MAD magazine has occasionally tried to make forays into other mediums besides magazines, and it never really works. Up the Academy was their half-baked and silly attempt to cash in on the popularity of National Lampoon's Animal House. But is it really all that bad? For the most part, yes, but it has its moments.
The film opens and closes with very a creepy shot of a guy in an Alfred E. Neuman (MAD's mascot) costume. It gets better, though. But not by much. The humor here relies heavily on stereotypes, toilet humor, and occasionally some slapstick gags. These only work about half of the time, and it's strangely nothing like the sense of humor in the magazine that produced it. The main characters are mostly thin stereotypes, and the jokes revolving around their stereotypical personalities get old fast. It's worth noting that Ralph Macchio starred in this, in one of his earlier roles, and he's one of the only entertaining people in the whole thing.
The plot is very nonsensical, and somewhat reminiscent of the Police Academy movies, although this was released well before them. Basically, a bunch of misfit troublemakers get shipped off to military school and wacky hijinks ensue. That's pretty much it. The movie isn't completely bland, though, the first 40 minutes or so were fairly entertaining. After that, however, the humor starts to go flat. There's one strange thing worth noting, and it really took me out of the movie-watching experience; the soundtrack plays incessantly through the movie. While I liked the style of music (late 70's rock and post-punk), it plays far too much. There were several scenes throughout the movie that would have played out a lot better if there wasn't a song playing in the background. The effects, while few, were pretty cheap, and consisted mostly of old stock footage. I get the feeling this was meant to be played for laughs in some scenes, but it still makes the movie look pretty shoddy.
Overall, this is a very hit-and-miss movie. When it's funny, it's very, very funny. When it's bad, it's really terrible. It certainly isn't horrible, but it's nothing special, and not really worth watching. I wouldn't recommend it. The first three Police Academy movies are a much better alternative if you're in the mood for a "bunch of wacky characters in a not wacky setting"-type movie.
Enjoyment: 3/5
Quality: 2/5
IMDB Page- http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0081695/
January 16, 2012
January 8, 2012
Movie Review- Little Miss Sunshine
I don't often watch Oscar-nominated movies, but when I do, they're usually a lot better than I expected. This is not one of those movies, sadly. This is one of those movies that starts out great, but then slowly becomes very un-enjoyable. Don't get me wrong, it's a great quality movie, but I personally didn't enjoy it. Plot-wise the premise isn't all too inventive; it's the average road trip movie, but the actors make up for it. Speaking of the cast, I thought that the cast was great, Steve Carell in particular. I don't know why, but I'm a sucker for comedic actors in serious roles. But while Steve did an excellent job, I couldn't help but feel that he kinda out of place the whole time. There was just something about him that made him stick out like a sore thumb in comparison to the rest of the cast.
The main problem I had with the movie, though, was that the movie got incredibly hokey towards the end. The rest of the film is really serious and is more of a dramedy, but the script takes a much more comedic turn after their grandfather dies. After that point, the movie sort of detaches itself from the serious and grounded tone of the film, and goes for more of the generic "wacky hi-jinks" found in road trip movies. And strangely enough, it's around that point that all the characters start to speak in almost nothing but deep and meaningful dialog. I don't mind the occasional bit of thought-provoking dialog, but the characters speak like that so much loses its meaning and becomes empty and annoying.
Overall, it's not that enjoyable a movie, but it's still a well-made one. I wouldn't recommend it, but if you're into Oscar-nominated/winning movies, than it's worth a watch.
Enjoyment: 3/5
Quality: 4/5
IMDB Page- http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0449059/
The main problem I had with the movie, though, was that the movie got incredibly hokey towards the end. The rest of the film is really serious and is more of a dramedy, but the script takes a much more comedic turn after their grandfather dies. After that point, the movie sort of detaches itself from the serious and grounded tone of the film, and goes for more of the generic "wacky hi-jinks" found in road trip movies. And strangely enough, it's around that point that all the characters start to speak in almost nothing but deep and meaningful dialog. I don't mind the occasional bit of thought-provoking dialog, but the characters speak like that so much loses its meaning and becomes empty and annoying.
Overall, it's not that enjoyable a movie, but it's still a well-made one. I wouldn't recommend it, but if you're into Oscar-nominated/winning movies, than it's worth a watch.
Enjoyment: 3/5
Quality: 4/5
IMDB Page- http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0449059/
January 2, 2012
Movie Review- Maniac
A lot of people hate this movie because of how violent it is. Sure, it's gruesome, but there have far more violent movies since its 1980 release. If you can look past the violence, this is a great movie. Maniac is a slasher/thriller, and if there's one thing slasher movies are notorious for, it's being crappy. This is one of the few slasher movies that actually bothered to try to be a good movie. And it excels in every category.
The story was original for the time, before slasher movies became really popular, and the script itself is truly disturbing. It centers around Frank Zito, a psycho who takes up killing women as a result of his tormented childhood. The characters are all fairly believable, but Frank in particular is horrifically captivating. The character development is spectacular, and we really get to see into Frank's mind, and it's a very disturbing look. Speaking of which, Tom Savini did the makeup for this movie, and he is excellent at what he does. The special effects and makeup for the deathscenes are very realistic, and most of them still hold up pretty well.
The cinematography is really nice, too. There's a lot of handheld and point-of-view shots, giving the movie and almost documentary-like feel to it at times. The score is really cool, too; it's a very creepy synthesizer-based score. The acting from the minor characters is decent, but Joe Spinell steals the show, being the main character and such.He looks and sounds like a regular guy most of the time, and that just makes him all the creepier.
Strangely enough, the ending is very bizarre and surreal, but it's fitting, given that the main character is mentally unstable, and we're not sure whether it's all going on inside his head or not.
Overall, this is a very unnerving, suspenseful, and downright disturbing movie. Highly recommended for those with a strong stomach and a taste for exploitation-type movies.
Quality: 4/5
Enjoyment: 5/5
IMDB Page- http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0081114/
The story was original for the time, before slasher movies became really popular, and the script itself is truly disturbing. It centers around Frank Zito, a psycho who takes up killing women as a result of his tormented childhood. The characters are all fairly believable, but Frank in particular is horrifically captivating. The character development is spectacular, and we really get to see into Frank's mind, and it's a very disturbing look. Speaking of which, Tom Savini did the makeup for this movie, and he is excellent at what he does. The special effects and makeup for the deathscenes are very realistic, and most of them still hold up pretty well.
The cinematography is really nice, too. There's a lot of handheld and point-of-view shots, giving the movie and almost documentary-like feel to it at times. The score is really cool, too; it's a very creepy synthesizer-based score. The acting from the minor characters is decent, but Joe Spinell steals the show, being the main character and such.He looks and sounds like a regular guy most of the time, and that just makes him all the creepier.
Strangely enough, the ending is very bizarre and surreal, but it's fitting, given that the main character is mentally unstable, and we're not sure whether it's all going on inside his head or not.
Overall, this is a very unnerving, suspenseful, and downright disturbing movie. Highly recommended for those with a strong stomach and a taste for exploitation-type movies.
Quality: 4/5
Enjoyment: 5/5
IMDB Page- http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0081114/
Movie Review- The Funhouse
Today's Movie- The Funhouse (Carnival of Terror)
The Funhouse, also known as "Carnival of Terror", is an often overlooked slasher flick from the early 1980's. Seeing as I like underrated movies like this, I thought I'd give it a whirl. I can totally see why this gets overlooked. It's directed by Tobe Hooper, of "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" and "Poltergeist" fame. He made this movie a lot better than it could have been.
I both liked and disliked this movie. On one hand, it has some of the best cinematography I've seen in a slasher movie, but on the other hand, the script is very boring and not scary in the least. The setting is a nice change-up from the usual slasher fare, it takes place in a seedy travelling carnival. But while it's a nifty location, the script doesn't take much advantage of the potential the setting had. The plot is just like any other slasher movie; a bunch of dumb teens get chopped up by a deformed psycho. But the originality put into the film falls flat. Heck, we aren't even introduced to the killer until more than halfway through the film. And when the killer does show up, he looks like a guy wearing a bat mask. On top of that, he does nothing but scream the whole time, which gets really annoying.
While the body count is pretty high (six people including the villains), they're very bland and not at all inventive. Even the villain's death is boring, which was really disappointing. And to make matters worse, nobody dies until about two-thirds of the way into the movie, so we're forced to sit through an hour of virtually nothing happening. The main characters pretty much just hang out at the carnival for an hour, and there's a weird subplot about the main character's little brother who pretty much just hangs out at the carnival, too. The acting is pretty lame, as well; the actresses virtually do nothing but scream for the last third of the movie, and the guys aren't any better. The characters themselves are unlikable, though, so that doesn't really help their performances.
Overall, a strange combo of crap and some nice cinematography. It's not a good film by any means, but it isn't terrible. As I said, I simultaneously liked and disliked the movie. If you're looking for a slasher movie that isn't Friday the 13th, I'd give this one a watch. Heck, you might enjoy it more than I did.
Quality: 3/5
Enjoyment: 3/5
IMDB Page- http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082427/
The Funhouse, also known as "Carnival of Terror", is an often overlooked slasher flick from the early 1980's. Seeing as I like underrated movies like this, I thought I'd give it a whirl. I can totally see why this gets overlooked. It's directed by Tobe Hooper, of "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" and "Poltergeist" fame. He made this movie a lot better than it could have been.
I both liked and disliked this movie. On one hand, it has some of the best cinematography I've seen in a slasher movie, but on the other hand, the script is very boring and not scary in the least. The setting is a nice change-up from the usual slasher fare, it takes place in a seedy travelling carnival. But while it's a nifty location, the script doesn't take much advantage of the potential the setting had. The plot is just like any other slasher movie; a bunch of dumb teens get chopped up by a deformed psycho. But the originality put into the film falls flat. Heck, we aren't even introduced to the killer until more than halfway through the film. And when the killer does show up, he looks like a guy wearing a bat mask. On top of that, he does nothing but scream the whole time, which gets really annoying.
While the body count is pretty high (six people including the villains), they're very bland and not at all inventive. Even the villain's death is boring, which was really disappointing. And to make matters worse, nobody dies until about two-thirds of the way into the movie, so we're forced to sit through an hour of virtually nothing happening. The main characters pretty much just hang out at the carnival for an hour, and there's a weird subplot about the main character's little brother who pretty much just hangs out at the carnival, too. The acting is pretty lame, as well; the actresses virtually do nothing but scream for the last third of the movie, and the guys aren't any better. The characters themselves are unlikable, though, so that doesn't really help their performances.
Overall, a strange combo of crap and some nice cinematography. It's not a good film by any means, but it isn't terrible. As I said, I simultaneously liked and disliked the movie. If you're looking for a slasher movie that isn't Friday the 13th, I'd give this one a watch. Heck, you might enjoy it more than I did.
Quality: 3/5
Enjoyment: 3/5
IMDB Page- http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082427/
December 31, 2011
Movie Review- Zelig
I really like Woody Allen, he's a great writer/director/actor. He's just as good as I expected he'd be in this movie. It's a very interesting concept, and it's executed wonderfully. The film is shot documentary-style, and revolves around a man from the late 1920's named Leonard Zelig, who has the strange chameleon-like ability to imitate those who surround him. If he spends enough time around doctors, he starts acting and talking like one, if he hangs around with guys with beards, he instantly grows a beard, and so on and so forth. This of course makes him a big celebrity. The film raises a lot of questions about individuality and conforming, and is very thought-provoking and well written. The cinematography is very interesting, the scenes that supposedly take place in the 1920's actually look and sound like they were filmed in the 1920's. There's also a good deal of stock footage from the 1920's that seamlessly blends in with the rest of the film, creating a very authentic documentary feel to it. The humor ranges a good bit, though, from subtle and witty dialog, to slapstick and a few visual jokes. Unfortunately, the the slapstick and visual humor, while still funny, seems out of place with the rest of the movie, and doesn't feel like it should be in a documentary. There's a good bit of parody of the culture of the time; Zelig becomes a marketing sensation and spawns a dance craze called "The Chameleon", among other things. The acting is really nice, Woody Allen in particular. He took a potentially silly character and made him strangely heartfelt. Overall, a very odd and inventive movie. The plot's a bit slow in places, much like real documentaries, but other than that, this is a great movie. Really recommended. 4/5
IMDB Page- http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086637/
IMDB Page- http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086637/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)