The movie begins with a few murders. We don’t know the people who are being slaughtered and we do not care about them, there is no attempt to give these people a character they are just used as a chance to get some gore into the movie, because of course that’s horror right? Gore, blood, violence! It is…right?

So after that we jump ahead in time a little to a couple moving into a big house in the country, which I’d guess must be around where these murders took place? We aren’t told this but I think we have to guess it. The couple seem happy enough, but we are hinted to that the wife (played very woodenly by Charisma Carpenter) has had mental issues in the past. This leads of course to a movie where strange things are taking place around the house and we as the watcher have to wonder if the wife is going crazy or are these people really as strange as they seem? One who is definitely strange is the grounds keeper who is blatantly just a weirdo. In fact we have to put up with him way too much in the story even if he has no use to the plot at all really.

The acting in this movie just sucks. This is a disappointment as Carpenter has been a good actor in the past and more believable. Her character in this movie just comes across as unfeeling and bland, there is no depth to the acting which makes me think it was just another pay check. It can also be said that an actor is only as good as the script they are given, and this one is just bad. The other actors are even worse, with this movie coming across as a very cheap and badly thought out mess.

So, can I get any good out of this movie? Well I can if I really try, and that will be that it ends. This is a badly directed movie and badly written. It has no coherent plot structure and as it gets closer and closer to the end it falls apart into just random scenes of unexplainable violence. I know it could be argued that these are “visions” in the wife’s head but the fact is it was TOO random. It’s as if somebody wanted to make a quick buck from making a horror movie with a known American star in it to catch people’s interest and the end result was this.

If a stronger director and a better script writer got hold of this and managed to give some scenes more meaning this may have been watchable but as it is all we are left with is a confusing mess of badly filmed death scenes and failed plot strands that never make it to the conclusion of the movie. Just a mess…

Rating: 1 out of 10 (for the fact it ended)

Horror has many styles, but it’s easy to say that psychological horror can be the creepiest kind. If it’s done intelligently and with a good plot the watcher can be pulled into the horror and feel they are playing a part in the story. They are not just about gore and violence but about the things we fear in the dark, and the unknown.

The Torment is one of those movies that manages to pull you in and feel for the characters. It all starts off calm enough; Alex and Kate are relaxing together in scenes very remnant of scenes in Paranormal Activity. It almost pulls you in thinking that they will be the main characters. This is when David appears at their door. Having broken up with his girlfriend Alex offers to let him stay there for a while until he sorts himself out. That is of course when things start getting weird.

You see, David see’s things in the dark, things that appear to be trying to get to him they are literally scaring the hell out of him. What we have from this quite effective start of the movie is a ride through the mind of a guy who may be losing his mind, or maybe he’s not? It’s up to us as the watcher to work this out as we watch.

The actors in this movie play their parts good, especially David. You feel for him as these creatures try to attack him, but you have to question is this all in his head or are these things real? He is the only one who can see them. The actor (Giles Alderson) really plays his role well and manages to portray the fear that David must be going through very effectively and it helps we as the watchers enjoy the movie and feel that we are a part of what’s going on. Nicholas Shaw and Zoe Richards (as Alex and Kate) also play their roles effectively as David’s friends wondering what is going on and if these things are actually real? They show the caring for David, and are willing to believe him that they are being attacked even when they can’t see what is actually going on.

One thing I also have to commend is the use of dark in the movie. This is no Blair Witch Project, but it effectively uses the dark, because of course it’s in the dark that the creatures come and it’s in the dark that most of the horror takes place. This uses the human fear we all have of the unknown in the dark, we all have it to a certain level because we all fight to protect ourselves and if we know a monster could be out there in the dark how are we going to protect ourselves against it?

So yes, I liked this movie. It does have some downfalls of course like some scenes do tend to go on a little long, but that does not damage the experience too much. When we live in a movie world of remakes though it’s about time we got a little gem that shows what can be done with a minimal cast, some atmospheric and effective lighting and a story that actually keeps your interest.

Rating: 8/10

One thing we at Pissed Off Geek like to do is highlight upcoming horror movies. This definitely looks like one to watch out for. We’ll have more information on it closer to it’s release.

The movie starts off with a happy little American town where everything is perfect. After a strange incident that led to a well-known drunk is shot things start to get crazy. People start to act all dreamy and spaced out for no reason at all turn on the ones they love, killing them. The Sheriff David Dutton (played by Timothy Olyphant) is drawn into a mystery that questions what exactly is going on with these people? And who are the strangers hanging around town watching the population as they start to kill each other.

These questions get answered of course through the course of the movie as Dutton and a small group of people including his wife have to make it through the town as the army quarantine the area and all hell breaks loose, trying to find a way out of the city and the living hell they find themselves in.

The acting in this movie is adequate. I can’t say there are any standout performances but for this type of movie it’s not really needed. These people are cannon fodder, all ready to be killed off at a moment’s notice. Timothy Olyphant plays his typical role, I’d think he only has one character he ever plays but again, for this movie it’s good enough. He’s playing the role he’s given which is pretty one dimensional. He’s just the hero of the tale and he’s there to save the day. Even the people who are the “crazies” are just adequate. There is no real menace to them, but we get to see pretty gory deaths from them as the unaffected few fight them off. I will admit that Russell Clank (the deputy) played by Joe Anderson is probably a more complicated character. As his demeanour changes are we move deeper into the story he does add something to the plot.

It’s not that I hate this movie, I don’t. I find it a quite entertaining attempt to remake a classic horror movie. It has plenty of gore and the acting is adequate enough to make the scenes seem believable. My problem is though that the movie is just too polished for what it should be. It’s almost paint by numbers style horror movie where you know what’s coming; there are no real shocks but “OH! That was a nice kill.” There is a certain amount of soul in the movie that’s missing. You don’t really care about the people in the movie you just want to see the next entertaining death. Some people may find this entertaining and exactly what they want, but I want my gore put into scenes of a movie with a strong storyline where you care about the people and you don’t want them to die. Instead of just not caring, and waiting until the annoying one dies soon.

Rating 6/10

It got me thinking though, why did Dawn of the Dead become the victim when Zombies clearly ran in the past? It’s not like Dawn of the Dead was a bad movie. Yes, it’s not as loved as the original and arguably not as good but it’s a damn fine horror movie. It’s got blood, it’s got zombies, hell it’s even got cameos from people who were in the original. Face it, in these “horror” times Dawn of the Dead is a sparkling diamond compared to some.

If we look at what zombies represent in the horror movie it’s easy to argue that there is nothing wrong with zombies running. Zombies are the out of control crowd that want to devour we the “normal” human beings and make us become one of them. We fear them because they just desire to eat us, to consume us and to take away our individuality. It’s the metaphor of losing freedom, for if we are human beings it’s our right to be free, is that not correct?

When a Zombie runs, it’s just another danger. In Night of the Living Dead it’s arguable that it makes sense that the zombie did not run, that it was the slow clumsy beast that it was. That’s how the young viewed the older members of society. Younger people wanted to be free from that, to express their energy in things like dance (and of course drugs). So the younger people (most of the survivors) were of course faster than the older zombies who were part of the society that was taking over the world.

Dawn of the Dead (the remake) is based in a world were everything is faster, the world is hectic. Everybody lives a job that has them running around 24/7 to make money and be a success. So when the zombies take over who are they representative of? The fast rat race that surrounds us, the sheep that make their way to the stores and still look at the things that they once wanted as living people. These zombies are the consumers that Romero was commenting on in the original; they are zombies to the consumer society. What they see they want, and they have to get it quickly. Just watch the chaos on the first days of the big sales to see a representation of this, The chaos of the crowd running through the shop doors to get that bargain. Suddenly it makes sense right?

So next time you question if Zombies should run or not, think of the society on which they are based on. When it’s representative of the time it was made, yes maybe they should be a little quicker than those “square” zombies we originally saw in black and white. I guess it’s a matter of taste but I’ve never been bothered by a running zombie. Maybe one day I will.

Posting this video as I’m backing this campaign 100%, all horror fans should

also sign the petition http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/bringclassichorrorfilmsbacktothebbc/

The movie starts straight from where the first left off.  We learn that some women are trapped in the caves and people are now looking for them.  Turns out they are looking for them in the wrong place because (as the people who saw the original know) the “flight plan” that was given is wrong.  One of the women who went missing suddenly appears miles away and a team of rescuers are called in to go into the caves where they actually are and see what happened to them.  Oh yeah, they decide to drag the survivor along for the ride.  As they get deeper into the caves they find themselves attacked by the same creatures as the original party were, but this time (in a small space of time) they’ve evolved to be tougher and meaner.  Not that that makes sense of course.

As with the first movie we have few characters to work with and the actors do the best with what they’ve got.  Shame is, there is very little characterisation as this seems to have been sacrificed to get straight to the action.  This of course is not a bad thing, but it would have been good to learn more about the characters as this is one of the strengths of the original.  The two characters from the original (Sarah and Juno) are not surprisingly the stronger of the characters and it is nice to see the continuing story between them and how it concludes.

I started by saying this movie was aimed at three groups and arguably I think it will be liked by 2 of them (people who have seen the first and want to see the continuation of the story and people who have never seen the first).  The third group may like it but when you compare the original with this the original is a better and a stronger movie.

The big difference between the two movies is that the second is made to be a much more fun one.  This leads to it having a different tone and one some may not like.  The gore is also upped to add to the fun which also adds to the difference between the two as in this it’s much more cartoonish and visceral gore where in the original it was harsher and more realistic to keep to the harsh tone.

I’ve talked to quite a few horror fans who don’t like this movie (probably because it can’t live up to the original) but I for one liked it.  Sure it’s more cartoonish in portrayal of the violence on the screen but it’s entertaining and in a genre full of remakes it’s good to see a movie that doesn’t tread old ground but extends a story that many wanted to see.

rating 7/10

When the movie starts it’s pretty much made it’s mind up that you’ve seen the first movie.  If you’ve not then you’ll be totally lost.  Bella is happy with Edward and everything is sparkly cool, in a miserable kind of way, could Edward ever be happy? Nah, it’s impossible.  Everything goes wrong when Bella gets a papercut and sends one of the vampires into a blood frenzy (a scene filled with over acting and cheesiness).  With this BIG drama Edward and his family decide they have to run away from Bella and that she’ll never see them again.

So what does Bella do? Well other than screaming all the time and acting even more miserable than she ever could she falls into the arms of Jacob who just turns out to be a werewolf (big fluffy CGI werewolf…I’m sure you can see my love of them).  Along with his “cocky” pack they defend their territory from the mean evil vampires (who Bella seems to think are not monsters at all but happy people who glitter in the sun and never kill people).  Bella proceeds to tease Jacob to within an inch of the poor guys life while all the time pining for her pale faced glitter wearing vampire.  As Bella fights to get glimpses of Edward she finds she must also contend with vampires from the past who for some reason seem to have a problem with Bella…oh the drama.

So, let’s start on the plus points of this movie.  The first thing I’d say the direction is hugely improved.  Gone is the motion sickness inducing sweeping shots of the first movie to be replaced by atmospheric scenes created by a director who finally seems to know what they are doing.  The second plus point? Kristen Stewart’s performance is actually quite tolerable in this movie.  She’s not a bad actress really, but she has to work with what she’s given and the problem is what she’s given is bad.

Now I’m past the good points let’s get to the bad.  The storyline for this movie is quite honestly terrible.  It’s so simplistic that you have to question why even bother using vampires and werewolves at all? Just call it One Tree Hill and add a few more storylines in there and you’d never know the difference, really.  If the “monsters” are being used to try make a unique story then it fails big time.  Also having a veiled attempt to turn this into some kind of Romeo and Juliet style story fails hugely as I’d argue the writer does not have the ability to handle the themes involved.

Other than Kristen Stewart and some of the older actors the rest of the cast are poor.  They are so wooden that they are lucky the watcher can tell the difference between the trees and the actors.  Again this could be down to what they have to work with, most of the script seems to ask for the character to be moody, or angry or a domineering asshole who thinks he has the right to control women.

So, did I like the movie? I’d say it’s watchable and probably little teen girls who watch it won’t give a shit about the storyline just which “hot” guy takes his shirt off next.  Of course nobody seems to realise the whole homoerotic nature of a bunch of topless guys running through the trees together and letting their “inner beasts” out (how Freudian).

This movie is miserable.  Don’t bother watching it if you actually want to be in a good mood, this will ruin your day.  I don’t mean to be overly harsh on the movie but even in it’s happier moments it’s almost suicide inducing.  But it DOES have amusing moments (that aren’t meant to be), especially Edwards Cheshire cat moments where his bodiless head appears to “warn” Bella not to do something, or to remind her what she said she’d not do.  He’s the ultimate obsessive boyfriend but just in head form…oh and who has left her (it’s that stalker theme from the first movie again isn’t it?).

The whole male dominating women issue in this movie is something that probably bugged me the most.  The women seem to have to live in servitude of the men and do what they are told.  Bella WILL be Jacobs, Edward spends most of the movie appearing randomly to tell her what to do, way to show a strong woman in a book aimed at teens eh?  I think it gives them a bad message, Bella should be a stronger person and not allow herself to be controlled…but no, she’s bossed around by the “angry” werewolf and the “miserable” vampire…not stereotypes at all are they?

So I’ll end before my rants go on for the rest of the day.  So yes, watchable movie but don’t go if you want an actual good storyline.

Rating 4/10

As a child growing up (and ironically part of this growing up was as a teenager) I remember being able to go to bed and turn on the TV and more often than not you could find a horror movie on.  This was the days of the VHS were you could record more than one of these movies on one tape and have a whole collection rather than just one DVD per movie.  I’ve lost count how many times I’ve seen all Lee’s vampire movies and even the ones without him (my personal one without Lee of course being The Legend of the 7 Golden Vampires).  We seem to lack the ability to make movies like that anymore.

I know it’s arguable that The Wolfman was a return to the gothic horror, but I’d counter argue that’s just a modern horror with an almost Photoshop style gothic world coloured over it.  You can take that movie and almost say “that’s out of American Werewolf in London” or “that almost feels like The Howling”, even though I did LIKE it, it felt like a facsimile of a true werewolf movie.  If you want a good gothic style werewolf movie hunt down The Curse of the Werewolf, another movie the Wolfman stole off.  Oliver Reed plays the tragic Lycanthropicly cursed character perfectly, but then again I doubt you could show me a bad Reed performance.

My point is we lack good old fashioned horror nowadays.  They don’t even show Hammer Horror movies on TV anymore which is a crime itself.  We have hundreds of channels on TV now, we even have horror channels so why can’t they show them? Look at Sci Fi (SyFy) now in the UK.  Almost every night they seem to reshow American Werewolf in London, it’s an awesome movie BUT why not replace repeats of movies with some classic horror? I bet it would be easy to really if they wanted to.

As much as I applaud the fact the Hammer Company is back making movies I find it a shame that they aren’t helping the cause of the old Hammer movies.  Clean them up, get them on Blu Ray! (if the new Hammer company have rights to the movies of course).  I know I for one would buy a Blu Ray collection of all the old movies, even if it did cost a lot.

The same goes for Roger Corman’s Poe movies with Vincent Price of course.  I would love Blu Ray releases of these movies so I could add them to my collection.  Even if it was just Fall of the House of Usher, Pit and the Pendulum and Masque of the Red Death they would take pride of place in my collection.  They were always my favourites and I miss that they’ve not been shown for years.

My guess is that the lowly horror geek who wants to see these movies shown again is a little spec of dust on the wave of the “WE WANT TWILIGHT” voices that seem to control horror now.  I’m just an old school fan who has to sit back and watch horror become all glittery and fluffy so that teens can be easily manipulated into buying into crap.  So yes, BRING BACK REAL HORROR! That’s what I say.

Murphy plays Alice, a screenwriter who moves into an old spooky house to finish something she is working on.  I’m sure you’ll agree with me that that’s now a typical ghost story movie is it? (Sarcasm).  Hearing spooky sounds around the house she investigates, which results in her finding mini-dv tapes which tells the story of some previous inhabitants of the old house.  As she views the tapes and discovers more about the couple who lived there her sanity seems to decay as the couple’s relationship falls apart, and strangely relate to Alice’s own troubles in her life.

As this is a straight to DVD movie I did not have much hope for the acting ability but it does have a strong cast (or should).  Thora Birch, the wife in the video segments is notable for making the best of what story she has and creates a believable character.  Marc Blucas (Riley from Buffy) who plays the husband in the video segments also plays his character well.  The problem is that the story in the flashback videos is more interesting than what is happening to Alice.  Britney Murphy seems to be lacking something in this movie and that surprises me because in the past she has played good roles.  Girl, Interrupted and Sin City would be examples of two movies where she is far superior to in this movie.  The number of times she was meant to look shocked or scared and all her face could manage was vacant really annoyed me.  As wrong as it feels to complain about her so soon after her death, her acting in this movie was poor and with other factors weakened the rest of the movie really.

This movie is watchable at best.  It tries to be quite inventive by using the mini-dv tapes to sell the ghost story but even with that it becomes far too recognisable as the average typical story.  Even the twist at the end is predictable to anybody as this type of story is over used.  It’s understandable that this was released as straight to DVD as I’m not sure I’d want to pay to go see it or even buy the DVD (I rented it).  Looking for positives in this movie I think I would pick out Thora Birch’s acting and the setting.  Although there was a failure to make the movie feel creepy the house still had a feeling of feeling empty and lonely (even if it was far from lonely).  It’s just a shame that the story and acting in general could not make better use of what was given to them.  For Murphy I’d rather remember her in Girl, Interrupted which I think is one of her better roles.  If I had to pick a horror movie to remember her by it would Cherry Falls which was a surprisingly entertaining movie.

rating 4/10