56

Adam Wingard’s TAPE 56 acts as the wrap-around story—the way we get to the mini-stories within. While it has a nice atmosphere, and some really subtle, creepy moments, it’s one of the weaker entries. I’m not sure the movie even needed a wrap-around story, and as it is, TAPE 56 doesn’t really do much else than set up the premise. Which tape are our thieves looking for? Why does this old (presumably dead) man have all these VHS tapes? Who is the mysterious person who hired our thieves? Why does the ring-leader have a mustache that makes him look like a 70’s porn star? None of these questions are answered. I don’t have a problem with ambiguity, but the open-ended nature of TAPE 56 leaves a lot to be desired.

AMATEUR NIGHT

David Bruckner’s AMATEUR NIGHT is our first “tape” and follows three frat-boy types as they go out on the town to look for girls. One of the guys sports a pair of glasses that contain a hidden video camera/microphone combo.

The guys eventually end up at a bar, where they encounter a few ladies, one of them being the very weird, mousy Lily. Lily is quiet and more than a little spooky, but she seems to have the hots for our camera-man.

Eventually the friends end up back at their motel room with Lily and another girl. The other girl eventually passes out, and soon the friends learn that Lily is more than she seems…

AMATEUR NIGHT is a nice starting point. It takes a little way to find its grove—the first half of the story is truly obnoxious, as we follow these giggling, repulsive guys on their quest to get laid. But once the mysterious Lily enters the picture, things really start to pick up. I wouldn’t call this segment scary, but it’s certainly disturbing, and it’s nice to see these three assholes get pretty much what’s coming to them.

SECOND HONEYMOON

Next up we have SECOND HONEYMOON, from director Ti West. West has already made quite a name for himself in the indie horror world, having directed THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL and THE INNKEEPERS. He has a very deliberate, slow-burn style that some love and some hate. Personally I loved both of his previous movies, so I was looking forward to this entry.

SECOND HONEYMOON follows couple Sam and Stephanie as they go on a second honeymoon out west, with Stephanie filming the proceedings. Things seem rather mundane at first, but one night, there is a loud knock on their motel room door, and Sam goes to investigate.

When he comes back, he reports that the person who knocked was a strange and somewhat scary girl asking for a ride the next day. Sam of course turned her down, and the couple goes to bed.

While the couple sleep that night, the mysterious girl comes into their motel room and films them sleeping—and brandishes a switch-blade which she softly strokes against Stephanie’s flesh.

To say more would be spoiling the pretty shocking ending, but I will say this is one of the strongest entries in the film. It’s the only one that isn’t “supernatural”, but West has a real knack for “realistic” dialog. This really feels like the video-log of a real married couple, and the way he slowly builds the tension from mundane to disturbing is masterful.

TUESDAY THE 17^TH

TUESDAY THE 17^th, from Glenn McQuaid, is hands-down the weakest entry in the film, and should have been cut entirely. It has a neat premise—a sort of satirical take on slasher films (thus the cheeky title), and also the premise of a “final girl” coming back for revenge against the killer.

But the end result is rather lame, and the acting is downright atrocious here. Our “final girl”, Wendy, is so unbelievably unsympathetic and annoying that there’s no possible way we can get on her side.

When the killer shows up, for some reason he doesn’t photograph on the video camera; rather, he’s just a bunch of blurry, staticy glitchies. This is a cool effect, but it leads the viewer to ask: Why? It seems like something that the filmmaker did because he thought it was cool for the sake of being cool, and didn’t put much thought into it.

THE SICK THING THAT HAPPENED TO EMILY WHEN SHE WAS YOUNGER

While TUESDAY THE 17^TH is the weakest entry here, SICK THING is the most disappointing.

Emily has skype-like chats with her boyfriend James. She’s just moved into a new apartment, and pretty soon she begins to suspect it’s haunted. Also, we learn that when she was younger she had problems with self-mutilation—a problem she seems to be picking up again.

SICK THING is very well directed and acted. The skype angle—which doesn’t really make sense in a film full of VHS tapes, but whatever—works wonderfully in bringing the scares, as James (and the audience) can spot things creeping in the dark behind Emily before she notices them.

However, when the “twist” is revealed, it’s like a bunch of hot air being let out of a balloon. It’s so incredibly lame and nonsensical that it downright made me mad. Director Joe Swanberg had a great thing going here, and then, for some strange reason, decided to sabotage it completely with an ending that is, to put it bluntly, fucking stupid.

10/31/98

As the saying goes, you save the best for last, and that is certainly true with our last story, 10/31/98, directed by a group of filmmakers known as Radio Silence.

Like AMATURE NIGHT, 10/31/98 is about a group of frat-boy types, but unlike AMATURE NIGHT, the guys in this segment are likeable and funny; we actually enjoy following them around.

It’s Halloween night, and four friends are trying to find a Halloween party they were invited to. They find what they THINK is the right house, but once inside, they discover it’s empty. Or is it?

10/31/98 is both amusing and scary. It has an almost “kitchen sink” approach to it, where the filmmakers throw every haunted house cliché in the book at you, and it all works incredibly well. I certainly hope Radio Silence tackles some more horror stuff in the future, because they have a real knack for knowing what makes horror fans tick.

With a little trimming here and there V/H/S could’ve been truly fantastic. As it is, we’ll just have to settle for a mix of pretty darn good and mediocre. As far as grading the entries, here’s how I’d do it:

TAPE 56: C-
AMATEUR NIGHT: C-
SECOND HONEYMOON: A
TUESDAY THE 17^th: D-
THE SICK THING THAT HAPPENED TO EMILY WHEN SHE WAS YOUNGER: C+
10/31/98: A+

V/H/S is currently available On Demand and also via Amazon Streaming. It’ll also have a limited theatrical run sometime in October. It's not excellent, but it's worth watching maybe once. 

DON'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT MY BAD REPUTATION: The Village

Don't Give A Damn About My Bad Reputation is a feature I've wanted to do for some time. Basically, I will be taking a look at films that have really bad reputations, and giving my opinion on if they were judged too harshly (or if they really are just dog shit).

THE VILLAGE
2004
Directed by M. Night Shyamalan


It may be hard to believe now that his name has sort of become a joke, but there was a time when M. Night Shyamalan was on top of the world.

After The Sixth Sense, audiences and critics were madly in love with this man with the hard to pronounce name. He was on a pretty damn good run too, with pretty much all of his films following The Sixth Sense being well regarded and making good coin at the box office.

Then came The Village.

The Village was the beginning of the end for Shyamalan. He followed it with the abysmal Lady in the Water, and then The Happening, where killer trees make people kill themselves. I have a soft spot in my heart for The Happening, just because it's so bat-shit insane that I refuse to believe he was being serious when he made the film. I like to think of it as a big-budget version of Birdemic.

But back to The Village. As was the case with all of Shyamalan's films at the time, The Village had a lot of hype built around it. The marketing for the film made it look like it was going to be straight-up horror. Cast member Sigourney Weaver was quoted as saying after she read the screenplay she had nightmares. People were excited for the film.

And then it came out and people more or less took a big shit on it.

So what's the deal with The Village? Is it really a big old mess, or did it get unfairly maligned?

The film is set in a small village, seemingly cut off from the world, during an undisclosed time in the past. The village is surrounded by ominous woods, and the town elders warn people to never cross the barrier into those woods. For you see, spooky creatures called Those We Don't Speak Of lurk there. The village has a truce with them--they don't come into the village as long as the villagers stay out of their woods.

Everyone seems to live in peace and tranquility--until animals start turning up dead and skinned, and the creatures start coming into the town late at night and giving everyone the creeps.

Nestled into this plot is the story of Ivy, played wonderfully by Bryce Dallas Howard. Ivy is blind, but she possesses the ability to see people's "colors" (or auras, if you will.) Lucius (Joaquin Phoenix) has a big crush on Ivy. So does the mentally handicapped Noah (Adrien Brody, who is fantastic at playing these type of characters).

As the story unfolds, Lucius is badly wounded, and the only hope of saving him is to retrieve "medicines" from the world beyond the woods. It's up to Ivy to set off to retrieve them, risking her life for the man she loves.

Here's the biggest problem with The Village: the advertising.

Every trailer, every commercial, every print ad went out of its way to literally SCREAM into the audiences face that this was going to be a BIG ASS HORROR FILM. It was going to scare your bones out of your body. You were going to shit the bed at night, shivering under your sheets. This was a film from the director of THE SIXTH SENSE, and it was going to send you to an early grave with fright!

None of that is true. Yes, there are creepy moments in the film--after all, there is a subplot about monsters. But The Village is NOT a horror film. It is a drama and a love story with supernatural elements.

The film looks gorgeous. Say what you will about Shyamalan as a writer (and I agree, the man has drastically lost his edge in the writing department), he really knows how to shoot a film. He's assisted greatly by the breathtaking cinematography of the always fantastic Roger Deakins. Deakins makes each shot look like an Andrew Wyeth painting come to life.

The costumes are perfect. The sets realistic. The actors believable. And the soundtrack, by James Newton Howard with violin accompaniment by superstar violinist Hilary Hahn is heartbreakingly beautiful; one of the best scores I've ever heard, up there with Nick Cave and Warren Ellis' soundtrack for The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. To put it bluntly, The Village is a very good movie.

But there's another problem, besides the misleading marketing: the trademark Shyamalan Twist Ending.

At the time this movie came out, Shyamalan's name was synonymous with twist endings. The Sixth Sense, after all, had one of the biggest twist endings in film history. Shyamalan sort of got shoe-horned into this task; it seemed like he felt he HAD to give each film a twist ending, or else his fans would be disappointed.

The Village does have a twist ending; several, actually. The following is a SPOILER, but since the movie is eight years old, it shouldn't matter at this point.

Our first twist comes when we discover that there ARE no monsters. The town elders have been making them up to sort of the keep the townsfolk in line. Yet, when Ivy goes into the woods, she does indeed run into a monster. The monster however turns out to be Noah in a costume--it was Noah who was killing and skinning all the animals in town.

Then comes the even BIGGER twist. Through the entire film, we are made to believe these events are taking place in the past. It turns out that's not true at all--it's the present, and the elders have again pulled the wool over the younger townsfolk's eyes. They set up the village as a sort of experiment; a way to escape the horrors of the "real world."

The more you think about this twist, the dumber it seems, and I suspect this also played a part in derailing the film for a lot of people. But this twist, despite it's large implications, is presented in a very after-the-fact way. It doesn't really hold much bearing on the plot, so really it should be easy to get over it if you think it's dumb.

So, was The Village unjustly maligned? I think so. And now--years after its release--might be a perfect time to revisit the film without all the stigma. If you go into the film expecting more of a dramatic thriller than a shock-till-you-drop horror film, I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.

Final Verdict (Give it a Second Chance or It Turns out it Really IS Bad!): Give it a Second Chance.

Review: I AM A GHOST

I Am a Ghost is one of those rare ghost stories that's told from the perspective of the one haunting the house, rather than those being haunted.

Anna Ishida is Emily, a woman from a seemingly Victorian time stuck in a loop. She keeps reliving the same random events every day, and she also finds herself communicating with a medium she can not see, named Sylvia. 

Emily died in the house she haunts, and Sylvia is trying to get her to move on--but it's not quite working, and neither woman can figure out why.

To say any more would spoil the film, so that's all you need to know. The less you know, the more effective this film is.

I Am a Ghost is a slow-burn, reminiscent of Ti West's House of the Devil, which also features a female character trapped in a spooky old house, slowly building towards a frightening climax.

This is essentially a one-woman show, and Anna Ishida does a fine job of carrying the film. She's not as polished as a "Hollywood actress", but this helps with the out-of-time nature of the character. 

Again, this is a slow-burn of a movie; some people may lose patience after seeing Emily cook the same two eggs for the fifth time, but the build up is worth it. When the horror finally kicks in, it's all the more effective.

It always helps to have a good setting for your film, especially if your film is of a lower-budget, and the old house in I Am a Ghost is perfect. It's clearly a real house--not a set--adding realism and a nicely preserved historical look. Director H.P. Mendoza employees a few nifty tricks to keep the mostly quiet movie engaging; for one thing, the film itself is presented in a frame reminiscent of an old photograph, with rounded edges. Split-screens and washed-out colors help with atmosphere and actually contribute to the film, rather than just feeling like they were added to "look cool."

If there's one complaint I have with the film, it's the (vocal) performance of Jeannie Barroga, as the psychic Sylvia. Never seen and only heard, Barroga's line-delivery feels very flat, almost as if she's just reading her lines off a piece of paper into a microphone, and not putting much feeling into them. But that's not enough of a problem to derail the movie. 

At 74 minutes, I Am a Ghost never over-stays its welcome. It knows just when to end, and doesn't drag things out any further than necessary. 

It may not be the slickest of ghost movies, but it's certainly one of the more effective, with a final act that will leave you chilled and disturbed. 

Review: LUNOPOLIS

I’ve watched Lunopolis twice now, and I feel like watching it a third time.

What a world this is where I want to watch a movie called Lunopolis three times!

This is the tagline of Lunopolis: There are people on the moon, they’re from the future, and they’re running our government.

Right away you want to throw this into the rubbish bin. But Lunopolis is a surprisingly fun movie about people who live on the moon and control our government. It seems really cheesy, and at times it is. But it’s also well done, and even creepy at times. Who knew a movie about Moon Men could be creepy? Not me, or Tom Hanks, who LOVES the moon, could have predicted such a thing.

The movie makes fun of Scientology and it has a fucking flying car in it. And a time machine. Also a moon rock. 

There’s a scene where a character yells “You can stop the charade, we HAVE your moon rock!” and is being serious.

Also, everyone who was ever good at anything or famous, like Albert Einstein, Ben Franklin, Hitler or Frankenstein was from the Moon. 

Why aren’t you watching this right now? It’s on Netflix Instant. It has a really cool soundtrack that sounds a lot like Explosions in the Sky and Mogwai. 

I give Lunopolis 4 out of 4 Moons.

Review: THE GREY

The Grey was a really poorly marketed film.

If you saw trailers or TV spots for the film, you probably got one thing out of it: LIAM NEESON FIGHTING FUCKING WOLVES OMG. HE MAKES “GLASS” KNUCKLES OUT OF TINY VODKA BOTTLES AND KILLS TEN THOUSAND WOLVES WHILE SCREAMING.

That is not at all what The Grey is like.

The Grey, believe it or not, is a surprisingly philosophical look at mortality and faith. Also it has killer wolves.

Liam Neeson stars as a sad, quiet, ass-kicking man named Ottway. He works for some oil company, where his job is to have a beard and also to shoot wolves and other animals so they wont eat the oil workers. 

Ottway and the rest of the workers are flying back to Anchorage Alaska when their plane goes bonkers and crashes. A bunch-o-people die, and the survivors go about trying to…survive. Easier said than done, because besides the fact that it’s freezing cold and snowy wind keeps blowing everywhere, they happen to have crashed near the den of a pack of big ass cartoon wolves who want to eat their fucking faces off.

One by one, the men are picked off by wolves, while Ottway tries to lead them to safety. 

The film was directed by Joe Carnahan, who made one good movie once, called Narc. Then everything he did after that was fucking awful. It’s nice to see he’s getting back into the “good movie” game. It looks like he’s been watching some Christopher Nolan films, because the film has a very Nolan-esq vibe to it.

It would have been VERY easy for The Grey to go wrong. I mean, just the premise alone—a bunch of guys fighting off wolves—screams B-MOVIE. But the script, by Carnahan and Ian Mackenzie Jeffers, goes above and beyond what is expected of it. Instead of just having the group of men be stereotypical, underdeveloped hard-asses, the script fleshes each character out, so that when they meet their wolfy demise, it actually is effective. We WANT these guys to survive. They don’t though…(SPOILERZ).

Liam Neeson is always good, even when he’s in garbage. But he does some of his best work in years in The Grey. He doesn’t feel like he’s collecting a paycheck—he feels like he’s embodying the character he’s playing.

It’s important to go into The Grey with a clear head, and NOT expecting it to be about LIAM NEESON: WOLF PUNCHER. It’s also important to go into the film realizing you’re going to walk out feeling really depressed.

A good alternate title for the film would be THE GREY: IS GOD REAL? NO HE’S NOT.

I give The Grey 4 Wolves out of 4.

Review: EXIT HUMANITY

ZOMBIE MOVIES!

Are you sick of them yet? I sure as hell am.

There was a time when the prospect of new zombie films was very exciting. Now, there seems to be a new low-budget indie zombie movie hitting Redbox and Netflix every week.

In this day and age of zombie overload, Exit Humanity does the impossible and creates a pretty original and interesting zombie film.

Exit Humanity is set several years after the end of the Civil War. Edward Young (Mark Gibson) is a shell of a man, having lost both his wife and his son to the walking dead. Pretty much done with life, Edward sets off to do one final task: scatter his sons ashes at a waterfall that brought him peace during the war.

Along the way he blows away zombies, and runs into Issac, who also is pretty adept at zombie killing. Issac says that a crazy general (Bill Moseley) and his gang of crazy soldiers have kidnapped Issac's sister, along with a bunch of other people, in hopes of finding a "cure" to the zombie outbreak.

So Edward agrees to help Issac, and before long, Edward, Issac and Issac's sister Emma are hiding out with a woman named Eve (played by the mom from E.T., aka Dee Wallace). Eve is thought of as a witch, and she has a few secrets she's not very proud of.

Meanwhile, the general and his men are out for blood, and chaos ensues.

Exit Humanity has a very simple story, and the whole "crazy evil army people looking for a cure" story-line is a nice little nod to Day of the Dead, but what drives the film is its competent production values. This is clearly a low budget film, but director John Geddes does a great job of not letting you realize that. The film looks gorgeous, and Geddes applies a neat little trick: whenever he has a scene that would require a bigger budget, it's presented as an animation, which ties into the sketches that Edward Young makes in his journal.

Also adding greatly to the film is Brian Cox, who narrates the story with Terrence Malick-esqe prose. 

But Exit Humanity is not without its flaws. The biggest is that the movie feels way too long. It starts to lag in the middle, and it's clear that a lot of padding is going on to stretch things out. Trimmed of about ten to twenty minutes, the film would be much tighter. 

I love Bill Moseley; he is of course a genre favorite. But he's pretty terrible in the movie. The rest of the cast does a fantastic job, which causes Moseley to stand out like a sore thumb as he chews the scenery and yells and knocks things over trying to act crazy. The movie also loses some points for totally wasting awesome character actor Stephen McHattie in a pretty thankless, nothing role. Things would have been better suited if Moseley and McHattie had switched characters.

This may seem a bit nit-picky since this is a low-budget film, but the zombie make-up is inconsistent and distracting. At times, it looks really good--creepy and effective. At others it looks like total crap--like people with white goop smeared on their faces. 

But overall, Exit Humanity does a pretty good job of injecting some life into the zombie genre. 

The music is very good, as is the costume design; these things are important. A good soundtrack and good costumes can make your low budget schlock look like a million bucks.

The zombie genre may be beating an undead horse (see what I did there??), but Exit Humanity takes it into a different direction, and succeeds where so many others have failed.