DAY OF THE DEAD

Zombies, zombies, zombies, and more zombies! To tell you the truth I'm pretty sick of zombies! So sick that it's affecting my enjoyment of AMC's hit television show THE WALKING DEAD. I'm way behind and just taking my time.

You wanna know how stale the Zombie genre is? It was getting clichéd back in 2003 and that was 11 years ago. Long story short, I'm burned out on zombies. But once in awhile something great like SHAUN OF THE DEAD or ZOMBIELAND comes along and puts a fresh spin on the living dead. I can only speak for the first two seasons, but honest to goodness THE WALKING DEAD television series has been my favorite zombie medium since the George A. Romero zombie films. His classic zombie films, NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD (1968) – DAY OF THE DEAD (1985).

My favorite zombie film is George A. Romero's DAWN OF THE DEAD (1978). But his third zombie movie, DAY OF THE DEAD will always have a special place in my heart. It was the first zombie , let alone exploitation film I ever saw. I was probably 9 or 10 years old when I first watched DAY OF THE DEAD. It was on television, and the channel was the USA Network. I never saw the movie from beginning to end and back then thought it and THE TOXIC AVENGER were the same movie.

If I remember correctly it was around 2002 when the zombie nostalgia bug hit me? I wanted to get all the Romero films on DVD. The Italian horror genre was peeking my interest as well, but that's another can of worms. The thought just occurred to me that it was around this time that I fell in love with horror movies again! Yes, how could I forget! Eli Roth's CABIN FEVER came out the same year as my zombie movie phase. And I'll say it again, I fell in love with horror movies again. You see, the late nineties was a terrible time for the horror genre.

So now that basically zombie fandom is everywhere and kids can buy zombie breakfast cereal, I'm kinda done with it all.

Then a few weeks ago I watched a documentary called NIGHTMARE FACTORY. It was about the special makeup effects studio KNB Effects Group Inc. They are the best in the business and my personal favorite makeup effects team. Their big break was doing the makeup work on a little film you may of heard about called EVIL DEAD II: DEAD BY DAWN!

One of the founders of the group, Greg Nicotero got his start assisting the great Tom Savini on DAY OF THE DEAD. It had been a few years since I watched the zombie classic and the documentary got me all nostalgic, so I decided to watch the film.

I forgot how much I love DAY OF THE DEAD! Yes, it's one of the meanest zombie films you will ever sit through, but man it's so good. The zombie makeup effects hold up. I would even say they are still the best practical effects on a zombie movie ever! CGI gore just cannot compete with practical gore when done correctly.

So in DAY OF THE DEAD it's pretty much over for mankind. Some survivors made up of military soldiers and scientists are seeking shelter in a old missile silo. The scientists are doing experiments on the zombies to try and make them more domesticated. Tensions are at an all time high as the soldiers are wanting to leave and find greener pastures. But the scientists beg for more time.

When the high in command finally figures out that experiments are being preformed on dead soldiers, all bets are off and things start to get bad. Real bad. The underground compound gets compromised and the zombies run (walk) amok.

By today standards DAY OF THE DEAD might seem textbook, which is fair to say. But the performances are still great. It still has that exploitation feel to it. And the gore, oh my gosh the gore! DAY OF THE DEAD should be zombie makeup effects 101 if it isn't already.

Final thoughts. What keeps me watching DAY OF THE DEAD is the story and characters. The gore is just a bonus for me. It's a hard film to watch. The movie makes you stop and wonder what's worse, mankind or zombies? It's social commentary like this that make the first three Romero zombies films worth watching year after year.

DEATH PROOF

DEATH PROOF is Quentin Tarantino's slasher movie. Wanna know why it's Quentin Taratnino's slasher movie? Because, it's unlike any slasher movie you've ever seen! That's why! But just like a Tarantino movie, DEATH PROOF is so much more. Like all his films, DEATH PROOF is a love letter to cinema, more importantly a love letter to exploitation/grindhouse cinema.

Originally DEATH PROOF was the second feature of a movie called GRINDHOUSE which came out in 2007. It was a double feature that showcased two movies, PLANET TERROR and DEATH PROOF. Robert Rodriguez directed the PLANET TERROR. The film was an ode to the glory days of exploitation cinema and the double feature, which was pretty standard back in the 60's and 70's.

Today's modern audiences didn't really “get” GRINDHOUSE so the movie flopped big time. It wasn't until DVD that people saw these films, which were released separately to recover lost expenses the best they could. PLANET TERROR suffers the most by being released separately. It feels incomplete compared to DEATH PROOF which is an extended cut on DVD. The full GRINDHOUSE experience is now available on Blu-Ray and I highly recommend checking it out!

DEATH PROOF is about a killer named Stuntman Mike, who goes around stalking women. Instead of a knife he uses his car. Things start off in Texas where we meet Julia, Shanna, and Arlene. Arlene is a friend visiting from out of town. The three girls are planning to hang out at Shanna's lake house for the weekend. But first meet up with some boys at a bar to start the weekend off right.

While hanging out at the bar and having a good time one of the girls, Arlene notices someone with a scary looking car has been following them all night. And it's none other than Stuntman Mike. A old fossil who's done some stunt work in television that nobody remembers. He's a likable guy but awkward as well. Arlene is frightened by his car, but after the old pervert gets a lap dance out of her, all seems well. Or so that's what her and her friends thought! 14 months pass and Stuntman Mike is now in Tennessee stalking a new group of girls. But what Stuntman Mike doesn't know is that these women fight back!

That's the gist of the plot.

So why or how does Stuntman Mike use a car and not a knife like a normal killer? Stuntman Mike's instrument of death is his car, a stunt car made up with reinforced steel, role bars, and the whole nine yards. You could drive straight into a brick wall going 200mph just for the experience. Why not just use a knife? Probably because Stuntman Mike gets no excitement from using a knife.

This weapon of choice is one of the films many reinventions in Tarantino's take on the slasher sub genre of horror. Another major reinvention is Stuntman Mike. Most horror movie killers sneak up on their victims. Not Stuntman Mike, he's a socialite to his prey. Flirting with young women at the bar. Come on, we've all seen this guy at the bar a time or two.

It's really not a reinvention but Tarantino does something else with DEATH PROOF that is quite unique. He makes the audience forget they are watching a slasher movie. The film starts off like a slasher flick with girls talking about girl stuff and boys. We see Stuntman Mike follow them. But once the girls get the the Texas Chili Parlor something cool happens.

During the time at the bar our slasher film takes a break and becomes a 'hang-out' film. It almost becomes a Richard Linklater movie. The audience spends a lot of time with these characters having a good time at the Texas Chili Parlor. But remember, Stuntman Mike is setting up his prey And moments before last call is when he makes his move. I won't spoil it but Stuntman Mike gets a lap dance! Tell me. How many slasher flicks are there that have one of it's characters give the 'killer' a lap dance? Sorry, but I must have missed that Friday The 13th where a camp counselor gave Jason a lap dance. That's right folks, Stuntman Mike gets a lap dance! It's a cool scene but odd as well. I have never been quite sure what Tarantino is trying to tell us here? I've had several ideas in the past but now I'm pretty sure the only point to the scene is to tell the audience that Stuntman Mike is basically 'marking' his hunt.

The next and final reinvention of the slasher genre comes in the second half of the movie. 14 months later and Stuntman Mike is after a new set of girls. Now that the audience knows how Stuntman Mike operates, Tarantino chooses to have his 'killer' in the background this time around. After what happened in Texas, ole Stuntman Mike might be playing it safe?

So we have a new set of women all of which who work in the movie industry. Two of them are stunt actors. Some of the girls go for a joy ride in a 1970 Dodge Challenger. They are having a blast. But these thrill seekers get a little more than they bargained for when Stuntman Mike joins in on the fun. Now it is around this time that DEATH PROOF becomes the coolest thing ever. Tarantino switches gears (no pun intended) and the film becomes a full blown car chase movie! And let me tell you, it is the greatest car chase scene in the history of cinema!

Now if you've had the pleasure of experiencing DEATH PROOF as a part of GRINDHOUSE your double feature just turned into a triple threat! A true blue grindhouse theater experience!

There you have it! Quentin Tarantino's slasher movie with a twist of kick ass! I cannot recommend this movie enough. This Halloween do yourself a favor and watch GRINDHOUSE!

Only 4 more days left till Halloween! Happy October,

A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET (1984)

Now here's a funny story. Out of the six Nightmare On Elm Street movies, the original A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET was the film I saw last. The third in the series, A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET 3: DREAM WARRIORS was my introduction to the franchise. I found the story and characters compelling enough that I didn't think it was necessary to backtrack immediately. Plus a friend at school told me the first film was super scary!

To this day A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET 3: DREAM WARRIORS is my favorite Elm Street movie. I love the look of the film. There's that 80's nostalgic feel to it that I just love. The story is good as well as the cast. It's worth mentioning too that this is the film where Freddy Krueger started being funny with his one liners. I also love the idea of the teenagers teaming together and helping each other out in one another's dreams. No matter how many times I've seen the movie, I just love it!

It wasn't until high school that I finally watched A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET. And like I said, the reason being was because the tone of the film was much more creepy and scary than the sequels. Freddy is more serious in the first film. The first time I saw the movie I didn't care for it. I preferred humorous Freddy. But as time went on I started warming up to the film. In fact, I think it was because of WES CRAVEN'S NEW NIGHTMARE that I wanted to give the first Elm Street another shot.

Like I said Part 3 will always be my favorite but let it be known that A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET now comes a close second. I have such a deep love and admiration for it now. From the get go it has this atmosphere of a dream. Something that was lost to me when watching it on VHS that first time. It wouldn't be until DVD that I fell in love with the movie.

Every film had moments where characters didn't know if they were awake or in a dream. This was done so effectively that even the audience would have a hard time knowing what was real or what was a dream. And no film captured that feeling better than in this one.

My favorite creepy scene still to this day would probably be where Nancy falls asleep in class. In her dream she hears the voice of her friend Tina who is dead. Nancy looks out into the hallway to see her dead friend inside a body bag calling for help. Scary stuff!

Another favorite scene is the climax of the movie. We see a montage of Nancy setting traps all around her house for when she pulls Freddy out of her dream and into the real world. I think that's what I like most about the Nancy character. She fights back! It's easy to write off these slasher movies as 'women in peril' films, but not this one, not A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET. Dream becomes reality more and more as the film progresses. I could be wrong, but I really think that from the moment Nancy's boyfriend dies ( a young Johnny Depp) and till the end of the movie, it's all a dream. All that work rendering Freddy powerless was for nothing because pulling him into the 'real' world was still just a dream. Of course I could be completely wrong on this, or am I?

It should be worth noting that Freddy Krueger is my favorite movie monster of my generation. A big part of that is due to the talented actor that played him, the amazing Robert Englund. Mr. Englund has had the fortunate to play the Freddy character in all 8 films (that's including WES CRAVEN'S NEW NIGHTMARE and FREDDY VS. JASON)! This was rare for horror films at the time because in other slasher flicks the role of the killer would be jobbed out to a stunt man.

Now all you twenty somethings that we're born in the early 90's might be tempted to skip the original and just watch the remake that came out a few years ago. My advice. Steer clear of that piece of garbage and watch the original instead.

Happy October!

FRIDAY THE 13TH (1980)

Does anybody still remember their first VCR player? I sure do. It was the early eighties when our family got one. It's too far back for me to remember the first video we rented. My best guest would be the Tom Hanks movie SPLASH. But I do remember the place where we rented movies. That place was called Beggar's Video. For a young kid the place was huge! In reality I'm sure the selection was small.

The thing I remember most about the video store was all the movie posters and cardboard standees. There was one standee in particular that always freaked me out. It was one of Freddy Krueger placed in a corner of the store. It made no difference where I was standing in the store, it always felt like Freddy was staring at me.

Another piece of advertisement that would always catch my eye was the FRIDAY THE 13th movie poster. A silhouette of someone holding a knife, and inside the silhouette we see woods, a cabin, some unlucky teens, and a full moon. The poster tells you every thing you need to know about the movie. Ingenious! To this day it is still one of my favorie horror movie posters.

Intrigued as I was of the poster there was no way I wanted to see that movie. I was already traumatized at an early age with AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON. So I knew what a scary movie was. It wouldn't be until years later that I would even consider watching a Friday the 13th movie.

Back in grade school during recess some of us kids would brag about watching a Friday the 13th or Nightmare on Elm Street movie. Describing in gory detail how sick and twisted these movies were. We were so full of crap back then! But just like with any group of school kids there was that one who did see these movies. We rode the bus together and on the way to school he'd tell me how scary they really were or were not.

It wasn't until the late eighties or early nineties that I watched one of these movies. They played them to death on Cable television. It was either TBS Super Station or USA Network I cannot remember which? Ah, good ole USA Network, one of the best Cable channels during the 80's!

Even with most of the gore taken out, I still couldn't make it through FRIDAY THE 13TH. I'd always change the channel before the movie was over. I never found out who the killer was, and always assumed it was Jason because he was the killer in the sequels. Everybody knows that!

Eventually I did watch FRIDAY THE 13TH in it's entirety and was dumbstruck that the killer wasn't Jason but instead his mother. What? Lame. Well, at least Jason popping out of the water at the end sort of redeems the film. In pop culture Jason's mother being the killer became an afterthought. I laughed my ass off when I saw the movie SCREAM and the killer brings up the question, who was the killer in the first Friday the 13th movie? I wonder how many people in the theater got the question wrong just like Drew Barrymore's character did?

Last year I reviewed my favorite entry in the Friday the 13th franchise, FRIDAY THE 13TH: THE FINAL CHAPTER. In that blog I explained how much I did not care for the original, and also why the fourth film is the quintessential movie in the series. The first film is cleaver yes, but I'm a Jason fan. Jason should always be the killer.

While it's not my favorite of the series I still enjoy watching it. I mean let's give credit where credit is due, FRIDAY THE 13TH is the one that started it all. Before I get crucified by all the horror guru's out there; yes, technically JOHN CARPENTER'S HALLOWEEN is the film that started the sub genre.

But, FRIDAY THE 13TH with it's gore and higher body count became the blue print for the slasher flick boom of the 80's. It's crazy how many slasher movie's were made during this time.

I like the camp setting and how the film looks like an exploitation film, even though it was released by a major studio so technically it cannot be a true exploitation film like say THE TEXAS CHAIN SAW MASSACRE.

For it's time, the gore effects were done very well. And some of the kills even hold up today. All the characters/victims are likable which is something that changed for the worse in slasher flicks of the 90's. I enjoy SCREAM and all, but to hell with all the horror films that followed where every character was self aware and too smart to be in a horror movie. Give me a break! That's why the eighties ruled.

In conclusion. I recommend FRIDAY THE 13TH for it's place in horror movie history.

ALIENS

Before I begin let's get one thing perfectly clear. In my opinion ALIENS is a horror movie first and a action film second. Because when you're facing a nest of Xenomorph's it doesn't matter how many pulse rifles, grenades, or flamethrowers you have. You're always going to run out of ammo.

The year was 1986 and I was at the grocery store where my dad worked. Looking at movie magazines like Starlog and Fangoria. I would do this a lot at the store while my mom shopped. One day I picked up a issue and saw one of the most frightening images I had ever seen. A slimy looking creature black as night with no eyes and a set of teeth/fangs that looked as if they could tear your face clean off. The only name I could see to describe such a creature was the name ALIENS.

Now at the time the only aliens I knew of were cartoon green Martians, E.T., or all the different creatures inside Mos Eisley from the movie STAR WARS. All of which are pretty harmless for a 9 year old. Magazine photos of ALIENS had me terrified.

When it was time for ALIENS to hit HBO, I was ready. I remember having to watch it with my dad. Needless to say we didn't make it very long. My dad changed the channel right in the middle of the first Alien attack. I still remember to this day that it was the scene where a Colonial Marine gets acid blood splattered on his face. I was disappointed but relieved at the same time because I was getting pretty scared.

It wouldn't be until years later that I would get another chance to see ALIENS. But this time it was on network television. Safe right? Kind off. We were visiting family and I remember all the parents having a quick family meeting if it was alright for us kids to watch the movie. The kids won that night!

I was blown away. Even on network television this thing was scary! The long corridors, steam filled hallways, and Aliens coming out of the darkness. This movie got under my skin so much that it would not be until years later that I wanted to see it again.

It wasn't until high school that I had enough guts to watch ALIENS again. But this time I loved it! This second go around I appreciated it and saw it more as an action movie that a horror film. For years to come I would consider it the most bad ass movie that I had ever seen. It wore that crown for several years.

Today I still think the movie is scary. It's not as scary as ALIEN, but ALIENS earns the action-horror sub genre title appropriately.

The thing that still sends shivers up my spine when viewing the film is how quickly the stakes are raised. At the beginning you have these confident grunts that have the experience and tools to take down any threat that comes their way. As Pvt. Hudson states, they are the ultimate bad asses.

All bets are off even after one, yes one encounter with the Xenomorphs. The Marines get their asses kicked! These things are the perfect specimen, therefore the perfect killing machine. Again as Pvt. Hudson puts it “Game Over man”! After you've seen the movie a bunch of times the horror/suspense goes away and it's just an action movie. But wait a few years. Let the original film ALIEN sink into your brain. Realize what just one of these Aliens can do. Now imagine 100+ more of them with your firepower stripped to nothing. And to make matters worse add a Alien Queen on top of it. Bottom line you're screwed. This action movie just turned into a horror film did it not!

If you've never seen any of these movies I highly recommend watching ALIEN. In fact make it one of the many scary movies you watch this Halloween! It's one of the greatest science fiction horror movies ever made. It starts off slow and atmospheric but trust me it's worth the wait.

But if you're looking for something a little more fast pace then look no further that it's sequel ALIENS.

Happy October!

HALLOWEEN 2 (2009)

Rob Zombie's 2009 film HALLOWEEN 2 is the most brutal slasher movie I have ever seen. When I saw it at the theater I thought it was an okay slasher flick but a pretty terrible Michael Myers tale. Purists beware, this film is not for you. While not really liking the theatrical version I still stood up for the movie explaining to haters that director Rob Zombie was experimenting with the franchise and the genre itself. But would agree with fans that this installment wasn't the best iteration of the classic horror character.

After recently watching the unrated director's cut of Zombie's HALLOWEEN 2, my opinion on the film has changed. In my review of his remake of the first Halloween film, I stated how I prefer the theatrical cut over the director's cut (which he claims as the definitive version). This time around for HALLOWEEN 2 it's the exact opposite. I like the unrated director's cut way more than the theatrical cut. And no, it's not because there is more gore but rather because the story Rob Zombie is trying to tell makes a lot more sense.

In the theatrical there are way too many WTF moments. The fact that Micheal Myers now has visions of his mother and a pale white horse aren't explained very well, leaves audiences snickering at these scenes. They are still weird but at least now the unrated cut extends these scenes giving more context to the story. This is probably the biggest artsy move that Zombie does to make this and the other Halloween entry “his”.

Another thing that the unrated cut improves on is Scout Taylor-Compton's performance. I thought she did a good job as Laurie Strode in the first film, but I hated her in this movie. This is one of the reasons why I waited so long to give the unrated cut a chance. She was just terrible from what I remember. Well, I like her performance a whole lot better in the unrated cut. I could be wrong on this because I haven't researched it, but I really think her scenes/performance got edited to death in the theatrical cut? After the events of the first film Laurie Strode goes very dark. Can you blame her? Her family and friends got murdered by Micheal Myers, and even she barely got away with her life. So yeah, she's messed up. In both versions we see Laurie have visions of Micheal Myers, and how she is slowly becoming like him. I like the unrated version more because these scenes are extended and better explained. I remember in the theater just being confused and annoyed by her performance. And who knows, I might be wrong about the whole thing? Maybe her scenes are the same? But I like it now and that's all that really matters.

One thing that did not change from the theatrical cut unfortunately was Dr. Samuel Loomis. I liked him in the first film but for the sequel, Rob Zombie really betrays the character. In HALLOWEEN 2 Dr. Loomis becomes a celebrity because of his bestselling book about the Micheal Myers murders. He lets it all go to his head and he becomes a big jerk. At first I liked it and thought it was kind of funny but in the end it's just a terrible and disappointing turn for the Loomis character.

Okay. So I already told you I like this film a little better now because of the added story elements to the unrated cut. Let me tell you what I love about the film. Now I am not for certain if the film was shot on 16mm, but it sure looks like it was. I love the look of this film! It's grainy, it's dark, and it looks like it belongs in a grindhouse theater.

Speaking of grindhouse. This is the most brutal slasher flick I have ever seen! Lot's of stabbing and bashing people's face in. This is definitely not the Micheal Myers from 1978. I don't have a problem with that, but a lot of fans do.

The big controversy among fans of the Halloween series and these films/remakes in particular is the portrayal of Micheal Myers. “Micheal Myers does not grunt or speak when he kills people”! This is the deal breaker amongst most fans. I get it. I totally understand why fans hate it. But I give it a pass because this is Zombie's take on the character and I give him major kudos for being different.

In the long run these Halloween remakes will be better for it, it'll give them longevity. At least that's what I think.

I have a few more reviews coming your way; but in the meantime, Happy October!

HALLOWEEN (2007)

When the subject of Rob Zombie's HALLOWEEN comes up, I have a love hate relationship to the film. It's kinda crazy that I've seen 3 versions of this film. A workprint version, theatrical cut, and the director's cut. I love the workprint cut, it's my favorite of the three but sadly the copy I had is lost forever. My foggy memory of the theatrical cut tells me I liked it for the most part. I could buy a digital copy for $8.00 but don't really want to. And the most face palming version for me is the director's cut. One scene in particular is what ruins it for me. There are a few other issues I have with the cut but for the most part it's one scene.

The original JOHN CARPENTER'S HALLOWEEN is my favorite slasher/horror film. Heck, it's one of my favorite films of all time. So naturally my first instinct at the announcement of a remake was negative, how could they or better yet how dare they mess with a classic! Then Rob Zombie's name came up and suddenly I was intrigued.

Being a big fan of the style and look of his two previous films, HOUSE OF A 1000 CORPSES and THE DEVIL'S REJECTS. I kinda knew what we the audience were in for. And after HALLOWEEN H20: TWENTY YEARS LATER and HALLOWEEN: RESURRECTION, the series was in some desperate need of a new direction.* I was ready for Rob Zombie to make Micheal Myers scary again.

If you don't know anything about the Halloween movie(s), here you go.

A psychotic murderer institutionalized since childhood for the murder of his sister, escapes and stalks a group of teenage girls/babysitters all the while his doctor races to stop him before he kills again.

That the gist of it for the most part. In Carpenter's original film he made Micheal Myers a boogeyman, a force of evil that cannot be killed. And the night he comes home, he is just stalking a group of babysitters. The television version and it's sequel HALLOWEEN II expand on why Micheal Myers is stalking Laurie Strode, one of the babysitters. But I'll talk about that later this month.

The big difference in Rob Zombie's film is the addition of lots of gore and his movie focuses on Micheal Myers as a young boy and what made him become a psychotic “boogeyman”. This aspect is what separates the two films and I think that was Zombie's intent all along. But, it is a remake so the second half is almost a shot for shot kill list of the original.

I really like that this film wasn't a 100% shot for shot remake. There's enough stuff here that makes it it's own thing. Too bad it's a little to white-trash-Kentucky-fried for my taste. My gosh, the opening five minutes of the film are way over the top and clichéd as hell! Okay Rob Zombie, we get it, these characters are the quintessential broken home family. But once you can get past that, the rest is okay.

The story element and what I like most about Zombie's remake is that I see his take on Micheal Myers as more of a Frankenstein's monster than a boogeyman. He's a product of his upbringing and the possible failure of Dr. Loomis trying to get through to him. Oh, and let's not forget that all Micheal really wants is to see his baby sister again, that's all.

So I can end this review on a positive note, I'll talk about the things I hate most about the film. At the top of the list for me is the ending. Ultimately it's his film, his vision so I can't really say he botched it up, but Rob Zombie botched it up.

The best ending being the workprint ending had Dr. Loomis make a brief connection to Micheal seconds before the “Frankenstein's Monster” gets taken out by police gunfire. This fantastic ending was replaced by a overly long cat n' mouse chase between Laurie and Micheal. With a climax that has Micheal helping Laurie shoot him in the face. This ending is both in the theatrical and director's cut. It's not a bad ending, it's just not as awesome as the workprint cut.

Adding more confusion to the fire is what happens to the Loomis character. Is he alive or is he dead? And no this isn't a mystery to be solved in the sequel. No my friends, this is a sign of poor editing. Loomis lives in the workprint, dies in the theatrical cut (or at least he should have), and lives in the unrated director's cut. And if you've seen the film about as many times as I have, you can see snippets of all 3 versions in the unrated director's cut, which by the way is the definitive version according to Mr. Zombie.

A few more things then I promise to talk about what I like. All horror fans know that Carpenter's original had some iconic kill scenes. One of them being a guy getting impaled to a refrigerator with a big ass kitchen knife.

When Zombie's film becomes almost shot for shot remake, you'd expect the kills to start becoming verbatim to the original. Not so. Or so I thought? In the workprint Rob does something awesome. He sets up the scene close to the original, but at the last second he messes with your anticipation and kills the character off differently. The twist on the jump scare is that he gets killed in a van and not impaled to the refrigerator with a big ass knife.

Now either Mr. Zombie got cold feet and changed the scene to where the guy does get impaled by a kitchen knife, or the Brothers Weinstein told him to change it because this is a remake and people want to see the same stuff over and over again?

But the scene that always makes me question what am I doing with my life, is the rape scene. A scene that again, replaced a perfectly good scene from the workprint version. Or it might be from the theatrical, I don't remember? Bottom line, it is not in the director's cut nor treated as a deleted/alternate scene. Poor shame.

Smith's Grove has done all they can do to try and help Micheal (now an adult), so they are moving him to another institution. In this scene Micheal breaks free from Smith's Grove and it's awesome. Mainly because all the transport/security guards are cast members from HOUSE OF 1000 CORPSES and THE DEVIL'S REJECTS.

This scene works two ways, It's bad ass and it feels correct. Micheal has a purpose to break out of Smith's Grove. He wants to reunite with his baby sister. The rape scene never has worked for me. It makes his escape seem more coincidental. And plus I don't like rape scenes.

Okay. Now on to what I like about this film.

The thing I like most about Rob Zombie's HALLOWEEN is the look of the movie. It has that late seventies early eighties feel to it. And it never feels like a gimmick, at least to me it doesn't. The original came out in 1978, so he may just be paying tribute to that. Regardless, I like his style. He's good at capturing the exploitation and grindhouse look.

The other thing that keeps me coming back to this remake is the cast. Scout Taylor-Compton did a good job as Laurie Strode. Her performance is better than you probably remember. It took me awhile to warm up to her, trying to fill the shoes of Jamie Lee Curtis.

Other standouts were Tyler Mane, Malcolm McDowell, and Brad Dourif.

Tyler Mane plays Micheal Myers and it's my favorite performance of the character since the original. The character hasn't been scary since the original, so kudos to Tyler and director Rob Zombie.

We all know Donald Pleasence is irreplaceable as the great Dr. Sam Loomis character. But, I really enjoyed seeing Malcolm McDowell's take on the role. Some of my favorite Loomis scenes were with him and Sheriff Brackett, played by Brad Dourif. I'm sure it was all on paper but I love what these two actors brought to their performances. Good stuff!

In conclusion, I feel that Rob Zombie made a decent remake of a horror classic. I'd rather watch this movie and it's sequel again, than ever watching any of the Texas Chain Saw, Friday the 13th, or Elm Street remakes ever again! This movie has it's problems for sure, but it's the strongest of the horror remake sub genre.

I can only recommend Rob Zombie's HALLOWEEN to fans of the series. Hard core fans of the series. Which in all likelihood you've probably already checked it out if you're a fan. And if you've never seen one of the Halloween movies, do yourself a huge favor and watch the original.

* I kinda liked HALLOWEEN H20: TWENTY YEARS LATER but the fact that Laurie kills a security guard dressed like Micheal Myers is stupid and completely ruins the whole idea/plot of the film. Plus having a Creed song in your movie dates the hell out it. As for HALLOWEEN: RESURRECTION? I enjoyed it for the most part, but the Brothers Weinstein thought the scenes with Busta Rhymes tested good and we all know how the fans felt about that.

BOYHOOD

Richard Linklater should be my favorite filmmaker, his DAZED AND CONFUSED is one of my top ten favorite movies of all time. I have never seen a film of his I did not like. I just got back from seeing BOYHOOD, and after tonight Linklater might very well be my favorite filmmaker.

He has this amazing ability to make the uninteresting interesting. His first film (I think) SLACKER is about nothing. It's a day in the life look at a bunch of twenty-somethings living in Austin, Texas. The film has no real narrative plot and is just linear vignette's that seamlessly move from one scene and character to the next. Some of the characters in certain scenes get long winded and may seem boring but in some weird way it works. You realize, like it or not, that you're hanging out with these people. You're experiencing a film version of life.

BOYHOOD isn't just a 12 year look at the life of Mason, a boy from Texas. It's a 12 year snapshot of family and life itself. I mentioned SLACKER earlier because that film is very similar in that it uses a lot of the same structure as this one does. Each of the vignettes chronicle a year or so of Mason and his family's life.

As for a synopsis the best thing to say is that the film is about family, parenting, and of course growing up. To describe the plot would just be paragraph after paragraph of me telling you scenes. I wouldn't know where to begin or end without fear of really ruining the experience of seeing it for yourself?

What I can do is tell you what I liked about the film. Everything felt genuine. No bullshit. What I mean by that is there was nothing dramatic for dramatic sake. Two examples. One scene there is an abusive drunken stepfather who hits Mason's mom. Any other movie would make this a big “Oscar bait” moment. You know, if the mother was played by Barbra Streisand or something clichéd like that. Not here. The film acknowledges it, deals with it, and then moves on.

Another scene that I thought was smart was when Mason was in eighth grade and him and his buddies were hanging with high schoolers. The kids were just hanging out doing what teenagers do. They start messing around with a saw blade. Like I said before, in any other movie this would be some dramatic plot point for our little Mason to learn a “life lesson”. The scene doesn't teach us anything, thank god. It's just a snapshot showing us and reminding some what it was like to be a teenager.

The use of music to signify the passage of time was cool. Very cool. I just love stuff like that. They also used stuff like Harry Potter and the Nintendo Wii which was fine, but to me the use of music was the coolest and most effective trope.

The cast was amazing as well. Ellar Coltrane who played Mason was amazing, probably the best child actor I've seen in a long time if not ever. And the funny thing is, this is his first and probably only film. Ethan Hawke and Patricia Arquette, who played the parents were great.

This is the first time for a movie (that's not a summer blockbuster or genre picture) that I can honestly tell you to believe the hype. This is a masterpiece that needs to be seen! Go see it!

Highly recommended!

THE EXPENDABLES 3

What happened? Really? What the heck happened with this franchise? I'll tell you what happened! PG-13, that's what happened! Something way more important than gory shoot em' up violence got sacrificed in this film, and that's attitude. The bad ass element that made the first two Expendables movies great is watered down if not gone. What we're left with is a pretty good GI:JOE movie for teenagers.

The film starts off promising with a jailbreak aboard a train. But by the second action sequence I was starting to worry a little bit, and sadly things did not get better in my opinion. You know the drill. Shaky camera, bloodless shootouts, jerky editing so you can't tell who's shooting who, and big super duper explosions to distract the audience and compensate for well thought out action scenes.

During a routine job the Expendables see a ghost. Conrad Stonebanks (Mel Gibson), co-founder of the Expendables and traitor thought to be dead is alive and well as a notorious arms dealer. The job all goes to hell when Conrad is identified and Barney Ross(Sylvester Stallone), the leader of the Expendables tries to end his ass. Conrad escapes but not without giving his former teammates a proper goodbye present by leaving one of them mortally wounded.

Shaken by what Conrad did Barney decides to disband the crew. Now it's out with the old and in with the new as Barney recruits some new blood. Plans for revenge quickly change as the CIA wants Barney and his team to bring Conrad in alive so he can go on trial for war crimes. The new team is young and full of energy but even with the aid of Barney they are no match for a seasoned old hat like Conrad Stonebanks. So it's up to Joe Christmas (Jason Statham) and the rest of the Expendables to save Barney and the new class of mercenaries.

This movie was just not for me. I was bias to begin with because of the PG-13 rating so that may have clouded my judgment from the start. I don't have a problem with PG-13 anything if the movie/story is good. What I have a problem with is that for this type of film it needs to be rated R. Period. But it is what it is so I can move on and make the best of it.

I was enjoying EXPENDABLES 3 for the most part, that was until it was time for Barney to recruit some new young blood. I was already two steps ahead, I knew he was going to get this new team only to get their asses handed to them by Conrad and had to get saved by the original bad asses. The idea of a new team didn't bother me, in fact I thought it was going to be kinda cool. But they messed it up. They messed it up big time. The new class of Expendables sucks. Not just the characters but the actors as well. Zero personality. I didn't care about these guys one bit. The original Expendables crew gets sidelined for a better part of the film for these punks? Screw you! No thanks!

At least the movie had some humor in it. Schwarzenegger had a few one liners that I laughed out loud at. Including a classic one that wasn't “I'll be back”! And I wanted more of Antonio Banderas who played a cool character Galgo, a mercenary who doesn't know how to shut up.

EXPENDABLES 3 was also the return of Wesley Snipes which sadly felt lackluster due to him only being in the movie for 30 minutes it felt like. Gotta make room for Kellan (Legend of Hercules) Lutz and MMA superstars who can't act I guess? It was good to see Wesley back nonetheless.

According to Stallone this is the final installment of the franchise, but I have a feeling we haven't seen the last of The Expendables: The New Class. (Sigh)

I recommend THE EXPENDABLES 3 as a matinée at best.

TEENAGE MUTANT NINJA TURTLES (2014)

So the new TMNT movie is not the train wreck I was expecting it to be. It's still not very good. A mediocre film at best. And the worst part isn't the subtle changes in the origin. Nor is it the films leading star Megan Fox. No, the biggest problem I had with this movie was the script. Uninteresting characters spewing out droll boring exposition. Scene after scene of characters telling us what's happened or what is about to happen.

I even think that director Jonathan Liebesman knew how boring the script was so he livened up scenes of people talking with dramatic close-ups and swooping pans. The film is shot well and looks nice but boring is boring.

In this latest incarnation of the popular franchise there are some minor changes, luckily none of them involve our favorite heroes in a half shell being from outer space.

Our story begins with fluff piece reporter April O'Neil trying to cover the story of a rampant crime wave by the mysterious Foot Clan. Hot on a lead she gets into trouble only to be saved by some strange looking heroes. Upon further investigation her super-hero like saviors turn out to be 6 foot tall walking, talking, ass kicking turtles. Not only does she become friends with them but things become a reunion of sorts when April finds out they used to be her pets when she was little.

Back when April was a young girl she had a pet rat and 4 turtles in her fathers lab. Her father was a scientist working on a experiment with mutagen and cell regeneration. One day the lab goes up in a gulf of flames killing April's father.

Excited by all of this, April tries to break the news about the cities new saviors. No one at work believes her and she gets fired for such a crazy idea. The only person that believes her is Eric Sacks, her fathers colleague. Unfortunately Mr. Sacks is a servant to Shredder and his Foot Clan. Eric betrays the trust of April and wants to capture the Ninja Turtles and use their mutagen blood as a ransom, for he and Shredder have a plan to unleash a toxin upon NYC. And the mutagen is the only cure.

Man this movie is kinda lame.

Not only is the climax of the film stolen out of the ending to THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN (nothing like grabbing low hanging fruit guys). But your villains motives are stupid and make zero sense. The character Eric Sacks going turncoat is dumb and doesn't gel at all, but that's what you get for such poorly written characters. I wanna focus on how poorly they treated Shredder, the arch nemesis of the Ninja Turtles.

Remember those slight changes I was talking about? Like the Turtles being April's pets when she was younger. That didn't bother me. the change that was odd to me was the fact that Master Splinter and Shredder did not have a past together. Usually how it goes is Splinter was a pet rat to Hamato Yoshi a ninjutsu master. Hamato Yoshi and Oroku Saki (who later becomes Shredder) are bitter rivals. It's TMNT scripture. Here it's only kinda sorta alluded to.

The filmmakers leave it up to the audience/fans to already know the back story. That's bad storytelling, especially if your movie is a reboot or whatever. It's the same problem I had with AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2 and the friendship between Peter Parker and Harry Osborn. Do they or do they not know each other? Oh? They are best friends remember, because the comics and previous unconnected films said so. Minor issue I understand, but it's just so sloppy in my opinion.

So back to my issue with the climax of TMNT. At the beginning of the film it's pretty apparent that Shredder knows nothing of the mysterious ninjas kicking Foot Clan ass up and down NYC. So fast forward to the big fight between Splinter and Shredder. I may have missed something? But to my knowledge this is the first encounter with these two. So when Splinter yells “SHREDDER”!!! His proper response should be “Yes...and you are...”? As I write this it does sound like a nitpick and I think I've made my point so I'll move on. But again like I said, poor storytelling.

On the subject of Shredder, you can tell Micheal Bay was a producer on this because Shredder must shop at the same store as Optimus Prime! My gosh where did Shredder get his outfit, freaking Cuisinart? The guy looks like an all purpose kitchen utensil from hell! How can he freaking move in that thing? My suspension of disbelief runs pretty high, but I had to laugh out loud a number of times. It's just too much.

Okay now to the good stuff, the mediocre stuff I should say. I liked how the Ninja Turtles look. The motion capture looked pretty good when the environment was them fighting at night on the roof tops or in a warehouse. What I didn't care for was whenever the action took place in their sewer home. There the action was too much CGI and it felt like I was watching a cut scene from a video game. Other than that it was fine.

Now to address the elephant in the room of TMNT which is none other than the star of the picture herself, Miss Megan Fox. Boy, is she a terrible actress. I remember thinking she did an okay job playing a emotionless demon in JENNIFER'S BODY. Come to find out she's just naturally emotionless. I'll end my criticism on that because what's left to say about her acting that hasn't been said already.

I know it sounds like I hated this movie but I didn't, the issues I have with it just stick out like a sore thumb. The more that I am bored with a movie the more I tend to pick up on laziness.

I give TEENAGE MUTANT NINJA TURTLES a moderate recommendation. Catch a matinée or wait for Netflix or Amazon Prime.

GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY

Someone pinch me because I must be dreaming. Let's go back to summer of 2012 and the midnight showing of MARVEL'S THE AVENGERS. The auditorium is full and everyone in attendance saw comic book movie history. The excitement of what we all saw was deafening to our ears. Then the post credit scene happened. For those that did not know, they just saw a giant purple guy. But, for the rest of us Marvel Studios just blew our freaking minds. Thanos! Thanos just made an appearance in the MCU! I was shocked that the powers that be were taking it this far. The flood gates have be opened.

With introducing Thanos in the MCU the possibilities of where Marvel Studios took us in the future are now endless. Every comic geek leaving the theater that night knew that a Infinity Gauntlet adaptation was on the horizon. My first thought was the next time we see Thanos will be in the second Thor movie. Nope. Phase II was going to grace us with a new addition to the MCU, and that new film would be GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY.

Wait. What? A talking raccoon and a giant tree alien? Um, no thanks Disney but some things should be left on paper. No kidding. It wasn't until last years Guardians panel at San Diego Comic Con that I was 100% on board for this new Marvel movie. Sure I was going to see it, but until that first glimpse of production I really felt this was going to be the dud that would send Disney into a panic. Then the first trailer hit, and at that moment I knew all was well (for me anyways).

GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY is awesome! Total 110% space opera. It's every thing I imagined it would be and a whole lot more. Star Wars, Flash Gordon, and most importantly the Marvel Cosmic Universe. My knowledge of this Marvel sub genre is limited. I read a few Silver Surfer issues here and there along with one or two of those Marvel Universe books. So I knew what a Kree, Ronan, and The Collector were. There is a good balance here to make the die hard geeks happy and to keep movie fans from getting bored from cosmic who's who.

The Marvel Cosmic Universe is something I never thought we would see on the silver screen. It took this long to get a Marvel team-up movie so why would we ever see one set in a galaxy far far away? It's kinda sad now really because I don't think the MCU can surprise us anymore? Really the only surprise Disney has left is paying Sony a dump truck size amount of money for the rights of Spider-Man. Sony you've really messed things up.

Outlaw Peter Quill,(or Star Lord as he likes to be called ) goes after a mysterious artifact with a rather large bounty on it. Several people want the artifact including Ronan the Accuser, a Kree Empire terrorist. The Kree Empire, long time enemies of the Nova Empire are about to make peace with one another. This does not bode well with Ronan so he makes a deal with Thanos. Thanos will destroy the home world of the Nova Empire in exchange for the mysterious artifact. This mysterious artifact is in fact a orb containing one of the most powerful items in the universe.

Ronan learns that Quill is in possession of the orb and sends assassin Gamora to retrieve it. The odds do not look so good for Quill who is being hunted by bounty hunters Rocket and Groot. And now added to the mix is Gamora. After an amazing action sequence the four are arrested and sent to prison.

In lock down they all get to know each other pretty well. During that time they meet Drax the Destroyer, who ends up being some much needed muscle. After their escape the five of them band together with a plan to sell the orb for the biggest payday they have ever seen. The group quickly learn of the contents of the orb, a infinity stone. One of the most powerful objects in the known universe.

Ronan acquires the infinity stone and sets out to destroy the Nova Empire himself without the aid of Thanos. Will our group of “heroes” high tail it to the far reaches of space to avoid destruction? Or will the Guardians of the Galaxy try and save the Nova Empire with what is destined to be a glorious suicide mission!

I cannot praise this movie enough! See this film as soon as you can. I'm going again as soon as I finish writing this review.

Everyone does a wonderful job in this thing. The biggest surprise for me was how great Dave Batista was as Drax the Destroyer. His character takes everything seriously and is not familiar with metaphors. It's wonderfully done. Zoe Saldana is great as always (big fan) as the assassin Gamora. But it's Rocket and Groot who steal the show. Meet the new Han Solo and Chewbacca. Like I mentioned earlier this film is total space opera. Complete Star Wars wheelhouse. The other standout is Chris Pratt as Peter Quill. This guy is on fire right now. With this, his sitcom, and JURASSIC WORLD coming up he's kinda like the new Bruce Willis.

The Guardians cast is perfect but my favorite character of the film was Yondu, played by Michael Rooker. I am a huge Michael Rooker fan. He always does an amazing job. Yondu, leader of the Ravagers is so bad ass in this. And he has the most coolest weapon in the MCU. We better see more of him come AVENGERS III time!

With the exception of Loki, villains have been one of the weak elements in these films. With Ronan the Accuser it gets a little better but not quite. He's like Darth Vader but a one note Darth Vader. I'm sure next year James Spader as Ultron will shut me up, in fact I'm counting on it. And speaking of villains GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY gives us are real first look at Thanos. Stellar job by Josh Brolin. Things are about to get real in the MCU.

Eventually the Guardians will cross paths with The Avengers and I'm sure it'll be cool, but hopefully they won't get to carried away with it. I love this film so much I want these films to go their separate way from The Avengers. Sadly we know Disney won't let that happen (ANT-MAN).

GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY is highly recommended!

SCANNERS (1981)

After 33 years I have finally seen SCANNERS! It was worth the wait. For years I've wanted to see this movie but factors always got in the way. I must have been 5 or 8 years old when I first discovered SCANNERS. My dad worked at a supermarket that had a video rental department. He would bring a movie home every weekend if not every day it seemed! Already having a movie picked out, I would still spend the better part of an hour browsing the selection. One movie that would always catch my eye was SCANNERS. The VHS box cover was iconic! Michael Ironside on the verge of spontaneous combustion is classic modern day cinema imagery. That box cover haunted and intrigued me for years.

My parents would never let me rent horror films, especially something like SCANNERS. There was plenty of times I tried to get my dad to rent it but I'd always get the classic “nice try bud”, or the “your mom will never let us watch that” response.

The closest I would get to seeing something like SCANNERS was looking at Starlog and Fangoria magazines at the bookstore in the mall. One of these magazines had a cover story on David Cronenberg's THE FLY, and I remember seeing a bunch of pictures from the movie SCANNERS. Thinking back on it now I bet the issue was a retrospective of the directors career leading up to his remake of THE FLY.

It was around this time that we got Cable T.V at our house and HBO became my new babysitter. Over the years I had forgot about SCANNERS, until I saw it listed in the HBO/Cinemax program guide. Unlucky for me the movie only showed on Cinemax and not HBO. If you were a child of the 80's you could have a pretty good guess why we had HBO and not Cinemax. Thanks a lot Cinemax After Dark!

So for me SCANNERS and Micheal Ironside's spontaneous combustion became legend, and legend became myth. So many movies so little time. Maybe one day I'll get my merit badge for seeing the horror movie with the exploding heads?

So now it's 2014 and The Criterion Collection just released David Cronenberg's SCANNERS on Blu-Ray. Criterion putting out a genre picture? It's happened before, but this is a movie I'd expect Shout Factory to give the special treatment not Criterion? (By the way, Shout Factory IS the “Criterion” of genre films). Anyways, I was happy to see it finally get the high def treatment here in the States. With Criterion doing the honors I knew I was in for something special.

The day had finally come. I was going to see “the one with the exploding heads”!

So Thursday night is movie night! Got my snacks, popped in the movie and I only took a couple sips of my drink. That's how good SCANNERS is, that's how well it holds up.

This movie is awesome! Classic Cronenberg, not quite a masterpiece but close. SCANNERS is a pitch perfect mix of horror and science fiction. I always knew what the film was about but had no idea what I was in store for. Bravo for a film to hold up as well as this one has. Let's get right to the dessert, the exploding head! Long live practical effects! It happens early in the film, and boy is it glorious. I won't lie, it put a smile on my face. Not because I am a gore hound but because for too long has CGI dulled my cinematic senses.(Looking at you MAN OF STEEL)! The art of CGI has come a long way and make the impossible possible. The new DAWN OF THE PLANET OF THE APES is a good example. But I will always be a fan of the organic.

A Scanner is someone with extraordinary psychic ability, and Darryl Revok is the most powerful one of all. Revok is a terror and must be stopped. Dr. Paul Ruth who specializes in Scanners recruits Cameron Vale, a Scanner that might just be powerful enough to stop Revok and bring him in. The closer Vale gets to finding Revok the more things start to spiral out of control. Come to find out Revok is part of a underground movement set on world domination. Can Vale be strong enough to stop Revok or is this the beginning of the end?

I love SCANNERS. Love it! No doubt about it, the film is classic David Cronenberg. When it comes to horror mixed with science fiction he has an eye for it like no other. A style he would master even more with films like VIDEODROME and his remake of THE FLY. Like I said SCANNERS is classic 'body in revolt' horror/science fiction, but I also saw something else that's pretty cool about the film.

With the risen popularity of comic book movies, SCANNERS can totally be looked at as a comic book movie. I'm not saying it is one, but the viewing experience does go up a notch viewing it in this new light. Telekinetic vs. Telekinetic hell bent on world domination, yeah in this day and age it's a X-Men movie! Now I want to see a Cronenberg X-Men movie! That would be awesome!

It took 20 years or so but I've finally seen “the one with the exploding heads”, and I am happy to say it was well worth the wait. SCANNERS isn't my new favorite film of all time, but it did exceed my expectations and that is always a good thing. As the saying goes with most David Cronenberg films, long live the new flesh!

X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST

X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST is my favorite film in the X-franchise. It's also a strange one if you think about the time travel too much.

Bryan Singer has made a summer blockbuster that has some gravitas to it which is rare these days. While Marvel Studios is the reigning champion of comic book movies, Singer has given them a run for their money. Go see the film. You'll be glad you did!

So it's the future and Mutants are on the verge of extinction because of the Sentinels. A Sentinel is a mutant-hunter-killer robot that does just that, hunt and kill mutants. The X-Men are no match for these Mutant Terminators because they can adapt, learn, and counter any mutant power. And I do mean any. How the Sentinels became this badass is because of the mutant Mystique. You see, her power is that she can shape change and mimic any human being. She can also mimic any mutant ability now for some reason. I don't remember her having this ability in any of the other movies? Maybe Rouge would've been a better lab rat? Anyways, so the Sentinels can now counter any mutant attack.

The remaining X-Men are running out of time. Kitty Pryde and her time travel trick can only save them for so long until the Sentinels finally get em. Magneto and Professor X come up with a plan to have Kitty send Charles back to 1973 and stop the Sentinel program from ever happening. It turns out that the trip would be too hard on the brain of the world's most powerful mutant. According to Miss Pryde it would tear Professor X's brain apart. So the next best candidate is Wolverine (Cool!!!), the world's most popular mutant.

So The Wolverine is told when he gets to 1973 find Charles and Erik because it's going to take the two of them to help Mystique from taking her dark path. Logan finds Xavier who is now a recluse living in his mansion due to the eventful ending of X-MEN: FIRST CLASS. He cannot deal with the pain and loss given to him by the actions of himself and his once best friend Erik Lehnsherr. To help this he gets high on heroin (not really, but you know it is) which blocks his mutant gene in his DNA. Once Logan tells him about the bad things Mystique is about to do he agrees to help.

We learn Erik is being held prisoner underneath the Pentagon for the assassination of JFK. With the help of a super fast mutant Logan happens to know they break Erik out.

Now that everybody is assembled it's time to find Miss Mystique before she goes all Terminator on poor Bolivar Trask.

Before I get into spoilers let me talk about what I really really like about this movie.

From the opening shot I fell in love. The bleakness of a worn torn future sets the tone nicely. There is a lot of neon in the future and it looks awesome. Very comic book looking! The same has to be said about 1973. The past looks pitch perfect with set design and camera work. Many times it looks like you are watching a film from the 70's. I just love details like that!

Director Bryan Singer has vastly improved his skills in terms of action. X2: X-MEN UNITED felt restraint in the action, especially when mutants were fighting each other. This time around the action and fights are more interesting.

And lastly the cast is just awesome! I love the main ensemble, James McAvoy, Micheal Fassbender, and Jennifer Lawrence are just fantastic. The First Class iteration is by far my favorite of the franchise.

Here are some things I didn't like but overall fine with:

So what is up with Mystique and her new powers? I don't ever remember her having the ability to actually mimic a mutants power? Wouldn't Rouge be a better candidate for Trask to experiment on?

JFK a mutant? Because as Erik put it “he was one of us”. Really? Surely it's not literal and just because he was big on civil rights.

Hank “Hulking-out” when he becomes Beast. We all know why the studio insisted on this idea. Just have him be Beast.

!!!SPOILERS!!!

Here is one of the main reasons why X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST is the best X-movie thus far. Bryan Singer has successfully removed most if not all of the dumbest plot threads in X-MEN: LAST STAND and X-MEN ORIGINS: WOLVERINE. How awesome is that!

Jean Grey and Scott Summers are back, and It's quite possible that the first Wolverine movie never happened or if it did it's more in line with X2 continuity. Who's to know for sure? I like to think X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST has changed everything for the better.

So X-MEN: APOCALYPSE is next. Man, I really want them to go all out on this one. So far only the First Class cast are returning and it is set in the 80's. I pray we get to see a young re-cast of Cyclops, Jean Grey, and Storm in this one.

My biggest fear is that 20th Century Fox doesn't realize X-MEN: FIRST CLASS was the reboot and they make the same mistake Sony has with the Amazing Spider-Man series.

Brief Thoughts on The 86th Academy Awards

The 86th Academy Awards are tonight, and like always I cannot help but watch. It's my love of movies that keeps me watching every year. I've made it a tradition ever since OLD COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN won Best Picture.

This year I'm expecting a pretty lack luster show. We know 12 YEARS A SLAVE will be taking home the big prize of the evening. I'm just rooting for GRAVITY and THE WOLF OF WALL STREET to win as many golden boys as possible! Bruce Dern winning an Oscar tonight would be cool too.

I've seen all but two of the Best Picture nominations (PHILOMENA and NEBRASKA), and from what I've seen and heard all the movies are worthy. GRAVITY and THE WOLF OF WALL STREET made me believe in the power of cinema again! THE WOLF OF WALL STREET was my favorite film of last year, so you know who I want to win. Sadly that film will walk away with nothing I'm afraid.

So tonight It looks like the only film worth rooting for is my second favorite film of 2013, GRAVITY. It should have all the technical categories in the bag. The one I'm really counting on is Alfonso Cuaron for Best Director!

Two films that I really think are missing at this years awards show are THE PLACE BEYOND THE PINES and MUD. But the real head scratcher is no nomination for Tom Hanks in CAPTAIN PHILLIPS?

Best of luck to all the nominees!

ROBOCOP (2014)

I tried. I tried really hard to enjoy this remake. Turns out, ROBOCOP (2014) is one of the better remakes to come out in recent years; unfortunately, the movie is just down right boring. What I mean by saying that its one of the better remakes is because they actually try different things instead of just being a shot for shot clone. Too bad the film is boring and suffers from serious pacing issues.

It's clear from the beginning that director Jose Padilha is not trying to mimic the classic 1987 original. The filmmakers update the 'franchise' by giving the story a face lift and making it topical by adding drone warfare into the mix. Added to that is a story that focuses on the science of what is to be a RoboCop. This is all interesting and different, but do we really need to spend what feels like half the film going over the origin of turning a man into a machine?

We get repeated scenes dealing with the construction of RoboCop. Too much time is also wasted on talking heads wondering if what they are building is safe/ethical. Seeing the science of RoboCop is cool but after awhile it gets boring. How many scenes do we need to have of OCP executives sitting around a table talking? I kept telling myself to be patient, they are building up to something. Not to worry, RoboCop will be kicking ass any moment now.

So RoboCop finally makes his debut to the public and things start off great. We get some decent crime fighting scenes. Overall the action isn't too bad for PG-13, except for the overabundant use of his stun gun. I realize cops use stun guns all the time, but this isn't real life, it's a movie. It's a blatant PC move that I didn't much care for. In this day and age PG-13 is a real disservice to action movies. What teenager is going to find your movie cool or memorable if the hero is going around kicking ass with a stun gun the majority of the time? The video games he or she are playing at home are more bad ass than your boring PG-13 action movie.

The film starts to get interesting (for the most part) when Alex Murphy/RoboCop begins to solve his own murder. Now I don't know if it was an artistic move by the director or a flat out mistake but RoboCop forgets to kill the man that murdered him. Wait! What? That's what I thought leaving the theater, that RoboCop didn't even kill his murderer . It took me a second to realize that he did, but it was done so nonchalantly that you barely notice it.

Here is where the movie really starts to slip off the rails.

Now that RoboCop has started to piece together his murder and all who were involved, we're ready for a climatic conclusion. Wrong. The final act of the film goes in a direction that makes no sense. RoboCop has the bad guys dead to rights when all of a sudden the villains change. I'll try and not spoil it completely but it's as if the studio came in and told the filmmakers that their movie has no Dick Jones in it. Remember Dick Jones? The memorable cooperate bad guy from the original film. Yes, how could you forget. Well, at the end of this movie the spirit of Dick shows up because Drone warfare is bad. And while nobody at OCP is truly bad enough to be considered a 'villain', just the thought of Drone warfare is bad enough I guess? Weak! RoboCop just killed an innocent man if you ask me.

All in all this film just wasn't for me. Kudos to Padilha for trying something different, it's just too bad that the finished product is a studio attempt to reboot a 'franchise'.