THALE

Thale (15) / Director: Aleksander Nordaas / Screenplay: Aleksander Nordaas / Starring: Silje Reinåmo, Erlend Nervold

In a cellar, dark and deep, I lay my dearest down to sleep; A secret they would like to keep

Norwegian Horror seems to be going through a renaissance period at the moment, which is a sentence I never thought I would type! Over the last few years, we’ve had “Dead Snow”, the “Cold Prey” films, and (of course) “Troll Hunter”. And not a stinker amongst them! Now another scary flick has emerged from snowy climes of Norway, fresh from the Toronto Film Festival, and has just been released on UK DVD. Directed by Alexander Nordaas on an extremely limited budget (as well as writing, producing, and editing … and shooting in his father’s basement!), it delves into the folklore of the country and melds it with a modern setting, which was something that “Troll Hunter” did very well.

Leo (Jon Sigve Skard) is the cool and taciturn boss of a crime scene clean-up company (called “No-Shit” apparently). He currently employs his friend Elvis (Erlend Nervold) as his working partner. Elvis is a bit of a dumb-ass and continually throws up at crime scenes, but he needs the job for the money for his estranged daughter. Called to a cabin in the woods (Seriously … never buy a cabin in the woods … doesn’t matter what country you’re in, no good will come of it!) to clear away the aftermath of an elderly man’s death (of which we never learn the reason for), they discover several hidden rooms. In one such room they stumble across a wide-eyed young woman, who is seemingly mute and possibly the victim of sustained torture. Due to scattered tapes and books, they find out she is called “Thale” (pronounced “Tul-lah”).Beautiful as she is, there’s something a little “off” about her, and as they settle in to await the return of the police, they realise that they are not alone in the woods …

Just before we get into the film itself, a question. Why are the publicists and designers of covers for DVDs, so intent on blowing plot points and narrative twists before you even view the film? You only have to glance at the box art or the pictures on the back of this film to see a major plot reveal regarding Thale, and some important climatic shots! I mean what the hell?! I’m betting that if they released “Sixth Sense” these days, there would be a transparent Bruce Willis walking through a door! Or with “Seven”, there would be a blood-dripping box with Gwyneth Paltrow’s noggin peaking over the top! Just stop it!

Anyway, “Thale” is a fairly short film, just clocking over 70 minutes if you ignore the credits. Most of the events take place within a small area and over a short time. Despite this, it still feels as if the middle section drags somewhat, with most of the “action” consisting of Elvis and Leo, sitting in the cabin watching over Thale and revealing a couple of personal secrets. Incidentally, much is made of Elvis having an “illegitimate” child. Is that still a big concern in Norway? God knows how “The Jeremy Kyle show” would go down over there…

In fact, as a whole it seems that the intriguing premise, as to where Thale has come from and what is chasing her (which takes a whole new twist towards the end) is never really fleshed out or expanded as much as it could have been. That may be a fault of the budget, or an intentional decision to keep everything low-key.

Having said that, there is still much to enjoy in the film. Silje Reinamo, who plays Thale, is a dancer and actress, and this is her first part in a feature film. With her large brown-eyes, and fluid physicality, she is marvellous as the mysterious woman, without ever uttering a word. What is refreshing as well is that the two guys never view her in an overtly sexual way, or attempt to take advantage of her. In my cynical mind, I can’t help feeling that if this was shot in the US or remade there, one of the characters would come onto her or be inappropriate in some way.  Exerting vulnerability and spending a fair portion of the film (yes, I have to mention it) unclothed, she nevertheless becomes something convincingly opposite this portrayal, when the end of the film comes. In fact some of the climactic scenes are breath-takingly beautiful scenes of violence that rivals John Woo for slo-mo brutality and elegance. Just watch the sequence where an assault rifle and a horseshoe are used as unconventional weapons!

There is a fair amount of visual poetry and cold beauty to the film. But then, that goes without saying when shooting in the Norwegian “wilderness”. There are some nicely creepy scenes as well, especially when one character is standing in a road, and something spindly in the far distance scampers across the horizon. When we do get full-on glimpses of these enigmatic “somethings” the CGI is effective enough, without being mind-blowingly realistic, but it’s still way better than the average SyFy “mockbuster”.

So, whilst it does have its issues, and you do feel frustrated that a lot more could have been done with the story, it’s still not a bad little way to indulge in Norwegian culture, and get a spooky horror fix at the same time. I would be very interested in seeing the next film from Nordaas.

And remember, whilst Nature is fierce, it’s Man that’s the real monster…
Extras: More vanilla than a choc-ice. Nothing … as I am NOT going to include “audio set-up” as an extra!

It does drag during the middle section, and so much more could have been done with the source material. However, it does have an ethereal performance from the lead actress, marvellous cinematography, and some deliriously poetic scenes of violence. Definitely worth a view.

THE TALL MAN

The Tall Man (15)

Director: Pascal Laugier
Screenplay: Pascal Laugier
Starring: Jessica Biel, Jodelle Ferland

Fear Takes a New Shape

Pascal Laugier’s “The Tall Man” was released on UK DVD last week, and I caught up with the film (having missed it at the Frightfest All-nighter and other Film Festivals). Laugier has a short but impressive filmography, including the much-acclaimed “Martyrs”, which divided genre fans right down the middle, due to its hyper-violence and philosophical intent. For the record, I found it a very impressive piece of work, and all the elements worked for me.  Laugier was also pencilled in to shoot the proposed “Hellraiser” remake/reboot/whatever at one point. On watching “The Tall Man”, it becomes apparent that “Martyrs” is not the only divisive film that Laugier was destined to make…

The film takes place in the run-down and remote Township of “Cold Sore”... Sorry … “Cold Rock”. Once a mining town, the recession and closure of the mine has reduced it to a few streets of mostly closed shops and trailers.  In this town works Julia Denning (Jessica Biel), a local nurse who keeps the surgery open and helps the poverty stricken families with children. However, it seems this town keeps mislaying their kids, as a number of them have gone missing. Enough in fact to foster an urban legend regarding the mythic figure of “The Tall Man”, who comes in the night snatches children, and spirits them away to an uncertain fate. Some locals believe in the myth, others are sure that it’s an unidentified paedophile or child serial-killer (Daily Mail readers obviously …). After listening to gossip regarding the boogey-man in a local diner, Julia returns to her large home that she shares with her young son and nanny. However, late at night she sees a shadowy figure carry her boy off, and a frantic chase begins… So far, so effectively-spooky and thrilling, but all is not what it appears …

Revealing more of the Rubik’s-cube plot would be tantamount to saying “He’s dead all through the film you know…” to someone who hasn’t seen “The Sixth Sense” yet (It’s been 14 years! Don’t get pissy!). So I won’t. Suffice to say, the plot changes directions so many times that if it had a Sat-Nav, it would have been smashed after the first 45 minutes. Sympathies are tested, allegiances are questioned, and moralities are uncertain. Just when you think you’ve got a handle on a character’s motives, the plot challenges you yet again. This is necessarily a “bad” thing, and it’s good to have intelligent film-making and to be confronted with a narrative that won’t follow convention. However, just like Beyoncé on stage, a big “but” is sure to appear …“But” the chicanery in this film is too much. Instead of challenging your expectations, it simply ignores common-sense (Why do two opposing characters dress the same way for no apparent reason, for example) and creates narrative holes the size of King Kong.

On top of this, there are some profound messages at its core, which the plot has been literally built around as oppose to just accommodating them. Basically it queries the effects that our life decisions have on our children, and what we should do to ensure their safety and a better future. The answer that the film gives doesn’t really sit well (with me at least), and seems trite and unforgiving, and to be fair the film does acknowledge that viewpoint.
At the centre of it all sits the marvellous performance of Jessica Biel. It has to be a multi-faceted performance and sometimes ambiguous, but Biel does indeed pull it off. It’s a real shame that she doesn’t get more parts like this, and that this role plays second fiddle to the mind-bending elements of the film, because she is terrific. Whatever else may be lacking in the film, it isn’t for her want of trying. The soundtrack and the opening credits are also wonderfully “doomy”.

I know I’ve been waffling about aspects of the plot (as oppose to details)and suchlike, and it may be that other people find this a brave and enchanting film, but personally I finished watching the movie with a sense of being “cheated”, and unsure as to how I felt about the messages therein. Maybe that’s a good thing, that I felt so strongly about it, but in terms of enjoyment and opinion of the experience, it’s only a 2 from me I’m afraid.  It may be, like “Martyrs” that your opinion totally differs.
Extras: Nothing, nada, zip, zilch, zero … not even a trailer! WTF?

​

A film that’s too concerned with mind-tricks and slippery twists, than providing a decent plot. Despite a superlative, but ultimately wasted, performance by Jessica Biel, this is a truly divisive film. You WILL love it or loathe it.

JACK THE GIANT SLAYER

Jack the Giant Slayer (15)

Director: Bryan SInger
Screenplay: Darren Lemke, Christopher McQuarrie
Starring: Nicholas Hoult, Stanley Tucci, Ewan Mcgregor

Prepare for a giant adventure

What’s that you say? There’s a new film depicting massive flesh-eating creatures fighting against medieval warriors? It’s in IMAX and 3D? It stars Ian McShane, Ewan McGregor, and Stanley Tucci? It’s from the director of “The Usual Suspects” and “X-Men 1 & 2”? Whoa … count me in! What’s that? It’s based on “Jack and the Beanstalk”!? It’s a partial remake of “Jack the Giant Killer”!? It’s had mixed reviews in the USA and less than stellar box-office? It’s a “12A”!!!!???? *awkward silence*

Ooh-kay. Well, as mentioned this film is a partial remake of the 1962 Kerwin Matthews film, “Jack the Giant Killer” with added references to English lore and the tale of “Jack and the Beanstalk”. That 60’s film is quite obscure these days, but it used to be a staple Bank-Holiday film on British TV, much like “The Wizard of Oz” and “The Great Escape”. It was a fun little film, that was basically like the Ray Harryhausen “Sinbad” films, but with worse special effects. Seeing as it’s been acknowledged as a remake, I’m not sure why Jack is now a “slayer” instead of a “killer”. It doesn’t make much difference to the victim I suspect. “Mrs Smith, I’m afraid your husband has been brutally killed”. “Well, that’s alright officer, as long as he hasn’t been slain…” Ahem, I digress…

Jack (Nicholas Hoult) is a simple farm boy in the kingdom of Albion (aka Medieval Britain). He grows up listening to the legends of giants, who live in a floating island in the sky and like nothing better than snacking on humans, until banished by an ancient king. Years later, both his parents have shuffled off this mortal coil, and he lives with his shit of an Uncle (who disappears after about 10 minutes for no good reason). Sent to the local castle to sell his horse (you can see where this is going can’t you?), he comes into possession of some enchanted beans after a monk has stolen them from the kings advisor Lord Roderick (Stanley Tucci).



Roderick has a plan to use giants to take over the kingdom, apparently. The monk tells him not to get the beans wet (though presumably he can feed them after midnight, or shine bright light onto them…). Due to reasons too daft to go into, the beans get wet, roll under Jack’s abode, which then grows the Beanstalk, shooting the house straight up into the Giant’s kingdom. The Princess Isabelle (Eleanor Tomlinson) is on the lam (as she doesn’t want to be a Disney Princess anymore) and was unfortunately a tenant of the aforementioned abode at the time. Therefore, Jack and the King’s Guard (led by Ewen McGregor) scale the beanstalk to rescue her. But this creates an opportunity for Lord Roderick and the Giants to create chaos.

Right, bad stuff first. The script is, to be perfectly blunt, awful. It’s extremely perfunctory and lacking in wit and/or charm. “Princess Bride” it ain’t! Some of the lines seem to come from 70’s British Sit-coms. “He wouldn’t spill the beans”, after a Monk is tortured for the hiding place of the enchanted beans. “You’re barking up the wrong beanstalk, Jack”, etc., etc. Woeful. The two main characters (Jack & Isabelle) make an insipid pairing, and there’s no chemistry between the two. Jack himself comes across as one-dimensional, and only shows some dynamism late in the film. It’s not Hoult’s fault, as he was terrific in “X-Men: First Class”, and also in the wonderful “Warm Bodies”. That heroic spark is just missing from the screenplay. So, waste of time then?

Not so. The thing that really saves this film from total mediocrity is the Giants themselves. Excellent CGI creations, they are much, much better than they first appeared on the trailers and adverts. The first Giant encounter focuses on the features in all their eye-rolling, hairy-nosed, wrinkled-skin glory. As Jack cowers in shallow water, we see (in silhouette) it biting the head off a cute ickle lamb, and effortlessly grab a fleeing human. In fact the more grisly qualities of the Giants are not glossed over at all. Nasty creatures that graphically pick their nose, smell their armpits, and frequently bite/stomp/kill/eat fleeing humans. All good nasty stuff. In fact at one point, we get a close up of a character (not saying if it’s human or giant *taps nose secretly*), that gets its face crushed and its eyeball flies out of the screen! Literally if you’re watching in 3D! The take-no-prisoners-after-all-fairy-tales-are-gruesome mentality is well represented here.

There are some great set-pieces, especially one battle scene that has hordes of Giants suddenly emerging from a forest to battle a small army on the run. Both the kingdom of Albion (actually Somerset) and the Giants kingdom look gorgeous on the screen, with locations (such as Well’s Cathedral) put to good use. One other nice touch is the character of Elmont (Ewen McGregor) as the leader of the King’s guard. Far from being the conceited doofus he appears in the trailer, he’s actually a stand-up honourable guy and quite atypical for this type of movie. There should also be a special mention for the great Bill Nighy who does sterling work as Fallon, king of the Giants, with his features recognisable on the CG face.  UK character actors Eddie Marsan and Ewen Bremner are pretty wasted though, especially Bremner who plays the world’s most irritating evil sidekick!

The 3D is okay, but not essential, unless you want beans (or eyeballs) thrown at your face. Incidentally, there’s a nice little coda at the end, that explains why the rest of the world should respect the UK that little bit more … or else!

So all in all, despite the disappointing script and some uninspiring leading characters, don’t write this off as a throwaway family film and have a kip whilst the kids watch. The OTT antics of the Giants and the surprisingly violent set-pieces make it worth your while.
But I would like to say to the film studios … Enough already with the fairy tales!! You’ve made your point and you’ve peaked your profits. Flog another dead horse. Please.

An awful script and an insipid pair of leading characters threaten to slay the film itself. But it’s saved by the non-child-friendly portrayal of the giants, some great set-pieces, and some nice locations. This is one that horror fans can enjoy with the kids without feeling that they’ve sold out … too much.

THE BAY

The Bay (15)

Director: Barry Levinson
Screenplay: Barry Levinson, Michael Wallach
Starring: Kristen Connelly, Christopher Denham

Panic feeds on fear

“The Bay” is a horror film marking a collaboration between director Barry Levinson (“Good Morning Vietnam”, “Rain Man”, & “Sphere”) and producer Oran Peli (director and guiding hand behind the “Paranormal Activity” franchise). It is shot in the style of a “found footage” movie (Wait! Come back! It’s good!) and depicts an incendiary event that affects the (fictional) small coastal town of Claridge in Maryland USA, during the 4th of July celebrations in 2009. Heavily influenced by events in a real-life counterpart town, the movie debuted at the 2012 Toronto Film Festival, and has built up quite a reputation in the meantime. After a short theatrical run, it is now available on DVD and Blu-Ray in the UK.

Although the whiff of “found-footage” can turn a horror fan ashen at twenty paces these days, as it is a much used (and abused) form of narrative in genre movies, it is used remarkably well and effectively here. The whole film is made up of multiple sources of footage, from Skype, to CCTV, to hand-held cameras, and mobile phones. There are also thinly disguised versions of Facebook and Wiki-leaks. This is pieced together to form the chronological plot of the fate of Claridge, albeit with a couple of flashbacks to environmental experts who first discover the “problem” in the bay area. It’s a plot device that can (and does) work well, particularly with a director of Levinson’s skill.

The framing device for the plot is Donna Thompson (played by Kether Donahue), a reporter who was a trainee during the (expected to be) lightweight coverage of the celebrations in Claridge on that day. Speaking in the present to an unknown source on Skype, she narrates the strung-together footage, puts events into perspective, and names characters and their motives. The day and the festivities start with Crab-Eating contests and Miss Crustacean (!) making an appearance. However, we soon become aware that two divers were found recently dead with mystery wounds. People are also suddenly developing boils and rashes, vomiting blood, and wounds are suddenly appearing on their bodies. As the day progresses, the medical and law enforcement departments are over-whelmed and things get a whole lot worse when the “disease” is identified…

This is all good chilling stuff. Although there are mangled corpses aplenty and moments of body-horror that will make you wince, it’s some of the stuff that is unseen that really hits you. A 911 caller shrieks  “I just saw something real bad”, and in an especially taut sequence, a police officer enters the house of an infected family, and only the audio captures the screams and the people begging to be killed. Without spoiling things, the cause of the horror is a combination of several things, but one of these elements is the existence of the marine “Isopod”. I’ll say nothing more, but if you watch the film or “Google” the genuine animal (Cymothoa exigua), for me it’s one of the best arguments for evolution, because there’s no way anyone would create one of these little sods! Having been aware of these creatures before, I have to admit this movie pushed all kinds of the wrong buttons for me (in a sort-of good way). *shiver*

The other aspects of the movie also work well, as there are lots of nice little touches nodding to the footage aspect. Donna wonders if she shouldn't be dubbed by a voice actor. Some snippets of message text contain spelling errors (“Holly Shit – Just ate something weird!”). There are a lot of disapproving nods to authority and small-town American attitudes as well. The Mayor refuses to acknowledge that there is anything wrong until it’s far too late, and it’s the town’s inherent greediness and denial that fast-forwards the horror. One cop, amid the chaos, even mentions that he’ll get “hell at the next town meeting”. Too late for that mate! It’s also genuinely frustrating (and probably close to the truth) as to how the smug indifference of the CDC (Centres for Disease Control) and Homeland security comes across, even when the epidemic gets way out of hand and the town is basically abandoned to its own fate. It’s interesting to note Levinson’s obvious disdain of the authority figures here, and who can blame him as the roots of the story lies in a real-life environmental disaster, where the facts were covered up (research “Chesapeake Bay” conspiracy fans).

There are a couple of mis-steps. I’m not sure about the female oceanographer’s French accent (I kept expecting her to say “Leesten car-fully! I weel say zis only once…”). The film does run out of steam after the halfway-mark, and seems merely content to have some of its remaining characters fall victim to the plague, or simply creep around in the dark. But on the whole, these points do not affect the main plot and atmosphere.
A special mention also, to the non-obtrusive soundtrack by Marcelo Zarvos. It’s unusual to praise a “soundtrack” in a “found-footage” movie, but this is especially creepy and doom-laden, and adds much to the horror scenes.

I was tempted to mark it a 4/5, but the short running time (75 minutes, not including credits), slight lack of impetus towards the end, and an absence of extras on the DVD/Blu-Ray, dropped half a point for me. But it is very much recommended and well worth a purchase.

Extras: Trailer, and an 8 minute making-of Documentary. The doc does contain an interesting interview with Levinson on his motives for making the film.



An enjoyable cross between “Jaws” and “The Crazies”. The mixture of cold-hard facts and plausible body-horror makes this a chilling film with a message, that’s well worth buying. Runs out of steam little towards the end, but leaves an impression on you that will make you drink bottled water for weeks!

HANSEL AND GRETEL: WITCH HUNTERS

Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters (15)

Director: Tommy Wirkola
Written by: Tommy Wirkola
Starring: Jeremy Renner, Gemma Arterton, Famke Janssen

Revenge is sweeter than candy
 

Despite a promising looking trailer, and an excellent cast, this film has built up a lot of negative hype, which was stoked when the release date was delayed by almost a year. Mostly shot in 2011 and intended for March 2012 showings, cinema-goers in the UK now finally have a chance to see this horror-cum-fantasy film. Remember when “R” used the mantra in “Warm Bodies”, “Don’t be creepy! Don’t be creepy!”? Well, when I sat down in front of the screen for this movie, I found myself thinking “Please don’t be Van-Helsing! Don’t be Van-Helsing!” Dark fantasies and fairy-tale horrors don’t seem to have a good reputation in this genre. Can this confound the critics and beat expectations?

“Hansel & Gretel”, of course, expands on the fairy tale by the Brothers Grimm. Taking place in an unspecified mediaeval time and country, the prologue depicts the well-known story with the brother and sister being dumped in the forest by their parents and chancing upon the candy-house with the wicked witch. Having despatched her, the credits (a nice mediaeval diorama with great 3D effects) show them growing up and becoming mercenary “Witch-Hunters”. Now portrayed by Gemma Arterton and Jeremy Renner, they are hired by towns to find the missing children (Witches eat them. Obviously.) And also to execute the aforementioned non-humans. With a nice line in MacGyver gadgets that are well before their invented time, and a pissed-off attitude towards anything witchy, they get to work in one such town. However, they uncover a secret coven (led by Witch-Queen, Famke Janssen), who are preparing to enact a secret rite which will make them harder to kill. With the aid of some new friends, and a troll called Edward, they prepare to kick some Hag-Ass!

Okay. There are some things that don’t hit the mark with the film. Even for a 3D film, and one set often in deep forests in the night, the cinematography is quite murky and dark. The plot is silly, doesn’t stand up to scrutiny, and meanders all over the place (especially in the middle section). Some of the plot “twists” are telegraphed with neon lights and fog horns. And you can’t watch any scene with broomstick flying, without thinking they’re going to break into a game of Quidditch, or that a Stormtrooper is going to appear on a Speeder-Bike with an Ewok on his back!

However … for the life of me, I just do not understand the amount of vitriol and distaste that has been thrown at this film by most film critics. Some high-profile UK critics have already proclaimed it to be the worst film of the year! (In February? Have a crystal ball do you lads? You’ve obviously lost a sense of fun…). It’s a good, goofy romp and all the more enjoyable for it. It’s well directed by Tommy Wirkola (His first film after the great Nazi-Zombie movie “Dead Snow”) and there are some very nice set-pieces that work well in 3D (especially the flaming crossbow-bolt, and the slow-mo, morphing bullet shot). It also has a brilliant line in sly humour that is quite atypical of the genre. Parchments of missing children are stuck to milk bottles (mimicking the US campaigns). The siblings have a stalker, who collects pages of mediaeval coverage of their exploits (“Orphaned Siblings defeat Swamp Witch!!”). Gretel forms a friendship with the troll called Edward (STILL a better love story than Twilight!), which can’t be a coincidence! As mentioned, the brother and sister have souped-up gadgets, including the world’s first tazer and the earliest record-player! It’s all done with such an infectious knowing wink, that you can’t help thinking that one of the producers, Will Ferrell, suggested a few ideas! The (great) final line of the film could have been easily ripped out of an 80’s action film with Stallone or Swarzenegger. It kind of feels like that as well. 80’s action, with touches of “Evil Dead” (One villain is the dead-spit of the “Cellar Witch” and there’s a great physical fight with her in a cottage.). Where else these days can you see a large group of witches, being mown down by supernaturally charged Gatling gun? Incidentally, it’s really good to see the film NOT go down the PG-13 route. Bodies are ripped asunder and explode, heads are cut off, and the siblings swear like drunken sailors (Please take note, makers of “Die Hard 5” and “Taken 2”!!)

Of course it wouldn’t work at all, if not for the main actors. Arterton has a ball as Gretel! All bitchy attitude, she witch-slaps her way through the movie, dropping the F-Bomb as if there’s no tomorrow! Hopefully, she’ll be up for some more action-orientated roles. Hansel could have been played by any decent physical actor really, but at least Renner injects a bit of personality into the role. He becomes endearingly tongue-tied and goofy, when the local peasant girl puts the moves on him. Best of all though is Famke Janssen. She hisses and hams and coos her way through the lines, showing all how a real witch should act.

So in retrospect, it certainly isn’t the disappointment that “Van-Helsing” was. It’s not a work of art or an award-winning effort, but it is a good, fun-filled, bloody romp, with nicely judged performances and some off-the-wall humour. And at the end of the day … what’s wrong with that?

Despite some shortcomings, this is a good, unpretentious, silly romp. There are solid performances from Arterton, Janssen and Renner, and a nice line in sly humour. Witch-Hunt it out for some guilty pleasure.

​

MAMA

Mama (15)

Director: Andres Muschietti
Written by: Neil Cross, Andres & Barbara Muschietti
Starring: Nikolaj Coster Waldau, Jessica Chastain

A mother's love  is forever
 

“Mama” has a very fine pedigree. Produced by “Mr Everywhere” himself, Guillermo Del Toro, and starring the talented Jessica Chastain, it was a much anticipated movie this year. A collaboration between Spanish-Canadian film-makers, it was directed by relative newcomer Andres Muschietti, being based on his spooky (very) short film that had drawn attention on YouTube. The film has been received exceptionally well in the US, and has just opened in the UK (22nd Feb). The trailer promised a spooky J-Horror type affair, as oppose to an all-out gore-fest. So how does it measure up?

The film opens dramatically, with a crashed car, a business man with a gun, and two scared little girls. Apparently driven over the edge by the financial crisis in 2008, the man in question blows his wife away, and kidnaps his little girls (a 3 year old and a 1 year old). They crash the car and end up in a deserted cabin in the woods during a snowstorm. (Seriously! Just how many deserted cabins are there in the US? There’s a business opportunity there I reckon…). Intending to do away with the girls, he is stopped by “something”. This “something” then takes care of the girls, and I mean genuinely take care, not Mafia “take care”. The story then flashes forward 5 years. The brother of the businessman (Lucas) is obsessively still searching for his sibling and the girls. The tracker working for him comes across the car and the cabin and finds the girls in a feral state, scampering around on all-fours and eating fruit from the forest. Due to a convoluted set of circumstances (where the girl’s Aunt comes across like Cruella Deville’s wicked sister!), the girls end up with Lucas, and his snippy, Goth-Rocker girlfriend Annabel. Given a large house by the supervising doctor, so he can keep an eye on their integration back into society (or so he says *cue sinister music*). We already know that Annabel is thrilled not to be pregnant, so the sub-text exists for her finding her maternal instinct with the girls. However, with strange happenings around the house, and a sudden accident, it becomes apparent that something malignant has followed the girls back to civilisation.

The film opens solidly. The initial sense of tension and the very brief glimpses of “Mama” (“Daddy? There’s a lady outside … and she’s not touching the floor!”), work well and compares favourably to the likes of “The Grudge” and “The Ring”. I must also mention the stunning cinematography that makes it a such a  good-looking film, with colours muted for large portions and contrast between light and dark turned up to “11” (Spinal Tap reference. I thank you…). This is especially apparent in some fantastically stylish Nightmare sequences. There are some very nice set-pieces; like the scene where the youngest child is playing with her sister … only it’s not as she walks down the corridor a second later! Also, the scenes where the oldest girl implores Annabel not to open the closet, and the unexpected attack on a leading character. All good stuff, although some of the scares seem to be lifted shot-for-shot from other recent films (I’m thinking “Sinister” and “Insidious” here … especially the face-over-the-shoulder shot in “Insidious”). You can argue that the scares are somewhat telegraphed and rely on the old chestnut of SUDDEN-SOUNDTRACK-BLAST to make you jump. But at least in the beginning, these are effective in what they set out to do.

Special mention must go to Jessica Chastain. A closet horror fan (Yay!!) but not a fan of gore (Boo!!), she was pleased to take the role and make it hers. Miles away from her caring Burlesque girl in “Lawless” or the tough-cookie agent in “Zero Dark Thirty”, Annabel is a sassy character, who has believable problems in bonding with the girls. This makes the later scenes where she comforts one of them that much more touching and affecting. You can tell she has lots of fun with the role. She really sells some of the scare scenes as well. Incidentally, it’s great that we are experiencing a cinematic era, where actors of Chastain’s and Ethan Hawke’s calibre have no problem appearing in unashamed horror films. The two girls are also particularly good (Megan Charpentier & Isabelle Nelisse). Never mawkish or Disney-fied, they convince at every point, whether acting feral or trying protect Annabel from the wrath of “Mama”.

You can sense a “but” coming up here can’t you? Especially if you’ve already checked the rating…But… It just doesn’t work for me, for a number of reasons. The biggest problem for me was (surprisingly) the ending. About 15 minutes from the end of the movie, it turns from spooky scare-fest to a Tim Burton film, complete with Danny Elfman choir-type “Aaah-Aaah” vocals! And not one of his good films either! It’s like the crew has handed the camera over to him, and said “Go on Son! Forget about the atmosphere we’ve just built up. Go mental with the special effects and do what you feel is appropriate”. But not only that, the final denouement completely contradicts at least two plot points that were earlier established, and smacks of an emergency re-write. I can’t remember a recent film that’s had a final act that I’ve felt was such a drop in quality.

There are also far too many holes in the plot to convince either. Why doesn’t Lucas tell anyone about his supernatural attack? Why is his brother’s spirit appearing to him to save his girls, when he was going to shoot them anyway? What happened to the cute sausage dog?! The doctor and aunt turn out to be pantomime villains for ridiculous reasons. Another sticking point were the pre-movie hype statements that said the actor playing “Mama”, Javier Botet (The slender guy who plays the “Hag” in the “Rec” movies) was doing all his own movements and bendy stunts. Well, that may be, but it’s kind of negated when he’s surrounded by flowing CGI hair and black smoke, so you can’t even see it! Initially scary, the figure becomes the Wicked Witch of the West by the (Tim Burton) end. At one point “Mama” even slides around the floor with just her hair showing, like a possessed wig! (BTW, see “The Wig”. Genuine South Korean bonkers film!)

Maybe I am being overly harsh on the film, but the flashes of brilliance and talent involved make the overall disappointment that much worse. As it stands it’s not something that we haven’t seen before, and it’s not something that we haven’t seen done better (“The Orphanage” and “The Devil’s Backbone” leap straight to mind ironically). However, it’s certainly gone down a storm in the US and rumours are already rife of a sequel. I suppose it’s good news for horror in general, but I’d much rather see something in the genre like “Dredd” or “Before Dawn” have that same kind of impact…
Ah well, the “Evil Dead” and “Stoker” trailers were good…

This has a solid beginning, with great performances from Chastain and the two girls. But the scares are derivative, the plot convoluted, and … that ending! A real missed opportunity.

GRAVE ENCOUNTERS 2

Grave Encounters 2 (15)

Director: John Poliquin
Screenplay: The Vicious Brothers
Starring: Richard Harmon, Shawn C Phillips

Fear is just a word, reality is much worse

Right up front, I’ll say that I did NOT enjoy or even like the original “Grave Encounters”. In fact I still get a bit of heartburn when I think about it (although that could be the dodgy local Vindaloo I had last night…). It was (in my humble opinion) one of the more annoying Blair Witch / Paranormal Activity / Found Footage mash-ups that I have ever seen. With unlikable characters, making stupid decisions, whilst filming in a haunted asylum, and encountering the usual white-faced spooks, with that interminable stretchy-dark-mouthed effect, that film-makers think scares us, and the usual throw-the-actor-at-the-camera type shocks. And … breathe! Yes … I am getting cynical and pissed-off in my old age. Anyway there was way too much ambiguity and too many telegraphed scares for me. However, on this site as well as cinema reviews, we want to highlight any overlooked DVDs that may tickle your fear-buds. The apparent success of the first film (and an admittedly stylish trailer, which clocked multiple views on YouTube) meant that the sequel recently appeared. So I watched “Grave Encounters 2” and I must say … I was pleasantly surprised…

The movie opens with a nice montage of “genuine” webcam reviews on the first film. To the credit of the film, not all of them are positive. It’s a nice touch, and done in a way that “Blair Witch 2” tried to pull off but failed dismally with it. The worst review comes from Alex Wright (Richard Harmon), who is the archetypical film-student snob, and fancies himself as a respected blogger and talented director (His crappy film project suggests otherwise…). The first part of the film deals with him and his friends following up on the urban legends surrounding the first film. As Alex researches it becomes apparent that all the events of the first film were real, and that the haunted hospital exists in real life. All during this time, the film consists of footage filmed by Alex or his buddies, and is just about believable in context. Yes, it IS a found footage film again, but bear with it. This continues when Alex tracks down the production company who released the film and uses a hidden camera to interview staff. In a brilliant touch, The “Vicious Brothers” (who directed the first film and wrote both) appear as themselves and are ridiculed soundly.

With this backstory now established, Alex and his buddies travel to the mental hospital to spend the night and film. It was at this point that I groaned so loudly that the neighbours knocked on my door to see if I was alright. Another straight re-tread of the first film? Well, for about 10 minutes, yes. But then a couple of crazy twists and a new addition to the cast turns the plot on its head. Some of the ambiguity from the previous film disappears, and the story takes several bold steps into originality. Highlights include; a door that goes nowhere (or does it?), a map that doesn’t work (or does it?), and a surprise escape (or is it?). Spooks appear again, but are in no way integral to the plot, and there’s a nice appearance from an over-grown one that struggles to stomp down the corridor after the team. Throw in a brilliant excuse for continuing to film at the worst possible moments, and a nice coda at the end that explains motives, and you have a surprising little treat.

Maybe it was because my expectations were so low, but I had much more fun with this than its predecessor. I’m probably in a minority (judging by message boards and other reviews), but the touches of originality and differing style of the new director John Poliquin, meant that I really enjoyed this ride. Definitely worth a thought if you want a fear-filler for the evening. A further sequel doesn’t look likely at the moment, but if there is one, then sign me up …

An off-the-wall sequel done right! With enough flair and twists to enjoy … even if you disliked the first one.