A Quiet Place - 13 Nerdy Nights of Horror Day 7 (After Halloween Specials)

A Quiet Place takes place in the not-too-distant future, in which most of humanity is wiped out, and we focus on one surviving family. Their tactics involve staying as quiet as possible, in order to avoid the creatures that have acute hearing. Things become more complicated for them, as they are soon expecting a baby that will become a target too.

In 2016, Michael Bay’s gave us the war film, 13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi, starring John Krasinski; what we all thought was going to be another tasteless retelling of history, ended up becoming one of the most intense, nail-biting, and exhausting war films I had ever seen. I was impressed by both Bay’s dedication and development he gave to these people, making us truly care for them, and seeing John Krasinski in a role like this was impressive. While it may not have been among my favorites of that year, it was still an impressive feat to unhold and give credit where it’s due. I bring this up, because after watching A Quiet Place, I can gladly declare Krasinski as Michael Bay’s good luck charm.

Originally the film was intended to be an installment of the Cloverfield franchise, but that idea was scrapped nearly the second Krasinski signed on, not only as the star, but as the director with additional re-writes; you can still see the intention with the design of the creatures, looking like a mix between the lickers from Resident Evil and the demogorgan from Stranger Things. If it did end up becoming a Cloverfield movie, it would have been a decent fit, especially coming off of Netflix’s The Cloverfield Paradox; with having the survival instinct to rely on silence, you get completely immersed in the dreading atmosphere that builds, wondering when there’s going to be some kind noise to ruin it.

Krasinski and Emily Blunt both give such captivating performances; being married in real life and in the movie, you really sense the stressful nature of keeping their family alive, even at the risk of losing theirs. Blunt, in particular, portraying a pregnant mother who goes through nearly the absolute worst struggle in the entire film, it made us truly feel the need for them to see daylight at least one last time.

Noah Jupe and Millicent Simmonds are also great as the kids, especially Simmonds who is deaf in real life, so the use of sign language does feel more mandatory than as a gimmick. With how diverse awards season has been slowly getting at, and with Paramount shooting all four of the actors for an Oscar, I’m willing to bet Blunt and Simmonds would be the most deserving of nominations; that, and John Krasinski for Best Director.

Some people have discussed the ending, being split on it either due to possible sequel begging; but to be honest, I don’t really see this getting a sequel, because I’m not sure what else there is to accomplish with the surviving characters. I take the ending as a sort of last stand move, than a lead up to a sequel; unless they do an anthology series, I think it might be best to leave this alone and give John Krasinski some new ideas to tweak with.

Overall, A Quiet Place is both a great horror film, and one of the best directed movies I’ve seen this year. It’s definitely a refreshing take on the genre, and I would proudly put Krasinski up with there with Jordan Peele, among the list of B-list comedy actors turned top class horror film makers. The suspense is great, the concept works, the acting is fantastic (especially from the kids); don’t miss this if you have yet to see it.

Rating: A+

A Simple Favor - 13 Nerdy Nights of Horror Day 6 (After Halloween Specials)

After the controversial remake of Ghostbusters bombed in 2016, it seemed as though the reception had really taken a toll on the writer/director, Paul Feig; reading through the e-mails from the Sony Hacking, it’s clear to understand that this was a contractual obligation to satisfy Amy Pascal, the former CEO turned producer who put him on the task. Feig clearly didn’t want to do the movie from the beginning, and rewatching it, you can tell his heart was just not in the right place; from the jokes, to the performances, the behind the scenes rumors, the special effects...had I reviewed the movie now, I wouldn’t have been as nice as I was then, but mostly just to vent my frustration with Pascal and how poorly she’s been handling things.

It made it look as though the director was losing his touch, but now Feig has made the same career move as John Krasinski and Jordan Peele: take a shot at doing horror/thriller. This brings us to his newest film, A Simple Favor. Based on the book by Darcy Bell, and adapted by Jessica Sharzer, A Simple Favor follows Stephanie, a widowed mother who befriends Emily, a business woman who suddenly goes missing. While she’s gone, Stephanie tries to figure out if she truly is gone, or if this is something much more elaborate.

A Simple Favor is one of those films that I was happy was given the kind of marketing it needed, because it is as much a guessing game as the trailers make it look. The best way to describe it, is that it's like if Gone Girl were done as a comedy, but that's as far as I can go without spoilers. Feig truly stepped out of his comfort zone; there is never a moment where the two tones of comedy and suspense feel out of place, and it feels like a natural situation that feels like would come about in this manner. Not only that, but the soundtrack being filled with French songs that sound both soothing and nerve racking at the same time, was a very fitting choice.

Anna Kendrick and Blake Lively are fantastic, playing opposite each other, giving a representation of their different social classes and how their particular human connectivity differs; with Kendrick’s naivety as a mother with a blog and Lively’s cryptic, but confidently suspicious business woman attitude, you always feel like there’s something being planned that you’re waiting for Kendrick to pick up, but you feel just as wrapped up as she is. I also love how even though Lively does disappear in the film, it feels like her presence is to that of Tyler Durant’s from Fight Club, like she’s there, but we’re not quite there noticing it. Normally, it’d be a longshot to say, but after last year’s inclusive choices possibly expanding, maybe we’ll expect Lively to come about in Oscar conversations.

Henry Golding does great as the husband with being a guy simply caught up in the middle of this chaos. I already noticed him gain attention with Crazy Rich Asians, but here he truly got to show off a little more of his dramatic side. Heck, I even enjoyed the two kid actors that played the sons; while I could tell it’s the typical “child performance,” the way the cast handles it makes it all the more hilarious.

If there was a downside, I would say it would have to be the ending; I don’t want to give it away out of fear of spoilers, but let’s just say there were some cliches present that I felt was done a little bit too standard. Not bad, just felt pretty basic for a film that was taking some risky turns.

If you get the chance to see this, definitely give A Simple Favor a moment of your time. With it’s intriguing mystery, it’s irresistible characters, a mystery that builds with interest, and dialogue and direction that blend comedy and thrills together, it’s a definitive return to glory for Paul Feig.

Rating: B+

Bad Times at the El Royale - 13 Nerdy Nights of Horror Day 5 (After Halloween Specials)

After Chris Hemsworth became a box office draw with the first Thor movie, it led to the eventual release of one of his earlier finished roles, in Drew Goddard’s The Cabin in the Woods. It was one of the earliest examples of a movie that I didn’t watch the trailers for, so my experience was exactly what the film was aiming for, and made for one of the most unique horror films of the decade. Afterwards, he went on to get an Oscar nomination for adapting The Martian to script. Goddard has proven with his work with Joss Whedon that he has a similar approach to character interactions and unique high-concepts; heck, he was even Sony’s top choice for The Sinister Six movie, and is currently developing the upcoming X-Force movie. As you could imagine, hearing his name has become one to truly spark interest at almost anything he does at this point.

That’s when we check into his newest flick, Bad Times at the El Royale; the film takes place at a bi-state hotel in the late-60’s, and we follow the strangers with secrets premise, involving criminals and a crazy cult lurking not too far. In other words, think sort of Identity (2003) if it was helmed by Tarantino.

This movie is like Drew Goddard’s love letter to the 60’s, and he makes sure to cover nearly every aspect of it in this kind of film; the politics, the food, the music, the religiously cultural status, the underlying layers of corruption and evil brewing about, and, of course, Jon Hamm. There’s just this nostalgic atmosphere in how the film is portrayed, both in its style and its dialogue; it definitely feels like a film that was pulled out from the beginnings of the New Hollywood Era.

Much like The Hateful Eight, each of the characters all have something that you eventually discover about them, and it’ll either have you feel sick to your stomach or having you feel empathy for someone not all good. And what I love most about them, is just hearing them kick back and just shoot the shit with each other, talking about stuff that makes you feel like you’re part of the conversation. It also helps, when you’ve got an excellent cast to perform to it; Jeff Bridges as a bank robbing priest, Cynthia Erivo as a lounge singer looking for ends meet, John Hamm as a door-to-door salesman, Chris Hemsworth as a Charles Manson-esque cult leader, Cailee Spaeny as one of Hemsworth’s brainwashed followers, Lewis Pullman as the bellboy with secrets, and even Dakota Johnson (Fifty Shades of Grey) proved she could give a good performance.

*SPOILERS*

The biggest complaint that I’ve heard is that the film does take its time to pick up in certain places; it makes sense, considering some scenes will end up repeating just from a different character’s perspective, and not everyone can adapt to that kind of film making. The runtime also becomes more noticeable, considering it takes until the third act for Hemsworth’s character to show up, and he was heavily advertised.

*END OF SPOILERS*

Overall, if you have a 60’s craving you need to fix, I highly recommend you check out (or IN, in this case) Bad Times at the El Royale; I would go into more detail, but with how there’s a lot of mystery to unfold, a good amount of surprise, a decent balance of violence, and dialogue and characters you’ll want to be around with for, I think the less I say the better for you to enjoy. If you missed your chance to see it in theatres, don’t miss out on it when it comes out on blu-ray.

Rating: A

Top 10 Horror Remakes - 13 Nerdy Nights of Horror Day 4 (After Halloween Specials)

So as you may have noticed, I have fallen quite behind as of late, and only got three reviews out for October. Sorry about that, I've just been dealing with a lot of personal stuff going on in life, either having to do with school or tragedy striking when you least expect it...point is, while Halloween may have passed, and while I did get you guys a review on Halloween day, I feel like I need to make it up to you somehow. What I've decided is that I'm going to finish up the 13 Nerdy Nights of Horror, as well as do something special for you guys during December. Not going to say what it is, but I am promising something for you.

But to hold you guys over for the time being, I felt like it was time to circle over to a couple topics that I have been eager to talk about, mostly with films in the horror genre. While this decade has seen success with fresh new IPs to build cults around, we mustn't forget the times when creators revisited previous works. Remakes of horror films have dated back as far as even the 1930's, where some see the potential that a film had untapped, and try to revitalize it into a new light to achieve that missing piece. Whether they're retellings of a monster in a book, or the tale of a vampire or some kind, everybody always talks about at least one detail that they always assume would have made the film better; some succeed, others just smell cash. Today, I want to discuss what I believe to be the best reimaginings of any horror film, ones that manage to both honor the original, but at the same time have elements that make the film seem necessary and have something that proves its worth. Some of them, I had discussed within the past decade even.

With that said, let's dive into my Top 10 Horror Remakes:

x x x

#10: The Blob (1988) - The 80’s was an era somewhat similar to the 2000’s. We saw a lot of old b-movies at that time get the remake treatment like Invasion of the Body Snatchers, Night of the Living Dead, even Nosferatu got it’s chance at a revival. However, as opposed to the 2000’s where they remade it for the sake of profit, THESE remakes were made to showcase how far we’ve come with special effects, and this film is no exception. While the original 1958 flick, starring Steve McQueen, still remains a classic by being one of the first to monster movies to have teenagers as the main heroes, it still was pretty low budget and cheesy in parts that aren’t as believable as they were back then. The 1988 film, directed by Chuck Russell and co-written by Frank Darabont, took the main premise components that worked, all while cranking the gore up to beyond recognition. This is one of the first films that introduced me to the body horror genre, and just how disgustingly disturbing visual effects can get, something Russell was all too familiar with after coming off of Nightmare on Elm Street 3: The Dream Warriors. But effects are one thing, what about the story? In the original, the blob was simply an alien life form that crashes on Earth, but the remake turns it into a biological government weapon gone wrong; it adds this conspiracy theory element to it, not knowing who's to say where the blob really came from, but it plays into the paranoia that was still present during that time period. Not only that, but the characters that interact in the film do try to take more action into their hands, as opposed to trying to solve it and then calling the adults. And it features some prominent actors like Shawnee Smith, Kevin Dillion, Jeffry DuMann, Paul McCrane, and even the late-great comedy teacher: Del Close. Although, I will admit, the film does have some issues; with it being also in the era of the slasher films, a couple kills can get a little hokey, along with the dialogue and acting being pretty bad at times. It’s understandable why people would prefer the original, but they still respect this movie as worthy remake. Whichever one you prefer, this is one that’ll consume your attention in someway.

#9: Cape Fear (1991) - While Martin Scorsese isn’t the first name that comes to mind when it comes to remakes, a lot of people forget that he has had a hand at some major ones; hell, the film that won him an Oscar, The Departed, was a remake of a foreign film. However, Cape Fear is not only another strong example, but is often one of the most overlooked. After spending a near decade in prison, Max Cady tracks down and antagonizes the Bowden family, whom he discovered the dad defending his case buried evidence that could of reduced his sentence. Being their 7th collaboration together, the best part is easily Robert De Niro as Cady; he is just chewing the scenery in almost every moment he’s on screen, being such a malicious ass. He doesn’t come off as a common murderous nutcase that we would normally stereotype, but as a calculative strategist that takes his time to study his enemies weaknesses and use his strengths against him at almost every angle by studying law in prison; it’s the thrill of the hunt that makes him a thrill to enjoy, even as he’s doing such horrid things to the Bowden family. While this remake does deserve the praise it got, even overshadowing the original almost nearly, you have to give credit that Gregory Peck and Robert Mitchum were still just as compelling; so compelling that they brought the two back in different roles, as a nod to the original. Either way, both films are definitely worth the watch; while I say decide for yourself, I’ve made my mind up already.

#8: Fright Night (2011) - As I was discussing earlier, the 2000’s were jam-packed of remakes of movies from the previous remake era, along with remakes of the original films that came out at the time. A lot of them were...underwhelming, to say the least. However, when Craig Gillespie’s remake of the Tom Holland vampire flick was released, it ended up being one of the biggest surprises for me. Much like the original film, Charlie is a high school student who has slight suspicions about his neighbor, Jerry, being a vampire; to fight off this beast, he seeks the help of a celebrity, Peter Vincent, who he thinks might have enough knowledge of dealing with the matter. The idea of having the film take place in Las Vegas is an interesting idea, especially as someone who just moved there at that time; the idea that anybody who works the night shift at a casino or hotel, possibly being a vampire, is the kind of paranoia originality that vampire movies had been lacking for quite a while. Not only that, but the blend of horror and comedy blend in perfectly, and it works intentionally, unlike with the original where it just felt silly. Here, I felt like every joke and scare had a stronger effect. Anton Yelchin and Colin Farrell are a great pair of leads, and I love the chemistry that these two share; that scene with the beer still has me tense up, everytime Farrell has that monologue. I also thought David Tennant’s portrayal of Peter Vincent was a delight to watch, and nearly every line he says had me cracking up; the only downside is that I wish his character was a little less Kris Angel based. I know, it’s Vegas, but come on, we also have Circus Circus, so you could have had him as a Fright Dome designer. Hell, the film was even nice enough to give a cameo to Chris Sarandon, the original Jerry, so that was pretty cool. The film was also released in 3D and, despite me not having seen it myself, I probably would have said it looked neat; however, I can only speculate, as I don’t have a 3D tv and that gimmick seems to be going into hibernation as of late.

#7: The Fly (1986) - You know how Josh Trank made comparisons between his Fant4stic and David Cronenberg? Well, if you watch this film, you’ll get what he was talking about (as well as the best thing you could say about Fant4stic). Jeff Goldblum plays the scientist, Seth Brundle, who is working on a teleportation experiment that could change travel as we know it forever. However, when he conducts the experiment on himself, a fly sneaks in, and the rest of the film is watching Seth slowly become this hideous creature. First off, the acting in this is a lot better than what people give credit for. Jeff Goldblum’s performance as Brundle is probably one of his more underappreciated roles, as you watch him go from a skeptical but ambitious scientist, suddenly gain almost all the things he lacked, only for it to slowly crumble before him is tragic and at times unbearable. It plays off as the true Greek Tragedy that this kind of story could tell. Much like The Blob, this was a remake of a 1958 b-movie, done as a way to showcase how far we can take this premise with the visual effects of that time period. However, unlike The Blob, this movie took a lot more time to really build the looming danger that Brundle was slowly discovering. The film keeps him as the main focus, so when you see the changes begin to happen to him, you’re more concerned about his survival, as opposed to thinking “hey, look how cool these effects are!” much like a few similar films on this list. It did what the original acted as, a metaphor for how fast we were jumping with scientific advancements and how if not careful, we could end up killing ourselves with the very tools we create. If you haven’t seen it, check it out, but be afraid...be very afraid.

#6: House of Wax (1953) - I know most people would associate the Paris Hilton movie as the image of “the remake of House of Wax”, but a lot of people forget that THAT movie is a remake of 1933’s Mystery of the Wax Museum. It’s about a talented sculptor whose work and hands are destroyed in a fire, caused by his jealous and greedy rival. Without his hands, he can’t sculpt wax properly anymore, while at the same time a killer is going around on the loose killing people. Much like Fright Night, this also had a release in 3D, but it’s not quite the same level of quality as today’s Real-D conversions. However, it still has a charming novelty to it, similar to how other horror films in the 80’s were utilizing the gimmick. And though this film wasn’t exactly a critical darling at the time, people have come to realize just how influential and important it was. This was the film that put Vincent Price on the map as one of the next masters of horror, and rightfully so; when he talks about his work as if they’re family, you believe that he’s that passionate about his creation. And when you get to him in his crippled state resorting to the gimmicks he wanted to avoid, it almost feels like a dark foreshadowing of Price’s career, doesn’t it. There’s also a great effect with the killer that I dare won’t spoil if you haven’t seen it. I would have to say, my only complaint would have to be the fire fight scene; I feel like had the film been edited a little differently, making that scene as a flashback in the third act, it probably would have flown better in terms of the mystery part, but that’s just me. Despite it, I absolutely love this scene; seeing the wax figures melt, and seeing the tension on Price’s face as he tries to deal with an ACTUAL fire on set, it really does get your heart racing. Even filmmakers like Tim Burton have talked about how somewhat unsettling yet fascinating watching wax figures melt can actually be.

#5: Carrie (2013) - While not the first Stephen King story to get a theatrical remake, the story of a telekinetic girl who gets back at her bullies is a deeply satisfying concept to get into, especially for the ending. The ‘76 DePalma film stands as debatably the strongest and most effective story from King that was executed so damn well, that no one would ever think to top it...at least, that’s what the general opinion is; the remake of Carrie got a lot of hatred, simply from the trailer along, and some have even called this film pointless. To both those points, I say the opposite. Not only is the remake good, I’d even say it’s better than the original, or at least, more faithful to the book and its original themes discussing misjudgment of others and the dangers of bullying. And with bullying itself becoming worse in our society, it almost makes retelling this story seem a little more important. Social media, digital cameras, and the amplification of exposure to violence have all been attributing factors that help give the film ground, as well as illustrate that while we do try improve from the past, we could still be doing the same mistakes as we did long ago. I did a comparison on this film and the original two years ago for its 40th anniversary, and in there I go into much more detail there, but don’t miss out on this film if you’re looking for something to get you out of your prom night blues...and into your prom night reds, am I right?...

#4: Little Shop of Horrors (1986) - It’s not that often you get to see horror movies remade into musicals, and Little Shop of Horrors does not hold back from it. Based on the Alan Menken and Howard Ashman musical, which in itself was based on a Roger Corman B-movie, the story follows a pushover who gets his job into fame and fortune with a plant, but the plant food is very specific...BLOOD. Before The Producers and Hairspray, this was the defining example of remaking a movie from its stage-play rendition; not only did the songs add so much more charm, but the story, characters, and effects especially were updated nicely. Frank Oz put all of his puppetry skills to the test, and what he gave us was one hell of a memorable film. If you want a reason practical effects still reign supreme, just watch the scene of “Mean Green Mother From Outer Space,” and just try to tell me that it doesn’t look convincing. Again, I’ve talked quite a bit about this film as well, so I’ll try not to go into too much detail; to me, it’s how you bring the musically and the scary together.

#3: IT (2017) - The most recent entry on our list, this movie has everything that makes this as unsettling and at times, terrifying as it should be. Based on only HALF of the novel by Stephen King, we follow the story of a group of kids, called the Loser’s Club, who live in the town of Derry, Maine. One of them, Bill, loses his brother to a demonic creature that comes about every 27 years, and it’s up to him and the rest of the Losers to fight against the fear eating monster, until IT returns again. What makes this remake different is that it’s a remake of a 1990 mini-series starring Tim Curry as Pennywise the Dancing Clown, one of the many forms of IT. And while it is a flawed low-budget mini-series, there’s still a lot of nostalgia that people have with it; so the idea of remaking it wasn’t about making it better, but whether it would be able to have an identity that would be as defining as its predecessor. Thankfully, if the box office has told us otherwise. While the biggest change was bringing the kids story to the late-80’s instead of the late 50’s, the exchanges between the characters is so good, that it doesn’t feel like anything’s different about it. And by telling the childhood story in more linear narrative, as opposed to flashbacking constantly, you get to know these kids and get to care about each of their dilemmas, so when the danger does strike at them, you do feel as scared as they do. I also love what they did with Pennywise, blending elements of practical makeup and CGI so well, that it makes it all the more unsettling when he reveals the dead-lights; and Bill Skarsgard is unquestionably phenomenal, so good to have an iconic horror villian revamped in a fresh way. Needless to say, I’m anticipating part 2, and can’t wait to see what they bring.

#2: Evil Dead (2013) - When you hear the announcement that a remake of your favorite horror film is coming out on your birthday, in a time when good horror remakes seemed rare, it’s easy to imagine my worry. Luckily, Fede Alvarez managed to not only relieve my worries, but he even got the approval of the trio behind the original to start with, and, dare I say, made it better. Unlike the original film, where it was teenagers going to an old cabin to have sex, the remake has it be more of a rehabilitation method for one of the characters; that actually makes the motive of staying at an old cabin seem more reasonable, as you would then have the deadites she sees play more off like withdrawals. And it’s fixing little holes in the writing, as well as the amplified dedication to use practical effects, that you feel this was made out of love for the original film in particular, but at the same time not afraid to highlight a few of the campier quirks the series is known for. Not only that, but the biggest stand out performance is the surviving champ. While the character of Ash Williams may not be in the film, aside from a post-credits wink to the audience, it was actually kind of refreshing to see the sister, Mia Allen, have a date with chainsawing deadites; this was also the role that introduced me to Jane Levy, and since then she’s been one of my new favorite horror actresses, later appearing in Don’t Breathe and Castle Rock. It’s a shame that we didn’t get to see more of Mia’s character later on in the franchise, because I would have loved to have seen her on Ash Vs. Evil Dead in some form. This is another one I’ve talked about quite a bit in my review of it back in 2013, as well as in my Evil Dead retrospect, but if you’re looking for a gloriously gory time, rev your chainsaws and chop away.

#1: The Thing (1982) - The film that set the standard for horror remakes for the rest of time, this masterpiece from John Carpenter has been implanted in pop culture, just like the creature would to any of our characters. However, what makes this film differ from the original, is that it does something that not many other horror films did at the time, and that was make sort of a sequel/remake to the original. Both the original and remake are loosely based on the John W. Campbell Jr. novel Who Goes There?, but what’s unique about them is that the Christian Nyby film, which Carpenter was a fan of, was only an adaptation of the first half of the book and had a completely different kind of alien, whereas the Carpenter film covers most of the latter half and a bit more. It takes its time to build up the suspense and allow us to get familiar with the characters, so once you do see them slowly get taken in by the creature; and we see it isn’t just humans, but even animals, making the sequence and situation more dire. Not to mention, you have powerhouse actors like Kurt Russell and Keith David as the leads, how could you not get any more badass? This of course brings us to the special effects, which even by today’s standards look unbelievably good. Even when this film was panned upon original release, people still gave it credit where it was due. With how outlandishly gory and disgusting it got, it coined the phrase from Roger Ebert, “a barf-bag movie.” Personally, I’d take that as a compliment. I also like the fact that the alien doesn’t have a definitive form, and that what it does show is only a glimpse of what it could possibly be. But to me, that’s also the scariest part about it; you never know for sure what it’s going to look like, and the next appearance might be worse than the last. The Thing is truly a masterpiece; the effects are fantastic, the characters are likable, the atmosphere is chilling, the music by Ennio Morricone is one of best, it truly is the #1 Horror movie remake.

x x x

A Farewell to the King (my Evil Dead Retrospective) - 13 Nerdy Nights of Horror Day 3 (Halloween)

Well, Halloween is once again upon us, and it’s time for me to give out a special Halloween review for you all. Usually, I’ve noticed that since 2014, I’ve kind of had a pattern with switching between anniversary reviews and movies that will be remembered as cinema classics; but this year, I feel like needs a special kind of anniversary review, but more so on a horror actor’s time playing a character, as he’s retiring from the part after 40 years. If you were to ask me the question “What is your favorite horror film or horror franchise?” my answer to you would be The Evil Dead franchise; with the final season of Ash Vs. Evil Dead now on blu-ray, it’s time I take you through my retrospective on The Evil Dead films and show, before it’s time we finally say goodbye.

The journey goes all the way back to the 1970’s, when the project started off as short film entitled Within the Woods; this was the prototype for what the series would eventually become, with Sam Raimi even generating word through showing it along with The Rocky Horror Picture Show during midnight screenings. Personally, I have yet to witness this, but what matters is that people got interested, and soon Raimi was able to get his funding.

This leads us to what would eventually become the horror film to put Raimi and Campbell on the map, The Evil Dead. My first discovery of this came long after I found about Army of Darkness, but we'll get to that later on. I knew that it was third film in the series, so while browsing Netflix on my XBox 360, I came across the movie and decided to give it a watch. From there on, I was hooked on how far something like this was able to go. I also got to see where the character of Ash was simply the lucky virgin (or not majorly tough ) who survived. But all that would change later with it's sequel.

Evil Dead II: Dead by Dawn is a bit of an interesting case here. As many have pointed out, the movie starts out as a remake of the first movie, only with different beginning circumstances; this was done out of two different studios owning the movies, so Raimi decided to recreate an opening that gives the audience a sense of what happened in the first film. This also works later on in the story as sort of what Ash imagines in his head. But after we get past that, we end up with one of the most chaotic cabin in the woods movies you will ever see in your life; from the fountains of blood flowing, the puppetry and makeup on the deadites, and all the cheesy joy you could ask for, in the best possible way. This was also the point in which Ash transitions from the coward we first saw into the badass who goes “fuck-it” and face the madness head on. Also, that scene in which he assembles his gear, then it goes into that tracking close up of Ash revving the chainsaw and preparing his sawn-off, was the first time I heard someone coin the phrase “groovy.” To me, that is the most badass moment ever captured on film (I will fight you on that)! People often associate this film as the best installment, and that's a fair choice.

Now we come to the third installment of the original film trilogy, Army of Darkness; once again, this was my introduction to the series, but it took me until I was 16 to finally finish the whole movie. Once again, with studios changing again, this time by Universal, rights were shuffled around again, this time in name; the title of the film was planned as “The Med-Evil Dead”, but while it does continue where Evil Dead II left off, it still works as a standalone film, much like the previous two do. However, this one isn't as highly praised, due to it focusing more on action-adventure than it does horror; honestly, it doesn't bother me as much, considering how drastic the tone transition between the first two wasn't as jarring. Plus, this lead to Ash embracing who he becomes truly known for: the smug asshole who we all wish we could be, that also saves the world. It's the character type that protagonists like the Marvel heroes would take after, including Spiderman whom Sam Raimi would later direct.

While we’re on the subject, I do want to mention the 2013 remake by Fede Alvarez. People are pretty divided with this movie, but I honestly think it’s a strong contender for the best horror remake, or remake in general. If you want to read more, I did a review of it back five years ago, but needless to say, it's definitely worth giving a watch if you're a fan of the series.

Thanks to the remake bringing word of mouth back to the franchise, discussions about brining Ash Williams back into the mainstream seemed like a possibility yet again; originally it was planned as a sequel movie to Army of Darkness, but Starz said otherwise and gave us Ash Vs. Evil Dead. Yes people, we got three groovy seasons of all the charm and gore you could ask for, along with new characters, including Xena herself, Lucy Lawless. As I'm writing this, I've only just finished season 2, but I have been absolutely in love with the show. To put it simply, we get more Ash kicking ass! The supporting team, played by Ray Santiago and Dana DeLorenzo, are a really fun duo for Ash to travel with; hopefully they have another shot at a show such as this.

I wanted to take the time to talk about this, not just because Bruce is hanging up the chainsaw, but mostly because it happened the year I lost my brother, Mickey. He was the one who introduced me to the franchise, and was also a major fan of the both the franchise and people attached; the series was one of the fandoms that he held to the best of standards, and was always open to seeing what the team was up to. Heck, one of my favorite memories he told me was getting Bruce to sign his book saying my brother was an idiot, just cause, and did it again with the next book. But to say that only covers a fraction as to what all that meant to him, or even what it meant to me being introduced to it. Since then, I’ve had ups and downs when it came to showing people these movies, but I love witnessing the first time experience, because it reminds me a little of what my brother was seeing.

I don’t want this to get too personal, but I felt like needing to share what this series means to me. It isn’t just my favorite horror franchise because of the effects, the memorable sequences, the dialogue, and the characters; it’s my favorite horror franchise, because it connected family, and that’s something that no other horror series could have.

And to Bruce Campbell, if you’re reading this, to you, Raimi and Tapert, I want to say on behalf of my brother: Thank you for everything! Hail to the king, Ash!

Rating: A+

Venom - 13 Nerdy Nights of Horror Day 2

After the backlash they received for how poorly executed he was in Spiderman 3, Sony made has been desperately trying to make a spin-off film of the character Venom to say sorry to the fans. An idea like this didn’t seem to be possible, since it would involve starting up a new Spiderman series after the symbiote was destroyed in Spiderman 3, but after the Marvel Cinematic Universe started to make its presence known, that possibility seemed more and more likely. Once Marvel finally got Spidey to join up with the Avengers in Captain America: Civil War and eventually getting a solo film (disregarding MY thoughts on that), it seemed like everything was going into place…almost.

Despite Marvel now having joint rights with Sony over Spiderman, Sony still has complete creative control over the film rights of Spidey’s villains, INCLUDING Venom; and one of the major problems that has been frequently brought up whenever the topic is addressed, is this: how are you going to make a Venom movie, without Spiderman, the very character needed to truly create him? Not only that, but the decision to make the film PG-13, especially when 20th Century Fox had already proven three times already that there is a massive audience for it, sends a message that only the studio (and Tom Hardy) were the ones who wanted this.

In the movie, Eddie Brock (Tom Hardy) is an investigative journalist, who falls hard on his luck after snooping through the wrong guy, Carlton Drake; he loses his job, his home, and his fiance. When he comes into contact with one of Drake’s escaped aliens, the symbiote, Eddie soon finds himself with a new companion that has an agenda to follow of his own.

Now before we get into this, I want to remind some of you of the movie that came out earlier this year, Upgrade; it had the same kind of synopsis as Venom, being that it was about a guy who loses everything, but gets a “friend” that latches on and helps him get revenge, by controlling his body. It’s a fantastic flick, but seeing it and then looking at Venom, I got a good indication as to what that already did wrong.

While the film was intended to have a PG-13 rating, but a “hardcore” one, it feels pretty choppy in some places; not as bad as in Slender Man, but you can definitely tell that they were cutting corners quite a lot. Not only that, but when doing a CGI characters that’s mostly black goo, doing night time action scenes makes it incredibly hard to see even who is fighting. The worst of them all is the climax, which looks so damn sloppy and messily edited, it felt like something out of Transformers 4; and for this to be the climactic battle of the movie that they heavily promoted, it’s just pathetic. And it’s sad because Ruben Fleischer is a much better director than this

I will admit, Tom Hardy in the first half of the movie does good with what he’s given and does act more like how Eddie Brock is supposed to be portrayed, but his character doesn’t really evolve throughout the course of the film. By the time he’s on his own living in an apartment after losing everything, he never really changes much after that, even WITH the symbiote. And for a film that’s 100 minutes long, it takes an hour for Venom to actually show up on screen. Even then, the only dialogue that I got a kick out of him was when he called Eddie a pussy. This leads to my biggest complaint, which is a giant nitpick, but...I’m sorry, the moment the symbiote said “I am Venom” is when I tuned out of the movie. I know they really wanted to work around the whole Spiderman inclusion, but the idea of the symbiote calling himself “Venom” without any reason as to why, and hearing it say “I Am,” it just really irked me the wrong way. Honestly, had this film taken place in The Amazing Spiderman series, I would have had an easier time buying it; even if you didn’t like those films, it would have been a lot easier to incorporate some connection to Spiderman by just name-dropping Oscorp, indicating that maybe Harry Osborn hired Drake to use the symbiote to create an anti-Spidey. It’s not the best explanation, but I’d buy it.

As for the rest of the cast, they’re all pretty much wasted for C-grade material, and these are all actors I’ve seen do good before. Riz Ahmed (Drake/Riot), Michelle Williams (Annie), Jenny Slate, Woody Harrelson, it’s like why go out of your way to get these people if this is the best you could offer? Heck, even Harrelson’s mid-credits cameo didn’t work, because the wig they put on him looked like it was last minute; we all know he doesn’t have much hair to begin with, but come on! You could have scrapped the wig entirely and just dyed what hair was there, and it would have been fine!

So is Venom the worst film of the year? No, I've still seen worse, but with everything that was a negative didn't help either. I love Tom Hardy’s performance, but the rest is still half assed. And with the inevitable sequel, I don't think they'll have the same luck as here. I say that, because the big hype for this film was seeing Venom kick ass the way we wanted to see it; now that we’ve seen it in one movie, how long could that last?

Rating: D

Hotel Transylvania 3 - 13 Nerdy Nights of Horror Day 1

I’ve been open about my love for the Hotel Transylvania movies since 2012, and even own the films on 3D blu-ray (still need a 3D TV though); unlike with Blue Sky and Illumination, Sony and Tartakovsky helped give the studio an identity, and bring out the best films that the studio has to offer. Both the first and second films came out at the right time, just before October to get kids into the Halloween spirit as the fall begins to set in; while the first one is better than the first one, the second one is still something I would comfortably recommend.

Going into the third one, I was still sore about the animated films Sony gave us last year, and how they gave the shaft to Tartakovsky when they chose The Emoji Movie over some of his projects, like Popeye. Luckily, HT3 is another enjoyable, creative, funny, and lively entry in the series that satisfies the kid in me.

Hotel Transylvania 3: Summer Vacation sees Mavis (Selena Gomez) taking her family and friends on a cruise, to help her dad cut back and relax; while there, Dracula (Adam Sandler) becomes smitten with the ship’s captain, Ericka (Kathryn Hahn), who is secretly the next in line of the Van Helsing clan, vowing to finish the job her great-grandfather started long ago.

Let’s start off with the animation, which is still just as strong as the previous two; this is the first installment that Tartakovsky co-wrote, and you can definitely get a feeling of that. There’s more emphasis on the way characters look and move, how they contrast with other interactions, and even slight small bits, all have so much energy and liveliness to it. While some may argue it feel a little too noodle-like, especially compared to it’s lower moments, it never once feels out of tune with the rest of the film; all except for Mavis, who after rewatching the first movie a while back with my newborn nephew, I realized has more realistic movements, compared to everyone’s dart like reflexes. Regardless, the colors and shading, accompanied by the proper and popping 3D effects, it makes the film twice as striking.

However, where I feel the film falls short is with the writing, something that has been a legitimate complaint about the series overall. Tartakovsky’s biggest strong point has always been visuals rather than dialogue, and there are some lines that do come off as a little on the nose about what’s happening. Other times, you'll have sequences that don't really add much to the story, but look so hypnotizing that it's hard to admire it. The premise also does feel a little sitcom-ish, when you put these characters on a cruise ship; that, and the ending felt predictable and a bit rehashed from the previous film. And the whole thing with Atlantis, sort of felt like Tartakosky still wanted to do that Popeye movie, but this was as close as he could get.

Where it makes up for some of that is with the performances and humor. I may not be as big into Adam Sandler as I used to, but I still get a kick out of them when I sit down to watch one. With the Hotel Transylvania films, being the most consistent role he’s played more than once, his vocal work never feels like he’s half-assing it, and you do feel for him, whether he’s making you laugh or a little down. And at this point, you do buy into the chemistry with the rest of the characters. Selena Gomez (Mavis), Kevin James (Frankenstein), Steve Buscemi (Wayne Werewolf), David Spade (Griffin the Invisible Man), Keegan-Michael Key (Murray the Mummy); I was a little disappointed that there wasn’t as much Andy Samberg (Jonathan) or Mel Brooks (Grandpa Vlad) this time around, but that’s more of a nitpick. Kathryn Hahn (Ericka Van Helsing) also gives a good vocal performance, delivering both sides of a bloodthirsty hunter and a conniving captain; even Jim Gaffigan as Abraham Van Helsing gets some laughs out of me.

The best way to put Hotel Transylvania 3 is that it’s a safe three-quel; it’s not trying to blow expectations, it isn’t offensive in anyway, but it may not be something to immediately go out and seek. As someone who is a fan of Tartakovsky and these films, I found it to be as enjoyable as I could want it to be. It may not have the strongest story of the three, but the animation and characters do make it an installment worth visiting. And with it now on blu-ray, this is a definite recommendation this Halloween if you have kids.

Rating: B+