The Fog (1980).

Review #2312: The Fog (1980).

Cast: 

Adrienne Barbeau (Stevie Wayne), Tom Atkins (Nicholas "Nick" Castle), Jamie Lee Curtis (Elizabeth Solley), Hal Holbrook (Father Patrick Malone), Janet Leigh (Kathy Williams), Nancy Loomis (Sandy Fadel), Ty Mitchell (Andrew "Andy" Wayne), Charles Cyphers (Dan O'Bannon / Dan the Weather Man), James Canning (Dick Baxter), John F. Goff (Al Williams), George Buck Flower (Tommy Wallace), Regina Waldon (Mrs. Kobritz), Darwin Joston (Dr. Phibes), Rob Bottin (Blake), and John Houseman (Mr. Machen) 

Directed by John Carpenter (#068 - Halloween (1978), #634 - Escape from New York, #712 - The Thing (1982), #732 - Escape from L.A., #1221 - Dark Star, #1298 - They Live, #1479 - Big Trouble in Little China, #1605 - Starman, #1874 - Assault on Precinct 13, #2130 - Vampires)

Review: 

"I think the primary reason I'm making movies is to get a response from the audience, is to get the audience to go with me down on whatever path I'm trying to take them with, whether it's to make them laugh or make them jump."

Admittedly, it does feel nice to inquire further into the works of John Carpenter. The Fog was the fourth feature film of his after the broadcast of Someone's Watching Me! (1978) and Elvis (1979). Of course, the genesis for what became The Fog came a few years prior around the time of Assault on Precinct 13 (1976), which had featured Debra Hill as a script supervisor and assistant editor in her first collaboration with Carpenter (with whom he wrote Halloween [1978] with). Apparently, the inspiration came when the two were promoting Assault in England and saw Stonehenge in the mist. This would collide with inspirations such as Val Lewton's films such as Isle of the Dead or I Walked with a Zombie to go along with the 1958 film The Trollenberg Terror, the Tales from the Crypt books, and the wreck of a ship called the Frollic. The Fog was written by Carpenter and Hill, who produced the film as part of a two-movie deal with AVCO Embassy Pictures, which was then followed the following year with Escape from New York (1981). The manner in which Embassy did a deal with Carpenter and Hill irritated Irwin Yablans, who apparently had a verbal agreement to produce the film and did a lawsuit. The result of this was that Carpenter and Hill wound up on working with an eager Yablans for Halloween II (1981). Prior to release of The Fog, Carpenter oversaw reshoots of the film because the original version apparently didn't work in his eyes to go along with needing to compete with horror films that would be released around the same time (with their levels of gore). The prologue alongside certain moments of gore to go with tinkering with the nature of the climax (such as showing the top of the lighthouse) are the most significant things that were done in these re-shoots. The movie was made for roughly $1.1 million and was a relative success with audiences. A remake was directed by Rupert Wainwright in 2005 (with Carpenter and Hill being producers) to tremendous failure.

 

It's interesting that the movie starts with a quote from Edgar Allan Poe’s poem “A Dream Within a Dream" ("Is all that we see or seem/But a dream within a dream?"). The faceless horror that arises from a strange ghost story (well, aside from the climax that sort of feels like a zombie film when they try to board up the church), complete with Houseman being the perfect voice to sell the opening in gentlemanly fashion. A. & A. Special Effects (as operated by Dick Albain Jr) were behind the fog effects, which they did on soundstages with fog machines that combined with various uses of dry ice, fog juice and optical effects (in one instance, a miniature of rocks, black velvet and dry ice to combine later) for what you see here. Barbeau had considerable television experience (most notably on Maude) but this was her film debut, one in which her character doesn't even share a scene physically on-screen with anybody other than her on-screen son. She still manages to pull off a strong performance here, charming and strong enough to carry the tension for sights and sounds. Holbrook is the logical choice for sobering truth in such carefully curated time on screen, one wracked with unnerving energy at seeing cracks form in his faith at the hands of a terrifying discovery (namely coordinating death). Curtis and Atkins are as familiar to us as bread with their warm presences, but (to me, anyway) that is a fun thing to have when seeing people get wrapped in terror. You do get your moments of slashing every now and then, but it mostly is a film trying to roll along with atmosphere (such as an expected on-point music score from Carpenter) and a threat of fog that can in some ways work out for suspense, by the time it gets most of its characters in line for the climax. The 90-minute runtime does end a bit abruptly, but it is still strange but enduring horror experience in which one gets bit of shock and gore at the revenge-plot play out ("six must die", as one sees). As a whole, Carpenter's fourth effort as a filmmaker managed to make an old-fashioned ghost story work out with eerie enjoyment and a solid cast that makes for a pretty good time to see play out all the way to its end. A neat little gem that ranks firmly in the second tier of Carpenter films, you won't miss with this one when it comes to calmly-built terror. 

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Well, that is a wrap on Halloween: The Week After VI. We had plenty of fun going through a historic October (45 reviews, because I just had to look for as many "different" films as possible) to go along with some useful loose ends fulfilled for this first week of November. Anyway, here is the list of candidates that just missed out on the cut of October 1 - November 7:

The Monster, The Man Who Changed His Mind, The Collector, The Gorgon, The Last Broadcast, Torture Garden, The Wolfman (2010), Quatermass 2, The Bride, The Thing That Wouldn't Die, Vampire in Brooklyn, Amazing Mr. X, Underworld 2, Friday the 13th Part 3, Frankenstein 1970, Alraune, The Plague of Florence, The Student of Prague (1926), The Bat, One Exciting Night, Wizard of Gore, Mary Reilly, Color out of Space, The Invasion, I Know What You Did Last Summer, Final Destination 3, The People Under the Stairs,  The Fly II, Van Helsing, Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh, Hello Mary Lou: Prom Night II, It's Alive, Martin, Monkey Shines, I Vampiri, The Abominable Snowman, The Aztec Mummy, From Hell It Came, The House on Sorority Row, Vampire in Venice, Blood for Dracula, Scream Blacula Scream, Planet of the Vampires, Ravenous, The Grudge, Hellraiser II, 

Death Line, Squirm,...

...As for what might be next, well, I do have one surprise up my sleeve.

Vampires (1998).

Review #2130: Vampires.

Cast: 

James Woods (Jack Crow), Daniel Baldwin (Tony Montoya), Sheryl Lee (Katrina), Tim Guinee (Father Adam Guiteau), Thomas Ian Griffith (Jan Valek), Maximilian Schell (Cardinal Alba), Mark Boone Junior (Catlin), Gregory Sierra (Father Giovanni), and Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa (David Deyo) Directed by John Carpenter (#068 - Halloween (1978), #634 - Escape from New York, #712 - The Thing (1982), #732 - Escape from L.A., #1221 - Dark Star, #1298 - They Live, #1479 - Big Trouble in Little China, #1605 - Starman, #1874 - Assault on Precinct 13)

Review: 

"I got into this business to make Westerns. I didn't get into it to make horror movies. I got typecast. But once I got over that, I realized it's like John Wayne. I wrote one script for him back in the '70s. He always wanted to play heavies. He was tired of playing the good guy, but he said, 'Oh, they like me that way.' I'm like a good whore; I go where I'm pushed."

On October 30, 1998, John Carpenter's Vampires was released to the general public. The film is based on the novel Vampire$, as written by John Steakley in 1990. Years had been spent in development by Largo Development, who recruited Russell Mulcahy (most notably the director of the first two Highlander films) to try and develop it as director with apparent ideas to have Dolph Lungren serve as the star. This did not come to pass, and Carpenter was approached to do the film right as he was on the idea of retiring after production of Escape from L.A. (1996) had been less than fun to make. The writing credit for the film is lent to Don Jakoby, although there were clear re-writes by Carpenter, who had been approached of the idea to do the film to look over two screenplays - one by Jakoby and one by Dan Mazur (evidently one script involved a part set in France with a church battleground and the other involved a mall with teenagers turning into vampires). Carpenter apparently liked both and thus utilized select elements from each to go with parts from the book before having to modify it again when the budget was suddenly slashed from $80 million to $20 million at the last minute. 25 years later, it probably seems apt to look back on what Carpenter was saying when it came to being asked about the film back then, and one quote certainly could stick with you. He mused that films nowadays (read: 1998), particularly with horror films starting with stuff such as Scream (1996) seemed to have a "postmodern style" when it came to winking at the audience and that his film tried to do the opposite. In case you were wondering, Blade (1998), a film also dealing with a vampire hunter dealing having to stop some sort of ritual from being done by an evildoer vampire, was released just a few months earlier in August (to be technical, Vampires was really released a bit earlier than October in France, but do you really care about France?). As one might expect, Carpenter also composed the music for the film. Two direct-to-video sequels followed in the next couple of years, but they had no involvement from Carpenter, so nope.

Carpenter obviously thought his vampires were savage enough to seem different from those ones that seemed to brood at times. The strange thing isn't so much that Woods is the lead actor here as it is the fact that Carpenter went through a row of names and somehow thought about R. Lee Ermey (the studio felt he lacked the star power and declined the idea). Oh hell, I was fine with the film, what can I say? Granted, it obviously isn't one of Carpenter's best films (of the five features he did in the 1990s, this was apparently his only successful one with audiences, but there are folks who will tell you about giving In the Mouth of Madness (1994) or the aforementioned Escape a second look). But I like Carpenter (thank goodness we live in an age where people remember The Thing as being great rather than the rubes that hated it back then), and I like his ideas in trying to do a Western with vampires that seems more familiar with Sam Peckinpah than his general influence in Howard Hawks. In the 108-minute runtime, you might say the best way to judge the film is how one rides with the opening action sequence, because it is the one big moment with the entire cast before basically doing a rendition of The Wild Bunch. Of course, this bunch involves vampire hunters sanctioned by the Catholic Church (they are pretty good at dragging folks into the sun, so they get leeway for drinking and screwing around at night) that deal with the general rules of vampires: stakes and the sun are the one to deal with vampires that don't care for crosses or turning into bats. Where else would vampires be around but in New Mexico? At the helm is Woods, who is actually pretty amusing in overblown macho-ness. His flippant energy is entertaining to me for that element of curiosity of just who would be more dangerous, the vampire beast or being in the same room with him. Carpenter apparently let him ad-lib for a take before doing one that adhered to the script and evidently the off-color stuff was left in at times. Sure, it isn't the timeliest of off-color stuff (oh hey, never check out an actor's Twitter account), but, well, his crudity suits the film like a glove rather than coming off as schtick (if it was really schtick, he wouldn't be wearing blue jeans the whole time). His intensity is fun, what can I say? Baldwin and Lee don't exactly have as much to do in deference to the hunt besides an attempt at chemistry that is shaky (particularly since the only reason the latter is there is because of a temporary psychic link formed to the villain...by a bite on the inside thigh). Griffith doesn't have as much to say as the general threat, but he makes a fair ferocious threat in feral desires, one who sees the night every time but with the lust for more that is, well, accurate (at least to a night owl like me, anyway). Schell may have the most inevitable of all paths for the film next to Guinee, but they both do fine in varying tones against Woods in "Catholic patience". In general, the film is a road film, one that dwells a bit in conversation of where to go in weary doggedness that can only be done the same way one has seen in a Western where a man brings his folks along for the ride to possible certain death because damn it, it's their ride (of course, there is the horror stuff one thinks they will see such as a handful of vampiric terror like severed limbs, so...). It even ends on a variation, because who else could tell doomed folks to go with God before giving them a head start on an inevitable chase to death? I think, at the end, I ended up liking the film a bit more when I processed it, even if I can acknowledge that it won't be everyone's cup of tea of weary Western-soaked vampire guns-in-the-sun. If you respect Carpenter as that director of human nature in worthy entertainment, well, the film (now 25 years old) will be just right up one's alley.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Next up: Cronenberg-mania.

Assault on Precinct 13.

Review #1874: Assault on Precinct 13.

Cast: 

Austin Stoker (Lieutenant Ethan Bishop), Darwin Joston (Napoleon Wilson), Laurie Zimmer (Leigh), Martin West (Mr. Lawson), Tony Burton (Wells), Charles Cyphers (Special Officer Starker), Nancy Loomis (Julie), Peter Bruni (Ice Cream Man), John J. Fox (Warden), and Marc Ross (Patrolman Tramer) Written and Directed by John Carpenter (#068 - Halloween (1978), #634 - Escape from New York, #712 - The Thing (1982), #732 - Escape from L.A., #1221 - Dark Star, #1298 - They Live, and #1479 - Big Trouble in Little China, #1605 - Starman)

Review: 

I'm sure that hearing me say that John Carpenter is a vastly underrated director sounds like repetition, but there is one little caveat to make: John Carpenter is a vastly underrated great director. If you remember, Dark Star (1974) was the first movie that John Carpenter brought onto the screen. Granted, it wasn't particularly great, but it serves as a low-budget curiosity for those who are into that sort of thing with loose sci-fi comedy. After the movie was done, Carpenter had two scripts he wanted to do for himself: this film and "Eyes", with the latter being sold to Jon Peters and eventually grounded and spit up into what you know as Eyes of Laura Mars (1978), but Assault did attract attention for financing that Carpenter could make, provided that he could do it for $100,000; Carpenter had a friend named J. Stein Kaplan from USC that served as producer, joining in tandem with Joseph Kaufman to produce. The budget restraints meant that Carpenter would have to change his idea of making a Western in the style of Howard Hawks' El Dorado or Rio Lobo into basically an urban rendition of Rio Bravo (1959). Given that Hawks is Carpenter's favorite director, this is an ideal pairing to make a movie that would basically serve as his coming out party to bigger and better things. Carpenter shot it over the course of three weeks and says it is his most enjoyable film experience, one where he also served as editor and cinematographer (he used a pseudonym for one of the roles, referring back to Rio Bravo). One certain scene in the movie would have possibly given the movie an X rating, if not for Carpenter cutting the scene in the copy given to the MPAA and then distributing the movie with the scene put back (he later regretted shooting the scene in that fashion). The success of the film led to Carpenter being approached about making a movie about a killer stalking a babysitter on Halloween night...and you get the idea.

What we have here is an ideal main trio of characters packed in a wonderfully captured movie that is wrapped up in tension with distinct characteristics in an endless cycle of violence. It is a grimy, wonderful movie. It is the most famous film for each of its main actors: Stoker, born in Trinidad and Tobago, had done stage work and a handful of blaxploitation films before this feature, while Joston and his characteristics when living in the same apartment as Carpenter while also having his own share of stage and TV work. Zimmer had three further film roles before retiring in 1979 to teach. Stoker does his best with the role here, packed in steely-laced patience and charm that makes a quality rendition of the hero seen from stuff like Rio Bravo. It is the stoic loyalty shown by Joston that proves the most striking for the film, one that takes in all of the sensibilities seen in Westerns such as Once Upon a Time in the West (1968) to worthy effect in sardonic charm. It comes through despite the background of the character, which means one really did a wonderful job in acting. The two make for a quality tandem when they meet in the film, one that isn't quite a buddy film but a useful collaboration that rewards both actors, complete with their final scene together. Zimmer matches them in screen presence that is self-assured and ready at the helm for action and tension, one with an unspoken rapport against Joston that keeps the movie fresh. Burton and Cyphers don't have as much to do, but they are nice character actors to see make an impression early in their careers (each started appearing in movies in the 1970s). One could maybe talk about the fact that there are very few lines for the threat presented in the relentless criminal gang that is shown cutting their hands to put blood in a bowl. Others would say: who gives a crap? You are here to watch a movie that is basically Rio Bravo meets Night of the Living Dead (1968), and it accomplishes all it sets out to do as an action thriller that utilizes its surroundings for a wonderfully built ride, one that rolls in tension the narrower and narrower things get within 91 minutes. Carpenter balances the three initial plot threads handily with no weak link before it eventually segues into moments of action that Carpenter stages with good timing and framing. There are movies that have come out in its wake that seemed their villains as obstacles to be taken down by the hero in a blaze of effects or perhaps doesn't take itself too seriously. This is not the case here, shown most strikingly with the scene most remembered: a scene in an ice-cream truck where someone is shot at point-blank range in the chest. Regardless how shocked one is at the scene, it certainly is a striking sequence fitting for its decade in grimy realism, and that is all that matters. Carpenter's music score also proves quite effective in setting the tone for the film in its tone and pace. As a whole, this is Carpenter's first big accomplishment as a director, one that shows him make an urban rendition of Rio Bravo with his resourceful methods of direction that would have him grow further in his subsequent career.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Redux: The Thing (1982)

Review Revised #712: The Thing (1982).

Cast: 

Kurt Russell (MacReady), Keith David (Childs), Wilford Brimley (Blair), Donald Moffat (Garry), T. K. Carter (Nauls), Richard Masur (Clark), David Clennon (Palmer), Charles Hallahan (Norris), Richard Dysart (Copper), Peter Maloney (Bennings), Joel Polis (Fuchs), and Thomas G. Waites (Windows) Directed by John Carpenter (#068 - Halloween and #634 - Escape from New York)

Review: 

The original review was 276 words. Seven years later, I decided to reconsider and make a revised review in light of the 40th anniversary of the release of this film.

The Thing from Another World (1951), if you remember, was a loose adaptation of the novella Who Goes There?, which had been written by John W. Campbell in 1938 (it was only discovered in 2018 that Campbell had actually wrote an entire novel before cutting it down to the novella published in 1938; the manuscript, called "Frozen Hell", was published in 2019). Howard Hawks had supervised the production while Christian Nyby served as director (while Hawks denied that he served as director, his uncredited contribution to writing alongside the fact that Nyby never directed anything as good as this movie ever again makes for an interesting argument). Producers David Foster and Lawrence Turman had wanted to do a remake more faithful to the original novella, as opposed to the plant-like creature of the 1951 movie. Several directors and writers came and went in consideration from Universal Pictures in the late 1970s and 1980s before John Carpenter was hired to direct and Bill Lancaster (writer of The Bad News Bears (1976)) was hired to write; this was the sixth feature film directed by Carpenter, who had just finished Escape from New York (1981); it happened to be the last screenplay written by Lancaster, who died of a heart attack at the age of 49 in 1997. Rob Bottin (who had worked with Carpenter on The Fog in 1980) was hired to help provide effects for the creature (with one exception in a dog cage, which was done by Stan Winston to help an ailing Bottin), which his team helped do out of chemicals, food, rubber, and mechanical parts that made the budget go to $15 million; while Bottin's effects received mixed attention at the time, he would continue to hone his craft and wound up with two Academy Awards for his contributions to visual effects. Released on June 25, in a month and year that saw movies come out such as Blade Runner (same day as this movie) and E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (released two weeks prior), The Thing would not be a major success nor a failure. Coming off the heels of movies like Alien (1979) probably did not help either, although this movie tries to go with a creature that isn't a man in a suit (as guided by Carpenter). Of course, the reactions that the movie received would make you think that they killed a dog on film, where even Nyby talked about the film negatively, saying "If you want blood, go to the slaughterhouse ... All in all, it's a terrific commercial for J&B Scotch" (now you see why I mentioned Nyby earlier when I relate the irony of a guy famous for "directing" one good movie trying to trash a movie that is way better than his). Years after the film was described as a cult classic, a 2011 version of The Thing was released that apparently serves as a prequel to this movie, and I cannot imagine how anybody really gave a crap about seeing what happens before you see Kurt Russell in a movie.

I haven't seen the 1951 movie in a number of years, but my recollections of seeing it as a straightforward tense movie probably seems right. The 1951 and 1982 movies are set in completely opposite locations and have tones that reflect the age they were made in when it relates to dealing with a threat from within, but the latter movie is especially more striking in its nihilistic execution. Carpenter has said that it is his favorite film from his line of work, even though the results of the film did not help his career the way he thought it would. I said the movie "flat out rules" a long time ago, but now I am even more appreciative of what was accomplished by Carpenter and company that has proven to be one of his most enduring works. The title creature is a ruthless being that pervades whatever it imitates without hesitation, and it makes for one hell of a spectacle and threat to watch on screen. To me, thinking effects are disgusting is like a compliment rather than a criticism, as if the only way to make a tense horror movie is to do it without a hint of cynicism. The best sequence might be the one where a desperate scramble to save a person by pressing on their chest that results in the ripping off of arms. Yes, the movie is a triumph of special effects, but it also is a triumph of paranoia with an ensemble cast that completely sells what is needed. Generally, it is easy to say that Russell does well with the material, because we have seen him do well in other productions before. But he has an effortless charm to him that makes him the kind of actor to just seep into a role without hesitation in everyman sensibilities, which happens in a movie where sanity hangs in the balance. The other members of the cast help in lending fear and irrationalities that doesn't drag the 109-minute run-time any further than it needs to. It seems fitting that two actors making early appearances in film before they became more known excel best: David (in his credited film debut) serves well in the tense glares to not get lost among the group while Brimley (who had a few film and TV credits) makes a stodgy and fierce presence in the face of futility and gruesome gore. The others contribute to the cold tension that bubbles slowly to the surface beneath the early little character quirks in a movie where danger can lurk by what is hidden just as much as what you see.

The music by Ennio Morricone is used selectively by Carpenter to great effect, present in terror without overwhelming you. The movie builds up to the handling of its chameleon-like monster with great planning that doesn't fall privy to the worst type of cliches seen in the lone location type of horror movies (namely dumb characters). The climax lends a welcome deal of futility and ambiguity that fits for a certain audience sensibility that doesn't turn out to be a cheat when you have tired characters that sit there and look at each other while a fire burns in the background. In other words, the movie sets itself up well for how it has to end without straining for it (so yes, ambiguity isn't everyone's thing, but at least it is a contrived ambiguity). In the end, there are a handful of Carpenter movies that could be argued to be his best work in the countless movies he made, and The Thing has certainly had its case strengthened in the four decades since its release with its handling of effects with tension and a great ensemble cast. Now more than ever, one should really check it out for those who are interested in science fiction and horror as it is a triumph of filmmaking from John Carpenter, a director who certainly deserves the credit for making classics of American cinema.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Starman.

Review #1605: Starman.

Cast:

Jeff Bridges (Scott Hayden / Starman), Karen Allen (Jenny Hayden), Charles Martin Smith (Mark Shermin), Richard Jaeckel (George Fox), Robert Phalen (Major Bell), Tony Edwards (Sergeant Lemon), John Walter Davis (Brad Heinmuller), and Ted White (Deer Hunter) Directed by John Carpenter (#068 - Halloween (1978), #634 - Escape from New York, #712 - The Thing (1982), #732 - Escape from L.A., #1221 - Dark Star, #1298 - They Live, and #1479 - Big Trouble in Little China)

Review:

"I have two sides to my personality. I'm very pessimistic about the long term: we're all born alone and we die alone, and if anything good happens in between, it's great. But I'm a short-term optimist. I gained this by making movies in which it's all going to work out."

As the months change, some things stay the same while others change with the wind. One thing that has become quite clear in all the time spent watching films is just how underrated John Carpenter is as a director. There is something quite striking in the films that he managed to make in over three decades of filmmaking, ones that reach within their imagery and mood with distinct characters that has generally soared higher than the initial perceptions of its time, which by and large makes him a cult classic director worth checking out in my view. Starman, the eighth of his eighteen films, was a light success with audiences at the time in making its $20 million budget, which must have been helpful when compared to the reaction of his previous film in The Thing (1982), which also depicted extraterrestrial visitors (albeit with a nihilistic outlook). Obviously the tide turned on that film (for good reason!), but Starman has its own interesting path to eventual film that results in a feature that is a secret gem. If anyone ever tries to shoehorn Carpenter as merely a horror director, this is exactly the kind of film to blow a hole right in that theory. Inevitably, one would look to another film involving a curious visitor from another world falling to Earth and making a bond with a human. Of course E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (1982) was also noted for certain similarities to Satyajit Ray's 1967 script "The Alien", so who knows? There were quite a few differences from the original script that were modified for a film, with Carpenter noting that one of the scripts had the alien be able to fly, and he noted in an interview that the possible similarities to films such as The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951) and The Man Who Fell to Earth (1976) startled the studio alongside other prospective directors that ranged from Mark Rydell to Peter Hyams. Carpenter, however, felt interested in making a film different from the films he did before that were in the horror genre, one that would be an interspecies love story that seems reminiscent of films like It Happened One Night (1934). This film spent five years in development, with a script that was bought by Columbia Pictures before Spielberg's film had been optioned (they dropped E.T. because they thought this film would be for grown-ups and E.T. seemed for kids. Ouch?). The script by Bruce A. Evans and Raynold Gideon would go through several re-writes that were left un-credited in Dean Riesner, Edward Zwick, and Diane Thomas.

So, if you spend a space probe out to space with a gold record (remember the phonograph? Good, I've yet to use one), what would happen if someone found it? Welp, perhaps something like this, although probably without the space orbs. The film presents itself as a mixture of science fiction and romance, doing so by bookending its effects sequences for its opening and end scenes, but the real treasure lies within the obvious: Jeff Bridges. He has managed to cultivate at least one memorable performance in every decade since the 1970s, one that has a great self-assured confidence to what he needs to do when it comes to keeping one's attention right where it needs to be. He manages to provide a wonderfully compelling performance, one that is essentially playing an imitation of himself, complete with movements that seem bird-like without just seeming like a bit. He and Allen contribute to a few bits of humor that work to the film's strength in tender growth with understanding. Allen (no stranger to romance leads with films like Raiders of the Lost Ark in spunky charm) keeps up with him just as well, one that has their own share of vulnerability alongside understanding to line up with Bridges for some useful sequences on the road in their road to love that doesn't seem quite forced for what is needed in a sweet but dutiful adventure. They start awkwardly with effective quality (how many romances start with seeing a being morph from kid to dead man look-alike?), and the culmination of that touch goes with a scene at a diner, where the weariness turns into resonance upon the sight of a resurrected deer. They carry the film as far as it goes with how touching they are, and it is definitely hard to see anyone else playing these roles better. Smith (an established character actor for a decade before soon adding directing later in the decade) also does pretty well with what he is given in with curiosity to counteract the heavy-handed effective character presence of Jaeckel. As a whole, I thought this was a pretty enjoyable movie, albeit one that could have been much sillier in the hands of anyone not as talented as Carpenter, Bridges, or Allen, because we are talking about a being that means no harm yet gets involved in a variety of quirky action moments. With 115 minutes at hand, it ends up being quite the ride for enjoyment, particularly if one is up to seeing Carpenter do something a bit different for effect: a star-crossed love story. One can't go wrong in that department with these folks at hand.

It was my birthday, so I figured, why not pick something favorable with its cast and crew? Another year come and gone from my twenties, too.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Big Trouble in Little China.

Review #1479: Big Trouble in Little China.

Cast:
Kurt Russell (Jack Burton), Kim Cattrall (Gracie Law), Dennis Dun (Wang Chi), James Hong (David Lo Pan), Victor Wong (Egg Shen), Kate Burton (Margo Litzenberger), Donald Li (Eddie Lee), Carter Wong (Thunder), Peter Kwong (Rain), James Pax (Lightning), Suzee Pai (Miao Yin), and Chao-Li Chi (Uncle Chu) Directed by John Carpenter (#068 - Halloween (1978), #634 - Escape from New York, #712 - The Thing (1982), #732 - Escape from L.A., #1221 - Dark Star, and #1298 - They Live)

Review: 
"I'm pretty happy with who I am. I like myself and what I'm doing. I don't need to be the world's greatest director or the most famous - or the richest. I don't need to make a whole lot of great films. I can do my job and I can do it pretty well. This is the realization I've come to, later in life. It's called growing up."
"I seem to have a knack for picking movies that go on to be cult favorites."

John Carpenter is a director that deserves further inspection, one that is far more than just his horror films. The 1980s are ertainly an interesting indicator of this diverting director, with eight of his eighteen directorial efforts being in that era (ranging from The Fog to They Live), comprised of success and flops that eventually alienated him away from Hollywood, but most of the features are generally well appreciated for their efforts in horror, science fiction and action, with some of those features also being composed or written by him as well. At the helm as star for some of those successes is Kurt Russell, who first rose to prominence as a child star in television and for Disney films before growing into further lines of work in the 1980s as an action hero (along with sentimental favorite in my view). The film had three different writers credited: Gary Goldman and David Z. Weinstein originally wrote it as a western that would combine Chinese fantasy elements one might find in a martial arts film within a western; subsequent attempts to turn it into something more filmable led to their firing and W. D. Richter (writer of films such as Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978)) brought in to rehaul the screenplay into a contemporary tale that kept just basic elements like Lo Pan and Jack Burton, using Rosemary's Baby (yes, that one) as his template.

Ultimately, what we have here is a film that screams cult classic - it was a flop at the box office in the midst of a busy summer (to put it in perspective, the top films of that summer were Top Gun, The Karate Kid Part II and Aliens) and marketing that even Russell found not to his liking, with the studio not really understanding Burton's character (to the point where they had them do the opening scene about his heroism). It influenced Carpenter back to independent filmmaking as yet another painfully misspreciated film of his catalogue in the 1980s (with only his film The Thing (1982) being more unappreciated in its time, which also found a deserved following). For all of its obviousness, one can't help but enjoy its b-movie style - cheesy but with wonderful effects and a zippy charm to its cast that make a strange and stark delight to the action film. Russell proves quite enjoyable with brash brightness for a part that is part-hero and part-sidekick, lumbering through lines of screwball bravado, whether in engaging in some trucker lines on a truck, or showing confidence right before knocking himself out of a fight. Cattrall follows along the screwball aspects of the film at times with sharpness, making for a quirky time when paired with Russell. Dun proves well in keeping with the quick pace and timing required of our true hero with confidence that springs well with the action sequences. Hong (a prolific Chinese American actor of various mediums for six decades) proves a fair villain, inviting one with some creeping mystery (we are talking about a long-living sorcerer who wants a green-eyed bride/sacrifice, after all) that makes a satisfactory threat. Wong, Burton, and Li prove a decent supporting cast to a film that moves along for 99 minutes with an aim to make a snappy martial arts effects film and succeeding fairly well at it. With floating eyeballs, lightning effects, a underworld beneath Chinatown, and a big ugly monster, how could one resist such a film? To call it contrived or bumbling is missing out on the fun, particularly one with an interesting approach to the hero-sidekick dynamic. On the whole, it is a likable film with enough well-done staging in action and design to go with an amiable cast for a deserved cult classic and a fair piece in John Carpenter's line of work that is worth a watch.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

They Live.

Review #1298: They Live.

Cast: 
Roddy Piper (John Nada), Keith David (Frank Armitage), Meg Foster (Holly Thompson), Raymond St. Jacques (Street Preacher), George Buck Flower (Drifter/Collaborator), Peter Jason (Gilbert), Sy Richardson (Black Revolutionary), Susan Blanchard (Ingenue), and Norman Alden (Construction Foremanst) Directed by John Carpenter (#068 - Halloween (1978), #634 - Escape from New York, #712 - The Thing, #732 - Escape from L.A., and #1221 - Dark Star)

Review: 
It should only make sense that the only way to see aliens of the subliminal kind are a pair of sunglasses. The idea for the film came from the 1963 short story "Eight O'Clock in the Morning" by Ray Nelson, which he subsequently adapted with artist Bill Wray into a graphic comic named "Nada" in 1986. As such, the screenplay credit went to Frank Armitage, a pseudonym for Carpenter (who naturally also co-wrote the music score with Alan Howarth). In any case, it really is a variation on Invasion of the Body Snatchers (why else would you have the aliens shown in black-and-white for most of the film), only if the aliens were already here and ready to help people sell out and obey in the vein of an sci-fi action thriller. In that sense, it works out pretty well in the film's favor, one that is packed with plenty of entertainment that is derived from clever subversive material and a mold of action and humor to go alongside it that never seems dull or too convenient. The film holds itself on the every-man in Piper, who signed onto the film after Carpenter met with him in the middle of his run as a professional wrestler. He can play the parts of the action hero like one could see in a b-movie (with that noted bubble-gum line seeming right out of his one-liner notebook) that comes in handy when needed that surely paved the way for other wrestler-turned-actors, but he plays himself with careful simplicity that seems just right for a guy like him. David does a fine job with a quasi-sidekick kind of role, where he can join alongside the action against sellout aliens or even the fight just to believe there even is one needed, which leads to the key highlight for both actors: a five minute fight scene between the two where they just take it to the other. It really does prove astounding how one can make such a scene that is so memorable (imagine having to rehearse that for three weeks) while not leaving the film off balance during the other parts of its 94 minute run-time. Foster is fair and subtle, and the other castmates pull their momentary plays on screen with interest in making a small environment like this seem like one to look at for a while and think about. The effects involving the aliens (resembling ghouls) looks pretty neat for the intent that the film wants to do. The action is also pretty well-done with blending with the rest of the film without suffocating it, and the climax is a nice touch. Of course a film that is meant to be subversive has its shares of political devotees, which are either people who understand the film or partisan ghouls for a certain supremacist side (I only include this sentence lest someone actually think this film is about anything but yuppies and unrestrained capitalism) or nearly as annoying Marxist hacks. In any case, one can enjoy the film for either its action content or its attempts at saying something about the nature of our society when it comes to commercialism through the lens of science fiction that delivers plenty of thrills and thought to go around.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Dark Star.

Review #1221: Dark Star.

Cast: 
Brian Narelle (Lieutenant Doolittle), Dan O'Bannon (Sergeant Pinback, Bomb #19, and Bomb #20), Cal Kuniholm (Boiler), Dre Pahich (Talby, dubbed by John Carpenter), Joe Sanders (Commander Powell, dubbed by John Carpenter), Barbara Knapp (Computer), Miles Watkins (Mission Control), and Nick Castle (Alien) Directed by John Carpenter (#068 - Halloween (1978), #634 - Escape from New York, #712 - The Thing, and #732 - Escape from L.A.)

Review: 
This is a weird one. But what is one to expect from a film with an beachball alien with claws? Dark Star is the creation of Carpenter and O'Bannon, who wrote the film while being students at the USC School of Cinematic Arts. Carpenter was inspired by George Lucas' and his drive to adapt his USC short "THX 1138" into a feature-length film to make his own feature. The attempt began in 1970 with an initial budget of $1,000 and the use of USC soundstages. The budget rose over time, having one form as a 45 minute short made on $6,000. Carpenter also composed the music score, while O'Bannon served as editor, star, production designer, and visual effects supervisor. Through the help of distributor Jack Murphy and Jack H. Harris, additional minutes were filmed to make it feature-length (along with doing certain cuts) that resulted in a 83 minute feature made for $60,000. O'Bannon subsequently described the film as such: “We had what would have been the world’s most impressive student film and it became the world’s least impressive professional film.” Carpenter later stated that it was "one of the most difficult, brutalizing, devastating, and satisfying experiences of my life." It wasn't a huge success upon limited theatrical release, but it has found its own place as a cult classic. It certainly stands out from other science-fiction films, that is for sure, seeming like a riff on features such as 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) and a bit of a precursor to Alien (1979) with its blue collar crew on a spaceship (which O'Bannon subsquently wrote) who have the task of destroying unstable planets that might threaten future colonization of other planets. Being stuck on a ship like that for years on end would probably either make for a horror or a comedy film - the result is an uneven, but fairly enjoyable little comedy. I didn't find myself loving what comes out on screen each and every minute, but it did prove to make a few interesting moments that overcomes some of its amateurishness. After all, the buttons on the bridge consoles are ice cube trays, the space helmets are from a toy line, and the bombs are made out of plastic model kits. The ending is apparently inspired from Ray Bradbury's short story "Kaleidoscope", albeit with a plummet towards a planet with a makeshift surfboard. 

For a movie described by Carpenter as "Waiting for Godot in outer space", there is plenty of discussion one could have about the place this film has within sci-fi, cynical yet biting in its tale that stands out from other space films of previous ilk (especially so in the years that followed), being a product of its decade that resonates for those who allow themselves to do so. The special effects team (Ron Cobb, Bob Greenberg, Greg Jein, Harry Walton, John Wash) prove to do a fine job with what they are given - it may be a cheap film, but at least it is an ambitious one too. The scene with the beach ball alien is also pretty neat too. The acting isn't too particularly great by any means, but there are a few moments that make for chuckles, such as O'Bannon and his reflections on being stuck on his ship through video tape with this casual crew, or Narelle having to try and give a philosophical try at stopping a smart bomb detonation. It isn't a great film by any means, but it is an ambitious one that sets out for its own take on moving beyond the stars with a fair sense of conviction on its side. It might not be for a casual taste, but it does have an appeal within for those who are curious enough to let it linger in its reaches.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Escape from L.A.

Review #732: Escape from L.A.

Cast
Kurt Russell (Snake Plissken), Steve Buscemi (Map to the Stars Eddie), Georges Corraface (Cuervo Jones), Cliff Robertson (President), Stacy Keach (Cmdr. Malloy), Peter Fonda (Pipeline), Pam Grier (Hershe Las Palmas), A. J. Langer (Utopia), Valeria Golino (Taslima), Bruce Campbell (Surgeon General of Beverly Hills), and Michelle Forbes (Brazen) Directed by John Carpenter (#068 - Halloween, #634 - Escape from New York, and #712 - The Thing)

Review
It's been a while (ten days) since I reviewed a movie, so let me get back to work with a familiar director, John Carpenter. And hey, it's the sequel released 15 years after the first movie, what could go wrong? The answer to that question lies within the movie itself. I praised the original for its dystopian outlook, Russell himself, and the thrilling action. What I forgot to mention is that Escape from New York managed to keep itself from losing momentum. The sequel? Not so much. While Russell is still the best actor in the movie, the rest of the cast isn't as impressive. Corraface's character comes and goes too quickly to make any real impression on you, while Fonda's character is more pointless than Buscemi's character, but at least the latter does something important, so points for that. The movie is bleak, but it isn't as interesting as the first movie, and the computer effects for water effects (especially the surfing - yes Snake surfs) don't help the movie, as they come off as too distracting. It takes a while for the movie to become interesting, and the action scenes are passable, though they are overshadowed a bit by the scene where Plisskin has to make 5 baskets in a row (at the LA Coliseum, no less), and the aforementioned surfing scene, which is just plain strange. The movie was written by Debra Hill, John Carpenter & Russell, with Russell apparently coming up with the ending. I guess it was hard to make an ending that wasn't just like the last one, with this ending being more bleak given that there was no sequel (which apparently would've been Plissken escaping Earth) because this movie proved to be a failure financially. It's not a bad movie, it at least is entertaining to a degree, and Russell clearly had a lot of passion for this movie, and I respect his performance. The movie itself, though, isn't as good, but it is at least a good way to pass 100 minutes, and you might enjoy the movie more than I did. It's hard to believe this movie was released in August 1996. August...9th, 1996. Okay, I didn't plan for this to be an anniversary review. Welcome to the human race.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night Redux: Halloween (1978)

Review #068 - REDUX: Halloween.

Cast
Donald Pleasence (Dr. Sam Loomis), Jamie Lee Curtis (Laurie Strode), Nancy Kyes (Annie Brackett), P.J. Soles (Lynda van der Klok), Charles Cyphers (Sheriff Leigh Brackett), Kyle Richards (Lindsey Wallace), Brian Andrews (Tommy Doyle), John Michael Graham (Bob Simms), Nick Castle (The Shape), and Nancy Stephens (Marion Chambers) Directed by John Carpenter.

Review
I originally reviewed this movie on October 30, 2011, watching it on television. I remember it being entertaining to watch back then, for me movies are entertaining when you can just sit back and talk about how the movie works. Two years later, I decided to revisit this movie, which had been appearing on TV once again. Out of all the movies in the Halloween franchise, this is the best of them all, it also could be considered one of the best horror films of all time. The movie isn't perfect by any means; the beginning has a few choppy dialogue scenes where it feels really cliche, especially from P.J. Soles, who just keeps saying "totally". But the movie overcomes it with some really chilling music that makes the boring scenes more interesting. I especially love when the characters are talking and Myers suddenly appears out of nowhere, while the music adds a layer of depth. Of course it helps that the movie is also frightening with its death scene, showing little blood but using lighting and perspective to make for a truly chilling movie. My favorite scene is after one of the deaths as Myers looks at the body and tilts his head. It really is a perfect scene.

Donald Pleasence does a wonderful job as Loomis, explaining the motives (or there lack of) for Myers but also saying his lines in a tone of voice that fits the movie's tone, which is fright. Curtis is a really good screamer and a good actress here as well, she's the most interesting character to watch. Special mention goes to Nick Castle, who is the one most famous for playing Michael Myers (The Shape), though he wasn't the only one who played him, there were several others who did stunt work, but Castle is the most notable, and he would later become a movie director in his own right, with films such as The Last Starfighter and Major Payne. The movie takes its time, letting you get interested into what happens next, and it has one of the best endings that leaves you waiting for more. This is an essential movie for October, or for any month when you're looking for a scare.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Escape from New York.

Review #634: Escape from New York.

Cast
Kurt Russell (Snake Plissken), Lee Van Cleef (Bob Hauk), Ernest Borgnine (Cabbie), Donald Pleasence (President), Isaac Hayes (The Duke), Harry Dean Stanton (Harold "Brain" Hellman), Adrienne Barbeau (Maggie), and Tom Atkins (Rehme) Directed by John Carpenter (#068 - Halloween)

Review
Some movies are just born to be awesome (the inverse is also true as well), and this is one of them. This is a dark movie, an unrelenting movie that never lets up on its dystopian outlook, with Plissken (played excellently by Kurt Russell) being the essential anti-hero for a movie such as this. The characters are jaded, but they still manage to be entertaining, such as Borgnine, he has a quirky charm in this movie, which contrasts well with Russell. The wire frame effect is in the movie for a few moments, but it does look impressive, and it is one of the highlights of the movie. That, and the fight between Russell and Ox Baker, or the car chase at the end, take your pick. This is at heart a thrill of a movie, it's an action movie that has fun in its own way, with a rouge gallery of characters and a good deal of sense. Now if you excuse me, I have some work to do. See you all soon.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.