Final Cut (and final viewing)

Two posts in one night! Don't say I'm not good to you.

I went to see BLADE RUNNER: THE FINAL CUT at the weekend. If you're not familiar with it, it's Ridley Scott's final, final, final version (honest) of his iconic science-fiction movie. It's been given a clean-up, had a few things added or removed and this is now the alleged final version.

I should stress that it's a subtle effort. It's not like when George Lucas revisited the original STAR WARS trilogy, dug out the original negatives and then took a great big digitised dump over the whole lot of it, smearing his excrement in the faces of fans and kicking to death the childhood memories of a generation. There are no computer generated aliens suddenly appearing at inappropriate moments or anything like that.

Now I should also stress something else. I don't like BLADE RUNNER.

It's hailed as a classic, I know. And I'm a science fiction geek too. But I just don't like BLADE RUNNER. There's something I can't quite put my finger on. Perhaps its because everyone in the film is so emotionally distant. Yes, I know most of them are supposed to be replicants or whatever you want to call them, but it's like the film is going out of its way to be as unemotional as possible and I just don't like it. I don't mind people acting like gits for an entire film, but this is just dull.

There, I've said it. Let me say it again. I don't like BLADE RUNNER.

Worse still, I've given it a few chances. Because it is such an iconic and well respected film, and because I'm a big fan of science fiction movies, I keep thinking that maybe I've been too harsh. Every so often, I'll think "well, it's been a few years, maybe I'll appreciate it more now."

It never happens. Before the weekend, I'd watched it three times. The first time, I didn't like it. The second and third times, I thought I'd give it another go, watched it, thought it was rubbish, and then decided I'd been right all along and that I shouldn't bother watching it again.

I don't like BLADE RUNNER. Now that we're totally clear where I'm coming from, I should probably explain why I actually went to see it again.

There are some aspects of BLADE RUNNER that I like. Well, two.

First of all, the look of the film. It is an incredibly well realised vision of the future and for as much as I dislike the film, the opening vista is breathtaking.

Secondly, I love the music. Vangelis created a truly futuristic sound for this movie that has never dated.

Both of the above I decided were enough to merit seeing it again in the cinema. Add to this the fact that (a) it's the alleged "final cut"; (b) there was the novelty of it being shown for one week only at, as far as I know, only one cinema in Scotland (the Cameo - see link on the front page of this blog); and (c) the fact that not only was it cleaned up and enhanced, it was being digitally projected.

That last reason was important. Ever since I first saw a film digitally projected (see one of my earliest Freakpit entries) I've loved the format. Sure enough, it benefited this screening no end.

The opening scene as we see Los Angeles in the year 2019 was more breathtaking than ever and stands up as one of the most stunning things I've seen in a cinema. The detail on screen, the visual effects, the music - it was all incredible, and it's all thanks to a marvellous restoration job and the joys of digital projection. If you get the chance to see this on the big screen, I seriously urge you to take it. It will leave you absolutely speechless.

I still don't like the movie though.

Oscars 2008: Stupid Predictions (animated)

The stupid predictions just keep on coming. Next, I thought I'd look at the category for the best animated movie. This time there are twelve films submitted, of which I have seen just two and of which (I think) three are nominated. I'd say that makes the idea of predicting anything pretty stupid, so again I live up to the title above.

One of the two I've seen is TEKKONKINKREET. It was rubbish. I don't see it making it in there to be honest. It's not been widely seen (though that could change) and I'm going to go with my gut instinct and say it's just too obscure a choice. Plus it's rubbish. Did I mention that?

The other one I've seen is THE SIMPSONS MOVIE. I really enjoyed this one, though I guess you'd have to be a fan of the series to really get the most out of it. The fact that it was such a phenomenon (a movie based on the popular TV show has been a long time coming) could be enough to get it nominated, but the fact that it's essentially a 90-minute episode of the show and got some lukewarm reviews is enough to ensure it's unlikely to win.

So what of the others on the list? (The list can be found here by the way)

AQUA TEEN HUNGER FORCE COLON MOVIE FILM FOR THEATERS (excellent name) is one that I almost went to see but didn't. It's not the usual animated offering by all accounts but, like the aforementioned THE SIMPSONS MOVIE, it got mediocre reviews and was accused of being just more of the same as its TV original.

BEOWULF looks horrible to me - others seem to love it though and the few rave reviews coupled with the new visual techniques (regardless of whether they appeal to me or not) could see it sneak a nomination.

RATATOUILLE is both a Disney/Pixar movie and got a lot of great reviews. It's therefore guaranteed to be nominated and almost certain to win.

SHREK THE THIRD seems to be more of the same and was not reviewed well. This will receive no nomination.

TEENAGE MUTANT NINJA TURTLES. I just can't see it somehow.

There are a few others on the list too, but while BEE MOVIE and SURF'S UP look like possible contenders too, I'm going to go out on a limb and make a wild prediction.

The nominations will be BEOWULF, RATATOUILLE and THE SIMPSONS MOVIE. RATATOUILLE will win. Even if I get the nominations totally wrong, RATATOUILLE will still win.

Note: This is a category I know nothing about and I don't really pay much attention to. Please do not bet your house and car on anything I have said above as I can't be held responsible.

Oscars 2008: Stupid Predictions (documentaries)

Nominations for the 2007 Oscars (the ceremony is to be held on February 24th 2008) will not be announced for another couple of months. I've not seen a lot of the films that will be nominated. I don't know anything about how the industry works.

So with that in mind, I've decided to start some Oscar predictions! Point me back in the direction of these posts next year and you can see how smart/stupid I look.

You're probably wondering what made me decide to do this. Actually, you're probably not wondering that at all, you're probably not even slightly interested. However, since you've been kind enough to come here and read my thoughts, I'll elaborate anyway.

Regular readers will know that I'm a fan of documentaries. Well today I was reading a news story about how the shortlist for the Oscar for best documentary film has now been narrowed down to fifteen movies, with voting underway shortly. So I went over to see what films were still in the running - click here if you want to see the full list on the Oscar website.

Okay, let's get my previous rubbish predictions out the way first. There is no place on the shortlist for IN THE SHADOW OF THE MOON, which is a shame as it's one of the better films I've seen this year. Nor was there any place for WE ARE TOGETHER, another film that I saw at the same festival and about which I made the same bold prediction. So that's two shot down already.

I'll also say that I've actually only seen three of the fifteen films, although one of the ones I've not seen is Michael Moore's SICKO, which I intend to see sometime this week.

So what of the three I have seen?

Well first of all there's NANKING. I wrote about this harrowing movie after seeing it at HotDocs earlier in the year and although I didn't specifically predict it then, it was one of the best I saw there and I was thinking of that when, in my comments about WE ARE TOGETHER at the EIFF, I said that the latter "could face stiff competition from a couple of other films I've already discussed from both EIFF and HotDocs". I was thinking of NANKING, the aforementioned IN THE SHADOW OF THE MOON, and one other.

That one other is WAR/DANCE, another African-set documentary I saw at HotDocs earlier in the year. It too impressed me greatly, leading me to say at the time that "it wouldn't surprise me one bit to find myself sitting cheering this on one next February". Click the link above to read the rest of my thoughts on that one.

But that still leaves one other film on the list that I've seen. I didn't write about this one on the blog (but almost did!) after seeing it aired on TV (you can be sure if I'd seen it at a festival you'd have heard all about it). It's a shame I didn't because it would certainly have been another Oscar prediction. In fact, I'll probably do another "best films of the year" countdown towards the end of this year and currently the film I'm talking about is sitting at number two.

It's called PLEASE VOTE FOR ME, and here in the UK it showed on BBC4 as part of their season on democracy. The premise is that a school teacher in China decides to teach her class all about democracy by holding a three-way election for the job of class monitor. The children selected are then given the job of running a campaign to convince their classmates to vote for them.

It's incredible how quickly the children turn into politicians, turning to dirty tricks in order to discredit the opposition, concentrating on trashing their opponents more than playing up their own strengths. In other words, it's just like a real election, except these kids are a lot more likable than the politicians we have in this country. One particular highlight sees one young boy come up with a grand scheme to trash the only female candidate's chances. It backfires hideously and the entire class, himself included, are reduced to tears. This is a highlight in a film of many. Absolutely brilliant - do not turn down the chance to see this if it arises.

Now, the nominations. Only five from the fifteen will be in the running come Oscar night and just for the hell of it, I'm going to say that all three of the ones I've seen will be included (though I do feel that PLEASE VOTE FOR ME might suffer underexposure in the cinema). The other two films will, I suspect, be relating to the war although I wouldn't totally rule out SICKO. Michael Moore might be one of the more popular and famous documentary filmmakers, but I'm not sure he'll be in the running this time - he's had some bad press (more for himself than the movie) which might work against him.

So what will win? Well if I'm going with my heart, I really want to see PLEASE VOTE FOR ME collecting the statue (though the other two I've seen would be worthy winners too) but, since it was the first one I predicted, I'm going to say WAR/DANCE will win.

You know what? This was fun. I might just come back and make some more Oscar predictions shortly. And I promise they'll be every bit as stupid and groundless as the ones I've made here. Thanks for reading.

Ferdinando Baldi

Last week, Italian director Ferdinando Baldi died at the age of 80. I don't know much about it, and I don't know much about him - but what I do know is that the few films of his that I've watched have formed a very enjoyable part of my ongoing love affair with Italian cult cinema, in particular the spaghetti western.

Despite the fact that I watch a ridiculous number of spaghetti westerns, I've actually covered a comparably small number of them here in the blog pages of the Freakpit. Nevertheless, of the ones I have covered, Baldi has already featured so I guess that minor distinction can count for something.

BLINDMAN is the film I've already enthused about here and, it could be argued, might be his most notable. It's certainly one of the few spaghetti westerns that has a very distinct identity of its own. See my previous entry on the subject for more about this movie.

THE FORGOTTEN PISTOLERO is closer to being a standard spaghetti western, but is still more enjoyable than a great deal of the other films of this genre, aided by a lovely score courtesy of Roberto Pregadio and some memorable casting (the always wonderful Luciano Rossi and the stunningly lovely Pilar Velazquez).

VIVA DJANGO, while arguably not an official sequel to Sergio Corbucci's seminal spaghetti western, took on board some elements of the earlier film and moulded them into a solid piece of entertainment. Rossi again features along with Horst Frank, Italian cult cinema favourite George Eastman and, in the lead, Terence Hill. Hill would later become more well known for his parts in comedic spaghetti westerns (such as the TRINITY series) but this rare outing into more serious territory gave him one of his better roles in the genre.

Finally, I should mention the other film of Baldi's that I've seen, TEXAS ADIOS. This was one of the earliest spaghetti westerns I saw (probably beaten only by the more famous Leone films and a couple of DJANGO movies) and helped form my love of the genre. Granted, it may have seemed fresher then before I'd had a chance to see just how formulaic a genre the spaghetti western was, but that doesn't stop it being enjoyable now and is a fun showcase for guys like Franco Nero and Luigi Pistilli to show why they were so suited to these movies. It also featured cinematography by Enzo Barboni (aka E.B. Clutcher), as did VIVA DJANGO, who would go on to find fame in the genre himself, directing several TRINITY films.

I don't pretend that this is a particularly useful obituary and it certainly isn't a representative overview of the man's career; but I felt I should add something here since the chances are that his death won't be big news over here. But for the films above, and I'm sure the pleasure he gave plenty of other viewers, I salute him all the same.

Two more movies from Ireland

If you were reading my Horrorthon coverage over the last week or so, you may recall I'd skipped out on a couple of occasions to see films elsewhere. That's because just before I went I discovered that two new Irish films that have yet to be released here in the UK were on general release in Ireland, and I wanted to see both of them.

GARAGE stars Pat Shortt, best known for his comedic work, as Josie, a simple-minded worker in a service station, who becomes friends with the young lad who gets a job there. It's directed by Leonard Abrahamson, who first gave us the critically acclaimed ADAM AND PAUL.

Josie leads a fairly simple and relatively carefree life but there is a darkness gathering behind the quiet rural facade. While never displaying anything other than the best intentions towards all around him, Josie is the unwitting victim of bullying, misunderstanding and a general inability of those around him to deal with him for who he is.

To say much more is to spoil the movie so I'll just say that this is a beautifully made film with terrific performances all round and deserves whatever success it receives - and the plaudits have already begun as, during its run at several of the major film festivals, it scooped a prize as part of Directors Fortnight in Cannes this year. If there's any justice, more prizes (and a healthy share of cinema audiences will follow).

Despite moments of humour and the warmth of the lead character, GARAGE certainly can't exactly be described as a feel-good film. It is, however, a laugh riot next to the alcohol-fuelled depression of KINGS.

KINGS, adapted from the play by Jimmy Murphy, is notable for its nomination by an independent jury as Ireland's candidate for the foreign language Oscar at next year's ceremony.
The production certainly feels like a play, though that's not necessarily a bad thing when compared to the kind of drivel that gets made for your local multiplex and centres around a group of Irishmen living and working in London. Travelling across to England from the West of Ireland in the seventies, they found not the land of opportunity and dreams but of hardship, anti-Irish sentiment and alienation. Now, in the present day, they gather for a wake in memory of the first of their number to die.

It may centre on the death of one of their friends, but it's about more than the loss of one man. It's an elegiac look at the home they left behind, a home forever lost to them. They are not at home in London and for all their hopeful talk of one day going back home, the world has changed so much that the Ireland they left behind no longer exists either. They're trapped between worlds and in a touching way the only home they have is each other. It seems that perhaps in the death of their friend and the echoes of their homeland they may just be mourning the loss of the same thing after all.

Over the course of the evening, the characters re-open old wounds while simultaneously trying to find solace with each other. Each of the actors shine (the cast is lead by Colm Meaney, these days most famous for playing O'Brien in STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION and DEEP SPACE NINE) through a well-written screen adaptation that is handled thoughtfully by director Tom Collins.

My head tells me that KINGS is not likely to be winning at the Kodak in February and to be honest I don't imagine its chances of even being nominated are all that good - but if I allow my heart to do the talking then I'll certainly be waving an Irish flag for them.

Especially since my own country's Gaelic contender, SEACHD: THE INACCESSIBLE PINNACLE was snubbed by BAFTA when it came to nomination time - but let's not get me started on that again.

If you'd like to see the trailers for either of the movies mentioned above, you can find the official site for GARAGE here and for KINGS head over to here. What the hell, here's the link for SEACHD's official site too.

Horrorthon 2007 (Part 4 - The End)

Slightly later than planned (that should be this blog's motto), it's the conclusion of my thoughts on this year's Horrorthon in Dublin.

After the disappointment of SHROOMS, things picked up with Stuart Gordon's STUCK. This based-on-truth thriller is a violent and gruesome (yet simultaneously rather amusing) drama that makes the most of few locations and a very small cast.

Mena Suvari is the young nurse for whom things are just beginning to look up when, alas, she slams into a homeless man with her car while off her face. Even more unfortunate for her is that the hobo (Irish actor Stephen Rea, as fantastic as always) is not only in a bad way as a result of the accident, but is also stuck in her windscreen/windshield (delete depending on which side of the Atlantic you live on).

Panic and fear leads her to hide the car in her garage while she figures out what to do, a panic that grows when she discovers that the body stuck in her car is still very much alive. The longer she leaves him, however, the more trouble seems to approach; in the end, it'll come down to either "him or me".

Solid performances (it's about time Suvari actually appeared in something good again instead of Orange adverts like every other washed up has-been) and Gordon proves that while he might not be in the outlandish horror territory he's known for he still knows how to ratchet up the tension. As mentioned before however there are still plenty of laughs to be had (if you have a particularly dark sense of humour) at both the situations and twists, and the gruesome moments that will have you wincing between giggles.

For the late night screening there was again a choice. while normally I'd have gone for SKINWALKERS since it's the one I'd not seen, there was no way on Earth I was going to miss the chance to see FOR Y'UR HEIGHT ONLY on the big screen in a cinema full of like-minded individuals. I'll not talk at great length about it, since I already have done as part of my sporadic Gobsmacking Cinema series, but suffice to say it's the pinnacle of appalling-yet-brilliant bad movies. I've never laughed so much in a cinema since... well, actually, I don't think I've ever laughed this much in a cinema.

Monday's opener was HOOD OF HORROR, a kind of portmanteau horror film hosted by Snoop Dogg. Sounds terrible, doesn't it? Well the reviews I'd read of it seemed to agree so when I discovered that there was another film I wanted to see elsewhere at the same time, I skipped it. More on the other film some other time (again, if I remember).

Instead, the first film I saw on the Monday was Tim Sullivan's DRIFTWOOD. It's the tale of a young man sent to a behavioural correction facility for youths where he discovers exactly how horrific teenage life can be when you're dumped in the care of power-crazed authority figures intent on shaping you into a fine, upstanding citizen.

The premise - yes, these places actually exist - is terrific and there's a great film to be made about it, but this isn't it. There's a half-hearted supernatural element involving the lead character's dead brother which just seems to be at odds with the general tone of the film, the large cast of young lads (especially US TV's Ricky Ullman) make it feel like a made-for-TV horror movie for young teenagers and worst of all the villain is played by Diamond Dallas Page, a wrestler who can't act. And I mean really can't act. Not a classic.

Things changed for the better with the penultimate film. I'm sure most of you have seen Steven Spielberg's epic sci-fi parable CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND. I thought I had. However, until I'd seen the director's definitive cut in a brand, spanking new remastered print on the big screen, I'm not sure I had. It's everything I remember and more. Not having seen the movie in cinemas on first release I was grateful for the opportunity - if you get the chance I urge you to take it. This tale of alien visitation and the effects it has on ordinary folks is absolutely spellbinding and is the reason cinemas exist. Towards the finale when the famous mothership appears in all its glory, there is a hushed awe that washes over the spectators. The same moment produced a similar effect on the people lucky enough to be at this screening.

Finally, the closing night film was PLANET TERROR. If you're not familiar with it, it's Robert Rodriguez's half of the double bill that was originally going to be released as GRINDHOUSE (the other half we've already seen as Quentin Tarantino's DEATH PROOF). The pairing was conceived as a tribute to the grindhouse trash cinema experience of the seventies, with the two directors not only making the kinds of movies you only saw then but also going out of their way to make them look the part. They even got guest directors in to make some fake trailers for other made-up seventies trash. The package was complete.

Then it bombed in the USA so they decided to split them up and release them separately. Tarantino's suffered when he added stuff back in for the full length version - too much talk, not enough Kurt Russell killing people. So does Rodriguez's half suffer the same fate?

Not a bit of it.

PLANET TERROR is the most insane and most fun movie you will see in a cinema this year. The plot, in a nutshell, sees some villains accidentally release a gas that turns people into zombies. So far, so seventies. So what works in the film's favour?

Pretty much everything. The seventies look is as perfectly replicated as the plot (right down to damaged film, missing reels and the inclusion of one of the aforementioned trailers); the music is a fantastic electronic score that is reminiscent of the best of the late-seventies and early eighties works of people like Lucio Fulci and John Carpenter; the gore effects are relentless, jaw-dropping and almost non-stop; the action is not only terrifically entertaining, it's frequent - far more so than the talky DEATH PROOF; it's gory, it's funny and it never takes itself too seriously. Everyone in the perfectly cast flick looks like they're having a ball - Michael Biehn's sheriff; Freddy Rodriguez as the put-upon hero; Rose McGowan as the stripper with a machine gun for a leg; Josh Brolin doing his best Nick Nolte impression.

There's so much to recommend PLANET TERROR that I can't fit it all in here - and I've not even mentioned Quentin Tarantino's guest appearance as the villain who gets his... well, just wait and see what happens to him.

Not for the faint-hearted, but easily one of the must-see cinema experiences of 2007.

And that's it! More non-Horrorthon stuff soon!

Horrorthon 2007 (Part 3)

Sunday kicked off with SUMMER SCARS, the latest low-budget Welsh horror from director Julian Richards. Richards was the man responsible for DARKLANDS, a Welsh variation on THE WICKER MAN which saw its director's cut screened at last year's Horrorthon. The earlier movie was an absolute turd, though I can happily say that SUMMER SCARS shows a lot of improvement.

The premise concerns a group of Welsh youths messing around in some woods who are befriended by a seemingly sound older chap (Kevin Howarth). It soon becomes clear however that he's dangerously unhinged and a fun afternoon for the young scamps soon turns into an unforgettable orgy of terror. The terror itself stems not from any supernatural shenanigans or pantomime villainy - instantly rendering it a cut above the dross that was DARKLANDS - and instead relies on the uncomfortable horrors of real life. There are some genuinely uncomfortable scenes - for the characters and audience alike - and with a tighter script and talented cast it is a vast improvement over DARKLANDS which, you may have guessed by now, I didn't think much of.

I skipped out of the next screening (a couple of new episodes of the MASTERS OF HORROR television series, in particular Stuart Gordon's THE BLACK CAT and Joe Dante's THE SCREWFLY SOLUTION). It's not that I wasn't interested - heck, I'd bought a ticket - but rather that there was another film I wanted to see elsewhere. But you'll probably hear about that, and one other, in a later blog entry. If I remember.

So the next screening I took in at Horrorthon was the BFI's brand spanking new, fully restored print of Hammer's DRACULA, the film that made Christopher Lee the star he is, even if he doesn't like to talk about it. Then again, with STAR WARS: ATTACK OF THE CLONES stinking up his CV, maybe he'll be happy to go back to talking about DRACULA again. But I digress.

Mad as this sounds for a horror lover like myself, I'd never seen this movie. In fact, I'm not sure I'd seen any of Hammer's adventures of the infamous Count before this one. I've really only seen a few Hammer films, although I think I may actually have seen more on the big screen than the little screen - unusual since most of them were made before I was born. But I digress. Again.

The film holds up remarkably well for its age - Lee looks as creepy as ever, and the make-up is better than the previous day's FRIGHT NIGHT, made almost thirty years later - and James Bernard's score is almost as iconic as the cape and fangs. Some of the acting is a little camp, some a little stiff, but it's forgivable in a bonafide horror classic. And importantly, this new print means that not only is it being seen on the big screen where it belongs (hurrah for horror films finally and belatedly getting the treatment they deserve) but it's also probably as nice as it's looked since it was first released. Lovely.

Next on the agenda was the surprise movie. Last year it had turned out to be the no-brainer SEE NO EVIL, which was hardly classic but at least a diverting hour and a half. This year was more disappointing than that.

As the opening credits rolled, there was a groan from the Dublin audience as the Irish Film Board's name appeared. As soon as I saw this, I moaned to myself "Oh no, it's SHROOMS, I already saw this at the Edinburgh festival". Now I should emphasise that I thought this only inwardly to myself; however, in a rather creepy coincidence, a young Irish lady sitting a few seats away from me turned to her friend and said almost exactly those very same words. Spooky. Far more spooky than anything in the film to be honest.

If you read my report of this movie from its Edinburgh screening you'll know that I thought it wasn't that bad. I must confess to having changed my mind on this viewing however. Perhaps it's because there was no novelty value in it, having seen it before; perhaps it's because I was swayed by the clearly negative reaction to the film by an Irish audience; or maybe now that I was watching it a second time I was able to more closely analyse its flaws.

Whatever the reason, I'm afraid to say I'm going to alter my opinion. I was almost tempted to go back and edit my Edinburgh blog entry but no, I'll leave it there so as to show that I'm prepared to admit when I'm wrong. And I was wrong about SHROOMS. I'll not be too hard on its predictability, since you could say that it's easy to call something predictable when you've already seen it. There's no getting away, however, from the fact that the characters are not an interesting group, some of the dialogue is just plain terrible and all in all the film just doesn't stand up to repeated viewing. I mentioned the lack of Irish accents previously; well I'd go further than that this time. The film goes out of its way to hide its Irish origins, to the point where it almost seems ashamed of it. On more than one occasion there were groans of disapproval from the Irish audience (the real indigenous people, rather than the inbred hicks of the movie).

This lack of Irishness is something I find particularly galling since, in its reluctance to deal with genre cinema, Irish cinema has a lot in common with its Celtic cousin over here. When something as rare as an Irish (or Scottish) film comes along that actually seems to embrace genre filmmaking, it would be nice for it to do so while embracing its national identity too, or else what's the point in having a national film industry? One of the joys of SEACHD: THE INACCESSIBLE PINNACLE (which I've covered here before) is that it is a uniquely Scottish film that embraces Scottish culture and history and weaves a story out of it; far more interesting to someone like me than giving good money to someone to make a film that could have been hacked out by any old Hollywood dud.

Sorry, my SHROOMS discussion appears to have gone on longer than intended. I'll save the rest of the Sunday movies (along with the ones on the Monday) for my next blog entry.

Horrorthon 2007 (Part 2)

Saturday also kicked off with another film I'd already seen, THE TRIPPER, but like MOTEL HELL I couldn't resist another chance to see it. It's not quite as mad as MOTEL HELL, but it does have some decent gore, some laughs and best of all the killer premise of an eighties-style slasher movie where the killer thinks he's Ronald Reagan. The politics of the film aren't exactly subtle but it's a whole lot of fun.

This was followed with END OF THE LINE, a low-budget Canadian film in which members of a religious order suddenly go on a killing spree. It's part slasher movie, part apocalyptic drama and despite some occasionally ropey acting it makes the most of its limited budget and its predominantly underground setting to weave an intriguing tale of religious fanatics and impending doom. It also has one of the best opening scares I've seen.

Another film I've seen before was up next - PREDATOR. It's been many years since I last saw it and - stop reading now if you don't want to feel old - I was too young to see it when it came out at the cinema. I wasn't therefore about to miss the chance to see it on the big screen. It doesn't disappoint. The creature itself is as cool as ever, but there are laughs aplenty to be had from the dated eighties machismo and daft one-liners as Arnie dispatches a bad guy. In fact, some of the dialogue is so bad I refuse to believe that it was even taken seriously first time round, but it certainly enhanced my enjoyment of this screening.

I skipped out on TEETH, having already seen it at Edinburgh (though I confess I was tempted to see it again just for the joy of once more seeing it with a large audience), but there was no escaping the dangers of young women as I followed it up with ALL THE BOYS LOVE MANDY LANE. Mandy, in case you don't know, is the beautiful young girl that every guy in school has the hots for but who refuses to put out for any of them. So when she agrees to come away for a weekend in the country with her friends, they all see this as the opportunity to finally get their hands on her.

Well, it turns out that someone else has other ideas and once they get there, they all begin to get picked off one by one in some rather unpleasant ways. The killer is revealed early on, which is a mistake, although when you come to the end of the movie (I'll avoid spoiling it here) you understand why it was done. It's still a satisfactory shot in the arm for the slasher genre though and despite some pretty sadistic scenes it's a breath of fresh air compared to the current popularity of torture horror movies. It'll be out in cinemas shortly and I advise you to check it out.

For late night action on Saturday, there was a choice of two movies - a screening of eighties teen horror FRIGHT NIGHT or Lucio Fulci's THE PSYCHIC. Now, I'm a massive fan of Fulci, but since I figured that the former would be on film and the latter from DVD, I decided to decline the Fulci film - I still await my first big-screen Fulci experience - and go with another love of mine. Cheesy eighties horror.

When you watch films like FRIGHT NIGHT now, you can't help notice that the acting is terrible, the dialogue dated, the fashions and music dated even more and in general they're just not good movies. However, that only increases the charm for people like me. Again, I missed this one in the cinema (too young - sorry again) but was still nevertheless nostalgic for it anyway, based on my teenage years spent watching late-night horror movies on the BBC. It may have dated badly but it's as enjoyable as it's ever been, largely thanks to the presence of Roddy McDowall.

When a young man discovers that his new neighbour is probably a vampire responsible for killing several young ladies, he decides to do something about it, with the aid of his girlfriend and best friend. That isn't entirely successful, so he turns to washed up horror actor Peter Vincent (McDowall). The rest of the cast are pretty much second rate but you can't hide class - McDowall is superb, ironic since he's really being asked to play a pretty bad actor. His class shines through and he totally out-acts everyone else in the movie - it's worth watching for his turn alone, although I should also point out that in addition to whatever merits the film may have, it was also being screened from a new print, which looked terrific.

To be continued...

Horrorthon 2007 (Part 1)

I was surprised when looking over the programme for this year's Horrorthon (a horror film festival held around Halloween each year at the Irish Film Institute) at just how many of the films I'd already seen but that's not to say I was disappointed. On the contrary, it provided me with a chance to see some classics on the big screen, not to mention allowing me a couple of gaps in my viewing long enough to actually allow me to go out and eat occasionally.

The opening night consisted of the eagerly anticipated horror comic adaptation 30 DAYS OF NIGHT. It was certainly eagerly anticipated by me. More's the pity then that to save a little bit of money (I was late in booking a hotel) and due to a lack of holidays (too many film festivals) I didn't actually get there for the opening night. That meant I also missed James Wan's DEAD SILENCE, a shame since I was really quite interested in seeing this effort from the SAW creators.

So the festival for me kicked off properly on Friday afternoon with a screening of the completely insane MOTEL HELL. If that sounds familiar to you, it's because I saw it at the Glasgow Film Festival earlier this year. I wasn't about to pass up an opportunity to see it again though as stuff like this doesn't pop up in the cinemas very often, particularly in such a fine print. Crazy fun like they just don't make anymore.

And then to another one I was already familiar with. FRIDAY THE 13TH: THE FINAL CHAPTER (guess what, it wasn't really the final chapter) sees the return of Jason Vorhees who, in a brave departure from the previous films in the series, spends the film being really hard to kill and slaughtering naughty teenagers in a forest on the shores of Camp Crystal Lake. Yeah, okay, it's not a departure at all, it's the same thing again - but when a formula works, why change it? I love eighties slasher movies and the FRIDAY THE 13TH films are among my favourites. This one is notable for appearances by Crispin Glover (who I struggle to watch without wanting to shout "Hey McFly!") and eighties kid legend Corey Feldman. There's gore aplenty (courtesy of the great Tom Savini) and a fair amount of humour - some intended, some not - love it or hate it, you'll certainly not get bored. I for one am glad that the title turned out to be a misnomer.

Because I'm always trying to see Scottish films whenever I can, I was interested to see Robbie Fraser's low budget tale of love and drama among role-play gamers in Glasgow. There's enough humour in GAMERZ to keep the plot ticking along when it otherwise gets a bit dull, but in the end I can't make up my mind if this film is an attempt to humanise the stereotypical gaming geek or if it serves only to reinforce the image. Watchable but flawed - still, at least it's a Scottish movie that isn't just about alcoholics, junkies, gangsters and poverty-stricken kids from broken homes.

Having already seen BOTCHED (see last night's post about the Cork Film Festival) and Joshua (see my Edinburgh Film Festival coverage) I took the opportunity to skip out for some food. I was glad that I returned in time for the late show however...

Survivors from a wreck at sea find themselves washed ashore on a strange island where small doll-type-things lurk in the bushes waiting to attack and strange things start to happen, most notably the discovery of an acid lake (no reason is given). No, this is not the next season of LOST. It's the stupendously named ATTACK OF THE BEAST CREATURES.

This mid-eighties oddity truly defines the term "low budget horror", while ensuring that the quality is perfectly commensurate with the amount of money spent on it. As a movie it's a failure in almost every way except for the one most important aspect - it's entertaining. To call the plot basic is an understatement; to say it's well scripted would be a lie; to say the acting is wooden is to insult trees; and to describe the special effects as, well, special, is just wrong. The creatures are clearly some kind of puppet construction, thrown about by hand and made for zero money; some of the gore effects are rather entertaining in a quaint way; and thrown together with the absolutely dire filmmaking on offer, ATTACK OF THE BEAST CREATURES turns out to be the perfect late night movie to watch in a cinema full of like-minded people who know how to enjoy such movies.

Actually, now that I think about the film again, I really do hope the next season of LOST is like this. If the makers of the hit TV show want to spice things up a bit, then lets stop with the romance and whinging about dead family members and instead get some 12-inch puppets running rampage round acid lakes. That's what the viewers all want to see. They just don't know it yet.

To be continued...

Cork Film Festival 2007 (feature films)

Okay, I covered the short films so Slightly later than planned, a few words about the feature films I saw at this year's Corona Cork Film Festival.

TONIGHT IS CANCELLED is a low budget film in which an Irish director turns up in Kosovo with plans to shoot a film based on the experiences of a local couple he meets there. While there's the odd moment of humour and some lovely photography, I found this film to be rather meandering and unengaging. The source material is undoubtedly rich in potential but it's potential that is not fulfilled here; similarly, director Brendan Grant shows enough to make me think he has promise as a director of features, but promise that remains unfulfilled here.

I can't say that I was overly enamoured with Colin Downey's DREAM DIARY either, though it certainly was bizarre enough to sustain the attention. An experimental art film in black and white showcasing some truly bizarre moments involving a giant worm, witchcraft, a woman with a strange disfigurement and plenty of other oddness besides, it's reminiscent in many ways of David Lynch's ERASERHEAD. But for all its similarities, it's not as polished and veers off into strangeness for the sake of strangeness once too often.

When Bob Quinn's Irish-language POITIN was first shown thirty years ago, it had presented a daring vision of the west of Ireland (the remote cottages are the same, but they're populated by scheming bootleggers and thieves), and was almost devoid of music. It is justifiably hailed as a classic of Irish cinema, but the negative went missing for many years. Now it has been recovered (a new 35mm print being blown up from 16mm without looking any the worse for it) and a new score composed for it.

Featuring Irish acting greats Cyril Cusack and Donal McCann, the film tells the tale of a man who makes his own poitin (think Irish moonshine) and sells it on via McCann and partner Niall Toibin. Doublecrossing and dishonesty mean it'll all end in tears for someone however, and what could have been a quirky picture-postcard representation of life in rural Connemara ends up as a gritty and accomplished crime film with a strangely effective bucolic backdrop.

Mel Cheren is the subject of the documentary THE GODFATHER OF DISCO, which covers the emergence of disco through its mutation into what was later called dance music and in an enlightening and enjoyable way sheds light on Cheren's almost unrivalled contribution to the scene with interviews aplenty and lots of archive footage. It's not all shiny suits and glitterballs however and the film covers the disco scene in its entirety, including the outbreak of the mysterious and deadly epidemic that the world would come to know as AIDS, along with Cheren's part in fighting it and trying to raise awareness of the issue.

BOTCHED was a perfect film for the late night slot - a low budget film set in Russia (although managing to make the most of shooting in a soundstage in Ireland for most of it), it stars Stephen Dorff as a criminal dragged into committing the usual "one last job", only to fall foul of forces beyond what he usually has to deal with. Kit Ryan's film is an interesting oddity that plays with audience expectations - what begins as an apparent story about a botched heist soon turns into a gory but endearingly mad horror-comedy which is not ashamed to have fun while tearing its characters to pieces, unlike the current trend for grisly torture movies. It'll certainly do well on the festival circuit (it also played at Horrorthon in Dublin, which I'll be covering soon) but these little films always struggle for cinema release without either an A-list star or a major studio backing them. One can only hope BOTCHED succeeds, as it certainly offers a pleasing couple of hours for potential audiences.

Next up was BOY A, a great little British drama about a young man who has been released from an institution where he was sent for his part in a despicable crime committed with a friend when they were young boys. With a new identity, a desire to leave the past behind and in many ways seeing the world anew, young "Jack" soon finds a new home, a job, new friends and even romance. Of course, it's not long before various parties, including the ever-reliable British tabloid press, are bringing the past back to haunt Jack, a past that finally catches up with him as a result of a snap decision to help a child in danger.

Based on Jonathan Trigell's novel, the story would seem to be in part inspired by one real life case that featured heavily in Britain's tabloids. I'm sure you know which one I'm talking about, and if you don't I've no desire to dredge up unpleasant memories by discussing it here. All I will say is that this is a terrific little film that really deserves a wide audience, though the subject matter may make that difficult.

The final film I saw was TRANCES, a documentary following Moroccan band Nass El Ghiwane in the early 80s, as they perform live and espouse their various philosophies on life. It's the first film to be rescued, or restored, or whatever you want to call it, by Martin Scorsese's World Cinema Foundation and while I found it enjoyable and acknowledge the need to save it I must also say that if you don't like the band's music the film could be a pretty hard slog for you. As an aside, I should mention that this film is almost three decades old and yet upon consulting the Internet Movie Database entry to see what the average score is I see that, at the time of writing, it is still "awaiting five votes". Rescued from obscurity indeed.

Coming soon: my opinions from this year's Horrorthon festival in Dublin.