The Movie: The Thing, directed by John Carpenter
Recommendation: Horror movie fans everywhere.
Reason: A work of paranoia that everyone should see.
The more I see of Carpenter, the more I appreciate him as a true visionary among horror directors. In the 80's, he was making some really interesting, some might say landmark projects. He directed The Thing, The Fog, Escape From New York, Big Trouble In Little China...aside from his slight man-crush on Kurt Russell (which was completely alright, considering the body of work they produced together), he really pushed the envelope. His specialty, perhaps even his fingerprint, is the sense of paranoia that marks his films. Managing a delicate balance between gore and suspicion, he really blew The Thing away.
The sense of fear and helplessness that feeds the terror of the film has been attempted by more than a few sci-fi shows since. The most notable of these would probably be The X-Files, which essentially remade The Thing, sans gore and only an hour long. Chris Carter could hardly have made a better decision-the episode was almost as creepy as this movie was.
When we're speaking of atmosphere, it's rare to mention characters, but Wilford Brimley's Blair completely redeems him for anything cheesy he's done in the past. Far surpassing the already decent effort of Kurt Russell, Brimley himself managed to heighten the fear to new levels. A hesitation here, a glance there...it was really an excellent performance. The Thing surely belongs near the top of the horror heap, for gorehounds and horror fans alike.
-118/365 down, 247/365 to go
Showing posts with label john carpenter. Show all posts
Showing posts with label john carpenter. Show all posts
Sunday, May 27, 2007
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Zombie movie. No zombies.
The Movie: Assault on Precinct 13, directed by John Carpenter
Recommendation: Me
Reason: I read an article (referenced in one of my previous posts) that called Assault on Precinct 13 John Carpenter's zombie movie. Therefore, had to see it.
So the ghoulies in this film aren't zombies, but a swarm of gang members determined to overrun the police station. Instead of the usual band of mismatched survivors thrown together by chance, we have a witness, some cops, some receptionists and some criminals. The zeds have guns (but they did that in Dawn of the Dead 1978 and Land of the Dead too). The stage is set for a siege, and John Carpenter succeeded in pulling off the claustrophobia and intensity he needed to.
Like Hitchcock before him, Carpenter faked out the censors to keep a critical (and unexpected) death scene in the film. I'll be watching the remake of this movie later in the year, but I really strongly doubt that the 2005 movie includes that particular moment. I have my doubts about the 2005 version in general, especially after seeing this one.
This wasn't such a bad way to kill some time. It's not the greatest movie of all time, but it's likeable enough. As usual, the action and horror directors of the 70's and early 80's pushed the envelope in unanticipated directions. Good for them. I miss that kind of daring in filmmaking.
-96/365 down, 269/365 to go
Recommendation: Me
Reason: I read an article (referenced in one of my previous posts) that called Assault on Precinct 13 John Carpenter's zombie movie. Therefore, had to see it.
So the ghoulies in this film aren't zombies, but a swarm of gang members determined to overrun the police station. Instead of the usual band of mismatched survivors thrown together by chance, we have a witness, some cops, some receptionists and some criminals. The zeds have guns (but they did that in Dawn of the Dead 1978 and Land of the Dead too). The stage is set for a siege, and John Carpenter succeeded in pulling off the claustrophobia and intensity he needed to.
Like Hitchcock before him, Carpenter faked out the censors to keep a critical (and unexpected) death scene in the film. I'll be watching the remake of this movie later in the year, but I really strongly doubt that the 2005 movie includes that particular moment. I have my doubts about the 2005 version in general, especially after seeing this one.
This wasn't such a bad way to kill some time. It's not the greatest movie of all time, but it's likeable enough. As usual, the action and horror directors of the 70's and early 80's pushed the envelope in unanticipated directions. Good for them. I miss that kind of daring in filmmaking.
-96/365 down, 269/365 to go
Monday, March 19, 2007
If coincidences are just coincidences, why do they feel so contrived?
The Movie: In the Mouth of Madness, directed by John Carpenter
Recommendation: Len
Reason: "Freaky."
It's rare to find a movie that's truly immersive. I've heard good things about watching Babel without subtitles, allowing for a normally unavailable empathy with the main character. I didn't expect a horror movie to get so very under my skin. I suppose part of that is John Carpenter's fault. Village of the Damned and The Fog were both very unsettling for me and with the proviso that I haven't seen The Thing or Halloween, In the Mouth of Madness is the most disturbing film of his that I've seen so far.
It isn't the violence or the special effects (God, it's definitely not the special effects). It's the backbrain 'I know that from somewhere' bits that Carpenter's thrown into the film, from the music (stealing the riff from Enter Sandman) to the story (which borrows heavily, but often subtly from both Stephen King and H. P. Lovecraft). He's got a strange sort of style that slips the references in, allowing the viewer to catch them in their own time. I was riveted, alternately twitching and going wide-eyed as one piece after another fell into place.
Was it a good movie? Yeah. The cinematography, the casting, those worked nicely. By 1995, Carpenter was a pretty capable director. The special effects...you do what you can with what you have. They were alright, not spectacular. Not as amazing as the technical work on The Fog (or, as I've heard, The Thing). Hurray for Sam Neill for being a pretty good protagonist and managing not to sound too over-the-top in his insanity scenes. I recommend this movie for anyone with a decent familiarity with Stephen King or Lovecraft. Twitch away, horror lovers.
-72/365 down, 293/265 to go
Recommendation: Len
Reason: "Freaky."
It's rare to find a movie that's truly immersive. I've heard good things about watching Babel without subtitles, allowing for a normally unavailable empathy with the main character. I didn't expect a horror movie to get so very under my skin. I suppose part of that is John Carpenter's fault. Village of the Damned and The Fog were both very unsettling for me and with the proviso that I haven't seen The Thing or Halloween, In the Mouth of Madness is the most disturbing film of his that I've seen so far.
It isn't the violence or the special effects (God, it's definitely not the special effects). It's the backbrain 'I know that from somewhere' bits that Carpenter's thrown into the film, from the music (stealing the riff from Enter Sandman) to the story (which borrows heavily, but often subtly from both Stephen King and H. P. Lovecraft). He's got a strange sort of style that slips the references in, allowing the viewer to catch them in their own time. I was riveted, alternately twitching and going wide-eyed as one piece after another fell into place.
Was it a good movie? Yeah. The cinematography, the casting, those worked nicely. By 1995, Carpenter was a pretty capable director. The special effects...you do what you can with what you have. They were alright, not spectacular. Not as amazing as the technical work on The Fog (or, as I've heard, The Thing). Hurray for Sam Neill for being a pretty good protagonist and managing not to sound too over-the-top in his insanity scenes. I recommend this movie for anyone with a decent familiarity with Stephen King or Lovecraft. Twitch away, horror lovers.
-72/365 down, 293/265 to go
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
