For A Few Movies More

I think we have all been through it at some stage; that moment when your perception of reality, recently corrupted by a Halloween special, is filled with an irrational fear of mundane tasks. Brushing your teeth in front of the mirror, sleeping with the closet door slightly open,  searching for the light switch in a  pitch black room, all of these innocent activities now have the potential of extreme terror. Looking back on it I think I reached an embarrassing age before I stopped checking the closet, or opening a door completely to make sure nobody was hiding behind it (though to be fair I did live in a house with five brothers so sometimes the fear was warranted). But now that I have grown out of such childish fears (kind of) what I want to know is when used to lean over to spit out the toothpaste and then hesitate to look up into the mirror again, what was I afraid of seeing? A ghost? A murderer? A zombie? A hollow-eyed infant? Better put: If I was the star of the latest Halloween release would I prefer the evil element be a supernatural being or a plain old human one?

Personally this one has always been an easy choice for me – Supernatural. I figure that if you are going to die you might as well do it in style. I want to see something that no living person has ever seen, have my mind opened up to new dimensional possibilities and whatever other stoner spin I used to have on it. Meanwhile the human killer is clearly just some disturbed freak out for some good old fashioned torturin’. But before I ask you what you would prefer let’s have a look at some of the pros and cons of an October 31st deadline.

Nis’ Pick – Hocus Pocus

If I know Dean, and I would I hope I do after years of countless movie conversations, this year’s Halloween picks will no doubt include his choice of either scary movie classic or unknown horror gem. With that in mind, I’ve decided to go the nostalgic/kid-route again, and what better choice than a Disney movie? Because we must not forget that Halloween isn’t just for Wiccans getting spiritual or for grown-ups to party, but it’s also for kids — young and young at heart — to get all spooked out and eat lots of chocolate.

Hocus Pocus tells the story of new teen in town Max (Omri Katz), who has recently moved to Salem, Massachusetts, and gets roped into taking his little sister Dani (Thora Birch) out trick-or-treating. At one of the houses, they run into Max’s new crush from school, Allison (Vinessa Shaw). She joins them on their outing, and before long they arrive at the old Sanderson House, a now-closed museum that used to belong to the famous Sanderson Sisters — witches who were hung 300 years ago for the deaths of local children. In an attempt to impress Allison, Max inadvertently lights The Black Candle, which brings the sisters — Winifred (Bette Midler), Mary (Kathy Najimy) and Sarah (Sarah Jessica Parker) — back to life for one night. The sisters must then brew a potion and capture a child to suck the life out of before sunrise, or they will turn to dust. The kids, now with the help of Binx (a kid from Ye Olde Salem that was cursed into a cat by Winifred 300 years ago), must prevent the sisters from brewing their potion and getting a child, or the Sanderson Sisters will live forever.

I really love this movie. I know that’s a rather blunt and unimaginative way to begin this review, but it has to be said. I wasn’t exactly sure what to expect from Warrior going in, I have a casual interest in the professional world of MMA fighting that the film focuses on, but beyond this, I feared that it had the potential to dissolve into a plodding melodrama. As it turns out, I couldn’t have been more wrong. Instead Warrior rises above the already high standard set by fighting films such as The Fighter to deliver quite possibly the most satisfying film watching experience you’ll have the privilege of enjoying this year. Part heartbreaking drama, part underdog story and part against the grain sports film, Warrior equally balances its various elements to form a well-rounded experience you won’t soon forget.

Despite the fact that Warrior’s trailer reveals far too much of its surprising plot, there’s so much more to this uplifting story than a bunch of burly men fighting for supremacy in the middle of a cage. Yes, the core component of the plot may revolve around two brothers entering a MMA tournament in an effort to claim a ludicrous sum of prize money, however it’s the reasons each of these brothers have for entering the tournament and their emotional journeys that bring them there that make up the bulk of Warrior’s story. A straightforward Rocky clone this definitely is not. We’re quickly introduced to two brothers who couldn’t be more different from each other. Brendan (Joel Edgerton) is a quite, reserved school teacher who’s need to pay his bills pulls him back into the world of professional fighting. While Tommy (Tom Hardy), the more edgy of the two brothers appears to be something of an unhinged brute. A live hand grenade that could go off at any moment, Tommy throws himself headfirst into the world of MMA without a second’s hesitation for reasons that I won’t disclose here. Caught in the middle of these two brothers headed for war is their father Paddy (Nick Nolte). A broken down old man who wants nothing more than to right the wrongs of his tainted past, Paddy attempts to reconnect with his sons as they seemingly drift further out of his life despite his best efforts.

The Paranormal Activity films seem to be a love them or hate them affair. Bringing a unique brand of restrained horror to a market oversaturated with gory remakes, the series is often applauded for utilising an effective slow burn approach to drive home a series of increasingly creepy scenarios, but has also occasionally been heavily criticized by fussy viewers for generally boring some audiences. Personally, my opinion of the films lands squarely with the former party. The original genuinely blew me away upon seeing it at the Sydney Film Festival a few years back, whereas the sequel, while not as good as the original, was still certainly a worthy follow up that continued the series in a fairly logical direction. Now, continuing on in the tradition previously set by the Saw franchise, the Paranormal Activity series is back for a timely Halloween release with the third film in the series. An entertaining and frequently scary journey through a metaphorical abandoned funhouse; Paranormal Activity 3 honours the previous instalments by returning to its found footage roots while frightening the pants off audiences with a series of well-executed scares. And while this latest instalment is an undeniably entertaining trip down memory lane, it holds perhaps a few too many similarities to its predecessors, often resembling a watered down version of what came before it. But worst of all, this film suffers from some of the most jarring plot inconsistencies I’ve witnessed in some time.

Ok, I think we all know what to expect from these films by this stage. Some ghostly occurrences go down, cameras are set up to capture said ghosts on film, and finally all hell breaks loose. It’s a familiar formula that worked a charm in the first two films and is once again utilised to varying success in this third outing. Plot wise, the film once again focuses on sisters Katie and Kristi (played by young Chloe Csengery and Jessica Tyler Brown this time around) being tormented by an unseen malevolent spirit. However the big difference this time around is that the film’s events take place before those of the first two entries, effectively setting it up as a prequel. Set way back in the year 1988, the film takes a step back in time and focuses on the sister’s early childhood interactions with the spirit that would eventually go on to make their lives living nightmares, dubbed Toby by the girls here. But while the sudden influx of odd happenings plaguing the family house may go unnoticed by their mother Julie (Lauren Bittner), her new partner Dennis (Christopher Nicholas Smith) has a far keener eye and thus is determined to capture the ghostly entity on camera. This can only end badly… Again…

I’m a little late on this review so let’s get straight to the point. Released way back in 1982, John Carpenter’s original rendition of The Thing was nothing less than a bleak and claustrophobic excursion into the heart of terror. Efficiently juggling a nagging sense of tense paranoia along with a series of in your face monster attacks, it was an almost perfectly conceived horror film that has managed to stand the test of time. Now cut to almost thirty years later and Hollywood has taken it upon themselves to churn out a needless prequel/remake (premake?) to the highly revered original. A ballsy move if there ever was one. And while predictably this weak imitator doesn’t come even close to replicating the original’s immersive design, it surprisingly isn’t a complete write off. It’s no stellar piece of filmmaking by any stretch of the imagination, but it’s still an energetic and entertaining enough experience to warrant a viewing.

Remember those crazy Norwegians from the start of Carpenter’s The Thing? Well this newly refurbished prequel aims to reveal the horror that befell their dishevelled camp. Immediately kicking things off with a bang, the film begins with a trio of Norwegian researches travelling along the desolate surface of the Arctic who quite literally stumble upon an alien spacecraft when the snow below them gives way, causing them to fall into a vast chasm below. How they escape the precarious situation they find themselves in is never explained, but never-the-less it appears as though they’ve made the discovery of a lifetime. The Norwegian research team wastes little time investigating this site, in the process discovering a frozen alien life form in the ice that they promptly excavate. Bad idea. Before long the creature has broken out of its icy encasing and begins ruthlessly attacking the members of the camp. But far from resembling your run of the mill extraterrestrial, this alien nasty harbours the uncanny ability to perfectly replicate its victims. Now with the alien creature possibly hiding behind a human disguise, the research team must try to determine who is still human, all the while attempting to prevent the creature from escaping to more densely populated areas.

Kenny Wormald and Julianne Hough have to be the oldest ‘seventeen year old kids’ I’ve ever seen. By comparison, they make the ‘kids’ from Glee look positively pre-pubescent, and the majority of them are only half a decade away from checking into retirement homes themselves. If you don’t know who I’m talking about, allow me to clarify. Wormald (27) and Hough (23) are the ‘stars’ of Footloose, but you’d be forgiven for not knowing that. In fact, describing them as stars undermines the work of legitimately talented actors. So, as you can see, I’m not going to buck the trend and give Footloose a favorable review. I’m not one for conformity, but in this case I have to agree with masses – 2011’s remake of the 80’s classic is far from impressive.

I’m not one of those people who are against remakes. There are those who will dismiss outright that a remake will have any value or be able to live up to the original, and therefore prejudge the film before watching it. I, on the other hand, am always happy to give a film the benefit of the doubt and judge it on its own merits. And given the recent technological and artistic advances made in the film industry, I think that there is something to be said for the idea of remaking films that perhaps suffered from the lack of artistry and technical wizardry we now possess. Having said that, I do think that it is important for a remake to offer something new and to use the intervening time since the original to advance the film in some way. Now, I haven’t seen the original Footloose, but it has become such a big part of the pop-culture archives that it, like its theme-tune, is part of general knowledge. It’s a story about teen oppression, resistance and exultation. A story about freedom of expression, and the joys of youth. It’s a story about cutting loose, Footloose. Here is where the 2011 version has its first major pitfall. The youth culture of today is hardly oppressed. There is so much freedom among teenagers these days that parents have hardly any rights at all. Kids are pretty much allowed to do anything they like. So how does a film whose message is about rising up against unfair, adult-imposed sanctions, resonate with an audience who don’t know what adult-imposed sanctions are. The reason why the 1984 film spoke to its audience is because it came at a time of change for young people, when the shackles of the conservative past were just starting to be loosened, giving young people a taste of self expression for the first time. It was a strong message then. Not so now.

When a film is released with the name Contagion you get a general sense of the subject without needing to see a trailer or read a review; you assume it must be some sort of disease or virus that spreads through humanity quicker than you can say ‘God Bless You’. The ensuing panic and civil meltdown before an impending apocalypse is always an engaging thought. What would happen as the dominoes of societal structure begin toppling over? Military outposts, riots, looting, the dash for canned goods; it is all part and parcel of the apocalypse genre and has been countless times. I immediately think to the array of Zombie films that have documented similar proceedings, or Day of the Triffids, Blindness, Steven King’s The Stand – even the recent Planet of the Apes covered the scenario with a two minute graphic of flight paths bouncing between the major city centres in between the credits. So when a film is released with the name Contagion you begin to wonder what will set it apart from the rest. What fresh ideas might it have? What will be its hook? However, with its modern take on the concept in the age of globalisation and a firm sense of reality, I can safely say that Contagion does provide a worthy lure and you wouldn’t be disappointed if you took a $15 bite of it.

The film begins on Day 2. Beth Emhoff (Gwyneth Paltrow) is a little flush in the face, a slight cough, but otherwise fine. She is at Chicago airport. In Hong Kong a man wanders out onto a busy road in a haze of fever. In London a Ukrainian model is found dead with foam around her mouth. In Tokyo a man has a seizure in a bus, the footage captured on a nearby phone camera. Before you know it director Steven Soderbergh has thrown us into the thick of it, witnessing the first cases of this new, unknown virus. We are then taken to the CDC, the Centre for Disease Control in America, and the World Health Organisation in Europe where the situation is evaluated and initial response is determined. In San Francisco freelance writer and blogger Alan Krumwiede (Jude Law) has picked up an early scent of a good story. In Minnesota Emhoff returns home feeling considerably worse; she to her husband, Mitch (Matt Damon), and her son who seems to have caught the virus from her. And it is from these points of view, the authorities, the suburbs and the new age media that the virus is detailed.

If you like slightly absurd or whimsical films, then Midnight in Paris could be something just for you. Written and directed by Woody Allen, the film tells the story of successful Hollywood screenwriter and novelist-wannabe Gil (Owen Wilson), who goes on holiday to Paris with his fiancee Inez (Rachel McAdams) and her parents, and falls in love with the City of Lights. Without giving too much away, Gil gets up to some shenanigans when he separates from the group, and discovers what Paris can be like after midnight (to be more detailed about what happens could ruin the reveal, which even though it comes early in the story, isn’t obvious from the trailer and is a nice little suprise, so I won’t discuss it just yet!).

It’s hard for me to say if this is a typical “Woody Allen Film”. I guess in a sense it is — a slightly neurotic white guy who makes witty observations and is surrounded by mid-upper class people who are either obvlivious to their surroundings and/or fancy-free, talky and conversationally intellectual, with an obvious love for and emphasis on an iconic city, that is almost another a character. I’m not a huge Allen aficianado, but I have enjoyed most of his films and seen enough to (hopefully!) know his style. I think it would be fair to say it’s Woody Allen-enough to appeal to his fans, yet not too-Woody Allen to alienate everyone else. I felt it was one of his more accessible films, with a great cast (Allen’s specialty), and a story that is a bit of a departure from his recent offerings — the addition of a sweet, supernatural twist to his regular Neurotic Guy Finds Himself kind of film.

“There she is”

The film opens with a wide shot of a barren countryside. Daniel Plainview is deep in a mine tolling away with a pickaxe, some dynamite and a large store of determination. His ladder gives way and he falls heavy, breaking his leg.

“No!” he yells out. But it is not in despair. Alone and stranded 50 feet down a mine shaft, Plainview scrounges around the dirt floor until he finds his rock. He admires his reward.

We next see Plainview seated at the lip of his mine shaft, supporting his leg as he backs away slowly. We then cut to him cashing in his keep, smoking a pipe as he watches the goldsmith measure the score. His leg is still clearly damaged but his expression portrays only a pure satisfaction. It is up to us to imagine the effort that must have been exerted to achieve what Daniel achieves and yet to him it was all clearly worth it. Every lonesome day, every gruelling hour digging, every painful minute crawling over the harsh terrain was worth it for a handful of silver.

Red State, Kevin Smith’s latest directorial outing is a radical departure from his usually light-hearted and comedic work to say the least. It’s a nihilistic journey into the heart of humanity’s dark side, an ode to all that’s wrong with the world but more importantly in the case of this review, it’s a riveting piece of cinema. I don’t think it’s too harsh to say that most of us were starting to lose hope for Smith’s directing career after he unleashed the woeful Cop Out upon audiences, but here he’s managed to completely reinvent himself. A harrowing and frequently disturbing tale, Red State is not only an opportunity for Smith to deliver his most mature work to date, but to also show off a level of directorial flair that I quite honestly never knew he had in him.

The opening ten minutes of Red State plants the viewer squarely in familiar Kevin Smith territory.  The focus is on three teenage boys, Travis, Jared and Billy-Ray (Michael Angarano, Nicholas Braun and Kyle Gallner’s) as they excitedly discuss the possibility of finally losing their virginity to a mysterious female they’ve contacted through an online dating website. The ensuing dialogue between the trio is vintage Smith, complete with a tirade of vulgarities wrapped snugly in a warm sense of humour. It’s an effective introductory sequence that efficiently garners sympathy for our protagonists early on by humanising them; they feel like real teenagers who want nothing more than to have fun and get laid. And just like teenagers are apt to do, they head off to a neighbouring town to rendezvous with their online hook-up. But just as the film looks to transform into a Road Trip/Sex Drive comedy clone, the tone changes and the film takes an abrupt detour through much darker territory.