Monday, October 30, 2017

4 Horror Films I Differ With Critics and/or Audiences On - 13 Nerdy Nights of Horror - Day 12


            After I reviewed “Death Note (2017)” and the original “Blade Runner,” I started to remember multiple situations that questioned whether or not my judgement towards a film was truly what I’ve felt. I also took into deeper thinking about more questions about my opinions on movies. Are my thoughts really my thoughts, or am I just going along or against a crowd, to feel some sort of importance? And if it was what I felt about the film, is it from a critic’s point of view, or from how I would go about movies regularly? Questions like these and conflicts like Rotten Tomatoes vs DC Fan boys, tend to come about every so often, and this year has had quite a number of films. The four films that I want to observe here are ones that I wanted to discuss how I felt about, where I have at least some form of disagreement with audiences and/or critics.




            “It Comes At Night,” written and directed by Trey Edward Shults, tells of a family of three trying to survive a plague that has infected almost all human life, and how they try to survive in this world, just as another couple comes by and asks for help. I remember seeing this movie the same day I went to go see “All Eyez On Me,” and I had time to do a double feature. I met up with a friend of mine who had graduated a month prior, and was actually joining someone in seeing the same movie. I felt lucky, knowing this was a film I wanted to talk with somebody about. I was advised by my friend, Noah, who said to look at this film in the same vein as “The Babadook,” “The VVitch,” and “It Follows,” which are all three films I truly love. However, after it was done, the three of us had kind of a similar opinion: “eh.” When I came home, I found a great divide between critics and audiences, where the critics over 80% were positive about the movie, but it got about 40% or less from audiences, who even gave it a “D” on CinemaScore. And I have to agree with them on that, because I don’t think this movie’s that good. Sure, I can admire the performances (especially Joel Edgerton who does a fantastic job), as well as the cinematography and editing, but that’s about it. I thought it was an interesting choice to change aspect ratios, to sort of signify if something isn’t right; but after the first time done, it becomes repetitive as you become more fixated on the ratio changing again, rather than the movie itself. The best way I can describe it, is that it feels more like a college short film turned into a feature on the same budget. It might be filmed and acted great, but you can definitely feel the pretentious artist vibe ejaculating into the reel.




            February brought to us all the smash horror hit, “Get Out,” by Jordan Peele. This is a film that just about everybody is calling one of the best films of the year, and one of the most original horror films ever made. People have not been able to stop raving about it, and the positive acclaim felt like no one could really dislike the movie. And to the film’s credit, it is a really interesting concept, having people use a hypnosis to steal other people’s bodies…but unfortunately, I don’t think the film is all that great. Do I like it? Yeah, but I wouldn’t go out of my way to say it’s one of the best horror films I’ve seen, let alone movies in general. I do think it is a well written film, adding a clever mix of horror, comedy, and politics, with some really creative actions and lines that each of the characters have, and the cast does an excellent job with the material, but I think it may be that I just didn’t think the film was directed all that great. I found most of the movie to be really slow, not really building that much tension, and could have easily been cut down for about a few of them. I know it’s trying to add in those subtle comedic moments, but the way they were inserted feels really unnecessary to what the film was trying to go for. It wouldn’t be a problem if the jokes were funny, but I only remember finding about one or two jokes that made me laugh. They just didn’t seem to land with me the same way some of his other comedy humors me. As for the horror element of the film, I didn’t really feel scared at all. In fact, the way this film tries to blend horror and comedy feels much like the effort of a college short film; the two elements in this manner just don’t work together. And it pains me to really say any of this, because I love almost all of Jordan Peele’s other works; he’s one of the funniest writers working today in Hollywood, but I just don’t think he was as good of a director here. It’s a shame too, because I want him to be versatile with his approach to comedy, but I just didn’t really get the enjoyment I wanted from “Get Out.”




            One of the more controversial films we have here, as well as one of the most controversial films ever released, was the Jennifer Lawrence flick, “mother!” directed and written by Darren Aronofsky, and co-starring Javier Bardem, Michelle Pfiefer, and Ed Harris. While some critics find it to be a somewhat passing film, garnering a 69% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes, much like “It Comes At Night,” the fresh rating it has is counteracted by a rotten rating by audiences, along with a score of F on CinemaScore. Not many films usually get a hated score like that, but casual movie goers did not hold back on this one. Similar to how “Detroit” is physically and psychologically violent, “mother!” amps that up to 11 and 12. This film has made people uncomfortable, vicious, ill, and shocked to see what was presented before them on screen. I didn’t think it was much, as the film looked like Aronofsky’s adaptation of “Rosemary’s Baby,” but when I saw the film opening weekend, I completely get what everyone was talking about. It’s Aronofky’s interpretation of God and the Old Testament, as told through the life of an acclaimed poet's wife, and by the time the film arrived at the third act, it clicked in pretty quick. I may not be someone who defines themselves to a religion, but I am aware that Darren Aronofsky is known for giving out films that make people feel uncomfortable, and “mother!” does that job amazingly. To me, this is what I was hoping to see from the religious films we’ve been getting in theatres the past few years, but never quite got. The many close-ups that comprise most of Jennifer Lawrence’s takes in the movie is a nice subtle choice that tries to get the audience as uncomfortable as her character is. So for people to go and complain about how uncomfortable the movie is, you’re actually applauding it. It honestly does make me sad that ambitious films like these only come every so often now, considering most movies nowadays are blockbuster or franchise universe attempts and installments. We really could use a New Hollywood Era, so auteurs like Aronofsky and others can influence other film makers to do the same.



            Last of this bunch, we have Gore Verbinski’s “A Cure For Wellness,” a film that hasn’t received well praise from either side. Much like with “mother!” I understand as to why people would be detracted away from the film, especially considering Verbinski has had a couple duds the past few years, with the exception of “Rango,” so it could have been that people had enough. Because of that, the film tanked at the box office, grossing less than $27 million against a $40 million budget. It’s a shame, because I just watched the film last night, and I find it to be one of the most atmospheric horror films I’ve seen in a long time. It was kind of like a mix between “Shutter Island,” “The Stepford Wives,” and “American Horror Story: Asylum.” Watching this on a 4K television, I got to appreciate the magnificent cinematography by Bojan Bazelli; every shot in this movie, accompanied by the amazing production design and stellar editing, show such an otherworldly presence that sucks you in. While I was upset at “The Lone Ranger” having a long runtime, “A Cure For Wellness” makes up for its runtime by giving us interesting discussions about the institution’s origins and how history tends to repeat itself time and time again. Dane DeHaan is excellent, carrying this performance of a man who is questioning the methods used at the institution, and how he can completely escape this nightmare hole. Since he has to wear a cast and crutches for most of the movie, even the sound of him moving can be unsettling as to what could happen. And seeing what this man goes through, it’s no wonder it got an R rating, because it goes into all the worst scenarios you could be thinking of almost every time. Although, I will admit I wasn’t too thrilled about the very end of the movie; it just felt a little too confusing for what I felt it should have gone for. If you’ve seen the movie, you may know what I’m talking about. Other than that, I would definitely call “A Cure For Wellness” one of the most underrated movies I’ve seen this year, along with “Ghost in the Shell.”


            I normally don’t do these kinds of reviews, but I wanted to do this so you guys got to know about some films that I tend to disagree with people on. Hell, it was one of the reasons I wanted to talk about the recent “Death Note” movie. If you’ve seen any of these films, feel free to tell me where you stand with them. Also, now that I’ve talked about some of the more talked about horror films of this year so far, what am I going to review for Halloween? Well…remember how I promised you a “Blade Runner 2049” review?


To be continued…

No comments:

Post a Comment