Midnight Movie of the Week #20 - The Incredible Shrinking Man

The Incredible Shrinking Man, made by the masterful Jack Arnold in 1957, is something of a miracle in the Sci-Fi/B-Movie world. Under the guise of a drive-in feature, Richard Matheson's adaptation of his own book exists still as one of the most fascinating tales of survival ever put on the screen.

The film's opening is similar to many films from its era in which a strange event affects the characters and brings doubt into a seemingly perfect world. That world probably bordered on the one inhabited by Leave it to Beaver before this event, but it will surely never be primetime TV in the wake of such a catastrophe. In this case the "event" is the presence of a radioactive cloud that is encountered by a man named Scott Carey (played by Grant Williams). Though most would say Scott is a victim of circumstance, some might say that this all happens because he was too lazy to go get his own damn beer...were he any kind of a gentleman, we'd be talking about The Amazing Shrinking Woman and Randy Stuart (which I just learned is a) the name of the woman who played Scott's wife, Louise; and b) a woman) would be our lead.
As time passes in the wake of this event, Scott realizes he's getting smaller. At first it's just a couple of inches and a few pounds, but things continue to accelerate and Scott loses his job and becomes an outcast. It isn't long before Scott's story makes him a three-foot tall celebrity, but he's the kind of celebrity who hates himself for what he is. He becomes mad at the world and only finds happiness when he meets a female dwarf who convinces him that life is OK for the small. This only lasts to the point when Scott becomes a few inches shorter than her, and his rage returns. Scott then ends up living in a dollhouse on an end table (that's really too small for a dollhouse, by the way), cursing life further.

Throughout the first half of the film, Scott Carey is a sad individual that represents many of the problems that have plagued humanity's brief existence. He grieves his appearance and becomes impatient with others, because they can't possibly understand the issues he is dealing with. This instills a hostile attitude toward others - who are at the same time going out of their way to help him - and believes that he cannot be a functional part of the world due to his disability. I posed the issue of his laziness saving his wife the same fate as a joke earlier, but I really am concerned about this version of Scott. If he were the one caring for her as she suffered this fate, would he have dealt with things with any grace or sympathy, or would he have cut and run as soon as he had the chance? His behaviors lead me to believe the latter.
Fate doesn't smile on Scott, and a run in with the family cat - which now dwarfs his 2-3 inch length - leaves Louise assuming Scott is dead and eaten. Scott actually has been forced down into the cellar, where he struggles to survive by fashioning weapons out of pins, sleeping in a matchbox, and stealing cheese from a mousetrap.

It is in this purgatory that Scott begins to change his thinking. Surviving an encounter with the resident spider becomes a far bigger concern than any of his previous earthly desires, and - with no way to get back up the stairs and Louise moving out to avoid her memories - the prospect of this being a permanent hell becomes far too real to Scott. As he realizes the challenges that face him, he grows more and more accepting of his place in the great big world. This might be due to the sense of accomplishment that comes with surviving what is essentially a post-apocalyptic wasteland, but it might also mean that Scott is believing in something bigger than himself and the challenges around him.

As the short film (har har!) barrels to an anticlimax (given an extra dose of theology by a tacked on inner monologue by Arnold that fits with the pulp sci-fi films of the '50s) the viewer begins to care deeply for Scott in his quest to survive. His misplaced desires and poor choices fade away as we witness him work to survive, and his willingness to tread forward and face his limitations is infectious. The tentacles of the spider and a surprise flood suddenly become effective to the viewer, because we've seen Scott's past faults break apart with our own eyes.I'm waxing pretty deeply about a film that features a tiny man battling cats and spiders, but that's the beauty of The Incredible Shrinking Man. At its core the film is a commentary on the human condition, and while the final moments may journey a little too closely to religion for some viewers, the point the film makes serves no specific doctrine. The Incredible Shrinking Man is a simple reminder that everything we have built up can be taken from us by any combination of time and/or the elements; and that only those who are willing to adapt to life will find peace in it.

Anyone who says otherwise is telling a tall tale. (Har har!)

I'm not trying to neglect you all...

...but I have written a post for another blog. In fact, I've written a post for Flickchart: The Blog, after being invited to guest post there after the other day's Random Horror Throwdown.

So, if you want to read my thoughts on the difficulties of being a cinephile AND a genre fan, or if you just want to see how many titles I could name drop in seven paragraphs, click on this writing right here and go check it out.

In the meantime, I'll be back tonight with the 20th(!) Midnight Movie of the Week. If that's not exciting enough, here's what You Tube calls the "best fight scene of all time".




Have a good one, folks!

Random Horror Throwdown: Alone in the Dark vs. Fright Night Part 2 - Wait, what?

Anyone who writes a blog will surely tell you that one of the most difficult things an author faces is finding new topics to cover. Sure, I could write about The Blob every day, but that might get silly after a while. (The operative word in that sentence is certainly "might", because I'm pretty sure a blog that covered The Blob every day would be the greatest website ever invented.) That's a moot point, however, because the other day - while I was perusing the awesome corner of the interweb known as Flickchart - I had what can only be described as a moment of supreme clarity.

If the question is "How do I vary the movies I cover and keep challenging myself to come up with something different?"; the answer is "Let a random generator pick movies for me and debate which is superior in The Mike's mind!". So that's exactly what I'm going to do in this first installment of the Random Horror Throwdown.

VS.

The Movies:

Alone in the Dark (2005, Dir. by Uwe Boll.)
Starring: Christian Slater, Tara Reid, Stephen Dorff.
IMDB Synopsis: Based on the video game, Alone in the Dark focuses on Edward Carnby, a detective of the paranormal, who slowly unravels a mysterious events with deadly results. (Note from The Mike: Yes, he unravels "a mysterious events." This movie's so bad, it defies quantity.)

Fright Night Part 2 (1988, Dir. by Tommy Lee Wallace.)
Starring: Roddy McDowell, William Ragsdale, Julie Carmen.
IMDB Synopsis: Charlie Brewster and Peter Vincent from the original Fright Night must face more vampires out for revenge. (Note from The Mike: Was Jerry Dandridge really "out for revenge"? I declare shenanigans.)

Now, the only way that it's humanly possible to pick between two movies, of course, is to break them down and compare them in a series of categories. (Well, actually I think that's kind of a silly way to do it....but it's exactly what I'm going to do now anyway.)

The Casts:
For starters, I've always liked Christian Slater. He flamed out trying to make the transition from heartthrob to leading man, but has consistently offered up solid performances throughout his career (Heathers, True Romance, and He Was a Quiet Man stand out). Stephen Dorff was the star of The Gate, so I have to give him some credit. Tara Reid....well, she's Tara Reid, with her goofiness and weird boobs. On the vampire side, we've got Roddy McDowell and William Ragsdale again, but they're given far less interesting material; and Julie Carmen (of In the Mouth of Madness) as the vampire seductress.

The easy choice here would be Fright Night Part 2 based on McDowell, whose performance in Fright Night might be my favorite horror performance of all time. But considering the complete fall from the first film, and my like for Slater (not to mention the fact that I honestly think Carmen in FNP2 is worse than Reid in AitD)....I'm going to give the surprise advantage in this category to Alone in the Dark. (1-0, Alone in the Dark leads.)

The Plots:
Alone in the Dark focuses on some kind of demons inside a hole under an orphanage that could take over the world, and the battle against them. Fright Night Part 2 has vampires seducing college kids and a Hammer-esque hero cashing in a paycheck. Both handle their plots with the grace of a monkey humping a football, but at least the latter is relatable and kind of coherent. Advantage goes to Fright Night Part 2. (1-1)

Which film's villains would fare best against The Blob?:
This is a pretty easy decision, from what I remember. The Dark's creatures come from underground, which I'd assume is warm since it's close to hell. The Blob loves warm things. The vampires are dead, and thus their body temperature is low, and thus they would possess the The Blob's kryptonite - cold. The Blob runs wild on Uwe's sheep-like creatures, so Fright Night Part 2 gets the advantage (2-1, Fright Night Part 2 leads.)

My experience with the films:
I've always said (for at least five years, that is) that Alone in the Dark is Uwe Boll's worst movie. That said...I kinda enjoy watching this in an Ed Wood manner, even if Wood is a far better director. I saw it in theater (in fact, I think I was the only person in said theater) when it came out, and laughed my face off like Nic Cage.

Fright Night Part 2, on the other hand, is a movie that makes me angry. I would rank Fright Night among my favorite horror films, and I'd rank this among the worst sequels ever made. I was so mad after blind buying it years ago that I sold the DVD back to a local store immediately - and I don't even regret it now that the disc is OOP and worth a pretty penny more than I got for it. In a battle between one of the worst movies I've ever seen and one of the worst sequels I've ever seen...I'll take the one that isn't a sequel. Give the advantage to Alone in the Dark on this one. (2-2)

The Directors:
Remember that one time when I said Ed Wood was a far better director than Uwe Boll? (If you don't, it was two paragraphs ago.) And I like Tommy Lee Wallace, even if this is a terrible film. So Fright Night Part 2 gets the advantage. (3-2)
This choice is like:
Any choice between these films would be akin to the choice made by the fellow in the above still from Indiana Jones 3.

But, the numbers don't lie. Based on Uwe Boll's awfulness and the fact that vampires mix with Blobs better than...whatever it was that Boll had in his movie...Fright Night Part 2 gets the win via count-out while Boll heads into the crowd to beat down an intelligent soul that dislikes his movies. Congrats to Wallace and the rest of the people involved in Fright Night Part 2...your film sucks less than something!

(Note from The Mike: I seriously hope I've only rated 1029 movies.....)

Pride and Prejudice and Zombies - Don't Try This at Home

If you've been following the nerd world over the past few years, you've probably come across the newfangled mashup Pride and Prejudice and Zombies. Devised by a formerly unknown fellow called Seth Grahame-Smith, it's the story of the Bennet family, Mr. Darcy, and....well, zombies. It's also rumored to be heading to the big screen soon, with Natalie Portman and director David O. Russell currently attached.

Inspired by this creation, and backed by a few close friends, I set off to recreate what the P&P&Z experience might be like. The results? Well, I finally have something to join Twilight in the "Things We Never Mention Again" section of my archives.
The Films:
Pride and Prejudice (1940, Dir. by Robert Z. Leonard.)
Starring: Greer Garson, Laurence Olivier, Edmund Gwenn
Synopsis (via IMDB): Mr. and Mrs. Bennet have five unmarried daughters, and Mrs. Bennet is especially eager to find suitable husbands for them. When the rich single gentlemen Mr. Bingley and Mr. Darcy come to live nearby, the Bennets have high hopes. But pride, prejudice, and misunderstandings all combine to complicate their relationships and to make happiness difficult.



The Return of the Living Dead
(1985, Dir. by Dan O'Bannon.)
Starring: Clu Gulager, James Karen, Thom Matthews, Linnea Quigley
Synopsis (via IMDB): When a bumbling pair of employees at a medical supply warehouse accidentally release a deadly gas into the air, the vapors cause the dead to re-animate as they go on a rampage through Louisville, Kentucky seeking their favorite food, brains.

Now, I'm not gonna lie here. The reason this whole thing started was because I, The Mike, happen to own a copy of that Pride and Prejudice feature. What can I say? I'm a sucker for classic cinema almost as much as I'm a sucker for genre cinema, and when I considered the promise of Garson and Olivier trading barbs at a bargain barrel price, I picked the flick up with the intent to watch it someday. When pondering Laurence Olivier with an Austen obsessed friend (after we had watched Hitchcock's magnificent Rebecca), demand for the movie grew.

Of course, I'm never going to full out agree to a "girls' night" of movies, so I insisted zombies based on a) the fact that the above book exists; and b) the fact that zombie films are often awesome. Thus, Pride and Prejudice and Zombies Night was born.

The Experience:
To say that this idea went belly up is like saying Arby's makes tasty treats - it's so true that other true things seem false in comparison. For starters, what I expected to just be a crowd of three viewers - said Austen fan, her husband, and Mikeself - was a crowd of five viewers. This was a welcome change, as it was good to have more friends around, but it became most problematic as soon as the idea of Pride and Prejudice was brought up to the unsuspecting male viewers. Last time I saw that "disappointed by movie choice" face was when I looked in the mirror the night we all went to The Blind Side.

I like to think I can be a sophisticated gentleman, but when I'm with what Paul Walker would call my "bras" things tend to go juvenile quickly - despite our age, level of education, or company. And, when we outnumber the girls, we're undefeatable. In this case, that meant that before the movie we had to share some laughs at the expense of an episode of Tim and Eric, Awesome Show, Great Job! - which quickly set the tone for three babbling buffoons to make the most of this period drama while getting evil glances from the hostess.

As I said, I actually wanted to see the Pride and Prejudice flick, and I tried to do my best to avoid the side conversations. But this is not a movie for a crowd. I missed about 40% of the dialogue while listening to their comments, and missed about 58% more while joining into and/or laughing at the comments. This wouldn't be a problem, were it not for the ladies actually trying to watch the film. The vicious glares sent from wife to husband are officially reason number 4,719 I'm happy to be single. I did catch the fact that Mr. Bennet was played by THEM!'s Edmund Gwenn, which made me happy.After 118 mercilessly tense moments (and the tension darn sure didn't come from the movie!) passed, it was time for things to get real with The Return of the Living Dead. Of course, by this point the annoyed hostess was checked out, pulling up her laptop to check out Perez Hilton or TMZ or whatever else girls who don't like horror flicks look at. The rest of us never really managed to focus entirely on the movie, as relief from the "mommy just hit daddy at the dinner table" feeling that was in the air through the first film opened us up to talk even more, but RotLD has never been a movie that it's entirely necessary to take seriously.

Between us males, and I think even the remaining attentive female, O'Bannon's zombie flick went over pretty well. While I've never found it to be a favorite zombie flick (I just think it goes a little too madcap, especially with Karen and Matthews' characters; and that most of the punks are incredibly one-note zombie snacks), it's a great film to sit around and chortle about. The high points, like Tar Man's rise and the "Send more paramedics" moment, brought many laughs, and much discussion was had about the intelligence of these trioxin fueled brain eaters.

So what did I learn from Pride and Prejudice and Zombies night? I'm tempted to give the Billy Madison answer (We are all stupider for having considered it), the gender research answer (males and females should never be allowed to interact), or the obvious answer (21st century blu-ray lovin' males don't generally like period dramas from the '40s and girls who like Jane Austen don't generally like zombies). Maybe there's not a correct answer, except that the combination of these films with this crowd was about as useful as the combination of Vault cola and milk in a bowl. (Seriously, don't try that at home either...grossest thing you'll ever see. And I watch Fulci.)

To Russell and Portman, or to whoever else tries to bring Pride and Prejudice and Zombies to cinemas...I sure as heck hope you have better luck than I did.

Midnight Movie of the Week #19 - Roadgames

If there's one lesson that can be learned from Richard Franklin's 1981 thriller Roadgames, it's to never doubt a Hitchcock disciple with a camera. Franklin, the Australian-born director who two years later would turn the unlikely title Psycho II into a pleasant reality, grew up worshipping the Master of Suspense, thanks to a viewing of the original Psycho at age 12. During his film-schooling at USC, Franklin tried to get in touch with Hitchcock's office to acquire a print of Hitch's 1948 thriller Rope, and ended up getting not only the film but the late filmmaker to visit the school. He made such an impression that the 21-year-old was then invited to watch Hitchcock work on his 1969 film Topaz.Roadgames, despite a slasher craze inspired ad campaign led by this ridiculously cool poster, is a version of Hitchcock's Rear Window on wheels. Stacy Keach stars as Quid, a sleep-deprived truck driver hauling a load of pork from Melbourne to Perth, who entertains himself by talking to his pet dingo and making up identities for the people he passes on his journey. As he travels he finds himself most interested in a roadmate driving a green van who starts the film with a female companion and ends up dropping bags of "trash" across the continent.

To the viewer, there is no question as to this mysterious driver's purpose - we are shown what happens in the hotel room with the young woman before the opening credits roll. The hook of the film, with no suspense regarding that man's guilt, lies in watching Quid unravel the things he's seen. Like James Stewart's character in Rear Window, Quid has made up his mind as to what he thinks he's seen, and we're left to see if his ability to put the pieces together is good enough to make an impact.Around the film's midpoint, Quid is joined in his quest by a young hitchhiker with a secret, played by all-time horror film champion Jamie Lee Curtis. She instantly buys in to his beliefs about the closely watched man in the van, and becomes an asset in his quest to discover the truth. In the third act we find our lead alone again, and are treated to some fantastic scenes in which he tries to convince himself he didn't see what he knows he saw. As he speaks each of his soothing and practical thoughts, we can faintly hear the voice in his head that's reminding him why each statement can't be true. It's a great touch that builds tension as the film rolls toward a final confrontation.

Franklin and co-writer Everett De Roche must have had a lot of fun putting this film together. Keach is given a lot of great dialogue and establishes a unique lead who has an intellectual streak, reminding us of his skill as an actor that has often been overlooked. Curtis isn't asked to do a lot, but succeeds in the familiar role thanks to her experience, as this was the fifth of six straight horrors she starred in on the big screen. The relationship between driver and hitcher is never taken too far, and the film maintains its simple focus on the mystery driver through a cool finale in a dark alleyway.Franklin, despite succeeding with Psycho II and a few more Hollywood films, never made it big in the states. By the mid-90s he grew tired of the studios and was back in Australia working on projects he wanted to deal with. It's a bit of a shame that he never got more respect in Hollywood, because Roadgames clearly established him as a precise director of suspense whose tendencies are echoed by David Fincher and John Dahl types today. Roadgames is a well-written thriller that focuses on creating rich characters and building interest in their thought processes; and as far as Hitchcock tributes go, it's one of the best.

Midnight Bites 5.11.10 - News on Fright Night, Romero, and more!

Though I don't often dip into the film news scene here at FMWL, there are a few recent developments I feel obliged to speak on. So, I'd like to offer up a few "Midnight Bites", in which I sink my teeth into some burning issues.

First and foremost, the news has broke that Colin Farrell has been cast in the heavy role opposite Anton Yelchin in Craig Gillespie's remake of the '80s favorite Fright Night. You won't find many people who are bigger fans of Fright Night than I am (in fact, I'm betting it's second to The Blob on the "Most Mentioned Films on FMWL" list), but I'm kind of digging where this remake is heading.

For starters, Gillespie is an established filmmaker whose Lars and the Real Girl is deeply loved by many, including the prestigious The Masha. Yelchin has quickly become a favorite in films like Charlie Bartlett, Alpha Dog (which was otherwise god-awful), and even Terminator Salvation. But Farrell, whom I've backed since Tigerland, is a most exciting addition that instantly adds the remake more credibility than most recent revamps.

Since the project was announced, I've stated repeatedly that the approach to Peter Vincent, as well as the casting of the character, is the pivotal factor that could sway me either way regarding this film. A gothic, Hammer Films inspired approach - like that shown perfectly by Roddy McDowell in the original - probably won't translate to modern audiences. Still, the film will need a strong actor in this role, one with the ability to play both a phony hero and a terrified everyman.

Might I humbly suggest veteran Sean Bean for the role? If the character's approached as an aging version of a Hugh Jackman version of Van Helsing, a sort of Indiana Jones of vampire killing, Bean could be a great fit. He's spent most of his career playing villainous roles in films like The Hitcher remake or National Treasure, and his scene-stealing turn in the first Lord of the Rings film, particularly in his final moments, is a great example of an actor handling moral conflict well. I trust Bean could pull off both the cocky showman and scared hero sides that made Peter Vincent one of my favorite characters of all-time. I know, it's a departure from the original, and it'd be easier to just pick someone like Gary Oldman or John Malkovich, but I think a Bean/Farrell showdown would get me most excited for this rehash.

And remember, no matter what happens with this remake, the original will always still be there for you. In fact, it'll probably be on a souped up Blu-Ray just because this remake's coming. That's a win.

Speaking of re-released films, I'm ecstatic to find that last week was the long anticipated return to DVD of Joe Dante's Matinee! A film I once loved on VHS, Matinee has been residing in the dreaded out-of-print file for several years, but has finally been re-released by Universal.
If you're unfamiliar with the film, Matinee stars John "You're out of your element, Donny!" Goodman as famed gimmick horror producer Lawrence Woolsey - a thinly veiled tribute to House on Haunted Hill/13 Ghosts/The Tingler schlockmaster William Castle. He's promoting his new movie MANT! (Half man, HALF ANT!) at a local theater, amidst the uncertainty of the Cuban Missile Crisis. Though it's been a few years since my last viewing, I recall Matinee very fondly as a film about the power of genre cinema, and will most definitely be reviewing it here soonest. In the meantime, you can read about the film here, or head over to Amazon and get your own copy. If you like Castle, Dante, or Goodman; I doubt you'll regret it.

Lastly, an interview recently confirmed that George A. Romero, the unquestioned Lord of Zombiedom, still plans to make two more Dead flicks. The obvious questions that arise from this announcement are:

A) Considering the decrease in budget and backing for his last three films, where and how will these films reach viewers?

and;

B) What the heck will George call these films? He had enough trouble coming up with Survival of the Dead (see the poster to the left if you don't believe me!) I recently started up a discussion of this via my trusty site Twitter account, in which choices ranged from the excellent and likely - like Rising of the Dead (via The Divemistress of Zombots! fame) and Legend of the Dead (via Emily C. of the criminally under-read The Quest to Watch Every Movie Ever) - to the ridiculous and silly -like my suggestion Funeral of the Dead. If you have ideas, let's hear them in the comments, or join the fun at the twitter with the hashtag #NewDeadTitles.

As for the news that Romero's making two more zed flicks? He's the master, I'm not gonna question him. Bring 'em on!

Midnight Top Five - Mother's Day Spectacular Edition!

One of the most common questions asked of me, now that I'm a mostly full-grown dude, usually sounds like this: "Hey The Mike, you know things about things....what's the most powerful force in the world?" Normally, an emotional response leads me toward saying either a) Hulkamania or b) The A-Team. But when I stop to turn my noggin on, and consider the force that allowed me to experience the combined efforts of the above, I realize that these are small potatoes compared to the force of the dynamic duo that made The Mike possible. The story of one member of that duo goes something like this.

Approximately several years ago, a young woman nearly died while farting out a strange-looking CHUD of a baby whose peanut-shaped head resembled a disfigured version of Michael Berryman. (I can only assume that's where his first name came from, but that's not the point.) The point is that this young woman and the young man (more on him next month) who coproduced this odd thing then devoted herself to helping that creature become the right kind of full-grown dude.

In the early years, that meant she needed to turn a dark-skinned cabbage patch doll into Mr. T with her bare hands. Later, it meant she needed to blitz a closing video store in the name of finally acquiring the VHS copy of Clownhouse she'd sunk so many dollars into already. To paraphrase Pulp Fiction, that video was her children's birthright, and she'd be expletived if some expletive's gonna put their greasy hands on that tape. But a lot of times, it just meant she needed to point the child in the right direction.

It's with that thought in mind that I, that previously deformed youngling's older self, present a special Midnight Top Five focusing on things I love due to the love of my dear mum - or, as she prefers to be known - The Masha. She did this to me.....Rear Window - I'm still unsure how this happened, but I've learned to never doubt The Masha. In the middle of a time span while Rear Window, was out of print, the above VHS somehow appeared in our household. Though a young Mike, well before acquiring his The, was resistant to the film for some reason. Like Hogan, Masha knows best, and it wasn't long before I was showing the film to others with excitement. A couple of years later, the realization that's lasted nearly 15 years set in - The Masha had most certainly brought forth the movie that is undoubtedly The Mike's favorite.Young Frankenstein - As a 16 year-old, The Masha gave The Mike the best Valentine's Day gift he's ever received. (Yes, I will pause for you all to have a moment of sadness regarding that statement.)

Grievers be gone, because Young Frankenstein rules my school. Appealing to The Mike's comedic preferences and love of horror nostalgia, it's still an all-time favorite film that the all-too-wise Masha knew would succeed in every regard. If I'm blue and I don't know where to go to, I don't have to go where fashion sits....because The Masha brought this happy-making movie to my attention.The Fog - When I really started to dig in to horror films during my teen years, there was one quote The Masha would always relay when I asked for suggestions (Because really, after Rear Window and Young Frankenstein...wouldn't you go to her for suggestions too?): "There's something in THE FOG!" Though later travels into the work of John Carpenter have knocked it out of my favorite five or six Carpenter films, and there's one aspect of it that drives me absolutely batty, I still have a supremely soft spot for whatever that something in The Fog is.The Phantom of the Opera - In all regards, I do enjoy the tale of The Phantom of the Opera. It was early in my days that I was brought a cheap VHS of the 1925 silent film, my first horror film, which served a double purpose of bringing me a "scary" story and helping me practice my reading. Though I've never harnessed the latter fully, the first purpose stuck.

(Also, The Masha pushed the musical version of the tale heavily on us children, and we did attend a performance of it in my early teen years. I don't think I've ever admitted it, but it was pretty darn cool.)Transformers: The Movie - Just in case one could ever think The Masha may lose her powers of awesome movieness with age, I'm reminded of the time within recent years when she excitedly told me of finding a VHS copy of Transformers: The Movie, which made me cry like a baby while sitting in theater circa 1986, and bringing it home. She's at the point where she's discarding old VHS movies she buys cheap, but she made sure to point out that, no matter what, she'll keep that on hand just in case of emergency. If that's not Masha-ly love, I don't know what is.

When I look at this list, I realize one gigantic truth - if I can go through five great influences she's had on me without bringing up the fact that she brought The Blob into my young life; that must mean The Masha holds powers that I can never fully understand. Regardless, I'm as appreciative as is humanly possible for all that she is to me. To her, and to all the others out there - Happy Masha's Day!

Iron Man 2 - The Alcoholic Superhero of the Summer

Yeah, I know. Iron Man 2 isn't a cult movie, midnight movie, horror movie, or whatever kind of movie this site's designed to cover. But hey, I've got the keyboard, and I want to talk about something.

Also, this post could be deemed as containing spoilers regarding the film's plot. I don't intend to directly address any developments, but structure of scenes and my opinions about their meaning will occur. If you haven't seen it yet, you're probably safest skipping this one (and coming back later, of course).

As a child, I loved the idea of Iron Man. I only had about 6 comics growing up, but that was more than enough for me to create my own images of the heroes I read about, and Iron Man - probably because his suit matches the colors of my mother's (and eventually my) college's sports teams - quickly became a hero of mine. As I've rediscovered Iron Man as a young adult nerd, there's a specific segment of the character's lore that appeals to me greatly, on a personal and professional level - the image of Tony Stark as an alcoholic/addict. While this part of Tony was barely alluded to in 2008's Iron Man film, I was ecstatic to find the sequel, in both subtle and direct ways, establishing Tony Stark's addiction perfectly.

One of the most common misconceptions in society regarding addiction is that it's simply a choice. My belief, which is backed by doctors, scientists, and those in treatment across the world, is that alcoholism and addiction are an incurable disease that requires constant attention. While it's not something that can be isolated in the body or something that can be traced to a virus or pathogen, the disease concept of alcoholism/addiction is widely accepted - and in my eyes is at the forefront of Iron Man 2.

In the film's opening scenes, the central point of the film is that Tony Stark believes he is untouchable. He shows little care for others, mocks legal issues, and is quick to proclaim that he believes he is above anyone else. Behind the scenes he is dealing with his own issues - a Palladium infection that parallels the heart problems the comic-bound Stark encountered after becoming Iron Man - but he hides this from others and insists that he knows best and that he has everything under control. This is amplified by the fact that the cinematic Tony Stark has already announced to the world that he "IS Iron Man", which makes his problems that more significant to a world of onlookers who know that the out-of-control billionaire is also someone they need available in case of emergency.

Others that I've already discussed the film with have stated they feel the infection is a parallel to addiction, and they're right to an extent. But there's a lot more going on that establishes Stark as an addict without showing him using or drinking often. A party scene that's designed to be comical does show a completely intoxicated Stark - who had started drinking to deal with his problems before the party began - making a fool of himself, embarrassing and fighting his loved ones, and destroying his own property. This establishes the ailment further, but it's the implications about Tony's mindset that really hit on key concepts of addiction for me.

The self-centered attitude I mentioned earlier is the key to most of the film's second act. Stark isolates himself from anyone who believes his actions are harmful and creates strain in the relationships with those that he used to hold dear. At the center is his assistant Pepper, whom he realizes has kept him out of trouble for most of his adult life. He knows he needs her, but instead of saying that he simply gives her his company...and leaves her to run it on her own. In the middle of the film he realizes he's isolated her and rushes to her to make amends, frantically stopping to get her a box of fresh strawberries - which are the only thing in the world she's allergic to. Tony sympathetically exclaims that he knew there was a connection between Pepper and strawberries, and that this realization has to mean he's trying. He wants to deal with their issues, but he's still not willing to admit that he has his own problems.

This is a summer blockbuster, so the third act naturally swings upward in tone. Tony finds the answer to his physical problems, reconnects with his best friends, and gets himself together long enough to save the day. But his attitude never really changes - he's become conscious that his behaviors have caused problems, but no progress has really been made to change his lifestyle, and he appears to be back to behaviors that could become high risk situations. He's nothing more than the proverbial "dry drunk" who isn't addressing the factors that could lead him back to alcohol.

Though the film never directly addresses alcohol as the problem like the comic did before it, the message is there. In a wrap-up scene, Nick Fury and his watchful eye point out a list of defects that make Tony Stark and Iron Man risky to himself and others, but Tony's mind is again closed to the possibility. This serves two purposes in the direction of our new Iron Man tale: Setting up the love/hate relationship between Iron Man and S.H.I.E.L.D (which will eventually be embodied by Captain America), and reminding us that Tony Stark has not hit his "rock bottom" yet.While I doubt that Hollywood filmmakers will ever delve into the Demon in a Bottle storyline that resulted in an alcoholic Tony Stark living on the streets while losing his father's company and his heroic side, Iron Man 2 proved to me that Jon Favreau and the team behind this version of Stark recognize what makes the character so interesting to me. At this point, the character is the big-budget equivalent of the teenage kid who just finished up a short-term drug treatment program, but is still convinced that partying on the weekends and smoking it up a few times a week can't hurt him if he uses the skills he has. Tony Stark may have found a happy ending for now, but the challenges are only going to get more difficult if he can't address the diseased mind inside his crimson and gold suit.

Midnight Movie of the Week #18 - Captain Kronos - Vampire Hunter

Due to a realization during my current viewing, I must start any discussion of Captain Kronos - Vampire Hunter with this statement: Lead actor Horst Janson, a German beefsteak of an actor whose most popular film is...well, this one...looks exactly like what I think a young Michael Bay on horseback would have looked like.That said, I bring you Captain Kronos - Vampire Hunter, one of the last wave of horror films to leave the beloved Hammer studios in the 1970s. Written and directed by Brian Clemens - who had earlier helped create the TV legend that is The Avengers - it's a strange entry into Hammer's canon that features the previously mentioned German lead, a slew of scenes set in day light, few corsets, and a bit of sword fighting.

In the countryside around a small village, a cloaked figure has taken up the hobby of draining the life from young women, and only one man's up to the challenge. He is Kronos (inexplicably pronounced Kraw-nos), accompanied by colleague Professor Grost (John Cater) and an indebted waif that he rescues from a stockade (Caroline Munro, who is one of the most beautiful things ever). They meet up with his old friend Dr. Marcus (John Carson), a resident of the plagued village, and the hunt begins.The vampires loose in this world don't fit traditional guidelines - but don't worry, that doesn't mean they sparkle. In this case, the vampire seems to be leaving blood in its victims while stealing their youth. Grost backs this up by sharing that there are many different species of vampires who use different methods of destruction, and Kronos backs him up by relaying that "what he doesn't know about vampires wouldn't fill a flea's codpiece." Most of the events that follow involve Kronos and Kompany searching the woods for clues using tools like red ribbons and reanimated toads. The group also runs into a gang of hooligans, led by Amicus Productions veteran Ian Hendry, leading to a brief and humorous battle in a tavern.

Kronos - as both a character and a film - is methodical to a fault. There isn't a lot of action in Clemens' film, but the sense of intrigue that melds with the fresh ideas it brings to vampire lore always keep me interested in the film. At a time when Hammer was struggling to adapt to the changes in genre cinema, this Vampire Hunter is clearly an attempt to provide a different type of story to the table. While this approach, also evident in films like Dracula A.D. 1972 and The Legend of the 7 Golden Vampires, wouldn't save Hammer, I'm inclined to say that it produced a few horror films that hold a special place in the studio's history and still keep me pleased nearly 40 years later.Janson isn't a particularly interesting lead emotionally, but he brings a strong presence to the lead. Thankfully, Cater and Carson each give strong supporting performances, which help to carry the star through the film's slower moments. Munro is the cast member who makes me most excited about the film, and her talent and beauty are sufficient to ensure that she is always a welcome sight onscreen. It's nice to see Hendry, who was memorable in Theatre of Blood, Tales from the Crypt (Raise your hand if you knew it was a movie before it was a TV show!) and Children of the Damned, in his small role - but I totally wanted to see him put up a longer battle with Kronos.

I know I haven't had a lot to say about Kronos that doesn't make the film sound kind of ridiculous, and it's probably one of the weakest films I've covered as Midnight Movie of the Week yet. But there's a charm in the swashbuckling tale of life-draining vampires vs. a blond with a chiseled jaw that always keeps me smiling when I see it. It's not a movie that's among Hammer's best work, nor is it more than a blip on the radar of 1970s horror, but I still kinda love it. If you ever want to hear how dead toads are linked to vampires, or need more swords in your day, or just want to look at Caroline Munro; Captain Kronos - Vampire Hunter is at your service.

Infestation

2009, Dir. by Kyle Rankin.

There are a lot of times when reviewing a film can be a challenge to a writer. For me, this is most common when discussing a movie like Survival of the Dead whose connections (in that case, legendary director George A. Romero) raise the bar for the viewer before they even have a chance to consider their reaction to the film. Then there are films like Infestation, whose appearance leaves little hope for the prospective viewer. Even after hearing some positive reviews and recognizing some cast members (Chris Marquette of Freddy vs. Jason and Ray Wise of tons of awesome movies) it still looked like something I'd find on the SyFy network. To my surprise, this turned out to be the type of film that I actually get excited to discuss. My low expectations were surpassed in every manner, and I ended up finding a deeply enjoyable creature feature.

As you can tell from the poster image that this text is hugging, Infestation is a film that asks its audience if they're ready for "global swarming". That swarming comes in the form of one of the B-Movie's greatest treasures, giant bugs. (In fact, the Japanese title for the film is Big Bugs Panic - and when the Japanese are giving your monster movie a loving title like that, you know you're in for some fun.)

Infestation follows Cooper (Marquette), a life-long slacker, and a group of survivors as they try to survive the insect apocalypse by finding somewhere that's safe - preferably Cooper's ex-military father's reinforced home. The group is a relatively standard one for this type of film - self-confident brunette, codependent blonde, smart Asian, strong African American (who doubles as the disabled member of the group), and African American handyman. Despite this, the characters seem relatively fresh and are a far more enjoyable group to follow than most horrors of late, especially since we're spared the "self-obsessed and possibly fascist prep/jock" character that we see far too often. None of the characters exist just to become a victim, and the film takes steps to establish them individually in the opening acts. It might not succeed entirely in this regard, but the effort that is made is welcome in a film whose premise might not require a script under other filmmakers.

While we're finding out who the characters are, there are a lot of bugs, which seem to be about 5 feet long and 4 feet wide most of the time. This provides a menace whose scale is similar to the humans, and that allows for a lot of hand-to-tentacle combat to take place. There is also a twist to the film in which some human/bug "hybrids" are introduced, and I won't spoil the initial moment of surprise by explaining their look here. Both sets of creatures look pretty cheesy, but that's exactly the kind of film this is. In fact, the goofiness of the creatures is one of the film's biggest charms to a b-movie monster fan like myself.

The film seems to stumble a little in the second act, but it picks up the pace when we're finally introduced to Cooper's father, played by Wise. The veteran star of everything from Swamp Thing to Jeepers Creepers 2 to TV's Reaper (plus he was in RoboCop!) takes control of each scene he's in, and he plays off Marquette perfectly. Wise's portrayal of the overbearing father also leads to the film's best dramatic moments, and a few late film twists gain added power due to his willingness to embrace the film's tone.

Infestation, like several independent horror films of recent years, leans heavily on the standards for horror comedies that Shaun of the Dead promoted. But unlike many of those films that seemed to be designed for their own amusement, Infestation never panders to the audience and keeps its primary focus on being a "Man vs. Creatures" tale. I'm not sure if I've seen another film pull that off as well since Shaun, which means that Infestation left me with a goofy smile that I'm sure will return during future viewings. Thanks to that charm and a teasing final moment, I hope to see Kyle Rankin and crew return for another Infestation. On its own, I can't recommend Infestation enough to anyone who is looking for a gratifying horror-comedy diversion.

Midnight Top Five - Vampire Movies

Vampire movies have always been a tricky lot. The most iconic is surely Bela Lugosi/Tod Browning's Dracula, but even that one has its share of detractors. (Heck, some even consider the Spanish version made on the same set to be better.) But there are a few vampire films I truly love, and I figured it'd be an easy topic to go Top 5 on...right now.

(Sorry Twilight...you just plain suck.)Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens (1922, F.W. Murnau) - Any discussion of vampires on film, especially any related to the history of cinema, has to start with Dracula and/or Nosferatu, German expressionist F.W. Murnau's silent masterpiece. If you're one of those anti-black-and-white folks you could check out 2000's Shadow of the Vampire, which follows the film's production. (And it's a true story, isn't it?) Max Schreck, whose name LITERALLY translates to "terror", creates one of the most iconic images in horror history with his performance.Dracula (aka, Horror of Dracula) (1958, Terence Fisher) - Christopher Lee's first outing as Dracula might be my favorite vampire film. Period. I've always loved the gothic feel of Hammer's films, and this one covers Bram Stoker's classic story well. Also, look for the future Alfred Pennyworth, Michael Gough, in a supporting role!Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht (1979, Werner Herzog) - Who says remakes can't work? While I won't compare it to the original, Werner Herzog's version of Nosferatu offers haunting visuals and an eerie romantic feel, plus a fantastic musical score. It's one of the most visceral horror films I've ever seen, even if you have to look at Klaus Kinski most of the film.Fright Night (1985, Tom Holland) - The film I once listed as my favorite horror film of the 1980s is also a film I consider a near flawless vampire film. Sure, it's cheesy and a bit out of date, but it probably did as much to mold my perception of vampires as any film has. Roddy McDowall as Peter Vincent is the ultimate horror hero.From Dusk Till Dawn (1996, Robert Rodriguez) - My initial response to this film, as a fifteen year-old, was "What? The guy mom loves from ER can kick ass?" But even then I knew that this flick, in all its goofy glory, was the vampire version of Assault on Precinct 13. (Well, I would have thought that had I seen Assault on Precinct 13 at the time.) Regardless, the combo of Rodriguez and Tarantino have a lot of fun with the vamps-in-a-titty-bar siege picture, and Clooney and Keitel cancel out the annoyance that is Juliette Lewis.

Honorable Mention goes to.......Bunnicula: The Vampire Rabbit (1979, Charles A. Nichols) - Based on the popular series of books, this 1979 Saturday Morning special was a favorite of Mini The Mike growing up. At the time I didn't know that it deviated greatly from its source, which today would be a clear sign that it bad sucks. I however, was more enthralled by that powerful nose twitch Bunnicula possessed, and spent many moons trying to convince our kittens to use Bunnicula powers. Which, they of course can't...there's no such thing as a vampire cat!

Or is there?

State of the Midnight Address: Vol. 3 - The Mike SPEAKS!

Good evening folks! Normally, this is the part where I write about how things are going at FMWL....but since I'm feeling a bit special....you all should listen to me talk about how things are going instead.

Survival of the Dead

2009, Dir. by George A. Romero.

Remember the days, around the beginning of the millennium, when all of us horror fans were pretty excited about the return of zombies at the hands of George A. Romero? At the time, Sir George was connected to the Resident Evil franchise, but that didn't pan out and instead zombies made their big comeback with Paul Thomas Anderson and Milla Jovovich leading the way. That didn't stop the Romero train, and after successes like Shaun of the Dead and the remake of his own Dawn of the Dead, Romero scored studio backing and a cast of Hollywood actors for his fourth deadhead film, Land of the Dead.

At the time, I remember finding Land entertaining, yet entirely flawed. In the wake of Romero's two follow-up zombie films, including Survival of the Dead, which is currently making its long awaited debut in the States, that film looks like a long lost treasure.

I say that while looking at my recent viewing of Survival of the Dead and wondering what exactly the point Romero is still trying to add to his story is. His original Dead trilogy, starting with 1968's Night of the Living Dead and ending with 1985's Day of the Dead, was a well-disguised cover for commentary on the human desire to destroy their species from within, focusing on racial, commercial, and sexual differences - among others - that prevailed despite the chaos that is devouring the world. In Land, Romero shifted his focus to embrace that human disconnect and focus on the creatures who are trying to survive their predicament. Poor response to that film, critically and financially, led to the independent production of 2007's Diary of the Dead and now, Survival of the Dead, in which Romero flounders to return to the ideas that established his legend.

Survival picks up on a tangent from Diary, following both the residents of a small farming island off the East Coast and a military crew of scavengers led by a Colonel (Alan Van Sprang, who also appeared in a different role in Land of the Dead) who led a hijacking of Diary's main characters. Now, armed with a small crew of diverse soldiers (basically a token back-up man, a token sex-obsessed ethnic character, and a token lesbian), the Colonel joins up with an exiled patriarch of the island retreat and heads across the sea to the island, where they find danger from both the living and the dead.

There are some interesting developments when considering the new style of living on said island, particularly in regard to their ability to confine and reuse the dead. But despite this, the characters quickly slip into the same old zombie flick routines. Old grudges are still more concerning than the threat of being eaten by a corpse, and we're bombarded with the same "humanity can't save itself" messages we've been getting from these films for years. The final shot of the film is a strong one, bridging the gap between human and zombie lore, but as an attempt to make the film relevant it's too little, too late.

Though it's nice to see Romero back to basics, as he was when he was at his peak, there's just not a lot in Survival of the Dead that carries weight. As someone who's revisited Romero's places of the Dead more times than is necessary, I wonder if there's anything left that can be said regarding these "Dead". I've wanted to see more from Romero's world - for example a cross-country, post-apocalyptic road-movie like the one alluded to at the end of Land of the Dead sounds fun - but at this point it doesn't seem possible with the dwindling resources at Romero's disposal.

In this case, the film is what the title says. Romero's dead will survive, primarily because he still understands the subgenre he invented better than a large majority of those who've tried to follow him into the zombie craze. But while these Dead do survive, there's little more than a few half-cocked ideas added to their story. I still like seeing George add to his story, but at this point it's hard to find a reason to feel that way. Survival of the Dead just manages to exist in the world Romero's created, and doesn't hold any power that can rejuvenate a race of creature features that have been feasting on the mindless horror fan for most of the last 10 years.