texas chainsaw massacre

My Bloody Valentine’s Day Weekend (A Friday The 13th Review)

Posted on by sgottahurt

I’ve finally seen the new Friday the 13th movie, and though my hopes weren’t set that high (well, they were set at least hurdle length off the ground), it sort of disappointed.

The opening sequence showed promise.  It even included a dude singing this song while listening to his iPod.  It showed some of the mechanics of Jason Voorhees tactics, but from there, not much else surprised.  I wasn’t looking for them to reinvent the wheel… just tweak it a bit.

I love the original Dawn of the Dead, but the new one enhances its story.  The same goes for The Hills Have Eyes.  This one falls in with The Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake – they both could have been worse, but they could have been better.  (Haven’t seen either Halloween or My Bloody Valentine, so no comment.)

I thought Jason was too powerful and menacing without showing any origin for his alleged supernatural abilities.  In the earliest films (2-4), he was vulnerable and clumsy, and in effect made him scarier.  He could be defeated, but no one was doing it.  Starting with Part 6, he was brought back to life and became zombie-like, and that worked for most of the remaining films.  The best in the series is still Freddy Vs. Jason, because it follows all the rules of both series, with tongue firmly planted in cheek.

SPOILERS: What’s with the Tom Cruise lookalike’s unwarranted hostility in the film?  Also, when did Jason ever keep somebody locked up and alive (a problem slightly hinted at in Part 4)?  And how do you show a bug zapper twice and not use it to dispense anybody!  (At least I called the wood chipper…)

Hail, hail, the gangs all GAHHHHHH!

Hail, hail, the gangs all GAHHHHHH!

(via this dude’s site)

JusWondering… Size Matters?

Posted on by sgottahurt

With Halloween approaching, I begin my usual ponderings like: who’s hosting a party? 

Will there be booze?

The Right Answer

The Right Answer

And is someone in Hollywood considering a remake of “Gremlins” as a CGI movie?

That eventually leads me to ponder about what makes something scary in an allegedly scary movie.  CGI does not work.  Sure, “Jurassic Park” had the advantage of being the first flick to fool our minds with computer graphics, but it smartly mixed in animatronics and puppets as well.

To me, it’s the proximity of the “evil one” in relation to the hero that works well.  When the Queen in the first “Alien” film sleeps not far from where Ripley’s about to hit the hay, that’s creepy.  In “Ju-On,” the Japanese original remade into “The Grudge,” I can barely handle the scene when the girl in bed removes the covers off her face to find the ghost woman bent over her.  (Maybe my fears are sleep-based.)  Then there’s always that ending chase in “Texas Chainsaw Massacre”…

One facet of horror in film that I believe goes untouched is size.  Big things are terrifying and small things are chilling, but what about medium things?

Going back to to the puppets in “Gremlins,” they were definitely small dangerous, and small dangerous can be frightening (ask Karen Black in “Trilogy of Terror.”)  But Gremlins in all their puppety-ness can fit in blenders and microwaves.  What are you going to do against a four-foot tall Gremlin?  A four-foot tall Chuckie?  Or a four-foot tall hamster?

In order from least scary to most.

In order from least scary to most.