r3:vi3ws--My Reviews, My Way.

I’m such a horror freak. I’m not really sure why it’s my favorite genre. Perhaps it’s because horror movies can be so predictable. Predictability is a good thing for me; brings more focus to acting, plot twists and special effects.


The Collector. Written and directed by Marcus Dunston with a little help from Patrick Melton. At this point it doesn’t matter who they are. Let’s just say that they are a part of the latter Saw movies, and based on The Collector, they want to capture the essence of that movie’s doom, while borrowing heavily from its gory premise.

The Collector’s main character is handyman Arkin, played by Josh Stewart. Poor Arkin, he’s broke. But luckily for him a wealthy family needs security bars installed around their house before they go on vacation. You see they have a safe behind the bedroom mirror brimming with rich people stuff. Heart-of-gold Arkin, secures the windows and hatches a plan.

Later that night, after a sentimental visit with his daughter and a desperate plea from his girlfriend (wife? not sure), Arkin decides to get the money to repay her debt instead of slapping her for using a loan shark. Arkin (think Edward Norton) returns to the house to retrieve the Booty from the safe

Unfortunately, another intruder has taken up residence there and booby trapped the entire house with extremely sharp contraptions. Hit one wire here and something shifts there, causing a sharp or blunt object to release and penetrate some part of a person’s body. Usually head or neck trauma—you know how these things go.

Somehow Arkin gets trapped, and he being our anti-hero/hero, must find a way to get out of the house alive and hopefully bring survivors with him. Good thing for Arkin he’s a smart guy. In the horror movie world smart guys are great foes for smart serial killers because that’s really the only thing they can do with their intelligence…that and install security bars.

The Collector has that creepy edge to it. The movie is full of choppy suspense; you just don’t know what these contraptions will chop off! Arkin, with his degree in Mouse to the masked killers degree in Cat is no dummy, and the game between them becomes gruesome. Obviously no shortage of gore here, characters materialize as merely script fodder. The fun with these kinds of movies is the execution of the execution.

To me a plot hole is something that doesn’t make sense when you think back through the movie you just watched and the series of events adds up to an impossibility. A plot hole should only be realized by the viewer at the end of a movie, especially at its resolution. Ever see Empire Strikes Back? How long did it take Luke to be trained by Yoda on Dagobah (you’re a real nerd if you have an answer).

The Collector isn’t so much full of these holes, but what I call Ployholes. A Ployhole is something that happens in the movie, a contrived bit, that doesn’t make sense while it’s happening right in front of you (like me making up terms). Example: A man returns to a house probably 6 hours later and the entire house has been filled with intricate Rube Goldberg type contraptions. It’s a director’s ploy to get you to believe it could happen, but as it’s happening on screen you know that it would be impossible. A ployhole realization happens during the movie. The Collector is filled with these on-the-spot suspensions of belief.

However, as a horror movie, The Collector delivers. It’s purely a device driven film that has no intention of explaining its never ending gore and shock. Like a rollercoaster, it makes you feel uncomfortable because you know you’re strapped in, but what happens next is unclear, a part of the fun. As I said before this movie borrows heavily from the Saw franchise, but it makes no real connection to that fan based audience—not even so much as a subtle wink.

Josh Stewart doesn’t do a lot of acting as much as he does reacting here. Pain thresholds are extremely high (ployhole) and the outcome of the film spells franchise. But overall The Collector is passable and should be available on DVD in a few months.

BTW animal lovers, beware of this film.

__________________
I have been formatted to fit this screen.

r66-The member who always asks WHY?

I really like the idea of putting a trailer in with a review. And do you want to do the actual popcorn rating thing?

I don't know the film so I can't comment about the movie, but nice review!

This one looked interesting to me, might check it out.

Thanks for the review.

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

Suspect's Reviews

Trailer contains blood....






When I was in my teens I wrote a lot of horror fiction. I never really knew how good it was because every time I had someone read my work--usually a family member--they would scoff at the graphic nature of my stories and tell me to write about "good" things, there is so much horror in the real world already, they'd say . I don't think they got it, or me. Thus began my appreciation for good horror films, books.

Seed. Ah Seed. Well, it's not a good horror film at all. The story stinks to high heaven, one-third of the movie takes place in a dark house where only flashlights are used--flashlights don't make good lighting for a film, and it's directed by the killer of video game inspired movies, Uwe Boll.

However, as an avid, avid horror movie fan I have to give Seed the thumbs up. I have been waiting for a movie like this to come around for a long time, one that I seriously have to turn my head away from time to time. One that pushes the envelope of realistic gore to its limits then pushes some more, just knowing that the audience won't be able to handle it---and this audience couldn't at times; one 5 minute scene involving a hammer and an old lady in a chair (consider it a warning, not a spoiler!).

I won't be spoiling anything by going over the crumb of a storyline. A serial killer gets convicted then sentenced to the electric chair. He is buried, but not yet dead and comes back for revenge....yeah, I know, right?

MoFos, MoFos, MoFos, Do not, I repeat DO NOT watch the first 5 minutes of this movie if you are an animal lover!! The first 5 minutes is actual footage of animal cruelty at ITS WORST. The disclaimer at the beginning of the film states that the footage was included to make people aware that it exists. I know it exists so I skipped that whole first 5 minutes (I peeked at some of it--but couldn't handle it--it is indeed brutal and graphic and real).

Micheal Pare is the lead here, barely recognizable, but adequate. He is the cop on the case and on Seed's list of revenge. The acting here is mediocre. Seems the director found a good casting agent who hired people that can act pretty well in this sort of film.

The film doesn't have that dreaded doom feeling that I usually look for in a good horror film. I remember watching The Decent and feeling really claustrophobic at times. It's that sense of panic that is missing here.

This film is a showcase for graphic violence and unsettling images. It has a storyline of uninspired slasher film motivations. And I doubt that anyone here will appreciate it as much as I did. Especially if your preferred genre is not hardcore horror.

Seed is in no way for everyone. In fact if I had to pretend I wasn't a horror movie fan I'd give it 2 out of 5 stars.

But since I am a horror movie fan, I'll give it 4.

Not for the squeamish.

Alot of people may see this movie as another tired piece of a horror franchise that should have ended through straight-to-video. Perhaps it would have if DVDs were capable of transferring faithful 3D effects and director's intentions. But fortunately for us horror movie fans, The Final Destination opened in theaters last Friday and we got to see this latest installment in a new dimension.

First the bad; The film's plot is a simple rehash of the previous three films. The Grim Reaper has come to collect his victims in the order they were supposed to die at a brutal speedway pile-up that infiltrates a concrete spectator grandstand. Young cutie Nick's graphic premonition of the event encourages him to gather up his friends and head for the exits just seconds before the real tragedy occurs.

As with all FD films, the fun begins when Death tries to reclaim his rightful bodies and instead of just giving everybody a heart attack or aneurysm, he constructs elaborate devices disguised as freak accidents. Blood and gore ensues.

I was actually surprised by The Final Destination. Now most of you proper film critics out there may shrug this movie off and that might be a shame. Director David R. Ellis really pumps up the tension and suspense in this installment. He winks at the audience by utilizing the formula from the last three films to manipulate the audience. He leads you into thinking one set- up will deliver what's expected, distracting you from the real outcome which you may have figured out, but forgotten. A segment involving a stylist trimming someones bangs near the eyes, sharp scissors, a loose ceiling fan and hairspray too close to a straightening iron has Alfred Hitchcock written all over it. Seriously.

Of course it's these sort of set ups that enhanced my experience of the film. The 3D effects are used to full effect here. More work could have gone into the CGI, but overall the blood is in your lap and you will find yourself pleased and laughing after each bit. It's fun. Ellis seems to know he's not making a masterpiece here, afterall the entire film is just around 70 minutes long, but he seems to understand what the audience wants then tweaks the gimmick just enough for real movie snobs who have happened to tag along. Like the gimmicks of the 50's, there is a 3D scene involving a movie within a movie theater that really, really works.

The cast is not important. Of course they are there just to die. each member is just a caricature of the modern zeitgeist; MILF, Douche, et al.
They speak their lines like any above average horror movie twentysomething. Again, the real charm here is in the direction and the execution of suspense.

Unlike the other horror film which opened the same weekend (Halloween 2), The Final Destination was a wonderful thrill ride. I appreciate its minor B movie tongue-in-cheek brilliance, its finely executed bits of tension and surprise, its opening credits (yes you read that right) and its humorous use of 3D. Though not a journey into fine film making, The Final Destination should show that director David R. Ellis has a future in film and perhaps his next one will showcase his talents even more effectively. Of course with its opening gross, The Final Destination probably isn't so final and we'll see this formula again, hopefully it will retain the charm, wit and fun suspense that this film imbued. But, that's just wishful thinking.

I snuck into The Final Destination ~ first time I ever did such a thing, too!

WELL WORTH SNEAKING INTO... you shouldn't pay for that crap. As Reporter said, the plot is the same exact thing as all the other movies ~ there's no continuity, altough I believe Final Destination 2 featured the girl who survived the first film. But this film is exactly like Final Destination 3.

The 3-D effects were cool, but I felt that they weren't strong and that there wasn't enough.

I try to give horror movies the benefit of the doubt, meaning I go into them doubting they will be any good hoping to be surprised. I rarely am surprised moviegoers. Lately most horror movies include a building, usually a house where people are trapped or going to be trapped. Sorority Row painfully follows this formula.

A better title for this movie might have been "I Know What You Did Last Semester Sister". A group of senior year Sorority sisters devise a prank that goes horribly wrong, vow never to tell the secret, then are stalked by a killer that apparently can kill people without ever arousing suspicion by police, investigators or the Fire Department(!).

In the middle of a crucial scene where walls are ablaze and timbers are falling all around, one character says to another, "We have to leave, the house is on fire." I include that quote not as a spoiler, but as a sample of the script and blocking this young group of actors must endure.

Of course this is Rumer Willis' big movie! It's a shame because you know Demi and Bruce have connections in Hollywood. I can imagine Rumer asking her parents if they liked the film and them lying, saying, "Well, you were good!" We'll have to wait to see if this Hollywood silver spoon will shine with enough polish.

I thought that women-in-peril horror films had at least graduated from dumb, topless, screaming heads to topless, smart, independent victims that give the menace a run for its money. Obviously the people behind Sorority Row are lazy homosexuals; one split-second female topless shot is all you get straight guys. Sorry.

So, you have a horror movie with about six beautiful young actresses, one tiny topless shot, no original kills (although one involving a bottle of alcohol is passable), no original story, no original twist, bad acting, Carrie Fisher making good on a promise to someone in Hollywood (I have to say a little respect has been lost for her), and an ending so ridiculous you want to strangle the theater manager for selling you a ticket.

So, what about Rumer? Well, she definitly has her mother's voice. the verdict's out on her acting ability, given that co-star Megan Elizabeth Wolfley as sorority sister Audrina Patridge does a superb job with what's given her; watch her MoFo's, she's going to be a star; she channels Kim Catrrall in this stinker--you'll swear it's a younger Samantha from Sex and the City!

What bothered me about this film is that they completely abused the 9/11 release date. Has 9/11 become this marketing cash cow? It almost seems disrespectful to overly promote a horror movie on that date.

Nothing good here MoFos. If you have a choice between Sorority Row and The Final Destination at the theater, pick The Final Destination, it's a good bet the formula will be familiar to you and the film makers make it worth your while.

I doubt that very much. If I made the movie, it would be about a fraternity... during hazing week... the guys would get spanked with big paddles... nobody would die, because that's a waste of good man flesh.

Jason if you made the movie it would be a great movie. Perhaps the makers of Sorority Row should read your post....

Quoted for giggles.

Nice reviews R66! We few and far between horror fans need to stick together!

Jennifer's Body: starring Megan Fox (kind of), written by Diablo Cody (Juno), Directed by Karyn Kusama (Girlfight),and it's a horror movie! Should be the greatest horror movie released in the last decade, no? No. I still reserve that title for 2008's Splinter.

Jennifer's Body has a lot going for it. Even though the premise could be described as original, the storytelling in this 102 minute movie moves at a snail's pace.

Jennifer is a high school popularatti, who is BFF's with a girl named---wait for it--Needy (how cool). These two girls have grown up together and share everything from emotions to angst. The point is they are deep chums. One night at a night club, Jennifer gets horny for a lead singer and after a great tragedy involving fire, is coherenced into the bands' van on the assumption that she's a virgin. Needy (Amanda Seyfried) lets her go, but soon regrets it because Jen comes back a very different person!

I could go on about the plot, and not that it would spoil anything, but let's just say the occult is involved. And well, the above virgin reference should fill you in a tiny bit.

This really isn't a horror movie so much as a high school dramateen involving two girls with different motivations. The clear star here is Amanda Seyfried. She has those eyes that convey what her lines won't deliver. She moves about the movie confused about friendship, love and mild jealousy. Her love for Jennifer is an interesting piece of plot because it's at once envy, perhaps lust, then turns to confusion and heartbreak when Jen begins to eat her classmates. The script only touches on this, but Amanda brings the point home nicely as an actress.

Megan Fox is passable as Jennifer. She never brings the essence of her character through the screen. It appears that she doesn't quite get what her character is about, instead reacts only to the confines of the film. Her complexities and situations are written to be profound but Fox seems lost in some other movie and never really connects the dots as well as her co-star (Seyfried) does. Think of it this way; like a 5-year-old girl singing Etta James' "At Last".

Yes, Megan Fox is hot. She beautiful. She's got a great body! Unfortunately, that doesn't excuse her ignorance as an actress for not seeing the underlying commentary in her film and acting it out appropriately. The Joke is on Megan here because the fact that she doesn't get it comes across on the screen and the film makers may have just given up in hopes the audience would see the irony. I did.

This movie is not a special effects showpiece, nor is it full of tremendous amounts of gore. What I mean is, it may be marketed as a horror movie, but clearly the film makers intended it to be a little more. Something tells me the focus group won out.

Jennifer's Body is like a water damaged Rolex watch; the outside is still intriguing, but the inner workings are damaged probably due to a single cog.

Good review, I probably won't waste my time seeing this now.

I couldn't agree more.

__________________

I now declare that "environmental horror movies" will be at the forefront of this genre from now until the polar ice caps melt. Tapping into this market should be interesting because exploiting the fear that our world will slowly die because we are diminishing our resources, will be overshadowed by the message that humans will be eaten alive by some unearthed, prehistoric parasite that has been hibernating inside Woolly Mammoths. The formula is set, so all the writers need to do is pick a location for the horrors to unfold.

If you've been reading my reviews you may already know that the quintessential plot point for a horror movie is to get the characters inside something; a house, a spaceship a train, boat, etc.

In the case of The Thaw it is a once frozen island that is slowly melting (thanks industry smokestacks) to reveal prehistoric creatures and the parasites within them. These creatures can survive thousands of years for some reason, lay eggs and seek hosts.

A neon twist at the end of the film reveals why a group of students have come to this isolated area , but fails to explain their motivations for being there.

Again, Splinter is my choice for anyone wanting to see a horror film of this nature done right. That's not to say The Thaw is bad. It will definitely get your skin crawling and satisfy your need for late night popcorn and an uneasy feeling. The creatures resemble silverfish and burrow into the skin. The females lay eggs and, voila! Flesh eating Larvae.

If you've never seen the show Monsters Inside Me (http://animal.discovery.com/videos/m...neak-peek.html) you don't know what creeped-out really is. I suggest a viewing if you dare.

The acting in The Thaw is not that bad. Lead, Evelyn (Martha MacIsaac), has that Dorothy speaking to Toto voice that takes out some of the urgency of the situation. Val Kilmer is on screen about ten minutes and grunts his lines like he just got out of bed.

Overall The Thaw isn't bad. Brought to you by Ghost House Pictures and "hand selected" by Sam Raimi, the film will not scare you into recycling, but may make you forget the plot is recycled until that last, scaaarry, question mark ending.