Recently in Opinions Category

Wow so let me just say this was not a horror movie this was more of a "why the hell did I just watch that movie". The acting was horrible (stars Tony Todd and Corin Nemec) and the plot (although based on a real world event) was horrendous. I am not going to go into what the movie was about or even who starred it. Let's just say that this is one of those Horror movies that tries way to hard to be scary but just ends up being a tired hack and slash where you don't give a damn about any of the characters good or bad.  Did anyone notice that the scars on Corin Nemec's face were in different places the entire movie? Did he have to do his own make-up or something?



Seriously all the cops in this could of been hit by cars and I wouldn't of given a damn. The only thing good about this one was it really did have some nice cinematography in it. The bonus features on the DVD were laughable and next to nil. All in all not one of Lionsgate's better releases. 

Well I have to say, I'm impressed with this graphic novel.

We originally told you about this about a month ago and couldn't wait to get into it. I have to tell you that we weren't dissappointed.

Imagine this - the authors have taken a classic children's tale and turned it dark.

No not gruesomely dark. More of a dark shade of grey instead of black.

the story is about a guardian of Wonderland searching for his missing princess (Alyss). She seems to have dissappeared into our world, a non-magical one.

Yay! AMC is really kicking some TV ass with their new Halloween lineup. They are having something called Monsterfest. Despite the name this isn't just "Creature from the Black Lagoon" or "Godzilla" this is hardcore horror heros like Jason, Michael Myers and Pinhead from Hellraiser. Last night I sat on my butt and enjoyed everything from the original Hellraiser (which I had never seen) to Scream 3 to The Frighteners (Peter Jackson's first horror film). All in all a damn good time. So many TV stations are afriad to celebrate Halloween so it's nice to see one that is not afriad to kick some ass and take some names. Make sure you tune in tonight and the rest of the week for some prime time horror.

- iamlegend

I was watching a program this morning that briefly discussed how horror as a genre almost died out in the 90's. That's because up until the "Blair Witch Project" there were fewer and fewer horror movies out there.

But that got me thinking along a different train of thought. What ever happened to truly creepy horror movies? It seems like nowadays horror movies are more about the shock factor - lots of blood and guts.

I liked Blair Witch because it was creepy as opposed to gory. Why has gore become so prevalent in today's horror movies? Do we need that much gore or can we go back to simply creepy where your mind fills in the gore for you.

For example, I remember watching the original "Amityville Horror" when I was a lot younger. It scared the crap out of me! To this day I still haven't been able to watch the whole movie or even the remake because the thought of sitting through it still freaks me out.

Yes it seems to me that horror movies of the 70s and 80s were better than the ones today, but that's my opinion.

What about you? Do you think today's horror movies are more about the gore? Or is that just the way the genre has evolved? And if so, could we go back? Do we even want to go back?

Please allow me to introduce myself

I'm a man of wealth and taste...

If you meet me, have some courtesy

Have some sympathy, and some taste

Use all your well-learned politesse

Or I'll lay your soul to waste...

--The Rolling Stones

How does one give sympathy to the devil? That's the challenge Thomas Harris faced when writing his background story on the birth of one of the most riveting fictional human monsters, Hannibal Lecter.

Of course, the first question to ask is why do it? Giving tea and sympathy to a consummately evil character that sends shivers down your spine with just that look and just that smile is quite an accomplishment. Why ruin it? When the Borg where humanized in Star Trek The Next Generation, the franchise lost a perfectly frightening bunch of monsters with no redeeming social values, and future stories lacked the visceral fear of being assimilated without remorse, of losing all that you hold dear in the wink of an eye and there was nothing you could do about it. Bad call there.

Thomas Harris made a bad call here, too. Not only does he try to explain why Hannibal is a cannibal, but he chooses to do it prosaically. His characters speak with flowery-mouth intensity appropriate for literature, not screen dialog. And for a laconic character that's short on words but long on cuisine, that's not a good thing; a known unknown evil is more worrisome and scary than a known known evil, definitely.

Director Peter Webber also makes a bad call by ponderously posing every scene with self-conscious importance. This slows the pacing throughout the movie, and scenes of visceral intensity, where Hannibal begins to succumb to his guilt and insanity, are held back because of it. And don't get me started on those James A. Michener-styled background tableaus. With near-risible martial arts aunt, offerings to ancestral samurai, and a poorly thought through revelatory exposition that is capped by Hannibal crying "you ate my sister!" I imagine lots of popcorn bounced off theater screens everywhere as audiences chuckled and shifted uneasily in their seats--for all the wrong reasons.

Adding to this undercooked cinematic souffle, Gaspard Ulliel postures a lot, as if doing a Vogue layout for Hannibal Lecter fashions. His ominous leering and malicious grinning doesn't evoke any of the uncanny calmness of Anthony Hopkins later, more menacing portrayal. It appears the look of the film was far more important than the substance.