Axiom's Edge Science Fiction and Fantasy

Defying Gravity may be part soap opera, but it ultimately gives us a strong, character-driven science fiction tale.

By John J. Joex

Rating: 4 out of 5 Stars

THIS REVIEW CONTAINS SOME SPOILERS

Way back in August, 2009 I ran a review of ABC’s Summer replacement series Defying Gravity in which I noted that its mixture of soap opera elements with realistic space travel gave us an interesting show that did not always quite work because of the disparate genres it tried to fuse.  I wrote that review after having seen four episodes of the show but then found that my opinion of the show improved as it progressed.  However, ABC yanked the series from its schedule after its eighth episode (claiming that to be its “season finale”) and American audiences did not get a chance to see how the show’s first season really ended.  Now Defying Gravity has made it to DVD, though, and with the chance to view the entire run I can see this series ultimately managed to soar and unfortunately was cut short before it could provide a more satisfying conclusion.

As I mentioned in my first review, the show gave us a heavy dose of soap opera early on as it alternated between the space mission that provided the core story and flashbacks to the training program the astronauts participated in which led to the selection of the final eight crew members.  However, the series focus began to shift as it progressed, and the writers began to work more science fiction elements (including the story of the mysterious Beta) into the mix.   In fact, it really started to pick up steam right as ABC lost faith in it and pulled the show off the air, and the story from Episode 8 (the last to air in the United States) to the series finale gave us a truly excellent and at times thought-provoking piece of science fiction.  In fact, we find out that some of the side-stories introduced early on that look like just soap opera asides to justify throwing in some gratuitous sex scenes actually provided an integral part of the bigger story (particularly Zoe’s abortion and how Gamma used that as a driving force to get her to complete her mission on Venus).

So yes, the writers threw in a lot of soap opera elements, and yes that was probably designed to boost the ratings (didn’t work, though), but ultimately they masterfully worked many of these into the over-arching storyline which leaned heavily toward science fiction (or you could even say speculative fiction).  And personally, I could deal with the soap opera elements.  They came a bit heavy early on, but then the writers started to balance out that and the science fiction elements as the series progressed.  And you have to admit that they gave us a very believable look at how we might explore the solar system in the near future both on a technological and personal level (if you are going to put men and women in confined quarters for an extended period of time, you have to address the implications of their biological urges).   And if you think about it, we have had very few television shows that give us anything approaching a hard science take on how space travel would happen (Ronald Moore’s failed pilot from last year, Virtuality, took a similar stab at the concept but also went nowhere with the networks).

In truth, this show was not a good fit for the broadcast networks.  Even though it was pitched as “Grey’s Anatomy in space” (with GA as one of ABC’s tentpole shows), it’s a bit difficult for the average viewer to digest.  And the soap opera elements probably turned off many science fiction fans, especially since they played up that angle more heavily at the onset.  This probably would have been a good fit for Syfy, though.  That channel does not demand the higher ratings numbers that the broadcast networks expect and with their recent rebranding they have been trying to court a larger female audience.  This one could have lured that demographic if given the time it needed to establish itself and grow.  That never happened on ABC, though, and the series did poorly in its international broadcasts as well thus dooming it to a single season that truncated the story it had just started to get rolling.

I highly recommend this DVD set to science fiction fans.  While you may struggle through the early episodes, stick with it and you will be rewarded.  And my rating above is based more heavily on the later episodes, as well as the general impression the series left with me.  True, this one strays into soap opera at times, but count that as the tariff for the excellent core story that delivers a strong, character-driven science fiction tale.

Buy Defying Gravity on DVD from Amazon.com:

By Sam Christopher

Rating: 2 out of 5 Stars

One of the nice things about being deathly ill (okay, so it’s not really that bad even though there were times you couldn’t have convinced me of that) is the chance to meet people outside one’s normal sphere. One of the other patients at the “IA Parties” (Intravenous Antibiotics) has become a pretty good buddy. We went to see Zombieland and Paranormal Activity together (and he scared the daylights out of a couple teenage girls sitting behind us at the end of PA, after the screen went dark) and I’m reasonably sure we’ll see some other stuff together in the future. And then there is the doctor’s staff, one of which leant to me and talked me into watching the film that is the subject of this review. We’ll call her “Felicia” (because that’s her name). I think Felicia’s main job at the doctor’s office is to make the patients feel at ease. She’s very nice (except when she pulls tape off of you—whew!) and easy to get along with. Don’t get me wrong, everyone at this doctor’s office is great, and I do mean everyone. But Felicia’s in a category all her own in the “up” department, always smiling (especially when pulling tape off of you) and positive, which can’t be easy with nothing but sick people around all the time. Sick people moaning and groaning—except for me, of course, I’m always a joy to be around when I’m sick.

But back to the review at hand. One of the first things I remember hearing Felicia talk about around the office was the new Twilight: New Moon sequel coming out, and when she heard that I review things like this she asked me what I thought of Twilight. I said I’d never seen it; after all, I’m not a 14-year-old girl. She told me I should really give it a chance and I reiterated that I was the wrong age and sex to be interested in a teen love story masquerading as a vampire film. But she was fairly persistent so I decided to give it a watch, not expecting much at all from it. But, I told myself, I’d never watched any of the Harry Potter films either and I enjoyed this latest one enough to want to see the earlier ones. So she brought me the two-disc version (I think it was the “Edward Makes Me Swoon” Special Edition, but I’m not sure) and I took it home. Now, I’d like to point out here that I’ve never had anyone over the age of 16 tell me this was a good film (other than Paul on this site who was dragged to see it by his—you guessed it—daughter, and he just said it was better than he expected). In the way of a review here I can only say– again– I am simply not the target audience for this picture. I don’t read romance novels, and I don’t watch romance films for the most part. That takes care of the story. I also thought the acting was pedestrian. But the film isn’t bad, I just don’t think it’s very good. A verdict, by the way, which will deter not a single teen from dragging their father to see the sequels (they already have the third film planned for release next June, I believe), nor anyone who does enjoy romance pictures from seeing what is ostensibly a “Smallville-ized” version of Dark Shadows.

The whole story revolves around a “coven” of vampires that apparently settled in the area that became Forks, Wa., after reaching an uneasy non-aggression pact with the local Amerinds who are descended from the vampire’s natural enemy, the werewolf (which doesn’t remind anyone of Underworld, I guess). All of this is explained in the film by Jacob Black, a local teen (more on him below). A high school girl, Bella, moves to town from Phoenix, Az. and falls madly in love with the centuries-old teen vamp, Edward Cullen. He intros her to his “family” of “vegetarian vampires”, so-called because they only drink animal blood (has PETA heard about these folks yet?) and they proceed to have a family outing consisting mostly of a baseball game until three nomadic vamps show up. These new vamps are real predators which have no compunctions about murdering people and Bella and Edward end up on the run… And I won’t say anymore simply because if something about Twilight: New Moon, or even the next one Twilight: Eclipse, catches your fancy you should watch this film.

And if you’ve seen the “Team Edward” and “Team Jacob” shirts and such around now you understand. I saw one somewhere that explains my position better than I can: I’m Team Dracula, because Vampires Don’t Sparkle.

Buy Twilight on DVD from Amazon.com:

J.J. Abrams ventures into the final frontier with a new cast

By Carl Lawrence

Rating: 3 ½ out of 5 Stars

WARNING: THIS REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS

I have a number of problems with the plot of this film, not the least of which is its seemingly, on the surface at least, erasing of all prior original series-related canon, which is in fact its greatest sin, and its overall implications don’t even stop there because it renders virtually all subsequent modern Trek mythology established in later shows null and void as well. That amounts to hundreds of episodes and ten movies rendered completely moot by virtue of their being undone. I never in my wildest dreams would have thought I would ever say this, but this is worse than if they were to have resurrected Kirk from the dead post-Generations the way a contingent of the fan base had been pining for over a period of many years because the implications here in contrast are much more far-reaching. J.J. Abrams and his two writers, along with Leonard Nimoy, have stated in interviews that what takes place in this movie occurs in an alternate universe. However, the clear evidence attesting to that is lacking in the film itself. My review will therefore proceed taking that into account for what it is: an absence of hard and credible evidence.

In terms of action, the film opens well. Nero, the Romulan Captain of a ship called the Narada, emerges from the future and into the past, initially without his even realizing it. In a rage over having just witnessed the destruction of his planet in his own era, he attacks the first ship he sees: a Federation Starship (the USS Kelvin) that also carries Kirk’s father and his pregnant mother. The Captain of the Kelvin is instructed to beam aboard Nero’s ship during the assault and Kirk’s father is placed in command. As a result of the peril at hand, Winona Kirk goes into labor as the ship is being evacuated and Kirk’s father sacrifices himself and the ship in order for the crew to escape safely. High intensity action and I couldn’t help but notice the striking resemblance of the escape shuttles to the shuttles seen in the original series –a nod and homage of a sort that I really liked and appreciated.

Jump-shot to Kirk as a boy racing a 20th century Corvette recklessly over the side of a cliff just after being warned by his stepfather not to damage the prized vehicle. The young lad barely makes it out of the classic sports car in time and pulls himself up from the side of the cliff as the automobile crashes to the bottom of the canyon. I can understand some boyish impetuousness, but this is just plain crazy. Kirk’s mother is never seen again. His stepfather is never shown and never heard from again, and this standalone scene can almost be edited out of the film entirely, but it does help set the stage for the older Kirk we’re about to meet, who—to put it mildly—still has issues.

He hits on the first girl he sees in the next scene, which happens to be Uhura, and in his bold inebriated stupor then proceeds to pick a fight with four Starfleet cadets, asserting that they’re short on muscle to put him in his place. Pine is good in the role, and this is an angrier Kirk than we’ve come to know up until now, with the underlying reason for his defiant rage a result of the absence of the father he never got to know and who wasn’t there to raise him. (This becomes clearer later in the movie when he meets the elder Spock and specifically asks him if he ever knew his father in the other timeline that Spock came from.)

Overall the stage is set and the film doesn’t waste any more time on Kirk’s misspent youth. Pike sits down and has a father-son type talk with him following the bar fight and manages to convince him to join Starfleet. Initially I had some reservations about Bruce Greenwood in the role of Pike, but he does a fine job. What happens with his character ultimately, as with all the main characters, is another matter entirely, however.

As we met up with Kirk as a young lad, so too is the case for Spock as well, who has a bad encounter on his home planet, Vulcan, with full-blooded Vulcan boys intent on tormenting him into showing human anger and emotion resulting from his mixed heritage. This is certainly consistent with what we already know about the character’s background and childhood, but what follows later in his early adulthood is not. These two principal characters—Kirk and Spock—meet in Starfleet Academy following Kirk’s having cheated on the Kobayashi Maru Test, which, as it turns out here, had been designed, or at the very least maintained by Spock. The original series and big screen features in no way indicates anything like this, and the writers rely here on vagueness and a lack of implication in those prior films to reach this contrivance. And while Kirk’s life up to this point has taken some very different turns than what he had experienced in the original unaltered timeline, Spock’s existence appears to have gone unaffected up to this point for the most part, seemingly consistent in both.

Here is where things begin to get hairy again, however, because unbeknownst to all, and what Kirk will shortly figure out is that Nero has lurked about quietly for the last quarter of a century and decides that it is now time to re-emerge finally. Another contrivance, and instead of taking a more logical course by having Nero’s ship disappear into the black hole that hurled him into the past immediately following the destruction of the Kelvin, only to have him reappear again twenty-five years later, with it being only mere moments to him and his crew, writers Robeto Orci and Alex Kurtzman choose to have them skulking around in the shadows for that period of time waiting for Spock to appear. One wonders why Nero’s crew would remain steadfast and loyal throughout all that time, and even though they’re Romulans, who like their Vulcan cousins have a considerably longer lifespan than human beings, it is nevertheless somewhat remarkable that Nero and his crew show no signs of age nonetheless compared to how they look when they’re first encountered at the beginning of the movie.

Quinto does a fairly adequate job as Spock, but his portrayal is very different from Nimoy’s in the original series or the movies that followed. While we shouldn’t have expected nor hoped for simple impersonations by any of these actors in their respective roles, it’s more noticeable in Quinto’s case that the performance varies from his original counterpart because Nimoy is in the movie, which also serves as an unintentional reminder. Some of what Quinto does in the role is also very out of character, such as stranding acting First Officer Kirk on the inhospitable far side of planet Delta Vega (nice nod to “Where No Man Has Gone Before,” though seemingly inaccurate nonetheless), and damn near getting him killed as a result. And while the planet harkens back to the second pilot episode of the original series, where it was Spock’s recommendation to strand Gary Mitchell (who is nowhere to be found here interestingly enough) once he began developing superior god-like powers, and thereby endangering the ship, young Kirk is hardly the same kind of threat here in contrast, although events leading up to this perpetrated by Nero could be deemed enough for Spock to behave in a seemingly irrational manner. Nevertheless, it still amounts to a lot for Kirk to forgive once he makes his way back to the Enterprise.

It’s on Delta Vega that Kirk meets the elder Spock as he runs for his life into a cave from a giant predator. (I guess we’re supposed to chalk this “chance meeting” that defies astronomical odds up to “fate.”) From there the two meet up with Scotty, who, in addition to being awkwardly brilliant, is intended for comic relief more than ever before in the annals of Trekdom, which incidentally, no longer matters a darn anyway as previously pointed out. Upon their return to the Enterprise, young Kirk follows through on elder Spock’s instruction to expose Spock the younger as being emotionally compromised after the destruction of the Vulcan home world by Nero, and in doing so the writers blow an excellent opportunity to show the shrewd and cunning side of Kirk and his ability to outsmart Spock-the-younger at a critical moment by having Kirk remove Spock from command after his outburst instead of Spock removing himself. I guess they felt they were being true to the Spock character here by having him realize the extent to which he is emotionally compromised right away rather than it taking a little longer for him to realize it, but it would have provided a great distinction between the two characters had it been handled the way I just suggested instead while also helping to illustrate why of the two it is Kirk who actually belongs in the command chair.

At least with The Wrath of Khan there was the strong sense of a continuing saga, with an old familiar foe coming to exact vengeance. Here, however, the villain appears out of nowhere, and with undo prejudice proceeds to wipe out all of established canon in the blink of an eye, basically telling longtime fans of the franchise of all stripes to just forget about all they’ve watched for the last forty-plus years because none of it matters any longer. (Should that be viewed as an appreciation of the fan base, or as a slap in their collective group of faces?)

The film’s climax, while exhilarating to many, was in many respects nothing we haven’t already seen before, which is why it fell somewhat flat for me, although points for showing the Enterprise firing scores of high intensity bursts, very atypical of what longtime fans are accustomed to seeing, are in fact well deserved. However, the movie ends on a note not consistent with the characters we have come to know, especially in the case of the elder Spock, who never would have stood for the destruction of his home world. The Spock we know would have convinced young Kirk to help him undo the damage that had been done by Nero by their going back in time to change a course of events that was never intended in the first place as evidenced by the original timeline (and deep down this is something Kirk also knows to be true from a much more personal standpoint). That’s just basic “Star Trek 101” – we’ve seen it many times before in similar situations, and the rest of the new Enterprise crew here would have agreed to help restore things to their natural order simply because it was the right thing to do. Kirk’s father need not have died in vain as a result, nor the six billion inhabitants on Vulcan, not to mention their future generations that had been deprived of ever being born as a result of Nero’s actions, none of which was ever meant to be. Genocide on a scale so massive that it is almost inconceivable is instead allowed to stand.

Star Trek has always been about hope –hope for mankind, hope for our future, but with that ending, hope is in very short supply and hard to come by …to say the least.

…And if it all really does take place in an alternate universe as Abrams, Orci, and Kurtzman have been saying for the better part of a year at this point, they really should make that irrefutably and abundantly clear in the sequel so that there is no longer any doubt.

Order Star Trek and Other New Release Science Fiction and Fantasy Movies from Amazon.com. And go to this link for the Top 100 upcoming and recent releases.:

By Sam Christopher

Rating: 2 out of 5 Stars

Not awful, just nothing special.

I’ve never been a big fan of remakes, or sequels for that matter, especially of cult or low-budget classics. Don’t get me wrong, some of them, like the Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake of ’04, work out fine but—and I think this is especially true when talking about cult classics—there’s something about the time in which a film is made that adds to its effect. There’s a quality to the storytelling, to the film as a whole, that usually suffers from being taken out of the context in which it was originally made. Even the aforementioned Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake, while definitely a worthy effort and a good film on its own, doesn’t rise to the level of just plain weirdness that permeates the nearly bloodless original. The 1990 remake of Night of the Living Dead was also a good film but still somehow never found a way to capture the sense of gloom and doom that made the original a classic, while ‘04’s Dawn of the Dead went a wholly different route, changing the parameters of the story such that it became an action-adventure film more than a horror story—something along the lines of what James Cameron did with 1986’s Aliens, sequel to Ridley Scott’s darker horror film, Alien (which always seemed a kind of remake of It! The Terror from Beyond Space which is showing on Hulu.com at the time of this writing if you’ve never seen it).

This remake of the excellent 1974 film of the same name, a remake co-written by the original’s creator Larry Cohen, just didn’t have the verve of the original. The quirky characters and situations he had created so deftly for the earlier version are here eschewed for a more traditional “monster movie” approach. The parents are just parents, there’s nothing about them that really stands out beyond the mother’s descent into madness as the story progresses and the body count mounts. And that’s the main problem with everything in this film: nothing anywhere really stands out. In the original, just for illustration, the baby is hardly ever shown; we’re only given glimpses here and there and that’s all right—by the end of the film the viewer hardly notices that he never really got a good look at the monster. Here, they hid the child for most of the film again, only this time it was annoying as there’s not enough else to occupy the viewer’s mind. There’s never any real mystery about what’s going to happen or to who—you see someone arguing with the mother you can’t help but think “Ding, ding, ding, ding—VICTIM!” At least the characters aren’t all instantly dislikable—as in the Friday the 13th remake or the Rob Zombie Halloween films—but not hating them doesn’t mean the same as caring about them.

The effects are all right, again typical modern monster movie bloodbath type stuff, and the plot plods along till the credits roll. I wasn’t really thrilled with the ending but I guess it made as much sense as any other would have. There seemed to be a subplot, very underdeveloped if it really was there, about the mother having some psychic connection to the child. It may have just been a played up version of mother-son bonding but sometimes it seemed like there was something more to it than even that. I may be reading too much into it, though. If it had been shown to be the case that there was something else going on—the kid is completely different from other children in other ways, wouldn’t have been that much of a stretch—it might have made more of the plot better. But, in fairness, it might also have made everything worse, too, so I suppose it’s just as well.

See also Sam Christopher’s review of the first three It’s Alive movies

Buy the It’s Alive Movies at Amazon.com:

By Sam Christopher

Rating: 2 out of 5 Stars

First of all. I just can’t buy it. I didn’t believe it when they did it in the comics, and I don’t see any way this could possibly happen. I see no way that Lex Luthor is ever elected President of the US. Don’t get me wrong, from what I’ve seen in the last three or four elections I can believe the American public capable of all manner of idiocy when it comes to politics, but this one I could just never buy into. He’s just tried to murder Superman a few too many times for my taste. And done it pretty publicly. During a campaign—and they skim over that nicely here, as I guess they had to for time—candidates are asked all manner of questions from all manner of people and I find it hard to believe that no one would ask Luthor about his past, especially with reporters like Lois Lane walking around, or that he would have as glib an answer for that as he would for questions about, say, the economy.

And then there are the heroes who take his side here. Power Girl, who has a history and Kryptonian connection with Superman (at least in the DCU—sort of), and Black Lightning, who has a history with Metropolis, I can see joining the crew only if they do so with the purpose of watching Lex. “Keep your friends close and your enemies closer” and all that. Captain Atom joining Lex’s super-team also makes sense because he’s always been more soldier than super-hero and serving whoever is the POTUS is as logical for him as it is for Secret Service agents. Major Force is a villain so that makes sense, and I don’t know what the rationale is for having Katana, but okay. But BL doesn’t seem to have any reservations about serving Luthor and PG doesn’t either at first. The first time we see any of them actually doing anything in the picture, when the Captain, Major, and Kara go to talk with Superman and try and get him to come to their side—after Luthor has apparently saved the economy, brought down crime, and rid the world of war (a President did all that in a few months?)—Atom talking about Supes having an ego-problem because he doesn’t trust Luthor is really a “Huh?! What?!?” moment.

And I’m not even going to get into the “Armageddon Guide to Physics” we have here.

It’s just that these are supposed to be made for a more adult audience and I think even teens will see through a lot of this. It just doesn’t fly without a lot more setup, and they didn’t have time for that here. As with the first DC Animated DVD, Superman/Doomsday, we would have been much better served with, say, a trilogy of hour and a half films telling one big story. I’ve never understood why Warner doesn’t do that, instead of these watered down versions of popular stories from the comics. A one-shot film makes sense for origin stories but bigger stories need bigger, more elaborate setup, which takes more time. Take the aforementioned Superman/Doomsday: It was okay, but wouldn’t it have been better as a three-part story, with The Death of Superman/World Without a Superman/The Return of Superman in three movements with all the other heroes and plot threads they could fit in from the original stories? If they could do it live-action with Lord of the Rings why not animated with the DCU?

This film is okay to watch; I just think they could have done so much more with it, that’s all.

Buy Superman/Batman: Public Enemies from Amazon.com:

By Sam Christopher

Rating: 1 ½ out of 5 Stars

The important things to remember here, class, is that teens are annoying no matter what time period they’re from and that Jason is the Grim Reaper of Teens. And anyone else who gets in the way. And Jason is completely unstoppable—well, mostly unstoppable—in the course of his duties. The story’s always the same: Jason don’t cotton to disrespectful young’uns playin’ that loud hippie music while smokin’ them left-handed cigarettes and havin’ premarital relations, but he has a cure for it. And, since teens apparently don’t know how to do anything other than play awful music, do drugs and have sex with each other, that cure is dispensed liberally throughout these films.

Point: I understand there are certain rules that these films must follow, which means there are certain events and gaps in logic one must anticipate when viewing them. I’ve seen every one of them now so I know. I say that with no pride; I think it says something… sad… about me that I’ve seen them all. In my defense, I have seen several at parties, when I was a teenager and I was playing that loud hippie music and smoking… well, never mind—this isn’t about me [editor: queue the creepy music . . . ]. In these films it’s always important to remember that Jason is a magical creature capable of anything, the original Friday the 13th being the only exception. That film was about Jason’s mother, who had lost her mind as a result of his drowning and thought she should kill all the camp counselors before they allowed another child to die. She had no powers other than ruthlessness and the element of surprise and could have easily been taken out by anyone with a weapon and the will to use it. This new film shows the very end of the first one in its first few minutes, with Nana Visitor (Major Kira Nerys from Star Trek: Deep Space Nine) as Pamela Voorhees. Jason sees his mother get killed and—y’know, now I’m wondering why he didn’t just go to his mother in the first place if he was all right; I mean, the whole point was that they were especially close, right? Then why wouldn’t he just run out and hug her rather than watch her fighting the girl? I guess that’s just an “it’s in the script” moment. Like a lot of the kills and the end (if you’ve seen any of these you should know how it ends). Truth is, the only problem I ever have with these films is how anyone survives at all, and why the FBI never gets into all the disappearances of kids. I would also think the place would be crawling with angry parents, too.

But the above is mostly for the franchise as a whole. This film, made by an amalgam of the folks who produced the Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake and the writing team from Freddie vs. Jason, has its own problems. Besides the limitations mentioned above, there were two moments I just couldn’t accept. Early on Jared Padalecki’s (from tv’s Supernatural) character is shown going through the town around Crystal Lake with “missing person” flyers—about his missing sister, not the ‘80s band—and the sheriff stops him and tells him there’s no use; “I put two ten-year veterans on the case,” he says. Two detectives of ten years found no trace of Jason around the woods, or the field of marijuana growing there—which was the only reason the teens were out there in the first place? And what about the other disappearances the old woman Padalecki runs into talks about? No traces of anything? Really? I let you guys slide when it comes to Jason, you gotta give me something here.

Which leads us into the second thing, also concerning Padalecki. Throughout the film, Jason never has any problem killing anyone. If he gets his hands on you, we’re shown, unless you look like his mother in that locket he has—long story—you’re dead. So, when he snatches Padalecki up and slams him repeatedly into the on-its-side bus—another long story—I felt pretty safe in assuming… but I’d be wrong! Not only is Padalecki not dead, his “injuries” from this vicious beating amount to a boo-boo on his forehead. Maybe he had that “LL Cool J rider” in his contract; you know, the one that says no matter what they show on the screen the character isn’t allowed to die.

I know I shouldn’t be looking for any logic at all here but I just can’t help it. Unlike science fiction, which I hold to a much higher standard logic-wise than horror, I don’t expect everything to make sense but some things should.

Buy Friday the 13th on DVD from Amazon.com:

By Sam Christopher

Rating: 2 out of 5 Stars

It’s hard to believe two things about this film, before watching it. The first is that I hadn’t seen it until last night. I remember the ad campaign and thinking how great it looked. It had Thomas Jane and that guy from Homicide: Life on the Streets (Andre Braugher) in it, and even William Sadler, from The Shawshank Redemption. I didn’t know at the time that this was directed by Frank Darabont, who it turns out wanted to make this film before Shawshank—luckily, that didn’t happen. The other thing that amazes me is that this came out only two years ago; it just seems like it’s been out forever.

The film is an adaptation of a Stephen King novella from 1980, which chronicles a group of people trapped in a grocery store enshrouded by a mysterious fog that hides all manner of fantastic creatures which evidently have the sole aim of slaughtering everything in their path. One of the best things about the film is the beginning, with the violent storm, and just a little bit further on with the coming of the mist itself and the building of suspense. A man from town runs into the grocery store just ahead of the fog and tells of how his friend had been “taken” by something hidden within the fog itself. And then there are the creatures themselves, which are very scary and bloodthirsty while also being realistic in appearance and function. They look very much like something that could easily have evolved on Earth; they even look a lot like animals and insects that have evolved here, just taken to an extreme, which adds to the realism of the situation. And then there’s the way the creatures act and react, which is also perfect for their forms. Despite the things they do, though, there never really seems to be any malevolence coming from them, they simply seem to be following their biological imperatives the way they always have.

But that’s really all the good I can say here. As well done as much of this film is, there are far too many scenes of people doing things that just don’t make sense. First, there is Sadler’s character, Jim Grondin, getting in the face of Jane’s character, David Drayton. Some of the men go into the back room of the store and try and run the generator. The exhaust flue appears to be clogged and the bag boy, Norm, volunteers to go outside and clear the pipe. Drayton tells him not to go outside, that there’s something out there (he heard something beating on the rollup metal door in the back of the store but no one believes him). Grondin makes this huge deal out of telling Drayton that “the next time you got something to say, count all your teeth first” because he doesn’t believe there’s anything outside—which makes you immediately wonder why he doesn’t just leave in the first place. And then a lot of other people make sport of the idea that there’s anything dangerous outside—again, making you wonder why they’re all still there. And then there are the scenes of people just staring. I understand the very first time they’re confronted with the creatures; I think almost anyone would freeze momentarily in that situation. But it seems when you’re watching the film that almost anytime something pops up everyone on the screen just . . . stops . . . and . . . stares . . . Almost every scene with a creature in it, I would say to myself, “Okay, time to go,” or, “Time to run,” or, “Okay, yeah, it’s eating that person, which means you can get away,” or, “Y’know, there seem to be, like, thousands of those things—time to get the hell outta Dodge.” It was just a really annoying thing.

And then there’s the ending. I’ve read that the novella ends differently, and that Darabont wanted a darker ending and that King was okay with what the director decided on. In fact, I’ve read what the original ending was and I have to say that not only do I like it better, it’s the ending I thought I was going to get when I watched film. The ending we got was certainly dark, I’ll give Darabont that, but it seemed too pat, too simple. The character does this irrevocable thing and then about two minutes later the entire situation changes. It just seemed to me that the decision was made too quickly, and carried out much too quickly. I think I would have waited a little bit—even though I agree that unless something changed I probably would have done the same thing eventually. The fact is that it seemed forced to me, like the ending was chosen and they were going to shoehorn it in no matter how it fit with the rest of the film.

All in all, this isn’t a bad film. I just thought it could have been better. (I also wasn’t thrilled with them learning so easily how the whole thing started, but as with the ending that’s largely just personal preference.)

Buy The Mist and other Stephen King Classics on DVD from Amazon.com:

By Sam Christopher

Rating: (Average) 3 out of 5 Stars

Okay, so Larry Cohen makes weird movies. Always low budget with fairly low production values and quirky editing and dialogue, his strangely compelling stories are at least generally interesting in an odd way. It’s Alive, as his first big splash, exemplifies all of this. From starring an old friend of Cohen’s (John Ryan) whom the writer/director just happened to run into somewhere, to the killing of a hooker coming home from work in the film, there’s always something of interest going on either on-screen or behind the scenes. And It’s Alive has another interesting backstory: It failed miserably on initial release due to a woeful ad campaign (anyone remember Clive Barker’s film Nightbreed?) and four years later was re-released with proper backing to achieve ultimate box office success. Something I learned from the Director’s Commentary in this set. This is a two-disc set, with the first film on one disc and the two sequels on another, double-sided disc. Each film comes with its own commentary, which is a nice touch, but it seems that they were all recorded at the same time so a few stories are told and retold.

First, of course, is It’s Alive (1973) (Rating: 4 Stars). I remember the ads for this when I was a kid; I always thought they were very scary and yet somehow I never got around to seeing it (probably couldn’t get anyone to take me). In fact, I never saw the whole film until I got this set. It’s really pretty well done. The acting is a little off at times but the quirkiness of the characters—which are sometimes reminiscent of the great Rod Serling oddballs of Twilight Zone—and verve of the story more than makes up for the production’s shortcomings. The story is all about the birth of a monstrous mutant, who—well, it is a horror film, I think you can probably figure out what happens. This is a fun film, and the Commentary is interesting as well. And with the 1977 re-release bringing monetary success, there was a 1978 sequel, It Lives Again (Rating: 2.5 Stars), in which the father from the first film (the aforementioned Ryan) is shown to have moved on from his woe and helps other parents of “Its” protect their babies from the government/corporate agents who want to kill them all (more on this below). This is also a pretty good film, with a logically derived story that trades off the interesting premise very well. My only real problem with it is that it doesn’t have the off-the-wall style that made the original film such fun, adopting a more staid, more orthodox approach. The last in the series, 1987’s It’s Alive III: Island of the Alive (Rating: 1.5 Stars), is easily the weakest of the three, and precisely for the reason Cohen himself mentions on the Commentary. In the first two films, Cohen made the decision to limit the audience’s view of the mutant children to snatches of glimpses here and there, believing that the less we saw of them the more effective they would be. Here, he decided to go all out and give the creatures much more screen-time, which had the detrimental effect of allowing the audience to study and dissect the weaknesses in the appliances and f/x making up the mutants. This last film is nearly saved by the presence of Michael Moriarty and Karen Black and the interesting premise of the mutants reaching maturity after only a few years and being ready to reproduce, but the dual problems of another rather static overall plot and too much viewing of the creatures sink it.

One thing that’s strange to me on the box of this set is that it describes the first film as being “filmmaker Larry Cohen’s cautionary cult hit that tapped into environmental fears”. It seemed to me that any indication of an explanation for the mutations that was every assayed—it was never really stated flat-out what the impetus for them was—always centered on a drug company’s fertility drug. I know it’s a small thing but it just seemed to me that if they were even going to mention it at all on the box they could have at least gotten it right. This is what leads to the government/corporate trackers of the second film, and it’s even mentioned in the third, as there is a team of hunters sent to the island where the mutants are essentially marooned by the government. That oddity notwithstanding, however, this is a very good set for anyone interested in low-budget, indie horror.

Buy It’s Alive Triple Feature from Amazon.com

By Sam Christopher

Rating: (average) 4 ½ out of 5 Stars

On January 11, 1972, the world was introduced to irascible newspaper reporter Carl Kolchak and his single-handed crusade to bring to light the truth, no matter how fantastic or seemingly far-fetched, behind any series of murders he covers. The product of an unpublished novel by Jeff Rice, Kolchak was portrayed as essentially a hard-boiled investigator who would follow the truth no matter where it led him, in the case of this story, to a vampire roaming the streets of Las Vegas. This first telefilm, entitled simply The Night Stalker, would become the highest-rated tv movie in the history of the networks and spark both a sequel and another would-be sequel that would subsequently morph into a single season series. This series would later be credited by Chris Carter as the inspiration for The X Files. It would also spawn a remake series from ABC in 2005 that was very different, more X Files-y, and only lasted half a season.

The original The Night Stalker (1972) (Rating: 4 Stars) is a very good film, with a screenplay by the great Richard Matheson and production by the creator of Dark Shadows, Dan Curtis. The story is sharp and logically driven, with crisp performances by Darren McGavin as Kolchak and Simon Oakland as the embattled editor Tony Vincenzo, who’s always caught between Kolchak’s fervor and the publisher’s orders to facilitate a good relationship with the authorities and foster a good business environment for a city that relies on tourism as its primary means of production. Barry Atwater plays the taciturn vampire, Janos Skorzeny, and stalks through the part like a rampaging madman—which is good since that’s what he’s supposed to be here—and Larry Linville (soon to achieve ever-lasting fame as tv’s Frank Burns on M*A*S*H) gives a good, if abbreviated, performance as the coroner. The only real problem I have with the film at all is the very end, when the authorities decide to threaten Kolchak with a murder charge if he doesn’t leave town and forget the story. I’ve always wondered what they would have done if he had called their bluff. I know the local heads of the police would evidently commit perjury but would Bernie, the FBI man, be friendly to Kolchak? And what about the coroner, or any of the policemen who had personally been involved with the tooth-and-nail confrontation with Skorzeny? And what about the victim Kolchak found still alive in Skorzeny’s house just before the end? It’s a kind of minor footnote to what is overall an excellent film but it is something I wonder about.

On the flip side of this disc we have the second Kolchak film, 1973’s The Night Strangler (Rating: 5 Stars), in which Kolchak ends up working for Vincenzo again. This time it’s in Seattle and publisher Llewellyn Crossbinder is played by the wonderful John Carradine. Oh, and there’s a story about murder victims being strangled by a dead man with superhuman strength who then takes some blood from his victims. This film also boasts a teleplay from Matheson, this time from a story he originated. ABC had wanted a story involving Jack the Ripper but Matheson decided that had been done to death so he came up with a story of a killer who shares enough characteristics with Jack to satisfy the network while being completely original. The killer, played by Richard Anderson (soon to achieve star status as Oscar Goldman on ABC’s Six Million Dollar Man and Bionic Woman series), is shown to be a good man grown mad over the years as his long life leads to his having watched everyone he ever loved die. This is actually a better overall story than the original piece, and a better overall production. Perhaps it’s a function of having played the roles before but McGavin and Oakland seem more at home, more comfortable with their characters than in the first film, giving this one more of a sense of fun.

My only problem with this disc is that there are no extras at all. I understand why there’s no Commentaries, as most of the principles are dead unfortunately, but it would have been nice to have a documentary or two about the series or just the films themselves. Even so, this is an excellent pair of films combining the talents of many stalwarts of both film in general and horror in particular.

Buy The Night Stalker on DVD from Amazon.com

By Sam Christopher

Rating: 5 out of 5 Stars (Highest Rating)

This is the review of a four film set of Spanish films which “star” the reanimated corpses of the Knights Templar, a Christian sect of warlike monks who, according to the mythos in the films, changed their allegiance to Satan and drank blood in order to gain eternal life. They were caught and, though the backstory changes in each of these films, subsequently put to death with their eyes being destroyed in various ways. Now they awaken from time to time to seek sustenance through the ingestion of human blood, which makes them more vampiric than zombified in the modern sense, although their appearance and the timing of their first film has led to their being classified as zombies. The Blind Dead is the product of the imagination of Spanish auteur Amando De Ossorio, and there is a bonus DVD about him in this set.

The first film, Tombs of The Blind Dead (1971), is often spoken of as the Spanish Night of the Living Dead. It is a deeply atmospheric film which shows the title characters sparingly, to creepy effect. Unlike NOTLD, these walking dead ride horses (which are also used to creepy effect through slow motion and sound effects) and track their victims by sound alone—but if it’s quiet enough they can even hear heartbeats, so that’s not as good for the victims as it sounds. They are also dessicated and blackened by being burned to death (which led to an American drive-in campaign to advertise it as Revenge from Planet Ape, with a tacked-on prologue tying the film however loosely to the Planet of the Apes series). The acting and characterization in this first installment are slipshod at best which seriously mars its effectiveness, but the overall story remains compelling. This film blew me away the first time I saw it years ago. The second film in the series, Return of the Evil Dead (1973), is the strongest of the series. It gives the viewer much more exposure to the Knights Templar and provides much better acting and characterization than the original. It concerns the Blind Dead returning to break up a 500th Anniversary party commemorating the town’s vanquishing of the Knights centuries ago. While this film’s story isn’t as compelling as that in the first, it is the overall better film. Next, we have The Ghost Galleon (originally titled Horror of the Zombies, from 1974), which has the Knights Templar aboard a “ghostly galleon” (hence the title) reminiscent of the Mary Celeste. Here they jealously guard their gold from any who would attempt to take it… which makes us wonder why they go out of their way to allow people on board in the first place. While there are some suitably creepy sequences here, this is easily the weakest of the four films. Finally, we have Night of the Seagulls (1975), which is often derided as the worst of the four films but I wouldn’t say so. This is a pretty interesting twist on the mythos of the films in that it’s set in a rural village where each year seven young girls are sacrificed to the Knights Templar in order to keep them from destroying the village entire, and then the souls of the sacrificed girls come back as seagulls. This film is on a par with the first in the series, just a slight notch below the second.

This box set came out a few years ago but is still available through Amazon.com. It comes with the four films and the aforementioned documentary DVD, as well as a booklet furnished by Midnight Media Publishing. The box is in the shape of a coffin, adding to the ambience. This is just a fantastic collection for those who like their horror dead and ‘70s-ish, a great addition to any Halloween Horror Party.