Halloween (2018)

2018 | dir: David Gordon Green | 106 m

Halloween is one among many John Carpenter masterpieces that he has deigned to bestow up the world, and I have, of course, watched it many times. The rest of the sequels... not so much. As part of my annual horror movie marathon this October, I decided to get caught up the rest of the Halloween series. Much to my dismay, I discovered that much like the Friday the 13th series, the sequels to Halloween represented at best diminishing artistic and entertainment returns and at worst head-scratchingly terrible movies, the scripts for which probably wouldn't receive a passing mark if they had had been submitted as creative writing assignments in a grade 4 class. Yes, I'm looking at you Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers and Halloween: Resurrection. These are sequels that are so bad that it felt like they were made specifically to insult and alienate fans of the series (or at least of the original film).

The Halloween sequels seemed to go off the rails almost immediately, adding increasingly nonsensical aspects to the Michael Myers mythology that made the character less impactful and the story unnecessarily convoluted. The series kept retconning itself before retconning was even a fully formed concept in pop culture. Halloween II was an otherwise solid sequel, but they retconned the backstory to make Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) Michael Myers' long-lost sister instead of a random victim of his senseless violence in an effort to try and provide some sort of motivation for Myers' character. This was despite Carpenter's own original vision of Michael Myers as an "absence of character," and more of a supernatural force of nature. Having Michael Myers obsessed with killing his own family not only didn't make a whole lot of sense, but it also detracted from the horror of an unstoppable, unidentifiable assailant whose motivations are unclear and unknowable, who can't be bargained or reasoned with, and who may strike again, anywhere, for any reason (or no reason at all). 

Ford v Ferrari

2019 | dir: James Mangold | 152 m

For someone who doesn't particularly follow sports, let alone auto racing, it seems absurd that I would get so excited for upcoming films about the sport; alas, I can't help myself. Maybe it's a deep-rooted unfulfilled love for going fast. Could be the mixture of smell of gasoline and burning rubber and the roar of engines around a track. Or most likely, it's watching these athletes excel at their passion as they race toward their dreams. It's easy to get caught up in the drama and high speed adventure afforded to us by these types of films, and they are appropriately at home on the big screen of a local theatre where the camera angles and sound systems bring an immersion to the experience that often goes unparalleled at home. Ford v Ferrari delivers on the visceral front but is keen in taking its time to deliver us a compelling story of (somewhat exaggerated for the big screen) true events about people coming together to accomplish something extraordinary. It's a solid turnout for everyone involved and although the runtime is long, I never felt like the movie was dragging on as I found myself invested from start to finish. The story beats are almost too familiar but the sum of all the parts produces a better sports film as it focuses less on the technical details and more on the characters, their passions and relationships. An overall excellent film and one not to be missed on the big screen, but should also be enjoyable again down the road.

Rating: 4 / 5

My Darling Clementine

1946 | dir: John Ford | 103 m

This movie is gorgeous; it's beautiful in more ways than one but I was truly taken aback by how striking the black and white film looked. The shots are deliberate and eye catching; the shadows are looming and bottomless. What makes getting into these westerns as a genre that I haven't really explored before is the astonishment of these old films: while many, many years ago I would be reluctant to watching a film from the 40's, maybe with the mindset that everything coming out 40+ years later would be inherently better somehow, but that was a foolish train of thought for a younger self. Henry Fonda's Wyatt Earp and Victor Mature as 'Doc' Holliday are absolutely ablaze here; their screen presence is bolstered by excellent framing and cinematography, but their acting really shines through. The steady pacing, developed characters and simple-yet-elegant plot and story make me yearn for the opposite of what we have right now: (most) modern movies are bloated, spend too much time on bravado and overly complicated stories. There's really not much else that I can competently say about the film; I haven't done my research to see where this stands but surely, it must be considered one of the best of the genre.

Rating: 4 / 5

The Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean

1972 | dir: John Huston | 120 m

When I asked Cale for a list of western's off the top of his head that I could add to our "Western November" month, I was provided with a succinct list of verifiable classics of the genre. Near the top of the list though, was an exception, and with it, carried a bit of skepticism. The Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean was sandwiched between Shane and The Searchers, with a little note: "that's a weird one if you can get it." Well of course, I had to get it, and he was quick to follow up with another note: "I think you'll enjoy that one; it's a little off-kilter." None of the other films really warranted viewer discretion or recommendation, so it immediately shot to the top of my list and I took it in, without knowing anything about the film. I was quite very pleasantly surprised. This is the issue: I've neglected western's throughout my life, only taking in some of the modern ones (like Tombstone and more recently, Unforgiven) and never really had to bear any shame for it. Being hesitant to even begin a project of focusing a month on them was daunting, but I know it was time to take me out of my comfort zone; Judge Roy Bean was the perfect movie to do so.

As the film starts out, we're given some on-screen narration and an introduction scene that finds our Judge taking over a small community and declaring himself the law; it plays out a bit oddly, but I was intrigued regardless. As the title would suggest, we follow Roy Bean's life as he turns this small community into a prosperous outpost in the west, which doesn't exactly sound enticing but the film managed to capture me as soon as I figured out that the movie is mostly a comedy (it may have taken me too long to figure this out). Everything is done fairly tongue in cheek, with some absurdity thrown in and a dose of serious moments that had me thinking that my friend was absolutely right to put this at the top of the list of westerns to see. 

Rating: 3.5 / 5

The Exorcist

1973 | dir: William Friedkin | 122 m

Its become apparent that over the past couple of years that not only horror has taken over my main movie watching, but the slasher sub-genre has hacked its way to the forefront. Yet there is a wealth of other incredible content that has been pushed to the side, including The Exorcist. Not unlike the other franchises I've spent time with lately, I saw The Exorcist decades ago; unfortunately I didn't have the foresight to catalog my views so the experience is practically nonexistent save that it did, indeed, happen. Regardless, it was time to revisit something outside the slasher world; I started with some supernatural in the realm of Insidious, and as Halloween approached I spun my disc for The Exorcist. This film just keeps getting better with time, right? The Exorcist has permeated popular culture to the point where my own memories of the film are replaced entirely with all the parodies, homages and call outs; it was surprising then, that most of the exorcism itself - the element that is most referenced - takes up a brief amount of time near the end of the film and while I did not time it, felt like it ended relatively quickly. But that's not a negative: this film takes its time and builds up properly, with incredible tension and wonder leading all the way to the thrilling conclusion. Everything in this film felt earned; no shortcuts and nothing unnecessary filling the runtime. I would behest to say The Exorcist is one of those films that feels like cinema, if that even makes sense: these films wake up that part of my brain that remembers "oh yes, THIS is why I love movies so much."

Rating: 4.5 / 5

The Lighthouse

2019 | dir: Robert Eggers | 110 m

This review may contain spoilers.

It's been nary twenty four hours since somberly leaving the theatre after watching The Lighthouse and I'm still unsure what I just witnessed, but I do have a feeling I just participated in something unique, and maybe even great. Throughout the nearly two hour runtime of the film, I was mesmerized from beginning to end, and there were many moments that have stuck with me, with noted significance on the performances by Patterson and Dafoe: they were incredible. Dafoe's Thomas Wake has a few close shot monologues that had me pouring over every word, every movement of his face and terrified as I gazed into those unblinking eyes. Pattinson plays Winslow, a newcomer in the lighthouse keeping world: he is adamant to perform his duties by the book, but is quickly (or maybe it's slowly) rolled over by Wake's relentless task-driving and unwillingness to adhere to anyone's rules but his own. Wake keeps the upper portion of the lighthouse off limits to Winslow, which - combined with living in such small quarters with someone and a belligerent seagull - drive him slowly mad. As the audience, we never venture away Pattinson's perspective and can't help but feel that madness reach out at us from the square frame of the lens. We question how much time has passed; we wonder if some of this is in Winslow's mind; we beg to know what's so special in the lighthouse. There's a degree of quirky humour throughout as well that perfectly complemented the weight of brewing terror.  The sound is ominous, loud and frightening. The black and white, square aspect ratio feels purposefully claustrophobic at times and beautifully unique throughout. 

I really look forward to seeing this one again.

Rating: 4 / 5

Leatherface

2017 | dir: Alexandre Bustillo, Julien Maury | 88 m

Just a few short weeks ago I launched into my journey to view all the Texas Chainsaw Massacre films; it's a project like those that came before it for Halloween, Friday the 13th and A Nightmare on Elm Street, but I was not prepared for how many Chainsaw movies there actually were. Or even how the "timeline" of these may be more messed up than the Halloween series. Alas, the final movie was upon me and I was looking forward to wrapping this series up, as I became nauseated with the ups and downs of quality throughout. Leatherface does away with the Massacre moniker presumably since it's (yet another) origin story of our miscreant psychopath, but I do feel as though it would belong: it's firmly planted in the "family comes first at all costs" that the entire series has been consistent with. In an effort to differentiate or perhaps re-invent the series, this movie tries to play tricks on you but to no real consequence; the story is familiar as we follow a group of young adult killers escaping from a mental institution and committing some truly horrific and nonsensical crimes. Yet it doesn't go all in on that, because we still have to find out what makes Leatherface, well, Leatherface; so much of the chaotic momentum is cut short as the film has to circle back to the original exposition. Nothing really stands out in this entry and I'm having difficulty remembering anything about the film a few short days after watching it. The franchise comes to a close - for now - with expected disappointment. I suppose it could have been much worse.

Rating: 1 / 5

Texas Chainsaw 3D

2013 | dir: John Luessenhop | 92 m

Regretfully, I did not get to see this movie in theatres in proper 3D, and it's too bad: I feel as though the horror-style 3D effects that are so common in the genre when it utilizes the technology are so over-the-top that they add a layer of cheese and fun that other movie genres cant' get away with. That being said, it's still blatantly obvious when these effects are going all in while watching in regular 2D, and I can't help but chuckle every time. Oddly enough, this entry in the Texas Chainsaw Massacre series picks up exactly where the original left off - then advances some twenty or thirty years (the time passed is messed up anyway). So many of the other entries pick up much later or re-tell the original in a different way, so it was refreshing to see some of the actors even come back to complete some scenes for the aftermath of the climax of the 1974 original. However, as we advance to modern times the movie feels like a lacklustre attempt; it falls behind the two remakes and I can't help but wonder why they didn't continue in that universe. The characters (as usual) are pretty unlikeable, although this film takes them a step further with some sympathy for Leatherface and making villains out of the local townspeople. The climax of the film is baffling and will leave a bad taste for sure, and I was glad when it was all over. It feels like this movie would get better with repeated viewings though: there is plenty of blood, thrills and mayhem.

Rating: 1.5 / 5

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning

2006 | dir: Jonathan Liebesman | 91 m

I was reminded of watching Ouija, followed by it's prequel and remarking that the prequel ended up being much better than the first film. Going in with that logic, I was expecting a similar treatmeant but alas, The Beginning is not a better film than the The Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake from just a couple of years previous. I see why this movie was made but don't really see any reasoning on why this movie exists on screen. R Lee Ermey gets a lot more screen time here and I can't complain about that, nor really the film as a whole. One thing that really stuck with me in a review I read was how this film makes Leatherface "a less sympathetic character" and it's spot on: the previous films explored different sides of Leatherface, to a point where he was an ineffective killer and easily persuaded/scared by his own family. He didn't choose to be the way he was: he was born into that family and it dictated all his actions; he was almost endearing. This prequel removes all that character development and familiarity that we've received in the first four films: Leatherface is a killer through and through, and his family reacts to HIS choices, not the other way around anymore. Granted, this is a prequel to a remake, so both versions of this character can co-exist: we haven't revisited this version again which might tell you everything you need to know about the subject.

For a slasher horror film it's difficult to say this disappoints as the gore is amplified and we're treated to some really grotesque displays of terror including Leatherface creating his first mask. The sequels have always struggled to keep up with the legend of the original Massacre as a shocking film, and I'm sure it was (although the skeptic in me believe it's mostly marketing); this entry treads tightly on the unbelievable and ridiculous: wherein events in previous movies felt more organic - that is, in how our group falls upon The Family - The Beginning feels smashed together and loose, although in retrospect that maybe makes sense, as it's not just the origin of Leatherface but of the family getting a taste for their murderous routine.

Rating: 2 / 5