Wednesday, April 29, 2009

Kick-Ass!

School has taken over my soul for the last few weeks, but I'll be back soon with a review of Obsessed (2009) and maybe Skeleton Key(2004), finally?

But for now, I bring you: Kick-Ass.


All you need to know is that it involves an eleven year old assassin named Hit Girl. You know where I'll be Opening Night.

-DR

Tuesday, April 7, 2009

The Last House on the Left (2009)

\
The Last House on the Left is a remake now in theaters, featuring Garrett Dillahunt and Sara Paxton. The original was filmed in 1972. Both were produced by Wes Craven.

There was never any way this remake could ever exceed or even accurately reproduce the original. The 1972 version is a classic, but also a relic of its era, much like many other exploitation flicks, such as I Spit on Your Grave (1978) or Cannibal Holocaust (1980). These movies typify a certain gritty "reality" aesthetic that can't be sincerely reproduced.

The closest we come is Grindhouse (2007), which is intended as a homage and does an excellent job, but is irreconcilably different from its source material in that it is deeply ironic. It seems now, post Scream (1996), everything MUST be presented with a smirk in order to be taken seriously, as contradictory as that may seem. This can work quite well, such as in Behind the Mask: The Rise Of Leslie Vernon (2006), but often this ironic winsomeness can choke the true terror out of a movie, leaving just a shell of self-satisfied hipness behind.

With the kitchy over-the-topness of exploitation movies pretty much ruled out, all that is left to work within is the Eli Roth School of Torture Porn. While both categories use about the same amount of gore, Saw (2004) and Hostel (2005) have somehow gotten a reputation for depicting much worse acts onscreen, I think mostly as a result of self-promotion.

This version of Last House has fallen onto the Saw bandwagon, like most modern horror movies. The unpredictable, almost dangerous edge of the original has been replaced by startlingly real effects that are nonetheless a bit lifeless.

One thing I have to address is the microwave scene. When I went to see this movie, people cheered and walked out saying how AWESOME and HARDCORE and GNARLY that had been, that the father paralyzed the main killer, then exploded his head in a microwave. As I listened, I wanted to tell them to see the original or Dead Alive (1992) or basically any classic gore fest, then come back and tell me what they thought of that scene.


It felt tacked on to me, like someone decided the last day of shooting that there wasn't enough gore, so they shot another few minutes for the end, so they wouldn't have to change the continuity. Not to be a party pooper, but a microwave wouldn't WORK if the door was still open, and anyway, why would he go through all the trouble of paralyzing the killer if he was just going to kill him immediately? It just felt poorly thought-out, and seemed too much like pandering for my taste.

Despite all my grumblings, however, there were some improvements over the original. For one, the levels of gore throughout were more even. In the original, as in many Revenge movies, especially I Spit on your Grave, the rape and torture scenes are often much, much worse than the revenge, so much so that one often feels cheated for the main character. If someone was brutalized for the first half of a movie, one would expect much more by way of revenge than just shooting their torturer a few times. The new version is much better about this, up until the very end.

In fact, the gore was quite good, especially in the second half. The garbage disposal scene, in which someone's hand is ground to pieces, actually made me feel a bit queasy. All of the actors, except for Sara Paxton as Mary, were excellent as well. Everyone gave it their all, screaming and flailing with the best of them, but at times Paxton looked lobotomized. She is literally expressionless as her friend Paige (Martha MacIsaac) is tormented and ultimately stabbed. I know she was supposed to planning her escape, but it got a bit ridiculous.

Also, I found it unusual that Craven changed the ending, allowing both Mary and the son of one of the killers, Justin (Spencer Treat Clark), to live. It even felt at times as if they were trying to imply the potential for a relationship between them! Would a girl who was raped and almost killed really go for the demented, sullen offspring of her attacker? Most likely not, I would think.

Besides this, their survival puts a completely different spin on the plot overall. Rather than the revenge of desperate parents, it becomes just another aspect of escape, a necessary evil more than the result of rage, and therefore much less effecting.

Overall: C