The Blog of David

Black Christmas Review

2009-09-14T19:36:00.000-07:00

It really says something about american horror that I need to specify "Not the remake, the original" after naming the title of nearly any half-decent horror movie released in the last couple decades. It's not enough to just say "Halloween" anymore. Now, you have to say "Halloween 1978". Or you can't say "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre", you have to say "In the name of all that is holy, no! Not that 2003 atrocity!"

Such is the case with 'Black Christmas', or as it should be called, 'Black Christmas 1974'. In 2006, somebody apparently thought that the original's lack of gore and breasts made it inaccesible to modern teenagers, and remade the movie into 'Black Christmas 2006', or as it shall be henceforth refered to, 'Black Christmas with Blood and Boobs'.

In truth, Black Christmas 1974 has many of the genre cliches of a slasher film. Bad guy enters house. Bad guy kills people. One girl is left. But the reason for this is that Black Christmas was the first to do any of these. Also, there are many things that BC1978 does DIFFERENT than other slashers. A great example of this is the antagonist himself. 'Billy' (we assume his name is Billy, though we are never specifically told this) is completely demented. I mean COMPLETELY demented. Not evil. Just insane. He doesn't saunter tword his victams like Jason. He doesn't kill with emotional detachment like Myers. He doesn't strike menacing poses before killing, gaze out of the shadows menacingly, or plan out elaborate murders. Billy screams and grunts while chasing his victams. Billy plays out confusing and disturbing monologues over the phone with multiple personalities. Billy sings lullabys to the bodies of those he has murdered. And scariest of all, Billy is shown almost entirely from a 1st person perspective. We never even get to see his face.

So the upshot of all that is that Billy's freaky. And the movie's ability to keep you guessing as to where Billy actually is keeps you on pins and needles throughout the entire film (literally).

As far as the plot goes, there are a couple twists and turns that I wont spoil for you, but the basic idea of the film is "murder girls one by one while the remaining girls become more and more panicked". Even though it's a tired formula at this point, there's still some scares to be gleaned out of BC1878's solid execution, and the film has an overall feeling of fresh-ness that speaks of a movie that came before Freddy Kruger and Jason Vor-howeveryouspellhislastname. It scared me, and it will probably scare you too if you let it.

Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian Review

2009-07-22T13:15:00.000-07:00

Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian was actually something of a pleasant surprise for me. While I suppose I can’t say that it’s better than its predecessor, per say, it does solve many of the problems I had with the original Night at the Museum. Namely, an embarrassing and unneeded domestic subplot, a lot of screen time for an annoying monkey, and feminist-influenced historical inaccuracies about Sacajawea. As a result, I enjoyed it a lot more than the original, and was laughing out loud on more than one occasion.

The movie gets going pretty quickly. The unnamed museum from the first movie has decided that its exhibits are in need of a technological upgrade. As such, the old exhibits are shipped off to the Smithsonian for storage. Larry, now the CEO of his own company, receives a phone call from Jed, the miniature cowboy from the first movie, who is unfortunately back for this sequel Apparently, all is not well in the storage facility of the Smithsonian Larry, being a good friend, immediately appears in Washington DC to infiltrate said facility in a scene that gives new meaning to the phrase ‘blatant ripoff of National Treasure’. Once inside, Larry ends up battling for control of Ra’s Tablet (remember? That mystical piece of rock that brings the museum to life?) with an ancient Egyptian king who speaks in one of the most fascinating lisps ever captured on film. Oh yeah, and he ends up with Amelia Erhart in tow, since the makers had already milked Sacajawea's potential as a vehicle for feminist propaganda for all it was worth. Still, though, she’s likable enough by the end, and other new characters, like Napoleon and General Custer, are an absolute riot. The plot itself is mediocre, but is helped along by an almost constant stream of clever jokes and creative dialog. By the end, you’ll probably have lost all interest in the plot, but will find yourself looking forward to the next comedic twist the writers throw at you. In particular, I found the “final confrontation” to be hilarious (I wont spoil It for you, but lets just say it involves a creative use for Larry’s flashlight and the phrase “Well… this is awkward.”)

In essence, NM: BS keeps most of what was funny and entertaining about the original Night at the Museum, and does away with most of the annoying aspects. It’s still clichéd and full of plot holes, but it’s funny and fun, and maybe worth owning if you like Ben Stiller’s style of comedy.

First Screens of 'Swampland'

2009-04-03T08:58:00.001-07:00

Here's a couple of screenshots of the game I'm working on, called 'Swamplands.' Best way to describe it would be a survival-horror game, like System Shock 2 or STALKER. Stay tuned for more updates later on!

Troll 2

2009-03-17T15:17:00.000-07:00

For anyone who has an interest in b-movies and terrible cinema, Troll 2 should need no introduction. For the rest of you, here's a short synopsis:

Troll 2 sucks.

Really, that's all you want to know about it. Really. Seriously. Truthfully.

Why are you still reading? Stop it! This movie is so horrible, you don't even want to read about it. Believe me.

Go away. Seriously. You don't want to read any further.

Well, I guess you're determined, aren't you?

Very well...

Troll 2 was released in 1992 in the US, straight to video. It was, in theory, the sequel to the mostly ignored 1986 horror film 'Troll'. In practice, however, Troll 2 has absolutely nothing to do with Troll 1. Nothing. Heck, it doesn't even have TROLLS IN IT!!!!! Yes. The movie is called Troll 2, and it doesn't have Trolls in it.

But, Troll 2's history has been documented elsewhere, so on to the review.

The basic plot of Troll 2 is that a young boy named Joshua Waits and his family are switching houses with another family who live in a town called 'Nilbog' (yes, it's 'Goblin' spelled backwards. Blech.). Joshua is told by his undead grandfather that the town is inhabited by vegetarian Goblins who turn people into vegetable goo and eat them.

I'm not making this up.

Most of the first part of the movie consists of the family being oblivious about the situation they're in, and Joshua (armed, remember, with knowledge granted him by the undead) keeping them from eating the poisonous foods that they are given. When the townsfolk begin showing their true colors, however, the family barricade themselves in the house, hold a seance to contact Grandpa, and defeat the Goblins with a triple decker Bologna sandwich.

Again, not making any of this up.

The movie ends with the destruction of the goblins and their queen, and the family returning safely to their own home. Then, quite abruptly, Joshua walks into the kitchen and witnesses his mother being devoured by inexplicably not-dead goblins. He screams. The movie ends.

The most obvious problem with Troll 2 is its ludicrous plot. As a comedy, it might have worked, but Troll 2 was obviously not meant as a comedy. Unlike many B-movies, it has absolutely no cheese or over-the-top tone to it. From the get-go, it appears that Troll 2 was meant as a serious movie. I guess this is why it's strangely compelling for me. With a lot of b-movies, you get the sense that the cast and crew weren't entirely taking things seriously. How the entire cast and crew of Troll 2 ever thought they were crafting a masterpiece is beyond me (especially when the fully-clothed popcorn sex scene comes along).

Secondly, the acting in Troll 2 is bad. Really bad. So bad that it's good. Here's an example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyophYBP_w4

See????

Really, I don't know why you're still reading...

In truth, I was really enjoying Troll 2 until the end. The end is cruel, sudden, and completely inept. The movie gives no sense of closure, which might be acceptable for a GOOD horror movie, but not for a poorly executed, horribly acted, ludicrously written piece of filth like Troll 2. If you dare to watch it... well, in truth, you'll probably love every minute of it. It's so bad that it's funny. I can't recommend it more to b-movie lovers. But if you don't approach it with a sense of humor... God have mercy on your soul.

MST3K REVIEWS: PRINCE OF SPACE

2009-03-17T14:46:00.000-07:00

I'm a huge fan of the cult classic Mystery Science Theatre 3000, and I decided about a month or so ago to start reviewing some of my favorite episodes. This was already posted on www.badmovies.org.

PRINCE OF SPACE

The Movie: Prince of Space, by itself, is an entertaining bit of garbage straight from our friends in Japan. The plot is confusing, but at times laughable in its ineptitude. Like most Japanese B-movies, the dialogue is fairly poorly translated, which results in some entertaining phrases (such as "boot blacking" being used for shoe shining). Poor translation aside, however, the dialogue is still quite funny. Honestly, how many times does The Prince have to tell them that their weapons don't effect him? Some miscellaneous other things pop up as well, such as the bad guys's strange resemblance to chickens (complete with a spaceship that looks like a roast turkey).

The Riffs: MST3K's riffs are generally hit or miss, and this episode is no exception. However, I found there to be more genuinely funny moments in here than in other episodes. For one thing, most of the jokes actually center around the movie rather than obscure cultural references (not that there's anything wrong with that...for those of you that understand them). Memorable lines such as "Saying it is me will have no effect on me!" and "Goodbye Mr. unfunny weird man!" all need to be heard within the context of the movie to be found funny...which is just the way I like it. And thankfully, the jokes are just as good near the end of the film as they are in the beginning (something that MST3K sometimes has trouble with). In fact, if anything, the first 10 minutes are the least eventful of the movie.

The Verdict: This episode is a favorite of my girlfriend and I. The movie itself has plenty of things for MST3K to rip on, and they don't disappoint. If you want an entertaining evening of MST3K, this is one of your best bets.

The Atmosphere of Painkiller part 1

2009-03-14T14:07:00.000-07:00

I'm a big fan of the 2004 (I think) shooter 'Painkiller'. It's fun, visceral, and has high re-playability. Also, it happens to have some beautiful graphics and level designs. I'm currently playing through the game on Nightmare difficulty, and thought I'd post some screens that I think show off the game's gorgeous looks. Stay tuned for more screens as I play through farther.

Fireproof review

2009-03-08T19:42:00.000-07:00

Over spring break, my family and I watched Fireproof.

And I liked it.

This may come as a surprise to many people, because it got a 28 on Metacritic. Its 28 rating on Metacritic makes sense, as all culture seems to be interested in film-wise are explosions and masturbation value (aka, The Notebook and Star Wars), and Christians are right between 'Nazis' and 'George W. Bush' in the big book of "People We Can Discriminate Against Without Getting Screeched At". So I'll put that aside and chalk it up with the million other instances where Metacritic has completely failed at identifying what makes a movie good.

Back to Fireproof.

As a whole, the film is pretty standard fare for a relationship drama. Acting is good on Kirk Cameron's part, but substandard everywhere else, mostly due to the fact that the directors were using un-paid volunteers rather than millionaire sex/drug-addled kindergar--I mean, actors. The plot is well put together, but not all that surprising. The filmography is adequate, but not eye-popping. And the tone is a little too sappy in parts.

But the reason it works so well for me is that the plot of Fireproof was, for once, about something I actually cared about. I mean, c'mon. I'm a Conservative Christian, I came from a perfectly happy home life with loving parents and friendly siblings, and I'm still on my first girlfriend, who I didn't actually start dating until almost 2 years ago. I'm sure movies about drunk fathers, promiscuous relationships, wild partying, and backstabbing are relevant to some people, but after I've seen cardboard cutout A and B making doe-eyed speeches about the virtues of divorce for about the twenty billionth time, I start wondering why I'm bothering with the genre. So seeing a story about a man finding God and fixing his marriage is a breath of fresh air. It may be a little unpolished, but it has heart behind it, and its one of the few films that made me care about a marital conflict. I don't expect non-Christians to enjoy it, but they aren't the intended audience anyway. For Christians, it's a well made movie that has a good message. Hopefully, it's an indicator of better things to come, because we know that Christians could use some decent films.

2009-03-08T19:05:00.000-07:00

Back from spring break. Not really any reason to post, except to keep the blog alive while I get caught up on school. Hopefully I'll post some reviews later.

Teh Byebul Matt. 23: 27-28

2009-02-18T17:47:00.000-08:00

This is just a really really random idea that came to me... post Bible verses in goofball language...I have no idea why I find this funny, but I'll probably do it for awhile, so get used to it ;).
MATTHEW 23: 27 - 28
Pharisees, u = teh fail rofl u r lyke graevs wit haz teh dead ppl!!!!!11 u think ur 1337, but ur not!!!111 lol

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974)

2009-02-17T18:05:00.000-08:00

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is a pretty well known title. For one thing, it was arguably the most influential horror film ever made. For another, it has a reputation for being one of the most VIOLENT films ever made.

First of all, get the 2003 re-make out of your mind. I have not seen it, I do not wish to see it, and I am not going to see it. The movie I'm talking about is the original 1974 classic. Shot on 16mm under horrible conditions and a low budget. It is raw. It is sick. And it is beautiful.

The plot of TCM is pretty straight-forward. 5 teenagers end up trapped in the out-backs of Texas, encounter a maniac family, and are systematically slaughtered. It's been done a thousand times since, but TCM was the first to use this formula, and one of the few to get it right. For one thing, it doesn't waste needless time on sex and nudity, like *insert generic slasher title here*. For some, this may be a disappointment, but when you realize that the time most other movies spend on titilation has been substituted with pure atmosphere in TCM, you'll probably agree that this was a good choice. For another thing, TCM actually has a surprising amount of believability to their characters. The wheelchair-bound Franklin is especially good. Although he is extremely annoying, you can't help but sympathise with him, even more so than the others. He is whiny, yes, but good-hearted, and lonely. Our empathy makes it all the more horrifying when he is suddenly and brutally killed. Unlike successors Friday the 13th and Nightmare on Elm Street, TCM doesn't see its characters as an excuse for elaborate death scenes.

One surprising thing about TCM is that it has relatively little blood, especially considering that the words 'Chainsaw' and 'Massacre' are in the title (on a related note, the title is fairly misleading, since only one person is killed with a chainsaw). Even so, TCM is still extremely brutal and twisted. You see a man wearing a skinned human face for a mask, rotting corpses, strange decorations made of human and animal remains... TCM has no qualms about showing you horrifying sites.

Finally, TCM is probably the most atmospheric movie ever made. Sure, that atmosphere isn't sophisticated or intelligent, but it's very effective. You can feel yourself sweating in the heat...you can smell the roting flesh...you can taste the blood. It's all very effective, and the anti-music musical score, which consists of sounds that are supposed to suggest what cattle on the way to slaughter would hear, really helps.

TCM is a great movie for people who like horror films. The raw, realistic quality is so different than any other horror film I've ever seen, and while you may find it to be slow at first, once you've immersed yourself in the nightmare of TCM, there's no going back.

The first post

2009-02-17T10:41:00.001-08:00

Here's my first blog post. It is rather uneventful.

I plan on posting random thoughts about movies, music, and video games on here, so check back if you're interested in any of those 3 things!