A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984)

Director: Wes Craven

Writer: Wes Craven

Starring: Heather Langenkamp, Robert Englund, Johnny Depp, John Saxon

Rated: R (bloody horror violence, terror, some sexual content, brief nudity, language)

Alright, alright, so I didn’t pick this one at random. But come on, it’s Halloween. And the title does start with an N…

A Nightmare on Elm Street, otherwise known as my favorite classic horror film and the movie that scared the crap out of me as a kid. A Nightmare on Elm Street tells us the story of several teenage friends who are haunted in their dreams by a man with knives for fingers, a burned face and who wears a red and green torn sweater. His name? Freddy Krueger. (Even if you haven’t seen the movie, I guarantee you know the name).

After one of her friends, Tina, dies, Nancy becomes determined to find out what exactly happened to her. The boy she had been with when it happened begs Nancy to believe him when he says he had nothing to do with it and it’s only until Nancy is haunted in her dreams that she believes him. The more investigating she does, the more Nancy starts to understand that Tina was murdered by none other than Fred Krueger in her dreams and that the two of them weren’t the only ones dreaming of him.

That really is all you need to know. I mean it’s a slasher movie how much plot are you expecting there to be? Basically the entire movie is Nancy discovering that her and her friends are all dreaming of the same thing and that in order to save her friends from dying, she must figure out a way to defeat Krueger.

Now you may watch this movie and think it’s completely ridiculous, and I understand that. The effects aren’t the best and the plot is a bit out there, but I personally have always thought of A Nightmare on Elm Street as a fantastic horror movie, the main reason being that it’s original. If you think about it, slasher/horror movies today (or at least the popular ones) are pretty much all the same. They’ve got your stereotypical characters you’ve seen way too many times, the gratuitous sex scenes, the stupid and annoying jump scares and painfully predictable plots. While Nightmare does have a sex scene here and there and some fairly bland characters, the plot is very different and frankly quite creepy. What scared me most about it as a kid was how it introduced the idea that I could potentially be murdered in my most vulnerable state. Or even worse, the fact that in my dreams – a place in which I feel most at peace – I could be destroyed by a murderous lunatic. Even as an adult that’s pretty scary.

Aside from the story, there are other things I just can’t help but love about this movie. For one, the music is great. I mean it sets the mood perfectly; it’s creepy and even kind of catchy. Also great for scaring your best friend who just happens to hate the fact that you made her watch the movie. (One, two Freddy’s coming for you…) I suck.

The acting is also enjoyable. I’m not saying it’s Oscar worthy (on no), but it’s just really energetic. Like everyone in it went just the right amount of over the top which makes watching it way more enjoyable, what with the screams and totally dramatic writhing around in bed. It’s great. This leads me to the last thing I love about this movie, which is the overall energy level. It’s got suspense, drama, comedy and lots of scares. Wes Craven was smart in not taking this movie completely seriously and it’s clear that he was able to poke a little fun at the whole idea.

I guarantee that if you’re a fan of scary movies that you’ll enjoy this one. If you’ve got popcorn and a few friends it’s a lot of fun. I know it’s technically November now (woops) but keep it in mind for next year!

Movie 43 (2013)

Director: Steven Brill, Steve Carr and more

Writer: Rocky Russo, Jeremy Sosenko and more

Starring: Richard Gere, Live Schreiber, Naomi Watts, Kate Winslet, etc.

Rated: R (strong pervasive language, crude and sexual content including dialogue, graphic nudity, language, some violence and drug use)

Not many movies piss me off, but this movie just rubbed me the wrong way. Tell me, have you even heard of Movie 43? You may be tempted by the all-star cast but please, for your own sake, don’t see it. Why? Because it’s not even a movie! Seriously, it a compilation of approximately five minute-long skits that are so unbelievably stupid I honestly find it hard to believe that adults created them. The humor is gross and offensive and pretty much all of the characters suck. Those who don’t (meaning those who aren’t complete assholes) are screwed over by the jerks and the viewer then just loses all faith in the movie as a whole.

Now I understand why someone might be intrigued by this movie. I mean it’s got a great cast and the tagline is: “What is Movie 43.” But before you ignore my advice and go see it, let me just give you an idea of what you would be getting yourself into: elementary level humor, for example a woman (Ana Faris) asking her husband (Chris Pratt) to literally take a dump on her, which is supposedly a way of showing his affection. (Wtf??) You’ll also get a hint of sexism in a skit about Richard Gere’s character’s invention of the iBabe, which is, as you might have been able to guess, an iPod only in the shape of a life sized naked woman. Oh and then you’ve got the just plain disturbing story of Naomi Watts and Liev Schreiber who homeschool their teenage son; the “comedic” twist being that in order to give him the typical social experience one might have in high school they feel the need to humiliate the crap out of him. It’s not funny. There’s also the story of the basketball coach who’s idea of encouraging his team is to tell them that they’ll win because of the fact that they’re black and Kate Winslet’s blind date with the guy (Hugh Jackman) with a scrotum on his neck. A SCROTUM ON HIS NECK. I can’t believe this is the crap we’re stuck watching in 2015…

Now if that’s all your type of humor then good for you, go see the movie. Just please don’t mind me saying that I have no idea how someone could genuinely laugh at all of the random and messed up shit that happens in this movie. And in case you’re wondering – like I was – how all of these talented people ended up in Movie 43, they were literally bribed. I’m not kidding. The brilliant mind behind this piece of shit filmed Kate Winselt and Hugh Jackman’s skit and then used the fact that they were in the movie to get other actors to sign on. It snowballed from there and thus…the worst movie I’ve ever seen was created.

One last thing that I have to mention is that one of the creators of the movie explained in an interview that people nowadays have extremely short attention spans and he thinks that Movie 43 is the type of movie we would enjoy. Excuse the language but fuck you too, dude. That’s like the “polite” way of saying that you don’t respect me, or anyone, as a viewer of your movies – or really any movie ever– so thanks for that.

Alright please for the love of God don’t see this. It is, without a doubt, the worst movie I’ve ever seen (if you can even call it a movie) and it does NOT deserve your time or money!

Lying (2006)

Director: M. Blash

Writer: M. Blash

Starring: Chloe Sevigny, Jena Malone, Leelee Sobieski

Rated: Not Rated

 Well…you either love it, hate it, or just don’t get it. Let’s just say I fell into somewhat of a “what the heck am I watching” type of category.

Lying is a fairly short film in which we join four young women for a weekend at Chloe Sevigny’s character’s country house in upstate New York. Things all seem fairly normal until the three guests – especially Jena Malone’s character, Grace – begin to notice that their host is actually quite a peculiar young woman. And, my friends, that is all I will say about the plot, though to be honest I’m really not leaving that much out as that is really all that happens in this movie.

Now I was really looking forward to seeing this movie for a few reasons. For one I adore Jena Malone and Chloe Sevigny simply because of their amazing talents, but I have also recently discovered how much I enjoy filmmaking as well as film analysis, and was excited to see the outcome of a movie made on a budget of just $150,000.

Unfortunately, I have more negative things to say than positive about Lying. This could possibly be because I had pretty high expectations, but I watched it with my mom, a documentary filmmaker, and she didn’t seem to enjoy it either for similar reasons. In terms of cinematography I merely thought it was lazy. Now I can handle very low budget filmmaking – in my mind a movie doesn’t have to look extremely cinematic in order to it to be good. I film things on my phone all the time because I can’t afford a nice camera at the moment, and I can honestly say - and I hope I don’t sound stuck up when I say it – that I might have been able to film Lying a tad better. Now unless the camera was meant to be extremely shaky and grainy at times then never mind, but to me (and my mom) it almost felt as if whoever shot the movie, wasn’t trying as hard as they could and should have.

In terms of the plot, I thought it was an extremely interesting one. I won’t spoil anything, but having the main character, or host in this case, have the “problem” Chloe Sevigny had, made for a very interesting story and excellent set up for a fascinating character study. But…I feel as if the director didn’t develop her character quite enough – or really any of the characters – for the audience to really care. While mysterious characters are great and fun to watch and attempt to figure out, the audience still needs something to work with, and all we have in this movie is just very odd behavior along with blah sub-characters whose only purpose is to portray the confusion we’re feeling as we watch their painfully awkward encounters.

Now even though I wasn’t thoroughly impressed with the movie as a whole, there were smaller aspects I did rather enjoy: the performances and a specific visual detail that served as a little bit of symbolism (something I always appreciate!) As awkward and long as the scenes could become what with the uncomfortably stale dialogue, it did feel real thanks to the performances given by the four main actresses. I mean think about it…a girl you hardly know, who happens to be a bit whacko, has invited you to spend time at her country house with two other girls you’ve never met. Yeah that definitely calls for some awkward moments don’y ya think? As for the small detail, keep an eye out for the colors red and white – especially on Chloe Sevigny’s pants – and think about what it might signify. If they did it on purpose, I actually think it was pretty clever.

Anyway, enough of that! I would not say this movie is terrible, in fact it’s kind of far from it. As I said at the beginning of this review you may love it, hate it or just sit there staring at the TV thinking “whaaattt.” Either way, I found it entertaining (though very slow at times) as someone interested in filmkaing and production. Enjoy, if you end up watching it! 

Killer Joe (2011)

Director: William Friedkin

Writer: Tracy Letts

Starring: Mathew McConaughey, Emile Hirsch, Juno Temple

Rated: NC-17 (strong and disturbing violence, sexuality, graphic nudity, drug use, language)

Knowing that Killer Joe was directed by the same guy who brought us The Exorcist, you really have no excuse for being shocked at how blatantly disturbing this movie is.

Killer Joe is the story of a very poor family in Texas consisting of twenty-two year old drug dealer Chris (Emile Hirsch), his pushover of a father Ansel (Thomas Haden Church), hard ass stepmother Sharla (Gina Gershon), and painfully innocent and naïve younger sister Dottie (Juno Temple). Due to Chris’s mistakes, he discovers that he owes a sizeable amount of money to this drug lord (I guess he’s a drug lord…) which sucks seeing as he – and his family – are practically broke. Hoping not to die, however, Chris discovers that his mother, who we are to understand severely mistreated him as a child and who nobody seems to like, is worth fifty thousand dollars through an insurance policy, and…you guessed it, comes up with the brilliant idea of murdering her in hopes of collecting the money. How does he do it? By hiring the notorious Killer Joe, a detective by day and contract killer by night. Sound screwed up? It is.

So when this movie ended I honestly had no idea how I felt. I had put off watching it for a while due to what I had heard about it which was, simply, that it was incredibly disturbing. And boy was it disturbing…yet somehow really good. I think my main issue was that it was advertised as a dark comedy, a genre I absolutely love, but I literally laughed once. While it’s freaky enough to think that there’s someone out there who actually thought this stuff up, it’s even weirder, in my opinion, that many people found it funny. Of course we’re all entitled to our own opinions but I just can’t see how sexual harassment, brutal violence, or sexually and emotionally manipulating innocent characters is funny. Putting that aside, though, I must admit this film is an absolute knockout.

Most people seem to avoid this movie because of Mathew McConaughey and to be honest, I understand where they’re coming from. I mean do you remember him in the early 2000s? (In case you don’t know, he basically managed to star in the most predictable and clichéd chick flicks EVER and was known for pretty much portraying the same type of character every single time). If that’s what you’re concerned about, do not worry. His performance was absolutely insane and by that I mean so crazy good that I didn’t even see McConaughey; instead I was introduced to a sick, crazy and just plain twisted man who happened to look exactly like him.

Aside from McConaughey the other members of the cast were brilliant as well. As I’ve no doubt mentioned in previous reviews, I really appreciate it when actors and actresses are able to pull off a character to the point where I believe that they are real. Seriously, the movie doesn’t even have to be good; as long as I buy and/or care about the characters, I will most likely not be able to hate on it. By the end of Killer Joe I literally felt as if I personally knew the characters. While the plot was weirdly exaggerated, the characters were so genuine that even amongst the strangeness of what was happening around them, I became oddly attached to them and when I saw bad things happen to them, I found myself on the verge of screaming at the screen (note: that does not normally happen).

Aside from characters and plot, I noticed that Friedkin played with some very clever techniques that helped to subtly develop the characters. For example there is a dog in the trailer park the family lives in named T-Bone who, you’d think, barks throughout the movie just because he barks a lot, but when you start to pay more attention to him and exactly when he barks it’s only when Chris is around. Not the most original or creative idea, but I kind of like how it gives the audience an idea of who the weak characters are and who the intimidating ones are.

Another little thing I noticed was during a scene I definitely won’t spoil as it’s pretty important. As I said, Dottie is the youngest and most innocent character in the movie and Joe, obviously, isn’t. Therefore, we’re surprised when we find how patient Joe is with her. There is this kind of trust we build for him in terms of his relationship with Dottie, but in this specific scene, he begins to lose that patience a tad and we are given the smallest hint at this as the camera, while centered on his face, goes slightly in and out of focus. It happens so fast that I had to rewind to make sure it had actually happened, but after realizing that it did, I figured that it was most likely done on purpose and served as a clever little way to hint at his unbalanced temperament.

Other than these two techniques there are definitely more, but I think they’re probably more effective when discovered while watching the movie, so the last thing I want to point out that I really thought added to the movie was the sound. Though there is music, there are many moments in the film in which very raw sounds are used that, for me, added extreme suspense. In a scene where Chris is hiding from the drug dealers he owes the money to, instead of music we are given the crackling sound of the tires of their motorcycles creeping up on him, and while I was visually aware of everything that was happening, I still found myself quite tense.

Alright, well that’s just about all I have to say about this one. I definitely recommend it, though not to those with a weak stomach. There are some mighty troubling scenes that I myself did not enjoy watching, one of which involved chicken, so don’t make the mistake I did and eat a grilled chicken sandwich before seeing the movie.