Hidden (2009)

Deeply wound in mood and mystery

This is a mystery tale from Norway--even with the title, which could be any number of things--that also includes some elements of a horror/thriller that revolves around a man who returns back to an area that brings back flooding memories and a new set of circumstances while at it. Is it the house or the woods or just the out of reach town that keeps perpetuating more terrible events? A boy is off urinating in the outskirts of a wooded area while his ride is parked in the road. Another boy, who appears to have been buried just prior, runs into the road and a semi-truck dodges him but hits and kills the passengers in the parked car.

Nineteen years later and Kai Koss' mom has passed away who he ran from all those years ago with some resentment towards her abusive ways. He's inherited her utilitarian house that seems to re-open old wounds when he steps inside and has some flashing haunts of her presence as if she's still there in the flesh to torment him. He goes to burn the whole house, just as he requested of her body to get rid of the reminder once and for all, but is stopped by the local cop, Sara, who takes his gas canisters yet gives an ear to listen to him if need be. Though he wanders about with little words and encounters the small town's folk who act somewhat coy, as if they have something to hide or a secret that is best not said aloud. He's trying to figure out why he's returned himself when there's a mysterious disappearance of a young couple that were last seen in his inherited house. The manhunt is on in the local wooded area to catch who it was or find some evidence, though it keeps pointing back to who else but the newcomer Kai. Throughout the ordeal he gets flashes of that night that happened many years ago and where the other boy, Peter, ended up, who went missing after the crash and reportedly was last seen near a waterfall with only shoes to show for it. Though Kai thinks differently.


This is a somewhat simple film that mainly concentrates on producing a steady mood and elements of mystery with not much else to get in the way. I have to say, it's refreshing to see a film that does what it does well despite being basic in execution. There are no explosions, unnecessary sex scenes, love triangles, excessive violence, just what was mentioned before. You can count on it since it knows what it wants and sticks its guns to it. Some portions do get a little confusing and trail off in whether it's relevant or not--most likely to throw you off scent--though the film unfolds gradually and has a certain balance and consistency to its framework. "Hidden" has an almost dream like quality, in that nothing is what it seems and can't be trusted that it's reality or illusion. Or is it a memory or present time at points? The enclosed wooded area makes those sentiments come to life in that the outside world doesn't exist but just this place and those characters and that dilemma that must be solved right now.



Like a reclusive celebrity, the movie is highly elusive about what amount of information it lets out at a time. Even the trailer is highly puzzling and seems to be edited to lure you in with the abstract rather than the concrete. There are McGuffins thrown left and right, mysterious phone calls and old photographs that can make your mind wander closer to the truth or farther away, it's hard to say exactly. It's an experience that may or may not be figured out by the viewer but it still manages to tap into different, unexplored sensations in the meantime. It's an enigma within an enigma that works that way all the way down to the wire when the credits roll and you're left with a puzzle to solve and a side to choose. That gives the film replay value to want to see if you're able to catch different clues on the next time around.



Rating: 7.5/10

Director: Pal Oie (Dark Woods)
Stars: Kristoffer Joner, Cecilie A. Mosli
Link: IMDB

Dread (2009)

Keep your fears to yourself

This Clive Barker adaptation plays out at first as a psychological drama that deals with questions of dread, terror, complexes and fear, though through the eyes of everyday students, as opposed to a clinical study with ethics, morals and stricter procedures in place. "Dread" is about a man's search--even if it means pushing someone to the limits--for what people are hiding deep down and how they come to terms with their secrets as he's still figuring out how to come to terms with his own biggest fear that he lugs around and consumes him inside. Though this doesn't appear to be a film about resolve as it only uses the premise to eventually unfold into a kind of twisted horror story to potentially get dread out of the audience instead of answering the questions it originally posed in a roundabout way. So to call this wholly a psychological film or to say that it will leave you intellectually stimulated by its close would be stretching it.

While smoking in an alley, a man named Quaid meets another student named Stephen who's taking a philosophy course to fill one of his requirements despite being a film major. Quaid goes on about theory, that attention should be focused on the things we don't understand and fear. "If you don't go out and find the beast, sooner or later the beast will come and find you." On the surface Quaid lives life by the fullest and Stephen, despite not admitting it at first, lived somewhat safe beforehand without risk, therefore avoiding his own fears without realizing it. Stephen had a sibling die in teenage years and he lets on about a fear regarding it. They join a partnership to do a project that goes to the roots of what someone dreads, though they leave the conclusion open ended on whether it's going to be generally helpful and therapeutic, for personal reasons or just for information's sake, which causes the film to roam about in areas and go off and on track. The interviews only produce minor material at first, until their editor, Cheryl, steps in front of the camera and explains about a childhood trauma. It's Quaid's turn and he backs away when the camera gets pointed at himself. Though he empties out his medication cabinet to let go of himself, only to wake up from a nightmare and a story about abruptly losing his parents as a boy.

Relationships go from building up to being torn apart in some melodramatic scenes. The characters get pressed about what their fears are and Quaid seems to take it more seriously than his counterparts due to still holding onto fear and the others reasonably letting go. He slowly starts to lose it but in short bursts, such as with violence or putting someone else's life on the line. Actually having a fear is something to be fearful in itself as it can catch you at the worst of times when you try and avoid it. Even as far fetched as that premise sounds, I'm sure it could have clenched that idea, though it doesn't always make that believably happen. For something of that sort, you'd have to completely lock a viewer in and this doesn't always do that. For instance, I might have an irrational fear of, say, heights but not an irrational fear of consuming meat whatsoever, and would have to relate more to the experience to gain a new perspective. Except the film doesn't always concentrate on one for long and occasionally goes off into some other areas about their personal lives that might not always have to do with the main agenda. The flow of the film is gradual to show its many transitions, though it still feel somewhat "bookish" in some areas, like you have significant chapters or scenarios that feel somewhat penned in around surrounding filler material in an attempt to connect it together.

Quaid's character seems somewhat manipulated to push the narrative a certain way. He doesn't always fit in, even in the uncertain terms of a disturbed trauma. He seems to hallucinate when it's convenient, backlash when it fits the scene, and then he's with it when it comes time to understanding his condition for a rational person. Though part of the character goes to show how far one human can punish another if they feel they are justified. But this doesn't always portray that, and goes for an unpredictable approach to get a rise out of a viewer, which kind of takes away from its staying power beyond the first look since that doesn't always come with refinement within itself. If there could be a relating point to the antagonist it's that he meant well but then crossed the line too far over an ethical boundary. Instead of observation he took it into his own hands on a personal level. That might have been a solid setup but that outlook was never fully capitalized on though and this doesn't go the sympathy route either--at least in an authentic sense--but instead keeps him as a slowly unveiled monster that might never be understood by himself or others. This makes it look at first like a gradual descent into madness or a childhood case that he couldn't help to prevent, but he seems more like a true sociopath or someone with an antisocial personality disorder even beforehand since it comes out as if it was second nature.

In the meantime, this shows a share of sex and some drinking. It's hard to say if the sex was a means to push the story with something to say or for entertainment purposes to keep your attention titillated--possibly both. I mean, it's a state of vulnerability and when you're most open, and it does show their personalities through action such as going into it for lust, validation and potential love. "Dread" began on good footing. This posed some contemplative questions about the title sake and the pacing moves along naturally with a sense for human drama to show fear in the flesh instead of on paper. Quaid's house has a grimy feel to it whenever someone steps in but don't at first notice the sense of degradation and unwelcome nature it radiates about himself. Jackson Rathbone does an excellent job as Stephen by effectively transitioning to a range of emotions when it calls for it. The character of Abby was a solid touch that she can't hide her fear but has to carry it wherever she goes. The editing in the film effectively moved the film along at first by splicing together two scenes at once to pull you into the story.

"Dread" attempts to build on itself by giving the audience a set of problems and to see what it all means, but then instead changes direction by stepping over the mark to turn over to one man's sociopathic tendencies and obsessions without always showing or giving enough to fill in the blanks of where he's coming from. From his perspective, he uses people and favors sadism at the expense of others. This is a film to showcase the making of a villain but it never makes him the cool type of antihero we cinema goers have come to love, but instead he's the deplorable guy that you know all about and are stuck with, which is going to cause some to squirm in their seats nonetheless, partly due to the other characters not always doing anything significant or heroic enough to stop his reign of terror. The ending brought this film down by closing like a share of the "Saw" films to possibly dodge where you'll think it'll go, whereas in the beginning it went out of its way to go a different route than a torture film, as well as by setting up some characters with different angles to their personalities than being mere objects to rid of. "Saw" at least had a highly-devised morbid game angle with rules and methods that you can count on, but, on the other hand, "Dread" tries to move into different transitions, which is fine, but ends up feeling like a cop out with nothing but a caught-you-by-surprise shock value to show for the experience.

Rating: 6/10

Director: Anthony DiBlasi
Stars: Shaun Evans, Jackson Rathbone, Hanne Steen, Laura Donnelly
Link: IMDB

Zombies of Mass Destruction (2009)

Infected by intolerance

This is a comedy first and foremost with an element of horror off to the side like the tone of "Shaun of the Dead" but unlike the actual movie itself. Where it throws a curve ball to the subgenre, is this is also a heavy satire about the society that zombies are dismantling in a place called Port Gamble back in September of 2003. This comes with a share of awkward moments, obvious puns and jokes about subjects you're not supposed to joke about. No one is safe from ridicule as the film jumps around to various sides without necessarily picking one outright. This attempts to tackle what's hot on people's minds in the last decade and probably much further back than that with politics, prejudice, religion, sexuality and if that wasn't enough, how to live your life in your family's and society's steps compared to your own way as an individual that might be flawed or "un"picture perfect. The sudden outbreak might just give them the calling they need to expose all the mentioned social constructs for what they are.

"ZMD" begins with character backgrounds before the ominous title makes headway. It shows how the town interacted with hypocrisies and contradictions despite the pleasant front. The brain eaters are ignored at first, even with bloody clothing, nibbling tendencies and a stumbling gait, until it jumps head first into neck biting time and an all-out onslaught when they attack slowly but in numbers. There are some theories on the tube of the viral outbreak, if it's a terrorist attack or a direct result of the United States government. This concentrates on a male couple who go through an ordeal with one's mother about coming out of the closet and end up at the town church to hole up. Inside there's some shuffling around of who wants to lead with two competing polititicians who both argue about personal views or by actually taking action for the greater good of the group--sounds about right--as well as a preacher who wants the situation to handle itself from a blinding divine light but then finally moves to forceful conversion. This also cuts to a woman who was born here but has an Iranian background and is looked at as a terrorist nonetheless by being tied and interrogated by her ignorant neighbor while ignoring his own family and the greater picture while at it. Her traditional but tax paying, business owning father seeks her out despite turning her back on customs that seem foreign to her.

Soon it becomes more about humans vs humans than what's supposed to be the obvious zombies vs humans. Everyone has their own interpretation about every facet of life and at the core of the film is about tolerance and intolerance of others around us that we may agree or disagree with. This plays more on a fun element where violence and a survivalist mode is only tentatively questioned when the zombies attack, rather than the usual dramatic performances and spending awhile building up to that point. Friends and relatives are killed but people quickly move on by putting their emotions aside. This does a better job than "Homecoming" that also had a political message and zombies as the backdrop but seemed to step over the line of poetic license. "ZMD" doesn't take itself too seriously and can get a viewer a little more loosened up about the iffy subjects that can, if approached wrong, turn friends into enemies and possibly neighbors and co-workers into lepers.

There are some funny gags from time to time and other lines that are humorous for ringing true. Though the film is possibly too self-aware in areas to the point of forcing a reaction from the viewer. The gay couple works a little better since you can both laugh with them and at them without the message cutting too deep or just being included as a mere token element. It would be impossible to get every aspect of every mode they're tackling. They go for a balanced approach, though often times it covers familiar ground if you've gotten into deeper discussions or arguments on the subjects already. It doesn't always do more than a written account information wise, which leaves some of the more involving debates at the credits since you're not always given more; inspiration and amusement wise is another story to go out there and do something on your own accord. Though to give it the benefit of the doubt, its subjects are like listening to a broken record for a reason and they're using a different medium to get at a potential person to listen through harmless entertainment. This seems more aimed at a younger and more impressionable audience, not to mention since zombies are trendy as of the last bunch of years and would be something of grabbing interest than a dry book or local town meeting.


What works about this movie is there is a give and take of view points and opinions in the wrap up as well instead of going all out with an agenda without some breathing room. Some realizations and revelations come to characters for a reward for watching, while others remain in their stubborn ways, or never get a chance due to the zombies getting 'em or getting turned over to a one-track mind after being bitten. Since this is a satire, part of the resolutions are left up to the viewer to decide their placing, or to just scoff the whole ordeal off. The performances are memorable in that they make the characters come alive instead of coming across as something to just perpetuate the story into a certain direction. They mostly manage to stay in context to the satiric tone though with a few areas nearly crossing the line over to drama. There's definitely blood and gore and some various weapons of choice used to put a stop to the traditional movie zombies that are lethargic. Though very little of it feels shocking or scary as it's never made out to be completely realistic in the slightest. The level of danger, even on a minor level, feels far removed despite what's being shown. In a sense it's treated like it comes with the territory rather than trying to reinvent the wheel. They could have replaced zombies with another brainless monster and it would have been most likely the same experience, which kind of takes away from the legend aspect of zombies that the title grabs you at. They do give a few nods to films before it but I'll leave that up to you to spot.

Rating: 6.5/10

Director: Kevin Hamedani
Link: IMDB

The Reeds (2009)

A muddy cloud of who's who, what's what, where's where

Three couples go out on what's supposed to be a leisurely boating retreat in a stretch of canal away from civilization in England. That's the easy explanation of it. The rest is a doozy to describe and try to make it cohesive sounding especially in the right order of things. Essentially the story unfolds like a loosely laid out series of events that eventually leads to a survival horror film with some elements of the supernatural.

Right from the getgo they get haggled when hiring a boat as if the trip is to be called off, but then get directed to a boat out back that has some teens already on it. Tempers almost flare until one of the women recognizes a red headed woman from earlier who ran out in front of their car abruptly and the too-cool-for-words youngsters stride away. Off the couples go with a map that takes them no where and with nothing but reeds standing in their way to the promised pub they're headed to. Did I mention cell phones don't work? A guy named Chris is the resident loud mouth and party guy who skinny dips, yells at the youngsters again and becomes a belligerent drunk when playing cards. Maybe it's for the best the pub destination fizzled. Soon enough they hear and see something unexplainable in the reeds and then crash from a protrusion that sticks through the bottom of the boat and injures one of the crew.


They're stuck and one of them is slowly bleeding to death. The most capable guy attempts to swim back while the others bide their time on the boat. They come into more circumstances with the teens who are now slaughtering animals, a man who might be friend or foe with a shotgun, under water cages with skeletons, some strange visions of themselves, along with nature and darkness standing in their way to safety...and who could forget "The Reeds," which aren't always capitalized on--might as well be "The Shrubs," "The Fences," "The Palm Trees" (I know, I know). The boat goes through more trouble and trying to scramble away all at once leads to a share of injuries among the crew, which seems both convenient towards the storyline for getting people out of the way to concentrate on the hero, but then anticlimactic towards generating the nuances of danger and desperation in a horror film. At this point people hallucinate with no explanation as to why and it makes the experience and relevance confusing as to what is actually going on even more so.

The issue with "The Reeds" is it fails to set up a premise, what that place in particular means, why it encloses a legend, or even if it's capable of drawing people in from some force towards it. It eventually gets there but you're not watching the film from back to front and would need some valid clues in the meantime. I have a feeling that this was written that way and it shows. The bread crumbs it lures you with don't feel satiating enough to entice your hunger to go on. Basically you get a share of forced melodrama with six people you could care less if they live or even die. The general tone feels confusing and tedious rather than mysterious or intriguing. You're left standing with no subtext or steady direction towards a focal point. Instead you get a share of general characters with attributes that are neither capable of bringing about a sense of the dramatic or in the way of entertainment. One of the women named Laura is an exception by showing some strength and a knowledgeable medical background to help her friends and get help. You have to sell your audience and this feels more mundane than delivering cinematic material that would be in the way of gripping or alluring. On top of that, the editing and camera angles are all over the place when the action heats up and can give one a headache with what's shown and for what reason. At times, certain events happen out of the blue and instead of being shocking or thrilling, it makes your throbbing brain work that much harder to figuring out what they're trying to portray and how it was relevant to the shot before it since it's not always framed up or hinted at beforehand, such as people appearing and disappearing without context.


Part of the outline is eventually explained towards the end through the "resident legend guy" yelling it back and forth with snippets of information that's supposed to make it sound more natural. Its twist seems too far fetched without more foreshadowing beforehand that would make it truly rewarding or fascinating. There's some atmosphere generated towards the latter portion when there are less characters in the way and it's nice that the film tries to go for something that isn't a straightforward template like some other horror films, as well as changes around the survival format somewhat. The performances were of decent caliber for what they're given and they seem to have some chemistry together as a group. Though its convoluted ideas and unsteady execution have little backing power in the greater scheme of things and really bog this down.

Rating: 2/10

Director: Nick Cohen (Voodoo Lagoon)
Link: IMDB

The Final (2010)

A matter of perspective and consequences for actions

Five friends are going through a kind of Hell on Earth in high school where day to day they get bullied mentally and physically by the socially elite with no end or escape in sight. The bullies are the absolute caricatures of their type: the callous jocks and pretty things that have nothing better to do than to torment those that they feel are beneath them. The parents either don't understand or are impassive to what they're going through. They take matters into their own hands by planning and pumping themselves up for the courage to secure back their name and gain the upper hand. They all have their own little justifications for why they are going through with it but with the same end result in mind. The trap is a Saturday night invitation only costume party in an isolated area, with spiked punch inside and shackles so that their former bullies can be tortured one by one and have to endure volatile speeches about what grief they've caused. This isn't a culminating outburst that shows the years that follow like "Carrie," but a film that concentrates on returning the hurt and sending a much more blatant message.

This goes from giving a little sympathy for the originally bullied's impossible situation, then moves on over to absolute hate and revenge that doesn't just get even but goes over the mark, making the viewer question if they're any longer justified or if anyone here is actually good or bad, victim or villain on either side of the fence. This starts out with everyday high school life, moves on to a kind of exploitation where the captives get it in drawn out torture scenes, then runs on over to embrace social commentary on the subject by using an exceptional case with exaggeration to make a point about everything that comes before it as there isn't anything general or normal about the characters or their situation here. One interpretation of the events that sticks out like a sore thumb is: those who bully deserve not just an eye for an eye, but an eye for a finger...and a face...and a spine. Though since these guys, like Columbine, don't represent the normal teen all the way through I'd say the message is more: how we chose to treat others is at most times fairly simple in execution but what follows sometimes comes with irreversible consequences for our actions. That can be said about bullies in the halls of school, or returning the favor outside of school with worse tactics, until someone steps up to stop the downward spiral

The fear in this film is produced by how far it can be taken from someone who is so over the edge that they don't care about the consequences since they have nothing to lose during school and at home. There are some general relating points, though it's up to you if you should be rooting for the plan to succeed or hope they get away or maybe an option C. Then again this has two-wrongs-don't-make-a-right type of scenarios where the bad guys in the film are just badder than the last, making this carry a somewhat bleaker tone because this isn't entirely resolved in its running time but instead the major resolution is supposed to come with the audience watching.

The personalities of the captures seem to partly mirror Columbine in that the leader displays a form of psychosis or be it psychotic behavior and the others carry a form of extreme depression that would make them more susceptible to follow. It's also true that they bounced back and forth detached plans and ideas from a normal reality--Columbine with tapes made in their basement--off only each other without outside influences who might have interjected by saying what they're doing isn't right. It's obvious to an outsider looking in but not to someone neck deep in delusional thoughts. There are inconsistencies amongst their personalities, but it does show that they're being human and that they can't handle the situation that came about by a kind of luck of the draw.

The issue with "The Final" is the general tone of the picture is hard to grasp at points, as it often missteps on blending together entertainment and a message without its seams showing. It wants to be a horror movie but also a heavy satire. It indeed does both, but not equally well at the same time. In the story, the master plan doesn't go as smoothly when someone steps out of line, another lets it go to his head, as well as an outside character tries to intervene. Though there's often little real anticipation, tension or sense of the dramatic here, especially once the torture begins. Take the easy and well known example of Jason in "Friday the 13th" in that he chases pretty looking young people around a wooded area only to kill them in different and grisly ways. Yeah, it's going completely for titillation but the time in between adds to the impact when it happens. "The Final," on the other hand, feels gratuitous in that the sadism is level across the board with tied up captives who are easily taken on one by one with those with the upper hand not always giving more leeway to the game they're playing. If they were trying to desensitize for whatever reason, then they did a decent job of it. It makes the time in between feel overlong and like it could have been edited down somewhat. The picture doesn't seem to always steadily or progressively build and it starts to bog down from going anywhere substantial enough to reel in your wandering attention despite people being hurt.

The is a daring movie that doesn't just open up the obvious can of worms with bullying and school life, but also violence and pacification, the right to bear arms and easy accessibility to high powered fire arms, some religious justifications and a little politics on war with a veteran. If they threw in how much money everyone makes, this film would be up there with one of the worst conversation starters at your job. It's gotta be on HR blacklists everywhere. The movie isn't subtle about what it's trying to say by its close, to the point of feeling like the scriptwriter speaking directly through the characters with well-defined realizations that cross the line for the likelihood of actually being said by someone on the spot. It starts out by taking a somewhat reserved standing for the audience to decide where they are and then by its wrap-up it's delivering the messages home for the viewer who might not have had their thinking caps on. I'm guessing they wanted to make it known that they weren't just making "Hostel" and "Saw" part whatever, but only using the format for other means, which makes sense, but still leaves those sentiments dangling in your face.

Overall, what brings "The Final" down, despite its possible good intentions and ability to start debates and conversations from it, which can't always be said about some other films once the credits roll, is it still feels like more of a concept than a fully realized or fleshed out story. The actors are hit and miss with attempting to make this ambitious film come together, whether it's going from a black comedic tone--ala "Heathers"--to not believably performing dramatically compared to their regular selves or be it generating suspense and scares, and that can take one out of the experience that they are actually watching a film. It's something that reads much better on paper than how it pans out for a full length cinematic experience. I can't say I'd recommend this for the overall experience unless you're able to have an easier time compensating for its setbacks.

Rating: 4/10

From Black to Red recommends instead: "Battle Royale": this Japanese film has some social commentary about high school life, among other aspects such as downsizing of the population. It's capable of blending messages in its story while still maintaining a certain amount of entertainment for the duration.

Director: Joey Stewart
Link: IMDB

Lake Mungo (2008)

A person not removed

This is a faux docu-drama with elements of mystery and the supernatural that revolves around a young woman named Alice Palmer who recently passed in her home town in Australia. She went missing in a local lake and the family doesn't want to let go right away or accept the inevitable. A decomposed woman's body is found, yet they partly drag out if it might actually be her and that her life couldn't have abruptly ended that day when there was so much more that could have been. Back at their house, there are strange noises, nightmares, sightings and even suspicious photographs to what seems to be her physical presence in the time that follows. The mother seeks out a psychic who wants to hold a seance. Secrets come out regarding the family after the fact, the psychic in question, as well as that involve Alice that no one else knew about her with immediate relatives and friends.

The slow, evolving pace is what makes this film work. It's not quick and upbeat or hip and trendy, but something that captures the scenery and her life in glimpses and flashes. There are a share of recorded mediums that it transforms from: some crisp and steady, some grainy and shaky. The latter comes with some eerie and unsettling scenes that eventually make your eyes scan the surrounding shots for hidden clues--nothing is what it seems is the impression. It has a very deliberate flow to the point of sucking in a viewer and getting involved to the point of forgetting that this is just a film. Though it's somewhat depressing watching a documentary film, even if fictional, about a young person that's life abruptly ends with only bits and pieces as to what she was up till that point. The story is concerned about her past and how it affects all that knew her now, but the mind still wanders into this dark territory nonetheless of what could have been.

The film gives off a general sense of regret and melancholia in that she keep things from them that were beyond her teenage years that caused her to silently suffer without anyone else knowing since she had very few to turn to or trust. The home video footage becomes instantly haunting that the person you're seeing no longer exists and little did she know of it at that time that it's her last images. The mother has the hardest time letting go and grasps on to any information, whether good or bad, about her daughter's life. The brother was also close and uses ways to cope with his late sister that some question whether it's rational or justified. The father and boyfriend speak with a little more pep that sometimes show glimpses of emotional restraint, as well as friends, co-workers and investigators who give their take.

"Lake Mungo" manages to keep itself interesting with a steady focus and share of revelations. Some of them feel a little manipulated, for fixating on one way for a period, then turning it around and that not being the case at all. As well as a few revelations jump forward a little quicker than others. Watching this gives off some reminders of the sad and wrenching film "Ordinary People," though there's still some positive, heartfelt and dramatic interviews that reflect human loss and then how to cope with the fact through a share of outlets that gives this a little bit of resolve despite its somber mood at times. Others who've had someone abruptly pass don't always get to share the after effects like they did, or to others that would have never known this girl in this particular place and time. Some areas are dry to give room to form an opinion, while others are leaning more towards the paranormal being possible without the other side getting a chance to breath. This isn't a film to just put on since the experience might linger and brood in one's mind or possibly turn over to being upset with the filmmakers for making it so realistic.

Rating: 8/10

Director: Joel Anderson
Link: IMDB

Kill Theory (2009)

Human beings used as pieces on a madman's board game

A man is in a mental institution serving out a sentence from cutting his own three friends off a rope to save himself when climbing. After time served a doctor puts him on a temporary release program to see how he adapts back into society. Yep, he's ready...he immediately turns over what happened to him onto a group of others to see if they would make a similar decision. Meanwhile eight friends about to graduate college are celebrating in a remote cabin with drinks and a carefree time. After the party wagon winds down and everyone goes to bed, one of the women is forced on camera by an assailant to point a gun at her sleeping boyfriend and shoot or else she dies. The object of the game is to make a decision to take someone else's life to save your own. If 6 AM comes around and one person is alive, then they go free. If not, they all die. They soon find out that the maniac hiding outside holds their lives in the palm of his hand and attempts to pit them against each other. They show distrust, cave-in on themselves from mounting pressure and indecision, and also form alliances all the while finding out who was really their friend or loved one due to the diabolical set of circumstances they suddenly found themselves in. They probably weren't the most prime examples of a set of normal people who have it in them to commit violence as opposed to blood related siblings or a family with wife and children, but then again this is a lunatic who probably went to great lengths to prove his theory after all with a warped sense of reality.

"Kill Theory" is essentially a board game for the audience, except where there would normally be inanimate pieces, the playing field is comprised of living, breathing people. This doesn't hide the fact that it's formulaic but there is still something about moving people around like chess pieces that gets our morbid fascination of suffering fixated. This isn't exactly a cat and mouse game where the little guy gets a fighting chance, since the ways to get out are frequently blocked with obstacles. The quicker the characters realize that the quicker they can be the strongest to survive. This is the TV show "Survivor" in a literal sense. The movie frequently amps up the carnage without always showing thoroughly valid reasons for the characters to take out one another, and there is a share of down time with showing the villain in action. This moves like a thriller so some of the faults and inconsistencies move by quicker than if they slowed this down or if you had time to think about it later. They represent the yous and mes, the regular folk not accustomed to murder, so some extra triggers would need to be in place than a few obstacles and some prior, albeit minor, relationship issues in the way.

The performances aren't always award winning but they do partly help in that they cry and plead their hearts out with no one to help, audience included; yet after their selfish ways come out, I'd like to think you were meant to be detached to them with any shred of empathy. It's a game where people die when they lose, and that game was made by someone who has no care for the players involved. In that sense, the film translates that cold distance than finding relating points. It turns the tone into a kind of rubber necking that happens at an accident scene as you curiously drive by in your car, wondering the morbid circumstances. There are some viciously gory scenes at times when inner emotional turmoil bursts out all at once by taking their rage on the closest body part, as if they're disgusted with themselves or want to get it over with as quickly as possible.

"Kill Theory" is a cinema invention. You'd be kidding yourself or would be heavily disappointed if you went into this otherwise. I mean, cross relating this to real life is so slim to not be believable even if read in bold print in the newspaper. Though what holds it together is it's often treated somewhat simplistically. Some movies need a few more layers to spice them up. But this is a film that sticks to its guns by doing what it does well enough and not going out on a limb with a temptation of getting overly ambitious. It would have undermined it by including too many twists to make it even more far-fetched. The characters are basic archetypes, which makes it easier to discern but it still has some go a different course than expected. As a viewer, you know what you're going to get but, of course, with a few surprises to where you'll anticipate where it'll end up.

Rating: 6/10

Director: Chris Moore (producer of "Feast" series)
Link: IMDB

The Graves (2009)

Flawed moviemaking at some of its ugliest

Usually I break into describing a film and then unfold its positive and negative points to be fair, especially to give a reader a chance to form their own opinions as well. Though I'm going to come right out with it: the pacing, character motivations, storytelling, dialogue, sense of the dramatic, music, you just name it with this film and it frequently misses the mark. "The Graves" attempted to tell an original story along with some horror conventions intact to show its homages but the end result felt like a cringe worthy amateur stab at filmmaking. It makes me as a terrible writer look even more terrible mind you just trying to describe it. I've met the director/writer/producer Brian Pulido at conventions and even talked about cool horror vids and whatnot before this came out, but even so, the experience just doesn't work. I have to say there is still passion here and they take it seriously rather than this being anything other than a genuine attempt. It's a learning lesson that shows how much filmmaking can be a pain in the neck to get right.

This begins in a remote stretch of land with battered cars strewn about. A husband, wife and baby come upon a black smith when they get senselessly attacked with the weapon the man was pounding away at. Megan and Abby Graves are going on a short road trip before the more in charge sister Megan goes off to New York to find the world's largest thermometer in Arizona. Meanwhile they film themselves in a comic book shop shamelessly plugging Pulido's books and then at a concert shamelessly plugging a horror punk band called Calabrese with none other than, you guessed, it Pulido himself announcing the band. Come on. Being two women, they get lost while driving--no more explanation needed. Jk, ladies. On their way off course they find a small town diner in a dinky place called Unity where the takes-himself-too-seriously preacher that they just heard on the radio walks in with a sense of command over the locals. The sister's tourist destination of choice is Skull City Mine that's supposedly haunted. Remember the description of the opening scene. Yep, they're headed right for there and it's about the only mode of build up that works here.

If you guessed this is going to be along the lines of "Children of the Corn," "Tourist Trap" and a little bit of "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" then you wouldn't be too far off the mark. The clerk with the crusty yellow teeth at Skull City Mine should have been a tell-tale sign of trouble, yet they immediately find it within a short while anyway when following the trails of the ghost town. A man is savagely killed by the blacksmith and the sisters silently witness the attack. Some kind of deafening noise ensues and the dead body is left without eye sockets. Something more is going on than just a burly backwoods looking man with a bludgeoning hammer. I'd like to mention that I haven't seen such a ridiculous case of walking villain/running victim since "I Know What You Did Last Summer." Like other aspects in this film it's hard to tell if it's trying to be serious or taking a piss, or when it's transitioning to either or and back again.

Soon enough one bad guy is traded for another when they try and leave, only to end up back in the same spot they arrived at. This isn't exactly mindblowing stuff: two women in bouncy tank tops running around trying to survive a maniacal killer who thinks himself as witty. I'm sure it's been done effectively before in a low-brow but still entertaining way, but this just feels like run-of-the-mill stuff. At least one of them is tougher than possibly most men inside the film instead of tripping over her own feet or whining. This is one woman with a winning streak of confidence that you wouldn't want to double cross despite her delicate feminine looks. It gives some clues as to what it all means but then slows down to go with an element of a sadistic torture film that we've all seen 100 times and the leading lady with strength starts to crumble under pressure. It felt like progress turned in on itself again, especially when you think Abby is going to take over but stands by idle till it's almost too late. It might be fine in a graphic novel but seeing it in action looks choppy. They eventually get to the town and then go around in more circles. Do they really not have that much of story that the characters just roam about? Then its attempt at explaining what happens feels so nonchalant as to lose its punch that it was leading up to.

The tone of the picture feels all over the place. So when it attempts to transition to its scary moments it comes across as forced. One moment there will be a splash of humor or being in the way of having fun, then in the next you'll get abrupt music and something that wants you to take it seriously in a matter of moments. Usually these things require a steady build up to put the audience in someone else's shoes, otherwise the viewer watches what's unfolding from a distance since there's no perspective or connection to what is seen or happening. The characters are going to find more relating points with guys despite their gender. Though it was evident that the two leads put a share of effort into this despite what they're given. Tony Todd and Randy Blythe are performed so over-the-top with invented speech that it comes off as cartoonish. Some of this is measured out where you can tell time was taken on a particular scene or location, though at other points it has state-the-obvious dialogue and scenes that feel rushed or done in one take especially towards the end. Some of the over-the-top dialogue has its moments scattered about, though some other lines fall flat on delivery: "I ain't in no hurry...nope. However long it takes...it takes."

"The Graves" fails to come together like a unified piece. It feels exactly like it was made with contrasting influences, day-to-day temperament and filmed at different times no less--all the various modes that should be hidden or flush when the final product is delivered. Even the background story that's supposed to drive the picture has nothing to say about religious fanaticism, with followers that are one-dimensional cronies. It uses it merely as a mundane, throw away plot device.

The experience wasn't pretty...nope.

Rating: 1.5/10

Director: Brian Pulido
Stars: Clare Grant, Jillian Murray, Tony Todd, Bill Moseley
Link: IMDB