Movie Review: August Underground's Mordum

Another one of those movies I watched not out of genuine interest, but merely for the godawful reputation it has for being sick, twisted, violent, and extreme, with little to no redeeming artistic qualities. How did it hold up? Not well.

This movie is based off of an earlier production called August Underground, which presumably is even worse than this. I have to assume that they learned from their mistakes and made the sequel a better film, despite how unbelievable that is. Shot in the realistic home movie style i.e. camera in hand, the film feels authentic if simply for the very low quality of the technology used, and there's something to be said for the film's use of normal looking people. No one looks Hollywood beautiful, a trait that detracts from some films like The Descent, a good movie absolutely, but filled with distractingly beautiful women. August Underground's Mordum at least has that going for it.

The film stars Fred Vogel, star of the original August Underground, Crusty, portrayed by Cristie Whiles, and Maggot, portrayed by Michael Schneider, killers with all of the motivations of Alex in A Clockwork Orange, but not one ounce of the charm. The acting isn't even believable. They don't look like monsters, they look like young actors trying to pretend to be screwed up people. But they just come off as lousy actors.

Describing the plot of this movie is almost impossible. There's sex, murder, robbery, rape, cannibalism, violence, necrophilia, vomiting, and it just keeps going. There's no real story, just a lot of criminal incidents thrown together with no edit points. It feels like you're watching a police evidence tape, which apparently was the intent. Still, I think those would be a heck of a lot more entertaining than this was.

They use shaky cam, obviously, a method I actually approve of when done well. Shaky cam in horror movies is acceptable, and I understand that every little 3 person studio wants to make the next Blair Witch, but this movie makes Cloverfield look like Lawrence of Arabia.

August Underground's Mordum is a borderline unwatchable mess of pointless dialog, unnecessary scenes, and bad special effects made more believable by the constant low quality of every aspect of the film. It looks amateur and almost appears to be a genuine snuff film for the sheer amateurishness of everyone involved. Frankly, I think people making actual snuff films would have more cinematic sophistication and have a little pride in their work.

Without any trepidation I can say that August Underground's Mordum is the worst film I have ever seen, but it isn't for the content. People with little money can make great films, like Primer. People with shocking content and an unusual story to tell can make gripping cinema, like A Serbian Film. People looking to just showcase gore can make any of the SAW films. The makers of all of those films, whether they are good or not, were trying to create films, movies, entertainment. If they wanted to shock, or wanted to scare, or wanted to entertain, or simply had a story to tell, they had intentions. August Underground's Mordum has nothing interesting to say, nothing worthwhile to see, and simply should not exist. Please don't watch it. And if you're curious as to just how bad it is, please don't purchase it. No one involved in this production should ever be inspired to make a movie ever again. I give this my worst rating in the history of my life: 1/2 stars.

.5 *'s out of *****

Movie Review: Inside (À l'intérieur)

This 2007 French film was recommended for me to watch because of my interest in justifying the artistic element of films notorious for their shocking content, as any of my regular readers can attest to. I went into it expecting your standard shocking content, a little story, and a number of yawns for myself. Instead I was treated to perhaps the best horror film I've seen since Audition.

Our protagonist Sarah, played by Alysson Paradis, is on the verge of going into labor, a few months after a car crash took away her husband. She's none too excited about it either, but appears to have a supporting circle of people including her mother and boss. On Christmas eve she goes home alone, planning to be induced in the morning, but our film's villain has other plans. Our villain for this picture, the unnamed monster portrayed by Béatrice Dalle, decides to stalk and attack the expecting mother. For an hour they play an oscillating game of cat and mouse with a myriad of pointy household objects, with guest appearances by local police and civilians. The acting by everyone in this small cast is capable, if not particularly noteworthy. The two main characters, Sarah and her attacker, are the best of the bunch, portraying their pain convincingly. Dalle in particular gives depth to her character with her guttural, almost child-like noises and cries.

The film is beautifully shot, with an emphasis on color and extended static shots. The use of angles and colors to evoke certain emotions and feelings in the audience is masterfully done, keeping you glued to the seat even when trying only to watch from the corner of your eye. The lighting, the cinematography, the angles, everything technical about this is great. The gore, something usually overlooked in exchange for great artistic direction, is absolutely convincing in this film. There was not one point at which I was taken out of the film by an obvious special effect. The audio effects are similarly well done, while the soundtrack is good, but not especially memorable, save for the closing scene. Surprisingly, the most convincing effects, for me at least, were the CGI scenes of a fetus in utero.

Inside may be using a pregnant protagonist as a gimmick to gain sympathy from the viewer, since we don't know enough about her to identify with her otherwise, but it isn't employed without purpose. Sarah's baby is an active plot point, arguably the focal point of the entire film. The symbolism of having the film take place on Christmas, as well as a slew of other symbolic elements, all come through clearly, adding to the effectiveness of all the hits to the psyche that this movie delivers.

Inside is one of the only movies I've ever seen to have me shifting uncomfortably in my seat, putting my hands over my mouth, turning my head, and wanting to close my eyes. Other films may have been more graphic, more violent, more sexual, more disgusting, but usually these things are used like a carnival sideshow. This film happens to be gorey, but not unnecessarily so. This movie is great. Great story, amazing atmosphere, real suspense without reliance on jump scares or cheap and excessive blood, and with a twist ending that'll hit you like a toaster to the cranium. 4.5 out of 5

****.5 out of *****

Movie Review: Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom

This film has garnered a reputation as among the most vile and wretched pieces of art ever put to film. A reputation hammered in by the infamous nature of its source material, as well as the grisly murder of the film's writer the same year it was released. Salò is based on The 120 Days of Sodom, or the School of Libertinism, by the Marquis de Sade, who you may be familiar with for having the word Sadism, or "the derivation of pleasure as a result of inflicting pain or watching pain inflicted on others," named directly after him.

This film was made in Italian, based on the writings of a Frenchman, and translated into English. Somewhere along the line I feel that something was lost in my understanding of the film. Periodically there were lines that were not subtitled, and though I got the gist of what was going on, I still feel I missed things that an Italian audience would not have, and for that I feel gypped.

There are no real characters in this film, just ideas given body. There are very few names used, usually just formal titles. The only characters given enough time to be considered protagonists are the leaders of this group of people that kidnap and rape and torture and murder people. The leader, referred to as the president, is cross-eyed and a completely detestable individual. In a movie about what Salò is about, he is able to transform himself as the most detestable of the lot. With the exception of Signora Castelli, a character played exceedingly forced, everyone else in the cast performs fine, but nothing to really write home about.

There sort of is a story, but if you've ever heard of Salò, you got it. There's no more depth or intricacy to the film than what it already is. Kidnapping, sexual abuse, murder, rape, torture, and it takes place in a castle of some sort in the Italian countryside. That's it. Those things happen. Furthermore, it takes 2 hours for those things to happen. The movie is supposed to be very unsettling, but for most of the film I was just bored. The gruesome scenes were good, by 70's standards at least, but they didn't make up for the film's reputation or long buildup. This film has no payoff.

On the other side of the coin, we have the movie's artistic direction, which is beautiful. Framing of the shots, sets, and cinematography are all beautifully done, and really wasted on this movie. The film's content may be ugly, but it is recorded in a style no different than one would employ in the most sophisticated of art films. Similarly, some beautiful piano and ambient period music is employed throughout the movie. The graceful audio well balances against the blunt actions it accompanies.

For a film with such a reputation, I'm disappointed. I've heard a lot of bad things about it, and while some of them were true, this film just doesn't hold up as a legendary shock film when compared to much of modern cinema. A Serbian Film is easily a better film, and several times more shocking than anything featured in Salò. The only good thing I gained from watching this movie is that I can now cross it off of my "Shocking films to review" list. If you're looking for something shocking by modern standards, skip it. Actually, I can't really give any reasons not to skip it, unless you want to be able to say that you have seen it. No endorsement here. 2 stars.

** out of *****

Oh what the fuck

"I had been busy with work/registering for school and your calls/voicemail REALLY rubbed me the wrong way. Sorry"

-Kathryn

Last text is from Wednesday night, the 19th. After a few days of silence I call on the 22nd, a Saturday. I get a hold of her and she says she'll call me back. She doesn't. 26 hours after that call I call again, once. Nothing. I call again 24 hours later, and again 48 hours later. She said she was having phone problems which is why I was leaving a voicemail. This apparently makes me creepy? Oh death's sweet embrace, where are you now?

"For every path you choose, there is another you must abandon, usually forever"

I've given up on Kathryn. We knew each other a short time, got relatively close, made plans, and then abandoned them. I don't know why she no longer wishes contact with me. We were planning what we'd do together, tonight, she was supposed to come tonight, but the last time she actually spoke to me was Wednesday night. I got through to her while she was at work a few days later, but just long enough for her to say she would call me back.

She didn't. And furthermore, she's not going to.

I don't mind being disliked, or loathed, or hated. Well, I mind it, it bothers me, but I'm used to it. I can handle it. After experiencing it enough times you start to adapt and deal. However, abandonment is something I cannot adjust to. I believe it stems from my childhood divorce issues. When someone just leaves, no reasoning, no contact, it hurts. Even when they're just acquaintances, when I'm just left without reason, it hurts. Jessica did this to me just last month. That still bothers me.

My day is shitty, the weather is cold, I'll be trying to review a movie later today. I don't expect my mood to recover.

Why? I'm only asking why.

How long has it been since I posted a personal update?

Months, at least.

My room has a heater now that my sister is off at her fancy college. Excuse me, her 2nd fancy college. I only was able to go to one crappy college. Then again, I didn't nag to get things. My father bought her a fridge for her dorm room. I don't know where she gets her sense of entitlement from. Since she's an hour or so away now, she won't be using her space heater. Spoils of war as far as I'm concerned.

Still single. Two prospects, both went kind of oblique at the last minute, with no real reason given. I hate that. I'm fine with being hated, but I want to know why. I find myself missing Katie, though not regretting anything.

I'm very lonely nowadays, even when I've seen my friends that day.

Shrink appointment tomorrow, thinking I'm likely to increase my anti-depressants slightly. Hopefully lunch with mum beforehand.

-B

2007's Catacombs is notable as a FEARnet original film, as well as being set in the infamous French catacombs. If you don't know what that is, go google it. You should. They're quite interesting, and much written about, despite this film's apparent belief that the catacombs are "Paris' dirty little secret." The film is also notable for featuring one time pop music starlet P!nk, real name Alecia Moore. She does about as well as you'd expect, but I'll get to that later. In a film set in one of the world's most beautiful cities, in the world's largest mass grave, what we must first evaluate is the cinematography and atmosphere.

It sucks.

That's not to say Paris or the catacombs aren't photogenic, just that this director chose to phone it in completely, when he could have just set up long still camera shots and had all of his cinematography for him. Instead, there were frantic quick moving shots, lots of blur, cheap fog effects, and awful lighting. The film's lighting is terrible, because this film takes place in an area that is often pitch black. Despite this, there was seemingly constant ambient lighting. It was very light ambient lighting, but any ambient lighting at all in a tunnel over 100 feet underground is suspect. This film represents a complete missed opportunity to do some creative work with sheer dark, very limited light, stark outside lighting for the external scenes, just constant missed opportunities.

Which leads me to the acting, which has one massive one in the role of Victoria, portrayed by Shannyn Sossamon, a favorite actress of mine. She does well, for the role she is given. The writing for her is stale and boring, but she sells it as well as she can, and does fairly well with it. Her sister, played by P!nk, does not. Granted the character is made to be hated, but having P!nk play her makes her especially detestable. Additionally, none of her music is featured in this film, despite numerous opportunities to do so. This is a surprising vacancy, but a welcome one. The addition of her music would have made this attempted horror film especially terrifying.

The villain is some goat mask wearing guy. I have no more information. Something was said about some anti-Christ cult, but it was all rather vague. Plus, he has maybe 10 minutes of screen time, hardly enough time to make yourself a memorable character, or lodge yourself in the minds of viewers. Wasted opportunity. The costume may have been good, but the shaky camera kept me from being able to tell. The gore, which was thrown in almost as an afterthought to make the film scarier, looks fake. A pathetic attempt to scare someone from an organization known as FEARnet.

There are more problems, more wasted opportunities, more stupid decisions, but I'm not here to pick the film apart piece by piece. I could, don't get me wrong. This film had a myriad of issues, but I'm not going to waste my time on this forgettable picture. It's a standard slasher, with a cool setting, but nothing more. If you like Shannyn Sossamon, she gives a good performance, but If you're craving her, just watch Wristcutters: A Love Story. And if you decide to watch the film, don't give up. Watch the whole thing. This film's absurd, hilarious ending, elevates it from a pathetic two stars, to a slightly more respectable two and one half.

**.5 out of *****

New Show Review: Bob's Burgers

Cartoons are a tricky thing. There is no winning formula to success, and sometimes an obvious recipe for failure becomes a record-breaking success that is beloved the world over. Matt Groening drew The Simpsons on the spot when asked to present his characters, out of sudden fear that they'd take away his creative control. He dare not risk his immensely popular "Life in Hell" bunnies, so he drew a family. Over 20 years later, it seems to be doing alright.

Conversely, there have been shows with all the ingredients, that bombed. A favorite of mine, The Critic, only lasted a few seasons and then faded into obscurity, despite an award winning team of writers and producers, as well as an all-star cast of voice actors. The Oblongs, a show starring some of my favorite voice actors and comedians (the Sklar brothers!) and featuring an opening theme song by my favorite band, They Might Be Giants, is one of my most hated cartoons ever, sitting just above the Veggie Tales. With Bob's Burgers, I'm facing a complicated situation. It's an incorporation of several elements I happen to love, but I would love them individually, pretty much anywhere.

Created by Loren Bouchard, a man who's career I've followed going all the way back to the old Squigglevision cartoons like Science Court and Dr. Katz, Bob's Burgers shares his unique view of animation, which has been varying degrees of realistic, this new show being one of the most realistic, despite its unusual proportions and movement. However, limitations such as realism have never hurt his ability to make the audience laugh. Home Movies, which I'd consider his best work, had some of the simplest and laziest looking character design I've ever seen in a cartoon, but the characters felt real, and the situations were human. Does Bob's Burgers measure up? Not yet, but it has potential to.

The all-star cast, immediately recognizable to any fan of modern adult cartoons, is what pulls this show together. I was already aware of H. Jon Benjamin, who shows some real range in this role, and Eugene Mirman's involvement, and they do well, but as the show went on I recognized almost the entire cast from previous roles in Home Movies, as well as Kristen Schaal from Aqua Teen Hunger Force, and Larry Murphy from Assy McGee. The writing is there, but it isn't perfect yet. The jokes need polish, as do the supporting cast, but I have confidence in the writing staff to improve as the show goes on. It is hard to say at this moment whether this will go anywhere, but I did laugh. I laughed more than I do at a current Simpsons or Family Guy episode, though that isn't saying much. As I said to Eugene Mirman in a recent email correspondence, at this juncture I am cautiously optimistic. Truly, I hope for the best.

Movie Review: Primer

I decided to begin my viewing of Primer with intense focus, being that the film is notorious for its extremely confusing plot. The plot becomes confusing about 35 minutes in. At least, that's where it begins. At about an hour into the film it starts to become exponentially more and more confusing. Then the film ends with calm piano and simplistic credits.

Primer was made for a budget of $7,000, a fact I was not aware of until after viewing the film. During viewing I had no idea. With the exception of the no-name cast and utter lack of special effects, a fact which enriches the film greatly, it is indistinguishable from a drama you would see in the theaters, in film quality. Were this film given a wide enough release to reach my area, I'd have seen it at least once, more likely 2 to 3 times, each time returning with friends to discuss the film's plot complexity with them.

I'm hesitant to discuss any of the film's plot for great fear of spoiling the intricacies of the plot to potential viewers. It was written with great skill, and the plot's chronological threads tie together in a story knot that as a writer myself I envy for its precision. It feels like the kind of writing gold that you do not encounter commonly in Hollywood, really. One must understand the ability to know how much work and sophistication went into it, and to acknowledge how difficult it truly is to create such a thing.

The cinematography is understated, but beautiful when utilized. There are many scenes that would have made equally intriguing posters (as seen above). I was impressed by how they used fairly uninteresting locations to evoke emotions of beauty, or anxiety. The pacing, the lighting, the 1990's world it feels pulled out of, everything is real to the viewer. It could be the low budget and unknown cast, but it feels too well done to have come out of sheer dumb luck. Despite all this, I have no complaints. Not a single complaint for the casting, the story, the pacing, the lighting, the score, or anything as grand and tangible as that. I do have a few disappointments though.

Shane Carruth (Aaron) and David Sullivan (Abe) both play their roles well, but they lack the confidence of experienced screen actors. They both feel capable in the roles, but at times hesitant to emote to what I feel is their full ability. Carruth I give a pass to because Primer was his baby, but Sullivan, who has continued his career in the business more than his fellow, could have been much more of everything. More angry, more frightened, more engaging, just more of everything. He does a fine job, but he could have done better.

My other disappointment, believe it or not, is that the film was not longer. At a run time of 77 minutes, the ending's suspenseful run through its last 15 feels closer to 5, and left me begging for a few more minutes, or an after the credits scene. My mind was racing, my eyes frantically searching the screen, and my desire left un-quenched when the credits rolled. A sequel feels like it would cheapen it, but there's so much left to say!

I can't agree with the poster's claim that "PRIMER is the headiest, most singular science-fiction movie since Kubrick made 2001," but it is among some of the best science fiction I've seen in the last decade, easily in the top 10. If you're looking for an intellectual thriller from a time travel angle, this is the one. 4 out of 5 stars

**** out of *****

Possible future Jack Black literature abominations

After the blissfully low opening of Black's latest insult to things I hold sacred in the form of the adaptation(?) of Gulliver's travels, I started to wonder, what other masterpieces of literature could Black adapt into a physical comedy? The possibles are many....

A Modest Proposal
Jack Black plays the titular Modest Proposalawitz, a man who inherits a bakery from a great uncle and is forced to turn it around and make it a profitable business again to restore honor to his family name. The local butcher shop recruits him to make custom meat pasties, but hi-jinks ensue when Black finds out the meat is coming from an unexpected source: the local maternity ward! Opposite Black is his romantic interest portrayed by pop sensation Lady Gaga who plays a struggling nurse working in the maternity ward trying to support her newborn son. Directed by Judd Apatow Rated PG-13.


The Old Man And The Sea
Black plays career fisherman Jack Oldman. He has fun with his other fisherman pals, portrayed by Kyle Glass and Adam Corolla, but when the friends have a few too many while out at sea and become lost, only Jack can save them. While out looking he catches the film's hook, a magical talking Marlin, voiced by Nick Jonas of The Jonas Brothers fame. Together they must conquer the water, rescue their friends, and learn the true meaning of friendship, and the true purpose of fishing along the way. Rated PG-13



Lolita
After a tragic accident takes his new wife from him, Humbert Humbert, played by Black, is left alone with his step-daughter Lolita. Though it starts rocky, Humbert helps her pursue her goal of being the sexiest pre-teen alive as she chases after the pre-teen miss America pageant. Along the paegant road they learn a few things about love, about family, and about themselves, and with an ending that will leave you wondering! Rated PG.