Reviews

Desperate to see a decent horror film for a change, I tentatively watched Feast, and was amazed! It's tongue-in-cheek from the outset. The tone is very much From Dawn till Dusk meets Dog Soldiers meets Tremors.

The story is simple: low-lifes trapped in a bar while alien-lifes run amok and pick them off.

Looking for gore, yet something funny to lift your spirits? Get a big box of popcorn, some beers, leave your brain parked outside and watch Feast. Oh, and try to guess in advance which character buys it next.

My only question is...Why isn't this movie released in the theatres yet?

Ah, the 70's. A decade when filmakers made films for themselves and the audience, before the accountants infested the studios!

In that respect, Texas Chainsaw Massacre goes against the grain of any horror film made in the 80's or 90's, with the exception of most Asian horror and possibly James Cameron's Aliens.

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is a brutal, ugly film with no redeeming qualities whatsoever. And succeeds all the more for it. The pseudo-documentary feel gives the film a distinctly unpolished look, whilst all the characters, even the teenage victims are, by degrees, particularly repellent. Especially the wheelchair-bound Franklin, of whom we are made to empathise with, not sympathise, in his isolation from the rest of the group. His disability is not patronised nor made any issue of, he is the 'runt' of the herd that is about to be slaughtered, and the film makes no apologies for it.

Having said that, the film does have one redeeming feature. It is a particularly effective eco-horror movie. The Sawyer (read: Saw Yer)family, having worked for generations in the local slaughterhouse, are unable to discriminate between human and animal fodder. Their level of innate cruelty knows no bounds: if it moves, torture it-then kill it! We actually start to think about what we are doing to animals every day in turning them into burger-fodder for the masses.

The anti-McDonalds/Burger King message is strong, and should make vegetarians of us all.

The quality of the acting in The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is unsurpassed in any film of this genre, most notably, the hitchhiker whom the teenagers pick up early in the film.

Special note must be made of the soundtrack which shuns any derivative musical score in favour of a genuinely unsettling blend of industrial noise. Like everything else in this film it plays very much on the psych.

There is no redemption in the finale of this movie, nor are we given any rationale for the family's actions. Everything and everyone is working on a base animal instinct to survive and in that lies the brutality and success of this film.

Because of this, we come away thinking we've seen a lot more than what is actually shown. There is very little blood in The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. What there is, is the psychological reduction of the audience to their basest level: that of pure instinct for self-preservation.

For around 83 minutes we are witness to a survival horror stripped of all gloss and pretensions. And an audience stripped of their civility.

That Tarantino has a real passion for the movies, we all knew. That he loves his quirky left-of-center soundtracks we were never in any doubt. That he could successfully pull off another ultra-stylish genre-busting event movie whilst From Dawn Till Dusk and Jackie Brown, good as they were, still withered in the dazzling light of Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction we wondered and wondered.

Has Quentin Tarantino, writer and director of Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction still got what it takes? Has Kill Bill been worth the wait. Or is it merely a "good movie"?

Well relax. Because Kill Bill Vol.1 sees Tarantino back to his true form.

The story is simple. A basic revenge movie. But this is only a structure on which Tarantino can hang his stylish visual feast. From the outset, his influences come thick and fast; martial arts; 70's baxploitation; Akira Kurasowa; Alfred Hitchcock; Sergio Leone and many more. However, how many would have ticked the checkbox marked "Japanese Anime"? That many, huh?

Kill Bill is ultra violent, but in a graphic novel sort of way that is hard to take offence. Anyone who has seen 'other' Asian exploitation movies such as Battle Royale (with cheese!) and Ichi the Killer, even Monty Python and the Holy Grail, will know what to expect.

The film constantly surprises and always entertains. But the biggest revelation is Uma Thurman as 'The Bride'. She not only kicks ass, she also gives a performance which constantly walks a tightrope between seriousness and parody with such skill, she gives Johnny Depp in Pirates... a run for his money. So much so, the Tarantino/Thurman partnership could almost be the new Scorcese/De Niro for the New Millenia! We'll see.

To say Kill Bill 'kicks ass' is no measure of its success: Pulp Fiction doesn't 'kick ass'; Reservoir Dogs doesn't 'kick ass'. What they do do, however, is to showcase a blinding storytelling talent that excites and inspires a new generation of kids all around the World into being film directors like the movies of Peckinpah, Hitchcock, Kurasowa, Leone, Scorcese did for the present generation of filmakers.

Quentin Tarantino's unabashed passion for the movies is there for all to see. It excites, inspires and above all, rekindles OUR love in the movies.

That is success. That's what Kill Bill does.

This is what happens when an inexperienced film maker with a genuine passion for the horror genre is let loose with a camera.

Cabin Fever has some interesting ideas let down badly by poor direction and acting. Any tension is scuppered by the hadhoc way so many characters are introduced and despatched for no or little reason.

For secluded woods, there were more people walking around than Picadilly Circus at the height of the tourist season. I found myself exasperated at the nth appearance of yet another new character only for them to disappear again.

Affectionate nods were made to all our favourite 70's and 80's horror movies: The Thing; Night of the Living Dead; The Evil Dead; The Andromeda Strain; Texas Chainsaw Massacre with liberal doses of Deliverance and Twin Peaks thrown in.

And here lies the problem. The un-selfconscious way he introduces these tokens to other movies is admirable and shows the promise of a great and subtle director of the genre. However, it also shows how poor Roth's movie is in comparison to these seminal greats.

Where the movie works best is when he is in David Lynch mode and the characters in and around the shop are working at full throttle. Here, Roth gives a genuinely disturbing and very funny character studies of the secluded mountain folk.

With more focus and discipline in the direction, this could have been a great movie. Instead, it only shows promise of a director with a genuine passion of horror films who wants to break free from the shackles of 90's horror parodies such as Scream. And this is not a bad thing.

I saw this as part of a special screening where the audience had to fill out questionnaires at the end in order for the cinema to give it a 'recommended' star. I didn't even know what the movie was going to be before it came on.

As a fan of the Ring trilogy, The Eye, and Asian horror in general, I was pleasantly surprised to see it was Hideo Nakata's Dark Water.

I wasn't disappointed. This has all the disturbing hallmarks of Ringu et al. However, it is also a very thoughtful and moving essay on the problems of single parenthood, the effects of divorce on children and rejection.

Hitomi Kuroki struggles to maintain custody of her daughter whilst sending her to a school with abusive teachers, trying also to hold down a job. All the while, the ceiling to her apartment in a run down tenement block is dramatically leaking water.

We feel total sympathy for them both as their initial enthusiasm falls into fatigue at their situation.

Oh, did I also mention there is also the ghost of a little girl on the prowl.

This film succeeds on two levels. As a social commentary in a similar vein to Urban Ghost Story, and as a truly scary experience.

Hideo Nakata uses all the techniques he showed in Ringu to give us a genuinely disturbing experience. The Eastern style of acting is not to everyone's taste, but it is high quality nonetheless.

Disturbing and thought provoking, it will resonate in your mind long afterwards. Don't miss it.

Luc Besson's take on St. Joan as a confused, possibly schitzophrenic, religious fanatic whose victories against the English having as much to do with revenge for the murder of her sister as her religious beliefs is certainly interesting. He portrays her not as a great fighter, but as a flawed but inspiring leader and lateral thinker.

But not a leader in the same sense as, say, Mel Gibson's William Wallace in Braveheart. She believes she is following the signs of God, though her motives are dubious to say the least. You feel that she is just using the French army for her own murderous revenge and not just the good of her country.

As a result, the long and very bloody battles against the English do not have the same sense of victory as in Braveheart. In fact they leave a bad taste in the mouth, as they are meant to.

Milla Jovovich is simply stunning as the angry, confused teenager. I have only seen her in Resident Evil and have grown to love her style of acting, which is a crossover between theatrical and naturalistic. She can portray kick-ass strength whilst showing great vulnerability and naivity. A fine actress, though not to everyone's taste it seems.

Even Dustin Hoffman, an actor who never fails to irritate me, (except in Midnight Cowboy, his finest hour), gives a terrifically restrained performance as Joan's inner conscience, and is excellent as a result.

Faye Dunaway gives a fine understated performance, yet, surprisingly enough, it is John Malkovich who lets the team down somewhat. Though he doesn't spoil the movie, you know he's done better work elsewhere.

As a movie, it moves along at good pace, though anyone expecting a feel good movie like Braveheart beware. Joan of Arc is not a heart-warming tale of an underdog country's victory over the tyrannical English. This is a very affecting portrait of a flawed individual who may have used the lives of a few thousand countrymen to do battle with her own inner demons, who by chance helped lead them into liberation.

A fine movie with enough good performances for repeated viewings.

It is interesting to note that both Ridley Scott and Robert Wise never made their name from directing any one genre of film. In fact, they seem to go out of their way to make as diverse range of films as possible:

Gladiator; Thelma and Louise; The Duellists; (Ridley Scott), The Day The Earth Stood Still; West Side Story; Sound of Music; (Robert Wise).

Yet they both managed, in my view, to make the two most effective horror films in their era: The Haunting (1963, Wise) and Alien (1979, Scott).

I think what the two men have in common, is their approach to filmmaking, which is treating their audiences with great maturity. This is the antithesis of modern filmaking now, especially in the horror genre.

Scott has approached Alien as he would any one of his films: to tell a good story as effectively as possible without insulting the audience.

The result being a plot that is, if one is honest, not far removed from any of the slasher flicks of the eighties such as Friday the 13th, where the cast systematically get bumped off one by one.

Where Alien differs greatly, though, is the sheer understatedness of the whole thing. From the lighting and sets to the superb ensemble acting, the whole movie is flawless. The alien is totally believable with a life cycle of its own.

Scott paints his canvas with greys and blues, then to complete his composition, adds a splash of scarlet - (you'll know it when you see it).

Like Wise's The Haunting, Scott's Alien sticks to the adage 'less is more'. Thankfully, we hardly see the alien though one could argue for a change, as the design of the alien is so good, whether seeing just a tad MORE of the alien would have helped the audience along a bit.

It's a small point, for it doesn't detract from the fact that Alien is one of the most important films of its genre in the last 40 years. This year Alien will be 23 years old. A new generation of DVD viewers is now enjoying a movie that hasn't aged a jot and can still hold its own in the 21st century.

Again, like House On Haunted Hill, I came away from 13 Ghosts with a sad feeling of what might have been.

I don't know, maybe I'm old fashioned, but I would have liked this remake to have been made around the time of the original; they made films for adults then, you know. Putting in lots of gore does not an adult film make.

Apart from some shock tactics, and you will jump, the film is devoid of any tension and feeling of being trapped within a machine. I would have liked the emphasis placed more on how the characters get from A to B within the glass machine. For a much superior example of this go and see Cube.

The glass walls were a nice feature, but I get the feeling the design was different for different's sake. There were lots of narrow corridors, however, I missed the big spooky rooms of a more traditional haunted house.

The ghosts were designed for cheap shock value and lacked any genuine creepiness. They looked more like the ghosts of WWF wrestlers!

For me, the film failed to define the characters well at all. This was not neccessarily the fault of the actors. The greiving father character had to communicate the loss of his wife, his home and the protectiveness of his kids in a movie that quickly resorted to the rapid editing of a pop video.

The protective parent under adverse conditions was not covered particularly well here; for a better example one only has to see Ripley and Newt in Aliens.

13 Ghosts is not a terrible movie. Anyone who enjoyed House On Haunted Hill, (and I did), and has the DVD on their shelves, (and I do), will find this an adequate stablemate, (I probably will), but if you're looking for a serious ghost adventure film with fully rounded characters, like Aliens with ghosts, then we still have a bit of a wait until filmakers stop making films for teenagers.

Doncha love it when you go into a movie with no preconceptions or anticipations whatsoever and you come out having seen a total gem?

The film is funny, poignant, subtle, intelligent and entertaining in equal measures.

The performances are all spot on, especially Birch. And when did you not see a cracking job from Buscemi? I've not seen characterisations this subtle and well observed since Rob Reiner's This Is Spinal Tap.

The film speaks volumes about teen angst and a disillusioned teenager growing up in (and out of) some mid-western town.

I could go on about the evolving, and diminishing relationships between the characters, the special courage of choosing not to fit in to the society around you, and the racial hypocrisy lying under a veneer of decency within the community, but I'll let you discover all this for yourself.

The soundtrack is the most refreshing thing I've heard since Tarantino's Pulp Fiction.

Give yourself a treat, go and see this movie.

Jeeps Creeps was a rare case where I got more than I bargained for. I have seen so many contemporary 'horror' films full of teenagers I cannot relate to getting systematically bumped off, only to find the twist ending has less twist than a slice of lemon.

The first hour or so finds only two teenagers, a brother and sister, (so no cliched nookie here, chaps!) on the road. This part of the movie is the most tense and knocks the spots off Speilberg's Duel and virtually anything Carpenter has done. One particular sequence is Hitchcock to a T. And I found myself on the edge of my seat, a rare thing indeed!

Being only two protagonists for so long, the film had to rely on a good script and character development. This it delivers. The brother and sister team are very good indeed and reminded me of the good character driven movies of yore.

However, when we meet the woe of their concerns, it's "Hello Buffy" time. But there is just enough to keep serious horror film affictionado interested, with some good direction and ensemble acting.

The ending is very brave and a fitting tribute to the excellent beginning.

The film as a whole, therefore, is a bit of a s**t sandwich. But if you like warm homemade granary bread and don't mind a tasteless filling, then you'll get along with this film fine. I did.

Oh dear. Apparently, I have to write a minimum of 4 lines for this review.

This is lazy, lazy film-making in the extreme.

Whoever did this ought to be thoroughly ashamed of themse...ah, I can't be bothered either.

Being a fan of the Final Fantasy computer games, I could relate to this film more so than most non-gamers.

Whereas '...The Spirits Within' has contrived-storyline-yet-stunning-animation computer gamers have come to expect from the FF franchise, it had none of the interaction. On the other hand, non-gamers who may not appreciate the technical efforts have found the lack of strong story hard to accept. And this is the problem of trying to bridge the two genres of computer games and cinematic entertainment such as this movie has tried admirably to do.

However, lets not judge too harshly. This film should be embraced by all. For I see this as the start of interactive cinema of the future.

One day we may see ourselves up on the big screen, with our faces mapped onto 'synthespians'. And rather than be a passive audience, soon we may be able to interact with the movie itself.

Also, the producers say the character, Aki, may go on to 'star' in other movies and become the first virtual movie star. It's innovative ideas such as this that establish change in an industry that has become stagnant with photo-realistic dinosaurs and teen screamers.

We just have to see the bigger picture.

After seeing Tim Burton's excellent Sleepy Hollow, and superlative Ed Wood, I was expecting much more of a character driven movie, with the characterization and spiritual philosopies that elevated the original movie out of the pure science fiction genre and into a cerebral adventure film with acutely observed social comments.

Unfortunately, the film suffers from poor script and direction right from the minute the astronaut crashlands.

They knew from the outset that they would never produce an ending to rival the original, and any cinema-goer in their right minds would never expect one. But they could have at least got the beginning right. Neither Mark Wahlberg's character nor the tension is ever developed, so when he is confronted by the apes: we feel nothing.

The humans, though they have the benefit of increased intelligence and speech, are poorly utilized. And Kris Kristofferson is criminally wasted.

The make-up and effects are, as you would expect, fantastic. However, despite improved flexibility in the make-up, there is little warmth in either the performances or direction that made millions of kids go ape-nuts in the seventies. Bonham-Carter's Ari, whilst convincing, is not a patch on Kim Hunter's Zira. Roth's quite brilliant performance as Thade virtually carries this film and makes it the one reason to stick with it to the end.

Did I say end? Well, the less said about that the better.

With the superb choice of Angelina Jolie to play the eponymous role, they were obvoiusly half way there to creating a great adaption of the computer game.

The producers succeeded admirably to bring the puzzle elements found in the game to the big screen, however, everything else seemed strangely empty. And the statue sequence was completely devoid of any tension. Nowhere in the film did Lara seem under any sort of real threat.

As a fan of the games, I was un-offended by this first attempt, but I look forward to the sequel.

The music was crap. Listen to the music on its own and it doesn't bring visions of adventure and mystery like a soundtrack should.

Nathan McRee, the (first three) game's composer, is sorely, sorely missed.