The Hills Have Eyes 2 - You’ve seen one set of mutated cannibal hillbillies then you’ve seen them all

Yes, I hate lazy horror remakes as much as the next fan of the genre.  However, when it came to the (‘original’) remake of the Hills Have Eyes, I was actually pretty impressed.  I guess I wasn’t the only one as it seems to have spawned a sequel… which I also watched.

I guess you could compare part 2 to ‘Aliens’ and part 1 to ‘Alien.’ Of course the major difference was that BOTH ‘Alien’ films were awesome whereas here, just adding soldiers and guns doesn’t automatically make it better.  The first film showed us what happened to a family when their camper van broke down in the middle of a desert and ended up at odds with the psychotic locals.  Now, some time later in the same desert, a team of young – and not that particularly experienced – soldiers are on a training exercise.  Guess what happens to them?!

So our young recruits start getting attacked and picked off one by one in classic slasher style.  You may think the fact that they’re armed with guns and the locals have melee weapons gives them an advantage.  It doesn’t.  Like I say they’re VERY inexperienced, almost to the point of it being a little unrealistic how quickly they go down.  However, part of the story is that they’re not that good at what they do, so I guess I can let that one slide.  Unfortunately, part of the problem with having all the characters dressed the same in their army gear makes them very difficult to tell who’s who – especially when one dies and then you realise it was a different soldier.  Not only this, they’re all rather forgettable and you can hazard a guess which handful will make it all the way to the final reel as they’re the only ones with vaguely identifiable character traits.

Sadly, it’s not just the people we’re supposed to root for who have problems (dare I call them ‘heroes?’).  The mutated rednecks are just as bland.  They’re not that scary and the make-up and gore isn’t up to the standards it would need to be to really stand out.  There’s a bit of gore and some nastiness here and there, but – again – nothing that you haven’t seen before (and better!) if you’ve seen much of the horror genre.

I may sound like I hated it, but I didn’t.  The problem is that it’s just the very definition of ‘average.’ It’s not bad, just completely forgettable.  There are too many horror clichés in here to really make it work well and it’s not a patch on either of the originals.  Plus, if I have to hear someone say either ‘We’re going to get through this’ (or a variation thereof) I may just hurl the remote at the TV screen.

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

The Lost Boys – One of the seminal films of the eighties

If you only see one eighties movie about vampires… then watch (the original) ‘Fright Night.’ However, if you’re well into either or both movie history, or our blood-sucking fiends of the night, then you should probably watch the original ‘Fright Night’ AND ‘The Lost Boys.’ There are some films you just have to see and The Lost Boys is one.  Maybe I was being too flippant when I said that you should watch it after ‘Fright Night?’ Let’s face it… Fright Night got an updated remake whereas The Lost Boys is yet to be redone by modern (CGI) hands.

There’s nothing amazing about The Lost Boys’ plot, i.e. a family relocate to a new town where they discover it has a dark secret.  Even in the eighties this was getting a little stale.  However, it’s the film’s blend of horror and a real self of ‘self-knowing’ without ever descending into straight up comedy.  The two central characters/brothers play off each other well, giving a natural feel of sibling rivalry while at the same time having each other’s back when push comes to shove.  Of course, this relationship is really put to the test when the elder brother only goes and gets mixed up in the wrong crowd – a crowd of vampires to be precise!  And, to prove the old warning true about never accepting drinks from strangers, he only goes and has a swig from a bottle of blood turning him into one of their reflection-less ranks.
As good as the brothers are, a
really great film also has a wide variety of supporting characters for them to interact with.  The Lost Boys doesn’t depart in that department.  For a start we have the pair lads who seem to live in the local comic shop and ‘swot up’ on how best to defeat the local undead via the pages of graphic novels.  If there is a real ‘comic element’ to the film it lies with them, but, seeing as they’re never used in excess, they never become annoying.  Of course special mention must be given to Kiefer Sutherland.  Before Jack Bauer was saving the world, Kiefer was ripping people’s throats out with his evil yellow eyes and 18 certificate Buffy the Vampire make-up.  He’s by far the stand out performance.  You may not want to root for him, but you sure won’t sleep easy after watching his sheer glee at terrorising any of us mere mortals.

Yes, as with any horror film you have to suspend your disbelief at times.  Sometimes plot points are a little hard to swallow, but this film is just too much fun to really care and the massive amounts of good so outweigh the negative moments it’s just not worth mentioning. 

You should definitely watch ‘The Lost Boys.’ Whether you’re a fan of great characters, horror, vampire, teen movies and general fun flicks from the eighties, it basically has it all.  And that’s before I mentioned the musical score.  Seriously… that chant is damn haunting and will stick in your head long after the cool (and completely out of the blue!) last line of the film!

8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one

A Christmas Horror Story – this could have been done better

Being a ‘Trekkie’ I do have the tendency to watch almost anything the great ‘Bill’ Shatner is in, so, coupled with my love of horror, I thought this one would be right up my street.  It wasn’t.  A kind of knew that ‘Captain Kirk’ would only have a small amount of screen time, so it wasn’t that I felt short-changed due to him only holding the intertwining stories together through use of his scenes as a radio DJ (which were arguably the best bits!).  My problem was with the story/s themselves.  Basically, the film is split into four different (Christmas-related) horror tales.  This wouldn’t bother me if it wasn’t for the fact that two of them aren’t really that good.

Perhaps it might have been better if the stories were told one after the other.  I watched this on DVD therefore this would have enabled me to simply skip to the next story if I was getting bored.  However, the narrative jumps back and forth between them all.  This means that, during the stories that you like, you’re just happily getting into when suddenly you’re wrenched back to one of the lesser interesting ones.

I would say that the highlight of the film (or rather story which appealed to me the most) involves the elves in Father Christmas’ North Pole toy factory developing a plague which turns them into flesh-eating zombie elves.  Therefore, Santa has to ‘kick a$$’ and take them down in a way that Rick and Darryl from The Walking Dead would be proud.  I quite liked the ‘changling’ story too, but mainly because I’ve always been fascinated by this – disturbing – type of fairy tale.  However, even that sort of lost its appeal once the lesser interesting stories have been interwoven within its framework.

Yes, William Shatner is the best part, but even his rambling brand of comedy wasn’t really enough to make me want to sit through an hour and a half of sub-standard Christmas stories.  I’d rather just see a twenty minute short of Santa bludgeoning elves to death in front of his mutilated reindeers and be done with it.  Pity.  Could and should have been much more fun.

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

The People vs Larry Flynt - Interesting ‘opinion piece’

It’s a bit of a cliché to say that you’ll either ‘love or hate’ the film ‘The People vs Larry Flynt,’ but the reason I open with such a phrase is largely down to the source material, i.e. real life.  It’s a semi-biopic picture which tells the story of self-titled ‘King of p0rn’ Larry Flynt and his rise to power, largely with the (in)famous adult publication ‘Hustler.’ I suppose how much you enjoy the film comes down to how much you see things from his point of view.  It does portray him in quite a sympathetic light (largely for the first half!) so, if you’re very ‘anti-adult publications’ then you’ll probably see him as an modern day devil in human form, hell bent on corrupting the morals of the nation.  However, if you’re more liberal in your reading material then you’ll probably tolerate Woody Harrelson’s performance for longer.

I mentioned that he’s effectively the ‘hero’ (although I should probably call him an ‘anti-hero!’) for the first half of the film.  I suppose it’s because he gets slowly more hardened and cynical before finally developing an attitude which generally feels like he’s at war with the world and simply wants to annoy everyone he comes into contact with (mainly judges!).  This is the point in the story where even his most die-hard supporters start to lose patience with him, for he becomes a little unlikeable, which can go some way to impact on your enjoyment of the film.

As if the characters weren’t controversial enough, the film-makers even chose one of the most controversial figures of the modern age to co-star, i.e. Courtney Love.  She plays Larry Flynt’s ‘love interest’ and opinion – naturally, it seems – is divided on how successful her (arguably) biggest on-screen role turned out.  One school of through is that she was amazing as the drug-fuelled woman in Larry Flynt’s life, others simply say that she was merely playing an extension of her true self.  Special mention to Edward Norton who – amazingly – gets overshadowed by the more ‘larger than life’ performances in the film.  He’s probably the most ‘sympathetic’ character among the batch as he plays Larry Flint’s long-suffering lawyer who is left practically tearing his hair out in frustration when it comes to his client’s antics.

As far as I can tell, ‘The People Vs Larry Flynt’ is a pretty accurate depiction of the events in the p0rn baron’s life, so if you think you need to know about the way the law attempted to ‘protect’ the public against the world’s seedy underbelly then give this one a go.  The performances are all spot on and whether you like the film will go hand in hand with how much you’re interested in the history of the subject matter and how much you can tolerate slightly infuriating on-screen characters. 

8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one

Swamp Thing (1982) - An era DC would probably like to forget

If you’re keeping up to date with the now rampant battle between comic powerhouses Marvel and DC then you’ll probably know that Marvel are waaaaay ahead with their ‘shared universe’ and DC are, despite Batman, Superman and Margot Robbie in hotpants, lagging behind significantly.  Back before such an epic cinematic conflict took place, DC had a fair few minor ‘superheroes’ on the silver screen, yet little way made of it. ‘Swamp Thing’ is one such example.  And for good reason.  It’s pretty awful.

Many people have slated DC’s recent offerings such as ‘Batman vs Superman’ and ‘Suicide Squad.’ Personally, I quite enjoyed them, but if people had to sit through ‘Swamp Thing’ they’d really have something to gripe about!  I watched it for three reasons: (1) It had Ray Wise in it.  He’s hardly a ‘big name’ in cinema, but, if you’ve seen him in ‘Twin Peaks’ (and pretty much anything else), you’ll know he’s a damn fine actor and always gives an intense performance.  (2) It was directed by Wes Craven and (3) It’s DC – and therefore may one day be dragged kicking and screaming into their floundering shared universe.

I was basically short-changed on all my three reasons.  For a start – the great – Ray Wise was hardly in it (sorry if that’s a minor ‘spoiler’ but there’s little anyone can say that will spoil this film any more than it already is.  Yes, the equally great horror maestro Wes Craven did direct it, but it was one of his early films that I think he probably never put on his C.V.  Surely he must have only done this one for the paycheque!  And finally, if this is an example of what happens in the ‘Swamp Thing’ then I hope he stays well clear of Batman and Superman!

It’s just awful (I think I already said that).  Sorry, I can’t think of any other way to describe it.  No, I’m not a ‘film snob’ who only wants to watch ‘high art’ with deep and meaningful character development (hell, one of my favourite films is ‘Flash Gordon’ so I’m well up for a good ‘good-bad’ film any day!).

There are old horror/sci-fi films which, despite their age, still stand up today.  ‘Swamp Thing’ will never be one of them.  I even spoke to someone who had read some of the comics it was based on and she confirmed that the film was completely different (and not in a good way!).  The ‘climactic’ end battle between hero and villain is truly laughable and like something out of a parody using men in rubber suits to slug it out (think that scene in ‘Crank 2’ that just sort of came out of nowhere!).

Just don’t bother with this at all and pray that DC have upped their game to produce the output they do today.  You may hate ‘Dawn of Justice’ and ‘Suicide Squad’ but, compared to ‘Swamp Thing’ they are truly cinematic greats!

3/10 Jabba the Hutt wipes himself down with this film

Absolutely Anything – Pegg and the Pythons

It’s hard not to like ‘Absolutely Anything’ – Simon Pegg, best known for his role as ‘Shaun’ in ‘Shaun of the Dead, Spaced’ and almost every other film where he’s played a slight variation of his usual loveable slacker alter-ego – plays, well, her a variation of his usual loveable slacker alter-ego.  However, when he’s wandering around in London one day pining over his neighbour, Kate Beckinsale, he’s given the power to have anything and everything he wants by the cast of Monty Python (albeit computer-generated alien monstrous versions of themselves who live in a space ship and decide to test humanity in this way to see what happens – and whether to blow the entire planet up while they’re at it!).  All Pegg has to do is wave his hand and his innermost desires come to fruition.

He therefore fixes the entire world’s problems and everyone lives happily ever after. 


Okay, so that would make a pretty dull film.  Everything goes about as swimmingly as you’d expect given a man who talks to his dog unlimited superpowers.  You’ll notice I opened this review with the line ‘it’s hard not to LIKE Absolutely Anything.’ I didn’t use the word ‘LOVE.’ And the reason being that this is basically one of those films that you can have on in the background and do other things and not really miss that much.

It’s definitely not bad.  It’s just not a ‘classic’ comedy.  Yes, the appearance of the (remaining) Monty Python boys is always welcome.  Even their beautifully-weird alien incarnations are as madcap as their geriatric human selves.  And it’s great to see them all together on screen again.  In some ways... the film could just be about them and would be even better!

Pegg plays Pegg.  Kate Beckinsale plays ‘generic love interest #56’ and there’s an array of characters who you’ll sort of recognise from other things, but not really know where.  The only real stand-out character (besides the CGI pythons) is the dog.  The reason being because one of Pegg’s wishes is that his pet can talk.  And talk her does.  For he’s voiced by none other than the (sadly) late, great Robin Williams and, yes, he’s definitely on a par with the Pythons when it comes to enjoyable screen time.

If you’re looking for a fun little comedy to pass the time then this would fit the bill.  It’s a nice enough film which doesn’t really try to be anything too amazing and should appeal to pretty much everyone.  Once you know the premise then you’ll probably predict every last plot point that’s to come.  However, I certainly couldn’t bring myself to hate it and will definitely re-watch it again in a couple of years.

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

Ex Machina – It gets better

‘Ex Machina’ is one of those films where, upon watching the whole thing, I’m glad I stuck with it.  It tells the – slightly slow-moving – tale of a young computer programmer who works for a huge, multinational tech company and is then apparently picked at random by his reclusive billionaire boss and asked to join him in his mountain retreat for ‘special duties.’ Of course that slightly sounds like he’s got a case to sue for sexual harassment, but it’s not like that.  His Bill Gate-likes founder has only gone and created the first ever artificially intelligent robot/android/cyborg (call it what you will) and wants an independent source to witness this feat.

Luckily, for our hero – Caleb – this artificial life form isn’t the kind of muscle-bound cyborg who typically comes back in time to kill your mother.  Instead, she – or ‘Ava’ – is more designed around the ‘female form’ (well… most of her, anyway – there are still parts of her on show that are blatantly wires and circuit boards).  Anyway, this makes their interaction a little more ‘complicated’ – if that’s the right word to describe getting a crush on what is technically an iphone with eyes.  So, will our hero fall head over heels for her, or declare her simply just a toaster who looks good in a mini-dress?

The majority of the film is basically conversations between either Caleb and Ava or Caleb and his boss, Nathan (Oscar Isaac).  Now, there’s nothing wrong with a film based mainly around dialogue.  It does bring the characters and their motivations out and you really feel like you’re getting to know them.  However, I just found the first half of the movie a little slow.  I ‘got’ the characters pretty early and it was clear to see that there was more going on here than meets the eye.  Perhaps the film did too good a job in setting up the unsettling feeling as to what was going to come?  I was basically dying for something to happen – or someone to die – whatever.  But, like I said, when it all goes down it’s worth the wait.  The second half of the film changes from simply ‘unsettling’ to downright dark!
Despite the film having little action, it does maintain a real ’28 Days Later’ feel.  And probably for the reason that it was written by the same writer.  The lingering shots and music make it possible that it’s set somewhere in the same universe (assuming there’s still some of the world left after the ‘infected’ had their way with it!

Normally, like to mention one of the actors who stood out.  I feel that I should say that Oscar Isaac gave a great performance, but I’m not entirely sure he does.  One of my annoyances with the first half of the film came from him.  I just felt he was so fundamentally unlikeable.  Maybe that was supposed to be how he was, but when a character makes up basically one third of the cast and is so downright awful, it left it a bit hard to take.

Still, despite all my minor gripes, I did enjoy the film (as I say, mainly the second half where I felt it sped up a bit!) and so if you’re in the mood for something with no car chases or giant robots stomping through New York then give this one a go.  It’s got good performances and is more of a subtle thriller than Hollywood’s average crop.

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