Rymdinvasion i Lappland (1959)

Aka Terror in the Midnight Sun aka Invasion of the Animal People.
 

Aliens go to Sweden...

Terror in the Midnight Sun is an American/Swedish co-production. After a meteorite crashes in the wilds of Lapland scientists are sent to investigate. There is something peculiar about this, since meteorites generally don’t leave skid marks. Dr. Frederick Wilson (Robert Burton) provides the Swedish scientists with international expertise. His niece Diane Wilson (Barbara Wilson) also happens to be in the area. They are both great excuses for making the locals in large part speak in English, though with that heavy Scandinavian accent.

The movie spends the first half hour setting up the mystery that surrounds this meteorite crash. Based on the title alone you know aliens will be involved and waiting for the characters to become as knowledgeable as the audience becomes slightly boring. After the aliens’ presences have been established the movie picks up pace. We are treated to an alluring shot of Diane behind the shower curtain early on though. There is also a great silhouette shot of her later on. It’s a nice reminder in today’s world of excess that less can indeed be more. This applies for the big alien creature as well. Director Virgil Vogel wisely keeps it off screen for a long time instead of optioning for fast gratification. Miniature models and conscious editing does the magic in creating the illusion of a giant alien, not just a regular guy in a fancy suit.

Playing with perspectives. The big alien creature planning to raise hell.

The landscapes of Lapland help creating a moody atmosphere. Man seems insignificant in these vast landscapes and even more so when juxtaposed against the creature. There is an otherworldly feel to this snow and ice covered place.

Inspired cinematography; Look at the twisted human shapes along with the crooked camera angle and a ski tracks swinging slightly from the left.

I was pleasantly surprised to discover Vogel previously had served as an editor on Touch of Evil (1958) and cult sci-fi This Island Earth (1955). His career directing has mostly been in television with westerns such as Bonanza and High Chaparral and crimes like Mission: Impossible, Streets of San Francisco, Airwolf and Magnum P.I. to name a few. I doubt Vogel will ever have a huge fan base, but I for one intend to seek out more from him.  

Terror in the Midnight Sun is a run-of-the-mill alien monster movie. There are no big surprises, but what’s on display looks pretty good. What sets it apart from others is the atmospheric setting and use of Sami and Swedish actors giving a cultural flavor to it. Besides how many alien monster movies set in Sweden from the 50s are you likely to find? Terror in the Midnight Sun is a rare movie that deserves more attention from sci-fi and horror fans.

 6/10

Zoo (2007)

Human sexuality in one of its many, many forms…

Zoophilia comes from two Greek words; zoo meaning animal and philia, friendship or love. It is referred to as the practice of sexual between a human and a non-human animal. Popularly it’s called bestiality. People who practice zoophilia are known as zoophiles, zoosexuals or just “zoos”.

Zoo tells the story of what is now known as “The Enumclaw horse sex case”. July 2^nd 2005 Kenneth Pinyan died of a perforated colon as result of receiving anal sex from a horse. In the movie he is only referred to as Mr. Hands, which was his name when distributing videos of different encounters with horses. Zoo addresses that Pinyan’s name was meant to be kept secret, but of course a swift search on the internet following the movie, his real name came up immediately.

The participants in Zoo want to keep their anonymity given the subject matter, so director Robinson Devor tells the story by having different people related to the case narrate over reenactments. It makes the film flow better than if he had chosen to show blacked-out faces for the duration. The cinematography and lighting help to create an at times artful looking documentary. Paul Matthew Moore’s moody score gives Zoo a more humane feel to it. Devor’s many tricks to downplay the sensationalism, unlike the media, is an intelligent choice. The subject matter is highly controversial, so by not giving into sensationalism, we are better able to look at it without our guards up. It gives the “zoos” narrating a chance to talk about how they perceive this. “The sexual aspect was only a minor part of it”, says one of the “zoos”. They treat their animals right other than in that one area, which they don’t feel is wrong. Is this damaging to the animals? Are these people really monsters? Zoo left me longing for more insight into these minds, but what we are granted is highly interesting.

I was really surprised by how tasteful the subject was handled. Zoo paints a more sympathetic picture of zoophiles. That may also cause some discomfort. You could dismiss them as “horsefuckers” and such because it makes it easier to keep at a distance, but it won’t give you more room for understanding. An animal rescuer that came to pick up the horse after the incident says; “I don’t quite yet know how I feel about [zoophilia], but I’m on the verge of understanding.”

Devor deserves praise for having guts to make a documentary on this subject and even more so for make it as non-exploitative as this. Ignoring zoophilia will not make it go away, so I for one am glad someone sheds light on this subject.

7.5/10

Stone Cold (1991)

Revenge of the 90s!

Brian Bosworth is Joe Huff, a policeman on suspension. The F.B.I. has other plans for him though. The biker gang “The Brotherhood” is waging war against all those who oppose them and after one of their members is found guilty in the murder of a priest time is in short supply. Joe goes undercover as John Stone (a fitting name) to infiltrate the gang. Action ensues.

Right from the start you know this is going to be a fast and furious ride. Bosworth establishes himself as the cool and cold messenger of justice within the opening minutes. Criminals will pay when he’s around! He works perfectly for what this role demands; tough guy with an attitude. This isn’t supposed to be Shakespeare, though I’d watch him in that as well. The biker gang is led by the very capable Lance Henriksen and his lead henchman played by William Forsythe. The latter had an even more menacing turn that year as Richie in Steven Seagal action fest Out for Justice. Both Henriksen and Forsythe do what is required when portraying evil, white supremacist bikers. Their range is a lot broader, but they respect the material and seem to have fun with it.

The great thing about Stone Cold is the pacing. So many movies with little to say spend too much time saying it. Most of what we see in Stone Cold is essential. It’s a very economic movie that doesn’t bother with non-vital information. When the bad guys are gone, the movie ends. There’s no need for a long wrap-up. The action is over. But the action we are treated to during Stone Cold is quite satisfactory. What makes it so you think? Well, there are regular doses of great explosions. Real explosions. There are dangerous stunts to keep you grinning. When people are shot you see it. I miss that in movies, particularly when you look at something as castrated as Live Free or Die Hard (terrible title!). They also swear when it’s appropriate. You expect a certain language from people like this. The third act ups the stakes and the action here works better than what we see in most movies of similar kind today. It balances it with restrained humor, showing glimmer without ever fully indulging. There is no annoying sidekick constantly puncturing the atmosphere. Stone Cold also takes a few original turns leaving some common clichés in the attic that had me nodding in approval.

What Stone Cold is all about!

Craig R. Baxley has proven himself to be a reliable director with Dark Angel (1990) and mini-series like Storm of the Century and Rose Red, both Stephen King adaptations. He has also directed and been second unit director on plenty of episodes of The A-Team. Way to go Mr. Baxley! I for one am a fan of the man. All directors can’t be Stanley Kubrick or Sam Peckinpah and that is just fine. Baxley is still a director I keep coming back to. He deserves a nod more frequently and I hope you give him a chance too.

As for Stone Cold it’s a great example of early 90s action that is easy to digest. It’s a fun, violent and bullshit-free film. Relax and let officer Joe Huff take care of business. That’s what he’s here for!

7/10

Guinea Pig (1985)

Torture for the people…

Guinea Pig is the first installment in one of the most notorious movie series out there. It’s also known as Guinea Pig: Devil’s Experiment, probably to differentiate it from the later entries. The plot is a girl being tortured by three men for nearly 43 minutes. The end. It doesn’t exactly sound groundbreaking, but in terms of fake snuff or pseudo-snuff if you will, it kind of is.

It’s roughly divided into chapters where each one is a new form of torture. The first one is “Hit” where our helpless victim is, that’s right, slapped repeatedly. She is also kicked, tortured by deafening noise for a long duration, scolded, maimed etc. This actually works quite well. While it’s fairly graphic, director Satoru Ogura presents it in a very neutral way. Yes, this is pseudo-snuff, but the depictions are decidedly unspectacular. Particularly the scene where the victim is beaten and kicked becomes repetitious and boring. That can be a good thing when depicting bad things. I was never comfortable with what I was watching and it never entertained me. If anything Guinea Pig fulfills more of a morbid curiosity. Just because something isn’t pleasant doesn’t mean it can’t be intriguing.

Guinea Pig's pièce de résistance.

Guinea Pig is shot-on-video, which adds to the grittiness of the film. It looks cheap and dirty like it should. The camerawork is nothing spectacular and I sincerely doubt the raw effect would pack such a punch otherwise. There is some music in Guinea Pig that the movie would have worked better without, unless they had incorporated it into the movie as opposed to put it on top. The same goes for the title cards. I’m not saying psychopaths aren’t able to edit movies, but it increases the distance between the movie and the viewer. I want no “interruptions” that hints at what we see on-screen has been subjected to any treatment beyond recording. This is a cruel matter-of-fact testament shot on-the-run. The sound effects are suitably unpleasant and play a big part in making this film feel as grim as it does.

Using the term “like” doesn’t feel appropriate when discussing Guinea Pig. It’s a fake snuff film and anyone watching it should expect just that. To me the first film in the series manages to create a dark atmosphere showcasing mankind at its worst. The first sequel, Guinea Pig: Flowers of Flesh and Blood, is a far more graphic affair, while simultaneously adding some oddball humor for balance. Each installment has something different to offer.

Guinea Pig remains one of the nastier films out there. It has been surpassed since by numerous others, Psycho: The Snuff Reels being one, but as a testament to extreme 80s horror it holds up very well.

8/10

Blood and Sex Nightmare (2008)

Blood and sex finally united on film!

Spoilers! You can thank me later.

Blood and Sex Nightmare starts off by showing us a tied-up woman and a maniac sharpening his butcher knife. She dies, but only after the camera has turned away, because some movies are like that. It’s quite a dull opening really. Then the movie proceeds…

Right from the beginning it’s evident that this is bottom of the barrel modern exploitation. I don’t mind that, in theory. This is quite basic filmmaking, but was it for instance really necessary to ever so slightly adjust the camera in several scenes? Couldn’t the director and director of photography come to terms with the composition before shooting? I’m giving them the benefit of the doubt that this was a conscious decision. That still makes it annoying since you’re taken out of the movie. Random zooming also occurs, but lacks the flavor of someone like Joe D’Amato.

Anyway, there is this guy Nick and his girlfriend Amy. Amy has just come back from something, not really of any importance, and Nick wants her to come with him to an adult resort called “Pleasure Mountain”. Amy doubtfully agrees. The punch line is that she’s a virgin, which makes an adult resort less ideal. That’s kind of funny, isn’t it? During their short, yet way too long conversation, the dialogue battles for your concentration along with the sound of horror trailers playing in the background. For the record, I recommend focusing on the trailer sounds. They are so much more interesting. Kudos to whoever gave us the option to choose though.

They arrive at their destination only to discover a rather pathetic looking cabin. There are no shots trying to establish how the resort looks as a whole, but I suspect this has a perfectly natural explanation. Good filmmakers make separate locations that are supposed to be one seem as one. You could argue that it’s part of the charm, unless you’re me. It’s obvious that this is made by horror fans. The camp is promoted as a Camp Crystal Lake sort of place, with an old guy sure they are all doomed! The old guy is actually the caretaker, Walter. He has arguably the best lines in the movie, such as: “They’re gonna be dead soon. Then she’ll be mine!” Best of luck to you Walter!

To up the body count we meet some of the other sex seekers at the camp. One of the cabins is particularly bizarre. An incest role-play is acted out like a sitcom complete with laugh track. It’s the boldest attempt at humor in the movie and perhaps even a try to soften cynical reviewers? All the deaths are done off-screen, which indicates just how low the budget really is. Making blood splatter appears to be cheap fortunately! They even cut away before someone, Willy, punctures one of the tires on Nick’s car. But hey, I’m not going to argue for destroying a perfectly good tire! That car probably brought the crew to the location and without it where would they be? Really?

This is also a supernatural film, since a straight-forward slasher would be a copout. Sarcasm check! It turns out that a guy, Felix Gallo, died here years ago. He hung himself and his pedophile mother is given the blame. All the sexual tensions of the resort have made him come back. Boggaboo!

As if this wasn’t enough we have a couple of slackers working at the resort watching horror. They actually seemed to be watching a movie with the ghost of Felix Gallo. I dare you to confirm this on your own! “Do you think movie violence fucks you up? I don’t know, but it’s awesome!” That did make me chuckle, a little. Blood and Sex Nightmare trying to give us that additional layer is a perfectly redundant choice.

Amy defeats the ghostly ghoul with a mirror, because mirrors can be like that. The 59 minute running time is near the end. Cut to two years later, same place and a recycled ending done to death. I had to ask myself if it’s spoofing clichés or just perpetuating them. My guess would be the latter.

Blood and Sex Nightmare is a dull film. Despite my hostility I don' hate it. Someone has created something that is out there for the masses to behold. It is what it is, but couldn’t that be something a little more worthwhile?

2/10

Cinemabarrel: The Resurrection

I originally began writing here after a friend of mine made this lovely page so that I could exorcise my thoughts on movies, of which there are many. Yet, somehow during the year life and a healthy dose of apathy got in the way. It's a shame since I really enjoy writing and in particular when it comes to movies. So for several months there has been nothing. Fortunately, like with Jason Vorhees, there is always the possibility of resurrection. My goal this year is one post every week. Everything else is a bonus. I want to keep writing for myself more than anything and this is the perfect place. While my focus will continue to be on that of horror and exploitation I'll try to show greater variety with genres. 

During October I participated in the imdb horror boards annual Horror challenge, which consists of watching 31 horror films, where at least 16 has to be first time viewings. This has never been a problematic goal. The challenge for me was/is watching as many horror films you can bare before Halloween sneaks up. I managed to watch 100 movies (well, one is a stand-alone episode in Stephen King based miniseries Nightmares & Dreamscapes) and it was EXHAUSTING! Previous years my average have been around 60 movies. Some people have asked; How do you find the time? It's all priorities. I'm not claiming the priorities are always the right ones though. October is usually followed by a lot less horror oriented November. A friend of mine participated in the challenge as well and took pride in beating my ass with nearly 120 movies during that month. I'm still only scratching the horror surface here, so it will be interesting to see what the new year has in store. Stay tuned! I'll leave you with a freaky poster for the Polish vampire film I Like Bats (1986).

Memories of movies #2 - Under Siege 2: Dark Territory

Back in the days there were very few shops that sold VHS’ where I lived. One man had monopoly with three stores and kept the prices unreasonably high for years. Still, the curious movie adventurer I was I frequently visited them, mostly the one named Cudrio. Apart from the prices and the greedy owner I remember they had some alluring and frightening films. The cover I picked up the most was Society. Looking at the back of that cover always promised me a world of demented terror impossible to fathom, at that point in time at least. It took about a decade before that film would find its way to my horror shelf. Society is demented fun, with excellent practical effects from the highly uneven director Brian Yuzna. The ending has a rare “what-the-fuck” quality to it. Those who have seen it know what I’m talking about.

But that’s not really the film in question. I took my bicycle down to buy a couple of movies one day. The movies chosen were Under Siege 2: Dark Territory, rated 18, and cop/dog buddy action comedy Top Dog starring Chuck Norris, rated 15. I had just turned 12 at that time. My longing for action was temporarily crushed at the counter. Clearly this kid wasn’t of the right age. However, they gave me the opportunity to call my father at work to verify that this was indeed okay. Apparently they had had a couple of cases with angry moms not appreciating what their kids had purchased. I hadn’t really asked him before about that, but was he really going to say no? Of course he didn’t and with Under Siege 2 and Top Dog in my backpack I headed home. It has been years since Top Dog crossed my retinas, but from memory it was decent, if rather routine, cop and canine with attitudes fare. Under Siege 2 on the other hand was a different beast. The cover made it look really cool to a 12 year old.

The Norwegian cover for Under Siege 2. The literal translation from Norwegian reads; "Hijacking in High Velocity". I was always fascinated by the "Action Collection" covers. Somehow it made the whole thing seem cooler.

At that point I hadn’t seen the first Under Siege flick, but that didn’t matter. We had an action film rated 18 and that was plenty. The first one was purchased on a Danish VHS about three months later.

Anyway, the first time I saw Under Siege 2 I was blown away. It was a fast-paced, slick and brutal action film. Steven Seagal as chef and top trained elite soldier Casey Ryback was the epitome of cool. That isn’t the case(y) today. Another exciting element was the setting, a moving train. I’ve always had a fascination with movies set on a train and it started, strangely enough, here. It’s a small setting, but with lots of possibilities! Everett McGill as the leading mercenary, Marcus Penn, was a mighty villain too. You know someone is badass if they use pepper spray to freshen their mouth! He also delivers a line that has ever since lingered in the back of my mind; “Assumptions is the mother of all fuck-ups!” I really think he was on to something! Assumptions have time and again led to mistakes, so he deserves credit for alerting me about this fact at such an early age. Years later I discovered the very same quote was actually used the previous year in the Australian drag queen comedy Priscilla: The Queen of the Desert. It doesn’t really change anything though. There are plenty of other great quotes as well. After the mercenaries, dressed as railroad men, stop the train the conductor walks off the train and asks what‘s going on. “Someone’s been shot. Who? You!” BANG! That’s some quality writing right there!

Under Siege 2 also marks Steven Seagal’s last great film (there were some duds before this one too though). No, I’m not counting his minor role in Executive Decision the following year, in case you were wondering. This was the last of his streak of brutal early 90s films. They were very unapologetically violent. The ruthlessness displayed in these films (and plenty other from the first half of the 90s) still makes me raise an eyebrow today. The primary example is a scene in Out for Justice (1991) where a stone cold William Forsythe drags a woman halfway through her car window and executes her at point blank range for honking the car horn at him. There is one quote acknowledging this; “He’s killing people like it was free!” It’s not pretty there or in Under Siege 2, but you’ll feel infinitely rewarded as Seagal moves his eyebrows just a tad when killing them.

In later years I have discovered why this was better than it really had any right to be. First off, director Geoff Murphy is the man responsible for one of my favorite 80s sci-fi films, The Quiet Earth. He has also been second-unit director on all three Lord of the Rings films. Second, it was co-written by Matt Reeves today better known as the director of Cloverfield and Let Me In.

Many movies have a tendency to become disappointments as you grow older (don’t watch the original Narina series again!), but with Under Siege 2 that is not the case. It simply never ceases to entertain me. I think this sequel is on par with the first one even though that one had Tommy Lee Jones, Gary Busey and a topless Erika Eleniak coming out of a cake, a frequently replayed scene, going for it. Seagal’s career isn’t the greatest anymore, to say the least, but back then he actually made some stuff well worth watching. Under Siege 2: Dark Territory was my introduction to his filmography and is part of the reason I still have a soft spot for the man with the iron face. Well done Mr. Seagal. Well done.

8/10 in case you were wondering.

8MM (1999)

Hollywood takes on a dark subject matter…

Private investigator Tom Welles (Nicolas Cage) is hired to find out if a snuff film is authentic or not. This is the start of a long dark road.

A snuff film is defined as; “A motion picture genre that depicts the actual death or murder of a person or people, without the aid of special effects, for the express purpose of distribution and entertainment or financial exploitation.” The term “snuff film” was first used by Ed Sanders, who wrote that the Manson family was involved with making such a film to record their murders. Fictionalized snuff or pseudo-snuff began gaining notoriety with the 1976 flick Snuff. Since then this sub-genre has grown slow and steadily in volume with the Guinea Pig films and Cannibal Holocaust being the most infamous ones. More recently A Serbian Film (2010) has dealt with the subject matter Both Guinea Pig: Flower of Flesh and Blood and Cannibal Holocaust have had to prove that they were indeed pseudo-snuff and not the real deal. There are several examples of real people committing torture and murder while filming the act. German cannibal Armin Meiwes filmed the killing of his willing victim, but since this was never done with an intention of distributing for money such videos aren’t generally considered snuff films.

8MM is a bold movie in the light of being a big-budgeted Hollywood flick dealing with humanity at its most depraved. The script was apparently a lot darker, but writer Andrew Kevin Walker and director Joel Schumacher disagreed and Walker has subsequently disowned the film. I can’t help but wonder what the uglier version would have looked like.

Do you like what you see?

*Spoilers*

Cage works well as the private investigator. His descent into the abyss is easily one of the movies’ highlights. While initially looking at the case with a certain detached attitude it gradually gets under his skin. My favorite scene is when Welles decides he wants to give the men responsible a dose of vigilante justice and takes on Eddie Poole (James Gandolfini). Gandolfini makes little out of his role for the most part, but excels in their little showdown not showing an inch of remorse while uttering; 


“Go ahead. Pull the fucking trigger. Well go ahead. What're you waiting for? Go ahead, do it! You faggot! What do you want me to do, start crying like a little baby? "Oh, I'm so sorry I killed the little girl." Well, fuck you, and fuck her! Go ahead! Put me outta my fucking misery! Pull the fucking trigger! Pull the fucking trigger! Do it! Do it!” Cage communicates a whole range of emotions while Poole rambles on. He wants him to suffer, but is afraid to go to that dark place. As Nietzsche has put it; “He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster.” To push him over he calls the victims’ mother and asks for a boost; “I want to hurt them. I want to punish them for what they did. Please give me your permission to punish them!” This could easily have come off as dumb or corny, but the scene is plays out as an emotional rollercoaster. Give in to temptation. What do you do when you encounter humans devoid of empathy? Do you want him to punish them? Another stand-out in the movie is Joaquin Phoenix as the porn shop clerk Max California that Welles hires to guide him in the underground video market. Otherwise Peter Stormare is a perfect fit as the extreme film director Dino Velvet. According to Max he’s “the Jim Jarmusch of S & M”, which is a small but welcome joke in this otherwise doom laden universe.


One thing I wondered about when Welles and California are scouring the underground market looking for snuff is how is the extreme film market today? Specifically is there still and to what extent a market for extreme movies dealing in physical copies? Internet has made everything more available so has it affected this market? We can watch videos of people being tortured and executed on the internet at any time. All the death and suffering is there for those seeking it, but is it enough? The answer always seems to be no.


One of the driving questions for Welles is the why. Why would anyone want to have someone make something like this? One answers his question with the chilling words; “Because he could.” That is a part of what makes 8MM so interesting. You wonder what the motivation is just like Welles. Tom’s surprised face as he finally unmasks Machine and realizes it is actually a human being behind it is a small revelation. In the end we can never get a satisfactory answer yet we strive for an understanding. It is all the more chilling when Machine doesn’t give a good reason either. In fact he makes a point that his life hasn’t been a troublesome one. There is no history of sexual abuse or other elements to shed light on it. Life isn’t black and white. Life isn’t a Disney film.


*End spoilers*


8MM works well on several levels. It works as a thriller, but more interestingly to me, it's a movie about movies and not just any kind. It puts a seedy light on the more abysmal genres of movies little or completely unknown to most people. While doing so it confronts you with your own views on violence without feeling condescending. It's an element through the movie lingering in the back of your head. I have followed that line of thoughts many times before. Why do I watch movies that feature such cruel and heinous acts? Why do you? Why not?


Joel Schumacher has crafted a solid thriller with 8MM. It gives viewers unfamiliar with snuff film and extreme cinema a safe and sanitized look into the darker side of movies, while posing intelligent questions. Dark mainstream entertainment can indeed be good.


8/10

Machine-Gun Kelly (1958)

 

Bronson the gangster…

Charles Bronson stars in his first leading role as the notorious gangster George R. “Machine-Gun” Kelly. He, along with female companion Florence ‘Flo’ Becker (Susan Cabot) and a gang of criminals are making life sour for bank owners. After a robbery goes wrong Kelly takes out the rest of the gang conspiring to kill him for fouling up. His next move with Flo is to kidnap the daughter of a wealthy businessman for ransom.

Bronson is surprisingly charismatic and loose in this film. His stoic nature more apparent in later films takes a backseat here and he shows remarkable capability. It’s also fun watching him in a rare role as a villain that even manages to generate sympathy, at times anyway. I’ve never seen Bronson laugh as heartily before either. There is a duality to his character. On one hand he’s like a small child terribly afraid of death. Being a bank robber isn’t the wisest of career choices then, but life isn’t predictable. On the other hand he can be a cold and calculating killing-machine. Much of this is due to Flo’s ability to manipulate him. Behind every strong man there is an even stronger woman. Her role becomes progressively more interesting as the film develops. I love watching her going from slyly sexy to a cold and calculating bitch. While there is a serious tone underlying humor frequently sneaks in punctuating that it’s just a film. Most of the laughs are provided by comedian Morey Amsterdam, which clearly isn’t the sharpest knife in the drawer. He is also involved in one of the most unexpected highlights in the movie.

A classier sort of gangster.

Director and b-movie maestro Roger Corman shot the entire film in merely eight days. I expected it to look a lot rougher, but everything is filmed with an on-the-run sensibility. Machine-Gun Kelly probably gained from this. Both the characters in the movie and the people making it are in a hurry, but still take time to evaluate what has to be done. With such a rigid shooting schedule and budget there is little room to elaborate on anything. A bank robbery is filmed from the outside leaving a shadowy figure holding his hands up and a bullet through the door as illustrations of what’s going on. It’s a necessary minimalistic approach, but it works. I still wish we could have seen more scenes cementing Machine-Gun Kelly’s name though. Fortunately Bronson was just warming up and has since addressed this issue with a hailstorm of bullets.

Machine-Gun Kelly isn’t a miracle of movie making, but in its rather simple script there are some interesting themes both explored and left for the imagination. If you like either Charles Bronson, b-movies with gangsters, Roger Corman or a combination of them then Machine-Gun Kelly is worthwhile.

6/10 

Death Wish 3 (1985)

His name is Paul Kersey…

Paul Kersey (Charles Bronson) returns to New York to visit his old friend Charley. His old town has again become a cesspool of sin. Detective Richard Shriker (Ed Lauter), tired of all the crime, forces Kersey to pick up old habits. He does just that, once again making the few people he cares about possible targets for the scum of the streets. Mayhem ensues.

The first Death Wish established the formula for the series; a man frustrated by the inactions of the law becomes a self-appointed avenger. Death Wish II elaborates in a more exploitative manner and remains the most nihilistic one. The only question here is how will Bronson dispense with the criminals this time around? Death Wish 3 is a more easygoing entry in the Kersey saga. It’s still brutal and packs the highest body count with 48, but shows some restraint for instance in a rape scene, that unlike the previous one is mercifully short here. This is Michael Winner’s third and final Death Wish film before leaving the reigns to veteran director J. Lee Thompson. Winner succeeds again in painting an urban dystopia of America gone wrong. The apartment complex where Charley resided shows good and honest people living in fear of the chaos in the streets. History is as usual repeating itself. But out of these worn-down streets rises a phoenix in the form of Paul Kersey. He is the vigilante angel of death. He is the savior of all that’s good, or at least it appears that way. There are some disturbing lines along the way, like when he says: “It’s like killing roaches – you have to kill ‘em all, otherwise what’s the use?” Kersey needs tools for this job and sends for his old friend Wildey .475 Magnum, a gun that surely would have given Harry Callahan potency problems. Apparently the sale of this gun increases every time Death Wish 3 is shown on cable in the States.

The villains in the movie, led by the menacing Fraker, all feel like caricatures. They are so over-the-top it’s virtually impossible to see them as human beings. That also makes it a lot easier to enjoy watching them die. And that is the big payoff. Bronson has some terrific scenes with the scum. As two crooks are messing up his car he calmly walks outside and asks them what they are doing. Unwilling to comply he kills them both before walking calmly back inside. He just sent Fraker a message. A bullet is all they understand. Things escalate and eventually Kersey declares New York a free-firing-zone, running around with a Browning 30. caliber machine-gun and an assistant feeding him ammunition. This again inspires the good and honest people to pick up their guns. The uprising has begun! Death Wish 3 really takes off towards the end. It’s a non-stop killathon dispensing everyone in the way. Detective Shriker even joins in and he and Bronson jogs up the street together only occasionally taking time to stop when killing. Eventually he finds the opportunity to use a rocket launcher as well. It’s all done in gloriously excessive 80s style. Thanks Ronald Reagan!

Bronson declares war on crime

Interestingly Death Wish 3 was released the year after Bernard Goetz shot a severely wounded four muggers on the New York subway. He was subsequently named “The Subway Vigilante”. The views on him were divided. Charles Bronson even went on to state publicly that people shouldn’t imitate Paul Kersey’s actions in the light of this.

Death Wish 3 is a gung-ho bullet storm of killing for those that like their action films violent. Winner directs this bad boy with brawn, though perhaps less brain this time. Bronson’s stoic nature wins me over every time and he brings a strange sort of minimalistic humanism to the whole affair. You like action? You need Death Wish 3!

9/10

A Serbian Film (2010)

You can add Norway to that list.

A nightmarish journey to the bowels of hell…

In May 2011 A Serbian Film was released in Norwegian stores. Having read about all the controversy I was naturally curious. After getting a confirmation from the distributor that it was uncut I picked it up fearing it would be pulled from stores. Norway bans A Serbian Film two short months later, making it the first one since Ichi the Killer in 2008. There were two paragraphs coming into play in this decision, first being sexual abuse and portrayals that sexualize children. The other paragraph concerns distribution of films with extreme violence made for entertainment purposes. So how gruesome is A Serbian Film and is it really worth banning?

A Serbian Film tells the story of porn actor Milos. He’s tired of the business and one day sees the opportunity to retire for good when he’s offered the lead in a new film. Milos accepts the deal unknowing about just what kind of a project he’s signed onto. The nightmare begins.

We’re given time to get familiar with Milos, his wife and son. They live a decent life. Early on their young son is caught watching one of dad’s porn films. As he goes to bed the kid remarks about a funny feeling he got downstairs when watching the film. Milos and his wife smile at their young innocent offspring. Both this scene and one later on portray child sexuality with skill and care. It is a part of them without knowing fully what it is yet. Building relationships also serves well for what is to follow.

On a technical level A Serbian Film is a surprisingly well-made film. The cinematography is professional, the lighting excellent and editing sensitive. The score works well with gentle piano tracks for the more quiet moments, while a brutal bass is ready to pound you on other occasions. That works particularly well over the ending credits when you feel exhausted and slightly violated.

Simple, but effective. Love that mise-en-scène.

The movie spends time building up and lets you believe Milos’ LSD infused journey into madness. There are a few potholes along the way you might question though. The prime example being when Milos is confronted with footage from something his mad director Vukmir has shot. It is the rape of a new born, or “new-born-porn” as Vukmir enthusiastically hails it. Milos’ eyes begin to wander away from the screen and so do mine at this point. You would think this would be Milos’ exit from the project, but that is not the case. Vukmir considers this horrific child abuse to be art that people just don’t understand, not yet anyway. According to Oxford dictionary art is; “the expression of human creative talent, especially in a visual form.” That is a quite broad definition and I highly doubt any normal sane person would agree that what Vukmir is doing is art. But that is a film within the film. A Serbian Film poses the question; what is art? Can a film that includes rape, incest, necrophilia and murder be art? I would certainly say yes. There is much beauty in A Serbian Film even if it can be in some rather dark corners. It reminds me of Cronenberg commenting on the beauty of a tumor. It is a living organism just trying to evolve. The tumor is a destructive force on the host, but has a beauty in its own right. One might disagree, but “art” and “beauty” are both ideas and challenging them, like in A Serbian Film is certainly meaningful and relevant in my humble opinion.

In regards to Norway’s reasoning for banning it, what we see involving child abuse, with the exception of footage of a young girl eating a lollipop, nothing here is portrayed in a manner to entice. And even that scene feels more like comment on the subject matter with some very dark humorous undertones. With that said, I certainly wouldn’t let a child of mine act in this movie. When it comes to A Serbian Film showing what they consider “extreme violence for entertainment purposes” I really have to disagree. Extreme violence as entertainment can readily be seen in modern movies like Saw and Hostel. Why is Hostel okay? Is Hostel okay if we say it’s a movie that plays on people’s xenophobia? A Serbian Film is actually a lot less interested in showing us brutality like these films. It shows restraint, believe it or not. Yes, it doesn’t shy away either, but it’s not as gratuitous as you might expect.

Becoming the beast.

A Serbian film is an unpleasant film as it should be. Dismissing it as cheap, exploitative trash is way too easy. It goes a long way to offend you, but does so in intelligent fashion. For those depraved enough there is the blackest kind of humor here, perhaps most evident at the very end. There is no escape, not even death. Banning it has only made it more sought after here in Norway and I encourage curious people to seek it out at their own risk. We are all responsible for making a better world. A Serbian Film only makes me want to try harder. In that light it certainly has value.

8.5/10

Untraceable (2008)

Untraceable you say?

A serial killer shows his victims live on internet. Their demise is directly linked to the number of viewers. The more people that watch, the faster they die. FBI agent Jennifer Marsh (Diane Lane), along with agent Dowd (Colin Hanks) is put to the task of tracking the killer down. Help is also enlisted by detective Eric Box (Billy Burke). That is essentially the story. Jennifer has some emotional baggage as well, but the story doesn’t seem concerned with exploring this. What fragments there are, aren’t really particularly interesting, so it may be a good thing. Still, it makes me wonder why they would even bother with it in the first place.

Diane Lane doesn’t exactly shine in the lead, but she’s limited by an underdeveloped script. For the most part Jennifer smiles bravely, when not looking shocked or sad. Colin Hanks is easily the most likeable character, while Billy Burke looks like a cardboard box. The killer himself is given too little development to make any impact. To the writers credits the killer manages to generate some sympathy with the viewer. That rare glimpse of intelligence is however firmly crushed and put to death during the course of the movie.

Psychopaths have all the fun, but at least this killer let's you watch. 

Untraceable is a competently made film. The technical aspects are perfectly fine without being anything special, apart from a couple of inspired moments. The real problem is the script. There are too many plot holes and dull scenes. You are never surprised during the movie apart from perhaps Jennifer’s stupidity when hunting the serial killer. You’re an FBI agent, so act like one! Most of the elements in the movie work okay, so it’s a pity the script drags everything down.

In all fairness I think Untraceable raises a valid point in terms of media and particularly internet cynicism. It doesn’t feel real, but there are real people behind the tragedies we witness. Trying to make it more realistic Lane at one point mentions the now infamous videos of soldiers being beheaded. Will anyone who reads this look for those videos afterwards? Have you perhaps already seen it or some other clip of a person dying? It’s quite remarkable how much cruelties we witness through the news, internet and so on growing up. Unfortunately they seem hell bent on making you realize this and so, much like watching a Paul Haggis film, the message becomes smeared all over your face. I like movies that don’t underestimate its audience. Movies that allow you to discover and contemplate things for yourself are indeed more rewarding. Less can definitely be more!

I will give Untraceable kudos for not spending a lot of time rounding off the movie. We know what the end is and what happens to Jennifer, her family and all others involved after isn’t interesting. Just like Die Hard!

In the end Untraceable is forgettable thriller. It’s passable entertainment, but don’t you want more from your movies?

4/10

The Human Centipede (First Sequence) (2009)

The Doctor will see you now…

Scientist Dr. Heiter (Dieter Laser aka Mantrid from Lexx) has a dream of creating a human centipede. Why would anyone want to do such a thing you might ask? Well, people have different interests and some are more eccentric than others. You could of course just label him a madman. It will make everything go down easier.

The movie opens with Heiter finding a suitable victim for his experiments at a rest stop. The hunter is patiently waiting for a prey. He’s a creepy looking man, much thanks to a strong face and truly villainous, borderline non-human eyes. A long coat, a dart gun and a car with a decent seized trunk can get you a long way when you’re a mad scientist, at least in terms of acquiring victims. The good doctor has plenty of luck on his side. One strange evening a couple of ladies lost in their search for a party show up at his front door. If there ever was an incentive to learn how to change tires this is the movie. It’s welcome that one of the ladies comments the lack of cell phone reception. “There is always reception!” Cell phones have become an element that always plays into consideration when psycho’s or the threat of psychopaths is imminent in horror films set after the 90s. The two girls, Lindsay and Jenny soon realize that their host isn’t quite right and unsuccessfully tries to escape. One of them gives it another go later on in a painfully slow cat and mouse game. It plays out remarkably well and has a tone and look similar to the scene following the dog chase in Tenebre.

A part of what builds up around the whole atmosphere of unease is the look of the movie. It’s given a cold and sterile, bluish look. Everything feels very clinical. Heiter’s house is like a small fortress sparse on everything. Dieter Laser impresses as the doctor. You can see Heiter’s detached attitude to humans in his eyes. It’s really quite terrifying. He feels like a poster boy for Nazi scientists. The doctor would probably be more at home during WWII when medical ethics was a non-issue. It would have been perfect for his experiment.

One of the more terrifying scenes in The Human Centipede.

Then there is the actual human centipede of the movie. As it progressed it started dawning on me just how twisted this idea is merely in theory. But this isn’t about theories and director Tom Six in content to show you more than you’ll need to see. The most affectionate gore hounds might be disappointed, but what restraint is shown only works to The Human Centipede’s advantage. The simple drawings Heiter shows when explaining the procedure to his victims works remarkably well. Initially I thought the movie would end with the completion of the human centipede, but this only marks around the 50 minute mark. For the last 40 minutes we follow the doctor, his human centipede and its/their effort to escape. The small cage designed for the human centipede made me squirm. If it isn’t bad enough that you have been surgically sown together with two other people you are confined to a small space at night as well. Add to that the humiliation of being in this state and you’ve got yourself an incredibly unpleasant and highly distressing situation. The thought of it really does make me uncomfortable, which is a good thing.

Science used for nefarious purposes.

Twisted as The Human Centipede is there is actually a very dark sense of humor in it. Yes, it’s gross and filled with what-the-fuck moments, but I also found myself laughing quietly at how absurd it is. It wouldn’t surprise me if Six’s sense of humor stems from Jörg Buttgereit’s Nekromantik. At least here the center of affection is alive though.        

                                                                                     

The Human Centipede is a challenging horror flick. It’s unpleasant to watch and is able to do that without going overboard graphically. I was always curious what would happen around the next corner. Could there possibly be anything near a happy ending? It is a horror that will benefit from multiple viewings. Tom Six has created a perverse little picture well worth seeing.

The sequel The Human Centipede (Full Sequence) has recently been banned in its entirety in the UK. I’m quite anxious to see how Six is going to top the first one, but since Buttgereit managed it with Nekromantik 2, anything’s possible. A third film has been confirmed so it looks like this is a concept that will be explored in more graphic detail in the future. The Human Centipede (First Sequence) is worth checking out for fans of alternate cinema.

8.5/10