Critters:

Review incoming....

 

Sleeping Beauty:

I finally watched Sleeping Beauty, a film which first seized my interests last year after I stumbled across the trailer on-line.

The fact that Emily Browning had a starring part in this film was a major seller for me, as I've always loved her previous roles. I don’t normally tend to seek out art films, even coherent ones, as they’re usually rather dull, but something about this one intrigued me, and I've always been a sucker for fairy tale references. Besides, I wasn’t about to pass up an opportunity to view a film whose trailer reminded me of The Story of O, not so much for the latter's dealings with sadomasochism, as that particular perversion is not covered within this movie, but due to the similarities in atmosphere, at least in the beginning. Browning's scenes at the estate put me in mind of O's experiences within the Château de Roissy. While the desires and practices of the men in both films are very different, the dehumanization of the girls involved is eerily similar.

The story revolves around Lucy, a young college girl struggling financially, who responds to an ad looking for beautiful young women to act as servers and eye candy at an estate which caters to rich, older men. Lucy, who is given the name “Sara” by her new employer, is required to pour wine and brandy, while wearing expensive and barely-concealing lingerie. The job eventually extends to include having Lucy consume a extremely strong sedative which places her into a deep, dreamless sleep, during which time she is placed in a room where one of the gentlemen clientele may do whatever he wishes to her senseless body, with the exception of penetration.

First let me say that this is a very pretty film, but it’s also a very English film. I wouldn’t go so far as to call it tedious, but it creeps right up to the edge of that line and tap dances around it while dining on crumpets and tea.

This movie feels like what you’d expect to see if Jane Austen had written a soft-core porno.

There is an abundance of nudity in it, and yet very rarely does the bare flesh come off as titillating. Even when the women are being draped in reveling lingerie, their actions are so benign that they might as well be wearing full Nun habits for all of the actual arousal it invokes. They are nothing more than inanimate objects to the rich and powerful men they serve. The few “sexual” situations are also tame for the most part, except for one in particular, which just comes off as grotesquely comical in comparison to the dignified tone set by the rest of the film.

 

Emily Browning is stunningly beautiful in her role, which should come as no surprise, and she carries off her performance with a serenity that is often at odds with the situations her character finds herself in. I can’t really praise her acting too much, not because it was lacking, but that the story itself felt incomplete. There is some mediocre attempt to show the audience a brief glimpse of her character’s life, but none of it is explained in any depth, and any dramatics we are tantalized with are quickly forgotten with no further explanation or conclusion.

Still, considering how little she was given in the way of character development, and the fact that she doesn’t say very much in the film, she still managed to captivate me. There’s a hint of something more there, and it’s perhaps one of the biggest teases the film has to offer. There is a scene in particular which I found profoundly moving, in which one of the gentlemen quotes a book to the proprietor of the establishment, while both are sitting on the edge of the very bed that an unconscious Lucy is laying on. The depth so subtly expressed in that one moment is exactly what I was craving from the rest of the film. 

I won’t go so far as to call the movie shallow, as there is at least some meaning behind it all, I just wasn’t always so clear as to what it was.

Underworld Awakening:

The recent holiday festivities have tampered down my free time a teensy bit, so forgive me for the site's lack of reviews.

I'd offer up some dramatic gesture of supplication, but I leave grand posturing to the cam whores. Instead, I have procured a nice, juicy bone for all you Underworld lovers out there.

Tada! New trailer:     

Also, it's been confirmed that Scott Speedman, the actor who played Micheal Corvin in the first two Underworld movies, will not be in the newest film. For which I am exceptionally grateful. His character was boring as shit and I usually tune out whenever he's on the screen.

My interest has been tickled by the Super-Lycan referenced to in the trailer, and since everyone's favorite Werewolf from the series Lost Girl, Kris Holden-Ried, has a part in this movie, I can only cross my fingers and pray to Fenrir that he's been cast in the role of mutant Hulk-wolf.

Although, let's face it, they could have cast that hunkalicious man as an inanimate object and I'd still be fighting back the urge to dry hump my computer screen.

Happy Halloween!

Bloody Mallory:

Review incoming....

The Thing Cast Watches the Prequel:

Every single ass-munching monkey-fucker responsible for this piece of shit "prequel" deserves to die in an abandoned ditch on the side of some long forgotten road from massive blood lost and severe internal trauma after being anally fisted for 48-hours straight by a herd of rabid pachyderms. 

Also, whoever made the following video rocks. If I wasn't already sterile then I'd gladly birth your babies.

The Woman:

Anyone who isn’t a complete novice when it comes to the horror/thriller genres will surely have their interests immediacy perked the second they hear of a film collaboration between Jack Ketchum’s literary genius, and Lucky Mckee’s directorial madness.

Throw in the ever lovely Angela Bettis and you have the setup for one hell of a ride.

What we get is The Woman, which is based off the third book in a series written by Ketchum, and sequel to a 2009 film, Offspring, also directed by Mckee.

Now, first let me say that it is not required for you to view Offspring before watching this movie, as a large chunk of the unanswered questions that will be littering your mind by the time this is over with have little to nothing to do with the feral woman in question, and will revolve more around the family that finds her, which isn’t covered in the first movie at all.

In fact, the actual woman, who is played by Pollyanna McIntosh, reprising her role as the cannibal female known only as the Woman, from Offspring, seems more like a side-plot, and one that hardly holds as much interest as the main family’s interactions and eccentricities. If anything, she’s as much a spectator as the audience, and while she only mumbles a handful of words during her incarceration, the expressions on her face accurately mirror what most of us watching the film are thinking, which is that something is seriously fucked up with this family.

I actually found several of the more brutal scenes with her downright hilarious simply because of the actress’s facial expressions, which pretty much just vary from crazy, snarling she-bitch to mildly annoyed or amused. There is one scene in particular, where the crazed patriarch of the family, played by an increasingly creepy Sean Bridgers, decides to sneak down and enjoy some happy-fun-rape-time with our wild woman and during the entire encounter, she just looks bored. Here we have the very people who are claiming to want to rehabilitate and civilize her, instead raping and torturing her, and she just seems like she’s constantly on the verge of rolling her eyes at the inanity of their antics.

These people may be deranged, but even at their worst, they still fail to impress our savage protagonist in the slightest.

Also, when I say that this is an extremely fucked up family, I mean it, although not in the same way that the family in Visitor Q was fucked up, as these people are portrayed far more subtly. Even from the start the mood for this all American, white suburban family is well set, as the creep factor sets in from the moment we’re first introduced to them, and only escalates as the film progresses, especially given the nonchalant nature in which they all seem to accept having a half-naked, and wounded, woman chained up in their cellar, but with so much potential hinted at, I would have loved to see more than just the first superficial layer the movie’s creators offered up.

Holy shit, it's Albert fuckin' Ingalls!

My main complaint about this movie is that it was entirely too short, and left me wondering just what in the hell was going on. By the end of it, I was convinced that maybe the version I’d watched had left out a good hour or more of plot points that maybe, I don’t know, at least hinted to an explanation in regard to the back-story of the main characters, as there’s a lot happening with them and their extremely bizarre lives that’s left unsaid.

Instead we are left with nothing but speculation and confusion as to what in the fuck just happened and the why behind it all.

Now, don't get me wrong, this was still a fun film, and I really enjoyed watching it. If I hadn't, then I wouldn't give a rat's unwashed ass about wanting to know more about it, because I'd just be happy that the whole Gods-awful experience was done and over with, instead of wishing it had been longer, and grittier. The movie isn’t ruined by it’s lack of information, but it would have benefited a great deal from a tiny bit more exploration, especially given some of the “surprises” the end delivers.

I kept waiting for this movie to really get it’s hands dirty. But instead of going over the edge, it just crept up to it, dangled a toe over the side, then ran back to safety because it was too afraid to push the limits. And no, not every film has to get down to A Serbian Film levels of depravity in order to make for a decent horror flick, but come on, give us something here. This film is tame at best, fun and violent, but still tame. I’m honestly shocked it received an R-rating, because it feels like I’m watching something that‘s been strongly censored and edited down. It feels rushed and incomplete, like watching an episode from the old HBO Masters of Horror series. It just needed more meat on it's bones to be truly satisfying.

Rape? Torture? No biggie, but somebody is going to die for putting her in that ugly-ass dress.

I will say that the ending didn’t piss me off, as I was able to put enough together through the vague tidbits that were offered to understand why the surviving characters behaved as they did, but even that would have made more of a powerful punch or overall connection if the movie had bothered to take just a little bit of time to delve deeper into the family’s dynamics. The “dog” scene in particular seemed more like a cruel joke on the audience, as by that point, most people watching would have probably been satisfied with the flimsy, shallow build-up towards the film’s climax, only to have that incoherent morsel thrown in last minute, and blow everything straight to hell and back with it’s complete lack of clarification.

As it stands, this movie, while fun, is nothing more than a semi-violent cocktease that will leave you either hating it for being too stingy with it’s content, or loving it, but craving more.

Do I recommend it? Yeah, because despite the incomplete, half-assed feel to it, this film is still superior to most of the shit they’re calling horror these days. Plus it makes for a pretty decent mindless popcorn flick so long as you're not too particular about the plot quality of your horror films.

And who knows? Maybe they’ll consider releasing a director’s cut, which I usually abhor, but at this point, I’ll take any scraps they’re willing to throw our way in regard to this film.