And the Winner is...

Yesterday I read a story in the Hollywood Reporter about what type of mood will be the trend at the Oscars this year. Such moods from prior years include the 2008 Oscar’s applauding of ominous movies like No Country for Old Men, There Will Be Blood and Michael Clayton, and 2009’s return to Hollywood-happy-endings with Slumdog Millionaire’s best picture win. This year’s possible trend could be even more difficult to determine since the usual number of 5 films nominated for best picture has doubled to 10. “With the widened field, there's a wider split between the feel-good contenders and the downbeat ones, between movies that depict the world as it is and those that show the world as we wish it to be,” said Steven Zeitchik of the Hollywood Reporter.

Oscar nominations won’t be released until February 2010, but rumors of possible entries include: The Hurt Locker, directed by Kathryn Bigelow (Point Break); Precious, the film adaptation of Sapphire’s Push, directed by Lee Daniels (co-produced Monster’s Ball) and introducing Gabourey 'Gabby' Sidibe as Sapphire; the Coen brother’s A Serious Man; and Jason Reitman’s Up in the Air, starring George Clooney. Since the Academy has recently attempted to appeal to a larger audience, expect to see films like Inglorious Basterds, The Hangover and Star Trek in some type of category.

Don’t expect to see movies like Amelia, starring Hilary Swank as Amelia Earheart, and Michael Mann’s Public Enemies in contention for any major award. Mann’s direction of the John Dillinger biopic starring Johnny Depp and Christian Bale generated only a 59 percent tomato-meter rating on Rottentomatoes.com. “Mann excels at staging the chaotic bank jobs and bloody shootouts that were just a day at the office for Dillinger, but even at 140 minutes the movie is so dense with incident that there isn’t much room for cultural comment or character development,” said J.R. Jones of the Chicago Reader. Amelia, on the other hand, earned an 11 percent tomato meter rating. To give it some scale, Eddie Murphy’s Meet Dave earned a 27 percent rating.

One entry I'm not so sure will be in contention for an Oscar is Jane Campion’s Bright Star, reviewed by Cat Pham, which has generated a lot of buzz. The film was beautifully shot, but I’d be very surprised if it were to receive a nomination for any major award outside of best actress; Abbie Cornish killed her part as John Keats love interest, Fanny Brawne. The movie seemed a bit robotic outside of Cornish, especially Ben Whishaw’s portrayal of John Keats. Regarding the chemistry between Cornish and Whishaw, Pham said, "What I wanted from these 'star-crossed lovers' was to see that they cared for one another with equal amounts of intensity. Keat’s feelings for Fanny, as portrayed in this film, [are] pale in comparison to the young woman’s ardent and unwavering love." Tom Long of the Detroit News had a similar review - "for a film about love, Bright Star is curiously cold, more pretty than emotional."

Also questionable is Clint Eastwood’s Invictus, starring Matt Damon as rugby player Francois Pienaar and Morgan Freeman as Nelson Mandela during the 1995 Rugy World Cup. Check out the trailer:


I’m including this now in the best picture category; however, it's only questionable because it hasn't come out yet. Eastwood’s films can’t miss. What movie of his in the past 10 years hasn’t been nominated for some type of Academy Award, if not for best picture? Check his resume: Gran Torino, Letters from Iwo Jima, Million Dollar Baby, Mystic River, etc. There’s another 3 or 4 I intentionally left off that could’ve been included on this list. Unfortunately, like so many other pictures, some of Eastwood’s work was beaten by other, arguably lesser films.

I hope the Academy gets it right this year. I was disappointed that Slumdog Millionaire won so many awards last year. I’m putting it in my too-much-hype category along with Crash and Chicago. Other factors have gone into films winning at the Oscars, which include producers lobbying for their films by distributing them, along with gifts, to as many judges as possible. I’d like to think that judges have kept an unbiased perspective, but with some of the wins I’ve seen over the years I wonder just how much Academy judges are influenced.

Check back for my review of the Coen brother's A Serious Man.

The Horror Genre: Churn'em & Burn'em

Is it me or does it seem like horror films are dominating movie theaters lately? Really I think they’ve been dominating for the past 80 years, but they never seem to stay in theaters long enough for people to see them. I’d say there are more bad horror flicks than good, and usually the good ones churn out so many bad sequels that it diminishes the original work. And no, I’m not just talking about the recent onslaught of gore porn that’s been “torturing” us every Halloween. That’d require an entirely different essay. Really though, why have there been 12 Friday the 13th movies (including Jason X and Freddy vs. Jason) and soon-to-be 9 A Nightmare on Elm Street’s? Big up to new Freddy Krueger Jackie Earle Haley . The guy’s been in everything since costarring in Little Children back in 2006, which was his first after a 13 year hiatus from acting. Anyone remember Kelly Leak from The Bad News Bears?

Anyway, my point is that the recent downturn in the economy has drastically affected Hollywood to the point that producers have shut down numerous projects that would have been green-lit 10 years ago based off of a big star and intriguing script. Producers are now opting to make the “fly-by-nightclubs” of the movie world—the horror film.

It’s funny how history repeats itself. During the Golden Age of Hollywood (1930-1950), Universal found itself struggling to make money as a result of the Great Depression. With nothing to lose, it took a chance by filming and releasing Bram Stoker’s Dracula in 1931. After the success of the film, Universal produced Frankenstein, The Mummy, The Wolfman, and other horror classics. “Universal was attracted to the horror because of the low costs of production. Screenplays were cheap to develop…film stars…never commanded the salaries of the luminaries of comedy or the western,” and “the horror genre could make efficient use…of existing studio sets and thus save thousands of dollars in basic production costs (Weaver, Tamborini, 55 & 56). It’s been nearly 80 years since Universal introduced audiences to the horror genre, but the same basic ideas are being applied to the genre today. Check out James B. Weaver, III, and Ron Tamborini’s Horror Films: Current Research on Audience Preferences and Reactions for more information on the horror genre.

Paranormal Activity, featuring a first time director and no name stars, has already earned over $40 million dollars domestically after being produced for the ridiculously low $11 thousand. Hollywood producers employ the same methods not out of necessity for lack of money, but because it’s good business.

The most successful horror films of 2009 so far, which include My Bloody Valentine, the Friday the 13th remake (proving franchises can just start over after running out of ideas), Drag Me To Hell, and The Final Destination all feature no-name casts and budgets that didn’t exceed $40 million. Faithful fans of the Friday the 13th and Final Destination franchises were lured back to theaters, while others may have been enticed by the recent return of 3-D.

A loyal fan base and 3-D vision still doesn’t explain why so many fans pour into theaters in hopes of experiencing a few frights for two hours. Obviously, viewers like the idea of being scared without actually being in danger. Also, today's fans have come to embrace crazed killers and beings in horror for the same reason American audiences embrace gangster movies—the antihero. Fans want to see the new traps Jigsaw has set for his victims, how inventive Freddy will be in killing a fresh batch of teenagers (shout out to the girl Freddy turned into a cockroach), and they want to see how Michael Myers will cheat death again (already shot, blown up, electrocuted, etc.) These killers were rejected by the world around them. Freddy was burned by neighbors, lifeguards let Jason Voorhees drown, Michael Myers was sent to a mental institution, and I guess Jigsaw felt underappreciated (I haven’t seen all of the 4th Saw movie yet). Horror film antiheroes, much like gangsters in gangster films, represent triumph through adversity and rebelling against the system that tried to restrain them.

Maybe I’m reaching too far, but I’ve got to tie this together some way. I’ve read other hypothesis which argued the exact opposite. Scholars have said that the characters I mentioned represent the oppressors of today, while the victims who try to fight them off represent the rebellion. Tell that to the students at Carrie’s senior prom.

Here’s a few of my must see horror movies:

Communism anyone?


So what if it rips off The Goonies


Better than the original

"I Think We'll Be Okay Now"

Can you guess what the plot of Poltergeist, the creativeness behind The Blair Witch Project, and $15,000 equals? That’s right, Paranormal Activity. This low budget horror/thriller about a couple who videotape themselves day and night in hopes of finding evidence of “paranormal activity” isn’t the scariest movie out there, but I bet it’ll make many viewers shut their closet doors before going to sleep.

The story, set in 2006, cribs from prior ideas established in classic horror films. The only setting is in a house, much the same as Poltergeist, and only handheld shaky cameras are used to film, just like The Blair Witch Project. I remember hearing an audience member say they felt like throwing up within the first 5 minutes of the film. I didn’t think it was that bad.

The movie opens with the freakishly controlling, day-trading boyfriend, Miccah (Miccah Sloat), experimenting with new camera equipment he’s purchased in hopes of catching what goes bump in the night. He videotapes his English student girlfriend, Katie (Katie Featherston), as she pulls her white convertible into the driveway of their house in what looks to be a family-friendly San Diego neighborhood. After a few onscreen minutes of playful banter between the couple, the first night of videotaping is set.

There is something very uneasy about watching someone sleep in the dark. The audience watches the couple through the camera’s POV (fly on the wall) with the camera time elapsing on the bottom right of the screen. The combination of fearing that something might happen along with the aggravation of waiting for something to happen only heightens an audience's anxiety. I could see people squirming in their seats as we watched the couple sleep.

It’s not too long before the eerie occurrences do happen: doors moving, loud booms, and misplaced keys are just a few things that are caught on tape. After the disturbances worsen, Katie employs the help of a psychic. The psychic informs them that the presence within their home is a demon. Without giving too much away, the couple learns why they are being haunted; basic rules to follow, so that they don’t aggravate the demon; and what exorcist they should contact. This scene gave me the same frightening chill I had as a kid when watching the part in Gremlins when Billy’s dad explains the rules of caring for Gizmo. I know it’s Gremlins, but there are some scary parts in that movie for little kids. Anyway, much like Billy, the couple fails to follow the rules.

Miccah brushes off the psychic’s remarks, convinced that he (Miccah) can fix the problem with his camera equipment and his Googled research. Katie foolishly obeys Miccah or offers only nagging rants as if Miccah forgot to take out the trash. As their aggravation for their situation and each other heighten, so do the demon’s activities. Simple sounds and moving doors turn to more frightening occurrences as the demon's strength grows. Remember, it’s always important to follow rules if you want to survive a horror movie, much like Zombieland and this other horror/thriller:


Watching Paranormal Activity made me feel like I was waiting in a long line for a so-so rollercoaster ride. Most of the excitement came before the ride, or climax, because I was waiting for something better to happen. The movie inches closer to its climax and pulls the audience along by heightening the demon’s activities. For the audience, there’s anticipation and excitement in waiting for the big rush ahead. But, like a mediocre rollercoaster, the rush comes and goes so fast that the audience is left asking “Is that it?”

I’m not one of the many critics who's been caught up in the hype of Paranormal Activity. It did have some creepy moments, but flickering lights and eerie shadows get old after a while. Much like The Blair Witch Project, I probably won’t need to watch this movie a second time—and it won’t be because it’s too scary.

Rating: 6 out of 10

"The First Girl I Let Into My Life and She Tries to Eat Me"

Welcome back, Woody Harrelson. The actor has steadily worked since the show Cheers but was out of the spotlight for most of the new millennium, costarring in After the Sunset, which flopped at the box office, and the cult hit A Scanner Darkly. Since costarring in No Country For Old Men in 2007, Woody said he was ready to be back in Hollywood. Man, is he ever. Just remember to get top billing if Wesley Snipes asks you to do White Men STILL Can’t Jump, Woody—you’re the bigger star now.


Now on to Woody's latest starring role in Zombieland.

Is it possible to make a feel-good post apocalyptic zombie movie? Ruben Fleischer pulls it off with his third directorial (first theatrical) effort, Zombieland. This horror/comedy about a group of emotionally detached humans living amongst an outbreak of zombies infected with mad cow disease will leave audiences laughing as they cover their eyes in disgust.

The story, set in the not too distant future, refreshes the idea of a “code” of the zombie world that has been presented by horror films for the past 40 years. Some have already called it America’s version of Shaun of the Dead, which also pokes fun at survival techniques in a land of zombies. I thought the latter film was both original and overrated, so I’m not as quick to equate Zombieland with it—yet.

The film opens with an iconic picture of the American flag before the camera zooms out to show an upside down president’s limo in a zombie infested land. Our nerdy hero, Columbus, played by Jesse Eisenberg (Adventureland), narrates the state of the world and how he has managed to stay alive. I won’t spoil it for you but he does enlist a set of rules to avoid becoming a “human happy meal.” It’s similar to Ferris Bueller’s list on fooling your parents into letting you stay home.

It’s not too long before Columbus meets up with Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), a Twinkie craving country bumpkin with zombie-killing on his agenda. The two embark on a road trip east. Columbus hopes to find his family while Tallahassee is looking for his next kill.

Shaking things up for the two new road buddies are Emma Stone (The Rocker, Superbad) and Abigail Breslin (Little Miss Sunshine) playing sisters, Wichita and Little Rock, who are also trying to survive as they travel across the states. Good for Breslin: the girl’s only 13, and she’s already trying to break her sweetheart typecast.

The characters are each different, but they all either were societal outcasts before the zombies or have since become emotionless. Columbus describes his life before the apocalypse as consisting of World of Warcraft, Code Red Mountain Dew (do they still make that?), and agoraphobia. After all, you must be somewhat of a zombie yourself if you expect to live among them. No family, friends, purpose, or compassion—just survival.

However, through their journey together the four do begin to appreciate what they have either never experienced or have lost—love. They learn to appreciate “the little things” in life, which Columbus writes as another rule. Also (no spoilers), while each character tries to live an emotionless life, it takes a comedic legend’s all-too-brief cameo to make them feel human again.

My only problem with Zombieland is the drought between action (i.e. kills). For most of the second act, zombies are merely a backdrop as our main characters delve into their emotions and start to care for each other. The comedy works better when it's combined with the undead. Fortunately, the movie's only a little over 80 minutes, so there isn’t too much downtime.

I’ve got to admit that I was skeptical with what director Ruben Fleischer might produce. The only previous work of his I recognized was the Borat movie, in which he was part of the miscellaneous crew, and as director of three Jimmy Kimmel shows. I’m guessing he’ll get more calls to direct in the future.

Zombieland is gory fun for anyone who enjoys zombie flicks, and even those who may be inept to the genre. With more apocalyptic movies headed our way (Legion, The Road, The Book of Eli, 2012.), I imagine this will be the most lighthearted. Is it coincidental that so many apocalyptic movies are coming out after our recent presidential election? Note the destroyed president’s limo in the beginning of the film.

7 out of 10














Up next - Paranormal Activity:

Nontraditional Gangster Films

What’s your favorite gangster film? Goodfellas? Carlito’s Way? The Godfather Part II?

The release of Michael Mann’s Public Enemies this past summer got me thinking about American culture and our fascination with gangster films.

Not to discredit the movies above. They are all in my top 100 list of favorites. My issue is that so many other gangster films have gone unnoticed by the American public. Films like In Bruges and City of God are still widely unknown. Other recent movies include:

Elite Squad, directed by José Padilha



A History of Violence and Eastern Promises, both starring Viggo Mortenson and directed by David Cronenberg






You could equate Elite Squad with City of God because of its gritty style of shooting and the similarities in the story, thanks to John Kaylin who also wrote City of God.

I’m pretty sure more people have seen Cronenberg’s A History of Violence and Eastern Promises, which had a combined domestic gross of almost $49 million, but that is still a low amount when you consider that other films like American Gangster and The Departed combine for a total domestic gross of over $260 million.

The reason I think American audiences aren’t attuned to embrace the movies above is because the nontraditional films don’t attempt to idolize the gangsters within. Scarface, Casino, etc., all feature gangsters as the prominent anti-hero; whereas, the gangsters suggested in the films above are the antagonist, or villain.

Gangster film fans love to embrace antiheroes centered in a rags-to-riches story. Even if those characters end up dead or in jail, it is still a story of triumph because the hero experienced success for a time.

With the success of Slumdog Millionaire, which seemed like a Disney version of City of God, I know American audiences would take an interest in nontraditional gangster films.

Next up I’ll be reviewing horror films released throughout the month of October 2009 in preparation for Halloween. I was hoping to review Scorsese’s Shutter Island, but that has been pushed back to February 2010.

First up, Zombieland: