Due for release on September 8th, the newest Stephen King film adaptation 'IT' now has a teaser trailer for your viewing pleasure. Based upon King's 1986 novel, the film will only tell the first half with the young group of children nicknamed 'The Loser's Club' with the second half assumed to follow suit within the next few years. While the trailer itself suffers from the usual jump-scares and quick editing that has become the usual horror film promotion now, I still have hope for 'IT' as it sounds like from many early screenings and interviews that the studio is following the novel pretty close. You can view the trailer in its entirety below or check out some stills from my favorite scenes.
'LIFE' tells the story of a space expedition gone south, something we've never seen before right? You might be surprised to learn that 'LIFE' actually has some great things about it, from its performances to its strong suspense. It's only when the film comes to its conclusion that it falters into the tropes it tried so hard to avoid with the first two acts and the ending left me very unsatisfied however we will not spoil here. The film stars Jake Gyllenhaal, Rebecca Ferguson, Ryan Reynolds, and Hiroyuki Sanada and everyone here does excellent jobs with the material given. The film is deeply grounded in science fact rather than science-fiction even down to the creature itself 'Calvin' who evolves and works just like any living organism would and its this realism that really helps 'LIFE' stand out among the other 'Alien' knock-offs of late.
The performances also help with the tension and what could have devolved into the usual horror tropes and this is because you truly care about them all. No one is singled out as the 'first to go' that many will see in films such as this, and many characters you truly love will end up dead and that genuine emotion really feels like a breath of fresh air in this now cliche heavy genre. As stated before, the film grounds itself in reality pretty heavily, and it really brings the tension up a notch. This feels like it could really happen, as 'Calvin' is not some sinister and deliberately evil creature but rather its just an animal trying to survive and living upon its instincts as any other living organism would. You still want to see it gotten rid of sure, but its the first time I've seen a sci-fi/horror flick establish the creatures attacking as simply following their biological makeup and only seem evil to us.
However, 'LIFE' in its final moments completely disintegrates into a cliche and predictable final act and its frustrating to see a film throw away its best aspects with only 30 minutes to go. It felt as if the screen writers (who wrote the excellent 'Deadpool' and 'Zombieland' films) just got tired of what they were typing up and just gave up with the ending we get now. It's really unacceptable considering the time and effort put into the film as a whole. 'LIFE' is still a well put together Sci-Fi film that I recommend highly, and this year as a whole has been great (though this would be a little lower on the bar). It's just that ending man, that damned ending that spoils the milk for me.
'Godzilla' was released back in 2014 and while very enjoyable upon the first viewing (In IMAX no less) I decided to take a look back after seeing 'Kong: Skull Island' in preparation and saw many more little cracks here and there and overall, I was very unsatisfied even by Kaiju film standards. First off, yes the film does a much better job than 1998's attempt at an American 'Godzilla' film, but in quoting fellow reviewer James Rolfe it's hard to say, but at least the 1998 film had more going on in front of the screen than the 2014 Legendary outing.
I understand the film is a reboot of sorts or for many an introduction to the creature and for 99% of the film, it's all a set up to the future films of this 'shared universe' but the film is almost ALL build up and little to no payoff other than some slightly interesting popcorn action. Godzilla himself is well designed and he looks and acts like the Big G we all know and love...but where is he half the time? Or hell, not even half the time it's almost all of the two hour plus running time and we barely see him. The film, like the 1998 outing focuses instead on many of the human characters, which is one of the biggest stumbles this film and many American monster movies commit.
Not only do they kill off the most interesting and well written character in the whole script within the first act, but everyone else is bland and just sit around talking about how they will kill Godzilla. I know this is typical of the classic Japanese versions as well, but here they focus on these scenes far too long making their blandness stand out more so than in the originals. The newly introduced creatures known as the MUTO are also quite generic and boring in their design and I don't understand why the film focuses so much on them. They're just insect like creatures with glowing red eyes and when Godzilla is finally going to confront one...it cuts to black and we only see the aftermath of their battle. What the hell?
In retrospect, I may have been a little more harsh on 'Kong' than I should have been. At least that film gets going right from the start and the characters have more personality to them than in 'Godzilla'. This movie does not hold up very well I'm sad to say. It has very little monster action, boring characters, and after the first act which is admittedly very strong with great pacing and tension it all goes downhill from there. It's not flat out horrible, don't get me wrong but It was very jarring to say the least to see the film again without the nostalgia glasses.
'KONG: Skull Island' officially opens today and is looking at a hefty $53 million opening if the cards are right. The film has also gotten very positive audience and critical reviews which helps a lot, and we'll be sharing our own critique tomorrow evening however, for now I'd like to ask that you stay for the scene at the end of the film once the credits have rolled. (WARNING: DO NOT CONTINUE READING IF YOU WANT TO LEARN OF THE ENDING YOURSELF):
...Alright then. The ending will tease fans of their favorite Kaiju monsters in what is sure to be an epic battle royale. While we only see vague hieroglyphic images of said monsters, as we fade to black we get a familiar roar that fans will love to hear. The film will connect with 2014's 'Godzilla' film from Legendary along with its upcoming sequel 'King of Monsters'. 'KONG: Skull Island' is rated PG-13 and was released by Warner Bros./Legendary Pictures.
Universal Pictures is celebrating its 100th anniversary and one of the main pillars of the studio's structure was the famed 'Universal Monsters'. From 1931 until the mid 1950's, these films excited and terrified audiences both young and old and have now become icons of cinema. This year, Universal announced that they wished to revive these classic monsters in what will be known as a 'shared universe' which many will likely associate with the recent Marvel Comics film series beginning in 2008. The success of these superhero films have driven the industry for many years now, but the decision to make these classics a part of that trend is troublesome to me and to many in the horror community.
That's not to say that these monsters have never crossed over to each other in some way or another. Hell, the Frankenstein's Monster fought the Wolf Man in one of the most popular horror films of all time. So if it's not the 'shared universe' angle, then what is it you may be asking? It's the tone and the overall direction in which the studio wishes to take said film universe. Below is a sample image from 2014's 'Dracula Untold':
The film itself wasn't bad (we may do a full retrospective review down the line) however it was filled with CG action battles with Dracula turning into a swarm of bats to fight like a video game character. Very little if any of that Gothic horror was present in 'Dracula Untold'. Our next sample is from the upcoming 'Mummy' reboot:
While they seemed to have the look down for a monster, I see many problems both in the individual image and the film's theatrical trailer which we'll post below if you haven't seen it yet. The film shows us the titular creature's sarcophagus, and this image above in the trailer. The rest is an action scene involving Tom Cruise in a plane crash that he has somehow survived. Nothing in this trailer would ever tell someone this is a Universal Horror flick and that's the problem right there.
Universal Pictures not only wishes to emulate the structure of Marvel, but it also seems they wish to create that structure of ACTION films but with monsters in place of people in tights and masks. The horror genre is one that the industry has never truly been proud of, but Universal Pictures was the exception and was for many decades. They took pride in their monsters as much as their masterpieces and because of that pride, they were all well made films in their own right and could stand the test of time along with 'Wizard of Oz' and 'Touch of Evil'.
However, times have changed and even the films that made the studio what it is now are scary to the executives. They want to play it safe, and to a certain level that's acceptable and understandable but it's still not always right. Making these monster film reboots into nothing more than computer generated action films causes distance from the demographic they need in order for the film to get the seats filled, and in turn the profits rolling. Toning the films down and stripping them of virtually every thing that a fan or audience member would be looking for in a film called 'The Mummy' or 'The Wolf Man' will ultimately hurt them but who knows if the lesson will ever stick for them.
Universal is likely to be taking more of a loss than a profit with 2017's 'The Mummy', however I sadly don't believe for one second that it will change what is the inevitable universe that's coming to cinemas. A good comparison to close out for you fine readers would be that we need more 'Monster Squad' and less 'League of Extraordinary Gentlemen'.
Check out the trailer for 'The Mummy' and let me know what your thoughts are. Are you for or against this new universe idea? If so, why? If not, then why? Thanks for reading guys.
We're kicking off our special review month on Director John Carpenter with a film that I never managed to catch for quite a long time, longer than any film fan would admit. 'Big Trouble' is one of my new favorite films to watch on a rainy day, or any other really. It's one of those special films that many if not all people know and may be thinking of their own special film right now. 'The Goonies', 'Gremlins', or even 'Clerks'. Films that never get old and just continue to have charm and rewatchability year after year. For those who haven't seen it, the film stars Kurt Russell as trucker Jack Burton, a man way in over his head when he arrives in Chinatown to visit his old friend Wang (Dennis Dun) who is to be married to his childhood crush on her way from the Far East. Wang and Jack soon begin to get caught up in gang wars, ancient Chinese sorcerers and of course trying to save the girl(s).
20th Century Fox's marketing department were flat out stumped when it came to the film, resulting in a very poor theatrical run and box office gross however thankfully the magic of home video rentals and frequent television runs have brought the film much of the love it deserved, however even with all of its new found love in its 30 plus years, I think many aspects of the film are actually still not on people's minds when watching including myself. For one, it may be really strange to say that despite this huge poster art above the page and all of the trailers and marketing material and as awesome as Kurt Russell is, he is not the hero. Rather Dennis Dun's Wang is the true hero of this action flick, which brings us back to the marketing issues. Among other aspects, Fox had trouble understanding this which led to them plastering Kurt all over the poster and even today an Asian leading man is completely unheard of today in Hollywood. Carpenter was always a man who stood for everything that Hollywood and the business system in general was not and his many conflicts and failures with the major studios really got to him and rightfully so.
John Carpenter is at his best when he is given complete control over his work and while he was unfortunately not given that opportunity here, he still shows his strong multiple talents here with his usual combo of directing, editing, and even writing the music and theme song for the film. It's these many aspects of Carpenter that makes him so interesting among the other filmmakers of his day, and even now there are none like him. Is there anything to complain about 'Big Trouble in Little China'? of course there is. It's 80's nostalgia does its best to cover up its shortcomings, but facts are facts and the film does have issues with its final battle between the villains and heroes, the film overall feels rushed in many places, and many characters are given little or no development despite them being very likeable such as Egg Shen (Victor Wong) whom I would have loved to know more about or have the various mythologies behind the film explained.
The film also has some very cheap effects work one minute, then have some amazing work the next. While this is likely due to the studio interference, it's still there on the screen and it's not pretty. Is 'Big Trouble' the best Carpenter film? Not really, but it's a damn entertaining one and one I should have watched a long time ago. I've seen it now about four times this last month to make up for lost time, and it's just that easy of a watch. Check it out on Netflix if you can, or purchase the Blu-Ray on the cheap and you'll have some fun and you may find it as a new part of your favorites collection.
