The 21st episode of 'The Sunshine Happy Kpants Hour' is uploaded and now available through iTunes, Talkshoe and streaming LIVE right here!
I hate to say this, but after the edit was done and I listened to some of the playback, I realized how bad this turned out. The music is awesome, but the content is messed up. A bit of feedback, skipping and the levels are wonky. I promise for something better next week. Try and ENJOY!
Songs played:
1) I'm All, So You're All by Automatic Static
2) Holding Out For Spring by Jonnie Murphy
3) Cute Yellow Pills by Little Plastic Stars
4) One More Morning by Heights Alliance
5) She Fell Asleep by Coed Pageant
6) Apples by Kate Martin
Well, kids.... here we are again. It crept up on me this year, but it's officially my 2nd birthday celebration for this blog! I can't believe I've been filling the internet with my silly thoughts for that long, but it seems to be true. Yet, somehow you all keep coming back!
I also am considering adding a book review every now and then, more television reviews and maybe even video game reviews! Now that I have been reading again, getting into some TV shows people have recommended and playing a lot more XBox 360, it only makes sense to blog about it. Right? Not that I feel I have a whole lot of insight to offer you on any of those things. I just love to write and people seem to enjoy it. Also, if you have anything you specifically want me to talk about or review, drop me a line or leave a comment. I'll do my best to honor your request.
Despite the uninspired execution of this movie, I still have faith in the "found footage" genre. I think there are still good stories out there waiting to be told. I'm not sure that every movie would fit in this genre. (like the possilbe decision to make 'Halloween 3' a "found footage" film) But after seeing what was done with 'The Blair Witch Project' and 'Paranormal Activity', I really see potential. Actually, the night I watched this, I made it a whole "found footage" fest. I also watched the Spanish film 'Atrocious' and the low budget 'The Poughkeepsie Tapes'. (reviews coming soon) They were 3 very different movies and complimented each other well. This was 'alternate history', 'Atrocious' was kind of a ghost story type thing and 'The Poughkeepsie Tapes' was a faux-documentary with footage included that was shot but the serial killer in the story. Four hours I'm actually glad I spent, even with this movie included.
I remember the first time I heard about 'The Hangover', I didn't have a whole lot of interest. Then everyone started talking about it and how good it was. At that point I started to wonder if maybe I was missing out on something really good. So, eventually, I took it upon myself to give it a shot.... I really enjoyed it. As of today, it is a part of my DVD collection and I've watched it a few times. Now, when I heard about the second one, I was hopeful for the same characters.... but in a different situation. Instead, we got a 'Die Hard 2: Die Harder' situation. What I mean is.... we got the same scenario again, but in a different place. Then the reviews came in and they were pretty mixed. I still had a desire to check it out, as I really love 'Die Hard 2'. Once I rented it, I didn't actually get around to watching it for over 2 weeks. I just wasn't in the mood for more of the same. When I finally did see it, well, I have to admit that I was pleasantly surprised. I think that I actually liked it more than the original. (Did I let the cat out of the bag too early?) The reality of the situation is: more of the same isn't always a bad thing! We had all of the original cast back for this movie. We had the same director and even if the story was almost identical, it felt fresh to me again. I actually think that the familiarity with the characters and situation made me appreciate it more and the I could laugh out loud because I was ready for it. All of those things are good things, I think. Who doesn't like things that are familiar? I do.
Let me start this review by saying that a lot of the trailer isn't in the film. Most obviously, the "Bloody Mary" sequence. Having read about the film after its release, I found out that there is a huge amount of additional footage that was shot and that this is what ended up in the trailer. In the end, tons ended up on the cutting room floor. Since the DVD release, you can now see it in the special features and they've also release a version of all 3 films called the 'Chronology'. It places all the films in order and includes additional footage. (This does not include the Japanese 'Paranormal Activity: Tokyo Night') With that clarified, we move on....
As this is a sequel/prequel to the first two in the franchis, many of the same characters return. Maybe not in the way we met them, but as their younger selves for most of the film. It's a good plot device and a good way to get repeat viewers back into the storyline by having something familiar to latch on to. This film also answers a lot of questions laid out in previous installments. It also fills in some gaps and somehow advances the story in reverse. Not that we needed a visual explaination of the past events, but it's kind of nice to re-live it the way the girls did. There are many genuine scares here. Anytime you have little kids and ghosts mixed up, things get creepy. I'm not entirely sure why that is, but it's a proven formula and it's taken full advantage of here. Those wonderful little moments where a child sees something that isn't there. Is it really there? Or are they just imagining it? It also makes us wonder if when our kids are out of our sight, what is really going on? Are the things that happen to them really happening or is it just a game? It's all that much more striking when you have kids of your own and see this film.
If you just read my review of 'The Stuff', you might remember some of the nice things I said about it and the nostalgia of watching an 80's film.... none of that applies here. NONE OF THAT.
I am assuming that this first full length movie directed by Bob Balaban, was supposed to be some kind of dark satire. (and for those of you who don't know Bob Balaban, I think of him more as an actor.... look him up, you'll know exactly who he is) I kept trying to get some kind of subtext in the screenwriting about the 50's or the 80's or the dark comedy angle, but if it's there it must really be hidden. I couldn't see anything in all of the images and storyline that was anything more than a family in crisis. Two, not very good, parents who feed their child human flesh. A child that has horrific nightmares about this parents and see's them doing strange things and becomes suspicious. A counsler that doesn't buy into it all until it's too late and a bit of blood and guts. There isn't anything charming or enjoyable about watching this. The characters aren't likable, the lead is annoying, the script is boring at best and it just has an overall negative feel to it. It's kind of like watching a news story about puppies being killed for thier fur. You want to know why anyone would do that, but instead.... you just get to hear about and see puppies being turned into fur and no ending in sight. No explanation. Nothing at all. And in my opinion, I guess it's better that way. I really could care less about this family or anything to do with them..jpg)
Horror films from the 80's are a different breed of film making. Dare I say, they're a different creature? (all puns intended) It seemed like back then, creature features were all the rage and that was even using the limited FX they had available. Now, it seems almost taboo to venture into creature features, even with all of the CGI and FX leaps and bounds we've made. Yet, you can't deny the charm of the old days and ways. Funny thing is, you can't always go back. What I mean is that we tend to romanticize things from our past. What seemed like the be all end all of horror movie making, doesn't always hold up. For example, I loved the movie 'House' when I was a kid. William Katt fighting evil in a big spooky house.... who couldn't love that? Then I recently watched it again, it didn't hold up as well as I hoped it would. This is one of the reasons that I kind of stay away from going back to the "classics". I tried to watch 'Ghoulies' recently to and I had to turn it off. It was just so bad.
The silly plot goes like this: (taken from IMDB.com) "A delicious mysterious goo that oozes from the Earth is marketed as the newest dessert sensation. But the sugary treat rots more than teeth when zombie-like snackers begin infesting the world." That's actually the storyline! A hobo (for some reason) eats stuff bubbling up from the ground and finds it delicious. He shares it with a buddy and soon it's EVERYWHERE! A big corporation markets The Stuff as a taste treat and never thinks to test it to see if it's safe for human consumption. It turns out to be something people can't stop eating once they've tried it. Whole families have refridgerators full of nothing but The Stuff. Soon, a little boy figures out what's going on and begins a crusade to try and stop people from eating it. He's joined by an investigator who is also trying to dig up dirt on The Stuff. They find out the truth behind it all and are soon being chased down by hordes of "zombie" like consumers un the mind control of The Stuff. It's like some kind of alien parasite mind control thingy. People die, things explode, Stuff oozes out of people, it's a big mess. (SPOILER!) In the end, The Stuff is kind of stopped and justice is served.... or is it? The company that marketed The Stuff has redisgned it, with less 'Stuff' in it and are going to start selling it again.... or are they? Ugh.
I never claimed to be an uber-fan of the original 'Human Centipede' flim. However, I did defend it for being orignal and really quite well made. It has a grossly over-hyped reputation as being one of the sickest films of all time.
'The Human Centipede II: Full Sequence' was filmed entirely in color, but converted to black and white in post production. I hear that there are a couple of color scenes still, but they were left out of the version I saw. The film was originally scheduled for a straight-to-DVD release. It was then banned in the United Kingdom by the BBFC because of its "revolting" content, but was eventually granted an 18 certificate after over 32 cuts were made. That means there is a lot of material that was left out and I've only heard of three of them. This could mean a very jam packed Blu-ray release. This film was released in theaters, on a limited run, but has not made it around the entire world just yet. That's why I believe there is still hope for a full, uncut version to make it here to the states. Now, once you see all of the things portrayed in this film, you'll be glad that it's in black and white. The blood is only part of it and what your mind can create out of the parts that are missing, are far worse then anything that was really filmed. I can imagine that if the final scene was in color, it would hit you like a punch in the throat with a metal glove. Because after spending an hour and a half getting used to the lack or color, the sudden addition of it would be shocking to the system.... just like the film itself.
As I sit here watching 'Hostel: part II' and writing this review, I'm reminded what it is about the 'Hostel' films that I enjoyed. However, that same feeling isn't felt in the 3rd installment of this unexpected franchise. Like the 'Saw' films, this concept never struck me as something that would go on and on. 'Saw' seems to have found a solid formula that blends the traps, with the character of Jigsaw and a rather obvious soap opera storyline. The 'Hostel' films just haven't found that groove. The 2nd film was still written and directed by Eli Roth, the man behind the 1st film. Because of that, it still felt the same and had a good storyline. This new chapter was directed by Scott Spiegel, the producer from the first two. I have to give him credit for taking the reins and feeling confident in his skills, but it just never seems to come together. The storyline is okay, the actors involved are pretty good and it looks okay on paper. Sadly, the writer, Michael D. Weiss just doesn't quite get the big picture of it all. He has a resume that reads like a bad day of watching the SyFy channel and that doesn't seem to matter to the people who paid to make this direct to DVD title. What he did, was to take out the "scary" part of the storyline. What makes 'Hostel' 1 and 2 frightening, isn't the torture and killing of random strangers, it's the fact that it takes place in remote and unfamiliar places. Anyone who travels can tell you that it can be rather scary when you're in a place you don't recognize and have no control over what's going on. Throw in the "evil hunting club" that seems to have its eyes everywhere and you've got something to work with. Michael D. Weiss put the story in a very familiar place, Las Vegas. He made the Elite Hunting Club, a very open organization who bet on the kills. It wasn't about an audience for the members paying to kill people. It was about the thrill of doing whatever you want to whoever you want and not worrying about getting caught. You could live out any single fantasy you've ever had. If you had money, you could be a murderer.... if even for one day. The original films also focused on the survival of the characters and their will to live. It also gave us a glimpse at what someone is capable of when they're pushed to their breaking point. It was about redemption. This all seemed to be missing in 'Hostel: part III'. And the ending? Well, let's just say it was cliche, unreal and downright stupid. It really ruined any other parts of the movie that might have kept me interested. Let's stop here and get to the plot.
