Johnny Rocket has a very interesting secret.

To spout on anymore about the details of the story would be unwise on my part, but what I can elaborate on is something that jumped out at me from the very start, which is the cinematography and the directing.  One of my main gripes will the population of Middle of the Road-ville, IndieFilmLand (that place really doesn’t exist, ‘cept for in my head) is that there is usually too much focus on trying to be shocking, or genre-hopping, or outlandish and not enough focus on making whatever kind of film they are making look its absolute best despite what the budget constraints may be.  If I, and I think this statement goes for many of the viewing public out there, can see a modicum of professionalism in the quality of the image, and to a slightly lesser extent, the quality of the audio, then the likelihood of me sitting through the entire thing is much, much better.  No Right Turn seems to be in line with me in that mindset, since not only does it look pretty sleek and slick, there are some outdoor scenes (the opening bathtub scene and any scene involving that bathtub, and the outdoor snow sequences) that are just really breathtaking in their simplicity and beauty.  I commend, above all other praise, the work of David Noel Bourke and his crew in giving this flick that extra coat of polish that makes it easier to enjoy the interactions on screen.

The shots of the bathtub and its unique surrounding area are some of the films best scenes.

Bourke keeps the pace of the film fairly methodical, but it never dips into the realm of yawn land or feeling disproportionately dragged out in order to pad time.  Whether or not you dig the pace is a matter of opinion, but I was impressed with the fact the film always seemed to know where it was going, and didn’t venture off into a web of subplots or bombard us with scenes that, while cool, don’tt really have any genuine purpose.  The acting, which is the ultimate compliment to any director’s vision, is lead by Sira Stampe (Monella) and Laura Bach (Nina) who really helped to keep me involved in the story and add some complexity and palpable emotion to the piece.  Tthe rest of the cast also does a really great job pinning down the mainline traits of their respective persona’s and driving those into their performance with fervor, most of the time for better, and occasionally for the worse.

Gotta be more careful when chopping those veggies.

No Right Turn was one of the tougher reviews I have donet.  It is a bit outside my personal comfort range, but I’m glad to have the experience of seeing it a bit early (thanks to director David Noel Bourke) and being able to share my thoughts on it.  It’s certainly is a pulpy, noir-y, and even fantastical tale, but I suspect that during my viewing I might have missed some of the messages, especially when it came to the very final few shots.  There is a lot of confidence throughout No Right Turn, and a certain bit of “cool” that flows through its veins which helps to define it.  At the same time though, I felt myself wishing there was a bit more in the last act, but since the flick put a premium on its quiet, calculating pace, maybe a big to-do wouldn’t have served the first two acts quite as well.  Regardless of my qualms thought, No Right Turn is still one of the best Indie offerings of 2009.

Rating: 3 out of 5 stars

I would like to take this moment to thank Jamin and Kiowa Winans for being not only the most classy and savvy film makers in the business today, but also being some of the most helpful, open, and supportive people I personally know.  It’s one thing to see a small independent film begin to succeed against all odds, but it’s even better when you know how passionate, respectful, and genuine the people are behind that film.

Without any further delay, here is the interview.

What got you into film and film making?

My family didn’t own a TV until I was about 10.  Naturally I was much more fascinated with the motion picture than anyone else I knew because I didn’t take it for granted.  It was this magic box to me.  From 10 on I was obsessed.

Did you specialize in film in school?

I did a year of film school then dropped out.  I had grown up teaching myself to make movies, so aside from a couple of film theory classes I didn’t feel like I was going to learn much more there.  Robert Rodriguez’s book, “Rebel Without A Crew”, really influenced me.  His advice was to take the money you would spend on film school and just make a film.  I think that’s good advice.

When did you first come up with the story for INK?

It was an evolving idea I started thinking about maybe 6 or 7 years ago.  I was really interested in telling a story about people who come out at night while everyone’s asleep in order to give them dreams.  For me most film ideas start with an image and then build from there.  In the case of Ink, it started with the image of Ink reaching for Emma asleep in her bed and Allel crashing through the window to stop him.

How did you come about the title for the movie?

I was working on the script and explaining the idea to some friends early on.  I kept describing the character as moving like black ink.  A friend told me I should use that as the character’s name.  Once I realized the many implications that had, I went with it.  I don’t want to say too much more.

How long did it take from basic idea to finished script?

It’s impossible to say, but probably around 3 years off and on.

When you were writing, did you have certain actors already in mind for certain roles?

I wrote the film with Chris Kelly in mind.  I had worked with Chris twice before on our first feature 11:59 and a short film called Blanston.  I really loved his work, but never had a lead for him until Ink.  I talked to him early on to see if he wanted to take on all the “complexities” of the role and he was for it.

I had also worked with Jessica Duffy before on a commercial so was familiar with her talent.  Everyone else in the principal cast were new to me.  Everyone auditioned.

Personally, I found INK to be a very deep and layered film.  Is this the way you wrote it, or do these things tend to come organically?

I’ve always gravitated towards complex films that open your mind.  One of my favorite films when I was a teenager (and still to this day) is 12 Monkeys from Terry Gilliam.  All of Gilliam’s films are favorites, but 12 Monkeys really hit me.  First, it’s complex so you don’t get everything in just one viewing.  I think that’s a sign that you’ve created a world beyond what’s contained in the film.  Secondly, it’s mind-opening.  One walks away from the film thinking about it for hours if not days.  Thirdly, it’s powerful emotionally.  The first time I watched it (in the theater) I was just mesmerized.  It wasn’t until the second time (the next night) that I was covertly crying by myself.

I tried to embody those same elements in Ink and all the films I make.  I wish I could say it all happens organically, but unfortunately it’s just a lot of work.

What was your budget?

For the time being we’re still hush-hush about the budget, but I’ll say it was under a million.

Did you have outside financial backing?  Or is it your own money?

We had private investors.  And Kiowa and I sell lemonade and brownies outside our house.  Tomorrow’s two for one by the way.

Did you do much preparation before shooting? …and what was the most vital piece of preparation you did?

We prepped for about a year believe it or not.  A lot of time.

It’s hard to say what part of the prep was the most important because it was all critical.  I would say anything having to do with the actors.  So auditioning, rehearsing, and fight training.  Fight sequences aren’t something where you just want to wing it.  Not if you want to keep your actors looking pretty.  Location scouting, costume design, and effects testing we’re also really critical for us.

The Incubi up close.

What was the inspiration for the look of the Incubi, The Storytellers, and Ink himself?

The Incubi and Storytellers stemmed from a quote I heard that goes something like, “How alike are all the tyrants of the world and how wonderfully unique all the saints”.  So the goal was to keep the Incubi looking assimilated, to use a Trek term, and to make the Storytellers unique from one another.

The word that best describes the Incubi is “sterile”.  We wanted them to be false, plastic, and sterile.  They don’t want to be infected, or tainted by the imperfections of humanity.  So they were covered in plastic and rubber and given a mask that we like to refer to as their “sneeze guard” from the rest of the world.  The mask has the purpose of not only protecting them from humanity, but it allows them to project nightmares onto others and it renders the Incubi’s vision colorless.

The Storytellers have an emphasis of pop culture from different eras.  It’s almost as if each died at different times from the past and the future and came to the dream world.  They have an “earthier” quality, warmer tones, and a lot of style.  They celebrate differences between each other.

Ink himself comes first and foremost from Snow White.  No villain has ever had a stronger impact on me than the witch from Snow White in old woman form.  Ink is just a more apocalyptic badass version of her.  Oh, and he has a huge, huge nose.  I would explain that choice a little more, but I don’t want to ruin it.

What was the inspiration for the, shall we say, “alternate dimension” that our heroes and villains inhabit?

I guess it’s just the way I see the world.  I believe there are things going on around us that we’re not able to see and I believe there are a lot of outside influences on the flow of the physical world.

INK himself.

Being a special effects buff I’ve got to know, how did you make Inks face, and in particular, his nose?

Well, I didn’t do a whole lot other than eat a sandwich while other more talented people created the prosthetics and applied the makeup.  Alison Chilen was our primary make-up artist, however the prosthetics were sculpted and created by Todd Debrecini and Chris Guarino.  They took our actor through a traditional casting and molding process.  They caste his face, made a mold, molded a new face, built the extra “features” including the nose on that face, and then molded the foam prosthetics using the new mold.

Alison spent between 2-4 hours a day applying the makeup and then another hour at the end of the day removing it.  She was the hardest working person on the set.

Were there any special challenges that arose for the cast and crew due to the ethereal nature of the film and its story?

Everything was more difficult.  This obviously wasn’t a coffee shop drama.  Almost every sequence had elaborate costuming, effects, lighting, makeup, stunts, locations or all of the above.  Unquestionably the biggest struggle was just getting through it.  It went on so long we were simply just trying to survive.

How long did it take to film?

83 days of hell.

… and how long did post-production take?

14 months of hell.

What scenes were the hardest to shoot, and conversely, which were the easiest?

Hardest… There were so many it’s difficult to say.  Anything with fighting…brutal.  Anything at night outside…brutal.  Anything with a lot of extras…brutal.  I would say the hospital sequence towards the end of the movie was the thing that almost killed us.  There were extras, fighting, fighting extras, elaborate lighting, effects.  Ugh, makes me want to cry thinking about it.  We were literally living in an abandoned hospital for a week and living on pizza and late night I Hop.  Yet, it is one of my favorite scenes in the film.  Funny how that works.

Easiest… A lot of the John and Shelly moments were really laid back and fun.  I think we were all at peace during those times.  Ironically those are the peaceful moments of the story.

How did you hone that unique visual style that sets INK apart and what or who influenced that particular style?

Well I’m glad you think it’s unique.  I’ve been making movies since I was a little kid so my style has been evolving and solidifying ever since.  Because I’ve ripped off so many different filmmakers, I don’t think anyone could say the style is anything but my own concoction.  It really is just a lot of other filmmakers I love Frankensteined together in my own way.

The “Furniture Reconstruction” fight early on in the film, how did you achieve those effects?  (unless it is a trade secret, then you can plead the 5th)

Ha, ha!  They’re primarily a combination of cheap tricks.  Some stuff was done practically and some was done in post.  There was some rotoscoping involved, but for the most part just cheap tricks.  We’ll probably show how we did some of that in the extensive doc about the making of the film.

Can you elaborate on the techniques, methods, and inspiration you used to create some of the memorable sound effects and the score?

The sound design was Kiowa’s department, but I’ll explain to the best of my ability.  We treated the sound design as another opportunity to tell the story, so each choice was very deliberate, even the absence of sound.  So every choice was motivated by story and environment.  When you’re working on a limited budget you have to make up for it with creativity so we were constantly trying to make unusual choices.  It’s very easy to slip into cliche conventions when dealing with sci-fi/fantasy so we constantly challenged ourselves to do something different.

A lot of the other worldly sounds were things that she created by combing various sounds.  We recorded and created all of our own foley and because of this, we’re able to make some unusual choices.  They were choices that were often subtle, but would give the world just a little bit of surprise.

The score was just a very organic process.  I worked on it over the course of a year constantly trying to find the right mood and aesthetic for the film.

Are there any invaluable lessons you have learned from both making, and then trying to distribute, INK?

Whew, that’s a question that could lead to a novel.  As far as making movies as a whole, I’m constantly learning that story is always king.  More than anything technical, story should always be put first.  If the story isn’t working, nothing else matters.

Distribution… Distribution is changing rapidly for indie film as digital downloads and web-based promoting begin taking over.  We’re in the midst of a huge change technologically and filmmakers have to have their finger on the pulse of what’s happening right now.  For us personally, we’re learning that we’re less and less interested in working with distributors and are more and more interested in bringing our films to our audiences personally and directly.  However, that model is still being formed.

INK has been playing in many theaters around the United states, some quite prestigious.  What are your feelings towards the internet buzz your film is garnering, and how do you feel about these types of grassroots campaigns to increase awareness of indie films?

The grassroots campaign has worked out really well for us, but that’s only because we’ve had really enthusiastic fans who have been very selfless about helping us promote.  That’s honestly the only reason Ink has been as successful as it has.  We’ve had no advertising budget and no celebrities in the film.  So the buzz that our fans have created has been humbling to say the least.  I don’t know how successful other films can be doing the same thing.  I know some that have been very successful.

Have you managed to make a profit from INK yet?

Ink’s been making profits in the theatrical run.  The release has been small so no one’s getting rich.  Instead, we’re putting that money right back into pushing it to new cities.

Is there interest from distributors regarding INK?

There’s been interest and offers, but none that we’re entertaining.  No one is offering us a substantial advance and the rule in the industry is an advance is the only money you’ll ever see.  The indie distribution scene is in turmoil right now.  Distributors aren’t spending any money and a lot of filmmakers are getting ripped off.  We’ve opted to hold on to our rights, protect the film, and release it ourselves.  It’s a smaller way to release it, but we’re finding that it’s finding it’s way regardless.

What can people do to help support INK?

First and foremost, get on our mailing list at www.DoubleEdgeFilms.com.  We send out an email every month or two letting people know how they can see Ink and other upcoming films.  It’s really critical if you want to see everything we’re producing.  We’re also on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube.  We’re pretty active on all networks and love talking to fans and other filmmakers.

If you’ve seen the film and like it, please be vocal about it.  Tell everyone you know, tweet, facebook, etc… Everyone has a voice via the web now, so word of mouth is more powerful than it’s ever been.  If you’ve seen the film and didn’t like it…well, in the words of Joss Whedon, “Now is a time for silent contemplation”.

Have you any ideas for your next project?

We’re already working diligently on the next two features.  They’re very hush-hush, but be assured that Midnight Showing will be one of the first to know when we start production.

What are your thoughts on revisiting the INK universe in the future?

It’s tempting.  A lot of fans have asked us about that.  At this point, I’m resolved to moving on only because there are so many other stories I want to tell.  However, we’ve considered developing a graphic novel based on the Ink world.  I guess we’ll see.

Anything you’d like to add?

I’d like to mention to your readers that you’ve been a support of the film long before anyone.  You saw the film very early on and have been behind it and us ever since.  So a huge thanks to you and Ronnie for your talent and passion.  It’s been invaluable to the success of Ink and you’ve made a friend for life.

INK LINKS:

Facebook page for the film INK

Twitter for INK updates and announcements

Youtube (trailers, interviews with Jamin and Kiowa, and short films)

INK and Double Edge Films Official Blog

Double Edge Films

The Buzz on INK  assets for fans, press and bloggers

My Review of INK on Midnight Showing

That's creepy.

From Beyond is another film from the golden decade of horror, but instead of trying to make a quick buck off of a preexisting trend, Stuart Gordon and frequent collaborator of Brian Yuzna (co-writer and producer) tapped into the works of influential and ground breaking author H.P. Lovecraft for some challenging material to bring to the silver screen.  Having faithfully brought a slightly revamped and modernized version of Lovecraft’s Re-Animator to celluloid glory the previous year, Gordon reached for a more experimental and psychologically geared piece, which From Beyond surely is.  Exploring the very real and quantifiable mystery that is the Pineal Gland, and all the wonderment that could ensue should science find a way to unlock it’s power, From Beyond is as much a horror story as it is a work of hypothetical science fiction heavily based on fact.

From Beyond is the tale of Dr. Crawford Tillenghast and his superior, Dr. Edward Pretorious, two brilliant scientists and physicists who have actually succeeded (when do you ever see a science experiment in a movie actually succeed?) in constructing a resonator that opens a door in the mind many before them have referred to as the mystical and spiritual “Third Eye.”  Unfortunately, this release of awareness and new found Sense has severely debilitating effects on whomever it is subjected too, often causing death and subsequent spectral rebirth, along with insanity for anyone lucky enough to not die.  When the experiments costs Pretorious his earthly existence, Tillenghast is left to try to plead his case to whomever will listen, and gets an opportunity to prove his innocence by recreating the events that took place on the night Pretorious was shook loose the mortal coil.

The universe might collapse under the weight of this much awesome on screen at once.

In order to tell such an intriguing tale Gordon needed some actors of considerable acting ability, as well as genre credit.  Cue Jeffrey Combs and Ken Foree, who are both horror hall of famers for their roles in Re-Animator and the original Dawn of the Dead respectively.  Combs plays Tillenghast, a character not too far removed from Herbert West.  While on the surface it may seem like a simple retreat of old ground for Combs, as the movie progresses, so does his character in new and unimaginable ways, both physically and psychologically, and Combs is the perfect man for this job.  Foree plays the ex-football star turned cop Bubba Brownlee assigned to babysit the second experiment, and brings some down to earth language and logic, as well as some much needed humor to the film.  He also gets a chance to stretch his acting ability, and this may be the best role I have seen him in save for his work in Dawn of the Dead.  Barbara Crampton plays Dr. McMichaels who believes that Tillenghast may not be insane, due to his scientific brilliance as well as his abnormally large Pineal gland which suggest the resonator has indeed worked the way it was designed too.  This trio consumes much of the screen time as they rebuild and tinker with the resonator, and they are all very likable and capable of shouldering that responsibility.  Combs does a bulk of the show stealing, but there are scenes catered to showing all three in the best light possible, and thus we get a balanced amount of exposure for each of them.  The other performance of note is that of Carolyn Purdy-Gordon who plays the insufferable Dr. Bloch, a hard line medical doctor who doesn’t have much, if any sympathy, for the mentally unbalanced.  From Beyond is in very capable hands on the acting front.

House that exists seemingly on the edge of the space and time? Check.

With the acting locked up tight, Gordon was free to craft what I can best describe as a driven, but very experimental type of horror flick.  Gordon again taps in one main color, much like he did in Re-Animator with the neon green that was so prevalent.  In From Beyond, he uses a light, neon-ish purple to signal the opening of the inter-dimensional gate by the resonator device.  It’s a wonderful hue that adds a lot to an already wonderfully photographed, framed, and lit movie.  Gordon is never shy about fully lighting a scene, which is an extension of his confidence in his special effects team and set designers.  The results is a movie that’s very striking and sharp, full of rich colors and detail during a time when dimly and poorly lit backwoods and houses were the norm.  The level of detail is eye popping, and the crispness to the image adds a lot of texture to a film that is, visually and aurally, superior to many of it’s predecessors, peers, AND successors.  Gordon also has a good sense of pacing, and while From Beyond isn’t as brisk and fun a yarn as Re-Animator, it is also a movie that isn’t trying to be.  From Beyond is just as much about the gore and creatures as it is about the discussion and reaction to the gore and creatures who are not of this planet or plane of existence.  Stuart also manages to slip in some tastefully done sexual tension and analysis, which existed in some of the works of Lovecraft as well.  The amount of enjoyment you get out of From Beyond will be directly related to how much you submit to its unique characteristics and subject matter.  But regardless of your personal leanings, Gordon surely has crafted himself a looker.

Did you do something with your hair?

But if you aren’t impressed with the philosophical and psychological meandering of From Beyond, you will probably be blown away by the special effects and make up.  Sitting somewhere right in between hideously grotesque and artistically gorgeous, the special effects in From Beyond are some of the most well conceived and constructed I’ve personally seen outside of a more major production.  As with the directing, the level of detail in them is astounding and really helps to bring to life these wild and slightly wacky creature designs.  Constantly pulsating and full of slime and general ickyness, the monsters and hybrids are truly the stuff nightmares are made of…very disturbing and mobile nightmares.  The score that accompanies these atrocities is subtle and, at times, hardly noticeable, but it does a nice job pf punctuating certain scenes and adding emphasis when required.  As mentioned before, the lighting and sets are all great, if not a little basic.  Hardly a concern when you have such immaculately vile things running amok however.  If you see From Beyond for any reason, make sure it is to appreciate the handwork of Mark Shostrom and Bruce Barlow who aimed to gross out even hardened horror fans out and, by my count, truly accomplished that goal.

I'm guessing that wouldn't make a very good pet.

Gordon and Co. certainly did a one-two number oon Lovecraft in ’85 and ’86, adapting two of his best stories for cinema while retaining much of what made him such an influence on what we define as “scary” today.  From Beyond still holds up today , save for a couple of ancient “floating creature” effects, and the picture quality still shimmers and shines with the best of them.  While I would still probably take Re-Animator over From Beyond if I had to choose, From Beyond tries to incorporate some very different, experimental, and heady ideas and concepts into a genre that is often maligned for being devoid of any cultural relevance, intellect, or intelligence.  While I’m not suggesting From Beyond is some vast, deep ocean of knowledge and learning, it is an entertaining piece of cult fiction that makes genuine stabs at ascending to the next level of the genre, testing the waters of what may have become the thinking mans horror picture.  Despite my insignificant analysis, From Beyond delivers the goods; a tight plot without an over-abundance of holes, and some horrific monsters and gore that are sure to please anyone hound who feasts their eyes on it.  Just don’t slip into an alternate dimension and get decapitated in the process please, I can’t afford the legal fees.

Rating: 3 out of 5 stars

Beware the call of the Resonator.

—————-
Now playing: Astra – The Weirding
via FoxyTunes

Remember when poster were fantastical hand-drawn pieces of art? I wish they would start doing that again.

Master of the Universe (MOTU for short) is a movie I remember fondly from my childhood.  It was the kind of film you would see played on TBS and WB channels on a Saturday or Sunday afternoon, usually buried in a marathon of similarly-themed sci-fi epics.  So you can imagine the delight I found as a pre-teen when movies like Fortress and Highlander would bookend a testosterone-laden thrill ride such as MOTU.  Much to my chagrin though, it has been well over 15 years since I last laid eyes on this toy-line inspired beauty, and I am happy to report it holds up incredibly well, despite showing signs of its now eclipsed special effects and cliched plot devices.

MOTU tells the story of an eternal battle between He-Man, the sort of Savior of the Eterians (good guys) and Skeletor, a tyrannical skull-faced villain who has amassed a gigantic force of black-clad soldiers with laser guns in an attempt to fuse his own existence with the all mighty the power of the universe to become a God to which all will bow and be subservient.  There are some other minor details, such as a sacred sword (who would have seen that coming) and a Cosmic Key that can tap into to musical nature of the entire universe to teleport anyone to any time and/or place, but they are all secondary to the over arching theme of Good vs. Evil that gives MOTU all the setup it needs to get on with the futuristic-fantasy style combat and whimsical, feel good storytelling.

Frank Langella doesn't just play Skeletor, the guy BECOMES Skeletor. Impressive since most of his acting was done solely through his shifty and piercing eyes.

One of the major challenges any comic/cartoon/toy-line turned movie faces is finding talent capable of bringing the larger than life characters that have been summoned from imagination to screen in an even remotely credible way.  Some may argue with what I am about to say, but Dolph Lundgren and company to a terrific job manifesting the starry-eyed childhood wonder that He-man and his cohorts exude to the medium of film.  Frank Langella as Skeletor may be one of the most perfect, glove-tight fights in cinematic history.  Dolph Lundgren IS He-man, right down to his Godly physique and “get it done” no bullshit attitude, as well as being a man of few wasted words.  Courtney Cox plays the perfect “Earth teenager accidentally sucked into interstellar warfare” and Meg Foster brings a deliciously sexy and sinister style to Skeletors mistress of doom, Evil-Lyn.  Bill Barty as the vertically challenged and infinitely adorable Gwildor does a good enough job to land him a role in any Jim Henson film, and James Tolkan plays the frustrating, non-believer cop role to perfection.  The best part is, you can just tell how everyone on set knew exactly what they were making, and instead of trying to prove what a great actor they are in the hopes of landing future roles in “better” movies, they revel in the ludicrous nature of the whole thing, and emit an aura of carefree fun with a touch of either pure righteousness for the good guys, or over the top menace and for the baddies.

Evil-Lyn rocking some awesome contacts and a fancy hat, giving her best "I am evil as all get out" face.

Gary Goddard, directing his only film of any relevance, echoes the playful vibe that MOTU is known for by keeping his camera relatively calm, but flooding sets and locations with a myriad of different bright, shiny, and often neon colors.  He does at times use come cool focusing tricks and “action in the background” techniques like when Skeletors wicked floating throne creeps up on our unsuspecting heroes on a building top, but for the most part he keeps it within the comfortable standards, which is by no means saying he does the viewer a disservice.  The colors and filters work to make the live action seem all the more fantastic and comic-bookish, with heavy hues of red breaking through strands of smoke and fog often when our villains are on screen.  Our heroes get far less of this Pink Floyd concert laser show treatment then the opposition, but they too are treated like gold by Goddards camera, being seen in many heroic poses, and never being filmed to look weak, or even beatable for that matter.  Goddard knew exactly how to make people playing action figures look every bit as fun and gigantic as we all imagined in our young minds when we were playing with the toys and watching the cartoons.

I would not fuck with this guy. Hes got a cape and a speedo on. That's serious.

While laser beams and zoom-ins on paintings are now dinosaurs of the art of film, for me they hold more than just nostalgia.  I liked the way yesteryears’ special effects looked.  Paintings made to replace expensive and impossible sets, sparks flying out of bodies instead of blood, costumes that were complex, bulky, and not aided by computer graphics touch ups, and Ghostbusters style lightning of all different colors, shapes ans sizes warm my heart to no end.  If some one made this film today (and I have no doubt someone in Hollywood is eyeing this for a remake) it would look more like a video game than a movie.  But thankfully, the memory we have before us is one which took full advantage of the available technology as well as traditional customs, presenting gorgeous and elaborate set design (the interior of Castle Greyskull is fucking BEAUTIFULLY done) and pyrotechnics galore.  It sits firmly in between cheese and art, never for an instant trying to pretend, visually or sonically, to be something it’s not.  The music and sound effects are full of tributes to Star Wars and the hordes of other popular space epics, while sprinkling in some Conan the Barbarian for good measure.  It’s all well beyond adequate, and detracts nothing from the overall experience.  If anything, it just adds to the charm and warmth.

What can you say, they just don't make 'em like they used to.

MOTU is one of the finest examples of a movie often referred to as a punchline in a joke, actually being sinfully entertaining and solid after 20 plus years.  Its indulgent, flashy, loud, and has limited mainstream appeal, but it’s also wholesome, pure, easy to understand, and never, ever boring.  It doesn’t bog you down with hours of back story, political allegory, or social commentary.  It’s just a fun, tightly wrapped interpretation of a, at one point, incredibly popular comic, cartoon, and toy line, instead of being a movie which only exists in an attempt to popularise and announce a forthcoming comic, cartoon, and line of pose able figurines.  The acting is well-suited to fit the mood, technical aspects are tailor made to increase that mood, and the story and pace are as on point as one could expect from a 1 hour and 45 minute flick destined to be one of the ultimate popcorn experiences of all-time.  So crack open a beer, pack your bowl, or whatever it is you flunkies do, and revisit a classic that deserves a much better legacy than the one history has bestowed upon it.  After all, YOU HAVE THE POWERRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!

Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

I HAVE THE POWERRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!

www.youtube.com/watch?v=CF20B8p4F08

AND JUST FOR LAUGHS!!!

www.youtube.com/watch?v=aeFH-QoAPCk

Badass. Digging the Communist theme.

Repo! The Genetic Opera is the brainchild of Darren Lynn Bousman, who most of you know as one half of the team that made SAW such an immensely popular and lucrative franchise, and buddy Terrance Zdunich, who is mainly a storyboard artist working on movies and TV shows.

Here’s a quick snapshot of the plot.

In the year 2056 – the not so distant future – an epidemic of organ failures devastates the planet. Out of the tragedy, a savior emerges: GeneCo, a biotech company that offers organ transplants, for a price. Those who miss their payments are scheduled for repossession and hunted by villainous Repo Men. In a world where surgery addicts are hooked on painkilling drugs and murder is sanctioned by law, a sheltered young girl searches for the cure to her own rare disease as well as information about her family’s mysterious history. After being sucked into the haunting world of GeneCo, she is unable to turn back, as all of her questions will be answered at the wildly anticipated spectacular event: The Genetic Opera. Written by Lionsgate

If there’s one thing that is grossly apparent right off the bat, it’s that Bousman and Zdunich have a lot of respect and love for cult classics such as Rocky Horror Picture Show and also seem influenced by more elegant and classic opera works such as Phantom of the Opera.  There’s even a bit of The Who’s rock opera Tommy in there.  It’s no shock that the mind that helped push the SAW franchise forward would be able to create a Gothic, dystopian future, but credit must be given for slick, yet earthly atmosphere embedded in the sometimes hallucinogenic visuals of the film.  It looks great, period.

Bousman manages to keep the narrative moving along swiftly with great focus, even while dealing with the difficult medium of opera.  That’s right kids, an opera where no word of dialogue is ever simply “said.”  Unlike musicals, where there can be breaks in between musical passages to drive the story home with normal movie dialogue, Bousman ensures that every word is “sung”, which can be very awkward at first when your not expecting it.  It’s difficult to accurately describe, but once you see and hear it you will clearly understand what obstacles must have popped up from this bold and daring choice.  Other than that, Bousman also unleashes some incredibly awesome graphic novel panels to fill us in VERY quickly of a particular characters background.

Paul Sorvino and his shotgun-wielding ninja chick bodyguards.

It may be a tricky type of film to make, but Bousman is a razor-sharp horror producer and director, and knew that if he brought in the right talent, he would have a chance to lure in a slew of fans regardless of the experimental nature of the film.  Paris Hilton (Super Global Slut) , Anthony Head (Giles from the Buffy TV Series), Sarah Brightman (acclaimed opera/classical singer and once married to Lloyd Weber who wrote Phantom of the Opera), Bill Moseley (Of House of 1,000 Corpses and The Devils Rejects fame) and Paul Sorvino round out the eclectic nucleus of the cast.  Terrance Zdunich also has a fairly large role as the Graverobber, and steals the show with his “Zydrate Anatomy” song.  The cast is, like so many aspects of this brave venture into total cult cinema, uneven throughout, with those who can sing clearly being more enjoyable and tolerable than those who can’t, with Alexa Vega and Bill Moseley probably being the two biggest culprits.  Hopefully the star power and notoriety brought by those actors outweighs the damage they have done by simply being the weak links vocally.

Sarah Brightman definitely has some bitchin' pipes. And she's kinda sexy, in that scary way. She's probably a goddamn witch in real life.

Which leads me to my assessment of the acting itself, which again can be easily defined as uneven.  While some amount of over and under acting is perfectly acceptable in horror, especially in something this theatrical and over the top, but sometimes the cartoon like personalities crossed the line between tasteful and embarrassingly out of place.  At times the actors would play very serious, as if this carried the same weight as The Phantom of the Opera, and at other times it was clear everyone was having fun and things were much more airy and carefree.  I waited for the flick to settle down, and choose a definite mood and direction, but it never did, as it gleefully jumped back and forth between trying to be emotionally heavy and serious, and being grin-worthy, funny and lightweight.  Maybe I am reading to much into something that can’t truly be defined, but I would have loved to see some lines drawn pertaining to acceptable behavior from all characters, as you would with any other film.

She's got the creepy, googly eyes. Burn at the stake, you kinda-sexy witch.

The final piece of the Repo puzzle is one that isn’t a very common problem in movies, the soundtrack.  That’s not to say all movies has great soundtracks, but they also don’t rely as heavily as Repo does on its’ music.  So how does the song selection hold up?  Take a guess.

UNEVEN.

Some of the songs, like Zydrate Anatomy and Legal Assassin knock it completely out of the park, while others are either too short or too gimmicky to be considered truly great. While taste is bound to vary from viewer to viewer, I felt the music was acceptable, but could’ve benefitted from maybe one or two ballads complete with verses, chorus, and a bridge and a few more rock and roll anthems.

There's also some gore, which is very well done, but used very rarely.

I, like so many of you, have waited for years, eagerly anticipating this movie to be released in any format, anywhere.  And while it may look and sound like I have nothing but negative things to say about Repo!, I feel it’s a case of me being exceptionally critical of a piece of work I felt had all ingredients to really show the world how versatile the “horror” genre can truly be.  Repo is by no means a failure, but instead comes off as a combination of over-indulgence and lofty ambitions.  It succeeds at what it aimed to do, but the cost for achieving that goal may be a dent in Bousman’s reputation, depending on how this is received in the community.  There’s no doubt in my mind that this vehicle can be used to create an amazing, genre-bending film, but Repo! isn’t that flick.

There’s a lot of psychotropic, semi-gory fun to be had with Repo!, but it’s kinda like looking for a 20 dollar bill in your friends extremely messy room, you know it’s worth it to look, but your gonna have to sift through some shit to get what you want.

House

House starts off innocently enough: a man and wife are driving to an appointment, end up lost and are given directions to help them on their way. Surprise surprise, they end up at an old (seeminly abandoned) house.

There, they meet another couple who found their way to the house. Suddenly the houses inhabitants reveal themselves. A rather inbred looking bunch of redneck sorts. At this point, House reminded me of House of 1,000 Corpses (awesome film by the way) so I was quite excited about it all.

As they become trapped in the house, stalked by some madman outside, the houses inhabitants turn nasty and it’s survival of the fittest with the two couples. Things take a weird twist here with each of the four people having flashbacks to their past. Apparently the stalker only hunts the guilty, and in their flashbacks we see what it is they’re guilty of. But the story also pits the couples against one another with the husbands being told to kill their wives, kill each other and vice versa. So by now I’m thinking that this film is part Addams Family, part Saw. No bad thing at all! As the stalker leaves his calling card (a tin can) it becomes more like Saw. And I’m a Saw fanboy, so I’m very excited now!

As the killer shows himself and things are explained it all goes pear-shaped. It goes from being a fight-for-survival horror, to a more fantasy film! I have to say, I was MOST dissapointed… I had such high hopes for this film! If they could reshoot the ending to make it less fantasy based, I’d recommend it. But as it is? I can only recommend the first three-quarters of the film, the rest is garbage.

Acting is sufficient, effects are ok, the one thing I did notice most was the lighting. Plenty of warm colours played against cool colours. Very colourful, but not in a cartoony way.

By the end of the film, a lot of things are left unexplained (eg: what is the black fog?) and the twist ending isn’t a very good twist and I was left thinking: is that it???!!!

Also, according to IMDb (aka: the Bible) this movie received an R rating. I have no idea why, as it has NO blood and NO gore what so ever. I think money changed hands there to get an R rating for hype purposes.

If you really must see a film called House, I recommend the 1986, highly under-rated, gem: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091223/

Rating: 3 out of 5 stars

[http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0837796/]