The Autopsy of Jane Doe (2016) #510

One the most haunting, slow burning horror movies I've seen in years, "The Autopsy of Jane Doe" is the perfect film to watch alone on a dark and spooky night. There is an overwhelming feeling of seclusion and solitude present, although that's the natural of environment of a small-town coroner. The movie is a masterclass on how to reveal each new clue to the audience for the maximum effect. Staring the brilliant Brian Cox ("The Ring" and "Trick-R-Treat"), giving a grounded performance the provides the gravitas needed for this film. "Autopsy" is a film that shouldn't be broken down scene by scene, so I'll provide a brief overview. 

The unidentified corpse of a young woman is found at the sight of a bizarre multiple homicide. The body is brought to the town's coroner, Tommy, who gets to work on the autopsy. Seeing that it's an unusual circumstance, Tommy's son and assistant, Austin, skips his date with his girlfriend and stays behind to help. Together, the two begin to discover one anomaly after another, where logic ceases to make sense. The corpse is a complete enigma, and their findings suggest something darker than they were expecting. Soon the line between reality and the supernatural begin to blur, but why? Who is the Jane Doe and what does she want?

The chemistry between Timmy and Austin feels real and genuine, as the deal with the different stages in their lives. Timmy is dealing with growing old alone now that his wife has passed away, and Austin is starting a new romance. When things begin to become chaotic, Timmy steps up to protect his son as best as he can.

 

31 (2016) #486

“31”, an original Rob Zombie film that fails to be all that original. Once again, it’s set in the 1970’s, yet again it stars his wife Sheri Moon, and while watching the film, it feels like you're watching a carnie version of The Running Man. This is also one time where Zombie doesn’t over explain things, leaving you wanting a bit more information about some characters, primarily the three aristocrats that seem to be running the event that’s taking place. Knowing this, the film is still to watch and is elevated by the performance of one individual.

The movie begins with a cold opening, black and white, with a haunting speech from Doom-Head, perfectly performed by Richard Brake (Mandy). This scene sets a high-level mark that the remainder of the film attempts and sometimes achieves. Here, Doom-Head is taunting his recent victim before finishing the job. He feels like an evolved version of Otis from "House of 1000 Corpses", just more methodical than maniacal; both are completely terrifyingly effective.

The next scene is a bright and sunny day, and we are introduced to the happy go lucky crew of carnies. The next few minutes are spent introducing this set of characters enough for the viewers to know their names and not much else. While driving at night, they come across a trap and are quickly overcome by unknown assailants, once again reminiscent of "House of 1000 Corpses". Some are killed while the others are tied up and driven off into the night. When the five carnies wake up, they find themselves as game pawns with odds of the survival being announced by three bizarre classically dressed aristocrats. These three explain that they are about to play the game 31 and all they have to do is survive the relentless onslaught by the various "Heads", beginning with Sick-Head, then the killer clowns Schizo-Head and Psycho-Head, and then Death-Head and Sex-Head, who was a rather inquisitive flirt earlier in the film.

The carnies are able to defeat the five "Heads" while losing two of their own. The aristocrats are forced to call in the sixth "Head", Doom-Head, who eventually agrees. He makes quick work of two of the carnies, which leaves Charly as the sole survivor, played by Shari Moon. Charly is able to survive the stated 12 hours of the game and Doon-Head is called off. Not caring about the rules, Doom-Head and Charly have a final stare down before the credits begin.

     

 

Blair Witch (2016) #440

"Blair Witch" is a respectable sequel that continues the original legend that is established in "The Blair Witch Project". There are some familar feeling moments in the film as well as some clever use of modern technology, such as ear piece camera/mics and a video drone. The origin of the Blair witch is discussed, what happened after Heather, Mike, and Josh went missing and how the residents reacted. I enjoy the reason why the campers go into the woods, Heather's little brother wants to find the mysterious house where she was last seen alive. I like how the people who go with him are lifelong friends as well as a girl making her own documentary. And I approve how the people who found the most recent clue want to tag along as well. This tallies six potential victims to be picked off one by one. 

"Blair Witch" does stumble slightly as a sequel when it comes to adding something new while building on the original. The downsides of the film, for me at least, include too many cheap attempts at having people jump into the camera and horrible non-subtle noises in the woods at night, a weird Bermuda Triangle style effect about the woods, an odd infection that one of the campers suffer from, and almost the same story beats from the original "The Blair Witch". Finally, this film ruins what the original did so well, it shows too much. 

The ending of "Blair Witch" leaves the question - what happens next? The actual ending of this film isn't as ambiguous as "The Blair Witch Project", but I can't help but wonder if there will be an attempt to make yet another sequel? How would they expand the existing story and what would they add to the established mythology? Will horror fans remember this film as fondly as the original? 

Overall, I enjoyed the movie even though it felt more like a remake than a sequel. There were moments that I laughed out loud at the characters, and parts that I felt engaged and had no idea what was going to happen next. I wished it had been a bit more original but at least I wasn't completely disappointed. 

Don't Breathe (2016) #437

Intense, intense, intense; that's the best way to describe the film "Don't Breathe", the newest film from director Fede Alvarez ("Evil Dead") and co-producers Sam Raimi and Robert Tapert. It's a simple premise that delivers in every way; three young adults break into a rundown house to steal a fortune in cash from a blind veteran. The small cast of main characters keeps the story running smoothly and at a brisk pace and the film doesn't rely on gore or jump scares since the entire film is one long scare. My only complaint is that we really don't get to know too much about the three thieves, so it's hard to sympathize with them too much when things run astray.

What makes this movie work so well is the use of sound as well as visuals in certain scenes. Like the movie "Hush", one of the main characters has a sensory deficiency and that handicap plays directly into the plot. Unlike "Hush", "Don't Breathe" utilizes this detail perfectly and actually makes it important to the premise of the film. In this film, the blind man has home court advantage and it doesn't matter that he's blind because he knows every inch of his house and has grown to live with his disability and has learned to depend on his hearing that much more. 

Jane Levy is the main antigonist/protagonist in don't breathe, returning to work with Mr. Alvarez after starring as Mia in the 2013 "Evil Dead" film. Like most leading women in the horror genre, her character is all kick ass and "can do", more than holding her own along the side of her two male partners. My favorite moment of this is when she tells the other two that she's going to climb through a window so they can get inside; one of the guys tells her she isn't being made to do it, she informs him that she's choosing to by her own choice.

Of course some people may complain that there are a few plot holes or situations where they'll ask why didn't the characters do this or that, but I think that's looking at the film much to closely. This is a great way to spend 90 minutes, just getting lost in the moment of a really fun movie. Fede has proved that he has range as a horror director and I look forward to the next project he works on.

10 Cloverfield Lane (2016) #435

"10 Cloverfield Lane" is a taunt thriller that may or may not take place in the same realm as "Cloverfield". It's a detail that's not too important because this film could have had been given any title, but if the two films are related, then the mysteries about the two films continue to grow and adding great potential for future stories in the franchise. The main difference between the two films in how they were filmed; "Cloverfield" was shot in the first perspective, POV, style while "10 Cloverfield Lane" is filmed in the traditional style, making this fim easier to watch for those who don't like the shakey-cam technique.

The movie, at the surface, is about three individuals who are locked in an underground bomb shelter after some questionable events happen in the nearby area. The story is carried by the talents of the minimal cast, showcasing John Goodman ("C.H.U.D") in a wonderfully creepy role as Howard, Mary Elizabeth Winstead ("Final Destination 3") as Michelle, and John Gallagher Jr ("Hush") as Emmett. The chemistry between these three actors is intense and perfect, striking a chord when Howard's paranoia gets worked up or when Michelle tries to escape.

The movie pacing could be considered a slow burn, at times moving along at a pace that makes you want to scream at the screen to hurry up and get to the point. When the point is made, the tension leading up to it makes perfect sense. There are enough twists and suspenseful moments in the film to make up for the lack of direct action that takes place in its predesessor. 

Like many others, "10 Cloverfield Lane" wasn't what I expecting but I really enjoyed it and I'm excited to see what comes next in this creative franchise.

Contracted: Phase 2 (2015)

It's sometimes difficult for a sequel to keep the spirit of the original film while adding something new so it's not repeating the same beat over and over. "Contracted: Phase 2" manages to honor the original movie while advancing the story forward; it feels like it stumbles at times but the overall production works. The first movie was nice and subtle and the viewer didn't know, but could guess, where the story was going. "Contracted: Phase 2" shows the aftermath and advances the narrative forward.

                      Spoilers below

If you've seen "Contracted", then you know what might be happening in this movie; it's easy to connect the dots. This series is about the start of a zombie outbreak plain and simple and you are reminded of this in the very first scene of this sequel. The virus is slowly beginning to spread and the authorities are now looking for the bio-terrorist that started it. By the end of the film a hospital has been quarantined, so it's interesting to see how large of scale the next film, if there is one, will take the story. 

The one detail, if details are important to you, that bothers me about this movie is how quickly the virus/infection spreads. It took 6 days for the main character Samantha in the first film to become fully infected, and 6 days for Riley to become fully infected, but only a matter of hours for everyone else? Samantha had sex with the source of, let's say contamination, and then Riley had sec with her a few days later; both of them suffered for nearly the same amount of time. But a girl that Riley kisses deeply and his grandmother who he gives a quick peck on the cheek change in less than a day makes it difficult to take seriously. 

Overall, "Contracted: Phase 2" is a fun little zombie film that focuses more on the infection and becoming rather than fighting of the hordes of undead that we're all so used to seeing.

The Conjuring 2 (2016) #432

Three years after the stellar original hit the theaters in 2013, the highly anticipated sequel to "The Conjuring" has finally arrived. Although we were given "Annabelle" to whet our pallet until now, that film ultimately left viewers feeling somewhat disappointed. So does "The Conjuring 2" live up to expectations? The answer is yes and almost; "The Conjuring 2" is a great horror film but didn't hit the adrenaline as hard as the original did. When directly compared to the original, there are fewer and less effective scares. As a stand alone film, which the movie is able to do if you have not seen the original, "The Conjuring 2" is still successful at adapting a story based on true events and a great way to be introduced to Ed and Lorraine Warren.

One of the best parts of watching "The Conjuring 2" is seeing Patrick Wilson ("Insidious" and "Bone Tomahawk") and Vera Farmiga ("The Bates Motel" return as Ed and Lorraine Warren. They have such great chemistry together and can really believe that they are the famous pair. Patrick is easily one of my favorite horror movie actors and I would love to see Vera in more big screen horror films as well. Joining the cast is Frances O'Connor ("Mercy"), who plays the single mother with four children, one who is haunted by an spirit. Another great part is having James Wan ("Saw", "Insidious", and "The Conjuring") return to the horror genre after directing the action film "Furious 7" (another great film!). He kept the film at an even pace and tried to push the story just enough, having admitted that there is only so much you can do when the story is based on real events.

That story that inspired "The Conjuring 2" is none other than the Enfield Haunting, one of the most documented supernatural occurrences ever. In 1977, Janet Hodgson, was possessed by a spirit who claimed that it's name was Bill Wilkins, an old man that had died in the house that Janet and her family now lived in. Various supernatural events took place in the house which involved family before Ed and Lorraine were requested to help determine if those same events were a hoax or not. The Warrens were recently in the limelight after being a part of the investigation with the Amityville Haunting. 

The film does a wonderful job in telling the tale of the Enfield Haunting while fleshing out further backstory for the Warrens and the dangers that their profession held. I'm excited for when I get to watch both films back to back at home and really compare notes.

Hush (2016) #430

Writer and director Mike Flanagan has delivered another fan favorite, word of mouth sensation called "Hush". A home invasion thriller, "Hush" pits a deaf/mute writer against a mysterious killer in a thrilling game of cat and mouse. Unlike his previous film "Oculus", "Hush" has a straight forward, simple narrative. With a budget of only $70,000, Flanagan and his cast and crew create an awesome little film. It's encouraging to see that solid horror films can still be made on the cheap and still have a polished and professional look to them; I would never have known that this film was made on such a tight budget without reading about that fact.

The situations presented in the film are intense and feel realistic and that might be where the film could have some editing; I personally feel that they had too many failed escape attempts before finally moving on to a different course of action. Another minor downfall to the film is that it is incredibly dark, as in unlit, through a good portion of the movie. These are petty complaints for an otherwise engaging and fun thriller that finishes on an adrenaline fueled high note. Flanagan avoids simple "jump scare" tactics and really uses the lack of silence beautifully at various points of the movie.


"Hush" stars Kate Siegel, who co-wrote the film with her husband Flanagan, and gives an amazing performance as Maddie, the deaf reclusive writer. Giving an equally solid performance is John Gallagher Jr as the masked killer her joyfully plays with his prey. Samantha Sloyan and Michael Trucco round out the other prominent cast members as Maddie's neighbors who become involved with the horror in their own way.

 "Oculus"

Martyrs (2016) #424

"Marytrs" is the 2016 American remake of the 2008 extreme French film of the same name. As the trend with most remakes, the new version is rarely as good as the original. This film is both too much like the original and yet strays horribly astray when it tries to be different. The first half of the film feels like a shot for shot redo that scales back the intensity while the second half fails to deliver any scares and the story feels weak; the choice to write a new third act is commendable only if the new material actually adds to the established narrative because what takes place feels uncreative.

Besides having questionable story choices, the elements that makes the original do scary are either reduced or removed altogether. Why remake a tame version of a movie that is considered to be one of the more extreme films of the past ten years? It's a confounding move that doesn't do well for the film.

Lucie is a young girl who is being held captive and being systematically tortured in a rundown industrial building. She manages to escape but her captor is unable to be found. She is placed in an orphanage where she becomes close friends with Anna, a girl who's her age. Even though she physically heals, she is still tormented by a monster that only she can see. Ten years later, the two friends find Lucie's abusers but end up discovering something far more terrifying.