The Blob

Let's take a step back, all the way to 1988. That's when they remade a classic horror movie from 1958, namely The Blob. Fun fact: Steve McQueen headlined the original Blob.

Anyway, I didn't see either version until a few years later when they used to run all the horror classics (and a few less classic movies) during the summer on TV.

So, the 1988 Blob. Essentially it's a sentient, moving pile of pink slime that eats people. It's gory and gooey, all in all pretty disgusting, precisely what you want from a cheesy horror movie. It's also pretty inconsistent with it's own rules, when it bothers to give any rules.

There are a couple of points though, that really shine through. First of all the main heroine, Meg, played very well by Shawnee Smith who went on to star in the Saw franchise. Although Meg faints the first time she sees the Blob eat someone, she goes on to really save the day. She is certainly no shrinking violet who stands around and screams until the hero comes and rescues her. To the contrary, she rescues the hero, Brian, just as much as he rescues her. A very nice balance, seldom seen.

The second point I'd like to make is the script itself. It's really well written in how it presents the small town, it's skiing resort, and the artificial blizzard cannons they need to keep the resort nice and snowy. It does all this in the first five - ten minutes of the film without you really noticing it. It absolutely does not hit you over the head with the information like a lesser film would. It goes by during the “everything is normal” phase. Blink and you'll miss it.

Finally, The Blob ties up all the loose threads. As far as I can tell, it leaves nothing hanging. Even minor side character arcs are wrapped up nicely. A very rare feature indeed.

Is it silly? Yes. Is it corny and cliched? Yes. But it's also pretty good. So ultimately if you're in the mood for a monster movie, give The Blob a chance. I can't speak to the original '58 version, I simply don't remember it well enough anymore, its been some twenty years since I saw it.

So until next time, when we might well revisit another horror classic from years gone by, have a great week!

Twin Peaks 2017

Well, the time has finally come. After the prophesied twenty-five years, Twin Peaks is back!

I didn't watch the original Twin Peaks back in 1990 when it ran on TV, but several of my class mates did, and they raved about it. It wasn't until I met my wife, almost ten years later, who had the whole thing on VHS that I saw the whole thing, and I loved it.

Twin Peaks is weird, odd, funny and chilling, all at the same time. It's also surreal, strange, brilliant and heavily symbolic. A murder mystery at heart that goes off the deep end with a gleeful howl. All of this is true, but it also doesn't really do it justice. Being the brain child of David Lynch, that kind of goes without saying.

Towards the end of the original run, Laura Palmer tells Agent Dale Cooper, See you in 25 years and that's how long it's been, and now it's back.

It premiered yesterday, and the few reviews I have been able to find are mostly positive. Like with all of Lynch's works, it will probably take time to digest, but I'm hopeful. I should probably point out that I haven't seen the new stuff myself yet.

It seems that Lynch has grabbed every original actor he could to continue the story, which I like, but it remains to be seen whether it's to give you a sense of nostalgia or because the story genuinely needs it. It is a continuation, but from what people can tell, also more. There are locations in New York and Las Vegas, which indicates a wider mystery than we've seen so far. All very interesting indeed.

Although there are a couple of episodes out, it's much too early to really form an opinion, but I'm cautiously optimistic. I really liked the original show, and I hope the new one isn't as boringly bland as the X-files restart was. Time will tell.

Point of order: if you haven't seen the original 29 episodes and the movie Fire walk with me, then you're going to have to watch them first. No synopsis or explanation is going to really help. It's as much an experience as a story.

Well, I'm off. Until we see each other again, have a great week!

Oculus Rift Touch

Last Friday, I visited a friend. My friend who owns an Oculus Rift to be precise.

I've talked before about my very first VR experience, and how amazing it was, but what I didn't know was that my friend has now gotten his hands on the Oculus Rift Touch, the virtual room experience.

For those who are not in the know, this means that you stand in the middle of the room, the VR headset on, and motion controllers in each hand. You become completely immersed in the world of your choosing, able to look around, including behind you and it's all there.

The first game I got to try out was Robo Recall, a sci-fi game where hordes of robots attack you and you get to shoot them. Or grab them and toss them around at will. This was incredibly cool as you actually have to physically aim your guns in order to hit anything. A far cry from using a mouse or normal controller. The robots run at you from all sides, they jump down from ledges allowing you to shoot them out of the air if you can.

Sure, at first the whole thing felt a bit alien, but soon enough I got the hang of it. You don't walk in the game, since that would either give you motion sickness (or you would fall over) or you'd crash into something. Instead you teleport around at will, destroying robots like the action hero we've all dreamed about being at some point in our lives.

Without a doubt one of the coolest action sci-fi experiences I have ever played.

The other game I tried is Wilson's Heart. A horror/thriller game set in the 1940's. It's interestingly done in black and white, with a Noir art style that invokes the films of the era.

Here, you are an inmate or patient in a very messed up sanitarium where evil occult stuff has gone down. Again, as with Robo Recall you can't walk around, but there are spots you can warp to in order to gather clues and items. This was actually even cooler. To be able to stand in a huge reception area and look around at the vaulted ceiling and all the little details made it feel as if I was actually there. You could also pick up things, twist them around, throw them away, or toss them up and catch them with your other hand. Likewise, you actually had to grab door handles and turn them to open doors.

This may sound simple, but these tiny details truly sell the experience. And it makes it a thousand times worse when a nurse suddenly appear behind you...

Also, at one point I came to a room where the outer wall had a huge gaping hole in it. I stood at the edge of the aperture and looked down. I'm not sure I could have stepped off even if the game had let me, it felt that real.

This meas that a game like Assassin's Creed would be on every level absolutely terrifying to play in VR, but museum tours would totally work. Someone needs to do a virtual tour of the great castles of the world, starting with Neuschwanstein Castle.

I could go on, gushing about how amazing this was, bu I think you get the point. If you get a chance to try out VR or room VR, try it. Maybe something easy first, it's new way of doing things after all.

Until next time, have a great week!

Jack the Ripper

One day, back when I was a kid, I found on my parent's bookshelf, a book on unsolved mysteries. It was one of those huge coffee table books that can cause real damage if you drop it on your foot.

I took it back to my room and started reading. It had were all the classics; The Mary Celeste, Roanoke, Kaspar Hauser, etc. But the most important one was Jack the Ripper. It was the first time I heard of the grisly murders back in Whitechapel in 1888, but it started a life long fascination.

I have since seen and read a great deal on the subject matter, one that to this day has no conclusive solution. There are many speculations, and even more wild theories, but if the facts are known and simply hidden away, no one has spoken in 129 years.

Last week when I wrote about Dracula: Dead and Loving it I, as I usually do, checked the cast list on IMDB. The woman playing Lucy Westenra, Lysette Anthony, was also in a TV series named Jack the Ripper from 1988. This peaked my interest and when I saw that Micheal Caine starred as Inspector Frederick Abberline, I was sold.

So, with the rather long intro out of the way, I'm going to talk a bit about Jack the Ripper (1988).

This series is in fact only two episodes long, but each episode is over 90 minutes, making the whole thing satisfyingly long.

Cast wise we're in good hands. Apart from Caine, we have Armand Assante, Ray McAnally, Jane Seymor, Hugh Fraser and many more. As is usual with a British production, everyone is quality and it shows.

The production is absolutely first class. At no point does it feel like anything except Victorian England, which is nice. The set, props and costumes are spot on, with one complaint. I feel that Sergeant Godley's hat is too modern. To be fair, I'm not a hat expert, but it still seems to be 20^th century to me. That is the one complaint I have of the entire production, which made me very happy.

As an example, Hugh Fraser, better known for his role as Captain Hastings in Poirot, plays Sir Charles Warren, the police commissioner. He apparently wore some of the real clothes originally worn by Sir Charles. That's authenticity for you.

The story is familiar to any Ripperologist, or indeed anyone who has seen FromHell (2001) with Johnny Depp. If you haven't, I won't spoil it. I'll just say that the 1988 production outstrips From Hell on every point except the score. On the other hand, that's not exactly hard, since From Hell is pretty mediocre. Wonderful soundtrack though.

An interesting point is that Caine's Abberline is an alcoholic, and Depp's is an opium user. There are no records suggesting that the real Abberline was a substance abuser. I have no idea where it comes from. Also, they mispronounce Abberline's name throughout the show. For some reason, they say AbberLEEN, not AbberLINE. Oh well.

Bottom line is that Jack the Ripper is a wonderfully well made show. If you like Victorian England or Jack the Ripper, go watch this if you can find it. First class all the way.

That's it for this time. Until we meet again, have a murder-free week!

Dracula: Dead and Loving It

Last night I was in the mood for something lighthearted, so I had a bit of a dig around and came up with a Mel Brooks film I had completely missed.

Dracula:Dead and Loving It (1995)

This movie isn't as well known as Brooks previous outing, Robin Hood: Men inTights (1993) nor is it quite as funny.

Don't get me wrong, Dracula is a funny movie, full of the Brooks-style humor that makes his films so enjoyable. But there is something that's missing. Or maybe it's too constrained by the Dracula story, maybe the version I saw was cut in a weird manner, I don't know.

We get a sterling cast, with the titular vampire played by Leslie Nielsen, and Mel himself playing Professor van Helsing.

Nielsen is wonderful here. He runs the full range from goofy to menacing, and I had never before seen him as intimidating, but he pulled it of beautifully. Can't help feel a bit sorry for him though, no Dracula has ever had it so difficult before.

The film in general is surprisingly pretty. Sure it's “just a comedy”, but it is wonderfully made. From costumes to set design, it all works with an eye for detail. Also, the dialog is at times hilarious.

The story, is perhaps where it stumbles a bit. If you have seen any earlier Dracula movies, then you know exactly what happens next. Compared to Men in Tights, where you were constantly surprised, we just go from scene to scene, almost as if following a formula, which I don't think Brooks used to do.

Anyway, I think it's an overall good movie. I liked it, and if you're in the mood for a nice and slightly silly comedy, give it a go.

I'll leave you with the trailer, and until next time, have a vampire free week!

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGCKrgSeXcE