The Dunwich Horror (1970)

NIGHT 7

     "I never heard anything like that!"

 

The Dunwich Horror (1970) is a low-budget horror film directed by Daniel Haller, produced by Roger Corman, and loosely based on the short story of the same name by H.P. Lovecraft. After his last horrible attempt at directing a film, someone let him do another... and to surprising result! Also one interesting note: this film was at least partially written by Academy Award winning screenwriter Curtis Hanson who would go on to write L.A. Confidential (1997) and 8 Mile (2002).

The Dunwich Horror follows Nancy Wagner as she falls for the strange and mysterious Wilbur Whitley and fails to see he's got much more horrific plans in store for her.

The acting is this movie is either decently good or terrible. There's a huge divide. Ed Begley is great in his final preformance (wish they did more with him though...) and there's something I really dug about Dean Stockwell's version of Wilbur and even Sandra Dee as stranger bait Nancy was not bad either.

The Direction most of the time isn't bad at all. I liked how Haller interpreted the Monster's attack scenes and with nothing more than pure directorial skill, pulls off the effect he wants with next to no budget on the monster. It's pretty effective (in a 1970 kinda way). This is leaps and bounds better than his direction in his previous attempt at a Lovecraft film.

And over all most of this film is quite watchable. It's nothing profound, but it's actually successfully a very similar feeling to the Roger Corman-Poe epics. (I wonder if he studied them better this time, or just got more advice from Roger?)

Most of the dialogue is laughably bad (which as you know can be enjoyable in itself.)

And the rest of the acting is pretty freaking horrible, it actually seems like they picked non-actors right off the street for how bad some of these guys are. I must admit though, I did get kinda bummed when the grandfather dies because he's one of those actors that's so bad it's actually worthwhile every time he's on screen and after he died I knew the movie would be less funny after that!

As for the source material, once again this is pretty much very loosely based on the H.P. Lovecraft story. They took specific elements from the work and then basically made up their own story with those pieces.  Unfortunately they removed a lot of my favorite scenes from the original story and in it's place they added a whole lot of stuff that doesn't make sense. (Yay!) And riddle me this, why would you put this story in a contemporary setting? This is a story about spells and demons what part of that makes you go, "oh hey this would work better in today's world..."? I'm torn between thinking it was a lost drunken bet of some kind or because they had no money for sets and costumes and just shot with stuff they had. All in all the stakes just aren't that high throughout the entire film. And looking back it's just another mixed up (and less good) Satanic horror (just summoning a slightly different dark evil entity!)

I also think this story could have been more interesting if Nancy didn't just blindly follow Wilbur... she initially asks questions about his intentions and stuff and he just literally replies with random answers and whatever he wants (most of it's B.S.) and she just like... okay! Stranger danger lady! Jeez! Stranger danger!

Oh and lastly I have to mention the godawful ending that doesn't make sense at all! This movie just races toward such an abrupt ending in the end, like they were running out of film to use or something!

The magnificent thing about this one is how much better it is than Die, Monster, Die! (1965) and in only 5 years too, that's one hell of an improvement!

The Dunwich Horror (1970) isn't great but it is interesting and watchable, and probably far better if you MS3K it, or have a couple of beers first (...or do both!) ;)

2.5/5 Stars.

Happy watching!




My H.P. Lovecraft streak continues tomorrow on The 31 Nights of Macabre Movies as we jump a decade and move on to the 80s' classic, Re-Animator (1985).

Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film through these links:

Die, Monster, Die! (1965)

NIGHT 6

     "All that I see... is horror."

 

Die, Monster, Die! (1965) is a low-budget horror film directed by Daniel Haller, produced by Roger Corman, and very loosely based on the short story The Colour Out of Space by H.P. Lovecraft. Haller was a protege of Roger Corman and actually built and designed all the beautiful sets from the Corman-Poe films. For reasons that are beyond me, someone decided that Haller was capable of directing (I'm looking at you Corman) and this is his first feeble attempt. The film is in fact in the style of the Corman-Poe films, but obviously he didn't learn much from Corman, because this guy makes Roger Corman look like Alfred Hitchcock.

This film follows "American" Stephen Reinhart as he visiting his fiancee and meeting her family for the first time. However somethings very strange about this family, and no one seems to want to talk about it. But good 'o Stephen is going to investigate.

Surprisingly the mystery aspect of the film is not half bad that is if we cared about the characters we were following or it actually paid off in the end even remotely, fix those "minor" problems and the mystery would probably be worth it.

Boris Karloff isn't inherently bad in this role, but there's really not a lot for him to work with and clearly time hasn't been good to him. He does surprisingly well for 78 but damn, this surely one of his most forgettable performances in his long career.

All of these characters just aren't interesting. This is especially noticeable in the main character, Stephen. After 80 minutes with this guy I have no love for him and know pretty much nothing about him. The poor actor didn't get the memo that he was in a horror film either and plays the whole role like he's a film noir detective, determined to get to the bottom of this mystery.

Why is this England? None of your actors are obviously British. So why transplant Lovecraft's Arkham to England? Is there something about this story that woudn't work in America that I'm missing? Better yet, why pick this story? This is the second film EVER made based on an H.P. Lovecraft tale. You have his whole library of work to pick from and you choose this story which isn't an easy adaptation, and then use the most basic elements from the story and pretty much make up the rest.

There's a point where this story just gives up on the mystery and just de-evolves into a 1970 radiation scare film? (Talk about dating the film!) Is that why you chose this story because you thought it would be edgy and relevant? I bet they thought: "Yup, this is definitely going to be some profound art 30 years from now."

I think the biggest sin of this film is that it just isn't interesting at all. It's actually quite possible that the title is more exciting than any single point in this film.

And the cherry on top of the whole mess? There is a surprising number of really bad jump scares in this film! There was a couple minutes where I really thought I was watching a modern horror film. Way to be modern and a head of your time in the worse way possible!

Big surprise, can't find anything magnificent about this one. Except maybe that someone tried to ape Roger Corman's style and ended up failing horribly. That alone is kind of amazing when you think about it. You know it's bad when it's not even laughably bad, just miserably bad.

Die, Monster, Die! (1965) is a serious snoozer, pass on this one unless you... well no, just take my advice and pass on this one.

1.5/5 Stars.

Happy watching!




My H.P. Lovecraft streak continues tomorrow on The 31 Nights of Macabre Movies with The Dunwich Horror (1970), unfortunately by the same director as this stinker, but don't let that scare you away fortunately tomorrow's is quite a bit better!

Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film through these links:

The Haunted Palace (1963)

NIGHT 5

     "One becomes accustomed to the darkness here."

 

The Haunted Palace (1963) is an AIP horror film directed by Roger Corman and starring Vincent Price and Lon Chaney Jr. The film is considered part of Corman's series of eight films largely based on the works of Edgar Allan Poe, dubbed the Corman-Poe cycle. Unlike the rest of the Corman-Poe cycle though, this film is actually based on a novella by H.P. Lovecraft entitled The Case of Charles Dexter Ward. This is actually the first film adaptation of an H.P. Lovecraft story ever made! As Roger Corman made more of these films he started to play with different things as he went on: Tales of Terror (1962) is an anthology film, The Raven (1963) is a comedy,  and The Haunted Palace only takes it's title from Edgar Allan Poe.

The story takes place in the town of Arkham where 110 years ago it's residents burned-alive a warlock by the name of Joseph Curwen. In present day Arkham a man named Charles Dexter Ward comes to town to inherit the property left to him. One problem, Charles Dexter Ward is the spitting image of his long dead ancestor, Joseph Curwen. And the people of Arkham do not want him to stay.

As with the rest of the Corman-Poe cycle the sets are great in this film, but dare I say they seem a bit more lavish in this one than rest of the series? I really dug the design of the mansion/palace sets here.

All in all, The Haunted Palace is a very fair adaptation of the H.P. Lovcraft story, It's not an exact telling, but they got the "gist" of the original story and worked from there. I think it works very well, Roger Corman did well to combine the spirit of the story with his already established style of the other Poe films he did.

Overall most of the acting is good, I could have done with better actors for the villagers but let's face it, they didn't have much of a role anyway. Debra Paget is particularly good as Ward's wife, Anne. And Lon Chaney Jr. is great as always, I only wish he had more of a role because essentially just a glorified henchman. He's effective though, he's got that "nice guy" charm that makes you believe whatever he says.

The biggest problem with this film is the loads of exposition needed to explain some of the finer aspects of the Lovecraft tale, and the details of the supernatural Cthulhu Mythos behind what's happening in the story. This film would have a hard time explaining it visually so it just has the characters lay out the necessary details which seems pretty awkward at points. And honestly, you'd be less truthful to the story but I'm not sure you need them to name the Great Old Ones and could have just said he's summoning a demon for all I care!

I also didn't understand why every single villager from one hundred years ago has a descendant that looks exactly like them, and remembers what the Warlock looked like 100 years ago. Come on, no one thought this through?

I really like the ending, but it is a very open ended scene to end on. Ending on that note actually makes it seem that the story isn't actually over in the slightest. I'm kinda surprised no one tried to make a sequel?

Vincent Price loves these kinds of roles and honestly he's the perfect guy for it too. It's hard to imagine this whole film working at all with a different actor playing those roles though so props to him. He plays both roles with a real level of conviction and it's not the "hammiest" role I've seen him in, but there's a bit of that too.

One thing I really loved was this story's focus on Ward's wife, Anne. They could have probably done more with her, because essentially she just does whatever her husband tells her... something I attributed to the timeframe this is supposed to take place in (but still we could have seen more struggle with obeying her husband). But letting the story focus on her (even partially) is an interesting move because as Charles gets wrapped up in the scheme, she's able to witness it all first hand. Kind of a cool idea.

The Haunted Palace (1963) is one of the better of the Corman-Poe films. If you're not into the big dark medieval horror epics like I am, you will probably find less to like here than I did, but it's in no way a horrible film and it's definitely very watchable.

4/5 Stars.

Happy watching!




The 31 Nights of Macabre Movies continue tomorrow with a far less successful Lovecraft adaptation, Die, Monster, Die! (1965).

Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film through these links:
 

Carrie (1976)

NIGHT 4

     "They're all going to laugh at you. "

 

Carrie (1976) is a supernatural horror film based on Stephen King's first published novel Carrie. It's directed by Brian De Palma and it stars Sissy Spacek, Piper Laurie & John Travolta.

Carrie is a High School senior who just got her first period, then gets made fun of by all the other girls in her class. But that's not the only thing that's developing inside Carrie. Those other kids are going to be sorry they picked on her.

The acting in this film is really great. You really feel for Sissy Spacek as Carrie in the first half of the film, which is a very crucial part to why this film works so well.

And Piper Laurie is amazing as Carrie's relgious-nut mother. She evokes the most emotion out of me personally when watching this. The fact that some people still in the world today act this way sickens me inside. Ugh it's a bit hard to watch at times.

Since Carrie has a (then) contemporary setting and involves and has a focus on popular culture in the 70s' it can seem a little bit dated when viewed today (not that I think a remake will be half as good...). This is not to say that the film's meaning and point are lost, but I found myself constantly distracted by fashions and the way some of the high school kids acted. And a lot of the dialogue is some very cliché, high school dialogue (again, probably what they were going for but still annoying and nothing noteworthy). Regardless the film is an interesting time capsule into high school in the 70s'.

The film has these moments where focuses on somethings a little too long, the scene in the shower at the very beginning seems to go on forever! And maybe I'm missing the point, but I feel like any other director would have shown less blatant nudity in that scene, it's so unnecessarily erotic!

I don't love the ending resolve with Carrie, it seems like the film didn't know where to go with the story and to me this seemed all-together too simplistic (I'm talking about the the house caving in part) though the last scene at the very end almost makes me not care about how I didn't like that haha.

One of the things I really like about this film is some of the more subtle points of the story. I like how through the entire film it leaves you with some uncertainty to why Sue is having Tommy take Carrie to the prom, and you think she must be in on the other girls' plan until she gets to the prom and she discovers the rope and the bucket. It's a very delicate combination of things and I feel like another director wouldn't have been as successful with this very critical story point.

I absolutely love the direction in this film. Brian De Palma is a beast, he just knows how to toy with your emotions and play with your heart strings. But that being said, it doesn't stop him from being very "experimental" and trying new things with shots either. Some of these experiments are unsuccessful in my option, like there's a spinning shot while Carrie is dancing at the prom that I absolutely hated. However, often than not this experimental camerawork works very well, for example the split frame shots during the massacre are brilliant and add so much to the heightened mood of that scene!

You really can get a feel for his ability? No better example than with the scenes right before the blood drops. They seem to stretch on forever just toying with your emotions and making you cringe. Do you feel that? It's suspense done well.

Today Carrie (1976) is considered a horror classic and even almost 40 years later you can see why. It's very unique when compared to most other horror films but yet still deals with a lot of the classic horror themes you go in expecting. And from a technical standpoint, horror films this good are very hard to come by.

4/5 Stars.

Happy watching!




Do you like H.P. Lovecraft? The 31 Nights of Macabre Movies continue tomorrow with the first ever film adaptation of an H.P. Lovecraft story. Tune in tomorrow for Roger Corman's The Haunted Palace (1963).

Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film through these links:

The Lords of Salem (2012)

NIGHT 3

     "We've been waiting, Heidi... We've always been waiting. "

 

The Lords of Salem (2012), is Rob Zombie's return to independent horror filmmaking. In present day Salem, Massachusetts recovering-addict Heidi works as a DJ at a local radio station. One day a strange record is sent to the radio station with Heidi's name on it, this record has no information with it except that it's by the "Lords" and Heidi's co-workers decide it'd be fun to play it on the radio. But this bizarre music has a strange affect on Heidi and the women of Salem.

The best thing about this movie is the originality. Yes these are themes we've seen over and over: a witches curse affecting someone in present day, creepy satanic imagery, a cult group raising the next anti-Christ... but somehow this movie does it all and makes it all feel fresh and original. This film is part horror and part "art film." Which is something I don't see too often, but works very well.

The Lords of Salem is Great at showing and not telling. The film doesn't tell you outright that Heidi's a recovering addict, but you can figure it out from the early scenes in her apartment. Same goes for Heidi & Whiteys relationship too, I can't tell you how refreshing this is in a world where every single movie feels the need to have characters explain every little detail of a relationship for us.

All of this, combined with so much very beautiful and original imagery of the film makes for some very memorable scenes. Oh hey, and not a single CG effect in the whole movie! I can't remember the last time I've seen that in a recent movie!!

Mostly nitpicks here but I'm not sure I love the ending of this film, but it's alright. I kind of wish Rob Zombie just went full on art film and didn't feel the needed to explain anything in the end. Because as it currently, the film is it feels very open ended intentionally for a sequel. Hell, House of 1000 Corpses (2003) seemed less open-ended than this and it got a sequel!

And what was with the design of the Satan-dwarf-twiggy-tumor-guy? Can't say it wasn't original.

This movie has some of the best and most "real" feeling characters I've seen in a movie all year! And that's really saying something. They all seem like real people nobody's character is tied to any kind of a stereotype or outline of a stock character we've seen on the big screen so many times before. It's amazing how when you put real characters and experiences into a movie it feels so fresh and real!

The Lords of Salem has some really beautiful cinematography. Every shot in the movie is dark adding so much to the mood. And most of the film is still but when the camera does move it has those beautiful, slow, sweeping long shots, not a single handheld shot in the movie. You can tell Rob Zombie's been studying some master filmmakers.

And then the great original soundtrack (composed by Zombie's bandmate, John 5) on top of this sweeping dark cinematography just creates such a beautiful mood. Bravo Mr. Zombie, bravo.

The Lords of Salem (2012) is part art film, part horror film and isn't the greatest horror film by a long shot... but I really wish more people were making horror films like this these days.

4.5/5 Stars.

Happy watching!




The 31 Nights of Macabre Movies continue tomorrow with Brian de Palma's Telekinetic classic, Carrie (1967).  

Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film through these links:

La maschera del demonio (1960)

NIGHT 2

     "In the name of Satan, I place a curse upon you!"

 

La maschera del demonio (1960) [literally: The Mask of the Demon], also known as The Mask of Satan and Black Sunday, is an Italian horror film directed by well known Italian horror director Mario Bava. Long ago a Satanic witch is being executed by having a metal spiked mask nailed on to her face, but before she's killed she places a curse on her accusers. Two centuries later a Dr. Thomas Kruvajan and his assistant Dr. Andre Gorobec happen upon the witch's tomb while traveling though a forest en route to a medical conference. Through a fluke series of events the doctors end up releasing the witch's soul from her infinite prison and bringing her and her curse back to life.

[Note this review is about the un-edited, English-dubbed version of the film.]

This is a movie with a nice simple story that's very interesting and exciting throughout. It also isn't bound by most of our American storytelling rules, so there's some very interesting twists and turns along the way.

The sets in this film are very beautiful. And with such a small budget, I bet a majority of the budget was spent on them too!

Over all the film is a little slow to today's standards. Most of this is to build the creepy mood but now a days this movie would have probably been half as long.

Also the English dub is pretty bad at points, they do the thing where they over explain things or word things strangely to fit the lips better, which can be awkward at times.

Like many low budget films, the film uses very simple practical effects which today seem very dated (namely the giant bat that attacks the professor at the beginning), and a lot of the makeup throughout looks pretty bad by today's standards... (Especially in Hi-Definition!) But this is one of those things the directors skill kind of makes up for, he doesn't dwell on the horror for too long at all so it doesn't give you a lot of time to stare at the makeup or the fake bat on a string.

The cinematography and direction in this film are really amazing. I can see why this film made director, Mario Bava an international star. The opening scene with the people nailing the mask on the witch is particularly awesome, the cinematography drags you right into the story. What a great way to start a film!

And the whole film makes use of light and shadow, I swear you could teach horror lighting based on this movie alone.

The mood of this film is completely unmatched. There's all of these great really creepy slow scenes in the tomb that can be combined with simple trick photography and putting actors in shots suddenly really adding great jumps almost subliminal suspense.

The Mask of Satan (1960) is a pure work of art. You watch this film and there's no wonder why this film opened doors worldwide for the cast and crew. It's really amazing.

4.5/5 Stars.

Happy watching!




The 31 Nights of Macabre Movies is off to a great start! We continue tomorrow by jumping to a brand new Satanic horror film, Rob Zombie's The Lords of Salem (2012).  

Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film through these links:

The Conjuring (2013)

NIGHT 1

     "Being possessed is like stepping in chewing gum."

The Conjuring (2013) is a critically acclaimed recent horror film directed by James Wan. The story follows the Perron family who are leaving the city life and moving into an old, large farmhouse in 1971. When strange and supernatural things start happening to select members of the family they seek advice from The Warrens, a husband-wife team of paranormal investigators who decide there is something very wrong with this farmhouse.

The movie does a really good thing where it doesn't show you any real manifestations of the ghost haunting the farmhouse till about halfway through the film. This really does well to echo the Perron family's feelings of weariness in the first half and the supernatural events build in a really nice way so that they start off as things that could not be supernatural at all, and then build to things that are harder and harder to ignore. After the halfway point they revel the awful looking witch though and it's pretty much downhill from there, after that point the movie can't stop showing you all the ghost people that live in the house! And the witch reveal is hilarious, even though I'm pretty sure it's not supposed to be int he slightest.

The big downfall of this movie is that it's story just isn't that interesting. There's nothing original about this premise, but the film tries to make up for that by spinning the plot as this overly complicated mess of different storylines involving creepy demon dolls, Satanic witches, ghosts and Catholic possession. All of which gets explained too simply in a whole lot of exposition. It really doesn't feel like any of these elements actually pay off in the end. At some point you realize the movie is pretty much a less well done version of The Exorcist (1973) down to the third act being a "risky" exorcism done by our protagonist. At least in The Exorcist there's an awesomely chilling ending, this movie couldn't even muster that.

Another problem with this movie is it has way too many characters, or at least doesn't effectively use any of the ones it has. I think the one character I actually remotely cared about was Lorraine Warren, and I think that has more to do with Vera Farmiga's performance than anything that's actually on the page. And what was the point of bringing in The Warrens less-good demon hunting buddies the skeptic cop, and the know-it-all Asian kid? Oh, right. Sequels.

The writing is really atrocious, lots of long exposition to explain things that are either convenient for the movie or pretty common knowledge already (if you've ever seen a horror film in your life). The dialogue is down right horrible: "Being possessed is like stepping in chewing gum; it sticks with you." This is one of the funniest lines I've heard in a long time and I'm pretty sure it wasn't mean to be.

And like most movies these days, this film suffers from an overuse of CG. How hard is it to make a sheet fly through the air or a crucifix fall over? I mean really. When you use CG to do these simple things they stick out to the human eye and are SO distracting. Talk about wasting money.

The film has a truly amazing direction. James Wan knows what he is doing and knows how to scare an audience. There's a couple of legitimately frightening scenes in this movie (the clapping scenes) that make the whole movie worth seeing. They're executed with perfect cinematography and great use of sound to make for a perfectly creepy moment, bravo.

I'm legitimately surprised that people liked this movie as much as I heard they did. Sure the scares are good but when the story lacks, I really can't forgive that. And so much of this movie feels like something you've seen before.

2.5/5 Stars.

Happy watching!





Check out what my good friend Daimeon thought of the film here. The 31 Nights of Macabre Movies is just beginning, we continue tomorrow with the classic Satanic horror film, The Mask of Satan (1960).  

Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film through these links:

The Corman-Poe Cycle

1. The House of Usher (1960) (based on the short story "The Fall of the House of Usher")
2. The Pit and the Pendulum (1961) (based on the short story of the same name)
3. The Premature Burial (1962) (based on the short story of the same name)
4. Tales of Terror (1962) (based on the short stories "Morella", "The Black Cat", "The Cask of Amontillado", and "The Facts in the Case of M. Valdemar")
5. The Raven (1963) (based on the poem of the same name)
6. The Haunted Palace (1963) (based on H.P. Lovecraft's novella The Case of Charles Dexter Ward, using the title from Poe's 1839 poem)
7. The Masque of Red Death (1964) (based on the short story of the same name with another Poe short story, "Hop-Frog", used as a sub-plot.)
8. The Tomb of Ligeia (1965) (based on the short story "Ligeia")

Oblivion (2013)

"Are you an effective team?"

Oblivion (2013) is the sophomore outing of director Joseph Kosinski following 2010's Tron: Legacy. Oblivion is a post-apocalyptic, conspiracy science fiction film about a man named Jack Harper, who believes along with his assigned partner Vic they are the only two humans left on earth after it was viciously attacked by Scavs and most of mankind was able to escape offworld to Saturn's largest moon Titan, the film starts with only two weeks left in Jack's stay on Earth before joining the rest of mankind on Titan. Jack however is starting to have second thoughts.

Let me start off by saying this is a hard film to talk about without tripping over any spoilers, so I'll do my best to dance around them and in my usual way merely vaguely mention and imply things but if you want the complete spoiler-free experience while watching Oblivion you'd better stop here, and for that matter don't watch the trailer either!

First things first, the music. I'd be lying if knowing the fact that M83 did the score for this film wasn't about 50% the reason I wanted to see it in theaters. (In that one respect, maybe my hopes for this movie were a bit too high!) Thus far I gotta say I really applaud Joseph Kosinski for his music choices of his filmography. The decision to have Daft Punk score Tron: Legacy was like the shot heard around the world, and for the most part Daft Punk delivered. The score for that film was amazing, however nothing like anything anyone really expected. Here again Kosinski picks an electronic band that's never done any kind of film scoring before, but has a rather cinematic quality to their music (much more than Daft Punk even!) Much like Tron: Legacy, Oblivion's score is not what I was expecting.

M83's score is somewhat lost between being too subtle most of the time and what sounds like trying too hard to be Daft Punk's Tron: Legacy score. Now both being helmed by the same director it's possible to assume that Kosinski gave the same direction for both soundtracks or that he is perpetually set on using the same type of soundtrack in his films (god I hope not!) But more than likely I feel like M83 listened to Daft Punk's score a bit too much before taking on this gig, and as a result I have to say, I'm kind of disappointed. Oblivion's score isn't bad even by a long shot and it definitely has its moments, but knowing M83's music... hell go online right now and listen to any tracks (at random!) from their most recent album Hurry Up, We're Dreaming (2011) and I have to say I think no matter what tracks you picked it would have worked better over this film than most of this score.

I can't think of a better word to describe the acting in this film over all than "good." I think my favorite actor in the whole movie is Andrea Riseborough, playing Vic Jack's partner who doesn't want to mess anything up by breaking procedure this close to being done with the mission, even though she's such a tiny part of the whole film. Oh and Melissa Leo as Sally is pretty unmistakably amazing for her small role as Sally, Jack and Vic's only contact to the rest of humankind at the beginning of the film. Tom Cruise kind of seems out of place at the beginning of the film but as the plot unravels and you see the whole picture he works for the role pretty well. But even though Tom is good for this role and really works, it's nothing we haven't seen Tom Cruise do a million times before. Oh and Morgan Freeman is completely wasted in this role. All in all he was fine, I can't help but feel they just needed another big name to put on the posters and sell the movie around the world. Frankly this kind of role is kind of bellow him.

Also much like Tron: Legacy, Oblivion suffers from all sorts of holes, inconsistencies and gaps in logic ranging from small to HUGE. (Warning this is probably the most spoilerish I'm gonna get in this post.)

Let's go through a couple shall we? There's moments where Vic says "don't go there I don't have eyes on you!" and then the next shot is of her watching Jack on a her flat screen from the camera on the Bubble Plane? There's a point when Vic locks Jack outside and he's demanding for her to open the door, next thing you know we cut to him inside with no explination at all. What the heck? Major cut or jumps in continuity like that are completely inexcusable. There's a moment when Jack is looking for a single drone in the vast wasteland, and he even says "it's like looking for a needle in a haystack..." then he switches from flying a jet over to a tiny motorcycle? That makes NO sense even remotely, and just feels like an excuse to show off more technology, also inexcusable. For the first part of the film the "Scavs" wear this supposedly stealth armor technology for the first part of the film because it helps them hide from drone persecution "most of the time" up until they reveal what's actually going on... after that they never put on their helmets (even once!) for the remainder of the film, even when battling what? You guessed it drones! Jeez guys, don't you think those stealth suits would help with what they're made for!? And then there's the whole bit about the ending that pretty much undermines the awesome foe we've spent the whole film setting up. The enemy has pretty much no reason to let the heroes get as far as they do, especially when I'm pretty sure the enemy was just going to kill them anyway! Ugh I feel like I could go on all day with little things this film messes up on!

There's also some very predictable things that occur in this movie, especially if you're a fan of science fiction films. But I gotta say that for the most part I was impressed and when they went down a direction that seemed cliché or rehashed, I was usually pretty impressed that the film chose to turn and go a different way along the way making the story seem just original enough.

I figured going into this film that the visuals were going to be worthwhile. Joseph Kosinski comes from a background in industrial and architectural design, and in my opinion is far better at that than telling stories. I have to say though that I was very impressed with the way this film mixed real physical sets and scenery and CGI. Coming out of a world of Tron: Legacy which is understandably mostly shot against a blue screen I was rather impressed with how much of this movie is actually shot in and against the real world! Kosinki made the right choice in again working with the amazing designer Daniel Simon who was the lead designer on Tron: Legacy and designed this films Bubble ship, towers, weapons and general "sci-fi tech."

Another great choice was to continue working with cinematographer Claudio Miranda who's filmography pretty thus far pretty much only has hits, but also worked on last years Life of Pi (2012) and previously with Kosinski on Tron: Legacy. Miranda really knows how to place and move a camera. I found myself constantly in a state of awe with the simple but effective camera work in this film. Even during interior shots inside Jack and Vic's sky cabin where they live, Miranda always seems to find a new and interesting place to put the camera, which isn't easy if you watch most sci-fi films where the majority of the story takes place aboard futuristic ships.

For what it's worth I gotta say I really enjoyed the story of this film, especially the basic set up. Which is something I gotta say I never thought I'd say. I'm a big fan of Wall-E (2008) and the seemingly identical nature of the setup for this film was almost a huge turn off for me, but I'm glad to say that I think beyond the general similarities the film goes on to do it's own thing. Sure there's references and homages to a ton of other films in this movie but more often than not the film doesn't choose to go down those paths too far and kind of just hints at the homages rather than dwelling on them, which I appreciated.

I found the basic setup captivating and even though it's told in a voice over with lots of exposition, it really drew me into the world and didn't let go. I can't promise this experience for everyone but it really worked for me. And I'm glad the trailer didn't tell any more than it already did.

Lastly I got to say that for every stupid little thing this movie misses, there's just about as many cool little things it does too. For example, I love the way the film turns the initial exposition on its head with an unreliable narrator and by the end of the film what you realize something unexpected about the narrator from the beginning of the film. I like the way the drones are used throughout the film as something cool, and heroic and then gradually very terrifying. In the same way I also liked the way the film used the Sally character initially as this lovable voice of "home" and gradually transforms it into something else completely menacing and unexpectedly sinister.

Oblivion (2013) isn't the most original film ever, but for what it's worth it's a fun ride and a perfect rental or matinee. 4/5 Stars.


Happy watching!





Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film through these links: