Alice in Wonderland (2010)

Well, this was a first. I was bored at a Tim Burton film. Bored! I wasn’t bored during Burton’s Planet of the Apes remake. Pissed off, yes, but never bored.

Yet, by the time Alice makes it to the White Queen’s castle, I was squirming in my seat, hoping the end was near. Actually, I wish I’d left the theater before I witnessed the waste of time for Sir Christopher Lee as the Jabberwocky and the AWFUL dance from the Mad Hatter.

Oh, what a waste of an evening. And yes, this was while watching the 3D version.

As with horror films, fantasy movies are reaching a crossroads. thanks to CGI effects. After the Lord of the Rings trilogy, computer effects have infected fantasy movies like a virus. Scripts, character development and the like have taken a back seat to the spectacle generated with the right computer program. And Alice is the perfect example of this illness. We never get a quite moment with the characters. Every time the movie slows down, it feels like all the life is drained out of it, as if everyone involved is just waiting for the next cool computer scene.

It doesn’t help that Mia Wasikowska plays Alice as if she’s half asleep. Yes, I know Alice believes it’s all a dream and has forgotten everything about her last visit to Wonder/Underland. But she never seems to react to anything without looking dazed and confused. Even as she turns into Alice, Warrior Princess (maybe a spoiler, but you know it’s coming within a few minutes of her falling down the rabbit hole), she doesn’t convey her determination or fear with any more than a puzzled look.

That fact that she was surrounded by a green screen stage during most of the filming might not have helped Wasikaowska’s performance. Reacting to a tennis ball is not an easy job. But imagine the added pressure of having to play off the incredible cast of character actors assembled for this film.

But that’s another problem with this movie. The rest of the cast was hired because their persona fit the role. Depp’s Hatter is just a more maniacal version of Captain Jack Sparrow, Carter get’s to act regal and scream, and Hathaway simply looks around with placid acceptance. While it’s not fair to say the cast didn’t perform their parts well, it’s a shame they didn’t demand a script with a bit more depth, more character development for them to build upon. Or that Burton didn’t make some unexpected casting choices, giving some up and coming actors a chance to build the characters, not just cash a paycheck by playing themselves.

In all, a rather bland offering that is obviously pleasing audiences. I just wonder how much of the box office is due to the 3D spectacle, though many of shots in the "real" world are surprisingly weak. This is likely a result of converting the filmed scenes (shot in 2D) to 3D. But it seems to be working, as the public kept this movie at the number one spot for the second week in a row. I guess you can polish a turd, with 3D and the right marketing campaign.

Some Reviews for you: The good, the bad and the warning....

Well, as I start working on the third part of my attack against Universal Monster movie remakes, here's a few reviews of interest.

The Relic:

Currently available on Hulu, this is an enjoyable monster movie from the 90's. A museum in Chicago becomes the hunting ground for a monster that needs to eat a section of the human brain to survive. Of course, as in any monster movie, the museum has a big fund raising preview of their newest exhibit that can not cancel. The police are forced to keep the museum open, allowing more victims to line up for a monstrous buffet.

The film has lots of gory moments, as peoples stumble across the monster's victims. The decapitated heads are incredible, thanks to Stan Winston's crew.

The film holds off showing the main beast until the last half of the film. This allows for some nice moments of character development and keeps the audience on edge for the big revel. The acting is solid, with Penelope Ann Miller perfect as a grad student (both looking and acting the part). Tom Sizemore, Linda Hunt and James Whitmore are very good as well, while Audra Lindley steals the show in a bit role as the head coroner.

And the monster is a great creation from Stan Weston. While some of the CGI is a bit dodgy, the combination of computer and practical effects works well. And a scene were the monster takes off a policeman's head is stunning.

Available on Hulu right now, so check it out. It's not a classic, but a fun little monster movie.

The Final Destination:

AKA The Way to Kill a Franchise.

The original Final Destination movies are not classics by any stretch. The first one was fun, introducing Death as an entity that becomes really pissed off if its grand design is messed with by someone with a premonition.

The second was, in my opinion, the best of the bunch. We get the outstanding opening car crash, the kills are interesting and the characters, while somewhat stereotypical, are at least interesting enough to garner some sympathy.

The third was simply okay, a rather forgettable entry with an over-reliance on CGI effects. Now we have the fourth, released in the theaters and on DVD in 3D.

Now, I didn't see the 3D version, but I don't think any of the effects would save it. The film is simply a collection of kills, with no interesting characters to keep the audience's interest. And the actors tend to read their lines like they're in a high school play.

Also, the film breaks the rules set up by the earlier entries. We have a second premonition for no reason other than to set up a outlandish scene of mass destruction. And that's a problem, as Death has never taken out innocent victims during the re-taking of a victim. The film also has a set up trap that fails for no reason other than to generate a jump scare. And the kills just aren't that interesting, being too set up for the audience not to see it coming.

Not awful, but nothing to keep you interest. It was worth the free rental I got from Redbook, but I don't think I would have felt the same if I spend my own buck. Rent at your own risk.

Nymphoid Barbarian in Dinosaur Hell:


It seemed like a good idea. I was in the mode for something low brow, the movie was free off Hulu and I had picked up a good supply of microbrew beer on my way home. Time to nestle in and watch something cheesy on TV.

The film opened with the trailer, which really looked promising. Stop motion dinosaurs, mutants, barbarians and a girl running around in a leather bikini. The movie started with a tacked on opening tying it to Tromaville in the flimsiest way. But that's fine, as it's narrated by the Nymphoid Barbarian, in a breathless cross between Marlyn Monroe and a valley girl.

If only Lloyd Kaufman had spend a few more buck on this movie and given it a What's Up, Tiger Lily treatment. He might have created a classic instead of dumping a film that deserves to stay buried.

I don't believe Troma made this movie. I think they picked it up for cheap, set it up to look like a classic cheesy movie, then released it upon an unsuspecting horde of schlock fans. It's a classic bait and switch, and I wasted over 80 minutes of my life hoping it would get better.

The plot is simple. Barbarian girl is captured by Evil barbarian. Barbarian Boy goes out to rescue his Barbarian girl. Evil barbarian's henchmen can't seem to keep Barbarian girl from getting away, but they always recapture her until Barbarian boy saves her.

Oh, and there are a few dinosaurs.

Look, I'm a fan of cheesy movies, the type that are so bad most viewers can't watch without losing their sanity. But this one pushed me to the brink.

First, only one person is carrying a sword, which is a wardrobe requirement of any barbarian. Sure, Barbarian boy has a mini crossbow and a knife, and eventually graduates to a firearm. But no sword? Barbarian girl doesn't carry ANY weapon at all, fighting with any broken tree limb she can find. And without swords, we get a lot of hand to hand combat that comes off like grade school kids wrestling on the playground. It's that lame.

The dinosaurs are infrequent but not too bad. Sure, they look like something from a Sid and Marty Krofft Saturday morning show and they do eat a few people. But the battles between humans/mutants and dinosaurs are pretty silly, as the animation doesn't really interact with the actors.

Come to think of it, the Evil barbarian's mutant henchmen do look very similar to Sleestaks. And Barbarian boy and Barbarian girl are aided by a couple of older male characters.....

Maybe Will Ferrell's remake isn't that bad after all.

I'm warning you all. Avoid this movie, no matter how tempting the title sounds. It's not worth your time, even if it's free.

The Case against Universal Monster remakes, Part Two

Sorry for the delay, but work's kept me a bit busy. Here's part two of the case against Universal Monster remakes.

In a previous post, I wrote that current film making styles can not generate the feeling and mood of the original Universal Monster movies. But film style is not the only obstacle facing a remake of the classic monster pictures. Today’s special effects, as shown in The Wolfman, also threaten to overrun the production.

The Trouble with Transformations

This is where werewolf movies shine. While other monsters can change forms, only the Wolf Man is about the transformation, both in a physical and intellectual sense. The character is a dark look at humanity when freed from societal restrictions and able to fulfill our most primitive impulses. The Wolf Man is the truest embodiment of man’s animalistic nature and a most striking transformation.

CGI technology is a silver double-edged sword to werewolf movies. While such tricks can deliver new, more amazing transformations, it can also lead to the dilution of the film’s emotional impact. To understand how this can happen, we first need to discuss the past history of werewolf transformations.

The first werewolf transformations involved lap dissolves and other camera tricks combined with make up effects. In Werewolf of London, Henry Hull changed his appearance in one continual tracking shot. The change was achieved by stopping the camera when Hull walked behind an object, like a pillar. Hull’s make up was modified to appear further along in the transformation. Then, with Hull back behind the structure, the camera rolled and Hull stepped into view, walking to the next foreground object. After several such cuts, the transformation was complete.

But the transformation most familiar to classic horror fans came in 1941 with The Wolf Man, starring Lon Chaney Jr. The change appeared on camera, with no cutaways or pillars blocking the audience’s view. The technique involved shooting several feet of film, stopping the camera and rewinding the film a few frames while makeup is applied to the actor. The camera rolls again, footage of the new make up is shot. Then the camera stops and the procedure is repeated. The results are a series of dissolves from one make up application to another in smooth succession, creating a stunning on screen transformation.

The technique was time consuming for the crew and physically demanding for the actor. Chaney claimed he was forced to be stationary during the entire shot, while other accounts say various techniques were used to line the actor into the same position as before. Regardless, any movement or misplacement of the actor would be detected during the dissolve and look jarring, so extreme care was taking during the long shooting process. Due to the difficulty of filming such scenes, it’s not surprising that filmmakers used such techniques sparingly.

One last thing needs to be mentioned about the early werewolves of cinema. One can’t ignore the fact that these creatures were portrayed by men in make up. No matter how monstrous their appearance, the werewolf always retained a basic human form. But then came 1981 and two movies changed the look and transformation of the werewolf forever.

Released in April, Joe Dante’s The Howling was the first movie to use modern latex and animatronic special effects to bring the werewolf to life. From glimpses early in the first half of the movie, the audience senses that the werewolves are unlike any previous screen incarnations. And once the creature is seen in its full glory, the audience knows these creatures are not men covered in yak hair. The werewolf looks like a wolf walking on its hind legs. It has an elongated snout, long, claw-like fingers and is indeed unlike any previous screen werewolf.

The first full body transformation, mostly visualized by traditional cell animation teases the audience and serves as a fitting, perhaps unintended red herring to Eddie Quist’s transformation. This moment is a showstopper in every sense of the word. Over several minutes, we watch as actor Robert Picardo’s skin bubbles, bone shift and stretch, and he changes into the towering beast. All the changes occurring on screen, with no cuts or dissolves. By the time his snout elongates into his final, wolf-like form, modern special effects have changed werewolf movies.

While The Howling might have beaten John Landis’s An American Werewolf in London by 4 months, the movie’s transformation was even more stunning. Instead of turning into a biped beast, David Kessler (played by David Naughton) is turned into a snarling, four legged monster on camera, under the bright lights of a small apartment. Hair literally grows on camera as David’s body flexes and mutates into a beast of nightmares.

While more dramatic than the transformations in both Werewolf of London and The Wolf Man, the effects work are just as, if not more, labor intensive. The actor is subjected to a series of body and head casts, from which the special effects team will create the various latex appliances needed for the scenes. The resulting creatures must also be sculpted and created, along with various stages in between man and beast.

And this work is all before the cameras roll. To film the transformations, the actor must have the appliances glued to their face and body, along with small air bladder between the actor’s skin and the appliance to create the bubbling effect. In some cases, the actor’s body is hidden and replaced by a fully articulated puppet (Naughton’s lower body was hidden by a false floor for one shot). And a crew of effects workers is needed to control the creature’s body, both with the real actor and the completely fabricated monster.

Given the time and effort required to change a man into a werewolf, one may wonder what could be the problem with a CGI transformation. After all, the actor would not be subjected to as much physical exertion, allowing older, more experienced actors to play the role. The crew needed to generate such effects scenes would be minimal and changes can be made with relative ease (compared to running back to the shop to rebuild or redesign an effect).

But the problem is that now, transmutation scenes are too easy and less time consuming. Aside from making them easier and cheaper, it also allows the filmmaker to insert more of them. And that is what happened in The Wolfman.

In the two earlier films, the audience was treated to one full transformation. Eddie Quist’s second transformation was interrupted just as it started, by a silver bullet to the chest. David Kessler’s second transformation is only shown in two brief shots. The expense of creating new makeup appliances and effects riggings prohibited a second complete transformation. And, to be honest, it really wasn’t needed, as both films were coming to an end.

But CGI has changed that. The Wolfman has three complete transformations, each stopping the story as Lawrence Talbot (Benicio Del Toro) is affected by the full moon. And while this might not seem the case, remember that the script is written to show three transformations, each in different locations and under different lighting. And regardless of the dialog going on while the changes take place, these additional transformations hold up the story, as nothing really is able to happen until the change is complete.

In fact, one can say the second transformation freezes the story beyond the metamorphosis, as Lawrence prowls about London in a special effect laden sequence. He runs across rooftops and down alleyways, ripping into unfortunate Londoners that cross his path. It’s a rollercoaster ride of a scene, but adds nothing to the plot. And Lawrence isn’t given time to react emotionally to what he has done, as he has to be on his way out of London, courtesy of a traveling montage, to his next transformation.

Watching Del Toro’s Lawrence undergo so many changes and multiple attacks on nameless characters dilutes the overall power of such carnage. In Chaney’s The Wolf Man, the first transformation sequence is of Larry Talbot’s feet alone. He only kills one victim, but later discovers his next target is the woman he loves. While the changes and attacks are thrilling, it’s the stuff that happens while Larry is human again that forms the meat of the story.

In the original, we see a man racked with guilt, terrified of the part of his being that now eludes his grasp. The remake doesn’t give Del Toro a chance to reflect upon his nocturnal rampages (or the actor doesn’t deliver, depending on your feelings towards Del Toro’s performance). The audience isn’t given the chance to feel for Lawrence’s plight or his numerous, nameless victims. In fact, to accommodate the climatic final battle (SPOILER AHEAD), the film changes the focus of Lawrence’s pain from his violent, animal form to the curse bestowed upon him by his father. The movie veers wildly from the source material, much to the film’s detriment. Lawrence mourning for his victims takes a back seat to a familial tale of a son taking vengeance for the sins placed upon his shoulders by his father. An interesting idea for a movie, no doubt, but it doesn’t work when you add werewolves into the mix, as victims become nameless meat puppets tossed into the grinder for cheap thrills. (SPOILER ENDED)

But that is the results of allowing a filmmaker access to cheap and easy (compared to previous techniques) special effects. The movie becomes less about the humans within the story and more about how much action a film can cram into it’s running time. Like The Mummy remake, the subtlety that marks the power of the original is buried under an avalanche of special effects designed to please a target audience.

Next up, how star powered casting can spell doom for any monster.

Sorority Row (2009)

Well, I wanted to get part 2 of my tirade against further Universal Monster movie remakes on line today, but I'm not sure that will happen. It's getting pretty long (into it's fourth page on my word processing program) and I need another read-through. Yea, nothing but quality here at The Shadow Over Portland, which is why I'm writing this quick review of 2009's Sorority Row.

It's a remake of The House on Sorority Row, though the movie credits Mark Rosman's script for Seven Sisters (another title for THOSR). The basic story involves 5 sorority girls who decide to help one of their sisters get back at her cheating boyfriend, only to have the prank backfire on them.

So, who are these five girls, you might ask. Well, I don't remember their names, but you can sum them up in five stereotypes. We have The Slut, The Brain (the sheepish one with glasses), The Minority (hey, one of the sisters even admits it in the opening moments of the film, don't blame me; and honestly, she doesn't have too much to do), The Bitch and The Survivor Girl (it doesn't take much guessing to figure out who she is).

Anyway, the five help the wronged girl fake her death by drug overdose, while having make up sex with the cheating boyfriend. These ladies really ham this up, driving the "body" out to an abandoned mine to dispose of the "remains," claiming to be protecting their sorority. Great so far, as the boyfriend is puking his guts out over the place as the girls talk about dismemberment and getting the trapped air out of the "body's" lungs.

However, boyfriend takes the joke a bit too seriously and punctures the "dead" girl's chest with a tire iron. Hey, no more air in the lungs to worry about. Never mind that she's now convulsing, gasping and really dying.

So, everyone but Survivor Girl decide to hide the body and pretend nothing happened. Survivor Girl is induced to play along through blackmail, as the now really dead girl was dropped down a mine shaft wrapped in her coat. Despite her pleas to get everyone to do the right thing, Survivor Girl capitulates, setting the rest of the plot in motion.

Eight months later, as the girls are getting ready to graduate, a cloaked slasher armed with a modified tire iron comes back for revenge. The killer is taking out anyone with knowledge of the cover up. Is the killer the dead girl, who maybe didn't die? Is it the boyfriend, whose gone a little crazy? Is it the dead girl's younger sister, who shows up out of the blue?

Do you really care? I sure didn't.

This film moves very slowly and methodically. It's as if the filmmakers were playing off the slasher film check list without any care about creating something interesting. A couple of the kills are inventive, but not much else. A shower scene, complete with absolutely gratuitous nudity, is added to the mix at about mid film, but it comes off as more boring than anything else. The killer's identity is no big surprise and, with all the girls are guilty, you don't really have anyone to root for. The film just feels dull and lifeless.

But, in the film's climax, one actor rises to the occasion and breaths some life into this clunker. Carrie Fisher, in the previously dull and thankless role of the house mother, appears out of nowhere with a pump action shotgun and a big can of whoopass. She is obviously John Rambo's mom as she chases the killer down, filling the house with lead and going down with a bang, not a whimper. I had wondered why she took this role, until her last stand in the kitchen. Who wouldn't want to play the Toughass House Mother from Hell. Damn, she was out of the movie too soon.

The final few minutes of this film just plain annoying. You have Survivor Girl plus two other strutting out of the burning house with heroic music playing. I guess you're suppose to cheer. Or maybe you're suppose to forget the fact that the house has been on fire for about 20 minutes and the fire department finally figured out where the college campus is located. Doesn't matter, as the sister solidarity/empowerment message is blazing across the screen in tight clothes and lingerage.

At least until the final scene. As the next group of sorority sisters start fall quarter (guess the fire, which caused beams to crack and floors to drop, didn't damage the house THAT much), the camera focuses on one of the gardeners. The one with a scar that looks like one Survivor Girl sustained, gripping a trowel in a most menacing fashion. Guess the message is standing up for your principles is fine, until you have to pay the consequences. Then it's time for a little payback.

Quite a shame, as this destroys everything the movie built up to. But, to tell the truth, it didn't bother me that much. The movie lost me long before the closing scene.

Recommended for die hard slasher fans only. Oh, and those who want to see Carrie Fisher kick a little ass.

The Crazies (2010)

I managed to catch a sneak preview of The Crazies last night at the Lloyd Mall Cinemas. This was the first preview I ever attended, so I was a bit excited. Not that I expected any bells and whistles; after all, this was just a preview for the general public. Still, it was a first for me and that gave it an air of excitement.

The Crazies (for those who don't know) is a remake of the George Romero film of the same name. It takes place in the farming community of Ogden Marsh, Iowa. Through a government accident, a toxic agent, code named Trixie, was released into their water supply. But the time this is discovered, too many of the citizens have become exposed to the agent, which induces a homicidal zen state. Yep, these are the calmest crazy people ever to grace the screen, at least until their veins start popping out and they finally start screaming.

As the story progresses, we follow the sheriff, his wife (the town doctor and pregnant with their first child), a deputy and the doctor's secretary as they try to avoid both the crazies and the government out to cover up this mishap and contain the outbreak through any means possible. No spoilers here, as you can guess all this from the trailer.

Anyway, the movie started a bit late, as the person running the preview was trying to fill the theater. Apparently, not enough pass holders showed up, so I assumed she was grabbing people from the mall to come see a free movie. I base this assumption on the actions of the lady sitting behind me.

This woman spend most of the movie whispering like, "Oh, God, don't go in there," "Oh, no, it's too dark in there," "Oh, Lord, what's going to happen," and so on. It fell into a pattern, where the whispers would start out slow, growing in speed as the tension mounted, then came the shrieking exclamation point. Followed by a moment of silence until the tension mounted again.

I don't know if she'd ever seen a horror movie before, but that lady was the perfect audience member for The Crazies. Because The Crazies isn't a real horror movie. It's a collection of jump scares, a full blown Hollywood version of the Haunted Houses that spring up everywhere during Halloween. You go into one room of the house, with your expectations of the scares to come culminating with something leaping out of a dark corner with a shriek. Everyone screams and jumps, you walk to the next part of the house and start all over again.

Not that a movie like that is a bad thing. And everyone involved worked hard to make the best damn Haunted House in the area. The acting is uniformly good, the production values are high and some of the set pieces are outstanding (the attack in the car wash was a lot of fun and the pitch fork killer was pretty creepy).

But the problem of making a movie SO reliant on jump scares is that some of the audience will get wise to the trick, see it coming and start yearning for something different. Not people like the lady behind me, who fell for it every time, but I saw a few members of the audience getting as restless as the picture wore on.

The second problem is, eventually the characters start acting stupid simply to set up the next jump scare. You would assume that, by the time our posse of heroes is whittled down to two (no surprise who they are), they'd figure out how not to act stupidly in this situation. Yet, they split up not once, but twice within the space of 5 minutes. In reality, these two would be winners of a Darwin Award, but the plot needs a few more jump scares, so the characters must behave as if they have no concept of how to learn from past experiences.

And, of course, the rule of escalating thrills required that a movie like this one have a massive climax. Again, not a bad thing, but did they have to dip into the Indiana Jones/Crystal Skull bag of tricks? All credibility this movie might have maintained was gone in a massive, overdone CGI sequence.

Finally, I really found myself missing the social commentary Romero worked into the original (if you don't know what I'm talking about, go rent a copy of the original). And while there are a few moments in the remake that touch upon some interesting issues involving the government response, they are soon cast aside for another chance to make you jump.

As I said, that's not a bad thing. But, like a buffet that only serves one item, you might get a bit bored after a while.

Unless you're like the lady behind me. Then this is the perfect movie for you.


Horror Happenings in Portland this week:

Slither, James Gunn's under appreciated horror comedy, is have a three day run at the 5th Ave. Cinema. Show times are 7 and 9:30 pm on Feb. 26 and 27, with a 3 pm showing on Feb. 28. While some people call this a rip off of Night of the Creeps (and there are quite a few similarities), it's also a great, gory romp of a film. Watch for some great work by Nathan Fillion and Michael Rooker.

Director Nobuhiko Obayashi's House ('77) is at Cinema 21 from March 1 to 4 at 9 pm. Described by Manohia Dargis of The New York Times as "Delirious, deranged, gonzo or just gone, baby, gone...", it involves seven Japanese schoolgirls visiting a haunted house. What could possibly go wrong?

The Case against Universal Monster remakes

On Feb. 15th, The New York Times summed up the weekend returns for The Wolfman as disappointing, but better than expected. After all, the internet had been ablaze for months with negative buzz from the fans. But absent from the article was any mention of the cause for such rumblings; the two year delay in getting the picture to the theaters, the reshoots, the last minute talks of re-scoring after multiple edits and the replacement of the original director. Yes, fans like myself were nervous, and with good cause.

Now, I won't spend time reviewing the film, as it's been done many times over in print and on the web. And while some have enjoyed it, the major consensus among horror fans seems to be one of disappointment. This was to be the film that jump started the Universal monster line, the blockbuster to bring back into the theaters the best known versions of Dracula, Frankenstein and the like.

Or, if not the creatures themselves, the style of horror Universal did so well in the 30's, a more serious, Gothic vision of horror. Movies where shadows, settings and characters were more important than simple jump scares and set piece moments.

And so, at this point, after much reflection, I think it’s time tell Universal not to try remaking these classic movies. I’m not saying to lock the monsters away in a vault, but stop try to recapture the flavor of those older films. Change the time period, the characters, bring the settings to more modern times, do whatever you think will bring the audience in. Just stop packaging the films as a return to the classic style of horror, because, quite frankly, you can't make those movies anymore. You don't know how, and even if you could, you wouldn’t want to make such a picture.

I know this is a strong statement and I expect it will upset a few fans. But allow me to present my argument over the next few posts before sharing your feelings on the subject. It’s not an easy thing to say, as I’m a big fan of these creatures. They were some of the first horror movies I saw as a kid. But as much as it pains me, I truly believe the sooner Hollywood stops trying to recapture the magic of those classics, the sooner the studios might make better movies with our favorite monsters.

They don't make movies like that anymore.....

I think part of the reason for the failure of The Wolfman is it's schizophrenic nature. Like the title character, this movie is a human drama until the moon is full. Then it becomes a furious collection of action pieces that undermines everything that came before it.

Look at the first 40 minutes or so of the movie. Up until the Lawrence Talbot's first transformation, we had a movie drenched in atmosphere. The rich settings, the dense forests, the interplay of shadow and light. Though I wished for a bit more character development, I liked the texture of the film. It felt creepy, something modern horror has forgotten in it's rush for the sensational and shocking.

Even the attack on the Gypsy camp, with the rapid pacing and increasingly gruesome violence, was unable to disturb the feeling of doom that hung around Lawrence like a smothering cloak.

But then Lawrence changes to the wolfman, and the film increases in pacing and action sequences until, finally, the audience is subjected to a climatic battle royal more in line with a Transformers movie than the preceding scenes.

Why the sudden change in tone and tempo? Because that's what Hollywood believes the audience wants in a movie. Because, even in an R-rated movie, the studio feels the ending has to be something that resembles a 12 year old's version of a comic book than an actual adult movie.

And this will be the fate of all Universal monsters should a remake trend take hold. Expect to see Frankenstein's Monster taking on hordes of villagers, throwing bodies about at dizzying speeds. Dracula will be bouncing across the walls of his castle to dodge a hailstorm of arrows let loose by Van Helsing and his crew. If you don't believe those scenarios, I suggest you revisit Universal's reboot of The Mummy. We were expecting a retelling of the classic Karloff film; what we got was a childish, forgettable video game.

Face it, old style film making is no longer practiced in Hollywood. Any hope of getting a serious Universal Monster movie has to come from outside the studio system, which likely won't happen anytime soon.

Next: The Trouble with Transformations.

The Deadly Spawn (1983)

You just don't see films like this anymore. And that's a damn shame.

I've seen quite a few articles covering this movie for over 20 years, yet hadn't see it before last night. Which is surprising, considering the cult status of this film. So you can imagine how excited I was for my first viewing to be a 35mm print on the big screen.

But within a few moments of the film's start, I started to feel a bit cheated. Two monster attacks and no gore except for the splash of blood thrown from off camera. By the time the father was attacked in the world's leakiest basement (seriously, that house should be condemned), I'd given up any hope on the film.

Then Mom went in the basement and the monster chewed her face off in a stunning effect moment. And things looked brighter.

This film is VERY low budget. The miniature buildings look worse than most model railroad houses, the acting is awful at times and the script is padded in spots. But the gore effects are great and surprisingly plentiful, the baby monsters look very good and the main monster is beautifully done. And the film exudes a charm that makes you overlook it's shortcomings. Add in an unexpected death, some really nice attacks by the baby monsters and a fabulous closing shot (oh, bad miniature house, your presence is forgiven), and you've got a great, cheesy time at the movies.

An added benefit was the print itself. Lots of pops and scratches, color consistency changes between reels and a frame that looks like the film was shot on 16mm and blown up added to the movie's charm. It was as if the film was passed around from theater to theater, dragged through the back alleys of Portland. A very nice touch, though probably unintended.

A real crowd pleaser for everyone involved. Thanks, BAM, for bringing it to the big screen.

Tonight (Sat, 2/20) is The Human Centipede at Cinema 21. The showing starts at 10:45 pm (Damn you, work, for making me miss this one). Maybe I'll see you at Trick or Treat, Monday at the Mission Theater.