Throughout TIFF, Kris and Joe will be doing "shared" reviews, in which we'll offer our opinions on a particular film in a single post. This is day 6.
------------------------------------------------------
When I first watched [Rec] last year, I was blown away by the super fresh take on the first person shaky-cam horror flick. Needless to say, I was psyched when I heard that [Rec] 2 would be having its world premiere at TIFF. Kris and I stumbled into the Ryerson just after midnight and took our seats, and what began was an immediate burst of terror on the screen which lasted for about half the movie. The suspense just barely sustained itself in the last half, and nearly fizzled out in the last third, but not before it gave us a few more jumps and faded sense of eeriness. All told, a highly effective film that achieves what it sets out to do; namely, scare the yell out of ya.
I've got to meditate more on this particular film, however. I was so taken by [Rec] because it expertly mixed social commentary, human drama, and creepiness, without glossing over any particular aspect. However, [Rec] 2 ramps up the thrills and the chills, often at the expense of the other areas. So it was a trade off that I'm not sure paid off (see what I did there?), but it certainly felt like it did.
What I did LOVE about [Rec] 2 was its further exploration of the supernatural side that was only briefly hinted at in the first film. The fact that that was the focus of this plot was incredibly compelling, and made the film far more frightening than if the directors merely had the characters being chased by the "infected"; these people were not "infected" at all, it turns out, but possessed.
With a few nods to The Exorcist, [Rec] 2 sets out on a new path and blazes an awesome trail. When the characters realize there is a hidden world that can only be seen by night vision was a development that was superbly carried out, with the tension slowly building around a fantastic concept. However, I think they "showed" too much of the monster in this one (I'm sure many would disagree), but what made her so creepy in the first film was that you only saw her in silhouette, then for a few brief seconds in eerie night vision green and black.
Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed [Rec] 2, but I hope they don't do a third. I think what they've got right now is a excellent, tight little package with its own mythology and visual style, and to mess with that would be to cheapen the whole thing. The directors said as much in the Q&A. Although....I hated Nightmare on Elm Street 2, but thought Dream Warriors was brilliant, so you never know...
-the coelacanth
-----------------------------------------------
Last nights' screening marked the home stretch for Midnight Madness 2009. 6 films down and everyone of them has been a lot of fun. Even Romero's Survival of the Dead, which i didn't enjoy, was still a ruckus of a screening. The festival is taking a visible toll on Joe and I but we're loving every second of it.
Day 6 of Midnight Madness hosted more zombies. [REC] 2, sequel to 2007's [REC] and the film Quarantine was based on, picks up where the original film left off. In [REC] an apartment building is under quarantine for mysterious reasons with tenants locked inside as well as a television crew who record all the events that transpire. [REC] 2 starts 15 minutes after the events of the first film and put us in the perspective of a SWAT team whose orders are to enter the building to try and control the situation.
What makes [REC] stand out from the pack of other first person horror films (Blair Witch Project, Cloverfield, Diary of the Dead) is the way directors Jaume Balaguero and Paco Plaza utilize the camera to tell their story. Many times the camera is used as a tool to see in the dark or to act as a second pair of eyes to look around a corner or in an attic. The shots are blocked in such a way that they deliver some really horrifying moments while still feeling natural to the central plot device of first hand recording. Unlike other films that utilize the first person camera, I've never questioned the characters in [REC] for recording everything. I never wanted to yell "throw down the camera and run!" Their reasons for filming everything are valid and make sense.
For [REC]2 Balaguero and Plaza have once again come up with fun and inventive ways to keep this device from feeling "gimmicky". The SWAT team not only carries a conventional video camera with them but they are all equipped with helmet cams which, you can imagine, capture some of the most scariest scenes of the film.
If you are a fan of [REC] than you'll really enjoy [REC] 2, it is a sequel in the true sense of the word. It plays like a counterpart of the first so well that you could actually watch both side by side, in fact i can't imagine watching one without the other now.
Great stuff, and i'm hoping Plaza and Balaguero keep cranking out some more of these.
Tonight we take on the demons of hell in Solomon Kane.
-Dropkick
9.15.2009
Midnight Madness day 5: Bitch Slap (2009)
Throughout TIFF, Kris and Joe will be doing "shared" reviews, in which we'll offer our opinions on a particular film in a single post. This is day 5.
-----------------------------------------
Well, last night's screening was an absolute blast! Colour me shocked. I was kinda dreading Bitch Slap, but ended up being thoroughly entertained. Perhaps because of my low expectations, or maybe because the film was actually not bad - either way, good stuff, and tied for first with The Loved Ones as my best of the fest so far.
Godard's famous quotation of "all you need to make a film is girl and a gun" gets multiplied by 4 here (on both fronts), and what we get is an obvious homage to Russ Meyer and sexploitation films of the 70s, all tits, ass, and big guns. The opening credits were some of the best I've seen in years (in any genre). Comical slow motion fetishization of the female form in all its glory (mainly the curvy bits), girl on girl action, supremely over the top dialogue, and a handful of locations all add up to something that is less a tribute to the films it clearly draws from, and more authentically one of those very films itself. Director Rick Jacobson knows what's up (he's clearly seen an Andy Sidaris film or three), and cameos by Lucy Lawless and Kevin Sorbo were inspired. The film was overly long, but that's a small quibble. Also cool to see stunt person extraordinaire Zoe Bell live and in person as part of the fun Q&A (girl's seriously built, and could easily take me and Kris down).
I'm sure someone (Kris, maybe?) will write an incisive dissertation of the post-feminist politics and subversion of genre and gender in Bitch Slap, but for me, it was all on the surface. What I saw was what I got, and what I saw was glorious.
-the coelacanth
---------------------------------------------------
Bitch Slap is boobs, and cars, and fire, and boobs, and guns, and Hercules and Xenia, and boobs, and girls with boobs, girls on girls with boobs, and motorcycles ridden by girls with guns on fire with boobs and girls.
i liked the part where the girls fought each other, and the other part where they threw water on each other... and i liked the girls alot.
i wanted to go to the washroom but i couldn't because if i got up i thought everyone was gonna laugh at me.
i like movies.
-Dropkick
-----------------------------------------
Well, last night's screening was an absolute blast! Colour me shocked. I was kinda dreading Bitch Slap, but ended up being thoroughly entertained. Perhaps because of my low expectations, or maybe because the film was actually not bad - either way, good stuff, and tied for first with The Loved Ones as my best of the fest so far.
Godard's famous quotation of "all you need to make a film is girl and a gun" gets multiplied by 4 here (on both fronts), and what we get is an obvious homage to Russ Meyer and sexploitation films of the 70s, all tits, ass, and big guns. The opening credits were some of the best I've seen in years (in any genre). Comical slow motion fetishization of the female form in all its glory (mainly the curvy bits), girl on girl action, supremely over the top dialogue, and a handful of locations all add up to something that is less a tribute to the films it clearly draws from, and more authentically one of those very films itself. Director Rick Jacobson knows what's up (he's clearly seen an Andy Sidaris film or three), and cameos by Lucy Lawless and Kevin Sorbo were inspired. The film was overly long, but that's a small quibble. Also cool to see stunt person extraordinaire Zoe Bell live and in person as part of the fun Q&A (girl's seriously built, and could easily take me and Kris down).
I'm sure someone (Kris, maybe?) will write an incisive dissertation of the post-feminist politics and subversion of genre and gender in Bitch Slap, but for me, it was all on the surface. What I saw was what I got, and what I saw was glorious.
-the coelacanth
---------------------------------------------------
Bitch Slap is boobs, and cars, and fire, and boobs, and guns, and Hercules and Xenia, and boobs, and girls with boobs, girls on girls with boobs, and motorcycles ridden by girls with guns on fire with boobs and girls.
i liked the part where the girls fought each other, and the other part where they threw water on each other... and i liked the girls alot.
i wanted to go to the washroom but i couldn't because if i got up i thought everyone was gonna laugh at me.
i like movies.
-Dropkick
9.14.2009
Midnight Madness day 4: The Loved Ones (2009)
Throughout TIFF, Kris and Joe will be doing "shared" reviews, in which we'll offer our opinions on a particular film in a single post. This is day 4.
-----------------------------------------------
Lineups are getting shorter outside the Ryerson in the moments leading up to the witching hour. That's not to say that the films being screened are of any less merit than the previous three - quite the contrary, in fact. It is simply evidence of the average moviegoer is more likely to attend a film in which the entire Hollywood starlet cast will be in attendance, or they'll have a chance to ask a few probing questions of a few acting legends, or gaze upon the creator of some of the most seminal walking dead films ever. However, with that out of the way - with the lack of recognizable names and deepening weirdness, the casual moviegoer is less inclined to take a chance on "one of those crazy midnight movies". It is entirely to their detriment, though, and to the benefit of Kris and I finding decent seats in the crush to do so. You see, as Kris mentioned in his Romero review, the stars have gone and the novelty for the curious has worn off, and coupled with the reality of getting to bed by 3 am (at the very earliest) only to have to rise and go to work a scant few hours later turns a lot of people off. For this often leads to a sort of mania, a celluloid psychosis where dreams begin to fuse with reality, and ghosts can be seen in broad daylight. We're lucky to have jobs that facilitate perfectly the MM schedule, and its attendant debauchery.
Last night's film, newbie Aussie director Sean Byrne's The Loved Ones, truly signalled the beginning of MM to me. It also served as this year's "extreme film", of which there is one every year, seemingly designed solely to shock and gross out and generally mortify the audience. I didn't find The Loved Ones to be that shocking, though, especially when compared to the previous couple films that have occupied this role at MM, Frontier(e)s, Inside, and Martyrs. There were some cringe-worthy moments, for certain, but the overall effectiveness of the film lay in its unique pacing, building of tension, and outright chillingness of the female lead, Robin McLeavy, doing her best Kathy Bates-in-Misery impression, and damn near pulling it off. And just when you think it's going to be a straightforward teen horror, things take a turn for the weeeeeeiiiirrrrrrrrdddddd......
Essentially a study in teenage obsession and loss, The Loved Ones ultimately succeeds as a horror film, despite a few missteps along the way. Because it doesn't rely solely on its gory money-shots and focuses more on the madness of the female lead (with some seriously fucked up daddy issues), her insane but willing father, and the bizarre and gruesome details of what goes on within the walls of their little farmhouse, it transcends the incredibly stigmatized and grievously misunderstood "torture porn" subgenre. Toss in some gorgeous cinematography and set design, and a pretty good understanding by the director of what works and what doesn't in the genre, and you've got a pretty decent flick. I didn't love it, but didn't feel like I had wasted my time either. The final scene is brutal, hilarious, and cathartic, and will have you singing quietly to yourself "Am I Not Pretty Enough?"...
Anyway, a very solid first effort by Byrne; he'll be one to watch in the genre for years to come, I hope. And Scott won't watch this one either.
-the coelacanth
---------------------------------------------------------
Day 4 of Midnight Madness hosted the best film at the festival so far, first time director's Sean Byrne's The Loved Ones is an Australian horror centering around prom night. Not what you might think, the film deceptively turns the genre on its head blending laughs and blood so flawlessly without ever feeling cheap or awkward.
It's one part Carrie, one part John Hughes, and two parts Misery.
The story splits it time between a kid named Brent, a pot smokin' metal head, who is dealing with his fathers death who died in a car accident. Brent just so happened to be driving the car at the time.
The other half of the story focuses on Brent's friend Sac and his prom date with hot goth girl Mia.
The dual storyline seems awkward at first. Whereas Brent's storyline is where the horror lies, Sac and Mia's is where the comedy is.
At first i didn't enjoy how the film jumped back and forth between the stories because i felt they didn't congeal well as they both went in completely different directions. In retrospect, the dual storyline really works for the film, during the horror scenes the film pushes you to your absolute limit. Sean Byrne is very aware of the audience as once you've been pushed he throws you back at the prom and ingeniously these scenes feel like they were designed to help you catch your breath before he shoves you back into hell.
Something must be said for Robin McLeavy's stunning performance as Lola. She delivers a Kathy Batesesque (circa Misery) performance so hypnotizing and deranged that it is destined to join the cannon of the greatest villains of horror. I'm talking people will dress up like her for hallowe'en.
Of course that depends on if this gem even gets picked up for release in North America and there's no good left in this world if it doesn't.
Films like The Loved Ones is what makes Midnight Madness one of the most reknown film programmes in the world.
Tonight i shudder as Joe and i take on Bitch Slap, a Russ Meyer/Sports Illustrated hybrid of a film made by the same people who made Xenia and Hercules.... so i guess that's Sam Raimi?
huh.
-Dropkick
-----------------------------------------------
Lineups are getting shorter outside the Ryerson in the moments leading up to the witching hour. That's not to say that the films being screened are of any less merit than the previous three - quite the contrary, in fact. It is simply evidence of the average moviegoer is more likely to attend a film in which the entire Hollywood starlet cast will be in attendance, or they'll have a chance to ask a few probing questions of a few acting legends, or gaze upon the creator of some of the most seminal walking dead films ever. However, with that out of the way - with the lack of recognizable names and deepening weirdness, the casual moviegoer is less inclined to take a chance on "one of those crazy midnight movies". It is entirely to their detriment, though, and to the benefit of Kris and I finding decent seats in the crush to do so. You see, as Kris mentioned in his Romero review, the stars have gone and the novelty for the curious has worn off, and coupled with the reality of getting to bed by 3 am (at the very earliest) only to have to rise and go to work a scant few hours later turns a lot of people off. For this often leads to a sort of mania, a celluloid psychosis where dreams begin to fuse with reality, and ghosts can be seen in broad daylight. We're lucky to have jobs that facilitate perfectly the MM schedule, and its attendant debauchery.
Last night's film, newbie Aussie director Sean Byrne's The Loved Ones, truly signalled the beginning of MM to me. It also served as this year's "extreme film", of which there is one every year, seemingly designed solely to shock and gross out and generally mortify the audience. I didn't find The Loved Ones to be that shocking, though, especially when compared to the previous couple films that have occupied this role at MM, Frontier(e)s, Inside, and Martyrs. There were some cringe-worthy moments, for certain, but the overall effectiveness of the film lay in its unique pacing, building of tension, and outright chillingness of the female lead, Robin McLeavy, doing her best Kathy Bates-in-Misery impression, and damn near pulling it off. And just when you think it's going to be a straightforward teen horror, things take a turn for the weeeeeeiiiirrrrrrrrdddddd......
Essentially a study in teenage obsession and loss, The Loved Ones ultimately succeeds as a horror film, despite a few missteps along the way. Because it doesn't rely solely on its gory money-shots and focuses more on the madness of the female lead (with some seriously fucked up daddy issues), her insane but willing father, and the bizarre and gruesome details of what goes on within the walls of their little farmhouse, it transcends the incredibly stigmatized and grievously misunderstood "torture porn" subgenre. Toss in some gorgeous cinematography and set design, and a pretty good understanding by the director of what works and what doesn't in the genre, and you've got a pretty decent flick. I didn't love it, but didn't feel like I had wasted my time either. The final scene is brutal, hilarious, and cathartic, and will have you singing quietly to yourself "Am I Not Pretty Enough?"...
Anyway, a very solid first effort by Byrne; he'll be one to watch in the genre for years to come, I hope. And Scott won't watch this one either.
-the coelacanth
---------------------------------------------------------
Day 4 of Midnight Madness hosted the best film at the festival so far, first time director's Sean Byrne's The Loved Ones is an Australian horror centering around prom night. Not what you might think, the film deceptively turns the genre on its head blending laughs and blood so flawlessly without ever feeling cheap or awkward.
It's one part Carrie, one part John Hughes, and two parts Misery.
The story splits it time between a kid named Brent, a pot smokin' metal head, who is dealing with his fathers death who died in a car accident. Brent just so happened to be driving the car at the time.
The other half of the story focuses on Brent's friend Sac and his prom date with hot goth girl Mia.
The dual storyline seems awkward at first. Whereas Brent's storyline is where the horror lies, Sac and Mia's is where the comedy is.
At first i didn't enjoy how the film jumped back and forth between the stories because i felt they didn't congeal well as they both went in completely different directions. In retrospect, the dual storyline really works for the film, during the horror scenes the film pushes you to your absolute limit. Sean Byrne is very aware of the audience as once you've been pushed he throws you back at the prom and ingeniously these scenes feel like they were designed to help you catch your breath before he shoves you back into hell.
Something must be said for Robin McLeavy's stunning performance as Lola. She delivers a Kathy Batesesque (circa Misery) performance so hypnotizing and deranged that it is destined to join the cannon of the greatest villains of horror. I'm talking people will dress up like her for hallowe'en.
Of course that depends on if this gem even gets picked up for release in North America and there's no good left in this world if it doesn't.
Films like The Loved Ones is what makes Midnight Madness one of the most reknown film programmes in the world.
Tonight i shudder as Joe and i take on Bitch Slap, a Russ Meyer/Sports Illustrated hybrid of a film made by the same people who made Xenia and Hercules.... so i guess that's Sam Raimi?
huh.
-Dropkick
Happy 62nd Sammy!
Prawns, Spawn and Autobots
For all the rave reviews Neill Blomkamp's District 9 received, I found my first shot at it engaging but vaguely disappointing, particularly as political allegory. A great premise and some clever script writing gives way to a third act that morphs into vintage Michael Bay-styled shoot 'em up and undermines the thought-provoking qualities of the first two acts. First the upsides... and there are plenty. Visually, it's stunning. The CG integration is almost transparent and the aliens are repulsive and creepy. The lead actor played by South African Sharlto Copley is very good. He plays a character who's a combination of Kafkaesque-nightmare bureaucrat and bubbling idiot. Without giving away the plot, he is charged with the impossible task of moving an impoverished alien population of a million+ away from Johannesburg to a remote encampment several hundred kilometers away. The South African setting is a welcome change from traditional Euro/American framework of most modern science fiction. The underlying themes of race, displaced populations and man's capacity for cruelty are front and centre in District 9, admirable and unusual for a genre picture, but it's hard to find the moral centre and therefore the point of the film without first understanding the political context that Blomkamp is working under. An hour of Wikipedia research into modern South Africa later, I rewatched the film with a more up-to-date understanding of the issues facing the region today and it plays like a different (and much better) film on a second pass.
So it comes down to this. You can have great fun watching District 9 as a campy straight-up Sci-Fi with loads of gore and nasty black humour ….or you can view it as a complex allegorical treatise on modern race relations and humanity's unending appetite for self-destruction.
In order to discuss the deeper themes plumbed in District 9, a basic understanding of the plot's start point is necessary. In documentary/newscast flashback, we told that a massive alien ship arrived over Johannesburg in 1982 and hovered some 1000 feet above for over two decades. Why they came and how they became stranded is never explained. A mission is mounted to enter the ship and it is discovered that the aliens inside are in dire straits. They are starving and apparently unable to provide for themselves. The authorities make the area in the vicinity of the ship a holding compound for the visitors, where they feed and provide for them: District 9. They are fenced off from the rest of Johannesburg's population and detained in the squalid conditions of a shanty town. They are surrounded 24-7 by the military, ostensibly for their own protection but actually more out of fear. This fear is seemingly justified as violent clashes between the aliens and the human population begin to increase, leading to a decision to relocate the entire alien population, some 1.2 million, to a remote area 250 km. from the city. This is where the film opens.
A Catch-22 exists in cinema when it comes to dealing with matters of race. It's nearly impossible to write a script that delves in any substantive way into the issue without stirring up counter charges and claims of racism, a dilemma that certainly complicates a deeper reading of Blomkamp's script. Almost by definition, discussions about race are contentious - a subjective topic that more often than not divides opinion depending on the viewer's perspective. As a result, most movie scripts end up skirting the issue, avoiding it outright or offering up overly-simplistic examples where the lines are clearly divided along the good victim/bad oppressor theme. District 9 may be something of an exception to this rule. On the one hand it seems to be wearing it's rather obvious political stripes on it's sleeve but upon closer inspection it may indeed be saying something rather more profound and subversive.
Intentionally or not, there is a bleeding of pre and post-apartheid South African politics in the District 9 story line. On the surface it first appears that we are immersed in an allegorical pre-1994 South Africa, but as the story unfolds, much of the plot involves sociopolitical overtones from present day South Africa and it may serve the audience better to view this film as a post-apartheid parable about illegal immigration and Malthusian despair. (Malthus was an influential early 19th century writer who wrote extensively on matters of excessive population growth). The modern fable Blomkamp has fashioned here is a contentious and potentially explosive one – that black South Africans are prone to the saying and doing the same intolerant things that white Afrikaans were universally condemned for two decades ago. There are unpopular, politically incorrect elements of District 9 (specifically the portrayal of the evil Nigerian crime syndicate, among others) but we westerners have all but ignored the region since Nelson Mandela was elected in 1994 and it seems that the truth of the matter is rather more grim than you might hope. It seems that they didn't live happily ever after.
In order to properly contextualize the story in District 9, you also need to be aware of a couple of key political events in the recent past....
Political primer #1....After the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the Afrikaans elite (aka: rich whitey) decided within three months to deal with the then-71 year old Mandela, confident that a black government wouldn’t be so influenced by the godless Commies as to immediately kill the capitalist goose that lays the golden (and diamond) eggs. The system that emerged has been fine for those whites rich enough to afford ample private security, but unsurprisingly bad for the Afrikaans working class, many of whom (including the director's family who fled and now reside in B.C.) left the country. Not surprisingly, the early decades of the new ANC government and a vanishing middle class have left the country corrupt, riddled with crime and flirting with anarchy. A sort of reverse ethnic cleansing has seen the country's skilled white middle class depart for safer havens and a vacuum develop in its place.
Political primer #2....After 20 years of black rule, neighbouring Zimbabwe experienced a political meltdown/societal collapse in recent years that has left millions of refuges fleeing the country for the relative safety and financial promise of South Africa. This massive influx of refuges (3 to 5 million is the latest count) has caused a great deal of social unrest in South Africa pitting two black communities against one another. In a recent interview, writer/director Blomkamp had this to say about the current state of affairs in South Africa:
“Another part of recent South African history that isn’t world news is that the collapse of Zimbabwe has introduced millions of illegal Zimbabwean immigrants into South African cities. … Now you have this powder-keg situation, with black against black … [W]e woke up one morning to find out that Johannesburg was eating itself alive. Impoverished South Africans had started murdering impoverished Zimbabweans, necklacing them and burning them and chopping them up.”
Armed with this information, District 9's political underpinnings make substantially more sense to the uninitiated and underinformed like myself. While the film is quite easily viewed as a piece of video-game escapism, the more interesting layers of the plot almost require a bit of background detail to help contextualize the story. Without this frame of reference, the film's allegorical side is all rather confusing. I understand why the film maker chose to shift the film into Sci-Fi fanboy territory and leave the more political aspects on the margins. It was probably the right decision. The fact that a sociopolitical context exists at all in District 9 is impressive enough.
Once this releases to DVD and a few others have had a chance to watch it, I'd be interested to hear what you thought of the film's tricky undercurrents.
Sporgey
So it comes down to this. You can have great fun watching District 9 as a campy straight-up Sci-Fi with loads of gore and nasty black humour ….or you can view it as a complex allegorical treatise on modern race relations and humanity's unending appetite for self-destruction.
In order to discuss the deeper themes plumbed in District 9, a basic understanding of the plot's start point is necessary. In documentary/newscast flashback, we told that a massive alien ship arrived over Johannesburg in 1982 and hovered some 1000 feet above for over two decades. Why they came and how they became stranded is never explained. A mission is mounted to enter the ship and it is discovered that the aliens inside are in dire straits. They are starving and apparently unable to provide for themselves. The authorities make the area in the vicinity of the ship a holding compound for the visitors, where they feed and provide for them: District 9. They are fenced off from the rest of Johannesburg's population and detained in the squalid conditions of a shanty town. They are surrounded 24-7 by the military, ostensibly for their own protection but actually more out of fear. This fear is seemingly justified as violent clashes between the aliens and the human population begin to increase, leading to a decision to relocate the entire alien population, some 1.2 million, to a remote area 250 km. from the city. This is where the film opens.
A Catch-22 exists in cinema when it comes to dealing with matters of race. It's nearly impossible to write a script that delves in any substantive way into the issue without stirring up counter charges and claims of racism, a dilemma that certainly complicates a deeper reading of Blomkamp's script. Almost by definition, discussions about race are contentious - a subjective topic that more often than not divides opinion depending on the viewer's perspective. As a result, most movie scripts end up skirting the issue, avoiding it outright or offering up overly-simplistic examples where the lines are clearly divided along the good victim/bad oppressor theme. District 9 may be something of an exception to this rule. On the one hand it seems to be wearing it's rather obvious political stripes on it's sleeve but upon closer inspection it may indeed be saying something rather more profound and subversive.
Intentionally or not, there is a bleeding of pre and post-apartheid South African politics in the District 9 story line. On the surface it first appears that we are immersed in an allegorical pre-1994 South Africa, but as the story unfolds, much of the plot involves sociopolitical overtones from present day South Africa and it may serve the audience better to view this film as a post-apartheid parable about illegal immigration and Malthusian despair. (Malthus was an influential early 19th century writer who wrote extensively on matters of excessive population growth). The modern fable Blomkamp has fashioned here is a contentious and potentially explosive one – that black South Africans are prone to the saying and doing the same intolerant things that white Afrikaans were universally condemned for two decades ago. There are unpopular, politically incorrect elements of District 9 (specifically the portrayal of the evil Nigerian crime syndicate, among others) but we westerners have all but ignored the region since Nelson Mandela was elected in 1994 and it seems that the truth of the matter is rather more grim than you might hope. It seems that they didn't live happily ever after.
In order to properly contextualize the story in District 9, you also need to be aware of a couple of key political events in the recent past....
Political primer #1....After the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the Afrikaans elite (aka: rich whitey) decided within three months to deal with the then-71 year old Mandela, confident that a black government wouldn’t be so influenced by the godless Commies as to immediately kill the capitalist goose that lays the golden (and diamond) eggs. The system that emerged has been fine for those whites rich enough to afford ample private security, but unsurprisingly bad for the Afrikaans working class, many of whom (including the director's family who fled and now reside in B.C.) left the country. Not surprisingly, the early decades of the new ANC government and a vanishing middle class have left the country corrupt, riddled with crime and flirting with anarchy. A sort of reverse ethnic cleansing has seen the country's skilled white middle class depart for safer havens and a vacuum develop in its place.
Political primer #2....After 20 years of black rule, neighbouring Zimbabwe experienced a political meltdown/societal collapse in recent years that has left millions of refuges fleeing the country for the relative safety and financial promise of South Africa. This massive influx of refuges (3 to 5 million is the latest count) has caused a great deal of social unrest in South Africa pitting two black communities against one another. In a recent interview, writer/director Blomkamp had this to say about the current state of affairs in South Africa:
“Another part of recent South African history that isn’t world news is that the collapse of Zimbabwe has introduced millions of illegal Zimbabwean immigrants into South African cities. … Now you have this powder-keg situation, with black against black … [W]e woke up one morning to find out that Johannesburg was eating itself alive. Impoverished South Africans had started murdering impoverished Zimbabweans, necklacing them and burning them and chopping them up.”
Armed with this information, District 9's political underpinnings make substantially more sense to the uninitiated and underinformed like myself. While the film is quite easily viewed as a piece of video-game escapism, the more interesting layers of the plot almost require a bit of background detail to help contextualize the story. Without this frame of reference, the film's allegorical side is all rather confusing. I understand why the film maker chose to shift the film into Sci-Fi fanboy territory and leave the more political aspects on the margins. It was probably the right decision. The fact that a sociopolitical context exists at all in District 9 is impressive enough.
Once this releases to DVD and a few others have had a chance to watch it, I'd be interested to hear what you thought of the film's tricky undercurrents.
Sporgey
9.13.2009
Midnight Madness Day 3: George A. Romero's Survival of the Dead
Throughout TIFF, Kris and Joe will be doing "shared" reviews, in which we'll offer our opinions on a particular film in a single post. Kendall is sitting in for Joe who couldn't make it. This is day 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It was fitting that last night i attended George A. Romero's latest entry in his ... of the Dead series "Survival of the Dead" zonked from a 3 hour sleep and a following 10 hour shift at the FBE.
I showed up in line looking very much like a member of the undead and feeling not too far off from the same.
Kendall soon joined me and we shuffled into the theater where chaos for good seating ensued. Somehow we snagged some pretty amazing seats, middle row center.
It wasn't until we looked around and noticed that disgruntled cast and crew members were yelling at Tiff volunteers and that we were also sitting right behind the man himself, George A. Romero, that we started to think we were sitting in the wrong seats.
Ah well, it was too late to do anything about it.
Romero came out before the screening to a very impressive standing ovation. As an audience we were not only paying tribute to the legend, but we were also welcoming him as an official Torontonian. Now that he does live here I wonder if Scott will buy 10 copies of all of his films just in case he comes into the store... we'll see.
After a few formalities from George the lights dimmed and i was already fighting to stay awake and that's without one frame of the film playing.
Survival of the Dead is a sequel of sorts to Diary of the Dead which i haven't seen. Unlike any other "of the Dead" films this one has a direct connection to another. The lead in this film was a character in Diary.
Sorry for pussy footing around the review for this flick, i just don't know how to come out and say i didn't like it. So I'll say that. I didn't like it that much.
All the characters have unfinished or unused character arcs, the plot branches out in many directions yet it never follows any plot twist to its natural end. Instead the film jumps and stalls constantly, the film desperately seeking some sort of conclusion but no one is kind enough to just shoot it in the head and be done with it. We watch it limp in horror; a living dead film.
Keep in mind that maybe Romero films aren't my thing. I love Return, Dawn, and Day but when i attended Land of the Dead i was left baffled as i was the only one i knew who just didn't get anything out of it. So there, it may just be me. I heard a lot of people say that Survival was better than Diary of the Dead.
Joe told me to separate the film from the director and look at it as just a film to form a more honest opinion but i can't help it.
It bothers me that Romero's name is on it. I feel like he should be a beacon of quality for the zombie genre, at the very least he should be a director that holds onto old film techniques and the use of special effect make up instead of going digital and heavy use of cheap cgi.
I want one more really good Romero film and this one isn't it, not by a long shot.
What followed after the film was quite possibly the worst Q & A session i have ever attended. Questions like "Do you prefer fast zombies or slow zombies?" or "Why did the zombie cross the road?" or the closing question "Can we see your best zombie impersonation?", all great stuff Toronto.
But i was a zombie by that point so who knows? It may just have been the best b style horror movie ever made followed by the wittiest questions anyone has ever asked a director.
I would like to thank Kendall for being such a blast of a Midnight Madness partner, she snuck in crispers which we would have ate during the movie if we weren't sitting right behind George A. Romero.
Tonight an Aussie horror flick, The Loved Ones looks very promising. Now that the big name tittles are out of the way and the star gazing element of Midnight Madness becomes more subdued I'm excited to sit down and watch some real film. No more big names, no more expectations, from here on in it's all about the films. (minus the closing film Ong Bak 2, I'm hoping for that one we will be treated to a martial arts demonstration by Tony Jaa)
-Dropkick
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It was fitting that last night i attended George A. Romero's latest entry in his ... of the Dead series "Survival of the Dead" zonked from a 3 hour sleep and a following 10 hour shift at the FBE.
I showed up in line looking very much like a member of the undead and feeling not too far off from the same.
Kendall soon joined me and we shuffled into the theater where chaos for good seating ensued. Somehow we snagged some pretty amazing seats, middle row center.
It wasn't until we looked around and noticed that disgruntled cast and crew members were yelling at Tiff volunteers and that we were also sitting right behind the man himself, George A. Romero, that we started to think we were sitting in the wrong seats.
Ah well, it was too late to do anything about it.
Romero came out before the screening to a very impressive standing ovation. As an audience we were not only paying tribute to the legend, but we were also welcoming him as an official Torontonian. Now that he does live here I wonder if Scott will buy 10 copies of all of his films just in case he comes into the store... we'll see.
After a few formalities from George the lights dimmed and i was already fighting to stay awake and that's without one frame of the film playing.
Survival of the Dead is a sequel of sorts to Diary of the Dead which i haven't seen. Unlike any other "of the Dead" films this one has a direct connection to another. The lead in this film was a character in Diary.
Sorry for pussy footing around the review for this flick, i just don't know how to come out and say i didn't like it. So I'll say that. I didn't like it that much.
All the characters have unfinished or unused character arcs, the plot branches out in many directions yet it never follows any plot twist to its natural end. Instead the film jumps and stalls constantly, the film desperately seeking some sort of conclusion but no one is kind enough to just shoot it in the head and be done with it. We watch it limp in horror; a living dead film.
Keep in mind that maybe Romero films aren't my thing. I love Return, Dawn, and Day but when i attended Land of the Dead i was left baffled as i was the only one i knew who just didn't get anything out of it. So there, it may just be me. I heard a lot of people say that Survival was better than Diary of the Dead.
Joe told me to separate the film from the director and look at it as just a film to form a more honest opinion but i can't help it.
It bothers me that Romero's name is on it. I feel like he should be a beacon of quality for the zombie genre, at the very least he should be a director that holds onto old film techniques and the use of special effect make up instead of going digital and heavy use of cheap cgi.
I want one more really good Romero film and this one isn't it, not by a long shot.
What followed after the film was quite possibly the worst Q & A session i have ever attended. Questions like "Do you prefer fast zombies or slow zombies?" or "Why did the zombie cross the road?" or the closing question "Can we see your best zombie impersonation?", all great stuff Toronto.
But i was a zombie by that point so who knows? It may just have been the best b style horror movie ever made followed by the wittiest questions anyone has ever asked a director.
I would like to thank Kendall for being such a blast of a Midnight Madness partner, she snuck in crispers which we would have ate during the movie if we weren't sitting right behind George A. Romero.
Tonight an Aussie horror flick, The Loved Ones looks very promising. Now that the big name tittles are out of the way and the star gazing element of Midnight Madness becomes more subdued I'm excited to sit down and watch some real film. No more big names, no more expectations, from here on in it's all about the films. (minus the closing film Ong Bak 2, I'm hoping for that one we will be treated to a martial arts demonstration by Tony Jaa)
-Dropkick
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When Survival of the Dead began my (very low, after the disaster that was Diary of the Dead) hopes began to rise. 'Here [I thought], here we will have a Romero movie that is really worth something, about the survival of humanity as a species and the disintegration of our benevolence and the human condition in the face of a crisis.' Ok so maybe i didn’t think quite so poetically in the moment, but you get the idea... unfortunately Romero didn’t. I love sci-fi and horror that aims to expose our humanity as a total crock, a facade of intelligence and superiority over other species that crumbles as soon as we are faced with disaster. Day of the Triffids and The Stand, to me, are both brilliant books that explore this concept, if you’re interested in a good read (I’ve seen neither of the movie-versions). Survival of the Dead, initially, seemed like it was going to be in the same vein as these; the theme of the film murkily reflects this sort of idea with constant references to the difficulty of choosing to hold on to our humanity in terms of our lives, and our humanity in terms of our relationships with people, something that we like to think separates us from animals, at some point in this movie everyone must choose one or the other. However, this whole idea is so muddled by useless story lines and characters that it is hardly noticeable, in fact I’m not even sure Romero noticed it, or really intended it. The story of Survival moves in way too many directions, one leading to another, introducing us to a new character, who we then think will be the focus of the movie, but never turns out to be. In the end the focus settles exactly where it started, making everything that happened in between feel completely useless, and where the film started is with a feud between two Irish families who live on an island outside of Delaware, and it’s exactly as ridiculous as it sounds.
I really don’t have anything else to say about this movie other than that it’s only redeeming quality is that it is ever so slightly better than Diary of the Dead, which I guess is good for Romero... I guess.
-Chandles
9.12.2009
Midnight Madness day 2: Daybreakers (2009)
Throughout TIFF, Kris and Joe will be doing "shared" reviews, in which we'll offer our opinions on a particular film in a single post. This is day 2.
---------------------------------------
Spierig Brothers rebound from their fun but flawed Undead to bring us Daybreakers, a vision of a world 10 years hence in which vampires have overrun the planet (but they're urbane vamps) and humans are the minority. However, dwindling blood supplies and a failure to find a synthetic substitute leads the vampires to more extreme measures....Cool concept, and was carried out kinda like Dark City with vamps.
Some real cool ideas about vamps changing back into humans and dwindling blood supplies (insert water/oil/economic meltdown metaphor here). Excellent cast with Sam Neill and Willem Dafoe standing out for me. I love Sam Neill. He's the sexiest man alive.
Anyways, fun film, if a bit shallow, but some good jump scares, solid acting, and a couple cool ideas make Daybreakers an above average entry into the vampire canon. Not a great film, but it fit the bill, and I'm glad to have seen it. (Sorry for the lazy review, I've got a wedding to go to in 20 minutes and this stain isn't coming out of my jacket...Just read Kris' review for a nice take on the film). Also, look for a guest reviewer tomorrow, as Kendall will be attending George Romero's newest in my stead.
-the coelacanth
-----------------------------------------------------------
Had enough of Vampire movies yet? Cause i have! well... after Daybreakers that is.
Daybreakers is a sci-fi Vampire pic set in the future, where humans are vastly outnumbered by the Vamps. This has lead to a dwindling food supply for the Vampires who are desperately seeking a solution to save their civilization.
The strength of the film lies in the Dystopian depiction of earth's future run by Vampires. Stylistically it's reminiscent of Gattica and Dark City, sort of a hybrid of those two but with vampires. You really get the sense of a backwards world. The way the city is alive at night but bare at noon. Also nice touches like Starbucks style coffee shops that serve lattes with your favourite type of blood, and Subwalks instead of Subways to get Vamps around by day. These scenes of Vampires living in a society on the verge of collapse is what makes Daybreakers stand out from your run of the mill Vampire flick.
It's when the film veers away from this Dystopia that it begins to drag on and feel more generic. Which is also how i feel about Gattica and Dark City.
The three leads hold their own, Ethan Hawke makes a great vampire. Willem Dafoe is, as always, kick ass. And Sam Neill is a god amongst men.
Daybreakers is a good movie, not a great one... which is too bad because it has some really great ideas going for it. I guess we'll see what the public thinks in January, I feel it may be a bit of vampire overload for the masses but we'll see.
For the screening the directors Michael and Peter Spierig were in attendance as well as Sam Neill to answer questions. I think Sam may have been drunk and i didn't get to ask him my one burning question; "Do you read Sutter Cane?"
Dafoe also showed up for a small appearance incognito as a press cameraman.
It was a fun night. Tonight we switch it up as Kendall and I take on a horde of zombies for Romero's Survival of the Dead... kinda sounds like this noon to ten shift I'm working.
-Dropkick
---------------------------------------
Spierig Brothers rebound from their fun but flawed Undead to bring us Daybreakers, a vision of a world 10 years hence in which vampires have overrun the planet (but they're urbane vamps) and humans are the minority. However, dwindling blood supplies and a failure to find a synthetic substitute leads the vampires to more extreme measures....Cool concept, and was carried out kinda like Dark City with vamps.
Some real cool ideas about vamps changing back into humans and dwindling blood supplies (insert water/oil/economic meltdown metaphor here). Excellent cast with Sam Neill and Willem Dafoe standing out for me. I love Sam Neill. He's the sexiest man alive.
Anyways, fun film, if a bit shallow, but some good jump scares, solid acting, and a couple cool ideas make Daybreakers an above average entry into the vampire canon. Not a great film, but it fit the bill, and I'm glad to have seen it. (Sorry for the lazy review, I've got a wedding to go to in 20 minutes and this stain isn't coming out of my jacket...Just read Kris' review for a nice take on the film). Also, look for a guest reviewer tomorrow, as Kendall will be attending George Romero's newest in my stead.
-the coelacanth
-----------------------------------------------------------
Had enough of Vampire movies yet? Cause i have! well... after Daybreakers that is.
Daybreakers is a sci-fi Vampire pic set in the future, where humans are vastly outnumbered by the Vamps. This has lead to a dwindling food supply for the Vampires who are desperately seeking a solution to save their civilization.
The strength of the film lies in the Dystopian depiction of earth's future run by Vampires. Stylistically it's reminiscent of Gattica and Dark City, sort of a hybrid of those two but with vampires. You really get the sense of a backwards world. The way the city is alive at night but bare at noon. Also nice touches like Starbucks style coffee shops that serve lattes with your favourite type of blood, and Subwalks instead of Subways to get Vamps around by day. These scenes of Vampires living in a society on the verge of collapse is what makes Daybreakers stand out from your run of the mill Vampire flick.
It's when the film veers away from this Dystopia that it begins to drag on and feel more generic. Which is also how i feel about Gattica and Dark City.
The three leads hold their own, Ethan Hawke makes a great vampire. Willem Dafoe is, as always, kick ass. And Sam Neill is a god amongst men.
Daybreakers is a good movie, not a great one... which is too bad because it has some really great ideas going for it. I guess we'll see what the public thinks in January, I feel it may be a bit of vampire overload for the masses but we'll see.
For the screening the directors Michael and Peter Spierig were in attendance as well as Sam Neill to answer questions. I think Sam may have been drunk and i didn't get to ask him my one burning question; "Do you read Sutter Cane?"
Dafoe also showed up for a small appearance incognito as a press cameraman.
It was a fun night. Tonight we switch it up as Kendall and I take on a horde of zombies for Romero's Survival of the Dead... kinda sounds like this noon to ten shift I'm working.
-Dropkick
Hunger (2008) - Steve McQueen
It is a treat to write about a film like this, it's not often I watch something new that is so spectacular. Hunger is a very sparse film, with little dialogue or back story. It simply presents a realist portrait of prison life. The prisoners involved happen to be IRA members in the early 1980s who have lost their "political prisoner" status All that being said, there certainly is an underlying political message here about how nasty those "troubles" really were. In particular, there is something that carries over into our current culture: people need to talk to each other, even to talk with "terrorists," because the lack of dialogue and recognition is what breeds violence. The film also reinforced my idea that there is a special ring of Hell set aside for Margaret Thatcher.
9.11.2009
Midnight Madness day 1: Jennifer's Body (2009)
Throughout TIFF, Kris and Joe will be doing "shared" reviews, in which we'll offer our opinions on a particular film in a single post. This is day 1.
--------------------------------------------
Megan's Body, uh er... Jennifer's Body, the second coming from stripper turned Juno wizard Diablo Cody, is a teen horror flick in the same vein as Buffy The Vampire Slayer. It's a teen sex comedy with all the glee and gore of an Elm Street flick.
The first midnight madness film to kick off Tiff was one i was looking forward to the least at the festival. My expectations were pretty low. I haven't seen Juno and have vowed never to put myself through that. I'm not a fan of Megan Fox, or teen sex comedies either.
Yet, with my expectations in the ground it was nice to have my enjoyment rise like the the undead.
Jennifer's Body is about the hot girl in high school (Jennifer) becoming possessed by a demon, which she needs to feed to stay alive. To feed her hunger she takes to eating various boys at school. All this told from the perspective of Jennifer's nerdy best friend Needy who is, surprisingly, our protagonist.
This film, as i suspect is the case with Juno as well, is a future classic. Think Heathers or Weird Science, but made today. Jennifer's Body will, like a cheese, age really well. The obvious metaphors in place here for teens in high school (having the popular girl in school be a boy eating demon?) secures its place as a future cult favourite.
For today however, i felt the film didn't deliver on some of the goods... even with my expectations shot. For a horror movie the scares were pretty standard, not too much new or innovative here. The writing can be at times beautifully honest such as a pretty realistic sex scene and the way all the adult characters are portrayed however, the writing is also this films achellis heel. Coady's use of invented slang and wit should conjure up more similarities to Heathers, but here it only makes the whole ordeal feel less engaging, and towards the end and i was ready to throw the Heathers comparison out the window for Idle Hands.
The performances are top notch, Megan Fox is mostly just Megan Fox, here and there she does shine but she felt more dull then i would have liked, which i guess works better for her character. Amanda Seyfried (Mean Girls, Big Love) really steals the show as needy best friend Needy. She brings all the right elements to the table for her character in a role unlike one i've seen her play in before.
Another mentionable performance is that of Adam Brody (The O.C. and uh.... The O.C.) who i don't particularly even like. Mostly because i felt he always plays a shy nerd, which i know is just a front so he can get chicks... what an asshole. But in Jennifer's Body he actually just plays an asshole which he is really good at.
The whole aesthetic of the film is pretty fantastic, from the sets to the use of colour and in particular the cinematography.
For the Tiff screening the big names of the cast were in attendance as well director Karyn Kusama, producer Jason Reitman and writer Diablo Coady... who by the way used to be a stripper.
I always forget the energy of a midnight madness show always makes a film seem better than it really is. So walking out of Jennifer's Body i thought it was pretty great. But after a good night's rest and the roar of the crowd far behind me i could make up my own mind on the flick.
In conclusion, Jennifer's Body isn't anything spectacular. As a horror film it isn't all that scary, as a teen drama it doesn't take itself seriously enough, and as a teen sex comedy it isn't crude or satirical enough. Mix up a film with short comings going in many different directions and you got yourself a cult hit.
Can't believe there's nine films left... whoa. I hope i make it through this. Next up Daybreakers, I really hope Willem Dafoe is there.
-Dropkick
------------------------------------------------------------
Last night marked the kick off to the Midnight Madness program, and while the film shown, Jennifer's Body, isn't likely to be the best of the program, it certainly is the most buzz-worthy, and offers the most star-power. Megan Fox stars as high-schooler Jennifer possessed by a demon after a failed satanic sacrifice. OC's dweeby-cum-dreamy (really?) Adam Brody plays a dickish leader of an aspiring "indie rock" band, and is the one who botches said sacrifice, giving Jennifer that nasty demon. Gloriously and atypically frumpy Amanda Seyfried plays Jennifer's best friend - and ultimately her worst enemy - Needy, and is the narrator of the tale.
What seemed to draw everyone to the film (aside from Fox's assets), was the presence of Juno-scribe Diablo Cody, who picked up the pen once again to churn out the script for this one. You either like Cody's dialogue or you're not too crazy about it. I'm in the latter camp - I find it rings false, is too "snappy", and seems written expressly in order to cement her status 20 years hence as some kind of modern day John Hughes. The film was not frightening, occasionally funny, and a sub-Tarantino hatchet job of teen comedies/horrors that were made a few years before the stars of this particular film were born. However, despite all these things, I actually liked the film. Or rather, I liked most of the film.
As I mentioned earlier, the dialogue didn't work for me, but there were a couple quiet actions onscreen that rang true and really captured the awkwardness and overflowing hormones of high-school. One thing that struck me as particularly touching was a two second shot of Jennifer and Needy's hands after they've been tightly clasped at a rock show, the imprint of Jennifer's grasp still visible on Needy's hand, slowly returning from white to rosy pink. And the funny/real/awkward sex scene between Needy and her beau, Chip (Johnny Simmons) was nice. Sound and production design were very good. There were a few really cool set-pieces, but some of the ones that should have been BIG failed to deliver (i.e. the prom).
I found Fox to be a distraction, as well; the real stars are the tough but vulnerable Seyfried, and the (unfortunately lost in the glitter) assured direction of Karyn Kusama, two apsects of the film that I think will be its greatest strengths when everything comes out in the wash. Oh, and JK Simmons was awesome too.
Anyway, not a bad way to kick off MM, and a film that would certainly be fun to throw on with friends a few year's hence. Pretty sure this'll be huge with the high-school set when it comes out theatrically in a month or so, and equally big on DVD among the same group. For genre fans, though, it's a bit too tame. In the Q&A following the film, an audience member asked Cody if she would be offended by a comparison of "her" film (everyone kept referring to is as such, and I almost felt embarrassed for the grievously slighted Kusama) to Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and I don't think the comparison is a stretch at all. Jennifer's Body came off a slightly bloodier version of a Buffy episode, which isn't to say it's bad, but merely to place it in a familiar context.
Once the hype and the star power fades, and Jennifer's Body stands naked and shivering, there's just not enough substance behind the beautiful faces and snappy bon-mots to make it worthwhile. However, as Kris said after the film, this one seems to have been tailor-made to provide endlessly quotable dialogue, and to improve with age. Like Heathers. Like Carrie. Unfortunately, Jennifer's Body can't leap through time, and I fear the next 15-20 years on the road to cult classicdom are going to be bumpy.
- the coelacanth
--------------------------------------------
Megan's Body, uh er... Jennifer's Body, the second coming from stripper turned Juno wizard Diablo Cody, is a teen horror flick in the same vein as Buffy The Vampire Slayer. It's a teen sex comedy with all the glee and gore of an Elm Street flick.
The first midnight madness film to kick off Tiff was one i was looking forward to the least at the festival. My expectations were pretty low. I haven't seen Juno and have vowed never to put myself through that. I'm not a fan of Megan Fox, or teen sex comedies either.
Yet, with my expectations in the ground it was nice to have my enjoyment rise like the the undead.
Jennifer's Body is about the hot girl in high school (Jennifer) becoming possessed by a demon, which she needs to feed to stay alive. To feed her hunger she takes to eating various boys at school. All this told from the perspective of Jennifer's nerdy best friend Needy who is, surprisingly, our protagonist.
This film, as i suspect is the case with Juno as well, is a future classic. Think Heathers or Weird Science, but made today. Jennifer's Body will, like a cheese, age really well. The obvious metaphors in place here for teens in high school (having the popular girl in school be a boy eating demon?) secures its place as a future cult favourite.
For today however, i felt the film didn't deliver on some of the goods... even with my expectations shot. For a horror movie the scares were pretty standard, not too much new or innovative here. The writing can be at times beautifully honest such as a pretty realistic sex scene and the way all the adult characters are portrayed however, the writing is also this films achellis heel. Coady's use of invented slang and wit should conjure up more similarities to Heathers, but here it only makes the whole ordeal feel less engaging, and towards the end and i was ready to throw the Heathers comparison out the window for Idle Hands.
The performances are top notch, Megan Fox is mostly just Megan Fox, here and there she does shine but she felt more dull then i would have liked, which i guess works better for her character. Amanda Seyfried (Mean Girls, Big Love) really steals the show as needy best friend Needy. She brings all the right elements to the table for her character in a role unlike one i've seen her play in before.
Another mentionable performance is that of Adam Brody (The O.C. and uh.... The O.C.) who i don't particularly even like. Mostly because i felt he always plays a shy nerd, which i know is just a front so he can get chicks... what an asshole. But in Jennifer's Body he actually just plays an asshole which he is really good at.
The whole aesthetic of the film is pretty fantastic, from the sets to the use of colour and in particular the cinematography.
For the Tiff screening the big names of the cast were in attendance as well director Karyn Kusama, producer Jason Reitman and writer Diablo Coady... who by the way used to be a stripper.
I always forget the energy of a midnight madness show always makes a film seem better than it really is. So walking out of Jennifer's Body i thought it was pretty great. But after a good night's rest and the roar of the crowd far behind me i could make up my own mind on the flick.
In conclusion, Jennifer's Body isn't anything spectacular. As a horror film it isn't all that scary, as a teen drama it doesn't take itself seriously enough, and as a teen sex comedy it isn't crude or satirical enough. Mix up a film with short comings going in many different directions and you got yourself a cult hit.
Can't believe there's nine films left... whoa. I hope i make it through this. Next up Daybreakers, I really hope Willem Dafoe is there.
-Dropkick
------------------------------------------------------------
Last night marked the kick off to the Midnight Madness program, and while the film shown, Jennifer's Body, isn't likely to be the best of the program, it certainly is the most buzz-worthy, and offers the most star-power. Megan Fox stars as high-schooler Jennifer possessed by a demon after a failed satanic sacrifice. OC's dweeby-cum-dreamy (really?) Adam Brody plays a dickish leader of an aspiring "indie rock" band, and is the one who botches said sacrifice, giving Jennifer that nasty demon. Gloriously and atypically frumpy Amanda Seyfried plays Jennifer's best friend - and ultimately her worst enemy - Needy, and is the narrator of the tale.
What seemed to draw everyone to the film (aside from Fox's assets), was the presence of Juno-scribe Diablo Cody, who picked up the pen once again to churn out the script for this one. You either like Cody's dialogue or you're not too crazy about it. I'm in the latter camp - I find it rings false, is too "snappy", and seems written expressly in order to cement her status 20 years hence as some kind of modern day John Hughes. The film was not frightening, occasionally funny, and a sub-Tarantino hatchet job of teen comedies/horrors that were made a few years before the stars of this particular film were born. However, despite all these things, I actually liked the film. Or rather, I liked most of the film.
As I mentioned earlier, the dialogue didn't work for me, but there were a couple quiet actions onscreen that rang true and really captured the awkwardness and overflowing hormones of high-school. One thing that struck me as particularly touching was a two second shot of Jennifer and Needy's hands after they've been tightly clasped at a rock show, the imprint of Jennifer's grasp still visible on Needy's hand, slowly returning from white to rosy pink. And the funny/real/awkward sex scene between Needy and her beau, Chip (Johnny Simmons) was nice. Sound and production design were very good. There were a few really cool set-pieces, but some of the ones that should have been BIG failed to deliver (i.e. the prom).
I found Fox to be a distraction, as well; the real stars are the tough but vulnerable Seyfried, and the (unfortunately lost in the glitter) assured direction of Karyn Kusama, two apsects of the film that I think will be its greatest strengths when everything comes out in the wash. Oh, and JK Simmons was awesome too.
Anyway, not a bad way to kick off MM, and a film that would certainly be fun to throw on with friends a few year's hence. Pretty sure this'll be huge with the high-school set when it comes out theatrically in a month or so, and equally big on DVD among the same group. For genre fans, though, it's a bit too tame. In the Q&A following the film, an audience member asked Cody if she would be offended by a comparison of "her" film (everyone kept referring to is as such, and I almost felt embarrassed for the grievously slighted Kusama) to Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and I don't think the comparison is a stretch at all. Jennifer's Body came off a slightly bloodier version of a Buffy episode, which isn't to say it's bad, but merely to place it in a familiar context.
Once the hype and the star power fades, and Jennifer's Body stands naked and shivering, there's just not enough substance behind the beautiful faces and snappy bon-mots to make it worthwhile. However, as Kris said after the film, this one seems to have been tailor-made to provide endlessly quotable dialogue, and to improve with age. Like Heathers. Like Carrie. Unfortunately, Jennifer's Body can't leap through time, and I fear the next 15-20 years on the road to cult classicdom are going to be bumpy.
- the coelacanth
9.09.2009
Midnight Madness 2009 : Jennifer's Body is going to be rad, the New York Times told me so; Kris and I will either confirm or deny this with our live(ish) coverage of TIFF's Midnight Madness
So TIFF is rapidly approaching, and Kris and I have both purchased passes to the Midnight Madness program, which means that for 10 days in a row (9 for me - I'll have to miss George Romero's latest on Saturday to go to some stupid wedding) we'll be entering some sleazy, dimly lit den at midnight only to be spat out into the weird, dirty streets 2 hours later, delirious and dazed, elated and exhausted, our eyes still blinking and sore from the assault of unholy images.
First up is tomorrow night's screening of the highly anticipated Megan Fox/Diablo Cody juggernaut about a girl gone wild, Jennifer's Body.
Friday has the awesome looking Daybreakers, a film about the world 10 years hence where vampires rule and humans are the minority, starring Ethan Hawke, Sam Neill (swoon), and Willem Dafoe.
On Saturday, Kris and, uh, maybe Kendall(?) will check George Romero's newest, Survival of the Dead. Have fun, ya dicks.
Sunday holds perhaps the most anticipated film for me, the deranged Aussie date flick (how fitting), The Loved Ones.
Monday is the boobs, bullets 'n bombs post-lobotomy Bitch Slap. That's a movie, by the way.
I'm also super excited for Tuesday's feature, the sequel to 2007's awesome [REC], imaginatively titled [REC] 2.
Solomon Kane is Wednesdays' offering, coming from the mind of the same guy that created Conan, and directed by some pale Brit who hails from the same region as our beloved Mot.
I'm looking forward to Thursday's Symbol, if only because, for me, it holds the biggest bust-or-masterpiece possibility.
Next Friday we'll be treated to the Belgian stop-motion animated feature A Town Called Panic.
And to wrap things up with a tearful goodbye on Saturday the 19th, we get Ong Bak 2: The Beginning, in which we see the formative years of the ass-kickingest Thai kickboxer in the history of everything, ever.
Couple all these screenings with the fact that my erstwhile best friend is going to be visiting from Japan during that period, and my regular work schedule, and you'll forgive me if I seem a little, well, tired. But excited. Anyway, follow along here as Kris and I are going to try our best to do shared reviews (not really sure how we'll work out the logistics of that) on each of the films, with perhaps Kendall (or whoever accompanies Kris to Survival of the Dead) chipping in a thought or two. Buckle up, motherfuckers...
Oh, and to get in the spirit of things, here's an article from The New York Times that talks about Jennifer's Body, the state of modern horror, and girls in the genre. Boosh.
First up is tomorrow night's screening of the highly anticipated Megan Fox/Diablo Cody juggernaut about a girl gone wild, Jennifer's Body.
Friday has the awesome looking Daybreakers, a film about the world 10 years hence where vampires rule and humans are the minority, starring Ethan Hawke, Sam Neill (swoon), and Willem Dafoe.
On Saturday, Kris and, uh, maybe Kendall(?) will check George Romero's newest, Survival of the Dead. Have fun, ya dicks.
Sunday holds perhaps the most anticipated film for me, the deranged Aussie date flick (how fitting), The Loved Ones.
Monday is the boobs, bullets 'n bombs post-lobotomy Bitch Slap. That's a movie, by the way.
I'm also super excited for Tuesday's feature, the sequel to 2007's awesome [REC], imaginatively titled [REC] 2.
Solomon Kane is Wednesdays' offering, coming from the mind of the same guy that created Conan, and directed by some pale Brit who hails from the same region as our beloved Mot.
I'm looking forward to Thursday's Symbol, if only because, for me, it holds the biggest bust-or-masterpiece possibility.
Next Friday we'll be treated to the Belgian stop-motion animated feature A Town Called Panic.
And to wrap things up with a tearful goodbye on Saturday the 19th, we get Ong Bak 2: The Beginning, in which we see the formative years of the ass-kickingest Thai kickboxer in the history of everything, ever.
Couple all these screenings with the fact that my erstwhile best friend is going to be visiting from Japan during that period, and my regular work schedule, and you'll forgive me if I seem a little, well, tired. But excited. Anyway, follow along here as Kris and I are going to try our best to do shared reviews (not really sure how we'll work out the logistics of that) on each of the films, with perhaps Kendall (or whoever accompanies Kris to Survival of the Dead) chipping in a thought or two. Buckle up, motherfuckers...
Oh, and to get in the spirit of things, here's an article from The New York Times that talks about Jennifer's Body, the state of modern horror, and girls in the genre. Boosh.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)