Friday, March 21, 2014

Body#19 2007 Review

waiter, there's a fetus in my soup...

I've been doing a lot of comedy lately, haven’t I? And although it’s been fun and swell, let’s tear away from this comforting zone to let ourselves be embarked on a terrifying tale.
Actual scary movies are hard to find, believe it or not. And to find one that is both scary and pretty damn good? Yeah…that’s pretty rare.
But here we are, Body#19, released in 2007 by Thai director Paween Purikitpanya. This movie might just be my favorite actual scary horror movie, the first time I saw it, coming across it by accident, I was amazed by the storytelling and twists and turns this masterpiece presented before me. But I’m getting ahead of myself, what’s Body #19, or more commonly known as ‘Body sob 19’ or simply ‘Body’ about?

Chon and his sister, a nurse working at the local hospital, found themselves renting a huge house from an unknown owner. All seems to go well until Chon begins to see questionable things crawling through the house. His sister decides to help him to unearth the mystery behind these strange sightings, but all they find is a name belonging to a woman who used to teach at the hospital. Things go from bad to worse as other people begin to fall prey to this monster that takes the form of a dismembered woman. And telling anything beyond this point would be a waste, because believe me guys, you need to see this movie for yourself.

This movie is incredibly hard to talk about because the plot holds so many mysteries and I really don’t want to spoil the fun for those watching this movie for the first time. You might think you've already got it figured out, the teacher is coming back to take vengeance on all those who wronged her as some sort of curse and Chon just so happens to live in one of the prosecuted future victims house, right? Believe it or not, if you thought something like that, you couldn't be more wrong. This entire movie is a rolled up burrito of mystery and twists till the very last second and you’ll never see them coming.
This movie needs to be seen at least twice to be fully understood, and believe me, the second watch will be a completely new experience. You’ll notice some of the expressions on the characters faces that you at first dismissed as just a little bit off to be a major plot point afterward.
But enough about the magnificent storytelling, how does the movie look? Well, pretty damn amazing, for the most parts. I’ll need to get this out of the way, the ghost/curse/grudge’s face looks…well silly for a lack of better term. Mainly the eyes that seems to be two Ping-Pong balls glued on the actress’s face. But thankfully it’s only visible in a few scenes and only when they use the practical effects, yes believe it or not, the CGI in this movie actually works and looks even better that the practical effects, never thought I’d say that.
But the effects, both practical and computer generated look amazing for such an obscure movie and fit the tone very well.
And is it scary? Well, for once yes, granted it’s not the scariest movie I've ever seen, but it did manage to give me trouble getting some sleep for a few days. That and the overall eerie and confusing tone of the film makes it an experience you won’t forget easily.
Soundtrack wise, there isn't a lot to be said except for one song that is repeated throughout the movie more that I’d cared for, but it does somehow tie in the plot so I’ll make an exception.

Even for its minor flaws, this movie is a must-see for all who can appreciate a good story that’ll keep you guessing and actual scares that work in the movie’s context. I love this movie more and more every time I watch it, and although the first view can be a bit confusing and make the movie seem like a bit of a mess at times, those who will stick with it till the very end will walk out of this movie with a smile on their faces.

Personal rating: 9.8/10

Critical rating: 9/10

Things I've learned from ‘Body#19’:
-Releasing someone from a curse is all about timing.
- Checking under your bed isn't always the safest route.
- Trucks are f8cking crazy.
- they missed a great opportunity in not having one of the museum workers scream “I BE PAKINZ BUTTREFLIES!!”, just saying.
- Also, fetus soup…

The best scare ever, gets you every time

Tuesday, March 18, 2014

Zombie Strippers! 2008 Review

Zombie Strippers!
Because there are still people out there wanking to it

Well, time to take a break from nightmares on Elm street and take a look at...stipping zombies. But all is well, I have enough scotch to clear my memory after this and we have a familiar face to lead us through this slightly necrophiliac propaganding  journey, no other than Freddy himself, goddamit Robert Englund, of all the undead joint in all the grindhouse in all the world, he walks into mine.
Well, to be honest, the fact that Robert Englund plays in this movie is one of the two big reasons I picked up this little flick made in 2008, the other would be the name, because honestly, how could I pass on a movie about zombie strippers? Also Jenna Jameson plays in this, here a guilty high five to those who know who she is
And yes, before you even ask, this movie is exactly what you think it is.

In a not too distant future, one where stripping has become illegal. A small group of commando is send out to take care of a laboratory spill that caused the personnel to become brain-hungry zombies. Of course things get out of hand and one of the zombies finds itself in an illegal strip club owned by Freddy Kruger and bites the hell out of one of the strippers.
And then things get weird, I’m not sure how things will go down in the future, but I’m pretty sure necrophilia will still not be the norm, so why in the name of all that is holy, the crowd goes wild when the returned stripper dangles her rotting flesh all over the dance floor , is beyond me. But Freddy sees an opportunity in this and all goes to hell beyond that point. And yes, it gets even weirder.

Ok, let’s get this out of the way, this movie is funny as hell. Sure it can be classified as toilet humor, but what can I say, it works. On the other end of the spectrum however, when did people start to find dancing corpses hot? I mean all right, I wouldn’t be one to kick Jenna Jameson out of bed, but she’s not so hot that I’d pay to see her rotting pieces splatter all over the dance floor.
But for all the fun this movie is in its juvenile humor, I do get the idea that this movie tries to be much deeper than it actually is, or at least that would be the case if I knew anyone’s reasons to do anything in this movie. They try to tackle multiple questions on the duality of men here and there, but it falls flat when you realize they are just quoting Nietzsche every once in a while, and like a joke without a punchline, this just goes on and on until the end of the movie making you wonder if there was a point to all this, and to save you the trouble, no, there isn’t.
And it’s a shame, because I really don’t want to call a movie named ‘Zombie Strippers’ pretentious, but I can’t see the joke, I mean why have the setup by having one character ask questions about the prosecution of weaker woman in this industry by pressurizing them with impossible standards, eventually wondering if men is born evil, just to never either answer those questions or never have a joke that works. So yes, and I hate to be the one to say it, but Zombie Stripper is, maybe unwillingly, pretentious.

For a movie that hopelessly tries to show us the evil of standards and expectations, something you’d expect would interest more woman than men (not being sexist here, just saying) this movie is 75% striptease, something that, more often than not, does not interest the female demographic. So why have all that talk about the pressurizing of woman in the industry? For f8ck squabble diddle doo, and that’s why this movie falls horribly flat in that regard.

Might want to rethink that lapdance...

But back to the point, the effects are unfortunately really poor, and I mean both they look cheap and they are uninteresting. More often than not computer generated blood spatter and wounds that would make the later ‘Violent shit’ movies proud. The small amount of practical effects are slightly better and the props and sets do their jobs nicely. The acting isn't even worth mentioning, seeing as the lead previous acting jobs were such unforgettable classics such as ‘Buttman at Nudes a Poppin' 7’ and ‘Breast Obsessed 3’. Robert Englund, and no matter how much I like him as an actor, didn’t bring his A-game either, he often seemed like he was lost on the set or really waiting for his paycheck, but even then, he did get a few chuckles out of me here and there.

So, final verdict? This movie is a blast, it’s perhaps poorly acted and has more strip scenes than gay undertones in Brokeback Mountain, but it’s funny as hell and will have you laughing all the way with its ridiculous plot.
However, I am speaking as a proud dong-owner here, and I feel that some of the ladies probably won’t be able to sit through so much of Jenna’s exposed…uhum…acting. And thus would find the movie pretty lacking and/or hard to sit through. However if you don’t mind, the humor is still side-aching and it has more memorable quotes and scenes than I could mention.

Personal rating:    7/10

Critical rating:    5.5/10

Things I learned from ‘Zombie Strippers!’:
- Nietzsche does indeed make more sense after you die
- This future might be a bit short of stupid, but at least it’s not ‘Teenage Caveman
- I’ll never look at a billiard ball the same way
- Rhino in a thong might be the worst logo for anything since the RE6 title card
- Foaming Chewbacca…seriously internet?
- and I though the teabag from killer pussy was bad…

Tuesday, January 28, 2014

Update January 2014

Hey guys,
sorry for the lack of updates and reviews the past few days, been kinda busy with a whole lot of stuff, mainly trying to find a job and such. so there might be a less reviews than expected the coming weeks, but i do plan to finish all the nightmare on elm street in less than a week when i get some time for myself.

Thursday, January 16, 2014

A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors 1987 Review

Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors
Freddy vs the supernatural Glee club

Finally the third installment in the series, Dream Warriors, acclaimed as ‘The perfect nightmare on elm street movie’. With a title as that, how can this movie possibly go wrong? Well, why not take a look at this 1987 meet-up of the dream demon Freddy Kreuger and the mighty Nancy dream Rangers…hold on, that’s not right.

A few years after the murders on Elm street, some teens seem to all share the same dream, and of course, parents, always doing what they do best, make things worse by committing them to a psychological asylum. 
And there they are find themselves like fishes in a barrel for our favorite dream murdering maniac, Freddy Kreuger. But it seems that an old friend has decided to make her comeback to finish what she started years ago, Nancy from the first movie. And after noticing one of the patients seems to have the power to control her dreams, she decide to form a team of dream warriors to finally destroy Freddy.
Warriors ranging from D&D wizards to an eighties idea of‘Bad’…ugh.

Sweet god does this one drive off the silly cliff with the quirkymobile. At first it seems to be all right until the whole ‘Dream ability’ thing comes into play, yeah, that’s a thing now. Apparently all the kids have special dream abilities, like one having super strength , the other being able to do backflips, and can someone call the kid who got the superpower to scream real loud like a girl to tell him he’s been screwed over? He can probably join Mati from Captain Planet and Aquaman in the ‘screwed at the superpowers hand-out club’.
But besides the silliness of the second half which let me remind you all, had a freaking wizard, how does the movie hold up? Well, for lack of a better term, it’s amazing.
I’m serious, the effects are incredible and the acting, although hammy at times, is pretty decent. And holy sh8t, is that Morpheus (Lawrance Fishburn)? This just keeps getting better.
The kids are likable for the most parts, and seeing Nancy again was a nice addition, but the real show stealer remains Robert Englund as Freddy Kreuger, who in this movie more than before, really shines. In the previous movie, especially in the second  one, Freddy just seemed like this uncharacteristic evil force, we knew he was evil, but beside that there was very little to add. But in this movie Freddy has much more of a personality (and a pretty, if not very dark, funny one) and we get to know a little of his backstory, and even though it’s contrived and cliché as all hell, it’s at least a step forward. But while on the subject, we learn about Freddy’s birth and the cruel and brutal circumstances of said event, but the movie blames those events for Freddy’s murderous existence as an adult. So instead of focusing on the big question this movie should be asking, is evil something you’re born with or is it something you come to learn trough traumatic events or taught by others, the movie just glances over it and forgets about it like if it was afraid of what it said. Which is something that really pisses me off with nightmare on Elm street 3.

But well, back on track, if you don’t have a problem with the silliness of the second act, this is probably the best movie in the saga so far. I still personally prefer the first one, but this one is a close second. the main antagonist, Freddy is much more refined and funny in a dark and twisted way. The Effects are amazing and a real treat to look at and its characters are varied and deaths are creative and original. Definitely worth a watch for any horror fan.

Personal Rating: 8.2/10

Critical rating: 8/10

Things I’ve learned from Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors:
- "The Freddy Kreuger" is the new drug sensation sweeping the nation after 'The Charlie Sheen'
- Never thought that the idea of Freddy playing with his puppets could be so wicked
- Even in the eighties, “I’m beautiful…and bad” sounds retarded


Freddy’s kill count: 20

Best kill in this movie: Killer puppeteer

Best kill so far: Killer pupeteer

Tuesday, January 7, 2014

Santa Claus conquers the Martians 1964 Review

Santa Claus Conquers the Martians
Beam me up, Rudolph 

Well, I woke up this morning and realized it had been a while since I talked to my old friend ‘reality’, but when I called that tricky mistress she just reminded me of the massive restraining order she had placed on me ever since I started to review movies, so here’s to the Christmas spirit: “Santa conquers the Martians” …in January.
Yes, I’ll have to apologies once more for my lack of reviews the past weeks, due to pesky family members and their silly traditions and habits, if you don’t mind, I’m gonna watch a movie about Martians kidnapping Santa.
Yes, this little trainwreck of a movie was introduced in 1964, and although the title is slightly misleading, it does involve space travel with the fatmeister himself, Santa Claus.

On Mars (never a good sign when a review starts with these two words) the Martian children are obsessed with earth’s broadcasts and culture, especially around Christmas when the good little boys and girls of earth get all kinds of goodies. The Martian adults are worried for the wellbeing of their children and decide that the best way to deal with this issue is to kidnap the fatman and force him to work on Mars to make toys.

Well, if you manage to read all that without banging your head against any kind of surface, you’ll notice that one, Santa doesn’t really conquers anything (well, technically he does, in a Christmas spirit kind of way), and two, this is in no way a horror/action or anything that I would normally review, but to be fair, I’m gonna make an exception for this one just on the name alone.
But yes, this movie is incredibly silly, but I get the idea that the creators actually meant for it to be a charming family picture, which makes me feel kind of bad for them when this movie had me laughing at just how incredibly bad it is.
At first I was hoping that they would go at it in a comedic angle, so that when they come to earth they pick up a mall Santa and highjinx ensue, but they actually kidnaps the real Santa, and two little annoying brats so the little drool-monsters watching this mess can identify I guess. And the whole world is in an uproar, meaning they knew Santa was real, so is this movie meant for children under the age of four? Well I sure as hell hope not, it’ll scare the living hell out of them when strange men painted green in thigh spandex and silly hats walk in the room with their robot made out of tin foil, oh wait, that’s just me and my very specific and somewhat disturbing phobia.
 But yes, the props and the effects are bad, and when I say that, I mean that the kindergarten plays next door looked more believable. But damn if it isn’t entertaining to watch.
At some point in the movie a guy with a long fur coat and a hat slightly resembling something that might have once been a polar bear costume walks in the set and we’re actually supposed to believe that it’s a bear?
But wait till you see the robot the Martians use to attack the north pole, he came in the night, two bright lights in the distance and walked toward the large papier-mâché rocks in all its cardboard glory as I fell to the floor gasping for air so I could somehow laugh harder. Sweet Jesus, if the props would be an actor, they’d be Tommy Wiseau, so bad it hurts in all the good places. I want to find the guy who made the costumes and hand him an award, because god knows we need the challenged persons to feel good about themselves.
Is Santa Claus Conquers the Martians any good? Oh god no, but that didn’t stop me from having fun. It’s a hidden cult classic that manages to do everything wrong and it’s damn enjoyable to see. You might think it’s strange but I actually do recommend watching it, then again, I like bad movies as long as they can keep me entertain.
So yeah, give it a watch if you come across it and feel bad for the people that actually put money into making this movie.

And merry Christmas guys, thanks for sticking with me and these silly movies.

Personal Rating: 6.5/10

Critical Rating: 2/10

Things I’ve learned from “Santa Claus conquers the Martians”:
- Santa bear is a 'thing' apparently.
- The fact that the Martians didn’t even ponder on the question of how Santa was going to breathe on Mars, let alone not explode smearing giblets of gory joy on the faces of the little Martian children quickly realizing something might be wrong, makes me wonder how the hell they even managed to build a spaceship, although then again, how hard can it be to make one out of  cardboard and tin foil.

Friday, December 27, 2013

December Update

hey folks,
I promised I'd let you guys know if there was any delayes on the reviews, so here it is: there will be some delayes in the comming weeks.
yes, who would have thougt I'd fall victim to the thing known as Christmas, but here I am, dragged from my home to a place in the middle of nowehere (also commonly known as Belgium) to spend some time with a sweet old lady that keeps calling me Raoul or Micheal (swear to god I couldn't make it up if I tried). so I'll be without internet for the coming days, and I'm really sorry about that, believe it or not, I had my Christmas review of ''Santa Claus conquers the Martians'' done and ready to go, but expect it in Januari along with the third and fourth instalment of the nightmare on Elm Street.
and if you're asking about the poor quality of this update, both in timing and grammar, i'm sorry to inform that i'm typing all of this on my Phone while hogging the only wifi hotpoint in town like a madman.
See you next year guys, merry Christmas for what it's worth and have a safe new year.

Saturday, December 21, 2013

A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge 1985 Review

A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge
Letdown sequel and Freddy’s strange obsession to get inside teenage boys

And we’re back with the second entry to the 'Nightmare on Elm Street' saga. And with no other than, according to most, the lowest point in the series, Nightmare on Elm street 2: Freddy’s revenge.
Produced only one year after the original nightmare came out, this is the movie that has fans and critics slamming down their fists in union. But is it as bad as most say? Well, let’s take a look at the plot.

Confused teenager Jesse and his family move to a new house, and it would only be logical that the house would be the same house where Nancy ‘banished’ the dream demon, Freddy Kreuger, and she sure did a lousy job of it, because guess who comes knocking down the walls of Jesse’s dreams? And he wants nothing more than his body for him to play with while they together replay the shower scene from 'American History X' with Jesse’s gym teacher and some whips…wait did we just stumbled into a different kind of movie?

Yeah…it’s gonna get weird, but the gist of it is that dear ol’ Fred wants to take over this whiny little bratty kid’s body to…murder around I guess? Ok, fist question here, why does Freddy want to be mortal again? He does know that the last time he was mortal he got burned harder than Taylor Swift at the VMA’s a few years back, there’s the obvious fact that he’ll walk around like a guy that has stuck pancakes to his face, and this time, people will actually be able to waste his scorched ass. I mean, it’s never explained why he was able to haunt kid’s dreams and become practically a god within his own realm, but it sounds like a hell of an upgrade from kiddyfidler groundskeeper to all powerful dream demon that murders all who sleep.
Just seems like a cheap trick have a possession story, but well, beside that gaping plothole, what else can there be said about this movie? Well, ok, disregarding the fact that Fred’s got a death wish, why does he want Jesse in particular? He even says at the beginning that he’s special or something, how is he special? Was he born under the star of plot convenience when all the BS planets were aligned? It’s never explained, Jesse’s got a younger sister, why didn’t Fred go after her? guessing with his past he’d probably think ’the younger the better’, and kids are much more easily fooled, why didn’t he just show up in her dream as a giant fluffy bunny or goddamn Justin Bieber or whatever.
But no, he wants Jesse, not any other kid in the neighborhood , just him and his awkward teenage romance with the girl next door.
Ah yes, the girlfriend Lisa, played by Kim Myers. She practically carries the movie in the third act, and why isn’t she the main character of the movie? She has a much more interesting personality and she is probably the best girlfriend any one could ever wish for,  you start telling about how you have dreams in which you brutally murder left and right? She accepts it and actually tries to help. You think you might have a spiritual connection with a child murderer that has been dead for the better part of the past decade? She believes you and search for a way to sever the connection. I mean really, faithful, helpful, cheery, nice and cute as a button? Do girls like that even exists?
So yeah, the story and the protagonist aren’t exactly the strong points of this movie, so what is?
Well, the effects are nice. Sure, they ain’t as good as the first one, shocker there, but at times they were creative, well, except for when the movie decide to pull a Hitchcock and redo a scene from “Birds” with an extra kamikaze ending. Seriously, exploding birds, what the hell where they thinking?
But for the rest, I guess credit is due where it is, and some of the effects where interesting. One of my favorite being at the very beginning where a school bus is being driven of the road as the landscape changes into a hellish abyss. Pretty neat scenery, but the whole movie does feel a little cheap. But all that good is being ruined by the fact that the first movie did everything a tenfold better, and the things they try to do just seems strange. For example, the entire movie, Freddy doesn’t have his glove, weird right? The knives just come out of the fingertips . I first thought it might be because the glove actually plays in the movie as an object of both rejection and temptation for Jesse, and is actually a physical object in the real world. But then the vodka started to slowly dissolve from my brain and I remembered that the glove was also a physical object in the first movie, where Freddy did have a glove at all times. It might be a small mistake here and there, but piled up, they do tend to piss off viewers.
But did this movie do anything right? In my opinion it did, I really liked the Freddy in this movie, it seemed like he had more of a personality, and even though he wasn’t in the spotlight much, he does get his times worth in the third act, which gives us a nice rest from our other obnoxious main character

But now we come to the big question, the one that had everyone’s jimmies rusted when they saw this flick:

Are the Homo-erotic undertones of Nightmare on Elm street 2 there by accident or was this really meant to tackle the subject of homosexual feeling during the coming of age of adolescence?

Well, there’s no question that some of those undertones were blatant, if I can say so. Sure I joked about it earlier with my summary of the plot. But to be fair, this movie deals a lot with sexuality, a lot more than in the first movie, ironic seeing as that no one actually had sexual intercourse in this movie, while in the first movie, the act was very much there early on in the movie to set the stamps on the characters of “the whore” and “the jock”, an almost ritualistic scene in every slasher movie, and above all, Wes Craven movie, who would never pass on the chance to have a cliché to then shine an ironic light on it.
But the fact that this movie deals more openly on the theme of adolescence and sexuality is all well and good, but why are the homo-erotic undertones so blatant? But a better question is, are they really there?
I believe that the homophobia of the modern age might have clouded our mind a bit on that subject, we have been crying wolf for so long that we tend to see them everywhere. I’ll admit that there are some scenes that are very much ‘gay’, there is no disputing about that. Like when half awake, Jesse stumbles into a leather bar and runs into his Gym teacher, who obviously has a ‘Dom’ complex, who makes Jesse exercise in the middle of the night only to lure him to the showers, where he gets his own misfortunate encounter with Freddy. There is no question that this scene was very much ‘gay’, yes. But maybe, and I’m just speculating here, this scene was meant more as a way for Jesse to overcome his father issues and fear of school. The strong, masculine, dominating Gym teacher could almost be a textbook description of how most teenagers saw their own father figures. And the fact that Freddy , through Jesse, actually serves what he deems a ‘just reward’ only proves Jesse’s own obsession with his revolting nature against his own father who is actually a very strict masculine figure.
There are many more questionable scenes, such as Jesse’s disgust toward the act of coitus with Lisa, but what most seem to miss is why he is revolted. In the scene Jesse and Lisa are getting it on in a private room at a party, when suddenly Jesse’s tongue turns into a misshaped mess of flesh as he was about to use it on her bosoms, which forces our wimpy protagonist to run away in fear to seek comfort at his bro’s house. This was seen by many as very proving of the undertones of the movie. But lost in translation is actually a much deeper scene than that. The fact that Jesse is disgusted in himself, and not Lisa, seems to actually show us that Jesse suffers from a ‘Hedgehog dilemma complex’ rather than homosexual urges. He is not disgusted by the female body, but is actually afraid of hurting Lisa was he ever to get this close to her.
So is this movie as Avant-guard in homosexual movement for the slasher genre as everyone is saying?
No, I’m not saying that the gay undertones aren't there, because they are. But I think it comes more from the lack of direction from the director’s part rather than actual intent.

So with all this said and done, is this movie any good? Well, it makes for an interesting tale about coming to terms with adolescence by having a demon literally taking over your body, but it makes for an horrible sequel to Nightmare on Elm Street. But I still don’t think it’s deserving of all the hate it’s getting.

Personal rating: 5/10

Critical rating: 4/10

Things I’ve learned from ‘A Nightmare on Elm Street 2, Freddy’s Revenge’
- The ‘Revenge’ part is pretty played down, although the kill count is pretty damn high.
- Jesse’s performance in his bedroom of ‘Touch me’ was still better than Miley Cyrus at the VMA’s.
- Exploding birds invading other movies than ‘Birdemic’
- When a dude breaks into your room in the middle of the night, jumps on you while you’re in bed and put his hand over your mouth while saying that there is something trying to get inside his body so he want to sleep next to you, your reaction shouldn't be calmly giving him relationship advise, no matter the bro-mance

Freddy’s Kill count:

Best Kill in this movie:
Exploding birds

Best Kill so far:
Blood geyser