Tag Archives: thriller

Hard Candy

1 Reply

mv5bmtc0mzgznti3n15bml5banbnxkftztcwndk3mdizmq-_v1_sy1000_sx675_al_Ah, Netflix. How I have forsaken thee! Well, mostly how I have watched TV on thee instead of movies, but definitely there was forsaking that occurred as well. It’s cool, though, we made up. Which, come to think of it, is probably not the best metaphor with which to open this review. So forget the Netflix stuff entirely except if you care about where I got the movie from, and pretend like I started with the next paragraph instead.

So anyway, I watched a movie last night. Except, that’s not where it started. Around this time last year (except imdb tells me it was more like two years ago), I saw a preview for a movie. I’m not convinced it ever got wide theatrical release, and I am quite sure I never found a place it was showing. If I remembered where I saw the preview, that might help, I guess. But I only remember the preview itself and my reaction to it, instead. Basically, it was a series of scenes implying a cat-and-mouse game between an adult photographer and a teenaged girl, but with the added spice that it was difficult to say who was the cat and who the mouse. Which, of course, made it ironically clear that the sexual predator guy was going to end up the mouse. But this is a good thing, because I think it would have been impossible to want to watch it, without that assurance. Instead, I was filled with intriguement. So, I waited and watched and eventually slipped it into my Netflix queue, the payoff of which occurred last night.

The movie went largely as predicted, which was not any kind of problem at all. Of course the ending stayed shrouded in mystery, but knowing all the stuff up to then wasn’t the point. Because the acting was really good and the situation was compellingly disturbing from the first moment until nearly the last. I know it’s not a particularly controversial position to take here, but I really had no idea just how visceral my negative reaction to the predator guy was going to be. Going in, I had the thought that maybe I was going to end up feeling sorry for him being trapped in Hayley’s web (Hayley being the Hard Candy in question), but that never happened. Sure, some of her actions were horrific or at least uncomfortable, but not once did I feel like his targetting was unfair.[1] Which (I’ll assume) says something else positive about the acting quality.

It’s hard to say I liked it, because it was so unpleasant to behold. But it was really very good, and it’s easy to say I was impressed by it. I don’t think I’d watch it again if I could help it, though. Those movies that really root around in the darkness of the human psyche (8MM and Schindler’s List spring to mind) tend to provide everything on the first viewing, as starkly as possible, as if to say, “See this? Don’t do this! Ever!”

(Footnote contains spoilers, sort of.)

Continue reading →

Vacancy

2 Replies

Sometimes my ability to fall behind on reviews can be ascribed to laziness, sometimes to being excessively busy. This time, though? Sheer exhaustion. Well, and being excessively busy. Since I saw Vacancy, I’ve had one day of weekend followed by three more days of being at work. And I didn’t really get enough sleep on Sunday, much less the other days. On top of which, Monday and Tuesday were as busy as any days at work I’ve had here, with the added virtue of occurring back-to-back and did I mention on not enough sleep? My fake vacation cannot occur quickly enough. (Literally. If the place weren’t so understaffed with other people on vacation right now, I’d go ahead and take off tomorrow, lost money be damned.)

Speaking of bring trapped in a Sartreian room that has a snuff film running on loop in the corner[1], estranged married couple Luke Wilson and Kate Beckinsale set out to re-demonstrate a lesson we’ve all long since learned: don’t take a shortcut unless you want something bad to happen to your car in the middle of nowhere, don’t expect the stranger in the tiny town a mile or two from the middle of nowhere to actually have your best interests in mind, and don’t stay in hotels where the proprietor is funny-looking and you are the only guests. But it’s okay; these lessons are clichéd for a reason.

Because once they get into that vacant room, they start to realize just how much trouble they’re in. I mean, watching people in your room getting murdered on video has a way of putting those petty little snipes and dislikes and even deep-seated angers with one another into perspective. (Which is the difference between this and actual Sartre; his characters would have finished the conversation first, then worried about how to escape imminent bloody death on videotape. In a way, I’m the mildest bit disappointed now and wish I hadn’t though of the comparison to start with.) From there, it’s all cat-and-mouse tension that is never relieved for any longer than what is required for the audience to remember to breathe. At least one scene is genuinely disturbing, and another is pretty terrifying in a laudably subtle way. And one scene, well, simply doesn’t fit the movie. But as that’s my only complaint, I say good on them. It’s not like it’s the best movie you’ll see this year, or even this month, but it might well be the best dramatic thriller you’ll see this year. Unless that one with Halle Berry and Bruce Willis is good? I think I heard not, though. So, yeah, this one, then.

[1] I know what you’re thinking, and you’re right. I could probably complain to someone and get the channel changed. But the alternative is this weird propaganda loop, and after a while the screams provide their own cold, inhuman comfort. …sorry, got distracted there for a second.

Casino Royale (2006)

MV5BMTM5MjI4NDExNF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwMDM1MjMzMQ@@._V1__SX1859_SY893_As so often promised, James Bond has returned.

And it’s a good return, too. Casino Royale has a Bond that, at the beginning of the movie, isn’t even a Double-Oh agent yet. I spent a little bit of time in skepticality, but there was a single moment in the first action sequence, when he jumps over the wrought-iron fence and into the [spoiler elided]; in that moment, I could tell that this new guy was still James Bond. From there on, I was able to lean back, stop analyzing and enjoy the ride. Sure, he’s the new guy, but going back to the beginning made that work pretty well. You see him making rookie mistakes and bouncing back (or not), and you get a brand new impression that he’s a human. Lately, these movies have shied away from that kind of character, and it’s refreshing to be able to worry about him and not just his sidekicks.

Bond’s mission is to follow some terrorist money and prevent it getting to the terrorists. Only, he discovers that the guy doing the laundering has accidentally lost all of it himself and hopes to win it back in a $150 million game of, well, Texas Hold’Em. (Apparently, that is now the only version of poker that officially exists.) So, Bond is bought into the game by MI6 and pursues a high stakes game of cat and mouse with the evil money laundering guy, wherein his dual goals are to find enough proof to capture the guy for questioning and, if possible, to make sure someone else wins the money. It’s actually quite a bit more exciting than it sounds, for all that there’s a lack of perfectly plotted gadgets and insane, overpowered supervillains. (Or, more likely, because of that lack. Humanized, I said.) The ending gets a little convoluted, but apparently the fault lies with the original author. (Well, sure, and some to the screenwriter for not finding a way to fix it at least a little bit.) They do win my respect, despite all that, for providing me with what will probably be the coolest thing I’ll ever see happen in Venice.

Two things I wonder, though. Will they start remaking all of the old Bond movies, and cause them to more closely follow Fleming’s work? I think that might not be a bad idea, though I doubt it’s what will happen. And, why is there such a big brouhaha over ‘James Blond’? Seriously, after putting together a solid Bond to rival the best performance of any of the previous ones, we’re focused on his hair? Lame. This must be how Reese Witherspoon feels when she reads In Style the day after the Academy Awards.

Most importantly, though, I stuck around through the credits and received the eternal promise: James Bond will return.

Snakes on a Plane

I know what you’re thinking. I’ve been talking about Snakes on a Plane since even before Jon Stewart heard about it, and now it’s been out for a week with nary a peep from me. I’ve been trying (unsuccessfully, so far) to resolve the spam issue hereabouts, and that has been taking almost all of my attention. It sucks, but there it is. (Incidentally, spammer people. I delete all of it. It’s not going to help you any to put it here. I guarantee you send me more spam in a given week than I get hits, even if all of my readers were gullible idiots. What you are doing is useless. It’s not going to make you any money. I promise. Please stop. Or when you get indicted and are being transported to the trial, I may very well… but I’m getting ahead of myself.)

What you have to understand is how very, very tired I was. Running on low sleep from dealing with new job, 90 minutes of commute per day, grandfather in the hospital, and still trying to have some semblance of a personal life. So by 10 PM on Thursday night, I was already more than able to go right to sleep. Staying awake for an extra couple of hours to watch a movie instead, that was the stuff of insanity. And yet, it was motherfucking snakes on a motherfucking plane, man. How am I supposed to turn that down?

Well, it’s like this. I have a history, when it’s late and I’m tired, of falling asleep. Shocking, I know. But I even mean when I have every intention of staying awake. It’s a combination of comfort and darkness that is usually unbeatable by my higher brain functions. And I was a lot more tired than usual. The point of all this is to make it clear that when I say I stayed awake for the whole movie, that’s not just some idle aside which should have been obvious before you ever started reading. I was motherf-. Well, I was really tired, is my point.

Even despite all my protestations, I’ll admit that this isn’t the finest endorsement ever. But really, how much better of an endorsement could I give than the title of the movie? Well, for one, I am able to confirm that there were moth- *ahem* snakes on that plane. And they bit people in all kinds of excellent places. And a wide variety of two-dimensional characters were in danger of dying at any moment, and often did. Scripted lines and situations alike were laugh out loud funny, and if you didn’t really care what happened to most of the characters, well, that’s kind of okay, because the point is the spectacle of it. It was, in short, the very archetype of an action/horror movie.

Now, go see it.

The Poseidon Adventure

I thought I ought to ground myself in history, so thanks to my good friends at Netflix, I snagged The Poseidon Adventure no more than a week after its remake’s release date, to watch prior to catching said remake. (Because I am nothing if not timely. Also: product endorsements deserve to be rewarded with free stuff. Just saying, good friends at Netflix.) The seventies were a different time is what I have learned. Sure, blah blah blah special effects cakes, but that’s not the thing. The thing is the acting. With the exception of Ernest Borgnine (who was frankly superb) and Roddy McDowall, every single male in the cast acted via angry loud voice. It was just bizarre to watch, especially in Gene Hackman, who I have certainly seen perform well enough in other (notably later) roles. Meanwhile, the women were mostly called upon to scream a lot. This is somewhat less surprising on the whole, but still pretty sad. As the main exception here was Ernest Borgnine’s wife, I am forced to assume that it was talent by osmosis.

As for the plot? Well, you know, boat flips over, people try to survive in upside-down boat. Is there more that you need to know? I will say that the set design did an almost non-existent job of conveying upside-downness, which robbed the movie of a good third of its purported impact. I expect that the remake will handle that part, at least. And maybe less shouting. But mostly better special effects traded in for someone not as good as Borgnine. Probably this is a bad thing; it certainly would be if the original had been a tour de force, but since it was not, I’ll take what I can get.

Mission: Impossible III

2 Replies

Here are the problems with the summer movie season.

1) It starts too early. First weekend in May? Inevitably, by mid-July all of the exciting movies are over, and you’re left watching previews for a voodoo horror flick for 3 straight months because it’s the only thing the movie studios think anyone will actually bother to see, and by the time it finally comes around, all you can do is thank God that the previews aren’t on anymore, all desire to actually look into the movie having been leeched away by repeat after repeat of that stupid, terrible, no-good preview.

2) Hollywood has learned, like an undisciplined child, that all attention is good and to be craved, regardless the actual quality of the action that garnered the attention. That is, any movie that is a sequel to a successful movie or has stars I’ve ever heard of or has explosions and car crashes, people will go see it in droves, cranking millions of dollars of profit into the studios, regardless of whether the film in question is actually good. The goal isn’t to make a lasting product, just to bring in money. Used to be, they’d make their money over time by having a film people wanted to see, instead of making it all in the first weekend. (I openly admit to being a part of the problem in this regard. But still, it would be nice to see good movies.)

3) No boobies. All of the nudity in the year comes in December when people are trying to win Oscars for Important Roles where shirts come off only because it is Relevant to the Plot, or else in February/March, aka horror movie season. (And I think we all know those pickings are getting slimmer even as they’re getting fatter.)

The good news, though, is this. Mission: Impossible III has glossed right over the failure of point #2, coming up with a sequel that’s actually worth seeing. More amazing still, it followed a pretty bad sequel, which is usually the kiss of death for an ongoing franchise. I think most of the credit for this can be laid squarely at the feet of J.J. Abrams and his skill with the Alias series. He may still be finding his sealegs in the mysterious / spooky sci-fi genre, but the boy knows how to handle spies, both (obviously) the exciting wetwork and (less commonly by far) their lives outside of those deadly mission into Prague. I mean, get this: I cared what happened to Tom Cruise’s love interest. That right there is an impossible freaking mission, let me tell you.

The only real flaw, and it’s minor, is that the villain is a bit of a hollow shell. Hoffman certainly pulls it off well, creating a sufficiently cold, unaffected, and downright dastardly bad guy that I didn’t notice that there was nothing really there until the credits were rolling. Evil and diabolical, sure, but nothing like reasonable motivations or character development. A pretty cool obstacle, and nothing more. I’d expected better after all those seasons of Alias I’ve washed down over the past year, but then again, it’s only a two hour movie. (I should also say that my ability to map out all the twists and turns an hour in advance is a flaw, but I’m enough used to that to only count it as a plus when a movie actually succeeds in tricking me, these days.)

V for Vendetta

You would think that after liking a movie a whole lot, I would be compelled to get out there and spread the word, right away. And that would be very rational of me. Nevertheless, here I am more than a week after seeing V for Vendetta, and obviously I’m only just getting here. This is a movie I’d have been perfectly happy to see again in the same week, mind you, only my mom has yet to be up to it. Plus, there’s this whole test-studying thing going on, but I’m nearly done there and also I digress.

So there’s this movie, right? In a lot of ways, it’s a straight up revenge movie in the fine tradition of Sudden Impact, Death Wish, or I Spit on Your Grave. At first that bothered me, because I had the idea that it was a meaningful, important film. But then it stopped bothering me when I realized that it could be both. If your revenge is grand enough and the cause is dire enough, you can be the match that sets off hundreds of pounds of gunpowder. Metaphorically speaking, of course. And I’m impressed that in the middle of a movie that I’m willing to compare to Death Wish, there could have been something as moving and true as Valerie’s story, which segment was worth the price of admission all by itself.

It’s misleading, because it looks like a pointed political allegory condemning the way we’re living our lives here in the western world these days. And, okay, maybe it is. But what makes it misleading is that it really isn’t just about right now. It’s about any society that allows its decisions to be made by its fear, and if that seems like a timely topic just now, maybe it just means that more people need to hear the message.

Also? All of the acting was great, and I have no complaints about the scripting. Best movie so far this year, and unless its predictive value is a little stronger than I’m comfortable with, it will be the movie that stands the test of time.

16 Blocks

Obligatory action movie time! Except, 16 Blocks wasn’t quite as action-oriented as I thought, which was mostly good and slightly bad. Sure, there’s gunplay and chases and car crashes and whatnot, but with neither explosions nor fountains of blood. It’s mostly a talking movie, between Bruce Willis and his fellow cops, Willis and his somewhat crooked grand jury witness, Willis and his estranged family. Mostly, they talk about right and wrong and redemption, and about the line between any two of the three. It wasn’t especially trite, but it was definitely a retread. On the bright side, it had heart.

That said, I’m not sure about Willis’s career these days. ‘Cause, seriously, who can remember the last time he didn’t play a sad-eyed cop trying to protect a person or people from a corrupt system? (Okay, sure, that one time he was a sad-eyed psychiatrist instead.) I know for a fact that he was once funny. Can’t we have that guy, every now and then? This is an unreasonable complaint, though, because I am in no way dismissing his sad-eyed talent. That man can carry the weight of the world on his shoulders at the drop of a hat, and I believe it every time. I bet it’s because he has a kid named Rumor. That would wear on anyone.

Derailed (2005)

Jennifer Aniston was always basically the hottest Friend, and now she has a psychological thriller movie. So, hey, that’s for me! Off went I to Derailed on Wednesday, and that was worth the effort of going to. This guy meets a hot chick on a train, they start down infidelity highway, and then things go suddenly awry; but not in the Glenn Close hide-your-bunnies manner.

As always, one moment of truth could have re-railed the whole situation, but the tragedy of psychological thriller lead actors is that they’re flawed with dishonesty. And so instead of admitting to his wife what happened the very first night, our hero is drawn ever further along the road to hell, with no offramp in sight. And that’s what the movie is really about: how you react to the gradual, inevitable dissolution of your life. Except, given the genre, you know someone is going to get shot by the end.

Red Eye

Wes Craven understands tension. Whether you care should be enough to determine whether you want to see Red Eye. Although his heroine fears flying and loss of control, nothing works as well for the audience as a good dose of claustrophobia, and the majority of the film delivers.

Rachel McAdams finds herself in the clutches of a professional… well, I don’t know if there’s a specific word for it, but when you need to hire somebody to do something nobody else can, but it’s a bad guy rather than the A-Team. Anyhow, he’s a professional one of those, and he has her where he wants her. Unless she arranges for a government official to be in an exposed position at her hotel, her father will die.

Any time the plot strays from the interactions between McAdams and her assailant, well, as you’ve just read, the plot is far too derivative for its own good. Luckily, the movie very rarely lets that plot get in the way of an otherwise excellent story. And as for the assailant, every bit of claustrophobia provided by the sets was matched by Cillian Murphy‘s depthless blue sociopathic eyes. Typecast he may always be, but as long as he doesn’t trip onto an unfortunately spaced barbecue fork, he’ll never hurt for work. It certainly helps that he can also act.

Special note for fans: Colby Donaldson plays a third tier role as the head Secret Service agent. So, y’know, good on him.