Yes. Yet another remake of a classic horror film is upon us. I really dig the original 1974 “Black Christmas” that Bob Clark directed. About the only thing that makes this remake look interesting is that it’s written and directed by Glen Morgan … of Morgan and Wong fame.

I finally watched “Silent Hill” this past weekend. It’s a movie that I had planned on seeing in a movie theater when it was released but things just kept me from going. I wish now that I had made it. The widescreen images would have been really sweet up there on the big screen.

I liked “Silent Hill” a lot. I have come to think of it less as a “horror” film and more of a dark fantasy or nightmare that you can’t wake up from. It’s all pretty bleak.

It’s kinda like “The Cell” only with a lot better acting (J-Lo you suck!) and story.

Sharon has been adopted by Rose and Chris but she has started having mood altering nightmares and keeps calling out “home” and “Silent Hill.” So, Rose decides the way to end all this is to take Sharon to Silent Hill and find out just what the heck is going on. Can we guess that it’s not the best idea? There’s a car wreck and Sharon disappears into the town. Can Rose find Sharon in the nightmare maze of Silent Hill before it’s too late?

The movie unfolds at it’s own pace as Rose unravels the clues to find Sharon and the who/what/when/where/how of Silent Hill. It’s very much like the video game in that respect as a trail of clues leads from on horrific locale to another. I do wish there had been a few more of the monsters that make the game such a fright fest (and trust me … the game is terrifiying in spots). But there is only so much you can pack into a two hour film. The filmakers did choose some really specific images from the game to use in the film which was cool. You get the idea that they wanted to stay true to the game yet take it just a step beyond. The addition of the underground coal fire (ala Centralia, PA) is a cool addition to the story. It’s all about the atmosphere. There’s a killer cast (Radha Mitchell, Sean Bean, Laurie Holden, Deborah Kara Unger and Alice Krige) that also helps step things up a notch as well.

I have read some reviews where folks have complained that the movie makes no sense. I am not sure where this is coming from as the film even has a “here is what has happened and that is why this is happening” segment late in the film. It all seemed pretty straight forward to me. Or maybe it’s because I loved the really sweet visual style of the movie that I can let certain things slide.

So, yeah. “Silent Hill.” I dug it.

Six women go caving. Six women get trap by a cave-in. Six women discover they are not alone in the dark. Repeat: In the dark.

“The Descent” is one of the better horror films to come along in a long time. It works on quite a few levels. First, you have the relationships between the women. Everything begins good and then the tension starts once the cave-in hits. Secondly is just the fact that they are caving. It’s dark, dank and very claustrophobic down there. The feeling of unease and dread is already pretty damn high before the monsters even make their appearance. When they do (oh, man … it’s pretty cool!) that’s when all all the gore and mayhem starts. Like most other current horror films, the gore factor is pretty high in “The Descent” once it gets there. Those Crawlers are just plain nasty. A woman behind us in the theater kept squealing and gagging all through the end of the movie. Heh.

Who will be strong or lucky enough to make it out? Well, that you just gotta find out for yourself.

Now, here’s the kicker. The version is U.S. theaters has a truncated end. It’s missing the 1 minute continuation that ends the original British version. I really hate that this was done (thanks again, Lionsgate) as the original ending fits so much better with the tone of the film. It also wraps up a plot device that just gets totally dropped in the American version. If you have seen the film and want to check out the original ending, you can thanks to YouTube.

As for complaints about the movie … I have a major one. There is a plot device that pits two of our women against each other. I usually find that a horror film isn’t the greatest venue for that sort of thing. I can’t honestly buy that folks would stop to hash out their differences while being chased by a pack of nasty, flesh-eating cave dwellers. This plot point is a slightly less offensive in light of the original ending but just didn’t work for me as presented in the American version.

Bottom Line:
Definitely worth checking out. It gave me the willies.

I am looking forward to seeing “Slither” (featuring Nathan Fillion!).

The reviews for the remake of “The Hills Have Eyes” seem to be off base for the most part. Alexandre Aja (Writer/Director of “Haute Tension”) delivers the goods and then some. It’s a very solid thrill ride with plenty of cheap thrills and buckets of blood and gore.

I have found it interesting that some reviewers who praised “Hostel” as being hardcore have lambasted “The Hills Have Eyes.” Trust me … “Hills” is the movie that “Hostel” promised us and never delivered.

Aja showed lots of promise with “Haute Tension.” That film was basically an exercise in using gore to help ratchet up the overall dread of the film. “The Hills Have Eyes” gives Aja a good chance to do something with a little more character and lot more with the gore. I found the violence in “Hills” to be a lot more vicious than that of “Haute Tension.” It makes me wonder if the MPAA harder on “Haute Tension” because it’s a foreign film and has let “Hills” slide a little more because it’s American.

I did like that the remake makes more sense of some of the plot points that never really worked in the Wes Craven version. The car wreck that strands the Carters in no-man’s land isn’t totally silly like before. Plus it’s nice to see the gas station owner be more active in getting the story rolling. The fact that our inbred, mutant cannibals are the by products of nuclear testing is a wee dull and standard … but it give us a great final act in a nuclear test site full of buildings and creepy 50’s style mannequins. That was fun! Some of the reviews have cried “foul” and have tried to make the argument that the filmmakers have a “message” about the effects of nuclear testing. Ummm, no. Aja isn’t on a soap box. He’s just using the nuclear issue as a basis not as a rallying cry. Those cannibals are evil and have no qualms about killing your mother and then pulling out her entrails for a light snack.

There are a few problems. There’s a pretty major scene that should have been in the film but is only referenced after the fact. I can only imagine that it ended up on the cutting room floor for some reason. Missing from the film also a family structure for our killers. To me that seems pretty important as the film’s thrust is Carter Family verses Cannibal Family. It works to set up the killers better as they aren’t all so random like so many other horror films treat the villains. Plus, it helps make Ruby’s act of defiance in the final act all the more plausible.

The acting is good all the way ’round. It real shame though that Emile de Ravin (of “Lost” fame) has nothing better to do than act totally hysterical after the first attack. Her character never really gets a chance to redeem herself past a cheap shot at the very end of the film.

So, hell yeah! There’s messy gunshot wounds, pick axes to the head, munched on entrails, eviscerated dogs, gnawed off arms, burned bodies and a baby that could potentially be lunch! “The Hills Have Eyes” was pretty rockin’ in my opinion.~

Yes, it’s mindless. Yes, the story is very from the cookie cutter with some plot holes and major silliness. But what I can respect about a film like “Final Destination 3” is that it does what it promises. It kills off C-List teen actors in elaborate and satisfyingly gory ways.

The Story:
You should know it. Girl foresees a roller coaster accident and gets her friends off the ride. Of course, the coaster crashes meaning that the “survivors” have cheated Death. Well, he gets super pissed about being cheated and comes back to kill with a vengeance.

Yeah. If you saw the first and second film you know the drill. “FD3” strictly follows the formula set down by it predecessors. The roller coaster sequence is a highlight. Don’t know why, but I have always had a thing for amusement park ride induced mayhem. Each subsequent death scene get more elaborate (think Rube Goldberg) and messy. There seemed to be a lot of head trauma in this movie … from car motors to weight machines to nail guns. Yup. The final sequence is another huge set piece involving a subway car which I found to be a nice capper for the film.

I do find it interesting though that shit like “Hostel” (which promised more than it could deliver) gets praised and yet a film like “Final Destination 3” (which promises nothing) gets lambasted. Oh, well. I guess Glen Morgan and James Wong aren’t peddling their ass all over Hollywood like a certain Eli Roth seems to be doing.

Bottom Line:
Definitely not a “great” horror movie but it’s solid, mindless fare … especially if you in the mood to watch teens die (and die messy).

Tobe Hooper’s remake of “The Toolbox Murders” is yet another one of those remakes that has nothing really to do with the original film other than the killer has a fettish for power tools.

Director Tobe Hooper’s gory “retooling” of the late ’70s chiller centers on a young couple (Angela Bettis and Brent Roam) who move into an old run-down L.A. apartment complex, only to find out that the structure is under the influence of an evil supernatural force that uses all manner of home improvement equipment to commit a grisly massacre.

I liked this movie a lot. It’s not the greatest horror movie ever made, but it far surpasses what is being churned out by the Hollywood cookie cutter. “Toolbox Murders” delivers all the gritty chills and violence that movies like “Hostel” and “Saw” promise and then never deliver. Hooper uses a nice creepy locale (the now demolished Ambassador Hotel) and a lot of visual misdirection for some really cheap thrills. Also on tap, are quite a few messy deaths involving the aforementioned power tools. The cast is very solid, led by a really solid performance by Angela Bettis. Sheri Moon even pops up in a nice bit part and is actually quite good (not so over-the-top like her performances in Rob Zombie’s two films). My major complaint would be the “supernatural” aspect of the film. I can get behind that the Lusman Arms was built with Satanism and evil in mind. It would have been more interesting if the “supernatural” aspects had been more misdirection rather than the final explanation for the killer and his wicked ways. ‘Cause I don’t like that you never find out just why a supernatural being would have a power tool fettish. That makes it kinda silly … until he saws the top of someone’s head off with a hand-held circular saw. Now that, I like!

Bottom Line:
Somewhat flawed but definately worth checking out.

I watched Wes Craven’s “New Nightmare” last night and enjoyed it for the most part. I was interested in seeing it since it’s not a “sequel” to the original “A Nightmare on Elm Street” and has gotten more good praise than bad. The movie is set in the “real world” and follows actress Heather Langenkamp (Nancy from the original “Nightmare”) ten years after the making of the first film. She’s married, has a child and seems to be being stalked by a rabid “A Nightmare of Elm Street” fan. Of course, she starts see Freddy Kruger everywhere she goes and becomes convinced that he’s trying to kill her family so he can come out of the “movie” and into “real world.” It’s an interesting premise to turn the reality of Freddy Kruger in on itself and the movie does have some really good scenes and scares. I particularly like the sub-plot of Los Angeles having one earthquake after another for no real reason. It mirrors Heather’s unsettled mind. Yeah, it sounds silly, but it works. And it’s fun to see Robert Englund, Wes Craven and assorted other “Nightmare” alumni play themselves. What didn’t really work for me was the climax of the film. It’s ok and certainly doesn’t ruin the movie. I think that rooting the movie’s premise abd conclusion totally in Heather’s psychology would have made for a far more interesting conclusion.

Bottom Line:
Worth seeing for it’s clever reinvention of the “A Nightmare on Elm Street” story line.
(Hell, you might even like the ending more than I did.)