Iro's Film Diary

#270 - Swiss Army Man
Daniel Scheinert and Dan Kwan, 2016



A young man who has been marooned on a desert island plans to find his way home using a corpse with many unusual but useful attributes.

Swiss Army Man has quite the twisted premise as it focuses on a desert-island castaway (Paul Dano) who is about to commit suicide when he discovers a corpse (Daniel Radcliffe) on the beach. Upon realising that this is no ordinary corpse (one that expels enough gas to be turned into a makeshift jetski, and that's just for starters) Dano opts to live and make for home, using Radcliffe's unique abilities in order to survive. It also turns out that Radcliffe is somewhat sapient and the two strike up an unlikely rapport as Dano must explain many different things about life to a being that has quite literally forgotten how to live. Though it is definitely the weirdly scatological nature of the premise that will leave an impression (especially when Radcliffe's bizarre physiology is played for all sorts of comical purposes), it does little to distract from the film's potent emotional core. Dano is pretty good as the shipwrecked survivor who not only has to figure out how to stay alive but also has to question just why he is staying alive thanks to his conversations with a naively curious Radcliffe. Radcliffe has the more obviously challenging role thanks to the sheer physicality involved, but he does an impressive job of emoting despite his restricted movements and speech issues. Together, they provide a mesmerising double-act that have great comic timing and fine emotional chemistry.

As befitting a film as weird as this one, there is a decidedly distinctive aesthetic to the proceedings. There's the obviously captivating ways in which a discoloured Radcliffe is put to use in overcoming obstacles, which can be visually striking as much as they are grossly hilarious, but they are just one part of the proceedings. Swiss Army Man ends up enveloping you as the visuals not only include comical displays involving a talking corpse but also feature some stunning displays of fantasy as Dano attempts to bring Radcliffe back to life. This is also borne out by the soundtrack, which does get a little repetitive in providing sheer walls of a cappella melodies but still manage to feel like an integral part of the experience (and, if nothing else, this film has guaranteed that I'll never hear the main theme from Jurassic Park the same way again). What is truly impressive about Swiss Army Man is that it really does provide a sufficiently complex approach to the subjects that it addresses, especially when it indulges some existential concerns by focusing on what death means (which is kind of unsurprising considering that one of the two main characters is a corpse) but does so in a strangely life-affirming way that doesn't give way to hollow sentimentality. It's a weird film that definitely won't play to everyone, but for those who are willing to accept (instead of look past) the various jokes about bodily functions it proves a strangely humanist piece of work and deserves what recognition it gets.

__________________
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0

#271 - The Lords of Salem
Rob Zombie, 2012



When a radio station DJ in Salem receives a mysterious vinyl record and plays it on air, it triggers the resurrection of a coven of witches.

I thought I was done with Rob Zombie. I'd seen three of his films and found them extremely wanting, mainly because there was something viscerally unpleasant about all of them that rendered any potential upsides irrelevant. I do respect how Zombie is one of those filmmakers who is passionate about the films he likes and that his own output is at least somewhat reverent towards his cinematic influences, but I feel like that's undone a bit by his willingness to indulge a little too much in the ugly side of genre fare. This is the case when it comes to his early forays into 1970s-style hixploitation with House of 1000 Corpses and The Devil's Rejects, to say nothing of when that same scuzziness bled into his remake of John Carpenter's Halloween, where he was arguably too successful in trying to strike out on his own while adapting a much-beloved classic. Still, that tiny spark of passion behind his otherwise off-putting work was enough to make me think that maybe, just maybe, he would translate that energy into a film I liked. As a result, I was cautiously optimistic about checking out The Lords of Salem because, even though I didn't have that much reason to expect an improvement, I thought that I should still give Zombie another chance.

Fortunately, The Lords of Salem proves a more agreeable piece of work than the other Zombie movies I've seen (assuming you can really apply a word like "agreeable" to a movie like this). A lot of that seems to be due to him branching out into a completely new direction by trading in his previous grindhouse influences and taking influence from more highbrow examples of retro horror (with many shots in the film feeling like they belong in a film like The Exorcist instead of The Hills Have Eyes). He may still wear his influences on his sleeve but they're still executed with aplomb as he crafts an aesthetic that is striking not just when it comes to heavily-saturated tableaux and hellish flashbacks but also when it comes to mundane scenes. Throw in a cast of cult actors that deliver relatively nuanced performances plus some masterful soundtrack choices (including what may be the best use of the Velvet Underground on a movie soundtrack) and you have a film that does admittedly still play like a Rob Zombie movie but also reflects how much he has grown as an artist while still staying true to his own sensibilities. Though it's still a little bit on the slow side and still has the odd moment of Zombie going for crude unpleasantness, I am nevertheless surprised in a good way that he has managed to create something like this.

#272 - The Innkeepers
Ti West, 2011



On the last weekend before an old hotel closes down, the two remaining employees decide to investigate the hotel's ghost story.

I did like Ti West's The House of the Devil well enough as it took slow-burn horror to a new level in the midst of a well-realised '80s pastiche, so I was definitely interesting in seeing more of his work. The Innkeepers seemed like a sound proposition in that it expanded upon the haunted house approach by extending it to an entire hotel and also building upon the idea of protagonists essentially being complicit in their own fates. In that regard, I do have to wonder if it was successful. It has a little trouble building up that much personality even as it focuses in on two very different leads who are united by a shared passion for the paranormal, though the film does an okay job of building up unease through its simple but somewhat effective ghost-story narrative.

What the ****. A movie about Paul Dano exploiting Harry Potter's dead body for magic?

That's... so fricken' stupid I gotta see it.

Nah. I don't remember the soundtrack being any great shakes and I don't think it deserves mercy points for not being as bad as other movies.

__________________
Movie Reviews | Anime Reviews
Top 100 Action Movie Countdown (2015): List | Thread
"Well, at least your intentions behind the UTTERLY DEVASTATING FAULTS IN YOUR LOGIC are good." - Captain Steel

It definitely sounds absurd, but I wouldn't call it stupid. There's too much intelligence and emotion at work for that to make sense.

Yeah, well, it doesn't make any sense to give it a low rating simply because I didn't like the director's other movies.either. Also, there's the fact that it is so radically different from said movies that it would have to be assessed independently anyway - there's not that much of a connection between this and, say, The Devil's Rejects.

I wasn't suggesting you do, I was just commenting on how the review doesn't extend far beyond loose comparisons.

If you rate something that much higher or lower than me I'm inclined to wonder why, what qualities raise/lower it, but... I dunno I got nothing out of it.

Hmm, that is a good point. With my write-ups, I try to make conscious decisions to avoid comparisons to other films where possible because it's not very useful if the person reading it doesn't know the other films, but I felt that it was warranted here simply because of the sheer difference involved between the films. It does sound like I might not have done the best job explaining its virtues, but I did mention a few of them.

Admittedly I haven't seen any of Zombie's other movies, but that's what raises the question of how it stands on it's own.

It probably speaks to a fault in Zombie's filmmaking that he does wear his influences on his sleeve, so to speak - I can't help but get caught up on moments that remind me of other movies that I've seen simply because of how well he appropriates the cinematic language. It's compensated for by the fact that the underlying story and characters are actually decent and the resulting execution does them a fair amount of justice.

I feel like you're abstracting out it's qualities as a competently made movie beyond what I'd credit it for doing exceptionally.

For instance, the story didn't interest me at all, it's only complexity came in incoherence, it didn't tell any narrative that hasn't been told before in more compelling ways without a cheap veneer of jumpscares and self-indulgent visual grotesqueries. None of the characters stood out with any even remotely unique qualities or characteristics, they're instantly forgettable...

I think if you're gonna make a movie you should put in the effort to show people something they've never seen before or at the very least reproduce a familiar concept with a fresh take on it, and by that I mean more than "Rob Zombie made it".

Nothing, not one second of this movie made me feel like it was worth watching.

So you question my opinion because of how I compare it favourably to other movies and then you criticise it by effectively saying that anything it does has already been done better. That's technically true for most new movies, but I didn't think that it was severe enough in the case of The Lords of Salem. The jumpscares didn't feel "cheap" to me - I barely recall there being any of note as the emphasis was on slow movements and reveals rather than in-your-face shocks, and as for self-indulgent grotesqueries...well, it's a horror movie about demons and witches. Some of it got a little absurd, sure, but not to the point where I'd actively hold it against the whole movie (and it paid off in a stunning final sequence). I actually reckon they were deployed effectively within the narrative, which was mostly a rather down-to-earth tale that slowly built up what was happening with the mysterious record and proved compelling enough in its own right. As for characters, most of them are flat but the subtle nature of the plot served them well as you see the protagonist cope with a history of substance abuse and the unnerving mystery of the record (which pays off in a way that makes enough sense at the end and also actually invites consideration rather than just "what the f*ck").

It's not a modern classic, but I found it an above-average exercise in old-school horror that took reasonable advantage of the creative freedom offered by the 2010s and actually saw Rob Zombie do something seriously worthwhile with his love of horror movies (and, if you think The Lords of Salem is terrible, then I can't imagine you getting much else out of his other movies). Also, can you take the film to task for self-indulgence then say that a film should at least show something new with the implication that this one didn't? Zombie being self-indulgent is what separates this from old-school supernatural horror like The Omen or what-have-you. I think this is an instance where self-indulgence actually managed to pay off for a film, not ruin it.

If Zombie's Halloween 2 did not exist, this would be my least favourite film of his. excruciatingly boring and again, miscast with his wife, Lords of Salem is a love letter to a slow burn witch genre that does not suit Zombie at all. You dislike his scuzzy films from before, I prefer them to this. House of 1,000 Corpses was a misfire, but admirable for a musician who loves the genre. I feel like Zombie hit his peak with The Devil's Rejects, which seems to be the 'fan' consensus.

I appreciate the deviation from his norm and a nod to the 70's horror genre, but it doesn't work for me. The film fails to engage in any way whatsoever and left me wishing I'd given up on him sooner. The only thing worse than this was the complete destruction of Michael Myers with Halloween 2....I still have nightmares from that film.

__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews

I see what you're saying, I'm just looking for anything that stands out.

Put it this way: It could have done without the orchestral stings.

I still don't know why anyone holds that up as a pro just because of it's genre.

I suppose we just have very different standards of what escapes the "worth my time" rating.

Who's to say it doesn't suit him? I appreciate him actually making the effort to move outside his comfort zone, which also goes for Sheri Moon playing someone who isn't shrill-voiced white trash for once. I don't deny that the film is a bit too slow for its own good, but I didn't find it especially boring - I'll at least take the relative mystery of the whole witch-based narrative than the painfully straightforward "psycho hillbillies murder lots of people" narrative of The Devil's Rejects, which may be more immediate in developing its plot but that doesn't make it a good plot either.

Don't get me wrong, I was expecting to hate it too and, for the first few minutes, I was worried that it would be as bad as all the rest, but it grew on me and is now the only film he's done that I kind of like so...yay? Still haven't seen H2 but I can't imagine it being especially worthwhile anyway.

I guess that'd depend on your reference points.

Perhaps.

I think that's because you have to take genre conventions into account when you're assessing a work, especially if a certain thing may be more acceptable in one genre while unacceptable in another.

It would seem so.

Me. Rotten Tomatoes. IMDB.

In all seriousness, if this is the way he's going with his future films and leaving the shock-shlock behind, I just hope he gets better material.

Also, despite my reservations about Sheri Moon Zombie, I also appreciate that she did something different than hillbilly.

That makes sense up until I try to reconcile it. It's really just one of my usual issues with horror; I know the movie's trying to gross me out with body horror and violent sexual overtones and whatnot, but how exactly does that serve the movie? What about it is supposed to appeal to me?

Oof, I walked into that one. That being said, you're right about the better material thing.

Yeah, I mean there's only so much that attitude does for you unless it rubs up against your existing preferences and preconceptions. Reading your post sounds like a pretty clear reflection of why I abhorred Human Centipede.

I have NO interest in seeing that and... still makes me wonder what the deal is with Pink Flamingos.

I'm not convinced it's an attitude thing. I can buy into extreme violence if it's meant to reflect the gross reality of war or... jumpscares if they happen like... once. Only. And it's actually unexpected and not overwhelmed by the sound of 40 violins hanging themselves...

Yeah, I think what sets apart Pink Flamingos from Human Centipede is that - to quote Videodrome - it has a philosophy. Underneath all the scatological shock tactics, the film actually has a twisted heart that informs its deranged cast of characters and overall tackiness to an extent that at least makes it more than just empty provocation. Human Centipede does not have such a heart and thus it is easily (rightfully?) written off as a gruesomely pointless piece of cinematic sadism.

Jump scares are one of those things where they've become so prevalent that it's easy to treat them as clichés when they're not done right, and I certainly agree that making loud sounds can be something of a crutch (I reckon the lawnmower scene from Sinister would have worked just as well without a screaming sting). If nothing else, one of the things that The Innkeepers did right was have one of the characters watch a screamer video on the laptop (which you obviously resent just as much as the character) which also leads you to be on your guard against other cheap scares that never actually happen.

See, that's subversion, I can dig that.