Year: 1992
Director: Francis Ford Coppola
Screenplay: James V. Hart, based on the novel Dracula by Bram Stoker
Starring: Gary Oldman, Winona Ryder, Keanu Reeves, Anthony Hopkins, Richard E. Grant, Sadie Frost, Tom Waits
Running Time: 128 minutes
Genre: Horror
In 1462, the Transylvanian knight, Vlad Dracula (Oldman) returns from a victory against the invading Turks, only to find that his wife has killed herself after receiving a false report of his death. Enraged at the idea that her soul is now damned because she committed suicide, Dracula renounces God and the church and swears that he will return from his own death to avenge hers.
In 1897, English solicitor Jonathan Harker (Reeves) travels to Transylvania to negotiate the sale of some property in London to the mysterious Count Dracula (Oldman). As Harker becomes increasingly disturbed by his strange, Dracula becomes convinced that Harker's fiance, Mina Murray (Ryder) is the reincarnation of his dead wife.
Escaping to Britain, Dracula sets about preying on Mina's best friend, Lucy Westenra (Frost). It becomes apparent that only the eccentric Dr. Abraham Van Helsing (Hopkins) has the knowledge to fight Dracula's reign of terror.
This, the umpteenth screen adaptation of the evergreen horror classic, feels closer to Anne Rice than Bram Stoker in it's sensuous, romantic portrayal of the vampire. Everything about the film is extremely stylised, showcasing a range of cinematic tricks, the problem with this approach is that it constantly reminds you that your watching a movie, it's too pretty to ever be involving or, crucially, really scary.
Keanu Reeves is certainly miscast as an English solicitor (his attempt at an English accent is notoriously dreadful), Winona Ryder also struggles with the English accent, but does do well with a fairly thankless role . Gary Oldman makes a striking, if never really scary Dracula (who appears variously as a grotesque old man, a wolf man monster, a man bat monster and a romantic knight), while a scenery-chewing Anthony Hopkins ladles on steaming, thick slices of ham as Van Helsing.
The designs, costumes and sets in the film are really impressive, and the film is too lavist andinventive to ever really be scary. It adapts the novel relatively faithfully, aside from the unnecessary prologue explaining Dracula's origins, and the subplot of Dracula believing Mina to be his reincarnated wife.
The problem is that the lavish, epic treatment doesn't really work for horror, because it just seems to dilute the scary elements.
Friday, 28 February 2014
Saturday, 22 February 2014
To Kill a Mockingbird
Year: 1962
Director: Robert Mulligan
Screenplay: Horton Foote, based on the novel To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee
Starring: Gregory Peck, Mary Badham, Phillip Alford, John Megna, Brock Peters, Robert Duvall
Running Time: 128 minutes
Genre: Drama
This is widely acknowledged as one of the greatest films ever made. Set in the 1930s in the fictional town of Maycomb, Alabama, the film tells the story of upright lawyer Atticus Finch (Peck), a widowed father to two young children, Scout (Badham) and Jem (Alford). Atticus agrees to defend a young black man, Tom Robinson (Peters), accused of the rape of a white woman. The events are seen through the eyes of Scout whose childhood view of the world is changed forever by the racism and other prejudices she encounters around her.
It is a powerful and deeply moving film, which features some stunning performances particularly from Peck who gives an iconic portrayal of dignity and decency. The child actors are superb, especially Mary Badham. It also features the screen debut of Robert Duvall as the reclusive Boo Radley. It's one of the best movies about children and the child's eye view of the world: Bright, sunny summer days, and also looming threatening shadows. The trial and it's aftermath, while key, are just part of the tapestry that makes up Scout and Jem's childhood.
I have to confess that I have never read the Harper Lee novel and came to the film expecting it to be a courtroom drama, and was surprised to find it to be much more than that, although it does feature a gripping trial sequence.
It deals with the evils of prejudice and bigotry without being too preachy, and is all the better for it. The film's compassion even extends to the more unsympathetic characters who are depicted as victims in a different way, due to poverty, their upbringing and their own prejudices.
Heartbreaking, powerful and at times even humorous, this is a must see.
Director: Robert Mulligan
Screenplay: Horton Foote, based on the novel To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee
Starring: Gregory Peck, Mary Badham, Phillip Alford, John Megna, Brock Peters, Robert Duvall
Running Time: 128 minutes
Genre: Drama
This is widely acknowledged as one of the greatest films ever made. Set in the 1930s in the fictional town of Maycomb, Alabama, the film tells the story of upright lawyer Atticus Finch (Peck), a widowed father to two young children, Scout (Badham) and Jem (Alford). Atticus agrees to defend a young black man, Tom Robinson (Peters), accused of the rape of a white woman. The events are seen through the eyes of Scout whose childhood view of the world is changed forever by the racism and other prejudices she encounters around her.
It is a powerful and deeply moving film, which features some stunning performances particularly from Peck who gives an iconic portrayal of dignity and decency. The child actors are superb, especially Mary Badham. It also features the screen debut of Robert Duvall as the reclusive Boo Radley. It's one of the best movies about children and the child's eye view of the world: Bright, sunny summer days, and also looming threatening shadows. The trial and it's aftermath, while key, are just part of the tapestry that makes up Scout and Jem's childhood.
I have to confess that I have never read the Harper Lee novel and came to the film expecting it to be a courtroom drama, and was surprised to find it to be much more than that, although it does feature a gripping trial sequence.
It deals with the evils of prejudice and bigotry without being too preachy, and is all the better for it. The film's compassion even extends to the more unsympathetic characters who are depicted as victims in a different way, due to poverty, their upbringing and their own prejudices.
Heartbreaking, powerful and at times even humorous, this is a must see.
Hostel
Year: 2006
Director: Eli Roth
Screenplay: Eli Roth
Starring: Jay Hernandez, Derek Richardson, Eythor Gudjonsson, Barbara Nedeljakova, Jan Vlasak, Rick Hoffman, Jennifer Lim
Running Time: 93 minutes
Genre: Horror
American college students Paxton (Hernandez) and Josh (Richardson) are travelling across Europe with their Icelandic friend Oli (Gudjonsson) on the hunt for drugs, sex and wild times. Arriving in Amsterdam they hear a story about a hostel in Slovakia which is full of beautiful, willing women who love Americans. Needless to say, the none too bright trio are soon on their way. At first glance the hostel is everything they could have wished for, particularly when they are greeted by the beautiful Natalya (Nedeljakova) and Svetlana (Jana Kaderabkova). However, when Oli disappears, Paxton and Josh soon discovers that the hostel has a dark secret. It's run by an organisation which lures tourists and then kidnaps them, whereupon a wealthy international clientele pay for the opportunity to torture the victims to death.
The film opens with the credits playing over a scene which hints at the horrors to come, where an unseen, janitor cheerfully whistles while hosing down the blood and gore from one of the torture chambers. From there the first part of the film almost plays like a bawdy teen comedy, as our three fairly unlikable "heroes" get stoned, drink, and visit prostitutes. It comes into it's own later on, after Oli disappears and the net tightens around Josh and Paxton. The relatable fear comes from being a stranger in a strange land and very far from home. When Josh worries about Oli, Paxton reminds him that they really know nothing at all about him. Of course this is the central fear of what could be called "tourist terror" where people venture out of their safe environments and come to harm. The film does have a point to make about the ignorance of some tourists, when Paxton, Josh and Oli first hear about the hostel they are told that their are no men "because of the war", when in fact there hasn't been a war in Slovakia since 1945. It also has a point about the horrors of rampant capitalism where life itself is just a commodity to be bought and sold, and where anything is available to whoever has the money. A kind of connection is made between Paxton, Josh and Oli's treatment of prostitutes early in the film and what will later happen to them (when Paxton and Oli try to persuade Josh to hire a prostitute he replies "going into a room with someone and paying to do whatever you want to her is not my idea of a turn on".)
The film was hugely controversial on it's release for it's graphic violence and explicit gore, leading it to be referred to as "torture porn". Certainly it is not for those of a nervous disposition, but it is quite a good horror movie and at times genuinely chilling.
Director: Eli Roth
Screenplay: Eli Roth
Starring: Jay Hernandez, Derek Richardson, Eythor Gudjonsson, Barbara Nedeljakova, Jan Vlasak, Rick Hoffman, Jennifer Lim
Running Time: 93 minutes
Genre: Horror
American college students Paxton (Hernandez) and Josh (Richardson) are travelling across Europe with their Icelandic friend Oli (Gudjonsson) on the hunt for drugs, sex and wild times. Arriving in Amsterdam they hear a story about a hostel in Slovakia which is full of beautiful, willing women who love Americans. Needless to say, the none too bright trio are soon on their way. At first glance the hostel is everything they could have wished for, particularly when they are greeted by the beautiful Natalya (Nedeljakova) and Svetlana (Jana Kaderabkova). However, when Oli disappears, Paxton and Josh soon discovers that the hostel has a dark secret. It's run by an organisation which lures tourists and then kidnaps them, whereupon a wealthy international clientele pay for the opportunity to torture the victims to death.
The film opens with the credits playing over a scene which hints at the horrors to come, where an unseen, janitor cheerfully whistles while hosing down the blood and gore from one of the torture chambers. From there the first part of the film almost plays like a bawdy teen comedy, as our three fairly unlikable "heroes" get stoned, drink, and visit prostitutes. It comes into it's own later on, after Oli disappears and the net tightens around Josh and Paxton. The relatable fear comes from being a stranger in a strange land and very far from home. When Josh worries about Oli, Paxton reminds him that they really know nothing at all about him. Of course this is the central fear of what could be called "tourist terror" where people venture out of their safe environments and come to harm. The film does have a point to make about the ignorance of some tourists, when Paxton, Josh and Oli first hear about the hostel they are told that their are no men "because of the war", when in fact there hasn't been a war in Slovakia since 1945. It also has a point about the horrors of rampant capitalism where life itself is just a commodity to be bought and sold, and where anything is available to whoever has the money. A kind of connection is made between Paxton, Josh and Oli's treatment of prostitutes early in the film and what will later happen to them (when Paxton and Oli try to persuade Josh to hire a prostitute he replies "going into a room with someone and paying to do whatever you want to her is not my idea of a turn on".)
The film was hugely controversial on it's release for it's graphic violence and explicit gore, leading it to be referred to as "torture porn". Certainly it is not for those of a nervous disposition, but it is quite a good horror movie and at times genuinely chilling.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)