The Daily Grindhouse: The Last Resort (dir by Brandon Nutt)

Posted on January 22, 2013 by Lisa Marie Bowman

The Last Resort is a low-budget horror film from 2009 that tends to show up on Chiller a lot. It’s a low-budget film about annoying people who, largely as the result of their own stupidity, get trapped in a really bad situation. It’s a movie that many people dismiss but I’ve always found it to be a pretty effective little horror film.

In The Last Resort, Kathleen (played by Marissa Tait) is a bride-to-be who decides to go down to Mexico with her bridesmaids and have one last wild weekend for getting married. They spend their first night in Mexico getting drunk and one of the bridesmaids, Sophia (America Olivio), leaves the group to spend the night with an American tourist named Rob (Nick Ballard). The next morning, Kathleen and the three bridesmaids decide to take a tour of the countryside with two rather sleazy locals. Sophia is left behind.

Not surprisingly, the two locals drive the group out to the middle of nowhere and then rob them, seriously wounding one of the girls in the process. Kathleen and her bridesmaids are abandoned to die in the desert but they manage to find a deserted resort where they take shelter for the night. Unfortunately, it appears that the resort is also home to a murderous demon which proceeds to possess each of the girls, one after another.

The Last Resort has a really terrible reputation and if you happen to look it up on the imdb, you’ll come across a lot of negative comments about the film. But you know what? For what it is, The Last Resort is not that bad of a film. The deserted resort is a genuinely menacing location and the director Brandon Nutt does a good job of maintaining an ominous atmosphere once the girls reach the location. (Though it should also be admitted that it seems to take the film forever to reach that point.)

While the girls might not be memorable as individual characters, they are believable as a group. You sincerely believe that they would not only all be friends but that they would also be the type of friends who, once they all get together, would end up spending a drunken weekend in Mexico and get stranded at a haunted resort. In all honesty, one reason why this film resonated with me is because I’ve been on a few similar wild weekends myself. Fortunately, neither me nor any of my friends were ever kidnapped at gunpoint but I do think that there were a few cases of demonic possession on some of those weekends.

Hey, it happens.

The Last Resort is one of those films that we tend to watch and go, “God, these people are so stupid,” but, to be honest, the stupider the characters act, the more strangely plausible a film like this feels. The fact of the matter is that, at any given moment, 85% of the world is engaged in doing something stupid. Smart people find themselves in stupid situations because, seriously, you don’t ever expect to find yourself being kidnapped or possessed until you already are.

That’s one reason why horror will always be a popular genre. It’s one of the few genres that forces us to admit that, for the most part, we have no idea how vulnerable we are until it’s too late. It’s easy to dismiss The Last Resort as being a film about stupid people making stupid decisions but, for me, it works precisely because it reminds us that we are capable of being just as stupid as the unfortunate bridesmaids in this film.

An Obscure Film Review: Katherine (dir by Jeremy Kagan)

Posted on January 21, 2013 by Lisa Marie Bowman

One of the great things about being an online film critic is that you occasionally come across a good but obscure film that you can then let the rest of the world know about as well. Katherine is one such film.

I came across Katherine as part of a 3-film compilation DVD called Classic Films Of The 70s. The other two films on the DVD were The Harrad Experiment and Born To Win and both of those films were so bad that I nearly tossed the DVD to the side without watching Katherine. I’m glad I changed my mind because, while it may not have truly lived up to the promise of being a classic film of the 70s, Katherine was still a thousand times better than The Harrad Experiment.

Beginning with the idealism and hope of the early 60s and ending with a literal bang in the 70s, Katherine tells the story of how one woman is transformed from being a sheltered, upper class liberal to being a political revolutionary who is proud to embrace violence in order to bring about change. Katherine ( Sissy Spacek, before she was Carrie) starts out as a teacher before falling in love with a civil rights activist (played, in a nicely smarmy performance, by Henry Winkler). Against the backdrop of the Viet Nam War and the violence of the late 60s, Spacek and Winkler gradually become more and more radicalized until they eventually go underground and turn violent. The film is made up of interviews with people who knew Katherine and Katherine herself even pops up and tells us her own version of her story. Despite being forced to wear a horrid wig in the latter half of the film, Sissy Spacek gives a wonderfully empathetic and multi-layered performance as Katherine. Even if you don’t always like the self-righteous stridency of the character, you never doubt her sincerity.

After I watched Katherine, I did a little research on the IMDb and I discovered that Katherine was a made-for-TV movie that was originally broadcast in 1975. This did not surprise me because, even as I was watching it, it was very easy to imagine a remake of Katherine (starring, I decided after much debate, Leighton Meester) being broadcast on the Lifetime Movie Network. However, if Katherine felt like a Lifetime movie with a political subtext, that’s only because I happen to love Lifetime movies. Katherine is both an intelligent and interesting look at a very specific period of American history and a portrait of youthful idealism, disillusionment, and wanderlust. We have all had to deal with that moment when our beliefs run into the wall of reality and Katherine captures that experience perfectly.

I found myself thinking about Katherine earlier today as I watched the presidential inauguration in Washington D.C. Though the film might be close to 40 years old, its portrait of naive idealism, political stridency, and destructive activism still feels relevant. Katherine is a film that most people have never heard of but it’s also one that is worth tracking down.

What Lisa and the Snarkalecs Watched Last Night #66: Tasmanian Devils (dir by Zach Lipovsky)

Posted on January 20, 2013 by Lisa Marie Bowman

(Minor Spoilers)

Last night, the Snarkalecs and I watched the SyFy original movie Tasmanian Devils. Who are the Snarkalecs? You can find out here.

Why Was I Watching It?

Seriously, yesterday was a weird, weird day. I don’t even know where to begin. In between the pervy guys who have been working on the roof of the house across the alley, and the woman in Georgia who keeps accusing me of having an affair with her husband (another long story that you can read all about here), I was seriously ready to just change my name to Diabla, stop washing my hair, stop wearing makeup, and just move to Vermont.

But, through it all, I took the strength for the knowledge that, at 8:00, there would be an original movie on SyFy and that I would be watching it with my friends, the Snarkalecs…

What’s It About?

I’ll tell you what it’s not about. It’s not about the spinning cartoon character who was always falling off cliffs and having safes dropped on his head. No, these Tasmanian devils are vicious killers but, at the same time, they’re also kinda cute and adorable in a chupacabra kind of way.

Anyway, Apolo Ohno and a bunch of his friends go to Tasmania. Apolo jumps off of a cliff, has some trouble with his parachute, and ends up plunging into a hidden cave and getting impaled on the world’s biggest stalagmite. Apolo hangs around for a bit, squirming like a bug and groaning despite the fact that he’s got a gigantic hole in chest. Seriously, Apolo must be invincible. Alas, his blood gets the attention of the Tasmanian devils and, in perhaps the defining scene of 2013, Apolo Ohno is literally ripped into little pieces on-screen.

There is a little bit more that happens in the film. Apolo’s friends end up running into a park ranger played by Danica McKellar and they soon all find themselves being stalked through the wilderness by the Tasmanian devils. However, for me, the film was pretty much about Apolo Ohno getting literally ripped into little pieces on-screen.

What Worked?

OH MY GOD! Apolo Ohno was literally ripped into little pieces on-screen! This led to me framing the term “Ohnotastic” as a way to refer to any spectacular death in a SyFy film. This eventually led to the creation of the Ohno Scale, which from now on, will be used to judge the effectiveness of SyFy carnage. Tasmanian Devils will now forever be one of the pivotal films in the history of the Snarkalecs.

(Hopefully, the next two-headed shark film from the Asylum will feature a Michael Phelps cameo.)

Beyond that, Tasmanian Devils was actually a pretty good film. It was the epitome of a fun movie to watch with friends and director Zach Lipovsky actually managed to generate some genuine suspense. Even better, both Lipovsky and Danica McKellar dropped by twitter and interacted with the people commenting on the film. It’s always really nice whenever filmmakers do this.

On a personal note, I enjoyed Tasmanian Devils because it was filmed in Canada, a country that I am strangely obsessed with. As for the male snarkalecs, they seemed to largely enjoy Tasmanian Devils because of the low-cut top that Danica McKellar’s park ranger was wearing.

What Did Not Work?

It all worked. Life is too short to be critical of a film called Tasmanian Devils.

“OH MY GOD! Just like me!” Moments

Insert your own low-cut top/heaving boobs comment here.

Lessons Learned

Apolo Ohno is not invincible.

The Daily Grindhouse: Alone With Her (dir by Eric Nicholas)

Posted on January 19, 2013 by Lisa Marie Bowman

I recently watched the 2007 horror film Alone With Her and I have to say that I’m surprised that this film isn’t better known. It’s probably one of the better horror films that I’ve seen recently. I say this despite the fact that it’s a “found footage” horror film and, as such, the entire film is presented as being told through the lenses of various spy cameras. I can count on two hands the number of “found footage” films that have actually worked for me. As of right now, Alone With Her is sitting on the tip of my right pinkie finger.

Alone With Her opens with a disturbing montage in which Doug (Colin Hanks) wanders through the streets of the city, following every woman that he sees and secretly filming them with a hidden camera. The fact that this montage plays out at such a naturalistic and unhurried pace makes it all the more disturbing. We watch as Doug does things like stand behind a woman so he can film up her skirt or pretend to shop solely so he can secretly get some leering footage of her cleavage. By the end of this montage, I was already thoroughly creeped out and debating whether I would ever feel safe wearing a skirt in public again.

(Ultimately, I decided that I would continue to wear skirts but that, from now on, I’m going to pepper spray any man who stands less than a foot behind me.)

Eventually, Doug spots a woman named Amy (Ana Claudia Telancon) at a park and follows her back to her home. Over the next few days, he obsessively films her as she unknowingly goes about her life until he finally breaks into her apartment and sets up numerous spy cameras. Now free to observe every aspect of her life, Doug arranges to meet the emotionally fragile Amy. Using the knowledge that he’s gained from spying on her, he strikes up a friendship. However, Amy’s best friend (played by Jordana Spiro) is suspicious of Doug and her suspicions lead to the film’s shockingly violent climax.

I didn’t have high expectations for Alone With Her and I have to admit that I’m still surprised at just how effective this film turned out to be. For a film that doesn’t have much gore or any huge “shock” scenes, Alone With Her is an effectively creepy horror film that sticks with you long after the final frame.

A lot of the credit for the film’s success has to go to the cast. Talancon is likable as Amy and Jordana Spiro brings unexpected nuance to the role of the stereotypically outspoken best friend. Anyone who saw the sixth season of Dexter already knows that Colin Hanks can play a psycho but they still might not be prepared for just how downright creepy Hanks is in this film. The film makes good use of Hanks’s neurotic persona and Hanks does a good job of gradually revealing the empty core that’s hiding behind Doug’s outward affability. As played by Colin Hanks, Doug is the everyman-as-psycho.

However, the real star of the film is director Eric Nicholas. I’m usually not a big fan of horror films that claim to have been assembled from ”found footage.” There are a few noticeable exceptions (like Ruggero Deodato’s Cannibal Holocaust, The Last Exorcism, Apollo 18, and Paranormal Activity 3) but, for the most part, these films never seem to be able to escape from the gimmicky feel of the concept. (Add to that, they often fail to convince us that anyone would actually keep filming even while they’re being pursued by a masked murderer or whatever threat the narrative may supply.) However, Nicholas manages to take the limitations of the found footage genre and transform them into strengths. It helps that this film is about voyeurism and, by presenting what we’re seeing as being “found footage,” Nicholas creates a true sense of unease. By the end of the film, I found myself nervously glancing around my bedroom and wondering if there was anyone secretly watching me. Nicholas creates and sustains such an atmosphere of paranoia that the film’s familiar story takes on a surprising power.

As I stated previously, Alone With Her was a real surprise. It’s a disturbing and all too plausible horror movie that stays with you.

Film Review: Casino (dir by Martin Scorsese)

Posted on January 18, 2013 by Lisa Marie Bowman

(Minor spoilers below)

Casino, Martin Scorsese’s epic, Las Vegas-set film from 1995, is one of my favorite films of all time. It seems to show up on cable every other week and, whenever I see that it’s playing, I always make it a point to catch at least a few minutes.

Casino opens with veteran Las Vegas bookie Ace Rothstein (played by Robert De Niro) getting into a car. He starts the engine and the car explodes. The rest of the movie is an extended flashback as both Ace and his friend and eventual rival Nicky (Joe Pesci) explain how Ace went from being the most powerful man in Vegas to getting blown up in his car.

We are shown how Ace was originally sent to Vegas by a group of mobsters who are headquartered in the far less flamboyant town of Kansas City. Ace keeps an eye on the city for the bosses and, as long as the money keep coming in, they leave Ace alone to do whatever he wants. When Ace isn’t bribing government officials (including one particularly sleazy state senator who was reportedly based on future U.S. Sen. Harry Reid) and breaking the fingers of the unlucky gamblers who have been caught trying to cheat the casino, he’s busy falling in love with the beautiful prostitute Ginger (Sharon Stone, who was nominated for Best Actress for her work in this film). Though Ginger warns Ace that she doesn’t love him and is still hung up on her manipulative pimp Lester Diamond (James Woods, who is hilariously sleazy), Ginger and Ace still get married.

Everything’s perfect except for the fact that Ace’s old friend Nicky (Joe Pesci) has also moved to Vegas. As opposed to the calm and low-key Ace, Nicky has a violent temper and soon, he starts drawing unwanted attention to both himself and Ace. When Ace attempts to control Nicky, Nicky responds by turning on his friend and soon, the two of them are fighting an undeclared war for control of the city. Meanwhile, the bosses in Kansas City are starting to notice that less and less money is making its way back to them from Las Vegas…

There are so many things that I love about Casino that I don’t even know where to begin.

First off, I love the film’s glamour. I love the way that the film celebrates the glitz of Las Vegas, presenting it as an oasis of exuberant life sitting in the middle of a barren desert that, we’re told, is full of dead people. I love seeing the tacky yet stylish casinos. I love seeing the inside of Ace’s mansion. And Ginger’s clothes are just to die for!

I love that Scorsese’s signature visual style perfectly keeps up with and comments on the natural flamboyance of Las Vegas. Consider how the film starts, with the shadowy form of Ace Rothstein being tossed through the air and then descending back down to Earth. Consider the image of Ace standing in the middle of the desert and being submerged within a thick cloud of dust as Nicky’s car speeds away from him. Consider how Scorsese’s camera glides through the casino, letting us see both the people who cheat and the people who are watching them cheat. Consider Nicky standing outside of his jewelry stare and freezing the movement of the camera with his reptilian glare. Consider the scene of cocaine being snorted up a straw, seemingly filmed from inside the straw. Casino is a film full of the type of images that all directors promise but few ever actually deliver.

I love that Casino is built around a brilliant lead performance from Robert De Niro. De Niro gives a performance that mixes both tragedy and comedy. My favorite De Niro moment comes about halfway through the film, when Ace finds himself hosting a wonderfully tacky cable access show called Aces High. Ace interviews “celebrities” like Frankie Avalon, introduces the Ace Rothstein Dancers, and even finds the time to do some juggling. De Niro makes Ace into an endearing and awkward character in these scenes, a permanent outsider who has finally managed to become something of a star.

It’s easy to compare Casino to Scorsese’s other classic mix of gangster film and social satire, 1990’s Goodfellas. Both films feature De Niro, Pesci, and Frank Vincent. (In a nice piece of irony, Casino features Vincent getting a little revenge after being attacked twice by Joe Pesci in two different Scorsese films.) Both films are based on nonfiction books by Nicholas Pileggi. Both films feature nonstop music playing on the soundtrack. Both films feature multiple narrators who explain to us how the day-to-day operations of the Mafia are conducted. When Scorsese shows us Ace and Ginger’s wedding day, it feels almost like a scene-for-scene recreation of Henry Hill’s wedding in Goodfellas.

At the same time, there are a few key differences between Goodfellas and Casino. Whereas Goodfellas was all about being a low-level cog in the Mafia, Casino is about management. Casino is about the guys who the Goodfellas made rich. Goodfellas was about the drudgery of everyday life whereas Casino is about the glitz and the glamour promised by the fantasy world of Las Vegas. Whereas Goodfellas was almost obsessively anti-romantic, Casino is a gangster film with heart. No matter what else you might say about him as a character, Ace’s love for both Ginger and Las Vegas is real. On a similar note, when Nicky turns against Ace, it’s because his feelings have been hurt. In the end, Ace and Nicky come across like children who have, temporarily, been given the keys to the world’s biggest playground.

Casino is a glossy, flamboyant film that literally opens with a bang and ends on a note of melancholy and loss. Not only is Ace reduced to being an anonymous old man working out of a nondescript office but our last two views of Vegas are of the old casinos being dynamited and an army of overweight tourists emerging from the airport like the unstoppable zombies from Dawn of the Dead. This, then, is Scorsese’s view of the apocalypse. The world isn’t destroyed by a cataclysm but instead by an invasion of terminal middle American blandness.

What Lisa and Evelyn Watched Last Night #65: Megiddo: The Omega Code 2 (dir by Brian Trenchard-Smith)

Posted on January 17, 2013 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Last night, after we finished watching the first episode of the new season of American Idol, my bff Evelyn and I watched Megiddo: The Omega Code 2, an evangelical apocalypse film from 2001.

Why Were We Watching It?

Considering that I’m an occasionally agnostic Irish Catholic and Evelyn describes herself as being a “Jewish atheist,” and that Megiddo: The Omega Code 2 is a film about Armageddon told from an evangelical point of view, I think the real question is how could we not watch it? I mean, seriously.

Along with that, of course, Evelyn and I both wanted to watch something that nobody would ever expect either one of us to ever watch.

What Was It About?

Stone Alexander (Michael York) is President of the European Union and is promoting a plan that he claims will solve all of the world’s problems. His younger brother, David Alexander (Michael Biehn) is vice president of the United States and wants to keep America from turning into Europe. David is also in love with Stone’s wife (Diane Venora). And, of course, Stone is actually the Antichrist while David is Michael Biehn.

Anyway, Stone uses his magic devil powers to cause President Benson (R. Lee Ermey) to die of a heart attack and David becomes President. David, however, refuses to join Stone’s “new world order” so Stone frames David for the murder of their father. David goes into hiding with a few loyal American soldiers while Stone makes plans to launch a military strike against Jerusalem.

It all, of course, leads to a huge battle between the forces of Hell and the combined armies of Spain and China (no, really). David finally gets his chance to confront his brother, many prayers are said, and, eventually, a CGI demon pops up and creates a lot of CGI mayhem.

What Worked?

Evelyn claims that nothing worked in this film but I disagree just slightly. First off, and most importantly, Franco Nero is in this film! He plays Stone’s father-in-law and, while he may no longer be the dashing Lancelot from Camelot, Franco Nero is still aging pretty damn well.

Udo Kier is in the film too. Seriously, Udo Kier pops up in the strangest places.

Michael York is a lot of fun as the wonderfully evil Stone Alexander. York’s performance here makes his delivery of the line, “YOU CAN LIVE! LIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIVE!” at the end of Logan’s Run look restrained. Also, if you’re going to have a made-for-evil name like Stone Alexander, you might as well be the Antichrist.

On a personal note, I had a lot of fun annoying Evelyn by pointing out that just about every policy proposed by Stone Alexander has also been proposed by Barack Obama. I imagine that Megiddo must be a very popular film among certain conspiracy-minded segments of the population.

What Did Not Work?

To be honest, the entire film didn’t work. It’s not a very good film. The special effects were cheap, the script made the Atlas Shrugged films look subtle, and I imagine that the film probably created more atheists than believers.

That said, Megiddo is still better than Avatar.

“Oh my God! Just like Evelyn and Lisa!” Moments

None.

Lessons Learned

Franco Nero ages like a fine wine.

Getting the point of Megiddo

The Daily Grindhouse: Kiss Daddy Goodnight (dir by Peter Ily Huemer)

Posted on January 16, 2013 by Lisa Marie Bowman

To me, Uma Thurman will always be Kill Bill‘s Beatrix Kiddo and, for that reason, she will always be one of my favorite actresses. Though we take that film and her performance in it for granted now, the fact of the matter is that Kill Bill, Volume 1 was one of the most important milestones in my evolution towards becoming a film fanatic. I was a senior in high school when I first saw that movie and I had the same insecurities that every 17 year-old girl has. However, when I watched the Kill Bill films, I felt like I could survive anything. If Beatrix Kiddo (in the form of Uma Thurman) could survive being shot in the head and come out of her coma kicking ass, then I knew that I could certainly survive breaking up with my boyfriend or getting my period in gym class or waking up with a big zit in the middle of my forehead.

However, even Uma Thurman had to start somewhere and that somewhere, in her case, was with an obscure, low-budget film called Kiss Daddy Goodnight. Kiss Daddy Goodnight, which also features Steve Buscemi in a small role, is one of those moody, atmosphere-drenched films that always seems to show up in cheap, 10-movie box sets. I recently watched it as a part of the Night Chills box set and I discovered that it’s not really as terrible as many reviewers claim.

First released in 1987 and looking as if it was produced with a budget of about a $1,000, Kiss Daddy Goodnight is another one of those oddly fascinating and pretentious grindhouse films that tries to mix art and exploitation. Shot on location at some of the sleaziest locations in New York City, Kiss Daddy Goodnight is the ennui-drenched story of Laura (17 year-old Uma Thurman). Laura is an actress who supplements her income by going out at night with a Louise Brooks wig on, picking up rich men, drugging them, and robbing them. Laura steals an ornate dagger from one of her victims and makes plans to give it to her mom as a birthday present.

Kiss Daddy Goodnight is also the story of Sid (Paul Dillon), a friend of Laura’s who, having previously left for reasons unknown, returns to New York and announces that he’s looking for Laura’s ex-boyfriend, Johnny. Sid wants to start a band. Laura tells him that she doesn’t know where Johnny is but she allows Sid to crash at her apartment. Sid spends most of the movie walking up to random people and asking if they’ve seen Johnny. He also finds the time to go through Laura’s closet whenever Laura’s not at the apartment. “Fucking bitch,” Sid randomly exclaims while looking at Laura’s dresses.

Kiss Daddy Goodnight also tells the story of William (Paul Richards), a courtly older man who lives in an apartment with a rabbit and who spends most of his time missing his daughter Lara, who wants nothing to do with him. William becomes obsessed with Laura, who looks almost exactly like Lara. We’re never quite sure what William does for a living but he’s rich enough to have a henchman who follows Laura whenever she leaves her apartment.

Finally, Kiss Daddy Goodnight is the story of Johnny who, once Sid does find him, turns out to be played by a very young Steve Buscemi. Johnny is only on-screen for about 5 minutes but, since he’s played by Buscemi (who, as opposed to Dillon and Richards, can actually act), he becomes a major character by default. Johnny is the only character in the film who seems to have a life outside of what we’re seeing on-screen. When Sid says he wants to get the band together again, Johnny says he no longer plays. When Sid says, “Laura says hello,” Johnny simply gives him a contemptuous stare and turns on the TV. The camera zooms in on the TV and we spend a few minutes watching football players tackling each other in slow motion.

Yes, Kiss Daddy Goodnight is an odd little film. While the film’s nominal plot is basically William pursuing Laura while Sid attempts to protect her, the film itself has a random, almost improvised feel to it. The film is more interested in documenting the weird people around Laura and Sid than in Laura and Sid themselves. When Sid applies for a job in a seafood place, the camera pans over to the two men in sitting in the booth behind him and we spend a minute listening to them talk about a friend who has been kicked out of a private school in Europe. When Laura takes a taxi to her apartment, the driver discusses philosophy with her. The phone number 559-8317 appears throughout the movie, cryptically scrawled on apparently every wall in New York. No one calls the number or even seems to notice it but it’s there as evidence that Kiss Daddy Goodnight is far more concerned with preserving a specific time and place than with telling a traditional story. When viewed as a historic document, Kiss Daddy Goodnight is a success d’estime.

Kiss Daddy Goodnight has a pretty bad reputation. One need only visit its page on the IMDb to see how little most people seem to think of Uma Thurman’s debut film. I, however, found it to be a bit more interesting than its reputation would lead one to suspect. Along with serving as a time capsule of New York City, the film proves that, even early in their respective careers, both Thurman and Buscemi had the talent and charisma necessary to become stars. If nothing else, just the fact that Uma Turman could go from Kiss Daddy Goodnight to Kill Bill, should give us all hope for the future.

It’s just more evidence that anything is possible.

Film Review: Les Miserables (dir. by Tom Hooper)

Posted on January 15, 2013 by Lisa Marie Bowman

I was recently talking to one of my fellow film bloggers when the subject of this year’s Oscar nominees came up. After I told her that I thought that Beasts of the Southern Wild was the worst of this year’s nominees, she rather vigorously shook her head and said, “No film this year was less deserving of a nomination than Les Mis.”

Now, I have to admit that it’s rare that her and I ever agree on anything. For instance, she thinks that Barack Obama is going to save the world whereas I … well, let’s just say that I don’t. She watches Glee and I would watch Community if it would ever come back on the air. However, we do usually agree about films and, in fact, our friendship was initially the result of our shared loathing for Avatar. So, I was curious why her reaction to Les Miserables was so different from mine.

In her own words, Les Miserables was “bombastic” and over-directed by Tom Hooper. She complained about Russell Crowe’s singing and she felt that Sacha Baron Cohen appeared to be acting in a totally different film from everyone else. The term “style over substance” came up more than a few times and she felt that even the things that did work — like Anne Hathaway’s draining performance as Fantine, Samantha Barks’ poignant work as Eponine, and Aaron Tveit’s charismatic performance as Enjorlas — simply served to highlight how uneven the film was when taken as a whole. Finally — and I think that this is actually the key behind a lot of the online backlash against Les Miserables — she admitted that a part of her reaction was due to the fact that she still resented the fact that Hooper’s previous film, The King’s Speech, defeated The Social Network for Best Picture way back in 2010.

What’s ironic is that I found myself agreeing with a lot of what she was saying. The fact of the matter is that Hooper does over-direct Les Miserables and the frequent jump cuts do tend to detract from the film’s performances. It’s not a coincidence that the film’s best performance is given by one of the few performers (Anna Hathaway, of course) who is actually allowed to sing an entire song in close-up without Hooper cutting away to distract us with something else. And yes, Sacha Baron Cohen does feel out-of-place and yes, Russell Crowe is a bit miscast in the role of Javert.

And yet, despite those not minor complaints, I still loved Les Miserables and I think it’s more than deserving of its nomination for Best Picture of the year.

Les Miserables in an adaptation of the Broadway musical that was itself an adaptation of Victor Hugo’s classic novel. The plot will be familiar to anyone who has ever taken an English class. In 19th century France, Jean Valjean (Hugh Jackman) serves 19 years in prison for stealing bread. When he’s paroled from prison, he adopts a new identity and starts a new life. Eventually, he becomes a factory owner and a local politician and is known for his kindness and honesty. When the tragic prostitute Fantine (Anne Hathaway) dies, Valjean adopts her daughter, Cosette. However, when the obsessive Inspector Javert (Russell Crowe) learns of Valjean’s true identity, Valjean and Cosette are forced to go into hiding. Many years later, the now grown Cosette (Amanda Seyfried) has fallen in love with the revolutionary Marius (Eddie Redmayne, who gives a performance that is just as good as Hathaway’s much more lauded work). As France descends into revolution, Javert again discovers Valjean, much blood is shed on the streets of Paris, and Sacha Baron Cohen keeps popping up and offering some awkward comedic relief.

Yes, Les Miserables is all about style and yes, it is a bit bombastic but is that necessarily a bad thing? I loved Les Mis specifically because it was such an old school spectacle. There have been several very serious, very sober-minded adaptations of Les Miserables and most of them, especially the nearly 5 hour French version from 1934, deserve to be seen. Both the Broadway musical and Hooper’s adaptation play up the story’s inherent melodrama and the resulting show is one that is designed to get more of an emotional response than an intellectual one. Tom Hooper’s Les Miserables is a film that has specifically been made for those of us who aren’t ashamed to shed a few tears at the movies. When I walked out of the theater after watching Les Miserables, I had mascara everywhere and I can’t think of a higher compliment to pay this uneven but ultimately triumphant film.

What Lisa Marie Watched Last Night #64: The 70th Annual Golden Globes

Posted on January 14, 2013 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Last night, I watched the 70th Annual Golden Globe awards. Judging from twitter, so did a lot of other people. All I can say is that I hope my golden globes are as popular as this show when they’re 70 years old.

Why Was I Watching It?

I have to admit that I nearly didn’t watch it because I was in kind of a crappy mood on Sunday night. Seriously,that night, my twitter timeline was a testament to just how annoyed this little redheaded Irish girl can get. But, in the end, I decided that I had to watch the Golden Globes because, even though I don’t care much for rich celebrities, I do love movies, I love TV, and I love award shows. Add to that, I knew that if I didn’t watch the Golden Globes that would mean missing out on a chance to make countless references to my boobs and I just couldn’t do that to my followers on twitter.

What Was It About?

It was about celebrities getting drunk and winning awards and getting bleeped while delivering their acceptance speeches. It was about the fact that the members of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association will do anything to get George Clooney to come hang out with them. It was about Tommy Lee Jones glaring, Jodie Foster rambling, and Quentin Tarantino using the n-word backstage. It was about Ben Affleck winning Best Director and Argo beating Lincoln for best film. It was about star fucking and star mocking. It was the best of award shows and it was the worst of award shows. In short, it was the Golden Globes.

What Worked?

To be honest, the 70th annual Golden Globes were a lot of fun. The show moved quickly and most of the jokes were actually funny. The assembled stars started drinking early and I think that helped out a lot.

Among those who won Golden Globes, the best acceptance speeches were given by Lena Dunham, Christoph Waltz, Ben Affleck, and Daniel Day-Lewis. A lot of people were critical of Anne Hathaway’s acceptance speech but I thought it was sweet and genuine.

My favorite winner was Jennifer Lawrence, mostly because she specifically started her speech by mentioning that she had beaten “Meryl.” Some people on twitter felt that was a bit rude but, quite frankly, I’ve grown tired of Meryl Streep showing up at every awards ceremony looking like grandma in a prom dress.

(Meryl, incidentally, was not at the Golden Globes last night because she had the flu.)

I thought Will Ferrell and Kristen Wiig were funny when they did their little introduction for the Best Actress (Comedy/Musical) award but I thought Tommy Lee Jones’ annoyed glare was even funnier.

Tina Fey (who looked great) and Amy Poehler (who did not) were both great hosts and I loved Poelher’s joke about how torturous it must have been for Kathryn Bigelow to be married to James Cameron. That’s one of the great things about the Golden Globes. Unlike at the Oscars, people are willing to make jokes about James Cameron.

Unlike a lot of people, I found Jodie Foster’s “coming out” speech to be funny and wonderfully human. That said, I wasn’t aware that Jodie Foster was ever in the closet. Seriously, worst kept secret ever.

It was a genuinely exciting and nice moment when Argo was announced as the winner for Best Motion Picture (Drama), defeating the heavily favored Lincoln. While I liked both of those films, there is a definite backlash brewing against the seeming inevitability of Lincoln’s victory.

Finally, Sacha Baron Cohen was pretty annoying but, on the plus side, he did take the time to insult Russell Crowe’s singing. As anyone who has ever watched South Park knows, this means that Crowe is going to jump in his tug boat and head off on a quest for vengeance.

And that’s the way things should be.

What Did Not Work?

A lot of people on twitter were really excited when Bill Clinton came out on stage to introduce the clip for Lincoln. Myself, I hit mute as soon as I saw him. I don’t watch awards shows to see redneck politicians. Add to that, having Bill Clinton introduce Lincoln was yet another example of the nonstop hype that has led to people resenting both Steven Spielberg and his latest film.

The Golden Globes used to be a fun precursor to the actual Oscar nominations so it was hard not to be disappointed that, under this new schedule, the Golden Globes were awarded after the Oscar nominations had been announced.

“OMG! Just like me!” Moment

“I’ll show you some Golden Globes!”

Lessons Learned

None. I was too stubborn last night to learn any lessons.

The Daily Drive-In: The Creeping Terror (dir. by Vic Savage)

Posted on January 14, 2013 by Lisa Marie Bowman

There are some films that you just have to see at least once before you die. One of those films is Dr. Strangelove: Or How I Learned To Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb. And another one of those films is The Creeping Terror.

While at first it might seem like The Creeping Terror and Dr. Strangelove don’t have much in common, that’s actually not the case. Both of these films were released in 1964. Both of them feature a scientist and a general who wants to blow things up. Both of these films portray an American military that’s incompetent when it comes to dealing with the unexpected. Even more importantly, both of these films are in black-and-white.

Beyond that, the two films don’t really have that much in common. Dr. Strangelove is a satire about nuclear war and was nominated for several Academy Awards. The Creeping Terror is a film about a killer rug that eats people and is currently in the public domain.

Okay, technically, the creeping terror of the title is not a killer rug. It just looks like a rug. Actually, it’s an alien being that crashes down to Earth and spends the majority of the film moving very slowly through a small town. Whenever it comes across an old man out fishing or a group of 30 year-old high school students dancing to the most generic music ever heard, the rug attacks and we’re treated to lengthy scenes of giggling extras climbing into the rug’s “mouth.”

Fortunately, there’s a local deputy sheriff and newlywed named Martin and Martin’s pretty concerned about this killer rug that appears to be eating everyone in town. Martin doesn’t really do much but he’s played by the film’s director (an enigmatic figure who went by the name of Vic Savage) so, by default, Martin’s the main character.

The Creeping Terror is probably best remembered for the fact that the film’s soundtrack apparently got lost during post-production and, as a result, nearly the entire film is silent with the exception of a narrator. For example, we might see Martin silently moving his jaw while the narrator recites, “Martin told them what he had seen…”

However, the narrator is not just there to tell us what people are saying. He’s also there to provide psychological insights. In one of the film’s more famous moments, the action stops for a few minutes so the narrator can tell us about how Martin’s recent marriage has strained his relationship with his bachelor friend Barney. During this moment, the narrator drops his usual even tone and soon, hints of self-loathing and anger start to turn up in his voice. Seriously, the narrator’s got some issues.

Now, a lot of people will tell you that The Creeping Terror is one of the worst films ever made but I think it’s hilarious and fun. Add to that, there’s a lengthy dance scene dropped into the middle of all this and you know how I am about movies with gratuitous dance scenes.