J*A*S*M

A bit yes, a bit no. Rabies is a pretty interesting take on the forest slasher genre, it looks like a serious version of Tucker & Dale vs Evil. Technically it’s excellent, the creators clearly knew what the resulting film should be like, but I’m still not thrilled or particularly satisfied. Some of the initial twists, which put the characters into an everyone against everyone situation, felt very forced. By this I mean that I didn’t believe that something like that could happen in a real world not written by screenwriters. This would not be a problem in a film where a group of teenagers are killed by a swamp monster, but it simply bothers me in a realistic thriller like this.

Wow! There really isn’t even a pinch of humour. Something like Cowboys and Aliens could never be good this way, even with the greatest genius behind the camera. To make with a serious face a film where a group of cowboys and Indians avert an invasion of aliens that have come to earth to mine gold (oops, spoiler) is mental. If it at least looked good, but no, not even that, it’s just two hours of grey and boredom. Not even the aliens are good!

It’s been long since two dead fat people were so funny… A perfect Nordic thriller, and, against expectations, it’s not serious or depressing, but a brisk and entertaining film that knows how to make you feel tension, surprise and fun. PS: Plus points for giving a certain animal species the end it deserved (#cantavoidphobia).

So I decided to go through the entire filmography of Ti West, who brought attention to himself with the excellent The House of the Devil. Trigger Man has a fairly good score on Rotten Tomatoes, an awful one in IMDB, and has attracted no interest in Filmbooster. It’s an interesting, but very ungratifying film. Even though I can appreciate the interesting execution of the second half, when we observe the entire situation through the eyes of one person (in real time, i.e. slow, there’s plenty of time to generate tension), I can’t appreciate the first half. The first unpleasant thing doesn’t happen until almost the fortieth minute, before that, there’s nothing! It’s just boring, and the argument that it’s intentional doesn’t change anything.

I’m shocked at how much I didn’t like it. I believed in Bousman, the trailers were good; after a long time, I could look forward to a great atmospheric demonic horror film, and on a Spanish setting on top of that, something I like a lot. But what I saw in the end made my jaw drop to the floor. I like Saw II, III, IV, Repo and Mother's Day, so I don’t know what Darren has done to surprise us with this dud. This film doesn’t work at all, like really, in any way. The actors are bad, the script is bad, the direction is bad, the music is awful, the scares made me laugh several times. It really pains me to say that 11-11-11 is the biggest horror epic fail of the year. If there’s anywhere where the phrase wrong on so many levels fits perfectly, that’s here. Mother’s Day and all the other Bousman’s films are Oscar contenders next to this one. One star for the last fifteen minutes, where you can screen capture a couple of atmospheric images. And I wanted to praise it so much! :-(

It’s been long since more than half of a film pissed me off, but after a couple of days I felt like watching it again. Apollo 18 is found-footage horror set on the moon, where the astronauts find a mysterious evil. The previous sentence hides the best and worst things of this film. The found-footage format tries to be properly convincing, and it goes so far that at times the image is very poor quality, grainy, intermittent; you can’t see anything. On the one hand, this pissed me off massively, but on the other, in connection with the lunar landscape and the interiors of the spaceship, it feels very authentic and original. The film has a very thick horror sci-fi atmosphere and it truly feels as if something bad happened to real astronauts on the moon. And then the mysterious evil… when it shows up the first time, something like “seriously?!” flashed through my head, but after a bit, the cringe horror monster becomes a pretty scary horror monster… that “thing” earned my respect (I’m intentionally not telling what it is). In the end, thumbs up, but to tell the truth, while I watched it I fancied giving it two stars, now I’m going for four. It grew on me.

The heist of the century, which, if we combined the teams of Ocean’s Eleven and Mission Impossible, would be enough for two films, shouldn’t last two minutes in a dystopian sci-fi satire. A naive far left film with which I cannot and I will not agree ideologically. Unfortunately, other than the idea, In Time doesn’t offer anything else (like breathtaking action, some tension, etc.), it’s just well made. But that core premise is great, it’s a pity that Niccol wasted it in such a dumb film. 60 %

Has Tom Six made a filthy meta horror film about how harmless perverts can become dangerous psychopaths after watching a filthy horror film? Probably not, because the last scene (i.e. the most cliché twist ever) allows for a completely opposite interpretation. I’d probably be one of the few who liked more the first and tighter part. It was more about the victims, I was able to relate to them and was mentally tramped by their sad fate. The second part, in contrast, moves only around the perverted protagonists and we don’t get to know anything about the victims. The first part is better as horror with a story, the second is more a probe into perverted thoughts, and I’m not saying that this is bad, it’s just that personally it doesn’t suit me. Martin (the protagonist) is portrayed very convincingly repulsive, which is one of the things that both parts have in common – Tom Six has a good nose for proper perverts. The rest of the actors, on the other hand, aren’t that good, and the film is not particularly well made, either, though the way it relies on brutality and nastiness it’s effective. So, four stars, but not as certain as the first part. PS: If the third part is to be even more meta, maybe some outraged film critic will sew together director Tom Six, Dieter Laser (Dr. Helter from the first part) and Laurence R. Harvey (Martin from the second part). I will give it five stars if it’s shot even worse :-D Edit: I’m reducing the rating to 3 stars, the memories of the film fizzled out surprisingly quickly.

I have one problem with the Paranormal Activity franchise: the obsession of all the members of that family (across generations) to constantly film themselves feels very artificial. In order to make it easier for viewers to get their bearings between scary scenes, the characters film themselves in situations where no real person would do it. The best way to solve that would be to abandon the format of 100% documentary footage, i.e. that most of the film would still consist of night footage from cameras, but the parts that move the plot forward would be like a normal film (as in the recent found-footage Undocumented). But if you are willing to accept the rules of the game, you are in for a good time. Paranormal Activity 3 is the scariest entry in the series. The jump-scares are perfect (and there are lots of them), it holds the tension throughout (and at times it gets very tense), and the last five minutes gave me for the first time in the three parts the sensation that some big fucking evil is lurking in that house. The actors are very good, they feel authentic. The behaviour of the characters is very arguable at times, I admit that, but that’s common in the para-documentary format. Another point, the mythology. This prequel added so many interesting elements to it that I want another sequel ASAP. Everything makes sense so far, there aren’t any contradictions, and it leaves room for the sequels to reveal more. It’s very clear that the concept of this franchise will not appeal to everyone. For some people, the slow burn terror will be boring, others will not like the format, while others will get lost in the mythology. The bullshit of those who, already from the trailer speak about “the same shite as before”, only to watch the first CAMrip available and then slap each other on the back with the other retards at how right they were, is really off the mark. The evergreen of stupid Americans and their millions incomprehensibly wasted at the box office is beginning to happen here (The Three Musketeers 3D are leading this weekend and it’s not much better, is it?). On the other hand, the moment emotions and prejudices become part of the hate for any franchise, that’s when any rational discussion ends; that’s a well known and natural fact, and it doesn’t surprise me anymore, I got used to it with Saw. And there’s something else I want to say, but I can’t do it without spoilers, so watch out... Spoiler: About the scenes in the trailer that are not in the film: while waiting for PA3 (and even before the trailers), it was clear that the plot would revolve around Kristie and Katie remembering the events that took place in the previous episodes, when they were little. They remember how they held seances, that weird people came to the house, that Kristie was always terrified, that the house burned down. All that is touted in the trailers, but NOTHING of it is in the film. And here’s the surprise (the twist), the third part is showing something that the sisters are actually not remembering! The climax opens a lot of possibilities: the girls and the mother (who may not be dead) won’t remember anything after the ritual (like Kristie at the end of the second part) and things will go on as if nothing had happened; the scary events reminisced by the adult sisters (including the fire) are maybe yet to come. This is my interpretation, but I think that, in light of the “evidence”, it’s quite a legitimate one. If that’s the case, all that bitching at the creators (those assholes promised something they didn't deliver!!!) is actually the opposite reaction that would be appropriate. It was a very smart surprise :) End of spoilers.

Reason enough to declare war on Japan.