The Helpers - Warning: may contain elements of `found footage' genre

Sometimes you have to wonder whether there are any American teenagers left in the country. Another car-load of them has only gone and broken down in the middle of nowhere and found themselves fall foul of... whatever the latest crop of psychos lie in wait for them.

It's nothing new, but then horror has little `new' left in it, but at least we can hope for an entertaining ride. Sadly, `entertaining' isn't a word I'd use to describe `The Helpers.' The word I'd use is `annoying.' We're used to annoying teenagers running right back into the clutches of the killers instead of sprinting for the hills as fast as they can. But, here we have not just the stupidest seven teenagers ever (yes, expect all the clichés, i.e. not bothering to actually kill the baddies, only running away leaving them to get up again and continue the pursuit), but also the most annoying baddies ever.

It's actually hard to tell the difference between the annoying teens being stalked and the annoying teen killing them. It's like a convention of shrieking MTV presenters being doused in red paint. The killers have no credibility about them. They're not scary, just irritating. And their backstory regarding why they're like they are doesn't really hold up.

Then, to add final insult to injury, the film-maker includes many sections of `found footage.' If you don't know what that is, then you obviously haven't been watching enough low budget horror movies these days. It's basically the most overused technique in film-making that allows a slender budget to try and be stretched to the breaking point.

The Helpers adds nothing new to the horror genre. It borrows elements of far better films, such as Hostel, The Hitchhiker and Vacancy. My advice: watch one of them instead.

4/10 You can watch this film while you're doing the ironing (you'll still get the general gist of it)

Tormented - Does it know what it wants to be?

I've seen so many horror movies in my life that I'm ashamed to say that I had to re-watch the opening twenty minutes or so of this film straight after sitting through it, simply to make sure I actually understood it!  It starts out soon after a British private (I think?) school has had one of its pupils commit suicide.  However, those left behind soon start to realise that the pupil may be dead, but he isn't quite finished with them.

Now, normally I list the plus points of a film and then get on to whatever gripes I have about it.  This time I'm going to do it the other way around.  First of all, as I said, I didn't 'get' what was happening.  Yes, I knew a student had taken his own life, but I couldn't work out who it was supposed to be and his relationship to the cast.  This is because you never see him (alive).  The action picks up after it's all happened.  Fair enough, but I thought it would be more integral to see his interaction with those who he considers to be his 'tormentors.' In fact, I actually thought a boy gets killed in a graveyard near the beginning of the film WAS the boy who everyone spends the rest of the film talking about (hence my need to re-watch the opening).  I guess there's narrative reasons they did it this way, but those fall under 'spoiler territory.'

Secondly - and I hope this isn't a 'spoiler' - this is a 'super-natural' film.  At first I was expecting a 'real' killer, but I guess this area of the plot is foreshadowed by the talk about 'Hamlet' near the start of the film.

So, once I'd accepted how the film-makers were doing this and the 'rules' of the game (so to speak), I actually sat back and quite enjoyed it.  Yes, there are other flaws I could mention - like the 'liberal' school uniform which the pupils seem to be allowed to wear any way they like (especially when it comes to the girls wearing theirs like St Trinians!).  Then you have the cast themselves.  I'm sure the actors are all competent enough, but the fact that every last one is a complete and total stereotype of a modern teenager does kind of grate on you after a while.

I know I'm sounding quite negative, but if you're looking for a gory little slasher film with a supernatural twist then you should enjoy it like I did.  The gore is actually worth waiting for as there's a scene with an eye which really is quite sick (in a well-done special effects kind of way).  Plus there's an undercurrent of dark humour running through this and the gag with the 'badge' made me chuckle long after the film had ended.  Of course this meant that the film veered from horror to comedy without really much warning.  All the actors play it straight, but there's some definite winks to the audience here and there.

'Tormented' is no classic and I doubt will be remembered by anyone, but it is perfectly watchable and if you're a fan of the genre then you could do worse (if you know what you're getting).

7/10 if I woke up on Groundhog Day and had to watch this again, I could live with that

The Innkeepers - Only for fans of really sloooow moving horror

The Innkeepers' cover artwork is a little misleading (I haven't seen the trailer, so I can't comment on that). It shows a blooded hand ringing a bell, implying that this will be some sort of gore-fest. It isn't. It is however one of the slowest moving horror films ever. I use the term `horror' over supernatural because on the 2-3 parts of the film where it actually gets scary, the scenes would probably fit more with other, more mainstream popcorn horror films.

It's about two workers at an inn which is due to close in the next few days. The inn is supposedly haunted and they decide to try and prove the stories true before the building is finally shut for good.

Most of the film is character-building. The two youngsters play their parts well. They're endearing and easily-related to. The story progresses and the tension slowly mounts. Slowly. This is where the film could fall down for some. I've checked other reviews and it seems that people either love or hate the film. Some see it as not that much of a horror - more a slow-burning suspenseful ghost story, putting characters over gore. Others simply find it too slow to be scary and/or exciting.

I fall somewhere between the two. The characters and the way the actors portray them deserves credit and there is certainly an air of tension created. However, I would have liked a few more scares and a little more action somewhere along the way.

This film will find an audience, but whether you'll enjoy it will depend on how `fast-paced' you like your movies.

6/10 May just keep you awake if Freddy Krueger was haunting your nights

Truth Or Dare - Gets way better than the start would have you believe

I got about three minutes into 'Truth or Dare' and absolutely hated it. It was the characters. They were completely loathsome. I don't want to come across as some sort of `anti-rich brigade' but they were just too posh and full of themselves. They were like clones of Tamara Eccelstone and Ben Fogle (anyone who wears £300 shoes deserves to be chopped up in a 'slasher' flick).

However, I persevered and I was glad I did. For a start, they were supposed to be horrid and, without going into too much detail, they got what was coming to them.  A gaggle of British teenagers bully your typical 'geeky' kid at a party.  Then, a few weeks later, they're all invited to his country mansion for his birthday party.  Yes, you may be asking, 'But why would they even go?' And you'd probably be right.  However, if you can suspend your disbelief long enough to get all the characters into the situation they're meant to be in, you'll at least receive a decent pay-off.  

You won't really remember any of the characters' names, even when the credits roll, but they're different enough to stand out from each other and you'll at least know them visually.  Plus they have decent motivation here and there, so many of their actions are at least reasonable given their unlikely situation.

For what is technically a horror/torture b-movie, there are some surprising plot developments which I won't go into for fear of spoiling it for you.  I don't think I'd call what transpires 'twists,' but there are definitely a few plot points you probably won't see coming.  Also, you may need a strong stomach as, when revenge comes these toffs' way, it's not very nice to watch.  There isn't that much gore, but when it comes it's not deliberately over-the-top and quite realistic given the setting (and budget!).

This is one film where the less you know about it the more chance you'll have of enjoying it. If you like 'Hostel' and revenge type films, definitely give this one a go. You may be surprised. And stick with it until the end - I was glad I did.  I've watched it twice now (with a fair few years in between viewings) and I'd completely forgotten what most of it was about, so I still found it enjoyable and fresh for a second time around.

7/10 if I woke up on Groundhog Day and had to watch this again, I could live with that

Day of the Dead (1985) - Ah, those were the days (of the dead)

Okay, so most hard core zombie lovers drool over Night of the Living Dead (its underlying racial undertones providing some thought-provoking moments). Then, this was followed by 1979's Dawn of the Dead, to which many people paralleled it with an attack on consumerism. Them in 1985, came Day and people said...what?

Any hidden themes are unclear. Some say it's an attack on genetic modification and god-playing scientists - maybe. But it, as the tagline suggests, is the darkest day in horror.

It's not as action-packed as Dawn, but for claustrophobic nature and tension, it really can't be beaten.

Watch it. Then watch it again. It's about the remains of human lives when they're forced together with people who they share nothing in common with. The undead take a backseat. Definitely my favourite in the saga.

8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one

Margin Call - You'll either love it or hate it

Or at least I'm guessing most people will from what I've read.

If you read the reviews of Margin Call, you'll see that people either say it's amazingly acted, tense and brilliantly-portrayed or (and I quote) `like watching paint dry.'

Margin Call tells the story of a nameless banking giant in Wall Street as it's about to go under. All the major executives gather for an emergency late night meeting to discuss if there's any way out of it. That's it. The whole film is basically set in a boardroom (and a few surrounding offices) over a period of one night. The cast meets in a boardroom then leaves. We see them in twos or threes as they discuss what's already been discussed in the boardroom then return to the boardroom to discuss more.

You may have guessed by now. I'm siding with the `watching paint dry' camp.

Yes, Margin call does have some great acting talent in there - Kevin Spacey and Jeremy Irons to name but two). However, I just found the whole film boring. Maybe you need to be more into the `investment way of life' to appreciate it more. I just found it difficult to work up much sympathy for people on (and this is the minimum mentioned) $250,000 a year. Oh dear - they might be out of a job. Tragedy.

As I said, for every person out there who feels like me, there seems to be someone who raves about this film. Okay, so it may be a good reflection of the banking world and the dialogue realistic, I just didn't care for it.

Check out the other reviews and make an informed choice before you decide to watch this. I'm a big fan of Kevin Spacey, but I wouldn't sit through this again.

5/10 a hard trek, a bit like unicycling to Mordor and back

Seconds Apart - After ages, Afterdark finally get it right! 

In case you don't know, Afterdark are a film company who make horror movies. These films normally consist of six stupid teenagers getting stranded somewhere and then getting eaten by a monster/a cannibal/a ghost - take your pick. In short, Afterdark films are those you only watch if you're really not expecting too much.  

However, with `Seconds Apart' I think they might have finally got one right!

I remember there were two twins at my old school. They were skinny little boys with squeaky voices and they got bullied. However, in 'Seconds Apart,' you really shouldn't pick on twins Seth and Jonah - they have telepathic powers and they ain't afraid to use them!

Seth and Jonah, played by real life twins, are genuinely creepy as they set about their evil ways. The story plays out a bit like a slightly extended episode of 'The X-files,' only without Scully and Mulder. Instead, we have a cop (seemingly the ONLY cop in the town who is allowed to drink on duty and slap a child in a crowded school dining hall and get away with it) who, upon finding suicide victims, automatically suspects locals twins because of a suspicion that they might have telepathic powers (good call, huh?). But kind of leap of faith can be forgiven on account that the story is pretty good. I won't say too much as there are even some things that you might not see coming.  It's definitely worth a watch.  However, on second viewing, it did drag a little and I felt it was actually a bit predictable - but then I had seen it before, albeit many years ago.

All I'll say is... if you see a pair of twins holding hands near you - RUN!

WARNING: I think it's also fair to point out that this film has a scene where two people OVER the age of forty kiss (that was possibly the most horrific part for me).

7/10 if I woke up on Groundhog Day and had to watch this again, I could live with that