Showing posts with label sam raimi. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sam raimi. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 9, 2013

EVIL DEAD Review


This remake of Sam Raimi's 1981 horror classic "The Evil Dead" is like the non-ironic version of last year's satirical "The Cabin in the Woods." Five friends indeed go to a cabin in the woods, but this time it's not for a romp of drinking and sex. It's an intervention for their heroin-addicted friend in trouble (Jane Levy of  "Suburgatory"), so things start dark and only get darker, more twisted and disturbed from there. The reimagining from first-time writer and director Fede Alvarez exudes promise with gutsy -- literally -- bravado, and it's produced by both Raimi and the original B-movie icon Bruce Campbell and therefore has received the the stamp of approval from them with good reason. It may not match the wit and camp of the original, but it has enough clever winks and homages, doesn't mess with the simple formula to unfold the demonic chaos and, most importantly, upholds the same ooey-gooey, gross-out thrill ride pleasure.

This new adaptation certainly shares the same blood lust. The real success is the minimal use of CGI gore and instead relying on physical effects to properly mimic the homemade craftiness of the shoestring budget classic. It's easily the most grisly and gruesome horror release in recent memory. Slicing a limb with an electric meat carver, face-cutting with a shard of broken mirror and the good old fashioned use of a chainsaw are among the violent nuggets that test the boundary of good taste. The madness all starts with a twisted recreation of the famed "tree rape" scene, which serves as a great launching point to the demon-infested cabin carnage.

The only recognizable actor is Levy (save for maybe Lou Taylor Pucci who appeared in an episode of "Girls" and here plays the guy in the cabin who realizes that everything is not going to be just fine), and it's fitting because -- as it is with most in the genre -- they only serve as meat to be pressed into the horror movie meat-packing machine. What's really on display is the structure of tension build-up and release, which this reboot does quite effectively. The early suspense creates an unshakable fear of the gore to come, and once it strikes it evokes a combination of shock, disgust and nervous laughter just as every great horror movie should.

And just when we become desensitized enough and just when it feels as if the movie might be stepping a little too close to contemporary horror movie tropes, the outrageous finish cranks up the intensity in a blood-drenched finale. It's sickening fun that'll leave fans of Sam Raimi's horror work (especially bringing to mind his own return to form, 2009's "Drag Me to Hell") cheering with glee as the screen is awash in red raining down from the sky.

Thursday, April 29, 2010



Archive: "Spider-Man 3" (2007)

Sam Raimi's "Spider-Man 3" packs in a bit too much, giving it the feeling of simply being overstuffed. Two new villains are introduced, one of which is supposedly the actual killer of Peter Parker's uncle. The other man Spidey exacted his revenge on earlier was merely an accomplice. The other villain is hardly used and could've been put to much greater use, but more on that later. There's also a pesky new photojournalist, played by "That 70s Show"'s Topher Grace, who is trying to take Peter Parker's spot on the Daily Bugle. Meanwhile, the relationship between MJ and Peter Parker becomes a foe all in itself. Her Broadway career is failing while Parker's fame is taking off as he just keeps getting more recognition as Spider-Man, and so she feels detached from him. And remember Harry Osborn, son of the Green Goblin, who vowed to kill Spider-Man? Well, he's back, and conveniently got a nice bump on the head, causing a loss of short-term memory. And so, they're back to being friends until Harry starts remembering and becomes his friend-turned-foe-turned-friend-turned-foe-turned-friend yet again, and also the man who MJ finds solace in when Peter's off being a jerk; more on that later, as well.

So let's back up here. First, there's Flint Marko, played by a strangely tan and buff Thomas Haden Church. He's a convict on the run and is just trying to get money to cure his sick daughter, which is his justification for accidentally killing Uncle Ben. We're supposed to feel sympathy for his situation, especially during a most forcedly sentimental speech he gives to Peter for why he must forgive him. Yet how can we feel sympathy when he's flying around the cityscape as a disastrous cloud of sand? While on the run, Marko falls into a pit where scientists just so happen to be conducting a molecular fusion test, and he gets fused with the sand and becomes the Sandman. The other villain is this sticky, black goo that immediately finds its way into Peter's apartment, and eventually takes him completely over, donning Spidey with a new black suit. This ominously exciting new suit with seemingly extraordinary yet dangerous powers was supposed to be the highlight of the plot, right?

Wrong. I was expecting grand darkness, a layer of some intense character development on Spidey's part, allowing Peter Parker to learn from his thoughts of revenge. This is entirely not the case, and it isn't even all that clear why the black suit is so appealing. No new spider senses or other powers are demonstrated and yet Peter Parker still puts up with the horrible side-effect of an annoyingly aggressive attitude. Just when Peter is being a pompous, uncaring jerk to MJ, he slaps on this suit and completely transforms into even more of an asshole. Apparently a dark suit and black, slicked-forward hair represents the newfound darkness. Oh, and the rumors are true: There is a musical number, and yes, two instances where Kirsten Dunst sings. Sadly, though, it's Tobey Maguire who dances. He struts down the street as a clueless egotistical loser, pointing his fingers at disgusted women. To spite MJ who recently called it off with him, Peter goes on a date with a Spider-Man fan named Gwen (played by Bryce Dallas Howard finally in a role as a normal person) to a jazz club where MJ works as a singing waitress. Next thing we know, Peter is tearing up the place with his shameful dance moves, pelvic thrusts included.

So, instead of putting the vengeful black suit idea to good use, it's used to create the single-most embarrassing scene throughout the entire movie. You see, this black goo is actually the villain Venom; he only comes to full form when he's able to manifest himself into somebody else. His later host is the scrawny Topher Grace, which is an odd combination to say the least. Venom is actually a really cool villain, or at least he could be. Once the gooey Venom stops taking over Peter and becomes something really threatening, he's defeated almost immediately. He ultimately feels like an after-thought, with the tons of other side plots in the way; it's a real shame, too. The movie feels like a blatant attempt to make this the biggest and best installment yet, which ironically strips away what could've made it all the better.

I admired the first "Spider-Man" for its colorful presentation and lively, energetic feel. I thought "Spider-Man 2" was quite possibly not only the best sequel ever made, but also one of the best super hero movies ever made. It was beautifully structured, wonderfully acted, and had just the right balance of exciting action sequences and deep, heartfelt emotion with a hint of light-hearted humor on the side. There were likable characters fending off truly menacing villains without too heavy of plot getting in the way. "Spider-Man 3" includes surprisingly bland performances from good actors: Kirstin Dunst is whinier than ever and Tobey Maguire is boyishly arrogant, and neither of them was like that before. The emotions feel forced, but the humor is still there, except sometimes unintentionally so. And there being two villains doesn't compensate for the fact that they're both pretty lame. Lastly, there's just too much plot going on all at once, almost like Sam Raimi lost touch with the ideal simplicity of the first two films. Sometimes less is a whole lot better.

What haven’t changed from the previous two films are the dazzling action sequences. The special effects are absolutely eye-popping, except there aren't enough of them. Sluggish sequences link the gap between the brilliantly vibrant and fast-paced web-slinging or superhero brawling sequences. As a whole, it meanders through mostly uninteresting side plots, and nothing ever really adds up into anything truly satisfying come time for the conclusion. However that may be the case, I must say that "Spider-Man 3" is entirely watchable if not at least a little enjoyable. It only comes as a disappointment to me just because "Spider-Man 2" showed me what these movies are truly capable of; it was a fault on my expectations.

Friday, May 29, 2009

In 3 Days, Christine Brown Is Going To Hell

Drag Me to Hell:
4 out of 4

After director Sam Raimi's disappointing "Spider-Man 3" he desperately needed something to redeem himself with. And so, he's returned to his origins of horror because before he hit Hollywood back in the 80s he made the slapstick, gross-out horror-comedy, "Evil Dead," and its sequel. It was a risky and bold move returning to that, but damn, it sure did turn out in his favor. The perfectly titled "Drag Me to Hell" is purposely campy, a delirious, freak-out horrorfest that delivers everything an audience could want in a terrifying, exciting, and oftentimes hilarious time at the movies. It's a throwback and Raimi definitely intends it to be viewed that way; just watch the Universal logo at the movie's start. He's pulling out his old tricks, but man do they work.

Alison Lohman plays Christine Brown, a loan officer at a bank who, while trying to impress her manager to acquire the assistant manager position, denies a decrepit old gypsy woman named Mrs. Ganush (Lorna Raver) yet another extension on her loan. Poor choice. This one-eyed, rotten-looking woman places a demonic curse on Christine, a curse of which she will spend the rest of the movie desperately trying to rid herself. It's an ever-unfolding nightmare that never ceases to have shocking jump-out-at-you moments and even more than that. The ideal blend of comedy and terror comes into play during an initial brawl in a parking garage with Mrs. Ganush that'll have you clenching your armrest while at the same time howling with laughter. It's amazing what this movie does to you as your heart will be racing in your chest from the anticipation but all the while you'll be laughing, which creates a feeling of pure hysteria, and it's an absolute blast.

As much as acting usually doesn't play a part in horror films these days, Lohman is a good sport here and her performance works wonders. She is persistently shown in close-ups to show her face always at unease. Even before terrible things start happening to her, she looks entirely paranoid even about appearing impressive at her bank job. Even through all of the absurdity she gets tossed into, Lohman plays Christine completely straight and throws on a face that is perpetually perturbed. And glossed over that is her bunny-toothed, innocent appearance of looking slightly dazed as she sinks deeper and deeper into doing anything she can to dispose of her curse. Even Christine's boyfriend, try as he may, can't help Christine, and he is played by Justin Long who also pulls it off totally straight-faced.

The movie is perfectly crafted where even the smallest details of the story have a big significance and eventually tie into something important. It's a roller coaster ride full of gooey, slimy, dripping, grotesque, disgusting moments that come at full-speed and really push the PG-13 rating to its limit. In one scene there's a nosebleed that'll have you cringing and scoffing at the same time. And there's the fitting playfulness to everything that unfolds, a requirement in this genre. It allows itself to not be taken too seriously and leaves room for an abundance of tongue-in-cheek fun. Keep watch, especially, for the scene where even the adorable little kitty isn't safe anymore. This cuddly little animal shows up and inevitably creates an audience proclaiming "Awww," and then, just like that, all cuteness is stripped away. Would Christine, the animal lover, really go to such extremes?! As a way of the movie winking at the audience, why yes, yes she would. It's always great to come across a damned fine horror flick. "Drag Me to Hell" is one, and it is unlike any we've seen in years. Consider yourself redeemed, Sam Raimi.