Synopsis:
The Angels are coming. Amy Pond has something in her eye. There is a crack in the wall and it's getting wider...
Thoughts:
The story keeps motoring along, moving forward not only in location, but also in explanations. We get to find out more about River Song. We get to find out more about the cracks in reality. The Doctor thinks aloud through most of the episode, feeding us information as he goes along.
The fate of Octavian and his men is quite sad indeed. There are a couple of great sequences surrounding Amy's affliction. The ending comes to us logically with the pieces fitting together nicely as you suddenly realize that you'd forgotten all about one of those pieces for the bulk of the episode despite it being right there. At least I forgot.
The post story wrap-up or coda or whatever you want to call it gets very interesting indeed. It was one of those things I should have suspected but had seen reason to not think that way but yes. If that helps because it won't. The Doctor gets to be very Doctorly and lies about his age yet again. Unless something's happened there, which it might have done.
This was an exciting episode and the feeling that we're building to something big is strong. I rather like that.
A spoiler-less review is difficult but there you go. Good stuff.
04 May 2010
03 May 2010
Music Monday - Social Distortion
I forget what came first. Was it the print ad that showed the album cover, featuring a jumping guitarist? Was it the description of the band's sound, that they were like good ol' straightforward rock n' roll? Was it the WARP?
I bet it was the WARP. The AM radio version of Laser 103, broadcasting a string of 'alternative' radio. 'Cold Feelings' got played a lot.
As I mentioned a couple weeks ago, I saw them open for the Ramones. I believe this was after I already owned the album with the jumping guitarist on it ('Somewhere Between Heaven and Hell') as I knew many of their songs. What I remember most about their performance was lead singer Mike Ness yelling at us to get out of our seats and mosh a bit, within the incredibly limited parameters that the Riverside security allowed us.
Years later the following song became popular again. Something about being in a video game? Please note: if this is the only song you know by Social D, expand your knowledge! They are too awesome to be ignored.
There was a cover song then did during that concert. I couldn't say that I'd ever hear a cover of that performer before, not done that well anyway. I wonder what had ever happened to him...
Social Distortion
Somewhere Between Heaven and Hell
Greatest Hits
I bet it was the WARP. The AM radio version of Laser 103, broadcasting a string of 'alternative' radio. 'Cold Feelings' got played a lot.
As I mentioned a couple weeks ago, I saw them open for the Ramones. I believe this was after I already owned the album with the jumping guitarist on it ('Somewhere Between Heaven and Hell') as I knew many of their songs. What I remember most about their performance was lead singer Mike Ness yelling at us to get out of our seats and mosh a bit, within the incredibly limited parameters that the Riverside security allowed us.
Years later the following song became popular again. Something about being in a video game? Please note: if this is the only song you know by Social D, expand your knowledge! They are too awesome to be ignored.
There was a cover song then did during that concert. I couldn't say that I'd ever hear a cover of that performer before, not done that well anyway. I wonder what had ever happened to him...
Social Distortion
Somewhere Between Heaven and Hell Greatest Hits
02 May 2010
'A Nightmare on Elm Street' (2010) review
Synopsis:
A bunch of 'kids' are stalked in their dreams by a mysterious burned figure in a red and green sweater.
Thoughts:
Remakes are just going to happen. They've been around since the early days of cinema. They happen. Sometimes they work out well, providing a different perspective on a familiar story. Sometimes they're a waste of time.
This movie was the latter.
Now, I'm not trying to argue that the original Nightmare from 1984 was the Best Movie Ever. I don't have it memorized or anything like that. I do enjoy Robert Englund's performance as Freddy in general and going into the film, that was my biggest concern regarding it. As it happens, Jackie Earle Haley's spin on Fred Krueger is a solid one. He's a little too quiet and a little too sane for my tastes, but he works well as the type of Freddy he's playing.
It's the rest of the movie that's the problem.
Now, I understand the concept of the formula. Certain types of movies tend to follow a pattern because the pattern works. This remake starts out acceptably, following the standard horror pattern, and then it just gets in a rut. It fails from the beginning by both following the standard pattern too closely, trying to be itself, and trying to reflect the original source material too strongly. It doesn't get the mix correct. It doesn't seem to know if it should be a movie that stands on its own or something that will only be watched by existing Freddy fans that will want to cut to the chase, so to speak.
As the original, the movie starts with a dream attack but the remake goes further. Instead of establishing the weird world we're getting into, it goes right for the throat, literally. It blunts the impact of the moment because it happens to a character we don't know and, therefore, don't care about.
This process continues for most of the film. We have characters that are just there, ever so loosely sketched in, and their eventual demises lack impact. While we meet the main characters in the first scene of the film, they rarely appear on screen until about halfway through the film. As a result, it's difficult to like them. The characters aren't built up together, giving the film a certain 'Psycho' reference point as well. It feels like two stories slightly connected instead of one arc.
The casting is poor as well. One of the main characters is supposed to be 17 but looks over 30. Most of the characters are that 'I'm 25 playing a teenager' look and that's fine. None of them fit together. Even the adults are a rough bunch. No one's too awful but no one really clicks. Our two main characters do a little by the end of the film but it's too little too late.
Being unable to care about the characters made the story that much more obviously muddled. There's an attempt to add more backstory to Freddy but that just made it more complicated. The premise is that Freddy was a groundskeeper (like Willie, who played him in that Simpsons Treehouse of Horror?) at a pre-school. He was accused of being a child molester and the parents hunted him down and burned him alive.
So, why does Freddy wait 12 years or so to get his revenge on these people? Just because the adults all stopped talking about Freddy, how does that mean that 20 or so kids in the class forgot all about this as well? Not only that, but it turns out that all the main characters forgot they went to pre-school together. I understand that they wouldn't all remember, I mean who remembers everyone they hung out with at age 5, but one of them doesn't? Why is the preschool still standing all these years later? If the adults were that bothered by the events and wanted to blot Freddy out, wouldn't they have the building torn down? In Milwaukee, we had a situation with an individual that killed a bunch of people and the apartment building he lived in was torn down within a year. The kids spoke about Fred's 'secret cave' but the adults couldn't find it. Once the main characters visit the pre-school basement, they find it in two minutes. In their defense, they've been there before, not that they remember it, but it's not exactly well hidden. Did the adults just not look? If they've tried to blot these memories out, then why did Nancy's mom keep a copy of their pre-school class picture? It's hidden but looks brand-new. It also conveniently has a list of everyone's names on the back. In typewritter. It looks like it's from the 1970s, not the 1990s.
One of the dream sequences explains much of Freddy's backstory. It starts as a dream attack sequence but then the character being attacked disappears. In theory he's supposed to be watching all this happen but he's not around to see anything. We see him briefly, the flashback starts, and he disappears. It looks like it was supposed to be just a flashback sequence and they tried to edit it into a dream sequence.
To wrap up, the movie is a mess.
There are bright spots. One attack in a pharmacy works well, being both stylish and creepy. There's another excellent effect near the end involving a hallway that works well. There's a haunting moment involving floating and a white dress as well. There's a neat moment when Freddy's voice floats around the speakers like the Ghost Host in the Haunted Mansion. These moments are too far and few between. The remake does try to reflect the original but the original version of those references are generally scarier and more solidly performed. In fact, after seeing the remake, we returned to my buddy's house and watched the original. It was better all around. The characters are developed. The attacks are creepier. The story fits together a bit better.
Honestly, skip this in the theatre. If you're really curious, wait until you can see it cheap. That way you're wasting more time than money.
Recommendation to avoid.
A bunch of 'kids' are stalked in their dreams by a mysterious burned figure in a red and green sweater.
Thoughts:
Remakes are just going to happen. They've been around since the early days of cinema. They happen. Sometimes they work out well, providing a different perspective on a familiar story. Sometimes they're a waste of time.
This movie was the latter.
Now, I'm not trying to argue that the original Nightmare from 1984 was the Best Movie Ever. I don't have it memorized or anything like that. I do enjoy Robert Englund's performance as Freddy in general and going into the film, that was my biggest concern regarding it. As it happens, Jackie Earle Haley's spin on Fred Krueger is a solid one. He's a little too quiet and a little too sane for my tastes, but he works well as the type of Freddy he's playing.
It's the rest of the movie that's the problem.
Now, I understand the concept of the formula. Certain types of movies tend to follow a pattern because the pattern works. This remake starts out acceptably, following the standard horror pattern, and then it just gets in a rut. It fails from the beginning by both following the standard pattern too closely, trying to be itself, and trying to reflect the original source material too strongly. It doesn't get the mix correct. It doesn't seem to know if it should be a movie that stands on its own or something that will only be watched by existing Freddy fans that will want to cut to the chase, so to speak.
As the original, the movie starts with a dream attack but the remake goes further. Instead of establishing the weird world we're getting into, it goes right for the throat, literally. It blunts the impact of the moment because it happens to a character we don't know and, therefore, don't care about.
This process continues for most of the film. We have characters that are just there, ever so loosely sketched in, and their eventual demises lack impact. While we meet the main characters in the first scene of the film, they rarely appear on screen until about halfway through the film. As a result, it's difficult to like them. The characters aren't built up together, giving the film a certain 'Psycho' reference point as well. It feels like two stories slightly connected instead of one arc.
The casting is poor as well. One of the main characters is supposed to be 17 but looks over 30. Most of the characters are that 'I'm 25 playing a teenager' look and that's fine. None of them fit together. Even the adults are a rough bunch. No one's too awful but no one really clicks. Our two main characters do a little by the end of the film but it's too little too late.
Being unable to care about the characters made the story that much more obviously muddled. There's an attempt to add more backstory to Freddy but that just made it more complicated. The premise is that Freddy was a groundskeeper (like Willie, who played him in that Simpsons Treehouse of Horror?) at a pre-school. He was accused of being a child molester and the parents hunted him down and burned him alive.
So, why does Freddy wait 12 years or so to get his revenge on these people? Just because the adults all stopped talking about Freddy, how does that mean that 20 or so kids in the class forgot all about this as well? Not only that, but it turns out that all the main characters forgot they went to pre-school together. I understand that they wouldn't all remember, I mean who remembers everyone they hung out with at age 5, but one of them doesn't? Why is the preschool still standing all these years later? If the adults were that bothered by the events and wanted to blot Freddy out, wouldn't they have the building torn down? In Milwaukee, we had a situation with an individual that killed a bunch of people and the apartment building he lived in was torn down within a year. The kids spoke about Fred's 'secret cave' but the adults couldn't find it. Once the main characters visit the pre-school basement, they find it in two minutes. In their defense, they've been there before, not that they remember it, but it's not exactly well hidden. Did the adults just not look? If they've tried to blot these memories out, then why did Nancy's mom keep a copy of their pre-school class picture? It's hidden but looks brand-new. It also conveniently has a list of everyone's names on the back. In typewritter. It looks like it's from the 1970s, not the 1990s.
One of the dream sequences explains much of Freddy's backstory. It starts as a dream attack sequence but then the character being attacked disappears. In theory he's supposed to be watching all this happen but he's not around to see anything. We see him briefly, the flashback starts, and he disappears. It looks like it was supposed to be just a flashback sequence and they tried to edit it into a dream sequence.
To wrap up, the movie is a mess.
There are bright spots. One attack in a pharmacy works well, being both stylish and creepy. There's another excellent effect near the end involving a hallway that works well. There's a haunting moment involving floating and a white dress as well. There's a neat moment when Freddy's voice floats around the speakers like the Ghost Host in the Haunted Mansion. These moments are too far and few between. The remake does try to reflect the original but the original version of those references are generally scarier and more solidly performed. In fact, after seeing the remake, we returned to my buddy's house and watched the original. It was better all around. The characters are developed. The attacks are creepier. The story fits together a bit better.
Honestly, skip this in the theatre. If you're really curious, wait until you can see it cheap. That way you're wasting more time than money.
Recommendation to avoid.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)