A look back at: Eraserhead

David Lynch, mostly known for his films that lack any sense and challenge the viewer to put the puzzle back together to discover what the movie was actually about. And his debut film Eraserhead is no different. But does it still hold up to this day?

Eraserhead is a movie that doesn’t rely on its plot really, in fact, it barely has a plot. But it gives you just the bare minimum to have some sort of understanding to what is happening. Our main character is Henry Spencer, and he is currently taking time off from work (a holiday as it is put in the movie). His girlfriend called Mary, and they are just after having a child together. But their child isn’t any ordinary child, the child is some sort of deformed, mutant child. We follow Henry as he struggles through this time.

One thing to note about Eraserhead is, it is a very quiet movie. In fact, David Lynch had a lot of trouble getting financial help from the AFI (American Film Institute) because the script for the movie was only twenty pages long. Lynch did end up receiving a grant from the AFI after about three years of production when he eventually ran out of money. Terrence Malick (director/writer) screened Eraserhead for a “potential financial backer” at one point, and he walked out calling the movie, “bullsh*t”. But what the movie does do is, it focuses on sound, imagery and mood instead an deep plot. In lots of scenes in Eraserhead there is very little dialogue between anyone, let alone Henry and Mary (who are the focus points, Henry more so than Mary). Even for the first ten and half minutes of the movie, there is no talking at all.

But what Lynch loves to do in his movies is blur the line between reality and dreams/nightmares. And this is where it all started, at sections of this movie it is near impossible to tell whether or not something happening is real. And it is a recurring theme throughout, if you don’t like confusing movies, you won’t only not like Eraserhead, but you’ll most likely dislike the majority of Lynch’s work (apart from some).

One scene in-particular where you (the viewer) can’t really tell what is reality and what is dream is, when Henry opens up his mutant child and stabs him/her/it. This makes the child grow huge in size, its head becoming bigger and bigger and bigger were it is nearly the same size of Henry’s room.

Which leads to another point which is, many of the dream/nightmare (type of) sequences do not have any sort of narrative. You aren’t sure on how these sequences impact the overall story, or how they will later on in the film. Nothing is explained for you in Eraserhead and that is the way Lynch wants it.

The film is very confusing and has lead to tons of discussions on different internet forums, with people throwing in their own interruption of the movie and hopefully having it somewhat correct. A lot of people think the first section of the movie is suppose to mean how tough parenting a child can be, and how much time and effort goes into it. But in the second half of the film is where people tend to get lost along with the meaning.

But since 1977 when the film first released, not once has Lynch said what the meaning of the film actually is. Only in the 2000 release of the film on DVD, Lynch said that “no one has come close to the true meaning of the film.”

But just because Eraserhead lacks a script and a meaning (until Lynch, if ever, tells us) it doesn’t mean it’s a bad movie. It’s filled with terrific sound design, directing and writing. For its time it also has unbelievable special effects. And Lynch done all these duties himself, which tells you something about how great he is.

I have seen tons of horror movies, I have seen tons of torture porn movies and most of all, I have just seen a lot of messed up stuff in movies. But Eraserhead is one of the few that really made me feel extremely uncomfortable. Everything about it is creepy, and even a bit scary at times. From Henry’s mutant baby to his horrid nightmares, it really got me on edge for the majority of the movie.

Questions:

*Should you watch this? If you haven’t seen Eraserhead yet and find it somewhat interesting, then yes, it a must see. If you like David Lynch’s previous work and think you could like this, then yes it is at least a watch. If you don’t like confusing, very weird and David Lynch type of movies then no, you are better not wasting your time on it. I’ve seen a lot of people just think it is a bunch of random shots strung together with a very basic plot and they think it was an utter waste of time (which is fine, mind you). So, find out what group you are in and then choose to watch or not!

*Does it hold up to this day?
Yes, Eraserhead does indeed hold up to this day and still remains as one of the most disturbing, weird movies ever made. And there has been a lot since 1977 too, which says something.

*If I liked this, what other movies from the director would I possibly like?
Lynch has a lot of messed up, confusing films that are all great. Blue Velvet, Lost Highway, Inland Empire and Mullholland Drive are all great movies that you could possibly enjoy. Lynch also done a short called Rabbits too which clocks in around 40 minutes long and too is very confusing, and still has that Lynch feel with the short runtime.

If you have any questions, comments, or opinions, please leave a comment below or contact me at ‘andyaylesbury@hotmail.co.uk’.

Thank you for reading!

Is Ash coming back from the dead?

The director of the three Evil Dead movies, Sam Raimi has said “I would love to make Evil Dead 4. My brother and I plan to work on the script this summer.” This giving long time fans of the series hope that another Evil Dead movie with Ash (Bruce Campbell) could possibly happen.

But after saying that, Sam Raimi has kind of gone back on what he has said. “Those guys made me say that. I am thinking about it but a crowd goes ‘Come on Sam, do it!’ so I said ‘Okay, I guess I was talking to my brother about it.’ But I feel like I was pushed into saying that, a little bit. In the hallway today I joked with Ivan, ‘Get working on that script!’ but I really don’t know.”

So where does that leave the chances of a sequel to Army of Darkness? Well no one really knows except Sam himself. But he has also said that he feels like the fans are forcing him into doing a sequel. “I’m afraid that every time I talk about it people get really mad at me when I don’t follow through with it. I would like to work on the script over the summer, that much is true. But the reason to come back and do it again is only that they’re making me, those fans.”

What’s your opinion on this? Would you like a sequel?

The Recent Barrage of Party Movies

Party movies have been around for a long time now, as far back as1978 when Animal House first came out and was a smash hit among the public. And since back in 2007 when Superbad released, there has been a revitalization of the ‘party movie’ scene with movies like The Hangover, The Hangover: Part II, Project X, and the upcoming 21 and Over. But there seems to be a minor problem with the recent barrage of them…they all do the same thing as previous movies and never change anything except the characters.

Superbad kind of set the bar for party movies again, that can be said and it also can be said that it’s a fantastic comedy movie. It was something new again, a plot that has us cheering the less popular guys in college and wanting them to succeed. What is Project X‘s plot again? Oh yeah, it’s about three guys who want to throw a big house party since their parents are away. It does seem familiar, huh? It’s so similar that it could be renamed, Superbad: The Found Footage Edition and people would probably understand. There is nothing knew there, and when you look at the new movie 21 and Over and some of the reviews coming through, it all points to ‘it’s the same story copied and pasted, the same cliché characters copied and pasted with different names’ and so on and so on.

Why people go see these movies and actually spend their hard earned money on them, to support them and actually fund future movies that are just cash-grabs. The Hangover is another example of a movie that is caught up in money and forgets to actually build on a sequel, The Hangover: Part II done nothing different than the original except change the location and the one character that is missing. And what is in the works now, and coming in the summer? The Hangover 3 and why? Because (mostly) it’s a quick cash-grab that the studio know they can just rope in more of the same crap of the original with no innovation.

Yes, a party movie is suppose to maintain the focus, the party, but it’s also not suppose to copy every other movie that is a party movie too. Which the recent barrage of party movies have been doing. They all just copy each other and wait for the money to pile in.

If any type of movies need to die, it’s these ones.

It’s time to leave the Alien franchise alone

Since the first Alien movie back in 1979 released creating the now legendary Xenomorph, infinite movies have learned and taken inspiration from it and it’s sequels. But since the second movie Aliens the series has been hurt continuously. Is it time the Alien should be left alone?

Since Ridley Scott brought us the stunning sci-fi horror movie the genre has never been the same, the epic build-up to the chestburster scene that no one saw coming to the amazing role Sigourney Weaver played as Ripley, a strong powerful female character that stayed in through-out the franchise. Not many people thought that Alien could be topped but director James Cameron took the job of trying to. What he done with Aliens is made it one of the best sequels in cinema history. Changing the original sci-fi horror feel to more of a sci-fi action movie with elements of horror mixed in it. With Aliens, Cameron brought of a ‘crew’ vibe, having a range of different characters all having their own traits and concerns. He didn’t solely rely on Ridley to be the main star of attention, but in the second half of the movie brought her into the spotlight. But with what happened at the end of Aliens, it left an opening for a sequel if there was going to be one.

Then start Alien 3, the film was being directed by David Fincher and saw the main character of the first two Alien movies return, Ripley. This is the movie that saw the Alien franchise decline, with a below average plot and killing off some other very important characters from Cameron’s Aliens. The movie didn’t impress as much as the original or the incredible sequel, but laid the groundwork for the sequel that was to come later on known as Alien: Resurrection.

Alien: Resurrection is widely known the worst of the Alien movies, creating a stupidly bizarre plot wrote by Joss Whedon (who directed the now popular Avengers movie) which I think is most to blame for this horrible Alien movie we got. But yet again, Ripley returns in Resurrection and has more xenomorphs to fight off. Overall, the film wasn’t liked by the majority of Alien fans.

That is why Alien 3 is so important, while it did do some good things, like having the xenomorph born through a dog this time unlike the two previous movies, it did stuff wrong and basically gave way for Resurrection and it’s horrible plot to happen.

That’s not the end though, Ridley Scott who directed Alien, last year released a prequel to it called Prometheus. And like the previous two Alien films, this one didn’t deliver (for some people). Though there is going to be a sequel to Prometheus to continue to prequel to Alien, I think after this prequel, the Alien franchise has to be left alone.

Of course you can too mention the Alien vs. Predator franchise that done horrible and did nothing for either the Alien franchise, or the Predator one at that. It was just milking both names and it resulted in (two) bad movies.

By now the Alien name is just getting milked more and more. Like video games, the Alien franchise has had video games adaptions too. Like the recently released Alien: Colonial Marines that takes place 17 weeks after the events of Aliens. Though it’s now known as the sequel to Aliens and bridges the gap between Aliens and Alien 3 (which it didn’t do, only created more plotholes). But the game has been smashed by reviewers and is doing very bad, like the 2010 game Aliens vs. Predators. Not to mention another Aliens game is in the works by Creative Assembly.

But what I am pointing to here is, the Alien franchise has been milked enough. We’ve had enough bad sequels since Aliens and as much as I was excited for Prometheus, after its sequel we don’t need anymore prequels or explanation.

Long time fans of the franchise (like me) have had enough of these bad movies, and bad video games killing the Alien name more and more with everyone that is released.

It’s time to leave the Alien franchise alone.

Remakes: Is Hollywood Finally Learning?

In the film industry these days (and fans of it), no one is surprised when a film is going to be remade. If it’s one of your favorite movies that is being remade you will most likely react with rolling your eyes or giving a big sigh. And most fans would have the right to react in such a way, given the track record of remakes. Some remakes such as the Black Christmas, Poseidon, Halloween, Godzilla and of course The Wicker Man. These being only some of a large amount of bad remakes, are Hollywood finally understanding how to do remakes now?

If you dig through enough films you can actually find some good remakes, I know, sounds absurd right? But there is remakes out there are actually very good and better than their counterparts, there is also films coming later in the year that are remakes and look promising too.

One of the movies that is better than the original is I Spit on Your Grave, originally one of the first films that fought sexism in movies. Showing a female character fighting back against males and not be given the normal character to just sit around and look good in front of camera. But was one of the video nasties that good of a film? It’s not a great film, in fact it’s probably a mediocre film but for what it does for females and the film industry at a time that was dominated by males, it made its mark. But in 2010 the film was remade, it was being directed by Steven R. Monroe. The film of course had its negative reviews like the first film from people who hated the type of movie it was, and for what it portrayed but in all the remake done everything the original did in a much better way. The remake does add in another character as Sheriff Storch and this kind of makes things a bit more intense with what happens. Along with the added character, the film looks and sounds way better (obviously) than the 1978 version. And Sarah Butler playing Jennifer is really good too, making the role her own.

But what Hollywood seems to love to do is remake a very popular old movie and then just cash in on the name, while not putting much work into the movie itself. But with them remaking a movie that originally had an interesting premise and wasn’t executed properly, they can remake it and make it what it was suppose to be like. And if Hollywood is going around just remaking the best old movies, what is there to really build on? Remakes like Psycho weren’t bad, but they just didn’t make the movie its own. It’s just a carbon copy of the original with updated visuals and sound and that’s not what people want.

Other remakes that are coming this year like Evil Dead and Carrie could be actually really good, because they are building on the originals premise. Evil Dead seems to be taking a very serious approach with what it’s doing, unlike the sequels that had a lot of comedy scenes and were less serious.

But is Hollywood finally learning now? Will they stop remaking movies that are near perfect already?

I for one think that remakes are headed in the right direction finally, of course we will get some bad ones along the way but I think we will be seeing some better remakes than we have over the past couple of years.

Transformers 4 & Michael Bay is back!

We knew that we were getting another Transformers movie, and we even thought that it was going to be a reboot. And if that was your dream, well Michael Bay is back to crush your dreams (of actually getting a good Transformers movie).

Bay has revealed that the new movie will not be a reboot which was what people were thinking what was going to happen, but the next movie will be set “a few years after the third.” When asked about the plot and would it be a reboot, Bay said “No, that’s wrong, we keep the Transformers the way they were, it’s just four years later.”

It has also been noted that Mark Walhberg will be starring in the movie too, which might give you some hope for the movie. But saying that, Michael Bay is back so keep your expectations low if you want something other than explosions!

The ABCs of Death Review: F is for Fun

When was the last time you watched a movie with 26 directors doing individual segments? Because if you haven’t (and most likely haven’t), then The ABCs of Death is a horror film you do not want to miss!

The ABCs of Death is a horror anthology movie, were every director in the movie makes their own small segment. The movies main premise is it has a short horror story that begins with every letter of the alphabet. It starts at A and goes all the way to Z, with each short segment very different to each other.

Also with The ABCs of Death is that not every segment is shot the same way, some are very different and don’t even use real people and instead use clay animation (claymation). Other shorts are animation, and some just use weird effects. Overall, you get a bunch of different stuff.

The directors that took part in this film are all up and coming horror directors, and really span all across the globe. Some faces you may recognize are Ti West (The House of the Devil, The Innkeepers, V/H/S), Adam Wingard (Autoerotic, You’re Next, V/H/S) and Yūdai Yamaguchi (Deadball, Yakuza Weapon). You really get a bunch of different directors from all around the world and each have different (great) ways of telling a short horror story.

One of The ABCs of Death’s faults could also be considered one of its positives to some people. The thing about The ABCs of Death is you don’t get any underlying story, kind of the ‘main story’ for an anthology movie that you may get in other anthology movies. The movie starts straight off with the letter ‘A’ and that’s it. Though I think it’s good that there is no ‘main story’ per say, I think there could of been a better intro to the movie.

Of course with an anthology with as much segments as this one, you will have some bad ones. But in The ABCs of Death there is very few bad segments, the movie definitely ends on a low point with the letter ‘Z’ (by far the worst segment of them all) with Jon Schnepp’s ‘W’ and Noboru Iguchi’s ‘F’ following close behind. Apart from them three main suspects, there really isn’t any other bad segments. Some are very, very weird like ‘K’ and ‘H’ but still are very fun and enjoyable.

The movies most impressive segments would be ‘M’ which is directed by Ti West, it’s extremely short (probably the shortest of the whole movie) but it has that wow factor that West normally gives in his films. Another great segment would be ‘T’ which is directed by Lee Hardcastle, I can’t dive into much detail but it’s very weird and very funny (and shot great too). One of the other stand out segments would be ‘Q’, which again is shot in a very funny manner and isn’t something to be expected. Along with these there is ‘G’, ‘O’ and ‘X’ that all are great as well. Most segments are very funny, weird and shocking but all in the good way.

The ABCs of Death is not your everyday normal horror anthology movie, it’s really far from it. It’s a film that is just about sitting back, turning your brain off and enjoying a film that is going to gross you out multiple times, make you say ‘wow’ numerous times and most of all, make you say “What the f***?” The ABCs of Death is an overall great movie.

F is for Fun.

Rating: 9/10

American Mary review: A good idea executed poorly

Note: No spoilers are in this review.

A recent horror film that has been given a lot praise over the past few months is American Mary, the film was directed and wrote both by Jen and Sylvia Soska (also known as the Soska Sisters) who also done the film Dead Hooker in a Trunk back in 2009 which received very mixed reviews. But does this effort succeed, or fall flat?

American Mary follows the story of surgery student Mary Mason, a student that has a lot of potential in actually becoming a surgeon. Mary switches up turkeys in her apartment in her spare time, practicing as much as she can to be even better than she is. After needing money and not having enough, she decides to go to a strip club to audition for a job. But the job she ends up with at the end of the night, isn’t the one she thought she would have. Mary ends up as a black-market surgeon, to switch up victims of the mob that run the strip club. Quickly after her first job at the club, Mary is contacted by Beatress (Tristan Risk) who wants Mary to perform body modification on her, to fulfill her dream of becoming a living doll true. Mary ends up going down a path of twisted revenge and black market jobs.

From the start it’s very clear that the Soska Sisters have thought up an original and interesting plot, with a likeable character like Mary Mason played by Katharine Isabelle who has brilliant character progression. She turns from a nice student who is trying her best to a revenge driven monster by the end. Isabelle puts in a stunning performance as Mary, I don’t think anyone else could of played the role better.

But it’s not all good for American Mary, when the movie starts to get really good and interesting, there always seems to be some scenes that stop its ‘flow’. Many of these scenes involve Billy Barker, the owner/boss of the strip club that Mary works for. In the movie it’s clear that Billy likes Mary, but the way the film depicts these emotions is extremely bad. The scenes involve Mary as a stripper and dancing around on stage half-naked, pouring blood on herself, etc. It wouldn’t bother me if these scenes didn’t drag on for what seemed forever. They go on too long, and these type of scenes reappear later on in the film too in different ways. Billy’s emotions could of been portrayed differently and more effectively than just have Mary on-stage half-naked dancing. It also seemed like a cheap move to please male viewers too, considering they drag on too long and rarely serve a purpose at all. Yes, it could be said that since it is Billy’s imagination it’s what he wants and that is Mary, but I still think it could of been done differently or just left out all together.

Another problem that surfaces in American Mary is that as the films goes on, you kind of lose target of who you are suppose to be cheering for, near the end of the film there is no one to be rooting for, to be hoping makes it out all okay. As I said previously Mary does change over time, but that also has a bad side. She changes into a person that you can’t like, her actions are brutal and you can’t find any emotions in her at all.

A reoccurring theme I see in American Mary when I look back at it now is, the film begins really well and then gets progressively worse as it goes on. One problem I found with the ending is that there is a plot-hole sort of, though I will not go into any detail because this is a non-spoiler review, I just have to note that there is an instance where you ask yourself, “Why didn’t x character just do a certain thing?” and it’s a problem, I’ve talked to others who have seen the film and they too told me that they asked themselves the same question.

American Mary is a film with a very original and creative storyline, but riddled with bad ideas and silly decisions. Is the film bad? No, not in the slightest. If you find the movie interesting then you should see it, because there is good aspects. But is the film great? No it’s not either, certain parts of the movie drag out with a plot-hole at the end too take away how great the film could of been.

Rating: 6/10

Django Unchained Movie Review

Django Unchained Review

Quentin Tarantino hasn’t made a movie now since 2009 when Inglourious Basterds was released. The movie was a hit, though it did get some tough criticism. Since back in 2009 people have eagerly awaited another Tarantino classic, but was Django Unchained worth the long wait?

Django Unchained deals with a tough subject for many people, the film takes place in 1858 in southern America during the slavery period. Django Unchained’s plot is quite simple, it involves Django (Jamie Foxx) who is a slave. He and his wife Broomhilda (Kerry Washington) were split up when they became slaves, after Django is freed by a bounty hunter (Christoph Waltz), he sets himself the mission of recusing his wife. Though like I stated, the story is pretty simple, it takes you the viewer a wild ride across many different places in America, and most of all, it doesn’t get boring.

If you have seen previous Tarantino movies you know that you are in for a big treat, from the amazing soundtrack that mixes Johnny Cash and rap together, from the magnificent main theme song for the movie, you really get a bunch of different songs and they all fit the movie perfect. Though the movie could be classed as an action movie it does simply more than just action. It blends in brilliantly written comedic parts that had me in tears from laughter. Tarantino knows how to mix both genres of film, he knows when to show over the top action scenes that have you engrossed and asking for more. Then it has the light hearted comedy moments, which all actors do well in.  The movies length could be considered one of its low points, coming in at around two hours and 30 minutes, but because of how fantastic the movie is, you never really notice the time fly by. As the film progresses on you only get more drawn into it, there’s not one part of the film that feels as if it is been streched out or even boring.

All the performances in Django Unchained are amazing, the lead role is played by Jamie Foxx, though some of Foxx’s latest films haven’t been good, he really steps up as Django and fits the role. You can see his character progressing as the movie goes on, at the start he is quiet man filled with anger, by the end he is a brave bounty hunter trying to recuse his wife. Other important roles which are played by Christoph Waltz who plays Dr. King Schultz, Django’s savior. Unlike his role in Inglourious Basterds he plays a good guy, which means you can be cheering for him. Apart from Django, he is the star of the show and really delivers with his role. Leonardo DiCaprio doesn’t play the role you would normally see him in, in Django Unchained he plays as the villian. He plays Calvin Candie, a slave owner who lives in Mississippi. Though it is a different type of role for DiCaprio, he really fits the his role. Other stars like Samual Jackson, Kerry Washington and Walton Goggins all do excellent in their roles too.

All in all Django Unchained is a brilliant return for Tarantino, everything about the movie is top notch. I’d rank this movie even better than some other classics Tarantino did, such as Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs. The movie is that amazing. If you are one who doesn’t go very cinema very often and waits for DVD releases, or gets the movies elsewhere, I would highly recommend seeing Django Unchained in cinema.

Rating: 9.5/10

If you haven’t seen the trailer for Django Unchained, here’s a link to the trailer for the movie: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUdM9vrCbow