2012: The Year in Film: "The Cabin in the Woods" Review

This is Joss Whedon's coming out party in the movies. First, this flick, that has been delayed several times, which Whedon co-wrote with protege Drew Goddard (who got his start writing on Buffy and has been involved in many nerd-tastic JJ Abrams projects since..), who also directs. Of course, Whedon also wrote and directed "The Avengers" which comes out in a couple of weeks. Good for him. Now I know I don't do much horror around here.. it's just not my genre. I find horror to be contrived, cliched, predictable and often unnecessarily gruesome simply for gore's sake. I have a rule, and that's that generally I don't watch things that I can completely figure out from a one minute trailer. That covers horror, romantic comedies, the type of action movies that Jason Statham stars in and shitty Adam Sandler-style comedies. In addition, I'm not frightened by the supernatural and/or things that are impossible. A lot of movie horror consists of atmospheric creepiness (tense music and things popping out at you) and preposterous, unbelievable situations. But horror can be great when done well and avoiding tropes.. "The Exorcist", "Silence of the Lambs" and "Alien" all come to mind, but many would argue that the latter to are more thriller and sci-fi than straight horror. But anyway, Whedon's involvement immediately piqued my interest, and then I started seeing that the flick was getting rave reviews (currently at 92% on RT), so I decided to check out this flick that's been getting so much buzz in the fanboy community.

First, this movie turns the horror genre on its head. It uses its premise to directly attack/mock typical horror movie tropes and situations, and really is quite funny, quite often. Despite how the trailer may appear, this is far from your typical slasher flick. There are layers and twists that make this much more than even a knowing horror attempt. It is at once quite meta and self aware, and at the same time making a legitimate attempt at constructing a story despite its acknowledgment of the problems of the genre. I am going to avoid spoilers in this review, because I avoided them myself prior to seeing it and really think it added to my enjoyment.



Using the traditional tropes of horror films (the jock, the slut, the brainy one, the stoner/goofball, the "good girl") allows for effective horror on one level while simultaneously making a mockery of the genre on another AND creating a cohesive narrative at the same time. The chutzpah of these guys, I'll tell you. The cast is strong, despite being limited by the constructs of the narrative.. particularly Kristen Connolly (Dana, the "good girl"). Of interesting note is that this flick sat for 3 years due to MGM's bankruptcy, so Chris "Thor" Hemsworth appears here in a supporting role. There are many extremely funny parts, which is to be expected with Whedon, but I laughed hard several times, and was legitimately frightened several times.. so good for this movie. This movie tries to do a lot of things and be a lot of things and doesn't necessarily knock each of these efforts out of the park.. but I applaud the hell out of them for even swinging. (too much baseball?) This sort of filmmaking is to be applauded.

I apologize for being quite vague with this review.. but I really don't want to spoil what's going on.. it will take a lot of the fun out of it. But it works as a horror movie, as a send-up of horror movies, as a simply fun movie, and as an overarching narrative of its own. My complaints are, simply, that at time it's a little TOO knowing and tries a bit TOO hard, and that I kind of sort of hated the ending.. rather strongly. In addition, and maybe this isn't entirely fair to hold against the flick.. but when you're making a smart, knowing movie, the dumb plot holes seem especially glaring. There are several that make no sense. Despite these criticisms, all in all, this a fun time at the movies. I had a blast.

7.5/10. If the ending was different, I'd be giving it an 8.5. It's good, a lot of fun, and well worth a watch. Check it out, you won't regret it.. as long as you know this isn't your typical horror flick.

2012: The Year in Film: "Lockout" Review

It's been a while since you've read my drivel, but there are several posts currently under construction, I'll have you know. I've been busy being a quasi-adult and reading lots of Batman. Noh8. First, an aside on movie etiquette: some dude brought in a probably 4-6 year old child to see this movie. Questionable parenting aside (it's rated PG-13..), if your child is incapable of behaving properly in a movie, WHY ARE YOU BRINGING HIM INTO A MOVIE?!? I feel dude's pain, believe me.. dad/uncle/male companion was probably 26 and wanted to check out a fun action movie, probably enjoy his Friday.. but c'mon, man. You don't live in a vacuum. When your child is babbling on at full volume throughout the movie you're having an adverse impact on everyone else and their enjoyment of the flick. I know that it's 2012 and no one gives a shit about anyone else and what's going on with them anymore, but let's try to display a bare minimum of consideration and human decency, shall we? I really think that movie theaters and restaurants could be vastly improved by having kid-free theaters/sections.

Several initial thoughts on "Lockout" before we actually start talking about "Lockout".. first, Guy Pearce is awesome. He has been consistently working for going on 20 years now, but somehow has never made the leap to full-on movie star. After L.A. Confidential and Memento, you'd have thought that he'd have moved on to a Christian Bale type career. Maybe he didn't want it, maybe he made some bad calls, who knows, but he's only 45, and between "Lockout" and this summer's "Prometheus", he may finally be poised to make the leap. In addition, I miss '90's-style action. From 1985-1997 or so there were no shortage of legitimately awesome action flicks that depended on the charisma of their stars and harrowing situations to make fun, extremely watchable flicks. A combination of the Matrix and super hero movies did two things to action: first, emphasized FX and camera tricks, and second: caused action flicks starring a normal human protagonist to have to up the ante, and everyone became an invincible master gymnast and killing machine. John McClane is not a super hero or kung-fu master. He's a plucky, tough-ass dude. He's not jumping into a room and beating up 17 people a la Neo. So let's jump into "Lockout".. it's somewhat hard to review a flick like this, because one must consider the ambition and intention of the filmmakers involved. No one involved with, or seeing "Lockout" has any illusions about what they are doing. They aren't trying to win an Oscar, they are trying to create a fun action flick.. so keep that in mind.

So the year is 2079 and a major international corporation has funded the construction of an orbital maximum security prison to house the world's most dangerous and deadly prison, MS1. It is, of course, impregnable, impossible to escape from and also completely safe. The President's daughter (Maggie Grace) is part of a humanitarian agency seeking to investigate the conditions on MS1 and travels to the prison on a factfinding mission. CIA agent Snow (Pearce) after a mission gone bad, finds himself of the wrong side of the law. When things go wrong on MS1, Snow finds himself being asked to undertake the suicide mission of rescuing the President's daughter. There are various secrets related to Snow's failed mission and things are not all they seem on MS1 as well.

So basically, the plot is "Die Hard" meets "Escape from NY", in outer space. Our hero finds himself outgunned and outmatched, with minimal chance of escape and a smaller chance of survival. These sort of bare bones, action movies for action's sake are pretty much entirely dependent on their star and cast. What separates Die Hard and the Rock from various Jean Claude Van Damme, John Cena and Steven Segal straight to DVD numbers (besides a solid story) is the charisma of the talent involved. Top-notch actors can turn the absurd into the enjoyable. Lucky for us, Guy Pearce and Maggie Grace give it their all. Pearce is one of the most underrated actors working today, and has shown remarkable range in his career.. but here he pulls out his inner badass. He brings a certain callous devil-may-care attitude and quip-filled badassery, in the best tradition of John McClane and Wolverine, Snow is an antisocial, stand-offish, smug asshole who also happens to be very, very, very good at what he does.



Luc Besson, the man responsible for "Leon", "The 5th Element", "Taken" and a myriad of other action movies over the last 20 years, produced, and you can tell. This is a slick, well-done flick that looks great and is a lot of fun if full of plot holes. Maggie Grace, who I didn't think was particularly strong in either "LOST" or "Taken", shines here and provides an effective foil, companion and moral compass for our reluctant hero. Longtime "That Guy" Vincent Regan (I recognized him as the Captain from "300") is strong as one of the inmate leaders, and newcomer Joseph Gilgun is downright disturbing as his psycho brother. The stakes are sufficiently high, everything makes just enough sense, and above all, Pearce is a joy to watch. This flick is about 100 minutes long but it feels like 40 minutes tops. A damn good time at the movies. Don't go in expecting "Schindler's List", but if you want to see some people get their asses kicked and laugh at ridiculous deadpan one-liners, check it out. It's a bit too derivative (it really is Die Hard meets Escape from NY in space..) and reliant on tropes to be great, and if the cast hadn't sold it it might not be good at all, but as is, a strong, extremely watchable action flick. I had a good time.

7/10.