Nov 8: [Rec] 3: Genesis

"A couple's wedding day turns into a horrific events as some of the guests start showing signs of a strange illness."

Directed by: Paco Plaza, Rated: R, 80 minutes

I am incredibly conflicted with [Rec] 3: Genesis. One, it's part of one of my favorite horror franchises and I feel obligated to love it, no matter how different it is. Two, it's just that- different. Abandoning the found-footage aspect that made the first two films so intense and terrifying, Rec 3 becomes a generic horror film that actually tries to be funny as well. The end result is a grab-bag of genres that can't find it's focus. It's confusing because Paco Plaza, the man behind the first two films, is back at the helm and pulling-double duty on the screenplay. Yet, it never feels like a genuine Rec film.

The first Rec is still one of the only movies to genuinely creep me out. That ending... Damn

The film's buildup is excellent. The first twenty minutes is actual in the style of the Rec we know, using handheld cameras and wedding footage from the ceremony and reception of Clara (Leticia Dolera) and Koldo (Diego Martin). Unfortunately for the newlyweds, an unusual illness sweeps through their wedding party, turning their guests into flesh-eating zombies (that aren't necessarily zombies). We see the initial outbreak and attacks through the lens of a wedding photographer's camera, but as soon as a character gets tired of it being in his face, he smashes it. Then, Rec 3 becomes your usual, multi-camera HD movie with none of the suspense a close-quartered handheld can actually maintain. Clara and Koldo then must find a way out of the Church and its premises, survive the demonic invasion, and of course, find each other (they get separated at the beginning).

I guess every horror movie does need a beautiful leading lady... 

Paco Plaza is by no means, a bad director. I honestly think that his intentions were good, and that his little baby, the Rec franchise, really does mean a lot to him. With Rec 3, I think he just wanted to experiment a little and breakaway from the found-footage of the first two, maybe in hopes of expanding the series and showing that he can actual do more than film (through first-person) a bunch of people running around an apartment complex. Even with the bad decision to shift the series' style, Plaza still has a terrific talent with a camera. He sets up wonderful shots and captures the color and terror that goes on at a Spanish wedding ceremony brilliantly. However, the weak script detracts from the pretty visuals (including its leading lady, Dolera) and nosedives the film into the realm of the laughable and ridiculous. Plaza definitely attempts to turn the film into a horror comedy, even highlighting each physical joke with cheesy music, all to rather weak effect. Maybe going into this, knowing it was this different, I would have been more prepared, but you don't have to be a genius to know it just doesn't work. 

Showing a little leg while wielding a chainsaw is far from any Rec staple. 

Both leads are interesting characters, but as more horror stories go, they lack any depth or substance. Clara has her moments of being a badass (she goes crazy with a chainsaw) but again, it feels completely unnecessary. The first two Rec films were terrifying because they didn't show a lot, and the moments they did reveal a bit, were all the more terrifying. In Rec 3, Plaza embraces the violence, turning the series down the path of torture-porn and gore. Sure, this works for some movies, but it's not what you sign up for when you head into a Rec flick. However, there's still a lot to enjoy, from the great visuals, to the even better makeup. It's definitely not a failure, just a disappointment. Sure, [Rec] 3: Genesis could have been much greater than it really is but I still like it, even if it is a little difficult to swallow. 

The Good:

the film has style, even if it is a bit misguided

The Bad:

very little of the movie feels like an actual Rec movie and in turn, feels very, very generic (with a lot of blood)

The Ugly:

knowing that the premise is an incredible idea but that its execution ruins it almost completely

Overall: 6.1/10

Discussion Question:

What are some of your favorite foreign horror films?

Trailer:

Oct 20: Dawn of the Dead

"A nurse, a policeman, a young married couple, a salesman, and other survivors of a worldwide plague that is producing aggressive, flesh-eating zombies, take refuge in a mega Midwestern shopping mall."

Directed by: Zack Snyder, Rated: R, 101 minutes

It's hard to imagine the pressure Zack Snyder must have faced when remaking Dawn of the Dead. Not only is the original a horror classic (created by the King of Zombies, George Romero) but it did something for the horror genre that very few films are able to do. Fortunately for all of us, as well as Snyder, he manages to produce a film that's both original and scary and reminds us that zombies are not to be f**ked with and that our neighborhood shopping malls prove to be the best place to lay low given the apocalypse. 

The end of the world starts on Black Friday.

Dawn of the Dead follows Ana (Sarah Polley) a nurse who suffers through one of the greatest film openings of all time. While fleeing from the undead, she meets up with Kenneth (Ving Rhames), Michael (Jake Weber), and Andre (Mekhi Phifer) and his wife, Luda (Inna Korobkina). The group make their way to what they believe to the a safe haven, the mall. Upon arriving they run into a trio of security guards that want nothing to do with outsiders. After a bit of mall-prison, the survivors are introduced to a truck load of people, all trying to get by as well which means more zombie deaths are on the way (the bigger the cast, the more the blood). So, as a newly united band of undead-fighting brothers, the gang try to figure out a way to escape the mall (that's now been compromised) and reach safety or rescue. 

There is also absolutely no piece of shit, annoying little brat, Carl. 

In 2002 28 Days Later changed the "zombie" genre. Sure, they were never called such things but the Rage-infected people closely resembled zombies. Danny Boyle made them fast, driven by adrenaline and anger. Upon these changes, the infected became absolutely terrifying as they chase their victims down. Snyder "borrows" this idea and turns the zombies in Dawn of the Dead into hordes of fast-moving, screaming monsters, doing whatever it takes to get to the appetizing bags of flesh. It's one of the things that turn Dawn of the Dead into something memorable and much scarier and 'cooler' than your regular zombie movie. Along with the speed-change, Snyder is very generous with the blood and gore, giving us plenty of decapitations, head-shots, limb tears, and more. Dawn of the Dead really feels like a video game, implementing clever camera tricks, limited ammo, and enough stuck-in-the-corner moments that make you nervous for the characters. 

Holy Romero, Batman! That's one fat zombie!

Unlike most horror movies, Dawn of the Dead has a very likable cast, with each actor playing their roles wonderfully. Sarah Polley is tough enough to kick ass but also has that damsel-in-distress attitude that shows she can't do it all on her own. Her male counterpart played by Michael Kelly is just as convincing. He's the every-man turned hero that is morally good and wants to do right and save as many people as he can. Then of course, you have Ving "I Don't Look Like a Bitch" Rhames, whose presence alone heightens the film into a new realm of badass. It's also really weird (but entertaining) seeing Ty Burrell in a role that's a complete opposite of his Phil in Modern Family. Dawn of the Dead features a handful of other recognizable faces thrown into the surviving mix as well as a couple of zombies that resemble certain celebrities. 

I pray that this man never has to face the end of the world. Although I'd definitely watch it... 

Dawn of the Dead is a movie I have to watch every year around Halloween. It's one of those movies that needs to be seen and is arguably one of the best debut films of any director. Snyder manages to give us a refreshing look at the zombie genre and injects his own style and humor into the end of the world. It's a bloody good time that is also scary and tells a story that's simple, yet effective. Unlike most movies today, Dawn of the Dead is an excellent stand alone movie that doesn't rely on the crutch of having a sequel. It's unique, it's funny, and it wears it's R-rating with pride. I highly recommend this movie. 

The Good:

a great cast of seemingly relatable and genuine people all thrown into a very apocalyptic circumstance

The Better:

taking a familiar story and making it completely fresh without feeling like an actual remake

The Best:

a lot of blood, a lot of gore, and plenty of scares that keep the entire movie interesting... as well as a few rather creative kills

8.4/10

Trailer:

Oct 19: Insidious

"A family looks to prevent evil spirits from trapping their comatose child in a realm called The Further."

Directed by: James Wan, Rated: PG-13, 103 minutes

I have always been against PG-13 horror movies, thinking they can never go places you'd never expect or that the violence and terror would be too tame. Insidious turns all of those notions on its side, and delivers a very scary movie that goes plenty of places you won't expect and has genuinely uncomfortable scares, as opposed to the constant jump-out gimmick so many movies utilize. The third act, however, is a little disappointing but the film as a whole still delivers on the creepy goods and sticks with you. 

F**k you, word!

Rose Byrne and Patrick Wilson play a young couple, Renai & Josh, with three kids, Foster, Dalton, and a newborn girl. As any horror movie would start, the family is seen moving into a new house. It's beautiful, it's old, and it's the perfect setting for something haunted. Dalton (Ty Simpkins) goes to sleep one night and never wakes up. Worried, his parents rush him to the hospital but after plenty of tests, the doctors cannot figure out what is wrong with him, he's just simply slipped into a coma. Renai begins seeing things- apparitions hovering over her baby's crib and a figure standing outside a window. Convinced the place is haunted, Renai convinces Josh to move. Once arrived in their new home, the haunting continues and the couple is terrified. Not knowing what's going on, they call in a specialist (Lin Shaye), and she discovers that Dalton is an astral projector, someone who uses out of body experiences in his/her sleep to "explore" different realms. The reason Dalton is in the coma is because he's wandered too far into the darkness and his soul and mind are in danger. Thus, Renai and Josh must figured out a way to save their son from these demons haunting them, lingering around and waiting for his body to be "released" for possession. 

Rose is beautiful, but she keeps playing the same exasperated, overwhelmed characters. Let's see a smile already. 

Insidious crawls under your skin and plants itself deep inside you, festering and oozing out all sorts of psychological creep. Director James Wan (Saw- the good one) is a very good director, using an eerie edge to his films similar to what Fincher implemented in Se7en. There's a large attention paid to detail and sounds, drawing you only to hurl you across the room once the tables change. Sure, the jumpy gimmicks are still present and some scares are accentuated with loud music, but for the most part Insidious works slowly and burrows itself inside you. The entire idea behind the film is very original and it really changes up the idea of a haunted house story, turning it more into a haunted person tale. The entire film is full of dread, because you continually anticipate each new scare and the music has an almost-constant heartbeat to it, putting you on edge even further. It's a great buildup that actually delivers for once and makes you hate what you're watching. Seriously, Insidious has moments that just rape themselves into your mind, creeping you the f**k out.

And this song... why, why why? So. Creepy. No. Ass.  

Insidious is terrific for about 95 minutes. The ending leaves you very frustrated, almost hating how the entire thing is concluded. But moving past that, it's still a terrific horror movie in a day and age where the good ones are damn near impossible to come across. Insidious is a success in large part to the direction of James Wan and the acting, led by the ever-likable Patrick Wilson, a man you want to see no harm done to but continually gets tortured, scared, or abused (see Hard Candy). I don't scare easily. It really takes a lot to get me spooked but Insidious manages to tip-toe the line between the horrific and the cliche and deliver something worth watching. Sure, it'll most certainly be ruined by its sequels (you know they're coming), but in the meantime, I highly recommend it. Just turn it off when there's about 10 minutes left. 

The Good:
a continued layer of horror that leaves you very uncomfortable, with a dissonant score that exaggerates the bizarre and a constant heartbeat that leaves you on edge
The Bad:
a few scares that get you because of the jump factor and then immediately hate because they're so gimmicky
The Ugly:
f**k this movie's ending... it is so terribly lazy and reveals way too much, taking away a lot of the horror it hoped to create

Overall: 7.4/10

Trailer:

Oct 7: Candyman

"The Candyman, a murderous soul with a hook for a hand, is accidentally summoned to reality by a skeptic grad student researching the monster's myth."

Directed by: Bernard Rose, Rated: R, 99 minutes

Here's another entry into the "Horror Movies I Haven't Seen" list. While this is stretching it a bit, as I do remember watching Candyman when I was really young, I remember nothing else about it. All I can recall is that it was on TV one day like 10 years ago. So, I'm throwing this in the batch with Hellraiser and Little Shop of Horrors. And I must admit, of these three films, I like Candyman the least. It's a very slow movie that takes a long, long time to get going, and once it does, it kind of just jumps all over the place. It's moments of terror are genuinely freaky, with plenty of blood and graphic murder scenes that will stick with you. But, the rest of the film is just very blah movie that's more f**ked up and random than anything else. 

That's a comfy looking coat though. 

Candyman follows graduate student, Helen Lyle (Virginia Madsen), who hears about an urban legend about the Candyman, an apparition that appears with a hook stuffed in a stump of a hand who kills anyone that says his name five times. Seemingly obsessed with the story, Helen seeks out information behind it, tracking down past "victims" as well as traveling to the hood (because the urban area is apparently the home of the killer?). Then, in some way or another, she ends up striking a deal or receiving a curse (I couldn't tell which one) from the Candyman (Tony Todd), and murders happen all around her, each being staged to look as those she was the one that committed them. A bunch of shit happens, a lot of blood is spilled, and you're left not really knowing what happened. 

Xander Berkeley also has a part in the film and this guy I'd really watch in anything. RIP George Mason.

I don't know if the film itself is very confusing or if I just checked out of it earlier than I should have, but there's a lot about the movie that just doesn't make sense. It really feels as though parts of the film were removed, as it jumps ahead in time and all over the place quite frequently. I really wanted to like Candyman, but I ended up feeling very underwhelmed by it. If I had to point out particular things I did like about it, I would say that Philip Glass' score is very creepy and the cinematography looks great. As a technical film, I can appreciate it. But through its plot and even it's weak acting, I have to condemn it as something close to terrible. 

And there are a lot of bees. Because, why not?

I'd recommend staying away from this Clive Barker adaptation. Yes, I know that this movie has quite the cult-following and I am sure to offend plenty of them, but I just could not fall in love with this horror movie. It's messy storytelling that's only heightened by its technical aspects, but still fails to deliver something worth remembering. Freddy, Jason, and Michael would all be ashamed to have the Candyman in the bloody echelons they share, and I for one could do completely without it. 

The Good:

a haunting score by the always creepy Philip Glass and a couple of graphic scenes that are pretty freaky

The Bad:

a messy story that never knows where to go

The Ugly:

that same story seemingly wanting to be full of symbolism and deep meaning, but just feels lost and confused (like the audience)

Overall: 4.3/10

Trailer: