39: Malevolence

Malevolence – September 10, 2004
Starring: Samantha Dark, R. Brandon Johnson, Heather Magee
Written and directed by: Stevan Mena

The plot: “It’s ten years after the kidnapping of Martin Bristol. Taken from a backyard swing at his home at the age of six, he is forced to witness unspeakable crimes of a deranged madman. For years, Martin’s whereabouts have remained a mystery…until now.” – IMDB

My thoughts: I woke up yesterday morning and immediately turned this on, honestly kind of expecting some kind of torture-porn flick. I was pleasantly surprised when I didn’t have to deal with sick and deranged mutilating shots. Instead, I found out that I would be watching a movie that was part crime, part slasher.

I’ll start off by saying that Malevolence definitely borrows from other movies – in terms of plot, it reminded me a lot of Halloween (crazy young boy, screaming ladies, a silent killer in a mask, and a cop that comes to find that the killer might actually not be dead) and in terms of how it was shot, it reminded me a lot of Texas Chainsaw Massacre (the original, duh.) The colors were very muted with a lot of neutral colors. It was shot nicely, but still definitely very raw. It didn’t have a glossy look like most “horror” movies have nowadays (I’m talking the latest Final Destination or Japanese adaptation). It was gritty and real.

Despite being a cast of unknowns, the acting was pretty solid. I especially liked the one little girl in the movie (who was M.I.A for a large majority of the movie) who didn’t think twice about bashing the killers head in with various objects. Typically, in a slasher, I would be talking to the screen wondering how someone could be so dumb as to hide under the bed when really you should be climbing out the window (or something to that affect), but most of the victims were pretty tough in their attempts to escape the killer.

The score sometimes verges on being a little corny, but it’s still effective. Lots of shrieking violins and electronic “bwaaaah” sounds that definitely make you recoil – especially when you have headphones on at a rather high volume. Not so tasty for the ears.

While Mena offers up some new, unique takes on the slasher movie (a somewhat chilling reveal about the serial killer and stronger victims), he still reuses a lot of scenarios and scenes that anyone who likes horror movies will see more as “borrowing” or “copying” rather than “paying homage.” Also, the film tends to vary between effectively catching you off-guard with what’s happening on screen and sometimes seems more deserving of an eye roll. For instance, this will be a spoiler, at the end of the movie, the last two survivors (a mother and daughter) are laying in bed, trying to sleep after the horrific incident they managed to survive. After a somewhat cheap scare already (a dream sequence in which the mother encounters her daughter with a bloody face), the shot lingers on them before suddenly, the closet door beside them slides open a few inches and there’s a loud screeching sound. The only thing that scared me was the abrupt noise.

All in all, it was enjoyable. A lot of the characters teetered between “good” and “bad” so it kept you unbiased (but still interested) about who would make it out alive. On the other hand, it seemed a bit too familiar and was a bit too predictable for my taste. It’s visually interesting and the score is cool. Not too shabby.

Stars: 3.5/5

(A quick note. This is the middle movie, though first released, in a trilogy. The next released movie, Bereavement, is next for review.)

17: Layer Cake (mmm, yummy!)

Layer Cake – October 1, 2004
Starring: Daniel Craig, Tom Hardy, Michael Gambon, Sienna Miller, Ben Whishaw
Written by: J.J. Connolly
Directed by: Matthew Vaughn

The plot: “A successful cocaine dealer, who has earned a respected place among England’s Mafia elite, plans an early retirement from the business. However, big boss Jimmy Price hands down a tough assignment: find Charlotte Ryder, the missing rich princess daughter of Jimmy’s old pal Edward, a powerful construction business player and gossip papers socialite. Complicating matters are two million pounds’ worth of Grade A ecstasy, a brutal neo-Nazi sect and a whole series of double crossings. The title “LAYER CAKE” refers to the layers or levels anyone in business goes through in rising to the top. What is revealed is a modern underworld where the rules have changed. There are no ‘codes’, or ‘families’ and respect lasts as long as a line. Not knowing who he can trust, he has to use all his ‘savvy’, ‘telling’ and skills which make him one of the best…” – IMDB

My thoughts: Oh, I love me some crime movies with double-crossing, clever nicknames, quirky personalities, and suave leading men. I’ll be honest in saying that before watching Layer Cake, I didn’t really “get it” when it came to Daniel Craig. So he’s got blue eyes and he’s smooth. But now that I’ve seen this film, I am so on board with him. He can be my Bond any day.

Layer Cake was like a more serious Snatch. Snatch relies heavily on its quick, fast-paced cuts and mini plots, whereas Layer Cake had a focus on Mr. X (Craig) and how he was going to get himself out of the messes he was stuck in. I watch Snatch to laugh and marvel at the number of missteps made by all of the characters and I would watch Layer Cake to hear Dumbledore say “fuck” a dozen times and to see Daniel Craig wear a suit.

It wasn’t the greatest movie ever. It didn’t keep me on the edge of my seat and I didn’t especially care about all of the characters (some of them, I couldn’t even remember their names or their role in the whole scheme of things). It was enjoyable and definitely worth a watch (come on, pre-Inception Tom Hardy? How can you pass that up?) Considering the fact that Daniel Craig seems to have the reputation of being a hardass, I was expecting something akin to a Transporter movie. Instead, I got a protagonist who doesn’t like guns, is embarrassed when a woman talks dirty to him, and tries to stay out of trouble at all costs; definitely a refreshing take on the typical crime/revenge plot.

All in all, give it a shot. It probably won’t disappoint, just don’t anticipate the greatest movie of all time. While this wasn’t exactly a glowing review, Vaughn being the director should put you at ease – he directed Stardust, X-Men: First Class and Kick-Ass and he produced Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels.

Stars: 3/5

9: Primer (AKA I don’t understand science)

Primer – October 8, 2004
Starring: Shane Carruth, David Sullivan
Written and directed by: Shane Carruth

The plot: “At night and on weekends, four men in a suburban garage have built a cottage industry of error-checking devices. But, they know that there is something more. There is some idea, some mechanism, some accidental side effect that is standing between them and a pure leap of innovation. And so, through trial and error they are building the device that is missing most. However, two of these men find the device and immediately realize that it is too valuable to market. The limit of their trust in each other is strained when they are faced with the question, If you always want what you can’t have, what do you want when you can have anything?” – Sujit A. Varma at IMDB

My thoughts: Let me tell you guys that I’m notoriously known for not understanding movies after I watch them. Even when I think I get them, I probably don’t. So, what results is me Googling like a crazy person, trying to find explanation of what I just saw.

It happened again. With half the dialogue being weird, science-y jargon, I didn’t really follow. It was like watching a foreign film without subtitles. So, let me lay down what this movie is about because that summary up there is dumb (sorry Sujit.) These guys accidentally create a device that allows for time travel in a strange way. They take advantage and decide to make some money on stocks and betting on sports. And then it gets kind of convoluted because there are two doubles existing at the same time in the spaces and I think at some point there’s three of one of the guy? I’m obviously still kind of lost.

I can’t blame a movie that was, I think obviously, supposed to be somewhat confusing or at least tricky to understand. What actually ruined it a bit for me was the music. At times where it should have been tense, the accompanying piano was full of major chords, which was off-putting and as far as I can tell, didn’t seem to be intentional. It happened a few times throughout the movie and it broke my focus on the movie.

For being on a budget of about 7,000 dollars, the movie looked pretty good. Some shots were grainy and seemed very handheld, but for every one of those was a beautiful shot. In terms of the technical language, I don’t know how accurate any of the science-related language was or if it was mostly made up for the sake up creating a “normal world.” However, Carruth has apparently said that he didn’t want to water it down just for the sake of the audience.

In general, it was a cool little independent sci-fi mystery film. Shane Carruth did a great job writing, directing, and acting in the film. If you’re into flexing your brain and enjoy saying “huh?” after watching a movie, check it out. And when you’re done, you might want to check out the wikipedia page for the movie. It explained a lot. According to one reviewer, “anybody who claims he fully understands what’s going on in Primer after seeing it just once is either a savant or a liar.”

Stars: 3/5