A Quickie With Lisa Marie: Conquest of the Planet of the Apes (dir. by J. Lee Thompson)

Posted on June 30, 2011 by Lisa Marie Bowman

(WARNING: SPOILERS BELOW)

Released in 1972, Conquest of the Planet of the Apes was the fourth film in the original Planet of the Apes saga. Taking place two decades after the end of Escape from the Planet of the Apes, Conquest details how Caesar, the son of Cornelius and Zira, eventually rallies his fellow apes to overthrow humanity. Caesar, in this film, is played by Roddy McDowall and Conquest features what is probably his best performance of the series.

Conquest of the Planet of the Apes is definitely the most radical film of the series and it’s probably one of the most radical films of the 1970s. Once you peel away the sci-fi/fantasy wrapping, you’re left with one of the few “mainstream” studio films to ever promote the idea of overthrowing society with a violent revolution. Even when viewed today, it’s odd to consider that this violent and rather dark film was actually given the same G rating that was otherwise exclusively given to children’s films. Obviously, the poor critical reputation of the Planet of the Apes series kept the Hollywood censors from really paying attention to what they were watching.

Director J. Lee Thompson goes for a far different direction from the previous more television-orientated directors involved with the series. Thompson emphasizes that savage, totalitarian aspect of future human civilization. This is a film in which the most sympathetic human character (the circus owner played by Ricardo Montalban) is graphically tortured and murdered within the first few minutes of the film. This is followed by Caesar being given electro-shocked treatment by the cheerful torturer Kolp (Severn Darden, who is a chilling villain) and finally, Caesar and his fellow apes violently overthrowing society while the futuristic city burns in the background.

Director Thompson reportedly based the ape uprising on contemporary news reports about the Black Panthers and it brings a real sense of urgency to the film. What sets this film apart is that director Thompson is clearly on the side of the Apes and by the end of the film, so is the audience. McDowall’s passionate performance is neatly contrasted with an equally impassioned performance from Don Murray (who plays Breck, the racist leader of the humans) and the audience is firmly on McDowall’s side by the end of the film, cheering as their own civilization is destroyed.

Originally, Thompson wanted to end the film with McDowall giving a fiery speech announcing that the time of man was finished. However, this finally proved to be too much for the film’s producers and, at the last minute, the scene was clumsily redubbed to allow Caesar to suddenly — out of nowhere — have a change of heart and call for a peaceful co-existence. This revised ending — though it did leave things open for yet another sequel — is an undeniable weakness. It just doesn’t feel right.

With that in mind, here’s Thompson’s original, unseen ending, in which Caesar watches as his apes followers murder Don Murray. It gives you a feeling of the type of film that Thompson was going for:

A Quickie With Lisa Marie: Escape From The Planet of the Apes (dir. by Don Taylor)

Posted on June 29, 2011 by Lisa Marie Bowman

(Warning: Potential Spoilers, especially if you’re good at reading between the lines of my attempts to be all mysterious-like)

Continuing with our look at the original Planet of the Apes films, we come to 1971’s Escape from The Planet of the Apes.

Escape From The Planet of the Apes starts out with a huge problem — how do you make a sequel to a film that literally ended with the entire planet being destroyed? Escape handles this problem by reversing the plotline of the original film. Instead of a group of humans going into the future and landing on a planet dominated by apes, this film features three apes going into the past and landing on a planet dominated by the past. It’s a premise that the film handles with a surprising amount of cleverness and the end result is probably the best of the various Planet of the Apes sequel. Certainly, it is the only one that can stand alone as a film separate from the rest of the series.

Using Taylor’s old space capsule, Zira (Kim Hunter), Cornelius (Roddy McDowall), and Milo (Sal Mineo, who you know is doomed because he’s the only one of the three who hasn’t appeared in either of the two previous films) escape Earth shortly before Charlton Heston blows the planet up at the end of Beneath the Planet of the Apes. Slipping through the same vortex as Heston did in the first film, they end up crash landing on Earth in the year 1974.

At first, Cornelius and the outspoken Zira become media celebrities. They do interviews with the press, appear on the covers of magazines, and are generally celebrated like simian Kardashians. However, one scientist — played by a very handsome Eric Braeden (seriously, he has gorgeous hair in this film) — isn’t as charmed by Zira and Cornelius. Instead, he views them as threats to the future of the human race, especially after he discovers that Zira is pregnant.

The character that Braeden plays, by the way, is named Dr. Otto Hasslien and attentive viewers will recognize the name from a throw-away reference made by Taylor (Charlton Heston) in the original Planet of the Apes. One of the more interesting subtexts in this film is that, much as chimpanzees Zira and Cornelius are this film’s equivalent to the human Taylor, Braeden’s Hasslien is this film’s version of Dr. Zaius. Much as Maurice Evans did for Dr. Zaius, Braeden brings a certain ambiguity to his villianous character. Though Braeden’s actions are ultimately hateful, it’s also made clear that they’re more motivated by fear than by evil. Indeed, when Braeden first appears in this film, he’s almost likable. It’s only at the film’s conclusion that we become fully aware of the irony that the human, “civilized” Dr. Hasslien ultimately shows less mercy and empathy to Zira and Cornelius than the ape Dr. Zaius showed to Taylor. The moral ambiguity of Braeden’s performance makes this a far more resonant film than most mainstream critics are willing to admit.

As for, Zira and Cornelius, the once-fawing public eventually turns against them as it becomes apparent that for the two of them to exist, humanity has to be wiped out. Zira and Cornelius find themselves hunted fugitives, fleeing for their lives while the whole planet — with the exception of a zoo keeper played by Ricardo Montalban and another scientist (played by Bradford Dillman — what a great name for an actor) — seems to be determined to destroy them.

Escape From The Planet of the Apes starts out as a likable, rather breezy social satire (much like Pierre Boulle’s Monkey Planet, the novel that Planet of the Apes was loosely adapted from) and that makes it even more surprising when, about halfway through, the movie shifts gears and becomes a rather dark and bleak action film. It all ends, like many films from the early 70s, in a brutal act of violence that carries a surprising punch to it. It’s after the end of the film that we truly become aware just how involved we had become with Zira and Cornelius. A lot of that has to do with the strong performances of McDowall and Hunter who both created characters that came across as real and worthy, regardless of how many layers of makeup they were acting under. Their chemistry as a couple makes this underrated film one of the surprising gems of the early 70s.

A Quickie With Lisa Marie: Beneath the Planet of the Apes (dir. by Ted Post)

Posted on June 28, 2011 by Lisa Marie Bowman

(WARNING: SPOILERS)

Continuing my look at the original Planet of the Apes film series, we now come to the first sequel, 1970’s Beneath the Planet of the Apes. Rather blandly directed by Ted Post and featuring only a cameo performance from Charlton Heston, Beneath the Planet of the Apes is rarely given the credit it deserves. Yes, the first half of the film is rather forgettable but once you get through it, you discover one of the darkest films of the 1970s.

Beneath the Planet of the Apes begins with yet another human astronaut crash landing on the Earth of the future. This astronaut is Brent and, as played by James Franciscus, he comes across as a slightly more earnest, far less charismatic copy of Charlton Heston’s Taylor. Brent has been sent in search of Taylor. Anyway, once he lands on the planet, he is quickly arrested by the apes, meets Zira (Kim Hunter) and Cornelius (David Watson, stepping in for Roddy McDowall), and then escapes with the still-mute Nova (Linda Harrison). With Nova, Brent makes his way to the Forbidden City where he comes across the ruins of Grand Central Station and discovers that he’s actually on Earth.

Yes, that’s right. The first hour of this 95 minutes film is essentially just the first movie all over again. And yes, this film’s (many) critics are correct when they say that this first hour drags and tests the audience’s patience. Obviously, Brent may be shocked to discover he’s on Earth but it’s old news to us and many viewers are probably tempted to give up on this film before Brent even figures it out.

But don’t give up! No, because if you stick with this film you’ll discover that, once Brent figures out where he is, things get really, really fucked up.

Essentially, Brent discovers that the ruins of New York City are now underground. And in this underground city, there are people. But they’re not people like Brent or Nova. No, these are people who have been horribly scarred by radiation. They’ve also mutated to the extent that they’ve developed the powers of telepathy and mind control. Under the leadership of Mendez the Tenth (Paul Richards), they spend their time singing hymns to the Alpha/Omega nuclear bomb, or as they call it “The Holy Bomb.” They keep the Holy Bomb in St. Patrick’s Cathedral.

These mutants capture both Nova and Brent. Brent is tossed into a cell and who else is there but Taylor? And Taylor, believe it or not, has become even more sarcastic and scornful than before! Seriously, Charlton Heston frequently spoke about how much he hated this film and it’s obvious in his performance. Heston might not have been happy about being there but the audience is because, even if he is busy hating himself, Taylor brings a jolt of life to the film.

And just in time because the Apes, led by Urko (James Gregory), have invaded the forbidden city! They gun down all the mutants. Brent , Taylor, and Nova manage to escape their prison and all three of them are promptly gunned down as well. As he dies, Taylor manages to set off the Alpha/Omega bomb. We see a blinding white light followed by a somber voice over that tells us: “In one of the countless billions of galaxies in the universe, lies a medium-sized star, and one of its satellites, a green and insignificant planet, is now dead.”

And that’s it! There’s no final credits, not even a black-out. Instead, on that note, the movie just stops.

Now, seriously, tell me that’s not a great movie.

A Quickie With Lisa Marie: Bad Teacher (dir. by Jake Kasdan)

Posted on June 28, 2011 by Lisa Marie Bowman

So, last Friday night, I went and saw the new Cameron Diaz comedy, Bad Teacher. Right now, all sorts of mainstream critics are running out of ways to trash this film but, for the most part, they seem to overlooking one important fact. Flawed and unfocused as this film may be, it’s funny. It made me laugh, it made Jeff laugh, it made my sister laugh, and it made my friend Evelyn laugh. (Of course, according to Evelyn, I laugh at everything, even if it means I’m the only person laughing, but that’s another story. Hi, Evelyn!) It also made almost the entire audience laugh. Admittedly, it was a small audience. I guess everyone else was busy crying at Cars 2. (It’s a Pixar film after all.) As for Bad Teacher, it may not be a great film but it works.

Anyway, Bad Teacher tells the story of a very bad teacher, played by Cameron Diaz. She doesn’t care about her students, goes out of her way to antagonize her fellow students, and shows up to work everyday either hungover or stoned. She’s also snobbish, petty, shallow, and you’d totally hate her except for the fact that 1) you can’t help but admire the way that Diaz throws herself into being as crass and as shallow as possible (she may be playing a vain character but there’s no vanity in her performance) and 2) every other teacher in the school is so annoyingly perky and movie perfect that you can’t help but share Diaz’s disgust with them.

Anyway, Diaz is teaching because her rich fiancée has dumped her. (One of the better jokes in the film is the number of lies that Diaz comes up with to explain why her engagement ended.) She is content to spend the school day asleep while her class watches movies featuring other, better teachers. However, then she meets the new substitute teacher who is really kinda creepy with his constant “up with humanity” perkiness but is also 1) rich and 2) played Justin Timberlake so he’s like totally hot. However, Timberlake is dating Diaz’s sworn enemy, the incredibly upbeat Amy Squirrel (played by Lucy Pond). Diaz realizes that the only way she’ll ever capture Timberlake’s attention is if she can raise the money necessary to get bigger boobs. The rest of the film basically deals with Diaz’s efforts to raise the money for her boob job (among other things, she accepts bribes from parents and embezzles from the school car wash) while continuing to pursue Timberlake and be pursued by the gym teacher (Jason Segal).

That’s actually a lot of plot for an 89 minute film and, as a result, Bad Teacher does feel overly episodic and ultimately disjointed. But so what? I laughed consistently for 89 minutes and that’s the important thing. It’s not that the film itself is filled with witty lines as much as it’s the fact that the entire cast so totally throws themselves into playing these genuinely odd characters. Pond steals every scene she’s in and Timberlake especially seems to be having fun spoofing his own image. If you think that watching people dry hump while fully clothed can’t be hilarious, than you haven’t seen Justin Timberlake in Bad Teacher.

For me, there were two other things that made Bad Teacher a success.

1) It confirms what we all always suspected and knew in middle school and high school — that our teachers were a bunch of horny, pot-smoking degenerates. Admittedly, I used to actually get high with my drama teacher — shhhhh! Don’t tell anyone! — but I’ve always figured that same was probably true of every high school drama student. This film confirms that the history and math teachers were just as stoned.

2) It features this scene, which got laughs and applause from the Dallas audience that I saw it with:

A Quickie With Lisa Marie: Planet of the Apes (dir. by Franklin J. Schaffner)

Posted on June 27, 2011 by Lisa Marie Bowman

(BEWARE! SPOILERS!)

With Rise of the Planet of the Apes coming out in August, I figured why not go ahead and review the original Planet of the Apes films. No, I don’t mean the terrible Tim Burton film. I’m talking about the old school sci-fi series from the early 70s. For the next five days, I’ll be reviewing each installment of this landmark series of monkey-centric Let’s start at the beginning with 1968’s Planet of the Apes.

The plot of Planet of the Apes is pretty well-known. Arrogant earthman takes off from Earth, goes through some sort of time portal, and crash lands at some point in the far future. Our “hero” finds himself on a planet where all the humans are mute savages and society is dominated by equally arrogant, talking apes. (“A planet where apes evolved from man!?”) Eventually, the Earthman reveals that he can speak, he escapes captivity, and — accompanied by his mute concubine — he enters what the Apes call the forbidden zone. And, once in the forbidden zone, he discovers “his destiny” as old Dr. Zaius puts it.

It’s difficult to review a film like the original Planet of the Apes because the film itself has become a part of American culture. Even if you’ve never seen the film, you feel as if you have. Whether you’ve seen the famous ending or not, you know that it features Taylor (Charlton Heston) on his knees in front of the ruins of the Statue of Liberty, raving and cursing while the mute and confused Nova (Linda Harrison) watches. Everyone understands the significance of such famous lines as: “Take your stinking paws off of me, you damn, dirty ape!” and “Goddamn you all to Hell!” regardless of whether they’ve actually seen them delivered.

Of course, it can be argued that the fact that the film has become such a part of our culture is proof of the film’s quality. However, I would argue that the proof of the film’s quality comes from the fact that it remains a watchable and entertaining film despite having become such a part of the culture. It says a lot that a film can stay enjoyable despite being respectable.

Why does the film still work despite the film’s main selling point — the surprise ending — being neautralized by the passage of tinme? A lot of the credit, I think, has to go to the apes themselves. Even under all that makeup, Roddy McDowall as Cornelius, Kim Hunter as Zira, and especially Maurice Evans as the iconic Dr. Zaius all manage to create interesting and intriguing characters who just happen to be apes. Before long, you forget about the makeup and instead, you’re more interested in seeing how Zaius is going to handle this latest challenge to his society.

That challenge, of course, comes from Charlton Heston. Everyone is always quick to make fun of Heston as an actor and it’s true that his range was limited. Frequently, the men he played came across as the type of chauvinistic, pompous heroes that were never quite aware of the fact that everyone was secretly laughing at him. And it is true that Heston has several of those moments here in Planet of the Apes. Even his famous final scene is, to be honest, almost painfully over the top.

And you know what?

In this film, it works perfectly. I don’t know if an actor has ever been more perfectly cast than Charlton Heston was in Planet of the Apes. In the role of Taylor, Heston basically spends the entire movie acting like a complete and total pompous ass. Whether he’s recording a “fuck you” message for Earth at the beginning of the film or if he’s arrogantly dismissing Zaius before entering the Forbidden Zone, Heston comes to epitomize every single thing that we tend to dislike in our fellow human beings. As played by Heston, Taylor is the perfect clueless hero and a lot of the film’s perverse pleasure comes from watching this paragon of masculinity and superiority repeatedly humbled.

And that, ultimately, is why Planet of the Apes remains a watchable film so many decades after it was made. Good satire never goes out of style.

A Quickie With Lisa Marie: Sanctum (dir. by Alistir Grierson)

Posted on June 27, 2011 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Earlier this year, I said that — based on the trailer alone — Sanctum appeared to be a terrible film. At the time, a few people disagreed with me. “Yes,” they said, “the trailer is a collection of clichés and the plot looks incredibly predictable and the selected dialogue is so tin-plated that it probably attracts radio waves but this is just an adventure film. STOP BEING SO GODDAMN JUDGMENTAL, LISA MARIE!”

Well, needless to say, that made me shut my little ol’ mouth all nice and quick.

Anyway, Sanctum opened in theaters on Super Bowl weekend and, if I remember correctly, it didn’t even play for a full week. It was such a box office bomb that it was yanked out and replaced by a Miley Cyrus film on Tuesday. Again, that’s if my memory serves correctly. As a result, I didn’t get a chance to see this film in the theaters. Instead, I had to wait to see it OnDemand. Was it as bad as I expected? Well, it wasn’t quite the disaster I was expecting but, at the same time, I still find myself resenting having to admit that I actually “demanded” to see Sanctum.

There are two misconceptions that need to be cleared up about Sanctum. One is that it’s a James Cameron film. Cameron is credited as being executive producer because his 3-D cameras were used to film the movie. (Also, I’ve read that he is a friend of Andrew Wright, who co-wrote the script.) However, the film itself was directed by Alister Grierson who tries to give everything a Cameronesque feel. In Grierson’s defense, he succeeds in that all of the characters are forgettable and that you’re never actually surprised by anything that happens on-screen.

The other is that the film is, as we’re told during the opening credits, based on a true story. Actually, it’s based on the fact that Andrew Wright apparently likes to swim around in caves and he once got trapped with a party he was leading and nearly drowned. However, nobody in his party died and I’m guessing that, at some point, someone may have actually said something half-way witty. As a result, that incident doesn’t really seem to have much to do with anything seen during Sanctum. As a lover of grindhouse and exploitation films, the blatant falsehood of the “Based on a true story” credit doesn’t bug me. In fact, it was my favorite part of the film.

Anyway, Sanctum is about a bunch of cave divers who get stuck in a flood and have to swim and dive their way to safety. It actually starts out pretty well, with a lot of aerial footage of Papua New Guinea and the initial cave diving scenes are genuinely exciting. But then, eventually, the story has to start up and everyone start to talk and the actors have to breathe some life into the cardboard characters and the whole film becomes so determined to be nothing special that it starts to get genuinely annoying.

Eventually, the cave ends up flooding and I guess you’re supposed to wonder — who will survive? Will it be model Victoria (Alison Parkinson), who keeps panicking because she’s a woman? Or how about Victoria’s boyfriend (played by Ioan Gruffod), who is rich and unlikable? How about George (Dan Wylde), who is getting older and serves as a mentor/sidekick to the group? Or maybe it’ll be Luko (Cramer Crain), who is a native who specifically decides to stick around to save all the white foreigners. Or how about the crusty, veteran diver (Richard Roxburgh, who has apparently never met a line he couldn’t shout into pointlessness) who has a strained relationship with his headstrong song (Rhys Wakefield) who just happens to be trapped down there with them all?

Seriously, who’s going to survive!?

Anyway, if it seems like I’m being really hard on this film, it’s because there’s enough hints of what the film could have been that it makes you resent, all the more, what the film eventually turned out to be. As I said before, even at its worst, the film is beautiful to look at. Admittedly, I’m both scared of water and intensely claustrophobic but, even taking that into account, the early scenes of the cave flooding and the characters fighting for survival are well-directed and genuinely frightening. This is a film that is at it’s best when characters are drowning because it means they can’t speak and we don’t have to listen to anymore of that terrible dialogue.

In the end, Sanctum goes to show that sometimes, you should trust the trailer…

Horror Review: Prince of Darkness (dir. by John Carpenter)

Posted on June 26, 2011 by Arleigh

“Say goodbye to classical reality, because our logic collapses on the subatomic level… into ghosts and shadows.”

John Carpenter’s Prince of Darkness is a criminally underrated entry in his canon—a blend of philosophical, apocalyptic horror and supernatural mystery that’s as unsettling as it is deliberately strange. Released in 1987, the film often gets eclipsed by Carpenter classics like The Thing and In the Mouth of Madness. Even so, it stands out as a unique organic link between science-driven paranoia and cosmic horror—the sort of film that grows on you as you unravel its layers.

The setup is simple but immediately offbeat: In a derelict Los Angeles church, Father Loomis (Donald Pleasence, always at his nervous best) stumbles on a swirling green cylinder hidden away in the basement. Loneliness and age hang over Loomis as he realizes this is no mere relic but possibly the essence of absolute evil—the literal embodiment of Satan. Sensing he’s in over his head, the priest reaches out to Professor Birack (Victor Wong), a physicist whose rational mindset is quickly tested by the uncanny. Birack arrives with a diverse team of grad students and lab techs, each bringing curiosity, skepticism, and just enough personality to keep things lively.

What starts as an academic investigation quickly goes off the rails. Strange, shared dreams trouble the researchers—fragmented transmissions from the future, warning of disaster in unsettling, VHS-glitch style. Meanwhile, the area outside the church transforms into a kind of urban wasteland: homeless people, gripped by an unseen force, stumble with zombie-like intent, trapping the group inside. Inside, members fall prey to unsettling phenomena, from unexplained possession to increasingly grotesque violence. There’s a sense that the evil in the cylinder isn’t content to simply stay put—and the combination of supernatural implication and scientific uncertainty gives everything a persistent, gnawing tension.

Carpenter directs the film with measured, stifling precision. His color palette—rotting yellows, bruised greens, washed-out sunlight—creates a perpetually uneasy mood. He uses slow tracking shots and carefully composed frames to ratchet up suspense, and the score (co-composed with Alan Howarth) pulses with ominous synths that buzz beneath all the dialogue, making even the film’s quieter moments feel restless and charged with threat. Compared to the gooey spectacle of The Thing, the terror in Prince of Darkness is more metaphysical—less visible monsters, more eroding reality.

Sound and image work together to keep the audience on edge: moments of unsettling silence are punctuated by visual oddities, like swarms of bugs or the warped geometry of the church’s shadows. The group’s scientific attempts to decode the evil—a jumble of quantum theory, apocalyptic Christian lore, and unsettling mathematics—do more to ramp up anxiety than offer answers. Carpenter seems to delight in ambiguity; the revelations never clarify so much as deepen the void, giving shape to a primordial kind of fear.

The film’s most iconic device is its recurring nightmare sequence, where the group—cut off from the world—witnesses a cryptic, shadowy figure emerging from the church, broadcast as a tachyon transmission from the future. It’s classic Carpenter: deeply unsettling, oddly hypnotic, and open to any number of interpretations. The blending of science fiction and theological horror feels fresh and ambitious, and it’s fair to say these sequences alone have ironically kept the film alive in horror culture discussions and remixes.

The cast, featuring Pleasence and Wong, manages the film’s shifts in tone—moving from banter about theoretical physics to genuine terror with surprising ease. The grad students are likable enough for you to root for, especially Lisa Blount and Jameson Parker, who carry the emotional brunt as things collapse. Alice Cooper’s cameo as a silent, menacing street dweller further anchors the film’s reputation for “unexpected creepy” in the best way possible.

While there are flashes of gore—possessions, injuries, even some memorable stabbings—Carpenter resists making violence the centerpiece. The real horror here is psychological: paranoia, loss of agency, and the collapse of foundational beliefs. Where The Thing was about trusting (or not trusting) your friends, Prince of Darkness is about grappling with a world where even faith and science seem powerless and interchangeable in the face of the unknown.

Thematically, this is Carpenter at his most cerebral and bleak. The notion that neither faith nor science can adequately tackle the unfathomable echoes Lovecraft, yet Carpenter grounds it all in urban decay and deadpan dialogue rather than Gothic flourish. The questions get bigger—what good is faith if truth is poisonous, and what does science matter against a force older than logic? Dialogue about quantum uncertainty and theological paradoxes isn’t there to solve anything, but to make everything less secure.

If the film has a flaw, it’s that its pacing feels deliberately patient—some might say slow. Tension accumulates gradually, and you’re invited to sit in the discomfort as the group loses sleep, loses one another, and loses touch with reality. As the stakes escalate, the line between dream and waking life shreds, leading to an ending that’s haunting, ambiguous, and deeply open-ended. There’s no neat wrap-up or cathartic victory—only trauma, unsolved terror, and a lingering sense that evil never really left, just waited.

It’s this refusal to explain or comfort that gives Prince of Darkness its lasting cult appeal. Carpenter puts cosmic pessimism front and center: knowledge itself stands as a kind of curse, and both faith and reason bend beneath the weight of mystery. Rather than offer solutions, the movie warns about the dangers of peeling back reality’s surface—a theme that’s only grown more unsettling in the years since it was made.

Watching Prince of Darkness now, the film may not fit everyone’s idea of a fun Friday-night scarefest. But if you want horror that’s slow, dense, and sticks with you, this is essential viewing. Carpenter delivers a bleak, hypnotic nightmare about what happens when explanations fail—when the universe itself seems ready to swallow us whole. Whether you’re a die-hard genre fan or someone looking for something different, Prince of Darkness is cult horror at its most unshakable—proof that the scariest stories are often those that leave their deepest secrets unexplained.

Film Review: Cars 2 (dir. by John Lasseter & Brad Lewis)

Posted on June 25, 2011 by Leonard Wilson

There was once a rumor that the major heads of Pixar – John Lasseter, Pete Docter, Andrew Stanton, and Lee Unkrich (I don’t count Brad Bird because he came later) were afraid to let any of their staff take on directing any of their films. With such an illustrious track record, it’s understandable. Pixar has picked up quite a reputation as being one of the few production companies one can count on to have Supposedly, they felt that the quality wouldn’t be as great.

So, I’m certain that the Pixar Heads are eating their own pie when they realize how Cars 2 turned out. It’s a fun film that the kids will adore, but it really lacks the heart that many of the other Pixar films are known for. Mind you, I’m not blasting the movie and saying it should be avoided. Not at all. It’s just that this is more of a movie for the kids and less of one for the adults. I feel that’s the problem everyone’s having with it. This is a good thing. It reminds Pixar of what they need to do to keep winning Oscars, while still being entertaining for the kids. Hopefully, because one of the head honchos made a mistake, maybe the company may consider letting some of the new kids try a hand at it.

In short, the Kid in me loved Cars 2. The Adult in me felt “Well, at least the Kid enjoyed it.” It suffers from two problems – a great story that would have been better set in the world of The Incredibles and a forced moral to the story. This may be the first Pixar film since A Bug’s Life where I haven’t teared up, this coming from someone who couldn’t make it out of the first 15 minutes of Up without tissues.

Previously on Cars, Lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson) won his very first Piston Cup after a pit stop in the small town of Radiator Springs, where he learned to slow down and relax. He also met up with Tow Mater (Larry the Cable Guy), who may not be the brightest spark plug in the engine, but means well and manages to help when he can. Now, we find that McQueen has earned a number of Piston Cups and is one of the best racers in the world. After returning to Radiator Springs, he finds himself greeted by Mater – who’s been anxiously waiting for his best friend. Mater, being who he is, can’t help but be a little overboard in his fun, which ends up getting McQueen involved in a brand new race that’s sponsored by a clean fuel magnate.

Finn McMissile (Michael Caine) and Holly Shiftwell (Emily Mortimer) are also investigating what could be a dangerous situation. While meeting with one of their American contacts (a great cameo by Bruce Campbell), the contact passes on some special information to Mater. Mater, not realizing what he’s been tagged with, is mistaken for a spy by the duo and brought into the investigation. That’s basically what Cars 2 is. It’s “Mater becomes a Spy”, and for the most part it works, but only if you really like the character. Mater is finally given his time to shine and he pulls it off well. I myself don’t mind Larry the Cable Guy, so it’s okay for me. For the grown ups, it could be a Mater overload. The kids will eat it up. The parents may actually get a little annoyed at how clueless Mater can be at times.

I have to admit that both Michael Caine and John Tuturro (Francesco Bernoulli) were two of the strongest character voices in the film. Owen Wilson’s okay, but the story really is only about him in terms of his relationship to Mater. I really didn’t care too much about Lightning this time around. We know his story, he’s grown about as much as he can in my eyes. More or less, he’s playing second or third fiddle. Seeing Caine in this made me want to watch Harry Brown again, or The Fourth Protocol. The fact that he’s also playing an Aston Martin DB5 type Vehicle is a sweet touch for me. He ’s smooth with his lines and pulls off the British Agent role pretty well. Mortimer is also relaxed in her role. Tuturro’s Bernoulli is as over the top as he was in The Big Lebowski, and he was a treat here as McQueen’s main rival. He may have had more fun than the others working on this, from the way he sounds.

Visually, Cars 2 is as beautiful as the other Pixar films, but doesn’t really seem to break that much new ground. Toyko looks nice, Paris is perfect (right down to the Ratatouille reference, if you catch it) and Italy looks sweet, but we know Pixar can do that. The 3D, however is downright magical, and I’m one who honestly believes the medium is best served with Animated films rather than filmed ones. It’s not exactly How to Train Your Dragon, but it’s still good in it’s own right.

I mentioned earlier that the story could have been better set in the world of The Incredibles. It’s an interesting spy story (the reasoning behind why what’s happening was funny in the sense of cars and the like), but the idea that cars are actually doing all of this action kind of pulls away from the story. At least, the adult in me comes off with this thought. For kids, it’s cars doing cool stuff, and I doubt it’ll come across as boring. The other problem is that the moral of the story – accepting your friends for who they are, despite their quirks (because we all have them) – feels a little forced. It’s like someone concentrated so hard on trying to do it that when it does occur, you go..”Okay, I get it.”, But I didn’t walk away feeling anything. Ratatouille’s Remy had a passion for cooking, one so great that he even made the most wicked food critic believe that “Anyone Can Cook”. In Up, Carl Fredricksen learned to let go of what he was holding on to and found new adventures. Mater undergoes a change, but it isn’t quite a big or a substantial. Actually it doesn’t even last long. It’s just clean fun.

Overall, looking at Cars 2, it’s not the greatest Pixar film they’ve done – far, far from it, but it’s a kid’s film. It’s quite enjoyable, but it sacrifices heart for action, something that Kung Fu Panda 2 managed to hold onto this year. Your kids will love it and you’ll enjoy that they’ll love it, but just don’t bring any tissues. They’re not necessary. You really wont find your heartstrings pulled here too much.

6 Trailers To Go On The Road With

Posted on June 25, 2011 by Lisa Marie Bowman

This weekend, I’m busy getting ready to go on a road trip with Jeff. I’ll be away from home for two whole weeks! However, fear not! With the help of WordPress and my wonderful, beautiful older sister Erin, I will still be updating and posting even while we’re on the road. I might even be able to convince my fellow Shattered Lens writer to spend the next two weeks watching the Lifetime Movie Channel and posting “What Lisa Would Have Watched Last Night.” How about it, guys? *wink wink*

Anyway, while I deal with shopping and packing, why not enjoy the latest entry of Lisa Marie’s Favorite Grindhouse And Exploitation Trailers.

(And by the way, just because I’m going to be out of town next weekend won’t stop me from posting six more trailers next Saturday. Why? Because I love you, silly!)

1) The Klansman (1974)

In this infamous little film from the 1970s, Richard Burton, Lee Marvin, and O.J. Simpson fight the Ku Klux Klan in Alabama. Believe it or not, I’ve actually seen this movie though the copy I saw was one of those public domain DVDs that I think was actually a copy of the edited-for-TV version of this movie. (I say that because every time someone cursed, there was an awkward silence on the soundtrack.) Even more odd is the fact that I’ve actually read the old novel that this movie is based on. Anyway, this movie is pretty bad but the book is okay. The film was directed by the same guy who directed the first James Bond films.

2) Beyond the Door (1975)

Okay, so this is pretty obviously an Exorcist rip-off but wow, this trailer freaks me out. Needless to say this is an Italian film. My favorite part of the trailer, to be honest, is the use of the Ryder truck. It’s a moment that epitomizes Italian exploitation in that you can tell that the filmmakers really thought that displaying the one word — “Ryder” — would convince viewers that they were watching an American-made film.

3) 2020 Texas Gladiators (1985)

Speaking of Italian exploitation cinema, here we have another example. I pretty much had to include this trailer because I live in Dallas and 2020 is just 9 years away. That said, I’m not sure what part of Texas this film is supposed to be taking place in. I’m guessing by all the shots of boots marching through grass that this is supposed to be up in North Texas but if you can find mountains like that around here then you’ve got far better eyesight than I do. Add to that, the sudden indian attack seems more like an Oklahoma thing. Not surprisingly, according to Amazon, this film was not only directed by Joe D’Amato but features both George Eastman and Al Cliver.

4) 1990: The Bronx Warriors (1982)

Apparently, it didn’t start in Texas. This is also an Italian film. It was directed by Enzo Castellari and, not surprisingly, George Eastman is in this one as well.

5) Empire of the Ants (1977)

The is the trailer that dares to ask — who are you going to listen to? Common sense or H.G. Wells? I’ll tell you, nothing freaks me out more than when I see one of those ant lines carrying a dead cricket back to the anthill. Ants are one thing that I will not allow in the house. However, I kinda admire them. They’re so neat and organized. Plus, males in ant society know their place.

6) Mr. Billion (1977)

“20th Century Fox presents Mr. Billion …. starring Terence Hill, the 5th biggest star in the world…” I haven’t seen very many Terence Hill films but I always enjoy seeing him in trailers. I can’t really say whether he’s a good actor or not because every time I’ve seen him, he’s been dubbed. But he definitely had a very likable presence. You wanted him to be a good actor whether he was or wasn’t. That said, even if I had been alive at the height of Mr. Hill’s fame, it never would have worked out for us as I’m Southern Italian and Hill is quite clearly from the north. That’s just the way it is. Anyway, back to Mr. Billion — I’m including two trailers for this one. The first is the “Prestige” trailer. The second one is much shorter and features one of those odd little songs that gets stuck in your head.

A Quickie With Lisa Marie: Green Lantern (dir. by Martin Campbell)

Posted on June 22, 2011 by Lisa Marie Bowman

So, earlier tonight, I was sitting in a dark theater watching the latest super hero film, Green Lantern. Now, Green Lantern is getting some terrible reviews right now and having seen it, I can understand why. That said, Green Lantern is not an offensively terrible movie in the way that Priest, The Beaver, or The Conspirator were terrible films. Instead, Green Lantern’s main problem is that it’s just so freaking forgettable. To be honest, I found myself forgetting about it while I was watching it. So, this isn’t going to be an easy review to write.

(This is also why this is a quickie review. I mean, I’ll make some noise for a few minutes and I’ll try to come up with something halfway neat for the end of it but don’t ask me if I really felt anything.)

Since I realized I was forgetting about the movie even as I was watching it, I decided to use social media to help me out. Blatantly ignoring the rules (but that’s why you love me, baby), I spent most of the film texting and tweeting. I’m pretty sure I heard the people sitting behind me whining about it but who cares? I did what I had to do.

Anyway, checking my texts, I find the following conversation:

Text from LMB (that’s me) to ENB (that’s my sister, Erin): Hey bitch where you at?

ENB to LMB: WTF, bitch? I’m sitting next to you in the theater.

LMB to ENB: Hi, Erin! lol. : )

Okay, so that’s not much help but it does tell you just how engaging this film is. I had the choice of either watching Green Lantern or sending text messages to my sister who was sitting right next to me and I chose to send text messages.

I also resorted to posting a few cryptic messages to twitter, with the hope that they would serve to remind me of what I was watching. Here they are:

Tweet #1: About to see Green Lantern. : ) — See, I didn’t start this film out with a bad attitude. I was looking forward to it.

Tweet #2: Old ppl always take forever buying tickets — What’s up with that? I would think they would be in a hurry seeing as how they’ve got less time to see a movie than I do. Just saying.

Tweet #3: We need a super hero named Red Herring — I sent this tweet just 15 minutes into the film but it shows that I had already picked up on the main problem with this film. There’s a lot going on but it all feels like it’s just been spit out by some script-o-matic sitting hidden behind the Hollywood sign. It just doesn’t ever really add up to anything beyond a sinking feeling of been there, done that.

Ryan Reynolds is haunted by flashbacks of his father dying. Why? Because Scriptwriting 101 says that the hero has to have some sort of self-doubt to overcome.

When we first see Ryan Reynolds, he’s lying in bed with a naked blonde. Who is she? What happens to her? Why does Reynolds, at no other point in the film, seem to be the type who would have a one night stand with some anonymous blonde?

Reynolds joins the Green Lantern Corp. when he gets a glowing green ring. All the other members of the Corp. doubt him because he’s human but then they say that the ring never makes a mistake. Okay, so if the ring is incapable of making a mistake and the ring chose Reynolds than why is everyone so convinced that Reynolds can’t cut it as the Green Lantern?

Seriously, it’s as if someone just wrote out a list of plot points and some anonymous script doctor just went down the list, checking off everything as he tossed it into the mix.

Plus, I think Red Herring would be a cool super hero. He could have the power of creating mass distraction and he could be the sidekick of my super heroine alter ego, Lady Verbose.

Tweet #4: Lol, cockpit is a funny word — I believe the exact line that inspired this tweet was something like: “And I still get into a cockpit occasionally.” It just made me laugh because cockpit is a funny word, largely because it’s a combination of cock and pit. Anyway, that is honestly the only line of dialogue that I actually remember from the film. As action and comic book movies tend to live and die on the basis of the quotable one-liner, that’s not a good sign.

Tweet #5: Green Lantern kinda bleh but Ryan Reynolds is mancandy — And you know what? He is. Green Lantern may have been forgettable but Ryan Reynolds made a likable hero and he brought some much-needed humor to the role. To be honest, as I look back at the various Green super hero movies, I can’t help but wonder how much better Green Hornet would have been if it had starred Ryan Reynolds as opposed to Seth Rogen. (I love you, Seth, but the super hero thing just isn’t for you.)

Also, Peter Sarsgaard did a pretty good job playing a surprisingly sympathetic villain. Both he and Reynolds deserved a better film.

Other than Sarsgaard and Reynolds, the cast was pretty forgettable but then again, it’s not like they really had much to work with. I have to be honest, though, that I am now officially bored with Tim Robbins. He shows up here playing yet another insensitive rich white guy. As usual, you don’t really buy him as the character because he’s just too obviously Tim Robbins.

Tweet 6: Lets not go to Camelot. Its a silly place. — I think this was inspired by all the scenes that were set on the home planet of the Green Lantern Corps. (That’s the group that Reynolds becomes a member of.) These scenes were obviously meant to inspire awe but they just felt silly. In the film’s defense, some of the special effects — particularly the evil entity known as Parallax — are impressive but, for almost every impressive special effect, there was another that just fell flat (which is never a good thing for a 3-D film).

Tweet #7: Sinestro is a silly name. — Sinestro, played by Mark Strong, is the leader of the Green Lantern Corp. And Sinestro is a really silly name.

Tweet #8: Why not just call him Eviltro? — Well, why not?