# 529 - CAT PEOPLE (1982)

CAT PEOPLE (1982 - HORROR / ROMANCE ) **** out of *****

(Meow, bitches..)



CAST: Nastassja Kinski, John Heard, Malcolm McDowell, Annette O'Toole, Ed Begley Jr., Ruby Dee, Lynn Lowry.

DIRECTOR: Paul Schrader

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and some good reasons to let your inner cat out right now - straight ahead...




IT'S LIKE THIS: In our last Halloween review, we hopped over to Japan and observed THE HOUSE WHERE EVIL DWELLS, wherein the dumbass Fletchers, an American family, were waylaid by a trio of goofy, mincing Japanese ghosts who were about as scary as a Pokemon cartoon. Let's just say things didn't end well for the dear Fletchers, even with their nemeses being as silly as Pee Wee Herman on laughing gas. I've seen supermarket checkout cashiers who were more terrifying.

So, let's go back to the States and head on over to probably the most exotic, mysterious city within our own country: New Orleans, LA. Our next Halloween Review is the 1982 erotic horror flick CAT PEOPLE, and let's just say that this is one good-looking movie. Hell, there were moments when I forgot I was watching a horror flick, and thought I was reviewing the latest Calvin Klein fragrance or apparel commercial, filled with slinky, purring, gorgeous folks who look ready to devour you at any minute. My, it's getting hot in here....

Anyway, our story kicks off with a prologue set several thousand years ago in some desert environment. We see a woman being led by her tribe to a towering, sprawling tree in the middle of nowhere. She is chained to the tree - and left alone by her escorts. Just when you are starting to think this is some prehistoric fraternity prank, who should show up but a sleek, handsome black leopard. Mr. Leopard locks eyes with our hapless damsel, like they are seeing each other across a crowded bar. Slowly, he walks up to her, gazing at her intensely in the way I look at my prime rib when I haven't eaten all day. Except when Mr. Leopard gets close to the chained maiden, he doesn't eat her. At least, not in the conventional sense. A-hem.

Flash forward to 1982 in New Orleans, and we meet our lovely, lovely heroine: Irena Gallier (Nastasska Kinski). Irena has just arrived in The Big Easy from New York. Apparently, she is an orphan and foster child who is now reconnecting with her long-lost brother Paul (Malcolm McDowell), who has spent the last few years tracking her down. Now that he has, he has asked her to move in with him and his weird house servant, Female (Ruby Dee). I should also add that Female's name is pronounced "Fuh-mah-lay." Just saying...

Anyhow, later that evening, a prostitute named Ruthie (Lynn Lowry) goes to a skeezy motel to meet a client - only to be attacked by a black leopard hiding underneath the bed. Ruthie barely manages to escape - and the animal control folks of New Orleans Zoo are called in. The are comprised of: (1) Dr. Oliver Yates (John Heard), hunky zoologist who loves cats; (2) Alice Perrin (Annette O'Toole), Oliver's assistant who has a crush on him; and (3) Joe Creigh (Ed Begley Jr.), the comic relief on the animal control team.

After an extended scuffle, Oliver and his folks are able to corral the loose big cat and tranquilize him. Later, Oliver learns from NOPD Inspector Brandt (Frankie Faison) that there have been a series of murders recently in New Orleans - and he believes this cat may be the culprit. But where did the black leopard, AKA Big Blackie, came from? Whatever the case may be, Big Blackie winds up the newest exhibit at the zoo - whether he likes it or not. Sorry, brother.

While all this is going on, it appears Paul has disappeared - and no one knows where he is. Irena, being new in town, tries to entertain herself as best she can in her brother's absence. After spending what seems like an eternity in the French Quarter, Irena ends up at the New Orleans zoo, after hours. She finds herself strangely drawn to Big Blackie, and he to her. Oliver discovers her and she runs off, leaving the big cat behind, who's all pissed at Oliver for cramping his style.

Eventually, Oliver catches up to Irena, who has somehow wound up in the branches of a tree twenty feet off the ground. She has no idea how she got up there - just that she instinctively leapt up and reached it, no problem. Ahem, folks. Anyhow, Oliver takes Irena out to dinner and is entranced by her exotic beauty which is almost... cat-like. Ahem x 2, folks. To be a nice guy and help out this newbie in town (or maybe to get her to like him) he gets Irena a job in the zoo's gift shop. My, my, my, it's getting hot in here...

All in all, a pretty good night for our dear Oliver: he met a hot, exotic, feline chick in the form of Irena, took her to dinner, got her a job, and is probably going to wind up in her bed real soon. Unfortunately, this really good evening is followed by a real bad day. As in: (1) Big Blackie kills Joe during a cage cleaning; and (2) escapes from the zoo later on when Oliver tries to put him down. Oh, and that evening - miracle of miracles - Paul miraculously turns up at his house and surprises the shit out of Irena. He says they need to have, ahem, a heart-to-heart about something. And what Paul has to say is supremely bizarre.

See, it appears that he and Irena are, um, "Cat People." That is, they are descended from an ancient race of beings that had big cats for parents. Being a "Cat Person" has several rules: (1) They can only mate with each other; (2) if they mate with a "Normal Person" they will transform into, ahem, a big cat; and (3) the only way they can turn back into a human form is to, ahem, kill a human. Hence, all the murders that have been happening lately. Apparently, Paul has been having sex with normal folk, then transforming into Big Blackie, and then having to kill more human folk to turn human again. Got all that?

Paul tells Irena that he and she are fated for each other. The only way they can avoid turning into big cats - and therefore keep from killing more innocent people - is to continue their ancient traditions of keeping it all within the "Cat Family." Paul says he can help Irena discover her true nature. Irena, on the other hand, basically tells Paul to go fuck himself - and books it out of there. She is rescued by the NOPD, and they take her back to Paul's house - where a K9 dog detects the smell of rotting flesh.

Before you know it, the cops have uncovered several corpses in Paul's basement - past victims of him in Big Blackie form. So far, Irena's reunion with her brother has been a total bust: (1) he turned out to be skeezy pervo who wants to boff her; (2) he's killed a shitload of people and stored them in the basement; and (3) he can apparently turn into a black leopard. All in all, it's looking like she should've stayed in New York, eh?

But is Paul right when he said she has the "black leopard" inside her, too? And how can she contain it? Is it true that if she makes love to a normal man, she will turn into a big cat and kill him? If so, how can she hope to have a normal relationship with any man? And what happens when she finds herself falling in love with Oliver? How can she give in to her desire but also protect him, too? Will she end up killing the man she loves because of the "cat within"? Or will she find some way to break the curse of the "Cat People" - and find a way to have a happy ending with Oliver? Or will she have to make the ultimate sacrifice to keep him safe and alive?

Well, I'm pulling for you, girl. Good luck with that...


BUT, SERIOUSLY: In our past Halloween review of THE HOUSE WHERE EVIL DWELLS, we talked about how execution is, essentially, everything when it comes to telling stories cinematically. A great idea can flame out if told incorrectly, as we saw with that movie. But we also discussed how a potentially silly idea can actually work, and even soar high, if given the correct treatment and told in an inspired way. Our latest Halloween review, is a beautiful example of that: CAT PEOPLE takes the ludicrous notion of humans morphing into jungle cats when sexually aroused, and turns into a hypnotic, surreal, and - yes - supremely sexy examination of love, desire, and sacrifice.

Director Paul Schrader was very clever to use New Orleans as a backdrop for this remake of the original CAT PEOPLE from 1944. That film was set in New York but, while considered a classic, it doesn't have the seductive, feline-like quality that this remake appropriately has in spades. Part of the reason for CAT PEOPLE 1982's sexy feel is the New Orleans atmosphere that is langurous, slinky, and mysterious - much like a cat itself. New York is simply too fast-paced and crowded for a tale that pivots around sensuality and dark romance, and CAT PEOPLE 1942, while an entertaining film, is simply not as alluring this version.

Another reason the remake fares better than the original is because of Nastassja Kinski, who gives us a more compelling Irena than Simone Simon did back in 1942. Kinski, daughter of German superstar Klaus Kinski, is very magnetic in the role and appropriately feline-like. Quite frankly, I can't see anyone else playing this role in the same way she does, combining innocence, sensuality, fear, and courage in a way that makes her constantly fascinating. Nastassja Kinski was never more beautiful and riveting than she was as Irena Gallier in this film. It is truly her best part.

The third and final reason CAT PEOPLE 1982 trumps CAT PEOPLE 1942 is because Paul Schrader wisely decided to turn his film into more of a dark, tragic love story - and less of a horror film like the original was. He makes the romance between Oliver and Irena the most important aspect of the plot, giving it an almost "Romeo-and-Juliet" aspect. As a result, the remake has a powerful emotional core that the original lacked. Schrader wisely realigns the various plot threads and streamlines the narrative in the most emotionally effective way. The result, quite simply, is a much better film that has a haunting, bittersweet feel.

For a film romance to work, both parties must be effective. John Heard as Oliver Yates is just as potent as Kinski's interpretation of Irena. When Oliver tells her "I've spent most of my life looking for someone I would even want to fall in love with. Now that I have, I'm not letting you get away." Without the right emotional build-up and the right actors involved, the line could've easily come across as false. But because Oliver and Irena's relationship is so engaging, Heard sells the line. Oliver and Irena are one of my TOP 3 favorite screen couples, right next Jesse Wyler and Terry Brogan from AGAINST ALL ODDS and Peter Parker and Gwen Stacy from THE AMAZING SPIDERMAN. Great characters played wonderfully by great actors.

Malcolm McDowell, Annette O'Toole, Ruby Dee, Ed Begley Jr, and Frankie Faison are all good in their various important supporting roles. McDowell is the true standout as Paul Gallier, the murderous villain whose crimes are rooted in an instinct for survival - not evil. McDowell gives the role layers of unexpected humanity and complexity that make it more interesting. Ruby Dee is also eerily effective as Female, the Cajun servant who knows all about the "Cat People" and their history - and how strong the "cat" is inside Irena. Finally, special mention must also be given to Giorgio Moroder, whose sleek, brooding music score does a lot to enhance CAT PEOPLE 1982's very seductive vibe. It's romantic, scary, and surreal - all at the same time.

In the end, CAT PEOPLE 1982 is meant to be more of a dark romance than a horror film. The emphasis on Oliver and Irena's "forbidden" romance is the emotional engine that powers the movie, turning what could have been just another "wild beast on the loose" horror movie into a moving look at the animal inside all of us - and the unexpected capacity of that animal to still make a great sacrifice for the one it loves.

# 528 - THE HOUSE WHERE EVIL DWELLS (1982)

THE HOUSE WHERE EVIL DWELLS (1982 - HORROR ) ** out of *****

(So much for a relaxing few months in the Japanese countryside..)



CAST: Edward Albert, Susan George, Doug McClure, Amy Barrett, Mako Hattori, Tsuiruyuki Sasaki, Toshiya Maruyama, Henry Mitowa, Mayumi Omeda.

DIRECTOR: Kevin Connor

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and even more compelling reasons to keep your ass in the city as far away from the Japanese countryside as possible - straight ahead...




IT'S LIKE THIS: In our last Halloween review, THE LEGACY, we traveled to rural England to observe two Los Angelenos as they found themselves ensnared in a supernatural mystery involving a really fucked-up inheritance and a huge spooky house. In our next Halloween review, we will hop further East to Japan, where we will explore another spooky house, although much, much, MUCH smaller than the one in THE LEGACY.

Our next flick is THE HOUSE WHERE THE EVIL DWELLS, and it is set in the Land of the Rising Sun. Our heroes are the Fletcher Family from San Francisco, California, who have relocated to Kyoto, Japan because of Daddy's new job. We have: (1) Papa Ted (Edward Albert), writer who has been commissioned to write a book on Japanese culture; (2) Mama Laura (Susan George), housewife whom we will find out later on is a bit of a nympho; and (3) Baby Amy (Amy Barrett), daughter who probably should have stayed in Frisco, if for no other reason than so she won't have to annoy the living shit out of us.

The Fletchers are given a home to stay in by old pal Alex Curtis (Doug McClure), a publishing exec who helped Ted nabbed this much-needed job. The house is your basic traditional Japanese style with sliding doors and tatami (read: on the floor) mattresses. As homes go in Japan, it's actually pretty spacious. Believe me when I say I know what I'm talking about. I lived there for over two years and encountered family apartments that my cats would think too small for them by themselves - let alone our fat asses thrown in, too. So, the Fletchers are lucky, indeed, to have a domicile big enough for all three of them.

Wait, a second… But what the fuck are those three goofy, transparent dipshits wearing kimonos who are running around the place, unnoticed by the Fletchers? Well, folks, in case you hadn't figured it out, those three clowns are ghosts - and although we the audience can see them, the clueless Fletchers can't. Apparently, the place was the site of a murder-suicide about two hundred years ago: a cuckolded Samurai warrior (Tsuiruyuki Sasaki) caught his slutty wife (Mako Hattori) playing "stuff-the-sashimi" with a hunky neighbor (Toshiyo Maruyama) - and he basically pulled a "Kill Bill" on them. Then, realizing there's no one left to cook and clean for him now that his ol' lady is gone, he promptly commits Hara-Kiri - which is Japanese for "Self-inflicted 'Kill Bill'". And just like that, the place's vibe is fucked for eternity. And Alex either didn't know about the house's messed-up history - or didn't bother to tell his pals. Nice. Cretin.

It doesn't take long for the Fletchers to cotton on to the fact that something is wrong in their house. First, Laura (under the possession of the slutty Japanese wife's ghost) comes on to Alex like a sorority girl in heat. Second, Amy starts seeing scary Kabuki faces in her soup, and this understandably kills her appetite. Third, Ted starts getting possessive and jealous of Laura and resents Alex's presence whenever he comes to visit. Fourth, big-ass cackling crabs (you read that right) start chasing Amy and her babysitter Noriko (Mayumi Omeda) around the house - and eventually causes Amy to fall out of a tree and hurt herself severely (do not even ask). And finally.... well, that's about it. Essentially the "haunting" consists of the silly transparent ghosts "possessing" their American counterparts and basically making them act like mean drunks. Yawn.

So... how will this all end? Are the loopy ghosts influencing Ted, Laura, and Alex to recreate the doomed love triangle from two centuries ago? And will Amy be eviscerated by those demonic crabs? What happens when a Zen monk (Henry Mitowa) tells the Fletchers they must get out of that house before it is too late? Or will the Fletchers be your typical Stupid Horror Movie characters and stay put? What the fuck is up with those cackling crabs anyway?

Who knows. This is Japan, after all, so all bets are off...


BUT, SERIOUSLY: In previous reviews, we've talked about the concept of "Idea vs. Execution." Basically, a bad idea can actually produce a good movie with the right execution. Conversely, a great idea can also devolve into a mediocre flick or worse, given the wrong execution. Our latest Halloween review, THE HOUSE WHERE EVIL DWELLS, is a prime example of the latter.

Here, we have an idea that, had it been presented correctly and effectively, could have yielded a classic, atypical Haunted House movie. Instead, it constantly makes the wrong choices and ruins every single chance to create dread and fear. Which is a shame, because the rural Japanese setting is actually quite fresh and atmospheric. But with such a flawed execution, this eerie environment's potential is completely wasted. Given the right handling, THE HOUSE WHERE EVIL DWELLS could have been an Asian-set version of THE SHINING, a film that it has more than a few parallels with.

Like THE SHINING, this film revolves around a family unit of three who move to an isolated location because of the father's job. Like THE SHINING, the family has past issues that begin to resurface the longer they remain in the haunted location. Like THE SHINING, it becomes clear that the grim history of the haunted location is going to repeat itself - with the family as its new victims. Unlike THE SHINING, however, THE HOUSE WHERE EVIL DWELLS is thoroughly lacking in the psychological depth and ambiguity necessary to make it a terrifying experience. In fact, this movie is probably the most obvious, ridiculous ghost story I've ever seen.

The sad thing is it didn't have to be that way. THE HOUSE WHERE EVIL DWELLS could've been a classic like THE SHINING, especially since it has three protagonists who are being influenced by three separate evil forces to recreate a specific part of the past, instead of just one like in THE SHINING. I have shown this film to many friends and the unanimous complaint is always: "Who the hell thought up the idea of showing us the ghosts in transparent form, making mischief, while the characters onscreen go about their business, completely clueless?" Whatever atmosphere and interest is created by the setting and the conflicts between the leads is thoroughly dissipated the minute we see those see-through phantoms prancing about like silly teenagers. Wow. Just... wow.

It doesn't help that the setpieces (if you can call them that) are patently absurd. The sequence where Amy sees the ghosts making faces at her in her soup bowl is more funny than anything else. So is the extended setpiece of Amy and Noriko being terrorized by giant crabs who growl at them like randy construction workers. If this were meant to be a comedy, then these scenes might be acceptable, but the press for the film confirmed it was supposed to be a full-blooded horror film. So, what gives? What a waste.

The cast is okay, and they are the only reason this film manages to rate a ** (mediocre) and not any lower. Edward Albert, Susan Fletcher, Doug McClure, and Amy Barrett are competent as the Americans caught up in the strangeness of Japan. The best scenes are the quarrels between Ted and Laura, which have the ring of real-life spousal arguments. Had director Kevin Connor and his writers taken a more subtle approach to the haunting, and highlighted the growing domestic fracture of the Fletcher family, as well as Alex's growing role in the matter, this movie would've been immeasurably better.

I sincerely believe this film should be remade and given the same cerebral approach given to THE SHINING. For entire passages of that movie, we could not be sure if Jack Torrance (Jack Nicholson) was simply going crazy from isolation - or if he really was being influenced by the "ghosts" of the Overlook Hotel. This is the same way that the Fletcher family's unraveling should have been handled here: is Ted and Laura's union simply going down the tubes because of Alex's presence - or are they all being influenced by the tragedy from two centuries ago? Like THE SHINING, the answer should not have been obvious until close to the end of the movie. In that film, the ghosts were kept out of sight, for the most part, until the last 20 minutes of the film - and that made it scarier. Here, everything is spelled out for us within the first 15 minutes in utterly ridiculous fashion. Again: what a waste.

Two words: remake time!

# 527 - THE LEGACY (1979)

THE LEGACY (1979 - HORROR ) ***1/2 out of *****

(So much for a relaxing few weeks in the English countryside..)



CAST: Katharine Ross, Sam Elliott, John Standing, Ian Hogg, Charles Gray, Hildegarde Neil, Margaret Tyzack, Roger Daltrey, Lee Montague, Marianne Broome, William Abney.

DIRECTOR: Richard Marquand

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and even more compelling reasons to keep your ass in the city as far away from the English countryside as possible - straight ahead...




IT'S LIKE THIS: In our last two Halloween reviews, DEADLY BLESSING and THE HOWLING, we saw what happened when Los Angelenos make the mistake of venturing past the limits of L.A. County into the great unknown otherwise known as The Boonies of Rural America. Three words: Very. Bad. Things. So can you imagine, then, how worse it is for Los Angelenos who make the mistake of going into the rural heartland of... foreign countries? I think I just shat myself visualizing the awful, awful possibilities: weird clothes, weird accents, weird food, weird hair.

That's exactly the problem facing the protagonists of our next Halloween review, THE LEGACY. Our leads are one lovely L.A. couple named Maggie Walsh and Pete Danner (Katharine Ross and Sam Elliott), interior designers who, from the looks of their Hollywood Hills home, specialize in Arabian/Moorish design. They must be somewhat talented, because when our story opens, Maggie is calling long-distance to some bank in London to verify a check she received from a British corporation that wants to hire them. The bank confirms the check is legit, and so now Maggie and Pete must make a hard choice: go to England and do the job - or stay in sunny L.A. for other assignments?

It turns out Maggie has never been to England and has always wanted to go, since her ancestors hail from there. She'd like to go to Britain about a week early so that they can explore the countryside (oh, shit, here we go again) before they have to start work in London. Pete, on the other hand, is a little more skeptical about this mysterious job and accompanying check - and thinks they should find out more about the offer. In the end, though, Maggie waggles her tits at him and basically makes him forget his reservations about crossing the Atlantic to the United Kingdom. Big mistake, Petey. You had it right the first time, bud. Stick to your instincts next time.

Before you know it, our lovely couple have skipped across the pond and are soon touring the British countryside on a motorcycle. So far, so gray and drab. Big fucking surprise. Unfortunately, before Maggie and Peter can say "Fuck this noise" and go back to London where at least they have some swinging pubs to go to, a car zips out of a country lane and sends them flying ass-over-teakettle over some hedge.

The car is a Rolls Royce, and its passenger is Jason Mountolive (John Standing), an English aristocrat who apparently has a huge-ass manor nearby. He graciously offers to have Maggie and Pete's beat-up motorbike taken to the closest village for repairs, then take our lovely couple to his mansion so they can freshen up and dry off from their tumble into all that wet English shrubbery. Not having much of a choice, Maggie and Pete agree. Mistake # 2, folks...

Not too much longer after arriving at the Mountolive crib (which, I should point out, is bigger than most Ivy League university buildings), Pete immediately detects signs that this place is about a few eggs shy of an omelet. For starters, the help is creepy as fuck, led by spooky Nurse Adams (Margaret Tyzack) and asshole Chauffeur Harry (Ian Hogg). Then a bunch of glamorous house guests arrive and pretty much look down their noses at the gauche Americans in their midst.

They are: (1) Jacques Grandier (Lee Montague), asshole French magnate; (2) Karl Liebnecht (Charles Gray), asshole German industrialist; (3) Clive Jackson (Roger Daltrey), asshole British music tycoon; (4) Maria Gabrielli (Marianne Broome), bitchy Italian countess; and (5) Barbara Kirstenburg (Hildegarde Neil), British publishing millionaire who is the only one who treats Maggie and Peter with any kind of kindness. What the hell are these five richer-than-Trump folks doing here in the ass-end of British nowhere?

Well, Mags and Petey don't have to wait too long to find out: it appears that all these folks have been gathered at Casa De Mountolivo because Jason Mountolive is dying - and they are all his heirs. Evidently, his will is about to be read. All fine and good, but what the fuck does this have to do with Maggie and Peter? They're just innocent bystanders who are staying only until their motorbike gets fixed, right?

Wrong. It slowly starts to shape up that Maggie's presence in Mountolive Manor is not a coincidence. Nor is the job offer that brought her and Pete to England. Nor is the "car accident" that totaled their motorcycle. What secret agenda does Jason have in bringing Maggie to the reading of his will? What mysterious connection does she have to the Mountolive Legacy? And what does Nurse Adams mean when she says "there can only be one"? Does it have to do with any of the mysterious "accidents" that begin claiming the lives of the other guests? Is some supernatural force whittling down their numbers? If so, why? Is there truly only one person who can claim... The Legacy?

Oh, who gives a shit. Mags and Petey should've kept their asses in the Hollywood Hills.


BUT, SERIOUSLY: The period beginning 1978 onward marked the rise of the American Slasher movie. Kicked off by the huge success of HALLOWEEN that year, this wave produced similar films like FRIDAY THE 13th, THE PROWLER, HALLOWEEN 2, FINAL EXAM, TOURIST TRAP, PROM NIGHT, TERROR TRAIN, and many, many more. All these films featured masked killers terrorizing teenagers or young adults in event-themed settings. Of all the Horror Sub-Genres during the late 70s/early 80s, the Slasher Movie was the most popular. Which makes THE LEGACY something of an anomaly.

This movie is more of a throwback to the old-school Hammer horror flicks of the 50s and 60s, utilizing the "old dark house" premise. There are no psycho killers here chasing nubile teens or college students. The characters here are all sophisticated adults at the mercy of supernatural forces. Their deaths are constructed as colorful setpieces that are elaborate and almost avant-garde. In this respect, THE LEGACY is closer to the Italian Giallo sub-genre than the American Slasher sub-genre. But, as we discussed in our recent extensive examination of the Italian and American Giallo sub-genres, the American Slasher film owes a debt of gratitude to Italian Gialli because of how it influenced HALLOWEEN - the movie that started it all.

THE LEGACY is a more elegant and brooding affair. Director Richard Marquand vividly utilizes the somber British countryside and milks maximum atmosphere from it. There are those who say this movie has a "quaint" feel, but we think this is actually a plus which adds to its authentic English ambiance. Think DOWNTON ABBEY meets DARK SHADOWS. Marquand also builds suspense and tension deliberately, preferring the "slow burn" approach over the rushed pace that was already becoming increasingly common in horror films even at that time.

Katharine Ross and Sam Elliott are solid as the American couple who quickly get more than they bargained for when they get to England. This element of having Yanks as protagonists swept into a sinister mystery (albeit a supernatural one) on foreign soil once again echoes the Giallo formula. Ross made her mark in BUTCH CASSIDY AND THE SUNDANCE KID, THE GRADUATE, and THE STEPFORD WIVES, and brings the same combo of charm, vulnerability, and strength to the role of Maggie Walsh. Sam Elliott, the epitome of rugged American masculinity, is perfect for the role of Pete Danner, a guy who is a quick study and unafraid to speak his mind and stand his ground. It should be noted that Ross and Elliott reportedly fell in love during the filming of THE LEGACY, and began a long-term relationship afterwards. Just like with Dee Wallace and Christopher Stone in our previous Halloween review, THE HOWLING, you can see the chemistry between these two and their ending up together off-screen is not a big surprise.

The rest of the cast fills out their roles quite nicely. Of them all, Margaret Tyzack and Hildegarde Neil are the standouts as, respectively: (1) Nurse Adams, the enigmatic head of the Mountolive household; and (2) Barbara Kirstenburg, the glamorous publishing tycoon who becomes Margaret's confidante and erstwhile ally in figuring out what is going on in Mountolive Manor. Charles Gray, who played one of Blofeld's iterations in the Bond Franchise, is also good as Karl Liebnecht, the unscrupulous German who sees Maggie as a threat to him inheriting Jason's legacy. Then there's musician Roger Daltrey who is ideally cast as Clive Jackson, the music magnate who is also zealous to claim his inheritance.

THE LEGACY may seem out of step with the films that were flooding theaters at the time but, in my opinion, that's a good thing. There are those who also question the film's ending, stating it is unbelievable. I beg to differ: just like with DEADLY BLESSING's seemingly out-of-nowhere final twist, THE LEGACY's final plot turn makes complete sense when you think about everything that has come before. They are both solid, underrated horror films.

# 526 - THE HOWLING (1981)

THE HOWLING (1981 - HORROR ) **** out of *****

(So much for a relaxing few weeks in the country...)



CAST: Dee Wallace, Patrick Macnee, Dennis Dugan, Christopher Stone, Belinda Balaski, John Carradine, Slim Pickens, Elisabeth Brooks, Margie Impert, Robert Picardo, Kevin McCarthy.

DIRECTOR: Joe Dante

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and even more compelling reasons to keep your ass in the city as far away from farm country as possible - straight ahead...




IT'S LIKE THIS: In our last Halloween review, DEADLY BLESSING, we saw what happened when two L.A. city girls (Susan Bruckner, Sharon Stone) went into the ass-end of Pennsylvania to support a good friend and fellow L.A. girl (Maren Jensen) following the death (murder?) of her country-boy husband (Doug Barr) involving a rogue tractor (don't ask). Unfortunately, it turned out machinery-gone-wild was the least of the Los Angeles lasses' worries - as it appeared someone from the local religious cult nearby (like the Amish, but somehow more square) really wanted them dead and gone so that the house and land could be reclaimed by the cult. All in all, a pretty strong case for breathing in some good ol' fashioned Wilshire Boulevard smog and soaking in some heavy 405 traffic congestion.

Now, in our latest Halloween review, we have another Los Angeles girl who goes to the sticks for some peace and quiet - only to find out, omigod, that the woods totally suck and are full of things that will tear you apart, eat you, and pick their teeth with your bones. Before shitting you out onto the forest floor to be eaten by even more critters. Holy shit, dude, don't these chicks watch horror movies? If they did, they'd know better than to venture past Malibu to the north, Montebello to the East, or Redondo Beach to the South. Stay where the concrete is, girls, and you will be just fine. From werewolves and insane religious cults, anyway. I can't promise anything about muggers, gangbangers, or shifty used car salesmen.

Anyhow, our heroine is Karen White (Dee Wallace), an intrepid TV news anchor for KDHB-Los Angeles/Channel 6 who is investigating a series of brutal murders by "Eddie The Mangler." Apparently, Eddie (Robert Picardo) has been terrorizing the L.A. area for the last year - and he has contacted Karen because he, well, has a crush on her. Seizing this opportunity to try to nab the killer, the LAPD and Karen's cutthroat, ratings-obsessed boss, Fred Francis (Kevin McCarthy), decide to use her as bait to lure Eddie out and trap him. Finally, Eddie agrees - and tells Karen to meet him in L.A.'s red-light district which, as you would know if you've been to L.A., covers several hundred thousand square miles.

Anyhow, the fateful night arrives and the LAPD and her schmuck boss send Karen out into the seedy underbelly of the City of Angels to meet up with the psycho killer who has been gutting women for the last year - armed with nothing more than lipstick and a wonky surveillance tracking device. Fucking great. "Don't worry," says the LAPD to Bill Neill (Christopher Stone), Karen's understandably concerned football player husband, "We've got her covered." With what exactly? Dead air?

It goes without saying that Karen's rendezvous with Eddie goes pretty bad. First off, the tracking surveillance wire on Karen's body goes dead. And second, the cops in this movie are apparently a bunch of hopeless nitwits who couldn't find their own asses even if their palms were super-glued directly to their buns. Fortunately, these assholes decide to earn their pay and manage to catch up to Karen in an utterly seedy (even for L.A.) porno joint where Eddie is just about to fillet her in a private booth in the back. They unload about ten pounds of lead into Eddie's ass - and Karen manages to crawl the fuck outta there to report the story of a lifetime.

Or does she? As it turns out, Karen ends up with some serious amnesiac PTSD, and can't remember a goddamn thing from the moment she entered the porno shop to the moment the borderline-useless Keystone Cops of Cali showed up to finally save her in the nick of time. In short, she remembers nothing about her few minutes in the private booth with Eddie. Karen's psychiatrist, Dr. George Wagner (Patrick MacNee) tells Karen that she just needs time to recover - and eventually she will remember what happened. Karen rightfully says she's not sure if she wants to remember.

Nevertheless, Dr. Wagner advises Karen and Bill to head up north to "The Colony" - his therapeutic village nestled among the redwoods of Northern California. In other words, it's a hamlet made up of wackos, nutjobs, and recovering basket cases like Karen - all of whom Dr. Wagner is treating. Wonderful, doc. Talk about a healthy environment. It doesn't help that one of the patients, a slutty brunette vixen with cat eyes named Marsha Quist (Elisabeth Brooks), starts making frank sex talk to Bill right in front of Karen. Donna (Margie Impert), another patient, helpfully points out to Karen that Marsha is a nymphomaniac. To which Karen politely responds something along the lines of "Thanks for the fucking breaking news flash, lady..."

Then weird things start to happen. I mean, even weirder than the whackjobs that Karen now calls her neighbors. The following occur with increasing frequency: (1) scary howling in the woods at night; (2) mutilated cattle corpses turning up in the middle of the paths; (3) Bill disappearing for hours on end and coming back with scratch marks down his back; (4) something creeping around in the bushes outside their cabin; and most terrifying of all: (5) Sam (Slim Pickens), the Colony sheriff, lurching up to Karen and in sickeningly-earnest-gushing-fan-boy-with-a-Kentucky-Fried-Accent mode, telling her "Say, yer somewun faymus, aintcha? Yer much purdier in purson. Hyuk-hyuk-hyuk." Jesus Christ, if this clown came up to me and said that in that fucking voice, I'd be in my car and driving - fast - back to L.A. within five minutes. Forget the werewolves - this guy is the real monster.

Anyhow. what exactly is going on in The Colony? What is behind the cattle killings and the eerie howlings late at night? What secrets are the Colony patients hiding from Karen? And where does Bill go to every night? And why does he come back with scratch marks up the wazoo? Is he porking that whore Marsha? And what happens when Karen's news station coworkers back in Los Angeles, Chris Halloran and Terri Fisher (Dennis Dugan and Belinda Balaski), discover that Eddie's body has disappeared from the L.A. morgue? What does this mean? Wasn't Eddie shot to shit by the useless Keystone Cali Cops? And what is Dr. Wagner true agenda in operating The Colony and bringing Karen to it? Will she live to tell the tale? Or will she end up howling at the moon?

Hard to say for sure. What I know for certain is this: if Karen survives her "vacation," I highly doubt she will venture twenty feet off Sunset Boulevard ever again.


BUT, SERIOUSLY: In 1981, two back-to-back werewolf horror films were released and quickly became instant hits - and eventual classics. The first was THE HOWLING in April 1981, which made its budget many times over at the box-office and was quite profitable. The second was AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON a few months later in August 1981 and was an even bigger hit, with its blend of black comedy and classic horror elements. These two movies often divide horror fans, specifically as to which one is the better film - and it is a very tough call. In the end, though, if we are to judge the film on its scare factor and atmosphere, I would have to give the title to THE HOWLING.

AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON chronicled what happens when two backpacking American college students (Griffin Dunne, David Naughton) are attacked one night on the isolated moors of rural England. One dies, the other survives - with bite marks. The survivor is taken to London, where he recovers with the help of a kindly doctor and a pretty nurse (Jenny Agutter) whom he begins an affair with. Unfortunately, he also starts to... change. I can see why AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON was more popular than THE HOWLING at the box-office, what with its juxtaposition of many crowd-pleasing elements: horror, thriller, mystery, comedy, romance, action. There was pretty much something for everyone here.

With THE HOWLING, however, we have a full-blooded horror film. While director Joe Dante and co-writer John Sayles bring some threads of black humor to the story, they don't let them take over the plot the way AMERICAN WEREWOLF did at certain points. THE HOWLING never loses sight of its focus: to scare the hell out of you. It may not necessarily be the better film out of the two, but it is certainly the better horror film. I hope you folks can see the distinction. While AMERICAN WEREWOLF had its own atmosphere (what with being set in England and all), THE HOWLING has a taut sense of steadily mounting, claustrophobic dread that the former doesn't quite have, despite its scary setpieces.

Some critics have knocked the setting of "The Colony" - an isolated therapeutic village that serves as backdrop for the unfolding events. I think it is perfect because of the off-kilter vibe we get from the very beginning because of it. And when the other narrative shoe drops in the latter part of the story, the strange setting makes perfect sense. In the novel of the same name by Gary Brandner, the place was just an average small town. However, how many times have we seen the "ordinary town that turns out to be evil" in horror films?

By changing it to a more clinical setting, Dante and Sayles are able to gracefully tie-in all the story's subtexts about repressed aggression and animal instinct in the midst of normal human society. In fact, they bring shades of INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS and THE STEPFORD WIVES into THE HOWLING with this element of an innocent woman arriving at an isolated community with strange people sharing a dark secret between them. Making it more of a therapeutic retreat keeps the story fresh and inventive - and quite spooky.

One thing that THE HOWLING has over the AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON is its ominous rural setting - the redwood forests of Northern California have never looked so spooky. Eighty percent of the story unfolds in this remote wilderness setting, and the movie is all the more atmospheric because of it. In AMERICAN WEREWOLF, we had some evocative scenes on dark English moors and in the nearby rural village filled with weird locals, but they were only a few. Most of the story unfolded in the modern capital of London. This in itself isn't a bad thing, as London has its own atmosphere - but it can't compete with a dark forest full of strange shadows and sounds.

Dee Wallace is terrific as Karen White, and I like how she manages to make the role consistently human and vulnerable without turning her into a wimp. Wallace would go on to bigger fame as Elliot's mom in E.T. THE EXTRA TERRESTRIAL the following year in 1982. She would also end up marrying her male lead here, Christopher Stone, in real-life. Watching them onscreen as Karen and Bill, you can kind of tell something was cooking in the kitchen, so to speak. Wallace and Stone have a very compatible air, and make for a handsome couple.

Patrick Macnee is suitably ambiguous as the mysterious Dr. Wagner, who may know more about Eddie The Mangler than he lets on. Macnee hits the right notes of avuncular warmth and gracious elegance, but also adds an air of distance that makes the character a bit inscrutable - perfectly appropriate for someone with a hidden agenda. Actually, it would probably be more appropriate to say that Dr. Wagner's hidden agenda has hidden agendas of its own. It's a fairly complex and layered role that Macnee essays well.

Dennis Dugan and Belinda Balaski are immensely likable as Chris Halloran and Terri Fisher, Karen's colleagues and friends from the TV station who get pulled into the fray even though they are far away in L.A. Dugan would go on to be an accomplished director himself, stepping behind the camera to helm many of Adam Sandler's comedies like GROWN UPS 1 & 2, HAPPY GILMORE, JUST GO WITH IT, JACK AND JILL, YOU DON'T MESS WITH THE ZOHAN, and more.

As far as Balaski, well, this woman was my biggest crush growing up (right next to Lesley-Anne Down and Kate Jackson), and her character of Terri Fisher is my fave in this film. I like how Terri is the first to intuit that something is wrong at The Colony - and is also the first to connect the events in Los Angeles to this isolated community way up north. The beach sequence where Terri realizes (SPOILERS) Eddie's involvement with Dr. Wagner through a picture that Eddie left behind in his L.A. pad, and her ensuing extended chase scene through the woods and several buildings at The Colony, is now a classic horror setpiece. Balaski starred in the classic PIRANHA, and appeared in GREMLINS a few years later - both directed by Joe Dante. Gorgeous, gorgeous woman with real talent...

The various bizarro inhabitants of The Colony are vividly played by Margie Impert, Slim Pickens, Elisabeth Brooks, Robert Picardo, and many more. Picardo, who would go on to feature prominently in one of my favorite TV shows ever, CHINA BEACH, is particularly scary and effective as the serial killer werewolf, Eddie Quist. These folks and their off-kilter auras are instrumental in creating much of the The Colony's eerie atmosphere. Then there's Kevin McCarthy as Karen's ice-cold boss Fred Francis. McCarthy was the lead in the original INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS, and his presence here reinforces THE HOWLING's connection to that movie.

In the end, while AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON may be the more critically and commercially popular film, THE HOWLING is the more effective horror film. And, quite possibly, the more financially successful film: THE HOWLING had a substantially lower budget than AMERICAN WEREWOLF, and made just about the same profit.

Data below:

AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON:
Budget: approximately $10 million.
Final Gross: approximately $30 million.
Expenditure vs. Profit: $10 million/$20 million

THE HOWLING:
Budget: approximately $1 million
Final Gross: approximately $ 18 million
Expenditure vs. Profit: $1 million/$17 million

You folks do the math - and tell me which one was actually the bigger hit...

# 525 - DEADLY BLESSING (1981)

DEADLY BLESSING (1981 - HORROR / MYSTERY ) ***1/2 out of *****

(So... if the Amish look like swingers in comparison to these assholes, why would anyone in their right minds want to live next to them?)



CAST: Maren Jensen, Susan Buckner, Sharon Stone, Ernest Borgnine, Jeff East, Doug Barr, Lisa Hartman, Lois Nettleton, Colleen Riley, Michael Berryman, Kevin Cooney.

DIRECTOR: Wes Craven

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and compelling reasons to keep your ass in the city, as far away from farm country as possible - straight ahead...




IT'S LIKE THIS: Poor Martha (Maren Jensen)... she's an L.A. big city girl who has moved to rural Pennsylvania out of love for country-boy husband Jim Schmidt (Doug Barr) - and soon runs afoul of his horrible relatives. And we're not talking "horrible" in the usual way - we're talking "horrible in the bible-thumping, fire-and-brimstone, you-will-burn-in-hell-for-living-the-modern-life-and-wearing-jeans" kind of way. You see, folks, Jim's family are, um, Hittites - who are like the Amish, only much, much, much, much, MUCH more repressed. If you can even imagine such a fucked-up scenario.

Yup, turns out the Hittities don't believe in nothing but the old ways, which means: (1) they follow the Bible to a "T"; and (2) nothing else. Which also means they have no electricity, running water, indoor plumbing, or clothing that doesn't look like it's a Halloween costume. And Lord forbid anyone who thinks about stepping out of the box and joining the Modern World, because those people are immediately shunned. Which is exactly what happened to Jim when he decided to go to college in L.A. and defy his family, led by whackjob father Isaiah Schmidt (Ernest Borgnine), who looks as scary as, well, Ernest Borgnine. Can't say I blame Isaiah for being concerned, though... I mean, seriously: what else could possibly happen to a nice guy who was raised by even more repressive versions of the Amish, when he gets to La-La Land? The words "eaten alive whole" come to mind...

Fortunately, Jim lucked out and met the sweet and lovely Martha at college, and now that they have graduated, they have decided to marry. Jim has brought his new wife back to, uh, Hittiteville to take over the farm he inherited when he turned 21 or something. Problem is, Isaiah and the rest of the Hittite clan are pissed off that Jim brought home an outsider for a wife - and have shunned him (and Martha) even more. They have also taken to threatening Jim and Martha to try to drive them off the land, which the Hittites want to reclaim for their own. And that's just the backstory, folks....

Our story kicks off in full when Jim gets murdered in their barn one night after a lovemaking session with Martha. We're meant to think it was an accident, but come on: gigantic tractors don't start up themselves and run over sexy farmers on their own, folks. Clearly, some human intervention was at play here. Or was there? Hmmmmmmmm.... Could there be something to the local whispering about an evil entity called the "incubus" prowling the surrounding land?

Whatever. The point is Martha is devastated by Jim's "accidental" death. Think about it: you are a hot chick who just gave up glamorous L.A. city life for a hot country boy and moved to the ass-end of Pennsylvania with him, surrounded by his colossal asshole relatives - and barely two days after your goddamn wedding, he... DIES!? What the fucking fuck? I would demand a re-count or... something. Anyhow, it's a good thing Maren has some loyal friends from Los Angeles who show up when she needs it most because, well, right now she, um, needs it most.

Cue the arrival of hot L.A. bombshells Vicky Anderson (Susan Bruckner) and Lana Marcus (Sharon Stone) to lend some moral support to their pal Martha. Vicky is your basic "rah-rah-rah-sis-boom-bah" cheerleader girl who was probably running for Student Council president in the womb and could charm even a rattlesnake suffering from a pounding hangover. Lana, on the other hand, is your textbook brooding artistic chick with dark depths and a full flask always conveniently located no more than a few feet away. I have a feeling her issues have issues of their own. I'd like to know what bizarre sorority house the earthy Martha first met these two in. I've seen friendships between cats and parakeets that were more believable...

The arrival of Vicky and Lana at Martha's farm does not go unnoticed to the constantly-spying Hittites. Then again, is it so surprising that a religious sect full of men who cannot have sex before marriage, cannot masturbate, and cannot get to the farm animals because they have been locked up by that damn Isaiah, instantly notices the two sexy blondes (and their even hotter brunette pal) parading around in skimpy shorts and low-cut blouses? Methinks not. It's like taunting a pack of starving pit bulls with dripping, juicy prime rib. Anyone else think this is going nowhere good?

Sure enough, even stranger things begin to happen. William (Michael Berryman), one of the Hittite teens who love to spy on Martha through her bedroom window, gets knifed by a dark figure while - you guessed it - during the Pervo Peeping Bill number again. Then Lana gets trapped in the barn and chased around by what looks like a banshee wearing a black robe. During the cat-and-mouse tussle with the killer, she stumbles across William's body and barely manages to escape with her own life.

The local sheriff (Kevin Cooney) advises Martha to take Vicky and Lana and get the fuck out because someone clearly wants them gone from the farm. Martha, being a tough, independent woman, says she will not be run out of her own home and plans to stay put. Even with a killer loose and the nearest house about a mile or so away. And with a phone that works sporadically, at best. And a truck that looks like it is going to fall apart at any minute. I don't know whether to admire Martha - or slap the living shit out of her.

Is the sheriff right? Are Martha, Vicky, and Lana in danger from something or someone that wants the farm and land? Is Isaiah or one of his minions behind the whole thing? Is it the "incubus" that everyone seems to quaking in fear of? And what happens when Vicky has a chance encounter with John (Jeff East), Jim's brother who is still part of the Hittite sect? Will they have a forbidden romance just like Martha and Jim's? Or will Isaiah refuse to lose another son to a "modern harlot"? And why is Lana suddenly having scary nightmares with dark figures, cobwebs, and spiders falling into her mouth? Is it a warning? Or does she need to lay off that flask?

Time will tell. Just remember that these chicks had a chance to get when the getting was good. How about them apples, bitches?


BUT, SERIOUSLY: Horror auteur Wes Craven is most famous to modern audiences for giving us three modern horror classics: the original NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET in 1984, and then SCREAM 1 & 2 in 1996 and 1997. These films were slick, entertaining, and thorough crowd-pleasers. Craven took a break from SCREAM 3 (which, frankly, was more of a horror comedy than an actual horror film), then returned in the passable SCREAM 4, which was conclusive proof that the series had run its course and had tapped the well dry. Still, Craven deserves credit for helming the terrific first entries in two of the best franchises in the horror genre.

Craven's name is so attached to the very commercial NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET and SCREAM series that people often overlook that he started his career in the 1970s with gritty, edgy horror fare that was decidedly not mainstream. In 1972, he directed LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT, a graphic and disturbing revenge film that was remade a couple of years ago into an even more graphic and disturbing update. Then in 1977, he helmed THE HILLS HAVE EYES, a grisly cult hit that was an early entry in the "In-Bred Cannibals Terrorize Stranded Tourists" sub-genre - which was also remade a few years ago.

LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT and THE HILLS HAVE EYES were so different from A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET and the SCREAM movies, that you'd be forgiven for thinking they'd been directed by two different directors. Basically, Craven's body of work can be divided into two distinct parts: the early section in the 70s when his output was characterized by graphic violence and a gritty, grindhouse vibe in rural settings, and then the later section which covers his work from 1984 onward, which were characterized by a more polished look, relatively sophisticated suburban or urban settings, and more audience-friendly plots.

In between these two sections, however, is a lone film that serves as a bridge between Craven's gritty earlier fare, and his more handsome latter ones. The film is DEADLY BLESSING, and was released in 1981 to a decent profit. This film combines elements of Craven's 1970s films (rural setting, weird characters, a gritty look) and his films from the mid-80s and onward (very attractive stars, suspenseful and crowd-pleasing setpieces, surprise twist endings). Indeed, DEADLY BLESSING has gradually developed a loyal cult following over the years, as fans of Craven and the SCREAM movies have realized this movie was practice for his more popular work later.

The movie's overall premise of city dwellers in deadly conflict with the superstitions and traditions of backward country folk isn't exactly new, but making the latter a repressive religious sect similar to - but more stringent than - the Amish, is a fairly fresh (for the time) perspective. This same conflict would be explored again three years later in Harrison Ford's classic thriller WITNESS, albeit in a more benign way. Here, Craven is more focused on creating an eerie atmosphere that paints everything in this bucolic setting in a distinctly sinister way. Perfectly appropriate for a film that is more of a horror film than a thriller.

Craven's ability to construct fluid, scary setpieces that keep audiences on edge is first shown off to good effect here. DEADLY BLESSING is full of them: (1) Jim's encounter with the tractor in the barn that leads to his death; (2) William spying on Martha, then becoming victimized himself by the killer; (3) Martha taking a bath, unaware that the killer has placed a snake on the bathroom floor; (4) Vicky and John encountering the killer while making out in her car in the middle of a dark field, and her subsequent attempts to escape; (5) the revelation of "whodunit" and Martha's desperate battle to the death with the killer; and the best of them all: (6) Lana's terrifying first encounter with the killer while trapped in the barn. This particular setpiece is actually even better than most of the ones that would come later in NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET and SCREAM. It is even more remarkable because it is the only one that takes place during the daytime - and, yet, it is the scariest one of all.

The cast is full of beautiful, talented faces. The trio of female leads are all solid and engaging. Maren Jensen (from BATTLESTAR GALACTICA fame) makes Martha an appealing mix of soft and hard, and she ably expresses the character's multiple internal conflicts - not just about what has happened to her husband, but also whether to stay and fight for his legacy or head back to L.A. with her friends.

Speaking of her pals, Vicky Anderson's sunny disposition is expertly played up by Susan Bruckner, who is the textbook "California Blonde." Lana Marcus, on the other hand, is meant to be a cooler, pensive, more distant personality, and the elegantly gorgeous Sharon Stone takes ownership of the role. This was Stone's first speaking part and her first real role. Before DEADLY BLESSING, she only had modeling experience and a dialogue-free, one-shot cameo in Woody Allen's STARDUST MEMORIES from 1979. Stone acquits herself well here, considering she had no real acting background and was required to play a wide range of intense emotions and scenes. The nice vulnerability that she would show much later in bigger, higher-profile productions like BASIC INSTINCT, SLIVER, INTERSECTION, THE SPECIALIST, and CASINO first reveals itself here. It's not surprising to note that, out of all the talented young folks just starting out in DEADLY BLESSING, Stone is the one who went the farthest with her career.

Lois Nettleton, Colleen Riley, and Lisa Hartman round out the solid female supporting cast. Hartman, who would later wed country singer Clint Black and make a name for herself on the TV show DALLAS, is particularly impressive. Like Stone, this was her first real role and she similarly knocks it out of the park. Ernest Borgnine, the most experienced castmember, shows his considerable mettle as Isaiah, the Hittite clansman who may or may not have basically ordered a Jihad of sorts on Martha, Lana, and Vicky. He lends the film some solid gravity and class. Finally, Jeff East and Doug Barr as equally compelling as John and Jim, Isaiah's sons who bristle under the oppressive rule of their father and the Hittite sect.

Then there's that famous (or infamous) twist ending. The single most divisive factor between those who like DEADLY BLESSING and those who don't is that ending which, admittedly, first seems to come out of nowhere. However, when you think back on the atmosphere of the film, the tone of the story, and all the hints planted here and there, it kind of makes sense. The version released in England omits the final twist and (SPOILER) simply ends after the first killer is revealed, and everyone thinking the nightmare is over. Lana says goodbye to Martha in front of the farm the next morning, and rides off with the sheriff to catch her flight back to L.A. The British version doesn't show what happens afterwards, when (SPOILER) Martha goes back into the house to see (SPOILER) what is waiting for her inside... Let's just say that our dear lucky Lana made the right choice of leaving when she did - she ends up being (SPOILER) the sole survivor of DEADLY BLESSING. Great, scary ending that deserves more credit than it often gets. I loved it. Poor Martha, though...

Bottom line: DEADLY BLESSING is solid horror flick with mystery overtones that marks a transition from Wes Craven's earlier grindhouse-style flicks and his sleeker, more commercial movies that would start a few years after this film. It is well-deserving of its increasingly popular status and growing cult following. It's safe to say that, without this movie, there would not have been a NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET or SCREAM.

# 524 - CARRIE (2013)

CARRIE (2013 - HORROR) ***1/2 out of *****

(Never piss off someone who can make bad things happen just by willing it - just saying...)



CAST: Chloe Grace Moretz, Julianne Moore, Gabriella Wilde, Portia Doubleday, Alex Russell, Ansel Elgort, Judy Greer, Zoe Belkin, Karissa Strain, Barry Shabaka Henley.

DIRECTOR: Kimberly Pierce

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and some compelling reasons to never harass someone with bad-ass telekinetic powers - straight ahead...




IT'S LIKE THIS: Poor high school senior Carrie White (Chloe Grace Moretz). She's as cute and pretty as, um, Chloe Grace Moretz but that's where pros end. On the cons side: (1) Carrie is routinely messed with and teased by her schoolmates, led by the pathologically evil Chris Hargenson (Portia Doubleday), the kind of manipulative bully who will always be harassing people, whether she is 16 or 60, unless an official complaint and lawsuit are filed against her; (2) Carrie has a religious zealot wacko for a mother (Julianne Moore) who doesn't tell her the womanly things she should know like, oh, one day she will start getting her period and shouldn't freak out about it because it's a normal part of sexual development; and the most devastating of all: (3) the senior prom is rapidly approaching but Carrie still doesn't have a date. All in all, not exactly a cakewalk for our dear Carrie.

Our story gets kicked off when Carrie discovers all about the aforementioned menstruation thing while showering after gym class. She basically sees all the blood coursing down her legs - and promptly freaks the fuck out. Carrie screams for help and rushes up to her classmates, who are understandably wondering why a little, um, crimson discharge is making her spaz out. That harassing bully Chris seizes the opportunity to be, well, even more of a harassing bully: she uses her Smartphone to film Carrie writhing around on the shower floor, bloodier than a stuck pig - while urging the other girls to hurl tampons at Carrie and yell "Plug it up! Plug it up! Plug it up! Plug it up! Plug it up! Plug it up! Plug it up! Plug it up! Plug it up!" A shining example of sisterhood, this is not, folks.

As you can imagine, this incident doesn't go over well with the school's administrators. The tender but tough Ms. Desjardins (Judy Greer) is instructed by Principal Morton (Barry Shabaka Henley) to fully investigate the matter. To make matters even worse, our psycho bitch Chris posts the video of Carrie bleeding all over You Tube. Ms. Desjardins urges Carrie to file a well-deserved complaint but Carrie takes the high road and decides not to. Ms. Desjardins, however, is not as forgiving: she punishes Chris and the other girls by making them do grueling exercise grills after class - either that, or they are banned from the prom. As you can imagine, the girls basically make like bimbo versions of Jackie Joyner-Kersey and get busy.

All except that psycho Chris - who thinks she can defy Ms. Desjardins and get away with it. Basically, she refuses to do any of the drills and urges her classmates to join her in her rebellion. When they all basically tell her to go fuck herself because there is no way in hell they are missing prom, too, Chris runs off throwing a hissy-fit to daddy. Mr. Hargenson (Hart Bochner) shows up to try to browbeat Ms. Desjardins and Principal Morton to let Chris go to prom. However, his attitude changes when learns about the video of Carrie that Chris took and posted on You Tube. When he demands to see her Smartphone to check if the video is on there, Chris pulls another hissy-fit and runs out of the room. Nothing sadder than a manipulative, harassing bully who finally gets caught in the act.

One girl who does feel genuinely bad about her participation in the shower incident is the lovely Sue Snell (Gabriella Wilde), who is inexplicably best friends with Chris. How can such a sweet, sympathetic, and kind-hearted girl like Sue be best friends with a fake, ugly-hearted, rotten-on-the-inside, awful person like Chris? Well, after the shower incident, Sue begins to see Chris' true, nasty colors and backs the hell away from her, big-time, and decides to keep things just all-business between them. No more personal stuff, thank you.

To make amends to Carrie, Sue decides to make a sacrifice: she graciously and generously tells her boyfriend Tommy Ross (Ansel Elgort) to take Carrie to the prom instead - and Sue will stay home and let the poor tormented girl enjoy a magical night of her own at the dance. At first, Mrs. Desjardins is skeptical of Sue's plan, but she gradually realizes that Sue is 100% sincere and is trying to make things right. And, as you can imagine, Carrie is overjoyed by the prospect of going to the prom with the guy she's been crushing on forever. It's quite literally a dream come true. If only Mama White would go along with it...

As we mentioned before, Margaret (Carrie's mom) is a religious zealot who abhors anything that isn't sanctioned by the Old Testament - and that includes going to prom with a hottie like Tommy Ross. Margaret does her best to get Carrie to decline, but Carrie has made up her mind that she will live it up finally - and stop living in the shadows. And when Margaret puts up a fight, Carrie lifts up all the furniture in the house using only her mind and puts Margaret in an invisible stranglehold from twenty feet away.

Oh, I didn't mention that Carrie has telekinetic powers? Well, she does, folks. In case you are wondering what that is, it's the ability to move objects just by concentrating and thinking about it. In other words, this is not the girl you want to cross the line with...

Will Carrie have a magical night at the prom? Or will Chris continue to harass her even though she's been banned from attending the event? And will Chris try to get back at Sue for seeing through Chris’ phony façade and rightfully turning away from her? Will Margaret find a way to keep Carrie home? Is she right when she warns Carrie that "they'll all laugh at you!"? Will Ms. Desjardins be able to protect Carrie? And who will protect Carrie's tormentors when she finally decides enough is fucking enough?

Five words: this will not end well...


BUT, SERIOUSLY: When we were leaving the theatre after watching CARRIE, a group of teenagers in front of us were discussing the film. One of them turned to the others and derisively said, "I guess the moral of the story is we should be nice to weirdos." The others laughed in response, and then they moved on to other topics not related to the film. However, whether or not they realized it, they hit the thematic nail right on the head - and one can only hope they will take it seriously. Or as Sue Snell, one of the movie's few survivors, says at the very end to an investigative panel convened to look into the prom incident where Carrie's wrath finally exploded: "Carrie White was just like us. She had hopes. She had dreams. You can only push someone so far before they break..."

CARRIE is a remake of the 1976 film that was based on Stephen King's best-seller of the same name. When the first movie came out in the mid-70s, America's high schools were considered relatively safe. The notion that they would eventually become increasingly common settings for mass murders and shootings was totally alien back then. Unfortunately, however, with the April 20, 1999 shootings at Columbine High School in Columbine, Colorado, our world changed. Bullying was initially cited as a main factor in the Columbine massacre, though there are those who now question whether other factors were involved. And although school shootings occurred before Columbine, it was never at that large of a scale and this tragic event that put a terrible face on the new, growing problem.

A study by the United States Secret Service about a year after the Columbine massacre reportedly showed that, in about two-thirds of 37 pre-meditated school shootings, bullying was a major factor. The website stopbullying.gov also states that 12 out of 15 school shootings in the 1990s were motivated by bullying. And now with the advent of social media, a new form of harassment has taken shape: cyberbullying and cyberstalking. Just recently, a Florida 12-year old killed herself after relentless bullying and being stalked online and in person by her peers. In CARRIE 2013, Carrie White becomes a victim of cyberbullying when Chris Hargenson posts the shower incident video on YouTube - mirroring real-life events.

Bottom line: with all the stories of bullying and harassment in schools reported over the last ten years, CARRIE 2013 takes on an added layer of significance. Meanwhile, watching CARRIE 1976 either for the first time or once again also has an eerie effect, because of how Stephen King intuited the future with his tale of a teased, harassed, and oppressed school outsider finally reaching her limits - with deadly consequences. In the end, CARRIE 1976 is a better film, but CARRIE 2013 is still a worthy remake.

The main reason the original film is better than the remake is because of Carrie herself, and the difference in the actresses playing her. In the 1976 version, Sissy Spacek brings a truly heartbreaking quality to the role. In Spacek's hands, there is a painful shyness to Carrie White that is almost palpable. You truly feel for her and want to protect her - which makes the harassment and abuse she gets from her peers even more wrenching. In the remake, Chloe Grace Moretz is a little too "pulled together." While we still feel sympathy for Moretz's Carrie, and want to see her left in peace, we are not as concerned for her as we are for Spacek's Carrie.

This has a lot to do with Moretz and how she carries herself. She has successfully navigated the tricky path from of child star to teen star that has tripped up many young performers before her, primarily due to her preternatural maturity and sangfroid. From her first major cinematic appearances as the precocious young terminal patient in Jessica Alba's otherwise tepid 2008 thriller THE EYE, and as the sister of Joseph Gordon-Levitt's lovelorn character in 2009's 500 DAYS OF SUMMER, Moretz has always displayed a self-assured and confident air that clings to her like a bold fragrance. Even in her characters' most vulnerable moments, this cool composure gives her an "I-will-be-just-fine-thank-you" air. As a result, she makes Carrie into less of a victim than Spacek did back in 1976 – which, in turn, makes this film just a little less affecting than the original.

What makes us still root for Carrie here, though, is the fact that her tormentors and harassers are just as unlikable and awful in this version as their 1976 counterparts - perhaps even more. Portia Doubleday takes the role of Chris Hargenson that Nancy Allen originally ran with and makes her even more loathsome, if that's possible. The film's most satisfying moment is when Chris and her boyfriend/accomplice Billy Nolan (Alex Russell, stepping into John Travolta's shoes) finally get what's coming to them at Carrie's hands. Poetic justice, if there was ever any. The rest of Chris’ bullying posse led by Karissa Strain and Zoe Belkin are similarly hissable.

Also, most of the “positive” characters are more vivid than their 1976 predecessors. The new version of Tommy Ross - Sue's boyfriend who helps her make it up to Carrie - is even more engaging than the one before. Ansel Elgort gives the role the same quirky sweetness that William Katt did in 1976 - but also infuses it with genuinely sexy masculinity. Which makes Tommy's eventual fate even sadder. In fact, when discussing this movie afterwards, we agreed that it wasn't (SPOILERS) the pig's blood that Chris and Billy dumped all over Carrie on the prom stage that really set her off - it was actually Tommy's accidental death because of the falling metal bucket. Basically, when Carrie saw this kind-hearted guy die because of Chris and Billy's malice, all bets were off - and there was no turning back.

My favorite characters though, are Sue Snell and Ms. Desjardins, the two ladies who each throw Carrie a lifeline that ultimately is not enough to save her. Gabriella Wilde's version of Sue is a lot more vulnerable and therefore less ambiguous and more likable than Amy Irving's interpretation in the original. Same goes for Judy Greer as Ms. Desjardins, who tries to look out for Carrie as best she can within the parameters of her job. Greer makes her version of the role less severe than Betty Buckley's back in 1976, without compromising her toughness. It's a tricky act, but Greer (who made her mark in comedies) manages it, proving that she can do serious as well as funny when she chooses.

Finally, there is Julianne Moore as Margaret White, a role that Piper Laurie made scary and unsettling in 1976. Here, Moore does a very welcome thing - she underscores Margaret's humanity. Yes, this makes the character a lot less creepy, but it also makes us see her as more than a one-dimensional religious nut - and more of a woman who's lived a hard life and is now inadvertently taking it out on her daughter. Julianne Moore has wonderfully expressive eyes that always seem to have a hint of sadness in them, even when she's smiling - and that vulnerability turns Margaret White into a more sympathetic version than the one Laurie gave us in the original. Brava, Julianne...

In the end, CARRIE 2013 is a solid remake of the 1976 classic. Whether or not it will be taken as more than just an entertaining horror film about a girl with special powers who is pushed too far, remains to be seen. However, in this day and age when school shootings seem to be happening with alarming frequency, with many innocent lives getting caught in the crossfire, let's hope in some small way this story will impart lessons about genuine tolerance and kindness - as those teenagers at the movie theatre jokingly mentioned. But let's hope they realize that harassment, whether in school or out of it, is no joking matter.

The Halloween Reviews...

Hello, folks...

Just a quick note to say the Halloween Reviews will start posting tomorrow, all the way through All Hallow's Eve next Thursday. Have a wonderful, wonderful weekend!

#524 - CARRIE (2013)

#525 - DEADLY BLESSING (1981)

#526 - THE HOWLING (1981)

#527 - THE HOUSE WHERE EVIL DWELLS (1982)

#528 - THE LEGACY (1979)

#529 - CAT PEOPLE (1982)

#530 - TENTACLES (1977)

#531 - DAWN OF THE MUMMY (1981)

#532 - THE WOMAN IN BLACK (2012)

#533 - INSIDIOUS 2 (2013)

#534 - MAMA (2013)

#535 - DARIO ARGENTO'S DRACULA (2012)













Happy Halloween (in advance)...

# 523 - BEVERLY HILLS CHIHUAHUA (2008)

BEVERLY HILLS CHIHUAHUA (2008 - COMEDY / FAMILY) ***1/2 out of *****

(I wonder if they're going to stop by Taco Bell on the way to the border...)



CAST: Piper Perabo, Manolo Cardona, Jamie Lee Curtis, Maury Sterling, Jose Maria Yazpik, and the voices of Drew Barrymore, George Lopez, Andy Garcia, Cheech Marin, Paul Rodriguez, Placido Domingo, Edward James Olmos, Loretta Devine and more...

DIRECTOR: Raja Gosnell

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and some compelling reasons to never bring your pets south of the border - straight ahead...




IT'S LIKE THIS: I have an old buddy whom we will "Matteo." Matteo is about, oh, 5'2" on a good day - but doesn't know it. Nope. He thinks he's about, oh, 6'5" - especially when he's been drinking. Trust me - you have not lived until you've seen a guy who's shorter than Jodie Foster in flats, yelling "YOU WANT SOME OF THIS!?!?" to a towering dude who's taller than Michael Jordan. It's amusing and, well, terrifying to watch - in equal measure. Because of his tendency to think he is bigger than he actually is, I call "Matteo" the following nickname: "My Lil' Chihuahua..." Which he pretends to dislike, but I know him better than he thinks. This one goes out to you, Papi.

Anyhow, the comparison of Matteo's bullish tendencies to the famously feisty small dogs that originated from the Chihuahua region of Mexico is an apt one. Just like my buddy, Chihuahuas are full of spit and vinegar, and are unafraid to take on other dogs that are ten times their size. Chihuahuas are full of personality and flair - and I shudder to think of how the World might have turned out if God Almighty hadn't made them as tiny as they are. Imagine if Chihuahuas actually grew to be the size of German Shepherds? We would have one in the White House right now, sitting in the Oval Office – and I don’t mean on the carpet. The only thing stopping these little shits from taking over the Earth, as I write this, is the fact that you could accidentally step on them and effectively end their World Domination scheme before it even gets off the ground.

Which brings me to our next review, BEVERLY HILLS CHIHUAHUA. As the title suggests, the story pivots on a spoiled, pampered mini-pooch named Chloe (voice of Drew Barrymore) who lives in the chi-chi Los Angeles neighborhood of Beverly Hills. Apparently, BH has already been taken over by the Chihuahua breed, judging from all the chicks (and some guys) walking around with these little Mexican ankle-biters in their bags and knapsacks. And let me just say that these dogs are more privileged than your average Kardashian - but a lot less annoying.

One of these folks is Vivian Winthrop-Ashe (Jamie Lee Curtis), a wealthy cosmetics tycoon who owns Chloe - and let's just say Viv spoils and dotes on her like there's no tomorrow. I would say that Viv treats the princessy pooch as if she were her daughter - but that wouldn't be enough. Chloe basically owns Viv. Hell, I have human fashion designer friends who don't have as much clothes as this dog has. Yes, sir... Princess Chloe is living the good life.

And what would any princess be without at least one secret admirer? In Chloe's case, he is the pet Chihuahua of Viv's hunky Mexican landscaper, Sam (Manolo Cardona). The dog's name is Papi (voice of George Lopez) - and he is basically Matteo with a Mexican accent. Papi has it bad for Chloe, and has taken to giving her dead grasshoppers as a token of his affection. Pssssst, Papi: right idea, wrong execution, hermano. Forget the insects - go for the Louis Vuitton doggie knapsack, dude. It goes without saying that all of Papi's wooing attempts have pretty much failed spectacularly.

Then things take a turn for the... well, depending on whose perspective you choose, it could be for the better for the worse. For Papi, it's the better. For Chloe, it's definitely the worse. You see, Viv has to go to Europe on a four-city tour to promote her new cosmetics line, and asks her irresponsible niece Rachel (Piper Perabo) to watch Chloe. And sure enough, the flaky Rachel drags Chloe with her and her equally-useless pals on a road trip to Mexico - where they promptly lose Chloe. And just like that, the pampered, primped, persnickety pooch is lost in a place that she thought only existed in her nightmares: the whole region south of the border.

This is where the "turn for the better" for Papi kicks in: when he and his master Sam learn about Chloe's disappearance, they spring into action and head to Mexico. I mean what better way to impress a girl than to rescue her from dire danger, right? Or at least, from a lot of dirt and questionable tap water. Eventually, Sam and Papi run into Rachel at a Mexican police station, where they reluctantly team up. Seems that Papi isn't the only Mexican with a serious jones for a white chick, as it appears that Sam has got a boner the size of Baja for Rachel. My, my, this is getting interesting, indeed...

Will Sam, Papi, and Rachel find Chloe? What happens when Chloe winds up in the middle of a dog-fighting ring that pits her against the feared El Diablo (voice of Edward James Olmos), a vicious Doberman pinscher? Will she survive the encounter? Or will she be rescued by the chivalrous Delgado (Andy Garcia), a cynical German Shepherd with a dark past? Will Delgado be able to escort Chloe all the way to the Mexico-U.S. border in one piece? Or will the crazy dog-fighting syndicate catch up with them? Will Papi and Chloe be re-united, and sire a bunch of Papitos and Chloeitas? How will this all end?

Whatever. Four words: Yo quiero, Taco Bell!

BUT, SERIOUSLY: Some movies have no higher intention than to entertain and charm. Unlike films like GRAVITY (our most recent review) that wrap themselves in lofty hype and claims to greatness, some movies simply drop all pretensions and take you on a no-frills roller-coaster ride for a couple of hours. BEVERLY HILLS CHIHUAHUA is one such film. It is not worthy of Academy Awards - and it doesn't pretend to be, either.

Anyone who loves dogs (particularly small dogs) will take a shine to this film (and its two sequels that went directly to DVD). It helps considerably that all the roles (both human and canine) are perfectly cast. Drew Barrymore’s sweet and innocent voice expertly captures Chloe's prissy and vulnerable sides, while George Lopez's trademark rasp gives Papi a rough-edged appeal. Andy Garcia's distinct persona of gracious-but-also-deadly-when-necessary is conveyed in his voicing of Delgado, the heroic German Shepherd who risks everything to help Chloe get back to the United States, while Edward James Olmos is spot-on as Delgado's evil nemesis, El Diablo. Then there's Cheech Marin and Paul Rodriguez, who are hilarious as Chico and Manuel, a nutty rat-and-iguana duo who pull cons on unsuspecting tourists. All these talented actors make the animal characters come alive with their expert voicing.

The human characters also hold their own against their four-legged counterparts, primarily because they are similarly well-cast. Piper Perabo is fine as the flighty Rachel, who gains a bit of maturity as she struggles to find Chloe. South American hunk Manolo Cardona is equally good as Sam, the humble landscaper who gets inspiration every day from his beloved Papi. Cardona would go on to star and score big in 2009's lovely and bittersweet UNDERTOW, which was a Colombian version of BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN (but even better). Finally, we have the wonderful Jamie Lee Curtis playing Viv, Chloe's devoted owner. Viv is in only a few scenes at the beginning and end of BEVERLY HILLS CHIHUAHUA, but Curtis infuses the role with her trademark warmth and likability - making it feel bigger than it is.

Ultimately, BEVERLY HILLS CHIHUAHUA is a solid film that should entertain kids, their families, and dog-lovers of all ages. Even cat people like us were charmed, and that says something... Go, Papi and Chloe!

# 522 - GRAVITY (2013)

GRAVITY (2013 - SCI-FI / ACTION / THRILLER) ***1/2 out of *****

(I'm thinking explosive upchucking in a zero-gravity environment is probably not a good thing...)



CAST: Sandra Bullock, George Clooney.

DIRECTOR: Alfonso Cuaron

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and some compelling reasons to remain Earthbound - straight ahead...




IT'S LIKE THIS: I bet if you polled the most popular jobs for young kids to aspire to when they grow up, "astronaut" is close to the top - if not actually at # 1. However, dear parents, if there is a movie that is very helpful in giving your little tykes a nice reality check about a career in space, our next review is it. GRAVITY explores what happens when a U.S. shuttle mission in Earth's orbit goes south (literally and figuratively) big-time when debris from a Russian satellite explosion turns there spacecraft into high-altitude Swiss cheese. Trust me: after your kids see this flick, they will be ready to explore careers in retail, law, fast food, go-go dancing, or any other kind of profession that doesn't require you to be more than five feet off the ground.

Before the shit hits the fan (or, rather, the debris hits the ship), our heroes are busy bantering and fucking around as they repair some communications device on the exterior of the shuttle. They are: (1) Dr. Ryan Stone (Sandra Bullock), cerebral and tentative medical engineer who is making her maiden voyage into orbit; and (2) Matt Kowalski (George Clooney), veteran astronaut who has led a shitload of missions before and is getting ready to retire when they return to Earth. In other words, this is Matt's last mission. Anyone thinking it will be in more ways than one, please join us at the Tequila table. You are obviously special. I should add that there are a few other crew members but we only hear and not actually see them (unless you count their corpses later on), so for all intents and purposes, Ryan and Matt are our only real characters.

Anyhow, just when you think you can't take anymore of this "water-cooler-talk-masquerading-as-repairing-the-comm-link-on-the-shuttle-talk", all that aforementioned debris from the Russian satellite finally hits. Of course, mission control down in Houston basically gives our intrepid heroes, oh, about 30 seconds of warning. In other words, "Houston, we have a problem - and YOU are the fucking problem." In other other words, thanks for nothing, assholes. And just like that, Ryan and Matt are cast adrift in space. After what seems like a goddamned eternity, Matt manages to lasso and corral a free-floating and free-spinning Ryan before she gets too close to Mars.

Thank goodness, too, because I can't imagine a fate worse than loop-de-looping your ass all the way across the universe. I can just imagine some Martian family having a nice picnic on a red dune, then the kids suddenly asking the parents: "Mom, Dad - what is THAT?!?" Cue the Martian parents looking up to see Ryan doing the ass-over-teakettle routine over and over again across the sky, all the while screaming her lungs out. Tragic, scary, but also somehow deeply, deeply hilarious.

But I digress. Anyhow, Matt - being the experienced vet that he is - tells Ryan that they have one chance: get to the Chinese space station over yonder and use its escape pod (or something) to re-enter Earth's atmosphere. However, to do that they must first get to the International space station that's a little closer to them and use that station's damaged escape pod to get to the Chinese one. Got all that? Good. I don't know about you folks, but I had no idea how crowded things were up in Earth's orbit. Hell, if Matt and Ryan just keep cruising a little bite more past the Chinese space station, they may find an orbiting Olive Garden or Arby's to grab a quick bite before returning to Earth.

So... will Matt and Ryan's plan work? Will they be able to reach the International station and use its damaged pod to reach the Chinese one beyond it? And even if they do make it to the Chinese space station, who's to say its pod isn't damaged, too? And what about their air? How long can it last, especially with them panting like a bunch of oversexed horndogs? Will Ryan live to see her boring-ass Illinois hometown again? Will Matt be able to tell more wacky stories to his mission control homies in Houston? Speaking of those useless bastards, what can they do to help our Dynamic Duo?

Well, considering Houston's version of an Early-Warning System consisted of twenty-five whole seconds, I'm thinking not much. Jack-asses.


BUT, SERIOUSLY: Some films are so technically-accomplished and dazzlingly shot and presented, that its easy to be overwhelmed by the sheer virtuosity of the special effects - and overlook that the human element of the plot is relatively mundane and formulaic. Such is the case with GRAVITY - which arrives with such tremendous hype and buzz that you would think it was the movie event of the decade. It is not. While the film is certainly a solid action/thriller with nice grounding in human emotion, it is most definitely not all that and a bag of chips. Bottom line: GRAVITY is overrated.

We have what we like to call the "Special vs. Standard" test in movies. That is, if you can watch a film in "standard version" and still be dazzled by it, then it's a winner. It's kind of like what a friend of mine likes to say: "There's no use in dating a woman who looks good in make-up, but actually resembles a saggy-faced basset hound underneath." Amen, brother. Basically, some films seem "terrific" when seen in "special" mode, i.e., IMAX, 3-D, or both. However, when you watch them in regular format, their "magic" fades - a little for some, considerably for others. AVATAR was one film that survived the transition from 3-D to standard, remaining a riveting, engrossing action/thriller (albeit with some hackneyed elements). INCEPTION was another film that played well both in IMAX and regular versions, with Christopher Nolan's pretzel-like plot still managing to confound and entrance. MISSION IMPOSSIBLE 4 is another example of an IMAX film that still holds its own even when brought "down to Earth" - primarily due to the best story in the MI series, as well as the best ensemble cast headed by a stronger-than-usual Tom Cruise. The latest Bond film, SKYFALL, was another espionage thriller given the IMAX treatment even though it was already a stellar flick on its own.

Then there are the films that depend entirely on their IMAX 3D/IMAX/3D elements to make them even remotely noteworthy - and there are too many to mention. Practically any big-budget action film or thriller these days is given the IMAX treatment. Most of these films are barely above-average experiences without the razzle-dazzle, though. Watch them in standard format - and you end wondering what the hoopla was all about, unlike the previously mentioned films which were terrific to begin with. GRAVITY falls somewhere in-between these two groups: it is definitely no masterpiece as everyone is trumpeting, but at the same time it has enough good things about it to keep it from being an average experience.

The action and thriller elements are well-staged by the writer-director team of Jonas and Alfonso Cuaron, and even in standard format, the technical effects are impressive. They are even more so in IMAX 3D. This part of GRAVITY works very well, and we found ourselves on the edges of our seats. The only quibble here is that there aren't that as many reversals or complications as you would expect. Our protagonists are usually able to solve their problems fairly easily. One sequence wherein Ryan "dreams" a solution to the thorniest issue she faces is subtly touching, but also may seem awfully convenient and contrived. How you receive it depends on how invested you are in Ryan as a character.

Which leads to the real reason GRAVITY isn't quite the masterpiece classic everyone seems to be trumpeting it as: the human element. Matt Kowalski is somewhat interesting, and we do get some nuance and dimension to him, but Clooney seems to be playing, well, George Clooney again: basically the same cocky, confident guy with hidden sensitive depths that we've seen in OCEAN'S 11, 12, & 13, and most of his oeuvre. Given that Matt is (SPOILER) actually in very little of GRAVITY's running time, this normally wouldn't be a problem because Ryan Stone is the actual protagonist of this movie - and she is more fleshed out than Matt. So what, then, is the problem? It pains me to say this, but: Sandra Bullock.

I love Sandra Bullock. She is my favorite movie comedienne, and always lights up any comedy she's in, even the undeniably weird and bizarre ALL ABOUT STEVE. Bottom line, this woman can make me laugh like no other. However, as a dramatic actress, I find her to be a bit stiff and inexpressive - quite simply, hard to read. And in dramatic films, emotional transparency is paramount. Her Oscar-winning turn in THE BLIND SIDE side-stepped this tendency because she was playing such a fiery, flamboyant character who was also quite open and funny, so the role tapped into many of Bullock's strengths. However, when she is playing dramatic leads who are more reserved and introverted, she ends up being remote and inscrutable. This made her characters in films like THE NET, THE LAKE HOUSE, and PREMONITION a little hard to get to know. To her credit, though, Bullock manages to bring a muted sense of vulnerability to these roles - but it sometimes isn't enough.

In GRAVITY, Ryan Stone's backstory is admittedly moving: she lost a four-year old daughter in a mundane accident at nursery school. Unfortunately, without the right kind of expressive actress to tap into this heartache, the saddest backstory in the World won't matter. It's not that Bullock is bad. She is okay, even good in certain scenes - just not good enough. During what should be her centerpiece moments (Ryan's suicide attempt and her subsequent hallucination of Matt returning to "save" her), Bullock isn't quite as moving as she should be. During these setpieces, I kept thinking about who would have been more emotionally-transparent and powerful in the role: Charlize Theron, Julianne Moore, Julia Roberts, Gwyneth Paltrow. All of these ladies have the capacity to say a thousands words with a single glance - and that is the kind of actress needed for this role.

What hinders GRAVITY from being a true classic, though, is its third act. Even with Bullock's miscasting, this movie might have fared better if writers Jonas and Alfonso Cuaron hadn't decided in the late going to turn Ryan Stone into a wisecracking action hero in the John McClane (DIE HARD) mode. These quippy punchlines undercut the emotionalism that the Cuarons tried to cultivate in the first half of the film. I particularly loathe the "I hate space" line. After that point, I realized that GRAVITY was not going to live up to the hype. You might argue that humor is sometimes an unexpected and welcome element in life-or-death situations, and I would agree tentatively with you. Here, though, it comes across as facile and cheap - especially with the cerebral approach taken by the first and second acts of the film.

Then there's the ending, with bombastic music blaring over scenes that are supposed to signify Ryan Stone's "rebirth" as a human finding her inner strength and second wind. Let's just say that at this point, the Cuarons completely throw subtlety out the window. Had Ryan's emotional transformation and character arc been more moving, we might have found this denouement satisfying. As it is, it comes across as too easy, unearned, and perplexing. Too bad, too, because with the right kind of development (and the right actress), this could've been an emotionally-dynamic ending. Instead, it's merely over-the-top and almost silly.

There's a lot of Oscar talk surrounding GRAVITY and its stars, and I have to say we are quite amused by that. GRAVITY is certainly a good film - but it is nowhere near as good as everyone is making it out to be. And as much as I love Sandra Bullock as a comedienne, her abilities as a dramatic actress are not as flawless. Her work here is competent, even good in some parts, but it does not deserve an Academy Award. The areas where GRAVITY deserves Oscars are in the technical areas of Visual Effects, Cinemtatography, and Sound Effects. In the areas governed by human emotion - acting, writing, directing - it is merely good. And "good" is simply not good enough for an Academy Award. For that, a movie should be special.

And GRAVITY is not. In the end, GRAVITY is not the movie event of the year. It is, however, the most overrated movie of the 2013.