Okay, so I've been sick for the better part of the week, so I haven't been able to think coherently let alone watch anything or come up with some original content for this blog.
So to give my poor head a break I give you a documentary about people living under Las Vegas. Enjoy that and I'll see you next week!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHbdLEAeJ8E
I can't remember where I learned of this movie, but I watched:
Kill List (2011).
Married couple Jay (Neil Maskell) and Shel (MyAnna Buring) are having problems. They are low on money and are fighting constantly. Jay has been out of work for a while, but when his old army buddy Gal (Michael Smiley) comes to dinner with his girlfriend Fiona (Emma Fryer), things might change. The kicker is that Jay and Gal are hitmen. They kill people for money and Gal has a client lined up who pays well. Then things start getting weirder and weirder.
A movie about a couple of
professional killers is always going to be somewhat dark, but Kill
List is something else. At first it seems almost too realistic, with
Jay's and Shel's arguments, but as soon as he and Gal go about their
business the tone changes and things get really weird. It goes from unpleasantly realistic to horror and you don't know when it did that.
Kill List is a “along for the ride” kind of movie. The destination isn't that important, and in fact I guessed the ending. Don't expect explanations or for anything to really make sense, as I said, it is all about the journey.
The actors are good, I have seen many of them in other roles, and the cinematography is nice. The director, Ben Wheatley, does a really excellent job capturing the bleakness of the urban sprawl. Everything seems cheap and unpleasant. Houses that should be nice seem tawdry and fake. It is all painted with a pale, grim and disturbing brush. You get the feeling that nothing and nowhere is safe. It is almost as if everything is fake, that every location is staged and what you see is just a backdrop. And in a sense that is true, it is a movie not a documentary, but the feeling works within the movie itself. Had they screwed that up, whether it was intentional or not, the movie would have been awful. They do pull it off though.
The sound is a mixed bag. Rather than music, it's sound. Droning sound that drills into your head and makes you uncomfortable. Perfect for a movie like this, but the actors have a tendency to mumble a bit and there were times where I couldn't understand what was being said. Not that you watch a movie like Kill List for the dialogue, good as it is.
A word about gore. Most of Kill List isn't that bloody, and you do expect a bit of splatter in a movie called Kill List after all, and there is quite a bit of blood from time to time. But there is one scene in particular that is very graphic, so be warned.
So, do I recommend this movie? To horror fans I do! Kill List is never going to be considered great, but is is good. You think you have it figured out and then it takes a turn, and then another turn until you're spiraling towards the end. As mentioned, I did guess the ending, but that didn't matter as the road there was good enough. Non horror fans should find something else to watch. I wish I could say more about Kill List, but that would spoil everything, and I refuse to do that.
That's that and all that. Join me again next time, and until then, have a great week!
I was in the mood for a classic, so I watched:
The Taking of Pelham OneTwo Three (1974).
Four heavily armed men, Mr. Blue (Robert Shaw), Mr. Green (Martin Balsam), Mr. Grey (Hector Elizondo and Mr. Brown (Earl Hindman) hijack a New York subway train and demand one million dollars in one hour, otherwise they execute one hostage per minute. Against them are Transit Authority Police Lieutenant Garber (Walter Matthau) and basically every cop in New York City.
This movie was adapted from the bestselling novel of the same name by Morton Freegood writing under the name John Godey. The name Pelham One Two Three means that the train left the Pelham station at 1.23 pm.
Apparently this movie is a huge classic, with a Rotten Tomatoes score of 98% and a 7.6 on IMDB. It is counted as one of “those” movies that are always rated extremely highly, and I don't get it.
Don't get me wrong. The Taking of Pelham One Two Three is a fine movie. The actors are excellent, the story is good and the cinematography works. Apparently filming was a nightmare due to the dust, the noise and the ever present threat of being electrocuted by the third rail. Yes, the power to the third rail was turned off, but no one wanted to trust that it was really turned off... The crew looked like coal miners at the end of each day. Serious film making in other words.
The problem is, at least for me, that the movie doesn't give you a chance to care about the victims. Sure, they are innocent, but the movie spends more time getting to know the hijackers, than anyone else. We also spend a lot of time with the rail managers and the Transit Authority police. If the movie was right then being a loud, angry and cantankerous man was essential for running a subway. There is a lot of angry yelling in The Taking of Pelham One Two Three, but I didn't care about the hostages one bit.
I guess that the movie was groundbreaking in '74, and there have been so many movies since that a lot of the magic has dissipated. I had a good time, sure, but I was also glad when the movie was over. I read famous critic Roger Ebert's review and the way he talked about The Taking of Pelham One Two Three makes me think my view is correct. It was a golden movie then, but it isn't now. Most of the surprises were pretty obvious, and the story was predictable enough once the film got going.
So, do I recommend this movie? Yes, I guess so. As I said, there isn't really anything majorly wrong with The Taking of Pelham One Two Three, but like Bullitt (1968) the magic was there for those who saw it back in the day. It is absolutely worth watching, and I'm glad I did, just temper your expectations accordingly.
That's that and all that. Join me again next time, and until then, have a great week!
When I play certain games like World of Warcraft, I like to have something on in the background to listen to if not directly watch. One such source is The Joe Rogan Experience.
I'm not a fan of Rogan as such, but he does love talking to interesting people and today I have two such episodes for you.
The first one is with rocker turned director Rob Zombie, in which they talk about horror movies, New York back in the day and much much more.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDLeJ5Rasuo
The second one is with British comedian Jimmy Carr. I have seen a lot of Jimmy's stand-up and he hosts a lot of comedy panel shows that I'm a fan of. This is the first time I've seen him just sit down and talk. They discuss comedy, history and a great deal more. Unfortunately I couldn't find the whole thing on Youtube so Dailymotion will have to do.
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8oo4hj
That's that and all that. Join me again next time and until then, have a great week!
Happy New Year!
We are starting the new year with a newer horror movie:
The Autopsy of Jane Doe (2016).
This movie title has been lurking at the corners of my awareness for quite a while, but when I saw a video about less popular horror movies that are well worth watching, and that video compared The Autopsy of Jane Doe with Oculus (2013) I had to watch it.
Oculus and The Autopsy of Jane Doe do not follow the same story but they both play with perception. This is not an easy thing to do in a movie, as it can easily devolve into massive plot holes and deus-ex-machina moments. I can happily say that both movies pass with flying colors.
This is the plot: Police respond to a multiple homicide in a private residence and in the basement they find the half buried body of a naked young woman. The sheriff rushes her to a morgue/crematorium run by the father and son team of Tommy (Brian Cox) and Austin (Emile Hirsch), because "I can explain the other death's, I can't explain her". As soon as they start work on the young woman, the titular Jane Doe, weird stuff start happening and soon devolve into a nightmare for all involved. The more they literally dig into her, the weirder things get.
The Autopsy of Jane Doe is a small movie. Almost the entire film takes place in the underground morgue, but director André Øvredal (Trollhunter) uses the limited space very effectively. The effects are stellar and very gory. In fact, if you are even slightly sensitive, do not eat while watching this movie!
The actors are excellent and despite having mostly only two characters to work with, it never becomes an issue. The star in many ways though, is Olwen Catherine Kelly who plays the titular Jane Doe. She spends the entire movie lying absolutely motionless on the cold table, a role that might seem easy but is horrible to actually do. Only when it became unavoidable did they use prosthetics, so for every other scene, she lies there completely still.
It is also worth pointing out that despite all the gruesome horror, the most unsettling thing in the movie is the corpses sightless eyes staring at you.
The movie does offer up an explanation for why and how all the horror happens, but considering the central theme of twisted reality, I'm not sold that this explanation is true. It could be, but nothing says that it is.
So, do I recommend this movie? Yes, to all horror fans, absolutely! Non horror fans will not have a good time, but for us that like this stuff, The Autopsy of Jane Doe is an incredible film. A good example of how simple things can be when they are done right!
That's that and all that. Join me again next time and until then, have a great start of 2024.
