Archive for the ‘Review’ Category

Rewatch: Nosferatu (1922)

Posted: January 28, 2018 in Review, Rewatch
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
5

So I’m seven films into this series (click here to see the whole series), where I rewatch horror films I previously disliked to see if there was something there I missed the first time. And this time around, I’m going with a classic. By which I mean, it’s probably older than any of my grandparents. Nosferatu, one of the earliest horror films and the first Dracula adaptation, as well as an example of German expressionist film. It’s become something of a cult classic since it’s release over ninety years ago, and its villain, Count Orlok, has become almost a meme, but longer lasting.

And can I just say, my own opinion aside, it’s a freaking miracle we even have this movie? Not kidding, we nearly lost this film to copyright infringement. Prana Films, the studio that made this film, was started and owned by two businessmen who never made a film before, and apparently had no idea you had to ask permission before doing an adaptation of a non-public domain work. Bram Stoker’s widow sued the company when she found out, and the company was forced to destroy all their copies…except or two copies, which have been copied and cobbled together to preserve the film to this day. Which is why if you watch the film today, sometimes the film is pure black-and-white, and at other times it’s sepia-toned.*

Okay, enough of that. Time to talk about the actual film.

WHAT’S IT ABOUT: It’s Dracula, just with everyone’s names changed: Dracula is now Orlok, Harker is Hutter, Mina is Ellen, etc. Do you need more information than that?

WHY I DIDN’T LIKE IT: I was fifteen or sixteen when I saw this film for the first time. And while I enjoyed older films well before then, I just didn’t get into it. I knew the plot, so I was never surprised or scared. It was just…boring. Really poisoned silent films for me.

WHY I REWATCHED IT: I just thought it would be good for this series. And in any case, while I still don’t read it that much, I appreciate classic literature much more than I did then. Maybe that extended to films too.

THOUGHTS: Um…it’s not good, but I find it hard to hate.

Look, you need to have a certain frame of mind to enjoy silent films, and I’ve only enjoyed one of the silent films I’ve seen (which was made in 2005, so…), so it’s safe to say I don’t have that frame of mind.

But I did enjoy it at times…as a comedy. Yeah, I know it’s a horror film, but I just couldn’t help but laugh at the film. There was so much to make fun of! For one thing, the make-up makes every guy look like a serial killer about to take a victim, especially when they laugh or smile, and every girl like a drag queen. I just couldn’t help but giggle. (Also, the character Knock is probably the inspiration for Count Olaf in A Series of Unfortunate Events. Thank the make-up department for that!).

And because it was a silent film, I could just sit in my living room and make goofy voices. I remember during one moment, when Hutter comes home to tell Ellen he’s going abroad, I responded to the dialogue card by saying, “Hi husband, good to see you too. I had a wonderful day, thank you for asking. Now what are you talking about?” And when Hutter runs into another room to start packing, I said, “So this is what Marge and Lois are talking about when their husbands announce they’re about to do something stupid.” It was hysterical.

Unfortunately, the best of on-the-spot comedy couldn’t help the film from dragging. For a 95-minute film, it felt so much longer, and like nothing was happening at all. Characters just took their time, said things, and reacted to things. There was nothing to get your blood pumping at all.

I could go on with the problems I had with this film, but that’d be a veeeery long blog post. I’ll just save time by saying, I had many more issues that kept me from enjoying it.

Still, Count Orlok is cool looking, and the sets are really pretty. I’ll give the film that.

JUDGMENT: I’m sorry, but it’s just not my kind of film. I know it has its fans, but I’m not one of them. 1.5 out of 5. I’m sad to say that, due to its place in film history, but that’s just how I feel.

Well, I think I might enjoy this next film a bit more. And if I don’t, there’s a good chance I’ll be reviled in the comments for it. in fact, people might shout “REDRUM” at me. That’s right, I’m rewatching Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining next.

Until next time, pleasant nightmares!

*Also, the version of the film I watched was restored in Wiesbaden, the city in Germany I lived in for four months back in 2015! That’s really cool, if you ask me. My former home helped to create a beautiful print of a classic movie. I wonder if my supervisors knew about that?

Thoughts on Lovecraft: Part 4

Posted: January 23, 2018 in Living and Life, Reflections, Review, Scary Stuff, Writing
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
0

Well, it’s been a year since I last had a Lovecraft binge (see Parts 1, 2, and 3 for my previous binges). And while I didn’t read any actual Lovecraft stories in the year (holy cow, that long?) since my last binge, he was certainly never far from my mind. I read a lot of fiction influenced or modeled after his work, including the Lovecraft/YA novel Awoken* (read my review here), shopped around my own Lovecraft-themed story The Red Bursts (still working on that), and wrote an article about why there’s not more adaptations or even a cinematic universe based on his work. No, surprise, after all that I was ready for another dive into his work. And boy, did I enjoy the eldritch swim.

So if you’re not familiar with HP Lovecraft (and I’d bet good money that you’re not), he was an early 20th-century author whose ideas and stories proved very influential on storytellers like Stephen King, Guillermo del Toro, and Allan Moore, among others. He’s considered the father of cosmic horror, the idea that humans are basically ants in our universe, that there are beings and truths so great and terrible that even glimpsing them can cause madness and death. It’s pretty bleak stuff, if you think about too much about it (which I have).

So this time around, I read “The Case of Charles Dexter Ward,” Lovecraft’s only finished novel, “The Colour Out of Space,” “The Dunwich Horror,” “History of the Neconomicon” and “The Whisperer in Darkness,” as well as several fragments, one letter excerpt, and one parody story, but I won’t go over those. And I got to say, these were definitely some of the most enjoyable of Lovecraft’s stories. They were consistently creepy and kept me engrossed in the story, as well as with the most accessible language (dude liked to pretend he was a contemporary of Poe, rather than a contemporary of Ernest Hemingway). Or am I just used to his style now?

The interesting thing about these highlighted stories is, they also mark Lovecraft’s shift from pure horror to science-horror. Sure, he’s done that before–“Herbert West: Reanimator” is the story of two men trying to discover the key to bringing back the dead using science, a theme also explored in “Charles Dexter Ward,” but more thriller and magical than science-fiction–but here there was definitely a more sci-fi element in his work. “The Colour Out of Space” and “The Whisperer in Darkness” both involved aliens, with the former involving a sort of alien infection and the latter involving aliens that have been visiting Earth for centuries.

Why did Lovecraft make this shift? Well, around the time these stories were written–late 1920’s and early 1930’s–was also the birth of science fiction as a proper genre. Pulp magazines like Amazing Stories and Astounding Stories were huge sellers, and since pulp rags like these were where Lovecraft normally published his work, he would’ve been aware of the young genre and its exploration of humanity’s possibilities through space exploration, technology, and aliens. It’s no surprise that he’d take elements from those stories and give them a freaky twist. And lo and behold, it led to Lovecraft writing some of my favorite works by him (especially “Colour Out of Space.” God, that was freaky, considering that what happened in that story could maybe happen in real life).

Honestly, I’m glad I decided to check out HP Lovecraft two-and-a-half years ago. Sure, his early works can be hit-and-miss, but as time went on, he got better. And by this point in his bibliography, he was very good at writing stories that stayed in your mind. It’s a shame he didn’t achieve more of a following during this time, because maybe then we’d have more works by him (sadly, he died in 1937 at barely forty years of age), and he’d be more well-known today.

And while I’m done with my latest binge, I’m looking forward to my next one, whenever that is. Especially if the stories from this point on are as good as the ones I read this time around. And seeing as At the Mountain of Madness is the next story in my collection, I’d say that’s a definite possibility.

Have you read these stories or others by Lovecraft? What are your thoughts on them?

*Funny story about Awoken: so I follow this woman named Lindsay Ellis on YouTube (check out her channel here) who does a lot of videos on our media and culture. Yesterday she uploaded a video about whether or not the hate over the Twilight franchise was warranted. During said video, she mentions she and friend/frequent collaborator Antonella “Nella” Inserra wrote Awoken as a parody of Twilight, only with Lovecraft characters instead of vampires. My mouth hit the floor. I had no idea that the novel was a parody of Twilight, let alone written by those two women under a pen name. Though now that I think about it, it explains quite a bit.

I reached out to both women on YouTube and Twitter, letting them know that I read the novel, my ignorance of its authorship, how much I actually liked it, and that I reviewed it on this blog. They asked for a link, and I sent it to them. Since then, I’ve gotten hundreds of views from their readers/viewers on that one review, and the number of reads is still growing. Wow. Didn’t expect that. Pretty cool. Probably won’t last a week, but it’s still cool.

Also, I learned about Poe’s Rule: if you write a parody of something, unless you ad a healthy dose of comedy, people will think it’s serious fiction in a particular style. Which is apparently what happened to me, as these readers are telling me. Good to know.

Rewatch: The Evil Dead (1981)

Posted: January 20, 2018 in Review, Rewatch, Scary Stuff
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
8

You know, I’ve seen a lot of YouTubers do series where they watch specific kinds of stories–sequels of great hits, weird-ass anime, the Mummy series, etc.–and I appreciate what they do, but I feel like I’m getting an idea of the horrors they have to endure just to entertain me. A lot of what they watch can be really bad or silly or painful, and they endure it just to bring me YouTube commentary and humor.

How do they do it as often as they do? They must have some serious endurance.

WHAT’S IT ABOUT: A bunch of friends/lovers go to a cabin in the woods for the weekend, and obviously, something horrible happens. It’s the embodiment of the cliche, if not the original that started the cliche.

WHY I DIDN’T LIKE IT: I saw it right before the remake came out, and I thought it was totally stupid. It was dated, the effects were terrible and cheap, and far from scary. I could not see how it became a phenomenon. And after I saw the remake and loved it, I was amazed that the original didn’t just get swept into the dustbin of history.

WHY I REWATCHED IT: You hear enough people talk about the influence of the original, and even do YouTube videos comparing both films (YouTube is a big part of my life, if that’s not obvious), you start to wonder if you missed something. It also started a phenomenon, as well as jump-started the careers of Sam Raimi and Bruce Campbell. Not to mention that the shooting was pretty dangerous: people were actually thrown into and had furniture fall on them. Not only that, but when the characters are fighting demonically-possessed friends with sharp knives, they’re actually fighting other actors with gunk in their eyes, completely blinded, while using actual sharp knives! Kind of makes you want to see if your opinion needs reevaluating.

THOUGHTS: Ummm…it’s better than I remember it. A little better, anyway.

There are some things about this film that are good. The camera work is always interesting, showing things from points of views I don’t normally see in horror films. At times, it feels like a drone is holding the camera: odd angles, fast movements, branches and whatnot hitting the camera. There are some really atmospheric moments, like when the characters arrive and there’s this eerie music and the porch swing is knocking against the wall.

And there are some shocking moments, like the…rape-tree scene. Yeah, if you didn’t know, that’s a thing this movie has. And it’s shocking and disgusting. Which is what the filmmakers were looking for, the most shocking horror film ever put to screen at that time, so I guess they got what they wanted.

But I have a lot of problems with this film. For one thing, the shock and awe only stays shocking as long as the audience isn’t desensitized. And I’ve been desensitized since I was nine and saw my first PG-13 movie. And when that stuff loses it power, what’s left has to hold up the rest of the film, and it doesn’t do that very well. Biggest issue I have is the effects: I know they’re going for memorable and it is, but they’re very silly at the same time, and in a horror film, even when I put aside my distaste for excessive gore, that’s just going to turn me off.

While I don’t expect the characters to be that fleshed out–not that kind of film–but they could’ve done a better job of establishing their relationships early in the film. I could not tell who was dating who, and they waited till nearly two-thirds into the film to reveal that Girl #3 was Bruce Campbell’s sister. Um…could’ve pointed that out earlier. I thought she was just a fifth wheel who went with the other four so she didn’t have to feel bad about not having a boyfriend. Which she was, but the sister part should be mentioned earlier.

And weirdly enough, for the bare-bones story, it actually gave me questions. For one thing, after the sister’s possessed and one of them is badly injured, the other characters are way too calm. Why are you so calm? Your friend’s possessed! Be a bit more freaked out and active! And why are the spirits said to be “sleeping” prior to being summoned by the incantations in the Book of the Dead, but they’re able to possess a hand or cause cars to swerve into the wrong lane? They seem pretty active to me! Are they like Cthulhu, sleeping but still able to affect the world, they’re just not at full power unless under certain circumstances? I’m so confused.

JUDGMENT: It may have caused a phenomenon and started a few careers, and you should see it for those reasons, but I wouldn’t expect to be really scared once you’re past age fourteen. On a scale of 1 to 5, I give the original Evil Dead film a 2 out of 5. That may be the unpopular opinion, but let’s face it: some classics don’t age well with time. We saw that with Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and I’m seeing that with Evil Dead. And I’m not sorry for pointing that out.

At the very least, I’ll check out the next film. I hear that and its sequel are at least a bit more enjoyable. And hopefully they will be.

 

That’s all for now, Followers of Fear. I’ve already reserved #7 in this series, and I think that, even if I don’t enjoy it as a film, I’ll find it interesting from an academic point of view. I’m talking Nosferatu.

Until next time, pleasant nightmares!

Review: Before I Wake (2016 film)

Posted: January 12, 2018 in Review
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
0

Before I Wake is a film that has been promising to come out since 2015. However the film’s distributor, Relativity Media, kept pushing it back and finally off the release schedule due to the company’s financial troubles and whatever decisions go on in Hollywood boardrooms. With only a promising trailer to go on, plenty of Americans were wondering if we’d ever see this film and if it would be any good if we did. However last year Netflix announced it had acquired the rights to the film, and this month they released it onto their streaming platform.

And as I’m sick today and didn’t feel like doing anything else, I decided to watch it and see if it would live up to my expectations (which was average at best).

*Sigh* I can see why it was taken off the release schedule by its cash-strapped distribution company.

Before I Wake is about Jessie Hobson (played by Kate Bosworth), who becomes a foster parent with her husband to young Cody Morgan (played by Jacob Tremblay) after their own son dies in a tragic accident. They soon learn that Cody’s dreams are able to manifest in the real world, and Jessie predictably starts using his powers so she can see her son again. However, Cody’s nightmares cause horrible things to happen, and Jessie must race to unravel Cody’s subconscious before it destroys everything around him.

And yes, I see the Nightmare on Elm Street influence, but let’s ignore that, shall we?

I’m not going to lie. This film was kind of disappointing. It does have its good points: Bosworth, Tremblay, and Thomas Jane as Jessie’s husband Mark have great chemistry. You really do buy Bosworth as a woman trying to fill the hole in her heart and sees Cody’s ability as a way to do that rather than Cody himself, and you also buy Mark as a man trying to be there for this kid and worried about his wife. And oh my God, is Jacob Tremblay some sort of prodigy? Because he is just amazing in this film. You really think he’s this earnest little boy who’s afraid of his powers.

And until we reach the last thirty minutes of the film, it’s decent.

But other than that, this film has some serious issues. The plot is kind of by-the-numbers despite the heartfelt emotions of the characters. The CGI monsters aren’t that terrifying after you get them into the light, and there’s more of a focus on this emotional connection than creating a scary atmosphere. And while I’m not opposed to focusing on a connection between characters, when you put more emphasis on that than on making a scary movie scary, you know you have a problem. Imagine if Carrie was less about a psychic girl using her powers to fix her life and then get revenge and more about two broken women trying to repair their relationship while psychic stuff happens around them and it’s still billed as a scary movie. You see my problem here.

And finally, that last half hour. That is my biggest problem of the film. Rather than trying to have a climax, it seems more like the film is concerned with wrapping up its story with exposition and trying to make us feel the warm fuzzies inside with a sappy ending. If perhaps they added an extra half-hour and tried to do some things different, maybe go in some darker directions, we could’ve had a better film. Instead we’re left feeling like the filmmakers got bored and just tried to finish up the film with an ending that sounded nice, rather than a good one.

On a scale of 1 to 5, I’m giving Before I Wake a 2. Great emotional storytelling and a good premise, but the execution makes for a terrible horror movie. If you’re looking for something scary to watch on Netflix, I would highly recommend watching another film.

Until next time, my Followers of Fear, I’m taking it easy while I continue to heal. Pleasant nightmares and have a good weekend.

Review: Insidious: The Last Key

Posted: January 6, 2018 in Review, Scary Stuff
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
0

You know, horror sequels get a bad reputation for getting silly or boring over time. Now, there are some that do give this rep some credibility (looking at you, Jason Takes Manhattan). But among horror sequels, there are some truly great gems that have as much punch, or sometimes even more punch, than the originals. And Insidious: The Last Key is one of those sequels, not just for being scary and creepy, but also for keeping things interesting with a character-driven narrative.

In this entry in the Insidious series, Elise Rainier (played by unacknowledged Hollywood treasure Lin Shaye) is called back to her childhood home to defeat the evil spirits that live there and which haunted her childhood. As she and her two stalwart companions Specs and Tucker delve deep into the hauntings in the house, they will not only uncover horrors from the Further, but from this world as well, and from Elise’s own dark memories.

This was a seriously solid horror movie. The best part of it, of course, is Lin Shaye’s performance as Elise Rainier, along with the character’s own arc in this movie. The arc itself is kind of similar to Elise’s arc in the last film–that she’s dealing with trauma and has to overcome it to save a life–but here, the scars are so much deeper, and the raw emotion you feel from Shaye as Elise opens them up makes it seem all so new. You feel her pain, you feel her wanting to make amends, and when you see her triumphs, you share in them.

As always, the atmosphere in these movies is creepy, the right balance between tension and jump scares. The creepiest part, in my opinion, is the antagonist, The Man With the Keys, or Key Face as he’s listed on Wikipedia. This is such a freaky looking demon, and unlike the Man Who Can’t Breathe from the last film, who got scary once you could see him in the light, The Man with the Keys is freaky no matter when you see him. In the light, out of the light, he’s so scary. I think if you put him up next to Bill Skarsgard’s Pennywise and had a contest on just visual terror, it’d be a very close call.

I also like, in addition to the many keys we see in the movie, there is just so many key-shaped imagery in the movie. Pumps, signs, etc. They’re all key-shaped, kind of tying into the theme of the movie of opening up old wounds and opening up the past.

I also thought that new character Imogen (whose name only makes me think of the song “Hide and Seek” by Imogen Heap) was an interesting addition. Not giving anything away, but her presence in the film could be a hint of where the franchise could go from here, given where this film takes place in the series’ timeline. Especially if Lin Shaye wants to finish her time with the series with this film or with the next one.*

Was there anything I didn’t like? A few things. I honestly thought the climax wasn’t as epic as it could’ve been. Not only that, but a few things we saw in the trailers didn’t show up in the film, which is always annoying. And finally, Specs and Tucker, our supposed comic relief, just weren’t that funny.

But all in all, Insidious: The Last Key is well worth plunking down cash for a ticket. On a scale of 1 to 5, I give it a 4.4. Check it out, and open yourself up to some terrifying storytelling.

That’s all for now, Followers of Fear. We’re likely going to have a bunch more reviews this month, so I hope you’re ready for recommendations and opinions. And if the trailers I saw in the theater are any indication, I’m going to have a lot to say in 2018.

Until next time, pleasant nightmares!

*I’m assuming that we’re going to get a sequel, given that already the film has made back its budget and then a bit two days after coming out.

Review: The Shape of Water (film)

Posted: December 30, 2017 in Review
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
8

Guillermo del Toro’s films are very much like Tim Burton’s films: there’s a distinctive feel and style to them that sets them apart from other films. A tendency towards the strange and the dark, creatures not oft experienced by man nor treated that much in modern fiction, etc. And such is the case with his latest venture, The Shape of Water, which del Toro says was inspired by when he saw Creature from the Black Lagoon as a kid and was disappointed that it wasn’t a romance between the Creature and Julie Adams.

I have to say, all these decades later, the concept has aged well.

The Shape of Water follows Elisa, a mute custodian at a government facility in Baltimore in 1962. One day, the facility receives an amphibian-man creature from South America, which is kept in a room that Elisa cleans. The two start interacting and romancing, leading to a plot to save the creature from the facility and those who would do him harm.

There’s a lot going for this film. For one thing, it’s beautiful. Everything from the sets to the costumes looks right out of the late 50’s, early 60’s, the lighting is used in different ways to highlight moods and atmosphere, and there are even throwbacks to classic films from that period, including a short musical number that I feel like was inspired by the ones American Horror Story does every couple of seasons. The acting is also pretty stellar: Sally Hawkins as Elisa is wonderfully expressive through facial expressions, body language, and sign language. Octavia Spencer (can that woman do no wrong?) and Richard Jenkins as Zelda and Giles, Elisa’s friends, are full of pathos and charm. And Michael Shannon as the antagonist Strickland, while feeling like a hammy caricature at times, is entertaining to watch on screen.

And oh my God, the make-up on the Amphibian Man (which is his listed name in the movie, I checked). That is award-winning stuff. It looks so real, and as far as I know, mainly CGI-free. That’s really impressive.

All that being said, there were a couple of issues I had with the film. For one, once you kind of understand what sort of film you’re watching, you can kind of guess the plot. It’s been done before, though not with Amphibian Men. So if you can guess the story archetype, you probably will guess where the story is going to go.

There’s also this theme of tolerance and the difficulties of otherness that pervades the film, which you would expect. There’s the Amphibian Man, which isn’t even human. Elisa is mute, Zelda is black, and Giles is gay. Obviously, the filmmakers are going to bring this up. And I’m not opposed to that, I love stories that explore the difficulties of being on the outside for no other reason than being who you are. The problem is, the theme is handled differently from scene to scene. In some scenes, like a scene midway through the movie at a diner, it’s handled very well. But at other times, the handling feels kind of clumsy, which kind of brings down the impact of the theme.

Regardless, this is a wonderful film. If you’re going in for a science-fiction/horror story, you won’t get that. But if you go in for a visually appealing and well-done love story with some sci-fi elements, you’ll end up getting your money’s worth at the theater.

On a scale of 1 to 5, I give The Shape of Water a 3.8. Take a dip into a strange new world, and see for yourself if there’s something to love here.

Now if only del Toro could do an adaptation of At the Mountains of Madness, which he tried to do a few years ago (but only after I’ve read that particular HP Lovecraft story). That would be awesome.

Review: “See What I Have Done” by Sarah Schmidt

Posted: December 26, 2017 in Review, Writing
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
0

Ever since I stayed overnight and experienced paranormal activity at the Lizzie Borden Bed & Breakfast back in July, I’ve kind of become a bit obsessed with the case and the hauntings that occurred because of the murders. The latest manifestation of that obsession is reading the latest fictional retelling of the events (of which there are several, believe me), See What I Have Done by Sarah Schmidt, who says she was inspired to write it after recurring dreams of Lizzie’s spirit visiting her. I first came across a review of this in Entertainment Weekly, and as soon as I saw it, I knew I had to read it.

See is a fictionalized account of the story of Lizzie Borden, who in 1892 was accused of murdering her stepmother and father with an ax and was acquitted due to lack of evidence and investigator bungling. The story is told from the perspectives of Lizzie herself, her elder sister Emma, their live-in maid Bridget, and a violent drifter named Benjamin, all of whom tell what they were up to on a hot, fateful day in August 1892 in Fall River, Massachusetts.

I have to say, See is not the usual sort of historical fiction I read when I delve into that genre.

Firstly, the four narrators are each given a unique personality and desires, so that it doesn’t entirely sound like just one person narrating four different people. Lizzie is a spoiled youngest child with a hell of a lot of quirks (to say the least); Emma is an older sister who has become constricted by her responsibility as Lizzie’s older sister and as a Borden and wants to run to a new life; Bridget is overworked, and is trying to leave for her homeland of Ireland, despite Mrs. Borden’s attempts to keep her; and Benjamin is a man who sees the whole world as his enemy, and can’t wait to take a swing at the world. Working with one first-person narrator and making them unique is hard enough, so it’s great that for a debut novel, Schmidt distinguishes them so well.

I also liked how flawlessly she manages to weave these four narratives, especially Lizzie, Bridget and Benjamin’s narratives, together on the day preceding and the day of the murders. Telling overlapping storylines, where several characters are in the same place and experiencing things at the same time, has always struck me as a monumental task which requires skills I’m not sure I have yet (if it’s actually easier than I think, let me know in the comments below). Schmidt did it like a pro, to which I applaud her.

But my favorite part is the descriptions Schmidt has her characters use. I’ve never seen descriptions like what she uses. She turns nouns like “termites” or “critters” into verbs (is there a word for that?), and…you know what, let me quote from the first page:

I breathed in kerosene air, licked the thickness from my teeth…My heart beat nightmares, gallop, gallop, as I looked at Father again…Pear skin crisped in my mouth…

How different was that? I have never heard any of these things described this way in fiction, and it’s kind of refreshing to hear. And Schmidt does this throughout the book, particularly with food. She goes all out to describe the food and the sensations of eating in a variety of ways. You really have to read it to believe it.

Now was there anything I disliked? A few things. I was kind of hoping going in that this would be a thriller of sorts that revealed an interesting take on an old theory or even better, a new scenario for the still-unsolved murders. What I got was more of a dissection of the Borden family, showing through several different eyes how grating these people have become on each other, and how it might have been a factor in the murders. And while the portrait painted is beautiful and quite telling of both the author’s vision of and what the family might’ve really been like, I thought the ending where the killer is revealed rang a bit hollow. Like I said, I wanted a new scenario or an interesting take on one of the standard theories for the case, and the way it was eventually portrayed fell a little flat for me.

And as much as I liked the unique descriptions in the book, some of them are used repetitively throughout the novel. I can’t count how many times things, especially fingers, are described as sticky, or how many times heat “itches” at someone. To quote some of my editors, variety in words and phrases throughout a story is important.

And what was up with the dislike for Lizzie and Emma’s uncle John? I get why Abby and Andrew Borden dislike him, he’s probably a bad reminder of Lizzie and Emma’s deceased mother, but why do Emma and Bridget dislike him so much but Lizzie adores him? There’s a lot there that I would’ve liked explained.

But all in all, See What I Have Done is an excellent debut for a new novelist. Putting a score on this book on a scale of 1 to 5 was difficult, but my head kept coming back to a 3.8. Engaging, atmospheric, and full of wonderful prose. Check it out, and ax yourself if you’re ready to dive into Lizzie’s madness.

And yes, I intentionally made that pun. And I stand by it. Goodnight, everybody!

Rewatch: Oculus (2013)

Posted: December 24, 2017 in Review, Scary Stuff
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
3

I’m halfway through this series I’ve been doing of rewatching and reevaluting horror films I previously disliked to see if I missed something. And for those of you who are keeping score, I found I now love Perfect Blue, hate The Strangers more than I did the first time, don’t really have a different opinion on The Witch, and feel underwhelmed by The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. And I’ve just finished watching my fifth entry, Oculus. What did I think? Let’s find out.

WHAT’S IT ABOUT: Oculus follows Kaylie and Tim Russell, a pair of siblings who witnessed their parents murdered by the spirit in a mirror as children. They return to their childhood home ten years after those events with the mirror in tow, Kaylie determined to prove that the mirror is haunted, Tim believing he hallucinated everything he experienced as a child. Weaving between past and present, Kaylie and Tim unearth dark memories, old wounds, and eventually, must decide if they are facing they’re own insanity, or an old and intelligent evil.

WHY I DIDN’T LIKE IT: Simple: the ending. I really liked these siblings, and without going into spoilers (though I could be forgiven for them, this film has been out for four years), I didn’t like how the ending treated them. Plain and simple, it just poisoned the film for me.

WHY I REWATCHED IT: An online critic I follow on YouTube did a video a while back of the Top 11 New Halloween Classics, and Oculus got #7. That alone was enough to get me interested in a rewatch. And when I did this series, Oculus was definitely on the list.

Thoughts: How did I hate this movie? It was awesome!

Now, I won’t go into full review mode, but this movie is almost entirely flawless. The concept alone is pretty ingenious, but it’s done in a way that puts you right in there with the characters. You’re seeing their memories as they remember them, at the moment they’re remembering them. And you’re experiencing what they’re experiencing the moment they’re experiencing it. It leaves you not only wondering what is real and what isn’t, but also makes you feel the paranoia and terror of the characters, who by the way are played amazingly by their actors. Especially Karen Gilliam as Kaylie Russell (we love you, Amy Pond!).

I also like how the film isn’t afraid to use a bit of body horror. There were definitely moments where I had to look away because I was so freaked out by what I was seeing, and these moments are never excessive in terms of gore or number of uses.

Add in some great camera work, ambiguity, and CGI that really deposits itself within the uncanny valley, and you got yourself a creepy horror film.

And as for that ending, it’s been four years, and I’ve done some just like it in that time. It’s honestly a good way to close out a horror story, especially if you care about these characters. It makes the ending that much more gut-wrenching. To sum it up, I now approve of the ending.

Judgment: This is definitely a masterpiece in horror filmmaking. On a scale of 1 to 5, I’m giving Oculus a well-deserved 5. Check it out, and see the horror through the looking-glass.

That’s all for now, my Followers of Fear. The next one in this series should be entertaining, at least. And if it’s not, at least the sequels are supposed to be betterthan the original. I’m talking Evil Dead.

Until next time, Happy Holidays and pleasant nightmares one and all.

Rewatch: The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974)

Posted: December 16, 2017 in Review, Rewatch, Scary Stuff
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
3

Going with a classic this time around, as well as one of the most polarizing films in horror. Some love it, some hate it. I hated it at first, but I think it’s time I see if my opinion needs to change. After all, this was one of the earliest slashers and is considered a staple of horror movies. Maybe it’ll give me a jump.

WHAT’S IT ABOUT: A pair of siblings and their friends go to the former’s ancestral home to make sure their grandfather’s grave wasn’t a victim of recent grave-robbing in Texas. They later come across a house filled with a cannibalistic family, including the chainsaw-wielding Leatherface.

WHY I DIDN’T LIKE IT: In high school, I had heard this movie hyped so much among horror fans. When I finally could get Rated R movies on my own library card, I was disappointed. I didn’t jump, or feel any atmosphere. I wasn’t scared. It just felt over-hyped.

WHY I REWATCHED IT: You learn more about its production and legacy, you see some remakes and one sequel. You wonder if you missed something. Hence a rewatch.

THOUGHTS: I didn’t care for it.

Yeah, I was more aware of the film’s importance in the horror genre, but I still didn’t find myself enjoying it. It took the film forever to actually get going and become interesting. And even then, it was cheap to the point of noticeable (I refer you to the meat hook scene), there were lots of awkward close-up shots of girls freaking out, and more shouting and screaming than was probably necessary…from the villains. When damsels in distress scream, it’s fine with me, it’s kind of expected. But villains being so loud and annoying…yeah, I don’t care for it.

Yeah, it was quite the shocker in 1974, and that was the point. The film was meant to shock the 70’s movie-going audience. And it did, which lead to it becoming so famous and getting so many sequels and remakes. But to me, who is used to more gore and shock and terror from later slashers, it just feels tame and boring.

JUDGMENT: 1.5 out of 5. Watch it to see what it did for horror, but honestly, once you’re past a certain age and seen enough horror films, you’re just not going to get scared.

Don’t kill me in the comments for hating my opinion. It is what it is.

 

Next time around, I’ll be taking a look at a film that has become a staple for Halloween, but I had one particular problem with it that ruined the experience for me. It’s time to rewatch Oculus.

Review: “Ramses the Damned: The Passion of Cleopatra” by Anne Rice and Christopher Rice

Posted: December 7, 2017 in Novel, Review
Tags: , , , , , , ,
0

I haven’t read the original Ramses the Damned novel since I was bar mitzvah age, but I remembered enough of the details (and remembered more during the reading of the book) to be very excited upon learning earlier this year that Anne Rice had written a sequel twenty-eight years after the original with her son, author Christopher Rice (whose books I need to put on my reading list one of these days). And now that I’ve read the Rices’ first collaboration, what do I think?

Well, you know how George Miller revisited the Mad Max franchise with Fury Road several years after the last entry, with a new cast and crew to help shape his vision, and the results were pretty awesome? It’s kind of like that.

 Ramses the Damned: The Passion of Cleopatra revisit Ramses and Julie Stratford shortly after the events of the last novel, preparing for their engagement party and their lives as globe-trotting immortals. However, news that Cleopatra is still alive reaches their ears, and there’s a chance she still holds a grudge against them. And as if that weren’t enough, new forces threaten the immortal couple, including an ancient queen whose very existence will turn the immortals’ world upside down.

Honestly, I could not tell this was a collaborative work. This may be because I’m unfamiliar with Christopher Rice’s work, but it’s more than likely he’s very good at imitating his mother’s style. Whatever the reason, the novel has a great story and moves along at a nice pace. The expansion of this fictional world to include new elements and characters didn’t feel forced or weird, and the twists and dramatic moments really allowed you to feel the surprise and attention when they occurred. You can’t complain about that.

And let’s talk about the new characters, because they were great! Bektaten’s addition to the cast was a real shake up, as was her companions Enamon and Aktamu (I hope I didn’t butcher those names trying to spell them). There’s a gravitas to them that leaps off the page and commands respect not just from characters, but from readers. It’s as if their many centuries have allowed them to transcend many human flaws and become something more. Imagine what they could be like in our modern world! It’d be truly something to see.

But of course my favorite new character (and possibly my new favorite character) is the aptly named Sybil Parker, an American author whose dreams cause her to be roped into this strange and magical world.* From the moment she appears on the page, she is just so interesting to follow, as her part in the story is so full of mystery and a bit of intrigue. And her arc, going from this timid homebody to this brave young woman who doesn’t bat an eye at immortals, was masterfully written. 

I don’t have any real problems to point out with this story. Possibly a bit more of Elliot Savarell would have been nice, but that is probably nitpicking on my part.

All in all, Ramses the Damned: The Passion of Cleopatra is a great return for a story we had thought finished long ago. On a scale of 1 to 5, I give the novel a 4.8. Pick it up, and get wrapped up in the story (been waiting a week to make that pun, and it was worth it).

But tell me, what did you think of this novel? What immortal creatures will we get from Anne (and possibly Christopher) Rice next year (I’m hoping angels)? And which Christopher Rice novel should I put on my reading list? Let’s discuss.

*Sounds like my dream life right there. Well, hopefully the former will be achieved someday soon.

Older Entries
Newer Entries