Ink

Directed by Jamin Winans
2009
Rated NR
102 minutes

Summary from Netflix: Late one night, a lost soul named Ink snatches 8-year-old Emma into the world of dreams. There, he hopes to use her soul to join the ranks of the evil Incubi. In the real world, Emma lies comatose, to the despair of her father, John. But the Incubi's benevolent opposites -- the Storytellers -- rally to help Emma, motivating John to wage war for his daughter.


My rating: ★★★★★ out of 5

"They're all reactions! One thing begets the next. A man has a weakness, he's flawed. That flaw leads him to guilt. The guilt leads him to shame. The shame he compensates with pride and vanity. And when pride fails, despair takes over and they all lead to his destruction. It will become his fate... Something's gotta stop the flow."

Some people who aren't heavily into watching movies, unlike most of my friends or those that will most likely come across this blog, just cannot understand why I prefer watching Anime, Foreign and/or Independent movies before I touch a commercialized US movie.  Watch this movie, Ink, and you will have a slight idea why I favor the not so typical that you won't typically find at the cineplex.

And here's the kicker.  I am not going to tell you any more plot then what the summary above has said or the trailer shows below.  Why not?  Well, why in the world should I spoil such a great movie for you and make you miss the opportunity to have a wild ride watching it like I did?

I laughed, I cried, I cried a whole bunch more during the credits, then I sat there once it ended and went, "What in the world just happened?"  I totally didn't expect the ending.  At all.  It has been soo long since a movie moved me like that.

This movie is incredibly beautiful, not in a blockbuster way and not in an independent movie way.  It is gritty, has it's own unique special effects, and neither go overboard.  The story line and composition can confuse at the beginning, then it starts to build.  Curiosity makes you stick with it as you learn more and more about the two main characters such as where eight year old Emma is being taken and the destruction of the father and why we have to know what is happening to his life. Even saying that isn't exactly all the plot the movie has. There are several different layers going on in this movie at the same time.

Ok, maybe a little bit of plot explanation.  Trust me, if I really tried to describe the plot any more then this you'd wonder I came down with a sleep deprived version of ADHD.  ;)

(BTW, no offense to anyone with ADHD.  I am just meaning that the plot skips and jumps from past to present to dream state to another dimension throughout the entire film and if I tried to describe it to you, you will most likely not follow me at all. Just trust me. Go see the film if you haven't already to know what I mean.)

A few other characters besides Emma and her father stick out in my mind.  The Pathfinder Jacob is funny like a jester and as philosophical as Yoda.  He also has got some really good lines (i.e. "Hello dirt. How are you today?").  I loved Liev the Storyteller as well for her character as well as how her hair was styled (someone teach me how to do that, please!) and her overcoat (which I am sorely tempted to make one for myself now).  The Incubi costumes, however, scared the bejesus out of me with their simplicity and overall effectiveness.  I hope I don't get bad dreams from those guys.  *shiver*

Once you get the flow of the movie, the ride will cause you to stay with it and just as you are really getting into it... WHAM!  Everything falls into place and you wind up with a box of Kleenex in your lap while you root and cheer for the ending to turn up to be a not so tragic one.

Overall, this movie was far better then I expected.  It has been a while since I saw a movie this good.  I have read other reviewers say this movie sits on the same shelf as Brazil, Matrix, Donnie Darko, Sixth Sense, Sin City, as well as several others.  I have to agree and yet I have to completely disagree.  This movie is unlike anything I have seen in a while.  It has so many different layers and it's own uniqueness which is very refreshing.

Here's the best part of it all.  If you don't have the ability to watch this on Netflix (rental or instant queue) or some other way to rent this movie, you can watch Ink for free on IMDB thanks to hulu.com (linkie linkie)!  Sure you will have to deal with a few commercials, but it's free, so there isn't any other excuse for you to miss seeing this unless you don't have 102 minutes to spare.

Little Shop Of Horrors: Special Edition (Musical Version)

Directed by Frank Oz
1986
Rated PG-13
94 minutes (102 minutes Uncut)

Summary from Netflix: Plant yourself in front of the tube and veg out with Frank Oz's horticultural horror flick. Gawky Seymour Krelborn (Rick Moranis), looking for a way to save his job in a ramshackle, skid row flower shop, purchases a curious exotic plant hoping it will make business bloom. And it does. There's just one problem: The little creeper possesses a rapacious appetite for fresh human plasma … and it's mushrooming out of control!

My rating: ★★★★ out of 5

"Feed me, Seymour!"

Remakes are a tricky thing but Little Shop Of Horrors kinda holds a unique place in film history for holding it's cult status as a musical comedy horror film. There is a rumor that in 1960 Roger Corman placed a bet that he could make a budget movie in just a few days and figured by redressing already constructed sets and a group of actors willing to work for small pay he could even make a successful movie while doing it. That black and white film grew enough of a cult status in small theaters over the decades in midnight showings that a musical producer picked up the rights for making a stage play which also grew quite an audience of it's own over the years in off-broadway circles. Frank Oz, Howard Ashman, and Charles B. Griffith decided to adapt the musical version into a modern musical comedy and finally create a big budget version of Audry II using the skills of Lyle Conway.

I first watched this film when it was released in 1986 in a movie theater with my parents and a few of my friends. It was quite an experience from what I remember because I never really had gotten into musicals before and yet it kinda held my attention since it featured many actors I enjoyed as well as an awesome scary puppet beyond anything I've seen up to that point including Jabba The Hutt in Return Of The Jedi. Audry II just held the audience in stunned silence every time he was on screen and I could imagine that every kid sitting in the audience had many nightmares that night and never could look at a Venus flytrap the same way again afterwards. As a muscial it was very well done and got fantastic reviews and the special effects even earned the movie an Academy Award nomination for the groundbreaking work that was done on Audry II alone.

However there is a whole different ending to the film that was long rumored to be true because of special screenings of the movie that left quite an impression on the audiences that viewed it. Many behind the scenes photos and reports claimed that extensive sets were constructed with multiple versions of Audry II but never seemed to be shown within the movie as it was widely released. The cult status of the movie even grew wider over the years from rumors of that "lost footage" being locked away and interviews with Frank Oz who claimed that the film was drastically changed when Warner Brothers forced him to film a happy ending. Those who had seen the off-broadway musical version confirmed that the original ending which was made for the movie followed the story of the play and had Audry II's seedlings taking over the world.

For the 12th Anniversary of Little Shop of Horrors Frank Oz was rumored to be finally making a special edition DVD that would make fans of both movies incredible happy. News through the video collectors grapevine buzzed when it was revealed that a rough cut of the "missing ending" was going to be included as a special feature along with more behind the scenes interviews and even a commentary by Frank Oz which covered everything including the original ending. It was released in 1998 for only a day before Warner Brothers was forced to recall the entire shipment because David Geffen still retained the rights for the unfinished footage of the ending and he was never asked for permission.

One can only imagine the level of cult status the film reached now as die hard collectors had refused to return their purchased copies and other fans wanted to see the special features that the later DVD re-release had removed. Those looking for a unopened mint or used copy of the special edition can expect to pay around $150 and upwards in the collector's market for a copy if they want it. Hollywood press has revealed that Declan O'Brien who directed Wrong Turn 3 had purchased rights for a modern horror remake of Corman's original film and that a possible 25th Anniversary Edition of the musical will be released in 2011 as well. Providing that Frank Oz and David Geffen can wrangle out further rights issues and David can finally release his own copy of the original cut to help restore the film for an official Director's Cut. I very much enjoy watching both the original Corman version AND the musical version every year as part of my Holloween marathon and having this special edition in my collection allowed me to enjoy both of them.



And for those who want to see the "original ending"... well, I'll be nice and help you along since finding a copy of the DVD is next to impossible.

**************************** SPOILER ALERT!! ************************************

Part 1:


Part 2:


Part 3:

Night Of The Demons (Original Version)

Directed by Kevin S. Tenney
1988
Rated R (Unrated on DVD)
87 minutes (DVD is 90 minutes Uncut)

Summary from Netflix: Director Kevin Tenney's tale centers on a group of hormonal teeny-boppers who turn a creepy old house into party central and unknowingly unleash an ancient demon who chooses very bloody Marys as his drink of choice. All the old reliable stereotypes are represented in this ghoulish blood-fest: the arrogant ex-boyfriend, the hero, the jerky new love interest. Alas, most of them become fodder for the demon. It's his night, after all.

My rating: ★★★ out of 5

"Blessed be the sinners, for the day of atonement is at hand!"

There have been many films that earned the name of cult status but Night Of The Demons earned that right because of becoming a Halloween viewing favorite. It was made with a fairly medium sized budget and a cast of only 10 people and many of them playing both their regular characters and their possessed forms as well. The controversy with the film came from the extreme level of gore and nudity that it contained as well as demonic possession which made it hard to find a company willing to release the film intact. Thankfully International Film Marketing and an European film company picked it up for limited release in theaters and drive-ins but it had to be trimmed down to an R rating for that to be possible.

The story the film tells is quite simple: Angela and Suzanne, the town's resident bad girls, have decided to have a hell of a party in the old Hull House which used to be the largest mortuary around before one member of the family went crazy and killed everyone inside the mansion. A handful of teens, with nothing better to do that night, show up for the party and decide that holding a séance might liven things up a bit more. Little did they know that locked away inside the crematorium is several demons that have been lying dormant for many decades and their little party game just awakened them. Suzanne is possessed first and then passes on some of her demonic energy to Angela with a kiss that pretty much sets the tone for the rest of the occasion. As the couples pair off to explore the mansion further and find their own private locations to make out they find themselves being hunted down by the demons as the mansion slowly changes to keep them from escaping.

I originally watched this film on VHS when it first was released and found it to be quite scary in it's own way but hardly the genre stand out that I imagined it to be (of course I was jaded by Evil Dead and The Exorcist by this point). The biggest highlights of the film are the actresses who play the bad girls Suzanne (Linnea Quigley) and Angela (Amelia Kinkade). Both of them totally play up both their bad girl roles as well as their demonic possessed forms that it becomes far more enjoyable to watch them stealing their scenes then root for the actual survivors to escape. Quigley completely plays up her sluttier side for the role of Suzanne and the scene with her character distracting the quickie market employees when Angela gets supplies for the party pretty much leaves most of the viewers in the same drooling state (Don't believe me? Try showing this movie at your Halloween party and look around the room during this scene).

This film has become popular enough in cult status that it has inspired two sequels which also brought back Amelia Kinkade both times as Angela for further parties at the Hull House with more gue.. victims. Night Of The Demons 2 even managed to become even more graphic in it's carnage that it was banned from Australia for 10 years and took being reedited just for a special edition DVD in 2007 for anyone there to finally see it legally. It shouldn't take a reviewer like me to tell you that picking up Night Of The Demons 1 & 2 for a Halloween double feature would be an awesome idea. What are you still sitting there for? Go rent them or buy them.

TerrorVision

Directed by Ted Nicolaou
1986
Rated R
83 minutes

Summary from IMDB: A civilization on a distant planet has found a way to solve its garbage problem: turning it into energy and beaming it into outer space. A flaw in this system is found when the signal is accidentally picked up on Earth by the Putterman Family's home satellite dish. While this would ordinarily be just another mess, this particular transmission contains a hungry monster who quickly begins snacking on various Puttermans. Only young Sherman Putterman has any clue what is going on, but nobody will believe him. Is there any hope for the Earth?

My rating: ★★★ out of 5

"A stray energy beam from my substation may be headed for your solar system, and could possibly result in the total annihilation of your species. I'm so terribly sorry for the inconvenience."

I love cheese in it's many forms, especially when it comes to B films and the '80s had a lot of them. Video stores and cable television opened the doors for many Hollywood producers to throw together low budget or medium budget film projects for short release in movie theaters then make a huge killing on rentals and sales. Early pioneers of this kinda film making were Albert and Charles Band who ran Empire Studios in the '80s and later became famous for their works under the name of Full Moon Entertainment in the late '80s and early '90s. One such film they did was a parody feature which mocked many of the late late night horror and science fiction features that probably once were shown on drive-in screens. Charles Band threw together several actors and actresses that were available and a reasonably funny script then set to work on using a previously built house set in a studio warehouse available in Italy. Most of the budget went into the creature effects for the "TV Monster" and the quite unique set designs for the house of a swinging couple who have quite unusual tastes in decoration and lifestyle.

I first watched this movie on VHS tape when it first came out and it left an odd impression on me. The TV Monster while cheesy and looking quite like something out of Jim Henson's worst nightmares kinda got under my skin because of how it consumed it's victims. Especially when it finally was pushed to the edge and decided to just suck up the remaining survivors of the family into it's multi-toothed maw (which leads to a nice point-of-view camera shot of being sucked right into it's mouth). All of the actors in the movie did an admirable job of getting through the script and definitely looked like they enjoyed themselves while filming it. Grampa Putterman played by Bert Remsen really thrived in his part as a survivalist who teaches his grandson the best ways to survive the end of the world but doesn't hold up well against an alien invasion from within the idiot box.

One major noteworthy cast member from this film is Diane Franklin who plays Suzy the Goth/Punk/Valley Girl (yeah, she is like a mesh of all three) daughter of the Puttermans. Diane later went on to play Princess Joanna in Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure and before playing Suzy also played Monique Junot the french exchange student in Better Off Dead. Suzy's heavy metal rocker boyfriend is played by Jonathan Gries who later came to fame playing Broots on The Pretender TV show and Uncle Rico in Napoleon Dynamite.

The one major thing that disappoints me is that after Empire Studios/Full Moon Entertainment kept going through several changes in ownership and even being renamed a few times is that many of their earliest films including TerrorVision have never been released on DVD (Although it was remastered and shown letterboxed on Showtime in 2007 when MGM purchased the rights for rebroadcasting on cable). I happen to own one of the few surviving copies of the VHS tape which I purchased used from the very same video store I first rented it from years later when they did an inventory purge. The soundtrack for the film was produced on a very limited run because of the film being on such a quick release period and is very valuable on the collector's market.

The Ruins

Directed by Carter Smith
2008
Rated Unrated (R Rated version released in theaters)
94 minutes Uncut (90 minutes for theatrical)

Summary from Netflix: An idyllic Mexican vacation in Cancun takes a dangerous turn for four young Americans when a mysterious tourist persuades them to join an archaeological dig, and they subsequently find themselves lost within the cursed ruins of a forgotten city. Jonathan Tucker, Laura Ramsey, Jena Malone and Shawn Ashmore head the cast in director Carter Smith's bone-chilling thriller, adapted by Scott B. Smith from his novel.

My rating: ★★★★ out of 5

"People come from all over the world just to see these ruins, especially one that's not on the map. I'm not taking you to some tourist trap, honey. Don't you want to have some experience or something to shoot other than the beach, the pool, the beach, the pool?"

I've been a huge fan reading horror/thriller novels during my free time whenever that comes available but most often when that certain story is picked up for movie adaptation I usually cringe. Most Hollywood writers usually have a hard time translating the terror and emotion of a good thriller and usually falling back into a type-by-numbers format of telling a "monster movie". Thankfully when Ben Stiller's production company picked up the rights for Scott B. Smith's The Ruins novel they just got the author to adapt his own story into a screenplay and found Carter Smith, who was a first time feature director, to take up the challenge of bringing it to life.

I had no high expectations of the movie when I settled into my comfy lounge chair other then some word of mouth on several horror sites online during it's initial release in theaters. What little I had heard about it was quite positive in that it had been put into the right hands and while not shooting with a high budget the film makers wanted to create a realistic thriller but bring back the classic old school build up of suspense and fight for survival. Which is quite a tall order when so many modern horror films and thrillers just never manage to pull it off quite as well as they claim they do until you sit your butt in front of a screen and see it yourself.

The film starts off with a typical group of college students on their vacation and looking for something more exciting to do then just being tourists. Of course it's just their luck that they stumble across a German tourist like themselves who is planning to leave on an expedition to an old ruin to look for his brother who traveled there with a pretty female archaeologist. Since it's a ruin that is off the beaten path and VIP only they figure it would be something worthy of exploring and getting in a few photographs of. First warning they get of something wrong is that when their trusty taxi driver has to be bribed into getting them there once he hears where they are going. Second warning is when they arrive at the jungle clearing before the ruins there are many long abandoned vehicles parked around that area and looking like they had been there for quite awhile. Course this would not be much of a story if they didn't ignore the obvious warnings and decide to venture further towards the dig site. Once they reach the base of the ruin they notice they are being watched by a few locals who seem quite surprised at their appearance there (or dumbfounded that a large group of people showed up). When a few of the students start climbing the ruins and come into contact with the vines growing around the ruin the locals go into a panic and treat them like they just were infected with a highly contagious disease not allowing them to go anywhere but to their intended destination at the top of the ruin.

What unfolds over the next seventy minutes on screen is quite a ride to behold as they discover what they had all gotten themselves tangled up in. The sound of an echoing cell phone ring emitting from the open shaft at the top of the ruin which forces a few of them on an exploration of the inner chambers to find a way to communicate with the outside world. The mystery of where the previous campers had disappeared to and why it seems odd that the locals and even birds and insects seem to avoid going anywhere near the ruins. I found myself quite enjoying the build up of the storyline surrounding all of these mysterious events and especially biting my nails when the girls found themselves being lowered into the inner chambers of the ruin to find the source of the ringing sound. It was a terrific payoff for the climax of the film and completely shifts around your whole concept of what is going on and the reasons why they need to find a way to contact the outside world.

The Exorcist III

aka The Exorcist 1990 aka William Peter Blatty's Legion

Directed by William Peter Blatty
1990
Rated R
110 minutes

Summary from Netflix: William Peter Blatty, who wrote the original novel The Exorcist and the Oscar-winning screenplay, writes and directs Part 3, which is based on his novel Legion. When a supernatural serial killer strikes again, police detective Bill Kinderman (George C. Scott, taking over Lee J. Cobb's role from the first film) investigates. The original's Father Damien, Jason Miller, returns in a guest role.

My rating: ★★★★ out of 5

"I have dreams... of a rose... and of falling down a long flight of stairs."

For years fans pestered Blatty about doing an official sequel to The Exorcist to wash away the horrible sequel known as Exorcist II: The Heretic which came out four years after the success of the original film. Those that never got to see that sequel should be grateful because even though Linda Blair returned as Regan it just was thrown together and hardly worthy of being called a "follow up" in any sense of the term.

I watched the original Exorcist for the first time on cable when I was probably 11 years old with a bunch of my friends at the time in the basement of their house. It was an experience that I would never forget because it managed to get under my skin in ways that made it hard to let go of the emotions I felt that night. It is still one of the few classic horror films out there that still make me a bit jumpy about odd noises in the night after seeing it.

When I first started college in 1990, I decided to take my first venture into being published by working as a movie reviewer for the small student campus paper. It was my pleasure to discover that very weekend was the premiere for Exorcist III and just seemed perfect for my first review. So that Friday I made my way to the local mall and got myself a nice comfy seat for the first afternoon showing since I had no classes that day.

I was sucked into the film as soon as the opening scenes started and it was very much the ride that I expected it to be. George C. Scott made the best of his roll as Detective Kinderman as possible and the duality of the character known as Sunshine/Patient X (played by both Jason Miller and Brad Dourif) was played off quite wonderfully in both writing and acting. The film was a nice balance of a supernatural thriller with an edge of mystery to it since it left the audience guessing who was the killer and how could he/she could possibly be carrying on the same modus operandi of The Gemini Killer who was executed years before. The shocking moments always came out of nowhere for first time viewers which is wonderful to experience in a theater filled with people who jumped, screamed, and even laughed at the right moments just like the writer planned. While the soundtrack by Barry Devorzon was quite good it didn't quite have the same vibe that Jack Nitzsche and Mike Oldfield got while working together on the first film.

During my research for this review however I discovered a much bigger story behind the scenes involving Blatty and the studio executives that I was never aware of before. Blatty came up with a story idea for the sequel and intended for William Friedkin to return to direct it but they had disagreement which left it falling into development hell. That story slowly evolved into the novel Legion, which was published in 1983, allowing Blatty to tie up story elements from the first book and bring a new twist into the core plot by presenting a much different type of evil force for the main characters to face. Morgan Creek approached Blatty about making the novel into a movie but he only agreed unless he was allowed to write and direct the film himself and the production would return to Georgetown so it would remain faithful to the original film and the books.

While the film was completed on time and just slightly over budget the executives and producers informed Blatty after a screening that they were unhappy with his filmed ending and wanted him to rewrite and refilm that segment because "an Exorcist sequel needs to have a demon possession in it" which was a completely different direction then what his actual novel has gone in. He decided to follow their instruction as long as they ponied up the extra filming cost and the cast made the best of the situation as they could including George C. Scott who had major issues with redoing scenes he already thought was his best performance. For those unfamiliar with the book and/or movie I'll just point out the differences between the original ending and the new ending in a footnote below the review to spare those who are sensitive to spoilers before watching/reading it themselves.

When Blatty decided to make a Director's Cut of The Exorcist for the 25th Anniversary of the film he inquired to 20th Century Fox (who released the film at the time) and Morgan Creek to release all of his unused reels of Exorcist III (which included the original completed cut of the film) and behind the scenes footage they had locked away in storage. He was informed to his shock that when Warner Brothers resumed the rights of the Exorcist films a few years earlier all of that material was removed and somehow lost between both companies. Which means that unless some collector out there managed to stumble across those "lost" reels or someone else reveals they had a copy of the original cut then there will never be a Director's Cut of Legion as it was originally intended to be released before the new ending was added on. It's a horrible shame because when you read the novel of Legion you can only imagine what kind of film it would be to experience up on the big screen fully intact.

If you ask me what a good night of scary movies would be.. I'd definitely say watching The Director's Cut of The Exorcist AND Exorcist III as a double feature would be as good as a suggestion as any. Both are great films and having a true sequel in the hands of the original author who is directing the film himself which is actually a great ride on it's own is pretty hard to find these days.



*** SPOILERS PAST THIS POINT ***

The one major thing that separated the original film from the new ending was that Sunshine/Patient X really was Father Damien Karras who somehow managed to survive his horrible fall, autopsy, and burial. He was found wandering around Georgetown with no memory of who he was and placed into an asylum. It was a whole different kind of possession in the original story as the Gemini Killer had grown quite strong in the afterlife and used the body of Kerras to return to living world and resume his gruesome work. The finale of the book and original cut was just a simple showdown between Detective Kinderman and The Gemini Killer and ending with Kinderman finally putting his emotions in check and shooting the body of his old friend and sending the evil spirit inside back to where ever he escaped from. The new ending introduced Nicol Williamson as Father Morning who is called in to perform an exorcism on Patient X and leaves Detective Kinderman in a situation where he must accept the existence of evil until they both find a way to free Damien from his prison,. They also add on the revelation that Pazuzu, the demon who possessed Regan in the original movie, provided Gemini the power to return in Karras's body in revenge of being forced out of his perfect host. Pazuzu and Gemini both share the body with Damien's soul caught in the middle before Kinderman can finally put an end to their control of their vessel. There is a brief scene from the original ending that made it into the trailer for the film which is a scene where Patient X is morphing through various faces while struggling for control of the body. One other thing I wanted to add here is taken from a post on Wikipedia about the ending of the novel version of Legion:

"The final chapter of the novel, an epilogue, has Kinderman at a burger-bar with his faithful partner, Atkins. Kinderman explains to Atkins his thoughts and musings of the whole case and how it relates to his problem of the concept of evil. Kinderman ends by concluding that he believes the Big Bang was Lucifer falling from heaven, and that the entire Universe, including humanity, are the broken parts of Lucifer, and that evolution is the process of Lucifer putting himself together back into an angel." 

The Runaways

Directed by Floria Sigismondi
2010
Rated R
107 minutes

Summary from Netflix: Dakota Fanning stars in this musical biopic as Cherie Currie, lead singer of the 1970s all-girl rock group the Runaways, whose meteoric rise up the charts was saturated with drugs and other excesses of the era. Though the Runaways start out as a novelty act, the rock 'n' roll chops of Joan Jett (Kristen Stewart), Lita Ford (Scout Taylor-Compton) and the other girls lift the group to international stardom 



My rating: ★★★ out of 5 (although I almost want to say 2.75 out of 5)

Ok, I'll admit it.  I wanted to see this because when I was younger, I thought Joan Jett was the coolest person on the planet next to Cyndi Lauper.  In addition to that reason, I also saw this movie out of a mild curiosity about Kristen Stewart and Dakota Fanning being in it.

After seeing the movie, I really wasn't sure if it was worth reviewing or not.

First off, it was hard to watch.  It wasn't so boring that I wanted to pick up my phone or have the movie in the background while I typed away on my computer, but some of it was just hard to watch and I feel a little loss for words right now on what I mean by that. 

I did like that they didn't make the whole music business to be all glamorous to be on the road and doing concerts.  This movie gave a much closer to realistic viewpoint then most. 

Unfortunately the movie fell short somewhere. Maybe it was the way it flowed?  Maybe it was the plot?  Maybe it was the acting?  I can't put my damn finger on it.  It didn't pull me in.  I felt like I was watching it through a foggy and smudged window.  Also the psychedelic crap scenes they had between Cherie and Joan made it seem more like the biopic of The Doors and just felt completely out of place to the rest of the film.

Well, at least I can say I saw it.  Don't think I really have any intention of seeing it again, even if it was to play on the TV as just background noise while I did some work (that's saying a lot coming from me LOL).  I say, watch it if you are curious about the history behind the band, but that's about it.

However, finding out that it was based off of a book by Cherie Currie, just makes me wonder if the book was any better then the movie.  Gosh I hope so...

Double Feature. The Hurt Locker & Brothers At War

After my husband's cousin, Private First Class Paul O. Cuzzupe II, an Army medic in the war in Afghanistan had died during combat operations, it made me wonder.  I had nearly no knowledge about what our soldiers go through.  I was just a typical ignorant American citizen that had only the miniscule amount of knowledge they show on TV or in movies.  I really never could get into watching war movies because it was really never my thing (or maybe it is because my father used to watch a lot of black and white war movies on our TV when I was younger).

My father was a veteran of the Korean War as a medic and my husband was in Civil Air Patrol before I met him.  I have dated men in the Armed Forces from all branches, but never really asked any of them questions about what they do or what they have done.  I always thought it was a taboo subject to ask, that it would make rake up bad memories, so I kept ignorant and silent.  Still, my need for knowledge about what goes on began to stir after the military funeral for Paul. 

My only way I knew how to get my questions answered without asking them was to look at any movies and/or documentaries in hopes that may satisfy my curiosity.

The Hurt Locker was the first choice.

Director: Kathryn Bigelow

2008
Rated R
130 minutes

Summary from IMDB: Iraq. Forced to play a dangerous game of cat-and-mouse in the chaos of war, an elite Army bomb squad unit must come together in a city where everyone is a potential enemy and every object could be a deadly bomb.

My rating: ★★★.5 out of 5

"War is a drug."

I thought this was a good movie for a war movie.  It kept me wanting to see it til the end, it was beautifully filmed, and the actors were very good.  It gave me a really good idea about what our soldiers are going through on the other side of the world, both in the past and right now.

The thing is, it wasn't a great war picture.  It left me feeling like I needed to see more movies in order to get a better perspective.  I still wasn't satisfied with knowing what my gut wanted to know.

Then I found Brothers At War...

Director: Jake Rademacher
2009
Rated R
110 minutes

Summary from Netflix: Filmmaker Jake Rademacher takes an unconventional approach to family bonding when he travels to Iraq to embed in four combat units, hoping to gain a greater understanding of the war -- and of his two brothers who are serving there. Rademacher witnesses machine gun battles and perilous reconnaissance missions, but he also gets a closer look at the sacrifices his brothers have made -- and their undying commitment to winning the fight.

My rating: ★★★★ out of 5

For a person who has never experienced war, who has never had to put on a solider uniform and be on active duty, this was a documentary to open my eyes and give me insight.  I finally got to find a bit of understanding in what these men and women go through.  I was able to learn that it wasn't all "shoot 'em up bang bang" all the time (like the movies make it out to be) and that there are some assignments that are more boring then a desk job.

I love that this was not a political film and there was no spin on it at all in one direction or another.  It was made from the heart, like more documentaries should be made.
What absolutely amazed me is with the extras of this DVD, I found out that Gary Sinise sponsored this film and helped promote it.  Many kudos to him for doing so.  It is a remarkable documentary.

After seeing Brothers At War, I think I have relatively satisfied my curiosity for now.  There are a couple more war movies I'd like to see, but this documentary really cleared a lot up that I had ever wondered about.

The Exorcist: The Extended Director's Cut

aka The Exorcist: The Version You've Never Seen aka The Exorcist: Restored Version

Directed by William Friedkin
1973
Rated R
132 minutes

Summary from Netflix: The revised version of this horror classic adds a remastered soundtrack and 10 minutes of footage, including a modified ending. When Chris MacNeil (Ellen Burstyn) suspects an evil spirit is possessing her young daughter (Linda Blair), she calls in two priests (Max von Sydow and Jason Miller) to rid of the demon. Writer William Peter Blatty scored an Academy Award for his big-screen adaptation of his own novel. 


My rating: ★★★★★ out of 5

“What an excellent day for an exorcism!”

Seriously if you haven't heard of this movie, then either you live under a rock, are a prude or are really super young and have no knowledge of this sort of thing. 

I myself have known about Exorcist since around the age of 10 when I was watching a copy at my neighbor's house on their beta video tape player.  I was scared witless of the movie (probably because the little girl, Regan, was about the same age as I was while watching it) that I had to only watch ten minutes at a time of all the bedroom scenes just to get through the movie.

Then around late high school, I picked up the novel by William Peter Blatty.  If you have seen the movie, understand that it is a walk in the park compared to the novel.  I can completely understand why the movie barely touches what is in the novel, because even in our current times of sensorship (compared to the sensoring that was 1973) a lot of what I had read would have never made it to the screen.  The movie is definitely an adaptation and both of them are beautifully horrific in their own way.  Seriously, if you crave a good scary story, pick up that novel.  As soon as I can find my copy I may read it again myself.

By college the movie couldn't phase me if it tried.  I was so deep into watching horror and goreish films by then that I decided to give a "gift" to my Film 101 class right after a three day weekend and showed them a music video I had made with my piss poor editing abilities of a certain popular song back then with nothing but footage from The Exorcist.  I scared (or maybe brain melted, hard to tell) the bejesus out of my entire class that was there that day in under six minutes.

Needless to say, me and this movie has some history together.  So when I found out that the extended director's cut was showing at a theater by my house, you bet your ass I was going!  Granted, I found out that the movie came out on Blu-Ray and DVD the very next day, but when do you get an opportunity to see it the way it was meant to be seen, right?

I would also like to state that this was the first time I ever went to a movie theater alone.  I couldn't expect my husband to go even if we had a babysitter (these sort of movies aren't his thing, and we have a mutual understanding about it) and I couldn't find anyone local willing to go with me.  I suppose the will to see such an event overrided my nervousness of doing such a thing alone.  They started the movie 15 minutes earlier then they posted, but I was fine with that since I showed up twenty minutes early.  I felt a little bad for the people that showed up on time, only to find that it had started.  My wallet wasn't overly happy that I was paying $12.50 to see this, but considering the fact that this was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, I was willing to deal with the exubert price.

The soundtrack was amazing and the extra ten minutes really did make a difference with the movie.  I was completely impressed and thoroughly enjoyed having the opportunity to see it in a theater, even though the room really wasn't that big.  For a movie that was made purely on physical special effects and absolutely no CGI work, it is a masterpiece.  I also was very pleased to wait after the movie to see the never-before-seen on-set footage from the making of the film and interviews with director William Friedkin, writer William Peter Blatty and members of the original cast and crew.  After watching the extras after the movie, I have to agree with what the cast and crew said that it was not a horror film (even though people have always said it was), but it is an amazing supernatural thriller.

For those of you with home movie theaters, I envy you.  You will have the closest experience to what I had seeing it in a true movie theater, even though it still won't completely compare.  If you have never seen the movie, do it.  If you have seen the movie before, see it again with the extended footage. 

Welcome & Enjoy!

Let's face it. We all entertain ourselves with multimedia, whether it is movies, tv, video games, books, etc. It seems that most of the pros that review for a living aren't on the same level as the rest of us.

This collaborative blog was created to review those forms of multimedia that our writers have been exposed to, no matter if we take delight in them or not. We won't discriminate with genres, even though we seem to enjoy horror or anime the most. ;)

Currently our two main reviewers are Duchess Webb & Stuart Glass, but we welcome any and all guest reviewers to come join us.

Also if you have any suggestions on what we should watch or play, you can either write to us, put your suggestion in this blog entry, or you could always make your suggestion into DW's Formspring.  Thanks!