|
‘The Devils Rejects’
(2005, Lions Gate Films)
Directed by Rob Zombie
Rob
Zombie's prior horror film, ‘House Of 1000 Corpses’, was a mildly
successful piece of garbage that made enough money to give him the go
ahead to make this semi sequel. Most of the cast return for this, with
some new cameos/ small performances from genre staples including Ken
Foree, Michael Berryman, Ginger Lynn, etc. Unfortunately, I did not get
to see this opening night due to some prior engagements, but I did see
it a few days later. Between the time it came out and the time I saw
it, it got a lot of real positive reviews, talking about its "no holds
barred approach to horror" and the "unrestrained gore" and its
"brutality". So, yeah, I was hyped to see this. Too bad it is a
generic piece of garbage. And it commits the worst cinematic offense
possible. It is boring. BORING. Halfway through, I couldn't wait for
it to end.
The film follows the Firefly family and their
adventures after a violent police raid on their home. Their mother is
captured and they are on the run. Oh yeah, this one is as boring as it
reads. Hostages are taken and degraded, people die, we meet more
assorted weirdoes and there are boobs. Basically, this is a retread and
homage to (actually a rip off of) countless roadtrip movies and
backwoods dumb fuck family movies. There are a few funny jokes and
Michael Berryman is really funny. I also liked seeing Priscilla Barnes
naked and degraded. And Willian Forsythe is fantastic as the vengeful
policeman, especially at the end when he completely snaps. But that's
it.
Too much of the movie wanders around pointlessly,
filled with non plot. Far too much time is wasted on junk dialogue.
And whoever talked about the no holds barred horror and the gore and
violence is a fucking retard because there is no good gore. No good
effects. And no good action. The gun fights are clumsily staged.
There is a disturbing lack of blood. The one good scene, a cross rip
off of ‘Texas Chainsaw Massacre’ and ‘Final Destination’, had potential,
but it cuts away too fast and we only see the hideous aftermath. Even
an axe to the head is clean and almost bloodless.
I was
completely let down and now I am sure that people who review movies for
newspapers have no idea what horror is. I don't hate this movie simply
because there is no gore. I don't like it because I was bored out of my
mind for 90 minutes and felt completely ripped off. The two best scenes
are Tiny dragging the corpse through the woods at the beginning and the
montage/end, which plays while “Freebird” blasts over the soundtrack.
So basically, we get a few random good parts in a mess of bad parts. It
should have been called ‘The Devils Retards’. Skip it. (Edward Black)
|
‘A Dirty Shame’ (2005,
New Line)
Directed by John Waters
I’ve
enjoyed every feature film John Waters has made, from his early ultra
low budget shock fests like ‘Multiple Maniacs’ and ‘Pink Flamingos’ to
the bigger budgeted and almost family-friendly ‘Hairspray’ and
‘Cry-Baby’. Not all of his movies have blown me away, but I never feel
like I’ve wasted my time watching any of them, and ‘A Dirty Shame’ is no
exception. Still, this is definitely lesser Waters. Despite the NC-17
rating, ‘A Dirty Shame’ is not a true return to Waters’ roots. It was
intended to get an R rating, and in my opinion that’s what the uncut
version should have gotten. The material is edgy, to be sure, but not
the full on assault against good taste and decency that die hard Waters
fans might have been hoping for when they saw this rating.
Tracy Ullman is a sexually repressed housewife who,
when hit upside the head, becomes a raging nymphomaniac. Johnny
Knoxville plays a “sexual healer” who has been gathering disciples, and
he believes Ullman will be the chosen one to come up with a sex act
never performed before. Much of the movie consists of various straight
laced characters encountering Knoxville’s disciples, who are all defined
by their sexual kinks. The funniest of these are the three “bears”
(hairy gay men, for those who don’t know). There’s also a guy with a
dirt fetish, a guy who likes to “upper deck” (leave bowel movements in
the tank of a toilet), and run of the mill swingers. It sounds like the
plot could go into explicit territory, but Waters never shows anything.
He just has his characters talk about it. Apparently for Waters, the
idea of his character’s fetishes in and of themselves is funny enough.
And that’s where the problem comes in, I guess. In
Waters’ best films, he’s firmly on the side of the outsiders, no matter
how depraved they may be. Here, he seems to be having a laugh at their
expense much of the time. Plus, the whole getting hit on the head thing
quickly becomes tiresome. It would be one thing if Ullman was the only
character this applied to, but it turns out that Knoxville and all his
disciples had their libidos set loose by similar knocks to the noggin.
When the movie falls into the old cliché of repeated hits to the head
knocking characters back and forth between personalities, it just feels
like a cheesy vaudeville routine. There are enough good gags to offset
this silliness to a degree, but overall ‘A Dirty Shame’ falls short of
what I hoped it would be. It’s a marginal Waters film, somewhere on the
level of his ‘Serial Mom’ and ‘Polyester’. Good for a few laughs, but
hardly worth repeat viewings. (Bob Ignizio) |