And while I admire the “shut the hell up” attitude of the fan, I can’t help thinking how sad is his life if this is his idea of a good time.  Plus I would’ve been more impressed if he had not only sat through the movie but maintained a steady stream of lapdances from hot strippers the entire time.  I mean, if you’re gonna fly in the face of the director’s boasts, really FLY!  “Who’s scared baby, I ain’t scared baby . . . who’s the naughty girl not scared with me?  That’s right, who’s the naughty girl not scared with me??”

Ok, that was a bit disturbing.  If you wanna read the brief article, you can find it HERE

That’s ok, from what I’ve read, the samples were too sugary for my tastes anyhow. I would’ve expected something like steak sauce with tomato juice in it, or cherry vodka maybe.

Ah well, I’m still intrigued by the series as it’s directed by former “Six Feet Under” creator Alan Ball, based on the successful series of books by Charlaine Harris. HBO has a good track record with series for the most part, so I’ll be DVR’ing the show right off the bat (no pun).

Ok, off to see Ratt/Great White tonight.  Review to follow. . . .

As for the trailer, the movie looks like ‘Cloverfield of the Dead’ but hey, maybe it’ll still be good. Dunno. But you know me, if it’s got zombies it can’t be all that bad!

Granted, one must approach anything with this irreverent of a title with a certain attitude; an expectation of tastelessness, of gore & nudity, and probably plot holes the size of New Jersey. Check, check & check. But it’s also got decent FX, a storyline that goes in a different direction than is typical for such fare, and heck - even the acting is tolerable. Yes, EVEN JENNA - who’s zombified Barbie walk cracked me up every time I saw it. Just goes to show that the girl can take a joke - or perhaps tell one.

Our story revolves around the standard apocalyptic virus infestation. This time it’s an underground strip club run by Ian (Robert Englund), specifically his bevy of dancers (including Jameson & singer Roxy Saint [Pictured]) who begin to dine on patrons in between sets of hyperactive, mortified sultriness on stage. Due to the . . .ahem, illegal nature of his establishment (as well as the newfound profitability of the undead talent), Ian decides to just ‘clean up’ after the girls each night and ride this wave out. That’ll end well, right?

Jameson plays Kat, the veteran star dancer of the club, as well as the first to be gnawed on by a rabidly contagious defector from a secret military squad who’d been cleaning up experiments gone awry just down the street. The newly dead Kat becomes so popular with the club regulars that one by one her co-dancers join her - usually by choice, so as to share in the spoils.

Implausible - yes. Derivative of every other zombie film - not so much. In fact, writer/director Jay Lee should be applauded for avoiding the traditional & instead finding an amusing twist to a well told tale. While clearly not dealing with a mammoth budget, he does keep the theme in line with what EVERY fanboy is expecting yet still infusing some political & social commentary along the line for good measure.

Unfortunately, the stereotyping of many characters - especially the Mexican janitor - detracts from the more responsible subtexts within the film and is probably my biggest complaint with it’s execution. That aside, I did enjoy the show and recommend it to anyone intrigued (and not offended) by it’s title.

The movie is shot from a first person perspective, made to look like ‘found’ footage at the ruins of former Central Park in NY.  As such, following ‘The Blair Witch Project” before it, the film utilizes handheld camera work looking as if it was shot by seizing epileptics to relay the tale of a small group of twenty-somethings who’s farewell party for a friend is interrupted by a meteor storm and a big, mean ole’ monster shortly thereafter.  Life-like and tense, you follow the troop throughout Manhatten as they attempt to escape the city, avoid the nasties and rescue one of their own.

This film could’ve been more aptly titled ’Cloverpuke’ as it made all 3 of us sick to our stomachs with the wildly swinging camera angles and bumpy head shots.  Other than that, it was well paced, featured a twisting storyline and was reasonably believable.  If you can get over two initial premises; the big monster and that someone in fear for their life would still hold it together enough to video the entire affair.  Or would even want to try.

The blatant parallels to September 11th don’t seem preachy or particularly politically charged - compared to similar films like “28 Weeks Later”.  I think director Matt Reeves (”Felicity”) & writer Drew Goddard (”Lost”) were more interested in capturing the horror of the city on that tragic day than pointing blame.  The acting is well done, the scenes were carefully laid out and the whole back story on the group of friends avoids cliche while managing to make even the more unlikable characters sympathetic.  Thus you care what happens to them and as they’re placed into danger, you react accordingly.

Above all, it definitely was entertaining although I would shy away from the ‘greatest movie ever’ type comments that permeate IMDB’s listing.   To me, it’s probably not a ‘classic’.  Classic’s are films like ‘Gone With the Wind’, which has a significantly shorter list of people who’ve ever puked while watching it.

The story surrounds Dr. Robert Neville, a somehow immune survivor of a man-made virus that has wiped out 90% of the earth’s population in the year 2009.  Of those that remain, 9/10’s have evolved into flesh-eating vampires who of course quickly finished off almost everyone else.  Except Neville, who’s held up for 3 years in Manhattan with his dog Sam, scavaging the city by day and hiding for dear life by night.

The story is based on a novel written by master storyteller Richard Matheson, which has been adapted to the screen twice before;  Once with Vincent Price in ‘Last Man on Earth’ (1964) and again with Charlton Heston in ‘The Omega Man’ (1971).  This version offers excellent pacing, fine character performances, some wonderful James Newton Howard scoring (as always) & magnificent shots of the ruined and desolate NYC streets. It successfully avoids pitfalls of it’s ancestors, the cliche’s in Price’s version, and the rather disappointing second halfs of each of the earlier films.   Smith makes the character at once an agile survivalist, yet sentimental & lonely; half-crazy yet sly as a fox.  And all the while tormented by guilt over what has happened in the past but using it as fuel to work for a better future.

Director Francis Lawrence, whose previous experience consists mainly of music videos and the film ‘Constantine’ (2005), does an excellent job of avoiding the ‘tried & true’ Hollywood method of horror movies, creating characters we care about in a setting full of dread and deep foreboding.   There’s no slo-mo Matrix-y shots, no comedic one-liners, no gallons of blood thrown about via comicbook pugilistics.  

And like Omega Man before it, Lawrence’s version shares some of the religious and philosophical overtones of it’s predecessor, but doesn’t wallow in them.  The presence of sound struck me as being put to effective use, not so much to intrude on the story but to actually enhance it.  When you first ‘hear’ the creatures, for example. 

Which brings me to tension - of which there is plenty.  I watched this with a sold-out crowd - heard minimal audience murmurings,  saw scant souls running out for a bathroom break.  In fact, after a few heartstopping moments, a collective sigh could be heard all across the room - when the end credits rolled, gracious applause.  It reminded me of the ‘old’ days of horror - when John Carpenter’s Halloween could elicit screams out of the audience and send weaker hearts running for the exits.  I did find the creatures themselves to be somewhat of a let down - The CGI lacking in realism and any geniune creepiness, but with such a well orchestrated storyline and capable cast, this is a small complaint.

I’m sure others will disagree but it’s satisfying for me to see mainstream cinema produce something reasonably original, based on quality content and utilizing artisans who take their craft more seriously than their paychecks.  Or at least equal to them.

I do recommend this film, it’s PG-13 rating well deserved for scare tactics, but not blood or sexuality of any sort.  

Rating: 5/5 Skulls

In our story, Barrow Alaska is getting ready for it’s annual winter month of total darkness, which lasts - ta dah - 30 days.   Unbeknownst to the town folks, this makes them a happy hunting ground for a large band of roving vampires who look at a month of sunless days as an extended vacation, with an all-you-can-eat buffet provided.

The local sheriff (Josh Hartnett), his estranged wife (Melissa George) and a handful of other townsfolk must try to survive Vampfest 2007 until the rising dawn weakens the undead and forces them into hibernation.  Or at least keeps them from killing everything in sight.

Directed by David Slade in a manner remnicent of films like ”28 Days Later” i.e. loud booms evoking a jump from the audience and monster attacks being filmed in a shaky, blurred hallucination of editing, the film still manages to be stylish and tense while avoiding many common pitfalls of the genre in recent years.  That means there are no quippy one liners, no “Matrix”-style fight scenes - in fact little of the over-the-top comicbook stagings that permeate cable or your local video store - and the characters act for the most part in a believable fashion considering their circumstances.  Not bad for a movie adapted from a graphic novel, eh?

Nitpickers will have plenty to dissect here however, as logic does take a backseat in several instances.  For example, after a breathtaking aerial shot looks down on block after block of carnage and humans being easily butchered by the vampfolk, the story then treats us to DAYS of survivors hiding in attics or empty general stores, and no vamps can seem to find them? In fact, the Vamps disappear a lot for a group who aren’t hindered by daylight - what, does this town have a nosferatu-friendly Happy Hour as well?

And as for the creatures of the night, the pre-release buzz was this film would ‘redefine’ the vampire archetype.  Well, I dunno about ‘redefine’ but they’re more like nosfer-zombies, with strange fox-like beady eyes, quirky (almost reptilian) body movements and a downright bizarre & guttural screech.   But they are mean as hell, so they DO have that going for them.

Still, despite the irregularities, this is a fun watch boosted with great performances by Ben Foster (as the dental hygiene impaired “Stranger”) and Danny Huston as the lead vamp, which helps to raise the level of creepiness without sacrificing believability or an underlying sense of danger.

Is it scary - not so much as tense (and bloody).  Is it good - definitely.

My Rating: 8 Skulls out of 10.

This version of Halloween attempts to give far more background into the Myer family at the beginning, yet ultimately explains very little as to what finally makes Michael snap.  And like many of the sequels that later followed in the original film series, Michael Myers’ transformation into a robotic killing machine has no real logical progression leading up to this powerful embodiment, which is unsatisfying as it seemed to be what our story was trying to accomplish.  I did however, like the further exploration into the relationships between Michael and his mother (Zombie’s real-life wife Sheri Moon Zombie), his shrink (Malcolm Mcdowell venturing boldly into Van Helsing territory) and Michael and his younger sister Laurie (Scout Taylor-Compton).

Zombie is an excellent director and clearly did his homework as many scenes are almost shot for shot from the original, but both the opening background story as well as the film’s conclusion are different and risk evoking the wrath of purists.  But let’s face it, this was basically an attempt at rewriting the ‘bible’ and it carried it’s share of risks for any director. 

Which leads me to believe this was a labor of love for Mr. Zombie.  His attention to detail and creative use of the camera supports this notion as does his penchant for filling smaller roles with familiar faces from camp classics of the past (Dee Wallace, Brad Dourif, William Forsythe, Udo Kier, Richard Lynch, Clint Howard & Bill Moseley to name but a few). Yes, there’s lots of hidden trivialities to keep the horrorhound guessing and plenty of blood too!

And that point bears repeating - that Zombie clearly made this film for fans of the original and horror films in general.  As such, it’s more gruesome and far more violent than what may be expected, which to me enhanced the sense of dread since you knew what this madman was capable of doing (Michael, not Zombie).  There are also some geniunely creepy moments and a good cat-and-mouse sequence near the end that got more than one squeal out of the audience where I attended.

All in all, this probably isn’t Rob Zombie’s magnum opus as I think he’d fare better with his own wacked out storyline as a launching pad (such as he had with House of 1000 Corpses) but it’s a laudable effort tackling the gargantuan task of re-inventing a classic.

I give it 7 out of 10 skulls.

Despite plot loopholes and pacing issues, I found this to be entertaining and a little spooky. Excellent music scoring enhances great sets and mediocre acting to tell a somewhat confusing albeit intriguing tale of revenge. Think of this as the flipside of ‘Toy Story’!

Rating: 7 out of 10 Skulls