The Cutprice Guignol

The Ninth Year: The Haunting of Swill House

Movie Marathon #23: Gremlins

There’ll be no beating around the bush here. No skirting the issue. No dodging the bullet. No dancing round the point. No talking around the real conversation. No literary procrastination. No tantric writing. No humming and hawing. No passing the buck. No bollocking on about nothing in particular. No pussyfooting. No waffling. No previcating.

I LOVE Gremlins.

Joe Dante’s surreal, touching and wildly entertaining movie lands in a rare and prized area of the horror genre; a family horror film. It matches wierd-looking but ultimately not TOO terrifying creatures with black-as-night humour and ridiculously fun action sequences. And probably the cutest protagonist ever (no, not a wide-eyed and goofy Zach Galligan-Gizmo, the unbelievably adorable Mogwai who I utterly and totally want as my own).

It mixes a Twilight-Zone-y premise with a small-town Christmas setting, and doesn’t once let up the barrage of jokes and sequences of the Gremlins running amok throughout the town (for such a light film, they do seem to murder an awful lot of people in incredibly violent ways). There’s also this scene in which a Gremlin puts some popcorn packets over his ears and does a little dance for a fraction of a second; I truly believe this to be one of the, if not the, funniest moment in cinema history. The first time I saw it, I was very nearly sick with laughter.

Add to that one of the catchiest film scores not written by John Williams, Dante’s madcap direction, and a cast who look like they’ve never had more fun in their life, and you’ve got one of the finest films to toe the scary/witty lines in all of silver-screen history.

Movie Marathon #22: Trainspotting

Choose life. Choose a fucking big television. Choose to watch more films directed by me, Danny Boyle, etc etc. No, really, Trainspotting’s brilliant.

First off, you have the source material; that searingly witty, brilliantly dark Irvine Welsh novel that just spits at you as you turn the page. Packed with emminently cinematic characters, there’s no way someone wasn’t going to adapt it at some point. Terrific stuff.

Then, that music-right from the borderline criminally fun Lust for Life opening scenes, to Blondie (who were the first band I ever saw live, fact fans) crooning about being radioactive or whatnot. In a very Tarantino-ish move, Boyle wove songs that should have no right to work into scenes they have no right to work in-the overdose/Lou Reed’s Perfect Day scene lollops into mind.

Then, those performances. First off, you’ve got a sterling Euan McGregor as Renton-the sad, slightly bitter, ultimatley unlucky hero of the piece. But he’s backed by scores of other brilliant characters. Johnny Lee Miller as one of my ultimate movie crushes, Sick Boy, knocks it into the stratosphere with his sleazy, witty charm and mismatching eyebrows, while his foil, a bumbling Euan Bremner, staggers around screwing up job interviews and generally being the most lovable heroin addict ever. Then there’s the supporting cast; a gorgeous Kelly Macdonald playing someone far too young to be called gorgeous by a legal adult, and the simply electric Robert Carlyle as Begbie. A sickeningly cruel wide boy with a penchant for the kind of arrogant violence this kind of group is all too privy to, he’s scary, cruel and simply one of the best on-screen characters ever.

So, aye. Trainspotting.

Movie Marathon #21: Fight Club

I remember watching Fight Club when I was sixteen. David Fincher’s adaptation of Chuck Palanhuik’s genius novel really blew my mind the first time I saw it; until this, every grown-up movie I’d seen had been incredibly worthy and slightly boring, but this-this was different. Funny, sexy, clever, engrossing and thrilling, it was one of the handful of movies that I’ve seen more than ten times.

And I can’t stress enough how much I admire this film. Among other things, it suddenly legitimized the existence of Brad Pitt, who I’d seen as little more than a moderately pretty human wig. His interpretation of Tyler Durden is dazzling, you’re equally as caught up in his slick charisma and anarchic idealism as The Narrator. And speaking of the same, Edward Norton turns in a performance that easily matches Pitt’s, the poster boy for disillusioned yuppie losers the world over. And that’s not even going into the rest of the great acting that peppers the movie; from Helena Bonham-Carter setting the screen on fire as the effortlessly sexy she-demon Marla Singer, to a somehow-perfect Meatloaf as a man trying to reclaim his masculinity after a bout of testicular cancer. It’s a grubby, grimy, filthy addition to Fincher’s oeuvre and one that pretty much marks the peak of his electric career.

But I have one issue with Fight Club. The majority of people I’ve watched it with have been men; specifically, middle-class kids with a similair upbringing to mine who have usually fallen in love with Norton’s defiant and violent spiel about men and masculinity in the modern age. And, although I can appreciate the film, understand the themes, and still think the thing is beautifully put together in every way-I’m not a man. Those themes don’t apply to me. And I always get the feeling there’s something about this movie that will never be able to totally get through to me, simply because I don’t have the urge to reclaim my masculinity and prove myself as a man. What with being a girl, and all.

That said, Helena Bonham-Carter kicks proverbial ass.

Movie Marathon #20: The Last Exorcism

As we move into the last ten days of my movie marathon, I’ve decided to bring up a movie I feel very strongly about. As if I hadn’t run out of them already.

I have very fond memories of The Last Exorcism, primarily because it’s the first horror film I ever had the pleasure of seeing in the cinema (and also because there was briefly a Sweded version in the works, my main memories of which involve birthing a troll doll and running around the woods with some big axes until we aroused enough suspicion to retire back into the shadows. And my brother delivering a monotone “No” in every scene.). It terrified the living hell out of me, and really sparked my interest in seeking out movies that genuinely made me uncomfortable to watch. I believe my viewing companion left the cinema with my nail marks in his arm, but I could equally be remembering my reaction to Sean Penn in Milk (vis; I hate Sean Penn).

I’m not convinced it’s a great film. Certainly, the first two acts- detailing a Reverend who has lost is faith but ends up involved in what appears to be a real demon possession- is adequatley interesting, poking some mild fun at the scores of exorcism movies that have infected our screens since Max von Sydow’s mother first sucked cocks in hell. And there are some pretty unnerving sequences-such as one where the main character beats a cat to death with a handheld camera, producing a really seasick, surreal affect that seemed to be lacking in most of the rest of the film.

However, the film fell flat on it’s face with the third act. Descending into possesed demon baby birth, redneck cults and Caleb Landry Jones sprinting around the woods slicing people up with big knives. As my viewing companion pointed out, it’s one of many films that could have the ending replaced with a choir singing “Everybody dies; THE END” in sonorously drawn-out monotone. All that said, there will always be a small place in my heart for The Last Exorcism. Crap as it is, it threw me down a mouldy well of horror that I never totally got out of.

Movie Marathon #19: Man of Steel

Shudder. Retch. Save me from myself. Yes, it’s time to tackle to colossal titan of a blockbuster that was this summer’s Man of Steel.

Right off the bat, Superman is a boring superhero. He’s the ultimate good guy- no layers, no facets, no deeper meaning, no dead parents, no fear of flying rodents. Swooningly handsome and donning the stupidest outfit I’ve seen in yonks (trying to make the ridiculous rubbishness of the original outfit better by “modernising” it just drew attention to the fact it’s still just as bloody ridiculous), the Man of Steel was already manging to do the opposite of piqueing my interest.

Then there was the actual plot. Granted, I fell asleep four times in the cinema when I went to see this with my consort (apparently, at one point, I woke up, took in the wildly stupid goings-on onscreen, laughed once, then dozed off again), but Chrsit almighty. Aside from demolishing practically an entire city, the plot was dizzily all over the place, bouncing around girtty pathos and big silly fight scenes. And I will stand by my defense that Superman ALWAYS looks a bit daft when he’s flying around.

And this brings me to my main point. This movie took itself far too bloody seriously. Much as I thought Michael Shannon was slightly brilliant as Zod and everyone else seemed to WANT to have fun with it, the movie still remained a slightly too po-faced rendition of what is, at the heart of it, a bit of cartoon fun from a long time ago. I can see why one might think a gritty reboot of the Batman franchise might work (more importantly, it actually did), but when someone went “Hey! Wouldn’t it be awesome if we redid the whole Superman series as a deadly serious trudge through moderatley good-looking Americana? We could even have Kevin Costner being nobly killed by a tornado!”, someone should have punched them in the face.

Also, right, there’s a bit towards the end which apparently I was the only one to take issue with where Superman and Zod are battling away on a building or whatnot and Zod snarls with glee “There’s only one way this can end- either you die, or I do!”. That’s TWO WAYS. He presented two seperate options with no equivocation right there in front of Superman. And, frankly, I don’t want the person defending our planet to be devoid of basic literacy skills.

Movie Marathon #18: The Avengers

Avengers Assemble is a movie about which I have many strong feelings (unsurprisingly). Anything written and directed by Joss Whedon (truly a God amongst Micheal Bays) instantly has my attention, as does anything with Robert Downey Junior. Throw in a handful of decent prequels, an epic tale in the works, and Tom Hiddlestone playing the sexiest Norse God ever, and I’m in.

Now, here’s the truth: I understand why people flocked to this movie in such huge numbers. I do. It’s great, in a lot of ways; a great spectacle mixed with a whole lot of fun and some adequately cool performances. But it’s absolutely not worthy of the ridiculously good reviews it achieved, and the critical and commercial success it reveled in worldwide.

Let it be known that I’m the strongest advocator of movies being, first and foremost, great fun; but The Avengers was two and a half hours of moderate entertainment, bland cliche and some slightly forgettable action sequences. Basically, it was an adequate superhero movie; no better or worse than most of the prequels and movies that would follow it. But because it was allegedly the first climax of the series-the entire team together and fighting some intergalactic threat-it was built up by hundreds of critics and rabid fans to be an EVENT.

And when it turned out to be simply as good (and, in some cases, noticeably weaker) as it’s predecessors, everyone seemed too embarrassed to admit their mistake. Taken as your standard popcorn buster of blocks, it’s perfectly fine. But it’s not groundbreaking, it’s not spectacular, and, dear God in Heaven, it’s not worth seeing four times at the cinema. You know who you are.

Movie Marathon #17: Sinister

Now, I write quite a lot. Hence, I enjoy movies and books about writers. True, most of the time they make the lot of us seem like a ragtag group of garrulous scum, but nonetheless, it’s always fun to see how various people produce their own interpretations of what the glamorous and brilliant lives of writers are actually like.

And that’s what eventually turned me onto the Scott Derickson flick Sinister. Following the tale of writer Ethan Hawke trying to write a follow-up to his hugely successful true-crime novel by shifting his family across the country to live in a house that was initially home to a grisly murder.

Personally, and judging by the conversations I’ve had with other people who write lot, there’s a similar experience most of us have had. At one time, you write something you’re inordinately proud of; an idea so brilliant, so well-articulated, so utterly perfect that you can simply never top it-but you’ll spend years trying to do exactly that. And that’s entirely what Sinister is based around.

There’s an incredibly well put-together scene in Sinister where Ethan Hawke first encounters real evidence of some majorly unsettling events taking place in his new home. His immediate reaction is to phone the police and, as he does so, he paces around his office, coming face-to-face with a stack of copies of his last book. He’s presented here with a choice; take his family and run like hell, or have one last grab at the fame, fortune and respect he always dreamed of as an author. And what does he choose? Like any writer, he dobs in safety and sanity to chase after one more hit. It’s brilliant; Hawke’s writer isn’t a terrible man, but he makes some awful choices based on what he thought would lead him to his Capote-level discovery.

Aside from that, I think it’s a generally solid horror film; unrelentingly tense, very disturbing, and completely compelling. It owes a huge and obvious debt to Stephen King-the rural setting, the family in peril, the author as a lead character-but that works in it’s favour rather than against, as the straightforward and classical stylings of the plot work to elevate it above overly complicated fear fodder like Insidious.

Overall, it’s a film I have particular affection for because I like the character it follows and the genuinely fear-inducing scary bits. It might not be the best horror film ever made, but compared to a lot of the dreck currently being churned out in the name of fear, it’s a very tight piece of cinema.

Movie Marathon #16: The Simpsons Movie

Recently, I wrote about my undying love for The Simpsons and how I genuinely believe that the show acts as a superb social marker and quick & easy way to judge someone on the fly.

I remember hearing whispers about the movie way back when I was at the height of my Simpsons mania; and it made me a little sad. Because I thought a movie would mark out a vast change in the way the show went forward; I envisaged a franchise of films at the loss of the television episodes, or just a complete flop that would kill a series which was already regularly accused of a major decline in quality. Luckily, it was neither of those things.

Much as there is debate about The Simpsons Movie, I think it’s brilliant. It doesn’t just run like an extended episode; the writers took advantage of the fact that their audience was already well-acquainted with these internationally beloved characters, avoiding throwing in scores of new cast members to spice up the movie or make it essential viewing for fans who were already skeptical of the movie. Aside from that, it’s genuinely funny; it keeps The Simpsons brilliant mix of surreal humour and beautifully touching character moments. And it’s not just madcap japes the whole way through-it’s by turns sweet, charming, sour, cynical and downright silly.

The animation, which marked a departure from the cruder drawing of the older series, was pretty spectacular. Huge, luscious crowd scenes, gorgeous scenery, the fleshing out of old characters; the animators took advantage of the changes the big screen would bring, and set themselves up for the next few years of superbly detailed animation.

For me, The Simpsons Movie did mark the end of an era for a big part of my viewing schedule. The show stopped being just a self-contained television programme-it was a franchise, replete with movie and video games. The show would then head off into a far more madcap and less grounded series, one that never really reclaimed the heart it had in the earlier seasons. But that by no means makes this movie anything other than what it is-warm, witty, clever and full of the creative brilliance that will always be what I love most about The Simpsons.

Movie Marathon #15: Elysium (Guest Post)

I’d very much like to welcome a guest author for this post-the formidable talent of my father Steve, and his quite expressive reaction to Elysium which I received via email from Thailand this morning. You can find more of his bloody brilliant writing (well, I must get it from somewhere) here, here and here.

Saw Elysium last night. Also read your review. I agreed with most of it, but overall I think you were too kind. It was no more than a loose grouping of ideas stolen from a range of sources. Elysium was a straight copy of Citadel from the computer game Mass Effect (look at the screenshot – it’s so close I’m surprised no-one seems to have mentioned it). The look of the dystopian earth (and how bored I am with dystopian Earths!) is a straight lift from the second Mad Max film. The plot, if you can call it that, had all the depth and complexity of a teletubbies episode. With pathos added by the wheelbarrow-load just in case you didn’t get it – the little girl dying of leukemia who tells the parable of the meerkat and the hippo. I guess it was supposed to get you right in the heart, but it caused me only an involuntary spasm of the lower bowel.

And don’t get me started on a dying Earth, polluted and starved of resources, but where all the characters are plump and healthy looking (including the little girl in the terminal stages of cancer) with great teeth and men who clearly manage to spend several hours a day in the gym despite their poverty-stricken lives. And then there’s Sharlto Copley, notable only for the ability to flex his muscles and shout in a funny accent, who for no discernible reason dons an exoskeleton to fight Matt Damon (I mean, it’s not as if he was short of guns…) and then decides to make himself President of Elysium. And Jodie Foster, who’s death when it arrived meant nothing at all. And Matt Damon’s death, where we were bludgeoned with the terrible pathos of it all (“Tell her I understand about the hippo”) in a way that had me spluttering indignantly over my choc ice. And a plot so full of holes that it looked like a string vest (to take one minor example, Elysium has all this technology and wealth, and how do they defend themselves against attack? By depending on a renegade agent on Earth who has less than five minutes to nip out to a mysterious parked van and launch the requisite missiles. What if he’d been dropping a big one on the bog? Or his car wouldn’t start? Or he was watching something really, really good on TV and couldn’t be arsed? Wouldn’t it have been logical to build some sort of defense system on Elysium?).

I agree that Spider was probably the least crap character. But he was still a long way short of plausible or engaging.

Pah! What an utter waste of time, money and effort. For me and all the poor souls involved with making this dreck. It’s not often you’ll hear me say this, but I actually preferred Pacific Rim. At least it was cheerfully and unashamedly crap, and had a sort of childish exuberance that prevented me from lapsing into a coma.

Movie Marathon #15: Lost in Translation

So, Sofia Coppola. She’s someone I’m endlessly torn about; almost tragically earnest, one of the ultimate examples of the Hollywood Babies set. Like a hyper-pretentious Rugrats spin-off.

Her debut, The Virgin Suicides, smacks of middle-class ennui and beautiful women. Lots of long, long shots, taut performances imbued with tension and blonde hair and death.

Then there’s Marie Atoinette. There’s nothing wrong with the film, per say, but it’s an airy confection, made up almost entirely of historical inaccuracy and bouncy soundtracks. It doesn’t feel like a Sofia Coppola film; it doesn’t take itself nearly damn seriously enough. The Bling Ring was another weird one-ostensibly a mockery of the shallow nature of fame-hunters that ended up, to a degree at least, pandering to the very people it claimed to be laughing at.

And that’s why I’m torn. I enjoy most of her movies, but it feels as if I enjoy them for different reasons than she intended; I like them because they look good and sometimes make me laugh. Ms Coppola meant for me to revel in a big, sticky ocean of her great ideas. Except Lost in Translation, which represents my favourite kind of uppity fluff; lusciously shot, sparsely written, witty in an honest way, and with a stray Ghostbuster thrown in for good measure. Top stuff.

It’s a tiny, quiet film-very much like Sideways, which I reviewed yesterday-and is often written off as overly thinky, unfunny comedy, featuring bland performances from pretty people. Honestly: that’s not the case. It’s sparse, yes, but still incredibly witty and featuring my favourite ever Bill Murray performance, as a washed up actor who meets a young newlywed (played by the frankly luscious Scarlett Johansen) by chance in a hotel bar. It offers yet another view on romance and marriage; a contrast between the long-suffering Bill Murray and his eternally offscreen wife and Scarlett and her yuppie buisnessman college boyfriend (played with typical confidence by Giovanni Ribsi). The main relationship is beautifully handled; never ostentatious, wild, silly or overtly dramatic, it’s a wonderfully scored, perfectly understated semi-romance that never really goes anywhere. An ambiguous ending might annoy the hell out of some people; for me, it’s a perfect reflection of the romance Lost in Translation depicts. Wistful, a little sad, but ultimately invested in a future they both know will work one way or another.

Aah. How sweet.