So I'm browsing my TV listings tonight and I realize there's nothing good to watch. A bit tired of gaming all day long, I decided to check netflix and see what they had. I'm scrolling down through the categories... Thrillers... nothing good that I don't already have in my queue... TV series... blech... Documentaries... Why the hell is there a documentary category on MY front page? I never watch the damn things... and I come across a listing for A Force of One.
A Force of One? That old chuck norris movie, you ask? Yes, that's the one. Haven't seen it in ages. So I'm chowing down on my steak and peppers, onions and shrooms (god i love shrooms, and not the hallucinogenic kind, either), and I start watching it. It doesn't take long for me to realize... this is a CHRISTMAS MOVIE! :-o
It's true. I admit it's a rare thing, a martial arts / christmas movie, but there it is. In fact, I think it's so rare that I have never before seen or heard of such a thing. And this movie isn't even that bad. One of chuck norris' better performances, by all accounts. And an actual martial arts movie, too, not an action / christmas movie, like Die Hard. What? Die Hard was a christmas movie? Of course it was. John McClane heads out to California to be at his wife's office christmas party? Yea, now you remember. Anyway, that was action/christmas, most definitely, and there WAS fighting, but the action was the focus, not the martial arts.
So I'm watching Chuck, and I remember the high point of his martial arts career was around 1969 or 1970 or so (the year i was born... yes, chuck is THAT old), and in between all the action, I'm watching the christmas decorations. Literally every scene is SPLATTERED with christmas decorations. The police station, people's homes, random shops, restaurants, there's even a bunch of christmas carolers singing on the street at one point! And I LOVE christmas, so to get a martial arts movie AND christmas all at once, is just CRAZY! I should watch this every year! :-D
Yea, i know, Chuck Norris doesn't always scream HAPPY HANUKKAH or anything, but hey, I'll take my christmas cheer where I can get it! I think this is pretty much Chuck's trio of good acting, I mean, he had his Braddock series, and I actually thought that one where he fought the demonic entity out in the desert was pretty good (can't remember the name of it... Hellbound, that was it, thanks IMDB) but there was mainly A Force of One, Silent Rage and probably the Octagon as far a all that goes. But this is quite possibly he only christmas movie that Chuck norris has ever done. lol
It's actually surprising how long christmas time lasts in this movie. I mean I don't know exactly when it was set or anything as no actual dates are even mentioned in the film, but there's a few killings and some police work and some martial arts training stuff and then some more killings and more police work and then more martial arts and then more killings and more police work and then martial arts finale, and through the WHOLE time there's decorations EVERYWHERE. They're just walking along the street and every house is decorated! Oh that explains it. According to IMDB.com, they hired Clark Griswold as scenery director (I totally just made that up). So either all this martial arts killings stuff happened in a very short span of days, OR the christmas season lasted even LONGER back in the 80's, which I find hard to believe. I started seeing commercials for xmas shit back in october this year, believe it or not. Now I can understand airing them before thanskgiving, because thanksgiving is basically just an american holiday and not a very official one at that since one of the presidents (roosevelt maybe?) just up and moved it a week earlier because he wanted more time to shop for xmas, but before HALLOWEEN? That's just pushing it.
Also, now I don't want to pick apart the movie too much but the ending was goofy. Jennifer O neill plays a policewoman, and chuck isn't even a police officer in this movie, he's just like world martial arts / mustache champion or something. And I don't want to give away the end, but the movie is 31 years old so if you really must see it for yourself and don't want it spoiled, don't read the rest of this paragraph. Chuck's about to kill the bad guy and she stops him, because as we all know, cops ruin all the fun, errr, I mean, they want to be the only ones allowed to do vengeance killings, errmm what i mean is, they don't want vigilantes running around killing people without due process (yea, that's it), so he's about to kill the baddest guy ever in the history of all bad guys (worse than snidely whiplash, even!), and she points the gun at him and stops him. Now she's practically shaking like a leaf because she almost had to shoot chuck to stop him from killing the guy (good acting on her part, i must say) and then the bad guy hops up and throws a box at chuck, which he easily destroys, and then he kills the bad guy anyway. Yea, I get that technically the bad guy was half-unconscious the first time and killing him would be murder, and the second time was technically self defense, but a box? Really? That's your excuse for killing the guy? "He threw a box at me, your honor." "But did the box hit you." "No your honor, but some fucker throws a box at me, he's got to die." "Well, yes i guess that makes sense. Case dismissed." And though she was about to shoot the shit out of him like 5 seconds earlier, the lady cop is TOTALLY OKAY with chuck killing him this time around. Yep. Doesn't even look alarmed, raise her pistol, nothing, just all smiles. Like chuck would have deserved a bullet for punching a semi-conscious guy, but once the guy throws a box, all bets are off! I'm surprised she didn't empty her gun into him at the end, screaming "THROW A BOX AT US, WILL YA? TAKE THAT MUTHAHFUCKAH BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM click click click... Goddamn box thrower! death is too good for him! (spits)"
Anyway, so by mere chance, I happened to watch a christmas movie during christmas season when i wasn't even planning to. Fun surprise! :-D
In other news, my brother is still behaving badly (and likely always will), so christmas is kind of fucked up this year. I don't want to be around him, basically because he thinks my sister and I are the root of all his problems and we should die (and yes i am pretty sure he is thinking that very thing, no exaggeration), and also because he's the only adult I've ever actually had a fistfight with, so he certainly enjoys violence with his family gatherings. Not just one occasion, either, but several fights. I mean seriously, sure, siblings squabble, it's a given, as kids they may even brawl a bit, but civilized people do not just start throwing punches at each other unless they are both professional boxers, you know what I mean? Who the hell does that anymore? I suppose that sort of christmas is more in tune with severely dysfunctional families the world over, but I have no desire to ruin what is normally a wonderful holiday for me by inviting a violent drunkard over for the holidays. Unfortunately, my mother, god bless her (it's just an expression, I don't actually believe in god), is so weirded out by the idea that one of her precious offspring could be fucked in the head, that she literally will NOT have holiday meals over at our house anymore if she can't have him here. Which, for years was a christmas tradition. Now I'm not trying to make her decide between the two of us (like my brother tried to force me to do with my sister, and i chose her instead of him), but I simply can't risk the very real possibility of multiple contusions and possibly broken bones for the holidays just because my mother wants to invite her oldest son. So, there's that awkwardness to deal with this year. I can't even talk to her about it, either, my mom is totally buttoned up on the whole issue. I mean it's one thing if she's too old or tired to do the holiday meals anymore, and she's 80, so i get that, but I offered to cook the meal myself next year (hey I have a year to learn how to cook it) and she was all like "but then your brother will have to be there, you cooking for him too?" So she nixed that idea right off. And don't ask me why she HAS to invite him to every holiday, either, but it's her house. Oh well. I guess I find somewhere else to spend my holidays after this one! Had to happen eventually. So much for mom's apple pie. Somehow she still managed to invite him over to our house on xmas to get her gifts, so my xmas is pretty much fucked now because of the risk the asshole will start something. And he ALWAYS starts something, so it's not even a risk, more of a certainty. Ah now i know what people mean when they say the stress of the holidays is a real killer. At least we're having xmas dinner at my one sister's house, so i get a small reprieve while I eat, at least.
Well, to all the people out there who don't have to deal with a violent drunkard who wants them dead on their holiday family gatherings, Merry Xmas and Happy New Year if i don't post again between now and then! Hopefully everyone will have something nice to look forward to this season and this coming year. :-) Enjoy your holidays however you can, with whomever you wish! Because, come on... Life's way too short to put up with all this bullshit, isn't it?
On the plus side, the world is supposed to end in a day or two! lol Hmmm maybe I better download my xmas games early so I have time to play them before the end. lol Obviously, I don't believe any of the world's-ending predictions out there. Although there is that whole risk of a meteor actually smashing into the earth at some point, but that's as likely to happen a billion years from now as it is in the next few days, so I'm not really planning on that one just yet.
Which brings me to another point as I close out this post... Doomsday preppers. Seriously? If the WORLD ENDS, you really think stashing a few canned goods and flashlight batteries is going to help you? I mean, the only instance whereby that's going to help, is if the WORLD is still here after whatever might happen, happens. So basically what you are prepping for isn't doomsday, but an event whereby most of the humans on the surface die, but somehow, you are spared. At which point, you'll live for another week or two, then your food will run out, go bad, or you'll die of some injury or sickness that was once easily cured with a hospital visit but is now fatal because you can't go to the ER anymore. But hey! Enjoy that extra two weeks in the underground shelter while you slowly starve, suffocate or die of illness, despairing and alone the whole time since you are one of the few people who didn't die right away. Have an extra ration of creamed corn just for the hell of it! lol
Thursday, December 20, 2012
Wednesday, November 28, 2012
W. T. F. Minnesota
You ever have one of those moments where you go WHAT THE FUCK?
Yea, me too. In this case, it's about this article I read on fark.com. Here's the facts as I understand them. Two teens tried to rob a 64-year old retiree while he was in his own home on thanksgiving day. He shot them both dead. Today he got convicted of second degree murder.
Now, my initial reaction on reading the article was YES! Old guy defending his home from ROBBERS! Way ta go! Only, apparently, everyone else in the town reacted differently. maybe i'm a little weird, I admit that, but i do NOT understand the reactions of the townspeople involved here. Apparently, everyone is shocked, SHOCKED, that anyone could kill these two wonderful teens. They were so fun-loving, so full of life, they were 17 and 18, and everyone liked them. Sure, the girl had had substance abuse issues in the past, but she was trying to turn her life around and was a mentor to many girls on her swim team, but the 17 year old boy would never have turned to robbery because he had a good job at his dad's business or something. A direct quote said something to the effect that they "didn't know whether or not they were there to rob him but regardless of that they shouldn't have been killed."
So now I am confused. I look up several articles so i can get all my facts straight. Here's what I know. The guy, a retired 64 year old ex-employee of the state department, is puttering around in his basement on thanksgiving day. He's been robbed EIGHT TIMES recently, according to the guy's friend, the last time was in october, where they took $10,000 worth of guns and electronics. Apparently, the 17 year old came down the stairs first, surprising the guy, who apparently had a rifle and a pistol handy. He shot the 17 year old in the shoulder (or chest, the articles differ on this), who tumbled down the rest of the stairs, then shot him once in the head. The 18 year old girl then apparently came down the stairs shortly thereafter, possibly after the older man dragged the body over on a tarp, and he shot her as well. She fell down the stairs. He would have shot her again, but his rifle jammed. Apparently, she laughed at this. The older man drew his pistol and fired into her chest several times and then shot through the chin into her head. Apparently, he believed the authorities would be suitably busy on Thanksgiving that he didn't want to bother them, so the next day he called his neighbor to ask if they knew a good lawyer, and then either the neighbor called police or the guy called the neighbor back and asked them to call the police. The police arrive friday, the guy admits to killing them, they arrest him, he goes to jail. Sits in jail for the weekend, gets arraigned on monday, and somehow, is convicted by this morning, wednesday, two days later.
Let's just look at the timeline here for a minute. I don't think I've ever even heard of a murder trial (which this turned out to be) taking two days from start to finish. He gets arrested friday, arraigned on monday. How would they even have notified potential jurors or finished selecting the jury by tuesday to begin the trial? Don't these things usually take years, or at least a few months?
I was discussing this with my nephew this morning. He told me a few things I had not read in any of the articles. I'm not sure where he gets his information, but he said the girl was shot 16 times. Excessive, if true. He also said the guy was happy he'd killed the two, asking the police if they thought the kill shots were nice and clean. Doesn't sound like a man who is feeling guilt over doing the shootings to me. Of course, my nephew also told me his trial only lasted ten minutes, because the guy wanted it that way. I asked my nephew how an entire murder trial can be conducted in ten minutes. My nephew said "maybe small scale crimes like this are handled differently? Maybe the guy was feeling too guilty?" Well, if the man is feeling guilty and wants his trial over quickly, then that certainly doesn't sound like the guy who was gloating over the kills during the police interrogation, does it? None of the articles I read mentions her being shot 16 times, nor his gloating, nor the length of the trial, except that, somehow, they found him guilty of second degree murder in 2 days. I can see a jury taking a couple days to decide the outcome, but the WHOLE TRIAL taking two days is unheard of, let alone ten minutes, which is absolutely outrageous. And small scale? A second degree murder conviction with national media attention is small scale??
My nephew was originally on the side of the teens. How dare an old guy shoot these two wonderful people with so much to live for. How could he shoot them, instead of getting an alarm system, or getting a dog, or just hiding and calling the police? One, it's a rural area, authorities might take a while to get there even if he had called the police. Two, he was in his basement at the time, whether he had a phone down there is questionable. Three, a dog, really? Those things poop EVERYWHERE. Four, an alarm system in a rural area might not have even made a difference. Sometimes your neighbors can be so far away they wouldn't even hear an alarm. But that's all just supposition on both our parts. My nephew had to completely rethink his position by the end of our discussion.
Let's look at the old guy's story. The 64 year old man filed a police report just last month totaling the ten grand worth of guns and electronics they stole from him. He's downstairs, working in his basement, according to what he told police. He hears a sound like glass breaking, and the next thing he knows there is a guy coming down his stairs. Fearing for his life and thinking they were armed, he shoots him. A few minutes later, the girl comes downstairs and he shoots her too. Apparently, the girl's initial wounds are so mild that she laughs when his gun jams, so he pulls his pistol and shoots her a few more times. Perhaps a bit excessive, I admit. But second degree murder? Really?
Let's run through this. It's legal to use deadly force to defend yourself in this man's state if you think you may be in danger or to defend your home or property. I think it was minnesota. Let's check these off. The incident occurred in his home. Defending your home, check. They were there to rob him as they had done so in the past... defending your property, check. They had stolen guns from him before, so he had every reason to believe they were armed, so defending his life, check. I don't really see an issue here.
Let's reverse things a bit. Say it's an 18 year old girl in her basement. Two 64 year old men break in. She has reason to believe they have robbed her before and that they are armed. She shoots them both. One laughs at her after she shoots him once. She's only just shot him, so there's no way to tell if he's got a gun on him or not, so she shoots him several more times until he's dead. Would SHE be charged with murder? I highly doubt it.
Why is the fact that these two were teens such an issue, that the old guy should never have cut their lives short? They've convicted 12 year olds of murder and rape before. Obviously, at least to me, these two teens were career criminals who'd robbed from multiple people multiple times. One at least was a drug addict, who stole not only from strangers but friends as well. My nephew said these were "teenage mistakes," but how do you make the same mistake of walking into another person's home and stealing their stuff 10 to 12 times? Now, who was the old man? An ex employee of the state department. Apparently never had a problem with the law before in his entire life of 64 years. Puttering around in his home on thanksgiving day because he doesn't have family close enough to spend the holiday with. A couple robbers break in and he shoots them. If these two had been anyone but a couple teens, the guy would be back in his home right now, puttering around in his basement.
Now I know, you've got questions. Why did the guy not call the police right away? Why did he shoot them so many times? Well, here's how I look at it. The guy's in his basement. It's thanksgiving. Two people break in to rob and possibly kill him. This is already an old person's worst nightmare. I'm sure he was rattled. He manages to shoot one of them, and puts another bullet in him to make sure he's dead, because he's an old man and the gun is his only defense. There's no way he can fight off two healthy intruders. Now, let's pause a moment here. Let's say you are the girl, upstairs, on the ground floor, and you hear two gunshots. Do you then go downstairs to find out what the noise was? This was a rifle, not a pistol. These were LOUD RIFLE SHOTS. No, you don't wander downstairs to see if your cousin is okay. You RUN FOR YOUR LIFE. Whether you go to the police or not is questionable, since you are there to rob the guy in the first place, but you almost certainly run if you are of sound mind. My bet is, she was already high. Now let's go back to the old guy. I am pretty sure if I was in the old guy's place, I'd be wondering why the other intruder hadn't bolted at the first sound of gunfire. So he's in his basement, he's just killed an intruder in his home, who he is almost positive was there to rob and possibly kill him with guns he'd already stolen from him. He's shaken, doesn't know what to do next. The phone is upstairs, so he can't call police. The second intruder, instead of running, comes downstairs after him as well. He puts a bullet in her leg as she's coming down the stairs, before she can aim and shoot at him for killing her friend. Keep in mind, this is the first time he's seen her. Up to the instant he puts a bullet in her, the intruders could have been anyone from Ted Bundy to Mike Tyson to Rambo. Up til she falls down the stairs, he probably doesn't even know it's a she. So she falls down the stairs, and the gun jams before he can finish her off. He's scared, angry, he's just killed one of the intruders, and the other is laughing at him, possibly still armed. Frankly, I'd have put a few bullets in her myself. I don't really know any sane people that laugh when they get shot. I'd have assumed she was laughing because she was nuts, about to shoot ME, or as was probably the case here, high as a kite. So. Now you're the only survivor of a gunfight in your basement. You've killed two teenagers. You check the bodies and realize they are unarmed. You're already in a panic because you just had a gunfight, the first time in your life you've ever had this sort of excitement, and you're 64 years old. What do you do now?
I admit, the old guy handled it badly. But he had every reason to believe they were armed and dangerous felons who had previously robbed him. I am sure that they were actually unarmed teens had never even occurred to him. The mere fact that he'd been robbed 8 times previously would have me pissed off. Who the hell robs an old man EIGHT TIMES in his own home? I could never in a million years convict this guy of murder if I was on his jury. Murder, to me, involves planning and preparation. I didn't think you could be convicted of murder without that part. I guess I was wrong, since these two teens surprised him in his basement, ended up dead and somehow he got convicted of second degree murder. Which again begs the question, how do you get arraigned, tried and convicted of second degree murder in less than 48 hours?
Everything about this case screams WTF to me. Sure, he didn't report the killings right away, on thanksgiving day. Sure he panicked. But he didn't try to hide the bodies. He admitted right away that he shot and killed the robbers when the police showed up. How this man is guilty of murder is amazing to me. How he was arrested, arraigned, tried and convicted in 3 business days is totally unbelievable to me. I doubt even jury selection would have taken less than a week for such a trial. So that leaves a deal arranged by the prosecution to convict a guy amid public outcry for killing "these two wonderful teens." Oh yea, while they were trying to rob him. Come on minnesota. I think instead of saying "whether or not they were there to rob him is irrelevant." and instead say "How many times he shot them is irrelevant." If they hadn't entered his home to rob him, AGAIN, they'd never have been injured in any way. So instead of being with their family on thanksgiving day, these TWO WONDERFUL TEENS of which you speak are out robbing old people. It would have happened eventually, whether they were 18 or 38, if they had gone on robbing people's homes and feeding their drug-fueled binges. Everyone was outraged because he had cut their lives short, but nobody has mentioned how he cut their life of CRIME short. Drug addicted career criminals going around robbing people's houses on thanksgiving day! I mean come on! I'm surprised the guy was even held over the weekend. I think as time wears on, this older guy will get exonerated and released. At least, he should if people come to their senses and really LOOK at the facts of the case.
But what do I know? I guess Minnesota is different, and in that state, the guy is a vicious killer. Remind me never to move there.
Yea, me too. In this case, it's about this article I read on fark.com. Here's the facts as I understand them. Two teens tried to rob a 64-year old retiree while he was in his own home on thanksgiving day. He shot them both dead. Today he got convicted of second degree murder.
Now, my initial reaction on reading the article was YES! Old guy defending his home from ROBBERS! Way ta go! Only, apparently, everyone else in the town reacted differently. maybe i'm a little weird, I admit that, but i do NOT understand the reactions of the townspeople involved here. Apparently, everyone is shocked, SHOCKED, that anyone could kill these two wonderful teens. They were so fun-loving, so full of life, they were 17 and 18, and everyone liked them. Sure, the girl had had substance abuse issues in the past, but she was trying to turn her life around and was a mentor to many girls on her swim team, but the 17 year old boy would never have turned to robbery because he had a good job at his dad's business or something. A direct quote said something to the effect that they "didn't know whether or not they were there to rob him but regardless of that they shouldn't have been killed."
So now I am confused. I look up several articles so i can get all my facts straight. Here's what I know. The guy, a retired 64 year old ex-employee of the state department, is puttering around in his basement on thanksgiving day. He's been robbed EIGHT TIMES recently, according to the guy's friend, the last time was in october, where they took $10,000 worth of guns and electronics. Apparently, the 17 year old came down the stairs first, surprising the guy, who apparently had a rifle and a pistol handy. He shot the 17 year old in the shoulder (or chest, the articles differ on this), who tumbled down the rest of the stairs, then shot him once in the head. The 18 year old girl then apparently came down the stairs shortly thereafter, possibly after the older man dragged the body over on a tarp, and he shot her as well. She fell down the stairs. He would have shot her again, but his rifle jammed. Apparently, she laughed at this. The older man drew his pistol and fired into her chest several times and then shot through the chin into her head. Apparently, he believed the authorities would be suitably busy on Thanksgiving that he didn't want to bother them, so the next day he called his neighbor to ask if they knew a good lawyer, and then either the neighbor called police or the guy called the neighbor back and asked them to call the police. The police arrive friday, the guy admits to killing them, they arrest him, he goes to jail. Sits in jail for the weekend, gets arraigned on monday, and somehow, is convicted by this morning, wednesday, two days later.
Let's just look at the timeline here for a minute. I don't think I've ever even heard of a murder trial (which this turned out to be) taking two days from start to finish. He gets arrested friday, arraigned on monday. How would they even have notified potential jurors or finished selecting the jury by tuesday to begin the trial? Don't these things usually take years, or at least a few months?
I was discussing this with my nephew this morning. He told me a few things I had not read in any of the articles. I'm not sure where he gets his information, but he said the girl was shot 16 times. Excessive, if true. He also said the guy was happy he'd killed the two, asking the police if they thought the kill shots were nice and clean. Doesn't sound like a man who is feeling guilt over doing the shootings to me. Of course, my nephew also told me his trial only lasted ten minutes, because the guy wanted it that way. I asked my nephew how an entire murder trial can be conducted in ten minutes. My nephew said "maybe small scale crimes like this are handled differently? Maybe the guy was feeling too guilty?" Well, if the man is feeling guilty and wants his trial over quickly, then that certainly doesn't sound like the guy who was gloating over the kills during the police interrogation, does it? None of the articles I read mentions her being shot 16 times, nor his gloating, nor the length of the trial, except that, somehow, they found him guilty of second degree murder in 2 days. I can see a jury taking a couple days to decide the outcome, but the WHOLE TRIAL taking two days is unheard of, let alone ten minutes, which is absolutely outrageous. And small scale? A second degree murder conviction with national media attention is small scale??
My nephew was originally on the side of the teens. How dare an old guy shoot these two wonderful people with so much to live for. How could he shoot them, instead of getting an alarm system, or getting a dog, or just hiding and calling the police? One, it's a rural area, authorities might take a while to get there even if he had called the police. Two, he was in his basement at the time, whether he had a phone down there is questionable. Three, a dog, really? Those things poop EVERYWHERE. Four, an alarm system in a rural area might not have even made a difference. Sometimes your neighbors can be so far away they wouldn't even hear an alarm. But that's all just supposition on both our parts. My nephew had to completely rethink his position by the end of our discussion.
Let's look at the old guy's story. The 64 year old man filed a police report just last month totaling the ten grand worth of guns and electronics they stole from him. He's downstairs, working in his basement, according to what he told police. He hears a sound like glass breaking, and the next thing he knows there is a guy coming down his stairs. Fearing for his life and thinking they were armed, he shoots him. A few minutes later, the girl comes downstairs and he shoots her too. Apparently, the girl's initial wounds are so mild that she laughs when his gun jams, so he pulls his pistol and shoots her a few more times. Perhaps a bit excessive, I admit. But second degree murder? Really?
Let's run through this. It's legal to use deadly force to defend yourself in this man's state if you think you may be in danger or to defend your home or property. I think it was minnesota. Let's check these off. The incident occurred in his home. Defending your home, check. They were there to rob him as they had done so in the past... defending your property, check. They had stolen guns from him before, so he had every reason to believe they were armed, so defending his life, check. I don't really see an issue here.
Let's reverse things a bit. Say it's an 18 year old girl in her basement. Two 64 year old men break in. She has reason to believe they have robbed her before and that they are armed. She shoots them both. One laughs at her after she shoots him once. She's only just shot him, so there's no way to tell if he's got a gun on him or not, so she shoots him several more times until he's dead. Would SHE be charged with murder? I highly doubt it.
Why is the fact that these two were teens such an issue, that the old guy should never have cut their lives short? They've convicted 12 year olds of murder and rape before. Obviously, at least to me, these two teens were career criminals who'd robbed from multiple people multiple times. One at least was a drug addict, who stole not only from strangers but friends as well. My nephew said these were "teenage mistakes," but how do you make the same mistake of walking into another person's home and stealing their stuff 10 to 12 times? Now, who was the old man? An ex employee of the state department. Apparently never had a problem with the law before in his entire life of 64 years. Puttering around in his home on thanksgiving day because he doesn't have family close enough to spend the holiday with. A couple robbers break in and he shoots them. If these two had been anyone but a couple teens, the guy would be back in his home right now, puttering around in his basement.
Now I know, you've got questions. Why did the guy not call the police right away? Why did he shoot them so many times? Well, here's how I look at it. The guy's in his basement. It's thanksgiving. Two people break in to rob and possibly kill him. This is already an old person's worst nightmare. I'm sure he was rattled. He manages to shoot one of them, and puts another bullet in him to make sure he's dead, because he's an old man and the gun is his only defense. There's no way he can fight off two healthy intruders. Now, let's pause a moment here. Let's say you are the girl, upstairs, on the ground floor, and you hear two gunshots. Do you then go downstairs to find out what the noise was? This was a rifle, not a pistol. These were LOUD RIFLE SHOTS. No, you don't wander downstairs to see if your cousin is okay. You RUN FOR YOUR LIFE. Whether you go to the police or not is questionable, since you are there to rob the guy in the first place, but you almost certainly run if you are of sound mind. My bet is, she was already high. Now let's go back to the old guy. I am pretty sure if I was in the old guy's place, I'd be wondering why the other intruder hadn't bolted at the first sound of gunfire. So he's in his basement, he's just killed an intruder in his home, who he is almost positive was there to rob and possibly kill him with guns he'd already stolen from him. He's shaken, doesn't know what to do next. The phone is upstairs, so he can't call police. The second intruder, instead of running, comes downstairs after him as well. He puts a bullet in her leg as she's coming down the stairs, before she can aim and shoot at him for killing her friend. Keep in mind, this is the first time he's seen her. Up to the instant he puts a bullet in her, the intruders could have been anyone from Ted Bundy to Mike Tyson to Rambo. Up til she falls down the stairs, he probably doesn't even know it's a she. So she falls down the stairs, and the gun jams before he can finish her off. He's scared, angry, he's just killed one of the intruders, and the other is laughing at him, possibly still armed. Frankly, I'd have put a few bullets in her myself. I don't really know any sane people that laugh when they get shot. I'd have assumed she was laughing because she was nuts, about to shoot ME, or as was probably the case here, high as a kite. So. Now you're the only survivor of a gunfight in your basement. You've killed two teenagers. You check the bodies and realize they are unarmed. You're already in a panic because you just had a gunfight, the first time in your life you've ever had this sort of excitement, and you're 64 years old. What do you do now?
I admit, the old guy handled it badly. But he had every reason to believe they were armed and dangerous felons who had previously robbed him. I am sure that they were actually unarmed teens had never even occurred to him. The mere fact that he'd been robbed 8 times previously would have me pissed off. Who the hell robs an old man EIGHT TIMES in his own home? I could never in a million years convict this guy of murder if I was on his jury. Murder, to me, involves planning and preparation. I didn't think you could be convicted of murder without that part. I guess I was wrong, since these two teens surprised him in his basement, ended up dead and somehow he got convicted of second degree murder. Which again begs the question, how do you get arraigned, tried and convicted of second degree murder in less than 48 hours?
Everything about this case screams WTF to me. Sure, he didn't report the killings right away, on thanksgiving day. Sure he panicked. But he didn't try to hide the bodies. He admitted right away that he shot and killed the robbers when the police showed up. How this man is guilty of murder is amazing to me. How he was arrested, arraigned, tried and convicted in 3 business days is totally unbelievable to me. I doubt even jury selection would have taken less than a week for such a trial. So that leaves a deal arranged by the prosecution to convict a guy amid public outcry for killing "these two wonderful teens." Oh yea, while they were trying to rob him. Come on minnesota. I think instead of saying "whether or not they were there to rob him is irrelevant." and instead say "How many times he shot them is irrelevant." If they hadn't entered his home to rob him, AGAIN, they'd never have been injured in any way. So instead of being with their family on thanksgiving day, these TWO WONDERFUL TEENS of which you speak are out robbing old people. It would have happened eventually, whether they were 18 or 38, if they had gone on robbing people's homes and feeding their drug-fueled binges. Everyone was outraged because he had cut their lives short, but nobody has mentioned how he cut their life of CRIME short. Drug addicted career criminals going around robbing people's houses on thanksgiving day! I mean come on! I'm surprised the guy was even held over the weekend. I think as time wears on, this older guy will get exonerated and released. At least, he should if people come to their senses and really LOOK at the facts of the case.
But what do I know? I guess Minnesota is different, and in that state, the guy is a vicious killer. Remind me never to move there.
Friday, November 23, 2012
Giving Thanks...
So here it is, Thanksgiving again.
I make it a habit to be thankful for the things i have. Like, wisdom. My good health, such as it is, in between bouts of cold and flu season. A roof over my head. Some little bit of money in my pocket. That my eyesight may not be great but i at least I am not as blind as some people with better vision.
I am thankful the elections are over. Despite what was won or lost this election, politics is always going to be about who is the better liar, until it becomes a contest to see who can live up to their campaign promises, which it should ideally be. If even half of what they said, they tried to do, the world would be a better place. Because seriously, who votes for someone who promises to do bad things and then lives up to that promise?
I am thankful it's the holiday season. Good food abounds. Christmas music plays constantly on the radio. I am thankful for the simple things in life.
I am thankful I have the freedom to be annoyed by completely trivial things. Like, wtf is up with movies and people with glasses? Check out The Mummy to see what I am talking about. Not the original horror film, the adventure comedy type thing with brendan frasier that came out in the 90's. I actually love watching that movie for several reasons, one i think rachel weisz is hot, two i love egyptology and three, that movie is full of magic, undead, killer beetles, mummies and all manner of godly intervention. Definitely qualifies as monster movie fare. Arnold Vosloo plays the mummy, imhotep, extremely well. i think they should make a 4th mummy movie and bring him back. He kicks ass. But back to my point. In the first movie, there's this guy. He's one of the ones that brings down a curse on himself by opening up the box with the canopic jars that contain Anuk-sun-amon's organs. At least, i think that's how you spell her name, the chick Imhotep is trying to resuscitate. So he's the first victim of Imhotep, he gets chased down a pyramid hallway and OOPS! he trips and his glasses fall off. DAMMIT! Now he can't see AT ALL! But, it doesn't really work that way. Three things anyone with glasses can tell you. One, you can still see SOMETHING without your glasses on. Even me, with my bad eyesight, often walk around my house when i misplace my glasses, wondering where I put them. I don't bump into walls, I don't feel around in front of me, going "I CAN'T SEE! WHERE ARE MY GLASSES I AM NOW BLIND!" with my eyes closed. I can even, occasionally, see where I put my glasses without actually having them on. And I NEED them to see. Two, when you need your glasses to see, you are pretty well aware of where they are at all times, even when they fall off. It's the movie equivalent of an assassin dropping his gun during a fight or something. Even if he can't get to it right away, he knows about where it went, it's just something he makes a mental note of so he can retrieve it later. Same thing with glasses. The only time you ever forget where your glasses might be is if they are off your person for an extended period of time. Which I have done. At no point when my glasses were off, did I suddenly close my eyes, drop to the ground, and start feeling around for them. lol Three, the last thing you do is close your eyes. Glasses are generally hard to replace unless you have extremely minor vision problems. So you are using what eyesight you have to try and locate them immediately... not feeling around in the dirt with your eyes closed. Also, if you note the glasses in the Mummy (and this is usually the case with anyone who loses their glasses in movies) the lenses are so thin that the person probably didn't need them to see to begin with, and yet they always immediately shut their eyes and start feeling around on the ground for them, which conveniently lets some other person step on them and break them. Utter silliness. Luckily mine are made of flexible metal and unbreakable plastic, because I'd be lost for days without a new pair if mine ever broke. lol
Something else that bugs me. So I'm talking to my nephew earlier, and somehow we got into a discussion about physics. Basically, because it contained math and he hates math. Which is fine, I am not that much of a math lover, either. in fact, to illustrate my point about math being bad, i mentioned the "Great Attractor" that's supposedly pulling galaxies towards it at an unprecedented rate. I basically told him that the great attractor was probably just a math error, as was the supposed "dark matter" controversy. The controversy being, physicists were running numbers in math equations, something they've been doing for years, and instead of the normal results, they get numbers that indicate most of the matter in the universe is stuff we can't actually see. So physicists begin pushing this "dark matter" theory, which is akin to religion, for me. I mean, look at the parallels. "There's a great being in the sky who controls everything and loves us and created us and guides us. YOu can't ever prove that he exists or doesn't exist, but trust us, he's THERE." and in the dark matter theory: "There's this dark matter and energy that we can't see or feel or detect in any way, but it's all around us and it shapes the whole universe. Trust us, the math says it's THERE." It sounds totally made up to me, and I am a man used to hearing lies. I assume the lies are covering up a math error that no one has discovered yet. I hope to be proven right eventually, because I know one thing for certain, 100% sure... Humans make a lot of mistakes. lol Now here's what confuses me. Because my nephew had never HEARD of the great attractor, he basically told me I was an idiot. I'm not really sure why me being an idiot is a fallback position for him, but it is. He is convinced that scientists do not believe there is a thing called the great attractor and that they do not believe galaxies are being pulled towards it, because, as I said, he'd never heard of it. I even provided him with a couple links to the topic, so that he would understand that it was a real thing and not something i just made up to try and fool him, for some strange reason, and he refused to read the links because one was wikipedia and another was a forum topic. Honestly, i didn't bother trying to push the discussion any further, because I know the difference between ignorance and stupidity.
Let me explain in case you don't know. Ignorance is the simple fact of not knowing something. Stupidity is not only not knowing something, but not wanting to know it. These may not be the textbook definitions, but this is how I compare them. I am, for instance, mostly ignorant about car engines. I know the basic principles of how they work, but I do not know a thing about how to fix or maintain them. Now, I am also stupid about car engines. I do not want to know how to fix them, mostly because the idea of me sliding under a car and getting oil, grease and dirt all over myself while trying to find a problem I know nothing about seems ludicrous to me. Just makes more sense to let a professional fix the issue, someone who knows what they are doing, so i know it's been done right, instead of trying to fix it myself and maybe gumming it up (humans make a lot of mistakes, remember?). So I refuse almost any attempt others make to show me how to do something to fix a car. It's not that I am proud of my ignorance (like some people are proud of not knowing a thing about science and adhering to religion to solve all their problems), it's just that I realize cars are complex machines that require extensive knowledge to repair effectively, and again, humans like me make a lot of mistakes. So yes, I am not only ignorant about engines but I am stupid about them. There are other things in life I am ignorant of, like computer programming, that I would dearly love to learn, but have not had the time or the opportunity to do so yet. Just because I am ignorant of something, does not make me a bad person. Let me also say, being stupid does not make me a bad person, either, it's just that stupid people are hard to reason with. Mostly because they are being stupid, and don't WANT to know any better.
Much like my nephew was being stupid when he told me the great attractor doesn't actually exist and I am badly misinformed because I happen to keep up on astrophysics. And in fact, he may be right about it not existing (i happen to agree and think it's a math error, as I said), but it's not because I am badly misinformed. His own ignorance/stupidity may blind him to the latest research in physics until such a time as they've explained what exactly is going on there. In any case, it's not that my nephew is a bad person, it's just that I recognized that he did not WANT to know about what i was talking about, so he ridiculed me and told me my links were useless because I hadn't thoroughly researched my topic and had scientifically proven references handy. lol And because I recognized he didn't know, and didn't want to know (and thus, was being stupid by my definition), I let him go back to playing computer games. Which of course, is a noble pastime in and of itself. :-D
I suppose being intelligent isn't really about knowing things. It's about knowing that there are things out there that I DON'T know, and recognizing my limits. So perhaps I can take pride in not knowing a damn thing about cars, because chances are good that, in my ignorance, I would screw things up horribly whilst trying to fix a broken engine, and so I am proud that I am wise enough to leave that sort of thing up to the people who know more than I do. So even if i were the most ignorant person in the world, simple recognition of that fact would make me smarter than most, who think because they think they know something, they are smarter. For me, it's always been a case of, the longer I live, the more I recognize that I really know absolutely nothing.
So when are the young going to learn this simple truth? That everyone actually knows almost nothing, and what little knowledge we have is based solely on our point of view? Who knows. All I know is, even when I was young, I knew this.
And I am thankful for that, too. Happy Thanksgiving everyone. I hope you didn't over stuff yourself with too much turkey, but I know most of you did, just like me. lol Always remember, being smart doesn't mean you don't make mistakes, it just means you might recognize that you make them, and can learn from that. If you want to. :-) Me, I want to keep making that eating too much on Turkey Day mistake. I am wise enough to know to enjoy good food when it's handy. ;-)
I make it a habit to be thankful for the things i have. Like, wisdom. My good health, such as it is, in between bouts of cold and flu season. A roof over my head. Some little bit of money in my pocket. That my eyesight may not be great but i at least I am not as blind as some people with better vision.
I am thankful the elections are over. Despite what was won or lost this election, politics is always going to be about who is the better liar, until it becomes a contest to see who can live up to their campaign promises, which it should ideally be. If even half of what they said, they tried to do, the world would be a better place. Because seriously, who votes for someone who promises to do bad things and then lives up to that promise?
I am thankful it's the holiday season. Good food abounds. Christmas music plays constantly on the radio. I am thankful for the simple things in life.
I am thankful I have the freedom to be annoyed by completely trivial things. Like, wtf is up with movies and people with glasses? Check out The Mummy to see what I am talking about. Not the original horror film, the adventure comedy type thing with brendan frasier that came out in the 90's. I actually love watching that movie for several reasons, one i think rachel weisz is hot, two i love egyptology and three, that movie is full of magic, undead, killer beetles, mummies and all manner of godly intervention. Definitely qualifies as monster movie fare. Arnold Vosloo plays the mummy, imhotep, extremely well. i think they should make a 4th mummy movie and bring him back. He kicks ass. But back to my point. In the first movie, there's this guy. He's one of the ones that brings down a curse on himself by opening up the box with the canopic jars that contain Anuk-sun-amon's organs. At least, i think that's how you spell her name, the chick Imhotep is trying to resuscitate. So he's the first victim of Imhotep, he gets chased down a pyramid hallway and OOPS! he trips and his glasses fall off. DAMMIT! Now he can't see AT ALL! But, it doesn't really work that way. Three things anyone with glasses can tell you. One, you can still see SOMETHING without your glasses on. Even me, with my bad eyesight, often walk around my house when i misplace my glasses, wondering where I put them. I don't bump into walls, I don't feel around in front of me, going "I CAN'T SEE! WHERE ARE MY GLASSES I AM NOW BLIND!" with my eyes closed. I can even, occasionally, see where I put my glasses without actually having them on. And I NEED them to see. Two, when you need your glasses to see, you are pretty well aware of where they are at all times, even when they fall off. It's the movie equivalent of an assassin dropping his gun during a fight or something. Even if he can't get to it right away, he knows about where it went, it's just something he makes a mental note of so he can retrieve it later. Same thing with glasses. The only time you ever forget where your glasses might be is if they are off your person for an extended period of time. Which I have done. At no point when my glasses were off, did I suddenly close my eyes, drop to the ground, and start feeling around for them. lol Three, the last thing you do is close your eyes. Glasses are generally hard to replace unless you have extremely minor vision problems. So you are using what eyesight you have to try and locate them immediately... not feeling around in the dirt with your eyes closed. Also, if you note the glasses in the Mummy (and this is usually the case with anyone who loses their glasses in movies) the lenses are so thin that the person probably didn't need them to see to begin with, and yet they always immediately shut their eyes and start feeling around on the ground for them, which conveniently lets some other person step on them and break them. Utter silliness. Luckily mine are made of flexible metal and unbreakable plastic, because I'd be lost for days without a new pair if mine ever broke. lol
Something else that bugs me. So I'm talking to my nephew earlier, and somehow we got into a discussion about physics. Basically, because it contained math and he hates math. Which is fine, I am not that much of a math lover, either. in fact, to illustrate my point about math being bad, i mentioned the "Great Attractor" that's supposedly pulling galaxies towards it at an unprecedented rate. I basically told him that the great attractor was probably just a math error, as was the supposed "dark matter" controversy. The controversy being, physicists were running numbers in math equations, something they've been doing for years, and instead of the normal results, they get numbers that indicate most of the matter in the universe is stuff we can't actually see. So physicists begin pushing this "dark matter" theory, which is akin to religion, for me. I mean, look at the parallels. "There's a great being in the sky who controls everything and loves us and created us and guides us. YOu can't ever prove that he exists or doesn't exist, but trust us, he's THERE." and in the dark matter theory: "There's this dark matter and energy that we can't see or feel or detect in any way, but it's all around us and it shapes the whole universe. Trust us, the math says it's THERE." It sounds totally made up to me, and I am a man used to hearing lies. I assume the lies are covering up a math error that no one has discovered yet. I hope to be proven right eventually, because I know one thing for certain, 100% sure... Humans make a lot of mistakes. lol Now here's what confuses me. Because my nephew had never HEARD of the great attractor, he basically told me I was an idiot. I'm not really sure why me being an idiot is a fallback position for him, but it is. He is convinced that scientists do not believe there is a thing called the great attractor and that they do not believe galaxies are being pulled towards it, because, as I said, he'd never heard of it. I even provided him with a couple links to the topic, so that he would understand that it was a real thing and not something i just made up to try and fool him, for some strange reason, and he refused to read the links because one was wikipedia and another was a forum topic. Honestly, i didn't bother trying to push the discussion any further, because I know the difference between ignorance and stupidity.
Let me explain in case you don't know. Ignorance is the simple fact of not knowing something. Stupidity is not only not knowing something, but not wanting to know it. These may not be the textbook definitions, but this is how I compare them. I am, for instance, mostly ignorant about car engines. I know the basic principles of how they work, but I do not know a thing about how to fix or maintain them. Now, I am also stupid about car engines. I do not want to know how to fix them, mostly because the idea of me sliding under a car and getting oil, grease and dirt all over myself while trying to find a problem I know nothing about seems ludicrous to me. Just makes more sense to let a professional fix the issue, someone who knows what they are doing, so i know it's been done right, instead of trying to fix it myself and maybe gumming it up (humans make a lot of mistakes, remember?). So I refuse almost any attempt others make to show me how to do something to fix a car. It's not that I am proud of my ignorance (like some people are proud of not knowing a thing about science and adhering to religion to solve all their problems), it's just that I realize cars are complex machines that require extensive knowledge to repair effectively, and again, humans like me make a lot of mistakes. So yes, I am not only ignorant about engines but I am stupid about them. There are other things in life I am ignorant of, like computer programming, that I would dearly love to learn, but have not had the time or the opportunity to do so yet. Just because I am ignorant of something, does not make me a bad person. Let me also say, being stupid does not make me a bad person, either, it's just that stupid people are hard to reason with. Mostly because they are being stupid, and don't WANT to know any better.
Much like my nephew was being stupid when he told me the great attractor doesn't actually exist and I am badly misinformed because I happen to keep up on astrophysics. And in fact, he may be right about it not existing (i happen to agree and think it's a math error, as I said), but it's not because I am badly misinformed. His own ignorance/stupidity may blind him to the latest research in physics until such a time as they've explained what exactly is going on there. In any case, it's not that my nephew is a bad person, it's just that I recognized that he did not WANT to know about what i was talking about, so he ridiculed me and told me my links were useless because I hadn't thoroughly researched my topic and had scientifically proven references handy. lol And because I recognized he didn't know, and didn't want to know (and thus, was being stupid by my definition), I let him go back to playing computer games. Which of course, is a noble pastime in and of itself. :-D
I suppose being intelligent isn't really about knowing things. It's about knowing that there are things out there that I DON'T know, and recognizing my limits. So perhaps I can take pride in not knowing a damn thing about cars, because chances are good that, in my ignorance, I would screw things up horribly whilst trying to fix a broken engine, and so I am proud that I am wise enough to leave that sort of thing up to the people who know more than I do. So even if i were the most ignorant person in the world, simple recognition of that fact would make me smarter than most, who think because they think they know something, they are smarter. For me, it's always been a case of, the longer I live, the more I recognize that I really know absolutely nothing.
So when are the young going to learn this simple truth? That everyone actually knows almost nothing, and what little knowledge we have is based solely on our point of view? Who knows. All I know is, even when I was young, I knew this.
And I am thankful for that, too. Happy Thanksgiving everyone. I hope you didn't over stuff yourself with too much turkey, but I know most of you did, just like me. lol Always remember, being smart doesn't mean you don't make mistakes, it just means you might recognize that you make them, and can learn from that. If you want to. :-) Me, I want to keep making that eating too much on Turkey Day mistake. I am wise enough to know to enjoy good food when it's handy. ;-)
Monday, November 12, 2012
The Weather? Really?
Yes, I am blogging about... the weather.
So, I have several nits to pick. For you younger folks, that means I have things I want to talk about. Firstly, what is up with weathermen? Or more specifically, meteorologists? Look, I know the weather is a complex global system. I know predictions about it are never going to be 100% accurate. But, can't we get somewhere in the ballpark? Now, I'm not complaining about any specific weather day. I wasn't out at a picnic today, for instance, and the weather forecasters said it was going to be sunny and 80 and I ended up in a blizzard. But, are they ever right? A meteorologist will tell you his forecasts are usually about 85% accurate. Which is absolute bupkus. I would say closer to 40%, and that's just within 24 hours at best. So who can keep a job being right 40% of the time? What waiter would keep his job if he said "Sorry sir, I screwed up your order a little. You wanted the fish and chips, and i got you a burger and rice. But hey, at least I got your drink order correct!" Or what employer would be in business long if they said "Oh sorry, I gave you $4000 dollars this week instead of $400. But at least I spelled your name right!" Look, when I can listen to the weather predictions for the next week, and make a more accurate prediction of the weather by saying the opposite of what the meteorologists say, they need to work on their computer models a bit.
Here's my next thing. Hurricanes usually come with lots of rain and wind. They usually do lots of flooding damage to coastal areas. Do you remember all the days leading up to Hurricane Sandy, where they said "This storm isn't going to be like anything you've ever seen before!?" Well. Let's review. There was lots of wind and rain. And.. it did lots of flooding damage to coastal areas. So... how was that different from the other hurricanes? Did it rain skittles? Did the wind smell of hot and spicy chicken wings? No, the only difference I can see was that it hit New York City instead of Florida or wherever. So why all the fuss beforehand? Was it just to spice up an otherwise semi-ordinary event like a hurricane coming ashore? Doesn't that pretty much happen every year, sometimes several times?
Which leads me to my next two points. There's tons of celebrities going on the air lately asking me to donate my hard-earned money to hurricane sandy relief efforts. Hmmm. Where were the celebrity aid requests during the last florida hurricane? Or don't celebrities care about a few retirees who lost their trailer park in the sunshine state? Is it just because there's a lot of celebrities living in new york and they now need your money because their expensive apartment building just got washed out to sea? Hell, get some hot female celebs to lose some clothes in the commercials, and I'll be more than happy to pay up. Yea! Start a naked female celebrity hurricane sandy relief effort! You'll rake in billions!
Just as an aside, I'm not trying to make light of people having trouble getting back on their feet after Sandy. I'm sure there's still people out there who are homeless or without power, and i can't even imagine. I mean, my power was out for 3 whole days during the october storm around these here parts back in 2005 and it drive me nearly insane! I was cold, it was dark, and worst of all, I had no internet access or computer games to play! AGH! So, anyone just getting back onto the net and reading this after being without a home or power for weeks, you have my deepest sympathies and admiration for surviving with your mind intact. Assuming you survived, with your mind intact. I don't think my mind made it, but nobody seems to have noticed yet. Or, maybe you did.
But here's my third (or fourth?) point, do we really need to start naming our winter storms? Athena? Brutus? I can see naming a hurricane. It's a huge weather event that has the potential to come ashore and cost millions of dollars in damage as well as lives, even if it does turn and head out to sea half the time. But do we really need to name every single cold front that sweeps across the nation? Aren't we just adding to the confusion at this point? Athena dumped an inch of snow on my front lawn! A WHOLE INCH! ZOMG! Brutus froze that lock on my car door! THAT COLD HEARTED PRICK! Geddit geddit? Cold hearted? HAH! I make joke. You laugh. But seriously, why? Are meteorologists or media junkies just so friggin bored that they need to draw viewers in by naming storms? Really? Are you that desperate for viewers??? Doesn't pretty much EVERYONE watch the weather at some point to find out the forecast? How do you get more viewers than EVERYONE? Isn't that being just a tad greedy? lol
So here's my problem in a nutshell. I looked at the radar images of hurricane sandy coming into the coast. I looked at the predictions of where it would go. Weathermen in my area were calling for tropical storm force winds when it got close enough. I looked where it was heading, realized that not only was upstate new york (where i live) not anywhere near the center of the storm, but we were in the outer bands of what is usually the lee side of the storm, where the hurricane's direction of travel and prevailing winds go against each other, and realized in about 2 seconds that we wouldn't see anywhere near that level of winds, and probably wouldn't feel much of anything. So how did I, an out of work technical support guy with a minimum of understanding about the weather, able to make an accurate prediction that went against what every weatherman in our area was saying, and be 100% dead-on-balls-accurate, as Marisa Tomei so eloquently put it in "My Cousin Vinny?"
Hell if I know. But when I can out-predict a trained, experienced meteorlogist, they got to be doing something wrong, don't you think?
In other news, I think my movie review format was a little too rigorous last month. I may go back to just random thoughts about the movie divided into paragraphs. It seems like having to organize my thoughts, instead of just rambling incoherently most of the time, stifles my creativity in my reviews. So, next review, I am going back to incoherent rambling! Sounds like a good name for a heavy metal band, right? "FEAST YOUR EYES, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN! Back by popular demand, INCOHERENT RAMBLING!" Hey, it'd certainly squelch the need to come up with good song lyrics. You could read your little brother's book report on See Spot Run while blasting out guitar riffs and the drummer's LSD-fueled solo and nobody would notice.
Squelch. Word of the week. Until next time, rabid fans! Yea, if you are frothing at the mouth to read my blog, you really need to get a hobby. lol
So, I have several nits to pick. For you younger folks, that means I have things I want to talk about. Firstly, what is up with weathermen? Or more specifically, meteorologists? Look, I know the weather is a complex global system. I know predictions about it are never going to be 100% accurate. But, can't we get somewhere in the ballpark? Now, I'm not complaining about any specific weather day. I wasn't out at a picnic today, for instance, and the weather forecasters said it was going to be sunny and 80 and I ended up in a blizzard. But, are they ever right? A meteorologist will tell you his forecasts are usually about 85% accurate. Which is absolute bupkus. I would say closer to 40%, and that's just within 24 hours at best. So who can keep a job being right 40% of the time? What waiter would keep his job if he said "Sorry sir, I screwed up your order a little. You wanted the fish and chips, and i got you a burger and rice. But hey, at least I got your drink order correct!" Or what employer would be in business long if they said "Oh sorry, I gave you $4000 dollars this week instead of $400. But at least I spelled your name right!" Look, when I can listen to the weather predictions for the next week, and make a more accurate prediction of the weather by saying the opposite of what the meteorologists say, they need to work on their computer models a bit.
Here's my next thing. Hurricanes usually come with lots of rain and wind. They usually do lots of flooding damage to coastal areas. Do you remember all the days leading up to Hurricane Sandy, where they said "This storm isn't going to be like anything you've ever seen before!?" Well. Let's review. There was lots of wind and rain. And.. it did lots of flooding damage to coastal areas. So... how was that different from the other hurricanes? Did it rain skittles? Did the wind smell of hot and spicy chicken wings? No, the only difference I can see was that it hit New York City instead of Florida or wherever. So why all the fuss beforehand? Was it just to spice up an otherwise semi-ordinary event like a hurricane coming ashore? Doesn't that pretty much happen every year, sometimes several times?
Which leads me to my next two points. There's tons of celebrities going on the air lately asking me to donate my hard-earned money to hurricane sandy relief efforts. Hmmm. Where were the celebrity aid requests during the last florida hurricane? Or don't celebrities care about a few retirees who lost their trailer park in the sunshine state? Is it just because there's a lot of celebrities living in new york and they now need your money because their expensive apartment building just got washed out to sea? Hell, get some hot female celebs to lose some clothes in the commercials, and I'll be more than happy to pay up. Yea! Start a naked female celebrity hurricane sandy relief effort! You'll rake in billions!
Just as an aside, I'm not trying to make light of people having trouble getting back on their feet after Sandy. I'm sure there's still people out there who are homeless or without power, and i can't even imagine. I mean, my power was out for 3 whole days during the october storm around these here parts back in 2005 and it drive me nearly insane! I was cold, it was dark, and worst of all, I had no internet access or computer games to play! AGH! So, anyone just getting back onto the net and reading this after being without a home or power for weeks, you have my deepest sympathies and admiration for surviving with your mind intact. Assuming you survived, with your mind intact. I don't think my mind made it, but nobody seems to have noticed yet. Or, maybe you did.
But here's my third (or fourth?) point, do we really need to start naming our winter storms? Athena? Brutus? I can see naming a hurricane. It's a huge weather event that has the potential to come ashore and cost millions of dollars in damage as well as lives, even if it does turn and head out to sea half the time. But do we really need to name every single cold front that sweeps across the nation? Aren't we just adding to the confusion at this point? Athena dumped an inch of snow on my front lawn! A WHOLE INCH! ZOMG! Brutus froze that lock on my car door! THAT COLD HEARTED PRICK! Geddit geddit? Cold hearted? HAH! I make joke. You laugh. But seriously, why? Are meteorologists or media junkies just so friggin bored that they need to draw viewers in by naming storms? Really? Are you that desperate for viewers??? Doesn't pretty much EVERYONE watch the weather at some point to find out the forecast? How do you get more viewers than EVERYONE? Isn't that being just a tad greedy? lol
So here's my problem in a nutshell. I looked at the radar images of hurricane sandy coming into the coast. I looked at the predictions of where it would go. Weathermen in my area were calling for tropical storm force winds when it got close enough. I looked where it was heading, realized that not only was upstate new york (where i live) not anywhere near the center of the storm, but we were in the outer bands of what is usually the lee side of the storm, where the hurricane's direction of travel and prevailing winds go against each other, and realized in about 2 seconds that we wouldn't see anywhere near that level of winds, and probably wouldn't feel much of anything. So how did I, an out of work technical support guy with a minimum of understanding about the weather, able to make an accurate prediction that went against what every weatherman in our area was saying, and be 100% dead-on-balls-accurate, as Marisa Tomei so eloquently put it in "My Cousin Vinny?"
Hell if I know. But when I can out-predict a trained, experienced meteorlogist, they got to be doing something wrong, don't you think?
In other news, I think my movie review format was a little too rigorous last month. I may go back to just random thoughts about the movie divided into paragraphs. It seems like having to organize my thoughts, instead of just rambling incoherently most of the time, stifles my creativity in my reviews. So, next review, I am going back to incoherent rambling! Sounds like a good name for a heavy metal band, right? "FEAST YOUR EYES, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN! Back by popular demand, INCOHERENT RAMBLING!" Hey, it'd certainly squelch the need to come up with good song lyrics. You could read your little brother's book report on See Spot Run while blasting out guitar riffs and the drummer's LSD-fueled solo and nobody would notice.
Squelch. Word of the week. Until next time, rabid fans! Yea, if you are frothing at the mouth to read my blog, you really need to get a hobby. lol
Wednesday, October 31, 2012
Horror movie #31 - Phantoms
MOVIE: Phantoms (1998)
PLOT: A couple sisters arrive in Snowfield to rest and relax and get some skiing in. Unfortunately, nobody seems to be left in Snowfield. Or rather, nobody whole. There may be a few pieces of them left behind...
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: Always a good one.
GOOD POINTS: Great acting and hollywood style special effects. Definitely not a small budget.
BAD POINTS: No nudity! Bit short. Could have dragged it out a bit more. Ending was a bit rushed.
SPOILERS: They never made a sequel to this one. Don't know why. Hmmm. Perfect setup for it at the end there.
IMPRESSIONS: great cast, Peter O Toole, who is surprisingly still alive and acting at the age of 157 years old (he's got to be at least that old), Rose Mcgowan, Ben Affleck, and Leiv Shreiber. Honestly, though, I never liked Ben Affleck. He looks like such a douche. Moving on. Like i said yesterday, some of the best horror movies are the kind where you don't know what's going on. In this case, first the people of Snowfield are missing. Then there's a body found, and you're thinking heart attack? Disease? And then pieces of bodies are found, and you're thinking psycho Killer? Demon Bikers? Space aliens? What? WHAT?!? WHAT THE FUCK IS IT? FUCKIN TELL ME ALREADY!!!!! And then finally you get to sort of find out what it is.
I have seen this movie before. I may have even reviewed this movie before, but I am pressed for time tonight. I was going to review Terrorvision, something i hadn't seen before, but frankly, it was so lame I shut it off. It was bad even for a b-movie. lol I scanned through a few titles hoping to find something decent but Phantoms will have to do for tonight.
That's it for the month! The horror movie review-a-thon is now over for this year. So many movies, so little time. Maybe someday I'll have the time to review several movies a day and do triple features on saturdays, but until that day comes, stay tuned! I'll still be reviewing movies here on my blog, just not as often until next october. lol I'm sure there were other good movies I could have reviewed, but finding them amid the mass of crappy horror out there is really hard to do. Maybe I'll have better luck next year! :-)
OTHER NEWS: I missed the Munsters last week! :-o I'm shocked. I really don't know how i missed it. Oh well. Busy week, and I have company coming. Candy, here I come! Happy Halloween everyone! :-D Enjoy the end of the political season next week! lol
#30 - Village of the Damned
MOVIE: Village of the Damned (1995)
PLOT: Midwich is a sleepy little town along the coast. Very sleepy. So sleepy, in fact, that pretty much the entire town passes out one day, all at once, from exactly 10 am to exactly 4 pm. 6 hours of absolute unconsciousness, during which time, nobody really knows what happened... until the local doctor notices the number of pregnancies is way up. Up by 12, in fact. Exactly 12. All dating to the day when the whole town was put to sleep by unknown means...
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: I really liked this movie. Always a good watch.
GOOD POINTS: Tons of famous actors. Big budget production, doubtless spent on the actors involved instead of explosive special effects. Not that there weren't any!
BAD POINTS: Not enough Michael Pare! He may not be the world's greatest actor but he always brings a lot of character to his roles. No nudity, again, despite some fairly attractive actresses in this movie. Oh well.
SPOILERS: Having seen the movie a few times, I am beginning to wonder if the development of emotions wasn't just a mechanism to help them survive... Hmmm. Sequel, anyone?
IMPRESSIONS: Some of the really best horror films are films where you really have no idea what the hell is going on, like the first time i saw this movie. There's some odd happenings, maybe some deaths, and an urgent desire to figure out what's going on, but just like the characters on the screen, you don't have enough evidence to piece it together yet. This makes you identify with them, because they are just as confused as you are about what's happening. And then what's going on starts to become clearer, and frankly, you'd rather you were still in the dark about it, because it's just too horrible to think about.
Village of the Damned is one of those films. It starts out pretty normal. Small town life. There's some sort of pumpkin festival being held by the school, which makes me think it's a halloweeny type of movie. All the characters are going about their daily tasks, some doing their jobs, some helping to prepare for the activities at the festival, when all of a sudden, everyone just passes out. There are some deaths involved, because when you're driving along and then you're asleep at the wheel, there's going to be a problem pretty damn soon. The authorities become involved, but can't get in to check out the town because everyone who goes within a certain distance of the town zonks out just like everyone in it. Animals, birds, everything, just out like a light. And then just as suddenly, they all wake up again. And if that wasn't bad or creepy enough, things just start to go downhill from there.
Definitely worth multiple watches. Seen it many times. Netflix was removing it from their queue on Halloween, so at this point I don't know where you'd watch it, but that's why i decided to view it tonight. It's got christopher reeve before his accident but after his superman days, and it's got kirstie alley back when she was still hot and a major actress. Lots of other major stars too, Mark hamill, linda kozlowski, michael pare i already mentioned, oh, and George "Buck" Flower! Let me just take an aside here to say... If you've got a name like George Flower, i can see why you'd take the nickname "Buck." He must have really got picked on at school when he was a kid. Great actor though. Village of the Damned was also directed by John Carpenter, who... also directs our bonus movie tonight! :-o TADAA!!!!
BONUS REVIEW: The Fog (1980) Still avaialble on netflix. The Fog was an excellent little gem by john carpenter a few years after he did "Halloween." Lots of suspense, many tense moments. You youngins may not understand suspense and tense moments, you just like your blood and gore. Well, there wasn't much of that in this movie. Just plain old creepy terror. Having seen the fog many times since I was a kid, it still creeps me out to this day. John Carpenter re-used jamie lee Curtis from halloween, cast Tom Atkins in the hero role (who would later be tapped to do halloween 3, which had nothing to do with john carpenter or Michael myers), and HEY, George "Buck' Flower also makes an appearance in this movie! lol That guy sure gets around. I swear you'd be hard-pressed to find a horror or western he DIDN'T have a part in in the 70's, 80's or 90's. Also, this was one of only two movies where Janet Leigh (of Psycho fame) co-starred with her daughter, jamie Lee curtis. The other was halloween H20. Also, if you look carefully, janet leigh's assistant is played by nancy Loomis, who played Jamie Lee Curtis friend in halloween. I am always amazed by how often these people tended to work together back then. It must have been like getting together with old friends every few months to work on another project. Anyway, you guys must know the plot by now! Antonio bay turns 100 years old and ends up paying for it's founding in blood! Yea, pretty simple stuff, but so much fun to watch. I even love just listening to the actors talk in this film. It's like every line of dialogue was trimmed and practiced until every single syllable is meted out for maximum suspense. Just hearing the story about nick's dad finding the gold coin on the old schooner ship while he's talking to jamie lee curtis was freaking me out. I may have peed myself just a little. Scenery is awesome in this movie, too. During the day, Adrienne barbeau's ride to the lighthouse where she works, totally beautiful to watch. The views were exceptional. And i'm not even talking about the actress herself, who was much younger in those days and also a babe! Always fun to watch that movie, i try to hit it every year around this time.
OTHER NEWS: Well, I went to bed last night figuring i'd lose power due to some light winds, and woke up this morning to almost sunshine. Sandy the "superstorm" managed to fizzle itself out in record time. Sure, I know some places got hit bad, virginia is still dealing with heavy snows and new york city is still half under water, but I knew it wasn't going to get bad here. We're on the slow side of the storm. Nothing happened here. We didn't even lose power, which is unusual for us. We tend to lose power during a light thunderstorm. lol Now all it needs to do is dry out a little and we'll still have candy for trick or treaters tomorrow night! :-D Hopefully not too many trick or treaters. I get anything the kids don't take. lol
And it is after midnight, so it's now officially All Hallow's Eve! YAY! Happy Halloween everybody! :-D Don't eat too much candy! Save some for me! lol
PLOT: Midwich is a sleepy little town along the coast. Very sleepy. So sleepy, in fact, that pretty much the entire town passes out one day, all at once, from exactly 10 am to exactly 4 pm. 6 hours of absolute unconsciousness, during which time, nobody really knows what happened... until the local doctor notices the number of pregnancies is way up. Up by 12, in fact. Exactly 12. All dating to the day when the whole town was put to sleep by unknown means...
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: I really liked this movie. Always a good watch.
GOOD POINTS: Tons of famous actors. Big budget production, doubtless spent on the actors involved instead of explosive special effects. Not that there weren't any!
BAD POINTS: Not enough Michael Pare! He may not be the world's greatest actor but he always brings a lot of character to his roles. No nudity, again, despite some fairly attractive actresses in this movie. Oh well.
SPOILERS: Having seen the movie a few times, I am beginning to wonder if the development of emotions wasn't just a mechanism to help them survive... Hmmm. Sequel, anyone?
IMPRESSIONS: Some of the really best horror films are films where you really have no idea what the hell is going on, like the first time i saw this movie. There's some odd happenings, maybe some deaths, and an urgent desire to figure out what's going on, but just like the characters on the screen, you don't have enough evidence to piece it together yet. This makes you identify with them, because they are just as confused as you are about what's happening. And then what's going on starts to become clearer, and frankly, you'd rather you were still in the dark about it, because it's just too horrible to think about.
Village of the Damned is one of those films. It starts out pretty normal. Small town life. There's some sort of pumpkin festival being held by the school, which makes me think it's a halloweeny type of movie. All the characters are going about their daily tasks, some doing their jobs, some helping to prepare for the activities at the festival, when all of a sudden, everyone just passes out. There are some deaths involved, because when you're driving along and then you're asleep at the wheel, there's going to be a problem pretty damn soon. The authorities become involved, but can't get in to check out the town because everyone who goes within a certain distance of the town zonks out just like everyone in it. Animals, birds, everything, just out like a light. And then just as suddenly, they all wake up again. And if that wasn't bad or creepy enough, things just start to go downhill from there.
Definitely worth multiple watches. Seen it many times. Netflix was removing it from their queue on Halloween, so at this point I don't know where you'd watch it, but that's why i decided to view it tonight. It's got christopher reeve before his accident but after his superman days, and it's got kirstie alley back when she was still hot and a major actress. Lots of other major stars too, Mark hamill, linda kozlowski, michael pare i already mentioned, oh, and George "Buck" Flower! Let me just take an aside here to say... If you've got a name like George Flower, i can see why you'd take the nickname "Buck." He must have really got picked on at school when he was a kid. Great actor though. Village of the Damned was also directed by John Carpenter, who... also directs our bonus movie tonight! :-o TADAA!!!!
BONUS REVIEW: The Fog (1980) Still avaialble on netflix. The Fog was an excellent little gem by john carpenter a few years after he did "Halloween." Lots of suspense, many tense moments. You youngins may not understand suspense and tense moments, you just like your blood and gore. Well, there wasn't much of that in this movie. Just plain old creepy terror. Having seen the fog many times since I was a kid, it still creeps me out to this day. John Carpenter re-used jamie lee Curtis from halloween, cast Tom Atkins in the hero role (who would later be tapped to do halloween 3, which had nothing to do with john carpenter or Michael myers), and HEY, George "Buck' Flower also makes an appearance in this movie! lol That guy sure gets around. I swear you'd be hard-pressed to find a horror or western he DIDN'T have a part in in the 70's, 80's or 90's. Also, this was one of only two movies where Janet Leigh (of Psycho fame) co-starred with her daughter, jamie Lee curtis. The other was halloween H20. Also, if you look carefully, janet leigh's assistant is played by nancy Loomis, who played Jamie Lee Curtis friend in halloween. I am always amazed by how often these people tended to work together back then. It must have been like getting together with old friends every few months to work on another project. Anyway, you guys must know the plot by now! Antonio bay turns 100 years old and ends up paying for it's founding in blood! Yea, pretty simple stuff, but so much fun to watch. I even love just listening to the actors talk in this film. It's like every line of dialogue was trimmed and practiced until every single syllable is meted out for maximum suspense. Just hearing the story about nick's dad finding the gold coin on the old schooner ship while he's talking to jamie lee curtis was freaking me out. I may have peed myself just a little. Scenery is awesome in this movie, too. During the day, Adrienne barbeau's ride to the lighthouse where she works, totally beautiful to watch. The views were exceptional. And i'm not even talking about the actress herself, who was much younger in those days and also a babe! Always fun to watch that movie, i try to hit it every year around this time.
OTHER NEWS: Well, I went to bed last night figuring i'd lose power due to some light winds, and woke up this morning to almost sunshine. Sandy the "superstorm" managed to fizzle itself out in record time. Sure, I know some places got hit bad, virginia is still dealing with heavy snows and new york city is still half under water, but I knew it wasn't going to get bad here. We're on the slow side of the storm. Nothing happened here. We didn't even lose power, which is unusual for us. We tend to lose power during a light thunderstorm. lol Now all it needs to do is dry out a little and we'll still have candy for trick or treaters tomorrow night! :-D Hopefully not too many trick or treaters. I get anything the kids don't take. lol
And it is after midnight, so it's now officially All Hallow's Eve! YAY! Happy Halloween everybody! :-D Don't eat too much candy! Save some for me! lol
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
#29 - Dracula 3: Legacy
MOVIE: Dracula 3: The Legacy (2005)
RECAP: Before I get into the plot of Dracula 3, I have to recap Dracula 2000 and Dracula 2. In Dracula 2000, we learn that Dracula had been captured several hundred years ago by Van Helsing and kept in a steel coffin under lock and key. Van Helsing remained alive by transfusing small amounts of Dracula's blood into his system in the hopes that some way could eventually be found to slay Dracula. Apparently, he's immune to silver and stakes through the heart just piss him off. Unfortunately, a group of thieves rob the steel coffin from Van helsing's vault, mistaking it for something valuable, and Dracula's coffin is opened while the group is flying over New Orleans. Dracula proceeds to slay everyone involved, the plane crashes in New Orleans, and Dracula is freed to find Van Helsing's daughter, who has dracula's blood flowing through her veins as a result of Van helsing's infusions. Through her link with Dracula, Van helsing's daughter discovers who he really is... Judas Iscariot, the betrayer of Christ, which is why Dracula (and by extension, all vampires) hates crosses, silver (the 30 pieces of silver), and all things christian. Unfortunately as the saying goes, he cannot die until god forgives him, so instead they manage to hang him from a neon cross in full daylight, lighting him on fire. In Dracula 2, a bunch of medical students discover his corpse in a morgue, burned beyond recognition, and realize his body for what it is, that of a vampire. They manage to resurrect him with blood and keep him prisoner in an attempt to divine what secrets his blood holds so that their professor, his body twisted and ravaged by disease, might be cured. Unfortunately, Dracula escapes, while a Vampire hunter from the vatican stalks him. Dracula infects a young medical student named Elizabeth and takes her with him, and another student joins the vampire hunter in his quest to find her and slay Dracula.
PLOT: This movie begins with the vampire hunter being recalled by the vatican, but the hunter (a half-vampire priest) breaks with the church rather than give up his quest. Tracking Dracula back to europe, the pair of hunters must navigate a war zone to find and kill their final target, and rescue Elizabeth.
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: The series as a whole was pretty good, but I think this movie kind of dropped the ball compared to the first 2. Still, it wasn't bad, there were vampires, nudity, lots of blood and gore, and plenty of beheadings to end the series.
GOOD POINTS: A couple of the same actors from Dracula 2. Not the same actor who played Dracula, but Rutger Hauer this time, who was not necessarily an improvement (he made Dracula look way too much like Lothos from Buffy the vampire slayer, lol), but a better actor, at least. And, nudity! So, points for that.
BAD POINTS: Dracula, who was so prevalent in the first two movies, is only in two scenes in this one. Basically this could be called "Two vampire hunters slay some vampires and dracula makes a guest appearance." except that title is way too long and gives away the whole plot. lol
SPOILERS: Okay, so... nobody tried beheading before? Duh! Why is this not an obvious choice for killing a vampire? Shit, they even knew to do that in Captain Chronos, Vampire Hunter! Bah. Just bugs me, the inconsistencies. Also, in the second movie, Vampires were supposedly OCD counters of seeds and compulsive knot-untie-ers. Which was used once in that movie and NEVER REFERRED TO AGAIN. Nice. lol Way to be inconsistent.
IMPRESSIONS: Ties everything up, so to speak. Might see a Dracula 4 eventually, but I doubt it, since Roy Scheider (the sheriff from jaws), who played the vatican priest sending the vampire hunter off on his mission, is now deceased. Also, well, don't want to give anything away, but it'd be hard to call the movie Dracula 4 without Dracula making an appearance. lol Still, might be worth a watch if you like martial arts vampire hunters doing battle with Lothos, I mean, err, Dracula. I have seen part of this movie before, but it was still rewatchable.
OTHER NEWS: Hurricane/Tropical Storm Sandy is making her way northwest. Locally, we are currently getting the outermost winds from the northwest part of the storm, but we are so far away from the center (it's now just a big storm, having lost hurricane status after making landfall earlier today) that the trees are barely moving around here. It'll turn back northeast before it even gets near us. We might lose electricity over the next couple days due to minor flooding or downed tree limbs, but I doubt we'll have any real problems around here. Not so the other places where it hit harder, and I hope everyone out there is being as safe as possible under the circumstances. Last I heard there were a couple hundred people trapped by flood waters (somewhere... new york city maybe?) who had chosen to remain in their homes, and the rescue services had to retreat for their own safety, but I don't think those trapped people were in any immediate danger. I guess we'll find out how they fared after the flood waters recede. Good luck riding out the rest of the storm, everybody! I think by tomorrow we'll have seen the worst of it, and by Halloween it'll all be over except for the rain.
See you guys tomorrow night if I still have electricity!
RECAP: Before I get into the plot of Dracula 3, I have to recap Dracula 2000 and Dracula 2. In Dracula 2000, we learn that Dracula had been captured several hundred years ago by Van Helsing and kept in a steel coffin under lock and key. Van Helsing remained alive by transfusing small amounts of Dracula's blood into his system in the hopes that some way could eventually be found to slay Dracula. Apparently, he's immune to silver and stakes through the heart just piss him off. Unfortunately, a group of thieves rob the steel coffin from Van helsing's vault, mistaking it for something valuable, and Dracula's coffin is opened while the group is flying over New Orleans. Dracula proceeds to slay everyone involved, the plane crashes in New Orleans, and Dracula is freed to find Van Helsing's daughter, who has dracula's blood flowing through her veins as a result of Van helsing's infusions. Through her link with Dracula, Van helsing's daughter discovers who he really is... Judas Iscariot, the betrayer of Christ, which is why Dracula (and by extension, all vampires) hates crosses, silver (the 30 pieces of silver), and all things christian. Unfortunately as the saying goes, he cannot die until god forgives him, so instead they manage to hang him from a neon cross in full daylight, lighting him on fire. In Dracula 2, a bunch of medical students discover his corpse in a morgue, burned beyond recognition, and realize his body for what it is, that of a vampire. They manage to resurrect him with blood and keep him prisoner in an attempt to divine what secrets his blood holds so that their professor, his body twisted and ravaged by disease, might be cured. Unfortunately, Dracula escapes, while a Vampire hunter from the vatican stalks him. Dracula infects a young medical student named Elizabeth and takes her with him, and another student joins the vampire hunter in his quest to find her and slay Dracula.
PLOT: This movie begins with the vampire hunter being recalled by the vatican, but the hunter (a half-vampire priest) breaks with the church rather than give up his quest. Tracking Dracula back to europe, the pair of hunters must navigate a war zone to find and kill their final target, and rescue Elizabeth.
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: The series as a whole was pretty good, but I think this movie kind of dropped the ball compared to the first 2. Still, it wasn't bad, there were vampires, nudity, lots of blood and gore, and plenty of beheadings to end the series.
GOOD POINTS: A couple of the same actors from Dracula 2. Not the same actor who played Dracula, but Rutger Hauer this time, who was not necessarily an improvement (he made Dracula look way too much like Lothos from Buffy the vampire slayer, lol), but a better actor, at least. And, nudity! So, points for that.
BAD POINTS: Dracula, who was so prevalent in the first two movies, is only in two scenes in this one. Basically this could be called "Two vampire hunters slay some vampires and dracula makes a guest appearance." except that title is way too long and gives away the whole plot. lol
SPOILERS: Okay, so... nobody tried beheading before? Duh! Why is this not an obvious choice for killing a vampire? Shit, they even knew to do that in Captain Chronos, Vampire Hunter! Bah. Just bugs me, the inconsistencies. Also, in the second movie, Vampires were supposedly OCD counters of seeds and compulsive knot-untie-ers. Which was used once in that movie and NEVER REFERRED TO AGAIN. Nice. lol Way to be inconsistent.
IMPRESSIONS: Ties everything up, so to speak. Might see a Dracula 4 eventually, but I doubt it, since Roy Scheider (the sheriff from jaws), who played the vatican priest sending the vampire hunter off on his mission, is now deceased. Also, well, don't want to give anything away, but it'd be hard to call the movie Dracula 4 without Dracula making an appearance. lol Still, might be worth a watch if you like martial arts vampire hunters doing battle with Lothos, I mean, err, Dracula. I have seen part of this movie before, but it was still rewatchable.
OTHER NEWS: Hurricane/Tropical Storm Sandy is making her way northwest. Locally, we are currently getting the outermost winds from the northwest part of the storm, but we are so far away from the center (it's now just a big storm, having lost hurricane status after making landfall earlier today) that the trees are barely moving around here. It'll turn back northeast before it even gets near us. We might lose electricity over the next couple days due to minor flooding or downed tree limbs, but I doubt we'll have any real problems around here. Not so the other places where it hit harder, and I hope everyone out there is being as safe as possible under the circumstances. Last I heard there were a couple hundred people trapped by flood waters (somewhere... new york city maybe?) who had chosen to remain in their homes, and the rescue services had to retreat for their own safety, but I don't think those trapped people were in any immediate danger. I guess we'll find out how they fared after the flood waters recede. Good luck riding out the rest of the storm, everybody! I think by tomorrow we'll have seen the worst of it, and by Halloween it'll all be over except for the rain.
See you guys tomorrow night if I still have electricity!
Monday, October 29, 2012
#28 - Evolver
MOVIE: Evolver (1994)
PLOT: A kid wins a toy robot in a virtual reality game contest and it turns out the toy robot was actually a former military program designed to create the perfect robotic soldiers. After playing the toy robot in a real game and defeating it, Evolver begins to evolve... and realizes, it hates to lose.
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: Not bad. Solid b-movie.
GOOD POINTS: Good performances by the veteran acting cast, solid special effects for the time, even some nudity!
BAD POINTS: No shower scene. How can you have a scene in a girls locker room and not include a shower scene? I am so disappointed.
SPOILERS: I would have thought the handles on knives were thicker than those tiny balls the robot was shooting, so it would have been hard to fit them into the launchers. Also, it would seem perfectly ludicrous to me that a programmer wouldn't include an option for the robot to eliminate a player with the toy ammunition and then program that player out of the game, instead of generating an error and causing the robot to try and find better ammo. That just seems silly.
IMPRESSIONS: Okay, so this movie is 18 years old. I can't remember if I saw it before or not. I am sure I haven't reviewed it before. Still, reasonable plot, good acting and decent special effects overall. It might have been more comfortable if it had been released in the 80's, but it's mere existence raises a question. Didn't we learn enough from Evolver (1994) to know we should NEVER include military grade projects in our children's toys by the time Small Soldiers (1998) was made? I guess not! I'm not really sure if this movie qualifies as "horror," but as "Alien" proved, science fiction could be scary, too. This movie is certainly not as good as "Alien," but I always include sci-fi in my horror list. Let's put it this way, if there's a good monster in it, I love the movie! If there isn't, well, it may still be horror, but it's not MY kind of horror. This movie at least had a robot with a penchant for killing in it, and that qualifies as a sufficiently scary monster type for it to make my list.
OTHER NEWS: I have a headache and I feel ill again. For those that know me, nothing new there. I'm probably coming down with the next virus, infection, flu or cold that's making the rounds. Strangely, I'm usually pretty healthy during the summer months. I need to move to florida or something where i'm always warm. Seems to be a better environment for me.
This has been a decent month full of reviewing new movies, but I think I am going to just review what I want to watch the next few days. If I find anything I haven't seen before and want to give it a viewing, great, but I'm tired of scouring netflix for stuff I haven't seen yet. Frankly, most of the movies either suck, or aren't horror, which really narrows down what I can view this month. Oh well, only 3 days left anyway. I'll still try and find stuff I haven't reviewed before, but with over 200 posts to look through every time I want to see if I've reviewed something before, I think I'll just hope I haven't reviewed it recently and watch it for sheer enjoyment's sake. Funny, I haven't seen Charlie Brown's Great Pumpkin so far this year. I will look for it this week.
Also, I love watching "Trick r Treat" every year on Halloween. If you haven't seen it, one of the best actual "Halloween" movies I've ever seen. Everything that happens during the movie takes place ON halloween, there's lots of gore and killing and halloween ghost stories and such and so on, and it's fun to watch besides. Something for everyone! Reminds me of the original Halloween by John Carpenter. Plus, Trick R Treat has actual monsters instead of just masked killers! AND Anna Paquin! Halloween doesn't have Anna Paquin. So there! :-P
Okay, I am going to get a lot of rest and watch nothing but horror the next few days. See you guys tomorrow night for another review. We're in the home stretch!
PLOT: A kid wins a toy robot in a virtual reality game contest and it turns out the toy robot was actually a former military program designed to create the perfect robotic soldiers. After playing the toy robot in a real game and defeating it, Evolver begins to evolve... and realizes, it hates to lose.
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: Not bad. Solid b-movie.
GOOD POINTS: Good performances by the veteran acting cast, solid special effects for the time, even some nudity!
BAD POINTS: No shower scene. How can you have a scene in a girls locker room and not include a shower scene? I am so disappointed.
SPOILERS: I would have thought the handles on knives were thicker than those tiny balls the robot was shooting, so it would have been hard to fit them into the launchers. Also, it would seem perfectly ludicrous to me that a programmer wouldn't include an option for the robot to eliminate a player with the toy ammunition and then program that player out of the game, instead of generating an error and causing the robot to try and find better ammo. That just seems silly.
IMPRESSIONS: Okay, so this movie is 18 years old. I can't remember if I saw it before or not. I am sure I haven't reviewed it before. Still, reasonable plot, good acting and decent special effects overall. It might have been more comfortable if it had been released in the 80's, but it's mere existence raises a question. Didn't we learn enough from Evolver (1994) to know we should NEVER include military grade projects in our children's toys by the time Small Soldiers (1998) was made? I guess not! I'm not really sure if this movie qualifies as "horror," but as "Alien" proved, science fiction could be scary, too. This movie is certainly not as good as "Alien," but I always include sci-fi in my horror list. Let's put it this way, if there's a good monster in it, I love the movie! If there isn't, well, it may still be horror, but it's not MY kind of horror. This movie at least had a robot with a penchant for killing in it, and that qualifies as a sufficiently scary monster type for it to make my list.
OTHER NEWS: I have a headache and I feel ill again. For those that know me, nothing new there. I'm probably coming down with the next virus, infection, flu or cold that's making the rounds. Strangely, I'm usually pretty healthy during the summer months. I need to move to florida or something where i'm always warm. Seems to be a better environment for me.
This has been a decent month full of reviewing new movies, but I think I am going to just review what I want to watch the next few days. If I find anything I haven't seen before and want to give it a viewing, great, but I'm tired of scouring netflix for stuff I haven't seen yet. Frankly, most of the movies either suck, or aren't horror, which really narrows down what I can view this month. Oh well, only 3 days left anyway. I'll still try and find stuff I haven't reviewed before, but with over 200 posts to look through every time I want to see if I've reviewed something before, I think I'll just hope I haven't reviewed it recently and watch it for sheer enjoyment's sake. Funny, I haven't seen Charlie Brown's Great Pumpkin so far this year. I will look for it this week.
Also, I love watching "Trick r Treat" every year on Halloween. If you haven't seen it, one of the best actual "Halloween" movies I've ever seen. Everything that happens during the movie takes place ON halloween, there's lots of gore and killing and halloween ghost stories and such and so on, and it's fun to watch besides. Something for everyone! Reminds me of the original Halloween by John Carpenter. Plus, Trick R Treat has actual monsters instead of just masked killers! AND Anna Paquin! Halloween doesn't have Anna Paquin. So there! :-P
Okay, I am going to get a lot of rest and watch nothing but horror the next few days. See you guys tomorrow night for another review. We're in the home stretch!
Saturday, October 27, 2012
#27 - Devil's Playground
MOVIE: Devil's Playground (2010). Now showing on TMC.
PLOT: A new performance enhancing drug causes a zombie apocalypse. A mercenary working for the company that created the drug finds out there's a person immune to the drug, and therefore may have a cure for the zombie plague. Unfortunately, he has no idea where she is. Tracking her down amid a horde of ravenous zombies could prove a bit difficult!
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: Pretty good! Better than average zombie movie.
GOOD POINTS: Made in england, where they pay attention to acting instead of special effects and how pretty the actors are. Which doesn't mean low budget. This looks like it was a major production. Plenty of gore, fast-moving zombies, lots of action. Recognizable english veteran actors.
BAD POINTS: So many characters going through different plots created a bit of confusion at first. They all tie together in the end.
SPOILERS: What's up with all the zombies knowing Parkour as soon as they turn? lol These baddies are leaping off walls, ceilings and stationary objects to get at their prey. I understand the drug supposedly gives them greater strength and endurance, but how does leaping off a wall compute into food for the zombie brain? Doesn't make sense. Also... Why are they scared of water? Never explained.
IMPRESSION: Good zombie flick. Bunch of major english actors. I recognized many of the faces, even if I didn't really know their names. Plenty of action, romance, drama, regret, guilty consciences and generally human foibles to be found. So a pretty realistic look at the end of the world. lol
OTHER NEWS: Lots of movie titles with "Devil" in them this month! Also, there's a Frankenstorm headed our way, combo of Hurricane Sandy and a Nor'easter headed our way. Typically, we don't get much snow from the nor'easters here and we are several hundred miles inland from the coast, so I doubt we'll get much more than some clouds and rain. A thunderstorm would be nice. But we're stocked up on food and water anyway. Also, Hurricane Sandy is supposed to be here around Halloween, so (1) little chance of seeing that full moon on Halloween and (2) less trick or Treaters means more candy for me! Wheeeeee! :-D
See you guys tomorrow night.
PLOT: A new performance enhancing drug causes a zombie apocalypse. A mercenary working for the company that created the drug finds out there's a person immune to the drug, and therefore may have a cure for the zombie plague. Unfortunately, he has no idea where she is. Tracking her down amid a horde of ravenous zombies could prove a bit difficult!
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: Pretty good! Better than average zombie movie.
GOOD POINTS: Made in england, where they pay attention to acting instead of special effects and how pretty the actors are. Which doesn't mean low budget. This looks like it was a major production. Plenty of gore, fast-moving zombies, lots of action. Recognizable english veteran actors.
BAD POINTS: So many characters going through different plots created a bit of confusion at first. They all tie together in the end.
SPOILERS: What's up with all the zombies knowing Parkour as soon as they turn? lol These baddies are leaping off walls, ceilings and stationary objects to get at their prey. I understand the drug supposedly gives them greater strength and endurance, but how does leaping off a wall compute into food for the zombie brain? Doesn't make sense. Also... Why are they scared of water? Never explained.
IMPRESSION: Good zombie flick. Bunch of major english actors. I recognized many of the faces, even if I didn't really know their names. Plenty of action, romance, drama, regret, guilty consciences and generally human foibles to be found. So a pretty realistic look at the end of the world. lol
OTHER NEWS: Lots of movie titles with "Devil" in them this month! Also, there's a Frankenstorm headed our way, combo of Hurricane Sandy and a Nor'easter headed our way. Typically, we don't get much snow from the nor'easters here and we are several hundred miles inland from the coast, so I doubt we'll get much more than some clouds and rain. A thunderstorm would be nice. But we're stocked up on food and water anyway. Also, Hurricane Sandy is supposed to be here around Halloween, so (1) little chance of seeing that full moon on Halloween and (2) less trick or Treaters means more candy for me! Wheeeeee! :-D
See you guys tomorrow night.
#25 and #26 - Jeepers Creepers and Pumpkinhead
Yes, I know. I missed my movie last night. So tonight you get a double feature! :-D
And yes, I HAVE seen both of tonight's features, but I had a request to review Jeepers Creepers, and Pumpkinhead was following it, so here you are!
MOVIE #25: Jeepers Creepers (2001) Was playing on AMC.
PLOT: A pair of siblings are heading home on college break when they encounter a homicidal maniac driving an old truck on the road home. Passing by his lair, they see him dumping some bloody, sheet-wrapped bodies down an old pipe. Now they are faced with a decision... To try and help his victims while he's away from his lair, or to go for help?
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: Love this movie. Rewatched it many times.
GOOD POINTS: Suspense, good acting, early appearance by Justin Long and some veteran actors to round out the cast. Good plot, lots of surprises.
BAD POINTS: No nudity! Damn. Gina Phillips is kind of hot in a girl next door kind of way.
SPOILERS: Love me some creature features! As the psychic tells Derry, "Don't know whether it's a demon, or devil, or just some.. thing..." that crawled out of some damn hell hole or whatever the rest of it was. Don't remember the full quote but that psychic was goddamn creepy. In fact this whole movie is creepy. I'm scared just thinking about it. Frankly if I was the Creeper fella I'd have thought twice before going near the Cat lady, though. She was freakin terrifying. I thought she was undead the first time I seen her, i truly did. lol
IMPRESSIONS: Not only worth a watch, but worth several watches. It's almost too much movie to take in in one viewing. You have to watch it several times to notice all the creepiness. And then it just keeps getting creepier, EVERY TIME! :-o This movie not only spawned a sequel that was almost as good, but Jeepers Creepers 3 is coming out next year! :-D
MOVIE: #26: Pumpkinhead (1988)
PLOT: Ed Harley is a simple man. He's a farmer, one of those fellas with a roadside produce stand. He's also got a son. A son he's very proud of, a son who is the last living remnant of his dead wife. But now he's got a problem. Some damn city folk done come along and rode their dirt bikes right the fuck over his little boy. Ed Harley don't take kindly to city folk, and specially not those'uns that done kilt his boy. So now... Ed Harley wants vengeance. And Ed Harley is goin to get it, one way... or t'other...
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: Fuck yea! Another vengeance movie! Everyone loves a good vengeance movie!
GOOD POINTS: Lance Henriksen! The man's a helluvan actor! Good mix of backwoods mysticism and a man in a latex suit as far as special effects goes. And George "Buck" Flower! The legend hisself! Well not a legend but a heckuva character actor.
BAD POINTS: No nudity! Well.. technically I guess Pumpkinhead isn't wearing anything... So... if naked vengeance demons are your thing, then (1) happy wanking and (2) you're one sick fuck.
SPOILERS: I kind of like pumpkinhead. I mean, for a vengeance demon, he looks like he'd be one helluva party animal. And shit, someone gets hammered and starts anything, you've got him to back you up! Can't go wrong there. SAY HELLO TO MY GIGANTIC FRIEND! YEEEAAAAHHHHH!!!
IMPRESSIONS: B-Movie goodness! I've only seen this movie a couple times. It's not the best vengeance flick ever, but it's pretty good. Lance acts his ass off, and there's lots of killing, blood, gore, blood sacrifices and so on! Worth a watch for sure! This movie spawned 3 sequels!
OTHER NEWS: "Five minutes til midnight. Enough time for one more story..." Err, uh, i mean, one weekend before Halloween! Yay! Hope everyone is partying it up! Even better, voting day coming up, that means all the political SHIT on TV will be over soon! That's right America! Our long national nightmare will finally be over! At least for a few years, anyway. (shrugs) Also, full moon on Halloween night! :-D
See you guys tomorrow night!
Thursday, October 25, 2012
#24 - Death Machine
MOVIE: Death Machine (1994). On NetFlix.
PLOT: The new CEO of Chaank industries (a weapons manufacturer), Hayden Cale, finds out that her new company is secretly refitting the bodies of soldiers listed as MIA with Weapons hardware and testing them as the ultimate killing machine, man sized armored warriors with no fear and no disobedience. About to shut the project down, Hayden crosses paths with the genius behind the company's success, and the inventor of it's next project... a fully mechanical killing machine that tracks you by the scent of your fear.
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: A bit goofy in spots, but tension is high throughout, first psychological, then full of action. Good watch.
GOOD POINTS: Hayden Cale (Ely Pouget) is reasonably hot. Jack Dante (played by Brad Dourif) is over the top psychotic. Love the name of the company. Chaank. It even sounds like a weapon manufacturer. lol
BAD POINTS: No nudity. Sigh. I need to watch more porn-horror. Horror-porn? Whore-or? Hmmm. New genre? Or just your basic slasher flick from the 80's? Hmmm.
SPOILERS: Could have done without the armored suit guys with the missing memories. I'm pretty sure they used them in Universal Soldier for about 3 movies. Didn't need to parade them around again in this one. lol Loved the Death Machine. Going to invent one myself right now.
IMPRESSIONS: Fun movie. Good acting, especially by Brad Dourif who is completely psychotic in just about any role he's ever played. The only time I saw him play a good guy was as the Sheriff in Halloween (the latest remake). And he was psychotic then, too, but then at least it made sense to give the crazy guy a badge and a gun. lol Good supporting cast in this movie. I loved the bald guy with the facepaint! lol Best character in the movie, I think. I did actually see this movie before, several times, in fact, but always a good watch.
OTHER NEWS: I'd have scoured netflix again for a new movie to watch, but I been running the car around all day. Get this. Car goes to the mechanic with an intermittent window issue. Won't go up or down half the time. Also, the blinkers cut out now and then, doesn't happen often. I figure, electrical issue, but I know shit-all about cars, so I let the man do his job. He says the motors that make the windows go up and down is shot, replaces it in both doors. Nearly $300. We get the car back. Still having the same problem... AND... driver side door will not lock. I can manually shove the button down to the lock position, and it pops right back up. Awesome, innit? lol It's worse than when it went in! Bloody 'ell, as they say across the pond. Bloody 'ell.
Also, still not feeling great. What started with a headache last night turned into aches and shivers. Sounds like another flu, no? Welcome, viral overlords. Possess my body if you like, but at least clean up when you are done or I WILL send you the cleaning bill. Oh yes. I'll hit you where it hurts, baby! Hmmm. Viral Overlords... good novel title! :-D
See you guys (and/or gals) tomorrow night for more horror! Just noticed I passed 200 posts this month. In 4 years that's ... (does some math... uses his fingers and toes) approximately one post a week on average! You know, when I say it like that it's not really that impressive. Never mind.
PLOT: The new CEO of Chaank industries (a weapons manufacturer), Hayden Cale, finds out that her new company is secretly refitting the bodies of soldiers listed as MIA with Weapons hardware and testing them as the ultimate killing machine, man sized armored warriors with no fear and no disobedience. About to shut the project down, Hayden crosses paths with the genius behind the company's success, and the inventor of it's next project... a fully mechanical killing machine that tracks you by the scent of your fear.
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: A bit goofy in spots, but tension is high throughout, first psychological, then full of action. Good watch.
GOOD POINTS: Hayden Cale (Ely Pouget) is reasonably hot. Jack Dante (played by Brad Dourif) is over the top psychotic. Love the name of the company. Chaank. It even sounds like a weapon manufacturer. lol
BAD POINTS: No nudity. Sigh. I need to watch more porn-horror. Horror-porn? Whore-or? Hmmm. New genre? Or just your basic slasher flick from the 80's? Hmmm.
SPOILERS: Could have done without the armored suit guys with the missing memories. I'm pretty sure they used them in Universal Soldier for about 3 movies. Didn't need to parade them around again in this one. lol Loved the Death Machine. Going to invent one myself right now.
IMPRESSIONS: Fun movie. Good acting, especially by Brad Dourif who is completely psychotic in just about any role he's ever played. The only time I saw him play a good guy was as the Sheriff in Halloween (the latest remake). And he was psychotic then, too, but then at least it made sense to give the crazy guy a badge and a gun. lol Good supporting cast in this movie. I loved the bald guy with the facepaint! lol Best character in the movie, I think. I did actually see this movie before, several times, in fact, but always a good watch.
OTHER NEWS: I'd have scoured netflix again for a new movie to watch, but I been running the car around all day. Get this. Car goes to the mechanic with an intermittent window issue. Won't go up or down half the time. Also, the blinkers cut out now and then, doesn't happen often. I figure, electrical issue, but I know shit-all about cars, so I let the man do his job. He says the motors that make the windows go up and down is shot, replaces it in both doors. Nearly $300. We get the car back. Still having the same problem... AND... driver side door will not lock. I can manually shove the button down to the lock position, and it pops right back up. Awesome, innit? lol It's worse than when it went in! Bloody 'ell, as they say across the pond. Bloody 'ell.
Also, still not feeling great. What started with a headache last night turned into aches and shivers. Sounds like another flu, no? Welcome, viral overlords. Possess my body if you like, but at least clean up when you are done or I WILL send you the cleaning bill. Oh yes. I'll hit you where it hurts, baby! Hmmm. Viral Overlords... good novel title! :-D
See you guys (and/or gals) tomorrow night for more horror! Just noticed I passed 200 posts this month. In 4 years that's ... (does some math... uses his fingers and toes) approximately one post a week on average! You know, when I say it like that it's not really that impressive. Never mind.
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
#23 - The Gate
MOVIE: The Gate (1987). Available on netflix til 10/30.
PLOT: Demons with unimaginable power who once ruled the universe find their way back into our world by way of a deep hole in a suburban backyard. Sending their minions out into the world to obtain two human sacrifices, they try and take over the world they once ruled! And they would have got away with it too if it wasn't for those pesky kids!
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: Good solid B-movie. Lots of demonic critters, even a zombie!
GOOD POINTS: Demonic entities, zombies, corpses, possessed moths, creepy parents.
BAD POINTS: 80's special effects. No nudity.
SPOILERS: "Ancient demons with unimaginable power" just doesn't mean what it used to, you know?
IMPRESSIONS: I like this movie but I have seen it before. I don't remember reviewing it, and I'm way too headache-y to look right now. I took an hour scouring netflix for something I haven't seen before, started a movie, realized I had seen it, and decided to watch this because netflix was getting rid of it by the 30th. It's a solid B-movie, there's action, demons, zombies, stupid kids and teens and a demon that looks like a garden slug with arms. What more could you ask for from the 80's? To sum up, this is like a Disney interpretation of H.P. Lovecraft, which, still isn't that bad.
OTHER NEWS: I has a headache. Hopefully I can find a better movie tomorrow night. Sorry for the short review.
PLOT: Demons with unimaginable power who once ruled the universe find their way back into our world by way of a deep hole in a suburban backyard. Sending their minions out into the world to obtain two human sacrifices, they try and take over the world they once ruled! And they would have got away with it too if it wasn't for those pesky kids!
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: Good solid B-movie. Lots of demonic critters, even a zombie!
GOOD POINTS: Demonic entities, zombies, corpses, possessed moths, creepy parents.
BAD POINTS: 80's special effects. No nudity.
SPOILERS: "Ancient demons with unimaginable power" just doesn't mean what it used to, you know?
IMPRESSIONS: I like this movie but I have seen it before. I don't remember reviewing it, and I'm way too headache-y to look right now. I took an hour scouring netflix for something I haven't seen before, started a movie, realized I had seen it, and decided to watch this because netflix was getting rid of it by the 30th. It's a solid B-movie, there's action, demons, zombies, stupid kids and teens and a demon that looks like a garden slug with arms. What more could you ask for from the 80's? To sum up, this is like a Disney interpretation of H.P. Lovecraft, which, still isn't that bad.
OTHER NEWS: I has a headache. Hopefully I can find a better movie tomorrow night. Sorry for the short review.
#22 - Exorcismus
MOVIE: Exorcismus (2010) Currently on Netflix, where I watched it.
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: Slow starter, but not bad! Second half of the movie was pretty decent.
PLOT: Teen girl gets possessed by satan. Priest who recently tried to exorcise a demon from another girl tries to help her, but his last exorcism was not only a failure, but the girl died as well. Is Satan up for round 2, or is the priest down for the count? There's no referee in this mano-a-mano battle of wills!
GOOD POINTS: No CGI, I don't think. Special effects are all acting and makeup. This is definitely NOT a "found footage" or "paranormal disasters" type of film. All the film is high quality. One nice twist near the end that was original and that I certainly didn't see coming. Everyone in this film looks normal! No teen hotties!
BAD POINTS: No nudity again! Sigh. Teen girl isn't all that interesting. Hard to identify with any of the characters, for me at least. Another film about demonic possession, very similar to others in the genre. Everyone in this film looks normal! No teen hotties! And yes, that is both a good AND bad thing. lol
SPOILERS: Talk about your anti-heroes! lol I don't want to spoil anything of the plot in case anyone wants to watch it, but this is definitely the only film of it's kind where the line between villain and hero is not only blurred, but completely erased and re-drawn. lol Impressive and unexpected!
IMPRESSIONS: I thought I was going to turn it off for the first half of the film. Seriously, you've got this teen girl, and she's going through your typical teen girl drama that I cannot identify with and don't understand, and she's not even getting naked, and nothing really of any interest happens for like the first 40 minutes of the film. I mean, there's a lot of backstory and events leading up to where the good stuff starts, so I wouldn't recommend fast forwarding (i was SO tempted), but after that, then things turn around. The rest of the movie was pretty decent. We're not talking the Exorcist here, but a pretty good cage match between good and evil in the end! Just, got to make it through that first half of the movie. lol
OTHER NEWS: Flu season has started! I read this story the other day about a 17 year old high school athlete who got the flu and a MRSA (meticillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus) infection and died within days. Basically they used the article as a hammering point for telling people that getting your flu shot is the best line of defense against the flu. Here's my problem with the article... There is no defense against the flu. It mutates every year. Saying the flu vaccine is the best defense may technically be true (since it's the only thing we have as an option), but it's like trying to stop a bullet by shooting it out of the air with another bullet. Let me explain.
Let's say a new strain of influenza starts infecting people in October. By november or december, the new strain is identified and catalogued, and perhaps another month or two for a vaccine to be identified. So let's say vaccine production begins on the new strain of flu by january. It takes 6 months to grow ANY quantity of vaccine, longer for the vast amounts that would be necessary to treat the populace of any major country. So by July of the following year, the first doses of the vaccine might be ready. And that is the EARLIEST possible time that any doses might be available. If you know your flu seasons, it doesn't start til october or november every year. So that gives the drug companies a few months between july and october to make enough to package, market and distribute. Yes, that's right. The vaccine for last year's strain is just getting finished up right about now. So here's another problem...
Doctors always tell you, you don't get sick from the flu vaccine. That's mostly true! The virus in the vaccine is either completely dead (in the case of a shot) or mostly dead (in the case of the inhalant, which you may actually catch the flu from, but the odds are slim). So why DO people get sick from it? I know I did. The fever, chills, etc. is your body's way of processing the antibodies necessary to become immune to the variant that you were injected with. You're not actually infected with the flu, it just FEELS like it, while your body reacts to one of the strains of flu in the vaccine. Yes, ONE of... the usual flu shot contains 3 vaccines for 3 of last year's most common varieties of influenza. Yes, not ALL 3 varieties, just 3 of the most common ones. There are many varieties of flu every year. Not to mention, if there was a major outbreak (like the swine flu a few years back) they usually include a vaccine for that in addition to the 3 most common strains.
So basically, let me sum up. IF their vaccine works EXACTLY the way they want it to, you get sick. You might miss days of work due to your body processing a dead virus so it can make antibodies to fight off last year's flu. This gives absolutely NO protection for THIS year's flu, since the flu strain mutates yearly to overcome your body's immune system. However, if at that point, you DO happen to get exposed to one of those 3 strains of last year's flu (how that might happen, I have absolutely no idea... Not even my genius brain can come up with a scenario whereby last year's flu strain slowly traveled the world and took an entire year to make its way to you), then congrats! You MAY (i say may because not even the doctors can guarantee that the flu shot actually works) not get as sick as you might if you had just got the flu in the first place. Money well spent. If their vaccine fails completely (meaning, you already had all 3 of those strains of flu last year), then you don't get sick (because there's nothing new for your body to react to), and you've spent the $20 or so for nothing. And then next year, you get to do it all again!
Oh, and in case you're one of those "man this guy is nuts!" folks, well, look it up, people. I'm not a conspiracy theorist. Nobody is out to get me. This is all fact. All this information is readily available on and off the internet. There's no argument about the effectiveness of the flu vaccine. Even the doctors and the pharmaceutical companies will tell you how it's made. Quite simply, it's the only option we currently have, even if it's mostly or completely useless. (shrugs)
I say, enjoy the flu season! Welcome our new viral overlords, and take a few days off work to shiver, and drink hot cocoa, and catch up on your sleep. lol See you all tomorrow night.
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: Slow starter, but not bad! Second half of the movie was pretty decent.
PLOT: Teen girl gets possessed by satan. Priest who recently tried to exorcise a demon from another girl tries to help her, but his last exorcism was not only a failure, but the girl died as well. Is Satan up for round 2, or is the priest down for the count? There's no referee in this mano-a-mano battle of wills!
GOOD POINTS: No CGI, I don't think. Special effects are all acting and makeup. This is definitely NOT a "found footage" or "paranormal disasters" type of film. All the film is high quality. One nice twist near the end that was original and that I certainly didn't see coming. Everyone in this film looks normal! No teen hotties!
BAD POINTS: No nudity again! Sigh. Teen girl isn't all that interesting. Hard to identify with any of the characters, for me at least. Another film about demonic possession, very similar to others in the genre. Everyone in this film looks normal! No teen hotties! And yes, that is both a good AND bad thing. lol
SPOILERS: Talk about your anti-heroes! lol I don't want to spoil anything of the plot in case anyone wants to watch it, but this is definitely the only film of it's kind where the line between villain and hero is not only blurred, but completely erased and re-drawn. lol Impressive and unexpected!
IMPRESSIONS: I thought I was going to turn it off for the first half of the film. Seriously, you've got this teen girl, and she's going through your typical teen girl drama that I cannot identify with and don't understand, and she's not even getting naked, and nothing really of any interest happens for like the first 40 minutes of the film. I mean, there's a lot of backstory and events leading up to where the good stuff starts, so I wouldn't recommend fast forwarding (i was SO tempted), but after that, then things turn around. The rest of the movie was pretty decent. We're not talking the Exorcist here, but a pretty good cage match between good and evil in the end! Just, got to make it through that first half of the movie. lol
OTHER NEWS: Flu season has started! I read this story the other day about a 17 year old high school athlete who got the flu and a MRSA (meticillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus) infection and died within days. Basically they used the article as a hammering point for telling people that getting your flu shot is the best line of defense against the flu. Here's my problem with the article... There is no defense against the flu. It mutates every year. Saying the flu vaccine is the best defense may technically be true (since it's the only thing we have as an option), but it's like trying to stop a bullet by shooting it out of the air with another bullet. Let me explain.
Let's say a new strain of influenza starts infecting people in October. By november or december, the new strain is identified and catalogued, and perhaps another month or two for a vaccine to be identified. So let's say vaccine production begins on the new strain of flu by january. It takes 6 months to grow ANY quantity of vaccine, longer for the vast amounts that would be necessary to treat the populace of any major country. So by July of the following year, the first doses of the vaccine might be ready. And that is the EARLIEST possible time that any doses might be available. If you know your flu seasons, it doesn't start til october or november every year. So that gives the drug companies a few months between july and october to make enough to package, market and distribute. Yes, that's right. The vaccine for last year's strain is just getting finished up right about now. So here's another problem...
Doctors always tell you, you don't get sick from the flu vaccine. That's mostly true! The virus in the vaccine is either completely dead (in the case of a shot) or mostly dead (in the case of the inhalant, which you may actually catch the flu from, but the odds are slim). So why DO people get sick from it? I know I did. The fever, chills, etc. is your body's way of processing the antibodies necessary to become immune to the variant that you were injected with. You're not actually infected with the flu, it just FEELS like it, while your body reacts to one of the strains of flu in the vaccine. Yes, ONE of... the usual flu shot contains 3 vaccines for 3 of last year's most common varieties of influenza. Yes, not ALL 3 varieties, just 3 of the most common ones. There are many varieties of flu every year. Not to mention, if there was a major outbreak (like the swine flu a few years back) they usually include a vaccine for that in addition to the 3 most common strains.
So basically, let me sum up. IF their vaccine works EXACTLY the way they want it to, you get sick. You might miss days of work due to your body processing a dead virus so it can make antibodies to fight off last year's flu. This gives absolutely NO protection for THIS year's flu, since the flu strain mutates yearly to overcome your body's immune system. However, if at that point, you DO happen to get exposed to one of those 3 strains of last year's flu (how that might happen, I have absolutely no idea... Not even my genius brain can come up with a scenario whereby last year's flu strain slowly traveled the world and took an entire year to make its way to you), then congrats! You MAY (i say may because not even the doctors can guarantee that the flu shot actually works) not get as sick as you might if you had just got the flu in the first place. Money well spent. If their vaccine fails completely (meaning, you already had all 3 of those strains of flu last year), then you don't get sick (because there's nothing new for your body to react to), and you've spent the $20 or so for nothing. And then next year, you get to do it all again!
Oh, and in case you're one of those "man this guy is nuts!" folks, well, look it up, people. I'm not a conspiracy theorist. Nobody is out to get me. This is all fact. All this information is readily available on and off the internet. There's no argument about the effectiveness of the flu vaccine. Even the doctors and the pharmaceutical companies will tell you how it's made. Quite simply, it's the only option we currently have, even if it's mostly or completely useless. (shrugs)
I say, enjoy the flu season! Welcome our new viral overlords, and take a few days off work to shiver, and drink hot cocoa, and catch up on your sleep. lol See you all tomorrow night.
Sunday, October 21, 2012
#21 - Saint Nick
MOVIE: Saint Nick (2010)
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: Lots of action! Zombies! Evil Santa clauses! So, fun. lol
PLOT: Saint Nick, instead of being a saintly gift-giving lover of children, is actually the undead remains of a bishop of the catholic church who, during the middle ages, roamed the countryside with his crew of "black petes" every full moon and stole food, gold and children from the populace. Finally, one town, fed up with the taking of their children and his demands for fresh meat, burned the bishop to death. That town was Amsterdam. Now, whenever the full moon falls on december 5th (every 32 years or so), Saint Nick returns to Amsterdam to seek VENGEANCE! :-o
GOOD POINTS: About time someone told the true story of St. Nick! I've never trusted that guy. Watches your children all year round to see whether they've been naughty or nice, breaks into your house once a year and leaves presents under the tree for them, leaving absolutely no trace of himself except some missing cookies and milk? CREEPY AS HELL! How is it this guy is not already locked up in a maximum security prison?
BAD POINTS: No nudity, despite some decent opportunities to reveal the finer points of the actresses. Definite B-movie fare.
SPOILERS: Man, that big bald SWAT guy had a really goddamn deep voice. I was hoping for some mano-a-mano with him and saint nick, but it never happened. lol Just saying the name gives me the shivers. Sinterklaas. Sounds like a vicious bloodthirsty demon of hell to me. SSSIIIINTERRRRRKLAAAASSSSSSSSSSS gah! Sorry. I scared myself. Also, I think I peed just a little.
IMPRESSIONS: Solid B-Movie. No boobage, unfortunately, but I guess Christmas isn't exactly the most obvious holiday for nudity. Much to my disappointment. :-( But, still a decent movie. Looking forward to St. Nick 2: NEW YEAR'S VENGEANCE! Yea, I did just make that up. lol Worth a watch. Probably not twice, but at least once. Funny in spots. Unintentionally, I think, but I am pretty sure the movie doesn't take itself too seriously.
OTHER NEWS: Dexter's on! Time to go! See you tomorrow night! :-D
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: Lots of action! Zombies! Evil Santa clauses! So, fun. lol
PLOT: Saint Nick, instead of being a saintly gift-giving lover of children, is actually the undead remains of a bishop of the catholic church who, during the middle ages, roamed the countryside with his crew of "black petes" every full moon and stole food, gold and children from the populace. Finally, one town, fed up with the taking of their children and his demands for fresh meat, burned the bishop to death. That town was Amsterdam. Now, whenever the full moon falls on december 5th (every 32 years or so), Saint Nick returns to Amsterdam to seek VENGEANCE! :-o
GOOD POINTS: About time someone told the true story of St. Nick! I've never trusted that guy. Watches your children all year round to see whether they've been naughty or nice, breaks into your house once a year and leaves presents under the tree for them, leaving absolutely no trace of himself except some missing cookies and milk? CREEPY AS HELL! How is it this guy is not already locked up in a maximum security prison?
BAD POINTS: No nudity, despite some decent opportunities to reveal the finer points of the actresses. Definite B-movie fare.
SPOILERS: Man, that big bald SWAT guy had a really goddamn deep voice. I was hoping for some mano-a-mano with him and saint nick, but it never happened. lol Just saying the name gives me the shivers. Sinterklaas. Sounds like a vicious bloodthirsty demon of hell to me. SSSIIIINTERRRRRKLAAAASSSSSSSSSSS gah! Sorry. I scared myself. Also, I think I peed just a little.
IMPRESSIONS: Solid B-Movie. No boobage, unfortunately, but I guess Christmas isn't exactly the most obvious holiday for nudity. Much to my disappointment. :-( But, still a decent movie. Looking forward to St. Nick 2: NEW YEAR'S VENGEANCE! Yea, I did just make that up. lol Worth a watch. Probably not twice, but at least once. Funny in spots. Unintentionally, I think, but I am pretty sure the movie doesn't take itself too seriously.
OTHER NEWS: Dexter's on! Time to go! See you tomorrow night! :-D
Saturday, October 20, 2012
#20 - Apollo 18
MOVIE: Apollo 18 (2011)
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: Not much! Very little, in fact.
PLOT: Supposedly released footage of the final apollo 18 mission reveals an alien presence on the moon.
GOOD POINTS: Unique aliens, i guess.
BAD POINTS: Constant breaking up of "found footage," constant breaking up of communications, constant loss of video feed due to camera being"off." Doubtless done to enhance the "suspense," only ended up driving me nuts.
SPOILERS: Why would an alien-infested, wounded guy pick up a camera and start filming another guy in his sleep? Honestly? Also, it's at least -300 degrees fahrenheit on the moon's surface, yet the astronauts, who are in spacesuits, repeatedly mention how much colder it's getting when they go into craters. There's no atmosphere on the moon. It's not any colder in the craters. If there was any change in atmosphere at all, it would be warmer since the actual presence of any atmosphere would tend to warm things up. But they still wouldn't feel it through the suits. That's the whole point of having the spacesuits, to protect the wearer from the environment. They aren't big, funny-looking raincoats!
IMPRESSIONS: I really despise these "found footage" pieces of trash. They save money on cameras, film, acting talent and special effects by making the film quality look "old and grainy" or repeatedly cut out while the camera is supposedly "off" so they don't have to show any actual action, or only a little of it. There's long shots of darkness or nothing while voices pantomime shit happening offscreen that we can't see, so we're supposed to use our imaginations to fill in the gaps. I couldn't even watch Blair Witch project because of that bs, and that was the first film that used this crappy style of filming, and the novelty of it sold a few tickets. The novelty has long since worn off. Trying to watch this movie was like trying to watch a bad B-movie while my cable tv kept cutting out. It's just not worth the annoyance level. This is why I dropped satellite TV, because we'd get a lot of storms moving through our area and the TV would repeatedly cut out and you'd miss what was going on. Just spend money on the damn film, show the action on camera, stop making the audio cut out, and you might keep a few viewers. Currently playing on showtime or something like that. I'm not watching it again and I recommend a pass on this one if you're even remotely interested. Not even worth it. The "found footage" of the astronauts having a barbecue in their yards (how that got added to the supposedly released lunar footage makes no sense either) was more interesting than the actual film.
BONUS REVIEW: "Creature" (1984). Not a bad little sci-fi B-movie! Not the same "Creature" as the one I reviewed earlier this month, this one has a crew of research scientists going to rescue the crew of an archaeological dig on Jupiter's moon, Titan. unfortunately, when they get there, they discover the archaeological dig happening to find an alien zoo. Several of the critters were still alive after 200,000 years. And, understandably, a bit hungry. Bit of nudity, 80's hair, Klaus Kinski, aliens and zombies! Can't go wrong here!
OTHER NEWS: Watching Elizabeth Shue in Piranha (2010). Still looking hot after all these years! lol See you guys tomorrow night.
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: Not much! Very little, in fact.
PLOT: Supposedly released footage of the final apollo 18 mission reveals an alien presence on the moon.
GOOD POINTS: Unique aliens, i guess.
BAD POINTS: Constant breaking up of "found footage," constant breaking up of communications, constant loss of video feed due to camera being"off." Doubtless done to enhance the "suspense," only ended up driving me nuts.
SPOILERS: Why would an alien-infested, wounded guy pick up a camera and start filming another guy in his sleep? Honestly? Also, it's at least -300 degrees fahrenheit on the moon's surface, yet the astronauts, who are in spacesuits, repeatedly mention how much colder it's getting when they go into craters. There's no atmosphere on the moon. It's not any colder in the craters. If there was any change in atmosphere at all, it would be warmer since the actual presence of any atmosphere would tend to warm things up. But they still wouldn't feel it through the suits. That's the whole point of having the spacesuits, to protect the wearer from the environment. They aren't big, funny-looking raincoats!
IMPRESSIONS: I really despise these "found footage" pieces of trash. They save money on cameras, film, acting talent and special effects by making the film quality look "old and grainy" or repeatedly cut out while the camera is supposedly "off" so they don't have to show any actual action, or only a little of it. There's long shots of darkness or nothing while voices pantomime shit happening offscreen that we can't see, so we're supposed to use our imaginations to fill in the gaps. I couldn't even watch Blair Witch project because of that bs, and that was the first film that used this crappy style of filming, and the novelty of it sold a few tickets. The novelty has long since worn off. Trying to watch this movie was like trying to watch a bad B-movie while my cable tv kept cutting out. It's just not worth the annoyance level. This is why I dropped satellite TV, because we'd get a lot of storms moving through our area and the TV would repeatedly cut out and you'd miss what was going on. Just spend money on the damn film, show the action on camera, stop making the audio cut out, and you might keep a few viewers. Currently playing on showtime or something like that. I'm not watching it again and I recommend a pass on this one if you're even remotely interested. Not even worth it. The "found footage" of the astronauts having a barbecue in their yards (how that got added to the supposedly released lunar footage makes no sense either) was more interesting than the actual film.
BONUS REVIEW: "Creature" (1984). Not a bad little sci-fi B-movie! Not the same "Creature" as the one I reviewed earlier this month, this one has a crew of research scientists going to rescue the crew of an archaeological dig on Jupiter's moon, Titan. unfortunately, when they get there, they discover the archaeological dig happening to find an alien zoo. Several of the critters were still alive after 200,000 years. And, understandably, a bit hungry. Bit of nudity, 80's hair, Klaus Kinski, aliens and zombies! Can't go wrong here!
OTHER NEWS: Watching Elizabeth Shue in Piranha (2010). Still looking hot after all these years! lol See you guys tomorrow night.
#19 - Session 9
MOVIE: Session 9 (2001)
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: Meh. Creepy, perhaps, not quite scary, rather confusing through most of it.
PLOT: A group of asbestos removers manage to get the low bid on an asbestos-removing job at an old closed mental asylum. As the days wear on, things start to get a little tense. Then one of the workers disappears, and things start to go downhill pretty quickly.
GOOD POINTS: Awesome location shots. Supposedly there actually was a Danvers institution for the mentally insane or something like that. I don't know if it was used during filming or what. Certainly the place is creepy as hell on the inside, as only an old abandoned insane asylum could be, and I love the opposite effect once people leave the building. The outside is as bright, sunny and cheerful as the inside is dark and oppressive, offering beautiful scenery and relaxing greenery, with birdsong aplenty. Good acting throughout.
BAD POINTS: Confusing story line. Had to look up on the internet what was supposedly actually going on. No real explanation. Easy enough to figure out whodunnit, no surprises there, just the why of it is never really answered. No nudity, but with this cast that's really a blessing.
SPOILERS: Supposedly (and you may need to know this information to figure things out in the film), there was an "entity" present in the asylum and it chose one of the cast to infest. I really hate giving away this sort of spoiler, but I spent literally the entirety of the film trying to figure out the why of it. They give so much history to this one former patient, I was somehow trying to connect that patient and the identity of the killer, but there is apparently no real connection at all except the "entity" theory. Which is strange because I identified the real killer right off. They basically showed his behavior in such a way that I literally had NO doubt about who it was, an in fact, who was doing the killing didn't even seem to be the real impetus behind the film. Mostly it was a question of why, which was never really answered, much to the film's detriment, I think.
IMPRESSIONS: I'm still confused. This movie is basically a confusing movie. I would have been fine if they had given a little more evidence to one explanation or the other, or even thrown a completely new theory into play and explained it at the end, but they didn't, so I was left quite unsatisfied. So it's basically a slow, thoughtful movie with a lot of suspense and no real consummation at the end, despite the small body count. I might watch again just to apply the new theory I read about on the internet to what i was seeing, in hopes of it clicking in and finally adding up, but I don't think a second viewing would help much. I would say maybe watch this one with some friends and have a discussion about possible theories afterwards? But don't get too drunk, or some fisticuffs may result.
OTHER NEWS: Grimm was good as usual, and apparently, they are bringing back the MUNSTERS! :-o Next week! I am flabbergasted. Munsters was one of my favorite shows growing up, mostly because the humor was better than in the Addams family. I doubt the new show will last more than a season (these blasts from the past never do), but hey, I applaud the effort.
BONUS REVIEW: The Lost Boys (1987) Also saw this movie tonight. Never reviewed it before, either, to my knowledge, mainly because it's such a cult classic and they play it during october every year! lol This movie was shot at the height of the 80s, starring many of the huge stars of the time. Jami gertz, jason patric, even the "two Coreys," as they were referred to back in the 80's. And Edward hermann, one of the most underrated character actors of our time. Yea, the guy who played richie rich's dad! lol Of course, Jami Gertz's career pretty much ended with "Twister," Jason Patric's career pretty much ended with "Speed 2" and the corey's careers pretty much died a few years after this movie, making "dream a little dream" (and of course, one of the coreys is deceased now). All in all I think only the older stars, dianne wiest and Edward herman, survived this movie. However, it was actually pretty decent, had great music throughout, and was even slightly scary/creepy in spots. Oh and of course, Keifer Sutherland pretty much made his career playing the vampire pack leader in this movie, because before this he'd only landed supporting parts and after this movie, he was (and still is, pretty much) hollywood gold. It's a pretty strong performance by him, I must admit, and basically glues the movie together. Worth watching for the music, fans of vampire films would also like this (and by fans of vampire films i do NOT mean Twilight fans), and good performances by keifer sutherland and most of the rest of the cast. Seriously, was that extra Frog brother really necessary? I know "the Lost Boys" spawned a couple awful sequels, but that kid only had like 3 lines of dialogue, tops. lol
That's it for tonight. I feel like an Orc peon. "Work work work!" Mostly because I have to run the car in for repairs first thing in the morning. blech.
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: Meh. Creepy, perhaps, not quite scary, rather confusing through most of it.
PLOT: A group of asbestos removers manage to get the low bid on an asbestos-removing job at an old closed mental asylum. As the days wear on, things start to get a little tense. Then one of the workers disappears, and things start to go downhill pretty quickly.
GOOD POINTS: Awesome location shots. Supposedly there actually was a Danvers institution for the mentally insane or something like that. I don't know if it was used during filming or what. Certainly the place is creepy as hell on the inside, as only an old abandoned insane asylum could be, and I love the opposite effect once people leave the building. The outside is as bright, sunny and cheerful as the inside is dark and oppressive, offering beautiful scenery and relaxing greenery, with birdsong aplenty. Good acting throughout.
BAD POINTS: Confusing story line. Had to look up on the internet what was supposedly actually going on. No real explanation. Easy enough to figure out whodunnit, no surprises there, just the why of it is never really answered. No nudity, but with this cast that's really a blessing.
SPOILERS: Supposedly (and you may need to know this information to figure things out in the film), there was an "entity" present in the asylum and it chose one of the cast to infest. I really hate giving away this sort of spoiler, but I spent literally the entirety of the film trying to figure out the why of it. They give so much history to this one former patient, I was somehow trying to connect that patient and the identity of the killer, but there is apparently no real connection at all except the "entity" theory. Which is strange because I identified the real killer right off. They basically showed his behavior in such a way that I literally had NO doubt about who it was, an in fact, who was doing the killing didn't even seem to be the real impetus behind the film. Mostly it was a question of why, which was never really answered, much to the film's detriment, I think.
IMPRESSIONS: I'm still confused. This movie is basically a confusing movie. I would have been fine if they had given a little more evidence to one explanation or the other, or even thrown a completely new theory into play and explained it at the end, but they didn't, so I was left quite unsatisfied. So it's basically a slow, thoughtful movie with a lot of suspense and no real consummation at the end, despite the small body count. I might watch again just to apply the new theory I read about on the internet to what i was seeing, in hopes of it clicking in and finally adding up, but I don't think a second viewing would help much. I would say maybe watch this one with some friends and have a discussion about possible theories afterwards? But don't get too drunk, or some fisticuffs may result.
OTHER NEWS: Grimm was good as usual, and apparently, they are bringing back the MUNSTERS! :-o Next week! I am flabbergasted. Munsters was one of my favorite shows growing up, mostly because the humor was better than in the Addams family. I doubt the new show will last more than a season (these blasts from the past never do), but hey, I applaud the effort.
BONUS REVIEW: The Lost Boys (1987) Also saw this movie tonight. Never reviewed it before, either, to my knowledge, mainly because it's such a cult classic and they play it during october every year! lol This movie was shot at the height of the 80s, starring many of the huge stars of the time. Jami gertz, jason patric, even the "two Coreys," as they were referred to back in the 80's. And Edward hermann, one of the most underrated character actors of our time. Yea, the guy who played richie rich's dad! lol Of course, Jami Gertz's career pretty much ended with "Twister," Jason Patric's career pretty much ended with "Speed 2" and the corey's careers pretty much died a few years after this movie, making "dream a little dream" (and of course, one of the coreys is deceased now). All in all I think only the older stars, dianne wiest and Edward herman, survived this movie. However, it was actually pretty decent, had great music throughout, and was even slightly scary/creepy in spots. Oh and of course, Keifer Sutherland pretty much made his career playing the vampire pack leader in this movie, because before this he'd only landed supporting parts and after this movie, he was (and still is, pretty much) hollywood gold. It's a pretty strong performance by him, I must admit, and basically glues the movie together. Worth watching for the music, fans of vampire films would also like this (and by fans of vampire films i do NOT mean Twilight fans), and good performances by keifer sutherland and most of the rest of the cast. Seriously, was that extra Frog brother really necessary? I know "the Lost Boys" spawned a couple awful sequels, but that kid only had like 3 lines of dialogue, tops. lol
That's it for tonight. I feel like an Orc peon. "Work work work!" Mostly because I have to run the car in for repairs first thing in the morning. blech.
Friday, October 19, 2012
Horror movie #18 - The House Where Evil Dwells
MOVIE: The House Where Evil Dwells (1982)
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: Loved it, but I'm partial to japanese culture, which the movie is steeped in, like properly brewed green tea.
PLOT: A family moves to japan, and rents a beautiful 200 year old japanese house. Unfortunately, the house is the location of an ancient tragedy involving a samurai, one of his students, and the samurai's wife. Yes, an ancient love triangle of DEATH! Luckily, the family managed to get it cheap because the house is rumored to be haunted. Unfortunately, the house really IS haunted.
GOOD POINTS: For the 80's, this was a quality horror film. Big-name actors for the time, hot starlets, on-location shooting from the looks of it, plenty of extras and outdoor locations aplenty. Special effects were probably very good for the time. Also, this is probably the most in-depth look into japanese culture i have ever seen in a horror movie. Not only do they show a brief look at ancient japan, but modern-day Japan (as it was back in the early 80's, anyway) is frequently showcased and referred to. If you have an interest in ancient japanese history and culture (as i do), this film is probably a bonanza of interesting information for you. Also, there's a horror story in there! Plus nudity! And the music is perfect! Very immersive.
BAD POINTS: Bit dated by today's standards. Special effects won't give anyone nightmares. Not terribly frightening and you pretty much know where it's going from the beginning. Only available on netflix. They haven't shown this one on TV in decades.
SPOILERS: Not sure what was up with the crab scene. Also, why the HELL didn't the wife just get out if she was getting "spooked?" hah! I make joke! You laugh. Also, wtf is up with the evil spirits cooperating to haunt the family? Don't those spirits basically hate each other? Must be a japanese thing. Look for things happening in the background, too. There's one scene where the wife is relaxedly reading a book and a Noh (japanese theater) mask is actually rocking back and forth on the wall behind her before it flies off and crashes onto the tabletop. Something similar happened to me in reality at one point so the fear of it is not lost on me. I may sleep poorly tonight.
IMPRESSIONS: Back in the 80's, America had a huge hardon for japanese culture. There were ninja movies aplenty, samurai movies, geisha movies, martial arts movies, you name it, we made a movie about it or imported them from japan and china. I remember seeing this movie when I was a kid and being rather frightened by it. Sure, it wasn't even that frightening, since I had been quite the horror movie aficionado even back then, but it showed me that even the japanese culture (which i also had a hardon for) had it's own ghosts, demons and spirits to contend with. I think this movie is one of the few American (or at least, english-language) movies I have ever seen that directly mentions a tengu (evil spirit/goblin/fallen angel) as represented by a Noh mask, in addition to the wonderful japanese music played almost constantly throughout the film. Normally, japanese music is incredibly relaxing to me. In this film, it manages to be incredibly sad, tragic and frighteningly tense all at the same time. Impressive! Certainly worth a watch if only for the picture perfect snapshot of japanese culture and mythology, but the horror story isn't too bad either. I think this is my second or third time watching it, so it definitely passes the rewatchability test, even if it has been decades between viewings.
OTHER NEWS: Getting hard to find movies! I either have to start watching and reviewing some otherwise crappy movies or fall back on oldies but goodies. Or... I could branch out. Find some sci-fi / horror to review. Maybe some foreign horror movies. Might work. Only about two weeks left, I can do it! Although technically, tonight's movie is not new, I certainly have not reviewed it before, and haven't seen it in decades. My streak of never-before-seen movies may not be unbroken, but at least I haven't seen most of them before, and none in a long time, and hopefully I haven't reviewed any twice yet! Like The Mummy. lol
See you tomorrow night for more horror!
OVERALL ENJOYMENT: Loved it, but I'm partial to japanese culture, which the movie is steeped in, like properly brewed green tea.
PLOT: A family moves to japan, and rents a beautiful 200 year old japanese house. Unfortunately, the house is the location of an ancient tragedy involving a samurai, one of his students, and the samurai's wife. Yes, an ancient love triangle of DEATH! Luckily, the family managed to get it cheap because the house is rumored to be haunted. Unfortunately, the house really IS haunted.
GOOD POINTS: For the 80's, this was a quality horror film. Big-name actors for the time, hot starlets, on-location shooting from the looks of it, plenty of extras and outdoor locations aplenty. Special effects were probably very good for the time. Also, this is probably the most in-depth look into japanese culture i have ever seen in a horror movie. Not only do they show a brief look at ancient japan, but modern-day Japan (as it was back in the early 80's, anyway) is frequently showcased and referred to. If you have an interest in ancient japanese history and culture (as i do), this film is probably a bonanza of interesting information for you. Also, there's a horror story in there! Plus nudity! And the music is perfect! Very immersive.
BAD POINTS: Bit dated by today's standards. Special effects won't give anyone nightmares. Not terribly frightening and you pretty much know where it's going from the beginning. Only available on netflix. They haven't shown this one on TV in decades.
SPOILERS: Not sure what was up with the crab scene. Also, why the HELL didn't the wife just get out if she was getting "spooked?" hah! I make joke! You laugh. Also, wtf is up with the evil spirits cooperating to haunt the family? Don't those spirits basically hate each other? Must be a japanese thing. Look for things happening in the background, too. There's one scene where the wife is relaxedly reading a book and a Noh (japanese theater) mask is actually rocking back and forth on the wall behind her before it flies off and crashes onto the tabletop. Something similar happened to me in reality at one point so the fear of it is not lost on me. I may sleep poorly tonight.
IMPRESSIONS: Back in the 80's, America had a huge hardon for japanese culture. There were ninja movies aplenty, samurai movies, geisha movies, martial arts movies, you name it, we made a movie about it or imported them from japan and china. I remember seeing this movie when I was a kid and being rather frightened by it. Sure, it wasn't even that frightening, since I had been quite the horror movie aficionado even back then, but it showed me that even the japanese culture (which i also had a hardon for) had it's own ghosts, demons and spirits to contend with. I think this movie is one of the few American (or at least, english-language) movies I have ever seen that directly mentions a tengu (evil spirit/goblin/fallen angel) as represented by a Noh mask, in addition to the wonderful japanese music played almost constantly throughout the film. Normally, japanese music is incredibly relaxing to me. In this film, it manages to be incredibly sad, tragic and frighteningly tense all at the same time. Impressive! Certainly worth a watch if only for the picture perfect snapshot of japanese culture and mythology, but the horror story isn't too bad either. I think this is my second or third time watching it, so it definitely passes the rewatchability test, even if it has been decades between viewings.
OTHER NEWS: Getting hard to find movies! I either have to start watching and reviewing some otherwise crappy movies or fall back on oldies but goodies. Or... I could branch out. Find some sci-fi / horror to review. Maybe some foreign horror movies. Might work. Only about two weeks left, I can do it! Although technically, tonight's movie is not new, I certainly have not reviewed it before, and haven't seen it in decades. My streak of never-before-seen movies may not be unbroken, but at least I haven't seen most of them before, and none in a long time, and hopefully I haven't reviewed any twice yet! Like The Mummy. lol
See you tomorrow night for more horror!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)