**THIS REVIEW MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS**

If watching Inside can be expressly cautioned for pregnant women and generally squeamish people, Grace is the natural extension of that film putting to film the notion that I am sure all new mothers wonder: “What if my baby is really a bloodsucking demon/zombie child?”

Directed by Paul Solet, Grace is a feature length version of his short of the same name and concept starring Brian Austin Green and Liza Weil as soon-to-be new parents Jimmy and Madeline. Sadly Jimmy (well, Michael in the full-length) dies in a car accident which also leaves Madeline badly hurt and the baby dead as well. Some either miraculous or creepy event happens after Madeline carries the deceased child to term but it comes back to life as she attempts to breastfeed it. She then shuts herself in with no one but her midwife Patricia to turn to when Grace starts taking a liking to Mommy’s blood rather than the breastmilk.

Even though I had not seen the short film (but who wouldn’t with BAG in it??) or read too terribly much about the film, I was aware of the basis for the plot thus it is kind of a spoiler but not really. I mean, you probably can take a really good guess from the poster alone. Really even though Grace is the driving force in the movie, it hinges on the lengths that Madeline, a vegan mother who preferred to spend her days watching the dead animal carcass channel, will go to to ensure the “health” of her child. Seeing as how the bulk of the story seems to take place in the course of just a few months after the birth, this is not as much a killer kid movie as it is a look at denial and delusions and what some people will do for their children.

Madeline is played here by Jordan Ladd and was a strong choice for the character as she and her actions take up a bulk of the film. Some of the strongest performances come in the weeks after Grace’s birth where Madeline is not only depressed over the loss of her husband and worn out from attending to the needs of a newborn but also joyous for the miracle baby. In many instances, these emotions are present and overlapping as one might expect a woman in her situation would have. Even as Madeline discovers Grace’s hunger and begins to sacrifice her health for the baby, she begins to waste away like a malnourished child in a third-world country. Madeline’s mother-in-law played by Gabrielle Rose is overbearing and likely just as deranged (in a less homicidal way) as a post-menopausal woman who still expresses breast milk with a pump hidden in her son’s former room. She poses a menacing presence to Grace’s secret as she is constantly pestering Madeline and sending people to check on her and the baby.

For a movie that was expanded from a six minute short, it does not feel padded as the pacing is brisk and the movie clocks in at less than an hour and a half. One element that seemed either thrust into the original story or one that was not expanded past what was in the original short was of Patricia, the midwife played by Samantha Ferris. She is in a great deal of the first act of the film but is conspicuously absent not long after the birth, dodging Madeline’s phone calls yet acting all stalker-y sitting outside the house. A love affair the two women had is fleetingly mentioned and then not paid off until the end of the film. I certainly would have preferred to see Patricia involved in the task of handling Grace throughout the movie as opposed to just appearing moments before the ending scene. One thing that I did like was the uncertainty about Grace and if she was really alive or if everything was in Madeline’s mind. The ambiguity is ushered by flies constantly gathering around Grace, phantom stinky smells with no corresponding baby output, and no one interacting with her other than Madeline. Some may point to the doctor’s visit as evidence that Grace is really alive as he hears sounds that she makes but I would even chalk that up to the fact that Madeline was crazy as fuck and could have a tape recording playing to help her delusions. Maybe at the end even Patricia is in on it. Who knows?

Grace was a good movie as even without a large amount of deaths it had some gore but mostly an unnerving message. There may be a dig in there at veganism as a non-meat-eating mother will go to the ends of the earth to destroy humans to feed her child but even without the social subtext it is quite disturbing. This is almost a perfect compliment to Inside, this time complete with a cameo by producer Adam Green. Just make sure to get your jollies on after seeing it.

I feel that for some reason, Below has been under the radar (cute, right?) for many years since its theatrical release. I seem to recall seeing the DVD turning up at any one of my DVD acquisition attempts at Best Buy but the vagueness of the poster, the boringness of the title, and somewhat lack of A-list stars have painted the picture as just another of Dimension’s direct-to-DVD abominations, even though with co-writer Darren Aronofsky on board it has a much grander pedigree than those films that suffer similar fates.

As we meet the crew of the USS Tiger Shark, a submarine in the Atlantic during World War II, they are given orders to rescue three members of a British hospital ship even though this will take them off course. From the start, we can sense things are a bit off with the men on board, especially moreso after the introduction of a woman, Claire Page, one of the survivors they rescued. The first portion of the film plays out like any other WWII submarine movie I have seen called U571 to the point that there are mechanical troubles, enemy ships in the area, and depth charges that shake the camera and tousle the crew like nothing else.

We then learn why things are a bit strange on the boat as the acting skipper Brice tells Claire the story of how the original captain tragically died while trying to retrieve debris for a souvenir while topside. Emphasis on story. As the sub continues to be inexplicably chased by a German destroyer (I have no idea if that’s the right term but whatever), strange occurrences start happening on board as random record players go off at the worst times possible, bangs on the hull spelling out B-A-C-K in morse code, more mechanical failures, and disembodied voices are heard. The way things are presented in the film, this could either be a ghost, a saboteur, hallucinations due to high hydrogen levels, or just shitty luck for those on board.

This film is really broken down into several different elements vying for screen time between straightforward WWII sub actions, a haunting, a (possible) vengeful spirit, and paranoia. This is pretty ambitious stuff for what we can assume was a relatively low-budget affair as it premiered on less than 400 screens to bring in a total of $600 thousand at the box office. The problem is, while there are strong points to each of the above components, they way they are intertwined here leads to a bunch of things that do not make sense for the production. One thing I do not understand was the purpose of setting this up as a period piece during WWII because as I can tell, there was not too much effort into selling it as a different time period other than mentions of Nazi Germany and antiquated machinery. This may be true even for U571 as it has been quite a while since I have seen that, but none of the dialogue or mannerisms or character attributes differentiated this movie from present day times. I cannot claim to be close to an expert on what dialogue in the 1940s would have sounded like but I am pretty sure it would not sound exactly the same as today. Really, I cannot see any discernible reason for this movie to be set during WWII as I could buy all of the action and occurrences if it took place on a modern-day sub in a fictitious sea battle being waged.

I feel if the film had a bit more focus, it could have been better but the battling story elements cause a really weird shift in tone during many of the scenes. Its strongest suit is as a horror movie, which is primarily the backbone of the story in spite of everything else (confusingly though it is listed as a rather generic “thriller” under genre on Netflix). While there is a reliance on jump-scares and people appearing out of nowhere, many sequences have a delightful tension as apparitions appear quickly and investigations take place with the pale glow of a flashlight in a long, spooky hallway. Even some of the other parts with the constant unraveling of the story behind the dead captain are entertaining enough to play along with and try to guess the outcome which is in hindsight rather obvious but not in the moment.

Cast wise, there is nothing especially bad here but not much to make a mark otherwise. The movie is populated with “that guy” actors who you recognize but maybe cannot place. And also inexplicably Zach Galifianakis is in it. I swear Bruce Greenwood plays every character the same regardless of dirtbag husband or President of the United States, as he has the same sort of almost charmingly but sleazy feel to him. Olivia Williams is good as the British nurse who incites most of the inquiry (she was the wife in Sixth Sense in case anyone else wonders). Scott Foley and Matthew Davis turn in largely similar roles to earlier films as Scream 3 and Urban Legends 2 respectively. The best was probably Holt McCallany, who I recognized from Fight Club, as the hardass on board mostly because he gets the creepiest scene in the movie and the best freakout.

There are parts of the movie that I really liked and parts that seemed to be standard fare from a variety of other movies from the various genres I have mentioned but the movie as a whole is somewhat lacking sadly. Perhaps I should have expected less from the man responsible for launching Vin Diesel‘s career.

Unlike some other teen-based horror movies that came out in the late 90s and early 00s, The Forsaken never really made a big splash when it first came out and seems to have faded into obscurity, relegated to random showings on late night cable even with the popularity of other vampire properties soaring. Like many of its cinematic brethren from that era, Forsaken really offers nothing new or differentiating in cinema or story. It is just a cleanly produced, slick offering catered towards the slightly younger crowd who probably would not notice its flaws.

Kerr Smith stars as Sean, low-level assistant for a film studio in Hollywood who has been hired to drive a mint car to Miami where he will attend his sister’s wedding. On the way, he meets up with Nick, played by Brenden Fehr who seems a bit too knowledgable in helping a young girl who acts very erratic after being bitten by a vampire. Nick shares that he too was bitten by a vampire over a year ago but has been able to contain the spread of the vampiric virus through a specific blend of medications. Nick is on a mission to track down and kill the main vampire to stop the spread of the infection through their bodies.

Viewing this movie is similar to watching a sporting event that you do not give a rat’s ass about. While the film is fairly proficient on a technical level and not a craptastic train wreck, not one thing about it is memorable from the story to the cast to the locale. I felt a grand sense of deja vu while watching this thinking back to John Carpenter’s Vampire$. Vampire$ itself is not a very good movie but no one can deny that Carpenter at least has some strong talents even when the movie he is making blows chunks. I am convinced that writer/director J.S. Cardone was trying to infuse half of Carpenter’s ideas with other, better, vampire movies like Lost Boys with nary an original though to ride along.

In the interest of full disclosure, I have seen the entire series of Dawson’s Creek which features Kerr Smith in the bulk of those episodes. While he is good there, as well as other more recent fair like the My Bloody Valentine remake, Smith is just utterly bland here as with the rest of the cast. Other than the contrived plot to get him on a cross-country journey, we know very little about his character Sean, his traveling companion Nick, the mostly mute random girl they pick up, any of the vampires … you can probably see where this is going. I will say some backstory to the bloodsuckers is given but it is largely inconsequential to the rest of the film and I missed it the first time around and I did not feel like rewinding the DVR.

Some of the choices of the story were just baffling. Nick explaining that he has been able to keep the infection at bay for over a year without any side effects or other damage really puts a damper on any sort of urgency that would otherwise accompany. Also, the fact that the vampires are just as likely to run you down in a car, slit your throat, or shoot you with a gun almost negates any need for them being vampires at all as opposed to a posse of crazed, desert-lurking weirdos. As such, the carnage is limited to gallons in a minimal amounts of scenes and there are more portions of car chases and action movie shootouts than gory kills or feeding.

I can just skim through the list of some of the movies we have reviewed and give you a bunch of worse movies but at least there may be a good performance, scary scene, or flat-out cheese to laugh at. Just like another Cardone script, Prom Night, The Forsaken is not so much a bad film as it is totally forgettable.

I must say I am a pretty uninformed movie goer sometimes. Case in point, I knew very little other than the basic premise for Splice going into it. However, I also knew that it received largely positive reviews when it screened at festivals earlier in the year, that it was a surprising pick-up by Warner Brothers, and it was going to be launched into theaters across the country to battle such populist dreck like Shrek and Marmaduke. I was expecting a well-done, but mostly generic sci-fi horror thriller but Splice is much more than that.

Clive and Elsa are scientists under the wing of a pharmaceutical company tasked with synthesizing proteins to combat a gaggle of biological baddies, mostly for commercial uses. After successfully splicing genes from multiple species to create a miniature Starship Troopers brain bug, they want to advance their work and splice human genes. When this is shot down by the greedy bosses, Clive and Elsa forge ahead with the intention to terminate the experiment before it births an organism. This does not go to plan and soon after they have created a being of sorts who starts off looking like a bald, mutated guinea pig before developing human characteristics. Mayhem then ensues.

Or, scratch that. Mayhem really does not ensue after all. Co-writer and director Vincenzo Natali could have taken the picture down the lazy river and had the human-ish thing, affectionately named Dren, escape and go apeshit on society at large. It is shocking that a major studio would allow such a leisurely story as mostly it revolves around Clive and Elsa, their relationship, and their ties to Dren as she develops further. The cast is small, the focus is tight, and the action and carnage is limited to a few scenes here and there. While I tagged this under the category of horror, drama would almost be a more appropriate genre to place Splice under as human relationships and interactions fuel the story more than gore and death scenes.

Adrien Brody and Sarah Polley are great as the couple, involved both professionally and intimately. As the film progresses, they leave questioning the morality of bringing Dren into the world and instead focus on their responsibilities towards her. Very easily could the two leads have sat around, wringing their hands with guilt and fear over the implications of Dren’s existence but instead the three become a sort of dysfunctional family complete with unspoken anger and underlying hostilities towards one another. Polley has the biggest load here as Elsa is not only fighting the demons of her childhood and her negligent mother but also the urge to become like her as Dren becomes too much to handle as she progresses.

The fortunate thing about Splice is that Dren is at least seventy-five percent human being with a modicum of CGI thrown in to create her four fingered hands and disjointed legs. In the majority of the movie, Delphine Chanéac plays the creature with the same attributes as an infant or young animal with wide eyes of curiosity but a bad attitude when things do not go her way. Chanéac’s acting goes a long way though to sell the subtle head turns of confusion like a dog and learning to dance as a young lady which not only let us invest in the character and her “journey” but also in Clive and Elsa as they struggle to gasp the effects of their short-sidedness.

The only real issue with the film was the climax which not only seems unnecessarily rushed but also shoehorns in random characters that seem to only serve as a way to increase the body count. As it is a fairly intimate movie between the three main characters, I would have rather they be the only parties involved as a way to wrap up the story in the same fashion that it began. That minor quibble aside, Splice is the complete antithesis to what a similar concept would have yielded in the hands of SyFy or The Asylum. It has heart, it has depth, and it is a good movie. Mega Piranha or The Terminators cannot say that.

Three years ago, a guy like me would have never had a concept of, nor would have cared about, a B-series comic book hero like Iron Man. Sure, he is a superhero featured in a barrage of comic books but Iron Man did not have the household appeal of the other more well-known comic book superheroes. With 2008′s feature Iron Man, that all changed as the wealthy son of an intellectual rose to stand along side the Dark Knight and the Man of Steel.

Picking up where the previous film left off, Tony Stark has outed himself as Iron Man and is subsequently dealing with the consequences of the injury that birthed his suited armor and the power it entails. However, as a man who has “privatized world peace,” Stark enjoys his adventures fighting the big baddies as much as his detractors like to point out the danger in his technology’s existence. When the son of his father’s former collaborator creates a powerful suit of his own, Stark is busy fending off other corporate slimeballs, frenemies, and disgruntled Russian physicists.

Iron Man is almost the polar opposite to a superhero like Batman. He may do what he does somewhat begrudgingly, but Stark is drunk on the power he exudes as Iron Man. He was a filthy rich playboy before the incident that caused shrapnel to circle his heart and a minor medical impairment does not cease those activities. He has the money, the technology, and the ambition to become the most important man in the world (suited or not). The film mirrors Stark’s lifestyle as instead of brooding shots of urban landscapes and harping on the disease of human nature, Iron Man the character and the movie are focused on spectacle and importance that being a superhero would likely carry.

Most of the main cast from the first film are back for the second installment, save for Don Cheadle taking over for Terrence Howard in yet another jarring recast. Robert Downy Jr. is still on his incredible streak of awesome movies and characters that was cemented by his first turn donning the Iron Man gear. His portrayal of Stark is a magical combination of cocky jack-ass with a dash of used-car salesman slime wrapped in a cozy shell of a guy that you would admire but probably would not be friends with (at least not for very long). Gwyneth Paltrow fortunately is given more to do this time around as she assumes controlling power of Stark Industries.

Scarlett Johansson and Sam Rockwell are along for the ride as a sexy double (or maybe even triple) agent and a wormy Stark Industries competitor respectively. Johansson might not have immediately sprung to mind as the best choice for Black Window but she pulled it off nicely with a good balance of strength to play off of Downy and kick-ass tendencies to take down a dozen guards in the blink of an eye. I especially enjoyed Rockwell though as the wimpy Justin Hammer, a guy so seemingly inept and wishy-washy that you wonder how even ascended to more than a janitorial supervisor. See also Galaxy Quest for another wonderful Rockwell performance.

The one new addition to the cast I was somewhat disappointed in was Mickey Rourke as Ivan Vanko. Coming off of a Downy Jr.-ish comeback, Rourke’s character was almost too one-dimensional comparatively to the rest of the cast and especially to Jeff Bridges’ villain in the first. As the scorned son of a former Stark Industries collaborator, Vanko seeks to avenge his father’s passing on Stark. This is all well and good but Rourke disappears for stretches of the movie and save for two very brief scenes when he is battling Iron Man, he role is mostly pedestrian as he tinkers with his physicist stuff. Also MIA quite a bit was Cheadle as Rhodey who steals an Iron Man suit and releases it to the government and Hammer because he feels Stark is a bit too immature to handle the power.

In all just like PBF commented on in a previous episode, Iron Man 2 falls into the same trap as Batman Returns. The core group of characters is greatly expanded to include new friends and foes taking time away from the existing cast and leading quite a lot going on. Fortunately, most of this is tied up within the actual story (the whole SHIELD subplot notwithstanding) but things could have gone much smoother with a more simplistic and straight-forward story.

Iron Man 2 is a solid picture though. Maybe not as solid as the first due to some of the small nitpicks that I pointed out but it is still an great couple of hours to spend with largely entertaining characters and stories.

A few episodes ago, PBF and I talked about movies inspired by true events and I was rather dismissive of this film. Yes, The Blind Side is at its core a film more oriented towards female viewers that goes over the top with sentimental gestures of faith and love. But it does feature football and statistics have shown that approximately 94% of men either love or are interested in football. So, how does a sure-fire date movie turn into a Best Picture nominee?

Michael Oher is a wayward young who has bounced from home to home after being separated from his mother several years earlier. He comes to study at the Wyngate Academy, a private Christian school attended mostly by the families of upper crust in society. His presence is an annoyance to his teachers due to his academic challenges and he stays mostly isolated from his affluent, caucasian classmates. After Michael is befriended by her young son, Leigh Anne Tuohy realizes that Michael has nowhere else to go and brings him home. Over time, the Tuohys and Michael become a close-knit family while Michael makes a name for himself on the school’s football team.

Normally these types of movies are not my bag as there seem to be dozens of uplifting, sports-based movies with any conceivable combination of elements (wimpy kid/underdog team/etc. seeking redemption or validation of their efforts). While you might believe (that is unless you have never read up on any other movie inspired by true events) that everything here is totally factual, it seems that there was some tomfoolery played with the narrative and the events themselves. This is not a bad thing necessarily as films exist to make money and the truth may not always be as compelling as what these facts can be spun into. Just a cursory glance at the film’s and the main character’s Wikipedia pages though indicate that some things did not play out as displayed in the film such as the real Tuohys took Michael in after he had started playing football. Again, there is no real problem in changing events and dressing them up for film but it is worthwhile to note at least.

The general consensus regarding Sandra Bullock’s Best Actress nomination and subsequent victory was primarily that it was undeserved for this film in particular but more of an award for her achievements over the past fifteen years or so of her career. I agree with that line of thought, not because Bullock did not perform well but she did not perform well enough here to warrant those accolades. Overall, the bulk of the performances were good but nothing to shower with praise compared to some of the other nominated pictures from last year. Mostly Quinton Aaron as Michael and Jae Head as SJ have the best performances as often times they are playing off of each other to which you can sense a natural relationship between them. Bullock has her moments of greatness though, particularly with Michael as she and the rest of the family push him towards greatness.

I will not lie and say that this is not a heart-warming and inspiring tale even though that might hurt any street cred I have for being cynical and sarcastic. Some of the things in this movie would seem outlandish if they were not based on reality (some form of it at least). But as many times as we see the fish-out-of-water-with-significant-economical-and-societal-obstacles tale told with the backdrop of sports, the film works by creating realistic and sympathetic characters that you invest in throughout. The drastic change from a homeless kid with one solitary polo shirt to a renowned student on the football field while improving his demeanor and academic performance is done well so things do not seem forced or unrealistic. The one element common to this genre I was happy at its exclusion was the evil human interference. We had a bit of this with the teacher and the NCAA official but I expected either the husband or the daughter over time would have a change of heart and push for Michael to leave only to later embrace him and his struggles. Again, this may or may not have happened in the real events but it is not only a clichéd point of conflict but it would have also brought down this otherwise universally positive tale.

The film does manage to touch on topical issues such as racism and poverty but these were fleeting glimpses, not plot points driven too much into the story. Mostly it boils down to one young man’s struggle in life and the love and support that he received from virtual strangers to succeed. Is it sappy? Absolutely but the end result is a good movie about incredible events and the strength of conviction. Is it Oscar-worthy? I say not but movie-goers cannot live on a diet of overblown, depraved horror movies forever.

War movies are an interesting beast. Having never been in these situations, I am sure the real life events of these movies can range the broadest spectrum of emotions from anger to fear to relative happiness. Rather than stick with these basic, primal emotions, recent films (especially those on the recent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan) have attempted to interject politics and the hand-wringing of whether it is right or wrong, mostly to the detriment of the film (at least for what I have read on movies like Redacted). Just like zombie movies, some films are made with a social commentary and underlying thought interwoven in the story while some are just straightforward tales about the subject matter. I am truly happy that Hurt Locker took the latter approach to telling a story about three men in an army of thousands who are just trying to make it through each day.

The vast majority of the movie takes place with the company of three men, each a member of the Army’s Explosive Ordinance Disposal unit in Iraq early at the start of the war. We meet them towards the end of their 365 day rotation as Sergeant First Class James takes over as a team leader for Sergeant Sanborn and Specialist Eldridge. Together, the unit sets out on seemingly regular treks to locate and neutralize explosive threats in the country. When not in the kill zone, they blow off steam by watching porn, drinking alcohol, and horsing around. Normally, the previous two sentences would warrant the opening act of a similar movie before a mad bomber, kidnapping, or other plot twist is introduced. Here though, that is about all we get in the way of story.

This is not an average film by any stretch of the term as classic film staples such as an over-arcing story line or character development are nowhere to be found here. We meet these characters, see them do their jobs, see them goof around, and then they go home. While there are some minor notes of change in the characters themselves, these can be easily chalked up to the hellacious environment they are surrounded by and the tasks that they perform. Almost like the Joker in a little known movie called Dark Knight, these characters are absolute. You are given sparse clues about their origins, we first see them in their “groove” so to speak, and they leave in largely the same manner that they appeared. Normally, this type of story would have critics chomping at the bit to declare the movie flat and devoid of any semblance to real-life but here I fathom that was the intention.

With authentic locations, barely recognizable actors, and the ol’ favorite shaky cam style of production, this film comes off more as a documentary than a feature-length fictional tale from Hollywood. And just like a linear narrative of a documentary, things do not unfold in a nicely packaged three act story. By jettisoning things like a begrudged terrorist bomber and A-list actors, you can forget at times that this is a movie and not found footage from a war-torn video camera. All of the actors were great in their performances of selling this notion. The lead, Jeremy Renner as James, has the acting chops and is charismatic enough to carry the film, but his relative anonymity makes you think you have seen him before but cannot place him. In fact, it was only after I scrolled through his IMDb projects that I realized I had seen him before as a fairly prominent character in 28 Weeks Later. What pulled me out of this non-fictional account of war were the quite random appearances by Guy Pierce, Ralph Fiennes, and … David Morse? These actors as well did remarkable in their brief roles but consider it jarring to see a group of unknowns being lauded by that guy from The Rock or the father from Contact. Weird.

While I may have decried other movies (cough … Diary of the Dead) for mostly contained components of the story loosely interconnected, it is fitting here as a slice of life for these soldiers in the battlefield. It helps that the major sequences are so terrific in their execution and so taut with anxiety and fear even as the scene ticks on for eons longer than you would find in a typical action movie. The opening scene alone is one of the shortest ten minutes of film ever as it is expertly crafted to the point that the notion of time becomes a luxury, especially for the characters. And politics is never brought into the mix as the characters never take time to ponder their actions and debate the merits of war. Whether their feelings of the topic were good, bad, or indifferent were not addressed. Nor should they be as this is not a movie with Romero-style commentary on life, war, and everything in between.

There are tons of things that I can talk about more but I will refrain as I enjoyed the hell out of this movie knowing little about it other than as a war movie that won Best Picture. As it stands of the nominees last year I have seen, Hurt Locker is deservedly a victor at least as a prime example that a film does not have to follow standard movie conventions to be great.

According to Box Office Mojo, the 1994 kids’ sports movie Little Giants grossed a meager $19 million in its theatrical release. Why is this movie relevant in a review for Wes Craven’s New Nightmare? The Rick Moranis and Ed O’Neill PG-rated family movie had the distinction of being released within a week of New Nightmare. As such, I saw New Nightmare at least seven or eight times in theaters via Little Giants. I also had a VHS copy of Man’s Best Friend, the Ally Sheedy-starring Cujo-ripoff just because it was the first with a preview for Nightmare 7 before its release. For the record, I believe I watched the movie once and the opening previews at least a few dozen times.

You see, somewhere between 1990 and this film’s release in 1994, I became very obsessed with horror films (healthy for an 8-year-old, huh?). When I first got wind of the newest Freddy film involving Heather Langenkamp and Wes Craven, likely through some random issue of Fangoria, I was excited. When watching it, I found it humorous that the film was set in a reality where New Line sucks, destroyed the Nightmare series, and thus has unleashed an ancient horror on the world which apparently really likes being Freddy. That’ll teach ‘em. As I said, I watched this movie tons when I was just an impressionable twelve years of age to the point where I can still visualize the cigarette burns between reels and hear the booming DTS clang of ironworks in the opening scene and recognize that one of the kid’s laughter from the background with the New Line logo was also used in the park scene later on. Again, none of this is really germane to the quality of the film but even if this movie were complete garbage, which for the record it is not, I would be the most impartial judge ever due to these circumstances.

But enough with nostalgia as this film does not need aid from my rose-colored recollections of it. It is just a damn fine movie on its own. Most of the acclaim I gave to Part 5 was its attempt to return to the roots of the story, namely horror instead of comedy. That movie failed though with its out of control, mainstream Freddy. Here though we have Wes Craven, who has most certainly been shocked and chagrined at life over the later sequels of his work, returning to form with his original concept and elements that work. For the better part of the film, Freddy is mostly a passer-by. Sure, he causes some damage and kills but for the first hour or so of the movie, the character of Freddy is largely absent. In his place is a menacing threat to Heather and her family. It may be Freddy, it may be a psycho fan, it may be paranoia and dementia. Who knows?

As opposed to the remake (which I have not seen but am just going off of PBF’s review), we have a largely original story but heavy callbacks to the original film that actually fit with the premise of the movie. While the overall idea of an evil entity which has taken Freddy’s form is a bit much to take at first, once you get past that, the illusions to the first film fit in quite well. Iconic moments such as the bathtub scene, the phone-makeout, and Tina’s death are referenced but not recreated as their original forms have no place in this film. And of course to bring things back to formula, Freddy starting out is once again a dark, menacing force with little time to mug for the camera or spout one-liners.

Above all, my main problem with the film was the change in course in the back half of the picture, especially pertaining to that particular penchant of Freddy. While still cleverly executed, after Freddy emerges from Heather’s closet, he seems to be on a rapid acceleration back to his former self from the last few pictures. The jokes are not as bad or as forced as before but to have a villain thrust upon you, immediately delivering trailer-worthy bits of dialogue is a bit much all at once. Once Heather/Nancy travels into Freddy’s world, the picture slams on the brakes for me. While I appreciate the reference to earlier in the film, for Freddy to die by way of the witch in Hansel and Gretal is a bit lazy and the finale is where the special effects are called to the plate and strike out with pretty bad CGI and matte paintings that are damn close to removing you from the story. However, even at its worst, the finale of New Nightmare is remarkably better than the ineptitude shown during any part of Freddy’s Dead.

I enjoyed how a prominent theme from the original (and some of the sequels) was carried over: namely, idiot parents. Just like Nancy in the first film, Dylan is having nightmares and seeing Freddy but he is quickly dismissed by his parents as nonsense. And once Nancy comes around to the existence of Freddy in real life, she then has to try to convince her “parents” or authority figures, John Saxon and that bitch doctor. Even though it was heavily re-edited (and twelve-year-old me noticed it too), the final part of the original Nightmare shown on Heather’s TV only expounds the notion that parents or authority will always think they are right and things like Freddy are just fantasy.

The reason that I keep watching and enjoying this film is simple though. It is expertly crafted leaving just enough details out of reach (such as what the hell is wrong with Robert Englund) and constantly building to bigger, more scarier things. And while it might be because my own kids now, I was quite anxious during the playground scene even though I have known for sixteen years that Dylan will survive. And when he cries out for Rex after Julie is Tina-zed, I got shivers. It was just that effective.

This is my longest Nightmare review to date but I feel it is quite warranted. Go ahead and disparage me and my beliefs if you must but New Nightmare is the best of all the sequels and at times comes damn close to beating the original in sheer execution if not originality. As I said, I am probably the worst person to get an unbiased opinion from on this film but it is remarkable and I am sure the few extra bucks that Little Giants got from me was worth it.

So now we come to the fork in the road. Nightmare 3 has ended. A sequel is greenlit. I would imagine the head honchos at New Line sitting in the conference room thinking about how to best continue the series. I would guess by this point Freddy had become fairly mainstream if I, a six-year-old at the time, had seen a fair amount of merchandise, television promos, and previews for the last films. So, instead of continuing on the path of relative excellence established by the previous film, Bob Shaye turns Freddy into a laughably bad stand-up comedian on a beach, presumably to click with more teens and more dollars. One might say this was a good choice as this film more or less launched Freddy into stardom, but it was at the expense of a good series to that point.

For some reason, I have historically really liked this film in spite of the about-face in technique. It was, and to a point still is, a pretty fun movie to watch but man did it piss me off this go around. I chalk that up to the fact that I cannot say I have actually watched all of the Nightmare movies in chronological order, instead skipping around to avoid Part 2, 5, and Freddy’s Dead. But watching the movie on the heels of its predecessors almost immediately sets it up for failure. In the first sixty seconds, you have many indications that this movie will be nothing like those before. This is not only the first in the series to give Robert Englund the main starring credit, but it also is the first to have the updated New Line logo and feature a typical 80s pop song over the credits as opposed to the score. Granted, these are relatively trivial things but these just forebode the rest to come.

I had remarked in my review for Part 3 that the final third of the movie seemed to start the train of flashy Freddy who was more direct and more entertained by his overly elaborate stunts. Well, this flick takes just that final twenty minutes or so, puts it on ritalin, and breeds it. The relative simplicity of Freddy has now been all but lost as his kills this go around range from the strategic repositioning of a junk yard, encasing Joey in a water bed, deflating Shelia’s lungs and I guess all of the oxygen molecules in her body at the same time. You get the picture.

While the sight of Brooke Theiss turning into a roach is cool and all, could Freddy not have slashed her in the stomach while doing upside-down crunches or smashed her head with a weight-set? Sure he could have but I suspect the producers, and likely the audience too, wanted less suspense and terror but more trailer and quote-worthy scenes instead. Regardless, you can keep the kills but get rid of stupid, wisecracking, beach-going Freddy and we would have a significantly better movie.

The concept itself is one I could get behind if it were done differently. After the survivors from the last film are slowly killed off (why even bother killing Kristen if she’s going to last almost half the movie), Freddy wants to continue but he needs a conduit. So, enter Kristen’s friend Alice who was pulled into Kristen’s final nightmare. As Freddy uses Alice to bring him new blood, Alice is stricken with the guilt that her involvement indirectly has resulted in the deaths of her friends and even her brother.

Alice is a pretty cool character after all. While I had thoughts to amend my plea for her return, she is still the best part of the movie from the development of her character as she progresses from the meek girl afraid of her drunken father to the chick who can take down Freddy with some fancy footwork. In fact, I don’t think even Kristen got as much development or progression of her character and certainly none of the other kids from the previous films, save Nancy of course.

The danger in bringing Freddy into full view was the makeup which I would say is remarkably terrible here. Again, he was fairly prominently featured in bright lights during portions of the third, but it almost seems like the makeup artists were dictated to tone down Freddy’s appearance to match the more audience-friendly nature of this and later sequels. He no longer looks scary or disgusting, he just looks like Robert Englund with a prosthetic nose and a bunch of makeup.

The final showdown was, like the rest of the film, over the top and unnecessarily convoluted but I would say that it worked as Freddy is now dead, the souls of his captured children have been released, and everything is hunky-dory. Until the next one that is.

I really do not want to be too hard on this movie as I liked it before, it still is nowhere near as craptacular as what is to come, and I am sure I will have a burning desire to see the ‘Dramarama-kickboxing’ or ‘Suiting Up’ scenes at some point in the future. The turn this series makes here is still disappointing all the same.

Here we are less than a week away from the release of the latest part of my childhood to be repackaged and resold to me. Rest assured, I will be there to see Nightmare 2010 on opening day but let us forget about that for now as I cannot say I have high hopes for it. Instead, just like every other horror and/or movie related website, I will revisit the original films and see how they hold up … or don’t.

It is quite astonishing that Wes Craven was able to create such an iconic character with a budget reportedly of less than $2 million. Equally amazing is that through the various production and financial issues, the original Nightmare on Elm Street still remains as a highly regarded tentpole in the slasher subgenre twenty five years later along with the Halloween and Friday the 13th franchises. I would argue the Nightmare series did not fair as well as the Myers and Voorhees based ones due to studio interference and rushing production to maximize revenues at the expense of the stories themselves.

Forgetting the rest of the series though, this movie stands up relatively well even to today’s horror standards. While the film is not without its flaws (more on those to come), it is still creepy as hell. I can safely say that the original has never come close to being “scary” to me personally, but that is more due to my pre-teen self seeing the thing a billion times and becoming desensitized. The overall concept of the killer coming after you in your dreams lends itself quite well to things that would normally be off-the-wall in more grounded entries. Sure, Michael Myers got shot six times and burned to a crisp and Jason can seemingly teleport anywhere, but overall those series were made up of events that could possibly happen.

Now, as you and I can attest almost anything can happen in a dream though. One moment you may be having brunch with the President, the next falling down an elevator shaft onto some bullets, and finish off with talking zombie gardeners. Craven uses the randomness and complexities of a typical dream to the advantage of the film as it cannot be damned for drastic location or tone shifts. Even the basic premise of being murdered in your sleep is horrifying enough as there is little that you could do to prevent that from happening. Everyone sleeps at some point and everyone has dreams. On the other hand, people could learn to stay the hell away from Crystal Lake and not be related to psychotic nutjobs (or at least do a better job of hiding that fact).

The general rule of “less is more” applies beautifully here as the minimal budget did not allow a great emphasis on showboating. In stark contrast to some of the later sequels featuring Freddy in a brightly lit place like … I don’t know, a beach or a television studio, Freddy is mostly relegated to the shadows with only a brief glimpse of his burned, disfigured face. Freddy is also more of an impending threat than a direct antagonist. His screen time is limited to the fairly infrequent nightmare world as opposed to being in every other scene. This is a much more effective manor of creating a menacing villain, scaring you with the unknown as opposed to putting it all out there, good or bad.

So with all of that acclaim being said, there were things here that irked the hell out of current me that previous me had never really picked up on. For starters, no one in this damn movie (save Johnny Depp, John Saxon, and possibly Robert Englund) can act. I sincerely like Heather Langenkamp and feel she really grew with this franchise but some of her scenes are downright awful, especially for a feature film like this. With the exception of a few scenes in the back half of the movie after everyone thinks she is crazy, Langenkamp awkwardly overacts and delivers her lines in a way that even Kristen Stewart would be embarrassed for her. Her cinematic mother, Ronee Blakley is even worse. I can forgive to a certain extent as the character is supposed to be a barely functioning alcoholic but that excuse even pushes the line frequently.

Craven also plays pretty loose with the rules of the dream world. While the infringements here are not as blatant as in some of the latter films, Freddy’s ability to transcend the dream world even when his victims are fully awake is a bit much without further explanation. With what we know, Nancy was wide awake when she received her unwanted makeout session with Freddy and Rod was more than likely aware as he was being pulled out of his cell and hung by the rafters. You can chalk these minor quibbles up to Freddy’s surging power as more fear is directed his way but again, these things are not really addressed here.

All of that is not really a problem though. Chances are if you are watching this you have seen it before. If you haven’t, you likely already know the basic premise where the most random shit can happen in a quick succession. As it stands, Nightmare ’84 is an excellent movie that is fully capable of elevating itself over its somewhat inconsequential flaws.