Warm Bodies

Directed by JonathanLevine.

2013. Rated PG-13, 98 minutes.

Cast:

Nicholas Hoult

Teresa Palmer

Rob Corddry

John Malkovich

Dave Franco

Analeigh Tipton

Cory Hardrict

The zombie apocalypse has already happened. R (Hoult) doesn't remember quite how. All he knows is that he’s been a corpse as long as he can recall and that he thinks his name started with the letter ‘r’. He’s a bit different than most of his kind. He’s fully aware of what he is, and what’s going on around him, evidenced by the running dialogue in his head that serves as our narration, even though he has the physical limitations of other corpses. He groans, stares, occasionally utters a word or two, and generally walks pretty slow. And yes, he eats people, particularly their brains. While out on a food run, he meets human girl Julie (Palmer) and instantly falls in love. The feeling is made stronger by the fact he’s just eaten her boyfriend’s brain which gives R the lad’s memories. Naturally, many of these include Julie. Against his better judgment, he saves her life and takes her back to the airport where he and lots of other corpses wander around all day. Romance budding against the backdrop of the war between the living and the undead ensues.

Warm Bodies manages to successfully subvert zombie lore while simultaneously embracing it. For one, the zombies themselves aren't completely mindless. They’re not anywhere near as lucid as R, but there is a thought process taking place, albeit slowly, but it’s there. Helping this not feel like a slap in the face of George A. Romero is the inclusion of the Boneys. They are the walking skeletons we’re told every corpse becomes, sooner or later. When this happens, they will truly be devoid of any thoughts other than how to get their next meal. It’s a classic case of using an even more despicable villain in order to make a questionable protagonist seem like a good guy. Combined with R’s oh-so-normal late teen/early twenty-something male sensibilities and confliction over his state of being, it works wonders.

Since I mentioned genre god George A. Romero, I’d be remiss if I didn't also note that zombie films are historically the most thinly veiled metaphors for what’s going on in current society. Whether intentional or not, this one provides a commentary on how the ceaselessly increasing presence of social media is eroding our face-to-face social skills. At least I read it that way. The final scene of the movie seems to echo that sentiment and make a plea to us in the audience.

Symbolism aside, our enjoyment of WB is enhanced by the way our romance is written. R comes across as a socially awkward, but really trying young man. His efforts to impress Julie are similar to what many a boy has done, and will do, to win over a girl. This makes him likable. More importantly, we understand why Julie likes him. This is in stark contrast to one of the biggest problems plaguing the recently concluded Twilight series. In that, Edward Cullen is so brooding and anti-social he seems on the verge of becoming an abusive partner. After all, the gift he keeps promising Bella is death. Bella is so constantly depressed she appears to be looking for someone to commiserate with. Her fascination with Edward plays like an unhealthy obsession, a true fatal attraction. That’s not the case in Warm Bodies. Here, we have two people in an extraordinary situation, but neither appears to be looking for a way out of life. Contrarily, Julie wants nothing more than to keep living. R’s biggest desire is to feel alive. Despite the prevalence of death in their society, in many guises, Julie is vibrant and R aspires to be.

In the ever-expanding ocean of Romeo and Juliet inspired romances, this has to be among the most unique. Our Romeo is a pale, dead-eyed thing with real issues expressing his feelings, yet we understand him just the same. However, a well done love story is not the only thing propelling this movie. It’s also a tasty slice of dark humor. The jokes themselves aren't often morbid, but enhanced by the morbidity of the situation. Corpses trying to communicate elicits enough laughter on its own. There are also R’s thoughts. Through all of this, WB congeals into a potent mix of comedy and carnage. Add the fact that our tale is, literally for some characters, a heart-warming one, and we get a zombie flick that appeals to fans of the genre and to those who don’t necessarily go for that sort of thing.

Texas Chainsaw 3D

Directed by John Luessenhop.

2012. Rated R, 92 minutes.

Cast:

Alexandra Daddario

Dan Yeager

Trey Songz

Scott Eastwood

Tania Raymonde

Shaun Sipos

James MacDonald

Thom Barry

Bill Moseley

Paul Rae

Gunnar Hansen

David Born

In true reboot fashion, Texas Chainsaw decides to ignore all the sequels and remakes that came before it and link itself directly to the original. In this case, that means re-working the ending of the original, using actual footage to sync it with the story being told in this newer version. After the events of the classic, the twisted family’s baby was snuck away by a couple incapable of reproducing while the evil clan is being slaughtered by the townspeople. Wait…what? Okay, none of this is even remotely implied by the original, but whatever. Let’s just fast-forward to the present, to somewhere that’s not Texas, and we meet the roughly college-aged Heather (Daddario). It quickly becomes obvious that she was the baby in the opening scene. However, in case you have doubts she finds out she’s inherited a great big house from her grandmother in the Lone Star State even though she thought all of her grandparents died before she was even born. Never you mind the fact she should be closer to 40 than 20, given the fact of when that first movie was made and the dates this movie uses itself. The important thing to note is that after arriving at her new house with a few friends in tow, she finds out there is another surviving member of the family: Jed, AKA Leatherface (Yeager). He’s been locked in the basement for all these years. When he gets out, well, chainsawing ensues.

What I like most about this addition to the series is that it gets right to it and never lets up no matter how ridiculous it is. Much of the killing from the original is incorporated into the beginning, including the killing of the family. All that inheritance stuff is set up fairly quickly. The ladies in the viewing audience get to see R&B star Trey Songz without a  shirt. Fellas, we get Heather’s supposed friend aggressively trying to get into her boyfriend’s pants. That boyfriend is Trey Songz, of course. The dialogue is horrible. The acting is the standard “meh” fitting a relatively big budget horror flick starring no one you’d pay to see. But hey, chainsawing ensues and all is good.

In the midst of all the flesh cuttin’ another villain is presented. After all, we have to find a way to make Leatherface a cute and cuddly sympathetic figure, right? Okay, not so cute…or cuddly, but definitely sympathetic. They think. Well, really, it’s a setup for another sequel. What did you expect? I expected nothing less. As long as whatever cockamamie plot they come up with next is just as eye-rollingly bad and chainsawing ensues, I’m there.

What? You’d thought I’d be all upset about this movie pissing all over the seminal classic? I understand why you might think that. I mean, it does haphazardly re-write the conclusion of its source material adding random characters and situations. Am I supposed to be outraged that all of the slasher movie tropes are lazily employed? Yes, that guy goes to investigate the foreboding basement and walks right up to the metal door obviously meant to contain something dangerous. Yes, the girl that has sex gets hacked up. And yes, the other girl falls while running through the woods, away from the killer. Here’s the deal: going in, I didn't pretend that this was anything other than an attempt to cash in on the franchise name. I didn't expect any great tension to be created. I just wanted chainsawing to ensue. It did, and the movie is goofy. And bloody. And beyond dumb. And so, I am happy. In other words, it’s so bad it’s awesome!

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974)

Directed by Tobe Hooper.

1974. Rated R, 74 minutes

Cast:

Marilyn Burns

Gunnar Hansen

Allen Danziger

Paul A. Partain

William Vail

Teri McMinn

Edwin Neal

John Dugan

Jim Siedow

Sally (Burns), her wheelchair bound brother Franklin (Partain), and a few of their friends are riding around somewhere in Texas, looking for some sights to see. Along the way, they pick up a hitchhiker who is obviously a few burgers short of a cookout. He likes to play with knives and cackle maniacally. Luckily for them, they manage to dump this weirdo before anyone suffers a fatal injury. They drive along some more and eventually find a nice secluded/abandoned house to hang out in. There is a lake out back and no authority figures around for miles. Ah, the perfect spot for kicking back and having a good time. Things are going great until they figure out they’re out of gas. One of them gets the bright idea to see if the neighbors in the only other house around will help out. The title and the birth of a sub-genre ensues. You know which sub-genre, right? That one where a group of teens off on an excursion wander into some back woods and meet some inhospitable hillbillies. Truthfully, we can probably trace its birth back a year further to the release of Deliverance. This one, however, creates the template we've been following ever since.

The genius of this movie is threefold. First, it comes dangerously close to boring us. During the setup stages, other than some grisly images right at the very beginning, there aren't all the tell-tale signs that let us know this is a horror flick. Sure, there’s the wacko hitcher, but once that passes it’s fairly mundane for a good little while. No strange sightings, or shadows crossing the camera, or cats suddenly jumping out at us and no foreboding music. The bad stuff starts happening pretty spontaneously. Second, it doesn't go into lengthy exposition to explain the back-story of our psychos. It’s not interested in why this is happening. It merely wants to give us the sinking feeling that something bad lurks in the bowels of America. This also keeps the run time short, a scant seventy-four minutes (according to the DVD I have), packing its thrills tight and not allowing us to grow immune to its tricks. Something the various remakes and sequels suffer from is giving us too much info, using all sorts of ridiculousness to explain things. Finally, it doesn't ever feel the need to make us in the audience feel better. Yes, at the risk of spoiling a near forty year old movie, there is a survivor. However, it’s hardly the ending we've grown accustomed to. We’re not experiencing any sense of triumph when the credits roll.

Where The Texas Chainsaw Massacre might lose newer audiences is in the visuals. Don’t get me wrong. The look of the film is still perfect. It’s got the griminess befitting its subject matter. However, for those raised on Saw and Final Destination movies, the blood and guts aspect might be a tad disappointing. When the heinous acts are occurring they’re often just off-camera or somehow obscured. The power of suggestion is a marvelous story-telling tool, but hardcore horror fans, especially those of slasher fare, may feel cheated. As sadistic as it sounds, part of the thrill of watching dead teenager movies is seeing horrible things done to the human body. Here, we only sorta see it. For its era, it is a gory flick. In 2013, it’s still not for the faint of heart, but far short of all those torture porn movies in terms of visible nastiness.

Excessive mutilation or not, TTCM still stands head and shoulders above most films of its ilk. Inspired by real life serial killer Ed Gein, it sparsely presents its story as a matter of fact, not stylized violence and overly elaborate contraptions. This rawness is where its power lies. When things happen we don’t feel like we’re watching a movie crew’s handiwork.

Scary Flick Time!

Well folks, it's that time of year again. It's time for my fourth annual 31 Days of Horror!!! Sure, it's a bit of a cliche to spend the entire month of October with ghosts, goblins, and all other creatures of the damned, but that's precisely what I'm going to do. As usual, we'll kick things off on the 1st and roll right through Halloween day. We'll start with a classic, and get into a few more. There will also be plenty movies of recent vintage. We'll definitely sneak in a horror based comedy or two (or three). And I'll try to fit a list in there somewhere. Oh, almost forgot, this year, for the first time we're even going to touch on a book...as it relates to cinema, of course. I'll get things cranking tomorrow. Today, I have to double check my house's history to make sure it's not built on top of an ancient burial ground. Been hearing some strange noises lately. Get...out. Wait...what...did you hear...never mind. Leatherface willing, I'll catch you at the flip of the calendar.

Hitchcock

Oz the Great and Powerful

Jack Reacher

Directed by Christopher McQuarrie.

2012. Rated PG-13, 130 minutes.

Cast:

Tom Cruise

Rosamund Pike

Richard Jenkins

David Oyelowo

Robert Duvall

Werner Herzog

Alexia Fast

Josh Helman

Dylan Kussman

Joseph Sikora

Our movie begins with a seemingly random shooting spree. From a parking deck across the street, sniper James Barr (Sikora) picks off five people, gets back into his van and speeds away. Through some crack police work, Det. Emerson (Oyelowo) figures out who the bad guy is, takes the SWAT team over to the guy’s house and arrests him. While awaiting trial in prison, some fellow inmates lay a beat-down on Barr. Before falling into a coma, he requests that Emerson, and District Attorney Rodin (Jenkins) get Jack Reacher (Cruise). They have no idea how to get a hold of Mr. Reacher since he’s been missing for the last few years. Luckily for them, Reacher catches wind of the shooting on the news and just strolls into the police station on his own. In a strange move for both parties considering Reacher’s feelings on the matter, he winds up working for Helen (Pike), Barr’s defense attorney, who also happens to be the daughter of the DA. Reacher investigating the crime ensues.

If you’re a Tom Cruise hater, there is no reason for you to watch this movie or read beyond this point. You've already decided not to see this movie. And yes, he more or less plays Tom Cruise. This character feels no different than Ethan Hawke from the Mission: Impossible flicks, or from his character in Knight and Day, or any number of films where he’s tasked with saving the day. On the other hand, if the mere mention of his name does not make you physically ill, then stick it out. By this point, he seems to have become a one trick pony. Thankfully, it is not a terrible trick.

Fortunately, our supporting cast is solid. Pike does fine work as Barr’s lawyer. She’s delightfully defiant in her willingness to defend an apparently guilty man. The drawback is that her chemistry with Cruise is a bit off. This is, at least partly, due to the script. It can’t figure out if it wants there to be sexual tension between them or not. Things initially head down that path, but the trip is abandoned. Richard Jenkins is great, as always, albeit in brief bursts of screen time. During the movie’s latter parts it is completely stolen by Robert Duvall and, surprisingly, famed director Werner Herzog. The two find themselves on opposing sides, but neither is any less enjoyable than the other. We just enjoy them differently. Duvall brings us comic relief while Herzog creeps us out.

Since we follow him around much of the time, we must get back to our hero. Reacher goes all over town chasing down leads and, as expected, this gets him into the occasional scrape. We focus more on the following of the clues than the violence. The movie is successful with this as what’s going on becomes increasingly interesting. There are just enough twists within the narrative to keep us paying attention to what’s between action scenes. This is very important because there really is not that much action. That fact, plus our expectations, for those of us who have seen the trailer, help create an identity crisis for our feature. It never seems sure if it’s a procedural or an action flick. As the former, things tend to come a little too easily for our hero. As the latter, as I've mentioned, there’s not quite enough of it. Of course, our finale is one where bullets and fists fly. While that’s not terribly original, it is entertaining. For some, however, it may be too little too late.

Overall, Jack Reacher is a fun movie. It’s a popcorn flick with ever-so-slightly more on its mind than the usual. We get an intriguing tale with some enjoyable performances. It’s not a bad way to pass two hours. That said, you must understand that if you’re looking for a non-stop action shoot ‘em up, this is not it.