I'm surprised that they waited so long to make a Goosebumps movie, and equally surprised they made one at all. The franchise is 23 years old, and as far as I'm aware isn't exactly relevant to today's kids before the movie came out. There was already a TV show in the 1990's, which is the better format for the series anyways. Perhaps the movie's purpose was to reinvigorate sales for a new generation or something. They sure didn't make it because anyone actually wanted a Goosebumps movie.
The biggest problem the movie faces before it even begins is how to approach the movie format. Not counting the numerous spinoffs, the original Goosebumps series is 62 books long. Most of them are standalone novels, which further complicates the task of trying to condense the series into one movie. When I heard they were making a Goosebumps movie I figured it would be an anthology movie, in the vein of Twilight Zone: The Movie and Creepshow. Instead, the movie goes with a weird meta plot, in which R.L. Stine is a character in the movie and has to fight off his literary creations with the help of a group of boring teenagers. I respect the creative team's choice to go in an unusual direction with the adaptation, but it ultimately fails in execution. At least the anthology approach would have left the window open for sequels.
Goosebumps appears to be taking from the Smurfs school of nostalgic adaptations. There's nothing there for the adults who grew up the original product, and instead spends its time trying to make itself appealing to an otherwise uninterested modern audience. I would have almost preferred it if the movie tried to pander to millennials with 90's nostalgia. That being said, I realized quickly what I was in for and tried to keep a kid's mindset. If you have kids or siblings or other 8-12 range children that want to see the movie, they'll probably enjoy themselves. It's fine as a mindless diversion for kids, just don't expect to get anything out of it yourself.
Jack Black plays R.L. Stine in the movie, seemingly cast just to secure the film's financing or to coerce parents into seeing the film because of name recognition. Probably both. He doesn't bring anything to the table that he hasn't already done in other films. The teen characters are all decently acted, each getting the occasional moment to be charming in spite of the tepid script. But the kids aren't coming to see this for Jack Black or the teenybopper wish fulfillment inserts, they're coming to see it for all the monsters.
Part of the problem inherent with the approach Goosebumps takes is the lack of actual monsters in the source material. There aren't many Goosebumps books with villains that translate well to screen, a majority of the books feature a ghost or haunted object as the source of scares. But the Goosebumps movie wants to have a highlight reel of CG monsters to chase Jack Black, so they picked a bunch of obscure monsters from the books instead. They also added a bunch of characters not from the series, such as a flying poodle with fangs and the obligatory cliche scary clown. I was surprised that they left out the Horrors from One Day at Horrorland, as I recall them being one of the more iconic villains from the series when I read the books. (I mean come on, the finale takes place in an abandoned theme park, and you leave out the only theme park related villains in the series?)
Slappy the ventriloquist dummy, who is an unofficial mascot for the series, serves as the central antagonist for the movie, but nothing he does makes any sense or has any clear motivation. There are a few undercooked moments where it seems like Slappy has unresolved father/puppet-son relationship issues with Jack Black, but it gets dropped almost immediately for more CG junk flying at the screen. I wasn't exactly expecting any logical sense from the Goosebumps movie, but they tried to give the movie sense and then fell flat on its face. His half-assed daddy issues raise several questions into the logic of the fictional-characters-come-to-life concept, when a simple "He's an evil puppet" would have sufficed.
The Goosebumps books were never exactly good, even by kid-lit standards. I read a majority of them growing up, and while I enjoyed them at the time, even then I knew they were hokey. In that aspect, I guess Goosebumps does actually succeed. It's escapist fluff kids, just like the books. It's the kind of thing, just like the books, that's fun for kids while they're kids and then really dumb and silly when looking back as an adult. The movie doesn't have high ambitions at any point, only trying to be entertaining for children. It doesn't try hard, but at least it's competently (if not mechanically) made. It's strictly kid's stuff. There are better horror-themed kid's movies out there, but as far as kid's movies go in general, this one is passable.
November 11, 2015
November 5, 2015
Movie Review: Brain Damage
Brain Damage is a 1988 horror-comedy from director Frank Henenlotter. It's sleazy, it's bloody, and above all it's incredibly silly. It's exactly what you would expect from the guy who directed movies like Frankenhooker and Basket Case. The movie sets its sights low and revels in its own goofiness. It's refreshing to see a movie that isn't afraid to have fun being dumb, a movie that doesn't have to wink at the audience and let them know that it's in on the joke.
The plot is very simple: A twentysomething guy named Brian winds up host to a talking brain parasite named Aylmer. The parasite injects Brian's brain with hallucinogens, and then lets the stoned Brian wander around to find victims for Aylmer to feast on. Eventually Brian tries to get rid of Aylmer, but this proves to be harder than expected.
For a movie made for less than a million dollars, Brain Damage looks fantastic. The low budget actually works to the film's advantage, as the cheap locations exude the creepy, grimy feel of 1980's New York City. The film is surprisingly well-shot, particularly the night scenes; it's well above the usual mediocre cinematography of similar movies. The special effects are stellar for the budget as well. The initial hallucination scene plays out like something from a Ken Russell movie, and it looks great. The effects for the Aylmer puppet are very clever, and his overall design is fittingly silly. His cartoon googly-eyes and dopey grin almost make him strangely adorable. He's a severely underrated movie monster.
The acting is passable, but the actor voices Aylmer deserves mentioning. He was voiced by John Zacherle, a TV horror host from the 1950's-60's. He has a very goofy Vincent Price sounding voice that is simultaneously unfitting and very fitting for the monster. Despite looking very silly, Zacherle actually manages to make Aylmer feel like a threat when necessary. It's a rare instance of a B-Movie having a memorable role because the actor was good.
If there's anything bad to say about the movie, is that the movie has a dumb ending. During the climactic confrontation, Brian is injected with a lethal overdose of Aylmer's hallucinogenic juice. This causes a weird growth to form on Brian's forehead, so he tries to shoot himself to stop the head-lump. The movie then ends with Brian's brother finding him not only alive, but with a giant glowing hole in his head. Cut to credits. It's a disappointingly abrupt ending to an otherwise fun movie.
If you have a strong stomach for gross violence played for laughs or an appreciation for crazy B-Movies, Brain Damage is worth checking out. It has surprisingly high production values, clever low-budget special effects, and a great monster. It's unashamedly silly movie and it's a ton of fun to watch. If you're looking for a B-Movie that's both entertaining and relatively well-made, this is the movie for you.
The plot is very simple: A twentysomething guy named Brian winds up host to a talking brain parasite named Aylmer. The parasite injects Brian's brain with hallucinogens, and then lets the stoned Brian wander around to find victims for Aylmer to feast on. Eventually Brian tries to get rid of Aylmer, but this proves to be harder than expected.
For a movie made for less than a million dollars, Brain Damage looks fantastic. The low budget actually works to the film's advantage, as the cheap locations exude the creepy, grimy feel of 1980's New York City. The film is surprisingly well-shot, particularly the night scenes; it's well above the usual mediocre cinematography of similar movies. The special effects are stellar for the budget as well. The initial hallucination scene plays out like something from a Ken Russell movie, and it looks great. The effects for the Aylmer puppet are very clever, and his overall design is fittingly silly. His cartoon googly-eyes and dopey grin almost make him strangely adorable. He's a severely underrated movie monster.
The acting is passable, but the actor voices Aylmer deserves mentioning. He was voiced by John Zacherle, a TV horror host from the 1950's-60's. He has a very goofy Vincent Price sounding voice that is simultaneously unfitting and very fitting for the monster. Despite looking very silly, Zacherle actually manages to make Aylmer feel like a threat when necessary. It's a rare instance of a B-Movie having a memorable role because the actor was good.
If there's anything bad to say about the movie, is that the movie has a dumb ending. During the climactic confrontation, Brian is injected with a lethal overdose of Aylmer's hallucinogenic juice. This causes a weird growth to form on Brian's forehead, so he tries to shoot himself to stop the head-lump. The movie then ends with Brian's brother finding him not only alive, but with a giant glowing hole in his head. Cut to credits. It's a disappointingly abrupt ending to an otherwise fun movie.
If you have a strong stomach for gross violence played for laughs or an appreciation for crazy B-Movies, Brain Damage is worth checking out. It has surprisingly high production values, clever low-budget special effects, and a great monster. It's unashamedly silly movie and it's a ton of fun to watch. If you're looking for a B-Movie that's both entertaining and relatively well-made, this is the movie for you.
Movie Review- Puppetmaster
Puppetmaster is a 1989 direct-to-video horror film from renowned B-Movie producer Charles Band. The film is part of a wave of killer doll movies that experienced brief popularity in the late 1980's and early 1990's, many of which were also produced by Band. While not as technically impressive or enjoyably silly as fellow doll film Child's Play, Puppetmaster still has a few redeeming qualities that make it memorable, at the very least.
The film follows a group of psychics who are investigating a hotel in California after an invitation from a former colleague. Upon arrival at the hotel, the group is informed that their colleague has recently passed away. The psychics deduce that their colleague was on the trail of Andre Toulon, a puppeteer who reportedly had the power to bring inanimate objects to life. As the psychics investigate into the hotel and their colleague's mysterious death, they are slowly killed off by Toulon's puppets.
Puppetmaster has a fairly interesting premise; but the execution leaves something to be desired. The film's pacing is sluggish and full of padding, and the characters are not distinct enough to warrant emotional investment. The setting and characters had potential to be engaging, but neither are given the proper attention to be effective. After most of the movie spends its time mindlessly milling about, the ending decides to take a sharp turn into a convoluted twist. It's revealed that the dead colleague killed himself and then came back to life using Toulon's magic so he could live forever. It's never made completely clear why he needed the puppets to begin with, or why the puppets decide to turn against the villain and kill him at the climax. It's all very needlessly complicated for an otherwise simple movie.
The main draw to this film is the troupe of killer puppets, and the movie competently delivers in that aspect. The designs of the puppets are all creative, even if some of them are more silly than spooky. I particularly like the ghoulish looking puppet, aptly named Blade, who has a hook and knife for hands. It looks like a cross between the masks from Scream and the Phantom of the Opera, and it's the only puppet of the bunch that actually manages to look creepy. The effects are well done considering the low budget, are a nice blend of stop-motion shots and puppetry.
It's also worth noting that the film has a decent musical score for a low budget production. The main theme that plays a few times during the film is enjoyably eerie. The theme sets a suitable mood for the movie, even if it never quite matches that atmosphere visually. Lower-budget productions typically tend to have really cheap or nondescript scores, so actually having a memorable theme is much appreciated.
Puppetmaster is not a good movie, by any means of the word. Most of the movie is nondescript and dull, but there is still some fun to be had for the niche audience this movie caters to. The special effects and puppet designs are neat to look at, and the movie is competently made to the extent that it's at least watchable. If you're looking for a killer doll movie other than Child's Play, this one is worth a shot.
The film follows a group of psychics who are investigating a hotel in California after an invitation from a former colleague. Upon arrival at the hotel, the group is informed that their colleague has recently passed away. The psychics deduce that their colleague was on the trail of Andre Toulon, a puppeteer who reportedly had the power to bring inanimate objects to life. As the psychics investigate into the hotel and their colleague's mysterious death, they are slowly killed off by Toulon's puppets.
Puppetmaster has a fairly interesting premise; but the execution leaves something to be desired. The film's pacing is sluggish and full of padding, and the characters are not distinct enough to warrant emotional investment. The setting and characters had potential to be engaging, but neither are given the proper attention to be effective. After most of the movie spends its time mindlessly milling about, the ending decides to take a sharp turn into a convoluted twist. It's revealed that the dead colleague killed himself and then came back to life using Toulon's magic so he could live forever. It's never made completely clear why he needed the puppets to begin with, or why the puppets decide to turn against the villain and kill him at the climax. It's all very needlessly complicated for an otherwise simple movie.
The main draw to this film is the troupe of killer puppets, and the movie competently delivers in that aspect. The designs of the puppets are all creative, even if some of them are more silly than spooky. I particularly like the ghoulish looking puppet, aptly named Blade, who has a hook and knife for hands. It looks like a cross between the masks from Scream and the Phantom of the Opera, and it's the only puppet of the bunch that actually manages to look creepy. The effects are well done considering the low budget, are a nice blend of stop-motion shots and puppetry.
It's also worth noting that the film has a decent musical score for a low budget production. The main theme that plays a few times during the film is enjoyably eerie. The theme sets a suitable mood for the movie, even if it never quite matches that atmosphere visually. Lower-budget productions typically tend to have really cheap or nondescript scores, so actually having a memorable theme is much appreciated.
Puppetmaster is not a good movie, by any means of the word. Most of the movie is nondescript and dull, but there is still some fun to be had for the niche audience this movie caters to. The special effects and puppet designs are neat to look at, and the movie is competently made to the extent that it's at least watchable. If you're looking for a killer doll movie other than Child's Play, this one is worth a shot.
November 3, 2015
Movie Review: The Road to El Dorado
Originally written August 9th, 2014.
I seem to have the inability to learn from my mistakes, because I have yet again listened to Tumblr’s movie suggestions. This time I watched the 2000 Dreamworks movie The Road to El Dorado. I have become infected with the Dreamworks smirk. Someone call a doctor.
For once the Tumblr hivemind was onto something. This isn’t actually that bad of a movie. For a kids’ film, it’s pretty solid. As long as you don’t mind the usual cliches that run rampant in kids’ movies, you ought to have a good time.
The movie follows two con men who find the legendary city of El Dorado. The citizens of El Dorado mistake them for gods and then hijinks ensue. It’s a straightforward and predictable story, but the characters make up for it. The two con men befriend one of the Mayans, and the three have really good chemistry. There’s a lot of fun banter between them, and most of the jokes hit. Surprisingly the movie steers clear of the usual kids' movie potty humor and is mostly just funny dialog and slapstick. It’s refreshing to see that for a change.
The other strong suit of the movie is the animation. I wish Dreamworks still did traditionally animated movies, because this movie looks fantastic. The character designs are great, and the locations are gorgeous. The animators did a great job capturing the look of Mayan artwork and architecture. It’s a very unique look, and anyone interested in animation is sure to pleased with it.
Overall, it’s a pretty good kids’ movie. The songs are painful to sit through and there are a lot of narrative cliches, but the same could be said of most kids’ flicks. If you have children or siblings that want to watch a movie, this is a good one to put on. It’s entertaining enough if you have to watch it too, and it’s not going to rot your kid’s brain or anything. It’s not the kind of movie you necessarily need to seek out, but if you get the chance to watch it, you’ll be pleasantly surprised
I seem to have the inability to learn from my mistakes, because I have yet again listened to Tumblr’s movie suggestions. This time I watched the 2000 Dreamworks movie The Road to El Dorado. I have become infected with the Dreamworks smirk. Someone call a doctor.
For once the Tumblr hivemind was onto something. This isn’t actually that bad of a movie. For a kids’ film, it’s pretty solid. As long as you don’t mind the usual cliches that run rampant in kids’ movies, you ought to have a good time.
The movie follows two con men who find the legendary city of El Dorado. The citizens of El Dorado mistake them for gods and then hijinks ensue. It’s a straightforward and predictable story, but the characters make up for it. The two con men befriend one of the Mayans, and the three have really good chemistry. There’s a lot of fun banter between them, and most of the jokes hit. Surprisingly the movie steers clear of the usual kids' movie potty humor and is mostly just funny dialog and slapstick. It’s refreshing to see that for a change.
The other strong suit of the movie is the animation. I wish Dreamworks still did traditionally animated movies, because this movie looks fantastic. The character designs are great, and the locations are gorgeous. The animators did a great job capturing the look of Mayan artwork and architecture. It’s a very unique look, and anyone interested in animation is sure to pleased with it.
Overall, it’s a pretty good kids’ movie. The songs are painful to sit through and there are a lot of narrative cliches, but the same could be said of most kids’ flicks. If you have children or siblings that want to watch a movie, this is a good one to put on. It’s entertaining enough if you have to watch it too, and it’s not going to rot your kid’s brain or anything. It’s not the kind of movie you necessarily need to seek out, but if you get the chance to watch it, you’ll be pleasantly surprised
Movie Review: Cockneys vs Zombies
Originally written August 6th, 2014.
Netflix is awash with all sorts of no-budget horror mashups. From Zombie Strippers to Sharknado, there’s no shortage of awful B-Movies. However out of the mire comes Cockneys vs Zombies. This poor man’s Shaun of the Dead is the cream of the crap.
There’s not a lot to say that the title doesn’t already explain. Do you want to see cockneys fight zombies? Of course you do. Watch this movie.
The premise is incredibly stupid and the movie just runs with it. It doesn’t try to be anything more than it is- a ridiculous horror-comedy full of swearing Brits. A team of bank robbers and a group of retirees banter back in forth in near-unintelligible cockney accents. If that appeals to you, it delivers.
It’s far from perfect and even farther from being good, but it’s a fun ride. If you want mindless entertainment that’s of some (minimal) substance, this is the flick for you. Decent effects, decent performances, ludicrous zombie action, it’s all good.
Netflix is awash with all sorts of no-budget horror mashups. From Zombie Strippers to Sharknado, there’s no shortage of awful B-Movies. However out of the mire comes Cockneys vs Zombies. This poor man’s Shaun of the Dead is the cream of the crap.
There’s not a lot to say that the title doesn’t already explain. Do you want to see cockneys fight zombies? Of course you do. Watch this movie.
The premise is incredibly stupid and the movie just runs with it. It doesn’t try to be anything more than it is- a ridiculous horror-comedy full of swearing Brits. A team of bank robbers and a group of retirees banter back in forth in near-unintelligible cockney accents. If that appeals to you, it delivers.
It’s far from perfect and even farther from being good, but it’s a fun ride. If you want mindless entertainment that’s of some (minimal) substance, this is the flick for you. Decent effects, decent performances, ludicrous zombie action, it’s all good.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)