October Horror Movie Challenge: Day 13

Alien. I finally saw Alien today. Of all the movies I have ever meant to see, this is probably one that's been there the longest. Despite hearing good things about it though throughout the years I was still able to totally appreciate it without the desire to view it critically. It was a fun experience and kept me compelled throughout. If for some reason you haven't watched it then it's worth looking into (even if you're not a sci-fi person).

One thing I will say though is that one point jumped out at me as being ridiculous. I am of course speaking about the one character being revealed as a robot. Yes, I understand this is a different, futuristic existence but that still just seemed incredibly hilarious to me. I don't see why he couldn't have just been a scientist incredibly focused on his mission, or that maybe he had some sort of alternate memory chip implanted into his brain. Whatever, I just didn't see the need to make him a full on robot.

With one great movie down I followed it up with HellBent. This film isn't one that I've heard talked about more than once, but it seems to be a modern slasher with a different take on the genre. It's not due to any incredibly creative killer or anything, but the fact that the lead characters in the film are all gay men. I was curious as to a horror film focused on exploiting men instead of women, so I gave it a shot.

It turned out to be a very nice slasher overall and with different jokes going on than a typical one. Sure, there are still things like goofballs getting killed in the woods, stalking, and everything else, but done with a different dressing. I enjoyed the characters and their banter and was curious about why some characters did die and why others didn't. These points were explained, although not explicitly, and were reasonable enough. If you feel like watching a fun horror film then HellBent is one worth looking into.

The final film of the day was StageFright: Aquarius. With a name like that, I was curious as to how exactly the film would be presented. Would it be some sort of artistic journey? Although I wasn't quite right, the film still turned out to be a winner. As StageFright implies, it is about people working on a stage production. The production itself seems fairly odd, but quite cool too. I was a big fan of shots of the practice as well as the accompanying music.

The rest of the plot isn't exactly creative, but it resolves in an entertaining fashion. Basically, there is a psychotic killer locked away in a nearby hospital. He gets out somehow and stalks one of the dancers back to the theater. From there, he gets himself into the theater and goes around killing people until everyone finally realizes. If it weren't for the characters and style, the movie would be much less notable. Since these things are all great though it helps create a neat little experience. I could see this being a movie I watch a few times over.

Game Box 1.0

Year: 2004
Director: David Hillenbrand, Scott Hillenbrand
Writer: Worm Miller, Patrick Casey
Genre: Sci-fi

Although video games are definitely big business there haven't been many movies based around them. There are a few like Gamer and the like, but not really all that much considering. In fact, it feels like there are more movies based around retro arcades than anything attempting to be modern. Anyway, here's this sci-fi or horror movie about a new video game machine - Game Box 1.0.

So what's special about this latest gizmo? Unlike every console before it, it interfaces directly with your head. By using the included attachment that fits onto the player's head, the machine can pull out pertinent thoughts and memories to use in games. For example, you use your thoughts to plug in someone to be the game's villain.

In theory it's pretty cool but in action Game Box 1.0 is painfully bad. The effects are shameful and would make anyone who actually plays modern games laugh. The story is completely dumb and the characters are to. The only redeeming value of the film is how juvenile the story is. This is a good thing because it makes it a lot of fun to watch with friends and joke about it being awful.

The Stepford Wives (Remake)

Year: 2004
Director: Frank Oz
Writer: Paul Rudnik
Genre: Thriller, comedy

I don't know what Frank Oz was thinking when he made this movie but I can attempt to guess at it. It's the 2000s and feminism is over and done with. Women are completely equal. Actually, women might even be more powerful now and are definitely wearing the pants and asserting it. So, let's make fun of that! Even the original movie was pretty hilarious! Men wanting their wives to be subordinates to them? Naaaah that's so dumb we've got to ratchet it up times a million now! That's what I think he was thinking and it just not work for me.

You see, in this take of the film, Joanna is no longer a sort of meek feminist. She's now a powerhouse media icon along the lines of Oprah. She has tremendous power and only loses it when one of her TV shows causes far too much of a ruckus for the CEO. They fire her, and in an attempt to make her feel better, her husband whisks the family away to the gated community of Stepford.

One of the things I don't like about this film is that it immediately presents the women as 100% warped from the get go. There's no question as to the fakeness of them and maybe they figured everyone already knew. Still, that basically kills off all potential growing drama when there's nothing to wonder about. Beyond that, Joanna is tremendously unlikable. She is what I imagine a lot of men view feminists as. They are always stiff and unfeeling in their dark power suits and have nothing but disdain for most around them. Since I believe the point of the original The Stepford Wives is still pertinent I find this version to be mocking the mere notion of it.

Anyway, beyond that the movie is actually very different from the original film. It takes mostly a life of its own by injecting some new characters and changing around the big reveal. I guess that's cool because then it would give people more of a reason to see the new film. There's nothing more useless than a remake that is a carbon copy of the original. Still, I'm not sure the changes that were made were for the best. I guess there's nothing I can do about it now though except wait for the eventual remake of this remake to come out down the line.

I Downloaded a Ghost

Year: 2004
Director: Kelly Sandefur
Writer: Jeff Phillips
Genre: Comedy: Family

I Downloaded a Ghost is just a simple made-for-TV Halloween film. It barely focuses on the actual holiday, but it involves a ghost which makes it spooooky! Well, not quiet. In this story, the ghost is of a man who was wrongly accused of a crime and then died. The main character, a young Ellen Page, uses the internet to download some ghost file for her haunted house and somehow it ends up being the accused guy! It makes enough sense for a children's film.

What follows is a pretty standard movie with a lovably dorky lead. This wasn't Ellen Page's first film, but she did get in on it just a year before Hard Candy. It's incredible to imagine just how young she was when that came out, just seeing her so tiny and cute in this film.

The ghost guy is pretty annoying. He's a wannabe stand up comic so expect lots of unfortunate jokes to come from him. The other characters aren't all very exciting but they're about par for the course in these kinds of films. The story doesn't really go anywhere that interesting, but it's okay. The strangest thing really is that if this is a Halloween time film for children, why aren't there more scares to be found? More focus on the guy in a ghost form instead of just hanging around in his ugly shirt? Kids tend to like creative things and fantasy, not dull reality.

What's especially amusing is that only at the very end do you really get to see a "ghost" (in more classic ghost form). Oh well, I can't complain. It was an acceptably amusing romp although I wouldn't watch it again. It might be a nice way to pass an hour and a half with a young child. Or if you want to watch the complete filmography of Ellen Page.

Puppet Master vs Demonic Toys

Year: 2004
Director: Ted Nicolaou
Writer: C. Courtney Joyner
Genre: Horror: Evil Toys

By this point the series seems to have lost its "horror" tinge. It's all just a joke and this is readily made apparent in this crossover film. Apparently, Demonic Toys is a series all its own which ripped off Puppet Master. Because of that, it makes sense that this battle would have to take place at some point.

The two worlds mesh perfectly and it makes sense why the toys are there. The toy company was spying on this toy maker, who is Andre's great great nephew or something. They've got the blood in them though which means both he and his daughter are able to bring things to life. As a matter of fact, despite an other film taking the toys out of the original house and family, they are once again brought into family hands for this film. Whatever.

While this film really brings nothing great to the story, it does make for an entertaining watch. If nothing else, it's kind of hilarious to see the main character flirt awkwardly with a cop as he tries to convince her he's not crazy. It's also interesting to see the head of a huge toy company introduce virgin girls to her dungeonesque "playroom".

There's no real point to the story but it entertains for a good hour and a half. If you're interested in burning some brain cells I'd almost recommend it. It could be a good double feature alongside Jack Frost (not the family film) for the holidays.

PS: Corey Feldman plays the dad character. I was overjoyed.

Evil Dead: The Musical

Year: 2004
Director: George Reinblatt
Writer: George Reinblatt
Genre: Horror: Possession, Musical

The Evil Dead is a fantastic movie. Originally released in 1981 it was just a tiny, cheap production but people fell for it. Because of the success of that one, they basically remade and added onto the film for Evil Dead II. Finally after that they did Army of Darkness which is one of the most rollicking and awesome horror films made alongside Peter Jackson's Braindead/Dead Alive. 


Evil Dead: The Musical isn't a film but a stage musical. I have yet to have the opportunity to ever see it performed live before my eyes but I was able to get my hands on a copy. While the video quality wasn't the highest I was able to see what was going on. Picked up the official soundtrack CD too!

When it first started I felt that the humor was a bit too modern and the whole thing was too goofy. But then I thought back to the source material and it is all very silly. Once I got over some of the slight changing of comedic pace, I realized this was a great labor of love. The music isn't incredibly catchy, but it's not bad either. The dance segments were pretty fun as well even if they were mostly lifting various dance moves from popular dances.

It tells the story of Evil Dead 1 and II relatively well. I'm not sure which production I watched, but the Ash in it was dorky but oh so adorable. He fit into the Ash role perfectly and even though he was no Bruce Campbell he was a fairly accurate simulation. I'd watch it again in a heartbeat if I could see it live. Otherwise, it was a nice one time experience kind of akin to the absurdity of the Reefer Madness musical.

Apparently the live showings even featured a "splatter zone". If you were up close to the stage you would have a good chance of some of the on-screen blood spurting out at you. I, for one, would dig that.