emily k(nits, watches, and writes)

There’s my review! Thank you and goodnight.

Fright Night

Well… I’d like to write a spoiler-free review, so we’ll see how this goes. Craig Gillespie’s Fright Night, coming out today in theaters nation-wide, is a remake of the 1985 film with Chris Sarandon and Roddy McDowall. So in that respect, I’m not sure how much can be considered spoilers seeing as the movie has been out for so long already. ANYWAY. I’ve never seen the original so I went into this film with only my low expectations. Because honestly, the trailers were not very impressive. And I’m the kind of movie-goer now that avoids trailers and preview images like the plague. I don’t want other people’s impressions to ruin me before I see a film.

Yet here I am doing that very thing.

So I’ll just tell you what I think worked and what didn’t work.

Visuals: I’ll start off by saying that the screening I attended at the Disney Studios in Burbank was in 3D. (Making this screening my first foray into 3D film.) And there were quite a few shots in 3D that worked incredibly well. The establishing shots were stunningly gorgeous and all the outdoor filming was great. The layering and depth of shots in 3D were really beautiful and there was a lot of careful detail put into the rendering. Yet that was ruined a bit by the GOTCHA! moments. The stuff made to intentionally jump out at the audience was pretty lame. But we expect that now with 3D in movies, right? …. right. I wish filmmakers had more faith in 3D visuals. It’s apparent to me that 3D can be used to make something beautiful and engaging, but seeing a dude in a club throw a t-shirt and have it jump out of the screen at me? Puh-lease. Whatever. And there’s this digital 360º pan that’s just … unnecessary. Another dumb thing is the ending credits. They basically just re-show things from the movie. “Hey stupid movie-goer, don’t forget what happened in the movie YOU JUST SAW.” Heh.

Tennant and Yelchin in Fright Night

Acting: The acting was really great. I mean, really. Especially from Tennant and Yelchin. They totally made the movie. Colin Farrell was almost able to pull off being creepy (without Vampire makeup) but he’s just a bit too sexy for it (I guess). The supporting cast was great: Toni Collette (as Mom … again) was a bit underutilized, but that happens to the Mom Role in movies like this. Imogen Poots managed to take a relatively dry side-character, the “out of his league” girlfriend, and make her relatively interesting. Ginger, Peter Vincent’s assistant/girlfriend/antagonist was maybe the best side-character in this movie. She was hilarious. But really, David Tennant as Peter Vincent was fantastic casting. He was very, well, himself, especially with the yelling and the quick delivery of his lines. But it worked perfectly for the role; his comedic timing was excellent and he didn’t take himself too seriously. The DT Fangirls will eat this movie up. And fun to hear the Doctor swear. There have been rumblings of a spin-off/sequel of Peter Vincent going around killing vampires, which I’d totally see. I’d 100% go see that in theaters. I think the only gripe I have is Christopher Mintz-Plasse, who is way too bitchy and angsty for me to feel any empathy for his character (his name is “Evil Ed,” so maybe that’s the point). Oh, and they spend a bit too much time with Charley’s stupid jock/stoner friends. They’re pretty useless.

Tennant as Peter Vincent

Sound: To be honest, I found the sound design to be the least interesting aspect of the movie. Yes, I know, Claudia Gorbman says music has to remain unnoticed to be effective, but I don’t know if I necessarily buy that. Music is definitely noticeable at all times, it just depends on the audience’s level of engagement with the film. I have a biased ear (I study film and television music if you didn’t know), and I didn’t find any element of the sound design engaging in any way. There was one moment, very early on in the film, where they panned the audio across the stereo channels as the camera did a 180º. Which was cool! It’s like you’re there. But that was it. The rest of the film used relatively stock horror music, pauses for enhanced jump-out-of-your-seat factor and popular music mixed in way too loudly. One cue in particular, which you’ll all notice I’m sure, happens on a shot of Peter Vincent looking out his window. The camera is positioned outside so you’d figure the music would start softer, then become louder when we eventually get a shot of the interior of the room. But no. It’s SUPER LOUD SO YOU KNOW IT’S A POP SONG AND THAT THEY’RE IN A VEGAS CASINO. Which is just lazy sound editing. The weird cover of “99 Problems” at the end of the film is …. well, weird. I’m not sure why they play it. If they’re relying on the lyrics to drive home some point of the film it’s lost on me. Except for Jerry’s weird adolescent lust and semi-homoeroticism. But it doesn’t seem to be a big narrative point so… I don’t get it. My best guess is they used it because the music video has similar horror visuals as the film and the end credits.

Overall: I hear there have been some minor changes to the story, aside from location and what-have-you. If you’re a fan of the original you may find that a bit distracting, about as distracting as the stupid 3D goggle things that didn’t quite fit over my glasses. But overall, if you like slightly campy vampire/horror flicks you will definitely enjoy this. I sincerely hope the 3D element doesn’t deter people. I also hope the “success” of the Twilight films doesn’t make this film less appealing to the general masses. This is a true popcorn-horror flick. It’s not meant to be a serious horror movie. It’s meant to be fun. And if you go in with that mentality I guarantee you’ll enjoy it. I wish more movies like this were being made. I’ll be seeing Fright Night again at the Alamo in 2D to see if it plays out any differently. And to see Tennant [edited] again. I lol’d.

Last night I had the extreme pleasure of heading up to Dessau Hall in Austin, TX, for a very special screening of the classic Coen Brothers film Blood Simple. The screening was part of a special collaboration between Texas Monthly and the Alamo Drafthouse; the two have “joined forces to celebrate film in the Lone Star state by tapping into Texas’ rich production history to celebrate the ten best Texas films and screen them in the iconic locations where either they were filmed or in a thematic setting.”

Texas Rolling Roadshow 2011

The amazing Coen redneck-noir Blood Simple was screened outside of Dessau Hall in north Austin, the famous music venue that doubled as Marty’s bar in the film. The aesthetic was amazing, the crowd excited, and the set-up absolutely awesome. The Drafthouse’s rolling roadshow involved an enormous inflated project screen, trailer filled with 35mm film projectors, and a glorious true stereo sound system. The screen was set up outside of Dessau Hall on the corner of Gregg Ln and Dessau Rd, tucked away in one of the few corners of Austin yet to be reached by new housing developments. Chirping cicadas and passing trucks only added to the ambiance of the Coens’ feature film debut.

My view at the screening of Blood Simple

The Drafthouse screened Blood Simple on, as alluded to above, 35mm print film. The look was absolutely gorgeous, and the sound was impeccable. To add to the experience, the Drafthouse showed 35mm print trailers of a handful of the Coens’ other films, including crowd-favorite The Big Lebowski (one of their most popular recurring Quote-A-Long films).

The Dude

There was nothing about the screening that wasn’t wonderful. Great ambiance, excited movie-going crowd, perfect locale, great weather, wonderful visual and audio quality, and an excellent film (by quite possibly my favorite movie makers). If only Marfa wasn’t 8 hours away … I’d be at the screening of No Country for Old Men in a heartbeat.

You can check out the other films on the Texas Rolling Roadshow here.

Today is the last day that a feature film will be part of my Ten Days of Trek. I’ll get to why in a moment.

Star Trek Generations

I’ll forgo bullet points so that I can just rant for a minute. The movie started out like the rest of the Star Trek films up until this point, which was awesome, because I like the Star Trek films. But then it turned into a prolonged episode of TNG, which was really boring. And then Kirk ended his Trek tenure in the worst way EVER. I know everyone and their grandmother has complained about it, but that’s not stopping me. I mean, really. The only thing I’ll give them is that they stuck with what he said in Undiscovered Country. That he’d die alone. And he did, considering that McCoy and Spock weren’t there. Also, neither of them were in the film at all, and were only briefly mentioned.

A brief point about my reaction to this film. Did I cry for Kirk? No. Did I cry for the Enterprise? No. Did I cry when Data found Spot? Yes. Like a little baby. So there you have it.

I also decided that I was going to stop re-watching the Trek films at this point. It really was the final send-off for the original cast, even if it was a disappointing send-off. So for the next three days I will highlight my favorite episodes. Tomorrow will be #3, the next day #2, and I’ll end with #1, my favorite and arguably the best episode of the original Star Trek series. Because I know how much you all want to know.

As a heads-up, there is a strong possibility that my judgment will be swayed by episodes parodied by Futurama. Just saying.

The last film to feature the entire original cast. Sad.

Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country

Thoughts:
- Spock was so interestingly out of character in this movie. Interestingly because Nimoy helped write the story and produce to the film.
- Kim Cattrall? Hilarious!
- For such a mighty race, I find it quite entertaining that Klingons have bright pink blood.
- I got really confused by Colonel Worf. They only call him Worf, so naturally I thought of the Worf we all know and love from TNG and Voyager. This Worf is even played by Michael Dorn, although the ridges in his forehead are different. Apparently he is supposed to be Worf’s grandfather. I kept thinking during the film, “this was released in 2001, after TNG had been on tv for four years. Wouldn’t this be confusing?” I guess it’s okay to have this film overlap TNG, even though it’s supposed to have happened well before Picard took over the Enterprise-D. I’d look into that further if … I cared that much. Which I kind of don’t. Maybe that makes me a bad Trekkie?
- I’m glad they dropped the whole Uhura/Scotty thing. I was not a fan.

Now we get into where Trekkies say the odd movies are poo.

Star Trek V: The Final Frontier

I really only have two things I want to say about this film.
1- People seem to really hate the tongue-and-cheek jokes of this film. I, for one, find them refreshing. The film knows not to take itself of the franchise too seriously. At this point why wouldn’t you point out there age or some of the oddities of their lifestyle? They’re the cowboys of outspace, and cowboy films and cowboys are comfortable with poking fun at their lives. Why should Star Trek be any different?
2- Everyone always seems to think that Kirk is a womanizer or whatever. But take a look at this film. It was co-written by Shatner and directed by Shatner. There was no love interest for Kirk, even remotely. I realize that Shatner =/= Kirk, but for the man that played the part for so long, wouldn’t you think he’d include that angle if he thought it was important to Kirk’s character? I do think, though, that Kirk is mostly interested in his friendship/relationship with Spock and McCoy, and I think the focus on those feelings is more in line with Kirk’s character than any romantic fling.