Tag Archives: JAPAN

SHUDDER HORROR FILM REVIEWS – EXTREME!

SHUDDER HORROR FILM REVIEWS – EXTREME!

I’m continuing the Shudder film review residency here on my site with this post. However, as I watched so many horror films on the channel recently, I have decided to break them down into categories. This one is called Extreme!

Essentially the films reviewed here are — because of their content, style or both — prime examples of nasty, violent, sickening and in some cases extremely depraved horror movies. So, be warned do not watch these films, unless you have a strong emotional constitution and actually enjoy witnessing graphic scenes of gore, sex and bloody mayhem.

For your information, the films are reviewed in order of my rating, which as usual is out of eleven.



REVENGE (2017) – DIRECTED BY CORALIE FARGEAT

Featuring a B-movie rape and revenge plot, this exploitation story is raised way above its subject matter due to ultra-stylish direction, gorgeous cinematography and a compelling lead performance by Matilda Lutz. She portrays Jen, an aspiring actress, who is on a weekend getaway with handsome boyfriend (cheating husband), Richard (Kevin Janssens). He seems very well off as their break takes place at a stunning isolated villa location. However, things go awry when two of his hunting buddies turn up, and one, Stan (Vincent Colombe) attacks Jen while Richard is out. From then on events twist from incredibly bad to worse for Jen, and she finds herself being hunted down in the blazing heat of the desert. The film looks absolutely incredible with amazing photography and colour design. Overall, what it lacks in story and characterisation though, it more than makes up for in stunning action, searing violence and a powerful critique of toxic masculinity.

Mark: 8 out of 11


TERRIFIER (2016) – DIRECTED BY DAMIEN LEONE

I saw this horror film appear in a post on the YouTube channel What Culture Horror. So, the story of a demented clown who never speaks and slashes people to death on Halloween definitely piqued my interest. It’s both extremely violent and low-budget, having been made for around $100,000. However, it is in fact impressively shot and edited for such a small amount of money. The gory effects are amazingly effective too, summoning up memories of 1980’s prosthetic film effects. There is no real subtext or thematic strength, but I was pretty tense and sickened throughout. Moreover, the clown called Art is a memorably monstrous creation. He kills without reason and purely for his own entertainment. Nihilistic in tone, the director sure knows his horror and delights in presenting many sick ways of murdering his characters. Thus, if you like disembowelling, strangulation, burning, beheading and other gruesome movie deaths then, Terrifier (2016), is worth watching from behind the safety of the sofa.

Mark: 7.5 out of 11



CITY OF THE LIVING DEAD (1980) / THE HOUSE BY THE CEMETERY (1981) – DIRECTED BY LUCIO FULCI

Filmmaker, Lucio Fulci, is often found lurking in the shadow of Italian horror filmmakers such as Mario Bava and Dario Argento, however, he truly knows how to frighten and sicken the life out of an audience. So much so he has been given the nickname, ‘Godfather of Gore’. As well as directing many films, notably, Zombie Flesh Eaters (1979) and The New York Ripper (1982), he is infamous for his “Gates of Hell” trilogy which included: City of the Living Dead (1980), The House By the Cemetery (1981) and The Beyond (1981). I re-watched the first two recently and while not as terrifying as when I saw them in the past, they still have the power to shock. While lacking coherent plots, containing pretty bad acting and some chronically dreadful dubbing in places, paradoxically Fulci’s films can arguably be considered surreal horror classics. They may not make any narrative sense, but his ability to create stunningly violent set-pieces is legendary. Memorable scenes include: the spewing of intestines, crawling maggots, hanging priests, drilled brains, chopped heads and monsters rising from basements and graves. Such imagery and dreaded moments — all set to a creepy synth soundtrack — make Fulci’s movies unsettling viewing experiences.

Mark: 7 out of 11


ISLAND OF DEATH (1976) – DIRECTED BY NICO MASTORAKIS

Not only is this one of the sickest films I have seen, it is also one of the most appalling I have sat through. Having said that, that is in fact what Greek director Mastorakis, based on what I’ve read, set out to do. The story, if you can call it that, focusses on a couple called Christopher (Robert Behling) and Celia (Jane Lyle) who go on a sex-driven-kill-crazy-honeymoon-rampage on the Greek island of Mykonos. If you can get past the couple having sex in a phone booth while telephoning his mother, and stomach Christopher raping a goat before killing it, then do watch the rest of this conveyor belt of pornographic sex and violence. By the end, I was stunned to silence at how sick the film was.

Mark: 1 out of 11


TETSUO – THE IRON MAN (1989) – DIRECTED BY SHINYA TSUKAMOTO

Lauded as a low-budget Japanese extreme body horror cult classic, Tetsuo: The Iron Man (1989), is either the work of a genius or a complete madman. Filmmaker, Shinya Tsukamoto, deserves so much praise for literally making most of the film in his own house and paying for it out of his own pocket. Yet, the thumping industrial soundtrack, jump-cutting-stop-motion style and story of metal invading the body, soul and mind of various characters was too f*cked-up, even for me. I know it gets mentioned as a work of genius, but it was frankly unwatchable. Thankfully, it’s only sixty-seven minutes of hell to get through.

Unmarked!

THE NETFLIX PROCLAMATION – REVIEWS OF: EARTHQUAKE BIRD (2019), i LOST MY BODY (2019), THE KING (2019), THE TWO POPES (2019) and more…

THE NETFLIX PROCLAMATION – FILM REVIEW CATCH-UP MARCH 2020

With COVID-19 threatening the world’s population, it is a time to remain calm and, if required, stay indoors out of the way of potential infection. As long as the Internet holds then there are thousands of films and TV shows to watch online to keep us all occupied. Obviously, one must also take a deep breath and pray that aside from the illness affecting the world, society manages to keep it’s social, financial and medical structures in place too.

Clearly, we need distractions at this difficult time. Films may not be the solution, but they can offer diversion at least. Thankfully, I love staying in and watching movies as it is a major hobby of mine. Indeed, I have been busy lately catching up on some of the latest releases Netflix has to offer. Thus, I present some quick reviews of films currently on the streaming platform, all with the usual marks out of eleven.

***MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS***



A PRIVATE WAR (2019)

Rosamund Pike is absolutely enthralling as the brave war correspondent, Marie Colvin. Putting her life and sanity on the line to report the terrors of conflict in Sri Lanka, Libya and Syria, to name a few, Colvin was both fearless and crazy in equal measures, but remains an incredibly powerful voice. This fine biopic feels haphazard and structurally chaotic but is certainly an impressive tribute to an iconic journalist. (Mark: 8 out of 11)


DESTROYER (2018)

Nicole Kidman gives another excellent performance in this gritty neo-noir-cop-procedural drama. The clever structure — which tracks back and forth between Kidman’s burnt out character in the present and her violent past going undercover in a crime gang — arguably works against the emotional power of the film. However, director Karyn Kusama and Kidman make a formidable team in delivering a moody, bruising and bitter revenge thriller. (Mark: 8 out of 11)


EARTHQUAKE BIRD (2019)

I really loved director Wash Washmoreland’s previous film, Colette (2018), because it was such a vibrant. colourful and sparkling biopic of a fascinating character. I was thus surprised to see he had followed it up with an under-cooked thriller like Earthquake Bird (2019). Alicia Vikander portrays a dour ex-patriot in Japan who gets drawn into a love triangle involving the effervescent, Riley Keough, and photographer, Naoki Kobayashi. The film felt, like Vikander’s protagonist, depressed; ultimately drifting toward a tepid denouement. (Mark: 6 out of 11)


Image result for earthquake bird

ENTEBBE (2019)

Rosamund Pike again! Here she is cast alongside Daniel Bruhl as they portray two Germans who joined a Palestinian military group that hijacked an Air France Flight in 1976. While the politics of the Israelis versus the Palestinians is explored to some extent, I felt more could have been done during the hostage situation to examine such complex issues. Instead, we get something more generic from director Jose Padiha, who inexplicably uses dance troupe montage to convey nebulous emotion and meaning. (Mark: 6 out of 11)


I LOST MY BODY (2019) – (Contains spoilers)

Both original and generic in terms of story, this romantic drama contains some of the most wonderful animation concepts I have seen in a long time. Brilliantly rendered and directed by Jeremy Chaupin, the narrative has two major strands. A severed hand – yes, a hand – seeks to unite with its body. Simultaneously, flashbacks reveal young Naoufel attempting to romance the girl he loves, Gabrielle. I really wanted to enjoy this more as the filmmaking is stunning. But, the final act of the film was too poetic, and it left me feeling cold and confused. (Mark: 7 out of 11)


THE KING (2019)

David Michod has been a filmmaker worth keeping tabs on since the release of brutal Australian crime film, Animal Kingdom (2010). After the big budget military satire War Machine (2017), failed, in my view, to hit the target, Michod has gone with another big production in The King (2019). Adapting Shakespeare’s Henry V trilogy (co-writer with Joel Edgerton) is no easy task and they deliver a film full of bravura cinematic moments. Timothee Chalamet is impressive in the lead role as the reluctant, but strong-of-heart young Prince Hal/King Henry. Lastly, Sean Harris, Robert Pattinson, Edgerton (as Falstaff) and Thomasin Mackenzie provide excellent acting support in a stirring period epic. (Mark: 8 out of 11)


Image result for the king timothee chalamet

THE LAUNDROMAT (2019)

Filmmakers Scott Z. Burns and Steven Soderbergh are usually so reliable in their cinematic endeavours. However, a star-studded cast including: Meryl Streep, Gary Oldman, Sharon Stone, Antonio Banderas, Matthias Schoenaerts and Jeffrey Wright cannot save this misguided comedy-drama about the Panama Papers scandal. I’m sure there is a great film in such financial crimes, but this was not it. (Mark: 5.5 out of 11)

MID 90s (2019)

Jonah Hill adds director to his already very successful acting, writing and producing curriculum vitae. Mid 90s (2019) owes much to the low-budget, improvisational and gritty style of filmmakers like Harmony Korine and Larry Clark, however, Hill’s approach is less extreme. The loose and episodic rites-of-passage narrative centres on Los Angeles based skater gangs and specifically Stevie (Sunny Suljic). He longs to grow up too fast and his experiences reminded me of an American version of Shane Meadow’s This is England (2006). While it’s a solid work of cinema, full of heart and believable performances, it’s ultimately quite underwhelming from an emotional perspective. (Mark: 7 out of 11)


THE TWO POPES (2019)

Fernando Merielles directs this adaptation of Anthony McCarten’s play featuring two giants of the acting world in Anthony Hopkins and Jonathan Pryce. The two heavyweight actors portray the real-life Pope Benedict XVI (Hopkins) and future Pope Francis, Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio (Pryce). The duo conflict, debate and laugh about serious matters related to the history of the Catholic Church; plus, some not-so serious matters such as pizza and football. Having sat through Paulo Sorrentino’s uber-pretentious TV series The New Pope (2020) recently, I was not in the mood for more theological drama. However, the two leads are excellent, especially Pryce; and while the film is very dialogue driven, the flashbacks of Argentine history from Cardinal Bergoglio’s early years were powerfully evoked. (Mark: 8 out of 11).


SILENCE (2016): REVIEWED BY A RELIGIOUS OUTSIDER

SILENCE (2016): REVIEWED BY PAUL LAIGHT

Rather than review every single thing I have seen in one monthly instalment I have decided to theme my reviews concentrating on quality rather than quantity in 2017. So, here I go with a light essay on the nature of the existence of God, the relevance of religion in today’s world and at the same time give my humble opinions on Martin Scorcese’s passion project Silence (2016).

martin-silence1

In my mind I do not believe in God. I do not believe in a higher-power that created Earth and oversees our everyday lives. I believe Jesus, Buddha and Mohammed existed in some form or another in the past and their philosophies and teachings laid the groundwork for Christianity, Islam and Buddhism; plus many of the other religions that are followed today. Personally, I believe in all that I see and hear and experience in life and while I respect other people’s faith, commitment to an all-powerful being is not for me. Each to their own I reckon.

liam-neeson

A belief in Heaven and God certainly explains many things such as why are we here? And what happens when we die? Because let’s face it the threat of a never-ending abyss of no consciousness is a terrifying thought after all. I mean, I lived and studied in Stoke-on-Trent for three years so have seen the void and it is frightening. So, I get that people need some comfort and answers to difficult questions. It’s just a shame that religion, organized or otherwise, has been used historically for not only good but also something that has caused: torture, war, murder, inquisitions, control, heartache and division etc. But, hey, that’s more of a critique of humanity rather than faith.

Thus, while I respect individual’s choice of faith or politics or ideology, religion and prayers are not for me. Having said that, I’m not a fundamental atheist looking to attack those believers and when reputed filmmakers such as Martin Scorcese embark on personal journeys into their own faith it certainly makes one have a look and reconsider your own perspectives. Indeed, Silence features a lead character which clearly acts as Scorcese’s personal conduit as Rodrigues journeys into the heart of darkness and faces a horrific test of faith.

silence-00432.jpg

Like The Last Temptation of Christ (1988) and Kundun (1997), Martin Scorcese is no stranger to broaching heavy and powerful subjects relating to religion. Of course, it’s easy to say I prefer his stylised, violent and darkly humorous gangster films as they are eminently watchable with kinetic camerawork, great soundtracks and brutal men taking each other out in all manner of bloody ways. Having said that these films still ring true to Scorcese as he grew up in a tough Italian neighbourhood where more often than not the choice was to become a gangster or a priest. What a choice!

Silence is set as far away from New York as you could get: in 17th century feudal Japan. It concerns two priests Rodrigues and Garupe (brilliant portrayed by Andrew Garfield and Adam Driver) who venture into the heart of darkness to attempt to find their mentor, Father Ferreira (Liam Neeson). It is a long film which requires much stamina in both heart and mind and at times certainly tested my faith in the director. However, after it had ended it left me with so much to think about I knew it was worth the journey. It’s a story that you absorb through your psyche and physicality. It does not strike any easy notes as it discordantly pulls at your cerebral sinews.

silence

The first act quickly establishes the drama but I felt that the second thirty minutes was arguably too slow as I was very keen for the quest to find Ferreira gain some pace. Yet, when the film focusses on Andrew Garfield’s character and the testing of his faith Scorcese really got to the heart of the narrative. Moreover, there was much in the film which reflected today. The priests are captured, humiliated and tortured in a Japanese equivalent of Guantanamo Bay. But the Japanese were not stereotypical or evil for evil’s sake. Their motivations of protecting their culture and own religion were well argued. In fact, it’s an important theme in the film where, in testing Rodrigues’ faith, are they not perhaps right to protect their way of life? Especially given they may have some knowledge of the violence committed by Westerners and Christians in the name of God.

silence3

Overall, Silence is a reflective and personal film about faith and culture clashes. Over the running time Scorcese, through the characters, questions his beliefs and how he should best go about praising the Lord. Scorcese’s soul is in many characters notably Rodrigues but also Neeson’s Ferreira. Most importantly he is also present in a fascinating sin-confess-repent-Judas character called Kichijiro (Yōsuke Kubozuka). While moving at a meditative pace Silence possesses some wonderful cinematography, sterling performances and a brooding score. Ultimately, faith is a personal choice and whether you believe in God or not an individual must choose their own path of faith even if it is silence.

GODZILLA (2014) – FILM REVIEW

godzilla

GODZILLA (2014)

**CONTAINS MASSIVE SPOILERS**

This massive budget reboot of Tohu’s iconic monster GODZILLA is not a terrible movie. It is a technical triumph in fact and has some memorable moments; however, for a MONSTER movie and cinematic experience it was a bitter, bitter disappointment. Plus, at times – dare I say it – it was pretty boring.

If I pay ten quid to see a film called GODZILLA I expect and demand ultimate carnage with the lives of thousands destroyed – eaten and crushed and fire-balled to death –  while cities and oceans are awash with blood, rubble and the tears of survivors.  Because Godzilla is a metaphor for nuclear attacks don’t you know so surely this should be your first priority:  show annihilation and destruction of cities and humans?  That’s what I want for my money!

Gareth Edwards and his massive team of filmmakers offer some destruction over its 120 minutes but ultimately Godzilla fails as a monster movie; it fails as a disaster film and fails most importantly as a piece of drama driven by believable and empathetic characters.  It’s not a great surprise to be honest as the sophomore director got the gig on the back of his independent film MONSTERS (2010)  which was filmed on Prosumer cameras with special effects and editing also done very cheaply. Much kudos goes to Edwards’ for creating Monsters on such a low budget and he is certainly a filmmaker who deserved a big break.

Monsters, like Godzilla was slow-moving, solemn and very serious in tone and in both films their monsters are hidden from view only appearing in full way too late in the narrative for my liking. I enjoyed Monsters because it gave us the brilliant actor Scoot McNairy who has gone onto to feature in some fine films notably Argo (2012) and Killing Them Softly (2012).  But it was essentially a love-story-come-travelogue with the creatures having little direct impact or threat on the characters.

Sadly, this also happens somewhat in Godzilla. It begins promisingly enough in 1999 with a nuclear explosion caused by the hatching of an egg which releases an unknown creature into the sea. So far, so intrigued.  Flash forward 15 years and Joe Brody (Bryan Cranston) is devastated by the loss of his wife (Juliette Binoche) during said nuclear disaster and obsessively attempts to find out what happened that fateful day.  Throw Brody’s son portrayed by Aaron Taylor-Johnson – quite handily a bomb disposal expert – into the mix and you get a promising character axis on the go.  Simultaneously, scientists Sally Hawkins and Ken Watanabe enter the fray to investigate but they are dull cardboard cut-outs there to serve us mundane expositional ramblings with no character momentum whatsoever. But Cranston’s character disappears from the narrative quite quickly and moreover, having to wait an hour before the first main bit of monster action really tested my patience.

I realise Edwards chose to go down the less-is-more route of Jaws (1975) but the reason the shark could not be seen in that was because the mechanical beast was beset with troubles and didn’t work so Spielberg and his team had to think creatively around this issue. Consequently, they created so many great set-pieces – something severely lacking in Godzilla. For example the scene with the two fishermen trying to catch the shark with a lump of meat is an especially brilliant sequence where the camera and music act as the shark. It’s a quality and economical piece of filmmaking with a fantastic punchline at the end to lift the mood.

When they do appear the Monsters are amazing to look at but there was not enough in the screenplay for me to actually give a damn by that time. The ensemble cast are pretty much wasted in my view and the less said about the screenplay the better. I feel it would have been better to have done a Towering Inferno (1974) or Poseidon Adventure (1972) style disaster movie with an ensemble star cast battling against the impact of Godzilla on their lives. In fact, Godzilla, however impressive he may look is pretty benign as a threat to humans; a decision which dumbfounded me. Overall, I felt the film needed a bigger name director like Steven Spielberg or Peter Jackson or a James Cameron figure to give us that WOW factor. The screenplay also had a humour bypass too and I failed to get value for my entrance fee. Sad to say this film was a gigantic disappointment.