REVIEW: “28 Weeks Later”

As the title obviously suggests, “28 Weeks Later” is the sequel to Danny Boyle’s widely successful zombie flick “28 Days Later”. Juan Carlos Fresnadillo takes over the directing reins and goes to great lengths to capture the same frantic style and pacing that helped make the first movie so unique. Mission accomplished! “28 Weeks Later” does something few sequels are able to do. It gives us a better film than its predecessor. Make no mistake, I really liked “28 Days Later”. But for me it lost its way in the third act which ultimately hurt the film a bit. The sequel steers clear of that and the result is a terrifying action horror movie that is relentlessly brutal but thoroughly entertaining.

I’m sure you remember the premise of the first film. A radical animal rights group storms a laboratory in England and inadvertently unleash a highly contagious Rage virus. 28 days later London and the surrounding areas are abandoned with the exception of Rage-infected people running the streets. That brings us to the sequel where many things have happened in the 28 days since the outbreak. The infected are believed to have died of starvation. A U.S. led NATO force has come in, quarantined an area, and created a safe zone for resettlement. It’s here that Don (Robert Carlyle) is reunited with his daughter Tammy (Imogen Poots) and young son Andy (Mackintosh Muggleton).

“28 Weeks Later” is smart with its storytelling. The movie opens up with a brief but brilliantly horrific scene that shows Don narrowly escaping a raging group of infected. But in order to escape Don makes a highly questionable decision and I found myself quick to judge him for it. But in a very subtle way the movie asks the audience what they would do in that situation. And of course the question grows more complicated when we learn there are children involved. The film forces several of its characters to make important yet difficult choices. Jeremy Renner plays Sgt. Doyle, an Army Sniper forced to choose between his superior’s orders and his moral convictions. Idris Elba plays General Stone that has to make a choice that will either save or end hundreds of innocent lives. Harold Perrineau plays a helicopter pilot called on to make some critical decisions by his best friend Doyle. It’s a movie of tough choices.

But c’mon, this is a zombie horror movie so you know things go bad at some point. I don’t want to give anything away but the Rage virus gets loose in the safe zone in a very surprising way. Just as in the first film, the infected are brutally vicious and ravenous. They’re genuinely frightening as they relentlessly pursue their potential meals. They run at breakneck speeds, burst through windows and doors, and spew gallons of infectious blood. They are pretty grisly sights and Fresnadillo doesn’t shy away from the gore. The infected transformation scenes are gruesome and the various zombie head shots, decapitations, and torchings aren’t for the faint of heart. Yet the graphic effects feel right at home here.

“28 Weeks Later” doesn’t stop to smell the roses. The story moves at a frantic pace with tension and intensity playing bigger roles than genuine horror movie scares. But the entire concept is laid out so well that there are moments that are utterly frightening. This is helped by some deeply committed performances. Renner is really good and convincing as is Elba. I was also impressed by the performances of Muggleton and Poots as the two kids who play a major role in the story. I also have to mention Rose Byrne’s solid work as a military doctor who makes saving the kids her top priority.

I expected “28 Weeks Later” to basically be exactly like the first film and that’s not a bad thing. But I certainly didn’t expect it to be a better movie that grabbed me early and kept me on the edge of my seat all the way to it’s fantastic final shot. Fresnadillo perfectly matches the style and tone of Danny Boyle’s first film while also making this movie his own. It’s much more straightforward but equally intelligent. “28 Weeks Later” is a wild ride and as far as horror movies go this one was right up my alley.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

“Sinister” – 3.5 STARS

Tis the season for horror movies and this year Hollywood has already given us several underwhelming entries into the genre. So along comes “Sinister”, a new supernatural horror thriller that may not break any new ground but fills the need for a fun horror movie experience during the Halloween season. “Sinister” is a small and relatively straightforward horror picture that uses several familiar devices yet is able to keep you a little uneasy in your seat. And even though I was hoping for more I’ve seen a lot worse efforts than this.

It was a nice surprise to see Ethan Hawke starring in this type of picture. He plays the role of a true-crime author named Ellison who moves his family into a new house in a small rural area. We quickly learn that the family who last owned the home were brutally murdered there. We also learn that one child from the family was never found. The murders were unsolved which serve as Ellison’s inspiration for what he hopes will be a can’t-miss best seller. I love how Hawke handles his character. There are several layers to Ellison. He’s deeply concerned that his 15 minutes of fame is up yet he refuses to accept it. His bullheaded insistence on finishing the book blinds him to the toll it’s taking on his children and marriage even as things begin to get really weird around the house.

The weirdness really begins when Ellison finds a box filled with several reels of Super 8 films and a projector in his attic. The films feature several brutal murders of different families in different years including the family killed in his new home. Ellison begins investigating the murders, connecting them In hopes of making a big discovery that would make his book I sure-fire hit. Of course it wouldn’t be a horror movie if everything went as planned. Ellison begins seeing visions, hearing bumps, and grows increasingly unnerved by his findings. But if the current trend in modern horror movies has shown us anything, it’s that you can never assume that things are as they seem.

“Sinister” plays in the sandbox of both psychological and supernatural horror. Even though the trailer gives away too much, there are moments where you wonder if Ellison’s mind is playing tricks on him or if he has unleashed an incredible force of evil. The movie establishes and then keeps the tension amped up as its mystery unfolds. It deals with some tough subject matter and throws some pretty haunting imagery at the audience. Speaking of the imagery, some of the films creepier moments are when Ellison is sitting alone in his home office watching these old films. The darkness, the steady sound of the projector, and the grisly images he’s seeing create a delightfully eerie atmosphere. But this also opens the movie up to some of it’s more conventional approaches.

You can’t help but notice some all-to-familiar devices that “Sinister” milks dry. There are plenty of cheap scares via sudden bursts of loud noises or music. We get the bumps in the attic, the slow walks down long, dark halls, and the very in-fashion creepy kids scenes. In fact, while watching this movie I could’ve kept a checklist of all the things horror fans have seen before. Creepy house with a haunted past? Check! A sometimes head-scratchingly dumb main character? Check! Slamming doors, power outages, a well-timed storm? Check!

But here’s the good news. Despite the well-worn formulas and clichés, “Sinister” still manages to be an entertaining and eventually disturbing horror picture. A large part of it’s success is due to Ethan Hawke’s strong performance and compelling character (despite his sometimes bonehead decisions). I bought into the conflict between his love for his family and his desire to write another bestseller as well as the repercussions that his clouded judgment brings on them all. But more importantly “Sinister” works because there is a genuine sense of unease to everything you’re seeing. And while it does require the audience to wait a while for things to unfold, the ending is frighteningly satisfying.

As I mentioned earlier, “Sinister” doesn’t break any new ground in the horror genre. It depends on several of the same techniques that we’ve seen over and over. But there is some meat to its story and as you get deeper into the film the tension gets higher all the way to the finale which is perfectly fitting for a good horror picture. “Sinister” won’t make anyone’s horror top 10 list. But it maintains its moodiness and delivers in the end. That’s more than I can say about some of Hollywood’s more recent horror efforts.

5 Phenomenal Horror Movies

THE PHENOMENAL 5

What better way to start my ’10 Days of Horror’ than doing a Phenomenal 5 on the greatest movies of the genre (according to me of course). This is certainly a wide open list and everyone has their opinions. But this is the one genre where I can list my top 5 without hesitation. The horror genre goes way back to the silent movie era and it has kept audiences fascinated ever since. These 5 frightening films are the ones that I can’t get enough of. For me, they are the best of the genre and I truly love each. So here we go. Now considering how broad a subject this is I wouldn’t call this the definitive list. But you can’t deny that these 5 horror movie classics are absolutely phenomenal.

#5 – “PSYCHO”

Alfred Hitchcock’s 1960 masterpiece “Psycho” has arguably the most well-known scene in horror movie history. But there’s also so much greatness wrapped around Janet Leigh’s memorable murder in the shower at the hands…err, knife of Norman Bates. Anthony Perkins is as creepy as they come and you know there’s something not quite right about the guy from the first moment you see him until that final unnerving grin. And of course there is his macabre relationship with his dear, dear mother. For my money “Psycho” is brilliant and it’s the perfect mix of mystery and horror presented with the sharp style of a master filmmaker. It has its share of detractors but I will always love it.

#4 – “HALLOWEEN”

Oh there are so many things I love about “Halloween”. The great John Carpenter gives us a host of special ingredients that makes this film unforgettable. “Halloween” gives us the quintessential scream queen Jamie Lee Curtis. It gives us the frightening Michael Myers. It gives us Donald Pleasence’s wonderfully goofy prophecies of doom. And how can you forget the simple yet to haunting piano score by Carpenter himself. Working with an incredibly small budget, the movie still broke new ground and invented the great horror movie cliches that are still imitated today. It’s a horror movie classic and the king of the slasher sub genre. It also still entertains me just as much as when I first watched it.

#3 – THE EVIL DEAD

In 1981 two young new filmmakers, Sam Raimi and Bruce Campbell, made what would become one of the scariest horror movies of all time. “The Evil Dead” is another example of creating a great horror film with a tiny budget. It’s a highly influential picture that spawned two great sequels. It’s the story of five college kids who spend spring break in an isolated cabin in the woods. They accidentally release demons who begin killing them one by one. “The Evil Dead” is one of the few movies that I would call genuinely scary. The creepy concept and disturbing makeup effects still stick with me to this day. And of course it introduced us to the wonderful character Ash. This is a horror treasure that beats anything that comes out these days.

#2 – “THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE”

For years I thought “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre” was based on a true story. It was one of the most frightening movies I had ever seen. It’s been years since I found out that the story is purely fictional yet the movie still has the same effect on me today. Tobe Hooper directed, produced, and co-wrote the film that was made for under $300,000 and featured a cast of unknowns. The story of five friends who encounter a cannibalistic family in rural Texas didn’t rely on a buckets of blood and gore for its frights. Instead Hooper creates a disturbing sense of uneasiness with this material alone. Throw in Leatherface and pinches of dark comedy and you have one of the greatest horror movies of all-time.

#1 – “NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD”

I never have a hard time telling people what my favorite horror movie of all time is. George Romero’s classic “Night of the Living Dead” was the first horror movie that really effected me. This is the film that put zombies on the map and there have been countless imitators since. As with the others on this list, Romero uses a small budget and no-name actors yet develops a horror picture that is unlike any other. Expertly crafted and wonderfully unsettling, “Night of the Living Dead” sets its creepy tone early and keeps it through so many clever techniques. I love everything about this true classic. It’s not just my favorite horror movie, it’s one of my favorite movies of all-time.

There they are – 5 Phenomenal Horror Movies. As I mentioned, this is a broad list and everyone has their favorites. But I’ll put my five up up against anyone’s. These five films showed that if you’re creative and skilled you don’t need loads of money and big backing to make a great horror picture. So what did I miss? What would you have included on the list? Which of my choices do you disagree with? Please take time to comment below.

REVIEW: “The Third Man”

“The Third Man” is a stunning British film noir from 1949 directed by Carol Reed and starring Joseph Cotten. It’s a film featuring a tight Hitchcockian story and some extremely clever uses of cameras and lighting. Novelist Graham Greene wrote the screenplay that takes place in a battered post-World War 2 Vienna. The city has been broken up into sectors, each owned by different countries. This plays a big part in Greene’s story. Throughout the film we see shells of buildings, burnt out cars and piles a debris left from the war and it creates one of the most believable atmospheres. This is in large part due to the incredible cinematography from Richard Krasker but more on that later.

This is the Vienna that novelist Holly Martins (Joseph Cotten) enters into. He arrives there at the request of his friend Harry Lime who has offered him a job. But he finds out that Harry had just been killed after being struck by a car. Curious about the circumstances surrounding his death, Martins begins to suspect that Harry was murdered. Along the way he runs into several characters including a cryptic British military policeman (Trevor Howard), Harry’s girlfriend (Anna Schmidt), a couple of Harry’s suspicious “friends” (Ernst Deutsch & Siegfried Breuer), Harry’s doctor (Erich Ponto), and an eyewitness to Harry’s death (Paul Horbiger). Martins sets out to piece together the tidbits of information he gets from each of these people and soon finds out that the truth may be a hard thing to handle.

The story moves at a perfect pace while nicely delivering all the elements you would expect from a high quality mystery and film noir. Cotten is fabulous as always and the supporting cast does a marvelous job of creating the shady and hard-to-read characters that give a movie like this such energy. It’s also necessary to mention that Orson Welles has a small but pivotal part in the movie and, just as you would expect, he is superb. The story never hits a lull nor does it ever overplay it’s hand. It’s intelligent and well constructed and I was consumed by both the narrative and the environment in took place in.

Getting back to Krasker’s cinematography, it’s impossible to watch this picture and not be struck by it. His work was ahead of its time and serves as an object lesson on creative camera angles and the use of lighting. The film was shot almost entirely in Vienna. Krasker goes to great lengths to capture the historical beauty of the city although it’s often shrouded in the darkness of night. But his impeccable use of lighting and shadows draws out the attraction of the statues, architecture, and cobblestone streets as well as the devastation left by the war. Also, you can’t talk about the presentation without mentioning the lovely score by Anton Karas. It features some great tunes none better that the beloved “Third Man Theme”.

I love “The Third Man”. Everything from its production value to the performances to the mesmerizing story works for me. This is great example of classic film noir and it had me hooked from the opening moments until that perfect final shot. This is a film that may have slid under some people’s classic movie radar. But this film excels in both visual presentation and intelligent storytelling. “The Third Man” is a real gem and it’s a movie that simply must be seen.

VERDICT – 5 STARS

5 STARSs

5STAR K&M

REVIEW: “Argo”

And you thought movies were for entertainment only! “Argo” is the third feature film directed by Ben Affleck. It’s also his best work to date. “Argo” takes place during the 1979 Iran hostage crisis and is loosely based on CIA exfiltration specialist Tony Mendez’s bizarre but daring rescue attempt of six US diplomats. For the most part Affleck steers clear of politics instead choosing to focus more on the intensity of the events. This results in a well conceived and focused story that sizzles from the opening scene to the end credits.

The film opens up with what’s arguably the best 20 minutes in cinema so far this year. Affleck instantly sets the stakes high by showing the immediate causes of the unrest in Tehran through a brief but effective opening montage. In 1979 Iran was in chaos after the people had overthrown their unpopular Shah and replaced him with an Islamic Republic. Anti-American sentiment boiled over after the United States granted asylum to the deposed leader. Led by Islamic militants, a mass of people break into the US Embassy and begin taking hostages. Six diplomats manage to escape and find refuge at the home of the Canadian ambassador. The protesting and subsequent storming of the US Embassy is packed with tension and it’s brilliantly visualized through a mix of old news footage and clever camera work. And I’m not just speaking of the hostile crowd outside of the gates. We see diplomats inside, fully expecting a breach, frantically gathering sensitive documents to incinerate and shred. We see last-minute contacts being made which sends Washington scurrying. All of this is realized as truly riveting, edge-of-your-seat cinema.

As mentioned, six American diplomats manage to escape and hide in the home of Canadian ambassador (Victor Garber). Knowing the militants will soon realize that six Americans are unaccounted for, the State Department brings in Tony Mendez (played by Affleck) to come up with a plan to get them out. He convinces his superiors to allow him to enter Tehran, meet up with the hidden diplomats, and leave the country with them posing as a Canadian film crew scouting out a location for a sci-fi movie. Knowing how thorough the militants will investigate the ruse if suspicious, Mendez is sent to movie make-up artist John Chambers (John Goodman) and Lester Siegel (Alan Arkin), a semi-successful Hollywood film producer. Together they put all the pieces in place for their fake movie including a title (“Argo”), a script, a production company, and even a movie poster, all intended to give credibility to Mendez’s cover.

The film then follows the planning of the mission, the anxiety of the diplomats in hiding, and the ever-present uncertainty in Washington from those who don’t fully buy into Mendez’s plan. All of this is told by the able hands of Affleck who has certainly established himself as a skilled storyteller. His style fits perfectly with Chris Terrio’s sharp and layered screenplay. Terrio crafts a potent dramatization by adding just enough to the real events to give the narrative a real dramatic pop. A couple of fictional characters are thrown in and there are moments that are purely for dramatic effect. But that’s what cinema does and I can’t imagine this story playing out any better than it does here. It also has the sharp sting of relevance. I couldn’t help but think of the recent Benghazi embassy attack During the film’s opening sequence.

You also can’t help but be impressed by the movie’s impeccable attention to detail in creating a believable late 70s and early 80s atmosphere and vibe. The movie opens with the old late 70s Warner Bros. logo which perfectly set the table for me. Then there are the obvious things – the cars, the clothes, the hairstyles, the technology. But Affleck also employs several clever devices such as original news footage featuring the likes of Tom Brokaw, Dan Rather, and Ted Koppel. We see archived footage of President Jimmy Carter as well as authentic newscasts of the turmoil in Iran at the time. It blends in perfectly with the fictional additions to give a true credence to everything we see on-screen.

“Argo” is a rock-solid movie that does all of these things well, and I haven’t even gone into the fantastic performances. Some have said otherwise, but I found Affleck to be a compelling lead. Then you have the incredible supporting work of Bryan Cranston, Kyle Chandler, Titus Welliver, and Michael Parks. And of course Goodman and Arkin are a blast. The performances are just another strength and this gripping and well-made film. It grabs you and holds you right through to its nail-biting finale. And be sure to stay through the credits for some great images of the real people involved in this amazing rescue attempt. It’s just icing on the cake of one of the better films of 2012.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

4-5-stars

THE THROWDOWN: “Annie Hall” vs. “Midnight in Paris”

Wednesday is Throwdown day at Keith & the Movies. It’s when we take two movie subjects, pit them against each other, and see who’s left standing. Each Wednesday we’ll look at actors, actresses, movies, genres, scenes, and more. I’ll make a case for each and then see how they stand up one-on-one. And it’s not just my opinion that counts. I’ll share my take and then open up the polls to you. Visit each week for a new Throwdown. Vote each week to decide the true winner!

*Last week Schwarzenegger (53%) out-muscled Stallone (47%) in our action icon Throwdown*

This week we move about as far away from the previous week as humanly possible. It’s old Woody versus new Woody in a Woody Allen Throwdown! When you see a Woody Allen film you know it’s a Woody Allen film. Yet in some ways his approach to filmmaking has changed over the past few years. So I thought it would be fun to pit what many view as a romantic comedy masterpiece in “Annie Hall” against Allen’s more recent and widely popular “Midnight in Paris”. These movies are wildly different yet each look and feel like a Woody Allen picture. So enough of the buildup. It’s old Woody Allen against new Woody Allen. It’s New York against Paris. It’s the Throwdown and your votes decide the winner.

“ANNIE HALL” VS. “MIDNIGHT IN PARIS”

In 1977, Woody Allen released “Annie Hall”, a movie that some have called the quintessential romantic comedy. Allen’s quick wit is never more evident than in the lightning fast and razor-sharp dialogue from the script he wrote about an eccentric New Yorker and his quirky perception of love and relationships. Diane Keaton won an Oscar for her role as Annie, a woman who ended her relationship with Allen’s character a year earlier. Allen spends the film lamenting his lost relationship and then moving on with his life. But can he ever really get Annie out of his mind? “Annie Hall” received three other Oscars including Best Picture and Best Original Screenplay. While I’m on record as saying I’m not the biggest fan of “Annie Hall”, it’s a movie that is loved by many.

In 2011, Woody Allen’s European tour stopped in The City of Light, Paris, France. “Midnight in Paris” is Allen’s love letter to the city, its beauty, and its history. Owen Wilson is fantastic as Gil Pender, a hack writer who believes he was meant to live in Paris during the 1920s. Allen shows us the magic of the city now and takes us back to the days of Hemingway, Picasso, and the Fitzgeralds. It features an incredible supporting cast highlighted by Tom Hiddleston and Corey Stoll as well as beautiful cinematography in some if Paris’ most glorious locations. This is a step outside of the box for Allen. More importantly, it’s a wonderfully romantic film that gives the most lovely look at one of the world’s greatest city. Allen won an Oscar for the screenplay and I can say without hesitation he certainly deserved it.

So is it Allen’s Best Picture winner “Annie Hall” or his love letter to the City of Light “Midnight in Paris”? I’ve got a clear favorite between the two. Do you? Your votes decide the winner. Click below and vote NOW!