Ravenous (1999)

 You are what you eat.

This has long been due and awaited by a select* few, and tonight I am ready once again: Whilst wallowing in footnotes of a scientific nature and working my pretty ass off about topics no single remotely sane and especially 'normal'** person is interested in, I needed to occupy my creative multitasking with some visual input in order to actually concentrate on being a frelling out-of-work penniless genius who is being thought of as a weird, nerdy retard. Pardon my French. So the search for DVDs working on this glorious excuse for a laptop*** led to 'not-really-anything-working-besides-for-a-handful-that-I-have-already-watched-extensively' - as a result, thinning out the collection to what is available on one backup drive. This is a sore topic for me, as most of my DVDs are not working anymore, and most of my backups are A)**** on non-working peripheral drives, or B) dead internal drives in inaccessible impossible casings. Add C) non-accessible drives in dead motherboards and D) non-working broken DVDs as your personal level of Schadenfreude demands. It's easily possible to add E) non-working DVD-player to that - but as of recently, I can say 'thank you' to Maynard of horrormoviediary.net, who volunteered to send me a working external DVD-player. Thank you.

Still, the final solution in this case having been the handful of movies of which I have several backups - having been blessed with technological paranoia from an early involvement with it on -, I chose Ravenous to be the movie of the... day? Weekend? Don't know, don't care, but what counts is that Ravenous is one of those movies I can actually watch, so there we go - praise Dame Necessity.

First of all:
Robert J. Carlyle. OMG. Robert J. Carlyle.
Your hostess has to admit to going all fan-girl-y over that Scottish guy. His characters are always memorable - Colqhoun / Colonel Ives in this wonderful movie, the father in 28 Weeks Later (Hallêlu:-Fresnadillo/Boyle!), Dr. Rush in SGU (only thing saving that series, besides for the distinctly Farscape-esque touch of the story and the ship Destiny... srsly), .... and most recently, effing Rumplestiltskin in faerytale-smooch-drama-series Once Upon A Time (again, only saving grace of that thing - I do see a pattern here).

So. Ravenous. *toothy grin*

This is the story of a young man of the American military, Captain John Boyd (Guy Pearce), who has been sent to Fort Spencer, located in what has to count as pretty much the remotest areas of the Sierra Nevadas, for a reason made very clear at the very start of the narrative; there, he encounters a very archaic concept coming to life, threatening all - an archaic concept made manifest as a ravenous hunger... for human flesh.

(cue in cheering, applause and enthusiastic hooting of the doubtlessly huge crowd here for effect)

Captain John Boyd is a coward at heart. He managed to take an enemy post in a battle once (ah, yes: The movie is set during the time of the Mexican-American war - complete with in-period garb, which of course impressed me positively A LOT, being the historical-accuracy-nerd that I am), but that was under ...special circumstances. That was ...different. *grins toothily*
You see, he let himself be captured by the enemy (= evil Mexicans in this case) by 'playing dead' - he could not bear witnessing the deaths of all his men, and so he thought it would be a good idea to fake being dead. Wise choice indeed, considering that he found himself on a wagon loaded with the corpses of his fellow soldiers, buried underneath them. Getting their, ehm, inside-stuff into his mouth. Heh.

When a mysterious stranger who calls himself Colqhoun arrives at Ford Spencer shortly after Boyd has, our soldier does not know yet that his life will change completely under the influence of the remnants of his own past and the needs of the present. A horror movie with engaging and truly memorable, well-crafted characters! [rasping-hissing-guttural-reptilian noises] Happy squeal.

Without going too much into the background-end of movie-narratives, Ravenous manages to make every single character in this movie into a well-defined semiotic entity - stereotyped just enough to provide a starting point, but crafted into veritable personalities from quite early on (well... needs to be from quite early on, as some people kind of die. No, not peacefully, rest assured). There is simply no possibility to mistake one character for another, as it so often happens with modern horror flicks; in case you don't know what I mean, think back to the last movie you watched involving some person killing teenagers and/or young adults appearing in friend-circle-sized groups, maybe even one in which this happens outdoors, preferrably in some woodland area. If you should suddenly find yourself thinking about, I don't know, Friday the 13th or any other slasher movie from the past decades in which you find yourself mixing up the victims because they are simply flesh to be killed off, then you got the point I was trying to make. However - this movie. Oh my gods. This movie. Oh my gods.***** The characters are awesome. All of them.

Witness:

• The Stoner: Private Cleaves, an awesome performance by David Arquette. David Arquette! I really had not expected that.
• The Native (I - Stoner): George, convincingly played by Joseph Running Fox. The scene which touches upon catholicism is BRILLIANT.
• The Native (II - Female): Sheila Tousey plays Martha, sister to George the Stoner. Silent, tough.
• The Bookish Boss: Colonel Hart - Jeffrey Jones! His performance in this flick is just all-around nifteh. Like, seriously.
• The Aryan Übersoldier: Private Reich (lol), hilariously played by Neil McDonough. You can feel the aryan hardcore-ness emanating from the screen. Well played, Mr. McDonough, well played.
• The Religious Shy Nutter: Private Toffler, charmingly played by Jeremy Davies.
• The Alcoholic Doctor: Knox, portrayed by Stephen Spinella. Convincing. *nods* Convincing and funny, actually - but in this movie, the 'funny' (or should I make that 'amusing'?) kind of comes with the territory... which I fully approve of.
• The Naive Coward: Captain John Boyd, our very own lead.

...as I said. No single fucking way to confuse these characters with one another - visuals and voice are particular to each person. This is a good thing. Whilst I dislike the overuse of stereotyping in general, I welcome it as a device for storytelling - and let's face it, movies are narratives, therefore the rules of storytelling apply in a kind of way. Mhkay? Mhkay.

All of the characters are loveable in their own way, and you will no doubt have your favourite (and one you like the least...) - mine is, as readers familiar with my rantings and ...delicate distinctions on decadence, death and dismemberment as well as desiccating husks of dead things might already have guessed, the cannibalistic character, as played by - remember the elegies at the beginning of this review? x-actly - ROBERT CARLYLE (*swoons*). No one, I swear, no one plays the calculating wendigo beyond human behavioural patterns - and yet using these to his advantage by impersonating them to those who still suffer from them - like him: The original nightmare from which the variety of anthropomorphic monsters we have in our world's myths, sagas, stories, tales and bedtime whispers have spawned, the original dread to which all these pay witness.


It's one of us. 
  

As for anthropomorphic monsters of movie-land - I don't know how my esteemed readers feel about this, but I personally think that there's something archaic about a human eating another human. Satisfying. Basic. Or maybe it's that 'non-monstrous-looking people doing monstrous things to one another'-theme I have going on (-- my favourite topos, really)... anyways!

[I did want to add in some deeply philosophical stuff about why the stuff witnessed in this movie can be classified as cannibalism, followed by a deeply philosophical view on why most of the stuff can't be cannibalism for purely semantic reasons; let's just state that cannibalism would be the eating of one's own kind (as Cannibal Flesh Riot! taught us so well)... and the change from human to wendigo seems to be pretty straight and without any turns back to the olden road of not eating people. There, long philosophical point made.]


When looking at the atmospheric pictures Ravenous provides the viewer with, you have to figure in the soundtrack to delve into the whole movie-experience. I'd recommend a relaxing intoxicant of your personal choice if I ever did such things or would, indeed, even assume in my child-like naiveté that this would be something people would or could do without repercussion from the righteous, just and holy Law(s) [insert the Law(s) appropriate for your geographical area, religious persuasion, social stratum, education, gender, musical taste, movie preference, political persuasion(s), favourite drink, age range and relationship to cats here] for such a heinous act of malice, evil and brooding terror.
*nods sagely*

...feel free to crack open a cold one, though.

Enjoy *grins*

So... Soundtrack. Damon Albarn and Michael Nyman truly are AMAZING composers. I was a bit disoriented the first time I heard Nyman being mentioned on the cultural radio channel over here - Ö1 for those of you who keep track******, but quickly connected the name with this movie. Seriously - the man is brilliant. Together, these two men are more than brilliant. Ravenous' soundtrack is exactly the sound you'd like to have running whilst merrily hunting down your human prey, preferrably in the mountainous and wood-covered ranges of something with only thin air left. Tenderness******* and all that.

Pacing: Comes with the soundtrack - or rather, the existence of this brilliant musical accompaniment to the narrative told here proves that the pacing is here - and it is indeed. It runs. It floats. It's natural. Sometimes, it speeds up a bit to let us cherish the rest of the story as well instead of dwelling too long on one point (as I would be wont to do, just so that you unnecessarily are aware of that); it generally can be said that the movement is fluid and follows from what has already happened how (and how fast). Natural pacing. It's rare to see that in a movie - especially in a movie about cannibalism!

By the way: Why is it that when a woman produces and directs a movie that is witty, gory, entertaining and full of suspense throughout gets called weird, but when guys do the same thing, no one says that? Oh, wait. 21st century, I nearly forgot.


Anyways! I am not writing as much and as lengthily as I would actually want to (...there's A LOT of stuff about this movie in my brain that wants to jump out at unsuspecting strangers, trust me...); this is due to me sitting here in front of the craptop, trying to go through my list of movie-reviews I have jotted down under the heading of 'to write' in order to do at least a bit of stuff that is actually really important to the world at large******** instead of just sitting around and worrying about stuff bothering me. So I ask you to forgive me this insanely short review of a movie that would deserve 30+ screens of analysis and love and hugs and kisses and kinky sex.


Hence: This movie is going to be one of the best you've ever watched, unless you seriously dislike character development, in-period-garb for actors, great and difficile acting, wonderful stereotypes used as they should be used, cognizant pacing, a beautiful soundtrack that makes you want to hunt people********* and twists and turns most people cannot foresee. I enjoy this movie immensely, whenever I have the chance to watch it. Some day, I shall make this review longer and more tedious and awesome to read...

11 / 10 holes in the ground. Like... holes. In the ground.

* Read: mad and obsessive.

** CSICON: Committee for Surrealist Investigation of Claims of the Normal: 'Finnegan's paper began with the electrifying sentence, "The average Canadian has one testicle, just like Adolph Hitler -- or, more precisely, the average Canadian has 0.96 testicles, an even sadder plight than Hitler's, if the average Anything actually existed." He then went on to demonstrate that the normal or average human lives in substandard housing in Asia, has 1.04 vaginas, cannot read or write, suffers from malnutrition and never heard of Silken Thomas Fitzgerald or Brian Boru. "The normal," he concluded "consists of a null set which nobody and nothing really fits."' 

*** Destrøyer øv t3k-N0-10gY

**** I officially and psychologically hate yellow. Hence the colour. Now delve into your Schadenfreude! 

***** Eh? Eh? EH?

****** Yes. I listen to Ö1 and love horror movies, nothing wrong with those two usually mutually exclusive things being combined into one happy package in me. :D

******* Possibly not the tenderness most people are thinking of when hearing or reading that word. Just to make this clear: There is no cuddling involved. 

******** The snark comes from realising that nothing I do is actually really important to the world at large. 

********* I don't know about you guys, but I feel like doing a Ravenous impromptu-show whenever I hear the soundtrack... *grins*

Midnight Meat Train (2008)

The most terrifying ride you'll ever take.

*yawns*

It's the third time that I'm trying to watch this movie. Not that that's got to say anything about its quality - it just says that I have not been able to keep up enough suspense from the beginning to the end to actually *watch* this movie, instead of having a pleasang look at it from the corner of the eye.




The Midnight Meat Train is one of those movies that I never had high hopes resp. expectations for. I read the original story by Clive Barker (one of the better ones in his Books of Blood), and I have to admit that I liked it. No story I like can turn out good on screen... and Midnight Meat Train proves that once again.

I had high hopes for it, and if it had come to the big screen in Vienna, I'd have seen it - so apparently we either didn't get it or I missed it. Both valid possibilities.




Anyways... Midnight Meat Train. In the story, a photographer discovers gruesome evidence of one of the underground trains of New York going... somewhere. Somewhere else. And that somewhere else includes a butcher selecting clean meat for Them... and Them. It's a delicious story that opens up some questions about Clive Barker's universe and an intriguing read.

The movie... yeah.




The main protagonist plus his handful of friends are sympathetic enough, but at the same time exchangable.

At 0:19:25 we get Ted Raimi! Automatic +1 for the movie. I heart Ted Raimi. He has less than a minute to live. 49 seconds, to be exact. I love his character. Just as I love any of his short-lived cameos.




So... movie. Plot. Photographer who needs to make better pictures in order to secure money happens upon a mysterious guy in a suit, who apparently works at night until the morning comes. Fascinated for some obscure reason, the photographer starts following the man. He arrives in a meat packing plant on his heels of his mysterious quarry.




He also manages to take some pictures of Nyarlathotep the Younger*.

Who is waiting... waiting for something (the Butcher, not Nyarlathotep the Younger... or maybe he is? Or isn't? You decide...).

Or someone?

But a security guard stops him from entering the same train as the man he'd been following.

...

Our butcher has a problem (a quite unsavoury one at that) which makes him slower - worse - at his job: Procuring meat.

Human meat.




Our photographer starts to freak out a little bit when it seems that the people involved in the subway are also involved in unsolved abduction cases along the subway line... and of course, this doesn't go without consequences. Our vegetarian suddenly discovers the joys of meat (steak, to be precise), but things go downhill with his girlfriend. She thinks he's obsessing too much about the whole stuff with the missing persons and the butcher. After an argument, he agrees... only to follow the butcher the very same night

He sees his work. And the butcher sees him.

After what may or may be not a dream sequence, our photographer finds himself ...marked.




He tells his wife, but she doesn't believe him. He seems crazy to her, and she's scared - of him and of what might happen. That night, they try to break into the butcher's room at a hotel. There, they find various torture instruments.

I've always dreamt of one of these...

Anyways, jealousy on my part aside, the movie certainly is interesting. I guess that if the viewer is not familiar with Clive Barker's story, Midnight Meat Train can be an actually engaging film with an interesting storyline which is not quite as predictable as others within the genre. As with the original story, there are hints of something Greater beneath the streets and bowels of New York, the epitome of the City as a living hive.

I'd hit it. Quite literally. Possibly with the hook. *toothy grin*



I like to think of them as ghouls. Yeah, blame me for my impertinence.

I liked that they kept some of the details of the story. As in, really, really liked it. Overall, a surprisingly good adaption of the short story, and an entertaining movie in itself.







...9/10 sterilised meathooks


* See my Hellraiser review.

Mind Ripper aka The Outpost aka The Hills Have Eyes III (1995)

The Government Created Him. Now They Must Destroy Him.

Yay! Thanks to the fine folks over at Bloody Disgusting, I can finally watch the movie I've always wanted to watch again since I first caught it on TV about 12 years ago. This piece of work is called Mind Ripper aka The Outpost aka The Hillls Have Eyes III. It fails as an installment of The Hills Have Eyes, it fails as a Wes Craven output (then again, what were we expecting - he is only ....."presenting" the thing)... but it works as a nifteh, funny movie that I am deeply nostalgic for.

A group of three (3) scientists find a wounded young man in the middle of the American desert (well... some American desert). They inject him with a curious, uhm, injection - and soon after, the doctor who developed the. uhm, injected stuff leaves the project, as he is not okay with the way the other scientists are treating the subject.

Funnily enough, as coincidences go, on the day of leaving for his holidays with his family, the good doctor receives a phone call informing him about difficulties with the subject... his former subject.

Luckily, the movie is fast: 20 minutes into the movie, we already get our explanation for what what happened when. The military tried, as usual, to create a super-human soldier* by means of scientists**. Actually, they injected the guy they found with some sort of virus... which is now running wild in the subject, changing and transforming him.

...into something that leaves eyes behind.

In the meantime, we get some characterisation through father-son-interaction. Teenagers were allowed to smoke back then, and parents were allowed to get a little louder with their kids.




Cut to annoying daughter of scientist with her even more stupid and annoying boyfriend. "I want to pleasure you forever..." - we all know where that leads ***




For some reason I cannot fathom yet, the dysfunctional semi-family is heading towards the military headquarters - in which the three scientist/military-guys (and gal) are making a desperate run from something they can't understand. Whilst the family is happily walking into the former nuclear testing facility.




A former nuclear testing facility owned by some nice company named GenTec. I tend to inherently trust companies with names like GenTec. They can only have the best of humanity on their minds, surely? They wouldn't ever give in to scientific curiousity... or lucrative offers of high sums of money for more practical experiments. Surely not.




Gods, watching this movie is a pure delight. The camera is at times abysmally bad, very simple and... uhm... old. It's a cheap 90s B-movie in the tradition of 80s B-movies. It screams DTV-release with every fibre of its being. But I love it dearly. I just liked it when I accidentally caught it on TV more than a decade ago, and occasionally remembered it fondly. But now, I love it.




This is happening to the infected man's mouth, for example. In case you can't realise what it is, it's a tooth/claw at the end of a long, tentacle-like, penis-like thing that the mutated soldier can shoot out of his mouth - to feed on other people's "minds" (we freely assume he includes "brains" in that rather broad and metaphysical concept).

They also had computers back in those days when I was but a wee little babe.

Inevitably, the group splits up, because, you know, you're safer in small, uncoordinated groups when in some creepy, apparently deserted surroundings that shouldn't be deserted.

At the beginning of the third act, we get the explanation for all the weird stuff that has been going on on the defunct military base.




The thing that makes this movie special is the mutant/monster - "Thor" (TransHuman Organism). He has a background story, he even has character and a personality. He is changing, and he doesn't know what is changing in him or into what he is changing... and it causes him pain. We get a little twist here, one that makes Thor even more tragic than he already is... and then he loses himself in desperate rage.




Cut to our rag-tag group of heroes, off to save the day. With brains. Because they figured out that our anti-hero needs brains... or rather, certain parts of them.




We get some 15 minutes of filler "plot" (brother-sister-bonding, talks about dad, a useless dream sequence, drama, guilt etc.) before things really start again. Our refugees need to find the kids' father's hand, because only his hand is authorised for the main door (?)

One thing: This movie has far too many survivors. Far. Too. Many. Survivors. On the other hand, it has a nifteh monster that I've liked for the past 12 years.




Plus, I approve of monster-rape (one of the reasons why Evil Dead is such an endearing movie).

I mean... this movie just has it all. A nifty monster with character background, Lance Henriksen, death by monster, death by electricity, 80s visions of computers... far too many survivors... Still, a mightily entertaining flick. And I don't just say that out of pure nostalgia. I actually enjoyed watching this flick, even though the death-count is below acceptable.



6.75/10 sudden onsets of baldness. I love this movie.




*Black Science. Remember?




** Scientists are always working for governments and secret organisations and believe in Evil(TM).

*** Tcha. Better luck next time, mate. We got fooled with that.

Cannibal Holocaust (1980)

Man is omnipotent; nothing is impossible for him. What seemed unthinkable undertakings yesterday are history today. The conquest of the moon for example: who talks about it anymore? Today we are already on the threshold of conquering our galaxy, and in a not too distant tomorrow, we'll be considering the conquest of the universe - and yet man seems to ignore the fact that on this very planet there are still people living in the stone age and practicing cannibalism.

There is so much baggage and back story that goes with the movie that it is entirely impossible to simply write a review of Cannibal Holocaust without delving a bit into the reasons why this movie is as infamous as it is.

But first, I'll try to give you a short synopsis of what passes for a plot in this flick: Professor of anthropology Harold Monroe (Robert Kerman) travels to the Amazonas - the "Green Inferno" - in search for a team of four young people, who travelled there to film a documentary about cannibalism as practised by certain tribes living in that area. Together with Chaco Losojos, a man who knows the jungle like his, errr, pockets and what I can only surmise to be a half-native guide (and a native tribesman who is used like a dog) he embarks on a search that makes him experience for himself how cruel reality can be - and when he discovers the remains of the film the four missing (and dead) people left behind as their legacy to the world, he discovers that the cruelty of reality isn't just confined to "primitive" people, and leads him to wonder who the true cannibals are...

I have a few issues with this movie, to be honest. Let's start with the most obvious one:

Lack of cannibalism.

Yes, you read that correctly. Maybe my appetite for gore (no pun intended) is a bit too high for a movie from 1980, but considering that this movie is named Cannibal Holocaust and deals with, well, cannibalism, I was definitely expecting more. What we get are a few scenes of implied cannibalism, and the few shots of "actual" cannibalism just look fake. And not gross and disgusting at all. Or, you know, bloody and violent.

My favourite scene - a meouwser, only in big!

Which brings me to my second point: The blood and the gore effects. For Flying Spaghetti Monster's sake, can it be that hard to at least produce artificial blood that doesn't have that faint touch of pink? Considering that Ruggero Deodato had enough money to film on location in Colombia and New York, only filming the interior scenes in his native Italy, it sure as hell couldn't have been a question of money.

To all you ambitious film makers out there who want to avoid someone like me ranting about how the lack of quality-blood makes your movie terrible: Add a little bit of green to it. Make sure it has the right consistency. Make sure it's not too bright, or, gods forbid, pink. Trust me - a little effort with the blood makes up for a lot. Deodato or whoever was responsible for the creation/acquisition of the fake gore sure as hell didn't go for quality with the blood. Or quantity, if I might add that with a slightly nagging voice.

Third point: The portrayal of the Yanomamo and Shamatari tribes... I don't care that the film is presumably misogynistic, but damn, if that isn't exploitation at its core, I don't know what is. I seriously don't know how they got the natives to cooperate and play their assigned roles in Cannibal Holocaust, because man... demeaning. I was constantly reminded of animals - only that, in my experience and in this movie, animals actually are treated better. As long as they're inedible. Ehm.

Plus... careful with the word "primitive" and the use of the term "stone age" to indicate that something is "primitive". At least try to be careful with that around me, movie, because that happens to just include my archaeological field of study, and I'm easily offended when it comes to calling my chosen cultures "primitive". Or any other culture that is remotely linked to mine by the derogatery use of the term "stone age". Let me add that "stone age" is a bit of a vague term, because it encompasses quite a long time.

Then there's the sex scenes... or should I make that "rape scenes"? I have no problem with rape scenes in general, but watching one in particular, in which the documentarists are gang-raping a young native female, made me feel ashamed of being a member of the species homo sapiens.

Pwetty. Me like.

On to the strong points of Cannibal Holocaust.

The first thing that I noticed was the incredible soundtrack, created flawlessly by Riz Ortolani. It is atmospheric and incredibly well made - it adds a special quality to what may otherwise remain a more or less unspectacular exploitation flick from the very beginning of the eighties.

The gore and violence, whilst not exactly on a level which sits well with the gorehound in me (as the three people who read this blog of mine know, the more blood and guts and pointless violence I get to witness in a horror movie, the more happy I am), is at times beautifully executed, as with the skull in the screenshot above.

What I could have done without was the animal cruelty. 'Nuff said about that topic.

Stone peni:

I will never look at a vibrator with the same eyes after witnessing how the script of Cannibal Holocaust uses that stony, ehm, member.

The acting is actually good - not great, not wonderful, certainly not something that would win an award these days, but it is brutally realistic - partly due to the nature of the scenes the actors were forced through. If you're interested in reading more about the details of the tribulations the cast had to go through, check wikipedia - the whole story is way too long and detailed for me having the flu and still being up, freezing and hungry, at 7:15 AM on this beautiful Tuesday morning. Man... I need sleep badly. And something against the flu. Merf.

A surprisingly good movie, everything considered. Even with the amount of criticising on my part, I still find the movie to be entertaining and moving at the same time with its scenic, sweeping shots, its fast-paced and hectic certainty and bitter grimness. Truly, Cannibal Holocaust manages to do something which I noted with the French directors of The Hills Have Eyes, Inside and other recent awesome movies from that part of Europe: The merciless camera. The viewer becomes entangled in the movie, he is the voyeur for whom these scenes have been staged and created - and although we may flinch and shy away from the brutality, we still are captivated by what happens on the screen.

You certainly won't be bored with this example of cinematic voyeurism.

A moving and brutal criticism of our modern society and how it behaves when there is no law to keep the darkness of humanity in check.

7.75/10 ritualistic punishments for adultery.

Fear Itself (TV) - "Eater" (2008)

Call me paranoid... but please compare:

When a serial killer is put in police cells for the night, the duty team discovers he is a shape-shifter - someone who takes the form of any human he feeds on. Before long, the cops have to figure out which of them is a wolf in police uniform.

vs.

When a serial killer is put in special police cells for the night, officer Bannermann discovers that he (the killer) is a shape-shifter - someone who takes the form of any human whose heart he feeds on. Before long, the cops have to figure out which of them is a voodoo-wielding wolf in police uniform.

Familiar, mh?

Whilst watching this episode of "Fear Itself", I was faced with that constant nagging feeling in the back of my mind that I had already seen this a few years ago. Turns out I'm more or less right: 2002, the 4th episode of "Urban Gothic"'s second season named Eater aired. It wasn't a particularly endearing episode - then again, "Urban Gothic" didn't suffer from too many highlights anyways. So, in that episode, the killer is locked up in a police station and can take on the form of anyone who he fed off.

In THIS episode (let's call it "Eater 2.0"), the killer is locked up in a police station and can take on the form of anyone whose heart he ate. Oh, and there is voodoo.

The difference between Eater and Eater 2.0 aren't that many (honestly, what did you expect?). One of them: Eater 2.0 was directed by Stuart Gordon. That is indeed something, as I'm a big fan of the man. Other than that... the Eater is much cooler in Gordon's version.


Other than that, this episode is a decent entry to the "Fear Itself"-series. Good use of light, the camerawork isn't bad at all, and stereotypical characters. The story is open and makes no attempt to lure us into some sort of trap - right from the beginning we know what is going on, figure out what happened and watch events unfold that are no surprise to us, because they are so predictable.

This movie plays out solid and predictably.

Sometimes, that's not too bad a thing, but you have to admit that it's not exactly a hallmark of brilliance either. What surprises me a little bit is that it is a predictable movie directed by Stuart Gordon!

I don't know why this one here and the 2002 "Urban Gothic"-episode are so similar that we can easily think of one single script used for two different TV episodes. I'd be curious to know more - whether it's just pure chance or not. I mean, come on... Eater. Eater 2.0. Seriously, the similarities are so gargantuan that you couldn't miss them even if you were blind. *shakes head*


Neutral 5/10 bloody sinews that look like red chewing gum.

Fear Itself (TV) - "Skin and Bones" (2008)

Let me start this review by saying that the world needs more movies about "obscure" monsters of myth, legend and lore. Seriously: There are hundreds of vampire movies, hundreds of zombie flicks. There is a scary amount of movies about clowns (apparently, those red-nosed things strike a nerve in a lot of people), aliens from outer space of differing varieties and flavours, flicks about golems (read: Frankenstein), giant monsters (aka "men in rubber suits"), not to mention the countless movies about ghosts... but what about the REALLY COOL thingies that go bump in the night?

Most of you probably know that I adore the movie Cannibal Flesh Riot! with an unhealthy obsession. I would sacrifice my first-born for this movie, if I ever had one. There need to be more movies about ghouls. Because, you know, ghouls are wickedly awesome. However, realising that not everyone might feel about ghouls the same way I do, I am perfectly content with the second most wickedly cool and awesome monster of myth, legend and lore ever: The Wendigo (spellings of the term vary, choose your own favourite version).

Before I turn my attention to the movie in question (Skin and Bones), let me elaborate a bit about why I think this movie is awesome.

The wendigo myth is one of the more captivating myths about nasty critters that exist (I am purely expressing my own opinion, of course). There are lots of local variations, but the basics of the myth remains/remained the same all through the different stories of the Algonquin-tribes:

The wendigo is a cannibalistic entity that embodies greed, excess and gluttony. Humans can turn into wendigos by either committing an act of cannibalism or by being possessed by the wendigo spirit (the Spirit of the Lonely Places).

There is much more to it than just that, though, but it would sort of make this review explode with trivia and stories none of you want to read in a review of a TV show's episode, so I just say that wendigowak are awesome beyond words (only ghouls top them) and that you should feel free to peruse the internet in order to find out more about this intriguing myth and concept.
Warning: A certain level of intelligence is required in order to appreciate the myth in its entirety. You have been warned - so if you have difficulty spelling IQ, don't bother. Not that I think any of my few but precious readers fall under that category.

That said - on to the flick itself.

The scenery is absolutely adorable. Maybe it's because the area where I grew up looks more or less exactly the same (the mountains, the sky, the colours... ah, nostalgia creeps in...), but it's very beautiful.
The colours are rich and beautiful, the pictures executed nearly perfectly. I especially like that the camera doesn't hesitate to show us extremely pretty, beautiful sights in the same frame as genuinely creepy and unsettling imagery. Thumbs up, Larry Fessenden. I thoroughly enjoyed what you did there.

Also, the script is good, no matter how often I have to read from other people who appreciate a good horror movie that it was like "Ravenous Lite".
Seriously, folks: There aren't that many ways to write up a wendigo-story and still stay close to the source material. Ravenous (one of my all-time favourites EVAR) managed to do it. Skin and Bones also manages to do it, and admirably so.
So unless you complain about "pretty much every vampire movie is a rip off of [insert personal "THE FIRST, ULTIMATE VAMPIRE MOVIE" here]" - which I seriously doubt anyone does, even purism can't go that far... I hope... O_o - or can't watch any zombie flick because, hey, it rips off Romero (it has ZOMBIES! ZOMG! RIP OFF!!!)... just don't.
Whilst I agree that the setting and the scenery of Skin and Bones may remind viewers of Ravenous, it's a movie in itself and doesn't need to "rip off" the movie that I managed not to review yet but managed a few times in this paragraph now (Ecce! To what lengths she goes in order to avoid typing Ravenous yet again... oh, damn... ><). I personally appreciate that Drew McWeeny and Scott Swan took the myth of the wendigo and didn't twist it into something it isn't. Then again, they already showed that they can write captivating scripts in Showtime's "Masters of Horror" episodes Pro-Life and Cigarette Burns, both of which I enjoyed. In my personal opinion, they managed to top those two episodes with Skin and Bones.

The story in itself is very basic. You gotta enjoy movies that work without adding unnecessary ballast to the plot: The father of a family (one (1) mother, two (2) sons, one (1) brother of the father, which would make him the boys' uncle, technically speaking) got lost in the mountainous woods whilst with a hunting party... and remained lost for ten days. Now he's back... and changed. He's the party's only survivor, and he's hungry...

Really, guys and gals, ladies and gentlemen, ghouls and ghosts - you HAVE to watch this. Its main bonus, besides for being a thoroughly enjoyable flick about the wendigo-myth, is...

Doug Jones.

You might remember him as the Pale Man in Guillermo del Toro's beautiful Pan's Labyrinth. Pale Man? Guy with his eyes in his hands? Creeeeeeepy? Yepp, that one.

And I have to say... Jones really carries the movie on his shoulders. His performance alone is enough to watch this episode of "Fear Itself". Seriously, I could do with much more of him on the screen (and, consequently, much less of any other character). It is pure joy to watch him. His movements are perfectly executed, his voice... oh my Gods, the voice...

...let me put it this way: You can literally feel the anger and rage and hunger and loneliness in the voice of the Spirit of Lonely Places. Well, at least I could. Maybe I'm just more sympathetic towards wendigowak than the rest of the world is, though.

Jones is creepy. That pretty much sums it up. Creepy... gorgeously creepy.

I think I have to watch it again now.

10/10 eerily moving portrayals of someone who lost his humanity to hunger... consuming, all-devouring hunger...

Wrong Turn 2: Dead End (2007)

Aaaaaaaah... and tonight, ladies and gentlemen, ghosts and ghouls and assorted monstrosities, we are back in the beautiful, scenic West Virginia woods, home to the nice, god-fearing inbred mutant cannibals from Wrong Turn.

To quote my DVD for a synopsis: The ultimate reality show turns into the ultimate in horror for six contestants when they find themselves pitted against hideously deformed and insatiably hungry cannibals... AND it features Henry Rollins.


This is Kimberly Campbell, playing herself (an interesting way to break the fourth wall, if I might say so). You know what will happen to her, right? Right?

Exactly.

And so, the sequel to Wrong Turn starts. Promising and truly enjoyable. I love my unrated redux version. It is pretty.



To quote director Joe Lynch from the commentary track (I like the guy - anyone who says to himself "I want to start the movie with a chick being split in half with entrails coming out of her vagina!" is okay in my book): "This is their walking off into the sunset shot, the movie is practically over now." I could agree, but then again, I would miss out on 96 minutes of gore.

The characters are, for the most part, stereotypes - they seem shallow and over the top at first, but the fact that the movie revels in using these stereotypes and just runs with them makes it ...work. And it works surprisingly good. We get a few bits about the background of the characters spiced throughout the movie, and it doesn't deter from the pacing or violence. We get to know mainly the dynamics between the characters, which is interesting in itself.

Did I mention that this movie features Henry Rollins? Henry Rollins!

Also, I totally approve that, unlike in its predecessor, we have no idea about who will survive and who won't. Trust me, if you know how horror movies work, you will be in for at least... 8 surprises. Okay, at least one. But seriously, Wrong Turn 2: Dead End breaks with the killing conventions. But see for yourself - take a mental note of who you think who will die when and how, and compare with the actual movie. If you can foresee all of the deaths and the survivors and the timing, then I shall bow down to your superior knowledge of horror flicks.



Speaking of characters... Jonesy. Oh my gods, JONESY. Every time he appeared on screen, I had to cringe inside. I was most definitely annoyed by that character... really annoyed. I was praying for him to die as soon as possible.

It has been criticised that Wrong Turn 2: Dead End isn't as atmospheric as the prequel, which is true to some extent. However, Wrong Turn's suspense mainly happens at night. This sequel is mostly shot during the day, in natural, bright daylight. Whereas Wrong Turn doesn't show us the inbred cannibalistic mutants until the end, we get treated to full, clear shots of the family from early on. However, it works for me - what reason is there to hide the mutants? We know them already, to repeat the whole not showing them clearly gimmick from the first movie would have been annoying.

Wrong Turn 2: Dead End also delivers more guts, more blood, more violence... all in all, more of everything. Sure, this is a matter of personal taste, but I like it. Usually, I'm not a big fan of sequels, but this... this definitely tops Wrong Turn. Although I have to admit that I liked the mutants from the first movie better than the family here (with, of course, the big exception of Three Finger. He rules.)... however, I can live with it.

Henry Rollins can stare people into submission.

Because, you know, Wrong Turn 2: Dead End makes me happy.

Something I never thought of seeing, not even in my wildest, most twisted dreams: A young mutant jerking off to the sight of a non-mutant character (see below for a portrait of the inciting sight), creating a relationship drama between him and his sister, who also happens to be his lover. I approve of Sister.

Those boobs nearly destroyed a happy couple's love life.

This is what happens to the boob-equipped lady. Behold - the spine!

Mutant masturbation, relationship drama, brutal killing and incest all in one scene. This pleases me.

What does not please me is Henry Rollins beating up my favourite mutant, Three Fingers, He of the Howling, Ghoulish Laughter.



Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaand the old timer from the first movie! I iz happy. By including him in this movie, we get so much... a delightful twist for once, that explains his presence and behaviour in the first movie, AND an actual origin story for our sweet mutant inbred family of cannibals.



Also, I just LOVE the bonding scene between Pa and Brother. Man, that young mutant is a perfect shot. His dad surely must be proud of him. I know I would be proud... in fact, I perversely feel a little bit of pride. A brave young man.



At which point I want to address the camerawork. It's truly outstanding - some of the shots are dangerously awesome, and all of them are beautiful. I really can't say anything more. Just good. Not just solid, but really good. Light, shadow... beautifully used, and just... I am truly impressed.

Also, we spend the last act of the movie in a veritable slaughterhouse (the family's house). I love slaughterhouses. Especially ones like that, complete with torture - physical AND psychological torture. I fully approve of that.

Preparing the food.

Another funny thing is that Henry Rollins pulls a Boromir* on us in this movie. Only infinitely cooler than Boromir did.

Everyone involved in that movie really did a great job. The acting is good throughout the whole movie, the script is cool, the violence and gore are awesome, the camerawork is at times brilliant...

AND we get a Happy End!

This movie earns the cynsanity stamp of approval. Now I just have to come up with a design for it, and I shall, but not now.

Thank you, Joe Lynch. Thank you for this movie.

9.75/10 incestuous inbred mutant cannibal hunters. I don't give the full 10/10 because I found the cannibals from the first one to look cooler. Oh, and... in case you want to have a character who attempted suicide at some point prior to the movie: Always remember Rippy the Razor!



*If you ever watched The Lord of the Rings, you will probably know what I mean. Remember that scene in which Boromir bravely takes about half a dozen arrows from the Uruk Hai, and still fights off hordes of orcs and tries to protect the annoying little hobbits? He is literally just like a sieve, and still he smashes his sword around. That's pulling a Boromir. And... Henry Rollins. Oh my. He does it so well.