Well From The Inside Out is still continuing, although I have been going through a bit of a dry spell with the creativity...that said, I finished the second draft of the second act today - so that means I can get onto the third act, and that means I can soon have it finished and then start on the treatment, and then start putting the treatment out there.
...
Editing wise, it continues apace - it's coming together nicely, like I said, the films are even better than last year's Sex & Ethics films, so yeah - it's good.
Tuesday, 12 May 2009
X-Men Origins: Wolverine...
I never saw any of the X-Men movies when they came out, but what with having a consistent posse of mates to go on frequent cinema trips with, there's so many movies to go and see - two of the group were really looking forward to Wolverine - and I thought it looked like fun, so off we went.
In the end, the two who were really looking forward to it came away a bit disappointed (I figured they would, the way they were banging on about it everytime the trailer was shown).
This said, it's not trash, it's a good bit of fun and I had fun watching it - despite not being someone who read the comic books, nor watched the kids cartoon (although I do remember the themetune, recently heard for the first time in years at a birthday party), and - when I saw Wolverine in the cinema - I had not seen the X-Men movies either.
Mind you, this being an origin story, it's not necessary - and indeed, I can view it in chronological order - Origins first, then the X-Men movies - and indeed, I've now seen the first X-Men movie (I got the 6-disc box set for a few quid, probably like a lot of other folk who love a bargain in a recession).
Action wise, Wolverine was packing heat - I've seen hotter action, but I've also seen far colder action ... if I dare draw that dodgy metaphor any further ... but I did think that in the last 30 minutes plot mostly went out of the window and was replaced by punching. Enjoyable punching, but also a little bit lacking.
Also, I would have very much liked the 'Wolverine through the ages' war montage (Civil War through Vietnam) to have been it's own 15 minute segment. I felt like the point where Wolverine 'goes solo' came far too quickly - we were there inside 15 minutes, when it really should have been at the 30 minute marker.
Or am I just seeking indulgence - the sight of Logan, chomping on a cigar, Thompson machine gun in hand, stepping off a troop transport onto the Normandy beaches was made of "pure win", quite frankly. More of that please, a little bit of indulgence now and then is a good thing after all.
For someone, such as I, who hasn't seen anything X-Men before (but was aware of it), Origins fills in all the right blank spots at the same time as acting as good fodder for the fans. Hugh Jackman is an absolute joy to watch as Wolverine (heck, the man just has the X factor ... and I don't mean having that shitty tv show taped on his DVR), it never truly stumbles (but it never truly thrills your pants off) and generally, well, it's a solid effort.
That whole bit where Logan was charging about on the motorbike was awesome though, as was the whole war montage.
In the end, the two who were really looking forward to it came away a bit disappointed (I figured they would, the way they were banging on about it everytime the trailer was shown).
This said, it's not trash, it's a good bit of fun and I had fun watching it - despite not being someone who read the comic books, nor watched the kids cartoon (although I do remember the themetune, recently heard for the first time in years at a birthday party), and - when I saw Wolverine in the cinema - I had not seen the X-Men movies either.
Mind you, this being an origin story, it's not necessary - and indeed, I can view it in chronological order - Origins first, then the X-Men movies - and indeed, I've now seen the first X-Men movie (I got the 6-disc box set for a few quid, probably like a lot of other folk who love a bargain in a recession).
Action wise, Wolverine was packing heat - I've seen hotter action, but I've also seen far colder action ... if I dare draw that dodgy metaphor any further ... but I did think that in the last 30 minutes plot mostly went out of the window and was replaced by punching. Enjoyable punching, but also a little bit lacking.
Also, I would have very much liked the 'Wolverine through the ages' war montage (Civil War through Vietnam) to have been it's own 15 minute segment. I felt like the point where Wolverine 'goes solo' came far too quickly - we were there inside 15 minutes, when it really should have been at the 30 minute marker.
Or am I just seeking indulgence - the sight of Logan, chomping on a cigar, Thompson machine gun in hand, stepping off a troop transport onto the Normandy beaches was made of "pure win", quite frankly. More of that please, a little bit of indulgence now and then is a good thing after all.
For someone, such as I, who hasn't seen anything X-Men before (but was aware of it), Origins fills in all the right blank spots at the same time as acting as good fodder for the fans. Hugh Jackman is an absolute joy to watch as Wolverine (heck, the man just has the X factor ... and I don't mean having that shitty tv show taped on his DVR), it never truly stumbles (but it never truly thrills your pants off) and generally, well, it's a solid effort.
That whole bit where Logan was charging about on the motorbike was awesome though, as was the whole war montage.
Wednesday, 6 May 2009
Valkerie, accents and the Germans...
I wasn't expecting Valkyrie to be good at all - the main bug-bear was the cast of Brits & Americalanders playing Germans, while using their native accents ... something which went very wrong with the movie The Bunker, where German soldiers all sound like they're either from Lahndahn, or The Norf.
Then, while not trying to be part of the "only as good as your last movie" brigade, Superman Returns (Singer's previous movie) was a complete load of pish ... plus, let's be honest, Scientology is a huge red arrow that points away from Tom Cruise's actual acting talent ... and the tabloid coverage of him, his missus and their celebrity spawn doesn't help much either.
So - with sights set decidedly low - I ultimately thought that Valkyrie was pretty good over all. I'll take events depicted with a pinch of salt - Hollywood, afterall, was the gang of pretty boys who stole the Enigma machine apparently (when in fact it was the British ... bloody U-571) ... ... anyway, I was quite surprised to find that this movie was really quite tense - even though you know what happens (well, most of it anyway - the state of modern education is shocking) - and yes, you can even get past Cruise the Couch Jumper, and find Cruise the Actor instead.
The actor who was so good in Born On The Fourth Of July, the actor who was gripping in Eyes Wide Shut - that guy is on screen, although admittedly having an eye patch and only two fingers and a thumb also help add to the illusion.
Mind you, it is a bit distracting when Eddie Izzard crops up and gets all shouty in the bathroom as it became eerily close to some of his (hilarious, by the way) stand-up comedy. I was half-expecting a lampooned James Mason as the voice of God routine.
What wasn't as distracting, however, was the actor's native accents ... well, not as distracting as I'd been expecting - but it was still right there in your face ... along with Bill Nighy's trade mark twitching.
Tension, though, is the film's strongest suit, and it was during the scenes showing the preparation, process and failed execution of the plans which provided the most wear to my seat's proverbial edge.
However, I recently (and finally) got to see the German language film Downfall - the meticulously detailed, decidedly non-Hollywood account of Hitler's final days in his doom-laden bunker. Now, quite frankly, that's how it should be done. The main problem with Valkyrie, is that it's decidedly Hollywood - perhaps not as Hollywood as say the likes of History-raping U-571, but it's all quite flashy and pretty looking. Downfall is about the darkest time of the darkest era in Germany's history, made by Germans and in the German language. It feels authentic, as well as being both endlessly gripping and morbidly fascinating.
Valkyrie on the other hand, surprisingly enjoyable as it is, is like History by Coca Cola ... History with a Pinch of Salt ... still, at least it's not the usual sort of 'Historic' garbage peddled by Tinseltown.
On a final note, perhaps it's best for each country to make war movies about their own side - it always feels vaguely inaccurate, or even wide-of-the-mark when one country covers another country's side in a battle. The Americans make (and have made many great ones) war movies about American boys fighting the bad guys ... but if I want a movie about the German side, I want it in German and made by Germans - and you know what, I want the same for the other countries. Quite simply, you can't truly represent someone else's side without being a part of that very culture.
Valkyrie, as I've said, is a decent movie. But Downfall's native viewpoint feels like something you could legitimately show in schools, and perhaps it has been. I know I watched Schindler's List twice in High School - once in History and once in Religious Studies - but I don't imagine any kids will be seeing Valkyrie in class anytime soon (although with the current state of education - thanks Blair, Brown, Balls et al - I wouldn't be surprised if they did), but I would fully support them getting a look-see at the bloody brilliant Downfall.
Then, while not trying to be part of the "only as good as your last movie" brigade, Superman Returns (Singer's previous movie) was a complete load of pish ... plus, let's be honest, Scientology is a huge red arrow that points away from Tom Cruise's actual acting talent ... and the tabloid coverage of him, his missus and their celebrity spawn doesn't help much either.
So - with sights set decidedly low - I ultimately thought that Valkyrie was pretty good over all. I'll take events depicted with a pinch of salt - Hollywood, afterall, was the gang of pretty boys who stole the Enigma machine apparently (when in fact it was the British ... bloody U-571) ... ... anyway, I was quite surprised to find that this movie was really quite tense - even though you know what happens (well, most of it anyway - the state of modern education is shocking) - and yes, you can even get past Cruise the Couch Jumper, and find Cruise the Actor instead.
The actor who was so good in Born On The Fourth Of July, the actor who was gripping in Eyes Wide Shut - that guy is on screen, although admittedly having an eye patch and only two fingers and a thumb also help add to the illusion.
Mind you, it is a bit distracting when Eddie Izzard crops up and gets all shouty in the bathroom as it became eerily close to some of his (hilarious, by the way) stand-up comedy. I was half-expecting a lampooned James Mason as the voice of God routine.
What wasn't as distracting, however, was the actor's native accents ... well, not as distracting as I'd been expecting - but it was still right there in your face ... along with Bill Nighy's trade mark twitching.
Tension, though, is the film's strongest suit, and it was during the scenes showing the preparation, process and failed execution of the plans which provided the most wear to my seat's proverbial edge.
However, I recently (and finally) got to see the German language film Downfall - the meticulously detailed, decidedly non-Hollywood account of Hitler's final days in his doom-laden bunker. Now, quite frankly, that's how it should be done. The main problem with Valkyrie, is that it's decidedly Hollywood - perhaps not as Hollywood as say the likes of History-raping U-571, but it's all quite flashy and pretty looking. Downfall is about the darkest time of the darkest era in Germany's history, made by Germans and in the German language. It feels authentic, as well as being both endlessly gripping and morbidly fascinating.
Valkyrie on the other hand, surprisingly enjoyable as it is, is like History by Coca Cola ... History with a Pinch of Salt ... still, at least it's not the usual sort of 'Historic' garbage peddled by Tinseltown.
On a final note, perhaps it's best for each country to make war movies about their own side - it always feels vaguely inaccurate, or even wide-of-the-mark when one country covers another country's side in a battle. The Americans make (and have made many great ones) war movies about American boys fighting the bad guys ... but if I want a movie about the German side, I want it in German and made by Germans - and you know what, I want the same for the other countries. Quite simply, you can't truly represent someone else's side without being a part of that very culture.
Valkyrie, as I've said, is a decent movie. But Downfall's native viewpoint feels like something you could legitimately show in schools, and perhaps it has been. I know I watched Schindler's List twice in High School - once in History and once in Religious Studies - but I don't imagine any kids will be seeing Valkyrie in class anytime soon (although with the current state of education - thanks Blair, Brown, Balls et al - I wouldn't be surprised if they did), but I would fully support them getting a look-see at the bloody brilliant Downfall.
Monday, 4 May 2009
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.
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.
Saturday, 2 May 2009
My Bloody Valentine 2009...
Another day, another horror remake ... and yes, another horror remake that doesn't surpass the original - what a shocker. In fact, the only way that the remake beats the original is in terms of gore - mind you, the uncut original's gore was mighty impressive for 1981 sensibilities in the slasher genre.
Annoyingly, the original movie was absolutely cut to ribbons in the UK until recently - but thankfully YouTube provided me with the means to see the original's uncut gory glory.
Anyway - with that in mind, the remake only just pips the original in terms of gore ONLY.
Everything else about the original is superior - the story, the plot, the characters, the coverage, the pacing, the direction, the writing - all superior in the original.
What's so wrong about the remake? Well, first off - the digital veneer of cheapness to the visuals doesn't help, and is constantly annoying, a major release such as this should at least be able to afford crew who are capable of making digital look it's best, rather than making it look like any old DV.
Next up - the first 15 minutes essentially crams in two massacres - it's like watching a shit version of the 1981 movie in 15 minutes, and then following it up with 80-or-so minutes of crap (mostly). This makes for an odd structure to the movie, as well as sets up a cast of piss-poor characters acted by a bunch of Dawson's Creek type rejects who are either half-arsed eye candy, purely annoying, morally bankrupt, or deathly boring and empty.
While I didn't see it in 3D, you can tell where the 3D would have been employed - and that's the only other good side of this remake - you can see how the effect would work quite well thanks to staging action in different planes - so that the foreground and the background appear almost layered on top of one another ... if that makes any sense.
Anyway, even this aspect isn't handled to it's full potential - in a movie where you get a gleefully gory shot or an eyeball skewered on a pick axe thrusting into the camera - why on earth are two axe-to-head kills later in the movie missing axe-into-camera 3D fun?! Indeed, some of the kills are annoyingly cut short (or flat-out not seen at all).
Plot wise, it's below the worst of Dawson's Creek or any of those teen dramas - full of a bunch of 'douchebags' cheating on each other, moaning about who is fucking who and being thoroughly dull - do we care? No we don't, now hurry up and die via a pick axe that should be getting thrust into our face every 10 minutes, but which isn't.
Heck, it barely feels like a remake of the original movie anyway - the story has been jumbled around, elements picked out for binning or for dumbing down/ham-fisting ... put it this way, I found myself glancing around the room as I waited impatiently for another kill to happen - the meat in the sandwich, so-to-speak, was insanely bland.
Then the final act 'reveal' happens ... and again you're thoroughly bored - the fantastic image of a gas-masked miner doesn't even feature in the final sequences. Why do that?! The image of a pick-axe-wielding mining maniac is superb for a slasher movie - it worked wonderfully well in the original - but here it's been handled so poorly.
Plus, quite frankly, the acting is shit - slashers aren't known for great acting, but the classics aren't known for boring dullards. Friday the 13th for example, you enjoy watching those kids on screen, you enjoy their banter, and you believe in them ... same goes for Halloween, same goes for The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and the same for the original My Bloody Valentine, to name but four.
Who'd have thought a movie about a psychotic miner wearing a gas-mask and swinging a pick-axe could have been this dull and toothless?
Annoyingly, the original movie was absolutely cut to ribbons in the UK until recently - but thankfully YouTube provided me with the means to see the original's uncut gory glory.
Anyway - with that in mind, the remake only just pips the original in terms of gore ONLY.
Everything else about the original is superior - the story, the plot, the characters, the coverage, the pacing, the direction, the writing - all superior in the original.
What's so wrong about the remake? Well, first off - the digital veneer of cheapness to the visuals doesn't help, and is constantly annoying, a major release such as this should at least be able to afford crew who are capable of making digital look it's best, rather than making it look like any old DV.
Next up - the first 15 minutes essentially crams in two massacres - it's like watching a shit version of the 1981 movie in 15 minutes, and then following it up with 80-or-so minutes of crap (mostly). This makes for an odd structure to the movie, as well as sets up a cast of piss-poor characters acted by a bunch of Dawson's Creek type rejects who are either half-arsed eye candy, purely annoying, morally bankrupt, or deathly boring and empty.
While I didn't see it in 3D, you can tell where the 3D would have been employed - and that's the only other good side of this remake - you can see how the effect would work quite well thanks to staging action in different planes - so that the foreground and the background appear almost layered on top of one another ... if that makes any sense.
Anyway, even this aspect isn't handled to it's full potential - in a movie where you get a gleefully gory shot or an eyeball skewered on a pick axe thrusting into the camera - why on earth are two axe-to-head kills later in the movie missing axe-into-camera 3D fun?! Indeed, some of the kills are annoyingly cut short (or flat-out not seen at all).
Plot wise, it's below the worst of Dawson's Creek or any of those teen dramas - full of a bunch of 'douchebags' cheating on each other, moaning about who is fucking who and being thoroughly dull - do we care? No we don't, now hurry up and die via a pick axe that should be getting thrust into our face every 10 minutes, but which isn't.
Heck, it barely feels like a remake of the original movie anyway - the story has been jumbled around, elements picked out for binning or for dumbing down/ham-fisting ... put it this way, I found myself glancing around the room as I waited impatiently for another kill to happen - the meat in the sandwich, so-to-speak, was insanely bland.
Then the final act 'reveal' happens ... and again you're thoroughly bored - the fantastic image of a gas-masked miner doesn't even feature in the final sequences. Why do that?! The image of a pick-axe-wielding mining maniac is superb for a slasher movie - it worked wonderfully well in the original - but here it's been handled so poorly.
Plus, quite frankly, the acting is shit - slashers aren't known for great acting, but the classics aren't known for boring dullards. Friday the 13th for example, you enjoy watching those kids on screen, you enjoy their banter, and you believe in them ... same goes for Halloween, same goes for The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and the same for the original My Bloody Valentine, to name but four.
Who'd have thought a movie about a psychotic miner wearing a gas-mask and swinging a pick-axe could have been this dull and toothless?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
