A Message From "Captain America: The First Avenger"

This is a little different from the normal stuff posted on Cinema Freaks, but I need to get some things off my chest. I saw "Captain America: The First Avenger" last month. I am not going to do a full-fledged review of it because TH already did one and I agree with most of what he said him. However, I wanted to touch upon a particular aspect of the film that had an effect on me.

There was one theme that really sticks out after seeing "Captain": selflessness. Steve Rogers is rejected by the Army five times before he can successfully enlist. He then does everything in his power to win the war and save the lives of his comrades, risking his life on a number of occasions. But he is not alone in his actions. Peggy Carter stands in front of a car driven by a Nazi spy, shoot at it repeatedly and is almost hit by the vehicle before Rogers forces her out of the way. Those who are doing their jobs still manage to go above and beyond the call of duty. Howard Stark, despite being a very wealthy civilian who is the biggest defense contractor for the government (and supplying half the genetic code for his initially egoistic son, Tony Stark a.k.a Iron Man) violates military regulations by personally flying over enemy territory to drop off Rogers in order to save 400 Allied POWs. Colonel Chester Phillips (Tommy Lee Jones' character), despite being of an advanced age, leads a charge into the headquarters of Red Skull (who says that this is no country for old men?). Even the minor characters seem to get in on the act. When Rogers tries to apprehend the Nazi spy I mentioned earlier, the villain throws a kid into the water in an effort to divert his attention. However, the kid quickly stops Rogers from aiding him, shouting out that he can swim and does not need assistance. Seriously, how many other movies can you think of where a kid says "It's not a big deal, I got this covered! Now keep chasing after the bad guy!" Not enough, I tell you!

These actions and feelings in "Captain" due to the fact this was taking place during World War II, where everyone had a sense of common purpose. Granted, "The Good War" has always had a tendency to be romanticized by the general public, but given that this is a superhero movie, this can be excused and you cannot help but get caught up in the unabashed red-white-and-blue patriotism on display. Despite this fact, we have and still see a lot of the bravery depicted in the film that actually takes place in real life. In a scene that is shown in the trailer, Tommy Lee Jones throws a fake grenade among his troops to test their dedication and while the rest scatter, Rogers jumps on it without hesitation (Jones then walks away saying he's still too skin). This scene is actually very similar to an 2006 incident in Iraq where Private First Class Ross A. McGinnis jumped on a grenade to save his fellow soldiers. Tragically, this one was real and he died when it exploded; he was posthumously given the Medal of Honor. The end of the film also mirrored real-life. I will not spoil it, but I will just say that it has similarities to the heroics that took place on September 11th (the tenth anniversary will be shorty upon us). I do not think that either of the comparisons were intentional and people might be offended that I am drawing parallels between real-life deaths to what happened in a summer popcorn flick based on a comic book hero. Comics, particularly back in the Golden Age, set high moral standards for everyone to achieve. But while they may have been and are more idealistic than realistic, as we have seen, some people actually live up to those standards. And even for those who do not, the heroics that take place in both popular media and reality can still be used to remind people that they can overcome great obstacles in order to achieve a level of greatness and improve the world around them.

Now, a lot of you will read this and think: wow, The Observer is really preachy, what has he ever done to make a difference, all this stuff is not going to happen, blah blah blah. I admit that I am a realist; I believe people are naturally self-interested and that to ask for them to be unselfish is very impractical and presumptuous. I also by no means the most generous person around. So why am I doing this? Because I am looking at what is happening in this country and this world right now, and I believe we are right at the moment of something happening that will change how we live and who we are, and if we do not adapt in a certain way, we are going to be in serious danger. But I am optimistic enough to think that we can get threw it and be better off as a result of it, and selflessness can help lead the way.

Now that is an ideal to aspire to.

I do not own the image above. It is for entertainment purposes only. Please do not sue me.

REVIEW: The Tooth Fairy (2006)

There are some things you just can’t make scary. No matter how hard you try, they just aren’t intimidating or fearful in any way. The tooth fairy is probably near the top of the list along with toenail clippings, old newspapers and dirty dishrags – except dirty dishrags can become scary with chloroform on them, so that’s probably lower on the list than the tooth fairy.

But people keep trying for some reason – first Darkness Falls and now this. Do they seriously think it’s that good of an idea to the point where we need multiple movies about it? I’ll spoil the surprise and say no, it’s not worth watching. But you’ll read the rest of the review anyway! Muahahaha!

Director: Chuck Bowman

Starring: Lochlyn Munro, Chandra West

Website: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0473553/

The film is directed by Chuck Bowman, who’s directed such classics in the past as Christy: The Movie and Spring Fling!...yeah, I’ve never heard of any of those either. It stars Lochlyn Munro, who was in Freddy VS Jason, so you know you’re getting the best star power you can get with this movie! But it also has Chandra West from White Noise and several Puppet Master sequels! Woah! The stars they brought on board for this movie are just BLOWING ME AWAY!

The film itself starts with happy, bouncy music over cheery 1940s small-town imagery that makes me wonder if I turned on the wrong movie. It looks more like a cheap Hallmark card than the opening of a horror movie. What’s the deal?

Then we see two dumb little kids going to a creepy house where apparently they can get a bike if they go inside and pull out their teeth for a creepy old disfigured lady. Doesn’t that sound like a good deal? But she chops him up with a machete after he does it anyway...raw deal, man; raw deal.

Yeah because that big red bike in the background doesn't at all take away from the seriousness and grimness of this scene...idiots.

In the present day, we see a woman named Darcy and her daughter Pam driving along and stopping at a gas station. It goes well until she meets two country bumpkins who I think were rejected from the last Texas Chainsaw Massacre circus show. They push her around a bit and get especially violent when they find out she’s married to a guy named Peter, and then they try to rape her until she steps on one of their feet.

Best service at a gas station ever?

Meanwhile, we see Peter, who is opening up a new hotel in town, where he works with a guy who seemingly doesn’t own any shirts. They get their first tenant, a hot chick who calls herself STAR, because she has four names that all spell that out. I think this cast of characters in general belongs in some kind of raunchy sex comedy or something, not a horror movie. Maybe they got mixed up with the cast of Bucky Larson: Born to be a Star or something – probably about equal levels of dignity either way, so it’s an easy mistake.

He's kind of like Gru from Angel...if he was a lot less funny and well written.

The daughter, Pam, meets this little girl who wears an old fashioned dress and doesn’t know who Harry Potter is, so of course she’s a ghost, even though the movie tries to play it up like it’s a surprise. And if you’re surprised at that, here’s another zinger for you: trying to put out a fire with gasoline is a bad, bad idea. The ghost-girl gives us a big old info dump about how there was once an old witch lady who lived in the house and killed kids after taking their teeth. Why? You’d find a more worthwhile answer in a Magic 8 Ball. Seriously, there’s no explanation. Does she just like teeth? Does she get off on it?

Anyway, we also learn that she just ‘knows’ somehow when kids lose their teeth (the explanation in Darkness Falls is looking pre-etty good right now, huh?) and comes to kill them when they lose the last one, or something. Pam thinks she’s safe at first, but then in an act of extreme coincidence, she hits her mouth on a rock after the ghost-girl leaves and loses her very last baby tooth. Aw snap.

The movie just kind of plods along aimlessly without any kind of actual interesting things going on, and I'd rather watch a 6 hour video of nothing but tax accountants filing papers and picking their noses than watch this for even one more scene. The characters seem to enjoy going on long philosophical diatribes that basically mean nothing. Like I love this one scene where Star and that kid who works for Peter have this conversation outside at night about going to college – it’s pretty much like watching two people who were raised without ever being exposed to normal human interaction, like in some kind of scientific experiment, try to converse. The awkwardness is just off the charts!

Oh, and occasionally there are a few scenes of Peter and Darcy beating up the two bumpkins from the beginning of the movie, but even those just feel like padding anyway. Way too much time is spent on this storyline, and since it literally amounts to nothing when they’re randomly killed off without any resolution to their storyline, it’s probably the most overt example of padding I’ve seen in a movie since the first half of Them.

There's also this lady in the picture below, who is an incredibly phoned-in and half-assed attempt at forcing more plot dumps on us, as she apparently knows everything with no explanation or reason for it. She comes by the house to warn the family about the evil stuff happening in the town, deciding quite smartly to dress all in black and sneak around like a house burglar - why? Just so the movie can shoehorn in a jump scare or two. I'm actually starting to miss The Ice Pirates' stupid joke set-ups watching this trash.

This is PJ Soles, who used to be in classic movies like Halloween, Carrie and Stripes. Now she's a minor character in this movie. I'll pause for a moment to let the incredible sense of empathetic shame wash over you in waves.

Things get serious when that guy who works for Peter is attacked in the middle of the night, tied up and put through a wood chipper by the movie’s ‘tooth fairy’ killer. Everyone is heartbroken and deduces masterfully that he must have accidentally fallen in. Next time put a safety label on that damn thing, Peter. You gotta be more careful. Oh, and after that we get some scenes where Darcy and Peter start to reconsider their staying in this town. Yeah, they really have to think hard about whether or not to stay there after Darcy was almost raped by the locals and after Peter's hired help got brutally murdered. It's just such a tough decision!

An every day occurrence.

"Oh, I think we should move back to the city after all these bad things that happened. Like the hillbillies that tried to rape me, the murder in our basement and the crazy old lady next door telling us there are evil things afoot...we're not having a good time."
"No, Darcy, that's a silly idea, I need this place to write stories because...well, because the script says we need to stay here! Hur hur!"

And wait a minute, why is this tooth fairy killer murdering these random people? The movie outright stated that she only went after kids losing their last tooth, and even in the beginning when we saw the prologue, there was no indication she was going on any kind of murdering spree. So what the hell? This movie can’t even get ITS OWN BACKSTORY right! There’s no logic here! It would have been easy to set up some kind of escaped mental patient killing people and taking their teeth just because he’s, you know, crazy, but this half-assed attempt at a supernatural ghost story just falls flat altogether when they can’t even make up their minds on how it works or decide what the story is.

You know what this is? This is a great big case of indecisiveness, like they wanted to go halfway with one idea but then got another one they liked just as much, only both ideas were about as good as handing deadly assault weapons to people with questionable morals and chips on their shoulders during wartime. Either way, we all lose.

We get introduced to some other moron with a beard who is apparently old friends with Peter. He serves basically no purpose in the story except…no, he literally serves zero purpose! His longest scenes in this movie are the ones in which he has an overlong, pointless “philosophical” conversation with Star, and following that, they sleep together before his head gets cut off by the tooth fairy. That’s it. He contributes nothing else. WHY WAS HE EVEN IN THIS MOVIE? Maybe he caught Chuck Bowman doing some embarrassing sexual act with a monkey, or something, and tried to blackmail him. It wasn’t worth it, man! It wasn’t worth it!

So yeah, are you ready for the mindblowing finale? They find out that the tooth fairy killer will be destroyed if all the souls she’s captured get their teeth back from her. Yeah, that plot thread that sounds like it came from some horror parody movie? It’s being played completely serious in this. Through a “climactic” – hah hah – finale involving the tooth fairy killer being set on fire two times and eventually being killed rather lamely in broad daylight, the movie finally, mercifully, ends. PHEW.

Insert caption about how stupid and unscary this is here; I'm too lazy right now.

I rarely come across films that are literally worthless in every possible way including for reviewing – most of them at least inspire some discussion about the various technical aspects the makers got wrong. Not here! There’s nothing about this movie worth talking about at all. It’s worse than nothing – a sub-level of horrendousness previously undiscovered by film. This kind of tin-can-budget sewer slime doesn’t even deserve one second of your time. I have greatly overexaggerated its worth even by typing out this 1500 word review.

REVIEW: Don't Be Afraid of the Dark (2011)

Director: Troy Nixey

Starring: Guy Pearce, Bailee Madison, Katie Holmes

Website: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1270761/

Guillermo Del Toro comes back with another sentimental, elegant ghost tale, this time a fair bit more horror-oriented than the fantasy of Pan's Labyrinth and the over-reaching sorrow of The Orphanage. This movie has a lot in common with those, and it seems Del Toro has found his niche - ghost stories with a lot of ambiance, a historical bent and lots of countryside scenery and big, spacious old mansions. It’s a good setting and creates a very thick atmosphere that is vital to the movie.

The story revolves around a family living in a big, old mansion that has a dark secret. The father (Guy Pearce) vies to get his house on the cover of a big magazine, while the daughter Sally (Bailee Madison) explores the house and finds some rather unsettling things, like voices that talk to her from an old furnace. It’s a pretty stock story, but it’s told with some real presence and drama, and so I found it more entertaining than I would have under less artful hands. Del Toro didn’t direct this, but he did write the screenplay, and it’s fascinating how much this feels like other Del Toro-involved movies like Pan’s Labyrinth and the Orphanage, which I mentioned earlier. He has a really set-in-stone style that I find very cool, and it shines through in everything he sticks his fingers into. Director Troy Nixey is a newcomer and does an admirable job, with a good sense of pacing that escalates as the movie goes on and doesn’t feel forced or rushed. It’s nothing revolutionary but it’s solid.

The acting is pretty good. Pearce's character is straight up rude; a cliche "disbelieving parent" type found often in these movies, and Katie Holmes is a pretty stock girlfriend character, but both are played well and I never had a problem believing them. Bailee Madison does a pretty solid job at playing a scared little girl, and as she had to carry the film, this was no easy task - she performs admirably. The lighting and colors are masterfully nightmareish, appearing soft and subtle at first but turning horrifying as the film reveals its creepy, slithering tendrils and the tension explodes. I wasn't too impressed with this in the beginning, but the old Del Toro magic won me over and I found myself drawn into his musty, archaic setting and the unsettling story. More points would have been awarded for monsters that were more terrifying, though...

REVIEW: Lake Placid 2 (2007)

2007 was apparently the year for terrible Sci-Fi Channel crocodile movies, as we got the abominable Croc and also this one. Lake Placid 2 is better than Croc, and better than the original Lake Placid (if only because there’s no Bridget Fonda in this one), but seriously, is it that hard to make a movie about killer crocs that doesn’t suck? I guess that’s a dumb question considering I just watched this and am now reviewing it. So suck up your crocodile tears and let’s review Lake Placid 2.

Director: David Flores

Starring: John Schneider, Sarah Lafleur, Chad Michael Collins

Website: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0974583/

Our movie begins with two morons out on the lake doing research, just like in Croc. Only this time they’re funny! One of them says that fishing isn’t a hobby of his, which is clearly why he’s out there to begin with, and clearly, acting isn’t a hobby of his either, seeing as he’s less believable than most third grade actors in a school play. But it’s OK. The crocodile eats him and spares us his dire performance any longer.

We then switch to something much more important: Sheriff Riley, played by John Schneider of Dukes of Hazzard fame! He tells his punk son Scott to respect him, then tries to get him to talk to a hot chick who I’m sure won’t be in any of the rest of the…oh, screw it; sarcasm is pointless now. The sheriff goes into town and hears about the guy being eaten out on the lake. Like any good law enforcement officer, he waves off the whole thing as a joke and accuses the surviving scientist guy of just being on drugs the whole time, not even listening at all. Truly the best law enforcement in the world.

"You raise a good point. Allow me to contort my face and tap my chin as I ponder your query."

That is until his ex-lover Emily shows up. Emily is a wildlife researcher/bleeding heart who’s been called in as well. She also doesn’t believe there’s anything out on the lake, even when they find the severed head of the dead guy from the opening in the water. What more proof do you need? A note from the croc saying he did it? Hell, I bet even then she wouldn’t believe it! Maybe he just cut off his own head, right?

They go to see Sadie, a crazy old lady who is sadly not played by Betty White this time. Apparently it’s her sister or something; I don’t know. She says she doesn’t know anything and refuses to talk to Emily, slamming the door in her face. Emily mutters something in a clear low tone that nobody would be able to hear that well through a closed door, and Sadie opens up the door again and snaps at her again. Maybe she just has really good hearing aids? I hear the Supersonic Hear-Thru-Walls models are just flying off the shelves! Later on she shouts at them to go away through the closed door and it sounds like she's right outside with them, no barrier separating them at all. Because doors don't block or distort sound in any way! Truly a genius handled the sound editing for this movie.

Then we see some more brilliant examples of tact as Emily and Riley see a helicopter landing around the lake. Emily tells Riley it’s a guy called Struthers, who is some kind of poacher who kills endangered animals, and she keeps talking about how bad and horrible he is even though he is clearly in earshot when he’s walking up to them – nice to see she’s got such a great sense of professionalism! Or maybe it’s just poor filmmaking. Oh and I also love how he keeps saying “She likes me” to his assistant every time Emily shoots down one of his dumb quips. I think I forgot to laugh at that one. Whoops!

Look at these two; it's like the movie is stuck in 1930s cliches of explorers.

Oh, and have you picked up that the sound editing is just horrible? There's zero sense to this. Like the above scene - Emily is walking away, clearly almost out of hearing reach, but she hears Struthers making a sarcastic quip about the idea of trying to humanely get rid of the giant croc and tells him to shut up, but the sound is mixed so it sounds like she's still right there beside him and not walking away in the distance. Maybe she's just really good at throwing her voice? I don't know.

Meanwhile Scott meets up with the hot chick from before, whose name is Kerri, and her dumb jock boyfriend Thad, who has no redeeming qualities. She says she doesn’t want Scott to think they’re all a bunch of redneck hicks, to which Thad replies that he hopes Scott brought beer. Real stunning refutation of that stereotype, I must say! So they all go camping on the lake, and I’m not making a sarcastic quip where I pretend I don’t know what’s going to happen this time. You know what’s going to happen.

They meet up with Larry and Rachel, another couple who you probably won’t remember when this whole thing is over. Larry is a big fat guy with a beard and no shame, and Rachel looks like she belongs in the 50s. We’re treated to some gay wrestling between Larry and Thad in the water while Rachel says she doesn’t want to come in and get her hair wet. Oh, don’t worry honey. That won’t be your biggest problem in about ten minutes. Whoops, spoiler! Oh well.

Scott goes for a walk and displays his amazing coolness when he stands in place, not moving at all, and somehow trips and falls on his ass, sliding down a small bank and landing in the lake below. To be so amazingly inept at even the simple act of standing up straight is just awe-inspiring. That is talent right there.

"Hmmmm, yup, just standing here, enjoying the fresh open air, not doing a thing..."

"Whoops, tripped over air again! Happens all the time. Hyuck hyuck hyuck! Don't judge meeee!" *splat*

Then we switch over to the group of croc-hunters actually starting their hunt. But Emily wants to do it without killing the animal, setting up a net and some bait to try and lure the croc into it. They get something in there, I’m not sure what because it’s so poorly shot, but then the croc sneaks up on them from behind and eats several of their friends, including dorky scientist-guy from the beginning and one of the cops I think. But that doesn’t matter. What does matter is HOLY HELL, THOSE ARE SOME CUBE 2-LEVELS OF CGI BADNESS THERE!

Mnomnomnomnom...nothing like watching your arm get eaten by CGI.

You know, when Jaws did the whole ‘keep the monster hidden’ thing about 35 years ago, it was good, and suspenseful. I am not sure this is what they had in mind. Having people standing there pretending to shoot at something off screen isn’t exactly good entertainment when that’s all you show, and barely ever the actual monster they’re aiming for. Christ. Riley says he doesn’t like hunting, but as soon as Struthers pulls out his guns, Riley is amazed and shocked at how awesome they all are. I like contradicting myself every two sentences, too. No, actually I don’t like that.

At the other end of the lake, Scott gets Kerri and Thad to come see what he found in the woods. Larry doesn’t go because he’s too busy watching Rachel sunbathe nude. He calls her breasts “little monkeys,” really? That’s the euphemism for breasts you’re using in this movie?

???

He’s still in the water though, and for some strange reason the croc bypasses him entirely to go after Rachel on the beach and eat her instead. I guess her dry hair just tastes better or something…and I told you that wouldn’t be her biggest problem, didn’t I?

Well if we can say one thing about this character, her hair was indeed very dry right until the very end.

So yeah, then Larry shouts “I’m sorry” after she gets dragged under and killed – not sure what the point of that is, buddy; not like she can hear you, being dead and all. Just sayin’.

Scott shows Emily and Thad the egg nest he found. Thad smashes some eggs, and almost gets into a fight with him. Thad spouts such poetic lines of dialogue as “You don’t want to start something you can’t finish, or it’ll be your darkest hour.” What is this, a Killswitch Engage song? Thad gets eaten by the crocodile in another amazing display of drop-dead awful CGI, and when they’re running away, Kerri says “What happened? What IS that thing?”

…really? It happened right in front of her, movie. It’s not like it was some alien creature never before seen on this planet! And she didn’t know what happened? I’m not sure it takes a rocket scientist to figure that one out! Her boyfriend got eaten by a crocodile! That’s not exactly cryptic or anything! Man these characters are dumb. If boxes of rocks are the standard, these characters are storage lockers full of rocks.

So while that’s all going on, Riley, Emily and Struthers, along with Struthers’ assistant, Ahmad (who Struthers ‘saved’ from a lion years ago and has him indebted to him) are planning to lure the crocodile out into the open and then kill it. But Struthers, being an attention whore, jumps the gun and ends up getting the boat flipped over, risking death for them all. Ahmad kills the croc but also quits being Struthers’ assistant, saying that he’s been doing it for 14 years and has not gotten any kind of gratitude. I think that’s more his fault for letting it go on so long, but OK. He gets killed off two minutes later anyway, so I guess there was no point to the whole exchange.

They go to see Sadie again, who tells them that she’s been feeding the crocs growth hormones because she doesn’t have money for better food…wait, huh?

"Don't you judge me!"

Anyway, they find out there’s 3 crocodiles. They kill another one of them, so now there’s only the one left. Meanwhile, Scott, Kerri and Larry are hiding in trees when an owl scares them and Scott delivers the following line: “I don’t think owls have ever eaten anybody.” STOP GIVING SCI-FI IDEAS FOR MORE MOVIES, DAMN YOU! Also, I wouldn't really trust the guy who can't stand up straight without falling over to lead me or give me any kind of logical consolation. Just sayin'.

Larry gets killed off, and Riley sends Kerri and Scott to stay with Sadie until they kill the last croc. Struthers cracks some more terrible jokes, Emily acts self righteous and annoying and Riley tries to be Bruce Campbell some more. Kerri says the crocodiles were ugly, and that makes Sadie so mad that she has to feed Kerri to the crocs, but it’s OK, because Scott saves her and somehow Sadie gets pushed into the water and eaten instead. And nothing of value was lost.

The final battle comes around and admittedly I don’t have too much of a problem with these action scenes, as they’re pretty well done in terms of slasher/monster movies. The special effects are crap, but the action scenes are quite good and maybe a little more exciting than the original film’s action scenes. So that’s at least one thing the film did right.

They kill off the crocs, Riley and Emily start making out spontaneously – crocodile hunts and gory death scenes are a big turn on in Maine, I hear – and Scott and Kerri find Kerri’s dog who went missing in an earlier scene, so everything is OK. Because no matter how many people died in the movie, if the dog survives, you know it’s a happy ending. How else would you even do it? By having a sensible resolution and providing a realistic way to send each character off on his or her next journey? Nah, just throw in a dog, as it is the cheapest possible way to end any movie. Hurrah for phoned-in and contrived emotions.

I don’t know. Lake Placid 2 was not the worst thing in the world. There were a few funny scenes and jokes. But on the other hand, the characters had little sense, the story was played out and dull and the editing and special effects were just horrible. So it’s a mixed bag. I can’t really recommend it, as there are so many better films out there, but it’s certainly better than the first one, and also way better than 2007’s other big crocodile movie, Croc. So there’s that! And now I’m finished with my summertime crocodile-movie-reviewing extravaganza, and can move onto something else…

Well isn't that just great?!

REVIEW: The Ward (2010)

Director: John Carpenter

Starring: Amber Heard, Marie Gummer, Danielle Panabaker, Laura-Leigh, Lyndsy Fonseca

Website: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1369706/

This is the return of John Carpenter, hallowed director of The Thing, Halloween and several other classics of 80s cinema, to the director’s chair. He’s done a few Masters of Horror episodes, and one of them (Cigarette Burns) was good, but it was high time for him to get back to what he does best. And so here we have The Ward, a punchy, spooky horror tale of an abandoned mental hospital, at which a young woman named Kristen (Amber Heard) is taken in after burning down a barn and losing pretty much all memory as to why. She interacts with the other patients, all of whom are very different, and with the strangely and unsettlingly uncommunicative hospital staff. The only problem is, there’s a ghost roaming the halls – a ghost of a young girl who Kristen suspects was also a patient there, and who is now killing off the inmates one by one.

The Ward is just a great, classic horror tale. The suspense is ramped up high, the setting is isolated and cool and the atmosphere is wicked and hellish, building up from a slight unease to full-blown terror and heart-pounding tension, like a growing infection. There are no bells and whistles with this movie, just a delightful romp through the horror tropes that we all know and love. The gore is nice and bloody, but not extravagant. Carpenter knows the genre, and is able to manipulate us so that we never quite know where the film is going. The twist isn’t mindblowing, but it’s also not the one you’d necessarily expect with how the rest of the film is set up, and that’s the mark of a good twist.

But mostly this is good because it’s a nice retro late-80s/early-90s style horror film that just works. I just went along with this and had a ball, and if you’re an old school horror junkie you will be right at home with The Ward. If not for the super-sleek production values and modern quality, this could have been released back then. Also Carpenter makes sure to take time out of the horror for a fairly lengthy music and dance scene with the inmates. That’s the cincher; this movie rules. Go see it this Halloween or sooner if you get the urge. It’s a killer.

REVIEW: Croc (2007)

Last year, I reviewed a movie called Blood Monkey. It was a terribly frustrating film that advertised itself as a killer ape horror flick, but was really just filled with dull padding and a lack of any kind of excitement. What I didn’t know at the time was that it was part of an asininely long series of made for TV crapfests put out by Sci Fi called the Maneaters series, all low-budget movies with terrible actors focusing on natural monsters and outdoorsy themes. Joy. A whole series of mind numbingly awful films about animals killing people. At least the one I’m reviewing today was directed SO WELL by the guy who gave us The Ice Pirates though!

…wait, that isn’t a positive at all. But then, as you’ll see, there isn’t much with Croc that is.

Director: Stewart Raffil

Starring: Crocodiles...

Website: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1127177/

The movie starts off in a swamp in Thailand where two guys are hunting for crocodiles or something in a boat. That comes to a close when the croc does his favorite karate move, the Nose Chop, and slices their boat in half.

Hiiiii-YAH!

Then it’s feeding time, and we see some of the WORST CGI since the Anaconda movies; oh joy!

Amazing. Is that from a really old 90s computer game? Because it would have been state of the art back then.

But then we move onto important scenes, like our main character Jack gawking awkwardly at a hot chick who comes into his crocodile farm. He’s so smitten with her that he instructs his nephew Theo to watch her all day…creepy, but I guess it could be worse. He could be courting a fat green frog-man-lady-thing like in The Ice Pirates.

Eugh, I've got to stop putting this in reviews.

So after some stupid stunts for the crowd involving basketball-playing elephants and calling down a member of the audience to be a goalie in an elephant-soccer game, Jack finds out that the chick he’s been tailing all day is some kind of animal health inspector. She points out all kinds of silly problems like how he’s feeding the birds tiny parasites in their food, or how the water and the meat is of extremely shifty quality. But he waves it all off because the safety of his animals is no big deal, as long as he can get a dinner date with the woman. She turns him down like any sane girl would do to such a terrible actor, though.

We see later that she’s talking to her bosses, who run a rival crocodile farm down the street. She says that she didn’t shut down Jack’s farm because the problems she found were all rather minor…wait, so feeding the animals parasites and having unsanitary water and food are minor problems? And even she didn’t ACT like they were very minor when she was there, so what the hell? When she gets back to her bosses it's like “Oh, they're basically mistreating these animals in every conceivable way…it’s no big deal!” Some animal welfare inspector you are, lady.

And it seems like the guys running the other farm don’t even know her name when she’s about to leave, despite the fact that they were acting like they clearly knew her in the beginning of the scene? I mean, they did hire her to look into Jack's farm; it's not like they'd forget her name that fast in real life...oh, screw it; nobody proofread this slop anyway.

Then the movie decides to delightfully treat us to scenes of what we all wanted to see in a killer croc movie, POLITICS. LOTS AND LOTS OF POLITICS. Yes, this is the movie for you if you wanted a bunch of scenes where the characters talk about debts and what’s going to happen if their farm closes down! In one scene, Theo spies on the rival croc farm owners and finds out they’re plotting against them, taking a few pictures for proof. They chase him down and he gets in the car with Jack who just happened to be driving by, only they get caught by the police and the gangsters at the same time. The gangsters break his camera memory card (how do they get away with this when the police are there? Are they corrupt? It’s never really explained), but it turns out he switched it with a spare one, so the whole scene was pretty much pointless.

In another scene we see Jack escape from a debt collector by having some smoke cover them while he runs away on the beach…I’m sorry, was there a crocodile anywhere in this? Did they really think all of this would be interesting to us? Why do I get the idea this director would be liable to make a werewolf movie and focus on the main character dealing with his insurance agency? Or maybe he’d make an alien movie and focus on the main girl’s pregnancy dilemmas? THE POSSIBILITIES ARE ENDLESS.

Phew, so in case you were dumb enough like me to watch this movie past that point, we actually DO get another scene with a crocodile, believe it or not. Because I guess the riveting world of crocodile farm politics just wasn’t enough for this movie. But seriously, movie, you could at least try? The scene goes like this – the girl’s boyfriend goes underwater to make out with her legs or something, and the croc gets him, but all she does is stand around and look confused. How come she doesn’t just look under the water? Might save her…oh wait:

Whoops! Message gained from this scene: sex is bad. We should all just abstain from even looking at the opposite sex, and that way we will never be eaten by crocodiles.

So seeking an opportunity, the rival croc farm leaders decide to do the normal thing for this situation and break loose a bunch of crocodiles from Jack’s farm, to make it look like one of them did the nasty, bloody deed. This actually does get Jack’s croc farm shut down by the police, even though I’m not sure that should be their first priority when there’s a croc on the loose KILLING PEOPLE right now. Deal with the farm itself later, guys! I’m not even sure what this is supposed to accomplish, anyway. It’s not going to stop any more murders from happening, so why the hell are they focusing on shutting down the farm as their first priority? And wait…I don’t even really care! I often forget that I’m stooping to lower intellectual levels when watching these things.

Yeah, you really need that many cops to hand the guy a piece of paper and shut down his farm, right? I bet these idiots also send 10 cops to save a cat stuck in a tree while there's a serial killer investigation going on.

We get some more banal banter and boring acting, with the police about whether or not to cut the captured crocodile open to see if it’s the one that did the killing. God, it’s like every time we get a kill in this movie, we have to suffer through six or seven scenes of nothing but talking and legal nonsense. HOW IS THIS ENTERTAINMENT? How did they mess this up? All they had to do was make a stupid slasher movie with a crocodile eating people! Was that not complex enough for the writers? Was the chief marketing audience for this movie grad students who wanted to feel smart for watching something about the legalities of crocodile farms in Asia? What’s the draw in that? Can someone explain it to me?

So then we see some more EXCITEMENT when the two guys who run the other farm debate about whether what they did was right or not…man, I miss Lake Placid. Hmph. At least that movie had ACTUAL STUFF HAPPENING. Jesus.

I really like this one scene where on TV it shows this guy on a boat being filmed from up above in a helicopter (or something…), with a croc swimming around him. The narration explains that it can’t be Jack’s crocodile because it’s a different kind. But there’s something off about this scene…

Oh, I know. WHY THE HELL ISN’T ANYBODY HELPING THIS GUY? He’s just down there stuck on a boat with a huge man-eating crocodile, no big deal at all, right? Seriously, they’re just filming him for the news and not making any apparent attempt to save him. That’s pretty harsh. In another scene, we see a family of four being warned that there’s a man-eating crocodile on the loose, and they just kind of blow it off. They get theirs, though, when their little boy gets eaten by the giant CGI croc just moments later, like the croc was waiting for a cue or something.

"I'm a douchey white suburban dad, and I'm right about everything. When you tell me there's a man-eating crocodile in the water I think you're joking, just because I haven't seen it yet."

Truly parents of the year, people! Exemplary work! Give them a medal! Ugh…

They meet a guy played by Michael Madsen, whose only character trait is ‘guy with gravelly voice so you KNOW he’s a tough veteran.’ He’s some kind of croc hunter, or something. He doesn’t really do much of any importance throughout this whole thing, but that’s because nothing of any importance happens in the rest of the movie anyway. I mean, are you really surprised? Did you really expect the film with as much purpose and meaning as that Rugrats All Grown Up cartoon to pull itself together in the last act?

There's one scene of note where a bunch of the other croc farm leaders get massacred by the croc when it SOMEHOW hides in their pool and they don't notice - plot convenience at its worst:

OK, seriously, how does he not see the crocodile? They're both underwater. How do you not notice that?

Is he just blind or something? Seriously, how do you mess this up? Is the crocodile just super-silent? Does he have camouflage powers? WHAT?

But otherwise it's just bland as all get out. Pretty much it just plods on and on and makes me want to go to sleep. The final battle is an unpleasant and unentertaining cobble of horrible wooden acting, illogical scenes, bad CGI and completely stilted, un-engaging fight scenes that pretty much couldn’t be any worse if you put frigging Space Eunuchs in there. I mean, the final battle gives more importance to the scene of the characters trying to get Jack’s leg free from the mouth of the gator, than the actual fight scene with said gator beforehand! I’m serious. They kill the thing in like, a second, and then spend a minute or two more debating what the best way is to make sure they don’t have to amputate Jack’s leg. Oh, yes, I’m SO INVESTED in what’s going to happen to Jack’s leg after this is all over! Please, spare me the suspense; my heart is about to give out! God, what a load! This movie is awful!

But then again, what was I expecting from this anyway; groundbreaking cinema? No, how about just mild entertainment; the bare minimum of laughter or excitement to keep me from falling asleep? Croc didn’t even have that, and even for a Made for TV movie it’s bad. Director of Ice Pirates, you failed again. Go sit in the corner.

Trailer Review: Battleship (2012)

Greetings, readers! Welcome to a new section of the blog called trailer reviews. Where I review trailers. Wasn't that a fun explanation?

And yes, that IS Rihanna in the front there!

Ahem. Yes. Today's trailer is of a new movie coming out next summer called Battleship. Yes, Battleship, based on the hit board game from the 1950s. I'm not even joking - that's really what it's about. The film industry is SO BANKRUPT FOR IDEAS that they're now making movies out of board games...why am I not more surprised? Oh yeah, because there's a Rock'em Sock'em Robots movie coming out this fall, too.

Prime movie material, guys. Prime movie material.

So yeah, here's the trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NNQqHsIc-4

It starts off with some steamy music and a nighttime beach scene of a guy and a girl sharing some intimate moments together. He says he's going to go straight to her father and tell him that he wants to marry her. Then we see that isn't a good idea because her father is Liam Neeson, who simply can't see what his daughter sees in the guy. And as we all know, Liam Neeson is the ultimate protector of daughters, so he can consider his attempt shot down. We then see some heavy-fire battle scenes and even a big monster rising up out of the ocean...and DUN DUN DUN, SUMMER 2012, BATTLESHIP IS COMING TO THEATERS!

Seriously, what was this trailer going for? First we get the romanctic beginning and the scenes with the kid and Neeson, and it looks like it might be some kind of drama, then it's like BAM, out of nowhere, the film is now a big monster/robot movie with action scenes and CGI and everything, with no segueway or lead-in at all. It's totally jarring, and doesn't set the movie up as anything to be taken too seriously. But then again, I really doubt it was supposed to be, anyway. Still though, it really doesn't do much for the movie's credibility at any rate. Just because those early romance scenes are in the movie doesn't mean you devote half of the trailer to them! A trailer should be used to set us up for a general idea of the movie. Would you like it if a horror film trailer mostly showed you the scenes in the beginning showing everyone having fun? No, I don't think you would, because it would be pretty silly.

To sum it up, this trailer fails hard at setting the film in question up to be anything resembling entertaining! It's like the chewed-up leftovers of a Michael Bay movie trailer. Since I did this review for the trailer, I will eventually see the movie itself next year, and you'll read my thoughts on it then. Until that day...I will lie in wait.