City of Lost Children

City of Lost Children/La Cité Des Enfants Perdus


Language: French with English subtitles.

Brief Synopsis: An evil scientist, Krank, cannot dream. He and his evil henchmen kidnap children in an attempt to steal their dreams. One (Ron Perlman) searches for his little brother, Denree, who has been kidnapped by Krank's henchmen. Along the way he enlists the help of Miette, a young girl, and other children in the bizarre and dark City of Lost Children.

My Take: I love this film. It's very strange, and unfortunately the cinematography is a bit dated now, but it's still a beautiful and wonderful sort of fairy tale for adults. It's sort of Pan's Labyrinth 1.0, if you will.

Miette, the heroine of the film, is engaging and extremely enjoyable to watch. She is the sort of girl I would have aspired to be as a youth, the kind of girl that takes care of herself and still manages to look good doing it.

One thing I found fascinating about this film is that Ron Perlman doesn't speak a lick of French, though he was able to muddle through his lines for the film. I think it works because his character, One, is a bit on the slow side. He's a side-show strongman, regaled for his physical strength and not his wits. Miette is most certainly the brains of the operation.

Krank and his minions are creepy, and the world they inhabit is equally so. Everything has a surreal, dream-like quality to it that's almost reminiscent of Tim Burton's early works, or, perhaps more appropriately, The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari. It is absolutely beautiful to watch even now, with some of the special effects being a bit dated. The film is an art piece in and of itself, without even the wonderful story and tremendous acting.

I hold a special place in my heart for dark fairytales, and this film fits the bill perfectly. While it is a bit too dark and violent for young children, it is most certainly fit for teens and adults who haven't lost the child inside of them.


Entertainment value: High. The story is fantastic, it's stunning to watch, and it's hard to take your eyes off of young Miette.
Scare value: Low-Medium. A few parts with Krank and the mad scientist brain thing are less than comforting.
Realistic?: Extremely low. This is a fantasy and it makes no bones about it.
Violence/Gore: Medium. I don't remember anything in particular that was horrifically violent, but there is certainly enough violence to warrant an "R" rating.
Sex: Low. One is hit on at a bar, and that's about the extent of it.
This movie is for: Anyone who is willing to watch a foreign film. Seriously, I recommend it that highly.
Films like it: Pan's Labyrinth, Dark City

IMDB Entry on City of Lost Children
Trailer

Peacock

Peacock


My basic synopsis: John Skillpa (Cillian Murphy) leads a fairly normal life in the small town of Peacock. He eats his breakfast, he goes to work, he comes home and goes to bed. What's not so normal is that he changes personalities entirely in the morning and evening into "Emma". When a train accident exposes Emma to the town of Peacock, it can only spell trouble for his small piece of normality.

My thoughts/my take: Cillian Murphy is brilliant as John/Emma Skillpa. He makes an extremely believable woman, and as John, he has an amazingly broken sort of persona that makes him at once a sad character and one you can't quite like. He reminded me very strongly of Norman Bates in Psycho, and since he was also a crossdresser with multiple personalities, I suppose the shoe fits.

The movie is confusing; sometimes John is actually in control while he's dressed as Emma and vice-versa. What's more, certain background points are alluded to but never explained, such as John's abuse by his mother and his relationship with Maggie (Ellen Page), a young mother who prostitutes for extra money now and again.

The performances make this movie, to be sure. The plot is meandering and confusing, the shots are good but not anything that wowed me. Cillian Murphy steals the show, particularly as Emma, but the supporting cast are all phenomenal as well. Susan Sarandon's nosy neighbor is very real-feeling, and Ellen Page's Maggie is extremely flawed, though surprisingly real as well. (No Juno crack wit here; Maggie is a dredge of society, a young mother with no ambition other than to get the hell out of Peacock.)

Maggie is the biggest plot device, with her young son and her rough life. The relationship between John/Emma and Maggie is the main focus of the film, but it just doesn't quite fit. While I would recommend this film to actors for a study on playing two characters at once as well as mental instability, otherwise I found it depressing and lackluster.

Entertainment value: Low-Medium. It's not a particularly happy movie and it's slow.
Scare value: None, lol, unless seeing Scarecrow from Batman in a dress scares you.
Realistic?: Fairly. The characters are all very real, living and breathing sorts. Which makes most of them also rather unlikable.
Violence/Gore: None.
Sex: There are mentions of it and one scene that references something pretty awful, but no actual sex is to be seen.
This movie is for: Die-hard Cillian Murphy fans, acting students.
Films like it: Psycho, sort of. I genuinely can't think of anything else that's close.

IMDB Entry on Peacock
Trailer

The Road

The Road


I'm not entirely sure where to start with my review of The Road. To call it depressing in a way I haven't seen since Requiem for a Dream might be the best bet; even that doesn't quite do it justice. If ever there was a movie that made you just want to curl up in a ball under the blankets and try to think about puppies, this would probably be it. Afterward, I wanted Prozac and a hug.

Mind you, I am a fan of Japanese guro flicks. I love a little depravity. What is so shocking about The Road isn't any sort of depravity, really. It's actually rather tame as far as violence goes. (I was expecting a LOT worse from the description of the book my boyfriend gave me.) What violence there was, it was very realistic, and it was generally over before you even knew what was happening.

A summary of the basic plot: The world has ended, and all that's left is a barren, desolate wasteland. It's also insanely cold, and all of the animals in the world are dead and gone. It's never explained why civilization as we know it collapsed, just that it did, the world is getting colder and colder, and the best bet is to "Head South." That's just what our dynamic duo of father and son is doing, following "the road" southward, toward the ocean and then further yet. Along the way they encounter other travelers and cannibals.

We never get the names of our characters either. They are The Man, The Boy, and The Man's Wife. While this is a fascinating idea in literature, it doesn't quite work as well in the movie, since it's fairly common for movie characters to never really give their names.

On the plus side of things, this movie is very, very well acted. Viggo Mortensen as The Man is convincing, he's also wonderfully fallible and human. He makes decisions and says things that make him slightly less likable than your average hero, and I appreciate that in a movie. I like my protagonists as flawed as possible. The Boy, played by Kodi Smit-McPhee, is surprisingly good. While I'm not entirely sure of his chemistry with Viggo, he delivers his lines with a lot of charged emotion behind them, when he asks The Man if they are the "good guys", he really sounds as if he means it, as if it's the most important question in the world.

The most interesting character, for me, was The Man's Wife. We only see her in flashbacks, and she's played by the stunning Charlize Theron. She wears little makeup, has ratty hair, and baggy clothes, and it makes her look like a former beauty queen who has seen better years, which the character may very well be. Her performance is haunting, and when she tells her husband that "her heart was ripped out when he (the Boy) was born", it literally gave me chills.

Is this a good popcorn movie? God no. Is it a beautiful, in a morbid sort of way? Yes. Is it worth seeing? Depends on your tastes and your ability to recover from movies that are depressing. I don't recommend watching it alone for sure, and if you thought No Country for Old Men was too bleak (it was written by the same author, Cormac McCarthy), then I don't recommend it at all.

I'm glad that I saw it as a film fan, but it's definitely not for the average moviegoer.

Entertainment value: Low. It's a bit slow in places, and it's about two people walking... no explosions and gunfights here.
Scare value: Scary isn't really the right word. It's definitely haunting, and the scene in the house with the cellar is actually pretty scary. (I won't spoil it, but it's pretty nasty.)
Realistic?: Since we don't know what caused the apocalypse, it's actually pretty realistic. Everyone is absolutely filthy, which I thought was a good bit of realism. Viggo's nails look like he just dug himself out of Buffalo Bill's well. Seriously. I wanted to give them all a bar of soap and a bucket.
Violence/Gore: Low-Medium. Other than said cellar scene... not a lot.
Sex: Other than the word "rape", mentioned once, absolutely none.
This movie is for: Fans of Cormac McCarthy, apocalypse movie fans, absolute film fanatics. Not really anyone else.
Films like it: I don't think I've ever seen anything else this desperately bleak. Not even Requiem for a Dream, and that's pretty damn bleak. It's different from most other post-apocalyptic films, and I honestly think the closest thing would be the first half of I Am Legend, possibly Omega Man.

IMDB Entry on The Road
Trailer

Bronson

Bronson


I think the only way to even begin to review this film is to give a brief overview of the man that inspired it. Charles Bronson, born Michael Gordon Peterson, is an Englishman with a penchant for violence and a love of causing trouble for prison workers. After a brief stint as a bare-knuckle boxer, he was imprisoned for the first time at age 22. He has been in and out of prison ever since, and has written several books on his imprisonment. He has also written a book on staying physically fit in tight spaces (like a prison cell!). His Wikipedia entry is here.

The film follows the life of Mr. Charlie Bronson, although loosely and with a fair bit of artistic license. The most amazing part of the film is the performance of the title actor, Tom Hardy. He looks like Bronson, he talks like Bronson, and he delivers some of the fiercest monologues I've heard this side of Patton. One particular scene has him on stage, telling the story of his imprisonment, wearing the cartoonish makeup of a woman on one side of his face and his own lack of makeup/hair/etc on the other. He spins back and forth as if in conversation, and at the end turns to face the audience, the split-face showing. It's a fantastic moment in the film, and one to surely be noted.

For being one of Britain's most violent criminals, Charlie actually doesn't do much violence. Sure, he beats the living hell out of quite a few prison guards, but there's about as much blood in this movie as your average Bond flick. Definitely less death. The movie is shot in a surreal, art house style, with narration by Bronson and a barely linear time line. Colors are very bright, stylized, and the high contrast almost puts in mind the Stanley Kubrick masterpiece on the criminal mind, A Clockwork Orange.

Overall, I liked Bronson. It's a bit slow in parts, and the actual film quality is rather low (though about average for British film and television, from what I've seen.) I would recommend reading up on the real man before seeing the film though, as it can be quite confusing in parts, and it's not hard to get lost.


Entertainment value: Medium. Certain scenes are absolutely amazing, but there are definite lulls in-between.
Scare value: Very low. There are a few tense scenes but nothing actually scary.
Realistic?: Medium-high. Since it's based on a real man, yes. The art style? Definitely not.
Violence/Gore: Medium. Lots and lots of bare-knuckle brawls, including one fabulous one with fully armored riot police and a completely nude Bronson.
Sex: ...Sex isn't the right word. Full frontal male nudity? LOTS. Actual sex? Little to none. You will become very well acquainted with Mr. Bronson's bait and tackle within short order.
This movie is for: Film geeks in general, crime buffs, people easily amused by naked men fighting prison guards
Films like it: I can't think of a single one!

IMDB Entry on Bronson
Trailer

The Poughkeepsie Tapes

Alright, here we go, my first review! I chose The Poughkeepsie Tapes because a good friend of mine was curious as to my thoughts on it. Here we go:



The Poughkeepsie Tapes


Until my boyfriend asked me to watch this film with him, I had never even heard of it. He said it was sort of like The Blair Witch Project in that it was a fake documentary, or most of District 9. Due to my flagrant love of both serial killer cinema and movies that try to transcend the fact that they are in fact just films, I agreed to watch.

There isn't much in the way of plot that can be explained without giving away spoilers. Basically, a serial killer has kept tapes of his crimes (240 hours worth!) and federal employees discover these tapes and try to figure out the causes and reasons behind his murderous work. The entire film watches like a documentary, with "interviews" of family members of victims, FBI agents, and the like.

The film is gritty and extremely unsettling, and for the average viewer, rather frightening. There are a number of jump scenes. (One scene in particular, with a Venetian plague doctor's mask, even got me.) The best bits are clips from the actual "tapes" themselves, footage of the serial killer at his worst, usually shot from a tripod or in the hands of the killer himself.

Due to it's disturbing content, this is not a movie for everyone. For the psychological thriller or horror fan, however, I feel it is a definite must-watch. It takes the pseudo-documentary genre to new heights, delivering genuine scares and an overall feeling of unease that most films can't quite deliver. Unlike most other films that present themselves as "real", there isn't much in the way of shaky camera movement, so motion-sickness isn't a problem like it is in films like Blair Witch.

Personally, I loved this movie. I felt that it was shocking without beating you over the head. The camera work was eerie, the special effects were spot-on, and the acting was very believable. As stated earlier, the scene with the Venetian mask made me nearly need new pants, and several of the murder/torture sequences made me feel squeamish. (I am not a squeamish individual. I watch real emergency room shows while eating lunch. This movie is one of the few that have made me ever feel quite so uneasy.)

Entertainment value: Low-medium. This is not your typical popcorn flick. Also NOT a date movie, unless your date is Ted Bundy.
Scare value: Medium. Definitely creepy, but not scare-your-pants-off horror. Will definitely make you think about keeping a baseball bat under your bed.
Realistic?: Medium-high. The killer in the movie is based off of a number of real killers, and none of the kills are particularly over-the-top.
Violence/Gore: Very high. The special effects are amazing, the entire movie looks as real as it claims to be. Not for the faint of heart.
Sex: Low. There might be a spot of nudity, but I genuinely don't remember.
This movie is for: Psych majors, horror buffs, and sickos. It's funny how often I've seen these three coincide...
Films like it: Nothing is EXACTLY like this film, but the closest entry would have to be the 1970's Italian flick Cannibal Holocaust. Also similar are Ghostwatch, Quarantine, and The Blair Witch Project, if only in style.

IMDB Entry on The Poughkeepsie Tapes
Trailer

Who is this Dani, and what does she mean by doing the movies?!

I am Dani, a 22 year old former film student and current film aficionado with a penchant for sarcasm and a bizarre love of potty humor. This blog came about because I can rarely find decent reviews on the movies that I want to watch, and so I figured I'd help other people from having that problem!

I watch a wide range of films, though if you're expecting to find reviews of the major blockbusters here, you're in for a disappointment. I prefer foreign, independent, and cult films above all others, and my favorite genre is horror. (Especially sweet, delicious foreign horror.) Not only will I review the films for their story, cinematography, acting, and the like, but I'll give you a decent summary of the movie's appeal to various sorts. (For example, I'll warn you if it's ridiculously gory, and a number of these will be.)

This will be a bit of an experiment as well, since I've never done anything like this. I'm curious to see if anyone even gives a damn about what I think. We'll just have to see, won't we? If there's any movies you want me to review, please reply here or send me a shout at lizardqueend AT hotmail DOT com!