The Thing

     

     I consider myself a horror movie fan, but I have a confession to make. I have never seen the classic John Carpenter's The Thing.  I know, how could I? Somehow, this movie slipped through the cracks of my to-watch list for years, and I can't exactly explain why. However, I finally managed to plant myself for an evening an take in this great flick. After watching it, I can  say with all certainty it now resides on my top ten list of horror classics.

      To briefly summarize the plot, a small group of people manning a research facility in Antarctica are thrown into a battle for humanity when an alien adversary that can take over and mimic any living form is revived from the ice and begins infiltrating their ranks. The Thing has a brilliant mix of the key elements I consider necessary for great monster horror. A claustrophobic and isolated feeling setting, unsettling imagery, psychological suspense, a well paced plot, and a monster(s) that doesn't disappoint. With these element strategically placed in the right proportions, the audience gets a chilling tale which is understandably a cult classic.

      The setting is the first thing that struck me about the film. An Antarctic research team isolated in a frozen landscape without anywhere to run to or anyone to come to the rescue anytime soon. The startlingly white surroundings are a perfect location for this story. Even before the alien presence begins it's rampage, the handful of residences are already stretched psychologically thin from their isolation. The frozen terrain is already highly dangerous. The creatures that descend upon them increase the tension they have already been dealing with to a boiling point.

      The movies starts with a lone dog, racing through the snow as a helicopter of Norwegians shoot at it from above. Already, the audience is drawn into the story by the conflict, which was brilliant. Typically, a horror story will start with a good spook then there is a slower build up to the next terrifying incident. This is where many stories can run into trouble. If the plot goes too slow, the audience is bored. Too fast and the potential for suspense and tension building is lost. Carpenter takes care to take this build up at a excellent pace with unnerving imagery that heightens the tension beautifully. Before the first encounter with  a live version of the thing exploding from the dog, the audience is treated to the creepy remains of the Norwegian site (corpse frozen in a suicide included), a ghastly deformed corpse still steaming, and a alien craft trapped in the ice. The autopsy of the deformed corpse is definitely squirm worthy. All this before the audience gets the first true glimpse at their enemy.

      Then, all hell breaks loose and the pace of the plot picks up at an ever increasing speed. The possibility of one or many of the crew being infected adds the psychological pressure of the inability to trust one another on already strained men. That internal threat is increased further by each horrific encounter with a former college turned thing which feeds back into the psychological terror. It's a masterfully played cycle that give the audience no safe refuge from the horror.

     The monstrous forms of the thing are truly spectacular nightmares. It's a credit to the special effect and makeup genius, Rob Bottin that the creatures still stand up today, even in the wake of modern computer generated graphics. Yes, there are some movements and moments where it's easy to tell there is puppetry and effects at play, but the whole is done so vivdly that they are overlooked in the terror of the moment. I personally feel the physicalness of props is always more frightening than overly flawless computer generated effects that can enter into uncanny valley before they can the actual setting of the movie. Maybe I'm just old school in that regard.  I felt the way Carpenter chose to portray the things as each unique was a smart move. The plot explains this organism takes over other organisms on a cellular level and mimics them perfectly until it is time to attack. It makes perfect sense that the resulting manifestation is a grotesque hodge-podge of various biological masses and unknown alien appendages. Plus, it looks scary as all hell.

      As with any film or book, there are always some places that are weak. This film was rather devoid of humor. That was especially evident to me after recently watching An American Werewolf in London. This is a matter of personal taste. Some people want more humor mixed in with their horror than others. I tend to prefer a level of humor that is fitting to the tone of the story, and this film was had a serous tone. If you expect some good chuckles out of your scary movies, you will find them few and far between here.

      The final battle scene with McReady against the former Dr. Blair didn't meet my expectations. The film had been building brilliantly up to that point, then the Blair thing easily takes out the other two survivors and makes an overdone entrance as his grotesque form only to be blow to smithereens moments later.  It felt more flash than substance. Less of a battle and more a quick kill for McReady, as there was very little back and forth between the two.

      Part of me is slightly tempted to remark on the lack of any female characters in this film. There are women who do go out to these research faculties. Why aren't they represented? However, I wonder if adding a female character would have been a negative. The dynamic of the men trapped in their little section of the frozen tundra would probably have been different with a woman. It would add layers of sexual tension and possibly battles over her favor, or even some sexist behaviors or attitudes. That is a great deal of complications that would have slowed the plot down. As it is, the men are miserably lonely and the lack of possible female companionship surely plays a role in that. I don't say this often, but I felt the all male cast was justifiable in this case.

      The final scene of the movie can be satisfying or a let down depending on the individual audience. McReady survies the blast from the final battle and settles in waiting to freeze to death. He is approached by Childs (another survivor) who has a flimsy excuse for disappearing. The two eye each other suspiciously, discuss their impending deaths, and the film ends with the audience unsure of the outcome. Are they rescued? Is Childs infected? The audience is left to ponder these things for themselves.Those who prefer a happy ending for the protagonist with all the loose ends tied up will find this a miserable close. I actually enjoyed this end. It felt appropriate in a film riddled with unknowns to have an open ended finish that left me still fearful as the credits rolled.

      Overall, this is an absolute must see for any horror fan. Great story well executed with gory special effects. A suspense fulled fun fest of alien grossness. Don't let this slip down you to watch list.

     

     

An American Werewolf in London

Blue Moon...

     Ah, the 80's. A time when horror films branched out further with more gory effects and dark humor. Throw in some gratuitous sex, maybe some rock and roll and voila- entertainment of the warped variety. John Landis' An American Werewolf in London (1981) is another film widely considered a classic in the genre, and with good reason. The twisted humor and visual effects blew away the audience of the time.

      The story is fairly straightforward; David and his friend are attacked by a werewolf on the road to London. David survives, only to become a werewolf himself and wreak havoc on the metropolis before he is gunned down. Add in a sexy nurse to romance with, a creepily cultist rural pub, and the undead victims of werewolf attacks, including David's deceased friend, and you have a film that still stands up 35 years later. The beauty of this film is not in the story line per say, but in the manner in which the story is told. The cliche traveler turned monster tale is infused with pop culture from the era and a dark humor bend that makes the plot feel fresh.

     The rock and roll modern vibe brings the werewolf out of the old secluded villages into modern day. There are at least three versions of Blue Moon played throughout the film and even Credence Clearwater's Bad Moon on the Rise (small side note, as a kid I was positive this song said "there's a bathroom on the right"). This may seem unimpressive today as many horror films utilize popular rock music, but at the time this was a new approach in the genre. The dream sequence where David's family is attacked my mutant Nazi monsters feels very much like a poke at the Neo-Nazi punk movement of the time. The sexy nurse Alex's flat if a treasure trove of little pop culture references, like Micky and Minnie Mouse figurines. The Muppets make a brief appearance. You get the picture, these bits took the werewolf out of the old 1940's Universal monster era and dropped it snap dab into the early 80's.

     Humor is sprinkled through the story to wondrous effect. David's nude romp through the zoo. David's undead friend, Jack is full of sarcasm and wit. His personality becomes even more amusing as his body decays. He is chalk full of best friend quips and that causal tone with David while deteriorating to nearly a skeleton, sitting in a porno theater. Oh, the theater scene. The interaction of all the victims with David is pure gold as far as funny goes, and then by the time David, in werewolf form, is creating chaos on the streets I was laughing out loud. I have a twisted sense of humor and this movie tickled my funny bone in perfect ways.

     No review of this movie is complete without mentioning the special effects and makeup.I much prefer the physical feel of puppets, makeup, and costumes over computer generated special effects. This movies is one of the pinnacles of the physical variety of special effects. The transformation scene is astounding, considering the old style of cuts of various stages of makeup application. Wolf claws forcing their way through fingers, limbs elongating and warping. Really brilliant stuff here. As a former makeup professional, this movie kills in that department.

     As always, I have to mention the little issues with the work. One is the relationship between David and Alex. I can believe that the nurse is attracted to someone they pity and want to take care of. I also can believe how Alex's affection could be appealing to David who is in turmoil, alone in a foreign country. However, the speed of this couple's relationship is tough to swallow. In a mere few days, they go from patient and nurse, to live in lovers, to Alex risking her life in a dark alley to save David. It's breakneck fast, and came off improbable to me. The lack of in-depth information on the werewolf curse is both a positive and a negative. The information isn't really needed to keep the plot going. At the same time, I'm left with a lot of questions that leave me itching for answers. Especially regarding the tavern and it's patrons. The village knows of the curse, why haven't they wiped out the werewolf before David and Jack come to town? How is Jack sure David is the last one? Why did the police cover up the case? Part of me feels this is nit-picking, as this was meant to be a fun romp with a modern twist on an old monster. The other part of me feels I've been denied much of the juicy bits of the werewolf mythology.

      Overall, this is a great entertaining movie with a funny slant. Well worth watching if you are a fan of the 80's, a werewolf buff, or just looking for something gruesome to laugh at.

Alien

     I can't dig into classic groundbreaking horror films without considering Ripley Scott's Alien (1979). The alien monster from this movie has become a permanent fixture in popular culture. Furthermore, the crossover between sic-fi and horror of Alien surpasses the cheesy attempt of scary alien flicks of the 1950's to create a truly unique experience that has been an inspiration for decades to follow.

     Alien put a unique spin many of the typical tropes of the horror genre. Instead of a cast of teens/young adults, the characters are a wide age bracket of professional adults on a job. This allowed for more distinct characterization than many of the slasher films of the time. No stereotypical group of teens being torn apart here. Weaver's portrayal of lead protagonist Ripley is monumental in horror. While former horror tales had a female lead, they were typically weak, scared girls that were traumatized through the story. Ripley is hard as nails throughout, being more of a warrior type of character than a trembling lady is distress. I could spend this entire review discussing the feminist boost from this character (that is preserved throughout the series) but there are other elements of the film that make it the success it is.

     The setting is another trope spin. Isolated locations are a standard in horror. The small rural town, the dark forest, and the towering mansion on the hill, all miles away from any other human that could help. Alien takes the audience even further; a lone spaceship, thousands and thousands of miles from another human inhabited site. Isolation in an extreme sense. Layered on his hopeless isolation is the foreign feel of the setting. A distant future, a strike and uncomfortable space ship, and an alien terrain. There is no place for the characters that the audience feels comfortable and safe in. The atmosphere is unsettling even before the alien creatures make their debut.

      Arguably, the creatures of this film are the best part of the movie. Ridley Scott reveals them over the course of the movie in a masterful manner that creates an increasing level of suspense. The aliens change throughout the plot, allowing the audience to grow more apprehensive as the story unfolds. From egg, to face clinging creature, to chest piercing phallic infant, to full blown fanged, tentacle beast, the monster reveal is drawn out in the most delicious tension. The audience asking 'what is this?" the whole time. The slow burn of suspense has the audience on the edge of their set, while still giving them the action they crave. No monster lurking in the trees, just watching potential victims. The alien is squirming with a chest cavity ready to break out and devour. Even in adult form, the aliens have surprises for the viewer, such as the grotesque second mouth and acidic mucus. I have to mention H. R. Giger's brilliant monster design (RIP genius). The aliens are both believable as living creatures and completely alien (pun intended) to the audience.

     No piece is without some faults. As with any film, the age will inevitably show. The interior of the space ship feels very much like the late 70's early 80's idea of the future (how could it not?). This is easy to forget once the viewer gets into the story. The genre blending of sci-fi and horror is as much of a weakness as it is a strength. This blend makes a unique story and setting. However, for those unfamiliar with hard science, this can be a lot to process. Not only is there a great deal to learn about the monster, the audience is dumped into a different time and place. This can be off putting to some viewers who prefer a more straightforward story. The werewolf attacking a small town is much easier to digest than a complicated futurist space station. Watching this with my mother is frustrating, as she will have twenty billion questions regarding what the crew is doing on this planet, how all the space travel works ect. upfront instead of trusting the movie will reveal everything.

     Overall, a fantastic movie. This should be a movie watched multiple times by fans of sci-fi and horror. It's a great example of the possibilities of cross-genre awesomeness.

Night of the Living Dead

     They're coming to get you, Barbara...

   
     Film can be a powerful medium of storytelling. I'm not talking about Oscar bait dramas or Summer blockbuster extravaganzas (though those can be highly entertaining too). I'm talking about the rare films that strike a nerve in culture that ripples inspiration for decades after it. George A. Romero's Night of the Living Dead (1968) certain qualifies as one of those films. If you haven't already guessed, I'm a huge fan.

      A quite rural area in Pennsylvania comes under attack by swarms of the undead seeking human flesh. A small group of survivors is boarded up together in an old farm house, battling for survival. "So what?" I can hear you say, "This has all been done before." Actually, that's the kicker; this film was the genesis of the modern zombie genre as we know it today. Alright, I admit that it's evident that Romero took some inspiration from I am Legend, but he took the good elements of the monster epidemic and made them all the more gruesomely appealing. The gore and violence were quite bold for the time. Much of the later splatter genre flicks owe a huge debt to this film.This movie literally made zombies the meat gorging, shambling, animated corpses we think of today. Before this film, a zombie was a living person under a voodoo curse. Any horror fan has to acknowledge this film's massive impact on the genre.
     
     The plot itself seems fairly simple, but there are many messages and themes that struck at the American lifeatyle of the time. People were watching the violence of the Vietnam war in their living rooms. Here, Romero has the survivors crowed around watching a television, desperate to find some answers and hope in the face of the violence outside. It's not hard to see the similarity. There is some fleeting ideas on the fade of religion from society. The only praying is by Barbara at her father's grave before the first zombie arrives. Barbara's brother admits he doesn't attend church much. Once the mayhem starts, no one is praying for salvation. As if religion is an old custom that does nothing in the face of a real enemy. The break down of the traditional family unit is seen by Mr. and Mrs. Cooper's combative relationship. The rebellion of the youth displayed as the Cooper's daughter feasts on her father and murders her mother.
   
     Racism is addressed beautifully, without being preachy but making the viewer really think about African American oppression. The hero is a black man, challenged by the arrogant and selfish white Mr. Cooper. Though Mr. Cooper never refers to Ben (our hero) derogatorily regarding his skin color, the audience can feel the man's need to dominate and take control of the situation. He assumes Ben is beneath him and is infuriated when the others follow Ben's leadership. At one point, Mr Cooper refuses to open the door to let Ben back into the house as zombies trail him. Then at the end, when we dare to believe that Ben is being saved, the redneck police militia shoot him down without any thought at all. The black hero being murdered ending, especially since Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated earlier in the same year the movie was released, makes a huge statement.

     The ending is traumatic, even without factoring in the civil rights message. The audience is rooting for these characters to survive. Barbara's emotional frailty after her brother's death, the young lovers' fierce devotion, the family's struggle to protect their child, and Ben's determination to persevere all allow us to sympathize with the characters. Romero picks them off and the audience is ultimately crushed when they realize all the efforts were futile. All hope is lost. Our hero is dragged onto the pile to be burned up as if his life and actions meant nothing at all. It's a depressing ending, but one that mirrors a feeling of hopelessness for modern day man. After all, it was the human space probe radiation that caused the dead to rise, so humanity has doomed itself. I would argue many people feel that we are our own destruction even today.

     Now, for some negatives. I hate to comment on them, as this is such a classic, but there are some issues modern viewers will come across. The film had not aged well visually in many regards. Compared to the modern special effects makeup and spectacular gore effects, much of what was terrifying when this film was released looks campy and tame to us today. The choice to film in black and white gives the movie a distinct gritty, noir look, but depending on the version you're watching it can be difficult to see the details. The soundtrack is odd. At some points there are spooky sounds while other scenes are surreally quiet without any score. Many of the inside scenes with the group of survivors talking feels very much like a stiff stage play. These things are really due to the age of the film. Still, it can be hard for a modern audience to look past all these little aged effects and awkward bits to get to the meat of the movie.

     Overall, this is a must see for any horror fan. Push the presentism aside as much as you can and dig into the flick that made the zombie a monster phenomenon. Really, stop reading and go watch it now.

World War Z

   

   
      I fully admit I adore zombies. As far as monsters go, zombies are capable of terrifying the pants off of an audience (if done right) and provide ample opportunity for social commentary and symbolism. I'm sure it's fairly evident at this point how fond I am of deeper meanings threaded through a story. I'm on the fence with how I felt about Max Brooks' World War Z.

     I've heard a ton of great things about this book. Right from the start, I had some high expectations for the novel. Did it meet them? Yes... and no. First, I was blown away by Brooks unique approach and world building. Typical zombie stories follow a small group of survivors in a limited part of the world as they struggle to survive. Brooks went for the full globe, as in a view of the devastation of the undead in numerous countries from multiple perspectives. The world politics play a role in how the war unfolds, especially attempts to control fear and combat the zombies. Brooks makes this global view personal by having the perspectives of individual interviews. These personal takes on the events give the reader the human emotion of the book. The plausibility of the world is solid and well plotted. At no point did I feel Brooks' traumatized world was unbelievable.

      Brooks approach to use interviews to construct a global history of the zombie war is genius. After reading books and watching movie after movie following the same band of survivors plot line, this was refreshing. Brooks tried something different, and the resulting world is fascinating. However, this is a double edge sword. Part of the benefit to following a group of survivors is that the audience will become emotionally invested in their survival. Readers care what happens to these people. Since Brooks chose such a global perspective through interviews, it was difficult to feel attachment in the same manner to individual characters. Characters were a vehicle to experience the overall feelings of horror and political/social commentary. The standard expectations for an immersive novel, like story arcs and character development are missing. Instead, we have a series of interviews that feel more like a means for Brooks to comment on the politics of war and American isolationism rather than a true horror story. The truth is, an audience is more emotionally concerned about individual people they connect with, than the general 'us' that is humanity. Yes, we care are about the global population, but we are going to be terrified when the singular character we empathize with is in danger. This book felt more like a tragic news story regarding people from another country; something removed enough that I felt only a basic level of sympathy. It far more upsetting if I personally knew the people involved.

     The individual interviews read rather dry to me and it seemed that the characters didn't have unique voices. This took me far longer to read than if I had compelling characters or a conflict fueled plot to keep me turning pages. I tried to switch back and forth from the audio book and the print copy to pull through. The variety in voice actors for the audio version helped somewhat to break up the monotony, but the interview format still grew tired quickly. Especially since there wasn't tension building around the chance of the character dying. They are telling there account of events after the fact - I'm not fearful they won't survive. They obviously did in order to tell their story. However, I've never been a fan of telling a story through interviews, articles, and journal entries. I would rather be experiencing the action with the characters instead of hearing their thoughts on it in retrospect.

     Overall, I would say this book isn't bad, just that I'm not the audience for it. For a different perspective, my husband loved it. He is quite the history buff and enjoyed building the story of the war in his head from the interviews. For me, this was a chore to read, even if I did appreciate certain elements of the book. I was starving for a story, and this felt more like a case study. To each his own, I suppose.