Search

Search only in certain items:

Happy Death Day (2017)
Happy Death Day (2017)
2017 | Horror, Mystery, Thriller
Plenty of humour (1 more)
Jessica Rothe is great
Not much for fans of traditional horror (0 more)
Enjoable Groundhog Day/Scream Mashup
It's not that scary, and there's no real blood or gore for die hard horror fans to enjoy, but Happy Death Day - the latest offering from Blumhouse Productions - still manages to deliver a wildly entertaining mashup of Groundhog Day and Scream.

College girl Tree Gelbman wakes up in the dorm of a boy she doesn't remember spending the night with. She has a pounding headache and can't wait to get out of there as quickly as possible. Sneering at the goth on her way out, avoiding the clipboard wielding tree hugger and blanking the less popular girl that smiles at her as she returns to her sorority house. Back in her room, her room mate has a birthday cupcake for Tree in honour of her special day, which she dumps in the bin on her way out to the class she's late for. Later on, we discover that she's sleeping with one of her college teachers, whose wife nearly catches them together. There certainly do seem to be a lot of people who have every right to be pissed at Tree. And, later that evening on her way to a party, Tree is approached by someone wearing a black hoodie and a baby mask. As the mysterious figure murders her, she wakes up, back in the boys dorm from that morning, and she finds herself having to endure her birth/death day once more.

Tree is understandably confused, as the days events begin to play out exactly as they did before, right up until the point where she's murdered again by the mask wearing killer. From there she goes through stages of anger, despair and acceptance, eventually coming to the conclusion that no matter what she does or where she hides, the Baby Faced killer is always going to find her and kill her, triggering the reset button on the day in the process. It's up to her to try and whittle down that big list of suspects, and take out the killer before they get chance to kill her. The only trouble is, each time that Tree dies the injuries she sustained leave a negative impact on her body, so she only has a limited number of days to find the killer and break the loop before she is gone forever.

So much of this movie rests on Jessica Rothe as Tree, and she just nails it, successfully moving Tree from victim to full-on bad-ass and becoming more and more likeable as she sets about changing her ways in order to get close to those potential suspects. There's a lot of humour throughout, and a pretty decent twist towards the end, just to keep you on your toes. Overall I really liked this. There's even a nice, last minute mention of Groundhog Day, the classic movie that this owes so much to.
  
Doctor Sleep (2019)
Doctor Sleep (2019)
2019 | Horror
Impressive Casting (2 more)
Excellent Ending
Beautifully Shot
Ridiculous Running Time (1 more)
Low On Scares
Doctor Sleep: The Long Haul
Contains spoilers, click to show
Watch enough horror movies, and you develop a certain tolerance: that said, I don't think you'd have to watch many to see this film and still not be scared. There are a couple of grisly moments, and Flanagan does an excellent job of building tension, but I had the feeling coming out of this film that I hadn't just seen a horror film at all. And I think that might have been the point: this was more about the story than the scares.

The story, overall, was well-adapted. About two-thirds of the way in the film really starts to veer off the path the book had laid out, but what it does with that last third is probably the best part of the movie. Spoilers follow: the end of Kubrick's "The Shining" left the Overlook Hotel intact (if a little sad) rather than burning it down as in the novel. Mike Flanagan does two things with this film, both adapting the novel and following on from Kubrick's film, and the Overlook features heavily in this ending and wraps up the Shining story quite nicely. In fact it seems the main purpose of the ending was to do justice to Stephen King's original vision, and in honesty it's a better ending than that of the novel.

Where "The Shining" largely ignored character's motivations and development and treated them essentially as set-pieces, "Doctor Sleep" spends far too long bringing them together. The characters are expertly cast, and Ewan McGregor almost takes a back-seat to let Kyleigh Curran's Abra shine (pun intended). Interactions are played off nicely and there's a self-referential cameo from Flanagan's other King adaptation that doesn't feel too shoe-horned in. The characters that are obviously just there to die die rather obviously, and one in particular serves purely as motivation for another to keep on fightin'. The acting itself excels, with a star turn by Rebecca Ferguson. The issue is that it simply could have been half an hour shorter, with half an hour less build-up. By the end of the movie I was just glad we had finally returned to the Overlook and things were starting to really happen.

The film is shot beautifully, and where scenes or characters from "The Shining" are re-created or referenced it's done with a great amount of care. I might have been the only one that found Rose flying above the clouds a little naff, but I still have to admit it was at least shot nicely. Overall, this was a brilliant film that could just have benefitted from a little trimming down, but Flanagan clearly cared about these characters and wanted us to feel for them and I think he certainly achieved that - and I have to stress again how ridiculously impressed I was with the ending.
  
Evil Dead (2013)
Evil Dead (2013)
2013 | Horror, Mystery
One of the greatest horror movies of all time would have to be “The Evil Dead” which had been spawned by Sam Raimi and his original short film “Within the Woods”. “Within the Woods” was filmed with the intent of gaining investors to collaborate on a full length film starring the then unknown God of “B” horror movies Bruce Campbell. “The Evil Dead” and its predecessor “Within the Woods” was meant to be serious and horrifying, though that proved to be hard with a smaller budget that Raimi and Campbell had originally hoped for. Little did they know that Evil Dead would become one of the largest trilogies in cult film histories.

Based on Raimi’s original 1981 script, five young adult friends set out on a short vacation in a remote cabin in the woods. Whilst reading from a book that was obviously supposed to stay hidden, one of them ends up summoning dormant demons that end up causing havoc among the group. Killing them off one by one. Though the aura of the film is somewhat similar to the original, we all know that with remakes there are always some differences. In the original the five friends go to a cabin for a care free fun filled weekend the remake centers around one friend trying to kick her drug habits “cold turkey” with the help of her three friends and older brother.

The cinematography of the film is one hundred times better (remember in the original; Bruce running from the “deadite” and you could see the lights in the rafters of the studio “that does not happen in this film”). The remake pays homage to the original in certain respects and can be spotted throughout the film if you are a true “Evil Dead” fanatic. Unlike the original movie that had been filmed in Tennessee the remake was filmed in its entirety in New Zealand. The recreation of the cabin is almost uncanny with a couple of differences here and there. As expected the special FX are much better with a bigger budget and the advancement of technology. Like the original the actors are not well known and only have done a couple other projects. The cast was well selected and the acting was much better.

If you are a true fan of the original film you may like or dislike it. I myself found it to be entertaining however it doesn’t come close to the original film. If you’ve never seen the original you may like this movie based on its own merits. I must add if you’ve never seen the original film shame on you. To all Evil dead and/or Bruce Campbell fans I can not disclose to you if Bruce makes a cameo but I will say this stay till the end of the credits and you may feel pretty groovy.
  
40x40

Rob Zombie recommended Dracula (1958) in Movies (curated)

 
Dracula (1958)
Dracula (1958)
1958 | Horror
7.8 (6 Ratings)
Movie Favorite

"""I could go on forever with the list, so I just picked five random ones, because I go through periods where I watch certain movies a lot. I don’t know why — I’ll get on a kick. I’ve been on a kick lately of watching Dracula, the 1931 version with Bela Lugosi, over and over and over and over. You know? I love everything from the ’30s. The 1930s is my absolute favorite time period for horror movies, because they were just so demented and sick. Sometimes you watch them and go, “Wow, they get away with a lot.” Then, of course, the codes came in and it ruined the party. When you watch movies from the 1940s, they seem so tame and so dry, but everything from the ’30s is just amazing. Lugosi in that film is so iconic, he doesn’t even seem like an actor giving a performance. Some of these people transcend to something else. It’s like Marilyn Monroe or something. They became something else. Sometimes people will make fun of his performance because of his accent, but he’s so… It’s so funny. I love watching him, because his performances are so unique. Sometimes there’s other people in the film — like David Manners, who’s like the lead, good-looking guy, and he’s so wooden and so 1930s-stiff acting, and Lugosi seems like Brando. You can see he’s so in it that when they yelled, “Cut!,” he didn’t cut. You can just see it. He’s so committed that his performance is funny, because it’s on such another level from anyone else in the film. Everybody in those movies back then, you watch them and it’s just — it’s that feeling like, “Eh, you know, even though they’re supposed to be boyfriend/girlfriend, husband/wife, they don’t [seem] like they’re having sex or something.” Lugosi seems like he wants to f— everything in the movie constantly. He just has that vibe. Really weird, man. You know? He does, essentially, I guess. Yeah, he does. He’s just not tame. I don’t know, maybe because he was Hungarian or whatever, he just has a different way of approaching, but he does not have that “uptight American actor from the ’30s” vibe at all. He just steals every moment. Not just him; Dwight Frye as Renfield is amazing. It’s funny — actors seem like they don’t want to do these types of movies, but as soon as you play a villain in something that’s like a horror movie, that’s what you’re going to be remembered for. Even if Anthony Hopkins won an Oscar for whatever — Remains of the Day or Howard’s End or I can’t even remember what it was — he’s Hannibal Lecter. Doesn’t matter if Jack Nicholson won an Oscar for Cuckoo’s Nest or whatever; he’s Jack Torrance. It’s so funny, these roles are just so — they stick."""

Source
  
From Dusk Till Dawn 3: The Hangman's Daughter (2000)
From Dusk Till Dawn 3: The Hangman's Daughter (2000)
2000 | Action, Horror
5
5.0 (3 Ratings)
Movie Rating
Thoughts on From Dusk till Dawn 3: The Hangman’s Daughter

 

Characters – Johnny Madrid is one of the most feared outlaws in the west, about to be executed, he is rescued and returns to his gang to continue his life of crime, he will kill some people, while protecting others, making him a morally confusing figure. Ambrose Bierce has come from America where he has survived a shooting, he wants peaceful life only to find himself in the middle of the battle. The Hangman is trying to eliminate the threats in the gang world including Johnny, mostly to protect his daughter, only it isn’t for him to choose. Esmeralda is his daughter that has been getting controlled for too long and is in love with Johnny, she goes on the run with him only to be left questioning his choices.

Performances – The performances here are poor once again, Marco Leonardi overplays is role in the film, while Michael Parks does the best he can with his role. We do end up meeting too many random characters that just seems to make everything struggle to get going in the performance side of the film.

Story – The story does return to the original format only in the western era, we have the outlaws, the victims and the authorities all ending up in the bar which is crawling with vampires and must put their difference aside to survive. This style did work first time, it doesn’t fail this time, but it is hard to become invested in the characters. the build up before the bar is a lot of filler because we do have a lot of people to learn their place and mentality which makes it hard to figure out who is the good and bad guys for the piece. We try to have a connection to the original movie with the creation of one of the vampires which better than the last time out too.

Horror/Western – The horror involved in the film is returning to the vampire outlet which again doesn’t feel scary as it could have been. The western side of the film just uses the criminal side of the last one only making it a prequel to the original.

Settings – The film is set in the western area, we do eventually hit the saloon made famous from the first film and this time we get to dive into the larger scale of the building.

Special Effects – The effects in the film are not at the best, we do get a couple of good moments only nothing that reaches the levels of the first film.


Scene of the Movie – Escape.

That Moment That Annoyed Me – To many characters.

Final Thoughts – This is a solid enough prequel, at least it does feel connected to the previous film which helps build on the legacy of the bar.

 

Overall: Simple prequel.
  
The First Purge (2018)
The First Purge (2018)
2018 | Action, Horror, Sci-Fi
Yet another wasted opportunity
Yes! Get in! Finally, the producers over at Platinum Dunes and Blumhouse realised that what fans of the Purge series were wanting was a look at how the night of legalised crime came to be. It’s all we’ve been asking for since 2013 after all.

After three films of decent quality in which the second, Purge: Anarchy is the highlight, The First Purge promises to shake up the formula by introducing a prequel into the horror franchise. But does it do enough to stop the series from feeling stale or are we looking at yet another paint-by-numbers horror flick?

No. That’s the short answer anyway. Director Gerard McMurray falls into all the usual horror movie clichés with a film that is definitely Purge-like in its construction, but once again plays it all frustratingly safe.

To push the crime rate below one percent for the rest of the year, the New Founding Fathers of America test a sociological theory that vents aggression for one night in one isolated New York community. But when the violence of oppressors meets the rage of the others, the contagion will explode from the trial-city borders and spread across the nation.

The cast of characters in this instalment is possibly the most unlikeable of the bunch, apart from a few exceptions. Marisa Tomei is hideously underused as the experiment’s creator, Dr. May Updale, when in fact she should and could be the most interesting part of the movie. The rest of the cast are one-dimensional characters that you could cut and paste into any horror film of the last decade. Y’Ian Noel as Dmitri is probably the only one who leaves any lasting impression.

Subtlety has never been the series’ strong point. One of the leaders of the New Founding Fathers is called Donald T for heaven’s sake, but that was always part of its dark charm. It has never been afraid to show us an America that, for now at least, doesn’t feel that too far into the future but the political side-swiping in this instalment bashes us over the head with what feels like a brick. It’s so on the nose.

The premise has always been the best part, and the Achilles heel, of the series and so it continues with The First Purge. Fans waiting to get a really intricate look at how the night of crime came to be will be disappointed as we’re treated to barely 10 minutes of exposition before we’re slung head-first into the same killing-fest that the last three films descended into after their first acts.

This gets old quickly, even more so in this instalment as the repetitive jump scares come thick and fast with uninspiring camerawork, dreadful dialogue and lethargic kills. The use of contact lenses to create some striking neon visuals aren’t enough to lift anything in the film above average.

Thankfully, the final act in a dimly lit tower block shows the audience the type of film it could have been. Slickly shot and nicely styled, it’s a much-improved finale that is only let down by some truly dreadful CGI blood splatter. However, the use of strobe lighting is an inspired choice in this sequence as we follow two groups of people each trying to dispatch the other.

Unfortunately, this highlight isn’t enough to lift the rest of The First Purge above the mundane. Where the first in the series was a film testing the waters regarding its premise and the second improved on that ten-fold taking the action out onto the streets, this tries to use a hybrid of both but it comes across as stale as a ten day old loaf.

The pacing too is an issue. The first 20 minutes or so are excruciatingly slow as the film tries to set-up as many of its plot-points as possible. Now, 20 minutes might not sound too bad, but this is a 97 minute film – that’s a fifth of the time gone with nothing achieved.

If we must get a fifth film, and from the box-office figures, it bafflingly looks like we will, all we can do is hope they take the cheap jump scares and replace them with a thrilling look at the people who brought the purge to life in the first place. Until then, save your money and wait for the network premiere when it comes to television in a couple of years.

When the best part of your film is the purge announcement that has featured in every instalment, you know you’ve run into some trouble.

https://moviemetropolis.net/2018/07/12/the-first-purge-review-yet-another-wasted-opportunity/
  
Aftershock (2013)
Aftershock (2013)
2013 | Horror, Mystery
7
7.0 (1 Ratings)
Movie Rating
Story: Aftershock starts as Gringo (Roth), Ariel (Levy) and Pollo (Martinez) travelling around Chile, they party over all night where they meet three girls Monica (Osvart), Irina (Yarovenko) and Kylie (Izzo). Going for one last party the six new friends find themselves in the middle of an earthquake, one seriously injured and an impending tsunami heading towards them.

The friends must race against time in a country none of them call home to make it out alive but the natural disaster isn’t the only threat when the prison is damaged leading to the prisoners being released upon the streets.

Aftershock gives us something very different because we get a disaster movie which comes off realistic and sudden which is a big plus but it doesn’t stop there by giving us a survival horror when the group have to survive from prisoners. It would be fair to say there is a negative with the building up to the disaster but this does help give us small character development. When we deal with the aftershock of the earthquake we have to deal with non-stop action throughout. This was a real surprise because I thought there would have been more hype about the film.

 

Actor Review

 

Eli Roth: Gringo is the single father on the trip, he is friends with Ariel which shows that he isn’t the closet with Pollo. He is using this holiday as a chance to get over the recently divorce but when the quake hits he finds himself having to pull Pollo out of his daze. Eli does well but it becomes clear he really should be behind the camera.

Andrea Osvart: Monica is the stricter older sister to Kylie who tries her best to keep her sister safe on their adventure but she has a secret from the rest which is very important for the aftershock side of the story. Andrea is good in this leading role being the sensible one during the situation.monica

Nicolas Martinez: Pollo is the Spanish talking member of the group, he has gotten by because the money his family has. He finds himself having to step up after the quake to do the things normal men wouldn’t. his final moments are slightly stupid but otherwise a good character. Nicolas is good in this role as the man who needs to step up.

Natasha Yarovenko: Irina is one of the girls who is very similar to Gringo being a single parent and also a success. She starts off thinking she is more but soon becomes the strongest one during the situation. Natasha is good in this role and the sympathy between her and Gringo’s character comes through strong.

Lorenza Izzo: Kylie is the younger party animal of the two sisters, she just wants to have fun on her trip but with her old sister trying to protect her she finds herself being held back until the quake hits and she wants her sister to help her. Lorenza is good in this bratty like character which put her on the map for a future horror scream queen.

Support Cast: Aftershock has the basic supporting cast that all help with the survival side of the story.

Director Review: Nicolas Lopez – Nicolas gives us a film that keeps pulling us in once the earthquake hits.

 

Action: Aftershock use the action for the destruction side of the story which helps us with mother nature side of the story.

Horror: Aftershock comes from the human side of the story as we see just how twisted they can become in a situation our characters find themselves in.

Thriller: Aftershock keeps us on edge from start to finish.

Settings: Aftershock uses Chile for the settings which works for a different location and shows our characters lost during a disaster.
Special Effects: Aftershock has good effects to create what happens to the characters in the disaster.

Suggestion: Aftershock is one to watch especially is you like disaster movies. (Watch)

 

Best Part: Earthquake.

Worst Part: Slightly too much before the quake.

 

Believability: No

Chances of Tears: No

Chances of Sequel: No

Post Credits Scene: No

 

Oscar Chances: No

Budget: $2 Million

Runtime: 1 Hour 29 Minutes

Tagline: The only thing more terrifying than Mother Nature is human nature.

 

Overall: Surprisingly intense film that blends two great genres.

https://moviesreview101.com/2016/08/19/movie-reviews-101-midnight-horror-aftershock-2012/
  
Wounds (2019)
Wounds (2019)
2019 | Drama, Horror, Mystery
Armie Hammer and Zazie Beetz on-screen chemistry. (0 more)
The main base for the story isn't very consistent. (0 more)
Will's life isn't that complicated, he does his shifts at the bar, comes home to his girlfriend Carrie and in between he flirts with one of the regulars, Alicia.

Life in the bar is pretty predictable, everyone drinks too much and there's the occasional fight. On this particular evening things get even stranger. When Eric and his friends arrive already drunk Will leaves them be, he's more intrigued by the group of college kids who arrive looking quite out of place. Everything is turned upside down when Eric and his friends start fighting and bring the night to a quick end.

Clearing up the debris Will finds a phone belonging to one of the kids, he takes it home intending to put it in lost property the next day but before that happens he discovers some shocking images that lead him and Carrie down a terrifying rabbit hole.

Wounds has a nice idea behind it but once I came out of the film and started thinking about it I began realising that somehow it's all just a little vague. One of the things I like about films with sci-fi and supernatural leanings is finding out about where the "things" have come from, in Wounds they give you a hint about it but nothing solid to go on. Will and Carrie are only given the vaguest of clues about what is happening and it's surprisingly frustrating. It felt very much like we'd been handed film two in a series and somewhere along the line we'd be handed the first film as a prequel and watch it end as they drop the phone in the bar.

We're also probably subjected to a little too much drama. The beginning takes a while to get to the horror aspect of things. By the time it came out I was genuinely surprised. I'd assumed the horror tag was added at a stretch as it was coming across as a thriller more than everything else. Certainly the drama portion seemed to be unnecessary to most of what was going on by the end of the film.

Armie Hammer plays Will in the main role of the movie. Will's journey goes through a lot of stages, potentially too many. It does at least work in a sensible progression rather than jumping around. Hammer is convincing in all stages even if they do seem a little far fetched but I would personally have axed some of it.

Here's what I would have done... Zazie Beetz was great and I love her in everything I've seen, in my opinion she was underused in this film. I'd have given her the role of Carrie and expanded it slightly while cutting Alicia and her boyfriend out completely. Beetz's performance was great but there wasn't really anything to get her teeth into when it came to the horror side of everything. She had great chemistry with Hammer onscreen which I didn't get from his performances with Johnson. Johnson's performance in general felt underwhelming, Carrie wasn't going to be a likeable character but she could have been so much more.

Sound plays a very big part in the film. As I mentioned at the beginning creepy crawlies play a big part in Wounds, and even when they're not there you know they're there. It's incredibly well done because more than once I found myself getting twitchy that I could hear them in the background of scenes. The other noticeable sound related issue was around the phone, at one point Will answers the mobile and we're subjected to a loud piercing tone that cuts right through you. Again, fantastic use of sound, but in this instance while it makes you feel the unease of Will as it happens it is also painfully loud for anyone who is even slightly sensitive to things like that.

The film uses effects to create the swarms of bugs... although saying that, if they didn't then it's a very impressive bunch of cockroach wranglers they have on staff. The effects themselves aren't fantastic but when they happen it's so fast that it kind of works in the moment.

It might not be the best horror film but it certainly wasn't a bad watch. It comes out on Netflix tomorrow, I won't be seeing it again right away but it's definitely going onto the Watchlist for the future.

Originally posted on: http://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/10/wounds-movie-review.html
  
If I Stay (2014)
If I Stay (2014)
2014 | Drama
The film's "live or die" premise is dumb, dangerous, and downright offensive. (4 more)
A totally lousy and illogical love story that lacks any heart.
The dialogue is almost as bad as Adam's 8-year-old-grade-level music lyrics.
It's far too frustrating and bland to be emotionally effective. The only pity I felt was for myself for having to sit through it for two hours.
If I Stay is unforgivable and reprehensible garbage. It should be avoided like the plague.
Had I not seen this film with a friend, it would have been the first movie I’ve ever walked out of. I haven’t hated a movie this much all year. If I Stay disappoints and offends on nearly every conceivable level.
Imagine yourself in a situation where your whole life is turned upside-down in an instant, and nothing will ever be the same again. That’s the troubling position young Mia Hall is faced with in If I Stay, after her and her family are involved in a terrible car accident. Mia wakes up from the crash, only to discover that she’s having some sort of transcendental experience, where she sees her own lifeless body being treated by paramedics. In her ghost-like form, no one is able to see or hear her, leaving her helpless as she watches her tragedy unfold. The devastating crash put her into a comatose state, and as she teeters on the verge of life and death, she’s informed by her nurse that whether or not she lives is entirely predicated on her will to survive. Based on the young adult novel by Gayle Forman, If I Stay asks us if life is still worth living even when all hope appears to be lost. Whether it’s really even worth it to endure life’s cruel hardship and heartache, and to muster the courage to face another day.

Well, if you answered that question with a resounding “yes!”, then like me, you’ll probably find this movie to be pretty darn stupid. Actually, regardless of your opinion on the matter, I think it would be hard for anyone to escape the fact that this movie is pretty darn stupid. However, as much as I find the central question of the movie to be absurd and even offensive, it didn’t detract from my interest in seeing the film. So let’s not make the assumption that I disliked this movie from the get-go, because that’s really just not true. Even though I may disagree with it, I can certainly sympathize with the idea of a teenager who is experiencing a life-shattering trauma and is afraid to continue living on afterward. However, I would personally argue that she hasn’t actually experienced any of that at all. She’s living in an extra dimensional safe-zone. Her horror can’t be real unless she makes it real by returning to life to face it. To look at it another way, couldn’t we say that if she chose death instead, that she never would have experienced the tragedy at all since she was stuck in a coma, and that she would be dead without ever knowing the fate of her family? That’s what I think, though I’ll admit it’s rather complicated as it draws upon unanswerable questions. To be frank, it’s a bogus scenario for a bogus movie that isn’t even worthy of that much thought, and clearly wasn’t ever given that much thought.

Before I digress on this topic, I’d like to look into a few of its implications, because I think it’s sending a terrible and dangerous message to its viewers, particularly the teenagers it’s targeted to. Basically, I believe the film is implying that death is a perfectly okay alternative to facing an undesirable change. I find that very idea to be immoral, irresponsible, and horribly atrocious. “Sorry your dad died, Timmy. If you can’t bear to live another day and want to end it all right here, well that’s okay with us. We understand and we won’t judge!” Are you kidding me? What kind of a message are they trying to send here? “Bad day? Just give up! Things are great here in Heaven! Join us today!” Is that really what they’re trying to tell us? How is anyone possibly okay with this? The film is essentially preaching that killing yourself is a perfectly acceptable option when life gets hard, and I have a really big problem with that. Whether we want to think about it or not, suicide is always an option we have in life, but that doesn’t mean that we should encourage it or try to pretend that it’s ever a favorable opportunity. Mia doesn’t even know what life will be like if she wakes up because she hasn’t lived it yet. Her fears are fully based off of negative assumptions. Yeah, maybe things will be really hard if she comes out of her coma. Maybe she’ll wish she was dead. Or maybe she’ll go through some difficult times, but then maybe things will get better and she’ll pick up the pieces and end up living a wonderful and happy life. Had she actually endured this new life and struggled with thoughts about suicide, I think it would have made for a far more compelling narrative, rather than all of this hypothetic nonsense. Either way, good or bad, life goes on. It’s up to us to adapt to it. Where there is hope, there is always possibility. With all that said, I would still contend that If I Stay’s premise is only the tip of the iceberg of its problems. This supposed tear-jerked failed to stir up any sympathy or sadness from me, and there are a few major reasons why.

First of all, it completely fails as a love story. The film is almost entirely devoid of romance, and has no believable connection between Mia and her boyfriend, Adam. Rather than being a Prince Charming type, Adam’s mostly just a jerk that she shouldn’t be wasting her time with in the first place. Yet the movie tries to make you believe that it’s love, and that this is what all normal relationships are like. It’s a complete crock. Movies like this give girls a false understanding of what love should be, and I find that to be an unforgivable offense. Adam’s the local hot shot rocker who falls for Mia, the talented young cello player who aspires to go to the renowned music school Julliard in New York. Adam manages to win her heart and the two of them start dating. Unfortunately though, their relationship can be pretty unpleasant to watch. Adam’s living the life of a local rock star and is blindly dragging Mia along for the ride, introducing the sweet, young girl to a world of parties, sex, and alcohol. Adam’s utterly oblivious to her disinterest in such a lifestyle and he rarely shows any concern for her feelings anyway. Yet she’s so foolishly committed to him that she follows this path of corruption, all for a guy who only thinks about himself. I thought this was supposed to be a love story, but it’s severely lacking in the love department. Just because Adam occasionally does something nice, we’re supposed to think he’s a good guy and forgive him for the majority of the time when he’s a lousy boyfriend and a loser? Of course, how romantic! Their whole relationship is lifeless and immensely frustrating. If living with him was my alternative to death, believe me, I’d choose death without hesitation.

Had I not seen this film with a friend, it would have been the first movie I’ve ever walked out of. I haven’t hated a movie this much all year. Even with my friend there, I still thought about leaving, then had a good laugh about the film’s title being so perfectly appropriate, as I contemplated to myself whether or not I should go. As much as I wanted to leave, I stuck it out all the way to the end. Then the entire audience ended up laughing at the ending, which goes to show I was far from the only one that thought this movie was a complete joke and waste of time. I had more than a few laughs at the film’s expense, from its dumb and derivative dialogue, to the way Chloe Grace Moretz slightly crosses her eyes whenever she’s upset. While I think I still remained open-minded about the film despite my issues with the story, I really don’t think the film itself was any good, nor does it appear to serve any purpose. Seriously, what’s the point of this movie? To give people hope that you can overcome obstacles in life? To justify suicide? I don’t know. Halfway through the movie, I was so disengaged from it that I was imagining how fun it would be to do cartwheels in the theater. That must be the lesson that I learned from all this. Well, that and to steer clear of crummy musicians, I suppose. While I’ve heard a lot of praise about the film’s soundtrack, I thought Adam’s band was quite horrendous. They do have a moment of redemption when they cover a Smashing Pumpkins song, which may have been the only good moment in this otherwise pitiful movie. I also found the lyrics of that song to be unusually appropriate to my misery when they said, “I’ll rip my eyes out, before I get out.” It’s almost funny that this might have been the only moment of the movie I could actually relate to: the thought of ripping my eyes out before being able to leave.


If I Stay is a movie that disappoints and offends on nearly every conceivable level. The saddest thing about this film is that garbage like this actually exists. Its pro-death agenda is just plain horrible and ill-conceived. It also troubles me greatly to think that teenage girls might watch this film and think that Mia and Adam’s tumultuous relationship is a desirable model of love. Lastly, I’d like to note that the If I Stay novel does have a follow-up book titled Where She Went. Wherever she goes, I sure hope it’s not back to theaters. If I have to sit through another If I Stay movie, I might just give up on life myself.

(This review was originally posted at 5mmg.com on 9.5.14.)
  
Jaws (1975)
Jaws (1975)
1975 | Thriller
The movie which heralded the summer blockbuster has never looked so good. At 44, this is a well but gently paced slow-burn thriller, with a mix of easy on eye thrills and gritty human discourse. Robert Shaw may well have made this his film, but he was far from alone. Almost all the lead cast were more than worthy, and it was Spielberg’s young direction along with John William’s iconic score which propelled this from just another thriller into a timeless tale.

Though in many ways it looks dated, it doesn’t feel it. It has a very general sense of a seaside resort, without the gratuitous Baywatch glamour, nor the dinge of the horror genre. The people and locations feel very real and even though the shark itself is a bit of a let down, it is not a total loss and has taken nothing away from the film.

But for my money, the defining moment is the ‘Indianapolis’ anecdote as told be Shaw. The entire scene is played and shot so well and its placement within the film is perfect. This was a real story about an almost fantastical threat, but like he would go onto do later with Jurassic Park, taking you out of every day life without taking you into space is what Spielberg does best.

This is a must see and always will be. This is one of the best films of the 70’s and beyond…