Grabbers (2012)

Grabbers

☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

(Liked It) 

Netflix Synopsis:  Residents of an Irish island must get very drunk to survive attacks by alien monsters who can't tolerate high blood alcohol levels in their victims.

The Peeps:  Jon Wright (director); Kevin Lehane (writer); Richard Coyle, Ruth Bradley, Russel Tovey, Lalor Roddy

Quick Run Down:  Fun, Funny, Good CGI and Creature Effects 

Worth The Watch:  Yeah!

Garda (officer) Lisa Nolan (Ruth Bradley) has been assigned to a few weeks of duty on Erin Island in Ireland, and she's coming in to take the legal reigns of the community while the local police chief is on vacation.  The deputy she'll be working with, Garda Ciaran O'Shea (Richard Coyle), is a hard drinking local a little sore about not being given the responsibility of police chief duties while the boss is away, but he's so hungover - if not drunk - most of the time that it doesn't really matter.  So, O'Shea sets out to show Lisa the ropes, but things aren't quite what they normally are on the island - a large pod of dead pilot whales washes up on the beach, covered in deep gashes and scars; people's heads are found missing their bodies; one of the town drunks keeps talking about a sea monster he's got taking a bath in his bathtub.  As the two policeman start to investigate, they realize they've got problems that are from out of this world!

I love creature features.  There are some bad ones out there, i.e., Squirm, but, when you think of movies like Critters, Tremors, Slither, Gremlins - these are gems, great movies that all follow the same plot but are easy to watch, fun and funny, and almost always entertaining. Grabbers slides nicely into this category.  A close blend between Tremors and Slither, the film's story is the basic one - aliens land (or splash, in this case) into a small town and wreak havoc among the locals.  From there, you've got various bits of interaction between the islanders and the aliens themselves until there's finally a big stand off, and the humans show the aliens that you don't mess with Earthlings.  This is what the best of the creature features do, and this is what Grabbers does.  The flick goes a step further, too; it throws in a bit of a high-concept - you gotta drink to stay alive.  This an intriguing, promising way to change up the routine.  Unfortunately, the drinking stays too limited and contained during the first act to allow the idea to serve as the springboard it could have.  The characters that DO drink in the opening bits of the movie have good stuff (Lalor Roddy or 'Paddy' has some really funny lines), but the real drinking and consequential shenanigans don't start until the last half of the film, which feels like missed opportunities. There are some other problems with the film, too.  The opening act has a LOT of scenes, so you're constantly moving from one thing to another, sometimes to only spend a minute or two with a character before moving on to something else. Also, we see the main alien of the film way too early.  Something that works so well with Slither is that every time you see the main alien, it is changing.  There is something knew about it, something fresh.  With Grabbers, the main alien is seen early on, and it remains the same for the remainder of the show.  This ultimately takes away from the impact of the creature, leaving the last half of the film not as good as it could have been.  These are all just downfalls, though; things that should have been done differently.  There are lot of things that are done right.  Casting is one of them.  Coyle, as O'shea, is good. He's always had strong comedic timing (his character in the British TV show 'Coupling' is hilarious), and he continues to work those chops here.  Bradley is good, if a little simple and lackluster sometimes, but the real shiner is Lalor Roddy, whose dialogue and attitude are nearly always worth a chuckle.  The CGI in Grabbers kicks ass, too.  The practical creature effects are creative and good, but the CGI is flawless, save one little scene near the end that the creators smartly, quickly cut away from. The main alien design will trigger connections to a major Hollywood sci-fi flick just released, and I can't help but think that Jon Wright and his team are cursing the H-wood pic for maybe stealing some of their design. Another good part of the flick is the scenery.  Shot almost exclusively in Ireland, the film is full of expansive, beautiful shots that allow for the setting to become a character itself. You can tell Wright knew what he was working with because he uses a lot of wide, panoramic shots of the coast, hillside, and flatlands within in the country.  Some really beautiful capturing.  And finally, the film is just fun.  It's not technically great; it often feels rushed and abrupt (esp. the love story); and the dialogue - European slang and Irish-isms like shite; feckin'; shandy's; 'I'm pissed'; 'the fittest' - is rushed and sometimes difficult to understand.  (I'm an American; what can I say?)  Still, the movie moves along nicely and is fun to watch, with some good laughs. Coyle sells it, and it seems like everyone else involved is genuinely having a good time as well.

So, if you wanna watch a movie that inspires some complaints but is still a good, solid creature feature, have a grab at Grabbers.  It's not great, but I think you'll have a good time.  An' if ye don't belee' me, well jus' go havuh look fer yeself, ya stubbern bahstird!  It's on Netflix!

I'll take a shandy of what he had!

"It's always the quiet places where the mad shit happens."

Alien Abduction (2014)

Alien Abduction

☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

(Liked It) 

Netflix Synopsis:  A real-life phenomenon inspired this horror tale about a family camping trip that becomes a nightmare when a wrong turn leads to an alien encounter.

The Peeps:  Matty Beckerman (Director); Robert Lewis (Writer); Katherine Sigismund, Corey Eid, Riley Polanski, Jillian Clare

Quick Run Down:  Occasionally Tense, Nice Visuals, Kinda Dragging and Repetitious

Worth the Watch: Yeah

Alien Abduction follows a family of five as they are making their way through the North Carolina hills.  Hills that are notorious for blue mountain light phenomenons that the locals chuck up to UFO's.  This is unbeknownst to the family, however, and they find a spot to lay down camp and hang out for the night.  Some of the said lights are seen that evening, and this visual - caught on handheld camera by the autistic, youngest son - carries the family through conversations the following morning when they breakdown their tents and head deeper into the mountains.  On there way though, they get lost - or something GETS them lost - and they eventually wind up in a tunnel where a slew of SUV and sedans have been abandoned and their respective owners nowhere to be found.  That's when strange shiznit starts happening, and those lights finally reveal their true selves!

Abduction starts us off with a note, a trembling forewarning, a knee-knocking precaution... a reason to shake your head and think, 'Yeah, right.' Before the movie even starts, a single sentence types across the screen in small, concise letters: "The following footage was leaked from the U.S. Military."  Or something like that.  I don't remember exactly what it reads, but I do remember exactly what I thought when I read it:  Really?  Are filmmaker's still using that? Aren't audiences - wait: before I jump the gun, I'll just say that, though I probably shouldn't have, I liked  Alien Abduction.  It has a couple of nice little family moments in the first act, which moves pretty quickly, and the end of the first act, opening of the second, is tense and well put together.  The rest of the movie tends to do the same thing over and over, just in different locations, but it still maintains an element of suspense and fear, namely in a few particular scenes.  There are about three jump scares -  the best of which is predictable and you know it's gonna happen but it still works when it does - and, all throughout the movie, there are some really pretty visuals using unique lighting, quick cuts, and off-center arrangement.  The acting's surprisingly good too.  Corey, the eldest son, holds up well under duress and a minor character arc, and a random side character isn't great but he has some good dialogue.  The mother's kinda worthless, but she serves her point in the end.  Despite all of this though, as mentioned before, the movie tends to repeatedly milk the same teet and wander aimlessly from one location to another to try and squeeze out yet another drop.  The scares and tensions induced often work but for just a short period of time.  You ultimately find yourself waiting on the end by about 45 minutes in (which is okay because the actual movie barely runs 80 minutes).  So, long story short - the second half of the film drags.  But, getting back to my opening point, are filmmaker's still trying to sell the whole 'this really happened' idea?  I like found footage stuff, but when the filmmaker's of found footage flicks put things like 'based on real events', 'discovered by authorities deep in the woods of (insert wooded, countryside county here)', etc., is the audience still really supposed to believe that or are the creators just saying that to create a different kind of horror experience (even if we know that it's BS)?  If that opening sentence - and some that follow it - wasn't there in the beginning of Abduction, would I have perceived the film differently?  I think I would, but I'm not sure if it would be for better or worse.  Just something to think about as your viewing the flick.

So, if you want to watch a movie that has a strong first half, some tense moments, and good visuals but pretty much just does the same thing in different settings, check out Alien Abductions.  It's flawed and far from great, but I think you'll like it.  If you don't believe me, check it out - it's on Netflix!

I wanna make a Beiber/prison joke for some reason...

  

'It's Good To Be Back!'

Llarvae and germs:

"It's good to be back!"

I've been on hiatus for reasons undefined, reasons undefined, but I'm back on the map with more movies and marathons in store.  Stay tuned - there are festival features; teeth-chomping marathons; and general gore gallore.  Plus, I'm broadening my horizons to include some general industry news for the serious hounds - gore and industry alike - out there.  So, brace yourself brothers and sisters:  I'm gonna find a place in film for you all!!

Heyyyyyyyy there!

___
*Disclaimer: Netflix is TM and copyrighted; all rights reserved.  Any previous, present, or future material used or stemming from Netflix is theirs, exclusively.  This site is not, in any way, affiliated with Netflix.  It's only a horror hound's effort to help consumers find the best (and worse) horror movies available on the website. Happy watching!

Storage 24 (2013)

Storage 24

 ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

(Really Liked It) 

Netflix Synopsis:  In this creepy thriller, an emergency power shutdown in London leaves four friends trapped by random circumstances in a cavernous storage facility. Before long, the group realizes that something lethal is inside the darkened warehouse with them. 

The Peeps: Johannes Roberts (director); Noel Clarke, Marc Small, Davie Fairbanks (writers); Noel Clarke, Colin O'Donoghue, Laura Haddock, Antonia Campbell-Hughes

Quick Run Down: Tense, Creepy, Atmospheric, Fun

Worth The Watch?: Yes!

A plane crash leaves Hyde Park in ruins and inadvertently locks several young Brits in a storage unit because the power failure caused by the crash has left the security of the facility on the fritz. If this isn't bad enough, most of the people in the place know each other and there is a current, sour separation going on between two of them. But then you have the cherry on top - there's one more person... well, thing... in the storage unit too.   It's not there to check up on it's stored stuff, either.  It's there for blood!

The British seem to really get it right in the horror genre every now and then.  For example, Neil Marshall's The Descent, Shaun of the Dead (comedy/horror; huge success), and Attack the Block (not big in the States but a great sleeper horror that is well worth the watch for any nationality), and while Storage 24 is not a great movie, it IS a movie that takes a basic premise, a single location, and a some imagination and talent to make a creature feature.  And that is just what Storage 24 is - a well paced, atmospheric, well-executed, cool creature feature.

Storage 24 starts off with a big bang.  Literally.  We hear a huge explosion outside of the storage unit the film starts off in and this, we come to realize, is the sound of the plane crashing into Hyde Park.  From here, things don't escalate very quickly.  In fact, they don't really start moving until about half an hour into the film, but the cast and the crew handle the film adeptly enough that you don't lose interest and you want to keep watching.  Once we get into the storage unit and there is real interaction, things pick up and that's when Roberts, the director, really starts showing his moves.  He milks the tension with great use of angles and close ups, relying mostly on sound and quivering eyeballs to tell and sell his tension.  Couple this with an X-Files inspired score that's good and moody and an alien creature that is partial CG/partial prostethcis but very well stitched into the film in both regards, and the movie moves quickly and keeps you interested and entertained.  There are some inevitable questions of debatable logic and decision making, but Storage overall maintains its creep factor at a high while working with minor character arcs and occasional scares.  There are even a few scenes of carnage that are deliciously drawn out just to make up for the lack thereof in the first 3/4's of the film.  Also, the location used is uniquely shot to give it a very vast, labrynth-like feel and, though you can sometimes tell the same shot is being used again and again, Roberts' pacing keeps those details hidden in the excitement going on in the film or easily forgivable because the film is doing its job and entertaining.  My biggest complaint would be the persistent presence of yellow, which often gives the cast and the background a sickly, jaundice color.  At first I thought it was a unique artistic choice, but then I realized it was just a repurcussion of the color scheme of the location design.  It doesn't hurt the film, but it's kind of distracting in some of the earlier scenes.  Just a heads up.

So, if you want to watch a creepy, tense, atmospheric, and fun British creature feature, I would definitely check out Storage 24.  It is surprisingly good, would make for a good couple on the couch with popcorn flick, and might even be something fun to sit down and watch with older kids/teens.  If you don't believe me, check it out.  It's on Netflix!

___
*Disclaimer: Netflix is TM and copyrighted; all rights reserved.  Any material used or stemming from the site is theirs, exclusively.  This site is not, in any way, affiliated with Netflix.  It's only a horror hound's effort to help consumers find the best (and worse) horror movies available on the website. Happy watching!

  

Rise Of The Zombies (2012)

Rise Of The Zombies

 

☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

(Didn't Like It)

Netflix Synopsis: When the undead overrun San Francisco, a desperate group survives by locking themselves inside Alcatraz Prison and must gamble everything on finding a way to stop the zombie scourge before it's too late.

The Peeps: Nick Lyon (director); Keith Allan, Delondra Williams (writers); Marial Hemingway, LeVar "Reading Rainbow!" Burton, Ethan Suplee, Danny Trejo

Quick Run Down:  Lots of CGI, Lots of Gun Shots To The Face, Lots of Running and Screaming, Not Enough Reasons To Say It's A Good Movie

Worth The Watch?:  No, Unless You're Just In That Kind Of Mood...

Rise of the Zombies follows a mixed group of survivors that are hiding out on Alcatraz after a zombie outbreak.  The bay current (...yeah...) somehow manages to bring in a tide of zombies and the group decides to head to the San Fran mainland in order to seek out the doctor that is on the verge of a cure.




There's nothing else you can do with zombie movies, and what you may come up with will be better executed on "The Walking Dead" before that phenomenon is finally given it's fatal bullet to the brain.  Rise is an example of this because the film offers nothing new save some good looking film (not even good shots or frames, just a good picture quality) and a slew of actors that inspire you to scratch your head and ask, "Are they THAT desperate?"  Marial Hemingway, Danny Trejo, Ethan Suplee, French Stewart - all actors that, at one point or other, were doing decent secondary/tertiary characters in big budget films.  Now, they are starring in zombie spin offs.  Oh, and there's LeVar Burton too!  You may remember an educational show called 'Reading Rainbow' that was on during the early 90's and LeVar was the host.  I haven't seen him in anything since, but he's in Rise and he's not bad.  He plays a scientist left on Alcatraz, so we get less and less of him as the film moves on, but it's still cool to see the guy from your childhood telling us about what he sees in his microscope.  Age has treated him well, too, even if he is doing B-rated zombie flicks.  Speaking of B-rated, this film isn't so much that as it is just uninspiring.  There is literally no character development and what we do get about any of the characters doesn't come until almost half an hour in.  From there, more is gradually divulged, all in the effort to keep the action "non-stop" and build characters as the film moves on.  This only semi-works for one girl, though, and once she's out of the picture, we're back to screaming, running, and shooting zombies in the face with head crown explosions CG'ed in afterwards.  There's one intense scene that is WAY over the top, but I give kudos for a pretty ballsy, albeit exploitive, sequence.  It'll make you squirm, to say the least.


There's not much to say about Rise of the Zombies.  The dialogue is eh, the acting is shoddy, the effects are poor (the opening sequence is just abysmal), and the plot is splotchy.  Personally, I'd say skip watching it, unless you're just in that kind of mood.  You know, when you're willing to torture yourself just to get a few cheap laughs.  One of those kinds of moods.  A beer and rowdy friends kind of deal.  But, hey - don't let me hinder you.  You can watch it whenever you want; it's on Netflix!!

What happens to this kid brings a whole new meaning to
late term abortion...

 

Pet Sematary II (1992)

Pet Sematary II

☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

(Really Liked It)

Netflix Synopsis: Having moved to a different town to start a new life, 13-year-old Jeff and his new friend Drew discover a strange Indian burial ground. After burying Drew's dog in the cemetery, they realize they've unleashed a deadly evil that can't be stopped.

The Peeps: Mary Lambert (director); Richard Outton (writer); Edward Furlong, Anthony Edwards, Clancy Brown

Quick Run Down: Atmospheric, Fast Paced, Surprisingly Grisly, Good

Worth The Watch?:  Yeah!

Pet Sematary II brings us to Ludlow, Maine, again, after Jeff (the first ever emo-kid Edward Furlong) and his father, Chase (Anthony Edwards with hair!) move there following the tragic death of Jeff's mother.  Once they arrive, Jeff makes friend with Drew, whose dog dies and they decide to bury it in the Indian burial ground, Pet Sematary, where legend has it, the dead come back to life.  They do in fact do that, but it seems that the dead bring Death with them when they come 'round the second time!

Pet Sematary II works for several different reasons.  First, there is a lot going on in the script, but it manages to not be too busy.  There's an angry stepfather angle, a boy that's lost his mother angle, a bully angle, and a scary angle.  All of these are nicely woven into the script by Outten to expand and intensify what is a thin, basic plot, a point the original Pet suffered from.  In this second one, when one angle plays through, there's another one to fall back on, helping the film move quickly and usher us into a grisly last 30/40 minutes.  Second, Lambert has stepped up her game this time behind the camera.  You've got some energetic camera movement, some killer production design, and good lighting, all working together to create a nice ambience and background.  The main actors in this sequel are lacking, but Sherriff Gus (Clancy Brown) is intimidating and unpredictable and by the film's end, he's tracking carnage all through the movie.  He's not the lead, but he practically carries the film in certain parts, and you can tell that Lambert began to rely on him more and more.  He's a lot of fun to watch and gives the movie a lot of the sinister quality it ultimately exudes.  The final thing that makes Pet II work is its grisly nature.  In the first film, there were some special effects, but they don't even come close to the 2nd.  This one has some cringe worthy moments that are both suggested and shown, and they bump up the degree of the film's effect.  King apparently had nothing to do with this production (he's not listed as any kind of affiliate, co-writer, producer, etc.) which is probably because, once he saw the nature of the violence in the film, he decided not to be involved.  He's noted as saying (in his book Bag Of Bones, I think) that the horror genre was moving further away from heroes and tone and praising more of the Monster and the pain the Monster could inflict.  I could easily see him having this opinion of Pet II, as it is surprisingly violent and gives the Monster the opportunity to almost get away with everything.  Whatever the reason, with King not being a part of the production, it feels like Lambert just said, "Screw it.  Let's do some really fucked up stuff in this film."  And she did, from rabbit gutting to face gnawing with a running dirt bike tire to power drills through the shoulder and melting faces.  Grisly, indeed, but it really sets the film a step above the rest.  I don't just say that because of the violence, either.  I love it when a horror movie embraces an R rating and runs it, really gives the audience what they are looking for.  After all, we're all adults, and we don't go to R rated horror movies to see mushy relationship and subtle fear.  We want some churning stuff that doesn't exploit but isn't scared to work with dark themes and capture a certain profile of evil.  Pet Sematary II doesn't quite got THAT far, but it tries and that's all I'm  - we're - asking for.  And, personally, I think it does it pretty successfully.

So, if you wanna see an early 90's horror film that turns out to be much more of a gem than you would expect, check out Pet Sematary II.  It's grisly, creepy, atmospheric, fun, and I don't think you'll be disappointed.  It's on Netflix!!

 

Pet Semetary (1989)



Pet Sematary

☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

(Didn't Like It)

Netflix Synopsis: Louis Creed moves his family to the country and discovers a cursed burial ground on his property that brings the dead back to life -- yet with an added streak of evil. An accident soon forces the heartbroken father to contemplate the unthinkable.

The Peeps: Martha Lambry (director); Stephen King (writer); Dale Midkiff, Fred Gwynne, Denise Crosby, Miko Hughes

Quick Run Down: Wanting, Trying, Little Bit of  B.S.

Worth The Watch?: No... Unfortunately, I'd Say 'Next'

The Crandell family of four has just moved into a new house on the outskirts of a small town.  The father, Louis (Dale MidKiff), is a doctor in the city but, after a series of tragic events, he finds his expertise hasn't educated him in the kind of death he's up against.

I want to say I'm a Stephen King fan, but I can't.  I've only read a few of his books, and that was mostly in H.S.  I still think he's an incredible writer, though (despite my lack of readership) for three reasons: he's prolific as all hell; have you seen how many of his shorts and novels have become movies?, and have you read his "On Writing" - Awesome!  All that being said, a good novelist doesn't necessarily design a good screenwriter because the script for this movie is eh.  It moves, but combining movement with a lazy partner (director Lambry) creates an overall sloppy combo that just doesn't make an entertaining dance.  Pet tries and works in certain instances, but, ultimately, it's a series of events that are barely atmostpheric because they only reach out from the center of a morbid tragedy.  That was King's point, well-deserved in his novel (I actually read this one!), but his macabre sense doesn't carry over in the film adaption.  The premise is there, ripe for horror, but the ultimate product is glossy, superficial, and unaffecting.  The "sematary" and the child are the only real selling points and they become used as the film moves on, namely after the actual 'thing' in the story happens.  That doesn't stop some creepiness from ensuing - it's freaking King, guys! - but it still doesn't make for a good horror movie.  When the guillotine finally falls, this is a horror film left mostly frightless.

Fred Gwynne (Munsters) plays the friendly neighbor in this, and he's awesome.  He makes you want to make a fire, pop the top on a bottleneck of beer, and listen to his stories about growing up in the small town.  Also, the kid that plays Gage is the cutest little boy I've ever seen.  He later goes on to play in Mercury Rising, which he's cute in too, but in Pet he's just adorable. 

So, if you want to watch a Stephen King written flick that doesn't do much, have at Pet Sematary.  It's not good, by any means, but there are some mediocre parts that do for minor scares.  Otherwise, I'd say next.  Your call.  It's on Netflix!

Holy crap - look at that face!