Nancy Drew and the Hidden Staircase (2019)

Tags

Family, Mystery

(Today’s NaPoWriMo prompt was for a poem describing a place in detail. I didn’t quite do that, but I used the theme of details to versify a mystery climax.)

The floorboards near the bookcase creaked,
And everyone’s concern was piqued
As, slow and calm, the expert sleuth
Prepared to publicize the truth.
She said, “I know who did the deed”
And eyed all three suspects to read
The guilt or panic on their faces,
Gathered near two fireplaces.

“Mr. Jones, you’re known as mean,
And as the gardener, less than clean,
But you are guiltless thanks to dirt
That’s caked upon your shoes and shirt.
The night in question, I could see
The room was spotless as could be,
And so your dirt is now defense
To soundly prove your innocence.

“And Mrs. Garber, you could well
Have been the culprit, but for smell.
Your strong perfume is hard to miss,
But as I think and reminisce,
The air was mildewy that day
And not at all like your bouquet.
So that leaves you, Miss Jefferson.”
Upon her heel, the Sherlock spun.

“You had the chance, the time, the aim,
Yet you are also not to blame.
The crime scene held a scrap of robe
Too rough and plain for your wardrobe.
Your taste is clear from how you’re clad,
(You really do look good in plaid),
And so I know you too are clean.”
The three, confused, looked round the scene.

“The culprit, though, is present still,
Too curious about my skill
To not be here tonight and see
If I could solve the mystery.”
She stepped two paces to the right
And huffed and heaved with all her might
To push the bookcase from the wall
And show the man behind it all.

He stood in shock, his pant leg torn,
For still he wore the clothes he’d worn
That fateful night, and as police
Led him away, he needed peace
And asked the sleuth, “How did you know?”
She donned a smirk and faced her foe.
“To notice things is my technique.
I heard the bookcase floorboards creak.”
____________________

MPA rating: PG

My VC has recently become enamored of mysteries and true crime stories, but the origin of that interest probably originated in her early love of the Nancy Drew books. I was curious to see what she’d think of a modern interpretation, and Nancy Drew and the Hidden Staircase, based on the second book in the series, was a fairly decent adaptation.

Sophia Lillis of It fame plays the titular teenage sleuth (is it all right to call her the It girl?) and gives her some likable spunk and humor as she must deal with a catty rival (Laura Slade Wiggins, who looked a little older than a teenager) and a haunted house. The production values are on the level of a Hallmark TV movie, but the mystery tries to keep you guessing, even as it’s kept at a tween-friendly level. I suppose the best part was its moral development; Nancy pulls a cruel prank on a bully early on, and it was nice to see her slowly recognize her own faults and choose to be better.

With the fond memory of reading the Nancy Drew series when she was little, my VC wasn’t particularly impressed with this film version, which she said was greatly changed from the source material, but it still felt like a more faithful attempt than the new CW series trying to be edgy like Riverdale. There are plenty of better mysteries out there, but Nancy Drew and the Hidden Staircase has a pleasant innocence to it that works well for the younger would-be sleuths.

 

Rank: Honorable Mention

 

© 2020 S.G. Liput
671 Followers and Counting

Glass (2019)

Tags

Drama, Mystery, Superhero, Thriller

We live in a world in which evil and good
Are warring in hopes that each be understood.

The good share a dream in which righteousness reigns,
Dispelling all ignorance, chaos, and chains,
And could be considered one-note or naïve
In hoping for changes no man can achieve.

But evil, for lack of a worthier word,
Is interesting in how it seeks to be heard.
It pleads its own case, it redirects blame,
It covers its face, it covets more fame,
It craves vindication, it bristles at scorn,
It scatters temptation, it toots its own horn,
It seeks self-redemption and curses regrets,
It wants an exemption that no one else gets.

It does entertain, but does it satisfy?
The good know the answer, and Goodness knows why.
_____________________

MPAA rating: PG-13

I feel like Unbreakable has grown in reputation over the years. Its unconventional take on the superhero genre predated the majority of big-budget comic book films, and the decline in M. Night Shyamalan’s output quality afterward made its excellence stand out even more. Naturally, it was a surprise when 2017’s Split made a post-credits revelation that it was set in the same universe, prompting speculation on what the inevitable third film would do to bring the characters together. Now that Glass has finally answered that question, I doubt I’m the only one thinking that we might have been better off not knowing.

Now nineteen years after the events of Unbreakable and three weeks after the events of Split, David Dunn (Bruce Willis) has become an experienced vigilante called the Overseer with the help of his son (Spencer Treat Clark) and sets his sights on Kevin Wendell Crumb (James McAvoy), whose murderous Horde personalities are running amok. However, both David and Kevin are soon captured and imprisoned in a mental hospital, alongside Elijah Price/Mr. Glass (Samuel L. Jackson), where psychiatrist Dr. Ellie Staple (Sarah Paulson) seeks to convince them their superhero/villain abilities are merely figments of their imagination.

I wanted to like Glass, and in some ways, I did. Like Unbreakable, it’s a rare slow-burn superhero film, where the action is infrequent but scrappy, and the psychological questions raised are given just as much time (or more) than the plot. I certainly can’t fault the performances, particularly Jackson and McAvoy. The former lets Mr. Glass’s cunning bubble under the surface for most of the film and later revels in his mastermind status, while the latter continues the bravura flurry of performances that made Split such a showcase of acting skill. Paulson also does well in making her psychiatrist a seemingly sympathetic mystery, with intentions you can’t help but suspect.

Some might complain that Glass takes too long to get to the showdown to which it is clearly building up, but that’s not the extent of the film’s problems, which also include the outcome of said showdown. Of course, Shyamalan has to pull out a last-minute twist to subvert expectations, but, despite some intriguing implications, it’s far from a satisfying one. Bruce Willis may have the least charismatic character, but his David Dunn, in particular, deserved so much better than this film. With time to think about the ending, I’ve come to appreciate its attempt at refocusing the narrative on side characters, but it still left a bitter taste in my mouth.

So, I suppose you could say that Shyamalan strikes again. It’s neither his best nor his worst movie, but it’s the least of this comic-themed trilogy and had so much potential to be more. It’s still very well-produced and directed and worth watching for Jackson and McAvoy’s performances, but it only works as a where-are-they-now story (I liked the continuity of Shyamalan’s cameos), not so much as a conclusion. The next time I watch Unbreakable and Split, I might just pretend they’re stand-alone films.

Best line: (Glass) “There are unknown forces that don’t want us to realize what we are truly capable of. They don’t want us to know the things we suspect are extraordinary about ourselves are real. I believe that if everyone sees what just a few people become when they wholly embrace their gifts, others will awaken. Belief in oneself is contagious. We give each other permission to be superheroes.”

 

Rank: Honorable Mention (on the edge of Dishonorable)

 

© 2019 S.G. Liput
652 Followers and Counting

 

2019 Blindspot Pick #9: Vertigo (1958)

Tags

Classics, Drama, Hitchcock, Mystery, Romance, Thriller

The birds in flight
May love their height
And laugh at bounded, grounded man,
But gravity
Can guarantee
That staying low’s a better plan.

Some love the thrill,
The view, the will
To see a limit and defy,
Yet none deny
That when you’re high,
It’s so much easier to die.
_____________________

MPAA rating: PG

Vertigo has to be the most critically lauded among my Blindspots this year, and I was quite curious to see whether it would match its reputation, since so many Hitchcock movies have fallen short, for me at least. Vertigo lands somewhere in the middle, confirming my opinion that Hitchcock mostly excelled in creating tension in individual scenes rather than whole movies.

The fourth and last collaboration between Hitchcock and star Jimmy Stewart, Vertigo is a tale of obsession that toys with the possibility of the supernatural. Stewart plays John “Scottie” Ferguson, a cop who retired after a deadly experience with heights but is commissioned by wealthy friend Gavin Elster (Tom Helmore) to investigate Elster’s wife Madeleine (Kim Novak) and her sudden strange behavior. As he learns more about her connection to a suicidal ancestor and develops a relationship with her, he encounters secrets and mysteries that shake him to his core.

As a fan of film, I can say that I am definitively glad to have finally seen this classic of cinema, an oversight that represents exactly what this Blindspot series is meant to solve. Yet it doesn’t hold the same fascination for me that it apparently does for so many. Perhaps it’s because the film’s intrigue was such a rollercoaster. It starts out interesting enough with Stewart as his ever-likable self, but the story really drags during his investigation, which consists of far too much of him wordlessly following Madeleine by car. Maybe it’s just me, but the picture below doesn’t do much for me in the way of tension.

Then comes a famous scene in a bell tower, which is indeed one of Hitchcock’s best for buildup and shock value. Not too much longer, and the reveal of the mystery left my brain working overtime, surprised at the unanticipated twist and giving me a new appreciation for the storyline. Yet what follows becomes a somewhat uncomfortable exercise in obsessive grief (including a weirdly unnecessary psychedelic dream), played out through what would be a deeply unhealthy relationship if not for the audience’s knowledge of its psychological underpinnings. How it ends, while effective, is also anything but satisfying, so abrupt that it made me recall how much I despise the final scenes in North by Northwest and An American Werewolf in London. I know Hitchcock knew how to end a movie, but I wouldn’t know it based on this one.

I certainly can’t fault the actors. Stewart is always good, always, and Kim Novak might be one of my favorites of Hitchcock’s blonde leading ladies. Barbara Bel Geddes is also great as Scottie’s casual friend/former crush, who is short-changed by the ending’s lack of closure. I also liked a cameo by Ellen Corby, who also appeared with Stewart briefly in It’s a Wonderful Life (“Could I have $17.50?”) Likewise, Bernard Herrmann’s hypnotic score is an outstanding accompaniment, and, like the score of Psycho, adds so much to the film’s atmosphere.

All in all, Vertigo is the second best one-word Hitchcock film that ends with an O, as well as the second best Hitchcock film that begins with an injured Jimmy Stewart. Sorry if that doesn’t sound like high praise, though I do appreciate its cinematic contribution of that vertigo effect above. I can see why film enthusiasts like it and why its filming locations around San Francisco have become iconic, and I have half a mind to see it again just to pick up on the hints to the twist that I might have missed the first time. Yet, considering it’s been ranked both 1st and 9th on lists of the best films ever made, I feel like its reputation is somewhat overblown. Psycho is still Hitchcock’s masterpiece as far as I’m concerned.

Best line: (Madeleine) “Only one is a wanderer; two together are always going somewhere. ”

Rank: Honorable Mention

© 2019 S.G. Liput
649 Followers and Counting

Circle (2015)

Tags

Drama, Mystery, Sci-fi, Thriller

Someone must die one minute from now.
You lack any power on why, when, and how.
But someone must die, and it could be you,
Unless you choose somebody else.
But who?

You don’t know a soul as you look all around.
They’re nothing but strangers, their eyes on the ground,
For they have the same choice, deciding who dies,
And may well have voted for your own demise.

So who will you pick, knowing death is no joke?
The seediest? Noisiest? Least of the woke?
Will you choose at random, no malice or spite?
And if you survive, then does that make it right?

Ten seconds to lose,
So judge them and choose.
_____________________

MPAA rating:  Not Rated (should be R for plentiful language)

This is my contribution to MovieRob’s Genre Grandeur for September, which focused on Ensemble Films.

If an ensemble means that the entire cast are on equal footing with no clear main characters, then few films match that description as closely as Circle, a sci-fi chamber piece currently available on Netflix. I have MovieRob to thank for even alerting me to this low-profile film’s existence, and it’s a fine example of a simple premise expertly executed.

Partially inspired by 12 Angry Men, the plot can be summed up in one sentence: a group of fifty people wake up standing in a circle, unable to move or touch each other else they die, and they discover they collectively decide who dies every two minutes. That is practically the whole movie, people standing in a circle debating who should be the next to die. Yet that simple, disturbing idea turns out to be something intense and thought-provoking from start to finish, buoyed by a talented cast of totally unfamiliar actors who give no clue as to who will survive.

After the disorientation of coming to grips with what’s happening, assumed to be an alien experiment of some kind, the deliberation among the “survivors” illustrates how easily people judge each other, delving into such a diversity of social debates, from race to gender to religion. While some of the stressed characters seem to act rash and stupid at times, the film lets the characters’ words and actions speak for themselves, not judging them but allowing them (and the audience) to judge each other. As the bodies keep dropping, a major split concerns the presence of a young girl and a pregnant woman, half the group believing one of them deserves to be the last one standing while others see them as obstacles to their own chance at survival. The film asks, without a clear answer, how evil is the desire to live?

While laden with far too much profanity for my liking, Circle is nonetheless a fascinating study into human nature. The deaths, carried out by a lightning strike, have shock value, always unpredictable in their selection, yet are mercifully bloodless. Some of the logistics aren’t 100% clear, such as how people make their choice with an implant in their hand. And while I would have liked some last-minute twist (or rather a different twist), its final scene is more about sparking conversation, theory, and ethical soul-searching than providing a satisfying end. Compelling in its moral grayness, Circle is an ensemble thriller that asks uncomfortable questions through an alarming, improbable situation as only science fiction can.

 

Rank:  List Runner-Up

 

© 2019 S.G. Liput
648 Followers and Counting

 

Detective Pikachu (2019)

Tags

Action, Comedy, Family, Fantasy, Mystery

If Pokemon really existed, as shown,
Which creature would you want to claim as your own?

A friendly Charmander with flame on its tail?
A giant Wailord? (Let’s be real: it’s a whale.)

A psychic Kadabra to bend all your spoons?
Or maybe some ghostly balloon-like Drifloons?

If you’ve a green thumb, then Sunflora earns smiles,
And Ursaring’s cute…when they’re still juveniles.

I’d love a Sandslash to dig holes with aplomb,
But perhaps you’d prefer the more handy Aipom?

A Seel or a Spheal would be (honestly) cool,
But know that for water types, you’ll need a pool.

If you need sleep, Jigglypuff’s known for its pipes,
And Eevee has options for multiple types.

Oh, come now, you must want at least one of these?
Arcanines? Kirlias? Sweet Caterpies?

What’s that? You say none of these names ring a bell?
You only know Pikachu then? Very well,
I shouldn’t be “shocked” since that mouse sure can sell.
_______________________

MPAA rating:  PG

Who would have thought that a live-action Pokémon movie would be the first film based on a video game to be deemed “Fresh” by Rotten Tomatoes, even if it is only at 67%? There was something about the trailers for this movie that strangely fascinated me. I don’t know if it was the faithfully rendered CGI pocket monsters or the casting of Ryan Reynolds as a talking Pikachu or just the inclusion of “Holding Out for a Hero,” since I love that song. But whatever it was, I had unusually high hopes for Detective Pikachu, and thankfully it did not disappoint this nostalgic fan.

While I was once an avid Pokémon player, I never played the Detective Pikachu spinoff game, so I didn’t have any preconceptions about the plot.  Justice Smith of Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom and Paper Towns (remember the Pokémon scene?) plays Tim Goodman, a young man with no interest in Pokémon who is nonetheless drawn into a mystery involving the powerful Mewtwo, his missing father, and his dad’s mysteriously talkative Pikachu. Plotwise, it’s nothing groundbreaking, but the mystery had enough twists and turns to be engaging and even some decent heart by the end. All the actors, from Bill Nighy as a wealthy industrialist to Kathryn Newton as an intrepid reporter named Lucy, give their utmost to the sometimes hammy proceedings, but Reynolds is clearly the source of star power, making the most of the script’s funny double entendres (aside from an eye-rollingly dumb gag about climate change).

I find it funny that there was such backlash against the “creepy” look of the live-action-ish Pokémon, because the effects are top-notch. It’s not easy for creatures with otherworldly powers and body proportions to look ostensibly real, but the effects team did an excellent job at bringing the 2D characters into furry, feathery, scaly life, as well as integrating them with the actual live-action characters and action scenes. It didn’t take long to get used to the visual style, making it just one of the film’s strengths. (On a side note, I was delighted that Kygo and Rita Ora contributed the song “Carry On,” which deserves placement in my End Credits Song Hall of Fame. Boy, that list needs some updating.)

The story doesn’t dwell on the whole “gotta catch ‘em all” motif, instead setting the action in a metropolis of peaceful coexistence, not unlike Zootopia. While the creatures are commonplace and treated as both partners and near-sentient wildlife, I wish there were even more of them on display. I fell away from the franchise after Generation IV, and with the mix of newer and older Pokémon featured, I’ll admit there were several I didn’t recognize. Yet, there were also plenty of originals for us original fans, from Charizard to Psyduck to an evolving Eevee (even the original Pokémon theme song too), so I commend the filmmakers for their equitable fan service.

I doubt those with no history with the Pokémon franchise will enjoy this movie as much as I did, but there’s still enough fun and creature cuteness/coolness to appeal to everyone on some level. And if I’d seen this as a kid, I would absolutely love it to pieces! As it is, Detective Pikachu proved to be a thoroughly endearing piece of effects-heavy family fun, especially for those who were ever in its target demographic. Luckily, that includes me.

Best line: (Lucy, describing a potential lead) “Down by the docks. Rough part of town, not the sorta place you wanna visit alone at night.”   (Tim, trying to impress her) “Well, I’m actually pretty good at being alone at night.”

 

Rank: List Runner-Up (could go up with future watches)

 

© 2019 S.G. Liput
642 Followers and Counting

 

Odd Thomas (2013)

Tags

Action, Comedy, Drama, Fantasy, Horror, Mystery, Thriller

(Today’s final NaPoWriMo prompt was for a minimalist poem, and since I can’t quite understand how one word could be a poem, I’ll at least end the month with a short couplet.)

Perish the thought
That the perished are naught.
__________________

MPAA rating: apparently Not Rated? (should be PG-13)

Odd Thomas is one of those movies that makes me wonder why it’s not more popular. A starring vehicle for Anton Yelchin three years before his untimely death, this horror-comedy-mystery hybrid is an overall fun watch that made me want to check out the Dean Koontz novels on which it is based.

Odd (Yelchin, and yes, that is his first name) is what I would imagine Haley Joel Osment’s psychic character from The Sixth Sense might grow up into, an everyday fry cook and oddball whose ability to see dead people aids in bringing justice to killers and peace to their victims. Further supported by a trusting detective (Willem Dafoe) and Odd’s devoted girlfriend Stormy (Addison Timlin), he also can see vicious spirits called bodachs who are attracted to evil, and when an especially large number appear in town, he knows some great calamity is close at hand.

This is yet another movie that floors me with how low its Rotten Tomatoes score is (a mere 36%) when I’d place it solidly in the 70s or 80s. I’ve read that some were annoyed by the lovey-dovey dialogue between Odd and Stormy, but they really make a cute couple so I don’t begrudge the film its bit of romance.

As for the horror-comedy side, those who enjoyed the mix in The Mummy will likely enjoy this one too, since Stephen Sommers directed and wrote both. The mystery is actually quite riveting, by the end especially, and finds a good balance between human evil and its supernatural side that only Odd can see. With its tepid reviews and the loss of its lead actor, it’s a shame that Odd Thomas will probably never get the sequel it deserves. It’s the kind of film I can see putting on every time it’s on TV, and I gladly will.

Best line: (Odd) “I see dead people, but then, by God, I do something about it.”

 

Rank: List Runner-Up

 

© 2019 S.G. Liput
628 Followers and Counting

 

VC Pick: Murder on the Orient Express (2017)

Tags

Drama, Mystery, Thriller, VC Pick

(Today’s NaPoWriMo prompt was for a poem featuring repetition, so I took inspiration from a form called the pantoum, wherein the second and fourth lines are reused as the first and third in the following stanza. I don’t think I’ve written one before, so it was fun trying it out.)

 

There’s death at our feet now and guilt in the air.
We wince at the wrong the once righteous have done.
The taking of life is a fearful affair,
Not easily halted once it has begun.

We wince at the wrong the once righteous have done,
But justice is fast on the heels of the crime,
Not easily halted once it has begun
And knowing that truth is a matter of time.

Yes, justice is fast on the heels of the crime
And eager that evil be dragged from its lair.
We know that the truth is a matter of time.
There’s death at our feet now and guilt in the air.
__________________

MPAA rating:  PG-13

My VC has recently become enamored of all things murder mystery. She’s gobbled up mystery novels by the series, and is currently making her way through innocuous but likable Hallmark mysteries. So of course, we had to check out one of the most famous mysteries of them all, Mystery on the Orient Express, specifically Kenneth Branagh’s rendition of the acclaimed Agatha Christie novel.

I’ll admit up front that I did actually know whodunit (it’s a famous story, after all), but my VC didn’t. And even though I knew the ultimate answer to the mystery, I couldn’t recall all the details and motivations. This is also the only film version I’ve seen, and it delivered its eloquent twists admirably, with a stunningly crafted setting against a snowy mountainside.

Branagh is an excellent Hercule Poirot, even if his handlebar mustache and OCD tendencies are a bit over the top, and he’s joined by a laudable collection of worthy actors/suspects, including Michelle Pfeiffer, Willem Dafoe, Penélope Cruz, Daisy Ridley, Josh Gad, Lucy Boynton, Derek Jacobi, Leslie Odom Jr. (of Hamilton fame), and Johnny Depp as the disreputable victim discovered murdered on the fateful 1930s train ride. I was also amused at the “coincidental” casting of Judi Dench alongside Olivia Colman, both of whom have Oscars for playing British queens, with Colman’s obviously coming after this movie.

Beyond the who’s who of talent, the film is also sumptuously shot, merging the feel of a classic with the polished cinematography and inventive camerawork of a modern auteur. Its ultimate resolution doesn’t really lend itself to a satisfying end (at least my VC thought not), but it’s true to what I recall about the original story, with its final open-ended theme meant to leave the audience pondering right and wrong. While it’s not the Oscar contender I thought it might be before its release (though still much better than its 59% Rotten Tomatoes score indicates), Mystery on the Orient Express is well-mounted and well-acted enough to please most fans of a good murder mystery. I’m looking forward to its sequel based on Death on the Nile, which incidentally I know nothing about and plan to keep it that way until 2020.

Best line: (Poirot) “I am of an age where I know what I like and what I do not like. What I like, I enjoy enormously. What I dislike, I cannot abide.”

 

Rank:  List Runner-Up

 

© 2019 S.G. Liput
627 Followers and Counting

 

Annihilation (2018)

Tags

Drama, Horror, Mystery, Sci-fi, Thriller

(Today’s NaPoWriMo prompt was for a spooky and mysterious poem. Of course, I could have used either of the movies from the last two days, but this one works too, with its theme of unchecked change hopefully providing the chill factor I was going for.)

The world is changing before my eyes,
And what a surprise
To notice mutations that God never tried
That eons would normally cover and hide.

That tree over there was not always a tree.
Nor was that creature that lurks in its shade.
Should I be afraid?
For I know what they are,
But what kind of people did they use to be?

Betrayed by their cells, too minute to resist,
They changed and exchanged what had made them exist.
What monsters are born from a change so extreme,
A mutable dream
Where men were not always the beasts that they seem?

Are questions of sanity signs that you’re sane?
Just being here mixes unease in my brain.
For I’m not immune;
My own skin’s a cocoon.
When it hatches, how much of myself will remain?
____________________

MPAA Rating: R (for some language and gruesome violence)

From the trailers, Annihilation looked like the kind of movie to follow in the footsteps of Arrival with its slow-burn, high-concept science fiction. Or maybe that’s just what I wished it was. It’s actually closer in spirit to 2001: A Space Odyssey, and while most critics considered that a point in Annihilation’s favor, it’s not for me.

Natalie Portman plays a cellular biologist and ex-soldier named Lena, who recounts her story to a hazmat-suit-wearing Benedict Wong. After her soldier husband Kane (Oscar Isaac) disappears on a mission, he returns a year later changed and distant, and Lena soon learns where he has been: a forested region of Florida, where a shimmering, expanding wall has puzzled scientists and swallowed any team sent to investigate it. Along with a head psychologist (Jennifer Jason Leigh), a paramedic (Gina Rodriguez), a physicist (Tessa Thompson), and a geomorphologist (Tuva Novotny), Lena enters “the Shimmer” in an effort to unravel its mysteries.

I’ll admit writer-director Alex Garland’s Annihilation has the high acting and production standards that modern sci-fi deserves, and it’s a home run at least on a visual level. The set-up is superbly intriguing, and Lena’s journey into the Shimmer is buoyed by the allure of the unknown. Signals and light are unexplainably altered. Monsters and strange species lurk out of sight. The evidence they find of Kane’s mission challenges their sanity.

It’s Alien-level tension and uncertainty (or at least Prometheus-level), but all this mystery has to lead somewhere for it to be worthwhile, and Annihilation’s ending is just too ambiguous for its own good. That’s where the comparisons to 2001 ring true, with the largely wordless climax playing out like a fever dream of compelling but nebulous menace. In the end, though, its unanswered questions just left me puzzled by its enigmatic lack of resolution.

It’s odd that this would be my gripe when I commended the ambiguity of The Endless just a couple days ago. I guess The Endless was open to interpretation in a way that suggested a complexity that was justifiably out of reach (and at least the main plot got some resolution), whereas Annihilation seemed more intentionally esoteric, like a puzzle where the writer was hiding pieces from you and chuckling at his own shrewdness. Maybe that makes no sense, and maybe others will enjoy the film’s mind-twisting, but Annihilation left me unsatisfied, just as my VC was left unsatisfied by the novel on which it was based (and by all the changes made by the filmmakers). I enjoyed the set-up, but not where it led. With its middling box office returns, they may or may not adapt the other books in the series, but either way, I’m not sure the resolution is worth caring about.

Best line: (Dr. Ventress) “Then, as a psychologist, I think you’re confusing suicide with self-destruction. Almost none of us commit suicide, and almost all of us self-destruct. In some way, in some part of our lives. We drink, or we smoke, we destabilize the good job… and a happy marriage. But these aren’t decisions, they’re… they’re impulses. In fact, you’re probably better equipped to explain this than I am.”
(Lena) “What does that mean?”
(Ventress) “You’re a biologist. Isn’t the self-destruction coded into us? Programmed into each cell?”

 

Rank: Dishonorable Mention

 

© 2019 S.G. Liput
625 Followers and Counting

 

Psycho 2 (1983)

Tags

Horror, Mystery

(Today’s NaPoWriMo prompt was for a poem about loving something dull, so I gave it a bit of a deranged spin, courtesy of Norman Bates.)

It’s just a wig, a ratty thing,
Gray from age and gray from dust,
And yet I cannot help but cling
To something I distrust.

It was my mother’s once, you know;
A hoary halo round her head,
And now no matter where I go,
I see it even though she’s dead.

To keep it still makes her feel close.
Morbid maybe? Yes, it’s true.
But I’m a quite obliging host,
And when I don it out of view…

Hello, Mother, how are you?
______________________________

MPAA rating: R (stronger language and violence than the original, plus brief nudity)

For those who may think that Hollywood’s resurrection of decades-old franchises for the sake of a sequel no one asked for was a recent trend, I will simply point to Psycho II, released 23 years after Hitchcock’s original (not to mention Psycho III three years later and Psycho IV four years after that). I think that the ’80s really kicked off the horror course of endless sequels, and Psycho was just one of many to get that treatment. While this long-delayed follow-up doesn’t compare with Hitchcock’s masterpiece, it’s a tight little slasher mystery in its own right.

Twenty-two years after the events of Psycho, Norman Bates (Anthony Perkins reprising the role) is supposedly rehabilitated and released from an insane asylum, much to the chagrin of Lila Loomis (Vera Drake), who still despises Bates for the murder of her sister Marion Crane. Getting a job at a nearby diner, Norman returns to his motel and the house from the first film, but after befriending a beautiful young coworker (Meg Tilly), he finds himself struggling with his sanity, especially as the body count mysteriously rises.

Psycho II really tries to humanize Norman, making him sympathetic as he wonders whether he can trust his own mind, and Anthony Perkins manages it better than any actor taking his place could have. The mystery of Psycho has become too ingrained in pop culture for it to have much shock value anymore, but Psycho II keeps the characters and audience guessing what’s real and what’s psychosis. I’m rather disappointed in how one character is changed for the sake of the plot, right down to the gruesome way they’re dispatched. Otherwise, though, the mystery has decent twists and performances and even a little dark humor, making Psycho II better than I would expect from a film cashing in on Hitchcock’s legacy.

Best line: (Norman) “Well, I’ll tell you. When I was little, I had a fight with my mother, so I put some poison in her tea, you know. But I’m all right now.”
(Mary) “You sure?”
(Norman) “Sure! Otherwise, they wouldn’t give me a job at a diner, would they?”
(Mary) “I don’t know; it takes a nut to work there.”

 

Rank: Honorable Mention

 

© 2019 S.G. Liput
624 Followers and Counting

 

The Endless (2018)

Tags

Drama, Horror, Mystery, Sci-fi

(Today’s NaPoWriMo prompt was for a poem of origin, so, inspired by the time loops in this film, I focused on how where we’re going might mirror where we’ve been.)

Is darkness our friend?
They say we came from darkness.

We’ve grown up searching for the light
From friends both fickle and contrite,
From dogs that lick and dogs that bite,
And lies that distance and unite.

It feels as though our life’s a loop,
A track so many have run before,
From more to less and less to more,
And ere our ship returns to shore,
Our time is short, but we explore.

The light’s the loop,
The dark’s the end,
They say we’re headed for darkness.
Is darkness still our friend?
____________________

MPAA rating:  Not Rated (R for the language and some violence, though there’s much worse out there)

Not being a huge fan of horror, I’ll admit I’m not very familiar with the works of H.P. Lovecraft, a name I’ve noticed becoming more and more popular lately. What constitutes Lovecraftian horror is new to me, but from what I understand, it deals with terrifying cosmic powers beyond the scope of human understanding, or basically fear of the unknowable. If that’s right, The Endless might be the best example I’ve seen, a fascinating and slow-burning mystery with an undercurrent of paranoia and weirdness.

Two brothers Justin and Aaron (played by Justin Benson and Aaron Moorhead, who also directed and split work on writing, editing, and cinematography) are struggling with normal life some years after escaping from a so-called “UFO death cult” out in the desert. Aaron remembers their time there as one of stability and plenty and wishes to return, and, though Justin is dead-set against it, he agrees to briefly visit their former home after a mysterious video arrives. Strangely, very little seems to have changed, but the longer the brothers stay, the more uncanny events seem to happen, portending a great danger that might be inescapable.

I won’t pretend to claim that I completely understood the film’s plot, but The Endless is well-acted and has intrigue to spare, with mysteries and fear piling on top of each other and most of the questions left largely unanswered by the end. Yet it’s very much a case of what you don’t see being scarier than what you do; there’s not really any nightmarish imagery, more foreboding and unease. A prime example is when the brothers are invited to pull on a rope as one of the community’s confidence exercises. The rope stretches off into the darkness as each person plays tug-of-war with something, with the chill factor coming from the lack of knowing what that something is.

As the film goes on, it enters a wilder side of science fiction, with time loops and fractured dimensions that challenge the mind and don’t provide easy answers, if any, but through it all, the brotherly bond between Justin and Aaron proves to be a strong human element to ground the craziness. I’m curious now to check out one of Benson and Moorhead’s previous films called Resolution, which apparently expands on one of the subplots from this movie, or vice versa. (Fans of theirs were no doubt happy to spot the connection.)

Like Chronesthesia, The Endless is an example of multitasking filmmakers making the most of a limited budget and delivering a surprisingly solid product; the special effects are especially well-done for an independent film. It’s also one of those movies worth rewatching and discussing with others, if only to understand it better, though perhaps that lack of full comprehension is both the point and the appeal.

Best line: (an anonymous quote displayed at the beginning) “Friends tell each other how they feel with relative frequency. Siblings wait for a more convenient time, like their deathbeds.”

 

Rank: List Runner-Up

 

© 2019 S.G. Liput
622 Followers and Counting