Fright Night

Vampire lore has had many types of themes over the last century of filmmaking.  The very story of Bram Stoker's "Dracula" had within it a love story of sorts, making it less of a horror story and more of a tragedy.  Sometimes, the vampire films we see are mostly monster movies featuring the bloodsucking character as a villainous monster.  Other times, the character is seen as a protagonist, siding with humans and even caring for them.  One theme that I hope the history of vampires in film will stay away from is the Twilight saga motif, where it's mainly a love story involving glittery vampires as a secondary theme—ugh!

As long as all the recognized rules are featured, I'm okay with it.  To be clear, vampires can be destroyed by sunlight and a wooden stake through the heart, they can't come in to one's home without being invited in by the owner, they can be harmed—if not destroyed—by garlic or blessed holy water or even touched by a crucifix.  Those are the main elements as to protect oneself from a vampire.  Other fundamentals about vampires in film are that they cannot cast a reflection and—depending upon the movie or story—they may be killed by silver.  I don't know when the silver mytho was established into the legend, perhaps within the Blade film franchise or comic book run, but it's understood now that that could be a defense against them in horror movies.

Between the decades of the late 20s into the early 60s, horror movies were pretty tame when it came to bloodletting or seeing someone—or something—getting killed.  It wasn't until the 60s and 70s—especially with Hammer Studios—that moviegoers were able to see some gore associated with vampire film mythology.  However—and maybe I'm a little biased in my opinion—I think the 80s was the best decade for horror films.  Whether it was creature features, vampire, zombies, werewolf, slasher or what have you, the 80s were the best.  Even with today's perfection of special effects and better cinematography, it can't hold a candle to 80s horror.

One of my favorite vampire films of the 80s was a little gem in 1985 called Fright Night, written and directed by Tom Holland.  Now Holland has had an interesting career as a writer and director of some of my favorite films.  He wrote the screenplay for Psycho II, which I thought was a worthy, and above average, sequel to Hitchcock's masterpiece.  Not only did he write and direct Fright Night, he also did so for Child's Play and Thinner.  If you get a chance, you should check out The Psycho Legacy; he really seems like a nice guy and enjoys recounting anecdotes about being involved in the sequel he had written.  I really wish he'd been involved in more movies back then because he really knew how to capture the feel of that decade and what moviegoers wanted to see back then.  If you grew up in my generation, then you know what I mean, especially when you watch this movie.

The film begins with high school sweethearts, Charley Brewster (William Ragsdale) and his girlfriend, Amy (Amanda Bearse), making out in his upstairs room as the late night show, "Fright Night," hosted by the famed 'vampire killer,' Peter Vincent (Roddy McDowall), is playing on TV in the background.  In the middle of the session, Charley hears new neighbors moving in and looks out the window to see two men appear to be

carrying a coffin into the house.  Charley, from then on, becomes obsessed with the mysterious men, especially after seeing women show up to the house and then hearing reports on the news of the same women missing or turning up dead.  As Charley keeps on eye on the new neighbors, and after seeing one of the men, Jerry Dandrige (Chris Sarandon), upstairs with a woman, noticing the characteristics he displays, it leads him to suspect Jerry is a vampire.

There's no denying this film is from the decade of the 80s when you view it.  The sets, attire, music, and style of filmmaking give it away for sure.  But that's a good thing, because I really miss the cinematography and style of movie sets you see in films like these.  For years I had thought that this movie was filmed at Universal Studios, thinking that Charley's street was the "Mockingbird Heights" portion of the back lot—I'm not sure what studio it was filmed, but it has that same quality feel to it.  Unfortunately, that's what today's movies steer clear from, for some reason...the filmmakers, I guess, don't want to feature the surrealism of a nice neighborhood or small town to be caught on camera.  I think they believe audiences won't buy into it, but, in fact, we want to go somewhere unlike the place we currently live.  I don't know...maybe they just don't want to make their pictures look the way 80s films did back in the day.

Speaking of the 1980s, one part of the film that really sends it home to let you know you're watching something from that decade, is the night club scene.  It seems that films from that era always had to make sure they featured some pop music to establish credibility of the filmmakers that they know what's hip.  On the contrary, however, the scene in the night club when Jerry is able to hypnotically keep Amy within his reach and have her dance with him is a pivotal scene.  Added to that passage of the story, you see Amy's point of view when her and Jerry are dancing in front of the club's mirrored walls and she sees that Jerry doesn't cast a shadow.

Now, Jerry Dandrige is more than your typical vampire—he's definitely a monster when called for and Chris Sarandon plays the part well.  He does the charming mystery man who has that slight edge of evilness in his smile quite well and at times he can be pretty terrifying—of course, it helps when you have some pretty terrifying prosthetics added to your body to make you look like a monster.  But there are times when he gives Charley that look that says he's going to kill him...soon...and it makes you feel the dread Charley feels.

One of my favorite characters from the film, Evil Ed (Stephen Geoffreys), really made this film as he was featured in some of the most memorable scenes.  Who can think of this film without remembering his high-pitched laugh and the line, "Oh, you're so cool, Brewster!"  More than the humorous sidekick to the main character, the character of Evil Ed does have a few imperative scenes that give a lift to the film.  When he's first turned by the vampire, it's such a sad dramatic scene and unsettling to see it since this movie, overall, is such a fun flick to watch.

Of course, the title of the film, Fright Night, refers to a very popular type of show throughout the country, and usually a locally produced show, at that time.  Back when I was growing up, throughout the 1970s and 1980s, the late night horror show was called "Creature Features" and was hosted by Bob Wilkins on Saturday evenings.  Of course, I was banned from watching it even though I begged and pleaded to my parents to let me stay up and see it.  But, on rare occasions-usually when my cousins came over to visit and
my parents played cards with my uncle and aunt, not paying attention to us rambunctious kids—my cousins and I would flip the channel to local Channel 2, KTVU, to see what horror movie would be on that night.  As karma would have it, the movie was usually something that scared the shit out of me and would give me night terrors for weeks, but I still have great memories and a longing fondness for those times.

So, understanding that concept—especially if you didn't grow up during that era—you can appreciate Roddy McDowall's character, Peter Vincent, and what he does for a living.  Essentially, he's just a character in a position that's becoming obsolete.  That, in turn, was happening in the real world-late night horror hosts were becoming a thing of the past in the mid-80s.  He even explains in the film, which rang true at the time: "I have just been fired because nobody wants to see vampire killers anymore...or vampires either.  Apparently, all they want to see are demented madmen running around in ski-masks, hacking up young virgins."  And he was right...at the time.  But besides all that, McDowall did a wonderful job at playing Peter Vincent.

Finally, William Ragsdale as Charley Brewster was a good choice.  The film needed to an actor with a nerdy presence, making it plausible that he would easily believe his next door neighbor is a vampire.  Yet, he has that everyday boy-next-door look to him to make you believe he isn't some outsider either.  Giving him a good-looking girlfriend (who knew that she would end up as...uh...Marcy?) and a friend goofier than him unquestionably substantiated him as the stable character in the story as well.  All in all, you see his point of view and find yourself wondering: What would you do if you found yourself in his situation?

Well, my final "bit" on Fright Night?

Now, many of you may have seen the remake a few years ago and probably enjoyed it (I can admit that I had as well), but it couldn't compete with its predecessor from the 80s.  I really can't understand why Colin Farrell would involve himself in a remake of an 80s horror film, but he made a decent choice in doing so (the Total Recall remake, however...not so much).  With that said, 1985's Fright Night is a great nostalgic piece of 80s horror—and vampire horror to boot—that's fun to watch and purely an awesome popcorn movie.  It's not pretentious or overly complicated—it's just a simple vampire movie for the modern day (if the modern day is 1985).  I highly recommend it and think any fan of 80s horror should look this one up and rent or buy it.

One caveat about trying to purchase this classic, however: You'll probably be able to find it on DVD, but if you want the Blu-Ray, you might be in for a shock.  Back in 2011, Screen Archives Entertainment released a limited edition Blu-Ray of the film.  When I say "limited edition," I mean they only released 3,000 copies.  I was lucky enough to be on a notification email list and was alerted when the discs were available for

purchase, but I could kick myself for not buying more than one.  The reason being?  Go on eBay and you'll see that there are astronomical prices for the Fright Night Blu-Ray.  In fact, a while back, I'd conducted a search and only saw one...for $349!  Oh well...at least I was able to get one to enjoy...I just hope it never breaks or becomes unplayable.  But you can still buy DVD copies or rent them, so please do so.

Well, that's it for today's post...thanks for reading...and I welcome any comments!

You can also tweet to me on Twitter, @CinemaBits, or check out my Facebook page here.

Jason X

Well…as one of the longest lasting slasher film franchises, this one finally jumped the shark by doing something very drastic and very risky.  Like the lesser-known Leprechaun franchise, the Friday the 13th filmmakers—the second go-around with New Line Cinema—decided to send their series icon, Jason Voorhees, into outer space.  Although not one of my favorites, I like what they did here and enjoy it for what it is: a mindless romp filled with special effects and Jason Voorhees letting loose on a spaceship in 2001's Jason X.

Now, I must say, there are a lot of things wrong with this film, but they’re mainly little things I can nitpick and useless stuff that can be easily overlooked.  For the most part, this film is very entertaining and New Line definitely made up for the Jason Goes to Hell debacle.

The film takes place in the near future, where the government has actually caught and imprisoned Jason Voorhees (Kane Hodder, reprising his role), keeping him in a research center near Crystal Lake.  The lead scientist, Rowan (Lexa Doig), wants to cryogenically freeze him since attempts to kill him have failed, as he’s able to regenerate and come back to life.  Of course, Jason is able to break free of his confines and run amok, killing everyone in the research facility, leaving Rowan as the last one alive.  She’s able to lure Jason

into the cryo area and lock him into the chamber as she starts the process to freeze him.  As she looks into the chamber, Jason slams his machete out into her, causing the chamber to leak.  As a result, not only does Jason freeze, but so does Rowan.  Cut to 447 years later, with a group coming into the research center, discovering both Rowan and Jason.  They take both of them and bring them onto their ship, flying off into space.  It’s explained that Earth has become too barren to support life, so humanity has moved to another planet called Earth Two.  The medical staff on board is able to revive Rowan, but decide against bringing back Jason, citing that his cells appeared to be too deteriorated to reanimate.   But he awakens anyway and goes after everyone on board, killing anyone in his way.

Now, I said I have some nitpicking about this film, so here they are.

First off, why couldn’t they get Jason right?  The Jason that always scared me is the ones where you really couldn’t see his eyes, being shadowed out in the hockey mask’s eyeholes.  In this film, they actually show a close-up of his eye and, knowing Kane Hodder’s appearance so well, I just saw his eye and not Jason’s.  Not only that, but did they give Jason a full head of hair?  Looks like it in some shots.  Basically, it looks like they just put the mask over his face and didn't bother to put the latex bald cap and prosthetics on his head.  A very shoddy job indeed.

Secondly, did no one else know about this research facility?  How is it possible that Rowan and Jason are cryogenically frozen and left there for 447 years?  Nobody ever came by to check on the place?  It just sat abandoned for four and half centuries?  What about the power to run that freezer?  Wouldn’t the power company come by and disconnect them for non-payment?  I don’t know…maybe it was nuclear and just ran forever.

Lastly—the dialogue.  Again, they get a little too comedic for my taste. When the girl’s about to get sucked out of the ship and into the vacuum of space, she yells out, “This sucks on so many levels!”  Really?  That’s the best you can come up with?  The lines in this movie almost left my eyes permanently rolled up into my brow.

Other than those few critiques—and even with them—I thoroughly enjoyed Jason X.  I like the concept of taking Jason to space, using futuristic concepts like the nanotechnology for medical purposes (and to create an Über-Jason) or the cryogenics in the beginning of the film.  Overall, the film is much like the first Alien film, where everyone is crammed into these tight quarters of the ship, wondering where the threat is and when it’ll strike.  Of course, the best concept filmmakers have ever come up with—since, of course, giving Jason the hockey mask to wear—is the creation of Über-Jason.  Yes, using the nanotechnology as the McGuffin in this film, they’ve produced an even more unstoppable killing machine.

After watching Jason X I kind of wished that they would’ve continued with this and gone on to make more sequels.  The conclusion of this film definitely left room for another to follow, but I guess they’d decided that staying in the present was the way to go.  How cool would it have been to see the new Über-Jason on Earth Two, dealing with a new futuristic world and finding a new place to call his territory, killing anyone who comes his way?  I would’ve paid to see that, specifically if it had been done right. 

It’s really hard to believe this is where the franchise went, especially when I remember the first few films.  It just shows that this little small-budgeted film really went places and made a lot of people money.  Gone, however, are the days of teenagers flocking to the theaters to watch the newest Friday the 13th film.  I think the last time I had to wait in a long line to see a movie is when the first Spider-Man film came out back in 2002, but that’s because it was a big budget film.  Since the 80s, I haven’t seen a rush to the movie houses to see the latest horror movie.  Even when the Friday the 13th remake came out in 2009, not very many people went out to see it.  I just think the heydays of theater-going are long gone.  With the technology of computers and phones, people really don’t see the need to go out and watch the latest film…they can probably find an illegal download of it and just keep entertained until the film is released on home media.  Even the exhilaration of watching a flick on the big screen has vanished since most people are able to afford to buy huge screen televisions to watch shows and films at home.

But, I continue to watch the art of film in a comfortable setting, being all too happy to plop down ten to fifteen bucks a go.  I still get a flutter of excitement when the lights start to dim and the previews begin to roll as I sit back and enjoy everything.  To watch a film, particularly a horror film, with a crowd of people who are into it as much as I am sends a tingle throughout my body and it’s a feeling that has never been matched.

Okay, enough of my rambling.  What, pray tell, is my final “bit” on Jason X?

Jason Voorhees runs amok in outer space!  That’s all I have to say!  Watch this film…it’s a fun ride!

As a side note, the final sequel to the original Friday the 13th series, as well as the A Nightmare on Elm Street franchise, Freddy vs Jason, was discussed in my look into the A Nightmare on Elm Street retrospective back on August of 2013.  Check it out here if you want to read about my discussion on the final sequel to all this.

Thanks for reading…and I welcome any comments!

Cinema Bits is on Twitter and Facebook.

Seeking Justice

Once again, Netflix streaming comes through for me with quite a nice movie in their “recommendations” section.  Looking for a change in my movie-watching the other day, I decided to browse through Netflix to see what I might like and I found 2011’s Seeking Justice, starring Nicolas Cage.  Thinking it was something along the lines of Law Abiding Citizen or Death Sentence, I was pleasantly surprised that it was something more intense and had quite a serious tone—something Cage seems to be fleeing from nowadays.  Although it left me with a few unanswered questions, I liked it a lot and found it quite entertaining.

When it comes to Nicolas Cage in films these days, it’s almost comedic how many movies he releases per year.  In 2011, he was featured in five movies; yet in 2012, there’s only one movie on his IMDb.com credits.  2013 has him with three and he’s got four, so far, slated for 2014.  But no matter how many movies he works on, one thing for sure, you’ll enjoy them to some degree. 

As Seeking Justice came up on the “popular” section of Netflix streaming, what caught my eye was when I read the description about a man who seeks justice after his wife is brutally assaulted and raped.  It made me believe that this was some kind of film about Nicolas Cage tracking down some guy who did unspeakable things to his wife and how he was going to get revenge.  But that wasn’t the case at all.  The other thing that caught my eye (and this was when the credits started popping up during the start of the film) was the cast featured within.  With all these well-known actors and actresses, how come I’ve never heard of this film?  I don’t remember Seeking Justice ever showing up in TV spots or even seeing trailers or posters in theaters.  It’s funny, because this is the second film I’ve enjoyed from Cage that has shown up in my Netflix streaming “recommendations” column, the first being Trespass.

Whatever the case, I chose the movie and decided to watch it.

Will Gerard (Cage), a school teacher, and his wife, Laura (January Jones), a musician, are a happily married couple, living in New Orleans.  One night, as Will is at a chess club with his friend, Jimmy (Harold Perrineau), who is the principal at the school where Will teaches, Laura is at music practice with her good friend, Trudy (Jennifer Carpenter).  After practice, Laura is brutally assaulted and raped by some unknown

man.  Will finds out later and goes to the hospital where she’s recovering.  As he goes to sit in the waiting room, he’s approached by a man named Simon (Guy Pearce) and offering to help “take care” of the man responsible for Laura’s attack.  Simon says that all Will will have to do in return is help later with being a lookout or with a call, giving him some vague reasoning.  At first Will doesn’t accept, but then reluctantly agrees.  After the assailant is dispatched, made to look like a suicide, Simon let’s Will know the job is done and that he’ll be contacted later on for what he can do for Simon.  Soon, Will finds out he’s in over his head.

It’s nice to see Nicolas Cage give a good performance in a film, leaving most of his eccentricities at the door and giving us someone we can see ourselves as.  We really don’t see him goof around much in this film…I think the only time he does is when he’s imitating James Brown for a brief moment as he jokes around with his wife and friends.  We see ourselves making the exact choices he makes, so there’s really no move he makes illogically.

January Jones is all right in her part as the wife, although there doesn’t seem to be a lot of chemistry between her and Cage.  Maybe it’s because I kept thinking of her off screen capers, how she’s sort of despised for certain things she has said in the media…but that shouldn’t affect my judgment of her performance.  She was okay.

I’ve always liked Harold Perrineau, from his time in “Lost” to his villainous role in “Sons of Anarchy,” he’s always been a solid actor in everything I’ve seen him in and doesn’t disappoint in this one.

Jennifer Carpenter is wasted in this film, limited to a few minutes—the filmmakers could’ve gotten someone else to just be “the friend” to January Jones’s character.  I was looking forward to her in this film because, being a fan of Showtime’s “Dexter,” I’ve always noticed she can have quite a range when it comes to showing emotion.  Maybe Carpenter and Jones should’ve swapped roles…I think that might’ve added to the film.

Guy Pearce nails it as Simon, the lead man of this secret organization.  He comes across as someone who youthink you can trust and you find yourself believing you’d do the same thing if you were Nicolas Cage’s character because Pearce seems so damned honest.  But he plays that nice-guy-come-backstabber so eloquently; he should get parts like this one more often.

One question that rang in my head after watching this: How does the organization that Simon runs get funded?  Seems that they recruit people like Will, who want justice or revenge, to do these deeds, but how does this pay off for them?  Is this just some club they have?  Do they all have day jobs?  It just doesn’t seem logical.  They all have some nice firepower, brand new black SUVs, cool wardrobes, so where’s the money coming from to pay for all this?  All this kind of went through my mind as I watched and I was waiting for some explanation as to how the group gets financed, but it never comes to fruition.  And, if they’re such ghosts that they can get into locked apartments or schools and they can beat any type of security, why don’t they just do the bad deeds themselves?   Why recruit some average Joe to do what they want and risk them fucking it up?  That’s the few things that I thought about while watching this film.

And my final “bit”?

Don’t get me wrong, I know that I’m praising this movie, but you need to see it for the enjoyment level you’ll get out of it.  Seeking Justice is most certainly a ridiculous movie played out with a serious tone, but it’s not thought-provoking or something that’ll make you analyze what you’ve just seen, just a good popcorn movie to sit and enjoy watching.  It’s not a perfect movie—there’s no message here, no moral of the story (unless one that says you shouldn’t get involved with a secret organization), just an interesting story from start to finish.  But…at the end…seems like they wanted to go with a sequel.  Well…just remember…”the hungry rabbit jumps.”

Thanks for reading and I welcome any comments!

Cinema Bits is on Twitter and Facebook.

The Lost Boys

Are you sick of me saying that the 80s were the best decade for horror films?  That no decade, since, has equaled the imperative period of cinema for the masses—mainly teens—to line up for the latest horror fest to play upon the screens?  Well, then I’ll let the reviews of films like these speak for themselves as we embark on one of the best vampire movies of that decade, The Lost Boys.

The film is noteworthy for a couple of reasons. 

First, it was filmed mainly in the town of Santa Cruz, California, a mere 40 minutes from the town I grew up in.  I remember when I first saw this flick; I noticed right away how similar the fictional town of Santa Carla looked so much like Santa Cruz.  However, I didn’t put it together that I was Santa Cruz, though the Boardwalk was featured throughout, even the familiar shops and locally renowned stage at the beach was highlighted as well.  It wasn’t until years later, with the advent of the internet, that I discovered the film was, in fact, made on location in Santa Cruz.

Secondly, the film is significant as the beginning of the collaboration of two of the stars of the film: Corey Feldman and Corey Haim.  Beyond The Lost Boys, the two actors teamed up on nearly ten more films after this one.  Sadly, Corey Haim died of a drug overdose in 2010.  But it’s worth noting that the last film he was featured in with his collaborating costar was the 2008 sequel to this film,  Lost Boys: The Tribe.  So, it’s sort of symbolic that the work the two actors were featured in together was bookended with The Lost Boys and its sequel.

Well, the film opens with Lucy (Dianne Wiest) and her two sons, Michael (Jason Patric) and Sam (Corey Haim), moving to the coastal town of Santa Carla to live with her father (Barnard Hughes) after her divorce.  Michael hangs out at the beach and soon gets involved with the local motorcycle-riding vampires, led by David (Keifer Sutherland), although he doesn’t know what they are until he’s turned.  Sam meets the local comic book/vampire experts, Edgar and Alan Frog (Corey Feldman and Jamison Newlander), and they inform Sam that Santa Carla is teeming with vampires.  He thinks they’re crazy at first, but after he notices his brother’s behavior, it confirms what the Frog brothers have told him.  But in order to cure Michael from being a bloodsucker, the leader of the vampires must be destroyed.  Can Sam and the Frog brothers kill the vampire leader to save his brother?

The film starts off a bit with the love story between Michael and a girl he meets near the beach during a concert named Star (Jami Gertz), so we get a little romance.  Then, when David shows up and takes Star away on his motorcycle, a sort of love triangle forms.  From then on, Michael tries to prove himself with David and his gang, playing chicken with his motorcycle near a cliff, drinking what he thinks is wine—but is a substance that turns him into a vampire (unbeknownst to him)—and dangling off a railroad bridge.  But after all this, the film switches gears and it’s about Sam with his new friends, the Frog brothers, becoming the vampire hunters throughout the rest of it.  And that’s what’s really enjoyable about this flick.

The movie has everything to make it interesting, but not convoluted, as we have the love story going from vampirism and leading to vampire hunting…all with a little comedy sprinkled here and there.  It’s nostalgic and fun, yet creepy and scary at times.  Keifer’s mullet may seem a little dated, but he’s still a bad-ass in this film.

Now the film has a pretty good twist at the end, however it leaves a bit of confusion on how it was missed by the characters early on.  It may have been a cheat, maybe not, but you can discuss and think about it later on after the movie ends.  However it came to be, the film boasts a very cool climax, vampires fighting vampires, other vampires getting their just desserts, and the unlikeliest of heroes comes to save the day.

Above all else, the filming location is what makes the film, because Santa Cruz was—and still is—the perfect place to set a movie about vampires existing amongst the living…as the soundtrack song goes in the film, “People Are Strange” in that little beachside burg.  Although I live quite a distance from the town now—around 180 miles compared to the 30 miles that used to span between the town and me—I occasionally visit Santa Cruz and always think of the movie whenever I find myself there.  The town is timeless and still looks the same as it had back in 1987 (and back further than that!), which relates so much to making it the setting of a place where vampires reside.  The Boardwalk is the one place highlighted in the film and it hasn’t changed a bit either.

One thing that’s interesting about this film is the credit you may or may not catch when you see the beginning of this film; Richard Donner is the executive producer of The Lost Boys and, for some reason, feels right.  In fact, if I had found out that he directed this movie, I would’ve believed it, because the film almost feels like an adult version of The Goonies.

The original score created in the movie is by Thomas Newman.  You may have heard some of his scores in films like The Shawshank Redemption or Finding Nemo, and so many others.  He definitely has a way to convey emotions into movies and he has no problem doing it here.  Mixed with Newman’s composition of music throughout is a number of songs that fit so well in this movie like the aforementioned “People Are Strange” by Echo & the Bunnymen, covering the famous hit by The Doors.  The one song that’ll stick to your brain after watching this is the theme song of the movie, “Cry Little Sister” by Gerard McMann.  However, above all else, you can’t—and won’t—forget Tim Cappello’s performance at the beach concert.  You may recognize him from a few of Tina Turner’s music videos as the oiled up musclebound saxophonist, which is exactly his look here in The Lost Boys.

So, with all that said, what’s my final “bit” on The Lost Boys?

If it weren’t for the bad language and some of the intense special effects, I’d say this would make a great family movie.  It’s a very entertaining motion picture with the vampire lore updated for modern times (for the 80s anyway).  It’s heartwarming while being heroic and peppered with bits of comedy all the way through.  If you haven’t seen it, you must do so now.

As a side note, there have been two sequels that followed this film.  The first one, Lost Boys: The Tribe, was released straight to home media in 2008 and wasn’t very good.  It did feature Corey Feldman throughout with a cameo by Corey Haim after the end credits, but it mainly focused on other characters as it left Edgar Frog a secondary one.  The second sequel, Lost Boys: The Thirst (also straight to home media), was much better and primarily focused on Edgar Frog as a vampire hunter.  You won’t miss anything if you skip the first sequel as it’s mainly a retread of the first film and doesn’t really play into the next film.  However, both are inferior to the original film, so you may want to just skip both sequels.

Anyway… that’s it for today’s post…thanks for reading…and I welcome any comments!

Cinema Bits is on Twitter and Facebook.

Jason Goes to Hell: The Final Friday

Well, after New Line Cinema bought out the Friday the 13th rights from Paramount Studios, this is what they brought us... Jason Goes to Hell: The Final Friday...

...and it's a wonder they didn't go bankrupt.

First off, it's kind of strange that New Line would go through the trouble to buy the franchise rights and title the first film, under their studio moniker, as The Final Friday.  You'd think they'd want a fresh start, something with "continues" or "returns" or "revenge" in the title.  Naming it "final" conjures up memories of Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare—which, by the way, was under New Line Cinema as well.

I remember seeing this advertised back in '93 and that's exactly what I thought, that it was just going to be some stupid story that led up to a few minutes of a grand finale.

Boy, was I right.

The story begins with an FBI ambush of Jason Voorhees, as he's led out into the open and they open fire on him, completely destroying him.  All that's left is pieces of him that are collected and sent to the local hospital morgue for examination.  Once there, the lead coroner (Richard Grant) begins going through the parts of Jason's body.  As he gets to his heart, he becomes mesmerized by it then suddenly begins eating it (?),

resulting in him becoming possessed by Jason.  He leaves, heading for Crystal Lake, being able to transfer himself from body to body on the way.  Meanwhile, bounty hunter, Creighton Duke (Steven Williams), is in town to look for Jason and finds out that the serial killer is able to switch from person to person, until he transfers himself to a member of his bloodline—his half-sister and her family—giving him the power to be reborn.  The only way to stop this from happening is if a member of Jason's lineage kills him with a magical dagger.

Really, that's all I care to get into.  The story's so convoluted and stretched out that it'd take me quite a few pages to explain it all.  How the filmmakers were able to get this story green-lit is beyond me.  I mean, didn't they learn a valuable lesson when part five was released?  You can't have a Friday the 13th movie without Jason.  Even if it is his soul moving around from person to person, the audience wants to see the hulking figure in a hockey mask.  It was previously attempted with Wes Craven's Shocker, resulting in a flop, so what made them think it would work here?  It was as if the filmmakers wanted to make an amalgamated rip-off of Shocker and The Hidden, deciding to stuff that script into a Friday the 13th movie.

I've said before that I usually watch parts one through four when I decide to go see these movies, but if I go beyond that, this is the movie I have trouble getting through.  I hate to say it, being that I'm a big fan of the whole franchise, but this movie is terrible.  Not only does the absence of Jason bother me, but the subplots don't make sense and characters are just annoying, especially Joey and Shelby (Rusty Schwimmer and Leslie Jordan).  As you watch this, you find yourself not giving a shit about what happens to anybody within this film.

Okay, so the biggest problem I have with this—and you better stop reading if you don't want any spoilers—is a scene later in the film where the remaining characters are aware of Jason being able to jump into any body he wants.  However, the other characters—as well as the audience—are able to recognize whose body Jason has taken over by noticing the lack of speech in the person.  With that said, and I won't say who it is (although I don't know why—not like you'll be able to sit through this), but the person who he jumps into is able to speak, tricking another character into trusting him that he's not Jason.  Now, this is a big cheat since it's been well established throughout the movie that whoever Jason takes over, he still remains mute to clue us in as we watch the film.  But the filmmakers decided to make him speak—albeit, in the body he's in—to throw us, the audience, off to make us think the person is the real person and not Jason.  If you haven't seen this and have just read what I'd just written, you may think this is just a bunch of garbage...and, unfortunately, it is.

Folks, you can easily skip over this one, because it does not jump into the next outing, which is Jason X.  You don't even need to have the knowledge of this movie's existence to get into Freddy vs Jason.  So, do yourselves a favor and go right past this one and pop in Jason X.  You'll have a good, yet silly, time with that one (more to follow).

My final "bit" on Jason Goes to Hell: The Final Friday?

Unless you're the most hardcore fan of the franchise that Jason built, just pass this one up.  It seems to be made by a group of writers and producers who just did not know the source material, as well as the history of the series' audience, and just flat out didn't give a shit what they were churning out here.  It's a bit of a rip-off, much like part five, but I'll watch part five over this one anytime.

Thanks for reading...and I welcome any comments!

Cinema Bits is on Twitter and Facebook.

Planet of the Apes (2001)

In 2001, when it was announced that Fox had brought on Tim Burton to helm the remake of Planet of the Apes, I’d become a bit interested.  Especially in seeing that we’d come a long way in movie technology, specifically in the special effects realm of it, I had actually agreed silently that the film had garnered the need for a reboot.  Of course it was no surprise that Danny Elfman would take the music score position, as he has done on most of Burton’s films, but it definitely sweetened the deal that he was brought on board.  However, the one addition to the production of this film was the one and only, Rick Baker—make-up artist extraordinaire.

At this point in my life, I’d been familiar with the 1968 original, knowing full well it was a Charlton Heston vehicle that’s been world renowned as a classic.  Besides seeing bits and pieces of it over the years, when it happened to be on TV, I’d never fully watched the original from beginning to end (about a year ago, I did, so please, no hate mail).

Seeing it as a golden opportunity, I decided to go out and purchase the book that the films were based on.  Upon doing so, I’d learned a bit about the novel and the author who had written in.  Turns out that the author, Pierre Boulle, is French and the book was originally written in French.  Only after its popularity had it been translated to English and other languages around the world, where it had become established.  All that aside, I found the book to be very interesting and entertaining, keeping the original film in my head as I’d gone through the book.  Now, I know I’d mentioned that I’d never fully watched the original movie, but I knew enough about the look of the characters and sets to plant it firmly in my brain so as to enjoy the novel even more.

Without giving anything away—I don’t want to give up any spoilers in this review—I knew one thing about the original film and that was the ending.  After finally seeing the 1968 original a while back, I was able to see how this would be a big shock to the moviegoers of the late 60s.  If you do venture out to rent the 1968 version, one cool thing I had read about the ending to the original was that it was Rod Serling’s idea.  See, the ending in the original film differs greatly from the ending of the book.  Both are shocking, but after knowing how the film ended, the ending in the book shocked me quite a bit.

So, anyway, I had read the book pretty quickly and finished it well before the 2001 remake was released to theaters.  The trailers I had seen looked good and the announced cast excited me a bit, so I set out to watch Planet of the Apes on Friday, July 27th, and enjoyed it thoroughly.

The film opens on the space station Oberon in the year 2029.  Leo Davidson (Mark Wahlberg) works on the ship, training primates—mainly chimpanzees—for space exploration.  As an electromagnetic storm is seen approaching the station, one of the chimps, Pericles, is sent in one of the space pods to investigate the

storm.  Suddenly, the pod disappears off the radar and no sign of the pod can be seen from the station.  Seeing that Leo was very close to the chimp, he goes against orders and takes another pod out to find Pericles.  As Leo flies into the space storm, the pod’s gauges and controls become erratic and nonfunctional.  He finally comes out of the storm, still not being able to locate Pericles’s pod and tries to communicate with the space station.  With no luck, Leo takes the pod to the nearest planet he sees and crash lands in a body of water on the surface.  Upon exiting the pod and swimming to shore, he finds that apes rule this alien world while humans are the hunted animals.

Before I go any further, I’ve got to say that this film seems pretty passé now that we’ve seen the awesome 2011 film, Rise of the Planet of the Apes and I’m sure we’ll all be watching Dawn of the Planet of the Apes.  With the realistic-looking apes presented in those films—thanks in whole to the near perfect motion capture and CGI meshing technology—the 2001 version seems very outdated.  But if you can forget that you’ve seen the latest Apes films and pretend you’re seeing Tim Burton’s movie for the very first time, you may be able to enjoy it for what it was.

First and certainly foremost, the make-up work by Rick Baker is phenomenal!  His involvement in this film is probably the one reason I had gone to go see it.  The two main actors who play apes in this film—Tim Roth as Thade and Michael Clark Duncan as Attar—look incredible!  Even Paul Giamatti as the Orangutan, Limbo, looks amazing.  For using practical effects and staying away from CGI, Baker did a magnificent job in making these actors into primates.

Danny Elfman’s music scores are usually hit or miss with me and I usually don’t pay attention to it one way or another.  However, Elfman hit it out of the park with this film, perfectly giving us a sound that goes with the subject matter of the film.  Heavy on the percussion, it’s easy to believe this would be the music of the apes as it sounds like music you may hear within a Native-American tribe or in the deepest part of the amazon jungle.  I’ve got to say that this is the most fitting score to a movie I’ve ever heard from Elfman.

As for the leading man, Mark Wahlberg, he’s probably the weakest link in this reimagining.  It’s just that we get the same “say hello to ya mutha fuh me” character, so it’s tough to get past the fact you’re watching Wahlberg as a futuristic astronaut going up against talking apes.  But he holds his own and has a good chemistry with the rest of the cast—I’ll say that much for him here.

In comparing the 1968 to this 2001 version, there are many points I can make about both, making it a tough decision as to which is the superior film.  Certainly the make-up effects are above par in this newer version, making the 1968 film look like a bunch of people in cheap Halloween masks.  But the story in the older version is more intriguing, with a much better pace set up until we get to the ending.  Each film has a surprising ending, both equally in what it represents, but I may side with the newer version for its shock value.  I definitely saw it coming as the 2001 ending comes straight from the source material.  But it was well played and I think most people won’t see it coming.

Now, I won’t tell you what precedes or ensues the scene I’m about to describe, but it’s something I had a little problem with.  As a bit of thanks and a way for Mark Wahlberg’s character to bid farewell to the character of Ari (Helena Bonham Carter), who happens to be a female ape in the movie, he gives her a lengthy kiss—no tongue or anything slobbery, just a kiss.  I guess it seemed appropriate for the story and
what the characters had been through, but it still seemed a bit cheesy and I think they could’ve gone with a hug or a hand-hold.  The scene caused a bit of unintentional laughter throughout the theater when this was first screened in my neck of the woods and it definitely caused me to groan when I saw it playing out.

After watching some of the behind-the-scenes featurettes, I gained a bit more respect for what was done for this film.  The training the actors had gone through to learn how to walk and act like primates was impressive as they certainly didn’t just make up a bunch of people to look like apes and told them to have at it.  The work they had done shows and positively pays off in the film.

So, what’s my final “bit” on Planet of the Apes?

2001’s Planet of the Apes was certainly a huge undertaking for Tim Burton to pull off—especially the way they did it.  If it weren’t for Rick Baker’s make-up effects wizardry, the film probably wouldn’t be as good as it was.  Like I’d mentioned, the sets were awesome, making you believe you’re really watching events happen on another planet.  The look of each and every actor in gorilla, chimpanzee and orangutan costumes was fantastic, making you believe it’d be possible for apes to evolve, one day, into an intelligent race who can easily dominate humans.  Pretty scary thought, huh?

That’s all I have for now…thanks for reading and, as always, I welcome your comments.

Cinema Bits is on Twitter and Facebook.

Unforgiven

If there’s one man—one actor—you’d think of when discussing westerns it’s got to be Clint Eastwood.  The gruff voice and look he’s been blessed with has always been perfect for the role of someone from the old west.  Continually a perfect fit for the gunslinger with no name who comes into town not looking for trouble but seems to always find it—that’s the role that Eastwood was born to play.  From the trio of Spaghetti Westerns he did with Sergio Leone in the mid-60s and up until this, his final western, 1992’s Unforgiven.

You can look at this as Clint Eastwood’s swan song…his last hurrah…his touching goodbye to his badass cowboy character, but what a way to go out!  Although he was pushing 62 years of age—and may have looked it at the beginning of this film—by the end of this flick, he looked like someone you best not mess with.

It’s hard to imagine anyone else with the career that Eastwood has enjoyed and it’s hard to believe how he started out.  I happened upon a few cameos he’d appeared in a few years ago when I decided to watch a couple of old creature features from the 1950s: Tarantula and Revenge of the Creature.  If you blink, you might miss him, but if you’re a fan of Eastwood you’ll know his voice when you hear it.  In Tarantula, he plays a fitting character as the lead commander in a jet squadron flying in to destroy the creature.  In Revenge of the Creature, Clint has a small walk-on role of a lab assistant who misplaces a mouse, but soon finds it…in his lab coat pocket (cue the funny, lighthearted music).  However, it wasn’t long until he found himself in an appropriate role as Rowdy Yates on TV’s “Rawhide.”  The rest, they say, is history.

Back in 1992—and after seven years since his last western film (Pale Rider)—when this film was announced to be released and a few friends wanted to go see it, I had my reservations about it.  I actually had the audacity to think that Clint Eastwood was too far past his prime to make another western of the same caliber as his older ones.  When watching some of Eastwood’s latest films like Heartbreak Ridge or The Dead Pool or even Pink Cadillac, I thought that he was better fitted as a modern type of film star, playing parts in his age range, and couldn’t see him back in a cowboy hat and boots.  However, after watching him in Unforgiven, especially after the finale, I had learned that I was so wrong.

In the small town of Big Whiskey, Wyoming, a cowpoke by the name of Mike (David Mucci) is insulted when a girl at the local brothel, Delilah (Anna Levine), makes a comment about the size of his package, prompting him to attack her with a knife and cut up her face with the help of his friend, Davey (Rob Campbell).  The women of the brothel want the men to pay for what they’d done, but the local Sheriff, Little Bill (Gene Hackman), agrees to let them go as long as they reimburse the proprietor, Skinny DuBois (Anthony James), with a few horses come spring thaw.  Not satisfied with the outcome, the women pool together a thousand dollars and put the word out of a reward for killing the two men in spite of Sheriff Bill’s disdain for assassins.  William Munny (Eastwood), recently a widower and taking care of his two children as a farmer, is visited by a young man (Jaimz Woolvett) who asks for his help in killing the two men, agreeing to
split the reward.  Munny, admitting he used to be a ruthless killer, turns down the offer and sends the young man—self-proclaimed as “The Schofield Kid”—away, but soon changes his mind as he sees the money would help him and his children.  After getting his old friend, Ned Logan (Morgan Freeman), to go with him, they soon catch up with “The Schofield Kid” and make their way in finding the men who cut up the woman.

The film starts off a little comedic at times, while other times you feel a wonderful tale is being told.  The affirmation of the heroes and villains are not so clear until the third act of the film, where you just want the movie to go on and on.  From the beginning—as with most Eastwood films—we know that his character is the protagonist, but we’re led to believe Hackman’s character may be one as well.  When the smug English Bob (Richard Harris) comes into town, putting down Americans and boasting about his own country, as an audience you really do not like this guy and feel Hackman’s character is a good guy for beating him down.  But that all changes when the third act comes into play and all bets are off.

Unforgiven is the fourteenth film that Eastwood has directed and starred in and I‘ll say he has quite a flair for it.  The way some of these scenes were shot really shows the beauty of the old west as it highlighted great scenery, showed off the lay of the land, and depicted how life was lived back then.  Eastwood doesn’t try to bolster himself as a perfect character, nor does he give himself any more screen time than his costars.  Everybody has their part to play and it adds up for a magnificent western film.

Yes, Eastwood is one of my favorite actors and I have a huge DVD and Blu-Ray collection of his films.  I’ve seen nearly all of the films he’s acted in and quite a few of the ones he’s directed (but not featured in the cast).  His deadpan quips and one-liners will go down in cinematic history as lines we’d all love to use in real life—and wish we’d thought of them.  From his famous “Do you feel lucky?” and “Go ahead, make my day!” lines of the Dirty Harry films to the best line in Unforgiven after Gene Hackman’s Little Bill tells Eastwood’s Munny that he’d just shot an unarmed man: “Well, he should’ve armed himself…”

Overall, I love just about everything in this film, from the story to the sets to the authentic wardrobe worn by the cast, all of it gives it the feel that you’re back in time and living in the old west.

I commend Clint Eastwood on this film, and most other films he’s involved with as an actor/director.  He is definitely one of a kind, knowing where he comes from and how he started.  Just reading the dedication during the end credits says it all: “Dedicated to Sergio and Don."  Sergio Leone brought forth Eastwood as the western superstar in the trilogy of Italian westerns and Don Siegel directed Eastwood in a handful of hit movies early on in his career as well.

On another note, you may or may not have read the succession of books by Stephen King called “The Dark Tower” series, about a lone gunslinger, Roland, on a quest to find The Dark Tower.  He goes on a journey across an otherworldly landscape, first going after “the man in black” and then continuing on his search.  Along the way, he finds portals to other worlds—including our present day world—and finds people to join his “ka-tet,” training them to be gunslingers as well.  It’s a spectacular narrative and I hope one day the whole story will be put on film respectably.  But I just have to say, the whole time I was reading the books, I’d always picture Clint Eastwood as Roland.  He was a man of little words, but was a badass as a gunslinger.

Well, my final “bit” on Unforgiven?

A simple story filmed in such a superb style, giving us equal amounts of suspense, action and drama.  Eastwood definitely gives us someone to cheer for and you certainly will by the end of this film.  It’s a perfect ending to his career as a western film star and he definitely went out with a bang.  Unforgiven is one for the books.  If you’ve never seen this film, what are you waiting for?

Hey, thanks for reading and I welcome any comments!

Cinema Bits is on Twitter and Facebook.