Blog Hop...splashdown!

I was asked to participate in a Blog Hop writing exercise by the amazingly talented Margaret Fedder. I was supposed to write something last week but I totally dropped the ball. Here is her entry. See how well-written that is? Yeah, don't expect that from me.

What was this simple assignment I failed to complete in time, let alone pass on to another blogger? Answering four questions. Here they are...

1. What am I working on? Heh. That is a loaded question. If letting ideas percolate in the back of my brain counts as working, then I am extremely busy with multiple projects right now. If, you know, sitting down and writing is considered "working"...yeah, not so much of that lately.

I wrote a novel for NaNoWriMo back in November. I even took a first pass at rewriting it. Now, I am totally stalled out. This is tied to various things like my depression, the amount of time I am spending making other people's dreams come true and my crippling addiction to Facebook games. I don't know about you other writers out there but there is a time when you mentally check in on a project and realize you are totally over it. That has not happened with my novel, I am still grasping the end of the thread tethering it to my interest (belabor metaphors much?). So, I still consider that an active work in progress.

Likewise, I have two screenplay ideas I am moderately excited about that I want to complete. They are still tethered to my mental to-do list also.

Having attended a comic book convention this past weekend, I have rekindled my interest in a 20 issue comic project I wanted to launch a few years ago called The Damocles Fugue. I am thinking of trying another kickstarter with different goals and parameters. I have to dust the cobwebs off the story in my mind but I think I have it completely outlined...somewhere.

So, yeah, not actually writing anything but thinking about writing a lot. Plus, working on a live comedy show and a podcast project in the future.

2. How does my work differ from others in the genre? Hoo boy. How to answer this one?

My novel is different in that it probably incorporates my love of film conventions moreso than most other writers. The genre is a horror novel and, having grown up influenced by musical magpies like U2 and cinematic scavengers like Tarantino, I have to say I enjoy a good pastiche. There are chapters that read like Southern Fried comedy and some that read like a Film Noir mystery...maybe readers will hate the tonal shifts but I believe I have a strong enough authorial voice to make it work. Also, like everything I have ever written, there is a tragic love story at the heart of it.

As for the screenplays, one is a rapid fire comedy in the His Girl Friday/Aaron Sorkin vein...nothing revolutionary. I just wanted to see if I could write something funny. The other screenplay is a ghost story about depression...it has the potential to be totally pretentious crap or something that connects with sad people. I won't know until I actually write it.

As for the comic book, I am again seeing where I am cobbling together heist movies, science fiction, Marvel comics from the 90s and Breaking Bad to create something I hope is exciting and new.

I don't feel confident enough yet to say I am redefining genres or creating something wholly unique but I am hoping to add to the overall quality of pre-existing genre conventions.

3. Why do I write what I do?

When I do write, it through an irresistible urge to spill electronic ink across a blank screen. It is a comforting and cathartic activity I use to release a lot of the psychic pressures in my head. I tend to dwell on things and examine them from 100 different angles and try to parse out the hidden meanings in human interactions. Writing helps me organize these thoughts while, hopefully, entertaining people. I am not above grasping for low hanging fruit if it results in a satisfying experience for me as a writer. I am not committed to some sort of lofty ideal of elevating the human spirit through literature. I just want to write things I would enjoy reading.

Also, my romantic life is just a shambles and writing helps me make sense of that fact.

4. How does your writing process work?

Like most people, I think inspiration hits at weird times. I usually have some way to write ideas down (I always carry at least a pen if not paper). Lots of times, the ideas go nowhere. However, if I can marry two separate ideas I have, I can usually create some traction in my brain to want to move forward with an idea. I don't start writing every single thing that pops into my head. I usually chew on it for a while to see if it still has flavor, so to speak. If an idea can hang out in my head for a week and still excite me, it is usually worth working on.

The actual process is as chaotic as I am. I have no writing desk or chair. I write on my laptop, usually in bed. I play music on my Itunes but at a volume so low as to not distract me with lyrics. This is why Classical music or instrumental groups like Ratatat work best for me when I am writing. I can, on average, write for about an hour or two before getting burned out.

Rewriting is where I have no discipline whatsoever. NaNoWriMo worked for me because I just had to keep plowing ahead and couldn't look back. Getting bogged down in rewriting is the number one thing that kills a story for me. The faster I can get the whole thing out, the more likely I am to finish it altogether.

So, yeah, there are my answers. Not sure if any insight was gained. I tortured some metaphors and that was fun. I have no one to pass this Blog Hop along to so, if the topic was a frog leaping from blog lily pad to blog lily pad, consider this the froggy splashdown.

I do want to thank Margaret for thinking of me and asking me to be involved.

Too Many Words About The Raid 2

I...I honestly don't know what I think about this movie and here is my meager attempt to process it. Massive Spoilers Ahead!

So, a few words about the first movie. The Raid: Redemption is probably the best action movie I have seen in 20 years, easily. I am a real sucker for unity of time and place (those Aristotelian ideals of drama). Die Hard is great because it is mostly entirely set in one building. You know the good guys, the bad guys and the geography. The Raid was a little less clear on the geography but all you had to know was, good guys are outnumbered by bad guys and...fight!

The Raid was the closest I have ever seen to non-stop action. I mean, yes, there were breather moments where the threadbare plot inched forward but, mostly, it was just a buffet of carnage. Just, pure, unashamed, action.

The Raid 2 is both greater than and less than the original. The first thing that bugged me was the Alien3 beginning where Evans just totally undoes everything that happened in the first movie. The guy Rama and his brother try to bring to justice is killed, the brother is killed and Rama is just sent straight into a new story. Now, I know this was the story Evans wanted to tell all along and the first movie was just his "demo reel" but it is kind of a slap in the face to fans of the original to just say "fuck it, that was pointless."

So, then, Evans plays around with non-linear storytelling for about ten minutes and then drops it. After that, The Raid 2, essentially, becomes every undercover cop movie I have ever ever seen. He has nothing new to add to the story or the drama. In fact, a lot of what bloats this movie is time dedicated to building characters that just end up 1 dimensional no matter what.

Speaking of which, there is a lengthy portion of the running time dedicated to building up the character of Prakoso (played by Yayan Ruhian, who played a different character in the first movie) when his role in the overall story is pretty minor. Essentially, he is Rug Daniels from the start of Miller's Crossing but we didn't get to know Rug's entire life story before he wound up dead in an alley.

Part of the "fleshing out" of 'Koso was a sequence that demonstrates why he is a hired killer. It is a loving homage to Friday the 13th (complete with ch-ch-ch-ka-ka-ka sound effects and a machete) which is one of the many film moments this movie references. Kubrick and Coppola get nods as well. Evans is kind of taking the film Magpie approach of Tarantino but his characters need some more work. Or less, if they only exist as a plot point.

So, why can't I just come out and say I didn't like this movie? I mean, weak characters, weaker plot and inconsistent stylization  abound...so, it sucked, right? Not so fast...

The action...my God, the action. I mean, that was the reason I came to see this. When Evans quits fucking around with his boring characters and just lets Rama fuck shit up, the movie recaptures that same adrenaline rush as the first one. Evans can direct the shit out of an action sequence. Like Rian Johnson, he will put a camera anywhere if it will give the audience a unique perspective on a fight. Like Alfonso Cuaron, he can stage an intricate scene with little to no effort. The set pieces in this movie are incredible. Just jaw-dropping action. Despite the lack of quantity, the quality of ass kicking is even better than the first one.

And really, how bad is it that I have to sit through generic cop plot #4 if it gets me to things like the car chase or the introduction of the three comically badass hitmen for the bad guy?

That is another thing this movie gets right, show us what the bad guys can do before the good guy fights them. Even have the hero lose a fight or two just to up the stakes. The baseball guy, hammer girl and knife dude reminded me of the specialized fighters in Big Trouble in Little China. They were a lot of fun.

So, yeah, on the whole this was an entertaining movie that failed to rise to its own ambitions. I liked it, in the end, but a little more discipline might help Evans in the future. Just my 2 cents.

Dispatches from the Fortress

This is going to be a potpourri of things too long to post about on Facebook but undeserving of their own entries.

#1- Snow

Right now I am "enjoying" my second day off work from the job that is slowly killing me. Being back in the south I am reminded of why I liked snow so much that I moved to Boston. Doesn't it make everything look pure and new? It seems to be the weather of hope for me. A snowy yard is ripe with potential. Even if nothing is done with it, it is a blank canvas upon which to paint a moment or memory.

Snow in Boston was pervasive and sometimes lingered the entire winter in the darker places that never saw sunlight. In Boston, snow was just a thing that had to be dealt with. The city couldn't stop for it so that brittle moment of seeing an untouched blanket of the stuff was rare. It rarely meant the same thing there but I didn't mind it.

#2- Okkervil River

Been listening to The Silver Gymnasium a lot lately. I left it in my mother's car (as I have no car of my own). She asked me, "Is that the group that sings 'We Don't Give Suicide Cards'?" Which is kind of awesome in that she was listening to Lido Pier Suicide Car. I think Hallmark needs to look into this.

I can't judge her because, when I am on rounds at the hospital, I sing the songs to myself. In the song "Pink Slips" there is a line about being "A refugee from the rat race, with his white tuxedo and his sad face." I always turn it into "with his pink torpedo and his sad face." Fans of Spinal Tap may recognize this as a euphemism for a dick.

I told my best friend about both of these and he says my family is giving that album an impressive rewrite. Hell yes we are.

#3- Writing

I have gotten some great feedback on the first 1/5th of my novel. I am in the midst of rewriting the second fifth. It took me a little while to get back into the writing of it but now I am getting excited about the project again. More updates to come.

#4- Woody Allen

So, this is one I have been resisting writing about but I kind of feel like I need to say what I need to say here. Firstly, I am not an apologist. I love Allen's work, yes, but I love Roman Polanski's also. And I totally believe Polanski is a rapist. Their art in no way makes me believe they are incapable of heinous things. I think what Woody did with Soon Yi is pretty sleazy but not illegal.

Now, again, I wasn't there but I believe Woody did not molest Dylan for one reason: it doesn't fit his pathology. Pedophiles get kind of lumped together as anyone who wants to have sex with people under 18 years of age. Woody's interest has always been in post-adolescent girls who display secondary sexual characteristics that indicate a girl is of the age to reproduce. Now, the reason this is creepy isn't because these girls aren't physically capable of sexual relations, it is because they are mentally and emotionally unprepared for such activities. Even at 18, the age of consent is probably too low because who the hell knows what they are doing at 18? But I digress.

Pre-pubescent girls, by definition, do not display the secondary sexual characteristics that indicate they are fertile. Dylan, at age 8, was just not Woody's type. If the accusation was that he molested her when she was 14, I would probably believe it.

Let me be clear, I think sex with a 16 year old is just as bad as sex with a 6 year old but there are two very different mindsets that lead to each. A man who acts on sexual desires for a 16 year old is violating decency but not doing anything that shocking if you understand how human biology works. A man who acts on sexual desires for a 6 year old is violating decency and the hard-wiring that tells men to attempt reproduction with viable candidates to produce offspring.

Therefore, I think pedophilia is a biological aberration while sexual attraction to underage girls is a moral failing.  Again, maybe Woody had a total psychotic meltdown and acted against everything in his being. I don't know. Right now, the narrative that Mia coached Dylan into the story makes way more sense to me. I totally believe Dylan believes it happened. I don't think this is a "false accusation" from her. But, I think the memory is false. Memories are completely unreliable. Just look at the Satanic abuse scares of the 1980s.

The trauma is very real to Dylan and whatever she needs to do to move on, I am all for it. I just think she is blaming the wrong parent. I could be incorrect but, the facts just don't add up to me.

Top 13 Movies of 2013

HAHAHA! No.

Better late than never, I decided I wanted to see as many actual 2013 movies as I could before choosing my top 13. That said, there are titles I have not seen yet that might have ended up in my top 13. I have not seen: All Is Lost, The Act of Killing, Blue is the Warmest Color, Mud, Side Effects, The Spectacular Now, Stoker, Stories We Tell, To the Wonder or The We and the I. I have heard good things about them all so they might have ended up here.

If you are wondering where Place Beyond the Pines or American Hustle are, Bradley Cooper saved one and ruined the other...I'll let you guess which is which. Either way, neither are itching to be in my collection anytime soon. Nor is the sequel to my favorite comedy (Anchorman 2) or the directing debut of one of my favorite actors (Don Jon). Also, as fun as Wolf of Wall Street was, it won't ever be one of my favorite movies.

13. Gravity- Say what you will about the script (there is some weakness here) but I cannot deny that I was thrilled and breathless for most of the movie. For these first few, outside the top 10, I want to focus on movies that succeeded in whatever their mission was. I would never dispute that Cuaron can stage and film the crap out of some exciting scenes, but maybe he needs to work from someone else's screenplay besides his son's. Clooney gives a winning performance. Bullock does just fine. This movie won't change your life but it is a great thrill ride.

12. The Conjuring- I am not a fan of James Wan, historically. I did like the first Saw quite a bit before the series devolved into torture porn. As it stands, Insidious feels like half a good horror movie. Well, I am a sucker for haunted house movies and this one is fairly top notch. There are a few cheap jump scares but Wan has learned how to construct real horror tension in a scene. The clapping game leads to several solid scares and reminded me of the knocking game from The Orphanage. As a horror fan, I appreciate how well this was made.

11. Blue Jasmine- As I was writing this list, I originally had Inside Llewyn Davis here. However, the more I thought about how flawed the Blue Jasmine screenplay was (Woody has only one idea about poor people and that idea was a cliche in the 1950s plus Peter Sarsgaard makes a completely arbitrary decision just to create a crisis). Cate Blanchett carries the movie beautifully and is the saving grace of it. Even subpar Woody Allen is still better than most other movies, though. I also felt the scenes with Blanchett and Baldwin discussing their marital problems were probably straight from Woody and Mia's break up.

10. Inside Llewyn Davis- I am a huge Coen Brothers fan, ask anyone. I liked No Country For Old Men more than There Will Be Blood and that is just ridiculous. Miller's Crossing is my favorite movie of all time. So, I am especially happy to see the boys back to telling original stories instead of adaptations of previous work. I like that the story plays like a record, moving in a circle. Like the protagonist of A Simple Man, Llewyn has almost supernaturally bad luck and is surrounded by oddball characters. It is the Coens doing what they do best, but it didn't move me. When Llewyn sings, the real heart of the movie comes through when the songs come on. Speaking of, does no one in the Academy recognize the irony of nominating "Please Mr. Kennedy"?

 9. The World's End- Probably the most flat-out entertaining movie of the year for me. Loaded with funny and making some strong rebellion vs. conformity points, Edgar Wright just hits all the...er, right buttons with me. I saw lots of funny this year but these guys just operate on another level by adding real emotion and actual action. So, is the artistic achievement of Llewyn Davis? No. Is it a movie I want to watch again and again before I ever rewatch Llewyn Davis? Yes.

8. C.O.G.- Based on the story by David Sedaris, I think this cool little movie captures his voice quite well. Following a disenchanted college boy as he tries to gain life experience; COG paints a picture of someone trying to find their place in a world that is petty, greedy, jealous and self-centered. Not that the protagonist is any better. The scene with him in church (you'll know which one) was as moving to me as Daniel Day Lewis crossing the line from appeasement to genuine sorrow in front of Paul Dano's congregation in There Will Be Blood. I was really surprised and moved by this little movie.

7. Prince Avalanche- David Gordon Green steps back to small movies and gives Paul Rudd the best role of his career. He and Emile Hirsch play off of each other very well as brothers-in-law tasked with painting lines on the road through an area ravaged by recent fires. It is slow and meditative in parts but the pain of Rudd's character is palpable as the story progresses. I love this little movie and it is probably my favorite character study of the year (besides #s 1 and 2).

6. Upstream Color- Ugh, so close to being a truly incredible film. As it stands, the first two thirds of this movie are amazing to me. Shane Carruth (who wrote, directed and stars) trusts the audience to piece together what is happening by relaying most of the information you need visually. There are not any exposition dumps, just beautifully shot images leading from one scene to the next. The middle third of this movie just kills me. Two people are brought together and fall in love through forces completely beyond their control. The passion, confusion and pain involved with truly loving someone is all put up there on screen. Carruth feels the need to resolve the plot of the movie and bring closure to the storyline, which is fine, but I feel the ending detracts from the power of the rest. Still, pretty great movie.

5. Her- I almost put these two (Upstream Color and Her) in the same slot because they both use science fiction tropes to explore the nature of romantic love. Her, just in the set up and execution, moves to a place that keeps the central metaphor intact in a way Upstream Color doesn't. Joaquin Phoenix, once again, turns in great work. The Master made me see him in a completely different light and this movie continues the trend. Of course, you can't watch and not think about Spike Jonze and his divorce from Sofia Coppola. Those events had to inspire at least some of this story. If you like thinking about power dynamics and imbalances in romance, you will find something to relate to in this movie.

4. Nebraska- Alexander Payne has officially won me over. I have been on the fence about him for years but Nebraska is the type of perfectly observed comedy-drama that I love. Filled with little moments of truth (my favorite is how Will Forte's cousins immediately become aggressive and condescending upon reuniting after years), Payne has made a movie about impacts and influences. One generation messes up the next and so on until we all get stuck in our own Nebraskas. Bruce Dern gives a straight up genius performance that breaks your heart and makes it hard to like him, all at the same time. Forte and Odenkirk are inspired casting because they can convey humor with minimal effort. I just love this movie.

3. 12 Years a Slave- Well-acted, well-written and well-directed; this movie is the anti-Django. Chiwetel Ejiofor is great in this. Ever since I saw him in Serenity and Inside Man, I knew he was going places. And Steve McQueen didn't make it easy for him, surrounding him with some of the highest level actors in modern film. The only weak note is Brad Pitt, of whom I am normally enamored. Pitt plays his character as angelic and doesn't even try to fit the patois of an itinerant builder in the 1840s. Otherwise, though, great performance after great performance with Fassbender standing out as the slave master who personifies all the evils of the trade. This was brutal and manipulative and I fell for the whole thing. It was also good to see last year's MVP, Scoot McNairy, pop up in a small role. Also, this wins the Winter's Bone memorial award for "movie I could smell." Filming this must have been miserable.

2. Frances Ha- Dear God what a winning movie. Greta Gerwig absolutely dazzles as a modern counterpart to Llewyn Davis. Adrift in her 20s, she roams from roommate to roommate, making connections and destroying them while in platonic pursuit of her best friend. Baumbach is great at capturing a breezy, literate realism from his actors and this movie is no exception. I want to live in this world and know these people. Kind of a "late coming of age" drama, it hit super close to home as Gerwig finds herself realizing that not everyone gets to have their dreams come true. Just great work all around.

1. Before Midnight- I thought this would be the case before I saw it and it absolutely was everything I hoped for (and more!). At this point, I come to see Linklater films because they will present some kind of truth or exhilarating idea to me. The Before series, in particular, feels like revisiting old friends. About five years ahead of me but emotionally right on track, I have fallen in love with Jesse and Celine. Their idealism in the first movie, their chemistry in the second and now their reality in this one are all of a piece. Each movie ends on a sort of cliffhanger that the audience can interpret however they want and this one is no exception. Their fights are raw and complicated and perfect. Their conversations with friends are exactly right in the casual revelation of intimate details and the exchange of ideas that can only happen with maturity. I love these movies and I cannot wait to see Boyhood this year.

The Fortress abandoned

I haven't written here in awhile. Writing here was taking away from time I could be writing my novel in November. Now that the novel is done (first draft, anyway), I want to write at least one more soul-bearing entry here.

Anyone who has spoken to me about weighty issues knows I have struggled with the idea of the God-shaped hole for years. This is the idea that we all have an emptiness inside ourselves that can only be filled by God. People fill it with drugs, alcohol, over eating, etc. Well, for various reasons, God doesn't fit in the God-shaped hole so I have been struggling with just what it will take for me to be happy with myself.

Lately, I have come to the conclusion that I have too much love. When I focus it on one woman, it is just suffocating, stifling and unpleasant for her. And I'm not talking about sex here, I mean emotional attention, full blast. I've started volunteering more and trying to let my friends know more how much I love and care for them. This helps alleviate the excess love I have built up. Once I get my body to a place I am happy with, I think I will finally be able to think about dating again. I think I am finally in a place to offer strong, solid support without being needy and desperate.

The other thing I am focusing on is presence. This sounds totally cheese ball but it works for me. The past got me to where I am right now, which is pretty content. So, I try to take a moment each day and gratefully acknowledge all the good and bad things that led me here. The hard part is letting go of the future. I live there most of the time.

I hate bad surprises. I mean, more than most. I can anticipate most of the ways things can go wrong and be ready for them. When life throws me something I absolutely wasn't expecting, I fall to shit for a little while. This is because it is a terrible shock to me when I am reminded I'm not that smart. So, to avoid bad surprises, I dwell on possible future permutations and outcomes. I am trying to let that go. It is the hardest thing besides changing my diet that I can imagine.

I am focusing on the Buddhist ideals I read about last year, letting go of hope and fear to live in the present. I am trying to be more mindful but it is an uphill struggle. I am already thinking about certain friends of mine reading this and what their reactions will be. Giving up the future is going to be tough but, I think, the healthiest move I can make. Besides, what really matters except right now?

I hope everyone reading this finds a way to improve your life in the coming year or a way to appreciate your life if it doesn't need improvement. I don't know a single person without potential for greatness in them. Next year, I'm leaving the Fortress of Solitude and joining the world.

Spooktoberween #23 and 24 The Conjuring and The Roost

Tonight, I am looking at the latest from a not-great director and the first effort of a pretty damn good director.

James Wan burst onto the scene with Saw back in 2004. I quite liked the movie and I think it gets unfairly lumped in with the endless torture porn sequels it spawned. The original was a clever little burst of paranoia and evil. I never saw Dead Silence (Wan's "creepy puppet" movie) nor did I see Death Sentence (his break from horror and attempt at a revenge thriller). Hearing the latter two films were kind of suck, I didn't drop back in with him until Insidious. The first half of that movie has some great little scares and creepy moments that make a horror movie really work. I understand he ran short of money before the end and it does lose a lot of narrative impact once his characters start roaming around the dream world.

I had heard good things going into The Conjuring. My cousin didn't like it but he admits he went in ready to hate it. Watching it apart from all the hype, I still have to rate it as an exceptionally well made horror movie. Even though a lot of scares in the movie are the same old, same old from other haunted house movies, Wan manages to keep things feeling fresh and tense. I had my jaw clenched almost the whole time.

Apart from effective staging, the movie has a couple of other strengths: casting and structure. The film begins with the story of the Warrens, real demonologists in the 1970s. Vera Farmiga and Patrick Wilson bring the perfect mix of off-kilter likability (her) and manly stoicism (him) to work as protagonists. Set up almost like The Exorcist, we follow their lives as they debunk hauntings and teach classes while the main story simmers in a completely separate storyline. Ron Livingston (who I have loved since Office Space) and Lili Taylor (inspired casting due to her role in The Haunting) have five daughters and a dog being terrorized by an unknown force in their new farmhouse. All the adult leads are believable, likable and sympathetic. The dual structure allows the audience to grow attached to both the Warrens and the Perron family (those who are terrorized) so that the stakes are raised for all the characters once the forces of evil attack.

The corruption of childhood games can be terrifying if used well (see the knocking game from The Orphanage for a perfect example) and The Conjuring employs a great variation on Hide and Go Seek that allows the audience to know that things are going very wrong while the characters are oblivious. Once the explanations start coming out of just how many different entities they are dealing with, I marveled at how Farmiga (in particular) could keep a straight face while talking about witches pledging allegiance to the devil. The movie tries to mix up a straight up ghost story with a demonic possession (a la Paranormal Activity) and mostly succeeds. With touches of The Amityville Horror and The Exorcist, you could do much worse if you are looking for a late night scare.

As Wan seems to be gaining control of his abilities, Ti West seems to be improving as a horror filmmaker. I first saw his work with House of the Devil, the super slow burn movie about a Satanic Cult. I liked it quite a bit. He has contributed little segments to horror anthologies like the ABCs of Death and V/H/S which don't really affect my opinion of him one way or the other. Once I saw The Innkeepers, I was totally sold on his talent. One of my favorite haunted house movies of all time, it might actually surpass Session 9 as my favorite horror movie. I won't say why but it just hits all the right buttons for me.

My friend, Marcus, let me borrow West's first movie, The Roost. The running time would not qualify for a feature without the framing sequence of a late night creature feature show (a la Fright Night) that stars Tom Noonan. The frame feels like a bit of padding/an afterthought except for one intrusion into the story that could be read as a Funny Games style critique of pop violence or the filmmaker covering his ass by undoing the one bit of heartfelt emotion that slips into the movie.

To add another layer, there is a Halloween radio show being performed and listened to by all the characters as they drive around in the middle of nowhere. These radio voices usually provide some ironic commentary on the action and reminded me a little of Kevin Smith's title cards between the scenes of Clerks. These little loving homages to horrors of the past are delightful but also the only bits of the movie that worked for me.

The main meat of the story felt like a nearly impossible slog (I had to keep stopping it tonight to get all the way through and it is only 81 minutes) as four unlikable, completely undefined characters wreck their car and then wander into a farm filled with rabid bats that turn people into zombies or something. There is an implication that this may be a doomsday scenario. Unfortunately, I did not care what happened to any of these people and their agonizingly slow decision making felt like a time filler rather than anything useful or character building. When things don't happen in House of the Devil or The Innkeepers, it is usually to ratchet up the suspense or get us inside the mindset of people who are truly frightened beyond belief. Here, it just seems as if any action taken would resolve the conflicts too quickly.

I would say this is for Ti West completists only. A lot of the criticisms that were unfairly levied against his later work would be totally legit if used against this. The amazing choices of Tom Noonan just serve to underscore how little any one else is doing in this flick. Thank goodness West and Wan have both gotten better.

Spooktoberfest #s 20, 21 and 22: The Mummy, Gravity and The Chair

From the sublime to the ridiculous, I've ingested three more horror movies.

I have to admit that I am a closet fan of the Mummy remake from the 90s with Brendan Fraser. It was one of the few post-Indiana Jones movies that actually recaptured a little bit of that same fun (I would argue that the first Pirates of the Caribbean movie was also pretty snazzy in that regard). Adventure movies are hard to come by. It was, by no means, a horror movie.

Sitting down to watch the original Mummy from 1932 with Boris Karloff for the first time, I was shocked by how much of the basic plot was identical in the 1999 remake. Besides adding in a bunch of chases and special effects, the story is that of Imhotep, a priest buried alive for the crime of loving the daughter of the Pharaoh. He wakes up in the 1930s and seeks out both the soul and the body of his lost love. There is a hero and a female protagonist who happens to have the soul of Imhotep's love. There are a couple of supporting players who don't make it all the way through the movie. Whereas the remake parlays every plot development into an action set piece, the original is truly a horror movie (laced with tragedy). Karloff is great at portraying the yearning desire of Imhotep. "No man has suffered for a woman as I have suffered for you," he says with the weight of 3000 years behind his words...and you believe him. He can't vomit sandstorms or control flesh eating scarabs but Karloff has the power of dark arts and ancient curses on his side. At a little over an hour, this movie moves quickly and never really slows down. I would recommend it to horror fans who don't need gore or special effects.

Gravity, on the other hand, is nothing but special effects...and it is pretty breathtaking. I know, you are asking how this is horror. If movies like Frozen (three kids stuck on a chair lift) and Open Water (a couple stranded in the middle of the ocean) count as horror, I don't see why Gravity wouldn't. Two astronauts find themselves with no obvious way home after a satellite is destroyed, creating a chain reaction of debris that is whipping around the Earth at 20,000 miles per hour. Like the sharks in Open Water or the Wolves in Frozen, the debris field is a recurring threat that you dread to see coming.

Clooney gets the better role as the experienced astronaut on his last mission. He knows how to handle pretty much anything and can size up a situation very quickly. He is also charming because...Clooney. Bullock has the thankless task of being the newb on her first mission having to deal with seemingly insurmountable obstacles between her and a return to Earth. I have read some reviews that say Bullock can't really carry all the emotional weight that is placed on her in the movie but I think her acting is fine. The dialogue is so damn cheesy at times that there is no way to deliver it where you come off sounding believable.

The person I saw it with wasn't really that impressed but I enjoyed the movie, overall. I was clenching my jaws the entire film. As the pair leap frog from one ruined vessel to another, their chances of missing a handhold and just drifting off into the void get higher and higher. The central metaphor of the movie is also one I am very in tuned with right now. When you are adrift and things seem hopeless, how do you go on? I thought the movie had some decent things to say about this but this is one of those rare times I wanted a little more ambiguity. There are several moments in the final sequence where the film could have just cut to black. Yes, the mainstream audience would have been angry but I think the point of the movie would have been better made. Regardless, Cuaron has crafted a cool thrill ride with some horrible dialogue. I saw this in 3-D Imax and that was totally worth it.

Finally, I watched a video a co-worker let me borrow called "The Chair." It is a low budget horror movie from 2006. Directed by the editor of Ginger Snaps (and the director of Ginger Snaps 2), I have to admit this had a decent enough premise. A girl moves into a sublet old house to work on her Psychology thesis. She has had mental issues in the past. She starts being pretty aggressively haunted and then possessed by a convoluted back story. The execution is somewhat...ok, very...lacking. The acting is subpar, the script goes into at least one completely unneeded twist (did her professor's identity even matter?), the titular chair makes no sense and the decisions made by everyone in the last ten minutes are just really stupid. The guy I borrowed this from likes to pick apart horror movies and tell how he would do them differently. I can't imagine how he likes this movie. So, yeah, not really worth watching but I could totally see a competent remake of this.