Plato Shrimp » Recently Seen

Rampop II · 10/19/2022 11:32 pm

Midnight Mass

When I decided to gamble on Midnight Mass, I assumed that, at best, I might be pleasantly surprised, but I never thought I’d wind up recommending it. Has anyone else seen this? Let me begin by saying I hated Walking Dead, and popular shows like Squid Game and All of Us Are Dead were so unappealing to me I didn’t even get past half an episode.
So when a friend told me Midnight Mass was “terrifying,” and that "The first couple of episodes might be a slow start but stick with it," you can imagine my skepticism. And none of us here has to imagine it; we’ve all learned the hard way to be wary of recommendations when so many of them turn out to be for just more of the same old re–packaged McCrap. “Terrifying” is a word I use sparingly (adding all the more emphasis to my recent use of the word in describing The Innocents). But hey, maybe this time will be different, right? Gotta put myself out there. It’s seven one–hour episodes, I’ll give it ’til the middle of episode three.

Episode 1: Introductions and stage–setting permeated with sufficiently ominous indicators. All aboard.
Episode 2: The first half fools you into thinking you’ve indeed been lured into another sucky horror–themed soap opera. Patience wears thin on the tarmac, and the music doesn’t help. But the second half then reassures us, all that was merely for the sake of lulling us into complacency, and now shit’s about to go down. Flight crew prepare for takeoff.
Episode 3: The heretofore unidentified menace is revealed, and it becomes clear we’ve got something original that’s worth sticking around for. Landing gears up.
Episodes 4 through 7: From here it’s just one delightful “oh shit” moment of sacrilegious mayhem after another. We’re at altitude and officially on vacation. I was beyond pleasantly surprised.

Elegantly sacrilegious, and intricately so. Makes me wonder if this really is the first time it’s been done this way. It’s imaginative, original, well thought–out, and it deftly sticks the landing. Midnight Mass gets my recommendation.

Vague, Rampop, vague!
I know.
So, what kind of menace are we dealing with? Aliens? Demons? Homicidal maniac? Some kind of killer virus?
I can’t tell you.
You’re not exactly selling this, Rampop.
I know! I could sell it in one sentence, but that same sentence would also spoil it.
I did try to tinker with the text colors here for the purpose of hiding a spoiler, but I don’t think it’s possible.
So if you’re willing to gamble, It gets my recommendation. I wasn’t 100% convinced of that until towards the end of the 3rd episode, but it’s worth the wait.

...other than that, though, what a (mostly) shitty week of viewing I’ve had!!!

Demons
Sure, we've all seen Demons. A classic that's nowhere as cool as I remember it being, but still fun. Terrible acting, predictable moments, fainting females and metro–macho males on motorcycles... maybe the helicopter was intended to drive home the point that this film is not to be taken seriously? I do love the premise, the makeup, and the only instance of which I am aware that shows new demon teeth pushing the old human teeth right out of the gums, which I had always felt was the proper way to grow demon teeth.
I would love to see this movie done just a little more seriously, though not too much, just with capable actors and a better script. The timing would be good right now, with all the pandemic hysteria. Maybe a demonic outbreak spreads to a nearby anti-masker rally, which then spills over into a nearby HMO building, where your doctor is also your insurance investigator... oh, right, you guys don't have HMOs up there, do you? Well, let it suffice to say that a horde of demons would be needed in order to make them any more evil.

Saloum
It works better as an action/suspense drama than as a horror movie, and works well as such, populated with a memorable cast of of heat–packing disparate parties with fleeting alliances and hidden agendas. The West African setting is refreshing. The “horror” part, however, ehhh. Again it's refreshing to see the African–influenced attempt at breathing new ideas into the genre, but unfortunately we wind up with just another showdown against a shapeless glob of CGI that plays more like a video game than a movie.

Love, Gilda

I do. I fucking love Gilda. When my “Freelance Writing for Fun and For Profit” class was given the assignment of picking a famous person living or dead to have dinner with, I chose Gilda. We went on an imaginary date to a rib joint and saw Sam Cooke perform.
I always knew Gilda was lovable and talented, and I’m not too surprised to learn through this doc that she was also brilliant. I had some stylistic complaints (I'm glad I didn't have to spend too much time listening to Bill Hader and Amy Poehler read Gilda’s diary), but those turned out to be minor irritations. Mere imperfections in the packaging. Love, Gilda is a treasure.

The Tingler
Caught this c/o another Svengoolie presentation. I’ve never seen Vincent Price play any character other than himself, so that alone is a highlight, and his freakout scene is priceless. The bloody bathtub scene is a special cinematic marvel. The ridiculous plot is largely peripheral for a good deal of the film; much of the horror stems not from the tingler itself but from the evil that men do. The hilarity of the puppet and the blackout scenes cannot be overlooked. Hey, it’s a William Castle horror flick with Vincent Price, need I say more; if you go for that sort of thing, then you probably already have. Who am I talking to?

Yokai Monsters trilogy: 100 Monsters, Spook Warfare, and Along With Ghosts

Absolute drudgery except for the final 5–10 minutes of the first movie, 100 Monsters, when all the demons show up for an entertaining closer that is actually pretty insane. Somewhat educational in that many of the monsters featured here are of the traditional Japanese variety (yes, the umbrella monster is a thing). But you'd be forgiven for wondering if this wasn't a case of a few supernatural scenes being edited into an unrelated and unremarkable jidaigeki that never reached completion.

Ginger Snaps
Yes, I finally got around to this one. So thoroughly promising, so thoroughly disappointing.

Subspecies
Respectable but forgettable vampire flick of the classic variety. Meh.

Eaten Alive
It was fun. Don’t be deceived; this ain’t no Texas Chainsaw Massacre by any measure. A mostly unoriginal but plenty entertaining B matinee.

Beyond the Black Rainbow
Re–watch. I had to take a break from the schlock and dip into my top–shelf inventory. The suspenseful pacing felt entirely different the second time around since I knew what to expect, but that freed my attention to more fully appreciate the amazing visual composition and great soundtrack. I don’t need to tell you guys, this is a very special movie.

Evilspeak

Unforgivable piece of shit!
Unsurprisingly so, of course. Full disclosure, I discovered that the North American release (and the version on Prime Video I saw) is still missing about 8 minutes, but a lot of those cuts were apparently made for pacing, not censorship, and it would have to be a mind–blowing eight minutes to make up for this yawn–a–thon of an atrocity. Standard 80s instance in which all the crazy stuff we saw advertised in the trailer occurs within the final 10 minutes, and even those 10 minutes are anticlimactic shit. There’s never even a reveal. Standard no–refunds ripoff from an era before social media was around to curb such egregious abuse being visited upon theater audiences.

XX

Mostly awful.
No, not X, and not XXX either, but every bit as deserving of your disapproval.
Billed as a horror anthology with all female directors, it bears all the hallmarks of a forced project, with heavy emphasis on making it an “all female” presentation with little concern for talent or quality. It’s not as if talented female directors don’t exist, of course. This film apparently couldn’t get any of them on board. Only two of the four directors have any credits at all to speak of, and those few credits are hardly impressive. None of the four are even promising up–and–comers, and one isn’t even involved in film production at all: Annie Clark is a music artist who has never worked in film production before or since XX.
The fact that XX was released in 2017 provides further circumstantial evidence of this being merely CYA window–dressing intended to capitalize on the Me Too movement and make Hollywood look more gender–inclusive. Tired, badly–recycled tropes all around. Skip it.

Baba Yaga: another censored print on Prime!!!
I became suspicious at some of the edits about 20 minutes in. I’m still developing the necessary nose for these. The official runtime for Baba Yaga is 90 minutes; the one on Prime is a paltry 78 minutes(!)
Apparently an 81–minute version also exists.
Go fish.

A couple more words about Jakob’s Wife...
I neglected to mention that this is a horror comedy. I also neglected to mention that it features a humorous scene of Barbara Crampton getting caught wanking in front of a window while her vampire “familiar” watches and conducts from the garden below. So that's fun.

All–in–all a pretty sorry week, albeit with highlights. Wish me better luck going forward...

Last edited by Rampop II (10/19/2022 11:43 pm)

Rock · 10/20/2022 12:34 am

Demons is a favourite. Embrace the chaos.

I've seen XX, and while most of it has faded from memory, I only remember the Karyn Kusama segment being any good.

Rock · 10/20/2022 12:36 am

Gayracula (gay Dracula porno)
The Seduction of Amy (Jean Rollin porno)

Jinnistan · 10/20/2022 8:22 pm

I'm back-logged on a lot of write-ups. Here's a quick one.

Not a horror film by any stretch of the imagination, although it has a couple of garish moments. Unless you're someone who considers the films of Peter Greenaway and Yorgos Lanthimos to be "horror", and some do due to their tendency to disturb and slightly disgust and just the general odd unsettling air about them.

I admit that I have no idea what a "culinary collective" or "sonic catering" consists of, whether these are actual things that people participate in or whether it's the fruit of Strickland's fetid imagination. "The Institute" is a remote and luxurious place for artists to workshop their concepts, here concerning a group which revolves around creating music and "dance" based on the erotic rituals of culinary textures, all while being followed by a rather unfortunately flatulent documentarian who's slowly being tortured by the gastro-incompatible delights that he's forced to witness and painfully digest. The similar Berberian obsession with sound design is used here for entirely different purposes, although the earlier film's "melon scene" frequently comes to mind. Meanwhile, a rival group of artists whose application for a residency at The Institute was denied turn out to be terrorist mimes, which may be the film's funniest joke (sound vs. silence, and equally insufferable in pretension) if only half-implied. The Fluxus-inspired performance art group, that takes its meta-immersion to ridiculous lengths, is best described in the film as "perpetuating the archetype of epicurean toxicity with cunnery and hysteria". Well, they can have the epicurean toxicity, just give me the flanger.

The appeal of a film like this depends on your sense of humor and taste for swallowing its absurdities in good faith. Luckily, as a fan of both Greenaway and Lanthimos, I have such a wavelength. Also, it's a great way to piss off some vegetarians.

8.5/10

Jinnistan · 10/20/2022 8:29 pm

Jinnistan wrote:
Rampop II wrote:
Threads (in case anyone is interested)
One of Crumbs' faves.

I only just realized that the crumbs' favorite that I was thinking of happens to be Things, not Threads. I apologize for the confusion this has caused. Things is also on Shudder at the moment though.

Rock · 10/20/2022 10:12 pm

Erotic Nights of the Living Dead

Rock · 10/20/2022 10:14 pm

Hoping Flux Gourmet hits one of my services at some point. I've liked everything I've seen from Strickland quite a bit.

crumbsroom · 10/21/2022 8:12 am

Jinnistan wrote:
Jinnistan wrote:
Rampop II wrote:
Threads (in case anyone is interested)
One of Crumbs' faves.
I only just realized that the crumbs' favorite that I was thinking of happens to be Things, not Threads. I apologize for the confusion this has caused. Things is also on Shudder at the moment though.

No reason to clarify this and possibly ruin someone's night.

Rock · 10/21/2022 9:00 am

lol

Things is great.

crumbsroom · 10/21/2022 10:35 am

Rock wrote:
lol

Things is great.

One of my greatest joys is that is somehow became a minor cult phenomenon. I was pushing this shit on people as far back as 1990 and when the internet started to be a thing, it was a long time before you could even find anything about its existence. For a long time I thought I might have the only copy in the world. Apparently, there were a few other suckers out there who rented it. I wasn't alone after all

Jinnistan · 10/22/2022 7:19 pm

There's been a lot of talk about Argento's "return to form". Calm the fuck down. Dario has managed to make a competent, if pedestrian, slasher film without completely embarrassing himself for the first time in a couple of decades. I have some cookies if he wants one.

6.5/10

This is an impressive directorial debut from Chloe Okuno who already shows a strong skill for Polanski-esque quiet, claustrophobic tension and an acute control over what the camera shows, and more importantly doesn't show. Some of the Polanski touches are direct visual references - the illuminated raindrops on windows from Rosemary's Baby, a swift flash-pan that resembles the classic mirror scene from Repulsion. Or the agoraphobic way Okuna keeps the faces of creepy men on the streets blurred in the background, anonymous and indistiguishable. All of this sets up enormous promise. And Maika Monroe makes an alluring eye for the audience's vicarious perception.

Problem is that the script is total horsehit, which it fakes well enough through the second act, but it all falls apart with several missed avenues neglected for the sake of the simpliest and most predictable and least satisfying way out. Did Okuna ask for Ti West's advice on sticking the landing?

7/10

Rock · 10/23/2022 3:55 am

Gonna try to see Dark Glasses next weekend. Keeping my expectations in check obviously, but it would be nice to see a second good horror movie in theatres this month after Barbarian.

Rock · 10/23/2022 3:56 am

Halloween Ends
The Demoniacs

Rampop II · 10/26/2022 8:15 pm

Guillermo Del Toro's Cabinet of Disappointments

A collection of one–hour vignettes macabre, each by a different director, being released piecemeal on Netflix throughout the final week of October. The first batch of four were released yesterday (10/25).

Did I fall for a fine–print bait–and–switch? Am I the only one here who didn’t know that Guillermo del Toro wasn’t directing, just “executive producing,” and (seemingly) had little to do with the creative process? Am I the last to find out that not even one of these episodes was a Del Toro creation? Should I have no one but myself to blame for my disappointment?

Bottom line: after the first two episodes (Lot 36 and Graveyard Rats) I decided to cut my losses and skip ahead to the one by Jennifer Kent (of Babadook fame). After the unimpressive Nightingale I'm sure I'm not the only one hoping to see evidence Kent won't turn out to be a one–hit wonder. But her episode isn't available until the 28th, and apparently she's getting the finale. After reading the synopses of the other two episodes currently available, I yawned and watched a couple of One Piece episodes instead. So that should say plenty. I'll come back when Kent's installment is up.

Did Del Toro vet these little creations before sticking his name on them?

Having only watched two episodes, am I passing judgment too soon?

They aren’t bad, per se, nor are they without their strong points, but they aren’t great, either. I’ll start with the good. It won’t take long:

The Good:
Tim Blake Nelson, finally getting to flex his acting muscles in a lead role, playing something besides a country/western cracker, and demonstrating that he can easily handle the job of lead man.

The animated intro. I could spend the entire half–hour just watching more of that. Massive dose of eye candy.

The visual effects are mostly quite good, but not necessarily put to good use. While I do value such things, I can’t live on special effects alone. “A special effect without a story is a pretty boring thing." is a George Lucas quote; say what we will about the man, he wasn’t wrong all the time, and this is one of those instances in which I couldn’t agree more with him.

The Bad:
Mostly predictable, lackluster plots, countless wasted opportunities, and generic, forgettable CGI–laden follow–throughs that just aren't scary. Run for your life, here comes the glorified cartoon.

I want to go back and take note of the writing credits. Not everything is the director's fault, even if their names are featured in the promotional spots. Here’s the rundown of the episodes in order, alongside their respective directors, in case anyone's interested:

Lot 36; Guillermo Navarro

Graveyard Rats; Vincenzo Natali

The Autopsy; David Prior

The Outside; Ana Lily Amirpour

Available October 28th:

Pickman’s Model; Keith Thomas

Dreams in the Witch House; Catherine Hardwicke

The Viewing; Panos Cosmatos

The Murmuring; Jennifer Kent (fingers crossed)

Rampop II · 10/26/2022 8:19 pm

Jinnistan wrote:

For a second, there, I thought...

crumbsroom · 10/26/2022 8:55 pm

Rampop II wrote:

Guillermo Del Toro's Cabinet of Disappointments

A collection of one–hour vignettes macabre, each by a different director, being released piecemeal on Netflix throughout the final week of October. The first batch of four were released yesterday (10/25).

Did I fall for a fine–print bait–and–switch? Am I the only one here who didn’t know that Guillermo del Toro wasn’t directing, just “executive producing,” and (seemingly) had little to do with the creative process? Am I the last to find out that not even one of these episodes was a Del Toro creation? Should I have no one but myself to blame for my disappointment?

Bottom line: after the first two episodes (Lot 36 and Graveyard Rats) I decided to cut my losses and skip ahead to the one by Jennifer Kent (of Babadook fame). After the unimpressive Nightingale I'm sure I'm not the only one hoping to see evidence Kent won't turn out to be a one–hit wonder. But her episode isn't available until the 28th, and apparently she's getting the finale. After reading the synopses of the other two episodes currently available, I yawned and watched a couple of One Piece episodes instead. So that should say plenty. I'll come back when Kent's installment is up.

Did Del Toro vet these little creations before sticking his name on them?

Having only watched two episodes, am I passing judgment too soon?

They aren’t bad, per se, nor are they without their strong points, but they aren’t great, either. I’ll start with the good. It won’t take long:

The Good:
Tim Blake Nelson, finally getting to flex his acting muscles in a lead role, playing something besides a country/western cracker, and demonstrating that he can easily handle the job of lead man.

The animated intro. I could spend the entire half–hour just watching more of that. Massive dose of eye candy.

The visual effects are mostly quite good, but not necessarily put to good use. While I do value such things, I can’t live on special effects alone. “A special effect without a story is a pretty boring thing." is a George Lucas quote; say what we will about the man, he wasn’t wrong all the time, and this is one of those instances in which I couldn’t agree more with him.

The Bad:
Mostly predictable, lackluster plots, countless wasted opportunities, and generic, forgettable CGI–laden follow–throughs that just aren't scary. Run for your life, here comes the glorified cartoon.

I want to go back and take note of the writing credits. Not everything is the director's fault, even if their names are featured in the promotional spots. Here’s the rundown of the episodes in order, alongside their respective directors, in case anyone's interested:

Lot 36; Guillermo Navarro

Graveyard Rats; Vincenzo Natali

The Autopsy; David Prior

The Outside; Ana Lily Amirpour

Available October 28th:

Pickman’s Model; Keith Thomas

Dreams in the Witch House; Catherine Hardwicke

The Viewing; Panos Cosmatos

The Murmuring; Jennifer Kent (fingers crossed)

I went to a showing of Pupi Avati's Arcano Inctatore that Del Toro introduced in person, with a long talk on what he loves about this film. I wasn't completely won over by it, by the way he talked about how the film affected him made me see him as a man who really understands how movies work. The guy knows his shit. And the guy is mad talented.

So it continues to drive me nuts that I have never really been able to find the love for his films. Respect? Sure. But not the love. And that's what I'm in this game for.

Rock · 10/26/2022 9:40 pm

Wolfen
Even the Wind is Afraid
The Slumber Party Massacre
Doctor of Doom

Rampop II · 10/27/2022 2:32 am

Berberian Sound Studio

Naturally I loved it but I’m not going to pretend my face didn’t drop into a countenance of bewildered stupidity when the credits rolled. So I’m that guy, huh? The only one who didn't get the joke. Sigh. Gimme my dunce cap and I'll take it from there. As much as I enjoyed Berberian, I was stumped by the ending. In my defense, there were a lot of decoys to throw me off the scent and toy with my expectations. The whole business with the plane ticket and the ominous “you know why they hired you” quote had me on the lookout for some sinister reveal on the employer’s side. As the main character slowly deteriorated, I was led to wonder if he would crack and go slasher on us. Then there’s the whole business with the beginning of the movie being suddenly repeated shot–for–shot but with everyone speaking Italian. I thought maybe we were getting into some kind of “alternate reality” scenario. So when the climax came, I missed it. I was so busy expecting one scenario or another (also busy fixating on the proper way to coach a good scream) that, when the movie’s real monstrosity was revealed, it flew straight under my radar. Yes, I understand now, that was part of the point. So when the credits rolled, I was a perfect portrait of a slack–jawed halfwit.
“Huhhh??? Whur’s the rest of the moovee? Derrrr…”
Then I swallowed my pride and, for the first time ever, looked up one of those “ending, explained” articles. Oh, the shame runs deep. It burns! The sting of humility!
Christopher Nolan has stung me like this a couple of times, too; I had to watch both Inception and The Prestige a second time before I understood what was going on in those films. I love all of his films, I truly do, but dammit, Nolan, stop rubbing my mediocre intelligence in my face!
It’s not like I need or want to be spoon–fed my material; on the contrary I hate it. But these guys outsmart me. And I think I can tell when it’s my failing and not theirs, meaning I feel pretty confident in my ability to distinguish between a cleverly–crafted brain teaser and just poor storytelling.
I’m all about accepting the mystery, but what bugs me is not knowing if I’m supposed to be accepting the mystery, or if something just went over my head. Maybe, as with the aforementioned Nolan flicks, Berberian would have become clearer to me upon a second viewing. Now I will never know. Maybe it was the sluggishness from the wildfire smoke that led me to cheat and just look it up. But that’s ok. Anyway, when I looked it up, I approved. Very cool. Very clever.
Great flick and I’m glad I finally saw it.

It also really made me want to watch The Editor again, so I did.

I fucking LOVE The Editor. I love the colors, I love the music, I love the cast, I love the jokes, love all that nudity… and I do love the editing. Great ending, too. Essential viewing for Giallo fans, but not only for Giallo fans.
For anyone who does not know, The Editor is a Giallo PARODY, and should be approached as such. But it is also an amazing homage. Fangoria called it a love letter to the Giallo genre, if I remember correctly. Definitely definitely definitely recommend.

Juan of the Dead

Meh. In an attempt at a fresh take on the zombie flick, this one gets a twist in that news of a zombie outbreak in Cuba is reported in state–run media as civil unrest blamed on counterrevolutionary dissidents. The idea seems like it could have gone somewhere but the movie did nothing with it. Instead it was just another zombie flick with standard low–brow comic elements, like the stock bumbling fat man. I’ve run into no fewer than three of these annoying characters just in the past week. They differ from Don Quixote’s buddy Sancho, in that Sancho was foolish enough to follow an insane man. These guys instead merely exist to make the hero look macho and mighty, by being hopelessly clumsy, dumb and unattractive. Can’t do anything right, constantly fucking up the plan, living in admiration of the protagonist while perpetually stuffing his face and falling on his ass. The main characters try to pull off some entrepreneurship by charging money to clean up zombies or some shit, I dunno, I’ve already forgotten. Kinda like Ghostbusters, maybe. Anyway, I say skip it.

Lucio Fulci’s Gates of Hell trilogy:
I had to double–check the order in which these were released; City of the Living Dead came out in 1981, and the other two followed in ’82.

City of the Living Dead

I remember being sufficiently creeped–out by this as a kid when I rented it under the title Gates of Hell. That retching scene got permanently seared into my memory, and the way the malevolent ghouls got around slipped a lingering uneasiness under my skin. A spook suddenly materializing right in front of you, just long enough to jam a lethal object into your gut before vanishing again? That shit ain’t fair! It created a morbid, pervading sense that nowhere was safe. The re–watch did not disappoint, and I was able to pick up on a real sense of humor evident in the film that I must not have caught back in the day. The method of dispatching mortals with that occiput–squishing fistful of dough became amusing with repetition, and the makeup on some of the undead extras led me to coin a new expression: Fulci Casserole. Who wouldn’t demure from some o’ that on the craft service table? Oh, Fulci, Fulci Fulci… did they have to be real worms? I’m typically not the biggest fan of substituting the gross for the scary, but Fulci has a special way of doing it, and what else should one expect from a Fulci flick? It’s not like being gross is all Fulci has to offer. Still not sure why he preferred to fill a studio with real worms instead of, I dunno, noodles? Maybe he had enmity with the owners. Or the janitors. Or the actors.

The Beyond
[img]https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71LV+lgYGvL._CR0,142,1279,1279_UX256.jpg[/img]
Fulci’s sense of humor features more prominently, here, with the graphic gore taken to hilarious extremes. That… urrrgh, don’t let me spoil it for you. That ultimate betrayal, let’s put it that way. Had me howlin. There’s no way that wasn’t supposed to be funny.
It’s also kinda fun to notice the influence of other films being released at the time, probably the most obvious one being Raiders of the Lost Ark.

The House by the Cemetery

Because who doesn’t want to move into a house with a cemetery for a front yard? Not to mention a coffin in the floor of the hallway, and a cellar door hastily nailed shut with wooden boards?
This one seems to have nothing to do with the other two of the Gates of Hell series. Sometimes hilarious, sometimes painful, The House By the Cemetery is a movie with a serious identity crisis; it just doesn’t know what it wants to be. A hodgepodge of borrowings from various other movies, thrown together willy-nilly. I don’t know if repeating the same cellar staircase sequence four times in a row was bold, lazy, humorous, or what, but it was definitely something. House by the Cemetery was either a parody or just an unloved trainwreck, but it is amusing regardless. I did appreciate the only shot I know of that depicts the bouncing POV of a person whose head is being dragged down a flight of stairs. I also learned that one of the scenes in The Editor seems to have been based on a scene in this film, unless another film pre–dates this one. Favorite line: “Damn tombstones!” About as perfect a selection for a “so bad it’s good” session as one could hope for.

Monstrum

Giant monster in the woods, 16th Century feudal Korea. Big budget production with a seasoned and capable cast. it's good. I wouldn't shake anyone by the collar over it, but I do give it my blessing.
Good "giant monster" movies are deceptively tricky to pull off. Cinema history is replete with forgotten knockoffs of the all–time greats, because there needs to be more than just a monster and a boss battle to make a monster movie stick, and it may be not one essential ingredient but a delicate balance of several. Volumes have been written about how the memorable ones tend to be about something besides the monster (eg cold war fears, social classism). It helps for the monster to take on sufficient archetypal qualities, and it also helps if the monster’s presence is more like that of an actual character in the story, rather than that of a mere prop. And for that, sooner or later, our monster is gonna need closeups. Footprints, shadows and sound effects are all good, and can carry a good deal of the weight in the right hands, but sooner or later we’re gonna need a proper introduction. Gotta gaze into the face of the fiend, make it personal, establish that intimate relationship with it. So it was when Ann Darrel first laid eyes on Kong’s grimacing grill, so it was when Godzilla first peered over the mountain, and so it was when Bruce’s massive head finally broke the ocean’s surface to catch a face–full of chum in broad daylight.
Sure, budget is a factor, but if you can’t make a monster that passes the muster, make a different movie, I say. And don’t go thinking you can just hide the fact that your CGI isn’t ready for the big time by making the monster all fast, so we never get a good look at it. Anybody who has seen a monster movie in the past 20 years probably knows what I’m talking about. They zip around such that it's nothing but a blur. Borrrrinnng!
Monstrum is another movie that would stand on its own without the monster part, a theme of brutal corruption (and classism) woven into 16th–century period piece with well–developed characters navigating a perilous and complex plot of intrigue among disparate parties. It does include a little of the bumbling fat man thing, but only partly so, because this guy is more than a two–dimensional device, and he’s still a plenty capable character. He just likes food.
But how's the monster? Hmm. I’m on the fence with this guy. It’s all CGI, and while the CGI does show, it’s better than most. It has a face and a personality, qualities that weren’t sufficiently capitalized on. Most of the movie has Monstrum doing the fast thing, darting around so quickly and fleetingly that we barely get a decent look at it until way too late.
Is the monster scary? No. The real scares come from the human side of the story, and that’s actually a huge part of the plot. And I don’t think I’m spoiling anything by mentioning the fact that, rather than telling a story of humans vs monster, this movie depicts the various ways that rival parties use the monstrous threat to serve their own political ends.
Hmm. Kind of like Covid.

The Day of the Beast

An ok attempt at occult dark humor. Most of the jokes are mid–grade at best, and a lot of them are predictable, but they do work better in the hands of the capable cast than they otherwise would. Álex Angulo really does exude such harmless innocence and good will that his sinful priest jokes do work, and some of the supporting cast like Terele Pávez and Nathalie Seseña bring to life a couple of wacky characters of their own. Still, one can only do so much with jokes like these. This was another one that relied too heavily on a stock “bumbling fat man” character for laughs. I think this is the third one I’ve seen this week. Lots of extreme violence seems intended as dark humor but I dunno, maybe I’m not British enough or something because they landed flat for me. By the time the movie kinda falls apart, it hardly seems to matter. The ending does manage to pull off some semblance of a landing, but more like a crash landing. Not a total loss, but not necessarily arriving all in one piece, either.

Behemoth

These motherfuckers stole my monster! That’s all I’m gonna say, but I’m looking into this because if it’s just an uncanny coincidence then either I seriously underestimate the zeitgeist or I seriously overestimate my own originality.
Anyway the movie sucks, and that is not the indignation talking. I might have felt better if the film had been any good. This is just amateurish on every level. Reminds me of a college video assignment. Most of the actors suck, the plot is all over the place, it’s just silliness all around. The monster, sigh, the monster is kinda cool in some shots and silly in others. For a “so bad it’s good” movie night, one could do worse than Behemoth. It’s pretty badgood.

Perdita Durango

Alex de la Iglesia's extremely violent and warped rampage based on Barry Gifford's 1992 novel 59° and Raining: The Story of Perdita Durango.
If you have an irresistible crush on Rosie Perez, then kneel and prepare to suffer for your goddess. You will be satisfied, and the pleasure will be worth every drop of the pain you shall endure! Hypnotized as she dances before your eyes, how far into the inferno are you willing to follow her, and how much farther into the shadows of sin and despair will she draw you?
Perdita Durango. sorta like Natural Born Killers but without all that media criticism subtext.
Unless it’s criticizing our glorification of sadism? Or is it just a glorification of sadism in itself? Is it criticizing a racial disparity between who is and isn’t permitted to play a sociopath? Or is it simply exposing our willingness to sell our very souls for this beloved screen queen? For those of us with an irresistible thing for Rosie Perez, Perdita Durango is definitely a cruel exercise in audience complicity. The result is quantifiable proof: we oughta be ashaaamed of ourselves!
Maybe some of the violence is supposed to be funny but I can’t tell where the serious ends and the humorous begins. Most of what I see comes across as an overindulgent amoral bloodbath, an immature treatment of relentless sadism with unrealistic two–dimensional characters. I also see myself, not turning away, bound to all of it like a masochist to a stake, abused, humiliated, and drooling for more. Just give me Rosie and you can drag me through oceans of shit, thorns and broken glass.
Let me be clear, I am not praising this movie. It’s a cartoonish, sadistic, and even annoying 2–hour hate–spree through a world where white virgin sorority girls love getting violently raped by murderous Mexican banditos, and James Gandolfini keeps getting back up from the pavement, no matter how many vehicles run him down. All these flaws serve to highlight that shamefulness, of enduring such mediocrity, and such moral reprehensibility, in service to dumb, lust—blind compulsions.

Thale

Uh… a pair of “crime scene cleanup” guys find a naked woman with a tail hidden in a basement, then they listen to a bunch of exposition on old cassettes, then those hazmat suited guys from ET show up, but with more guns... eh…
Good cast and a usable story but it needs some fleshing out. Feels more suitable as a short film than a feature. It seems to want you to fall in love with this mystery lady, but I just wasn’t feelin’ it. She’s fine, but Rosie Perez is just too tough an act to follow. I can’t say I recommend Thale, but it’s ok. Maybe good enough for tv? Meh. Good enough for a matinee with the flu. Oh, maybe not, because there’s a lot of puking in this movie. OK a matinee with chicken pox.

Perfect Blue

Dammit, Kon–Kantoku! Et tu?
What is reality?????

[edit: that's the poster for the book, not the movie; my mistake.]

.

Last edited by Rampop II (10/28/2022 5:31 am)

crumbsroom · 10/27/2022 10:25 am

I've never looked up the explanation to Berberian, and so I have been able to remain completely befuddled by it. If that's being a stupid viewer, sign me up for Dunceville. I like films which give me just enough to make me think I should know what is going on, but push me into the dark when it comes to daring to give me a full look at what is happening. I want to think I missed something. I want to always think I'm on the cusp of pulling it all together, but constantly being frustrated by my fingers as they seem incapable of making a knot to keep it from falling all back to pieces.

As it is, there are a number of scenes in BSS that I have no notion of how they fit into the overall fabric. But I feel that they belong there. I would miss them if they were gone. Maybe Strickland had a very specific point to every image that he shows us, in fact I wouldn't be surprised if he does. But do I need to know what these reasons are? Not ever remotely. Confuse me. Anger me. Mislead me. Treat me like the human dog I am, dear precious Movie.

Basically, I want my films to contain the essence of what I understand to be life. And I don't understand it. I don't understand my dreams. Or other people. Or myself. Or even my own writing. Not even this. So what kind of horrible cheat would it be if movies ever dared to have answers and resolutions for me? I'm actually always kind of confused when the vast majority of the world seems to become angry and confused the less they have things resolved for them, where I am the reverse. I rarely recognize human life on a screen if it has a definite shape. "What the fuck is that?" I mutter under my breath as they hit plot point after plot point, the rest of the world nodding and grinning with some kind of perverse understanding.

Fuck that.

That's why I was drawn to this film that I watched last night. Much more somber and distant than BSS. Maybe even more impenetrable. But it has that same elusive quality where I feel like I've watched a very specific story, without anything ever becoming specific. Maybe brilliant? Maybe a con? Who cares?

Seriously, what the fuck is this?

No, please don't tell me.

Tell me.

No nonono

Mystery!

Jinnistan · 10/27/2022 4:48 pm

Rampop II wrote:
I'll come back when Kent's installment is up.

The Viewing; Panos Cosmatos

You know Cosmatos is the director of Beyond the Black Rainbow, right? Probably worth checking out as well.

Also Cosmatos' second film, Mandy, is on Shudder, and worth catching. It's the superlative Nicolas Cage-on-LSD freak out film that is both bearable and massive.