"Kite" (2014)... It's A Bird! It's A Plane! It's A Kite?

The Trailer:

Director: Ralph Ziman
Cast: India Eisley, Callan McAuliffe, &Samuel L. Jackson

Synopsis: A few years after witnessing her parents' murder, Sawa (India Eisley) and her father's cop partner Karl (Samuel L. Jackson) take justice into their own hands in an attempt to avenge her parents' death.

Apparently this movie is based on the original Japanese anime by the same title, which is some kind of cult classic anime. I have never seen nor heard of the anime, but I can only imagine that this movie did it NO justice. First and foremost, the title of the movie is a wonder to me due to it never really being explained. Sure there is a moment when Sawa looks out her apartment window and sees a kite and another scene we are shown a flashback of Sawa and her friend, Oburi (Callan McAuliffe) playing with a kite when they were children and that's it, folks. Side note: the kite Sawa sees out her window, isn't really there; we later see Karl look out the same window and he doesn't see the kite. Perhaps the symbolism of the kite is explained in the anime series, but in the movie the title is lost on me. Anyways, on to other matters. The plot of the story... Oh man. So this a revenge tale, somewhere along the lines of Kill Bill, but not executed nearly as masterfully. For one thing, Sawa is a teenage girl with no training in hand to hand combat or anything of the sort, as far as we can see, yet we're expected to believe that she can take down all these men and women who are gang members and mafia type people. What? No way! Though, I could look past that. I can stretch my suspension of disbelief to believe that, no problem. But then there's the drug: amp. According to the movie, amp can erase a persons memory during the high. Sawa is basically addicted to this drug and repeatedly mentions that she can't remember her parents, well not really. So why does she have such conviction in her mission to avenge them? It just doesn't make sense to me. Also, another ridiculous thing to me are Sawa's earrings. They are mentioned and shown frequently throughout the film, even as a way to identify Sawa when she is later captured by the Emir (a gang Sawa thinks killed her parents), though they look like a pair of earrings you can buy at the store. While yes, for Sawa they trigger a memory of her parents, but as a way to identify her? That's just silly. Again, maybe this is a component that is better explained in the anime. What I did like, though, about this movie is the location. This movie is filmed in South Africa, so it looks gritty but also bright with neon colors against stark backgrounds that really make the settings pop. I think the film makers also used the negative connotations associated with South Africa to their advantage; they made it seem as though the authorities couldn't handle the crime that was being committed and rather than try to fight it, they protected only certain areas. Also, it is mentioned that most of the cops and/or detectives were dirty and sold weapons to gangs. But even this aspect is a little troublesome, because if this is based on a Japanese anime, why not film the movie in Japan? This movie just feels uninspired, like it let itself become so grounded in other revenge-tale movies that it did nothing to set itself apart. There's nothing new or creative about this movie.

While I think the casting was awesome, I think the actual characters were written so lusterless that the actors didn't have much to work with. Therefore made for a lusterless movie. And the whole time I kept wondering how they got Samuel L. Jackson on board with this? This is way below his level of skill. Oh, well. I'm not implying you shouldn't watch it. It's still an okay movie, just don't expect anything grand from it.

Would I watch it again? Ehh, maybe.

"Honeymoon" Is Your Spouse Who You Think They Are?

The Trailer:

Director:Leigh Janiek
Cast:Rose Leslie & Harry Treadaway

Synopsis: On the second night of their honeymoon at her her family's lakeside cabin, Paul (Harry Treadaway) finds Bea (Rose Leslie) wandering the woods while in a sort of trance.

First off let me say, I was ecstatic upon watching the trailer and seeing Harry Treadaway was starring in this movie. He is fantastic as Dr. Frankenstein in Penny Dreadful and was excited to see if he would bring that same dark, cynicism that is ever present in that role into this movie. While I can fairly say that his role as Paul is not as intense as Dr. Frankenstein, it was still a joy to watch. Paul is loving, attentive,charming, and worrisome, especially after finding Bea wandering the woods alone at night. Rose Leslie, whom I am not familiar with, as Bea was a perfect match for Paul; she is quirky, strong, adventurous, and loving. It is clear that there is a deep connection between the two characters, that they understand each other on a more emotional level. This very strong and emotional connection is called into question later in the movie which leaves us wondering do they really know each other or is there something more sinister at play here? This film isn't in-your-face scary which I am grateful for. Rather than having intense, outright scary elements, this film manifests an aura of fear through the establishment of strange and eerie atmospheric tones; what with the isolated, outdated cabin and the sense of being alone in a ghost town (they went to the cabin in the off-season so there is no one around). From a pretty early point, we can deduce that there are extraterrestrial forces (or some kind of paranormal force) at play here, but the force never comes to the forefront of the movie. The fact that the extraterrestrial force is left as more of a backdrop to the occurrences throughout the film made me like it so much more. The story focuses more on the uncertainty Paul feels towards Bea as she becomes a distorted version of herself, a version that is stripped of everything that made her Bea. The setting also plays a part in the overall tone of the film. As I mentioned earlier, they're at the cabin in the off-season, so it has a sense of abandonment. Also, with woods being so daunting— especially after Bea was found wandering in them—, there is a feeling of being trapped by them.

Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed this film and am glad that I watched it despite the lower rating it has on IMDb and Netflix. Would I watch it again? Most definitely!

"The Scarehouse" Or maybe the Revenge-House

The Trailer:

Director:Gavin Michael Booth
Cast: Sarah Booth, & Kimberly-Sue Murray

Synopsis: After a hazing tragedy landed both Corey (Sarah Booth) and Elaina (Kimberly-Sue Murray) in prison for two years, they now seek revenge on the sorority sisters at The Scarehouse.

Hmmm...so here we have another tale of girls who have been wronged and now seek justice in the most extreme way possible. I'm not saying Corey and Elaina didn't deserve justice after what those girls lead them to, but is killing them really going to make anything better? Nope, not one bit. And then the way in which the director revealed to us why Corey and Elaina are seeking revenge is kind of choppy. The past is shown through video footage filmed by one of the sorority sisters, whose name I can't recall and really don't care about. But at first I was confused as to what the footage was supposed to be, I didn't realize until about 20 minutes in that it was showing me what happened to Corey and Elaina that lead them to prison. The main reason for my delayed realization being that the girls shown in the footage aren't easily recognizable to the girls who are now entering the Scarehouse (a haunted house devised by Elaina for the purpose of trapping the sorority sisters and/or killing them). Once I did realize what the footage was, I was immediately annoyed by it. My annoyance doesn't lie in the found-footage-esque type of filming, but in the fact that it takes so long to reveal to us why Corey and Elaina feel like they deserve some sore of justice and, more importantly, the big reveal isn't all that bad. I mean, what the sorority sisters did was shitty, but it certainly doesn't justify the torture that Corey and Elaina are now doling out to them. It's overkill. Let's take a moment to discuss the sorority sisters, shall we? I never learned any of their names, you know why? Because I didn't care about any one of them. They're all flat, one-dimensional, archetypal college girls. Nothing stands out about any of them, so when they're killed off, I felt nothing. Honestly, they all seem like a rando group of girls who would never be friends in real life, and I couldn't comprehend why either Corey or Elaina wanted to be in their sorority. Then there's the killings. So, Corey mentions at one time or another that they have planned the killings of each girl, but I don't understand their plan. The first girl who enters the scarehouse is killed almost immediately, but then the second girl is instead taken to a room where she is tied up. We're never given an explanation for why they chose this fate for some girls or death to others, it doesn't make sense. Also, the ending was clear and obvious from about a mile away. And, again, I didn't understand the motivation behind it. To me, I think it would've been more effective to incriminate the girls in the crime that got Corey and Elaina sent to jail, rather than kill them, which probably would've made for a better movie. But oh well.

Overall, The Scarehouse has some decent kill scenes and satisfactory acting, though it's not very innovative or imaginitive in any way. I, honestly, lost interest about 5 times throughout the movie, but just kept watching in hopes that it would somehow exceed my expectations. It never did. Would I watch it again? No.

"Rigor Mortis" Stiff, But Not Quite Dead

The Trailer:

Director:Juno Mak
Cast: Siu-Ho Chin, Anthony Chan, Fat Chung, Kara Hui, & Richard Ng

Synopsis: After moving to a public housing tenement, a failed actor, Chin Siu-ho (Siu-ho Chin) attempts to commit suicide only to be saved by a strange neighbor. After the attempt, many a strange occurrences begin happening which Chin must now try to combat.

Upon first finishing the movie, I liked it but wasn't particularly moved by it in any way. But after a night of being haunted by the ghosts and vampires showcased in this movie do I finally understand the slow dissolving horror this movie has to offer. Rigor Mortis is stylish, heartbreaking, and horrifying in it's own way; a way that is both unique and familiar in the Asian ghost-story scene. The fight scenes are Matrix-style and wonderful: the special effects that make that happen were superbly executed and done without many hiccups. The whole vibe the movie gives off is surreal and like a comic-book (think Sucker Punch). There's never really a scare moment in the movie, but rather, moments where there are supernatural elements. It's much more a fantastical hero story, than that of a horror film. Which I'm okay with because the movie is beautifully crafted. Visually, it's a treat for the eyes. The story is a little on the drab side, and moves at a slow pace which, for my taste, doesn't mesh well with the quicker-paced fight scenes. But that may just be me and my American need for things to be fast and efficient (Haha). The movie begins with a shot of the ending, which leads to the illusion that we know what the ending is and just have to watch in order to see how the characters got to that point. I personally love movie done in this fashion, so immediately I was hooked. Also, setting the movie up in the enclosed, yet vast space of the daunting tenement building leaves an eerie taste in our mouth right from the start, which assists in the overall unearthly tone of the rest of the film. And also, later leads to a feeling of inescapableness. The color theme of the movie is earthy with lots of browns and tans that have a high contrast to the bright bursts of blood that happen throughout. The ending offers a twist, which is reminiscent of "An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge" by Ambrose Pierce, which is not so much a twist but a tragic realization. If you've ever read "An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge" I might have just ruined the ending for you (Sorrynotsorry). This movie is also interesting in that it can be a movie purely for entertainment or it can be a movie with a much deeper meaning than it has you believe. There are many allusions and parallels to Chinese folklore and mythology. Is it required that you be familiar with Chinese folklore and mythology in order to watch the movie? Not at all, but if you're like me and want a more clear picture of what the director and writer wanted to show in this movie then you might want to do some research. The ending also offers a reason why the movie is titled Rigor Mortis, which I happen to find quite clever and foreshadowing.

Overall, I enjoyed the movie. And like I mentioned before, the idea of the spirits and the way they moved about haunted me in my dreams last night. Rigor Mortis is truly unforgettable and chilling and I loved it. Would I watch it again? Hell yes!!

"Jessabelle" The Girl Who Never Was

The Trailer:

Director: Kevin Greuttert
Cast: Sarah Snook, Joelle Carter, Mark Webber, & David Andrews

Synopsis: After a tragic car accident, Jessabelle (Sarah Snook), returns to her childhood home to recuperate. While staying there with her estranged father, Leon (David Andrews), a ghostly entity begins to wreak havoc on her life.

I wish horror movie makers would stop making movies about a person returning to their childhood home where they uncover some dark secret about his/her parents, which they now feel they must fix. It is an old and tired trope that, of late, is so predictable that it rarely conjures any fear in most viewers. Case in point: Jessabelle. There are so many horror clichés and tropes in this movie that it almost seems like a mockery of modern horror films, except that it is dead serious in its clichéd mediocrity. From fairly early on, I knew that the movie was going into evil twin territory, I just didn't know how it was going to proceed and be explained. Still, both procession and explanation the movie provides are nothing of originality or intelligence and didn't intrigue me not one bit. I mean, the most important detail that explains how these series of events came to be doesn't make sense, which basically makes the movie moot. !!!Spoiler Alert!!! I wasn't gonna give away the ending, but it is so ludicrous, that I just have to get it off my chest for anyone who dared to read beyond the spoiler alert. Okay, so the ghost that is haunting Jessabelle (who I will now from this point forward be referring to as Jessie) is the real Jessabelle. You see, Jessabelle's mom, Kate (Joelle Carter) had an affair with a black, voodoo practitioner ("ahh lets add voodoo to the story to give it some edge", the writer thought) and was impregnated by him. And so, when Kate gave birth to a black baby, Leon knew the baby wasn't his and so decided to murder it! Then Leon decides to adopt Jessie as a cover up to the murder. The big freaking problem with this is that we are shown a flashback of Jessabelle's birth, and it's in a hospital with nurses and a doctor, all who saw that Jessabelle was black. So how did no one say anything when Leon shows up one day with a white baby??? Up to this point, the movie was already disappointing in its lack of creativity, but then with this stupid backstory, it just fell to a lower level of lameness.  !!!Spoiler Alert Over!!! Also, there is a random romance angle with an old high school boyfriend, Preston (Mark Webber), but this really serves no purpose to the story other than being the romance angle. SNORE. And then there's the accents. This movie is set in Louisiana, so of course they had to have actors fake a southern drawl, except it sounds too forced coming from Sarah Snook and Mark Webber. Why not just find southern actors with a real southern accent? *Sigh*

There are certain aspects I liked in this film, though, like the setting. I love a movie set in the south, because it adds a layer of mysticism and a touch of whimsy that usually works well with ghost stories; so the fact that this movie was set in Louisiana was good for me. And there were some jump scares that rattled me a bit, so that's a plus. And the acting was okay, nothing stellar. Overall this movie is nothing new. I was never roped into the movie, I simply finished it because I hate leaving a movie in the middle, because sometimes movies really pick up in the second half. Now for the true test of whether I thought it was bad or good: Would I watch it again? No.

"The Culling" But Who is Culling?

The Trailer:

Director: Rustam Branaman
Cast: Jeremy Sumpter, Elizabeth Di Prinzio, Brett Davern, Lindsey Godfrey, Chris Coy, & Harley Graham

Synopsis: A group of friends make a horrifying detour on their way to SxSW when they find a young girl crying in a diner parking lot. When they return her to isolated farmhouse, strange things begin to happen.

Oh man, where do I even begin? You know, I love all kinds of horror movies: supernatural, sci-fi, paranormal, creature features, torture, gory, psychological thrillers. Really, any movie that has a scare element to it. And because I cherish horror so much, I will be the first person to call out any shitty horror movie and its even shittier clichéd plot/characters. And The Culling is probably one of the shittiest horror movies I have ever seen, thought, do correct me if there is even worse out there.

 So we have the group of friends: Amanda (Lindsey Godfrey), her boyfirend Sean (Brett Davern), Tyler (Jeremy Sumpter), his girlfriend Emily (Elizabeth Di Prinzio, and Hank (Chris Coy). Amanda just got out of rehab and also has some kind of psychic ability, but neither detail are ever used to carry the story along; they are simply stated and kind of talked about later in the movie but not to any useful effect. Like in one scene when they first get to the farmhouse she mentions that she has a bad feeling about it and everyone is just like "please, stop with your psychic bullshit". Also, later her and Sean sneak outside to smoke weed and she asks Sean why he never visited her in rehab. Those are really the only times either detail of her life are mentioned, for what purpose? I'm guessing to make it seem like these characters have depth, but it adds nothing to the story. Sean seems to be the only one who has any brains, but he is also the douche of the group so no one takes him seriously. Example: When they find Lucy (Harley Graham) in the parking lot, Sean suggests they take her to the police or call the police, yet everyone thinks he's just being inconsiderate. Emily and Tyler are supposed to be the "levelheaded" ones of the group, yet every decision they make is stupid and leads the entire group to trouble. Like when Sean suggests taking Lucy to the police they say no and then decide to take the girl back to her remote farmhouse. RED FUCKING FLAG!! Are you idiots? She could be bait for a maniacal weirdo, or perhaps people who dabble in black magic shit (which is what she turns out to be). And Hank has absolutely no purpose, except to come back from near death to save Emily and then we never see him again.

Also there are so many moments where you have to wonder, "did the writer forget what he wrote in the last part?', because there are so many scenes that don't fit with the previous scene. Like one moment they are frantically looking for Lucy, who somehow goes missing, and then the next scene they are all chill and sitting by the fireplace. Like, what?? Did you all forget that the little girl is missing??? Then they are moments of just pure stupidity and are simply put, unbelievable! Like when Hank is shot and bleeding out, Emily and Tyler decide to have an argument about who is going to go out and get help. *Groan* Are you fucking kidding me? You're friend is bleeding out and dying and you want to waste time arguing!? Ridiculous!! And to make it all worse, there is absolutely no suspense ever in the entirety of the movie. There is never a scare moment. And we are never given an explanation to anything that has transpired over the progression of the movie. It's just so stupid, I would recommend you to never ever ever in your life endure this ridiculous movie!! Ever! Waste of my time!!!

"The Giver" But What Am I To Receive?

The Trailer:

Director: Phillip Noyce
Cast: Brenton Thwaites, Jeff Bridges, Meryl Streep, Odeya Rush, Alexander Skarsgård, & Katie Holmes

Synopsis: In a dystopian community that knows no pain or war or inequality, Jonas (Brenton Thwaites) is chosen as the next Receiver whom will gain the memories of true pain and much more about the world.

I read the Giver about a year ago and enjoyed it quite a bit. It's a dystopian novel, but still feels very contemporary and relevant. The book's author, Lois Lowry, is a minimalist in her writing style, so that left a lot of room for creative freedom on the screenwriters part, which worked in some instances and bombed in others. The atmosphere and setting the movie creates is one of interest and wonder: It's futuristic without feeling too distant that we can't relate to it. All the actors did a phenomenal job with the characters they portrayed—given that the book doesn't give much character development for the secondary characters—, especially Jeff Bridges as the Giver and Meryl Streep as the Chief Elder. Brenton Thwaites also did a fabulous job as Jonas, the quiet, polite and curious boy who is to be the new Receiver. All the memory sharing scenes, I really enjoyed as well. The memories meshed well with the rest of the movie even though their tones were much different from the monotonous tone of the rest of the movie. They were colorful, wondrous, and alluring, and also disheartening and sometimes chilling, especially for Jonas who had never experienced any kind of emotional elevation or depreciation in his entire life. Now, these are examples of what I liked that the screenwriters added to the story or, rather, built upon the original content of the book.

(Spoilers Ahead)
Now for the liberties I didn't like. I didn't especially like that the characters ages were bumped up. I understand that this was done so there could be romantic interest among Fiona and Jonas, but I didn't feel it was necessary and took away from the innocence of how Jonas experiences everything. I also wasn't fond of how the Chief Elder is now a villainous person, whereas in the book she is hardly ever mentioned. This change leads to a very "intense" ending with a chase and punishment for those who helped Jonas escape. Speaking of people who helped Jonas, Fiona and Asher both assist Jonas in his grand escape, when in the book they didn't know anything about it. Also, the fact that Jonas hastily decides to leave the community in order to save baby Gabe is a new addition; in the book Jonas carefully plans his escape. Additionally, what I really would have liked to see in the movie is how when the Giver gives a memory to Jonas, the Giver loses the memory. In the movie it is implied that the Giver still retains the memories even after giving it to Jonas. And now for the biggest let down: the ending! The ending becomes too Hollywood in the movie. I mean, now there is this great chase scene, and the "worry" that Jonas won't be able to cross the Boundary of Memory in time to save Fiona, and the fact that Asher actively defies the Chief Elder by not "losing" Jonas. These are all tacked on the movie to give it a more suspenseful ending, but I felt it cheapened the very ambiguous, imaginative ending that the book has to offer. In the book, we don't know what happens to the community as Jonas crosses the Boundary of Memory—which, now in the movie is a physical boundary whereas in the book it is more metaphorical—, we're not even really sure what happens to Jonas. And that's what I loved about the book, it left room for wondering and speculation among the readers and the movie's ending was simply to definite.

While I enjoyed the movie for the most part, I wasn't particularly impressed by it and more so frustrated at the changes that were made. Would I watch it again? Yeah, probably, but it's not one of my favorites.

"Marina Abramovic: The Artist Is Present"

The Trailer:

Director: Matthew Akers, Jeff Dupre

Cast: Marina Abramovic

Synopsis: While preparing for her exhibition at the Museum of Modern Art, Marina Abramovic reflects on her past and how it has brought her to this point, to her most important work.

This documentary is dazzling and seductive and heartbreaking and inspiring all at the same time. It is an emotional overload to the soul. And as an artist, I was moved deeply by Marina's candidness and willingness to be vulnerable with her audience as well as the people in her life. I have studied and followed Marina's work for quite a while and had actually read about this particular performance some years before I ever even knew that there was to be a film made documenting the whole display. And when I did hear about the documentary, I thought "well I just have to watch it". Marina's show at MoMA is a simple one, yet extremely grueling on her psyche and body: she sat across from a patron of the museum and simply gazed into their eyes.She did this for 7.5 hours a day, six days a week, for eleven weeks. While this may seem easy or undemanding, it is not and you can see how it affects her over the course of the exhibition. Also, the way people reacted to her and the moment and space they shared with her, for some it seems like they were having a spiritual experience with her; they cried, they put their hand to their chest, a gesture of gratitude. These people were experiencing a moment in their lives where someone was actually looking and them and truly seeing them, this is not something that occurs often in our day to day lives and it shows in their very real reactions. I was also intrigued to see how she herself prepares for such performances, along with how she prepared the young artists who recreated some of her most important works for the MoMA show: It was all very spiritual and being at peace with nature and self. I was inspired. 

And while the documentary did touch on some of her past performances, I wish there would have been more. I do realize that this film was made to document, what could be called, her magnum opus, but I really wanted to hear more about her past and how she came to this point. There was discussion of her relationship with Ulay, a fellow performance artist, who was also her lover for quite some time. They talked about the hardships they faced as a performance duo, but also as a couple. Both Marina and Ulay both told their side of the story and how it affected each other and their work, and how ultimately their differences led to their downfall. To watch them talk so warmly about each other, but also with so much heartache, was heartbreaking. It's harrowing to see two people who sincerely care about each other have to live knowing how much they've each hurt one another. 

Overall, I really admired and appreciated this documentary, not only for it's primary content, but also for how inspiring and encouraging it is. As an artist, it is enlightening to see how far art has come and how far art can go. I was also positively inspired by a lot of the wisdom Marina had to impart on us viewers about her life and her work and how it has taken so long for her to finally be taken seriously. I have already recommended others to watch this documentary, and I most certainly would re-watch this!

"That Awkward Moment" When A Movie is Not Anything Like it Was Advertised...

The Trailer:

Director: Tom Gormican
Cast: Zac Efron, Miles Teller, Michael B. Jordan, Mackenzie Davis, & Imogen Poots

Synopsis: After Mikey (Michael B. Jordan) is cheated on by his wife,  he and his two friends, Jason (Zac Efron) and Daniel (Miles Teller) decide to make a pact to stay single. This becomes difficult when Jason meets Ellie (Imogen Poots) and Daniel starts a secret relationship with his friend Chelsea (Mackenzie Davis). How will they keep their pact?

I wasn't expecting a cinematic masterpiece when going into this movie. I was expecting something more along the lines of the Hangover movies (which I've never liked, apparently, much to the bewilderment of my fellow 21st century, early 20's peers). What I mean is that I thought that kind of weird comedy where nothing actually happens and is just a bunch of dudes bro-ing out with each other and doing ridiculous things was what this movie was gonna be. And it definitely is, but it just fell flat for me. There are too many moments where literally NOTHING happens. It's just people looking at each other, or walking along and talking, though the conversation is muted and there is some sentimental song being played over the scene. There's also too many scenes of their surroundings. And while I certainly don't mind seeing the beauty of New York, these scenes are definitely just filler scenes to prolong the movie. Albeit, there are gag scenes, though they are few and far between and also just not funny. I'm sure I emitted a small chuckle at some of the scenes, but nothing that had me bowed over with laughter, which is really what I want in a comedy. It's actually listed as a rom-com, which are definitely not my favorite type of movie. But it really does fit the mold of a typical rom-com, fully furnished with a manic pixie dream type girl and the two buffoon like friends who impart their own types of wisdom on our dear Zac Efron who is apparently in the middle of a crisis because he finally realizes that it is possible to love women and not just fuck 'em for a while until their time on his "roster" runs out.

The actors did an average job at their characters, nothing to be excited about. For me, the only good thing about this movie was the attractive cast, but that's about it. Would I watch it again? Probably not. Like if it were on tv and I just wanted some background noise, yeah I'd put it on. But other than that, no I wouldn't watch it again.

"Housebound"... Bound for Greatness Or???

The Trailer:

Director: Gerard Johnstone
Cast: Morgana O'Reilly, Rima Te Wiata, Glen-Paul Waru, & Ross Harper

Synopsis: When career criminal, Kylie Bucknell (Morgana O'Reilly), is sentenced to house arrest in her childhood, where her mother, Miriam (Rima Te Wiata) and stepfather, Graeme (Ross Harper) still live, strange things begin to happen. Enlisting the help of Amos (Glen-Paul Waru), the man in charge of keeping track of Kylie who is also a beginner paranormal investigator, Kylie is about to solve the mystery of her home.

I wouldn't say I loved this movie, though I did like it quite a bit. This New Zealand movie is funny without being obnoxious, as is the norm in most American horror comedies. It's humor lies in how much it follows the clichés of general ghost story movies where the main character returns to their childhood home and memories of paranormal happenings resurface, and so he/she works to solve the mystery of the hauntings. Along with the cliché story line, this movie is fully equipped with a stereotypical horror film score that is loud, "haunting", and builds to a crescendo just as there is about to be a cat scare (definition: "when there is a buildup of tension followed by a fright of something harmless" as defined by tvtropes.org). And yes there were plenty of cat scares, and even some jump scares which add some to the horror aspect of the movie, but mostly lends a hand to the comedy aspect that pokes fun at typical horror movies. There is also a good amount of humor that lies in the subtle dialogue between characters or said as an aside, that can easily be missed if you're not paying attention. All the actors did a good job as their characters, nothing to rave about but still good enough that they ca pull off the sheer ridiculousness of the movie without it feeling amateur and silly. Because, in the end, this movie is still a ghost story that needs a satisfying conclusion, for the ghost and for the family.

Overall I liked this movie. It's nothing new, but it was still good fun and I would surely watch it again in the future when I want a good laugh.

"Wet Hot American Summer"

The Trailer:

Director: David Wain
Cast: Too many people to name...

Synopsis: On the last day of summer camp circa 1981, a group of teenage counselors try to make the best of their last day.

I realize that this movie came out in 2001, a whopping 14 years ago, but it wasn't until yesterday that I took the time to watch it. And let me just say that I was not disappointed. It is a parody of all those bad 80's summer camp flick that make summer camp look like the epitome of American teenage life. This movie is not very plot driven, and more of a series of events over the course of a day that follows various characters on their independent conquests. And it's hilarious, with all it's offbeat humor and witty, clipped dialogue. Plus all the overtly clichéd, stereotypical characters of teen flicks are played to a tee by all the actors involved in this movie. And these actors being able to carry a joke without making it seemed forced is what really made this movie so hilarious. Along with the constant jokes, there are just so many silly moments that simply require a laugh due to their sheer ridiculousness. And all the little jabs and fun made of 80's movies was icing on an already well iced cake!

Wet Hot American Summer is in no way a cinematic masterpiece, but it is a wonderfully crafted comedy. Will everyone enjoy this type of humor? Definitely not. But those that do will love it. Will I watch it again? Hell yes, I would!!

"If I Stay"... Long Enough To Actually Care

The Trailer:

Director: R.J. Cutler

Cast: Chloë Grace Moretz, Jamie Blackley, Mireille Enos, & Joshua Leonard

Synopsis: After a tragic car accident, Mia Hall (Chloë Grace Moretz) has an out of body experience while in a coma. She must decide whether she will wake up and live out her life, even though it is clear that it will never be as it was, or if she will allow herself be coaxed into death.

Unfortunately, I have to say that I wasn't impressed with this movie. Maybe it's because I was mentally comparing the movie to the book (which I thought was beautiful and poignant). Not much was lost in the book to movie process, mostly just the emotional impact of the book.

I was mostly disappointed with Mia's character. She seemed much more self-involved, whereas in the book she was mostly concerned with her family especially in the beginning right after the crash: Mia is all over looking for her parents and her brother before the paramedics arrive, but in the movie she pretty much goes immediately to her own body and stays there not even concerned with her family. And I just didn't love Chloë Grace Moretz as Mia. Which is such a shame considering how much I love Chloë Grace Moretz's other work, most notably her portrayal of Abby in Let Me In. But in this movie she was just blah. She was too quiet and/or timid in parts that required more of a punch, and she was too emotional in moments that didn't need it. She was unconvincing as the Mia Hall I was expecting. To me, Mia always seemed confident in herself, while also knowing that cello wasn't the coolest of instruments to play, especially since her parents are punk rockers. Even still, she was confident and witty, but in the movie she comes off as self-conscious and reserved. I'm not sure if it is Moretz's acting abilities that I'm questioning or if it is the directors directing, either way this was not Mia Hall. Also, can I just mention the shitty CGI effects of placing Chloë Grace Moretz's head on some real cello players body. I would have been satisfied with the typical up-close shots of hands playing the instrument and/or shots from behind as in other movies that have actors who can't actually play the instrument the character does, but CGI-ing her head in just cheapened these intense moments. UGH!

I was appreciative of Mireille Enos' portrayal of Mia's mother, Kat. When I saw the previews for the movie, I thought "she is the perfect choice for Mia's mom". Kat is comforting and motherly while also being a total badass and Mireille portrayed that seamlessly. Joshua Leonard was also good as Denny, Mia's father.Not exceptional or award-worthy but he got the job done. Jamie Blackley as Adam wasn't bad but he wasn't believable. I mean the guy is 25, and we're supposed to believe he's a highschooler? Yeah, right!

This movie is trying to hard to be overly sentimental and poignant and ended up feeling too forced. I never felt connected to Mia or any of the other characters for that matter. It's lengthy as well, for no reason because it just seemed to drag and about half way through I didn't care if Mia woke up or not (although I already knew because I read the book), I just wanted the movie to end already! Like I mentioned before, nothing was really lost from the book and yet the emotional impact simply wasn't there anymore. It was somehow lost in translation. Don't get me wrong, though, I did cry quite often throughout the movie but I think that is mostly because I was reminded of the despair I felt while reading the book, not necessarily because the movie moved me to tears. Would I watch this again? Most definitely not!

"Girls Against Boys"... Or Slow Against Boring, Which Will Win?

The Trailer:

Director: Austin Chick

Cast: Danielle Panabaker and Nicole LaLiberte

Synopsis: After being assaulted twice by men, Shae (Danielle Panabaker) teams up with Lulu (Nicole LaLiberte) on a killing spree of various men that have crossed their paths recently.

Where to start? I think there is an overall message that all girls aren't inherently good and that all boys aren't inherently bad, but it took too long to get to this point, and honestly it was just a bore to watch. There is nothing innovative about this tale. A girl gets raped and then her and her unstable friend seek revenge on, not only her rapist, but just men in general because they "are all guilty of something". Though Danielle Panabaker and Nicole LaLiberte do their best at portraying such flimsy characters, there is simply nothing interesting about this movie that seems to drag on forever and ever. And the more the movie progresses the more sloppy and messy it becomes. *Sigh*

The killing spree. Okay, not really a killing spree; in the course of a day, as a couple, they kill three individuals. And then both Lulu and Shae go on to kill one other person, each on their own. I simply cannot wrap my head around the kills. They all seem so unnecessary and pointless. Also, I am completely incredulous to the idea that after seeing Lulu kill the first victim, Shae just goes along with it without a second thought. And then, after the first kill, they sit and have a bowl of cereal. I guess this is to show to us how ruthless and heartless these characters are that they can sit and eat while a dead body is laying beside them, but just comes across as pretentious and plainly put, dumb. Also, at the end of the movie, after they've killed all these people, we're supposed to believe that they didn't get caught. Because never, not once in the movie do they question their involvement in these murders and if the police are looking for them. They are not skilled murderers, they are amateurs that left messes and bodies lying about, how were they not caught? It's pure silliness. My suspension of disbelief could not stretch far enough to cover this absurd implication.

Also this movie has little dialogue. I get that in certain movies talking is unnecessary as what is being conveyed to us can be shown through body movement and facial expression, but this is not one of those movies. There needed to be discussion between the characters, and real discussion. Not pointless guessing-game talk about the percentage of vitamins and ingredients in Captain Crunch cereal. There's also quite a few filler scenes that serve no purpose. Like Shae just walking about a farmers market, or sadly walking to class, or writing notes in class. None of these moments make Shae seem more relatable or whatever it is that director was trying to shoot for with these scenes, they're just ineffectual. Also, on a side note: what was Shae's deal wit bathrooms? Every time she was feeling uneasy about something, she went into a bathroom. I don't know, I think that may be something that only bothers me.

I can't say this is a horrible movie, because it's not, but it's also not good in any way. As a drama, horror, thriller (as it's classified on IMDb) there's not nearly enough blood or scare components to make it a horror, and there's not enough emotional substance to be a drama either. It's just sort of blah. Also, as another side note completely off topic: I'm not entirely sure that Lulu is a real person, she could be a separate sect of Shae's psyche that is a much more extreme version of herself, but this is only a theory and I don't really have enough evidence to support it. All in all, I probably wouldn't watch it again.

"WhoAmI/ No System Is Safe (Kein System ist sicher)"... Literally, No System!

The Trailer:

Director: Baran bo Odar

Cast: Tom Schilling, Elyas M'Barek, Wotan Wilke Möhring, Antoine Monot Jr., Hannah Herzsprung, & Trine Dyrholm

Synopsis: Benjamin (Tom Schilling), a computer hacking genius, joins a computer hacking team in order to become noticed in the darknet hacking groups, especially an idolized hacker, MRX.

This movie is no way a cinematic masterpiece, but it is amazing. It's overall atmosphere and tone is similar to Fight Club, but no where near as masterful. And while that is true, I still thoroughly enjoyed every minute of it. Tom Schilling did a wonderful job as the shy, nervous computer "nerd" who seeks help from the cybercrime detective, Hanne Lindberg (Trine Dryhom), investigating the crimes performed by the Russian cyber mafia, Fr1ends, and the computer hacking group known as CLAY (which we later learn is the group Benjamin is apart of). The group of CLAY (acronym for Clowns Laughing At You) consists of four members; Benjamin, Max (Elyas M'Barek), Stephan (Wotan Wilke Möhring), and Paul (Antoine Monot Jr.). They start out with small computer hacking jobs, but soon realize that they are nothing but a joke to MRX (MRX is like a hacking legend/icon whom they all look up to). In order to impress MRX, they move onto bigger jobs such as hacking into the German Secret Service. Their job is simple: hack the German Secret Service's main server, leave a note for them in the form a hundreds of flyers inscribed with "CLAY was here. No System is Safe!" to be printed as soon as the server boots up the next morning. The mission was just to prove to the secret service that any server could be hacked and not to be too comfortable in their so-called security, they were definitely not supposed to take anything from the server. Benjamin, though, took data from the server to serve as proof of their work. But later in a angry drunken stupor— after seeing Max kissing Marie (Hannah Herzsrpung), the girl Benjamin has had a crush on since forever— Benjamin gives this data to MRX to prove that he is a somebody rather than the nobody that Max and the rest of CLAY claim he is. This simple act leads them into a dangerous game with MRX and the Fr1ends, who have now committed murder because of the data Benjamin stole.

I was on the edge of my seat, figuratively speaking, the entire time. And I was just as confused and incredulous as Hanne Lindberg was, while Benjamin is relating his story to her. All the holes and inconsistencies in his story left me wondering what really happened and how Benjamin is truly involved. And in the end with the double twists (yes, double twists!), I was also just as surprised as Lindberg. I didn't expect either of the twists, they were perfectly crafted and extremely believable. Also on another note, I really appreciated the consistent voice-over in this movie. The voice-overs always served a purpose and were never forgotten about as it is in some movies, where it starts with a voice-over but is never followed through with. I would absolutely watch this movie again, and of course I would recommend it to others!!

"Metalhead (Málmhaus)" Rock Out With Your Grief Out?

The Trailer:

Director: Ragnar Bragason

Cast: Thora Bjorg Helga, Ingvar Eggert Sigurðsson, Halldóra Geirharðsdóttir, & Sveinn Ólafur Gunnarsson

Synopsis: After witnessing her brother's death at age twelve, Hera (Thora Bjorg Helga) submerges herself into metal music (the music her brother loved) and finds solace there. And now in her early adulthood she must try to cope with the grief that she has been living in and finally find her way out.

I didn't really know what to expect from this movie. The trailer almost makes it seem like a psychological thriller, which it definitely is not. It's mostly a study of the effects of grief on a family who, rather than deal with the loss of their son/brother, remain lost inside their own sorrow. 

The setting of this film is a muted, bleak, cold village in Iceland. All the citizens are hardworking people who don't understand Hera's penchant for heavy metal music, and really just think of her as a rebellious nuisance. When Hera reaches an age that demands her to make something of herself and become someone's wife, she rebels against that even harder. She also becomes reckless realizing that her idea of how she wants to live her life doesn't match what her parents want from her. And while Hera is outrageous and loud in her effort to escape her grief, her parents are much more subdued. Her father, Karl (Ingvar Eggert Sigurðsson), doesn't talk much about his late son or anything for that matter. He is quite distant from everyone, especially his wife. Hera's mother, Droplaug (Halldóra Geirharðsdóttir) is still going through the motions of being a mother and wife, but is emotionally detached from both Hera and her husband. This creates a dynamic between the family members that is both broken and strained. And though Hera is wallowing in her grief, she finds an essential part of herself. She finds her love of heavy metal music and creating her own music in order to finally deal with her pain. Which also forces her parents to deal with their own pain. 

Through most of the movie it seems as though the writer wants us to believe that only a sad or disturbed person could like heavy metal music, but that idea is snuffed out with two important moments in the film: When Janus (Sveinn Ólafur Gunnarsson), the new priest in town, reveals that he is a metal fan and when said priest encourages Hera to embrace her true self and not let others' opinions of her define who she is. Hera ultimately learns that she doesn't need her grief to be  a good musician, and she doesn't need to give up her love of heavy metal in order to prove that she has finally moved past her grief. And with Hera's new found confidence in herself and her unorthodox way of living, they also can finally move past the grief that has plagued them for so many years. I most definitely liked this move and would totally watch it again!!! \m/