Tag: Peter Jackson

[31 Days of Horror Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan] Day 11 – Blood Diner (1987)

Director: Jackie Kong
Cast: Rick Burks, Carl Crew, Roger Daver, LaNette LaFrance, Lisa Guggenheim
Screenplay: Michael Sonye
88 mins. Unrated.

I’m not 100% certain of when I became aware of Blood Diner, but I remember that poster. I can’t even recall where I first saw it, but I love that poster. Then, while sick at home one day, I started watching In Search of Darkness, a pair of documentaries (with a third one on the way) celebrating the 1980s in horror, and there it was: Blood Diner. The film has been notoriously difficult to find at times, after a limited theatrical run, it went to VHS but took years to make the jump to DVD and then Blu-Ray. Well, as it turns out, I had a copy without even being aware of it, and knowing Blood Diner’s relationship to Hershell Gordon Lewis’s torture porn classic Blood Feast, I had to take the opportunity to highlight it this month.

Brothers Michael & George run a popular health food diner, but their patrons do not know that this eatery is a front for their true goal: a cannibalistic ritual to bring forth the ancient goddess Sheetar. Aided by their undead Uncle Anwar, the brothers prep for their ritual by collecting virgin body parts for their blood buffet, all the while evading detectives hot on their trail.

Blood Diner started out as a sequel to Hershell Gordon Lewis’s Blood Feast, but just before production began, the decision was made to treat the film as inspired by Blood Feast, but really being its own thing. Interestingly enough, the finished product feels more like a remake than anything else, and ironically, years later, Blood Feast got both an actual sequel and an actual remake, and now Blood Diner exists in its own place in the history of horror.

Let me start with this: Blood Diner is a bad movie. A very bad movie. To be honest, it’s been a few days since I saw it, and had I started writing this right after seeing the movie, I probably would’ve hated this thing. A few days, though, have given me some time to process the movie, and this movie requires processing, and I’ve come to the conclusion that this movie is kind of amazing. It’s bad. It’s maybe the perfect example of so-bad-it’s-good cinema. There’s just so much going on in Blood Diner that it’s hard to even comprehend it all, but I’ll try to explain it the best I can. That’s what I’m here for.

It didn’t shock me to learn that Blood Diner was shot in 3 weeks. That seems to be the style for filmmaker Jackie Kong (Night Patrol, The Underachievers). Her small but memorable filmography is littered with schlock that likely could’ve inspired Peter Jackson’s splatstick absurdity in years to come. Kong infuses Blood Diner with a ludicrous display of visual insanity that doesn’t always work, but if you’re in the right mood and you have a few friends and maybe a few brews and a solid amount of fast food, it could work.

But let me continue by saying the acting is pretty much atrocious by all, the logic gaps (which I believe are purposefully done) run aplenty, and the various visual gags are seemingly meant to turn viewers away. Tasteless may be the best term to describe what’s being put on display here.

So even though Blood Diner is a film you can “warm” up to (and I use that term lightly), there will be some of you that see it and cry foul. This will not satisfy everyone. In fact, it’ll probably turn most of you away. But the lunacy is still pretty fun, and the so-bad-it’s-good nature is something to be admired, as most films of that ilk that try to be bad just ending up being worse than you could imagine. Blood Diner is a special kind of bad, and since it is so tough to find on any media, be it physical or digital, that I have to recommend trying it if you come across it. It’s like the golden idol in Raiders, and horror fans are Indiana Jones. If we find something this rare, we must see it. Maybe that’ll sway you, maybe it won’t.

2/5
-Kyle A. Goethe

1

[31 Days of Horror Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan] Day 1 – The Frighteners (1996)

Director: Peter Jackson
Cast: Michael J. Fox, Trini Alvarado, Peter Dobson, John Astin, Dee Wallace Stone, Jeffrey Combs, Jake Busey
Screenplay: Fran Walsh, Peter Jackson
110 mins. Rated R for terror/violence.

Happy October! We’re back with the 31 Days of Horror, and while we may not actually take Manhattan, it’s been 8 years of this event that I look forward to for 11 months, and this year especially, I have a number of treats in store and so much more expanding to the site and what I’m hoping to add to the YouTube channel as well, so check that out. Let’s start with an absolute classic (at least, to me it is) with The Frighteners!

Frank Bannister (Michael J. Fox, Back to the Future, See You Tomorrow) has quite the career. He makes his money staging hauntings at local homes and then going in to exorcise the ghostly presence and make some quick cash. Sure, the ghosts are real, and Frank can really see them, and a good portion of locals see Bannister as a con man, but when he discovers a presence that appears to be the Grim Reaper on the killing spree in town, Frank will have to work alongside his ghostly friends and a newly-widowed resident to discover who is responsible, and hopefully put a stop to them. He’s also trying to evade an unhinged FBI agent, Milton Dammers (Jeffrey Combs, Re-Animator, Unbelievable!!!!!) who seems to have a vendetta against Frank.

I discovered The Frighteners when I first came across the magnificent VHS cover as a youth perusing my old video store. It had a 3D effect of a creepy ghost fact protruding from the box, and I knew I had to see this movie, and I was not disappointed. This movie is full of that enjoyment factor, something that director Peter Jackson (The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, They Shall Not Grow Old) has cultivated throughout his entire career. Beyond anything else, his films are engaging and exciting. He also has a notable ability for world-building, and there’s plenty of that at play in this film. Sure, it isn’t a Middle Earth-worth of world-building, but he and co-screenwriter Fran Walsh have built a town on the water with a multitude of interesting and odd characters and an inversion of the classic ghostbuster-type story. The inclusion of this Grim Reaper killer and a wealth of foreshadow and mystery elements make for an exciting and worthwhile whodunnit, and sure, in hindsight perhaps it feels a bit on-the-nose of a mystery, but when I was younger, I didn’t put it all together until the very end. In that way, the film is a lot like Malignant, with so many exciting reveals that you may catch a few, but not all of them, and the pace moves along so well that figuring out some of it doesn’t take away from the enjoyment factor.

This was Michael J. Fox’s last leading role in a feature film, as he became too disillusioned with being away from his family for so long. From here on, he moved onto television with Spin City. It’s too bad because the role of Frank Bannister works so well because of Fox’s inherent ability to translate very unusual characters and settings in a realistic way. He took that on with Marty McFly, and he took that on with Frank Bannister. The two have that classic Fox charisma, but there is a lot of heavy lifting to both, and I don’t think either film would work as well with another actor in the role. Bannister isn’t always likable, but Fox makes him consistently interesting and engaging.

The rest of the cast is filled out nicely with well-layered character performances. No one but John Astin (What the Bleep!?: Down the Rabbit Hole, TV’s The Addams Family) could possibly play The Judge, a long-dead gunslinger with a Yosemite Sam approach to gunplay. Jake Busey (Starship Troopers, DIVOS!) is an inspired choice as the demented Johnny Bartlett, a serial killer searching for a high score (side note: I met Busey at a convention a few years back, and I can conclude that his acting abilities are quite strong, as he is known for his villainous personas, but is generally one of the nicest people I’ve met in the business). There’s a cemetery-bound Drill Sergeant in the film that wouldn’t have worked well with anyone outside of R. Lee Ermey (the role was written to satirize his character in Full Metal Jacket). It also seems like Jeffrey Combs was just told to do whatever he wanted with Milton Dammers, as his secondary antagonist is one of the most disturbing and unusual I’ve ever seen put to film.

From a technical perspective, The Frighteners represents an end of Early 90s horror films, whereas Scream, which came out a few months later, would mark a turning point for the decade. Jackson’s film is nicely shot, but it has a sleepy town visual aesthetic more in line with the works of Stephen King’s Derry and Castle Rock, and it just looks more classically eerie. The pacing is quick and consistently evolving the narrative. Just like From Dusk Till Dawn’s genre switch, The Frighteners makes a hard turn into horror from the more darkly fantastical comedy that the movie starts as. This couldn’t have been done with the steadily built narrative that takes its time getting the viewer adjusted to the world (I would recommend the Director’s Cut, but both versions do this well), and the editing that holds the framework together. In fact, the tone makes sense for a film that was almost a Tales from the Crypt movie. The score is memorable and fitting, and it evolves with the narrative.

The Frighteners holds a distinctive place as being one of the most CG effects-laden films at that point, and when the amount of effects work became apparent to Peter Jackson as he prepped for the film, he just said, Buy More Computers! Weta Digital, his effects workshop, went from 1 computer to 35 in the span of making this film. In fact, because of this wide-scale purchase, Jackson had to find a use for these computers once post-production was complete, and it was there that he settled on the idea to make a fantasy epic as a follow-up, so we wouldn’t even have The Lord of the Rings without The Frighteners.

That’s really the only place I could fault the film. In the years since The Frighteners has been released, CGI has moved at a rampant pace, and not all of the effects work as well. They have an endearing quality to them still, and some have held up quite well, but there are moments where the age of the movie is noticeable all the same, and we have to look at it through the lens of time to see if it still holds up today. Thankfully, the more bombastic tone of the narrative doesn’t get bungled up by the aged effects, but they are there still, and it could turn some viewers away.

Peter Jackson’s The Frighteners is an excellent little horror movie that showcases that further transition from Splatstick horror like Dead Alive and Bad Taste to the more mature and thoughtful execution of The Lord of the Rings and King Kong that Jackson would go on to. I absolutely adore this film and it’s a staple in my home to this day. I would recommend checking out the Director’s Cut, if you can, as it offers a bit more world-building and expansion on the story, but both cuts are well-worth your time, and outside of some aged effects, the movie holds up.

4.5/5
-Kyle A. Goethe


For my review of Peter Jackson’s Bad Taste, click here.
For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, click here.
For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, click here.
For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, click here.
For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Lovely Bones, click here.
For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, click here.
For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug, click here.
For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies, click here.

3

[31 Days of Horror Part VII: The New Blood] Day 2 – Freddy’s Dead: The Final Nightmare (1991)

Director: Rachel Talalay

Cast: Robert Englund, Lisa Zane, Shon Greenblatt, Lezlie Deane, Yaphet Kotto

Screenplay: Michael De Luca

89 mins. Rated R for horror violence, and for language and drug content.

 

If you have ever seen Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy, a lengthy documentary on the making of the Nightmare on Elm Street franchise, or its sister Crystal Lake Memories (the making of the Friday the 13th franchise), you will know how much work has gone into each of these films, even though the criticism by many of the uninitiated is that they are all the same. They believe that each installment is the exact same as the previous ones, a story repeated over and over until the box office receipts are too small to be worth the risk of doing it all again. In this assumption, they would be wrong. The sixth Nightmare on Elm Street film went through several drafts from several screenwriters, each trying to nail down a unique new direction to take the film. Today, let’s talk about the finished product and try to wrap our heads around how it all failed so spectacularly.

Freddy’s Dead: The Final Nightmare opens ten years in the future, presumably in the year 1999 or 2001. In the years since Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund, Nightworld: Door of Hell, The Midnight Man) began his otherworldly murder spree, he has claimed almost all of the children of Springwood, and the town itself has become a ghost, a shell of its former self. Now, he sets his sights on a young man with no memory of who he is. This John Doe (Shon Greenblatt, Newsies, Luster), as he is lovingly referred to, finds himself at a shelter for troubled teens and, with the help of Dr. Maggie Burroughs (Lisa Zane, The Nurse, Game Day), he follows a trail of clues leading back to Springwood, Fred Krueger, and a revelation that neither is prepared for.

Of the many varied attempts to nail down the story for a sixth film, director Peter Jackson had a take where kids were purposely drugging themselves in order to enter the dreamworld and beat up a weakened and aged Freddy Krueger, and there was also an idea to bring back Jacob Johnson (Alice’s son from the previous film) as a teenager, so it both shocked and disappointed me that we got a “finale” that feels so uninspired, cheap, and forgettable. There are flashes of a genius take on Freddy Krueger here, but they are lost under the weight of all the meaningless goofiness. The tone here suggests the director, Rachel Talalay (Tank Girl, On the Farm), believed that Freddy Krueger was at his best when he is comical, silly, almost chummy with the audience. The failure here (this failure is similar to what happened with Chucky as well) is misunderstanding that Freddy’s wit should be used only to lull the audience into a sense of fun before ratcheting up the horror elements again. A well-placed piece of dialogue can convince the viewers that it’s okay, we’re having a good time, and it calms the audience after a big scare before introducing another one. Here, the horror is almost used to remind the audience that it’s okay, we’re still watching a scary movie, even if you aren’t scared.

As I’ve said, there are elements to Freddy’s Dead that could have really worked in a better movie. One of those elements is the mythology building. Other horror franchises have taken a stab at building in supernatural mythology late in the franchise with films like Jason Goes to Hell or Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers, but for Freddy’s Dead, being so heavily laced with supernatural elements from the get-go really helps it here. In the case of Michael Myers and Jason Voorhees, those franchises started out rather simple, with stories of serial killers that, however unlikely, “could have happened.” With the original Nightmare on Elm Street, we knew that Freddy was a monster, a demon, or something unholy from the very beginning, so the way that Springwood has been turned into a ghost town with people slowly going mad after the loss of all the children could really work. I’m also referring to the Dream Demons, a concept that seems to have some value to it in establishing Freddy’s supernatural powers without downright spoiling the mystery. Even the backstory of Freddy’s childhood, all things that could have worked in the proper context.

So what does work in the film? Well, as I said above, the origin story is an element that could have been better, but I felt it was still executed nicely in the finished product. There’s something to seeing the evil of this “Son of a Hundred Maniacs” at play from a very early period, and the sequence featuring a cameo by Alice Cooper as a foster father to Freddy is deliciously wicked and disturbing. I enjoyed the idea that Fred, as an adult, tried to suppress his darker deeds and eventually tried to hide them behind a traditional suburban façade, and I also really like his later monologue in the film where he expresses no remorse and takes no responsibility for his deeds.

There’s a standout sequence in this film featuring Carlos, one of the teenagers from the shelter who ends up in Springwood with Maggie and the John Doe, that is exemplary and stands out among the wreckage of the movie. I won’t get into specifics but the use of sound and sleight-of-hand calls back to more traditional Nightmare, with Freddy playing a supernatural cat-and-mouse game with his prey.

Bringing a real conclusion to Freddy Krueger’s tale had to be a daunting task for production, but sadly, the screenplay and plotting from Michael De Luca (In the Mouth of Madness) was seeming buried under a collection of poor ingredients. Most of the cameos in the film (besides Cooper’s) do not work. The inclusion of Roseanne and Tom Arnold as grieving parents doesn’t work as comedic or sad in a scene that should have been tragic (grieving parents going mad over their pain), and Johnny Depp appears in a dream, perhaps as himself or the still-suffering Glen from the original film, and being wasted as much as the original Ghostbusters actors who appeared in the reboot. The entire video-game/power-glove/Breckin Meyer-fights-his-father sequence is laughably Looney Tunes and out of place (this was his first role, and I can’t blame him for taking it).  The 3D finale almost seems like high-art compared to the previous hour, but again, it’s a gimmick that took precedence over the conclusion to one of the most iconic franchises in horror history.

I’m not mad that Freddy’s Dead: The Final Nightmare is easily the weakest entry in the franchise by a mile. I’m just disappointed, and maybe that hurts more than anything else, really. Here we have an example of filmmakers and crew doing what they think is best but ultimately creating a film that doesn’t honor what the fans want. I’m a big defender of the filmmaker making their vision and screw trying to make the fans happy, but I’m not entirely sure who the team behind Freddy’s Dead is trying to please, because it certainly wasn’t me. There are some elements that work at play here, but they are far and few between. It pains me to say it, but I’m guessing Freddy’s hell is probably just rewatching this finale.

 

2/5

-Kyle A. Goethe

 

 

For my review of Sean S. Cunningham’s Friday the 13th, click here.

For my review of Wes Craven’s A Nightmare on Elm Street, click here.

For my review of Steve Miner’s Friday the 13th Part 2, click here.

For my review of Steve Miner’s Friday the 13th Part III, click here.

For my review of Joseph Zito’s Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter, click here.

For my review of Jack Sholder’s A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge, click here.

For my review of Danny Steinmann’s Friday the 13th Part V: A New Beginning, click here.

For my review of Chuck Russell’s A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors, click here.

For my review of Tom McLoughlin’s Jason Lives: Friday the 13th Part VI, click here.

For my review of Renny Harlin’s A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master, click here.

For my review of John Carl Buechler’s Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood, click here.

For my review of Stephen Hopkins’ A Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child, click here.

For my review of Rob Hedden’s Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan, click here.

3

[Hobbit Day] The Hobbit (1977)

Director: Jules Bass, Arthur Rankin, Jr.

Cast: Orson Bean, Richard Boone, Hans Conreid, John Huston, Otto Preminger, Cyril Ritchard, Theodore, Glenn Yarbrough, Paul Frees, John Stephenson, Don Messick, Jack DeLeon

Screenplay: Romeo Muller

77 mins. Rated TV-PG.

 

It’s still interesting to me to hear that most film fans, even fans of the Peter Jackson films or the J.R.R. Tolkien novels, are unaware that they were previously adapted: The Lord of the Rings into two animated films of drastically different tones in The Lord of the Rings and The Return of the King, and The Hobbit into the film we are going to talk about today. I’m not talking about short films or student films or experimental pieces like Leonard Nimoy’s Bilbo Baggins song (it exists). No, it’s a TV movie released in the 1970s from those guys that made all your favorite Christmas specials, but now, over 40 years later, there’s are some interesting comparisons and contrasts to Jackson’s films. They are uniquely opposite interpretations in execution and finished product, but these older, almost forgotten takes on Middle Earth still carry a lot of weight.

You know the story, but I’ll remind you again. In the Shire, there lives a comfortable enough Hobbit named Bilbo Baggins (Orson Bean, Being John Malkovitch, InnerSpace) who is rather happy with his cozy uneventful existence, as many Hobbits are, and he is looking for no reason to change it. Everything changes, though, when he is visited by a wizard, Gandalf the Grey (John Huston, The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, Chinatown), who enlists his burglary skills (of which he has none) to help Thorin Oakenshield (Hans Conreid, Peter Pan, The 5,000 Fingers of Dr. T) and his band of dwarves to reclaim their home and their dwarven treasure from the villainous and greedy dragon, Smaug (Richard Boone, Vicki, Hombre). Along this journey, Bilbo will encounter trolls, goblins, and a frightening creature by the name of Gollum (Theodore, The ‘Burbs, Nocturna) who carries a nifty magic ring.

The first noticeable difference between this film and Jackson’s trilogy is just that. One is a film running just under 80 minutes, and the other is a three-part film series that comes in (extended cuts and all) at just over nine hours! For many people, Jackson’s Hobbit films are bloated and stuffed with pieces that were unnecessary. They believe that the films are simply too long and undeserving of a full trilogy of films to tell their story. To that extreme, I’ll throw back The Hobbit 1977, a film that I believe loses a lot of its grandness in swiftly running through events like a checklist. This Hobbit interpretation is too short. I personally like the heft of Jackson’s trilogy (yes, flawed as they are, if I enjoy a world, I could live there forever), but I will attest that neither adaptation perfected the length of their story to match Tolkien’s.

There’s also the animation aspect. I’ve always preferred live-action, but the Rankin/Bass animation of this version is rather endearing and warm. There’s a certain charm to the animation style of The Hobbit (though I also prefer Bakshi’s batshit crazy Lord of the Rings animation style), and it works to better effect here than in The Return of the King.

I like the voice cast of our central players. Orson Bean is a positively inspired choice for Bilbo Baggins, and John Huston’s take on Gandalf works wonders (it’s also different enough from Ian McKellan’s take on the character to allow both versions to flourish nicely). The consistently unusual performer Theodore does fine work as Gollum in a role that I wouldn’t have thought to work from a performance angle. I’m just not a fan of the flat characterizations of the company of dwarves. Don Messick (The Last Unicorn, Pufnstuf) and Jack DeLeon (Temptress, Allyson is Watching) voice most of the dwarves and we just don’t get much time to care that they’re on the journey with us. It asks the question of why we care about anyone else on the journey except for Bilbo, Thorin, and Gandalf. Not enough time is delegated to any of the secondary dwarves in this adaptation, but they are there anyway because that’s how the book did it. I understand as well that the book didn’t always give a lot of attention to the secondary dwarves, but if you can’t make them compelling characters, just don’t put them in the movie. It’s an adaptation, not a translation.

Among all that, I still quite liked The Hobbit. It’s a good family-based version of events, and without the Jackson films to compare with, it’s cute and warm and enjoyable. Sure, it’s a nearly forgotten take on Middle Earth, but I find that I keep coming back to it, flaws and all, and enjoying myself. I think you could too.

 

3/5

-Kyle A. Goethe

 

 

For my review of Ralph Bakshi’s The Lord of the Rings, click here.

For my review of Jules Bass and Arthur Rankin, Jr.’s The Return of the King, click here.

1

[Early Review] Mortal Engines (2018)

Director: Christian Rivers

Cast: Hera Hillmar, Hugo Weaving, Jihae, Robert Sheehan, Ronan Raftery, Leila George, Patrick Malahide, Stephen Lang

Screenplay: Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens, Peter Jackson

128 mins. Rated PG-13 for sequences of futuristic violence and action.

 

So if you look back at my Most Anticipated Films of 2018 List, you will find that the final spot on that list was given to Mortal Engines, an adaptation of the novel by Philip Reeve and the first of a series of stories. I saw the teaser trailer at an opening night screening of The Last Jedi, and I didn’t know what to think initially. It was a crazy few moments of giant city-like machines chasing each other. I’d never read the books and had no context to place the film other than the name Peter Jackson. That was enough for me.

Mortal Engines follows Tom Natsworthy (Robert Sheehan, Bad Samaritan, TV’s Love/Hate), an apprentice historian from the giant “predator” city of London. Tom once dreamt of more with his life before the death of his parents, but now he resides in pillaging through the garbage of cities London has ingested. Now, when a mysterious woman makes her way into London and attempts to kill Thaddeus Valentine (Hugo Weaving, The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, Hacksaw Ridge), Tom finds himself embroiled in their feud as he learns a horrible secret from the woman, Hester Shaw (Hera Hillmar, Anna Karenina, An Ordinary Man), that changes his view on everything. Now, he and Hester are searching for a way to stop Valentine from unearthing a great weapon while being endlessly pursued by a Stalker from Hester’s past named Shrike (Stephen Lang, Avatar, TV’s Into the Badlands).

The greatest strength of Mortal Engines comes down to its world-building. This is a fully realized environment, one that I really enjoyed spending time in. This of course comes from Philip Reeve’s source material, aided by the powerhouse writing team of Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens, and Peter Jackson (King Kong, The Lovely Bones). I craved more information and wanted more time to be spent here in this world.

Though the world itself is really well built, it is inhabited by flimsy characters. I didn’t really get any of Valentine’s motives for his actions in the film, both in flashbacks and present. I didn’t really feel like any of the characters were likable enough to connect to or interesting enough to keep myself invested. They are people just kind of doing things for two hours.

There was so much more I wanted from this film. I feel like the biggest mistake was keeping such a short prologue at the beginning to set up the story. There is a voice recounting the Sixty-Minute War in shockingly lack of detail that it doesn’t really serve its purpose. An effective prologue can work wonders as we’ve seen previously with The Lord of the Rings films, written by the same writing team. I wanted to have the Shrike and the Stalkers set up more. I wanted to have the predator cities and the static settlements explained more to just get things going. It would have taken the great world-building and used it as a tool to drive story and develop character.

I think the lack of character depth comes from a very fresh and new director in Christian Rivers (Minutes Past Midnight) and a lot of new talent that hasn’t been tested in this large of an arena yet. I think Rivers has an excellent knack for capturing visuals (his film background up until now would show that), but I don’t think he pressed hard on character and performance. Hillmar and Sheehan have virtually no chemistry in the film and not a lot of depth. They perform as well as they can but they never develop that chemistry piece that is either miscasting or lack of time spent on directing performance.

Mortal Engines is capably enough put together to the point I would want to see a franchise continue based on the other books. The film is bursting at the seams with ambition. There is a world here that looks gorgeous on film and I want to spend more time in it, but there are problems in this film. It is far too rushed, it needs character direction, and it lacks enough power in its story. I thought the film was just okay, and I wanted to love it, but I was entranced enough by its strengths that I still want to see more.

 

2.5/5

-Kyle A. Goethe

 

 

For my review of the anthology Minutes Past Midnight, click here.

 

For more Almighty Goatman,

1

Kyle’s Top Ten Most Anticipated Films of 2018

 

Since I’ve already seen one of 2018’s releases, I’m probably a little late on presenting my most anticipated list for 2018. Don’t worry, it hasn’t changed much. Let’s start off with a note:

  • This list is more anticipated, not what I think will be the best by any stretch. These are the films I’m most looking forward to as of right now, so there will be more blockbusters than indies because that’s just how it plays out. So, with that being said…

 

NOTE: THIS IS NOT A COUNTDOWN BUT A LIST.

 

Annihilation

-I thoroughly enjoyed director Alex Garland’s Ex Machina from 2015, and on that film alone, I cannot wait to see Annihilation. Garland has had a run of pretty solid work in the last few years, and getting top talent like Natalie Portman and Oscar Isaac involved is only making this more hyped for me. I don’t know much about the film’s plot outside of the lone trailer I’ve seen, but getting a chance to see a great storytelling weave a yarn in his own sandbox is always a great thing.

 

Pacific Rim: Uprising

-I’m very sad that Guillermo del Toro isn’t returning to helm the sequel to his underappreciated Pacific Rim, but that’s what it took to get The Shape of Water, so what can you do? At least he is staying on in a producer role and the franchise is continuing. I’m not sure how to feel about Uprising as the film looks drastically different from the original, but John Boyega playing Idris Elba’s son looks interesting enough, and genre favorite Steven S. DeKnight behind the camera is setting the film up for success. I’m very excited to see an expanding of this mythology and more Jaeger/Kaiju action.

 

Ready Player One

-I’m just starting the book right now, and the trailers for Steven Spielberg’s Ready Player One have been fascinating. I just don’t know how to feel but the film looks bonkers. There is absolutely no reason not to be excited for more Spielberg but this one feels so familiar and yet so different from what we’ve seen recently from the director. As long as there are enough weird Easter Eggs, I guess I will keep plenty busy at this one.

 

God Particle

-Yeah, this one was on my list for 2017, but it got bumped back. God Particle is all but confirmed to be the next Cloververse film after Cloverfield and 10 Cloverfield Lane. Since I loved both of its predecessors and I enjoy dissecting theories about this quasi-anthology, God Particle should be a fun and interesting ride.

 

Avengers: Infinity War

-What do I say that hasn’t already been said? Almost 20 films in and we are getting this massive film. I have no words. I doubted that this franchise could or would work, and I was wrong. Pop in Black Panther and Ant-Man & the Wasp (I didn’t want to have more than one franchise installment on this list but I’m stoked for all three) and this should prove to be another exciting year for the MCU.

 

Solo: A Star Wars Story

-All the drama behind-the-scenes has made me rather nervous for Solo, but I trust the minds at Lucasfilm because I’ve enjoyed all three Star Wars adventures since their acquisition by Disney, so I trust that they acted at the right time installing Ron Howard as the new director to fix this anthology film. What does make me nervous, though, is the lack of the trailer with only four months to go.

 

Deadpool 2

-I elected to pick Deadpool 2 over The New Mutants and Dark Phoenix because of how surprising the original Deadpool was in 2016. With the shuffling around behind the camera, the exit of Tim Miller, and the addition of David Leitch, it is interesting to see how this one plays out. If the teaser or short that were released are any indication, I think we are in good hands here.

 

The Predator

-Trust me when I say that all of my excitement for this film is riding on Shane Black. I always love a new Predator film, but Shane Black is the reason this is on the list. I love Black’s storytelling sensibilities from his writing of the greatest action film of all time (yeah, I’m calling it for Lethal Weapon) but also his work as a director with Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, Iron Man 3, and The Nice Guys. Some people aren’t aware that Black even co-starred in the original Predator, so he has a good tie to this series.

 

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald

–Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them was quite a surprise. I love Harry Potter, but the idea to expand the mythology with an adaptation of a textbook was weird. Turns out, J.K. Rowling has a few more stories to tell. The flaw with the first film, though, was Johnny Depp’s cameo as Gellert Grindelwald. I didn’t like his appearance and I don’t have as much faith in him as an actor, so seeing him take on the second-biggest villain in the Harry Potter universe was an odd choice. With The Crimes of Grindelwald, Depp will be taking on a much larger role, so I’m interesting if a little nervous to see what comes of it.

 

Mortal Engines

-Though the trailer didn’t have much to offer (as the film is still about a year out), seeing Peter Jackson’s name onscreen again is always a welcome sight. He’s taking on a producer and screenwriter role this time with Mortal Engines, an adaptation of the novel series by Philip Reeve. Jackson and his team are incredible writers, so a nice foundation to this film is enough to spark my interest. We will have to wait for another trailer to see how it is all shaping up, but Mortal Engines has a lot on its plate.

 

So there it is. What film are you most excited for in 2018? Let me know/drop a comment below.

 

-Kyle A. Goethe

 

 

For more Almighty Goatman,

1

31 Days of Horror Part II: Day 25 – Bad Taste (1987)

 badtaste1987b

Director: Peter Jackson

Cast: Terry Potter, Pete O’Herne, Peter Jackson, Mike Minett, Craig Smith

Screenplay: Ken Hammon, Tony Hiles, Peter Jackson

91 mins. Not Rated.

 

I’m a big Peter Jackson (The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The Lovely Bones) fan. I’ve really enjoyed the kind of art he can create on a budget. I will say, however, his early work leaves a lot to be desired. I guess there is a point in Jackson’s career that I start to love his work, The Frighteners. Bad Taste came before that point.

badtaste1987c

In Bad Taste, the population of Kaihoro has been replaced by aliens who wish to harvest the humans for intergalactic fast food. The Astro Investigation and Defense Service recruits several agents to stop them.

This movie is just kind of bad. I didn’t like the wooden characters, the sound work is terrible, and I just didn’t find it very interesting. The idea can work, but I just didn’t see it happening here.

One important point to make is that director Jackson didn’t give up, filming the entire movie over the course of four years while working a regular job. That takes a lot of work, and I can respect that.

badtaste1987a

Now, I cannot forgive Bad Taste for its boring film work, even if I liked the ending and the alien costuming was pretty interesting. There is a lot to improve upon, but it didn’t work nearly as much as it should have. What did you think, bloggies?

 

2/5

-Kyle A. Goethe

 

For more 31 Days of Horror, click here.

For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, click here.

For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, click here.

For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, click here.

For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Lovely Bones, click here.

For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, click here.

For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug, click here.

For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies, click here.

1

Christopher Lee Passes at 93

zzz1

Sad news to report today as legendary actor Christopher Lee has passed away. Lee was 93 years old and died four days ago. Lee had amassed 282 acting credits in his career according to his iMDB profile and is a notable performer of such characters as Count Dracula, Sherlock and Mycroft Holmes and villains from The Lord of the Rings and Star Wars franchises, as well as teaming regularly with director Tim Burton later in his life. His most recent major role was in The Hobbit trilogy with director Peter Jackson.

Thank you, Christopher, and you will be missed.

 

Selected Filmography:

draculaprinceofdarkness1958a

 

0

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)

thelordoftheringsthereturnoftheking2003a

Director: Peter Jackson

Cast: Elijah Wood, Ian McKellan, Viggo Mortensen, Liv Tyler, Seas Astin, Cate Blanchett, John Rhys-Davies, Bernard Hill, Billy Boyd, Dominic Monaghan, Orlando Bloom, Hugo Weaving, Miranda Otto, David Wenham, Karl Urban, John Noble, Andy Serkis, Ian Holm

Screenplay: Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens, Peter Jackson

201 mins. Rated PG-13 for epic intense battle sequences and frightening images.

  • Academy Award Winner: Best Picture
  • Academy Award Winner: Best Director
  • Academy Award Winner: Best Writing, Adapted Screenplay
  • Academy Award Winner: Best Film Editing
  • Academy Award Winner: Best Art Direction – Set Decoration
  • Academy Award Winner: Best Costume Design
  • Academy Award Winner: Best Makeup
  • Academy Award Winner: Best Music, Original Score
  • Academy Award Winner: Best Music, Original Song (“Into the West” by Fran Walsh, Howard Shore, Annie Lennox)
  • Academy Award Winner: Best Sound Mixing
  • Academy Award Winner: Best Visual Effects

 

After pouring years of his life into an ambitious project, director Peter Jackson (The Lovely Bones, King Kong) finally saw his vision receive the recognition it deserved after winning 11 Academy Awards (making it the most nominated franchise in history), tying the record. The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King was the final chapter in the trilogy based on Tolkien’s novels, and indeed one of the greatest films ever crafted. Equal parts grandeur and tragic masterpiece, our third trip to Middle-Earth.

thelordoftheringsthereturnoftheking2003c

Frodo (Elijah Wood, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Cooties) and Sam (Sean Astin, TV’s Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, The Goonies) have gotten back on the path to Mount Doom, with Gollum (Andy Serkis, Rise of the Planet of the Apes, Arthur Christmas) in tow, though Gollum’s path is becoming increasingly more treacherous. Is he leading them down a trap?

Meanwhile, Gandalf (Ian McKellan, X-Men: Days of Future Past, The Prisoner) and Pippin (Billy Boyd, Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World, Dorothy and the Witches of Oz) are heading to Minas Tirith to warn the Steward of Gondor, Denethor (John Noble, TV’s Fringe, Superman: Unbound), of the war that is on his doorstep. The only problem, Denethor, who also happens to be father to Boromir and Faramir (David Wenham, 300, Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga’Hoole), has grown insane and weary in grief over the loss of his favorite son.

This is a spectacular film achievement, visually perfect in every way. The performances are stellar. The plot interweaves and closes off all loose ends. The cinematography is sweeping, epic in scope, and perfectly crafted.  The film’s 200-minute runtime goes by smoothly, not a moment to stop and catch one’s breath. Even the visual effects have not aged in the dozen years since its release. The film even contains the largest prop ever built for a motion picture in a battle sequence containing giant creatures called oliphaunts.

The film features another wonderful battle sequence overcut with Pippin singing a song to the eating Denthor. It is beautiful and chilling and everything that this series is all at once.

As a note to casual fans at the completion of this review for The Lord of the Rings trilogy, check out the extended editions. As terrific as the theatrical cuts are, the extended films are the supreme version of the story. They feature cameos and performances not seen in the previous incarnations, such as The Mouth of Sauron, a wholly chilling character unfortunately cut from the film.

thelordoftheringsthereturnoftheking2003b

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King is perhaps the greatest fantasy achievement in filmmaking that we will ever see. It excels on every level and continues the tradition of high-fantasy movies in a glorious fashion. I doubt we will see an equal for a very long time.

 

5/5

-Kyle A. Goethe

 

For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, click here.

For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug, click here.

For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies, click here.

 

For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Lovely Bones, click here.

11

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)

thelordoftheringsthetwotowers2002a

Director: Peter Jackson

Cast: Elijah Wood, Ian McKellan, Viggo Mortensen, Liv Tyler, Sean Astin, Cate Blanchett, John Rhys-Davies, Bernard Hill, Christopher Lee, Billy Boyd, Dominic Monaghan, Orlando Bloom, Hugo Weaving, Miranda Otto, David Wenham, Brad Dourif, Sean Bean, Andy Serkis

Screenplay: Fran Walsh, Philipps Boyens, Stephen Sinclair, Peter Jackson

179 mins. Rated PG-13 for epic battle sequences and scary images.

  • Academy Award Winner: Best Sound Editing
  • Academy Award Winner: Best Visual Effects
  • Academy Award Nominee: Best Picture
  • Academy Award Nominee: Best Art Direction – Set Decoration
  • Academy Award Nominee: Best Film Editing
  • Academy Award Nominee: Best Sound

iMDB Top 250: #16 (as of 12/7/2015)

We had to wait a whole year to find out what happened to Frodo (Elijah Wood, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Cooties) and Sam (Sean Astin, TV’s Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, The Goonies). That, or just read the book.

thelordoftheringsthetwotowers2002b

Let’s just focus on the film. The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers furthers Frodo and Sam’s journey to Mordor to destroy the One Ring. The fellowship has broken, and friends Pippin (Billy Boyd, Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World, Dorothy and the Witches of Oz) and Merry (Dominic Monaghan, TV’s Lost, I Sell the Dead) have been taken by the orcs to Isengard. Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen, A History of Violence, On the Road), Gimli (John Rhys-Davies, Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark, Anacondas: Trail of Blood), and Legolas (Orlando Bloom, Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, The Three Musketeers) follow the orc pack in an attempt to free them. As Frodo gets closer to his goal, he comes across help in the form of the creature Gollum (Andy Serkis, Rise of the Planet of the Apes, Arthur Christmas), who held the ring before Bilbo found it sixty years previously, but is Gollum truly a friend or a foe?

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers is based on the second book in The Lord of the Rings trilogy and proved to be the most difficult in adapting. First of all, the book is split in two. The first half covers Aragorn and company on their journey. The second half focuses on Frodo, so careful planning and rearranging was taken to make the film chronological in nature. As I’ve said before, Tolkien was a great storyteller but his structure left something to be desired. Then came the difficulty of too much climax with two stories running concurrently. So some events from the second book had to be relocated to the first and third film.

The acting here is tremendous again. Newcomer Bernard Hill (Titanic, ParaNorman) joins as King Theoden of Rohan, who has a warped mind due to the hold Saruman (Christopher Lee, Star Wars – Episode II: Attack of the Clones, Dark Shadows) has over his mind. Theoden is confined to his throne and being further distorted by the slimy Grima Wormtongue (Brad Dourif, Dune, Curse of Chucky). Frodo gets to interact with Faramir (David Wenham, 300, Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga’Hoole), brother of the recently slain Boromir (Sean Bean, TV’s Legends, GoldenEye).

Peter Jackson’s vision is further explored in sweeping visuals during the battle of Helm’s Deep, the film’s main set piece. The score continues to impress, giving each character its own nuance. Again, the costumes are gorgeous.

thelordoftheringsthetwotowers2002c

The faults with this film are few. The pacing is difficult from the screenwriting difficulties. It is clear that the middle act of the film muddles a bit in trying to realign itself to the story. Really, that’s about it. This film has, since its release, been considered to be much better than initial reviews gave it, even though initial reviews were still damn good, and while I enjoyed it, it certainly wasn’t as good as the first and third. Still, take this journey to Middle-Earth. You won’t be disappointed.

4.5/5

-Kyle A. Goethe

For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, click here.

For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug, click here.

For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies, click here.

For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, click here.

For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, click here.

For my review of Peter Jackson’s Bad Taste, click here.

For my review of Peter Jackson’s The Lovely Bones, click here.

5

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑