From Dusk Till Dawn (1996)

Related image

 

From Dusk Till Dawn still entertains me today. Over a decade later, I will come back every so often to this movie for it’s originality, abrupt twist, and George Clooney’s sheer acting ability. Before his peak with Kill Bill, Quentin Tarantino was at his best in the 90’s delivering fresh aura to cinema along with his indie buddy filmmakers wave. His crime caper vibe and cheesy hamburger dialogue married perfectly with friend Robert Rodriguez’s cool, rock and roll direction. These two combined a stylish crime nightmare that blended genres into one satisfying bite.

Straight off the stake this may not be for everyone. Not exactly a happy movie but an absolute brutal thrill ride. An entertaining punch to the chest that dishes out unexpected laughs and shock. The biggest diss I can find  the audience dislikes so much is the twist (and probably the gore). By the cover you can guess this isn’t your normal “escape the authority, brother, we just robbed a bank” type of flick. This I personally loved. My favorite bit of the movie is when it snaps your neck at a 180 degree turn and ship-shapes into a mythical monster. Some say this is when the movie loses it’s grasp. I say nay. From Dusk Till Dawn never loses sight of what it wants to be. From A to B the goal is always prominent.

Who doesn’t like a good heist film? Well, this is the aftermath of a bank robbery and you never get to see it like Tarantino’s classic Reservoir Dogs. However, you don’t have characters named after the colors of the rainbow.  From Dusk Till Dawn follows the Gecko brothers who must take the cash across the Mexican border without being caught and meet at the Titty Twister, leaving trail of fire and dead carcasses. Seth (Clooney) is the oldest brother with a temper but keeps it under a cool veil. This is a guy who has a book, a cool book, and you want to be in his cool book. This role here jumped Clooney’s stardom because of his on screen presence and cool demeanor. Although, I think Seth is almost as dimwitted as his younger brother, Richard, leaving him in a room with a woman alone. Richard (Tarantino) is a psychotic sex offender who has a knack of grinding his teeth. He is perfect in this role for being simultaneously weird and awkward. The two leads play well, but Tarantino is surpassed by Clooney’s espresso experience in acting. You can see this alone, clear as day, when Clooney forces Tarantino up against the wall in anger, skewing Tarantino’s glasses and Clooney keeps him from fixing them. Tarantino is not prepared for this and you can see his cowering bewilderment. It’s quite impressive to see. Speaking of impressive, Salma Hayek is a goddess. A sexy introduction for her as she steps on stage with a boa wrapping her seductive body and the music serenading and accenting her curves. Even this experienced actress leaves Tarantino with a foot in his mouth.

Image result for from dusk till dawn 1996 salma hayek tarantino

Everyone does there part. From the young Juliette Lewis as a daughter of faith to Harvey Keitel, a father who has lost faith. And lets not forget those two guys we randomly meet and start rooting for at the Titty Twister. Tom Savini as Sex Machine who fancies a whip and a secret weapon in the formation of his privates. Then we have Fred Williams as Frost who has an endless supply of cigars and talks about ‘Nam back in ’72.

Acting wouldn’t be without it’s writing and Tarantino has a script that not only makes us laugh but is cheesy. Like when Jacob (Keitel) is talking about his spirituality with his kids or when Seth is discussing how his .45 will answer questions. Tarantino’s writing can easily be put into a 24 episode anime or it’s own manga series. At times it’s delectable but sometimes it’s nonsensical and dare I say somewhat juvenile; however, his odd ideas ‘trademark cliches sticks out like a stylish smile with vampire fangs.

From Dusk Till Dawn will always be a movie I come back to, no matter how long. From the opening bad-a** credits to the closing. The last 45 minutes when the twist manifests itself is a total switch up and pushes the question “What if?” in cinema. A great throwback to grindhouse flicks and a great film in general.

Related image

***Spoiler***

On a side note, despite rather two lackluster sequels, my latest viewing made me realize this original could have a proper direct sequel. One focused on Lewis’s character, Kate. Her life takes a turn as a monster hunter after the events of this film. She eventually goes out to seek Seth for help, whether or not he helps or not, I think there is a sequel here. A monster hunt sequel, more than vampires. From Dusk Till Dawn can venture into other mythological territory with different storylines than stay with one tone. Then again, maybe that’s what makes this film so unique as a standalone.

Advertisements

Alien: Covenant (2017)

Alien: Covenant – IMDB

 

alien Covenant

 

As a fan of this beloved series, I read articles, watched interviews, and looked out for the anticipated teaser trailer released last Christmas. My hopes couldn’t have been higher. A return to the dark and dangerous universe of Alien. Prometheus opened a whole new world for us to explore and upon initial viewing I loved it, then hated it, then as time passed it grew on me and I have accepted it for being a stand alone film and an unique entry in to the franchise. With that being said, there was a lot to be expected from Ridley Scott taking yet another lead in the xenomorph franchise. And then finally, FINALLY. A full red band trailer was released. I watched. As the trailer for Alien: Covenant burst from its organic egg shell, revealing it’s gooey innards. I couldn’t help but be exposed to the spoilers on screen as one colonist after another were dying showcasing their deaths to entice and scare viewers demanding it’s attention. AND THEN, my questioning began, “Is this really going to be good, it looks like Alien? Should I lower my bar of expectations? Is this the sequel we deserve?”

alien--covenant-crew-174699.jpg.pagespeed.ce.SKSFLaAjdE

I see nothing but death.

I believe Ridley Scott listened to those shouting and screaming Alien fans and their hatred for Prometheus without consideration of those who spoke softly for their love of a film that took a risk in a new direction. Scott himself wanted to create something new that centered around creation and a story that provoked the thought of origins for life. And not just any life, but birth of the hissing xenomorph. I understood Prometheus was set in the same universe but placed far before the original. And it was this movie that many were apparently down right upset about. Movies age like wine, many show their true colors and morph into something flavorful later on down the road. The tick with this film is Scott took a chunk of Alien and a spice of Prometheus. When instead it should have been vice versa. It felt like he wanted to please the audience and new comers with an over cooked monster and playing it safe. When, in fact, I would have chosen the risky route. Continue Prometheus mission.

This is the biggest fault of the film. Alien: Covenant wanted to spring into an Alien movie so badly it left many ingredients that made it’s predecessor stand alone. There’s reviews that could go on about what Prometheus did wrong and what not. Yea, yea, we know. A great sequel would add to the first’s mystery, answer questions and then some. Frankly, the sequel does not. You want to know if Shaw gets any of her questions answered? Who cares. Want to know any more about the Engineers? Nah, irrelevant, they’re just a plot device. Alien: Covenant moves forward in a storm abandoning almost everything behind. Leaving a mess of a film.

There are good points in the movie and I will say it definitely is not a waste of time. By far my favorite is watching the androids, Walter and David, both played by the magnificent Michael Fassbender, interact with one another. Their conversations and differences make some compelling dialogue. They are by far the best part of the film. David is becoming more of a solid character in the franchise as Ripley. It’s exciting to think about. **Spoiler** Seeing as David’s relationship with Weyland is submissive in the the shadow of his creator, David holds the ability to create, and to create he does. The perfect being. And this is justified (if not hard to swallow) in the beginning  when Weyland talks to David on his initial creation. This bit I loved. Discussion of art, creation, and Gods. It is what is expected of a Prometheus sequel.

Androids were not the only ones who were good, those looking for a more serious role for Danny Mcbride actually has a good standing here. It was a pleasure to see him on screen and provide a drop of comical relief and play a driven husband to the end. A part I was looking forward to. And Katherine Waterston who played the down beat Daniels. She did good but nothing to stand out or even complain. She is in grief of losing her husband so her character hardly has an uplifting moment. With that to say the movie as a whole is quite atmospheric and despairing.

In relation to the other characters I really wish they were more fleshed out. Especially Oram and Karine. This couple could of had some deep conversations. Oram (Billy Crudup) could have used a lot more text and background on why and how he is religious. I think personally he is the most interesting character besides David. With Shaw out of the picture, Oram could have real conversations with David. If not him, Daniels or Tennessee about the future humankind’s path is set on or the Engineers’ purpose. Potential once again lost. Oram is just another guy with faith providing no meaning or value to his own asset to the story of origins. Like the trailer,  Alien: Covenant provided  meaningless scares and predictable deaths. There’s no exaggeration. The deaths are predictable, good acting, but predictable, signing on a new cast dying for a paycheck.

alien-covenant-slice

Some effects I enjoyed but couldn’t help but feel it was a slight downgrade from Prometheus. Times I felt practical effects could have been used but weren’t. i.e. animatronics. The aliens themselves are creepy. Mainly the new one, the neomorph. The original isn’t welcomed like an old friend coming home. Not that it should as it’s history in terrorizing the screen for the past 30 years. We all know what you’re capable of alien, step aside. The neomorph is here and shows it’s origins but where is it on the scale of the Engineers’ existence? Where does it stand? We still know little about the goo from the previous movie. Why couldn’t we just get proper sequel instead of an Alien prequel? You are draining this series dry, Ridley Scott.

The music itself is terrific. With moments calling back to Alien and Prometheus scores gives a hybrid vibe of the universe that’s currently existing and was happy to hear. The additional music was also good, emanating a dark ominous howl. Creating a subtle hint of intense terror that’s not exploding in your face.

It’s interesting to see where the franchise is going.  Not to be sexist but I was hoping not another heroine in this picture. But it’s not all we got. And I hope she isn’t the only one. We’ve had a Ripley. Please, present something new. And try not to kill everyone in the opening credits, so learn from the mistakes. If by chance Scott listens and isn’t a crazed old man looking for a come back and says “F***  it this is how the story is gonna be” we can fix this average film into what the franchise needs: back to answering and asking questions Prometheus introduced. We’ve had our Alien films, bring us something else. Tease us with Alien, give us Engineers and a space to explore with new findings. Our minds are bigger than this. What is life without expanding our boundaries? It’ll be hard to trek back around this film and find our footing once again. Maybe in time this will grow but who knows. We still have stupid characters and a lazy, messy plot that wants to entertain with the occasional questionable dialogue.

I saw a lot of promise when Michael Green was attached (creator/writer of Penny Dreadful, writer of Gladiator). We’ll see where this takes us. Scott proclaims at this moment that the series is pinned for an additional three movies that lead up to the original Alien. Anything could happen. Am I worried? At this point, yea, I am. A Prometheus like sequel will be welcomed. Scott needs to figure out his vision for the future of the franchise. Do I still look forward to the next entry? Hell yea, I do. However, we need innovative ideas. It’s time for the reigns to be passed on Ridley Scott. If you need attention, get a dog.

In the end, I liked the movie. Since Aliens no Alien movie has been perfect. Close calls but no perfect specimen. If Scott plans to release these next few additions then he needs to find that vision and stick to it. Pleasing the audience with a cooked monster will do nothing. Possibly the goriest entry along with Alien Resurrection, we need more than shock and fright. Story much? Missing the chemistry David and Shaw had we can only look forward now after a grim experimentation. One can hope for the director’s cut. As I and fans alike look for the missing parts not already integrated into a film we anticipated for.

neomorph1-700x300

 

The Thing (1982)

The Thing (1982) – IMDb

The thing

Briefly I would like to explain my absence and apologize for it. For the past three months I have been in Basic Military Training for the Air Force (hua!) and have been missing my currently small but meaningful followers. To pay tribute to my return I have decided to review an all time favorite of mine: John Carpenter’s The Thing. Recently, I purchased this movie for my third time off of Amazon. A long awaited Mondo’s Steelbook Collector’s edition that I have fallen in love with. With a haunting bleak cover of snow and blackness, and a ghostly mutated figure screeching upwards on the left side of the case – the words THE THING etched across it’s chest. And subtle, hidden words lie beneath this beautiful box: Man is the warmest place to hide. I gladly unwrap the movie and recall my favorite moments, and times I introduced this bad boy to fresh eyes. Much like when I told my friend he HAD to watch this movie upon it’s arrival a week after basic, hence, he does not like horror. And I told him if there were ever a horror to watch before you die it must be The Thing  (and given, a few others). He was quite hesitant until this day, today, I had the pleasure of finally showing him after weeks of anticipation. He’s a hard nut to crack, my friend, but has said it contained a good, enjoyable plot and good characters. Seeing 25 years is around the corner of it’s release, that it has stood the test of time and is a worthy addition for your shelf. However, he said, it seemed drawn out and some of the characters were not well developed. Is he right? Meh, to my degree of thinking HE IS WRONG. But I will explain later, ladies and gentlemen.

If you are reading and have witnessed this bloody awesome movie then I hope you have enjoyed it as much as I have. If not, then you’re on the wrong ship. Those of you who still need to pop that cherry, I suggest, as a movie lover, watch it. Experience it. Take in the cold and bleak wasteland that is of Antarctica. Where everywhere you go is isolation. Where you thought the below 40 degree weather was the worst of your fears. Until you find out there’s a 100,000 year old UFO beneath the ice. A neighboring outpost is left burned and destroyed, inhabiting nothing but ice and dead bodies. What do you do? The radios are down. You have acquired a stray dog who appears to be normal. Then things happen. Abnormal things. Things you can’t explain. One thing leads to another thing. The characters begin to question each other. Without noticing, you start questioning them. Soon enough you question yourself, Are You Crazy? The thing creeps up on you, slithering it’s way to your brain, becoming absorbed, clouding your judgement. You start building a shanty spaceship out of scraps thinking escape is the answer, I’m telling you that’s not it. You’re infected. Take your last shot of J&B Scotch and burn yourself.

The thing about The Thing is that you begin asking questions from the start. Who are the Norwegians and what are they saying? What is the dog doing? Then more questions begin to form. I think what makes a good movie, specifically this one, is to keep the audience engaged. Have a setting that they become familiar with so they  have the feeling of isolation. Introduce characters we can relate to who can also represent the daily human being. Keep them diversified. Make their personalities stand out and make it seem they have been working with each other for months to the point they appear close. Now throw them in a situation that they need to survive within a stationary location. Where they are faced with unknown, terrifying threat and need to survive with little resources. Where their wits are their best weapon by a foe who takes over it’s host. But they become challenged, divided – their trust tested. This alone, is my favorite part of the movie. The psychological fear can be witnessed on each characters faces. Like the scene when the blood is tested to see who is really who. This scene is what sold director John Carpenter to be a part of it. It was really well done. I feel for the guy because his movies are great but at the time, if any of you know, critics and audience alike did not swarm to his movies let alone Halloween. This made most of his movies a box office flop, only to be picked up by fans in the later years. Carpenter was hit hard by the critics as well. Saying “He’s better suited to direct traffic accidents, train wrecks and public floggings.” Ouch. If it’s any compensation, Mr. Carpenter, we love your movies now. the growing popularity even grew another limb in 2011 entitled by the same name The Thing. Which was a prequel and was to say the least OK. It tried to explain some questions from the first but left out the amazing special effects from the original (1982, not 1951).

I’d like to go out on a separate limb here and comment on the simple but haunting score. Done by Ennio Morricone, using a deep three note bass cord. I thought what was more impressive is that it sounded like John Carpenter did it himself since he has scored for many of his own movies. It fit perfectly, giving Antarctica that lonely, ominous feeling.

Let’s not forget the hard working special makeup effects creator Rob Bottin, who worked himself to exhaustion. Stan Winston (Aliens special effects) stepped in to lend a hand for the dog kennel scene. What’s cool about the effects is it’s actually made and not computer generated like modern movies (i.e. The Thing (2011)). This is where most of the terror, I believe, s produced. The imagery is grotesque. Like pulling guts out from two deformed bodies entangled together creating this twisted freak of a monstrosity. Or when a body’s chest opens up and clamps down on the victim’s arms and tears. And the head dislocates itself from it’s body and forms into it’s own nightmarish creation. You truly believe every part of this thing wants to survive.

Now, to comment on something my friend said earlier. The Thing can feel slow but something is happening and it adds to the storyline if not the characters. It’s a quiet progression, like the cold environment it is set in. The slowness, like other films I have reviewed and said, draws you in and makes the shock value increase. And these moments here are bloody, holding nothing back. As for the characters, you get to know how each individual reacts under pressure and in the face of peril. You see who stands out as the leader, the follower, the strong and the weak. I found myself questioning who to trust and having to change my belief, as did my friend.

The Thing and Alien are among my most beloved films in cinema. They both follow similar criteria; isolation and a small crew against an impossible foe. The Thing is even watched annually June 21 in Antarctica by researchers and the like. Its becoming a forgotten film by the younger generation but I will spread it like an infection. Without it we wouldn’t have the many imitators it has today. It even spawned a chilling videogame in 2002 that elaborated on the ending with a rescue team arriving to the outpost to search for survivors. I played it many years ago and due to it being difficult and being frightened I never finished it. If there were ever going to another installment, I feel this would do justice. (Even though I think sequels/prequels have potential to lessen the value of it’s predecessor.) Since the ending leaves you in the cold to ponder did something survive? It’s the ending that completes this masterpiece. Whether or not a direct sequel will be touched upon only time will tell. Would it be worth the admission?

the thing3

 

 

 

 

Spring (2014)

Spring (2014) – IMDb

From the minds of Aaron Moorhead and Justin Benson (Resolution) comes a fantasy tale of love disguised as a creature feature. Spring is a different movie and is similar to Richard Linklater’s talkie, but romantic Before trilogy with a monster twist. The movie is set on the coast of Italy, a beautiful setting with a labyrinth of brick roads. Age old buildings tower above the white cliffs overlooking the ocean with a taste of vino and smell of greenery in the air. This is where our protagonist, Evan (Lou Taylor Pucci), escapes from drama in the U.S. of A. after his mother passes, and he loses his job. He arrives in Italy and makes some quick acquaintances who help him to a few drinks and some fun.  Suddenly, Evan meets this beautiful ‘goddess’ of a woman, Louise (Nadia Hilker).  She is beautiful. If she told me she was a 2,000 year old mythical goddess, I would believe her. Louise is a man’s fantasy come true, inviting Evan to come away with her when they first meet. As easy as he could take her up on this offer, he simply wants to sit down and have a drink with her, get to know her more.  However, love has a way of ‘transforming’ things.

Lou Taylor Pucci and Nadia Hilker have wonderful chemistry. At first, you can sense Evan wants this girl, whether it’s lust or love; and you can sense Louise being distant with him, but still likes his close company. The dialogue between them feels like we’re listening in on a conversation between two complete strangers who found a connection. The writing is authentic and quirky, and each character has their own characterized way of speaking, even the smaller roles. Spring is a slow paced movie, but is still ever so engrossing with the dynamic writing, beautiful scenery, and the unfolding of the mysterious, pretty lady’s dark, inner secret. The move is not scary, naturally. It has horror elements and themes, and the climatic monster reveal is both shocking and peculiar.

I blindly purchased Spring due to it’s interesting setting and plot, and after from what I heard, and instinct was telling me, we found each other at a local Best Buy as fate has brought us. I enjoyed this movie and the connection between the two leads. Lou Taylor Pucci is a well rounded actor. I have seen him in a few flicks now and find find his talent underrated. In Spring, he is charismatic and very likable as Evan, even funny; same goes for Nadia Hilker’s role. Although, I watched a special featurette where the makers felt the ending was premature, so they went out and shot an extended ending with their iPhones. To be honest, I was happy with the original ending and thought the new one turned Evan into an unlikable character.

Anyways, Spring is a unique film. It’s labeled horror, but it’s different and not what you’d expect. If you’re expecting something like Species or The Howling, then this might not be for you. If you want something fresh, change of pace, like HoneymoonI do recommend it as a date night movie. Spring stands out from the rest of the body horror/creature feature flock, possibly becoming a cult classic.

Jurassic Park (1993) – IMDb

via Jurassic Park (1993) – IMDb.


I remember owning this movie on VHS and had my name written on it so people knew whose it was. Jurassic Park had a tremendous influence on me, as it did a whole generation and many to come; it was one of the reasons I fell in love with practical effects and creature features. Steven Spielberg didn’t intend for this movie to be a monster movie but more about what would happen if engineers brought dinosaurs to life and we walked side by side? Universal Studios bought the rights to Jurassic Park before it was even published, confident it would be a box office hit. Right they were. The movie was sold out for consecutive days. David Koepp, the writer, said: “I’m no expert, but I think this is a good movie.” We’re still under the shadow of this colossal movie, having the fourth installment arriving just days away, exactly 22 years after the first was released. It is much anticipated by fans and new comers to sink their teeth into but I feel it won’t have as much a bite as the first initially did. It is epic, beautiful, thought provoking, and a harrowing adventure that friends and families will remember for a lifetime to come.

We all know Steven Spielberg can handle any project he comes into contact with, he has an act for directing with a sense of warmth, suspense and adventure in his pictures. Jurassic Park is clearly a masterpiece. From the special effects to the subtle wit to the dramatic ferociousness and back to the overwhelming, spectacular effects. Stan Winston (Aliens) and his team out did themselves here, the effects are top notch and even subtle. Like when Lex shines a light into the T-Rex’s eye, it dilates; or when the raptor’s eyelids move or nostrils flare. The dinosaurs have so much life, you can see the weight and even their breath on glass. They seem so realistic it’s extraordinary to this day, and the CGI is better than a lot of movies today. The special effects won an award for their hard earned effort and same for the incredible sound. Without the sound, or music, Jurassic Park would have a big difference. The score is beautiful and adventurous and will stay in your head, I even whistle it randomly. The music and sound together adds to it’s over all atmosphere giving it a distinctive feeling, it’s a whole another universe to experience and yet it’s familiar.

In the first hour it’s all character development. The slow burning attribute helps the viewer become aware of what you’re watching and it makes you feel more. It draws you in with the sense of control Spielberg has on the development of the story. You are introduced to an engaging and varied sorts of characters. You have the creator of the amusement park John Hammond, played by Richard Attenborough who was good friends with Spielberg and fits his role. Hammond comes and invites two paleontologists, Dr. Sattler (Laura Dern) and Dr. Grant (Sam Niell), to visit his monstrous park. Sattler is ready to move forward in a relationship with Grant and have kids but he simply does not like them, must be the smell. Grant is also old fashioned and loves his work but sees technology is making his field more advanced. Although it helps with new discoveries, it takes away the whole experience of digging. Flying over seas via helicopter to an island 150 miles away from Costa Rica you meet Jeff Goldblum’s best fitting character Ian Malcolm, otherwise known as Dr. Chaos. There’s also the blood sucking lawyer, Genarro, who is greedy for money and only cares about convincing his investors; Hammond’s two grand kids who are stellar actors here, and the veteran hunter, Muldoon, who has a close eye on the velociraptors.

From the landing pad to becoming a dinosaur’s next meal is a fun experience on par with a theme park. Exactly one hour in is when the movie kicks in gear and you are treated to the infamous T-Rex scene breaking out of his paddock. Spielberg presents the terrifying creature with precision and horror, taking enough time to invoke this unstoppable fear that will cause chaos.
During filming, when it would rain, the T-Rex would malfunction and come to life and scared some of the crew. Shoot, I would, too, seeing it was a life size man-eater! The crew would give out warning when the monstrous king would step out onto the set since a sweep of it’s head flying by you felt like a bus passing by. Put that into perspective…

Jurassic Park will feed you some scary sequences. John Hammond, the theme park creator, takes his guests to the velociraptor’s paddock just in time to see it fed. You don’t see it, only it’s small area of confinement that’s covered with plant life. A cattle is lowered into the thick. And then the crunching and mauling sound of it being torn to shreds and the plant life shaking and swaying, reacting violently. The feeding scene is excruciatingly terrifying cause your imagination goes to work like the raptor does on the cattle. You also learn these animals have intelligence. What’s more terrifying than intelligence? Intelligence with memory, even more so when you find out it has escaped.

Man and dinosaurs were not meant to walk side by side. There are discussions and themes about it through out the movie. One of my favorite scenes, one that seems to be overlooked (and as a child I found boring) is after the raptor’s snacking when the group gather in a room to discuss the park and have a bite to eat. Although, no one touches their food. In fact Hammond is bewildered that the scientists don’t like the idea of free will to create this life that has been separated from humankind for 65 million years. Especially Ian Malcolm (who has the best lines), who has a morbid sense of humor but is also deep in thought; he is dressed in all black, contrary to John Hammond who is dressed in white. This is symbolic for the two characters. Hammond is a God-like figure. He has been present for every birth on the island and, like birds, they imprint the first face they come into contact with which helps them to trust him. Hammond has the power to create the illusion of life out of free will but failed to have the discipline and responsibility to gain this power therefore not fore seeing the actions he has put into play. Moving up from his flea circus, he wanted something tangible for people to see and touch. But he wants to control the uncontrollable; life finds a way, as Malcolm tries to convey to him the chaos theory. Malcolm has a dark approach but it’s reality. Telling Hammond that life breaks boundaries, painfully and even dangerously. You can not simply control something that wants to be free. It was natural selection that killed the dinosaurs and they were “[raping] the natural world” bringing them back. Hammond’s ignorance and Malcolm’s arrogance are the best of both worlds, providing us deep conversation with intrigue. 

Michael Crichton wrote Jurassic Park because of his fear of advancing bio-engineering technology and that one day dinosaurs will be back possibly for the sake of entertainment and profit. Something to think about of our future. Also, Crichton compared himself to Malcolm because of his outlook on life and Spielberg to Hammond. If that’s so, than I’m Grant cause I’m not really good with technology either.

We can’t even handle each other, what makes you think we can handle dinosaurs? Steven Spielberg has directed a genuinely smart, timeless epic that inspires me to read the book and will be loved by everyone to come into contact with. This magical movie leaves a message for us and after an unlikely hero saves the day, the ending moments leaves a sweet, melancholy filling. No words are spoken, just the beautiful score to help sink in our survivors’ weekend adventure.

Extra: I’d like to think Wayne Knight’s character Nedry, changed his name from Newman (Sienfeld) who was having financial problems but found a way to fix that. He left his apartment in New York and his post man job to do a gig for a company who wanted dinosaur specimens. His mission: to infiltrate the lab on Site A and acquire dinosaur embryos and return them for large amounts of cash. But when you combine money and greed, you become blinded by a toxic, gooey venom of evil.

Animal (2014) – IMDb

via Animal (2014) – IMDb.

Image result for animal 2014 movie

On the surface, Animal looks like your usual low-budget, monster B-movie. Underneath is pretty much the same. Not entirely bad, I might add, it stands out of the crowd just a tad. The movie features great creature effects that show off early on, if only it was matched by some good dialogue (if not campy). With a couple good kills and a simple as you can get storyline, Animal is sure to entertain some audience.

Animal follows the likes of Dog Soldiers and Predator. Although, the storyline is much simpler: teens go out in the woods for fun, they get lost and find a creature that has a taste for human flesh. They proceed to run away from this thing and manage to find shelter in a cabin where they meet another band of survivors. One of them has their noggin wound up a little too tight and makes decisions that will frustrate you and talking to the screen, ‘are you stupid?’ Because he makes choices like sacrificing people and making a run for it, we’re supposed to understand his blind decision making and insanity since his girl was killed off in the opening scene. But au contrar, I could care less. Kill the bastard. But what’s a horror movie without someone doing something stupid? I, for one, did not care for pretty much any of the characters. I pin that cause on the writing; it’s just so careless and lazy, it made the characters appear uneducated.

Many parts of the movie are predictable but for the sake of the other parts that are unexpected I won’t spoil anything for you. The surprise moments happen early on which makes the rest of the movie feel more vulnerable. Every boarded up window, closed door or ruffling bush leaves you an impression something is gonna happen but you don’t know when! Even some deaths can catch you off guard but somehow the shock value wears thin especially towards the end when things speed up. Vulnerability is still lingering in the atmosphere but the characters just get picked off in more careless acts of violence. Which the gore is reminiscent of Feast, similarly the animal compared to it’s ferocity. The animal itself is creepy at first, but shows it’s beastly-self far too often and the scare dies down. We become familiar with it’s movements all too soon. Good thing the special effects are good. If there is one thing Animal did right was showing the creature in prosthetics. I don’t remember seeing any or little creature related CGI. That’s one thing to make your monster more believable and devilishly cheesy. Creature features and other usual B-movie fodder use a lot of CGI, but what if they used prosthetics instead? I’m a believer that CGI doesn’t last as long as special make-up effects tend to do.

I looked at Animal hoping it wouldn’t become another failure like Creature with Sid Haig, fortunately Animal steps above it. The acting is so-so, given the script the actors had to work with. And I take back some of what I said, I thought Carl and Mandy were cool and didn’t want to see them go, one gets mauled (not a complete spoil) off screen. Subsequently, Animal is a small surprise that borrows ideas from other films, which is cool, I don’t mind that, I just wish the writing could have had more work done; it would have helped the execution. That alone I think is what will keep Animal from gaining a cult following. Unless they follow up a storyline that answers questions like: why is that cabin there? why are the creatures familiar with it? and where did they come from? But I’m expecting another military bio-project gone bad.

I recommend horror fans alike to give this a look, and any other audience members looking for an escape to the woods.