Many years ago, while aimlessly surfing through the offerings of dubious quality on OnDemand, I ran across a little movie called Hide and Creep. It's about a little town in Alabama called Thorsby, and how the zombie apocalypse begins there. It's clearly a very VERY indie production--the special effects were...not great, the cinematography was pretty amateur, and it was quite obvious that the majority of the cast were likely friends/family of the filmmakers. However, the script was funny, the main characters were pretty likable, and I admired the clear DIY spirit and enthusiasm. You could say it reminded me very strongly of Clerks, but with zombies, right down to the slacker video store owner and pop culture rants. On the whole, I liked it.
And then, as they say, some things that should not have been forgotten were lost.
It didn't take me two thousand years, but the other day the movie popped into my head for whatever reason. I thought I should look it up and rewatch it, just for old time's sake.
To my great delight, it turned out the movie had a SEQUEL!
Hide and Creep was released in 2004, and in 2015, the same writer and director (and star, and producer...it's a very small company) released a sequel called For a Few Zombies More.
For a Few Zombies More takes place ten years after the events of the original film. Video store owner Chuck has adapted the slacker life to zombie times, spending his days roaming the countryside trying to track down movies, as part of a "preservation project." While out one day, he meets a mysterious young woman, who's on a mission to rescue a scientist who might have the secret to creating a zombie vaccine. Soon, they run into other characters with other missions, and eventually wind up returning to Thorsby for a climactic showdown with a shadowy figure called "The Chief." Along the way, they make some allies and some enemies, fight some zombies, and debate the nature of society and what the zombie plague says about humans (a debate Chuck very firmly does NOT wish to engage in.)
I saw some of the twists coming, but that could be because I watched Hide and Creep immediately before. In general, though, I enjoyed it a lot. I still am very fond of Chuck's character (he's like a southern Randal) and also enjoyed The Woman With No Name. The plot moved along, and there was enough tension to keep me on the edge of my seat most of the time. The villains were appropriately unpleasant, though I thought maybe there was a little more gratuitous toplessness than really necessary. They also clearly had a much larger budget for special effects, since the zombies were much more impressive this time around. I did think the tone was darker than the first movie--while there were funny parts, I felt that this had a more cynical attitude. It also had a banging punk soundtrack, which I appreciated.
On the whole, while I'd say these movies are probably not going to push George Romero off his throne as the king of zombies, they were a lot of fun, and obviously a passion project for the cast and crew. Both are currently available free on Amazon Prime, and are a fun way to spend a humid afternoon.
Tuesday, July 21, 2020
Wednesday, July 15, 2020
Going off the rails on a creepy train: Breakheart Pass
As we've previously established, I like old movies, and old action movies are probably my favorite. Yesterday, I watched Breakheart Pass, which is from 1975, but set out west sometime in the late 1800s. The basic plot is that Charles Bronson is a wanted man who gets picked up by a US Marshal in a small western town. The marshal decides to take him by train to the nearest fort to face justice. The two of them board a train headed to the fort, along with a bunch of other passengers and a group of soldiers.
Then, of course, havoc ensues.
1. Charles Bronson was kind of weird looking. I don't know if it's the haircut or the mustache or what, and it's not helped by the giant, weird fur coat he's rocking here. I mean, the man's a decent actor and a good action star, but man...not attractive.
2. This has some strong Murder on the Orient Express vibes, as well as a little bit of Agatha Christie's Ten Little Indians, in that you've got a group of people trapped on a moving train, almost none of whom are who they claim to be, and they're dropping dead at an alarming rate.
3. It took me quite a while to figure out what was going on, and who was responsible. I was frankly sort of impressed since I'm usually pretty good at ferreting out plot twists.
4. I was glad the romantic subplot remained very very sub. I kind of thought it was downright yikes due to the age difference, but the main actress (aka one of only two women in the entire movie) turned out to be 39 and not 22 so it wouldn't have been SO off. (Bronson was 54 at the time.) Um, further research tells me that she and Bronson were married when this was made. FURTHER sidenote--she was also married to Ducky from NCIS, and he introduced her to Bronson while they were making The Great Escape. Oops. She once famously said that the reason she was in so many Charles Bronson movies is because no other actress would work with him. I hope she was joking.
5. There's a pretty good fight on top of a moving train car. There's also some decent explosions.
6. Because this is a western, there are some Indigenous people. They are on the side of the villains, but they're not particularly terrible. Also, the actor playing the chief was actually Lakota, and not some Greek guy they painted brown, so kudos there, casting department.
7. On the whole, I liked this one. Not enough to watch it again, but enough to say if you enjoy 70s action movies, this one is worth your time.
Then, of course, havoc ensues.
1. Charles Bronson was kind of weird looking. I don't know if it's the haircut or the mustache or what, and it's not helped by the giant, weird fur coat he's rocking here. I mean, the man's a decent actor and a good action star, but man...not attractive.
2. This has some strong Murder on the Orient Express vibes, as well as a little bit of Agatha Christie's Ten Little Indians, in that you've got a group of people trapped on a moving train, almost none of whom are who they claim to be, and they're dropping dead at an alarming rate.
3. It took me quite a while to figure out what was going on, and who was responsible. I was frankly sort of impressed since I'm usually pretty good at ferreting out plot twists.
4. I was glad the romantic subplot remained very very sub. I kind of thought it was downright yikes due to the age difference, but the main actress (aka one of only two women in the entire movie) turned out to be 39 and not 22 so it wouldn't have been SO off. (Bronson was 54 at the time.) Um, further research tells me that she and Bronson were married when this was made. FURTHER sidenote--she was also married to Ducky from NCIS, and he introduced her to Bronson while they were making The Great Escape. Oops. She once famously said that the reason she was in so many Charles Bronson movies is because no other actress would work with him. I hope she was joking.
5. There's a pretty good fight on top of a moving train car. There's also some decent explosions.
6. Because this is a western, there are some Indigenous people. They are on the side of the villains, but they're not particularly terrible. Also, the actor playing the chief was actually Lakota, and not some Greek guy they painted brown, so kudos there, casting department.
7. On the whole, I liked this one. Not enough to watch it again, but enough to say if you enjoy 70s action movies, this one is worth your time.
Sunday, July 12, 2020
"I'm looking at a tin star with a drunk pinned on it." El Dorado (and also Dust Up)
Twice in one weekend -- I know, I'm surprised too. Yet here we are.
After my adventure with The Three Musketeers, I figured I'd try something else new. At some point, for a reason lost even to myself, I added a movie called Dust Up to my Amazon watchlist. I can't figure out why, since it was a small indie from 2013 without a single recognizable star in it, aside from the woman who played Tara on Buffy (whom I liked, but I'm not exactly following her career). The basic premise is that a one-eyed veteran, who has moved out to the high desert to escape his traumatic past, ends up crossing the path of a deranged meth dealer, and ends up having to fight off a hoard of methed up crazy people, with the help of a young mom (the aforementioned Tara), her dopey addict husband, and the vet's indigenous (?) friend. It was...weird. If I had to make comparisons, I'd say it reminded me quite a bit of From Dusk Til Dawn, what with the B movie cast, over-the-top violence, and tacky effects. There were quite a few very funny moments, and I liked the leads quite a bit. The Native friend was...troubling. I wasn't sure if he was supposed to actually be indigenous, or just one of those people who fakes it, but it did give me some moments of eeegh. I'm not sure I'd strongly recommend it, but if you're a person who enjoys bargain basement Tarantino, it's not a total waste of time.
The other movie I watched was El Dorado. And before you ask, no, not the cartoon. This is the 1967 film with John Wayne, Robert Mitchum, and James Caan. It's one of those classic sixties westerns that involves groups of heavily armed men shooting at each other for convoluted reasons. As usual, I found it utterly delightful. Some thoughts I had:
1. The relationship between Wayne and Mitchum is...well, someone is probably writing slash about it somewhere, and for good reason. It's like the male version of "gals being pals." The two of them were trading some rather heated looks. Perhaps I just read too much slash fic, but the undertones there felt scorching to me. Maybe more so from Mitchum's side, but for a guy who is a legend for being a "man's man," John Wayne was delivering some smolder himself. I kept waiting for them to kiss. (Spoiler: they did not.) The whole bit about how Mitchum fell apart because some woman left him...um, we all know it's because John Wayne left. You're not fooling anybody here. I did not buy his relationship with the local madam for a second. Or maybe yes, but there were definitely some bi vibes happening.
4. Caan's character clearly does not understand the relationship going on here, either. Him and the old guy with the bugle seem determined to just stay out of the way and let the other two trade meaningful looks uninterrupted.
4. Holy hell, do I love the men of the Caan family. My deep lust for Scott is well-documented, but his father was no slouch when he was young, either. Just so tiny and feisty! I knew there was a reason my favorite Corleone was always Sonny. He doesn't disappoint in this, and he brings in the sexy, sexy comic relief.
5. I haven't watched nearly enough Robert Mitchum movies, but I need to add more to my list. The man can break your heart with just a single facial expression. There's a part where he comes back after being laughed out of a saloon that just about broke me. And then watching John Wayne try to soothe him through it...
6. Special effects in the 60s were very rudimentary. Don't think I didn't notice you throwing that dummy down during that horse trampling scene. It wasn't exactly "just fling the plastic skeleton and hope for the best in Army Of Darkness" level obvious, but it was not subtle.
7. Hey, Ed Asner! I almost always like Ed Asner.
8. There were only three women in this, and it most assuredly does NOT pass the Bechdel test. However, the sister with the shotgun is pretty badass. She is going to give James Caan and his bitty ass a run for his money.
9. There is a racist bit. It is "Mickey Rooney in Breakfast at Tiffanys" bad, but at least it's mercifully short. But ouch. Bad.
10. The poem: I always forget about Edgar Allan Poe, and it's always a mistake. Yeah, he was a massive drunken creep, but there's a reason his poems are still famous.
11. That was just a delight.
After my adventure with The Three Musketeers, I figured I'd try something else new. At some point, for a reason lost even to myself, I added a movie called Dust Up to my Amazon watchlist. I can't figure out why, since it was a small indie from 2013 without a single recognizable star in it, aside from the woman who played Tara on Buffy (whom I liked, but I'm not exactly following her career). The basic premise is that a one-eyed veteran, who has moved out to the high desert to escape his traumatic past, ends up crossing the path of a deranged meth dealer, and ends up having to fight off a hoard of methed up crazy people, with the help of a young mom (the aforementioned Tara), her dopey addict husband, and the vet's indigenous (?) friend. It was...weird. If I had to make comparisons, I'd say it reminded me quite a bit of From Dusk Til Dawn, what with the B movie cast, over-the-top violence, and tacky effects. There were quite a few very funny moments, and I liked the leads quite a bit. The Native friend was...troubling. I wasn't sure if he was supposed to actually be indigenous, or just one of those people who fakes it, but it did give me some moments of eeegh. I'm not sure I'd strongly recommend it, but if you're a person who enjoys bargain basement Tarantino, it's not a total waste of time.
The other movie I watched was El Dorado. And before you ask, no, not the cartoon. This is the 1967 film with John Wayne, Robert Mitchum, and James Caan. It's one of those classic sixties westerns that involves groups of heavily armed men shooting at each other for convoluted reasons. As usual, I found it utterly delightful. Some thoughts I had:
1. The relationship between Wayne and Mitchum is...well, someone is probably writing slash about it somewhere, and for good reason. It's like the male version of "gals being pals." The two of them were trading some rather heated looks. Perhaps I just read too much slash fic, but the undertones there felt scorching to me. Maybe more so from Mitchum's side, but for a guy who is a legend for being a "man's man," John Wayne was delivering some smolder himself. I kept waiting for them to kiss. (Spoiler: they did not.) The whole bit about how Mitchum fell apart because some woman left him...um, we all know it's because John Wayne left. You're not fooling anybody here. I did not buy his relationship with the local madam for a second. Or maybe yes, but there were definitely some bi vibes happening.
2. I'm pretty sure she was a madam. No one exactly said, but it was strongly implied. Particularly the bit where she suggests she could manage to be both Wayne and Mitchum's girl at the same time. Wayne looked intrigued. Mitchum looked concerned. (See point 1.)
4. Caan's character clearly does not understand the relationship going on here, either. Him and the old guy with the bugle seem determined to just stay out of the way and let the other two trade meaningful looks uninterrupted.
4. Holy hell, do I love the men of the Caan family. My deep lust for Scott is well-documented, but his father was no slouch when he was young, either. Just so tiny and feisty! I knew there was a reason my favorite Corleone was always Sonny. He doesn't disappoint in this, and he brings in the sexy, sexy comic relief.
5. I haven't watched nearly enough Robert Mitchum movies, but I need to add more to my list. The man can break your heart with just a single facial expression. There's a part where he comes back after being laughed out of a saloon that just about broke me. And then watching John Wayne try to soothe him through it...
6. Special effects in the 60s were very rudimentary. Don't think I didn't notice you throwing that dummy down during that horse trampling scene. It wasn't exactly "just fling the plastic skeleton and hope for the best in Army Of Darkness" level obvious, but it was not subtle.
7. Hey, Ed Asner! I almost always like Ed Asner.
8. There were only three women in this, and it most assuredly does NOT pass the Bechdel test. However, the sister with the shotgun is pretty badass. She is going to give James Caan and his bitty ass a run for his money.
9. There is a racist bit. It is "Mickey Rooney in Breakfast at Tiffanys" bad, but at least it's mercifully short. But ouch. Bad.
10. The poem: I always forget about Edgar Allan Poe, and it's always a mistake. Yeah, he was a massive drunken creep, but there's a reason his poems are still famous.
11. That was just a delight.
Thoughts on the 2011 Steampunk Three Musketeers
(Cross-posted from FB. I miss movie reviews. So here I am.)
Watching the 2011 steampunk Three Musketeers.
1. I like so many of the people in this cast. This should be better.
2. Remember back when Orlando Bloom was a thing? Weird, right? He’s kind of...fun as a villain, though. I think he might be one of those “character actor in a lead’s body” types. Also, he should never do anything but costume dramas, because the look suits him.
3. No matter the adaptation, Porthos is always the best Musketeer. I am not willing to debate this.
4. Is D’Atagnan SUPPOSED to be a complete void of charisma? Because that’s almost as universal as the Porthos thing. Is it because he is a literal child? Also, who was responsible for choosing that hairstyle for him? I demand a personal apology.
5. I wish Milla Jovovich’s husband would make better movies for her to be in.
6. It’s like they watched Guy Richie’s ‘Sherlock Holmes’ and said “Let’s do that!” but somehow got it just slightly wrong. Like they were trying for the same cheeky, winking, gritty tone, but it’s too well-lit and the sentiment is just shy of Hallmark level.
7. Fights are good, though.
8. So are the costumes.
9. This cast is WAY prettier than the 1993 version. Sorry Kiefer (and Kiefer’s mullet).
10. I like that the women have more to do in this one than just look scared. (Or, in Rebecca De Mornay’s case, vaguely constipated.)
11. I did not sign up to watch “Villains Special Effect Spectacular” here. Why are the Musketeers barely in this film?!
12. Speaking of, Christophe Waltz is doing his best, but when it comes to creepily smiling sex predator cardinal, no one will ever be able to take the crown from Tim Curry.
13. This film had many flaws, but James Corden is the absolute worst thing about it. By comparison, the war blimp impaling itself on the spire of Notre Dame is downright charming. I wish they’d impaled James Corden instead. Preferably right at the beginning of the movie.
2. Remember back when Orlando Bloom was a thing? Weird, right? He’s kind of...fun as a villain, though. I think he might be one of those “character actor in a lead’s body” types. Also, he should never do anything but costume dramas, because the look suits him.
3. No matter the adaptation, Porthos is always the best Musketeer. I am not willing to debate this.
4. Is D’Atagnan SUPPOSED to be a complete void of charisma? Because that’s almost as universal as the Porthos thing. Is it because he is a literal child? Also, who was responsible for choosing that hairstyle for him? I demand a personal apology.
5. I wish Milla Jovovich’s husband would make better movies for her to be in.
6. It’s like they watched Guy Richie’s ‘Sherlock Holmes’ and said “Let’s do that!” but somehow got it just slightly wrong. Like they were trying for the same cheeky, winking, gritty tone, but it’s too well-lit and the sentiment is just shy of Hallmark level.
7. Fights are good, though.
8. So are the costumes.
9. This cast is WAY prettier than the 1993 version. Sorry Kiefer (and Kiefer’s mullet).
10. I like that the women have more to do in this one than just look scared. (Or, in Rebecca De Mornay’s case, vaguely constipated.)
11. I did not sign up to watch “Villains Special Effect Spectacular” here. Why are the Musketeers barely in this film?!
12. Speaking of, Christophe Waltz is doing his best, but when it comes to creepily smiling sex predator cardinal, no one will ever be able to take the crown from Tim Curry.
13. This film had many flaws, but James Corden is the absolute worst thing about it. By comparison, the war blimp impaling itself on the spire of Notre Dame is downright charming. I wish they’d impaled James Corden instead. Preferably right at the beginning of the movie.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)