Slasher flick revisiting, and Nightmare on Elm Street 4,5,6,7...

So I've been into a right old slasher flick rampage of late - what with the Friday 13th and My Bloody Valentine remakes coming out, it got me thinking about revisiting some of the slasher flicks I'd only seen once or twice on DVDs that were otherwise collecting dust on my DVD shelves - I'll point out that I saw Friday 13th 2009 in the cinema back in February, which is when this slasher revisiting rampage started.

I'll also point out that back in my teenage years, and then again during my time at uni when DVD exploded big time, I was frequently watching slasher flicks ... and that last year I had a whole Halloween franchise revisit ... but you know how it is, there's so many movies out there, that you just happen to stop watching certain flicks or certain sub-genres for a while through no actual intention, it's just how it goes.

Anyway - I started off, after the Friday 13th remake, with My Bloody Valentine (the original), then there was (in no particular order), Madman, Nightmare In A Damaged Brain, The Burning, and Maniac ... then I fished out Friday 13th Part 5 as I'd only seen it once on the DVD that had otherwise been sat around for a few years not getting watched at this point ... then I got the His Name Was Jason DVD, which in itself was great, and in a wider context got me all hot and bothered to rewatch some of the Friday 13th flicks again - I ended up doing all of them (but not in full chronological order, oddly enough).

Then a poll on Homepage of the Dead - about picking your favourite slasher icon (Jason, Freddy, Michael or Leatherface) got me intrigued in going back to Nightmare on Elm Street 4 through 7 - movies I'd only seen once-a-piece many years ago (the first three I've seen more than once each though), so, without further delay, some thoughts...

Nightmare 4: The Dream Master - it's pretty tame, the kids are annoying, they're poorly written, Freddy is miles away from being scary or intimidating, and I just couldn't help but be continually annoyed (for this and the two following movies) by the lead telling all their friends about Freddy - if they didn't do so, their friends wouldn't have a clue about Freddy, so therefore the lead is murdering their chums by proxy ... silly bastards. Also - Freddy raps in the credits ... oh dear lord.

Nightmare 5: The Dream Child - thoroughly sick of "Dream" sub-titles now, plus it's a direct follow-on from #4, which was naff anyway - plus, it's decidedly NOT scary ... while the dream elements are creative, I don't find them scary, nor especially interesting ... also, how come everybody falls asleep in the blink of an eye? I wish I could do that, but no, it always takes at least ten or twenty minutes to actually drift off. Plus, Freddy is far from scary or intimidating - he's just stupid, but still the best part of the movie ... then, once again, more end credits rapping - geeeeeeeez.

Nightmare 6 ... or rather Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare - oh my fuckbeans, this is bad ... I mean really, really bad. It's not scary (again), the dream sequences have gotten more ludicrous and downright shit (such as the videogame sequence with a horrendous Power Glove advert-cum-spoof), Freddy is a complete joke, the script is awful, the acting is pish - especially by that black-haired woman who turns out to be *sigh* Freddy's daughter from when he tried to 'be a family man' (with added childhood abuse flashbacks for extra cheese) ... she is really shit - "aaaaaaaarrrrggghhhh ... oh wait, my hair's flopped over my right eye, let me break the moment completely and move it out of the way ... ahem ... aaaaaaarrrrrggggghhhhh" ... I mean for fuck sake ... then there's that bullshit with the 3D glasses.

Oh, and the bullshit about killing Freddy - with a few knives and a pipe bomb - WHAT THE FUCK?! That's how you kill him? If you can't kill him by burying his bones in sacred ground, or by that weird shit in the church in #4, or whatever it was in #5, how is a few knives and a pipe bomb gonna do it?

Nightmare 7 ... or rather Wes Craven's New Nightmare - a pre-cursor to Scream in many ways, it's actually quite interesting, but sadly it takes too long to really get moving. I feel it could have been 15 minutes tighter with ease, or how about putting a bit more Freddy into it - who, while only really there in the second half, is finally scary again - no more Power Glove gags, no more rapping, no more "oh just forget he was a child killing kiddy fiddler as we sell soft toys of him to children far too young to watch these movies" - no - he's bad ass once again, rocking a kick ass trench coat and boots and sporting a genuinely fucked up face (the make up in 4 through 6 was crap) ... the dude's scary again.

Now - as is the trend - A Nightmare On Elm Street is getting remade. Is this necessary? Of course not, but it's happening, and at least they've got the dude that played the decidedly messed-in-the-head Rorschach filling the sharp-fingered one's boots. Let's hope they at least make it scary, and make Freddy a dark and disturbing figure.

His Name Was Jason...

Out of the collection of 'franchise slashers' - the main three being Freddy, Jason, and Michael (with Leatherface hovering around in fourth place - at least in terms of sequels anyway) - it has always been Jason Voorhees who was my favourite. Freddy is alright, but he's too based around quips and chit-chat, plus he turned into a joke far too soon - not to mention too large of a cultural figure, which is especially disturbing considering he's originally a child-murdering paedophile! Beyond part 3 there's bugger all point in watching a Freddy movie - I mean part 6's 'death by map' says it all really. Michael Myers, my second place slasher figure (tied with Leatherface admittedly) - he's silent, but deadly, with a penchant for heavy breathing behind an iconic, but creepy-as-fuck, mask. #1 rules, #2 is decent, #3 (while not including Myers or a Myers-a-like AT ALL) is surprisingly good, but then #4 comes along and it all turns to shit - shit mask, boring plots, and Michael Myers just becomes a pale immitation of what he once was. H20 vaguely increased the franchise's standing somewhat, but it was massively in debt to Scream, and then of course there was the 'sequel that dare not speak it's name' - Halloween 8. Nuff said really. However, Rob Zombie came along with his remake - and yes, it's most definitely a Rob Zombie movie, and while flawed and not up to the standard of Zombie's original effort The Devil's Rejects, I still dig it. One of the best things the remake did, was make Michael Myers scary again - he regained his standing as a formiddable foe, a position long since lost by shoddy sequels. Leatherface - well, TCM#1 is simply a genre classic of epic proportions, nuff said. TCM#2 is gleefully OTT in every respect. TCM#3 has its moments, but ends up drifting wide of the mark. TCM#4 ... "real sequel" my arse, quite frankly. TCM2003 - it was never going to be a patch on the original, and it wasn't - but you know what, I quite like it on it's own you know? The follow-up to TCM2003 was completely unnecessary though. Now - the main man himself - Jason Voorhees. He's got the coolest look, including his burlap sack hillbilly-ish outing in #2, he's got the second-coolest signature weapon in the shape of his trusty machete (nothing beats a screaming chainsaw, natch), he's got the coolest name, coolest signature theme (two echoed half-words and everybody knows who you mean), and the greatest number of cool sequels. Also of particular interest, Jason was merely talked about in #1, and then only seen in a 'final scare' dream sequence - it was his mother doing the slaying. Freddy, Michael, and Leatherface never had that to contend with that when they showed up on the scene. But let's just whip through the Friday 13th franchise with my brief thoughts, shall we? #1 - gore-ific fun. Teenage camp counsellors getting offed in the woods, Jason's crazy-ass mother, Savini's masterful gore effects, it really kicked off the 'slasher set at a camp' craze, and the introduction of Manfredini's fantastic score. #2 - Jason turns up, and rocks the burlap sack look with style. Classic kills, classic plot of - yep - camp counsellors in-training being picked off one-by-one, a cast of interesting-but-simple characters that you like watching - and well, a legend is born. #3 - 3D playfulness, Jason gets his signature hockey mask, funky themetune, it picks up right after #2, plus I got to to-and-fro a couple of emails with Larry Zerner a number of years ago concerning the alternate ending, which was cool ... mind you, Miner's directing skill seems to have taken a nose-dive since #2 as it's an endless succession of characters seeking out strange noises and being scared to do so because we the viewer knows something might happen - but they don't know, so why are they creeping around with a scared look? Plus the dialogue is awful, and that hippy chick's 'scared' moment is nothing short of laughable. However - Jason rocks up and you get basically 30 minutes of awesome to cap-off a kinda rocky flick. #4 - follows #3 directly which is just awesome, Savini is back, the characters are again interesting-but-simple (and genuinely entertaining), it looks great, Crispin Glover gets the best death - and dance, Jason gets killed, it looks fantastic, the woods are dark, scary and it's lashing down a storm when shit kicks off - which is how the franchise works best. #5 - aye, it's not good really is it? At least it still looks like #4, so this is the last time we'll see the night-time lit and shot in such as a way as they had been doing ... and, well, there is some nice totty throughout. Certainly the lowest point in the franchise thus far unfortunately. #6 - JASON LIVES! The birth of 'zombie' Jason, Alice Cooper on the soundtrack, pure OTT fun, Thom Mathews being thoroughly 1980s, and I have fond memories of watching it on Christmas Day many years ago (it was a present, along with...) #7 - Jason's best un-masked appearance - the effects are simply jaw-dropping - Kane Hodder's first character-defining entry, telekenesis is an interesting addition, some nice totty, a last hurrah for the 'kids having a house party' plot ... such a shame that it was neutered by the MPAA - the uncut footage would have made it much ballsier. #8 - the last properly good Jason movie, one could argue - although calling it "Jason Takes Manhattan" is a bit daft when it takes an hour to get to the Big Apple, and the whole 'kids voice, vomits lake water, turns into boy Jason' bit at the end was just stupid, and again the MPAA stuck their stupid nose in and neutered it - still though, this is Hodder's finest moment as Jason - the dude just rocks throughout - it's amazing how much joy you get out of him punting a ghetto blaster down the pavement ... everything in Manhattan rocks, if only they'd had some more cash to extend all that ... the themetune of "The Darkest Side of the Night" kicks ass, Jason's 'pruned and soggy' look is cool, it's nowhere near as shoddy as I originally thought it was when I first saw it as a teenager, and despite it's flaws I'm now quite fond of it. #9 - the gore is cool, and any time Kane Hodder is on screen I'm liking it ... then they come along and think 'outside of the box' and forget to bring Jason with them, so instead we get a bunch of twats we don't care about whatsoever farting around being chased by Jason's soul ... ugh ... then there's the distracting inclusion of a couple of Evil Dead references in the final act, Jason getting taken to hell, the utterly daft "Final Friday" moniker (New Line were never going to buy a franchise to kill it off, sheesh!) and the seed for a turd-festival "VS" mash-up happens. #10 - I enjoyed the idea of 'Jason in space', but converse to my thoughts 'then and now' on #8, #10 isn't as good as I once thought ... anyway, the final appearance of Kane Hodder who simply IS Jason is good, there's some nice kill gags, some interesting ideas (even though Uber-Jason doesn't look as cool as he should really). Freddy VS Jason - a spin off, rather than a franchise-follower in my view, it was complete gash when I saw it and I've never been back. Cringey Nu-Metal soundtrack, not at all scary, it's got 'that one out of Destiny's Child ... I think' in it, it's too slick, Kane Hodder isn't in it anymore and ugh ... I just didn't care for it at all ... at least it had Monica Keena in it though. Friday 13th 2009 ... well, you can see my thoughts on that here: http://deadshed.blogspot.com/2009/02/friday-13th-2009and-another-rant-about.html

SAW V...

Yes - it has taken me ages to get around to musing on this flick - but never mind, because here comes some muse-juice.

Saw V, basically it's an entire film made simply to explain what the fuck happened in Saw IV, and why the fuck that Hoffman dude - who looked pretty much identical to that Strahm guy - decided to come over all Jigsaw's New Apprentice. As Amanda got the Alan Sugar treatment for not paying attention to "the rules", and simply made torture devices to do nothing but kill, she was out of the game.

There's a similar strand connected to this Hoffman dude, but it's all pretty up in the air to be honest. Why bother investing the time and effort into believing what's happened when it'll just be re-explained in the next movie or two?

I thought the original Saw was a genuinely interesting and fresh slice of low budget indie horror ... then Saw II happened (resulting from a non-Saw script that was so similar to the franchise in question here, they just said "oh fuck it, just make that the next Saw movie instead") which was decidedly "meh" ... then Saw III came along, and I thought tidied it all up quite nicely. I would have ideally left it there - Jigsaw dies, Amanda dies, that nurse dies, the dude dies and the kid is left in that room - a suitably bleak, but final ending to the franchise.

Then they simply had to blunder in with the abominable Saw IV, in which they thought "oh bugger, we've practically killed off every single character except for one or two 'background artists' who had a couple of lines - let's make them the new focus of the movie!" ... so we ended up with that SWAT guy, who suddenly decides to overstep his official duties and come over all Inspector Gadget - minus the gadgets, humour, dog, niece, but with all the dopey barging forward.

I bet he wishes he had a ruff-talking dog and a super-smart crime-fighting niece watching his back though, because like many of the characters in the Saw franchise, they don't pay a blind bit of notice to "the rules" - a factor especially galling in Saw IV and now Saw V. You'd have thought that, mostly being detectives, they'd detect the key to surviving a Jigsaw "test" - do what he says, listen carefully to the message (although admittedly, you don't have to listen that carefully to get the underlying message).

At this stage it's become a franchise centred around torturing bastards and testing career-obsessed people in possession of one-tracked-minds.

Saw V is no different - you've got the ludicrous amount of time-line-bothering back-and-forth, a protagonist that doesn't pay attention to "the rules", a bunch of daft twists, more evidence of how Jigsaw seemingly possessed the ability to foresee the future as clear as crystal (explained limply by saying 'if you can predict human behaviour, then you'll do alright in this game sunshine') and of course - lashings of gore.

Now, as a gore-hound, the effects are eye-saucering ... although the sheer volume of nastiness, rather than Savini-style spectacle and magic, becomes swiftly hard-to-swallow, especially when you realise that there's yet more Saw films to come ... a sixth for sure.

Like I suggested earlier, it should have ended at Saw III, nuff said ... but oh no, they've gotta keep blundering on, making the franchise stray into intensely preposterous territory and further and further away from it's indie roots of intrigue and shock.

Saw V didn't shock me. I did grimace a couple of times - but then again, if you don't grimace at some poor bastard's forearm bursting through his flesh with squishy sound effects, then you simply aren't human and nobody in their right mind would want to meet you down a dark alley. Was Saw V any better than Saw IV? Probably, because it explained (mostly) what the fuck Saw IV was supposed to all be about.

The franchise really has become an industry unto itself (with spiralling production costs, and diminishing returns) ... a cookie cutter industry. Take the "Hello Zepp" theme tune, whack it on the audio track, give the cameraman some speed and some assorted hallucinatory drugs so he can flap around all over the latest trap like an ADD-addled hamster, have the writers take another kind of drug that lends itself to developing vast plot twists that could rival the daftest conspiracies bandied about by morons on "teh intarwebz" for head-scratched "eh?"-ness ... ... *gasp* ... ... then get an editor who also acts like a drug-addled rodent, and some CGI whizz-kid to splash a bit of digital-gore about to help turn the whole film into a frenetic lump of chaos in post production.

And new to the method with Saw V, add a bunch of distracting oval patches of post-production work where you've had to lighten the image up because you've suddenly realised the image is too dark, when really, you should have just left it alone.

So in summary (about time too), Saw V ... well I guess it's better than Saw IV, but that movie was utter shite, so it's not saying much really is it? Well, see you in a few months for some chit-chat about Saw VI, I guess...*sigh*

Indiana Jones 4...

Another week and another trip to the cinema, it's certainly become something of an addiction of mine thus far into 2008, and with at least two other must see flicks in the next couple of months or so, it's most likely not about to stop.

So here we are, pretty much two decades since the last Indy movie, and as I was predicting it's suffering the same critical fate as Land of the Dead did. A loved, revered and established trilogy gets a new sibling 20 years after the last ... well, crusade.

Some people are decrying it as garbage, others are saying it's just the same as the other movies ... as for me, I'm somewhere in the middle. I never ever expected it to best either Raiders or Last Crusade, but figured it'd either beat or at the very least tie with Temple of Doom somewhere in the back of the pack.

My assumptions on my own opinion were indeed correct and this is where I stand. While it's a little bit too far fetched at a couple of junctures, twice in one set piece even, it never strides into territory where I'm still not entertained. In fact, the first truly far fetched sequence I absolutely had a blast during (aptly enough) ... it even tied into the quintessentially 1950s vibe of the film (while the predecessors were quintessentially 1930s, in that serial adventure vein in which the Jones films were forged).

Shia LaBeouf, as in Transformers and Disturbia, can do no wrong. The lad is consistently entertaining and talented, bringing a genuine warmth and humour to his roles which sit nicely with the audience. As for Ford, he certainly doesn't look too old for this film, not a jot - if Stallone can do Rambo aged 61, then Ford can do Indy 4 ... and pull it off he most certainly does.

It makes several nods to the previous films, but it never really obstructs proceedings too much, their inclusion feeling natural and necessary.

Mind you, it does get a bit wobbly half-way in before picking up ... at which point you're either with it till the end or you're lost for good. Indeed, what with it being the 1950s it is all a bit sci-fi ... but sci-fi in a jungle with blow pipes, monkies, copious cobwebbing and vines.

I say you're either with it by the end or not, and I stand by this. It does all get quite far fetched ... but then again Last Crusade featured a knight in a cave guarded by an invisible 'faith bridge' who'd been there for centuries guarding Jesus' dad's coffee cup. Raiders has the Ark of the Covenant, look at it and your face melts off ... and then there was Temple of Doom ... well, nuff said beyond monkey brains and that nutter tearing hearts out.

Needless to say Indy 4 will be the awkward sibling of the other three, tight-knit brothers. The new kid on the block will have to work to fit in with the rest of the franchise, but that was always going to be the case, so ignore that as much as possible - indeed, I purposefully didn't re-watch the first three prior to seeing the latest installment so that I could judge it purely on it's own.

I think one of the problems many of the film's detractors will have with it, is that they grew up watching Raiders, Temple and Crusade. There's a special place for them in their hearts and they don't look kindly upon shedding any negative light upon them. They don't like to seek out their flaws in order to cut the new kid on the block some slack ... indeed I can understand such a mindset.

Having re-watched many of my childhood favourites on DVD, I've rekindled my love for them and gone back in time to when I first viewed them. I recaptured that magic and wonder, but equally - perhaps this is exclusively down to my film school background though - I've also spotted the flaws, the audience-acknowledging smug bits, the lesser quality sequels and so forth ... but I still love them just as much, certainly not less.

With this in mind, I've cut Indy 4 some slack, but I do wonder if Lucas, Spielberg and Co's venture to recapture the magic and fun they had on set didn't fully translate to the film ... or at least the script, which is where any of the film's flaws originate.

Regardless, it's a fun romp and good to see Ford back in the Fedora. Certainly not the best - but it never was going to be - so it's at least as good as Temple of Doom, and frankly that's as much as could ever have been realistically expected ... so just enjoy it.

At least they didn't do a Die Hard 4.0 and water it all down and mutate the formula.