Hello all,
In the fall of 2002, I began my post secondary education at the University of Toronto, St.George Campus. It was a big adjustment for me to be in the big city as I grew up in Brampton; a suburb of Toronto. I had been to Toronto on school trips, the occasional Blue Jays Game, visits to family friends or for the odd shopping trip. My Dad commuted for year to Toronto for his job, so I do not believe he wanted to be there during the week for his job and then again all weekend so the trips to Toronto were a once in a while occurrence, but i digress.
My first cinema studies class was aptly called Introduction to Film Study, which consisted of a lecture, screening and tutorial; all of those occurring on different and subsequent days. When we were given the syllabus or class schedule there were a few films that I recognized but most of the films I had not heard of. At first this is a bit dis concerning but I quickly learned that it was better to be exposed to films that you would not otherwise watch.
The first film that was screened was Citizen Kane, which did not speak so much to me at the time but through repeated viewings and the analysis of it, I learned to appreciate it very much. It is an integral film, in the cinema studies lexicon because of its narration techniques and some stylistic elements that the films itself championed. The second film that was screened was Memento, which I had seen before and is in my top five films of all time. I did not immediately love the film, because after the first viewing I did not entirely understand the film; if you have seen the film you will no doubt understand what I am saying. I am not going to systematically go through all the films that were screened because that you take up a lot of page spaced but also because I do not remember all the films that were screened, although I still have my syllabus for this class.
The lectures by Professor Charlie Keil were truly fascinating even if the topic was not so intriguing, Professor Keil had a way of drawing attention; that and he was extremely likable. Some of the screening were a bit tough to get through; we started with early short silent films in the fall and by Christmas break we had just got to colour film with Singing in the Rain. I remember some screenings were you could see other students start to nod off and then their heads would spring up because no one wanted to miss anything that might be on the final exam. If one week you stayed awake, the next week if may have been you that was fighting the urge to sleep.
Another notable film that was screened was Roger and Me; the interactive documentary from Michael Moore about the downfall of his beloved hometown of Flint, Michigan in the wake of the closing of Flint's GM plant. I had not been a fan of documentaries and to this day I would not say that I am a huge fan of them but I do enjoy Moore's Documentaries and a few others such as Capturing The Friedmans and Supersize Me. I am more draw to the interactive documentaries where the director of the documentary is shown onscreen and interacts with people while unveiling or delving into his or her topic of interest. Bowling for Columbine as disturbing as it gets has to be one of my favourite documentaries because it really looks critically at the American Consciousness and its obsession with guns and how it has become an ongoing threat to the American Dream.
The last film of my introduction to Film Study is by far my favourite film of that study year and is in my top five films of all time. The film is called The Celebration, or Festen in its native Danish. The Celebration was the most noteworthy of the Dogme 95 films which were films that followed a manifesto that a group of filmmakers swore they would follow. The manifesto stated the stories in the films had to have not flashbacks, take place in the present, use no props that had to be brought to shooting locations, that is all the props used had to already be in those locations, whether they be outside or in buildings,and the films had to be shot using digital video cameras. There were other conditions that had to be met but I cannot remember them right now, although I do have a book on the Dogme films where it details what the manifesto said. The film itself is about a group of family members meeting up at their summer home to celebrate their father, Helge's 60Th with a party. Extended family members also attend this party and there are amble lodgings to accommodate overnight guests. The film has a very raw look and feel to it that I had never really seen before or since. I subscribe this raw look to the use of digital video and to the film's subject matter. I will not describe the whole plot of this film because I do not want to spoil it but also because I think that I already did in a previous blog entry, but I will say a few things. The whole impact of the film begins when at the dinner table, Christian whom is the youngest of Helge's, in his speech/toast to his father unearths a dark family secret that no one sees coming. The whole rest of the film is dealing with this dark revelation and the impact that it has on the entire family and their future as a family. I have previously, but cannot stress enough how great a film The Celebration is, and although it will not speak to some it definitely speaks to me as a great cinematic achievement.
That is all for this entry. It I can clear some of the fog from my head, my next entry will delve into my second year of cinema studies and possibly some of my third year of cinema studies.
Thank you to all whom are reading. I greatly appreciate your taking the time to read my thought, opinions and ideas.
Thanks,
Fanboy Dave
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Monday, March 19, 2012
Confessions of a Cinephile
Hello All,
This is my attempt to explain where my love of movies began and how it has evolved and continued to evolve through the course of my life. This will likely be an ongoing series of entries as I do not believe I will be able to say all that I would like to say in one entry.
I was born in the early 80s to a loving Mother and Father. My father is one of the many James Bond Fanatics; I consider myself somewhat of a Bond fanatic, although I am not as into it as my Dad and his close from Doug, but I know more than the average person does about the James Bond Franchise. In my early life, I was exposed to plethora of Walt Disney films and still enjoy them today but am more of a fan of the Pixar computer animated films than the animated Disney films of today. I grew up watching a lot of action adventure films, including the Bond, Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Star Trek and Back to the Future films.
I would often go to the movies with my mother who would go see just about anything with me that I wanted to see. My Father was a police officer and worked rotating shifts so he worked odd hours and was not always around and my sister was and still is a social butterfly who started working just as soon as she could so if she was not in school, or out with friends, she was working, leaving my mom and I to do to the movies or hang out at home. We did go to see movies together as a family. I fondly remember seeing Batman Forever, X-Men and a host of other films with my whole family. For my birthday we would usually go to the movies on the weekend to celebrate; Home Alone 2, Mighty Morphing Power Rangers, and Toy Story were among some of the films that were watched for my birthday celebrations. I believe that I associate movie watching with spending time with family and to this day love watching movies with friends or family members.
Another side to my obsession with films is my love of analyzing the situations that the characters find themselves in; I do this more with Television Shows though because the stories are ongoing. I analyze the moral questions that some films raise and the issues that the filmmakers are trying to propose to the movie going public.
Over time I was able to see more mature films. My mother and I would watch a lot of cop films. I remember renting all of the Lethal Weapon and Die Hard films and watching them with my mother; I would later add these films to my burgeoning DVD collection in the late 90s. My mother also liked comedies (anything with John Candy) and I did as well so we would often watch those when we were not watching cop films.
In the late 90s as I grew up I began to confront my childhood fears about horror films by diving into the Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday The 13th and Halloween films. The Nightmare on Elm Street and Friday The 13th films are now among my favourite horror films and I immensely enjoy the pairing of Halloween 1 and 2; the original as well as hyper violent and visceral Rob Zombie remakes. More recently, I have become a huge fan of the "found footage horror films" of the Paranormal Activity franchise and I eagerly await the 4th entry to the franchise. I also am a fan of Zombie films, beginning with my first real self appointed exposure to them with the Dawn of the Dead remake, a bunch of years back. As I tend to do, I went back to the beginning and watched George A. Romero's Night of the Living Dead and the original Dawn of the Dead, followed by Day of the Dead and the later released Land of the Dead, Diary of the Dead and Survival of the Dead. I also am a big fan of the 28 Days Later franchise and count 28 Days Later amongst my top 5 films of all time for a lot of reasons that I have already detailed in previous entries.
My movie viewings would change very much in the fall of 2002 when I began to attend the University of Toronto aiming to attain a Bachelor of Arts with a major in Cinema Stuides. The cinema studies program involved learning of the history of film including early motion toys (precursors to film), the development of the classical Hollywood System, various National Cinemas, how Narration and Style operate in films to tell a story and so on. In my next entry in this series, I will discuss my experiences with film while attending University.
I hope that I have been somewhat coherent in my detailing of my love of films and their place in my life. I appreciate any feedback or questions that you may have.
Thanks for reading.
Fanboy Dave
This is my attempt to explain where my love of movies began and how it has evolved and continued to evolve through the course of my life. This will likely be an ongoing series of entries as I do not believe I will be able to say all that I would like to say in one entry.
I was born in the early 80s to a loving Mother and Father. My father is one of the many James Bond Fanatics; I consider myself somewhat of a Bond fanatic, although I am not as into it as my Dad and his close from Doug, but I know more than the average person does about the James Bond Franchise. In my early life, I was exposed to plethora of Walt Disney films and still enjoy them today but am more of a fan of the Pixar computer animated films than the animated Disney films of today. I grew up watching a lot of action adventure films, including the Bond, Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Star Trek and Back to the Future films.
I would often go to the movies with my mother who would go see just about anything with me that I wanted to see. My Father was a police officer and worked rotating shifts so he worked odd hours and was not always around and my sister was and still is a social butterfly who started working just as soon as she could so if she was not in school, or out with friends, she was working, leaving my mom and I to do to the movies or hang out at home. We did go to see movies together as a family. I fondly remember seeing Batman Forever, X-Men and a host of other films with my whole family. For my birthday we would usually go to the movies on the weekend to celebrate; Home Alone 2, Mighty Morphing Power Rangers, and Toy Story were among some of the films that were watched for my birthday celebrations. I believe that I associate movie watching with spending time with family and to this day love watching movies with friends or family members.
Another side to my obsession with films is my love of analyzing the situations that the characters find themselves in; I do this more with Television Shows though because the stories are ongoing. I analyze the moral questions that some films raise and the issues that the filmmakers are trying to propose to the movie going public.
Over time I was able to see more mature films. My mother and I would watch a lot of cop films. I remember renting all of the Lethal Weapon and Die Hard films and watching them with my mother; I would later add these films to my burgeoning DVD collection in the late 90s. My mother also liked comedies (anything with John Candy) and I did as well so we would often watch those when we were not watching cop films.
In the late 90s as I grew up I began to confront my childhood fears about horror films by diving into the Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday The 13th and Halloween films. The Nightmare on Elm Street and Friday The 13th films are now among my favourite horror films and I immensely enjoy the pairing of Halloween 1 and 2; the original as well as hyper violent and visceral Rob Zombie remakes. More recently, I have become a huge fan of the "found footage horror films" of the Paranormal Activity franchise and I eagerly await the 4th entry to the franchise. I also am a fan of Zombie films, beginning with my first real self appointed exposure to them with the Dawn of the Dead remake, a bunch of years back. As I tend to do, I went back to the beginning and watched George A. Romero's Night of the Living Dead and the original Dawn of the Dead, followed by Day of the Dead and the later released Land of the Dead, Diary of the Dead and Survival of the Dead. I also am a big fan of the 28 Days Later franchise and count 28 Days Later amongst my top 5 films of all time for a lot of reasons that I have already detailed in previous entries.
My movie viewings would change very much in the fall of 2002 when I began to attend the University of Toronto aiming to attain a Bachelor of Arts with a major in Cinema Stuides. The cinema studies program involved learning of the history of film including early motion toys (precursors to film), the development of the classical Hollywood System, various National Cinemas, how Narration and Style operate in films to tell a story and so on. In my next entry in this series, I will discuss my experiences with film while attending University.
I hope that I have been somewhat coherent in my detailing of my love of films and their place in my life. I appreciate any feedback or questions that you may have.
Thanks for reading.
Fanboy Dave
Sunday, June 20, 2010
Batman: City of Scars Review!
Hello everyone,
As of late I became aware of a new Batman fan film called City of Scars; through www.joblo.com cool videos section. I will try an not reveal any significant plot details but SPOILERS MAY FOLLOW, SO BE AWARE!
I thought this was the best Batman fan film that I have seen, although it is only the second one that I have seen; the other one that I saw was Ashes To Ashes (review to follow soon). The actor who played Batman/Bruce Wayne is not an ugly man but is not boyishly handsome enough to pull off playing the Bruce Wayne part, which maybe why for 95% of the film he is in the Batman suit. I believe he played a great Batman; scruff on his face added to the grittiness of his portrayal of Batman and his voice as Batman was a little raw and deep (thought that was great). His suit is the suit that features grey in the torso section with the small, but revamped batman symbol below the neck. I thought it was nice that they were not trying to imitate Bale's Batman suit. The black eye makeup around his eyes was a nice throwback to Keaton's Batman; nice touch.
The cityscape shots of what is supposed to be Gotham City were very good. The presence of both Detective Montoya and Allen were also a nice touch; a nod to the Gotham Central comics, Batman Gotham Knight and other Batman comics that feature those characters. I enjoyed thematically and visually how they ran with the theme of scars in the film. This is achieved by alluding to Bruce Wayne's emotional scars, showing his physical scars and featuring characters who have facial scars such as the puppet character Scarface; who looks great. I thought the Joker looked great, however his voice deliver was not theatrical and over the top enough; he channels Mark Hamil at times but holds back with his voice volume and intonation when he really should play it up more. Bat-cycle is featured briefly, although it is really just a sport bike, but does feature a batman themed heads up display; again I thought it was great how they were not trying to imitate what Nolan did with his Bat-pod. Batarang, utility belt are shown briefly, batarangs are used once and a his bat arsenal tools/weapons are showcased briefly; the prop people did a nice job.
The closing of the film is just great. A shot of batman on a rooftop with his face posed next to two gargoyles looks excellent. If you are a Batman fan, I highly suggest you check this film out; can be found on youtube (I believe), I screened it off of joblo.com and it may be on www.batmanfanfilms.com .
Excited about watching Batman fan films in the near future,
FanboyDave
As of late I became aware of a new Batman fan film called City of Scars; through www.joblo.com cool videos section. I will try an not reveal any significant plot details but SPOILERS MAY FOLLOW, SO BE AWARE!
I thought this was the best Batman fan film that I have seen, although it is only the second one that I have seen; the other one that I saw was Ashes To Ashes (review to follow soon). The actor who played Batman/Bruce Wayne is not an ugly man but is not boyishly handsome enough to pull off playing the Bruce Wayne part, which maybe why for 95% of the film he is in the Batman suit. I believe he played a great Batman; scruff on his face added to the grittiness of his portrayal of Batman and his voice as Batman was a little raw and deep (thought that was great). His suit is the suit that features grey in the torso section with the small, but revamped batman symbol below the neck. I thought it was nice that they were not trying to imitate Bale's Batman suit. The black eye makeup around his eyes was a nice throwback to Keaton's Batman; nice touch.
The cityscape shots of what is supposed to be Gotham City were very good. The presence of both Detective Montoya and Allen were also a nice touch; a nod to the Gotham Central comics, Batman Gotham Knight and other Batman comics that feature those characters. I enjoyed thematically and visually how they ran with the theme of scars in the film. This is achieved by alluding to Bruce Wayne's emotional scars, showing his physical scars and featuring characters who have facial scars such as the puppet character Scarface; who looks great. I thought the Joker looked great, however his voice deliver was not theatrical and over the top enough; he channels Mark Hamil at times but holds back with his voice volume and intonation when he really should play it up more. Bat-cycle is featured briefly, although it is really just a sport bike, but does feature a batman themed heads up display; again I thought it was great how they were not trying to imitate what Nolan did with his Bat-pod. Batarang, utility belt are shown briefly, batarangs are used once and a his bat arsenal tools/weapons are showcased briefly; the prop people did a nice job.
The closing of the film is just great. A shot of batman on a rooftop with his face posed next to two gargoyles looks excellent. If you are a Batman fan, I highly suggest you check this film out; can be found on youtube (I believe), I screened it off of joblo.com and it may be on www.batmanfanfilms.com .
Excited about watching Batman fan films in the near future,
FanboyDave
Saturday, February 13, 2010
3D, Why Are you overcharging Me?
Hello Everyone,
Is it just me or are you tired of all the movies coming out in 3D. Avatar has made hundreds of millions of dollars. Guess how?; 3D. It would have been nearly impossible to see this film in 2D. I saw it in 3D, although I tried to see it in 3D Imax, but a bunch of eager beavers bought their Imax tickets online and sold out the showtimes. Currently, I have only seen two films at the theatre in 3D; My Bloody Valentine and Avatar.
This list of coming films that will be in 3D is huge. However, I am still annoyed. Take Pixar as an example. They offered last year's film Up in 3D; however the DVD release did not feature a 3D version. This is likely because Pixar was offering this 3D theatrical release as a "roadshow" attraction to get a higher box office return. I do not like paying 13 plus dollars for 3D so I chose not to see it in 3D. Back to the list of 3D films coming soon. Here's a very truncated list; Toy Story 3, Halloween 3, Gremlins 3 (rumored), Shrek 4, Piranana (may change), James Bond 23, Spiderman 4, and a host of others. What I do not like about this increased tendency for 3D production, aside from the cost of buying a ticket, is how it is effecting production. James Bond 23's (no official title as of yet) production is allegedly delayed because they have decide to do it in 3D. James Bond films are great and do not need to be made in 3D to get more people to see them.
I am not totally against 3D films. I believe that there have been some decent films done in 3D. I have not seen Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs or Christmas Carol (jim carrey one), but I believe them to be decent films. I believe in 3D release for kids films, the occasional horror film and made an action film every once in a while.
I do believe that the only reason for the rumored Gremlins 3 is to have it released in 3D. I also believe the same for the Halloween 3 non-Rob Zombie film. They tried to do Friday the 13th part 3 in 3D, but did not do well with the 3D and the DVD release does not feature the 3D, however the 3D sequence towards the end of Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare does appear on the Nightmare on Elm Street boxed set DVD release of that film.
Ultimately, my problem with 3D releases are how they affect a film's production (delays and such) and how they affect the writing of a film (scenes plugged into a story just so 3D technology can be used).
What are your thoughts on the wave of 3D films that have come out and are continuing to come out? Let me know. I would love to hear from you.
Yours Truly and slightly Disgruntled,
Fanboy Dave
Is it just me or are you tired of all the movies coming out in 3D. Avatar has made hundreds of millions of dollars. Guess how?; 3D. It would have been nearly impossible to see this film in 2D. I saw it in 3D, although I tried to see it in 3D Imax, but a bunch of eager beavers bought their Imax tickets online and sold out the showtimes. Currently, I have only seen two films at the theatre in 3D; My Bloody Valentine and Avatar.
This list of coming films that will be in 3D is huge. However, I am still annoyed. Take Pixar as an example. They offered last year's film Up in 3D; however the DVD release did not feature a 3D version. This is likely because Pixar was offering this 3D theatrical release as a "roadshow" attraction to get a higher box office return. I do not like paying 13 plus dollars for 3D so I chose not to see it in 3D. Back to the list of 3D films coming soon. Here's a very truncated list; Toy Story 3, Halloween 3, Gremlins 3 (rumored), Shrek 4, Piranana (may change), James Bond 23, Spiderman 4, and a host of others. What I do not like about this increased tendency for 3D production, aside from the cost of buying a ticket, is how it is effecting production. James Bond 23's (no official title as of yet) production is allegedly delayed because they have decide to do it in 3D. James Bond films are great and do not need to be made in 3D to get more people to see them.
I am not totally against 3D films. I believe that there have been some decent films done in 3D. I have not seen Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs or Christmas Carol (jim carrey one), but I believe them to be decent films. I believe in 3D release for kids films, the occasional horror film and made an action film every once in a while.
I do believe that the only reason for the rumored Gremlins 3 is to have it released in 3D. I also believe the same for the Halloween 3 non-Rob Zombie film. They tried to do Friday the 13th part 3 in 3D, but did not do well with the 3D and the DVD release does not feature the 3D, however the 3D sequence towards the end of Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare does appear on the Nightmare on Elm Street boxed set DVD release of that film.
Ultimately, my problem with 3D releases are how they affect a film's production (delays and such) and how they affect the writing of a film (scenes plugged into a story just so 3D technology can be used).
What are your thoughts on the wave of 3D films that have come out and are continuing to come out? Let me know. I would love to hear from you.
Yours Truly and slightly Disgruntled,
Fanboy Dave
Thursday, January 7, 2010
The Rebirth of Mockumentary Horror Films
Hello Everyone,
I hope that everyone out there had a great Christmas. I did; my in-laws and my wife got me every DVD that I wanted and I am currently trying to get through everything that I got, which will take me to the spring at least. I am currently cranking the newest Lady Gaga CD as I write this blog, which is of course totally unrelated to the blog topic..anyway..
On Decemeber 29, I acquired a copy of the mockumentary horror film Paranormal Activity and I just got around to watching it January 5Th. I was aware of the film when it was in theatres but did not get a chance to go to the theatre to see it. This was also the case with the other mockumentary horrors The Blair Witch Project and Quarantine (which I just picked up PVed for 7 bucks). I have no aversion to seeing these films in theatres, I just did not get to the theatre to see them.
I wholeheartedly enjoy these mockumentary horror films and hope to see more of them in the future. Some may say that once you have seen one of these types of films that you cannot really watch them anymore or they lose something because you are familiar with the technique of this neo-genre, however I disagree. As much as these mockumentary horrors are all shot on digital video, often used unknown or non-actors and have limited set locations (1-2 locations in total), there is something different about each one and I will explain what is different between these three films and what I take as a viewer from each one. First I will give a brief (haha...I have no idea no brief) rundown of The Blair Witch Project, and then Quarantine and then Paranormal Activity. SPOILERS WILL FOLLOW. BE AWARE. I DO NOT WISH TO INTENTIONALLY RUIN ANY OF THESE FILMS FOR YOU BUT IF YOU WISH TO SEE THEM AND HAVE NOT STOP READING!!!!
The Blair Witch Project came out in 1999 and hit film and more specifically horror film fanatics by storm. No one saw this movie coming. It cost approximately $ 60,000 and is estimated to have made roughly 248 Million Dollars worldwide, which I believe makes it the highest grossing independent film of all time or one of the highest grossing independent films of all time.
The Blair Witch Project, of course follows a documentary film crew who are shooting a documentary about an urban legend witch (called the Blair Witch...who saw that coming?). The film although not a lengthy film (approx. 81 min.) is rich in mythology and was fueled at the box office by the Internet website and Internet buzz (Many believe it to be the first film that was made as in money by the Internet buzz and chatter about it), word of mouth, deceptive missing posters featuring the three actors in the film which could be bought it some stores and finally what fueled my renting of said film was a sly and manipulative little documentary (really a mockumentary)which featured an introduction to the Blair witch myth/story and interviews with family members of the supposedly missing stars of the film. Myself and many others saw this on local cable and believed the story to be true, however we quickly learned once the film was out that it was simply a playful lie and that the stars of the film were alive and well and that the film was a mockumentary horror film. This film is very Hitchcockian, in that it does not show a witch or any creature in fact, but you believe that horror that the three people are enduring is real and you believe that they actually see something (one moment in the film, Heather is running out of the tent and she yells, "What the F^&K is that?"). This film does not scary everyone but I will admit that it freaked me out when I first saw it and when I do watch it it still creeps me out. The rich mythology, but more importantly the extremely significant box office profits lead to a second and very significantly weaker Blair Witch 2: Book of Shadows film, which featured no use of 16mm or digital camera and is not shot from the actors perspective or the documentary style of the first.
The Blair Witch Project is a horror classic (although it is currently only 11 years old) and began a short-lived trend of documentary Horror films (see St. Francisville Experiment) ,which had just now returned with 2009's Paranormal Activity with I will discuss at the end, but next up is Quarantine.
Quarantine (2008) features a reporter and her camera and residents of a 3 or 4 story apartment building and deals with their plight as a super-rabies virus claims them all. Quarantine runs about 89 min, so it is slightly longer than The Blair Witch Project but these types of films tend to be somewhat slow in the beginning and build to a very tense last half an hour and run about 90 min at most. I cannot directly claim this film to be the rebirth of the horror mockumentary that began with The Blair Witch Project because it is actually a remake of a Spanish film called REC (as in record, clever huh?) which strangely runs 85 mins (whoa...I just blew your mind eh?). I have not see REC, but probably should it came out in 2007 and just last year was followed by a REC 2, so obviously it does not end the same way Quarantine does. I could say that REC was inspired by or is in the spirit of The Blair Witch Project, but Quarantine itself is just a Hollywood remake of a foreign film. There's Hollywood for you, quickly adapting filming techniques from independent movies and phasing them into the Hollywood mainstream.
Quarantine, unlike The Blair Witch Project features known, but not big actors Jennifer Carpenter (Showtime's Dexter), Steve Harris (TV's not forgotten The Practice), Marin Hinkle (2 1/2 Men) , Jay Hernandez (Friday Night Lights..the movie not the show, although the show is great as well) and Greg Germann (Fox's 90s hit Ally McBeal). So as you can see using TV or former TV actors means this movie was paid on the cheap, although Jennifer Carpenter probably got thrown a bit of money (just watch Dexter, it's great). The reporter and residents collectively the help of a vet played by Germann figure out is a rapidly acting form of the rabies that infects humans. No until almost the end of the film do we discover throw yellowed newspaper articles pasted to an apartment wall that the virus is tied to a terrorist group and that group has a scientist created a 'doomsday virus' and wouldn't you know that scientist lives in this apartment building, has not been seen by the super for a month, and appears in his apartment to be infected and quickly kills the reporter and her cameraman.
Although the infect have rabies what comes to mind is zombies from George A. Romero's Night of The Living Dead and the rage virus infect from 28 Days Later and the surprising quite good 28 Weeks Later. Quarantine seems to be in the spirit of those two films while at the same time using the techniques of The Blair Witch Project, although not shot on 16mm but on digital video both give a home video feel to the look and sound of the film. Just in case you were wondering Quarantine runs 89 mins ; just under my 90 min limit. Although the reason behind the human rabies virus is eventually shown to the viewer there does not seen to be much of a mythology or backstory there, which is fine, it just does not lend itself to a franchise or to any kind of bleed over to other mediums; specifically books or comics. I will not discuss Paranormal Activity.
Paranormal Activity (2009) was made for approximately $15,000 and has made approximately 107 million in the North America as of Decemember 13Th, 2009. This film features unknown actors; Katie is working now, but Micah does not have anything in the works right now. Both the actors first names are used as their first names in the film, very Blair Witch of director Oren Peli, who is slated to be writing Paranormal Activity 2 slated for 2012...if we make it...haha. The film runs 86 min but the extended edition runs 99 min, but I am going by the theatrical cut's length, so the film is again under 90 min. The trailers for this film made you believe that the house was haunted but it turns out as you watch the film that you discover that Katie is actually being pursued by a demon (i would call it a poltergeist cause poltergeists can movie things but they are powerful spirits of dead humans, whereas a demon is a powerful entity that was never human). A psychic who comes to the house tells her, after she explains that she has been 'haunted' before that this entity is after her and will pursue her if she flees; this is not escape. This tells you that the whole coarse of the film will take place...you guessed it....in their 'haunted house'. Like The Blair Witch Project nothing is really seen, save for shadows, however doors are slammed, voices are heard and tense, screaming behaviour from the terrorized couple ensues. This film begins the rebirth of mockumentary horror that started with The Blair Witch Project, so hopefully you enjoy this type of horror cinema because you are going to see more of it...so get read...change your underwear...turn the lights down and get ready to scream.
All three films (The Blair Witch Project, Quarantine, and Paranormal Activity) take themselves seriously and are presented as truth, however the artifice (artificial nature) of Quarantine is more noticeable because of casting known actors in the film. The Blair Witch Project stared the first cycle of mockumentary horror films (see also St. Francisville Experiment) which was somewhat short-lived. Quarantine was evidence of a rebirth in interest for mockumentary horror but did not go all the way like Paranormal Activity did with their unknown actors and home video style shooting technique. These mockumentary horror films started with The Blair Witch Project, an independent American film, were somewhat brought back to the surface by modestly priced (1.5 mil)small studio Spanish film REC, which Andale Pictures remade and have been resurrected with the low budget sleeper Paranormal Activity. I am hoping that this cycle last longer than the other one cause I can only say with certainty that The Blair Witch Project, The St. Francisville Experimnet and Session 9 truly belong to this first cycle.
I highly recommend all the films that I have mentioned and hope that you have seen them or will take the time in the future to see them
Sincerely,
FANBOY Dave
Monday, September 7, 2009
R U Game(R)?
Hello everyone,
Yesterday afternoon I saw Gamer, along with my friend and co-worker Sharif. I have been following this film for a bunch of months; when it was original called The Game and then became Gamer.
I enjoyed the casting of Gerard Butler (great in 300, also Phantom of The Opera, Rock N Rolla) and Michael C. Hall (he was great in Six Feet Under and is great in Dexter but it is cool to see him a film). I thought they determination and sheer will of Gerard Butler's Kable met Michael C. Hall's megalomaniac Ken Castle's drive to control the world through his technology very well. They were both evenly matched as opponents.
I would have liked a longer running time; the film was only 95 minutes. I believe that the film could have been about 20 minutes longer and it would not have dragged. They could have featured a few more scenes with Chris 'Ludacris' Bridges or inputed a couple more action sequences.
I regard this film as a Running Man for the new technological era. This of course, being the era that we live in and will continue to live in until, our obsession with technology leads us to our destruction; if of course this happens.
The films deals with how people use video games to escape from their own misery but also how super real video games could lead to the employed enslavement of lower class citizens who are forced to be the puppets of these gamers so that they can care for their families. This I believe is the most intriguing aspect of the film and involves the hyper interactive video game called Society create by the Ken Castle character who later created Slayers (the game which Kable is played in as a character).
I was a little disappointed with the film but I am currently unable to articulate how I was disappointed or what disappointed me, so do not hold that against the film. I would say if you are a action film fan or a gamer to go see this film and you will be entertained and may even start thinking about the deeper message which the film is expressing.
Thanks for reading. Feel free to recommend topics, make comments or ask questions.
Sincerely,
fAnBoY DaVe
Yesterday afternoon I saw Gamer, along with my friend and co-worker Sharif. I have been following this film for a bunch of months; when it was original called The Game and then became Gamer.
I enjoyed the casting of Gerard Butler (great in 300, also Phantom of The Opera, Rock N Rolla) and Michael C. Hall (he was great in Six Feet Under and is great in Dexter but it is cool to see him a film). I thought they determination and sheer will of Gerard Butler's Kable met Michael C. Hall's megalomaniac Ken Castle's drive to control the world through his technology very well. They were both evenly matched as opponents.
I would have liked a longer running time; the film was only 95 minutes. I believe that the film could have been about 20 minutes longer and it would not have dragged. They could have featured a few more scenes with Chris 'Ludacris' Bridges or inputed a couple more action sequences.
I regard this film as a Running Man for the new technological era. This of course, being the era that we live in and will continue to live in until, our obsession with technology leads us to our destruction; if of course this happens.
The films deals with how people use video games to escape from their own misery but also how super real video games could lead to the employed enslavement of lower class citizens who are forced to be the puppets of these gamers so that they can care for their families. This I believe is the most intriguing aspect of the film and involves the hyper interactive video game called Society create by the Ken Castle character who later created Slayers (the game which Kable is played in as a character).
I was a little disappointed with the film but I am currently unable to articulate how I was disappointed or what disappointed me, so do not hold that against the film. I would say if you are a action film fan or a gamer to go see this film and you will be entertained and may even start thinking about the deeper message which the film is expressing.
Thanks for reading. Feel free to recommend topics, make comments or ask questions.
Sincerely,
fAnBoY DaVe
H2; Trashy Horror!
Hello Everyone,
A couple of weeks ago, specifically the opening weekend of Halloween 2, I went to see...wait for it..Halloween 2. I did see Rob Zombie's take on the first Halloween film and did enjoy it; it was not as brutal as I thought it would be from hearing about his previous films, which I still have not to this day seen. SPOILERS MAY FOLLOW. BE AWARE.
Firstly, I will say that it is more brutal and gory in content than the Zombie's first Halloween; I did not mind this. I was kind of glad that it was rated 18A because that means the director or studio is not afraid of excluding younger moviegoers and therefore the content or vision of the director does not have to be compromised to sell more tickets.
Rob Zombie's panache for featuring trashy looking and acting characters is featured in this film, although largely absent from the first film. Laurie's middle class lifestyle, albeit her tendency for saucy talk with her somewhat slutty friends in the first film has been transformed in this film. Laurie, now living a year since the incidents of the first film is living with Annie (her friend who survived the first film) and her father, Sheriff Bracket in their trashy house, she dresses in a grungy rocker style (torn pants, rock t-shirts, messy hair) and hangs out with some trashy, slutty girls who are all dead by the end of the film (SURPRISE). You can say that Laurie's genes catch up with her in this film; her lifestyle is similar to the one that her teenager sister was living at the beginning of the first film. I am not a fan of Rob Zombie's trash horror cinema, I do however enjoy how he handles horror in the Halloween films.
Zombie turns Dr. Loomis from a devoted, concerned and action oriented doctor in the original Halloween films into a sensationalist, 'anything for a buck' writer, played aptly, once again by Malcolm McDowell; just Knight him already. I enjoyed the altruistic, take action Dr. Loomis played by Donald Pleasance but am willing to accept this different take on Dr. Loomis which seems a bit more realistic. Malcolm McDowell's Loomis does attempt to make good on all the bad he has done; see the film cause I will not go into greater detail.
Zombie uses the hospital setting from the original Halloween 2 as a jumping off point and is not featured as a principal set location. Zombie begins to do something with Laurie that Carpenter never did and that is to draw a genetic connection between her and Michael. I cannot go into further details, less a spoil the ending for you. The film ends with resolution in one way and the possibility for a new beginning in another way. I had an inkling of how the film was going to end, although I was still a bit taken aback by it and cannot decide whether I liked the ending or whether I was a bit disappointed.
Rob Zombie has said that this will be his final film delving into the world of Halloween. There is a possibility for the franchise to be rebooted. If handled appropriately it may world but I am very apprehensive because I believe that there is a strong chance that a franchise reboot will require too much effort that the studio is not willing to put behind a horror franchise.
If you enjoyed the first film or consider yourself a horror fanatic than I highly recommend that you see this film. If you do not fit into either or the two groups but would like to see it, I suggest you rent the dvd when it comes out, however if you are really interested from trailers, reviews or word of mouth then you should check it out.
Thanks for reading.
FANBOY dave
A couple of weeks ago, specifically the opening weekend of Halloween 2, I went to see...wait for it..Halloween 2. I did see Rob Zombie's take on the first Halloween film and did enjoy it; it was not as brutal as I thought it would be from hearing about his previous films, which I still have not to this day seen. SPOILERS MAY FOLLOW. BE AWARE.
Firstly, I will say that it is more brutal and gory in content than the Zombie's first Halloween; I did not mind this. I was kind of glad that it was rated 18A because that means the director or studio is not afraid of excluding younger moviegoers and therefore the content or vision of the director does not have to be compromised to sell more tickets.
Rob Zombie's panache for featuring trashy looking and acting characters is featured in this film, although largely absent from the first film. Laurie's middle class lifestyle, albeit her tendency for saucy talk with her somewhat slutty friends in the first film has been transformed in this film. Laurie, now living a year since the incidents of the first film is living with Annie (her friend who survived the first film) and her father, Sheriff Bracket in their trashy house, she dresses in a grungy rocker style (torn pants, rock t-shirts, messy hair) and hangs out with some trashy, slutty girls who are all dead by the end of the film (SURPRISE). You can say that Laurie's genes catch up with her in this film; her lifestyle is similar to the one that her teenager sister was living at the beginning of the first film. I am not a fan of Rob Zombie's trash horror cinema, I do however enjoy how he handles horror in the Halloween films.
Zombie turns Dr. Loomis from a devoted, concerned and action oriented doctor in the original Halloween films into a sensationalist, 'anything for a buck' writer, played aptly, once again by Malcolm McDowell; just Knight him already. I enjoyed the altruistic, take action Dr. Loomis played by Donald Pleasance but am willing to accept this different take on Dr. Loomis which seems a bit more realistic. Malcolm McDowell's Loomis does attempt to make good on all the bad he has done; see the film cause I will not go into greater detail.
Zombie uses the hospital setting from the original Halloween 2 as a jumping off point and is not featured as a principal set location. Zombie begins to do something with Laurie that Carpenter never did and that is to draw a genetic connection between her and Michael. I cannot go into further details, less a spoil the ending for you. The film ends with resolution in one way and the possibility for a new beginning in another way. I had an inkling of how the film was going to end, although I was still a bit taken aback by it and cannot decide whether I liked the ending or whether I was a bit disappointed.
Rob Zombie has said that this will be his final film delving into the world of Halloween. There is a possibility for the franchise to be rebooted. If handled appropriately it may world but I am very apprehensive because I believe that there is a strong chance that a franchise reboot will require too much effort that the studio is not willing to put behind a horror franchise.
If you enjoyed the first film or consider yourself a horror fanatic than I highly recommend that you see this film. If you do not fit into either or the two groups but would like to see it, I suggest you rent the dvd when it comes out, however if you are really interested from trailers, reviews or word of mouth then you should check it out.
Thanks for reading.
FANBOY dave
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
