My Two Cents
As the only Wes Anderson film I had seen was Fantastic Mr. Fox, I figured it was about time I delved deeper into his filmography. And what better place to start than the beginning? Wes Anderson's first film, Bottle Rocket, is a quirky but charming comedy/drama/romance/heist film. But what really impresses me is the director's vision, his visual style. I swear every frame is a work of art! My only complaint about this film is that a few times it feels a tad unfocused and the editing was a little jarring in places but that is just nitpicking, the perfectly fleshed out and likable characters more than make up for the flaws. 8/10
Found footage movies have been around for a good while, but how many of them have actually been "good"? I know I tend to hate a whole lot of them; I hated how the characters of the Blair Witch Project wouldn't stop screaming at each other, and I hated how incoherent the filming and characters of Cloverfield were. [REC] is a novel film that once again relies on hand-held camera work to make everything appear "real." Only, in this case, the film uses all its tricks to craft a genuinely tense and freaky experience, and it does so without so many annoying characters!
The film is pretty short and to-the-point. It starts off with the seemingly-uninteresting premise of following some firemen around on their normal course of duty. When they find an apartment building with a potential zombie outbreak, and everybody's quarantined inside, things get really tense really fast (and if any of this sounds familiar...yes, this is the exact same thing as Quarantine, the Americanized remake that replaced [REC]'s demonically-possessed zombies with glorified rabies). [REC] gets very frantic as the camera bounces along and characters break out in frequent shouting matches, so it is a bit of an agitating experience. In this case, however, the agitation works to the film's advantage, to immerse the audience in the situation and keep them at the edge of their seats. To achieve this, the film does employ all the tricks it can to lend the film a creditable look and feel. Overall, it is one of the most intense and successful found-footage films to date.
The story is short and simple, and it remains small in scope and scale to keep within the film's boundaries. It uses a cast of characters who aren't all that deep or even likable, but definitely look and sound realistic. The film's finale pulls out some twists that are genuinely creepy, and paves the path for the sequel (which is every bit as good, if not better, than this).
The film does use a lot of shakey camera work, but it is ingenious in the way it uses various effects to replicate the appearance and workings of documentary footage (including one scene that rewinds and fast-forwards, scenes using the camera's light, and scenes shot entirely in night-vision). It is also great for capturing a claustrophobic feeling in the settings. Editing is pretty decent. Acting tends to be quite hectic, but everybody does an admirable job of playing their parts realistically. Writing is okay. This production uses a limited amount of sets, props, and costumes, for good effect. No real music is used in this film, except for some cool rock 'n roll in the end credits!
Even though I hated movies like Blair Witch Project and Cloverfield, I find myself more attracted to [REC] for a genuinely unnerving experience using all the gimmicks it can. Horror movie fans everywhere should check it out at least once (and forgo that copycat Quarantine movie).
4/5 (Entertainment: Very Good | Story: Pretty Good | Film: Good)
Recommendation: Sure.
----------
[REC 2]: Fear Revisited
The first [REC] film brought decent new meaning to the found-footage genre, using all the gimmicks it can to shove zombie horror in the viewers' faces! [REC 2] continues the story in the same way Aliens continued with the Alien movie: with a bunch of soldiers busting into the place, all guns blazing! [REC 2] starts off hard and fast and remains unsettling throughout; with everything already set up in the first film, this continuation resumes the events with a fresh new cast of characters, all of whom experience new horrors that the viewers also get to experience.
I've always felt that [REC 2] is a grade scarier than its predecessor. A lot of it is because the film is inherently more hard-edged and intense, with soldiers combing through the rooms and confronting zombies at every turn. The scenes in the attic remains some of the creepiest I've seen though, thanks to its brilliant use of light (or, night vision, as the case may be), and for featuring more of everybody's favorite zombie, Nina Medeiros. Those scenes are really tense, as the characters search in the dark and witness unnatural things.
The story continues where the first film left off. It takes a few daft moves, with teenage kids breaking into the quarantined building and getting themselves caught up in the mess. It also takes a few cool new twists, with the soldier characters, and a lot more built onto the whole demonic possession thing. Characters are still pretty shallow, but not quite as unlikable as in the first film.
This film still uses some really frantic camera work, but it's thankfully not quite as crazy as the first film. It still makes brilliant use of hand-held effects (including spotlights, night-vision, and now picture-in-picture modes). Editing is pretty decent. The actors are great, and everybody does their best to be realistically tense. Writing is not bad. This production uses some decent sets, props, and costumes, all within the film's inherent limitations. I'm still rather curious how they filmed certain scenes though. Once again, musical choices are kept to a minimum.
[REC 2] is about as good, if not slightly better, than the first film. It has some really creepy and tense scenes, and for a found-footage film, I find it exceptionally well-done.
4/5 (Entertainment: Very Good | Story: Good | Film: Good)
Recommendation: As a follow-up on the first film.
----------
[REC 3]: Genesis
In [REC], documentary filmmakers found themselves trapped in an apartment building with a zombie outbreak. In [REC 2], soldiers went into the building to take care of things. Since there's a [REC 3], you can surmise that the events of its predecessor didn't go exactly as planned. Having done the [REC] thing with documentary films and helmet-mounted military cameras, it was now time to take things to the next level...
Wedding videos!
What the frakk? [REC 3] starts off with the same promise as the other two films, with photographers filming the action with their hand-held cameras and utilizing their full potential. Then something happens; when the big zombie outbreak occurs and all heck breaks lose at a wedding, the cameras get broken, and the film reverts back to being an actual film, all in third-person perspective, with real cinema cameras capturing the action, in actual widescreen, with actual editing and an orchestrated soundtrack and everything.
If you hated the found-footage effect of the last two [REC] films, this might be refreshing for you, because the filming is a lot more sane when it's an actual film. What little faux footage the film uses is terrible; it shakes, bounces, zooms, and flips around so much, I was praying that it would stop soon. It did, but with cinematic footage in the rest of the film, it just felt way off. Juxtaposing the realistic found-footage with cinema only proved how terrible the actual cinema is: nothing about it felt real, all the actors seemed overly-dramatic, and the jarring shift just ruined any tension or suspense of disbelief. In fact, from that point on, the film became a rather weird self-parody, going so far as throwing in pop songs and having the characters fight zombies with every weird thing they could. They had characters running around in knights' outfits with swords and morningstars in their hands. The bride ran around with a chainsaw. It's just got ridiculous and stupid as it went on.
The story is as daft as they come, but it's especially stupid considering that this film has hardly anything to do with the last two films. Aside from the fact that there are demonic zombies running around, there's absolutely no connection to those other two films. It leaves me wondering what the point of this film is. The best that can be said is that the characters are okay.
This film looks sharp and slick with its photography and editing...and that's the problem, because it contrasts so heavily with the rough found-footage effects established in the film's beginning (in addition to deviating heavily from the last two films). Editing is okay, but once again, proves to be a distraction more than anything. Acting is pretty good, and the writing is just plain silly. This production is overloaded with slick-looking sets, props, and costumes. Music is dispensed liberally throughout the film, but I think it would have been better without any soundtrack at all.
The problem I see with [REC 3] is not only that it's too different from its predecessors, but that it rips its own guts out with a chainsaw, because it slammed all the documentary stuff next to the actual produced-film stuff, ruining the whole point of the [REC] franchise. And in the end, it's just so silly and dumb, I'm thinking that the filmmakers decided to ditch doing actual horror. But while this level of self-parody worked for movies like Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 and Evil Dead 2, it falls very flat in [REC 3].
2.5/5 (Entertainment: Average | Story: Poor | Film: Poor)
The Good:Women floating upwards from a lake to the sky get devoured by flying fish; a man tumbles around and a tree grows out from his ass; a fairy lady lays an egg on a man's back, a baby hatches, it quickly consumes the man's flesh and head, climbs up a tree, its head splits in half, and out comes the fairy lady; a bunch of dudes perform some Human Centipede-esque ritual in a circle, pooping coins and eating them; a naked woman exercising suddenly collapses and smashes her head on the wall and out her ass comes hordes of flying insects; and a whole bunch of other weird shit I couldn't accurately describe for the life of me. Yep, this is totally normal. Oh, and awesome soundtrack, by the way.
The Bad:Nothing major (so far).
The Bottom Line:A trippy, cartoonified Bosch painting come to life. Check it out if you're in the mood for something strange.
[Show spoiler]Found footage movies have been around for a good while, but how many of them have actually been "good"? I know I tend to hate a whole lot of them; I hated how the characters of the Blair Witch Project wouldn't stop screaming at each other, and I hated how incoherent the filming and characters of Cloverfield were. [REC] is a novel film that once again relies on hand-held camera work to make everything appear "real." Only, in this case, the film uses all its tricks to craft a genuinely tense and freaky experience, and it does so without so many annoying characters!
The film is pretty short and to-the-point. It starts off with the seemingly-uninteresting premise of following some firemen around on their normal course of duty. When they find an apartment building with a potential zombie outbreak, and everybody's quarantined inside, things get really tense really fast (and if any of this sounds familiar...yes, this is the exact same thing as Quarantine, the Americanized remake that replaced [REC]'s demonically-possessed zombies with glorified rabies). [REC] gets very frantic as the camera bounces along and characters break out in frequent shouting matches, so it is a bit of an agitating experience. In this case, however, the agitation works to the film's advantage, to immerse the audience in the situation and keep them at the edge of their seats. To achieve this, the film does employ all the tricks it can to lend the film a creditable look and feel. Overall, it is one of the most intense and successful found-footage films to date.
The story is short and simple, and it remains small in scope and scale to keep within the film's boundaries. It uses a cast of characters who aren't all that deep or even likable, but definitely look and sound realistic. The film's finale pulls out some twists that are genuinely creepy, and paves the path for the sequel (which is every bit as good, if not better, than this).
The film does use a lot of shakey camera work, but it is ingenious in the way it uses various effects to replicate the appearance and workings of documentary footage (including one scene that rewinds and fast-forwards, scenes using the camera's light, and scenes shot entirely in night-vision). It is also great for capturing a claustrophobic feeling in the settings. Editing is pretty decent. Acting tends to be quite hectic, but everybody does an admirable job of playing their parts realistically. Writing is okay. This production uses a limited amount of sets, props, and costumes, for good effect. No real music is used in this film, except for some cool rock 'n roll in the end credits!
Even though I hated movies like Blair Witch Project and Cloverfield, I find myself more attracted to [REC] for a genuinely unnerving experience using all the gimmicks it can. Horror movie fans everywhere should check it out at least once (and forgo that copycat Quarantine movie).
4/5 (Entertainment: Very Good | Story: Pretty Good | Film: Good)
Recommendation: Sure.
----------
[REC 2]: Fear Revisited
[Show spoiler] The first [REC] film brought decent new meaning to the found-footage genre, using all the gimmicks it can to shove zombie horror in the viewers' faces! [REC 2] continues the story in the same way Aliens continued with the Alien movie: with a bunch of soldiers busting into the place, all guns blazing! [REC 2] starts off hard and fast and remains unsettling throughout; with everything already set up in the first film, this continuation resumes the events with a fresh new cast of characters, all of whom experience new horrors that the viewers also get to experience.
I've always felt that [REC 2] is a grade scarier than its predecessor. A lot of it is because the film is inherently more hard-edged and intense, with soldiers combing through the rooms and confronting zombies at every turn. The scenes in the attic remains some of the creepiest I've seen though, thanks to its brilliant use of light (or, night vision, as the case may be), and for featuring more of everybody's favorite zombie, Nina Medeiros. Those scenes are really tense, as the characters search in the dark and witness unnatural things.
The story continues where the first film left off. It takes a few daft moves, with teenage kids breaking into the quarantined building and getting themselves caught up in the mess. It also takes a few cool new twists, with the soldier characters, and a lot more built onto the whole demonic possession thing. Characters are still pretty shallow, but not quite as unlikable as in the first film.
This film still uses some really frantic camera work, but it's thankfully not quite as crazy as the first film. It still makes brilliant use of hand-held effects (including spotlights, night-vision, and now picture-in-picture modes). Editing is pretty decent. The actors are great, and everybody does their best to be realistically tense. Writing is not bad. This production uses some decent sets, props, and costumes, all within the film's inherent limitations. I'm still rather curious how they filmed certain scenes though. Once again, musical choices are kept to a minimum.
[REC 2] is about as good, if not slightly better, than the first film. It has some really creepy and tense scenes, and for a found-footage film, I find it exceptionally well-done.
4/5 (Entertainment: Very Good | Story: Good | Film: Good)
Recommendation: As a follow-up on the first film.
----------
[REC 3]: Genesis
[Show spoiler] In [REC], documentary filmmakers found themselves trapped in an apartment building with a zombie outbreak. In [REC 2], soldiers went into the building to take care of things. Since there's a [REC 3], you can surmise that the events of its predecessor didn't go exactly as planned. Having done the [REC] thing with documentary films and helmet-mounted military cameras, it was now time to take things to the next level...
Wedding videos!
What the frakk? [REC 3] starts off with the same promise as the other two films, with photographers filming the action with their hand-held cameras and utilizing their full potential. Then something happens; when the big zombie outbreak occurs and all heck breaks lose at a wedding, the cameras get broken, and the film reverts back to being an actual film, all in third-person perspective, with real cinema cameras capturing the action, in actual widescreen, with actual editing and an orchestrated soundtrack and everything.
If you hated the found-footage effect of the last two [REC] films, this might be refreshing for you, because the filming is a lot more sane when it's an actual film. What little faux footage the film uses is terrible; it shakes, bounces, zooms, and flips around so much, I was praying that it would stop soon. It did, but with cinematic footage in the rest of the film, it just felt way off. Juxtaposing the realistic found-footage with cinema only proved how terrible the actual cinema is: nothing about it felt real, all the actors seemed overly-dramatic, and the jarring shift just ruined any tension or suspense of disbelief. In fact, from that point on, the film became a rather weird self-parody, going so far as throwing in pop songs and having the characters fight zombies with every weird thing they could. They had characters running around in knights' outfits with swords and morningstars in their hands. The bride ran around with a chainsaw. It's just got ridiculous and stupid as it went on.
The story is as daft as they come, but it's especially stupid considering that this film has hardly anything to do with the last two films. Aside from the fact that there are demonic zombies running around, there's absolutely no connection to those other two films. It leaves me wondering what the point of this film is. The best that can be said is that the characters are okay.
This film looks sharp and slick with its photography and editing...and that's the problem, because it contrasts so heavily with the rough found-footage effects established in the film's beginning (in addition to deviating heavily from the last two films). Editing is okay, but once again, proves to be a distraction more than anything. Acting is pretty good, and the writing is just plain silly. This production is overloaded with slick-looking sets, props, and costumes. Music is dispensed liberally throughout the film, but I think it would have been better without any soundtrack at all.
The problem I see with [REC 3] is not only that it's too different from its predecessors, but that it rips its own guts out with a chainsaw, because it slammed all the documentary stuff next to the actual produced-film stuff, ruining the whole point of the [REC] franchise. And in the end, it's just so silly and dumb, I'm thinking that the filmmakers decided to ditch doing actual horror. But while this level of self-parody worked for movies like Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 and Evil Dead 2, it falls very flat in [REC 3].
2.5/5 (Entertainment: Average | Story: Poor | Film: Poor)
[Show spoiler]What an impressive feat in non linear storytelling! Taking cues from Stanley Kubrick's 2001 and Shane Carruth's Primer, the film screws with our heads as we see our heroine confounded by the existence of doppelgängers. Effectively a mind-f*ck retelling of the story of Sisyphus, the mechanics of the twisty happenings on the boat is pretty arbitrary. All we need to know is that Jess is stuck in a loop from the grief of losing her son. The allegorical nature of the story is simply more interesting than the plot specifics. So yes, I pretty much love it, but I don't think its perfect. Had the film been anchored by more commanding performances, it could have been a modern classic. I could be wrong though. Maybe it is because I'm sure the first two-thirds will take on a new meaning on second viewing.
I've seen the film a few times, and my score's about the same as yours (4.5/5). Haven't bothered to offer a full-blown analysis yet, but maybe on the next viewing...
I've seen the film a few times, and my score's about the same as yours (4.5/5). Haven't bothered to offer a full-blown analysis yet, but maybe on the next viewing...
I would love to write about it when school settles down. There is so much there, dude! I'm surprised there hasn't been a big budget remake of it.
[Show spoiler]What an impressive feat in non linear storytelling! Taking cues from Stanley Kubrick's 2001 and Shane Carruth's Primer, the film screws with our heads as we see our heroine confounded by the existence of doppelgängers. Effectively a mind-f*ck retelling of the story of Sisyphus, the mechanics of the twisty happenings on the boat is pretty arbitrary. All we need to know is that Jess is stuck in a loop from the grief of losing her son. The allegorical nature of the story is simply more interesting than the plot specifics. So yes, I pretty much love it, but I don't think its perfect. Had the film been anchored by more commanding performances, it could have been a modern classic. I could be wrong though. Maybe it is because I'm sure the first two-thirds will take on a new meaning on second viewing.
3.5/4
here is the most recent post I made on the film, when I was in the middle of utter OBSESSION:
[Show spoiler]
There are 2 types of Jess': Good Jess and Bad Jess. At any time, there are 2 of one, and 1 of the other:
You can easily tell the difference between a Good JEss and Bad Jess:
-Good Jess tries to save the others (in theater) before she snipes and kills them
-Bad Jess doesn't try to save the others (in theater), instead she tries to snipe them in theater from the get-go, but is shot in face by Good Jess.
-Bad Jess (with bloody face from being shot by Good Jess) takes Sally and Downey to Room 237 and stabs them
-Good Jess (with snipe suit) gets in fight with another Good Jess (without snipe suit), and Good Jess (with snipe suit) lets herself get tossed over
-Bad Jess gets in fight with another Bad Jess. Bad Jess kills the other Bad Jess on-board and tosses her corpse overboard. (big difference between the Good Jess fight above)
-I think what defines a Good v. Bad Jess is in sniper room: Good Jess resists inner demons to go kill everyone right away (she says "f*ck you" to the mirror), Bad Jess caves in
dude, you now have to change your "location" to "Club Loop"
did you notice who "jess" is? hint: your favorite film
[Show spoiler]What an impressive feat in non linear storytelling! Taking cues from Stanley Kubrick's 2001 and Shane Carruth's Primer, the film screws with our heads as we see our heroine confounded by the existence of doppelgängers. Effectively a mind-f*ck retelling of the story of Sisyphus, the mechanics of the twisty happenings on the boat is pretty arbitrary. All we need to know is that Jess is stuck in a loop from the grief of losing her son. The allegorical nature of the story is simply more interesting than the plot specifics. So yes, I pretty much love it, but I don't think its perfect. Had the film been anchored by more commanding performances, it could have been a modern classic. I could be wrong though. Maybe it is because I'm sure the first two-thirds will take on a new meaning on second viewing.
3.5/4
Glad you liked it.
I thought a couple of the performances were iffy too. But on second viewing I decided it was more character idiosynchrasies than the acting. It's also fun trying to figure out the triggers of the loop.
Next greatest random selection: The Devil's Backbone
Over the past decade, there has been a plethora of imaginative adventures and mythic tales coming out of Guillermo Del Toro: the man has given us tales of demons and demon-hunting superheroes, of a certain dhampir battling an army of vampires, of a little girl and a fantastic labyrinth, and most recently, giant robots beating the snot out of giant monsters. Prior to all that, however, Del Toro's work has been much smaller in scope and scale, a grade more personal in nature, but still with unique imagination. The Devil's Backbone is one of his finest films to date; a ghost story in a unique place and time, embodying a certain boyish charm that only Del Toro can replicate.
The film presents an interesting drama, laden with suspense, thrills, and quite a bit of action towards the end. The film takes its time in telling the story, carefully and methodically presenting its multilayered plot in a series of revelations that makes the whole thing feel whole. The film is filled with a cast of rich and endearing characters. Even though the story focuses mostly on children in an orphanage out in the middle of nowhere, it does have many underlying conflicts (including the threat of war) that drives everything to a gripping climax. The story actually bears much in common with Pan's Labyrinth, for both these movies are set during war time, taking place in orphanages, and both draw pretty stark parallels between the world of children and the world of adults (and both ultimately collide with harrowing results). In spite of this, the film manages to capture a certain tone and feeling on both sides; there is a hard edge to the adults, and a certain level of boyish innocence to the kids, on a level not too different from a movie like Stand By Me. In the end, it's a tale that encompasses the young, the old, and perhaps those extending far beyond into the afterlife.
This film uses very good photography and editing. Acting is superb from the whole cast, and the writing is great. This production uses good and real-looking sets, props, and costumes, all with a distinct period look and feel. Music is pretty decent too.
Even though Pan's Labyrinth is so critically-acclaimed and hard-hitting, I personally prefer The Devil's Backbone for its tight storytelling, quality characters, and overall tone. I think it remains one of the director's best works, and it comes recommended to all.
5/5 (Entertainment: Good | Story: Perfect | Film: Perfect)
Recommendation: Yes!
The Criterion Collection Blu-Ray makes this thing look like it was made yesterday!
Next greatest random selection: The Devil's Backbone
[Show spoiler]Over the past decade, there has been a plethora of imaginative adventures and mythic tales coming out of Guillermo Del Toro: the man has given us tales of demons and demon-hunting superheroes, of a certain dhampir battling an army of vampires, of a little girl and a fantastic labyrinth, and most recently, giant robots beating the snot out of giant monsters. Prior to all that, however, Del Toro's work has been much smaller in scope and scale, a grade more personal in nature, but still with unique imagination. The Devil's Backbone is one of his finest films to date; a ghost story in a unique place and time, embodying a certain boyish charm that only Del Toro can replicate.
The film presents an interesting drama, laden with suspense, thrills, and quite a bit of action towards the end. The film takes its time in telling the story, carefully and methodically presenting its multilayered plot in a series of revelations that makes the whole thing feel whole. The film is filled with a cast of rich and endearing characters. Even though the story focuses mostly on children in an orphanage out in the middle of nowhere, it does have many underlying conflicts (including the threat of war) that drives everything to a gripping climax. The story actually bears much in common with Pan's Labyrinth, for both these movies are set during war time, taking place in orphanages, and both draw pretty stark parallels between the world of children and the world of adults (and both ultimately collide with harrowing results). In spite of this, the film manages to capture a certain tone and feeling on both sides; there is a hard edge to the adults, and a certain level of boyish innocence to the kids, on a level not too different from a movie like Stand By Me. In the end, it's a tale that encompasses the young, the old, and perhaps those extending far beyond into the afterlife.
This film uses very good photography and editing. Acting is superb from the whole cast, and the writing is great. This production uses good and real-looking sets, props, and costumes, all with a distinct period look and feel. Music is pretty decent too.
Even though Pan's Labyrinth is so critically-acclaimed and hard-hitting, I personally prefer The Devil's Backbone for its tight storytelling, quality characters, and overall tone. I think it remains one of the director's best works, and it comes recommended to all.
5/5 (Entertainment: Good | Story: Perfect | Film: Perfect)
Recommendation: Yes!
The Criterion Collection Blu-Ray makes this thing look like it was made yesterday!
PQ: 4.5/5, AQ: 4.5/5
Looking forward to finally watching my copy during the final days of October. It was a blind buy.
All countries
Argentina
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Bulgaria
Chile
China
Colombia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Estonia
Denmark
Finland
Greece
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
Indonesia
Ireland
Israel
India
Latvia
Lithuania
Malaysia
New Zealand
Norway
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Singapore
South Africa
South Korea
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
Turkey
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
in a few.
Linear Mode
