Because nobody likes spending an hour reading a movie review, I bring you Quick Horror Movie Reviews, a site offering to the point reviews of horror films from a guy who has seen thousands of them. From the classics to the hidden gems, the slashers to the creatures, the multi-million dollar blockbusters to the direct to video awfulness, it's all here! Read, enjoy, and for the best experience, go old school and view the desktop version!
After discovering hundreds of VHS tapes showing the torture and murder of various people, the police do what they can to piece together the clues to capture a serial killer. This 2007 film, which saw a huge delay in its release (more on that in a bit), is shot like a documentary, and contrary to what many may believe, is neither real, nor based on a true story--that said, for being a mockumentary, this one looks as real as any such film you will come across. If you are a fan of true crime shows, this movie is right up your alley. We see interviews with people involved in the case, such as police, FBI agents, the guy who had to watch all the tapes, family and friends of the victims--you get the idea--intertwined with clips from the found tapes--and this is where things get weird.
Not calling YOU weird...
Back to the distribution thing--the film was set for a theatrical release in early 2008, but MGM, for reasons not explained (or found by this reviewer), pulled it, shelved it, and seemingly forgot about it. The flick saw the light of day (bonus points if the song and/or movie of the same name just entered your mind) in 2014, when DirecTV gave it a video on demand release--it found even more fans three years later, when Shout Factory gave it a DVD and Blu-Ray release, a full ten years after it was shot.
That's a long time to be tied up
In this case, it's better to be released late than not at all. This movie has a very unsettling feel from start to finish, and the fake documentary/found footage approach is presented quite well. Some parts of the movie are hard to watch, both in their level of violence/torture and in the graininess of the films. If all home videos looked like this in the 1980s or 1990s, they would have never stuck around. For a guy so invested in making these videos, you would think that, at some point, the killer would get a different camcorder, or maybe try a different brand of tape, but alas, all are damaged to the point of being hard to watch--a more subtle approach in post would have been very much appreciated by the viewer. One also wishes the momentum would have kept up throughout, but the intriguing story eventually gives way to more and more video clips meant to shock the viewer instead of advancing the story. The Poughkeepsie Tapes still comes off as a unique, fresh entry in the found footage genre, and certainly is worth watching.
Sylvian (horror legend Tony Todd) is a three-hundred year old vampire who has hired a genetic scientist (Delia Sheppard) to come up with a cure for his condition. The serum fails, and now vampires are wreaking havoc in, you guessed it, Las Vegas. The movie starts off with shots on and around The Strip in Vegas--as this is one of my favorite cities, I very much enjoyed this opening--unfortunately, it was all downhill from there.
I stayed in that room once...up there...to the left
Oy, where to even begin? How about here--nothing in this movie borders on being even the least bit scary. Tony Todd seems bored out of his mind, and must have been wondering how his career led him to doing this movie. Despite having Vegas in the title, other than the opening (which I'm certain was stock footage), we don't see the city at all--in fact, much of the feature looks like it was shot on green screen. The CGI is horrendous. The vampires are strippers who look like they may have been plucked from a nearby porno shoot or plastic surgeon's office, and interestingly enough, there's no actual nudity in the film.
Looks like surgeon's office it is
The acting (using this term is a stretch) is amateurish. The story is dreadful. The directing is uninteresting. The ending, if you can make it that far, is absurd--of course, you won't care by this point. There is a somewhat catchy techno song that plays over the credits--it probably isn't even that good; my excitement for this movie finally being over likely made it sound better than it actually was. If you are a Tony Todd fan, you may be tempted to watch this movie...don't. I am as big a fan as there is, and believe me when I say there's nothing to see here. We know our main man will take on just about any role, but he deserves better than Vampire in Vegas. I did, however, learn one very important lesson here--I'm never again letting my girlfriend pick a movie for me to watch.
Psychiatrist Miranda Grey (Halle Berry) is involved in a car accident on her way home from work. When she awakens from the incident, she finds herself a patient in the same mental institution she works in, having been accused of killing her husband, Douglas (Charles S. Dutton of Roc...yes, I used to watch that show). Miranda's problems don't end there, as she finds herself being haunted by a spirit as well. I recall seeing this one in the theater in 2003 and loving it. I watched it a few times over the years, but prior to watching it earlier today, I had not seen the movie in maybe ten years or so. Would I still love it as much as I did back then?
She can't wait to find out
I will start with what I completely forgot about--well, one of the things I completely forgot about anyway, and it happens to be the worst thing about this movie--the CGI. Some of the visuals in this movie are so bad you will wonder how the film ever saw a big screen. That said, I really have no other major complaint about this film. The story is an interesting one, and will absolutely keep you engaged, especially near the end, when the twists and turns come at a breakneck speed. I love the acting in this, and the movie has a whole slew of performers I enjoy watching. Aside from Berry and Dutton (both of whom I like), we also have personal favorites Penelope Cruz (Vanilla Sky), the grossly underrated John Carroll Lynch (Zodiac), and, of course, my favorite actor in the history of acting (and the reason I paid to see this in the theater to begin with), Robert Downey Jr. (Tuff Turf).
"Tuff Turf? Really?"
There's not a ton of gore in the movie, but there is certainly more than enough suspense to make up for it. Adding to the enjoyment of the movie is a very satisfying ending (the very final shot with the bus and the kid notwithstanding ). A lot of people like to bash this movie--the critics hated it, and while not a box office bomb, it wasn't exactly setting the world on fire in 2003 either. I, on the other hand, was pleasantly surprised to find that after so many years of not watching it, I still very much liked Gothika, and certainly won't wait another ten years to watch it again.
Married couple Amy (Kate Beckinsale of the Underworld franchise) and David Fox (Luke Wilson of Zombieland: Double Tap) are on their way to see her family when their car breaks down. They walk back to a motel in the middle of nowhere to rent a room for the night. Once in their room, they pop in a couple VHS tapes and find them filled with snuff films...shot in that very room. We learn early on this is not a happy couple--in fact, they seem to not be able to stand each other, and some of this may be based on real-life, as it was reported that Wilson and Beckinsale genuinely disliked each other during the shooting of this movie. What's worse is neither character is likable in the least, making you, at best, not care about them, and at worst, hope for their demise.
"Well, that's just mean!"
The supporting cast, namely Frank Whaley (The Doors) and Ethan Embry (Empire Records), are much more impressive than the lead duo--Whaley is especially good as the motel clerk. You know how a lot of movies struggle with the whole "Can this person really be that daft?" thing? Amy and David fit nicely into that category...actually, they may be even dumber than most. Just watch what they do when they discover the VHS! The events that unfold from that time on are so unlikely you will find yourself having trouble getting into the movie the rest of the way. There are a few things to like about this flick. The masks the killers wear look cool, and you have to appreciate the practical approach over the use of CGI. I saw this movie soon after it was released in 2007, and upon watching it again, it qualifies as one of those movies that was better in memory than in reality.
A group of...I don't know if they are supposed to be demented or rednecks or just general degenerates...they're sort of a dime store version of the Sawyer/Hewitt family from The Texas Chainsaw Massacre...anyway, these idiots begin terrorizing a group of four chicks you may find at your local strip joint, but the hunters become the hunted when the women unleash a surprise. Right from the opening, you realize this movie had little to no budget, but we know that alone is not reason to give up on it; that said, you will not be surprised to find the acting is horrendous, the dialogue is mind-numbing, and the story is thin--so thin, in fact, you will find seemingly countless minutes filled with the aforementioned women getting naked and dancing, so I guess if hitting the strip clubs is your thing, you can skip getting the singles and pop this movie in.
Better yet, pass up both and keep reading
Everything in this movie plays out precisely as you expect it to--I'm going to assume you will never watch this movie, but if you decide to, here comes a spoiler alert--this movie gives us a similar twist as one in the modern-day classic Trick 'r Treat, but everything about that was superior to what Wicked Lake presents, from the acting to the likability of the girls to the unpredictability to the special effects to...literally everything. The full moon seems to imply they are werewolves, but they drink blood as if they're vampires, and also make reference to being witches. If they said exactly what they are supposed to be, I missed it, but it really doesn't matter.
They ain't got nothing on this pack
Naturally, there are attempts at humor, and not a bit of it draws so much as a slight laugh. There are exactly two things about Wicked Lake that surprised me: Ministry front-man Al Jourgensen makes a brief appearance in this film and also did the music for it, and Angela Bettis (Carrie, May), one of my personal favorite horror actresses, makes a very quick cameo. How these two legends in their own fields got roped into this mess of a film is beyond me, but if you are a fan of either, and need to see/hear absolutely everything they have ever done, check out this movie...there's no other reason to watch it. If you do decide to torture yourself, however, I'll let you know there are some shots that play during the credits--you'll be shocked to hear these are of the four women dancing and being naked, but if you have ever cared to hear what it would sound like if Ministry covered "What a Wonderful World", you may want to check it out; also, half way through the credits we get a bonus scene featuring a gag that was beaten to death all throughout the movie...you won't care about this.
This is a low budget horror anthology, featuring three stories from three different directors, with the common element being a bordello run by Madame Raven (Natalie Milner).
The only thing more lacking than her facial expression is her personality
We start with "The Ripper", which tells the tale of a serial killer who picks the wrong prostitute to bring home. Filled with loads of horribly fake looking blood, repulsive strippers, and unfunny comedy, this is a rough way to start the movie. The acting is bad--actually, let me get this out of the way now--unless otherwise mentioned, assume all the acting in all three of the segments is bad. This story unfolds exactly as you picture it will when it starts, so don't expect anything surprising. The one really interesting thing about this outing is the animation used to help the story along--this is really well done, and is the best thing about the first story.
And he's the worst thing about it
The second segment, "Stitchgirl", is by far and away the best and most entertaining of the three. A bordello regular has requested a new girl be created from the remains of other dead girls. This oddity made me think "This is what it would look like if Tim Burton remade The Bride of Frankenstein". The black and white presentation is visually pleasing, Stitchgirl (Eleanor James) looks cool, and the carnival-esque full-color scene is trippy in all the best ways (and features some of the most English looking people you will ever see). The conclusion of this story is a letdown, but otherwise, it's a fun watch.
Don't blink!
Our conclusion, "Vice Day", finds a man watching a webcam stripper, and trying to control his emotions. This is honestly the weakest of the three segments--for as poor as "The Ripper" was, at least something was happening in it to keep your attention. "Vice Day", on the other hand, just sort of plods along, with bad acting, a boring story, and mind-numbing dialogue. If "Stitchgirl" got the ball of this movie rolling fast, "Vice Day" brought it to an immediate halt, and sent this film off with a whimper.
I considered this while watching this segment too
If you care enough, stay tuned for a post-credit scene--if you decide against this, however, you're not missing a lot. I recommend checking out "Stitchgirl", but there's not much else to see with this 2009 anthology.
An American pathologist (Scott Wilson, Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon) orders gallons of formaldehyde be dumped into the Han River, resulting in a monster fish that kidnaps people, particularly a child named Hyun-seo (Go-Ah-sung). We then follow Hyun-seo’s family as they try to rescue her. Bong Joon-ho brings us this 2007 South Korean film—if his name sounds familiar, you probably heard it a lot around the 2019 Oscar season, when his slightly overrated film Parasite walked away with the Best Picture award, beating out films such as the much more overrated The Joker and the less overrated Once Upon A Time In Hollywood, which my girlfriend and I saw at the SIFF Cinema Uptown while vacationing in Seattle last year...remember vacations? Weren’t they nice?
"Let's see...we have our cameras, our masks..."
Back to The Host—this one was also met with much critical acclaim, and broke box office records in South Korea upon its release. Similar to Parasite, the scares in this movie are overshadowed by comedic moments and social commentary. Interestingly, the movie is based, in part, on real life events...this being the American dumping toxins into the river, not, you know, a kidnapping monster. Speaking of the monster, it’s a CGI creation that is on par with what you would see in your typical SyFy Original, so don’t expect much out of it. The thing moves around awkwardly...sort of like a slightly injured frog. The acting is fine, offering nothing spectacular but nothing too bad either, and here is where I will insert the obligatory subtitles warning. The Host is not a bad creature flick, but having heard so much about it, I did expect a bit more.
Filmmaker Jack Hess (played by this film's maker, Jason Impey) is on a mission to shoot the perfect snuff film. This one-man band production has almost no budget, and Impey is credited as not only the lead actor, but also the writer, director, producer, cinematographer, editor, stunt man, camera operator, and he did the music to boot. Incidentally, Impey has over one hundred directing credits to his name, so he's a busy dude. The movie starts off slowly, as we follow the every move of a woman who is eventually killed, and this seems to go on for an eternity. The interactions between the killer and the victims are less scary and more unintentionally hilarious, from the exaggerated falls down the hills to the fake blood to the fight in the woods, which is one of the greatest horrible fight scenes I have ever watched.
The whip sound makes it even better
The awfulness and hilarity don't stop there--the acting is atrocious, and the dialogue (what little there is) is mind-numbing. As I watched, I wondered how much better this movie could have been had it been made a silent film...but with better music than the song the plays on a loop throughout. Perhaps my favorite thing about the movie was near the end--Hess goes in for the kill, and there, under the victim's shirt, you can see a large bulge. As Hess digs in, we find out the purpose of this--it holds the fake organs Hess will soon remove and chop to pieces before his dramatic final cut call. From a technical standpoint, this movie is a train wreck (though considering the budget, Impey did a good job working with what he had). That said, it is inexplicably entertaining and will have you hooked until the end.
When the dead come back to life, a group of people find themselves held up in a country house as they try to survive. This is another remake of sorts of the George A Romero classic, but if you are thinking “Hey, another awesome remake, like the 1990 one”, you are oh so wrong. Not that this is a terrible movie--it's just very different. Before I get into what I mean by that, I'll start off with what will likely catch your attention when you see the cover of the movie--the legend himself, Sid Haig (House of 1,000 Corpses), does indeed star in this movie, and his performance is every bit as wonderful as you would expect.
"Thanks Josh!"
The rest of the performances are what you would expect from a movie that likely saw a majority of its budget go into the 3D presentation--I'll say nothing about that, as I didn't see the movie in that format, but in 2D, it is painfully obvious a lot of what we see was done just for the 3D effect. The film lacks any real direction, as it seemingly can't figure out where to go. We start off with a shot of the original Night of the Living Dead being shown on a television, then move to a road that looks similar to the one in the original film--much like in the Romero classic, we see siblings heading to a cemetery, so we think this will indeed be like the 1990 movie--a direct remake. When we see what unfolds in the cemetery, it becomes clear that is not the case. For the remainder of the film, we see some scenes that are similar to those in the original film, some characters with the same names and other references to the 1968 movie--we also see the people in the house watching Night of the Living Dead on television--one guy, who is already dead, by the way, points out the similarities of the movie and what is happening in real life...yes, it's a mess. The zombies look horrible, but there is something about the makeup that will make you smile. There's a bit of gore and Haig there to help you make it through this movie, but not a whole lot more.
Scientist Dr. King (Jeffrey Combs, Re-Animator, Dark House) tries to save his son from cancer by turning him into a human-shark hybrid creature. Tom (William Forsythe, Halloween, Raising Arizona) and Amelia (Hunter Tylo) are the heroes trying to stop the madman and his blood-thirsty son. This movie has two things going against it right out of the boxes, and both are even worse than the plot--this is a SyFy Original, and William Forsythe is the lead AND the hero. Had I known these facts prior to starting the movie I may not have watched it, but commit to it I did, and regret doing so I do. We may think the presence of of Combs would off-set all the negativity, but he seems beyond bored with this movie, and is given little opportunity to shine. As for our shark-man, most of the time we see him it is done with super quick cuts, and we don't get a great look at him.
Here's a bad look at him
The story is as lame as you are probably thinking, and it plays out worse than you are imagining. The movie looks cheap, the acting is dreadful, the "action" scenes are lacking, and the death scenes are all a bunch of quick cuts with some blood thrown in. SyFy movies are pretty much all awful, but many are at least entertaining--Sharkman is not one of these.
Three friends decide to raid Area 51 after one experiences a strange happening at a party. They meet up with a woman whose father had maps of the underground tunnels at the mysterious desert location. This movie, which was completed in 2009 but not released until 2015, is brought to us by writer and director Oren Peli--if this name is familiar to you, it's likely because he is the same guy who brought us Paranormal Activity, an extremely low budget film that made an absolute fortune and, more importantly, was an original, creative, and scary movie--Area 51 is far less inspired. Most of this movie is the three guys making their way to Area 51 and talking about their plans--for as dull as those conversations are, when they are talking about anything not related to Area 51, it's even worse. The movie is presented as a found footage film, as the guys record everything on their phones and small cameras, resulting in shots that look like...
this...
this...
and this.
We get some brief shots of Las Vegas, which is nice, as that's one of my favorite cities. The shots of the desert are also nice, and honestly, it is these settings that helped get me through this movie. Once the friends and the woman make it into Area 51, things pick up a bit, but we really get the case of taking the good with the bad once there. Some of the ideas about what could be inside Area 51 and the technology used is really interesting, and plays out well. Unfortunately, much of what happens there is in the dark--this, coupled with the constantly shaking camera, makes it nearly impossible to see anything happening for much of the time. We get just a brief look at the aliens, which is fine, as this approach works quite well here. The ending is a bit lazy, but certainly could have been worse. Should you decide to watch this film, be warned--everything that happens leading up to the characters actually being inside Area 51 is a LOT to get through, but what you see once there almost makes you feel like it was worth the wait.
A group of friends on their way to Washington D.C. end up stranded and staying on a farm. What they don't know, however, is the family living there has a dark secret. I saw this 2009 film for sale at a second-hand store, noticed it was directed by George A. Romero's son G. Cameron Romero, and, considering the genes of the director, decided it was worth a buck to buy it and give it a shot--I'm still considering taking the DVD back and asking for a refund. We find out immediately this film is set in 1969, but if you happen to be grabbing a quick snack or drink when that shows and you miss it, you will never guess this is set in that time. Nothing at all about this movie would indicate this is set in 1969--it feels much more like people in 2009 occasionally dropping some 1960's lingo for no apparent reason. The actors delivering these lines even seem uncomfortable with the phrases! If you are going to make a movie set in the past, at least TRY to make it look authentic! If you don't, what's the point? Just set the movie in modern times and let it go!
Does this say 1960's to you?
Our issues, however, don't end there. I mentioned the acting, but my goodness, it gets even worse from there. Not a single actor in this film is even remotely talented. The characters are all one-dimensional, and, naturally, include the cliche country folk. As bad as the acting is, much of the post-production work, especially the sound editing, which is nothing short of atrocious, is even worse. The story itself is pretty much straight up slasher, with varying degrees of satisfaction--most of what we get is rather uninspired, including one of the most predictable "twists" you will ever see. Back to the director--Romero sure doesn't have the magic touch his father had, but there is a nod to Night of the Living Deadthrown in, so there is that. My beloved readers, should you happen to come across Staunton Hill at your local Salvation Army and wonder if it's worth the dollar they are asking, rest assured--it's not.
Ted Cogan (fellow Cincinnati Reds fan Rob Lowe, The Outsiders. Wayne's World) returns home from war and is haunted by visions of the dead. This is the 2007 SyFy Original sequel to 1999's Stir of Echoes, (which I tragically have yet to review here) and it has little in way of connection to the original film. At the start of August I went back home to Ohio to visit my Mom, and she insisted on watching this one, thus continuing what seems to be our tradition of seeing each other once a year and watching a Rob Lowe horror flick each time (this tradition started last year when I visited and we watched another made for television film starring the former greaser). Speaking of my Mom and Stir Of Echoes--one reason I have not watched the original film in so long is because a number of years ago my Mom, thinking my girlfriend had already seen the movie, talked about the ending of Stir of Echoes and spoiled it for her--she now sees no point in watching the movie.
"If you don't get on with the review already..."
Anyway, having not seen The Homecoming for years, I agreed to watch it with Mom and Sani, assuring my girlfriend she did not have to have seen the original film to understand what is happening in this one. Much like I believed the first time I saw it, the film really is better than it generally gets credit for being. Yes, the movie does start off rough, with very questionable special effects, but bearing in mind this is a SyFy Original, this is to be expected, and frankly, it's not nearly as bad as what we usually get from these films. Lowe is a believable and likable hero, but the remainder of the cast does leave a bit to be desired. There are some genuinely creepy moments in the movie, and a bit more gore than I expected. The film moves at a decent pace, and delivers a pretty unexpected twist near the end. The final sequence is also a memorable one. Is The Homecoming as good as the original Stir of Echoes? No. However, I do find this one to be much better than most believe it to be.
With Ginger dead and Brigette as good as gone, how does one create a third installment of the franchise, yet keep the same characters and actresses? The prequel, of course. But don't think we're going back to a year or two before the events of Ginger Snaps...we're going back a hundred and some years...you read that right, and no, it's not a typo...and it gets worse. As we know, Katharine Isabelle played the title character, Ginger, in Ginger Snaps and Ginger Snaps 2--Emily Perkins played her sister Brigette in both films. Both return in this film to play, presumably, ancestors of Ginger and Brigette named...wait for it...Ginger and Brigette. Not only do they look just like the previous incarnations of the characters, but worse, they talk just like them--yes, two girls in the 19th Century walk around talking like they just arrived in a DeLorean from 2004.
"Whoa, this is heavy"
Pretty much everything we like about the first two movies is thrown out the window in this film, and this story just sort of plods along. The sisters end up in a colony full of bad people, and the acting of said villains is awful across the board. Even Perkins and Isabelle seem bored and completely tired of playing these characters. You begin to wonder if the point of this movie is to say the sisters were cursed because this happened to their ancestors, or if the family just has unfortunate luck with werewolves--honestly, by the time you make it through this movie you probably won't care--I know I didn't. Ginger Snaps 2 was a nice way to end the story of Ginger and Brigette, and this is a prequel that nobody asked for, and the world didn't need. Watch the first two films but skip this one.
On the heels of the events of Ginger Snaps, Brigette (Emily Perkins) finds herself trying to control her werewolf transitions. She ends up in drug rehab, where she is stalked by another werewolf looking for a mate. To add to her misery, Brigette also has visions of her dead sister Ginger (Katharine Isabelle). As is the case with most movies, the sequel is not quite as good as the original. Brigette's character has changed quite a bit from the original film--pretty much gone is the quiet, shy girl, replaced by somebody much less...interesting. Perkins' performance is also not on par with that from the original, and Ginger is tragically virtually an afterthought in this movie. A new character, Ghost (Tatiana Maslany, Hardwired), is introduced, and she turns out to be the most fascinating element in this film. Ghost becomes a little sister of sorts to Brigette--she's intrigued by Brigette's werewolf traits, helps Brigette escape from the rehab center, and she often speaks as if she is reading from a book.
"..and the wolf, undetected, continued in the sheep's clothing"
Another rather disappointing thing about this movie is the lack of original characters. One of the strengths of the first film was in creating unique, quirky characters--other than Ghost, that is pretty much gone in this one, traded in for run-of-the-mill personas and every cliche used in every other drug rehab movie ever made. Even with a larger budget, the werewolves and makeup look weaker than in the first movie, which is also a bummer. Still, there is enough going on this movie to keep you going--mainly the gore. There is still some comedy in this movie, but far less of it, and it's a bit less dark than in the first film. One thing part two does have over its predecessor is the ending--whereas in the first movie the ending is disappointing, the one here is fantastic, and honestly brings the final score up quite a bit.
A mysterious creature is terrorizing a small Canadian town, and when sisters Ginger (Katharine Isabelle, Freddy Vs. Jason) and Brigitte (Emily Perkins), two weirdos obsessed with death, come across it, their lives become much more interesting. This early 21st Century werewolf film is one that has divided horror fans since its release--I have known many people who love it, many who hate it, and sprinkled in here and there are those who think it's just okay. Furthering this gap is most of the guys I know dislike it, and the majority of the fans I have come across have been women. If you find this odd, you've probably never seen this movie--I'll just say a lot of this film has to do with something about women that most men cringe to think or talk about, and that not all the blood we see is from bites. Fellas, if this is your hangup with this movie, I encourage you to get past it--I even dare you to try to put yourself in the shoes of these girls and imagine how horrifying everything in this movie must have been for them.
"We'll let this one live"
Now that we have that out of the way, I'll say I have always been a casual fan of this film--it's not what I would consider one of my all-time favorites, but it is one that I have watched several times. Isabelle is wicked as Ginger, and Perkins is almost as good as Brigitte, the more shy, awkward sister. There's a decent supporting cast here too, including Kris Lemche of Final Destination 3 fame, and Mimi Rogers, who sort of steals the show as the mother of the sisters. The bloodshed is plenty, and you have to love that the director skipped CGI and made the werewolves the old-fashioned way. There's also more than a fair amount of dark comedy in this movie--at times this adds to the charm of the film, but more often it just distracts from it. The movie does run a bit long, and while the ending is built up wonderfully, it doesn't quite pack the punch you are expecting. Still, with so many bad werewolf movies out there, you could do a lot worse than Ginger Snaps.
Television reporter Angela (Manuela Velasco) and her cameraman are documenting the local fire station when they get a call to go to an apartment building to help a woman get out of her unit; when they arrive, however, they find there is more going on than they expected. Spain brings us this 2007 flick that combines two horror elements—zombies and found footage—and cranks both all the way up to eleven. When I say zombies, it may not be quite what you are picturing. These are of the more fast-moving, rage virus variety, ala 28 Days Later, and the infected change quickly. The dilemma here is everybody is trapped inside the building—police, military, and other powerful government types have sealed off the building, leaving the people inside quarantined.
She likes what I did there
Once the outbreak begins to spread, the film becomes truly terrifying. The action is pretty much nonstop from the time of the first death, keeping you glued to the screen.The blood flies, so if you are not into gore, you may not want to watch this one. Speaking of pieces of a film that may turn off the viewer, be warned this one also has subtitles and the found footage shakiness, but even if those are two things you can’t stand in a movie, still give this one a shot—when it comes to shaky shooting, it is much better done in this movie than in many similar to it. The movie plays upon many fears, not the least of which is of the dark--the final sequence in particular may make those with nyctophobia have a panic attack. Of note, the actors in this scene really were in the dark--both literally and figuratively--and had no idea what was happening in the room, thus their reactions are quite real--this is also used in a few other scenes in this movie, and the results are awesome. There really is not much not to like about [Rec]--it is not only one of the finer zombie films ever made, but one of the best horror flicks of the 21st Century.
A flesh-eating virus breaks out, and the students at a high school prom are falling victim to it.
Lots of missing flesh here
This is the follow up to Eli Roth's 2002 film Cabin Fever--that movie was somewhat clever, groundbreaking, and grotesque in all the right ways--the sequel is none of the above. This movie is disgusting, childish, lowest common denominator rubbish that is, for the most part, a waste of time. To make matters worse, the dialogue is dreadful, practically all the characters are one-dimensional stereotypes, and the comedy (this is a horror comedy film, in case I didn't mention that) is painfully unfunny. The gore is so over the top it is boring, but I do give the movie makers credit for steering away (for the most part) from CGI. Literally the only interesting thing about this film is the relationship between Paul (Rider Strong) and Cassie (Alexi Wasser), his longtime friend--Paul's meltdown at the prom when Cassie shows up with his nemesis is by far and away the best scene in this movie, and stands as a battle cry for male teens all around the world. If you have seen Cabin Fever and are curios about it's sequel, never satisfy that curiosity...just run away from it.
The Solomon family moves into a haunted farm house, and daughter Jess (Kristen Stewart, Panic Room, The Runaways), a trouble making teen of some sort, is the only one of the family who can tell something is wrong--well, her little brother can too, but he doesn't talk...or show emotion...or do anything redeeming. This movie came out in 2007, the tail-end of about a five year stretch when these ghost/haunting movies were hitting the big screen seemingly every month. Not that I was complaining--many of these films were really good--The Messengers just doesn't happen to be one of them. By the time this movie arrived in theaters, we had already watched The Ring, The Grudge (wait, I haven't reviewed The Grudge yet?!), and probably even the Japanese movies that inspired them, so when we watched The Messengers, it just came off as a rip-off of those films...and it still does to this day.
"What face am I supposed to be making again?"
Most of the scares are a CGI-fest and/or jump scare, but there is a scene or two that will grab your attention. Kristen Stewart, the queen of the stone-faced actresses, is just that in this film--the only thing surprising about this is that the twins who play Ben, her little brother, are even more stone-faced than Stewart--I know this is hard to believe, but trust me on this one. Penelope Ann Miller (Chaplin, The Relic) and Dylan McDermott (Home For The Holidays, American Horror Story) phone this one in as Jess' parents, but John Corbett (The Wonder Years, Northern Exposure) saves the day, turning in, by far, the best performance in the film. A twist and turn along the way will keep you going, as will a couple creepy appearances by William B. Davis (the Cigarette Smoking Man from The X-Files), but in the end, his existence in this film, and the twists, really don't make a lot of sense. All that said, this movie made a ton of money, and spawned a prequel that more closely follows the original script and is much better. The Messengers really isn't a bad movie--it has some entertaining elements, but you have to take it for what it is--a cheap version of much better films.
A group of six morons and a baby take a yacht out into an ocean, and amidst their horseplay, they all decide to go for a swim--actually, one girl didn't want to go in, but she was forced to against her will--that's not really important. It's not until they're in the water, however, that they realize nobody bothered to lower the ladder so they could climb back on.
"Damn! We're in a tight spot!"
Other than also featuring people stranded in the ocean, this movie doesn't really tie in to the original, overrated film, and unlike that movie, isn't really based on a true story, though it claims to be. It is kind of, sort of teased that, as in the original film, we may see sharks, but surprisingly, that doesn't happen; instead, we get a lot of attempting to get back on the boat, a lot of whining and blaming, a quick flurry of action that sees one character get stabbed, one die of exhaustion, and another, the one who looks like a young Jeff Brantley, hit his head on the bottom of the boat and suffer a skull fracture.
"Right. Down. Broadway."
Outside that fifteen minutes, and a little in the end, there's not much action in this film, but it certainly does a better job keeping your attention than Open Water does. Strangely, you may actually find yourself caring about a character or two along the way, something you certainly wouldn't expect after the first half hour of the film. The end, and subsequently, who survives, will surprise nobody. The dialogue switches from captivating to mind-numbing with unusual regularity, and the editing leaves a lot to be desired. While not exactly the movie you are expecting it to be, Open Water 2: Adrift has some interesting moments that keep it...ahem...floating in a sea of mediocre sequels.
