Film Review: The Private Life of Henry VIII (dir. by Alexander Korda)

Posted on March 6, 2011 by Lisa Marie Bowman

This afternoon, as part of my mission to see every single film ever nominated for best picture, I watched Alexander Korda’s 1933 biopic The Private Life of Henry VIII.

Now, I have to admit that I’ve never been a big fan of the historical King Henry VIII as I have a hard time finding much sympathy for a man who beheads one wife, not to mention two of them. I like to imagine that he met his end in much the same way that Joe Spinell meets his end at the end of Maniac, with all of his dead wives suddenly showing up and ripping off his head. But, Henry is one of those larger-than-life historical figures that always seems to end up as the subject of movies, speculative fiction, and, of course, Showtime television series.

The Private Life of Henry VIII is one of the better known recreation of Henry’s life on-screen. For the most part, the film ignores Henry’s policies as king and instead is a darkly humorous recreation of his relationships with five of his six wives. (His first marriage, to Catherine of Aragon, is ignored.) The episodic film opens with the execution of Anne Boyelen (Merle Oberon). This sequence establishes the film’s tone early and it’s actually a lot more cynical than we usually expect a film from 1933 to be. In between shots of Boyelen waiting to meet her fate, we get extended scenes of two executioners — one French and one English — arguing about which nationality is better when it comes to chopping off heads. Meanwhile, the members of Henry’s court spend their time whispering innuendo about Henry’s new wife, Jane Seymour (Wendy Barrie). When Henry (played by Charles Laughton) finally shows up on the scene, he turns out to be a buffoon, a childish man who happens to control the destiny of England. After Jane dies in childbirth, Henry marries Anne of Cleves (played by Laughton’s wife, Elsa Lanchester). Anne, however, finds Henry to be repulsive and, in the film’s most obviously comedic segment, she goes out of her way to make herself as sexually unappealing as possible in order to convince Henry to give her a divorce. (This, of course, led to the split between England and the Catholic Church but the film doesn’t dwell on that. This is a comedy, not Man For All Seasons.) After the divorce, Henry finally marries Catherine Howard (Binnie Barnes) who has spent the whole movie pursuing Henry. For the first time in the movie, Henry is portrayed as being truly in love, unaware (at first) that Catherine only married him for his crown and is actually having an affair with Thomas Culpepper (Robert Donat).

The Private Life of Henry VIII was not the first movie to be made about Henry VIII but it’s probably the most influential because of Charles Laughton’s Oscar-winning performance in the title role. Laughton’s performance pretty much set the standard as far as future Henry’s were concerned. His Henry is buffoonish womanizer who does everything to excess. (This is the film that pretty much created the whole image of monarchs as men who don’t use forks, knives, or spoons.) However, as over-the-top as Laughton’s performance may seem, it’s actually full of very subtle moments that suggest the actual human being lurking underneath all of the bluster. It’s hard not to sympathize with Laughton’s Henry as he struggles to explain what sex is to Anne of Cleves or with his obvious pain when he discovers that he’s been betrayed by the only one of his wives that he actually loved.

(Of course, any similarity between Laughton’s Henry and the real-life Henry is probably a coincidence.)

The Private Life of Henry VIII was the first British film ever nominated for best picture and, perhaps because it wasn’t made by the Hollywood establishment, it hasn’t aged as terribly as most films from the 30s. While the film does have its slow spots, the performances of Laughton, Oberon, and Lanchester still hold up well and some of the film’s dark comedy almost feel contemporary. Oddly enough, this British film about English history lost to an American film about English history, Cavalcade.

(I should mention that I haven’t seen Cavalcade so I can’t say whether it was a better film. I’m going to have to see Cavalcade eventually but it’ll be later than sooner as the movie is only available as part of a DVD boxed set that costs close to 300 dollars. Agck!)

A Quickie With Lisa Marie: The Robe (dir. by Henry Koster)

Posted on March 2, 2011 by Lisa Marie Bowman

As part of my mission to view every film — good or bad — ever nominated for best picture, I spent last night watching 1953’s The Robe (which was nominated for best picture but lost to From Here To Eternity.) The Robe is an old school biblical epic, the type of film that used to regularly get nominated for best picture but which you don’t see much of anymore. If you’re wondering why that genre hasn’t stood the test of time, I’d suggest watching The Robe.

Richard Burton stars as Marcellus, a womanizing Roman centurion who falls in love with young, pure noblewoman Diana (Jean Simmons). Unfortunately, Diana is set to marry the decadent Caligula (Jay Robinson). (Yes, that Caligula…) Burton’s rivalry with Caligula leads to him being reassigned to Jerusalem where he not only witnesses the crucifixion but also wins Jesus’ robe in a dice game. However, Marcellus soon finds himself being haunted by nightmares of the crucifixion and he discovers that he can’t even wear the robe without having a seizure. His slave, Demetrius (played by musclebound Victor Mature) has secretly become a Christian and steals The Robe before disappearing into the Holy Land. As Marcellus, who believes that only by destroying the robe can he free himself from his guilt, searches for Demetrius, he is reunited with Diana and, since this is an old school biblical epic, he also ends up converting as well. Unfortunately, he does all this around the same time that Caligula becomes Emperor and (in this film if not in actual history) begins to persecute the early Christians.

The Robe was the first film to made in “Cinemascope” and, while that may have been an amazing development back in 1953, when watched today, it’s obvious how much of the film is really just made up of filler designed to show off the new process. Again, it may have been amazing at the time but today, it just seems like a slow movie. Even more importantly, The Robe itself is so reverent and respectful of its subject that it’s just not that interesting. Speaking as a nonbeliever, I’ve still sometimes feel that a lot of contemporary films make it a point to ridicule Christians because they’re an easy target. Unlike a certain other world-wide religion, most Christians aren’t going to blow you up just because you featured an image of Jesus in your movie. However, movies like The Robe were not only extremely reverent and respectful but they went out their way to let you know how reverent and respectful they were being. The result is a film that lack any hint of nuance or anything that might actually challenge the audience. It’s like Avatar with Jesus.

Since he’s best known for being an alcoholic and marrying Elizabeth Taylor, Richard Burton might seem like an odd choice to play an idealistic Christian martyr. And, quite frankly, he is. Throughout the film, he’s visibly uncomfortable and, quite frankly, he didn’t have the legs necessary to pull off the ancient Roman look either. Jean Simmons is also stuck playing a stock character — the virtuous maiden. As with a lot of the old school biblical epics, the lead characters are so boring that you can’t help but feel they had more fun as pagans. Meanwhile, poor Victor Mature wanders through the film struggling to show anything resembling emotion. I mean, he tries so hard that its impossible not to like him. At the very least, The Robe proves that any film featuring Victor Mature will have some sort of camp value.

(As I watched The Robe, I kept thinking about a comment that Groucho Marx supposedly made. Apparently, he said he wouldn’t watch any movie starring Victor Mature because “I won’t watch any movie where the guy’s tits are bigger than the girl’s.”)

The Robe does feature some interesting supporting performances from several wonderful B-movie character actors. Jay Robinson is obviously having the time of his life playing the Emperor Caligula. Robinson’s version isn’t quite as effective as Malcolm McDowell’s but Robinson is a lot more fun to watch. Richard Boone is effectively slovenly in the role of Pilate and there’s a nice little throw-away scene where Pilate absent-mindedly washes his hands twice. Meanwhile Ernest Thesiger (who played Dr. Pretorious in the Bride of Frankenstein) is an oddly benevolent Emperor Tiberius while Michael Rennie, the alien from the original The Day the Earth Stood Still, plays none other than St. Peter. Even Jeff Morrow (from This Island Earth) has a small role.

Like most of the old school Hollywood biblical epics, The Robe seems pretty hokey when viewed today and I get the feeling it probably seemed hokey when it was first released back in 1953. Still, I remember that my Grandma Meehan used to love to watch these movies whenever they would show up on television. She would have deep theological debates with the images that flickered across the screen. I can still remember spending multiple Easters listening to her argue with The Ten Commandments. I don’t know if Grandma ever saw The Robe but I do know that she believed that the Holy Tunic was presently located in France and not at the Cathedral of Trier in Germany. Seriously, you did not want to question her on this point.

To be honest, watching this type of film is always an odd experience for me. Up until recently, I described myself as a “fallen Catholic” and I always felt so proud of myself afterward. I could spend hours telling you why I no longer believed in the faith of my childhood and I could get quite smug about it. I guess I still can but, as of late, I’ve discovered that humility goes well with a lack of faith. I’ve also been forced to admit that when you’re raised Catholic, you’re a Catholic for life regardless of whether you believe in the Holy Trinity or not. If pressed, I guess I’d call myself “an agnostic Catholic.” I’m the type of nonbeliever who still feels the need to go to confession after a long weekend. It’s not so much that I doubt my doubt as much as I wish that I could still go back to a time in my life when I actually could have faith without feeling like I was in denial. So, even as I openly scoff at these films, there’s always that small part of my heart that wants to embrace the film in all of its simplistic and hokey glory.

That said, it’s also true that The Robe is a lot easier to resist than a film like Pasolini’s The Gospel According to Saint Matthew or, for that matter, The Exorcist.

A Quickie With Lisa Marie: Crossfire (dir. by Edward Dmytryk)

Posted on February 28, 2011 by Lisa Marie Bowman

I recently decided that I wanted to watch and review every single movie ever nominated for the Academy Award for best picture. As part of that mission, I recently rewatched one of my favorite also-rans, 1947’s Crossfire.

Crossfire is a message movie disguised as a B detective flick. A group of soldiers who have just returned from World War II decide to get together for a drink. At the bar, they run into a civilian named Joseph Samuels (Sam Levine). The soldiers end up going back to Samuels’s apartment and the next morning, Samuels is found dead. Obviously, he was killed by one of the soldiers but which one. Suspicion falls on the meek (and missing) Floyd Bowers (Steve Brodie) but police detective Finlay (Robert Young) and Sgt. Peter Keeley (Robert Mitchum) both (correctly) suspect that Samuels was actually murdered by the far more outspoken and imposing Montgomery (Robert Ryan). It quickly becomes obvious that Montgomery is an anti-Semite who killed Samuels solely because he was Jewish. However, neither Finlay or Keeley can prove it. The film quickly becomes a darkly intense duel between these three men as Finlay and Keeley attempt to trick Montgomery into implicating himself while Montgomery attempts to further frame Bowers for the murder.

Before Crossfire, director Edward Dmytryk specialized in making low-budget “B” movies and he brings that noir, near-grindhouse sensibility to Crossfire. As a result, Crossfire is a one of those rare “message” films that is actually entertaining. Only a few times does the film start to feel preachy and luckily, Robert Mitchum is there being his usual cynical self. If anyone could deflate the pompous nature of the mid-40s message movie, it was Robert Mitchum. The film says, “Love one another.” Mitchum replies, “Baby, I just don’t give a damn,” and he keeps things from getting too heavy-handed. Mitchum is one of three Roberts to star in this film. Robert Young plays the police inspector with just the right amount of world-weary indignation while Robert Ryan is a force of nature as the film’s brutal murderer. Don’t get me wrong. You can pretty much peg Ryan as a killer from the first minute he shows up on-screen. If Mitchum and Young smartly underplay their roles, Ryan goes the exact opposite direction. He’s an obvious brute but he’s also totally believable. You look at his character and it’s not difficult to imagine him passing the collection plate at Westboro Baptist Church. As well, Crossfire also features an excellent supporting term by one of my favorite noir actresses, the great and wonderful Gloria Grahame. She plays Bowers’ married girlfriend and gives a compellingly, real performance that suggests that maybe Hollywood in the 40s wasn’t quite as clueless as we all like to assume.

Crossfire was nominated for Best Picture of 1947 but it lost to another film about anti-Semitism, Elia Kazan’s Gentleman’s Agreement. (Oddly enough, both Kazan and Dmytryk would end up naming names during the McCarthy Era.) Like Gentleman’s Agreement, Crossfire was based on a novel. However, in the original novel, the victim was not Jewish but instead was gay. However, back in the 1940s, the Hollywood Production Code specifically forbade any open depiction of homosexuality and so, the crime went from being motivated by homophobia to anti-Semitism.

A Quickie With Lisa Marie: One Million Years B.C. (directed by Don Chaffey)

Posted on February 27, 2011 by Lisa Marie Bowman

So, last night, I was talking Oscar fashion over on twitter and, at one point, I somehow ended up promising that if I was ever nominated for an Oscar, I would wear an outfit based the fur bikini that Raquel Welch wore in the 1966 film One Million Years B.C. Well, everyone seemed to think that this was a pretty good idea on my part but it made me realize that I’ve never actually seen this movie. As I was already planning on going to Fry’s to buy the Criterion edition of Fish Tank, I decided to buy One Million Years B.C. as well. When I returned home, I kinda watched it.

I say “kinda” because One Million Years B.C. is probably one of the most draggy movies ever made and my mind wandered considerably whenever there wasn’t a dinosaur on-screen. The movie opens with a really pompous sounding narrator who explains 1) that One Million Years B.C. was a long time ago and 2) not much else. I mean, honestly, Mr. Narrator, I could have figured out we were dealing with prehistory just from the fact that there’s a bunch of dinosaurs wandering around. Anyway, the movie itself is about a caveman (played by a nicely rugged actor named John Richardson) who is exiled from his own savage tribe but who eventually ends up with Raquel Welch’s tribe. But then his new tribe gets sick of him and decides to exile him as well. This time, Welch goes off with him and they eventually join Richardson’s old tribe which then goes to war with Welch’s old tribe and then finally, a volcano explodes. Oh, and there’s a lot of dinosaurs wandering around as well. On rare occasions, they attack the cave people but, for the most part, they just put out the same aloof vibe as my cat does right after he eats.

Most of the film’s dinosaurs were created through stop motion animation and they’re fun to watch. However, for me, what truly made the film was a giant turtle that pops up about 30 minutes in. It’s trying to make its way back to the ocean and, for its trouble, a bunch of little cave people insist on throwing spears at it. But the turtle just kinda looks back at them and shrugs. What a cool turtle!

There’s a certain type of viewer — and we all know the type — who will complain that One Million Years B.C. commits the sin of 1) having dinosaurs existing at the same time of cavemen and 2) having all the different dinosaurs living together at the exact same time. And to those people, I think it’s high time that everyone just finally says, “Shut the fuck up.” I mean, seriously, instead of nitpicking every little cinematic detail, why don’t you concentrate on losing some weight before you drop dead of a heart attack?

Just a suggestion.

Oddly enough, this film has a weird connection to the James Bond film series in that, on the basis of their work here, both John Richardson (who also starred in Mario Bava’s classic Black Sunday) and Raquel Welch came close to being cast in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. However, the roles ended up going to George Lazenby and Diana Rigg instead. (Welch was also nearly cast as a Bond girl in Diamonds are Forever.) Though neither Welch nor Richardson ever became a part of the 007 franchise, Robert Brown (who plays Richardson’s father here) later played the role of M in a handful of Bond films.

Game Review: Marvel vs. Capcom 3: The Fate of Two Worlds

Posted on February 24, 2011 by Semtex Skittle

The Bottom Line

It’s been over a decade (no, seriously! Marvel vs. Capcom 2 came out in 2000! It was on the Dreamcast!) since we last dropped into this remarkable franchise of fighting games. A lot of our favourite characters are missing, but the feel hasn’t changed.

Unfocused Ramblings

As usual, I like to begin these reviews with a boring story about my personal life. About ten years ago, a friend of mine owned the Sega Dreamcast. He never had a ton of games for it, and we all agreed that the controller was preposterously big, but it was probably the console that my group of friends and I played the most during that stretch. Because whatever we thought about the Dreamcast, and however few games there were on it, or however few my friend owned… he did own Marvel vs. Capcom 2. At this point, years later, I don’t even remember much about the fine details of the game. But I do remember its feel… and that feel has returned, to my hazy memory more or less intact, this year with the release of Marvel vs. Capcom 3: The Fate of Two Worlds. So now that I’ve played it, and the excitement is all flooding back to me, the unfortunate truth comes out: for all of its selling points (and it has them to spare) this game is not as much fun as its predecessor.

It’s not. You may think it is, and you may even be having more fun with it now… but it’s a matter of circumstance. And this game is not as much fun as the last one.

Does that mean that Marvel vs. Capcom 3 isn’t a great game? No. Actually, I’ve been impressed by basically everything that I have seen from the new title so far. It has the same feel of the old game. That hyper-frenetic superhero/comic book/action game and so on action is quite intact. You still have the hyper combo bars. You still have three different characters who are flying in and out of the action supporting one another and generally causing some havoc. You can still fill the screen with blasts of energy and crazy attack schemes that seem like no one could ever possibly survive them (and be just as disappointed to see that your opponent blocked in time). In other words, they’ve done a magnificent job of recreating what made Marvel vs. Capcom great. So we can say that this sequel is a faithful one. So what’s the problem?

I’m not sure this game translates as well to playing against faceless strangers on the internet as some of the other fighting games that have come out over time. Of course, it’s not a different experience on XBox Live (or the equivalent service of your choice) but this game, unlike other games, is a more intense frenetic experience and should be less about a cold, tactical approach. To me, this makes it more fun to play with friends than in multi-player match-making. Ultimately, that’s subjective, and if you like fighting games you should enjoy the multi-player experience here as well. Of course, whatever I may say about frenetic superhero/video game combat, the more skillful players of fighting games will still maintain a big advantage in this game due to the huge variety of combos available, even if the move-sets of each character are relatively simple. A lot of universal concepts translate across all characters (such as chaining together flashy aerial or team combos, and the counters to those moves).

The game does offer some options to help teach people about the game-play mechanics. If your fingers aren’t made of steel you may get frustrated attempting to execute long multi-team-mate-extravaganza type combos, but the mission mode (sort of a training mode with specific objectives as far as moves) encourages you to explore chaining moves together (from the basics of knocking a foe in the air and coming down on top of them with a crushing blow all the way to the aforementioned 500000 hit combos). I suspect that if you explore some of these modes, and trouble to learn the moves of a few favourite fighters, you’ll quickly get the hang of winning in this game.

Oh, and don’t be overly troubled by the absence of some Marvel vs. Capcom favourites. I’m sure they will all be available through DLC sooner or later. What’s that, you say? They announced that Jill Valentine and Shuma Gorath will appear as DLC characters even before launch? Let the games begin!

The Big Question

What were they thinking, not including characters like Megaman X? Presumably they were already looking at the prospect of selling DLC packages… but there is an infinite pool of characters to draw on between Marvel and Capcom. It still feels a little cheap to have excised some of the staples that we’ve been playing with since the first installment in the series.

Overall Game-Play

It’s a seamless game-play experience that has more than its fair share of flashy effects and super-cool sets of moves. My one gripe with the game on the whole is the inconsistency in move-sets between the characters, where some of the characters have a huge variety of diverse moves that can work in every situation… while other characters… are basically stuck with a signature move or two and a series of button combos. I can see how the innate attributes of the different fighters necessitate some of this for the purposes of balance, but it’s a little disappointing to find out that a personal favourite character has a lackluster move set. I suspect that this will be the exception rather than the rule for most players, but I do think it’s worth mentioning.

Graphics

It’s not visually breathtaking, but it has a certain (and to my mind, incredibly appropriate) style, and you won’t be disappointed by the attack animations. A ton of unlockable artwork accompanies the game in addition to the rendered character models, and there’s a lot to like with the visuals in this game. More important than the overall graphical presentation is probably the tightness of the experience, which doesn’t seem to have any glitches or bugs to it.

Sound

An upbeat main soundtrack accompanies unique themes for every fighter in the game as well as for the mighty Galactus. You’ll likely recognize a lot of the music as remixes on songs associated with the character in question (for example, Chun-Li’s appearance in a bout is accompanied by an overclocked remix of her battle theme from Street Fighter II) and you’ll probably come to appreciate a few favourites. I didn’t find the score forgettable which is a point in its favour. Obviously there’s not a ton of room for mood music in a fighting game, so the character themes and menu themes are essentially it. As for the voice acting, I haven’t encountered any voices that send me to my knees screaming at the heavens, and I take that to be a good sign. For a handful of bonus points, if you have some good surround sound and bass, you may be blown out of your seat by comments from Galactus, who addresses Thor with a hearty “If you are a god… then what shall we call Galactus!?” and other fun-loving quips.

Film Review: Black Demons (directed by Umberto Lenzi)

Posted on February 21, 2011 by Lisa Marie Bowman

(Hi! This is actually a review that I wrote a while ago for an anthology of B-movie reviews that a “friend” of mine was planning on self-publishing. Much like this site, the book would be made up of different reviewers giving each film their own individual spin. We were going to call it Dinner and a Cannibal Movie. I came up with that title, by the way. Unfortunately, the project was eventually abandoned but not before I’d written a handful of reviews. Here’s one of the shorter ones, for Umberto Lenzi’s Black Demons. Oh, and be warned: Because of the nature of the project it was written for, this review is full of spoilers.)

Black Demons.

My ex-roommate Kim and I have a long-standing argument concerning this film. I claim that it’s an Umberto Lenzi zombie film that was made in 1991, long after Italian zombie cinema had run its course. It is also my contention that we saw this movie in October of 2004. Admittedly, we were performing our own private pagan ritual during most of the film’s 90-minute running time but we still paid enough attention to not be impressed by it. Kim, on the other hand, argues that we never watched Black Demons and that, furthermore, there is no such film as Black Demons. I suspect that a combination of her own rather prodigious liberal guilt and the film’s own utter banality has led her to repress the memory of it in much the same way as the protagonist of a Dario Argento thriller will often forget a key detail of a murder he has witnessed.

Black Demons tells the story of five young people who find themselves on the bad end of some black magic. For reasons that are never really made all that clear (largely because the entire cast has a bad habit of mumbling their dialogue), English Kevin is in Brazil with his American girlfriend, Jessica. Tagging along with them is Jessica’s half-brother, a morose young man who is recovering from a nervous breakdown and who has the rather unfortunate name of Dick. Along with having a vaguely incestuous relationship with Jessica (whether this was intentional on Lenzi’s part or just a case of bad acting is up for debate), Dick is also fascinated by black magic and has a tendency to wander off by himself a lot. This leads to a lot of scenes of Kevin and Jessica repeatedly shouting, “Dick! Dick!” as they search for him. This provided both me and Kim a lot of giggly amusement if nothing else.

Anyway, Dick attends a black magic ceremony that he records on audio tape and then proceeds to obsessively listen to whenever the movie needs an excuse to bring on a few zombies. The morning after the ceremony, our threesome’s jeep breaks down out in the middle of nowhere. Luckily, two hikers – Jose and his girlfriend, Sonya – come along and invite everyone to spend the night at Jose’s villa. As luck would have it, there’s a big cemetery located right behind the villa and idiot Dick decides to play his little audio tape right in the middle of it.

(I think Kim may have exclaimed, “God, what a dick,” at this point but she denies it along with the movie itself.)

Needless to say, this causes six zombies to rise from their graves and the usual hilarity follows. It turns out that these zombies were, in life, African slaves who rebelled against their white masters and were put to death as a result. Their eyes were plucked out as they died, though this doesn’t seem to keep them from being able to see once they come back to life. It turns out that the mission of these six black zombies is to kill six white people to even the score. Unfortunately, most of this is explained by Jose who has such an incredibly thick accent that it is next to impossible to understand a word he says. Therefore, the plot may actually be a bit more complex than I realize.

Though, I doubt it.

As Kim and I immediately realized, the zombies need to kill six white people. Yet there are only five white people in the film. Whether this was a case of lazy writing or maybe an actor walked off the film at the last minute, I do not know. However, Lenzi ingeniously handles this problem by killing an anonymous, never-seen white guy offscreen and then having our heroes hear about it on the radio. Still, you have to wonder why these zombies, seeking vengeance for being slaves in their past life, would only feel the need to kill six white people. Sure, it works out in the sense that there are six zombies and this way they only have to kill one person apiece. But still, it seems like they’re letting the white race off a little bit easily here. Indeed, if the solution to all of the world’s racial strife is simply to kill off the five, uninteresting losers in this film, then I have to side with the zombies on this one.

Unfortunately, Kevin and Jessica aren’t willing to sacrifice themselves for world harmony and insist on surviving until the end of the movie. Kevin eventually figures out that the zombies can be stopped by a well-thrown Molotov cocktail. How exactly he figured this out isn’t really clear. Perhaps he saw it in another, better zombie film. (Like Lucio Fulci’s Zombie 2, for instance. Unfortunately, beyond the Molotovs, the bad acting of the female lead, and a grisly fetish for showing eyeballs getting damaged, these two films have little in common.) Kevin’s plan works though not before the tragic ends of Sonya, Jose, the phantom sixth white guy, and yes, even Dick. Leaving behind a bunch of smoldering slaves, Jessica and Kevin flee the villa for a world still torn apart with racial strife and anger. Thanks a lot, guys!

Almost all good horror is to be found in subtext. Such as, Dracula may be pretty intimidating with his fangs and his blood drinking and all, but it’s as a symbol of unbridled lust and secret fantasies that he’s been able to become and remain an icon for over a century. And while Frankenstein might be frightening to look at, his true power comes from being a sign of what happens when man attempts to play God. In an admittedly less literary vein, what else is a truly scary slasher but proof positive over how little control we truly have over our own future? Strictly on paper, Black Demons should be a film awash in powerful subtext. After all, these zombies wouldn’t even exist if they hadn’t been enslaved and treated like property by the ancestors of the film’s heroes. In a world that is still struggling (and failing) to deal with the legacy of racism, a film in which a bunch of slaves come back to life and seek vengeance on only whites should have quite a bit to say. Perhaps if Black Demons had been directed by Fulci or Deodato, it would have done just that. However, this film was directed by Umberto Lenzi which means that it ends with Kevin assuring Jessica that their nightmare is over with the camera ominously (and, quite frankly, obscenely) pans over to a bunch of black children playing on the side of the road, basically equating those living children with a bunch of bloodthirsty, vengeful zombies on the basis of the color of their skin. Whether Lenzi realized what he was doing or not, this one camera movement manages to be a hundred times more offensive than anything found in Cannibal Apocalypse.

Perhaps, in this case, Kim had the right idea.

Lisa Marie Does The Roommate (dir. by Christian E. Christiansen)

Posted on February 15, 2011 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Because of all the snow and ice that hit Dallas earlier this month, I’ve been running a week behind when it comes to going to the movies. For instance, I was planning on seeing The Roommate when it first opened but, because of the weather, I didn’t get a chance to see it until this previous Saturday. I ended up seeing the movie at the AMC Valley with Jeff, my sister Erin, my friend Evelyn and her boyfriend Steven, Evelyn’s younger sister Emma, and finally Katrina, who works with my sister Erin.

Now, you may be asking — why were so many people required just for me to see one movie? Well, The Roommate didn’t look like a film to be seen alone. It looked like a film that was meant to be seen in a group of people. The Roommate looked like the type of campy, silly little film that demanded some audience participation. At least, that’s what it looked like. However, as we watched the movie, it quickly became apparent that this film was neither campy nor silly. Instead, it was just — well, it was just there.

In the Roommate, Minka Kelly plays a poor girl from Iowa who leaves home to attend college in California. She’s a design major or something like that though she’s going to one of those movie colleges that is exclusively populated by models and where you’re only actually require to attend one class (and that class, of course, is taught by Billy Zane). Anyway, Kelly has been randomy assigned a roommate and it turns out to be Leighton Meester. Kelly and Meester hit it off but it quickly becomes evident that Meester has some issues. Soon, she’s stalking all of Kelly’s other friends, cutting herself to get attention, and eventually revealing herself to be a comic book super villain. Kelly, for her part, refuses to accept that Meester’s crazy until after the first murder has been committed and yet no one really gets upset at her for that. Seriously, couldn’t one person have said, “You know, if you hadn’t been such a clueless idiot, a lot of trouble could have been avoided.”

It’s a sad fact of life that most movies are rather forgettable. Who hasn’t had the experience of sitting through a movie and then realizing, a few hours later, that you really can’t remember much about what you’ve just seen? A similar thing happened to me when I saw The Roommate except, as opposed to forgetting about it after I saw it, I actually forgot about it while I was watching. After about half-an-hour into the film, we all stopped paying attention and instead, me, Erin, Emma, and Evelyn started to whisper about old episodes of The O.C. and Buffy the Vampire Slayer while Jeff and Steve started to talk about sports and Katrina ended up spending the whole movie flirting with the guy sitting behind us (which I don’t think his girlfriend appreciated since she kept going “shhhhhhh!” in this really annoying, obnoxious way). Every once in a while, I would look up at the screen and think to myself, “Oh yeah, there’s a movie playing” but, quite frankly, I never saw anything on-screen that would justify making any more than a minimum effort to pay attention. That’s just the type of film The Roommate is. It takes the old Radiohead song about no surprises, please to heart.

What makes this disappointing is that, concept-wise, the movie has potential. Everyone has had that one friend that has turned out to be just a little bit too clingy for comfort. Most of us have had more than a few. As well, your first few semesters of college are supposed to be all about figuring out who you really are. Are you gay, straight, or somewhere in between? Are you a good girl or are you a bad girl? Are you a rebel or are you a conformist? At least that’s how I remember my first semester of college and, for me, my randomly-selected roommate was the key to answering so many of those questions. I imagine that’s the way it is for a lot of people. The best horror often has some sort of tenuous connection with reality so The Roommate had a chance to be, at the very least, a fun little B-movie.

Unfortunately, effective horror also requires a willingness to risk alienating the audience and The Roommate is too concerned with maintaining its PG-13 rating to take that risk. That PG-13 rating means, in short, no nudity, no blood, and no darkness. Instead of truly exploring the premise for all that its worth, The Roommate is more concerned with being safe for tweens and teenagers. That was the majority of the audience when we saw the film and seeing how much they appeared to be enjoying the film made me feel really, really old. Of course, to be honest, I probably would have enjoyed the movie to if I was only 15 years old and I’d never actually seen a good horror movie before.

However, no film is totally useless and The Roommate did inspire me to start concealing a pocket knife underneath the clasp of my bra, like Leighton Meester does in this movie. That may be the best development in self-defense since I finally figured out how to use pepper spray without spraying it in my face.

Quick Take: Magicka

Posted on February 14, 2011 by Semtex Skittle

Quick Take

If you ever asked yourself how much fun it would be to randomly combine 10 different “elements” to create an absurdly large array of spell effects this game answers the question. For the rest? Don’t ask questions.

Unfocused Ramblings

I have, upon reflection, a soft spot for games that are developed by groups of Swedish students. I mean – in a broader sense, if you can make a game that people will enjoy, then why not? And through the magic of Steam, this game becomes available to the world. I know a lot of people have already played Magicka, and but I’m hoping more people will take the plunge into it.

So what is Magicka? It’s a humorous adventure-RPG-ish-game set in a world that parodies a number of mythologies as well as aspects of pop culture. You’ll see a ton of references to pop culture icons like Star Wars, 300, and literally dozens of others. The opening movie which introduces the setting and the premise is chock full of pop culture references and popular memes, and it doesn’t slow down from there. The player takes command of a nameless mage clad in an obscuring robe who has been taught at the academy of magic, and learned to wield eight ‘basic’ elements in order to weave together ever-more-impressive spells. If that weren’t enough, you quickly learn about two basic combines which produce two other, we’ll say “hidden”, elements (which, themselves, are frequently used to create still more sophisticated spells). With these ten building blocks, tens of thousands of combinations are possible. And, since the game doesn’t really force you to progress forward, and even your most tenderly beloved allies are valid targets for your spells, the game really does encourage you to play with these elements until you create something you really like. And from there, to use that spell until you get tired of the animation… and develop something new… and so on.

And yes, there are some big booms available in the more sophisticated spell combinations.

On top of just randomly mixing and matching various elemental building blocks to create beams, balls, streams, and walls, there also exist a repertoire of ‘Magicka’; defined spells that you learn the combination to which have particularly powerful effects (such as Revive, which restores a dead ally, Haste, which allows your mage to run at incredible speed, or Grease which deposits some very flammable fun on the ground).

Your mages can collect weapons from time to time which have some special effects, but for the most part, the game attempts to steer clear of any kind of level-up or power-up type stuff. The focus is very much on the interplay of the spell combinations, and the limitless fun you can have blasting your friends up, over, and through the landscape elements using your magical powers.

All of that sounds good, right? Well, it is. But the game does have some problems, and I would be remiss if I didn’t warn you about them before you shell out your hard-earned cash for a copy of Magicka.

– The single-player version of this game just doesn’t stand up well on its own. For several reasons. The most important one is that it’s very easy to kill yourself in Magicka, and if you do so when playing solo, you’ll find yourself regressing to a checkpoint that could be a good ways back. Quit the game? You’ll end up restarting the entire chapter. This glaring weakness still exists in multiplayer, but with a team of four, you can revive your comrades and hopefully not all die at once. This is tough in single player.

– There are some bugs. Let’s not mince words about this. In addition to wacky things that can happen with spell effects (many of which will send you or your enemies flying around the screen) the game seems to crash occasionally, and it just doesn’t feel quite as polished as you might expect from EA’s latest release.

– They made some inexplicable choices with the multi-player, such as not being able to reconnect to a game in progress, and the cut-scenes not being skip-able except by the host (and they’re pretty lengthy cut scenes at that. You can skip ahead of the cut-scene even if you’re not hosting, but you just stare at a loading bar until the cut-scene ends anyway).

– Despite having its own tutorial section, Magicka really doesn’t teach you much about how to play. Pay close attention to the controls it does show you, and don’t be afraid to experiment, but also don’t spend a lot of time looking for the game to guide you… because it won’t. That having been said, it’s not a crippling problem since experimentation is half of the fun in this title.

– Although the game is clearly more friendly for multi-player use, you’re definitely going to prefer putting together a group of four friends as opposed to playing open multiplayer. Friendly fire is a huge part of this game, and you’ll enjoy it more with your friends. Trust me.

The Bottom Line

Personally, I love Magicka. It’s a great multi-player experience and the combination of spell effects is a lot of fun. But it’s not a polished experience; it has some bugs, some of which are frustrating, and as a single player experience it leaves quite a bit to be desired. For what you’re going to pay for Magicka, however, you’ll feel as if you’ve gotten your money’s worth.

What Lisa Watched Last Night: Less Than Zero (dir. by Marek Kanievska)

Posted on February 13, 2011 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Last night, I ended up watching the 1987 anti-drug propaganda piece, Less than Zero.

Why Was I Watching It?

Last night, I was hanging out with Jeff, our friend Evelyn, and Evelyn’s friend Steven and we were flipping stations, trying to find something that we could use for background noise. When we came across an announcement on FMC that Less Than Zero was about to start, I made the mistake of admitting that despite having read Bret Easton Ellis’s novel and heard a good deal about this film, I had never actually sat down and watched Less Than Zero.

Well, after everyone got finished making fun of me (boo hoo), it was agreed that we simply had to watch Less Than Zero.

“But,” I started, “isn’t Gone With Wind starting over on TCM…”

“Fuck Gone With The Wind,” someone (I think it was Evelyn because she’s a meanie) said, “you’ve never seen Less than Zero before.”

What’s It About?

It’s about rich kids in Los Angeles doing drugs. Clay (played by Andrew McCarthy, who my cousin Jessica met once and who she says was a really nice guy) is a college student who comes home to L.A. and discovers that his ex-girlfriend Blair (Jami Gertz) and best friend Julian (Robert Downey, Jr.) are addicted to cocaine and that Julian owes a lot of money to a drug dealer named Rip (James Spader).

(Personally, I would never buy drugs from someone named Rip — with the possible exception of Rip Torn.)

Anyway, Clay takes it upon himself to try to save the soul of everyone in California.

What Worked?

Downey and Spader are both great in this film. From what I’ve read, the general assumption seems to be that Downey was just playing himself here but whether or not he was, he still gives an excellent performance. Spader, meanwhile, turns Rip into a great villain by making evil sexy.

The film, full of garish neon and defiantly tacky pastels, looks great in its decadent, shallow way. The same thing can be said of the music.

What Didn’t Work?

Everything else. Less Than Zero really doesn’t work as an anti-drug film because the character of Clay seems so boring when compared to Julian and Rip.

If I had to choose between the three of them, I’d probably hang out with Rip because 1) he always seems to be having a good time, 2) he’s apparently not a drug addict himself, and 3) he’s got the most money of all of them. That therefore makes him preferable to both Julian, who is having a good time but is also a drug addict, and Clay who isn’t a drug addict yet appears to be miserable throughout the entire film.

“Oh my God! Just like me!” Moments

One night, years ago, I found myself making out with an ex-boyfriend in a convertible while one jagged bolt of lightning split the night sky above us and hundreds of scary guys on motorcycles drove past us. As is often the case, the memory was better than the ex.

Lessons Learned:

Drug dealers make the best dates.

Film Review: The Rite (dir. by Mikael Hafstrom)

Posted on February 6, 2011 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Last night, me, Jeff, and my sister Erin braved the melting ice and snow in order to drive out to the AMC Valley View and see The Rite, which is the latest movie to come out about exorcism.

(Quick sidenote: Yes, the AMC Valley View has replaced the closed Regal Keystone as my place to see mainstream, establishment films. It’s actually a pretty nice little theater and it’s located in Valley View Mall so, at the very least, you can do some shopping before you see your film. Add to that, I think I’ve developed a girlcrush on the girl who always sells us our tickets because she’s 1) something like 6 feet tall and 2) she just gives off this really sarcastic, monotone, I-don’t-give-a-fuck vibe. Oh! And they’ve also got that old House of the Dead video game in the lobby and last night, Erin played it and Jeff and I were laughing so hard because she just started shooting everything! That said, the theater doesn’t do matinee showing and oh my God, I hate the drive up there because it means having to cross Coit road and once you get pass Coit, nobody knows how to drive. Bleh. But anyway….)

The Rite begins with those dreaded words: “The following is based on true events.” We then meet Michael Kovak (played by Colin O’Donoghue) who is the son of a mortician who lies about wanting to be a priest so he can get a scholarship to the seminary and get a college degree in psychology. His plan, of course, is to get the degree and then resign from the deaconate before actually taking his vows. However, when he attempts to resign, the Father Superior refuses to accept the resignation. He also refuses to accept Michael’s claim of having no faith in God. Instead, he convinces Michael to go to Rome and to take a class on exorcism. The theory here — and it’s the same theory that seems to crop up in every film ever made about exorcism — is that if you can see proof of the devil then therefore, you’re seeing proof of God because one can’t exist without the other. Some people would call that wishful thinking but regardless, Michael goes to Rome and who wouldn’t? Rome is full of old buildings, beautiful people, stray cats, great food, and romantic possibilities, after all.

Rome is also the home of Father Lukas (played by Anthony Hopkins) who is a veteran exorcist. When Michael expresses some doubts in Exorcism Class, he’s sent to learn from Lukas. Michael watches as Lukas performs several exorcisms and yet, he still refuses to believe that any of it is real. Even when the possessed start to spit up Holy Nails and pieces of the One True Cross, Michael continues to argue that it’s all a psychological condition. But then, Michael starts to have disturbing visions of his father (played by Rutger Hauer) and Lukas starts to act strangely and Michael comes to realize that, regardless of whether he believes in the devil, the devil certainly believes in him.

The Rite actually has a few things to recommend it. The scenes in Rome are shot to emphasize the eerie atmosphere over easy shocks and, as a result, the film creates a sense of unease that is so subtle that the viewer is almost seduced into sharing the film’s Manichean world view. Anthony Hopkins is always fun to watch on-screen and he knows exactly how much over-the-top to go in his performance without descending to the level of camp.

Unfortunately, director Mikael Hafstrom never quite manages to settle on the correct pace for the film. Some scenes are over much too quickly while others seem to just drag on for an eternity. It seems to take forever for Michael just to get over to Rome and even once he does arrive in Italy, you’re never sure of how long he’s supposed to be there, how long he’s already been there, or how many days pass between his first meeting with Hopkins and the end of the film.

The film’s other big flaw, along with the slow pace, is the character of Michael or, more specifically, Colin O’Donoghue’s passively blank performance as Michael. Since the film is essentially meant to be about Michael’s struggle with belief, it would be good if the film’s star was capable of suggesting some sort of inner emotional life. Instead, O’Donoghue simply comes across as a block of wood that’s been whittled into the shape of a man. As a result, Micheal never seems to be a man in the throes of a crisis of faith. Instead, he just seems petulant. Anthony Hopkins is so dynamic and O’Donoghue so bland that you actually resent O’Donoghue for having more screen time.

Director Mikael Hafstrom deserves some credit for trying to make a “serious” movie about exorcism but, to be honest, I prefer the more unapologetically sordid approach of a film like The Last Exorcism. Ultimately, The Rite tries so hard to be serious that it forgets to be entertaining.