Horror-thon 2008

Success!! GP survived 8 unending hours of pure horror yesterday, in preparation for this most phantasmic of holidays. Below are 10 mini-reviews (in no particular order), cooked up for your viewing pleasure. Hold on to your pointy hats.....!

1. 2001 Maniacs (2005)- Dir. by Tim Sullivan. Star. Robert Englund.

2001 Maniacs is the tale of a crew of three college boys off to Daytona Beach for Spring Break. Instead, an unexpected detour takes them to a place called Pleasant Valley. While it's not as far South as Florida, the place is certainly "deep South". Englund plays the town mayor, who sports a Confederate Flag eye patch and a hokey twang. The townsfolk are amazingly generous, but more than a little bit creepy. Excitement for the big feast abounds, but fewer and fewer outsiders seem to be likely to make it to the event...alive anyway. Aside from the fact that the title may have just as well have been 2001 Boob Shots, 2001 Maniacs was highly amusing. The movie shares many intentional similarities to Cabin Fever. So, if you enjoyed watching that one, you'll love this movie. This movie doesn't take itself seriously for a second and that's part of what makes it so much fun. I still don't think Englund would have a career if it wasn't for Freddy Kreuger.

3 stars. trailer

2. Halloween (2007) - Dir. by Rob Zombie. Star. Malcolm McDowell

So many people have told me that they were disappointed with Rob Zombie's remake of Halloween that I was prepared to be disappointed. After finally seeing the film, I would consider it less of a "remake" than an "homage". Zombie has always made it abundantly clear, even prior to his directorial debut, that he is a fan of the genre. He pays a great deal of respect to the original work. The first half of the movie is the background story of how Michael Myers came to be the psychopathic killer he is known as. The second half is a rehash (or an update) of the events in the original film. I found myself completely satisfied with the Rob Zombie version. It shed much light into the main character while respecting John Carpenter's vision.

4 stars. trailer

3. Vampire Diary (2007) - Dir. by Mark James & Phil O'Shea. Star. Anna Walton

Vampire Diary is a film out of the UK. It begins as the story of documentary filmmaker, Holly, who is busy following a group of so-called "vampires" about. This group of club-kids are truly nothing more than pretenders, dancing around in black eyeliner and latex. It's while she's filming them, however, that she meets a mysterious woman named Vicki. Vicki is a completely different breed. The second part of this story covers the somewhat tragic lesbian relationship between Holly and Vicki. Vampire Diary has a very amateur feel that gives the film a gritty edge and a distinctly UK underground flavor. It has a tendency to drag a bit in the middle and it is certainly not typical of vampire movies. The best part is really watching Anna Walton.

2 1/2 stars. trailer

4. The Happening (2008) - Dir. by M. Night Shyamalan. Star. Mark Wahlberg

The latest from M. Night Shyamalan seems to have gotten just as bad of a rap as The Village did. Call me biased, but I don't think this director has yet to make a "bad" movie. In The Happening, a mysterious event has spread throughout the East Coast, causing people to commit suicide en masse. School Science teacher Elliot Moore, his wife and their friend learn that the airborn toxin is wafting to Philadelphia and decide to join the exodus out of town. I thought the storyline for The Happening was an inspired one; very original. There were some extremely disturbing scenes, most memorable of them being at the construction site. However, the movie suffers from one major flaw. It's name is Mark Wahlberg. While I appreciate the man's acting for the most part, he was awful in The Happening. A cardboard cutout of the actor would have done just as well and had to have been paid far less.

3 stars. trailer

5. Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (2007) - Dir. by Tim Burton. Star. Johnny Depp

When I heard that Burton was going to give the classic story of Sweeney Todd his special treatment, I was ecstatic. When I learned that it was going to be a musical, I was less enthusiastic. When I actually heard Depp and Bonham Carter sing, I was nauseated. The costume and sets in this movie are the most gloriously theatrical since Pee Wee's Big Adventure. There is good deal of blood spraying and gushing about, but it all looks (intentionally, I suspect) rather fake. The plot is truly deserving of the "classic" badge of honor, by the way, and would seem to lend itself well to a director who dabbles in the dark and delightful. Wonderfully stylistic, as Burton tends to be, but marred significantly by the lead actors' serious lack of any vocal skill whatsoever.

2 stars. trailer


6. Invasion (2007) - Dir. Oliver Hirschbiegel. Star. Nicole Kidman

This story has had many incarnations, from the original, black and white, 1956 version to the 1993 stingray creature version. It hasn't gotten any less creepy. My personal favorite was the 1978 Donal Sutherland version. Regardless, the concept that those around us might all someday turn against us is inherently sinister. Kidman and Daniel Craig struggle through this latest version, trying to remain unturned. The story is basically the same as in past renditions. The two stars are convincing and do their roles proud. I think Invasion is now my second favorite telling of the Body Snatchers story.

3 stars. trailer

7. Quaranine (2008) - Dir. John Erick Dowdle. Star. Jennifer Carpenter

Initial trailers for this film had me saying, "That looks like the dumbest movie ever." But, since it was the only horror film playing at my neighborhood theater on the dark and stormy night that I insisted on driving that extra mile down the highway, I ended up seeing Quarantine anyway. It just goes to show how deceiving trailers can be. The entire film is shot through a hand-held videocam, exactly like Blair Witch was. So, until the 20 minutes that it takes to get used to the unsteady picture passes, you may be a little motion sick. While it is, on the one hand, sometimes frustrating to have the audience's vision restricted to the perspective of one character in the film, on the other, the restriction heightens the sensation that someone may be creeping up behind. The story is interesting and takes advantage of paranoia as its main scare tactic. A pleasant surprise and the only one of these 10 films that actually frightened me at all.

3 stars. trailer

8. The Reaping (2007) - Dir. Stephen Hopkins. Star. Hillary Swank

The Reaping centers around a college professor, who travels the world in order to disprove so-called miracles. Because of her reputation, the town of Haven sends a school teacher to meet her and request her aid with one of their own mysteries. It seems that the town's entire river has turned to blood. It seems also, that if Katherine doesn't agree to help, a young girl's life may be in danger. As she sets about applying her scientific methods to explain the phenomenon, the town is visited by a series of biblical plagues and it becomes harder for Katherine to deny a supernatural cause. The Reaping was not disappointing, mainly because I didn't think it would be any good in the first place. The "twist" ending is trite and predictable. The acting is mediocre. One thing I was grateful for was the absence of focus on the apparently tempting topic of a black man in the South.

3 stars. trailer

9. Shiver (2008) a.k.a. Eskalofrio - Dir. Isidro Ortiz. Star. Julio Valverde

Shiver comes to America from the same people who brought us The Devil's Backbone and Pan's Labyrinth. It's the tale of a young man with an allergy to sunlight and his single mother. To avoid the bullying and health issues of living in the city, the pair move to a town in a shady valley. When villagers begin to die, their blood sucked from their bodies, guess who's the main suspect? I detest the American name for this film, but that's just about the only thing I found objectionable about it.

3 1/2 stars. trailer

10. The Number 23 - Dir. Joel Schumacher. Star. Jim Carrey

While I am not a fan of Carrey's brand of comedy, I do enjoy him in dramatic roles. In The Number 23, he plays a dog catcher who is, while bored at work, happily married with a son. On his birthday, his wife gives him a small-press paperback that cause him to correlate everything to the number 23. Save yourself the trouble and rent Pi instead.

2 1/2 stars. trailer

Update: Halloween Plans

GP had planned a nice, relaxing vacation down to our beloved Austin, Texas for the holiday weekend. However, due to unforseen and tragic circumstances, we had to cancel our trip (Luckily, we won't miss out on any party action for our most favored holiday). What that means for you is, we have the opportunity to present a special event.

Last year, Gummi Popcorn posted a list of our favorite 10 Horror recommendations. This year, we will begin monster movie maddness (starting immediately after this is posted) which will last for eight grueling hours. At the end of it, GP will post 10 (count 'em) mini reviews. Each one will be a movie never before reviewed at GP and each will be even more terrible than the last!! (OooooOOOOooooh!). To keep up our strength, we have fortified our castle with Bloody Mary's and salted nuts. Will we survive so many straight hours of Hell??

Wait and see.....

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning (2006)

Directed by: Jonathan Liebesman
Format: DVD
DVD Features: commentary, deleted scenes, trailer, featurette
Starring: Taylor Handley, Jordana Brewster, Diora Baird, Matthew Bomer, R. Lee Ermey
trailer

Anyone who's ever taken a cross-country road trip, especially through Texas, knows that the way is polka-dotted with tiny little towns. Some of them are no larger than a gas station and a motel. Those towns have always creeped me out. I've walked into a roadside Dairy Queen and had a room full of backwoods eyes follow me up to the counter. Once, I stopped my car on the side of the highway just to poke my head out and look at the stars. It was mighty fast before flashes of the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre made me poke my head back in. If I was the only person who got chills from inbred, tobacca chewers, we wouldn't have movies like The Hills Have Eyes, The Devil's Rejects or 2001 Maniacs. We most certainly would not have this prequel to a remake of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre.

In The Beginning, two brothers are on their way to enlist in the military and ship off to Vietnam. The eldest, Eric (Bomer), is marching off proudly to his second tour. What he doesn't know is that his brother Dean (Handley) is planning to detour to Mexico to dodge the draft. The pair are just beginning to hash out the issue when they and their girlfriends are run off the road. Sheriff Hoyt arrives on the scene and takes the two boys and Dean's girl Bailey (Baird) into custody. Instead of taking the group down to the stationhouse, they end up at the home of the Hewitts. Hoyt is actually head of the household, all dressed up like a lawman. The family is the last left in town after the slaughterhouse closed and drove most of the residents out. While Dean, Eric and Bailey suffer the Hewitts' demented sense of hospitality, Eric's girlfriend Chrissie catches up to them and attempts a daring rescue.

Generally, it's not in one's best interest to expect good acting in a horror film. Disappointment almost assuredly follows. (The only exeption to that rule might be a Hitchcock film.) That said, it was surprising to find the acting in TCM: The Beginning well above par. Taking center stage is R. Lee Ermey who plays Sheriff Hoyt/Mr. Hewitt. He's completely convicing as the disgusting, disturbed and dispicable head of a household of cannibals. If I ever met the actor, I'd have a really hard time turning my back toward him. The best out of the four kids in the movie is Handley, as Dean. Not only is he cute with his boyish blonde curls, but
his character has surprising strength. The rest of the cast is marginal. Andrew Bryniarski is the actor behind the leather face, but little more is required of him than a bit of lumbering about.

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning is advertised as the answer to everything you ever wanted to know about Leatherface. Even the filmmakers, when trying to explain themselves in the special features, don't lend very convincing support to the prequel claim. In reality, the only segment that gives any background to the legendary murderer's past is the brief series of scenes that backdrop the opening credits. Apparently, after the 2003 remake of TCM was released, the producers of the movie were innundated with questions from fans. It seems as though they took those questions, invented answers to them on the fly, and strung the rest of the movie together to fill in the gaps. The Beginning ends up being, in essence, TCM: The Remake Part 2; yet another retelling of the same scenario.

The movie is, however, quite gorey and with me, a little gore goes a long way. Every drop of blood was very realistic and all of the major components are covered. TCM: The Beginning satisfies the blood splatter, juicy organs, dismembered digits and gapeing body cavity cravings of a jaded horror fanatic. Want to see someone impaled on a rusty chainsaw? You'll get two. Want to see someone get their face peeled off? No problem. There was even one scene that turned my stomach a little and that's saying something. Full marks for gore gratification! (Honestly, don't let the kids watch this one.)

Although the story is getting tired at this point, it must be difficult to follow up one of the best horror movies ever made. Maybe it's the source material or maybe it's the "based on a true story" level of reality, but TCM: The Beginning does much better than your average fright fest. While it's not as fun as a movie like Cabin Fever, it is a bit traumatic. After watching it, you'll feel like you've been through something terrible.

Overall Rating: 3 1/2
Hottie Rating: 2

Alternate Recommendation: The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974)
Official Site
IMDB Page
Dr. Gore's review

News: GP the Candy

I was in the drugstore on my lunch break today, looking for those Halloween candy pumpkins I adore, when lo and behold:



Gummy Popcorn candy!! I knew it was a matter of time before someone stole my idea (despite the spelling difference)! Naturally, I had to pick up a box to check out the situation. I was unhappy to discover that, while the box is kinda neat, and the idea is fantastic, the execution is disgusting. The "Gummy" candies are sort of marshmallowey, like the white part of those gummy frogs (or strawberries or sharks). They're coated in sugar/sour granules. However, they don't have any identifiable flavor. They don't really taste like popcorn, or any kind of fruit. They sort of taste like something you'd find under the sink, but sour. Eww. Regardless, winners of The Gummi Awards might find a box of these in their prize pack.

Update: Last Call for Nominations

Well everyone, it seems that the Gummi Awards has gone on long enough. We were holding out, hoping to get a few more nominations in before closing the doors. However, those categories are starting to look a little moldy and stale up there on the left. In order to be fair to those readers who did submit their nominations, we will officially close the contest down at the end of the month, on Halloween (October 31st). Last chance to let us know what you'd like to see win a Gummi Award and last chance to win some prizes for yourself! Categories will close regardless of whether or not there have been nominations. Here's what we still need to see:

Most Nauseating Vomit Scene - c'mon people, you're missing such an obvious one here! So far we've only got one nomination. Are you going to let that person win? Well, are you?! The one we're thinking of is a comedy...

Most Awkward Moment - aren't there any movies out there where mom walks in on her son "choking the chicken" or someone catches their junk in a zipper?? I know I've seen one or two of those....

Most Inappropriate Musical Sequence - there are more nominations in the Crazy Cool Carpet Design category than there are for this one. Seriously.

Tell your friends, pester your spouses and if you just can't think of anything go online! The clock is ticking (tick, tick, tick)...

Know Your Director: Introduction

It is a travesty that the directors of film often get less credit than the cast does. The public seems to identify a movie much more by the faces in front of the camera than the crew behind it. In trailers, movies will often proclaim, “From the director of …” instead of just mentioning a person’s name. Understandably, actors and actresses get more recognition because they’re so much more visible. It’s somewhat like looking at a sculpture and admiring the quality of the bronze while ignoring the artist who formed it.

At GP, we feel that it’s really the director who can make or break a film and that the best actors in the world often flounder under poor direction. As an illustration, consider the movie Mad Dog and Glory. The film stars three actors with a proven track record of excellence on screen; Robert DeNiro, Uma Thurman and Bill Murray. So, one might reasonably imagine that Mad Dog and Glory might be a good film. It wasn’t (no need to wait for that review). It sucked. Badly. So, why was DeNiro great in The Good Shepherd, Thurman fantastic in Pulp Fiction, and Murray hilarious in Rushmore, but not in this movie? Answer: direction. Mad Dog and Glory was directed by John McNaughton whose body of work consists largely of television episodes. Nothing can ruin the performance of three skilled actors like poor directing.

With that said, GP would like to introduce a new feature dedicated to the most talented, creative and exceptional people in the director’s chair. Know Your Director will profile a specific man or woman each time, focusing on the aspects that make their films stand out. Each one has a certain style that defines their work, favorite cast members and familiar titles. So, next time you’re seeking a new experience at the theater (or the rental store, or the On Demand menu) Know Your Director may be a good place to start.

Burn After Reading (2008)

Directed by: Ethan & Joel Coen
Format: Theater
Starring: Brad Pitt, John Malkovich, George Clooney, Tilda Swinton, Frances McDormand
Trailer

There are certain directors who can always get me to fill a seat in the theater. The Coens are two of them. Although I've been burned before by the dynamic duo, I will allow that everyone makes mistakes and they haven't illed so much as to cancel themselves from my list of favorites. Burn After Reading was certainly on my list of "what to see" as soon as I saw the trailer. So, when someone offered to take me to a film Friday night, I immediately knew which one I wanted to go to. Knowing that my movie companion was a little on the conservative side (I don't mean politically), I took the chance that she'd appreciate something a little offbeat, but also oddly amusing. At least, that's what I was hoping for...

Burn After Reading is billed as a "spy comedy", but I wouldn't really classify it that way (Get Smart fits the description more). The whole thing begins with Linda Litzke (McDormand) who is a single woman desperate to feel attractive. To do so, she believes, will take a series of expensive operations. Since her insurance refuses her coverage, she is forced to seek other means of financing her endeavors. When her coworkers at the local gym discover a CD loaded with suspicious documents, she sees her chance at making a little cash. The man that she and gym-mate Chad (Pitt) make a clumsy attempt to blackmail is indeed former CIA agent, Osbourne Cox (Malkovich). The reason he's "former" is because he's got some booze-related problems and his wife, Katie (Swinton) is preparing to divorce him for attractive Treasury agent Harry Pfarrer. Pfarrer, despite the fact that he loves his wife, is an habitual cheater. Not only is he sneaking around with Cox's wife, he also manages to get into Litzke's undergarments. As if that isn't confusing enough, add in the rest of the CIA, the Russians, a few divorce attorneys and an unrequited love. Oy.

I've noticed that many great directors, the Coens included of course, choose to work with the same actors on a regular basis. It almost seems like a group of friends making movies for their own entertainment. Among the Coens regulars are Francis McDormand (Fargo, Blood Simple, Raising Arizona, Miller's Crossing) and George Clooney (O Brother, Where Art Thou?). McDormand is a fantabulous actress without a doubt. She's not as astoundingly impressive as she was in Fargo, but it's easy to see why she's got a career. Clooney's Pfarrer is the most amusing character here by far (I almost peed). He's also clearly a dirt bag for his wife's sake, but is really rather human by the end. Excellently played. Malkovich is really creepy and despicable as Cox. He didn't get any sympathy from me at all. Pitt is dumb, but lovable and takes a respectable break from the heartthrob role.

Burn After Reading does have some unsettling scenes. The overall tone of the movie is amusement and lighthearted mishaps. So, when a couple of graphicly violent shots disrupt that tone, they're all the more disturbing. That doesn't, however, make them negative aspects of the movie. In an industry saturated with explosions, zombie guts and gunfire, it's easy to see violence as commonplace. In this film, however, it has a similar effect as it might in real life. Imagine you're going to retrieve your Sunday morning newspaper from your carefully manicured suburban front lawn. You reach down, carful to keep your robe from opening and look up just in time to see the neighbor hack the paperboy's neck with a hatchet. Blood squirts everywhere and it just ruins your whole day. That's what I mean by disturbing.

I don't think I'll ever be the same after O Brother, Where Art Thou, but I think I can lower my guard just a bit. After two solid flicks (No Country for Old Men included), the Coens are proving they haven't lost their touch (although they do remind me of the guys from Myth Busters). As a fan of the two directors, I highly recommend the film. As your average movie goer, it might not be what you're expecting, but it will be worth the admission price. Go and see it now, or rent it later, but don't let it escape you either way.

Overall Rating: 4 stars
Hottie Rating: 3 stars (for Clooney/Pitt combo)

Alternate Recommendation: Blood Simple
Official Site
IMDB Page
Rolling Stone review - in which Peter Travers tries to force some type of social commentary on the picture.

Iron Man (2008)

Directed by: Jon Favreau
Format: On Demand
Starring: Robert Downey Jr., Jeff Bridges, Terrence Howard, Gwyneth Paltrow
Trailer

Good prospects seem to hit the movie theaters in waves. For a while, the sea of offerings lap dully at the shore of mediocraty. Then, a string of features with enticing trailers swells up and drenches the box offices. Again, the wave dies down and it's back to chick flicks and Will Ferrell comedies. Trouble is, I'm a poor surfer. I either get so wrapped up in the rest of life that I forget to make it to a show or I end up waiting on the same jerk who keeps promising to take me to the theater and never follows through. When I have money, there's nothing playing and when I'm broke the latest Scorsese or Wes Anderson flick comes out. Murphy's Law of movie going? Perhaps. Consider also the fact that I can hardly stand to spend my evening rushing to make a screen time only to be viciously wallet-raped at the ticket counter and then have the best parts ruined by some inconsiderate anus with a cell phone. Sigh. The fact that I missed watching Robert Downey Jr. zip around the big screen in a material representation of a Black Sabbath song is entirely due to the aforementioned jerk and my reluctance to give up on him. When will I learn?

Tony Stark is a millionaire playboy of the Bruce Wayne variety. He also happens to be an engineering genius. The corporation he inherited, Stark Industries, profits by conceptualizing and manufacturing arms. In an interview with a Vouge Magazine reporter (Sure, like Vouge is any kind of reputable news source.), he makes clear his apathetic and cynical views on heading a company that enables soldiers to blow each other up. In Filmland, a comment like that is sure to land you in Just Dessertsville, and so it does.

Stark is headed back from a demonstration of his newest missile, when his Hummer is attacked and its accompanying troops slaughtered. When he regains consiousness, he finds himself in the clutches of Raza (Faran Tahir), leader of some type of desert-dwelling tribesmen bent on destruction (shall we assume Al Quaeda here?). Guess who's weapons the bad guys are armed with? Guess what Raza wants Tony to make? And so, with the aid of fellow captive Yinsen (Shaun Toub), he builds a robotic suit of armor instead. Thus, Iron Man is born. Upon returning to civilization, Tony Stark announces that he's had a change of heart. He says his company will no longer be producing weapons, which of course, sends his business partner, Obadiah Stane (Bridges) into cardiac arrest.

While I've long been aware of the Iron Man comic's existence, I can't claim the ability to judge how the movie adaptation measures up. So, someone more qualified than I will have to chime in (hint, hint). What I can say is that the movie is chock-full of eye candy. Whether it's Downey's bulging (dare I say..."throbbing"?) deltoids (..yummy..) or wicked-bad CGI, Iron Man doesn't disappoint on the asthetic front. The effects are truly top-notch and if the film has no further redeeming qualities, it's almost worth it for this aspect alone.

The acting is pretty solid all around. I've got a serious crush on Robert Downey Jr. (gee, could you tell?) for some mysterious reason. Nonetheless, I wouldn't be afraid to admit if he'd done a lousy job. I think he was a great choice for Iron Man; he's fun to watch. What really impressed me was that the techies who drew up the costume CGI managed to capture the character's body language. Jeff Bridges, however, always makes me suspicious. I'm not sure if that speaks to his acting skills, or typecasting. In this case, my suspicions were justified. I could have sworn that Terrence Howard was the guy from Scrubs (turns out that's Donald Faison), but the guy is a lousy best friend. When Tony calls up his buddy Turk Dr. Christopher Turk (oh, now I see why I was confused) to show him the new toy he's working on, Howard's character just tells him that he needs to rest and think about producing more weapons of mass destruction. Some pal. The film's answer to Bond's Money Penny is Ms. Pepper Potts. Paltrow, as the sultry secretary/love interest, slinks around the screen in a wardrobe that Carrie Bradshaw would be envious of. She doesn't honestly do much, except bitch when Stark gets all ethical on her. But, she sure looks good doing it. It's not Gwyn's fault really; her character was written as an ornament. The only horrible acting was Shaun Toub (the bad guy) who was nearly as terrible as Dominic Purcell in Blade Trinity (or anything else for that matter).

Iron Man was marginally better than I had expected it to be. I've almost had enough of the comic-to-movie genre. But, Downey's performance was great as a jerk turned hero genius scientist and the CGI was eye-popping. I was pleased to see no time wasted on obligitory love scenes or weak comeback lines. The movie isn't, by far, any Oscar winning goldmine here, but it is a solid, entertaining piece of cinema. Go ahead and rent this baby and have yourself a good time. In many ways, Iron Man is what Hancock should have been.

Overall Rating: 3 1/2
Hottie Rating: 3 3/4

Alternate Recommendation: The Maxx
Official Site
IMDB Page
353 Haiku review

The Mangler 2 (2001)

Directed by: Michael Hamilton-Wright
Format: On Demand
Starring: Lance Henriksen, Chelse Swain, Daniella Evangelista, Miles Meadows, Will Sanderson
Trailer

I will watch almost any movie, once, depending on the situation. I shop the horror section, on most occasions, before venturing elsewhere. That being said, I'll explain the situation that led me to choose The Mangler 2 from my On Demand menu. A couple of weeks ago, in an attempt to get a handle on my love handles (watching movies all day will do that), I hired a personal trainer. This past Saturday, she worked me so hard that, on the following day, I was barely able to move due to muscle soreness. Taking this as the perfect excuse to shirk my responsibilities and lay in bed all day watching movies, I set about to do just that. Although I had just rented two perfectly watchable DVDs from the video store that prior evening, I decided to go for the cheap thrill. "Besides," I reasoned, "that Ellen Page movie would probably go better with a dusky light and a glass of wine."

The Mangler 2 centers around a group of private college students. Jo Newton (Swain) is the daughter of a neglectful father who happens to own the school. She is of the angsty/goth/hacker variety, although her "hacking" consists mainly of downloading programs from the Internet. She and her fellow school prefects are held back from a school outing because the jerk headmaster (Henricksen) wants to know who's defaced the school's website. Feeling pissed off and outcast from her classmates, Jo decides to infect the building's new high-tech security system with (dun, dun, duuuuun!) The Mangler 2 virus. Just as the program is busy downloading, class jock, Dan (Sanderson), climbs through her window and distracts her from her revenge. The two run off to join the others, Emily, Corey and Will (Dexter Bell) for an impromptu pool party.

After Jo brags about her newest prank on the school, the group realizes that they would be the prime suspects since they're the only students there. So, they all run up to the headmaster's office to fix his email and place the blame on someone else. As they make their way through the empty hallways, they begin to come across mangled faculty members. When one of their own is boiled alive by the sprinkler system, they realize that they've got to fight the machines for their lives and try to escape the grounds before they're all dead.

Here's a movie selection tip - whenever you see Lance Henricksen's name on the cast list, avoid at all costs. His filmography is a list of B-grade flops and cartoon voice-acting. Granted, there are a few exceptions, like Alien or (maybe) the first Pumpkinhead, but it's a safe bet that whatever horror movie he's involved in will suck horribly. The rest of the cast of "teenagers" is just as awful. Daniella Evangelista plays class slut Emily who is mainly just a set of boobs bouncing their way through the script. She'd be attractive if the camera never panned above her neck. Of course, The Mangler 2 includes the class stoner, Corey (Meadows) and the token black guy (Bell) as well. Chelse Swain only has one expression - the twisted mouthed angsty one - and she doesn't pull even that off very well. Midway through the movie, the school's chef (Philippe Bergeron) is added to the group of hopeful escapees. His anti-computer monologues could have been amusing if they weren't delivered in the most lame fake French accent ever. In fact, I didn't realize he was trying to be French until someone mentioned it in the movie.

Sometimes, I can overlook a sad plot and horrible acting if the gore is exceptional. Sadly, that wasn't the case with The Mangler 2. There is some blood splatter and a crazy, wire entangled, horny headmaster, but some of the murders are offscreen. In a horror movie, no kill should ever, ever be offscreen. None of the effects were nauseating or even shocking. The animated computer wires are laughable. Even Jo's animated fractal screensaver is pathetic.

I never saw the first Mangler movie. After having seen the sequel, I don't think I need to see another Mangler movie ever again. This movie was weak, it lacked imagination, there was hardly any gore involved, and the acting was scraping the barrel. Don't waste your time with this movie. I've seen porn with better acting. There are a million horror movies out there and I'm betting that at least 80% of them are better than The Mangler 2. Still, it's not the worst movie I've ever seen and for that, and that alone, I can't give it a 0 rating.

Overall Rating: 1/2 star
Hottie Rating: 1 star

Alternate Recommendation: an episode of Scooby Doo
Official Site (none found)
IMDB Page
DVD Verdict review

***Note: If you found this review via IMDB, please let us know by leaving a comment. Thanks!***

Only You (1994)

Directed by: Norman Jewison
Fortmat: On Demand
Starring: Robert Downey Jr., Marisa Tomei, Bonnie Hunt, Joaquim De Almeida
Trailer

This may be Gummi Popcorn's first romantic comedy review. I tend to avoid the genre in general, because most of these movies are predictable, cheesey, sappy, unrealistic and just plain boring. They're fairy tales; the kind of things shown to little girls to make them believe there's a prince charming out there somewhere. They're also churned out by Hollywood like a Chip's Ahoy cookie. The most heart-breaking scenes I've ever seen were found in dramas and foreign or indy films. Real romance, I feel, is filled with pain and anguish. That being said, I have found, on very rare occasions, I good romantic comedy. Some of the early 80's films (most of them star John Cusak) can be fun to watch. The only thing that made me take a chance on Only You was Robert Downey Jr.

Faith (Tomei) is about to be a young bride. All her life, she has believed in destiny. When she was a child, she was told that she would marry a man named Damon Bradley. A week before her wedding to a boring pediatrist, she gets a phone call. After she hangs up the reciever, she realizes the name she jotted down was Damon Bradley. So, beliving this could be her last chance to meet the man of her dreams, she rushes off to the airport (in her wedding dress) to catch a plane to Italy. Tagging along is her sister-in-law and best friend Kate (Hunt). The pair try to track Faith's mystery man from hotel to restaurant and across the country. As Faith is chasing Mr. Bradley through the streets of Venice, she loses a shoe in true Cinderella style. The man who delivers the shoe says his name is Damon Bradley. The two spend a romantic night together and seems to click perfectly. There's just one catch - he lied about his name. His real name is Peter (Downey) and he's madly enough in love with Faith to try one more deception to keep her around.

The whole premise of Only You is silly, but so is love. Faith is willing to risk her entire future on a name. Where she gets the money to jet off to Italy on a whim is beyond me. Faith's friend Kate is married and jaded and rightfully so, because her husband (played by Fisher Stevens) is a jerk who takes her away from her "girls' night out" to cook dinner for his poker friends. So, why is she willing to deny a wealthy, debonair Italian wife snatcher a chance? Even Peter, who is really the perfect match for Faith, is kind of a dirtbag. He consistently lies to her and, while his intentions are good, is this really a characteristic to admire in a man?

I have had a crush on Robert Downey Jr. since I don't know when. The reasons are beyond me, but whether he's a heartbroken liar, a dream-obsessed businessman or a down-and-out junkie, I love the guy. There's just something about the actor that draws me in. He looks great in Only You and, despite the fact he's untruthful, I wanted his character to succeed. I'd never understood the obsession with Marisa Tomei until I saw this movie. She really is beautiful. In Only You, she has a sort of Audrey Hepburn allure (and haircut) and naivete that makes Faith an enjoyable character. Naturally, she needs a friend and confidant to cling to, who provides the more realistic approach while still being supportive. Boonie Hunt does a reasonable job of fulliflling that role while carrying on a subplot of her own. I was a bit disappointed that the third in the friendly trio, Leslie (Siobhan Fallon) didn't have a larger part in the movie.

Only You is a cute and light movie. Admittedly, there were moments where I was drawn in. But, it was just as frustrating as most romantic comedies are. Why don't these people just communicate to each other? As usual, it's got a perfect ending, where the two who were truly meant to be together, find the strength to unite. Maybe it's just the result of my experiences, but I still prefer a more realistic approach to love. Woody Allen usually gets it right, I just wish he wouldn't act. If you're a fan of the genre, I think Only You will be a nice addition to your collection. As a non-fan, I was interested in the scenery, but not so much the plot.

Overall Rating: 2 stars
Hottie Rating: 4 stars (for beautiful Tomei and my crush on Robert)

Alternate Recommendation: Chasing Amy
Official Site
IMDB Page
Washington Post review - I honestly coudln't find another accurate or well written review for this one.

***Note: If you found this review via IMDB, please let us know by leaving a comment. Thanks!***

Shutter (2008)

Directed by: Masayuki Ochiai
Format: DVD
DVD Features: trailers, director feature, spirit photography featurettes, deleted scenes
Starring: Joshua Jackson, Rachael Taylor, Megumi Okina, John Hensley, Maya Hazen
Trailer

I thought the trend of Asian horror movie remakes was at an end. It apparently hasn't quite died yet. This time, instead of taking from the stock of Japanese films, the original Shutter was from Thailand. Nonetheless, the American version was shot in Japan by a Japanese director. According to his interview in the special features section of the disc, Ochiai attempted to stay as true to the original as possible. While I feel that to be an admirable trait, I remember being disappointed when I saw Ringu because it was so similar to the American version. When will American audiences learn to enjoy foreign cinema without having it tailor-made for us?

In Shutter (the English version), Benjamin and Jane have just gotten married. The happy couple plans to spend their honeymoon in Japan, where Ben has a photography shoot. He'll be working with his two pals Bruno and Adam who've set the couple up with a nice apartment and studio in an abandoned building. As the couple is driving in from the airport, Jane accidentally crashes into a girl standing in the road. When they regain consciousness, there's no body and the police find no evidence of an injured girl. Riddled with guilt, Jane begins to see the girl in window reflections. But Ben tells her she's imagining things and with the stress he's experiencing at the job, it's not a good time to bring this up. Apparently, the expensive photo shoot didn't go well. All of Ben's pictures developed with strange defects, just like their honeymoon roll. While Jane is flipping through her amateur shots, she notices the girl from the road is in all of them. Who is this woman, what does she want and what doesn't Jane know about her husband's past in Japan?

The main premise of Shutter relies heavily on the concept of spirit photography. A big deal in Japan, it hasn't quite hit Western shores (I always wondered where the idea for the game Fatal Frame came from). There are magazines filled with pictures of ghosts in Japan and it seems that Ben and Jane have managed quite a collection of their own. I think spirit photography is a fascinating idea and an interesting one to base a film around. But Shutter suffers from many of the same similarities as most of its predecessors. There is always the culture shock of American transplants to Japan and it always seems to be the girlfriends who are suffering. While Jane does a little bit better tackling the subway system than most, she's still feeling a bit lost and isolated. Just once, I'd like to see an American woman who's having a good time in that country.

Shutter also has the same brand of fear as most of the other films. There isn't really a gore factor and all of the terror comes in slow, suspenseful waves. I appreciate the fact that the filmmakers aren't constantly trying to make the audience jump at inane little things. However, I'm getting really tired of spooky long-haired chicks. In The Grudge it was scary. In The Ring it was a puzzle. In Shutter, it's just old news. This film does have the benefit of an interesting plot and a few unexpected twists, which makes it more enjoyable than it otherwise could have been and that's what saves it from just another Japanese remake.

All of the actors here are acceptable in their roles. None are really fantastic or will leave a lasting impression. Joshua Jackson makes a great loving husband who falls gradually from grace, but I didn't buy his fear. Seeing a character in a horror film truly convey their fright makes me feel afraid all the more. Jackson didn't do that for me. Jane (Taylor) never seems more than curious and frustrated. The Japanese actress, Megumi (who plays the ghost Megumi) doesn't have to do much more than move slowly. Bruno (David Denman) and Adam (Hensley) are really just sort of older jocks who've acclimated to live overseas. No depth there, I'm afraid.

I can't really confess any strong feelings either way on this movie. I did expect it to be terrible and it wasn't. It's just different enough of a movie to be interesting, but just similar enough to others to be boring. I don't regret the rental and the DVD's special features are good (just don't watch them before you see the movie). But, when you've seen one American remake of an Asian horror film, you've sadly seen them all.

Overall Rating: 3
Hottie Rating: 2

Alternate Recommendation: go see something in its original language
Official Site
IMDB Page
A.V. Club review

***Note: If you found this review via IMDB, please let us know by leaving a comment. Thanks!***

Brainscan (1994)

Directed by: John Flynn
Format: On Demand
Starring: Eddie Furlong, Frank Langella, T. Ryder Smith, Amy Hargreaves, Jamie Marsh
Trailer

Lately, I've been stumbling upon some not-quite-classic-but-still-campy nuggets of recently-passed cinema. You know - not quite Casablanca and not quite MST3K. To be honest, it's mostly due to the fact that I'm lazy and broke and I haven't returned my Netflix movies in a while. But, being lazy and broke has its advantages, believe it or not. Namely, stumbling upon not-quite-classic-but-still-campy nuggets of recently-passed cinema. I digress. There's something to be said for hidden treasure. The risk in hunting for it is, of course, finding crap along the way. I came across Brainscan and, recognizing the name, decided to give it a chance.

It's the mid-nineties. Video games and computers offer limitless entertainment, but Michael Bower (Furlong) thinks he's seen it all. When his best friend Kyle (Marsh) calls him up to tell him about an intriguing ad in the latest issue of Fangoria, he takes a break from video taping the girl next door's bedroom window to respond. The ad is for a product called Brainscan and it promises an experience so realistic and terrifying that it's like no game ever played before. Feeling an affront to his teenage boy video game prowess, Bower takes on the challenge. Soon, disc 1 arrives in the mail. Brainscan leaps from the screen and takes over. Michael's mission is to go into a man's house and murder him (creatively) before the time limit is up. He's absorbed into the first-person perspective and completes the mission with time to spare. The next day he learns that a local man has been murdered and inside his freezer is the man's foot! How realistic is too realistic?

Brainscan is loaded with cool, outdated technology presented as cutting edge. Michael's phone is a voice-activated and crudely animated butler named Igor. The game discs are played via cartridge inserted into his DVD/disc drive device. Even the special effects are mid-nineties conceptions.

Who knew that Eddie Furlong was in anything except Terminator 2? In fact, looking over his rap-sheet, I don't see anything later than 1999 that I recognize. Really, would any of us recognize Furlong if we saw him now? I know plenty of girls who confess a crush on dear Eddie (oh, I'm sorry, Edward)from "back in the day". For his role as Michael Bower, just imagine John Connor with a little less rebellion but just as much of a techie fetish. Brainscan is entirely suitable for anyone with a Furlong habit. One of the most amusing characters in this movie was Trickster, played by T. Ryder Smith. Trickster is the goblin-like character that springs from the Brainscan disc. He's sort of the movie's version of Beetlejuice, but a little more punked out. At least he appreciates Primus. Smith plays him (underneath a lot of makeup) as an impish creature; ridiculous and odd, but perfect for the film and plenty of personality. The rest of the cast is the usual gathering of high-school misfits. They're not outstanding by any means, but likeable enough. None of them steal the spotlight from Furlong.

There are a slew of improvements that could be made to Brainscan to make it a better film. For one, Michael has the "Pipi Longstocking Syndrome". That is to say that he's got plenty of neat gadgets, no cash flow issues and, most importantly, absent parents. For another thing, I would have made the game's first victim the troublesome school principal, who cancels the boys' classic horror movie club. Kyle should have been a much more prominent character, being Bower's best friend, and could have been given a good deal more screen time. The topic of Micheal's mother is strong in the beginning of the movie. It seems as if it will be a major factor, but is never really developed.

To summarize, Brainscan isn't quite the film it could have been, but it's amusing to watch. It's not in the least bit frightening, of course, but it gets a smidge tense at times. I wouldn't go adding this movie to your personal collection, unless you're into this sort of thing, but rental (at a reasonable discount) is not something to shy away from. However, if you're into smoking a bit of the green stuff, or getting a bit tipsy (not that GP condones that sort of thing), it could be the perfect 96 minute diversion.

Overall Rating: 3 stars
Hottie Rating: 2 stars

Alternate Recommendation: Videodrome
Official Site (none found)
IMDB Page
The Austin Chronicle review

***Note: If you found this review via IMDB, please let us know by leaving a comment. Thanks!***

Editorial: DVD vs. TV

We are lucky, in this day and age, to have so many movie formats at our disposal. We can view our favorite flicks on VHS, DVD, Blue Ray, television, On Demand cable, theater and the internet. There was even a short-lived laserdisc phase. VHS was nice while it lasted, but it's quickly on the outs in favor of more durable digital formats. I think the most common ways to see a movie lately, have been DVD or television. So, here's our verdict on which way to go.

Pros TV: The convenience of movies on television is definitely a bonus. Making a special trip to the store, incurring late fees and even awaiting your next DVD via post can be a drag. Several channels, such as AMC and IFC offer uninterrupted viewing, eliminating the need to mute those pesky commercials. If cable is an option, On Demand offers a variety of films that can easily be rewound, paused and fast forwarded, just like a DVD. The list of free movies changes frequently and new releases can be purchased, often for a lower cost than at the video store.

Pros DVD: The invention of the DVD was an absolute improvement over VHS. Not only do they not wear out and streatch like magnetic tape will, the picture quality and chapter-to-chapter scrolling make this format superb (not to mention the elimination of the need to rewind). DVDs usually include subtitles in several languages, extra features, behind the scenes peeks and commentaries that were never available before. Plus, if you've got the time, DVDs can be watched over and over again without incurring extra cost. DVDs are frequently available in widescreen format as well, which allows you to see the entire screen shot.

Cons TV: Watching a movie on television has its share of drawbacks. If you elect to see a film this way, you must put up with a number of detriments. First, there are commercials. Even if you can avoid those, networks almost always edit your films for time, content and the dreaded "formatted to fit your screen". You see, when filmmakers set up camera, they usually intend for what they're shooting to end up on a movie theater sized screen. Notice the rectangular shape of a theater screen. Now, notice the shape of your TV at home (unless you've got a fancy wide-screen version). It's square, isn't it? That means, when a movie is formatted, each end of the picture must be severed to account for the change in size and shape. That's what is often referred to as "pan and scan". So, not only are you missing part of the original picture, you must rely on the editors to focus on the most important bits of the shot. They don't always do a great job of this. If you have children watching, it might be important to you to have some of the dialogue edited so as not to offend their delicate ears. But, being the purist that I am, I enjoy viewing a film in the most original format possible. And, if English isn't your first language or if it isn't the original language of the film, the availability of subtitled versions is limited. Even On Demand is flawed. The newest releases are around $5 and you can only review the movie for 24 hours without paying again. The selection of free movies is terribly lacking and even something as recent as Top Gun is off the list. Normally, you will find yourself settling for a B grade horror flick that never even made it to theaters.

Cons DVD: Unless you have Netflix or something similar, renting a DVD comes with the inconvineince of running back to the store or paying an extra charge for returning your selection late. The discs can get lost or broken or arrive so scratched up that they're unreadable. Then, there's the financial factor. Are you willing to shell out the charges to keep a movie for a few measly days? I'm often surprised at the bill from my local video store.

While either option carries its advantages and disadvantages, I overwhelmingly recommend DVDs. The selection is usually broader, the movies are available unedited, and the special features often shed some light into the movie that one may not gather otherwise. But take my advice and always, always rent the widescreen version!

Update: Communication

A short while ago, a new feature was added to Gummi Popcorn. Towards the bottom of the left nav bar, we've added a widget that tracks our visitors from all over the globe. We were pleasantly surprised to find that GP has a number of international visitors. Welcome! We're ecstatic to have folks from South America, Europe and even Australia here and hope that you continue reading and enjoying our reviews!

Also, there is currently a small mailing list circulating. Members of the mailing list get alerts whenever GP is updated with a new review or post. Several of our readers get the newest GP updates through Google reader, but if you don't have gmail, the mailing list is the way to go. Anyone is welcome to subscribe or unsubscribe as they wish. All you need to do is leave a comment on this post with your email address. As usual, your email addresses will not be published here. We will simply record your addy and delete your comment, so that it will not be published on the web.

We whole-heartedly welcome all of our visitors! Please continue to read and submit your comments. There are still openings for Gummi Award nominations (foreign movies are definitely eligible), so what are you waiting for?

The Devil's Backbone (2001)

a.k.a. El Espinazo del Diablo (Spanish title)
Directed by: Guillermo del Toro
Format: On Demand
Starring: Íñigo Garcés, Eduardo Noriega, Federico Luppi, Irene Visedo, Fernando Tielve
Trailer

I'd first seen a trailer for The Devil's Backbone some years ago in an art haus theater. I don't remember what I'd gone there to see, but I remember keeping this Spanish movie in the back of my mind. So, on a dark and stormy recent night after a few martinis, I'd only barely convinced myself not to stop at the video store on the way home. On Demand, I reasoned, would have to suffice in the name of my budget (Grey Goose martinis are seldom cheap). But, I was lucky that night and happened upon The Devil's Backbone in the horror menu. It was just the perfect selection for my mood and one I'd seemed to have put off for too long. I remember seeing del Toro in person, at a special screening of an early film in Austin. Of course, he went on to direct Pan's Labrynth, so the credentials behind this movie are substatial.

Somewhere, in a rural area of war-torn Spain, there is an orphanage. An old widow, Carmen (played by Marisa Paredes), runs the boy's home with the gold left behind by her late husband. After, Carlos (Tielve) loses his father, family friends leave him in the care of Carmen. With his stash of comic books and wind-up toys, the boy makes fast friends. Jaime (Garcés) is the resident bully and he's not terribly impressed with Carlos, and maybe a little jelous. During his first night, Carlos learns that the orphanage harbors a secret - there's a ghost roaming about. He also learns that the young handyman, Jacinto (Noriega) has a thirst for gold. The war hovers nearer their doorsteps and yet their greatest threat may come from inside. Is it the little boy's ghost or the greedy Jacinto that will ruin them all? What horrible secret is Jaime privy to? Where is the gold hidden and who will come out of this place alive?

History not being my strong suit, I couldn't begin to tell you which famous Spanish war is raging in The Devil's Backbone. del Toro knows though, and he seems fond of showing its effects on children. In both this film and in Pan's Labrynth, he depicts the orphans of this particular entaglement. While not concentrating on the fighting itself, he chooses to explore the lives of who may have been left behind. I tend to sympathize with his choice. Often, history is told of heroes and noble generals, not the underestimated courage of people on the fringe. His focus is poinant and special.

No matter what language, good acting shines through. For a child actor, Ferando Tielve does an impressive job. The majority of the boys do what they do best - be boys. The best character by far, was Irene Visedo. She plays a tough, amputee widow with dignity and grace. Íñigo Garcés was a little less convincing and I think he was chosen mostly for his eye-candy factor (if you're into that sort of thing). His girlfriend, Conchita (played by Irene Visedo) is a noble character, but really little more than an ornament in this film. All around, half of the cast acted suburbly and the other half was so-so.

The Devil's Backbone is really a story within a story. The dual plot keeps things interesting and the perspective of the young characters makes the film refreshing. I liked the way the movie was shot, with plenty of dusty browns and shadows. I think the bomb might have been developed a little more as an aspect of the film. It's hinted at and maybe some of the symolism escaped me, but it could have played a bigger part. This movie is not as fanciful, even considering the ghost, as Pan's Labrynth and I believe that there was more room for that fantastic aspect. One thing's for certain though, I shouldn't have waited so long to see The Devil's Backbone.

Overall Rating: 3 1/2 stars
Hottie Rating: 1, maybe

Alternate Recommendation: Pan's Labrynth
Official SiteIMDB Page
The Austin Chronicle's review

***Note: If you found this review via IMDB, please let us know by leaving a comment. Thanks!***

Boy Eats Girl (2005)

Directed by: Stephen Bradley
Format: On Demand
Starring: Samantha Mumba, David Leon, Tadgh Murphy, Laurance Kinlan
Trailer

I have my issues with the free movies that come with my On Demand cable. Usually, it's hard to find anything worth the time to see. Most times, those movies are the ones you pay for. However, I've noticed that certain factors determine what goes onto the free menu and one of them seems to be country of origin. It appears that American audiences are reluctant to watch anything from foreign lands unless that movie has made it to the Oscars or has attained "cult status". Lucky for me, these are the kinds of movies I like to watch and I never balk at subtitles. While Boy Eats Girl does not require English subtitles, it does come from Ireland. Oh, and - bonus! - all the guys have delicious Irish accents!

Boy Eats Girl revolves around a foursome group of friends; Jessica, Nathan, Diggs and Henry. The four high-schoolers (although they all look like they're in their mid-twenties) have been friends for a while and Nathan's began to take a shine to Jessica. His friends arrange a meeting between the two to force Nathan to finally ask Jessica out. But, on that fateful night, Jessica's father won't let her out of the house and Nathan gets tired of waiting. As he's headed home, he catches sight of his potential girlfriend (who managed to sneak out eventually) in a car with another guy. His hopes dashed and his heart broken, he goes to his room and proceeds to drink heavily. As he's toying with the idea of hanging himself, his mother bursts in and accidentally completes the deed.

Previously, as his mother was painting a chapel, she'd stumbled across an ancient book of voodoo. So, she goes back to steal it and uses black magic to resurrect her son. As everyone knows though, if you mess with the dark arts, something's bound to go awry. Nathan wakes up the following morning with no recollection of the night's events and a terrible hunger he can't quite alleviate. He decides to show up at the school dance and ends up in a fight with the class bully. Guess who gets bitten. From that point forward, there's a string of gruesome incidents, eventually turning everyone in town into flesh-eating zombies.

If you've read a few of my reviews, you will have noticed that I heart gore. Boy Eats Girl does not disappoint in that regard. There's one scene in particular in which Jessica uses a piece of farm equipment to puree a group of attackers. It's lovely! Intestines spill, heads explode, internal organs are obliterated - in short, it's a lovely display! The dismembered pieces are a bit rubbery, but that can be easily overlooked in the name of comedy.

The essence of the film is one quarter romantic comedy, three fourths Shawn of the Dead. While the dialogue and the humor of Boy Eats Girl don't quite meet the level of the British film, it's not a total loss. For one thing, it wasn't nearly as hyped. The teenage team has the advantage of a stronger, faster Nathan who hasn't yet given in to the madness of the flesh. If you ask me, he should have eaten the class slut, but that's beside the point. The mother and son actually have a decent relationship, which is absent in most films about teenagers. The attraction between Nathan and Jessica is cute, but not particularly compelling. I was satisfied that the girl could kick ass. Plot-wise the movie was entertaining, not spectacular.

The cast is typically well-rounded; there's the slut, the bully, the dork and the stoner-types. Diggs (Murphy) and Henry (Kinlan) provide most of the comedic element. Mumba and Leon are okay actors and do quite a fair job. The worst cast member was probably Mark Huberman, who play class bully Samson. Random gang of zombies could have done a much better job of groaning and dragging their limbs. The worst they seem to do is hover about and gnash their teeth. There wouldn't have been anything wrong with a bit more horror.

So, as a discount rental or a free On Demand pick, Boy Eats Girl is a safe bet. It won't leave you in bed with the lights on and it won't have you holding your sides with laughter. On the other hand, the action and humor will hold your attention.

Overall Rating: 3
Hottie Rating: 3 (God, I love guys with accents!)

Alternate Recommendation: Fido
Official Site
IMDB Page
Dystopia Magazine review - Carol Sullivan is a bit more generous than I was.

***Note: If you found this review via IMDB, please let us know by leaving a comment. Thanks!***

Atonement (2007)

Directed by: Joe Wright
Format: On Demand
Starring: Keira Knightley, Saoirse Ronan, James McAvoy, Romola Garai, Juno Temple
Trailer

**The movie is a Gummi Awards nominee for the Most Offensive Example of Animal Testing/Cruelty category.**

One of the great things I've discovered since I began The Gummi Awards contest is that I've been pushed outside my usual boundaries. Because I have committed to watch and review every movie nominated, I find myself venturing into genres I never would have otherwise. In fact, as much as I adore film and as often as I watch them, there are plenty that slip under my radar. I'd never even heard of Atonement prior to its nomination. It's not a movie I think I would have thought to see. I do enjoy drama, but only every so often and usually when it involves my favorite actors. I also steer clear of war movies in general and while Atonement doesn't center particularly around the war, it's a substantial aspect of the plot.

This movie takes place in London during the early part of the 1940s. Young Briony (Ronan) is a clever 13 year old girl. She was born into wealth and spends her time writing plays. She's got a crush on Robbie Turner (McAvoy), her elder of about 10 years, who works for her family. Robbie has fallen in love with Briony's older sister, Cecilia (Knightley). When Robbie writes a note to her, he gives it to Briony to deliver. But, it's the wrong note and when Briony sneaks a peek at it, she gets the idea that dear Robbie is a bit depraved. That very same night, she stumbles across the scene of a crime. Her cousin Lola is being raped and she catches the assailant in the act. Although she catches only a brief glimpse of the man, she tells the authorities that she's sure it was Robbie Turner.

Robbie is arrested and sentenced on Briony's testimony. Faced with doing time or joining the war effort, Robbie goes off to fight the Germans. Cecilia, who returns Robbie's love, commits to wait for him to return and shuns her family. Realizing what she's done by accusing the man her sister loves, Briony denys an education at Cambridge and enrolls in nursing school. While Robbie and Cecilia yearn to be together, Briony leads an almost nun-like existence, still writing and still hoping to make things right.

Make no mistake, Atonement is a serious drama. There's no comic relief and no airy atmosphere to distract from the tragedy. The love affair between Robbie and Cecilia is a tortured one full of longing, hope, and pain. Briony doesn't have it easy either. She is learning the full scope of consequences resulting from her action. Really, the story isn't about the pair of lovers, even though they get the majority of the screen time. It's truly about young Briony growing up and trying to cope with her actions. The plot is solid, well told and very moving. It's also inventive and original.

Atonement is superbly acted as well. I thought Ronan did the best of the three actresses who portray Briony. She's intense but childlike at the same time. McAvoy is so utterly charming that it's impossible not to fall in love with his character. Knightley is an actress that I haven't decided whether to like or not. I enjoyed her performance in The Jacket, but could barely stand her in the Pirates of the Caribbean films. Her portrayal of Cecilia in Atonement has swung her once again toward the positive verdict. Even the supporting cast does a wonderful job in each of their various roles. Lola is a veritable Lolita, but innocent all the same.

This movie was very depressing. Not on the scale of Eternal Sunshine, but close. However, I appreciate a film that makes me feel something over a bland romantic comedy. The love between the two main characters is palpable and I wanted every moment for them to be together. While it's Briony who's caused all the trouble, it's difficult to hate her completely. The ending was nicely done and unexpected. I love the originality of Atonement and the fact that it portrayed the horrors of war without making the leap to become a "war movie". It's a beautiful film and one that I recommend, as long as you have a box of tissues and a bottle of Prozac handy.

Overall Rating: 4
Hottie Rating: 4 1/2 (for the library scene)

Alternate Recommendation: The Illusionist
Official Site
IMDB Page
Salon.com review

***Note: If you found this review via IMDB, please let us know by leaving a comment. Thanks!***

Update: Director List

As you may have noticed, there's a little bit of maintenance going on here at GP. Our list of directors was getting a bit long. So, we've broken it up into sections. Now you can pinpoint a range of director names instead of searching through the entire list. If you're looking for our latest review, go straight to it by clicking in the New Reviews section in the left-hand nav bar.

Director List: Y thru Z

**Note: This list consists only of directors noted in my reviews, and only their movies that I have reviewed. It is not meant to be all inclusive by any means.***

Mennan Yapo

Premonition

David Yates

Harry Potter and The Order of the Phoenix

[A-C] [D-F] [G-I] [J-L] [M-O] [P-R] [S-U] [V-X]

Director List: V thru X

**Note: This list consists only of directors noted in my reviews, and only their movies that I have reviewed. It is not meant to be all inclusive by any means.***

Gore Verbinski

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest

The Weather Man

Peter Weir

Master & Commander: The Far Side of the World

James Wong

Final Destination 3

Joe Wright

Atonement

[A-C] [D-F] [G-I] [J-L] [M-O] [P-R] [S-U] [Y-Z]