I just found this – and I’m posting it completely as is, I haven’t even read it all myself yet. I’m still trying to find time to watch all of the extended editions in one long 12 hour chunk (I’ve still not even seen the extended final film in the trilogy) so I’ll likely update this big time when that time comes. What this is, is my first review, from January 2002, long before I started writing reviews here, when Ambival.net was just my blog/brainfart chamber lol. I wrote the day before, “I went to see ‘Lord of the Rings’ this morning – I was pretty surprised, but also it wasn’t exactly my kind of movie.” First of all: not my kind of movie? Second of all: a movie, in the morning? So you can see how much I’ve changed in 10 years lol)

6th January 2002

I have to begin by saying that my expectations of this movie were ultimately non-existent. I heard word-of-mouth in spits and spats, mostly relating to the ‘annoyance’ of a cliff-hanger ending, of which I’ll write more later, and I saw the obligatory hype, and I chose my path in supporting the rival, Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone. I should also begin with the pointless but popular comparison to that movie: the only, repeat only, similarity between the two being their adaptation from extremely popular novels.

The differences abound. For while Chris Columbus’ more mainstream family flick was an almost page-by-page visual transcript of JK Rowling’s novel, and firmly followed the classical hero’s journey, Peter Jackson’s Fellowship, and I’ll quickly admit I have no intention of ever trying to read Tolkien’s novels again, completely redefines the very term “hero”.

Several rings of power were created thousands of years before the story begins, distributed about Middle Earth, the world of the story. An evil presence created a counter-ring, a single ring that could enslave all. A battle destroyed the evil, but not the ring, and instead of being destroyed, the ring fell into the hands of man. The story follows Frodo and a gathered “fellowship” as they run from remaining dutiful evil forces and try to protect the ring from ever being used.

The classical hero’s journey has a single hero, who is offered a quest to save his people – he rejects the quest, meets a mentor who gives him powers, finally accepts the quest, the mentor leaves him, and he goes to confront the usually physical evil presence to retrieve the object of the quest. For the mentor, consider Yoda the ever-wise creature of the Star wars movie, or even Obi-Wan Kenobi, the equally-wise Jedi. We never doubted these characters. But almost instantly the moment Jackson introduces the wizard Gandalf (played brilliantly by Ian McKellen – and I don’t usually like his work), we are shown that he is just as weak as the other characters. The ultimate nemisis for our heroes (note the plural, for each and every member of the fellowship is displayed as an individual here) is not evil itself, not a physical presence, but man’s innate capacity for the evil within themselves – the ring as an evil catalyst. It is truly extraordinary for me to see such complicated characters in the kind of world usually home to archetypes – those who have read the novels, perhaps, might not be so surprised. But still I believe that this movie has redefined what it means to be a hero, and especially in these times (I hate to say it), boy do we need a movie like that.

The only thing wrong with the film, in fact, is the editing. It seems like someone lost faith in the cutting room and decided to make it a normal 2 hours, and then they previewed and decided it was marvellous, so a producer or other brainless wonder told the editors to pad it out with montages made from bits and pieces from piles A and B. I imagine the film’s rough cut was around 5 hours.. the finished product is neither too short nor too long, more just plain wrong. The ending – despite what you may have heard (and I heard plenty) – is not jarring, there is closure and resolution and emotional peaking as expected in any ‘epic’. But the editing is genuinely what I think they call ‘choppy’.

To grudgingly return to the Potter Comparison, I pick Potter. This film, while proving that Jackson is as frightening and unique directing event pictures as he was making video nasties in his back garden, seems somehow late and sticky-taped together – there’s a slew of production errors, and some pretty shoddy ADR work. But, and a huge but at that (“and no mistakin’”), it is a perfect construction – the effects are bigger and scarier than ever seen, the ring’s power is as fully conveyed as possible, and the themes are surprisingly disturbing (instead of having friends there as a failsafe fallback, Frodo has to earn and learn those – that – friend, and is even told early on “yes, you are alone,” a brutally honest statement rarely heard in the movies). As a complete trilogy, I’m convinced it will go down in cinema history and it deserves to; as I’m convinced that it deserves any of the Oscar nominations and wins I’m certain it will achieve; but, in the end, my reaction was still a solid, “coulda, shoulda, been better…”

For a movie touted as a game changer, Cabin in the Woods is more than happy to play by the rules.

I don’t know what exactly happened to change things, but for the past few years I’ve always intended to get to the movies more and see things ASAP but it just never really worked out. This year I’ve kind of attacked that goal with a passion and it seems to be a good year for it, with “must-see” movies like this coming out each week now for the foreseeable future. It’s likely that if I’d waited more than a few weeks to see this one, I would’ve approached it with far more apprehension and cynicism than I did today. I’m pretty good at avoiding spoilers and I managed to do so in this case – aside from the poster featuring said cabin revolving in layers like a giant impossible rubik’s cube and the buzz all over about spoilers in itself really threatening to spoil the experience (recalling the episode of The IT Crowd, “Moss and the German” – Roy’s “don’t tell me there’s a twist, I’ll be guessing what it is all the way through!”), I had very little idea what was coming as the movie began. I have to be honest: I don’t know what difference it really would’ve made if I had known everything. The spoilability of this movie has been grossly overstated, possibly to its detriment. But I’ll try my best here not to say too much.

Cabin in the Woods is a movie unmistakably made by people who love horror movies and want desperately to do something new with the genre. Comparisons to Scream are inevitable and its reference points unending (I wrote down a bunch of titles but decided not to list any of them here because they’re all a bit of a giveaway). From the off, and for a good chunk of its running time, it plays with one of horror’s most worn out situations, succinctly put by the very title, The Cabin in the Woods. It retreads this trope so well, in fact, that it kind of gets boring. There’s an intercut mysterious subplot (which contains some very subtle and well played exposition that pays off at the end) but I have to admit, I spent most of the first hour thinking, “really? this is it?”

But Cabin in the Woods is not about the setup. Cabin in the Woods is about the pay off: the less about which you know, the better.

One poster in the UK has a gigantic quote on it calling it a “game changer”, a phrase I hate almost as much as the word “canon”. Unless you actually take the last shot of Cabin in the Woods to signify this as the last word in the horror genre as we know it, ushering in a whole new era (spoiler: it isn’t), there’s no sense in which this film is a game changer. Trust me, for all its creators’ knowledge of the game (which isn’t all that impressive – we’ve all known all of this since Scream whether we saw it or not – it’s mostly basic storytelling anyway), it is more than happy to play by the rules. Until the genuinely “well I haven’t seen that before” finale (you’ll know it when you see it), this movie is really no better than the genre clichés it purports to being “above”. Some will argue that this is partly the point, but I mostly found it lacking.

So on the one hand the more you like horror movies – the more you really like horror movies – and the more you know horror movies, the more you are likely to enjoy Cabin in the Woods. On the other, the more you really like and know horror movies, the more likely you are to have seen everything it does (except that one shot – where the elevators open, that’s all I’ll say) done better. If I was 17, the age I was when I first saw Scream, and had as limited (though ample) experience of the past 10 years of horror as I had then of 70s and 80s horror, I’d likely be gushing over this as much as I did then over Scream, and I imagine that’s the audience which will embrace the “game change” moniker and love this movie the most. And because it does that one shot so well, I’m frankly able to let that slide.

The one thing I do hope the final shot signifies is that Whedon and Goddard have no intention of turning Cabin in the Woods into a franchise – it’d be easy, yes, just run through all the other possibilities – but dull as dishwater now we’ve seen the elevators open. (Addendum: immediately after I posted this I saw the word “prequel” on Twitter. I didn’t think of that. Gagh.)

The first I heard of this movie was that it was to be Isabelle Fuhrman’s followup project to Orphan, which in itself was enough to put it on my watch list of 2012. I had no idea of the books or their Twilight-level following – it was only as the release date approached that I became aware that this was how it was being set up. There’s every chance if I’d come to the title via that route I might’ve flat refused to see it, lol. Well thank god, I didn’t. As it was, it seemed to me to look a lot more like (as many, I know, have already said) The Running Man or Battle Royale than Twilight, and with a much more capable, compelling actress than Kristin Stewart in the lead – I was never going to be that easily dissuaded.

I was taking a risk seeing this in its first screening at the multiplex – a risk I’d long forgotten, usually going to smaller movies at graveyard times, till the noisy, chatty, snack munching, packet rustling, nuclear phone screen brigade came into the screening. It was astonishing to hear how fast this audience went silent as the film began. It seemed to surprise them with its directness, to grab them with its dreamlike (or rather, nightmarish) cinematography and subtle use of visual effects, just as quickly as it got me, and never let go.

I love dystopian visions like this. But they’re never so powerful as when they find their way into something that will actually be widely seen – by audiences who will react just like the audience I saw it with… people genuinely not expecting something so unsettling… people, perhaps, expecting Twilight. By that token, I found its scathing commentary on reality TV culture and its logical conclusion – even if it is, as some have written, not quite as pointed and thorough as we’ve seen elsewhere – all the more powerful than those movies mentioned at the start of this review. This isn’t a bargain bin 80s memory or Asian art house (not meaning to dismiss those movies, but that’s how they are seen at this level) – it’s apparently the movie Hollywood hopes will take up the Twilight mantle and keep the money rolling in. That it even suggests the ideas that it does had me walking out of the cinema simply wondering how it got made in this world. (It’s worth remembering that director Gary Ross made his debut with Pleasantville, another relatively large production that was startlingly provocative in its way).

I didn’t know till very recently (as I polished this review, in fact) that the violence had been cut a little to get a UK 12A certificate – this is something that actually prevented me from seeing The Woman in Black recently (I’d rather wait and see if there’s an “unrated” cut on the blu-ray, thank you). But thinking about it, this is almost exactly what the movie is about. If we come out of the movie wishing we’d seen more of the bloodshed, then we’re dangerously close to the monstrous people portrayed in the movie itself. As it is, the violence is so powerfully suggested that I barely thought about how little I actually saw.

Likewise, I’ve seen some criticism of how little we get to know of the other contenders in the games. Though I understand the book does this too, focussing almost exclusively on Katniss’ perspective, what this did for me in the movie was induce pure anger. The ruling classes of this world, dressed in garish pinks and purples, their very appearance flaunting injustice – the audience of the hunger games TV show – give no thought to the interior lives of these pawns either. When we do see the other kids, they too seem to have a strange detachment from the matter at hand – Isabelle Fuhrman’s vicious Clove displays outright glee as they descend to their (23:1 odds against) inevitable deaths. In another film I’d probably share the objection to the cold emotional detachment that’s rife here – but in this case I found the portrayal of desensitisation, the feeling of “this is just how things are and there’s no use trying to change it” as terrifying and unexpected as it was an upsettingly believable speculation on where we’re headed.

When I fawn over a movie as popular as this I start to feel a little dirty at this stage of the review and scrape around for something negative to say. I will say that the movie could maybe lose 10 or 20 minutes somewhere at the end of the second act/beginning of the third act. When the control room brings the sun down prematurely Truman Show -style, Jennifer Lawrence even says something along the lines of “They can’t wait to end it,” by way of explanation. The CGI dogs in the finale kind of do a disservice to the wonderfully subtle (if slightly cheap-looking in longer shots) effects of the first hour, and some of the “shaky cam” of that dreamlike cinematography I mentioned sometimes had me a little worried, effective though it ultimately is at suggesting the extent of the violence.

One of the movie’s most powerful lines is spoken by Donald Sutherland explaining why they bother having a survivor in this show. “Hope is stronger than fear,” he says. A cynical voice inside me whispers that arguably this is exactly the kind of hope a movie like this delivers. We come out of the movie enraged and inspired but we’re probably still not going to do anything about it. Also, Roger Ebert burst my bubble of excitement a little by writing that as a parable, everybody sees what they want in the movie – mentioning the fact that some Tea Party folks in America relate to the kids… These are points I have no answer to but felt I should also slip in here somewhere. I think in the end my optimism reigns – the fact that so many will see this movie means simply by the law of averages that many young people will see what I saw, and perhaps one of them will do something about it. I don’t know.

There is also the hint of the beginning of a Twilight-y love triangle towards the end and I’ve already seen hashtags like #teampeeta and #teamgale on Twitter but, y’know what? I’m as surprised by how little this bugs me as I was that those initial Twilight comparisons didn’t put me off going to see it in the first place. I’ve put all 3 books on my iPad/iPhone and intend to read them at the soonest opportunity. I can’t wait to the next movie to see where this goes, and I look forward to reading the original book from whence it came.

Well this is the first year I haven’t even got around to predicting the nominations, lol. And it’s too late to see any more of those nominees now so here for what it’s worth is my list of predictions/hopes/fears/whatevers for this year’s awards

Best Picture : Midnight in Paris – this is my favourite by far of the bunch. I know The Artist is more likely and though I didn’t find that movie as amazing as some, I’m fine with that – but I think Midnight addresses the nostalgia so prevalent in this year’s list of nominees perfectly. The Help is the only one I haven’t seen.

Best Director : Terrence Malick, The Tree of Life – I’m too torn between all the others. Tree wasn’t flawless but it had some of the most memorable moments of this year, and let’s face it, he’s long overdue.

Best Actor : Gary Oldman, Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy – I actually thought he was up for supporting till just now lol! I guess Clooney or any of the others are more likely but I wasn’t particularly wowed by any of them. I wasn’t particularly wowed by Oldman either, but I’ve been wowed plenty of times before and he deserves this. The award Tinker, Tailor most deserves is for Art Direction, which it isn’t up for.

Best Actress : Meryl Streep, The Iron Lady – I might be one of the few people who actually think that the film here was almost better than the performance, which for me was far too distracting to be truly great. But this seems to be a cert and I’m fine with it. As I said I haven’t seen The Help tho.

Best Supporting Actor : I would really love to see Max Von Sydow win here for Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close which I actually quite liked, but it’s not gonna happen.

Best Supporting Actress : I’ve only seen Bérénice Bejo (The Artist), so I’ll go with that. She was one of the best things in it.

Best Original Screenplay : Woody Allen, Midnight in Paris – probably the most likely to actually win of those I actually want to win.

Best Adapted Screenplay : let’s go with Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy (Bridget O’Connor/Peter Straughan) as I’d like to see it win something.

Best Editing : let’s give this one to The Artist

Best Cinematography : The Tree of Life – I’ll be a bit peeved if War Horse wins anything tonight, but if it wins this one over Tree it will be my most peeved moment…

Best Art Direction : Like I said Tinker, Tailor deserves this one, but in its absence I have to go Harry Potter because it deserves something tonight…

Best Costume Design : Sandy Powell’s one of the few costume designers whose work I always recognise and she’s lost too many times, so Hugo.

Best Original Score : I think Tinker, Tailor was the one here that stood out most for me. Slick. Alberto Iglesias.

Best Original Song : Duh. The Muppets

Best Make-Up : Harry Potter again. Iron Lady again was too distracting to be great. Albert Nobbs I don’t know.

Best Animated Feature : It’s the only one I’ve seen, so Rango. Some surprisingly powerful sequences in that movie.

Best Sound Editing : Drive because it deserves something.

Best Sound : No clue. Hugo

Best Visual Effects : Wow, tricky category. I’ve gotta go Rise of the Planet of the Apes ‘cos, again, it deserves something (if not Andy Serkis for Best Supporting Actor as some suggested)… but if Harry Potter gets nothing else, that’s my second choice…

I’m gonna leave documentary and foreign out because I’ve seen none of them and apparently they’re as rubbish as usual lol.

Anyway, the show will be great whatever

As mentioned previously, I was kind of out of the habit of reviewing anything except things about which I had a lot to say last year, and the Star Wars movies were no exception despite my working through the new blu-ray set, extras and all. It’s not like I didn’t have anything to say about them, either, particularly the prequels. I know them well, I watch them frequently – and I’m likely to watch them even more frequently in the next few years as each hits the big screen again in 3D (it’s one of those series I always have to watch in its entirety even if I really just want to watch one part – more on that in a sec).

So the occasion here is the first of these post-converted 3D re-releases. Some were angry that George Lucas wished to tinker with these movies yet again at all; some were angry that he chose to start with the “inferior” prequels; some just don’t like 3D at all. I have to admit, I’ve been slow to come around to the new 3D stuff in general. I’ve written often of my love for Mark Kermode’s weekly film show/podcast on BBC Radio 5 Live and respect his opinions on the matter greatly, at the same time as spending (just looking at last year) a good quarter-to-a-third of my time in the cinema wearing those silly glasses. There are some things I just want to see in 3D. Even if it’s just so I can be allowed a valid opinion on how it looks (especially where post-conversion, as here, is concerned).

Since I’d already watched the whole Star Wars saga mere months ago, I wasn’t sure how bothered I’d be to see this one – which, however you look at it, is easily the worst in the series (this doesn’t mean I don’t still like it) – again. But when I saw the trailer before A Monster in Paris on Monday, I knew I had to. The 3D, simply put, looked fantastic, and it even looked like they may have tweaked the visual effects even more than the blu-ray release (the final battle on Naboo here has always bugged me – looking as it does like an unfinished animatic taking place literally on a Windows XP desktop).

At the time of this writing, my opinion on the whole Star Was saga is thus: it is one long story, the best and worst parts of which are scattered throughout. The prequels as a whole were not necessary, sure; the original trilogy stands alone perfectly fine, just as the very first movie (sans “Episode IV” title) stood fairly well alone. HOWEVER… The last hour of Revenge of the Sith – and I realise this will upset some people – is for me as powerful as anything in much grander cinematic sagas – I’ll even invoke The Godfather – and places it far and away as the best film in the whole series. Everything in Revenge of the Sith after Anakin kills Mace Windu makes everything else in the prequels absolutely essential, and makes even the original trilogy, if I’m honest, a little pale to my eyes.

The Phantom Menace is a necessary beginning to all this. It’s overly verbose politically, relatively humourless, and yes – even here, surely the best it will ever look – some of the effects look frankly unfinished (that last battle? I guess it’s just the total absence of human figures… I just don’t know…). But it’s worth it, if for nothing else, for the two key set pieces: the pod race (simply stunning in 3D) and the “Duel of the Fates” (the three way – four way, if you count Darth Maul’s double ender? – light sabre duel between Qui-Gon, Obi-Wan and Maul). For me personally, I’d add Padme/Amidala’s wardrobe – some of the most beautiful dresses I’ve ever seen in movies. I’d even add fragments of Jar-Jar which honestly do make me laugh – his whole Buster Keaton act in the final battle on Naboo is fantastic fun. And then there are the few fragments of story that resonate later on in the series (just one, for example, I noticed this time around, Anakin’s telling Padme “I can fix anything,” echoed later in Attack of the Clones after his mother’s murder) making the best of what’s to come just that bit better.

Is the 3D necessary here? No more necessary than it has been in any 3D movie I’ve ever seen. I will say that, as with Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part II (eep, I really ought to review that soon I guess!), I was more than impressed by the post-conversion… I don’t know how they do it but the technology is certainly getting better. Most of all, provided your eyes can physically “do” 3D, it’s a great excuse for seeing what I find to be at the least an interesting movie again on the big screen looking fresh as the day it was made.

I find it so easy to look past this movie’s flaws because some people simply get so laughably venomous in regurgitating them and being blind to the many good things in it. At one stage Qui-Gon tells Anakin, like the Neil Diamond song, “Feel: don’t think.” And while The Phantom Menace might not have the emotional weight it aspires to, I’m convinced if the audience is just as empty as they think the movie is, they’re only adding to the problem.

Older review: October 10th, 2006:

This one always surprises me by being so perfectly watchable as it is – moreso, in fact, each time I sit down to it. It’s true that it has its flaws – slightly flaky visual effects, acting at its lowest ebb for the series (and, considering the series, that’s pretty damn bad), and a general absence of energy, spark, je ne sais quoi … and, of course, Jar Jar. But I’m of the opinion that the whole Star Wars series has just as many, similar flaws, that it’s real value in cinema comes mostly from the combo of the powerful story and John Williams’ score, both of which are present enough here. I really view all six movies as one work, and the more I watch it, the more I see that this sixth is just as valid as the rest.

Star Wars: Episode II | Episode III

Well I let down this site again last year but I plan to keep up with things in 2012 once I’ve tidied up a bit, but that won’t stop me having fun with the awards shows as usual (I’ll make sure I get my usual Oscar predictions page up and running for next year in good time this year, too – promise).

Best Motion Picture – Drama – Moneyball – anything but Snore Horse will do me here, though I’ve seen nothing but that. I just have a gut feeling they’ll go with Moneyball here.

Best Performance by an Actress in a Motion Picture – Drama – Tilda Swinton – We Need To Talk About Kevin – I don’t like the obvious so no Meryl Streep for me. I like seeing Tilda Swinton winning anything.

Best Performance by an Actor in a Motion Picture – Drama – Brad Pitt – Moneyball – Again, just a feeling I have about the Globes and Brad Pitt here.

Best Motion Picture – Comedy Or Musical – Midnight In Paris – The only one I’ve seen. I know, The Artist, The Artist – but I freakin’ loved this movie and have a feeling it has an attitude to nostalgia that, even once I’ve seen The Artist, I’ll favour.

Best Performance by an Actress in a Motion Picture – Comedy Or Musical – Charlize Theron – Young Adult – Seen none of these, I love Jodie Foster, but Young Adult looks fantastic.

Best Performance by an Actor in a Motion Picture – Comedy Or Musical – Owen Wilson – Midnight In Paris – Again, I just loved this movie, and Owen Wilson was particularly impressive.

Best Animated Feature Film – Rango – Just caught this the other day and loved it. Stunning animation and genuinely moving in places.

Best Foreign Language Film – The Skin I Live In – Oh, I was gonna go with the Angelina Jolie one for the same reasons as my Moneyball ones above, but I just saw this one this week, too, and, OMG… hope this one wins, the Oscar too (though it’ll probably somehow not even be on the shortlist there or something).

Best Performance by an Actress In A Supporting Role in a Motion Picture – Janet McTeer – Albert Nobbs – I have absolutely no clue here… but I’ve liked Janet McTeer in other things…

Best Performance by an Actor In A Supporting Role in a Motion Picture – Albert Brooks – Drive – hmm, torn between him and Plummer, but this is the only one I’ve seen and he was one of the best things in it.

Best Director – Motion Picture – Woody Allen – Midnight In Paris – I may as well stick with Midnight as my one to root for. It really is his best in years (though I haven’t seen a bunch of ‘em lol). As I think I usually say at the Globes (I hope I’ll be more up to speed, as I said, this time next year, though) – I know I’ll be wrong.

Best Screenplay – Motion Picture – Woody Allen – Midnight In Paris – Well, I hope he wins one or the other, directing/writing, hehe…

Best Original Score – Motion Picture – Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross – The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo – Again anything but Snore Horse here for me… haven’t seen any except that. Loved the Reznor/Ross Social Network music tho.

Best Original Song – Motion Picture – “Masterpiece” – W.E. – Hmm, sad there’s no Rango here… but I’ll go with Madonna for the same reason stated above for Brangelina. It’s the HFPA.

And now the interesting stuff I don’t normally do! TV! lol… genuinely, more excited about this portion than the cinema side this year.

Best Television Series – Drama – Game Of Thrones – I don’t know if Boardwalk is up for season 1 or 2? I preferred season 1, anyway. In any case, Game of Thrones held my interest more consistently.

Best Performance by an Actress In A Television Series – Drama – Claire Danes – Homeland – yikes, haven’t seen any of these… but I love Claire Danes.

Best Performance by an Actor In A Television Series – Drama – Steve Buscemi – Boardwalk Empire – duh of the night?

Best Television Series – Comedy Or Musical – Enlightened – haven’t started watching this yet but I believe this is what I would pick if I had.

Best Performance by an Actress In A Television Series – Comedy Or Musical – Laura Dern – Enlightened – ditto.

Best Performance by an Actor In A Television Series – Comedy Or Musical – Matt LeBlanc – Episodes – something tells me “they” won’t be able to resist this, as explained for other things above… plus it’s the only one I’ve seen. And I liked.

Best Mini-Series Or Motion Picture Made for Television – Mildred Pierce – Just please not f-ing Downton… but I absolutely LOVED this series, this is my favourite thing up for anything tonight.

Best Performance by an Actress In A Mini-series or Motion Picture Made for Television – Kate Winslet – Mildred Pierce

Best Performance by an Actor in a Mini-Series or Motion Picture Made for Television – William Hurt – Too Big To Fail – oy… no clue in this category lol.

Best Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role in a Series, Mini-Series or Motion Picture Made for Television – Evan Rachel Wood – Mildred Pierce – my MEGA root for the night. Have loved Evan Rachel Wood for years and not only was she brilliant overall in this, she was so brilliant she made me not regret her being swapped in for the equally amazing Morgan Turner who played the young Veda.

Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role in a Series, Mini-Series or Motion Picture Made for Television – Peter Dinklage – Game Of Thrones – tough category but Dinklage was easily the best thing in Game of Thrones next to Maisie Williams

“Simple just shit itself…”

If my reviews are ever helpful to anyone but myself, I can guarantee this won’t be one of them, as it’s one of the kind I pretty much already had written in my head the minute I heard about the film, and it’s only developed as the past year or so has gone onwards. From the spark of “Kevin Smith is gonna do a horror movie” to the whole rush of the SModcast network and his radio station – even a whole podcast series of Q&As about this very film – it’s sort of a miracle that I still came to this movie not really knowing exactly what to expect.

As high as my expectations were, they were matched a massive fear of disappointment, in which case I would have written much here about the fact that after listening to Smith, his family and friends for the last 6 months (I still haven’t missed a single episode of Per Diem or Get Jobs, and I listen to all but a couple of the podcasts as avidly), the movie feels something like a home movie, with Ralph Garman as a mute bad guy, Smith’s wife Jen in a small role, and the likes of Michael Parks, John Goodman, and Kevin Pollak, whose performances Smith has barely been able to contain himself over (they’re the reason behind the recent Academy qualifying theatrical run of the movie in LA).

So the main part of this review is this: I’m overjoyed to say that with my frankly unfair expectations for this project after Cop Out and Zack and Miri failed to turn me on (tho, again, having listened to Smith I understand the part those films played in his grand scheme), it didn’t disappoint me at all. This film isn’t just a gargantuan leap over Smith’s last two films, it’s a complete departure from anything he’s ever done.

I reserve one heart in my rating this first viewing because quite honestly, by the time the credits rolled, I still didn’t know what to think. I sat through the whole of this movie with my mouth slightly agape, simply a slave to the wonderful fact that despite having been exposed to so much talk about it over the past year, I had no f-ing clue where it was headed next. John Goodman and Michael Parks’ performances steal the show completely, it’d be a great film if was just theirs, but Smith handles his action sequences with a confidence I don’t think anybody would’ve seen previously in his abilities as a film maker. The gore is minimal but thrillingly inventive, with even the stuff you may see coming a mile away coming from just enough of another angle to tickle the senses. This is a movie I look forward to seeing again and again, and if Kevin Smith fulfils his promise that his final movie, the 2-part Hit Somebody, will be even better, than I’m honestly frightened about how much that one will blow me away. I’ll be honest, I don’t care how silly it sounds: I feel oddly proud of the dude about this one… he pulled off what he set out to do beyond anyone’s doubts or expectations… that’s literally all there is to say…

I’ve reviewed a bunch of horror documentaries here and though I might just be leaping at the opportunity for a short review (trying to get back into writing more regularly here), this one should really be no exception as it’s among the most notorious. Coincidentally it finally hits blu-ray this Halloween as an extra on a new release of Halloween II; I only just heard about it very recently (despite its seeming notoriety lol) and was surprised I knew nothing about it.

There’s very little of social or historical commentary as you find in other horror docs here – at only 80 minutes with the list of films it shows clips from (let’s just say too many to list here; and just about any horror movie you can name that had been made before the film came out in 1984). What you get is Donald Pleasence and Nancy Allen sitting in a movie theatre talking solemnly about how horror movies (or terror movies, as they’re called here; a great move allowing the inclusion of such nightmarish movies as Marathon Man and Midnight Express) make us feel.

What strikes one most about this one is not just the array of movies included but the slickness of the whole thing. The editing is top notch – cutting together, say, door slams or something, a dozen or more at once from different movies. The whole opening sequence is a relentless montage of “alone in the house” scenes. We see this kind of thing all the time now but it’s strangely impressive to see it in a production so old.

Suddenly, after describing the movie, I realise it doesn’t sound like much, but it’s one of very few of these horror documentaries that I’ll likely watch again and again, just for the sheer assault of content it provides. It’d be something great to have on in the background on a scary movie night, or on an iPod to watch a little of on a long journey, etc when you want that atmospheric je ne sais quoi that all these movies provide but you either haven’t the time for a full movie or can’t decide what movie to watch. If you love horror, chances are you don’t need me to tell you all this; but if you love horror, really, drop everything if you haven’t seen this yet.