Watch Piranha 3d:
Director: Alexandre Aja
Writer: Alexandre Aja, Grégory Levasseur
Starring: Elisabeth Shue, Adam Scott, Ving Rhames, Richard Dreyfuss, Dina Meyer, Brooklynn Proulx, Quinn Lord, Jessica Szohr, Jerry O’Connell, Paul Scheer, Cody Longo, Riley Steele, Eli Roth, Ricardo Chavira, Christopher Lloyd

The protagonist, Sara Tobias, did not engender any sort of empathy in me. Usually I can identify with the protagonist in a movie like this but, the script just piled on a bunch of trite problems that have been done to death in a thousand other flicks before this. If it had just been the tragic death of her parents or her nearly being raped or even being the freak at school I could have felt a connection. With all of them piled on the poor girl I couldn’t help but feel that she needed to just die and get it over with. I actually found myself hoping that at some point one of the bizarre and lethal incidents that were happening to the people around her would happen to her as well. To her credit Laura Mennell, the actress playing Sara, seemed to be giving it her best effort but, I think even she was struggling with the ridiculous weight of circumstance placed upon her character.

My last real bone of contention is the final sound mix. This is another indicator of this movie’s shoestring budget. There is a real problem when I have to turn my television up full blast to hear dialogue at normal levels only to be nearly deafened by background noise three minutes later. I understand budget constraints but seriously does it cost that much to normalize volume? I honestly can’t say I’d recommend this movie to anyone I like, which includes my readers here, but, if you have no other options and need to kill an hour and a half or you just want to torture someone then give this movie a try.

Why can Cane get away with such flagrant violation of both law and logic? Well, because he’s played by Arnold Schwarzenegger. It doesn’t matter what role Arnold Schwarzenegger is playing; somehow, someway he’ll end up gunning down bad guys in extravagantly ridiculous action set pieces. That’s why he’s there. He could be playing a burger flipper and he’d still manage to find a rocket launcher behind the deep fryer. In fact, the inclusion of Schwarzenegger goes a long way to explaining not just the plot holes in End of Days, but the muddled mash of both the horror and action genres.  The storyline is standard religious horror: Satan millennially returns to Earth in human-form in an attempt to procreate and seed a spawn. If he does so before the clock hits the thousand-year-mark (in other words, before New Years in any new millennium), he unleashes the Armageddon. There’s a specific woman he must impregnate – for some reason or another – and Satan and his minions seek out the young lady, whilst meanwhile a group of priests attempt to assassinate her before Satan can get his hands (and other parts) on her.

However, the inclusion of Schwarzenegger dictates that action formula will follow despite a plot better-suited to horror. So – as Jericho Cane – Schwarzenegger is sucked in to the Satan spawn scenario and with him plenty of action familiars. There’s the aforementioned helicopter stunt, battles with armed assassin-priests, a fist-fight with a demonically-powered old lady and a stupefying number of shoot-outs with Satan considering he’s immune to man-made weaponry. It’s a bizarre amalgamation of both horror and action, with both the scares and thrills suffering significantly. Too much time is devoted to Schwarzenegger’s action antics to focus on any scares or generate the potentially-frightening plot. Among the scariest moments is a subway encounter with a freakish-looking albino (who then shatters into pieces like glass along with any generated scares) and a sex-scene where Satan simultaneously screws both a mother and her (of age) daughter, whose bodies morph together for some reason never explained.

On the action front, the largest dilemma is that Satan just doesn’t suit the conventions of the action genre. While a villain that presents too little of a challenge can be particularly un-thrilling, the opposite can be just as problematic: that is, a villain who has almost unlimited power. Pitting a security personnel up against the Lord of the Underworld just isn’t believable – even in the universe of an over-the-top action flick – and both plot-holes and concessions of logic become a necessity to keep the story moving along on typical action course. End of Days goes to significant lengths to make it clear that Satan – being the nigh invincible figure that he is – cannot be harmed by any weaponry, even while in his human-form. Yet this is an Arnie-action film and thus needs the requisite gun-fights, so scene-after-scene Schwarzenegger shoots at Satan with guns, and grenade launchers, and so on – and of course scene-after-scene Satan is flung to the floor, picks himself up and sets off after our hero as if he’s just been toppled over playfully rather than riddled with bullets. It’s not just repetitive, but almost entirely nonsensical. Similarly, a variety of fundamental story issues have been ignored to keep Satan from simply dicing Jericho Cane into countless pieces as he would in real life. For instance, early on in the film we see Satan in his true-form, a CGI, translucent flying-lizard that can zip through the air at high-speeds and ignite explosions. Then the next two-hours-plus is spent with Satan chasing around Schwarzenegger in a middle-aged man’s body, which is assumingly why he can never seem to catch Schwarzenegger. Why wouldn’t Satan ditch this body for a few seconds and simply blow Schwarzenegger up? In another scene Satan magically appears in Schwarzenegger’s apartment, which raises the question of why he wouldn’t just magically appear next to Schwarzenegger instead of chasing him around on foot for the entire running-length? Along with limitless power come many limitless inconsistencies, purposely designed to keep the story moving.

When it comes to scares or thrills or any of the things we as an audience normally expect of a good horror or action film, End of Days constitutes a complete failure. Nonetheless, End of Days does work on another level, a level that typically even the worst of Schwarzenegger’s films operates on.  This is the type of film where every other sentence is a one-liner and the plots lack of logic is compensated with much ensuing absurdity. Despite any attempts at genuine scares or thrills falling short, End of Days never ceases to be entertaining, and this makes up for many of its shortfalls. There’s something very hard to hate about Arnold Schwarzenegger being tossed around by an overweight old lady (albeit a possessed one) or randomly blending day-old pizza and drinking it. Plus, any movie which has Arnie telling the devil himself that he’s a “fucking choir boy” can’t be all bad. End of Days is absurd, ridiculous, and downright dumb for the most part, but it’s also quite a bit of fun. If you’re looking for an Oscar-winner, hell, if you’re looking for something semi-coherent, skip it, but if you want something that will keep you entertained for two-hours, it’s worth a watch. And despite all its flaws, that’s more than you can say of most horror films.

House on Sorority Row is about a group of senior sorority sisters of Theta Pi who decide to schedule a year-end graduation party in June, after the house usually closes. Their house-mother, Mrs. Slater, waving her cane and generally seeming a bit unhinged, vetoes the idea and insists that that they leave on the usual date. Afterward, Mrs. Slater finds Vicki (the fabulously slutty and impetuous house member) and her boyfriend tussling on Vicki’s waterbed and is so disgusted she punctures the bed with the head of her cane (which, of course, will come into play later as a useful weapon for impaling). From earlier, puzzling scenes in the movie, we see that Mrs. Slater has some mental disorder, but the opening scenes leave the exact nature of her problems a mystery until later in the film.

Vicki’s humiliation leads to her idea of playing a practical joke on Mrs. Slater involving her boyfriend’s gun (loaded with blanks) and the scummy sorority house pool, which Mrs. Slater is to cheap to keep up. All of the sorority sisters besides Katherine, the sweet and virginal one, agree immediately. Of course, as jokes involving guns often do, things go terribly wrong, Slater ends up dead, and the girls decide to hide the body and continue with their graduation party plans anyway.

What makes House on Sorority Row different from most movies of this genre is that it manages to be funny, tense, and scary all at the same time. In early scenes after Mrs. Slater’s death, the girls all nervously attend their party, afraid that somebody will find out their secret as frat boys dive into the pool and ask about Slater’s absence. After the murders begin, the movie cleverly misdirects the the viewer regarding the identity of the killer and the reasons for them.

The acting here is decent overall. Kate McNeil is dull and timid as the prim Katherine and Eileen Davidson steals the show as the aggressive, impetuous, and sexually-charged Vicki. Jodi Dragie as Morgan delivers her lines with a cluelessness that makes them hilarious. Try to watch her deliver the line how do we know if she’s still alive ?halfway through the film without laughing. Unsurprisingly, this was her first and only film, according to IMDb.

House on Sorority row doesn’t have depth or great acting, but it’s fun, lighthearted (as lighthearted as a movie that features a severed head in a toilet can be) and a great early example of the genre.

The film takes place on the night before Easter and opens with a robbery where a masked gunman mercilessly kills a liquor store clerk. We’re then introduced to a single Mother, Mindy Peters, and her handicapped son, Nicholas, who is obsessed with the holiday – we later find out that his father died on Easter. Mindy has a date with her new boyfriend, Remington, who, unbeknownst to her, is the criminal who committed the robbery and plans on moving in with her despite Nicholas’ objections. When Mindy has to work a double shift and can’t get a babysitter, Remington offers to help but has more sinister plans to party. Unfortunately for him and his friends, a masked killer is on the loose and begins to pick them off one by one.

So what separates Easter Bunny, Kill! Kill! from other recent slasher movies? Firstly, it’s not a remake and even though it’s about a masked killer who chooses to kill during a particular time of the year, I think this is more in homage to classic slashers than an attempt to bring something entirely new to the table. I would have liked it to look a little more authentic (like last year’s The House of the Devil) but this may have been impossible due to budgetary constraints or simply because Director Chad Ferrin wants this to be remembered as an unpretentious modern-day slasher.

There are some gory death scenes which include a drill to the head, plastic wrap suffocation and even a broom to the throat (not the brush end). Muskatell manages to walk a fine line in his portrayal of Remington who’s simply vile but strangely likable (the handlebar mustache and chops complement his pear-shaped body and maniacal laugh for comic effect).

I’m a little uncertain about the direction as the photography is dodgy throughout and certain shots don’t appear to be framed properly – if this was for effect, I don’t know if it always worked. I thought the ending was a little weak and felt rushed but it tied things up nicely.

In the end, though, this isn’t looking to break any new ground; it’s a straightforward exploitation film in the style of the ultraviolent slashers from the 70s and 80s, with unwholesome characters, a thin plot and questionable morals (all of which is good).

May is a young woman that leads a fairly interesting but yet non-eventful life.  She has a full-time job as a vet assistant, she goes home everyday to greet her best friend, of whom is a porcelain doll, and she spends most of her free time sowing her own clothes.  Does that draw you in?  No?!?…well, while May is very lovable, she is also PAINFULLY shy and more than just a little awkward.  In social settings she is a complete wreck, yet her fellow patrons excuse this and tend to see her as a very sweet and sensible young woman.  Bettis displays all of May’s traits brilliantly and never fails to make every conversational frame the most awkward and unnerving segments of the film.  To the films advantage, these segments are welcomed and at often times funny and entertaining.  These qualities are amounted by Bettis’s performance.  It will draw you in, guaranteed, and you will be biting your nails the whole way through.

The key to this film is how May’s friends and coworkers relate to her.  Some are turned on by her innocents, some think she’s a freak, and some feel she’s just too “weird”.  May also wants nothing more than for her piers to see her for who she really is.  Who does May think she REALLY is?  Or better yet, what kind of person  is she capable of becoming???

Throughout the film, it’s as if May is feeling love and friendship for the first time, and throughout most of her personal encounters with other wonderful characters, she reacts to her complete ignorance in the most frustrating and violent ways.  It soon becomes more than May can take, and that is exactly where the film turns into a common slasher, but only at a first glance.  While May seems to take part in a rather tiresome plot switch to slasherhood, our director, Lucky McKee, has an even grander trick up his sleeve.  It isn’t until the films final moments that the pieces literally fall into place.  What we’re left with is a horror film that is incredibly original as a slasher, a drama, and a dark comedy.  More importantly, it is highly entertaining and very thought provoking.

See this film.  It has climbed into the ways of my top ten.

The film begins with fairytale imagery, reminiscent of Pan’s Labyrinth (Guillermo Del Toro Spain 2006). The cinematography and colour exploration in the beginning scenes through the woods describe the ‘other worldliness’ that envelopes a young girl lost in an enchanted snowy place. Alas, the child is wrenched from her idyll as she and the rest of her family are attacked by an angry mob intent on killing them. Their wooden lodge is set ablaze and the little girl is the only survivor. As she runs through the forest her eyes change and this is the first indicator that she is different.

These opening scenes are visually beautiful and reveal what the rest of this film is really about: great art direction and fantastically ambient locations which emboss a story that asks questions about alienation, secret societies, forbidden love and guilt (albeit in a slightly stilted manner). What this film is not is a horror werewolf picture. Once that is acknowledged and the expectation for full on monster mayhem is quashed, this film actually has moments of tension and anticipation, which move the story at an adequate pace.

When the action is transferred to the present, the backdrop of Bucharest suggests a time and place that is steeped in the unconventional. The leading lady, Vivian is the little girl all grown up, nineteen to be precise and she is still running. She lives in a secret world that embraces the mysterious periphery of a city at night. The underground club she effortlessly enters, whilst ‘others’ struggle, is frequented by young adults that appear reckless and uninhibited, which is a sharp contrast to the morose yet smart loner. This is also where we are introduced to her cousin Rafe, a cocky, aggressive, self-confessed romantic. Vivian keeps him and his ‘pack’ in line, but she seeks solace in an abandoned church when her privacy is invaded too many times. Also inside the church, sketching, she meets a graphic novelist called Aiden who is researching the Loup-Garoux (human to wolf shape shifters). Unbeknown to him this is exactly what Vivian and her family are. Desperate to meet her again, he pursues her through the back alleys of Bucharest. She has amazing climbing and running skills so he quickly loses her. However, upon discovering that she works in a chocolate shop, he pursues her. As the title suggests, the contrast of two opposing food sources is a beautiful metaphor for Vivian’s duel personality: blood-her ancestry and her identity, chocolate-comfort, a desire/need. This also helps to describe the contrast of the two men that want her.

Every seven years the leader of the pack, Gabriel takes a new wife, and this year it is Vivian’s turn. Astrid, Vivian’s aunt, was once Gabriel’s wife, and father to Rafe. This causes conflict between her family and within herself. Vivian’s nature means she is continually fighting against who she is and all that it entails, and once Aiden stirs her more human feelings she becomes withdrawn and confused. Because of Aiden’s impact on Vivian, the rest of the pack has to asses how this situation will ultimately affect the lineage of the Loup-Garoux. She is almost repelled by an absinthe swigging Gabriel (Oliver Martinez) who represents all that she despises in her ancestry, so she begins to fight against the traditions which have always prevailed.

At first it appears that the werewolves pose no real threat to humans as their exposure would almost threaten to exterminate their existence. However in one scene a known drug dealer is used as prey for the Loup Garoux as they chase him to his death through the forest. This chase is where for the first time we get to see the transformation. They leap into the air (in slow motion) and with minimum special effects a bright, mystical golden glow poetically transmutes the human into an actual wolf. This hybrid was certainly a surprise as there was tension and a big build up to what exactly Vivian was suppressing.

Although initially a little disappointed when revealed, this has to do with the psyche of what a werewolf looks like; it actually starts to clarify the reasoning behind the behavior of some of the characters as well as questioning how they can control who they kill as wolves. There are big differences to other representations of werewolves, which includes their lack of transformation when there is a full moon and their bite is not infectious (they are however still at risk from silver). Vivian’s growing attraction for Aiden inflames a spiteful and jealous suspicion in Rafe; spying on the couple, Rafe’s pack sneak around and prowl, regarding humans as ‘meat’ and nothing more. Rafe tells Gabriel what Vivian is up to and is told to drive Aiden out of town. I really liked the idea of the Loup Garoux’s view of humans; they are merely play things and a good meal and I would have liked to have seen more development of the cat and mouse chase, it would have provided more of an insight into what kind of lives they lead, as well as contributed to suspenseful and tension filled scenes.

There really is only one significant stalker scene and it revolves around a woman in a red dress (again playing on the Little Red Riding Hood tale), who rejects the supremely confident Rafe. Rejection and jealousy induces the destructive side of him, which sees him intent on destroying Vivian’s relationship in frustrated retaliation. Essentially this is the catalyst which enables Vivian to confront her lineage, which ultimately cements her future.

Lack of identity is this film’s biggest obstacle when trying to connect with the main characters and their circumstances. Vivian is the heroine of the piece, as she is the one who ultimately changes the history of the Loup Garoux- given this, perhaps Vivian should have a persona that radiates this strength and determination. Sadly, Katja Von Garnier neglects Vivian’s stance as the character that holds the power, even though every scene that Vivian appears in she is responsible for the cause and effects of many of the male characters.

Unfortunately, Agnes Bruckner (The Woods-Lucky McKee; 2006) who plays the permanently nonplussed lead looks so despondent and indifferent throughout that she is very difficult to care about, which is a problem as the film revolves around this character. Aiden played by Hugh Dancy (Shooting Dogs-Michael Caton-Jones; 2006) does however possess a charm that is easily translatable and believable. His charm works well against Bryan Dick’s annoyingly self important Rafe, who seems to really enjoy his dual personality and pushes others around him to their limits. Oliver Martinez (Unfaithful-Paul Martel; 2002) as Gabriel, is simply not strong enough. As the pack leader he seems to suffer from the same disease as Vivian- he is completely uninspiring.

Overall the film contains questions and dilemmas which are very interesting but never really addressed; it is easy to see how this may have alienated many of the young fans of the book who perhaps engaged with the turmoil of self identification. The whole look and feel of the film is well shot and realised, but regrettably the lack of horror leaves the film confused as to what it wants to be. It does give the impression that it has dark qualities, yet, like most aspects of this film it is never really explored in detail. The direction is sensitive to its atmosphere and the visual depiction of a crumbling society is beautifully translated. It is worth watching for its imagery, and at 98 minutes running time it is reasonable to suggest that if disappointed by lack of horror content, its fragmented gothic inspired milieu provides an alternative to current hormone driven teen horror/angst pictures.

The young lady who is the subject of Judith is the unfortunate sister of everyone’s favorite masked psychopath, Michael Myers. In the original Halloween, her role is rather limited.  She is the victim, the object of the very young Michael Myers’ rage. As creepy music blares in the background, the camera follows Michael’s point of view as he sneaks up on his sibling as she sits, naked, unaware, brushing her hair in preparation for a Halloween party. In the new tribute film, the stylized camera angle remains the same, but the writer and director try to breathe new life into the cliched character, fleshing out her personality a bit and giving her an identity beyond hacked up pretty corpse.

The idea is an excellent one. Unfortunately, it doesn’t work out quite as well on screen as it does in theory. Due to the small scale of the film, many of the actors, including Sarah Stephenson who plays the title role, are a far cry from their predecessors.  The acting is at times flat and at others, overly melodramatic. Glimmers of personality occasionally shine through, but not enough to make the viewer really care about Judith as an individual. Judith’s party preparations with her friend D’arcy (Ana Gilmore) add little to her already minimal character. The chance to develop Judith’s character is sadly squandered, lost in their rather mundane conversation about boys and Halloween decorations.

On the positive side, one stylistic departure from the original works well in Judith’s favor.  The background music, both during the credits and throughout the film itself, is excellently edited.  The choice of songs adds an eerie, contemporary feel that fits in well with the over-all atmosphere. Judith’s opening credits do a good job setting up the scene of small-town folks preparing for Halloween celebrations.  The choice of the Beach Boy’s serene, oddly haunting melody “Don’t Talk (Put Your Head on My Shoulder)” lends a strange sense of foreboding to the opening shots of Judith. The meticulous attention to detail in set design not only contributes to the dark tone, but is truly a homage to the original.

If only the detail that went into creating an atmospheric setting carried over to the characters. Since the film is meant to add dimension to some minor characters, it would have been interesting to also get more of a glimpse into Michael’s story. True, this tale is meant to belong to Judith, but plenty of tantalizing hints about Michael’s madness are scattered throughout the script and the set. We see his attic room where he locks himself away, listening to loud music, scribbling dark poetry on the rafters and playing with his pet tarantula. Here, liberties are taken with the Michael Myers mythos. He seems like more of an angry, sullen teenager than a deeply disturbed child when his killing spree begins.

For a film intended to offer viewers a fresh perspective on a well-known story, Judith winds up raising more questions than offering insight about the characters and their motivation. The concept is there, but the execution is lacking. And as any Halloween fan knows, in this genre, execution is everything.

A fitting statement from one of the featured subjects in Horror Business, a documentary on the horror film industry that has a lot of monkeys with cameras, but very few filmmakers. One doesn’t have to be part of mainstream Hollywood to be considered a director, but most of the no-talent hacks showcased within this movie are shooting stuff at the level and with the same amount of care as a high school student shooting their English Media project. There are a few small appearances from accomplished filmmakers involved in the horror business, such as H.G Lewis, Sid Haig and Lloyd Kaufman, but for the most part the featured “directors” don’t stand the slightest chance of ever making it in the horror business this film professes to be about.

The one exception is David Stagnari, an avid horror fanatic that is attempting to jumpstart a career as a director with his short film Catharsis. Stagnari is a person a lot of horror fans could easily relate to; a fan since he was a small child, Stagnari intelligently discusses the state of the genre today, what he wants to accomplish as a director and reminisces of his past experiences watching double-features at a drive-in, which has now been paved over and replaced by a “Babies R’ Us”. Although only a few clips of Catharsis are shown throughout Horror Business, you can tell that, even though Stagnari may never break it big, he is at least trying to create something of substance.

On the other end of the spectrum, we have Ron Atkins, a pretentious douchebag (excuse the terminology, but it’s the most accurate description of the man) who doesn’t even attempt to make anything remotely worth watching. Armed with a consumer camera, Atkins shoots his films without the aid of lighting, a crew, a tri-pod, a script or most importantly, a single intelligent thought. The level his films operate on is best surmised in the instance where Atkins adds a subplot to his film in which Dick Cheney penetrates a dog in the rear, and then laughs profusely at the joke. His view that what moviegoers think of his films is irrelevant as long as he enjoys them is despicable and shows a total disregard for the (few) people who may end up renting or buying one of his films, but his wife’s reasoning that anyone who dislikes Atkinson’s movies actually enjoys them doesn’t even make the least bit of sense in the most warped of logic. Atkins then has the gall to trash Hollywood films for their poor quality, a bold statement coming from a director whose entire oeuvre is disregarding both the audience and any apparent attempt at quality on his part. As well as absent filmmaking skills, Atkins also has anger issues (he cusses out a teenage Burger King employee) and what must be a tendency to lie or at least stretch the truth to hyperbolic extremes, one example being his claim that he’s sold over 30,000 copies of his movies. Considering that on IMDb none of his films have over 94 votes as of this posting (and the average vote-count hovering below fifty), I find this very hard to believe, although admittedly there is the small chance that his parents have purchased 29,900 copies of his films.

The rest of the filmmakers fall somewhere in between the two: not entirely as reprehensible as Atkins, but none nearly as respectable as Stagnari. There’s an alcoholic who chooses his cameraman a few minutes before his shoot, two adult men still living in their parent’s home and producing schlock on par with Atkins, and an animator who specializes in flash animation. It’s about as far from the horror business as you can get. This doesn’t mean that Horror Business had to be a failure: if the documentary had focused on the pitfalls of the various directors and what holds them back, it could have worked. As it stands, Horror Business seems unfocused. There’s no message or apparent point behind the proceedings; it consists of interviews and behind the scenes set footage, stuff that would make a great special feature on a DVD, but isn’t sufficient or substantial enough to work as a film of its own. It retains a certain level of interest, but it never feels like a real movie. That’s the real problem with Horror Business: not that it focuses on people so far outside of the horror business, but that it doesn’t know what to do with them.