The Purge Review

           Once were the days where daring masters like Paul Verhoeven or John Carpenter painted stark, biting portraits of humanity and futuristic America and its own peculiarities and the “what-if” possibilities that could happen. In "lamens" terms, they created speculative science fiction like no other filmmaker at the time. With his feature debut, writer and director James DeMonaco aims to create the same sense of social commentary on the state of both America and human beings. In 2022, The United States has adopted a new rule to battle with both unemployment and rime rate, and that comes to the deformed 12-hour period called “The Purge.” It’s quite simple: for 12 hours, all hell breaks loose, and it’s all completely legal. As the film lightly explores, humans are creatures with pent-up rage and anger, and to allow them to express it in glorious fashion is catharsis for American citizens -- to explore on all their dark impulses.  A wicked idea to explore on such a touchy topic like violence and human nature, especially in a genre film, no less. However, what starts out promising enough to invite many ideas and themes to be explored, results in a typical, cliche-ridden home invasion thriller. While desperately maintaining any sense of tone, it straddles the line of genre movie conventions and social commentary, it comes off as confused and sloppily done rather than focused and assured. The premise itself becomes irrelevant as it only serves as a justification for psychotic people to commit their crimes without persecution. This could happen any other day. The purge serves only as the film’s self-indulgent political backdrop without any moral implications.

    As the hour approaches, James Sandin (Ethan Hawke), a wealthy home security developer, prepares his family for the inevitable. In their ideal, upper-class neighborhood, as neighbors approach on assuring of yet another successful purge, Mary Sandin (Lena Headey) and her kids Charlie (Max Burkholder), a young, precocious nerd, and Zoey (Adelaide Kane), a young teen dating a significantly older boy, Henry (Tony Oller), all try to reassure themselves of the safety and sanctity their father provides. As the family does their best to keep themselves occupied during the night of mayhem, Charlie inexplicably disarms their house and lets in a bloodied wanderer (Edwin Hodge), who begs for sanctuary as he is being chased. Soon, they’re visited upon a huge party of purge participants, as their leader (Rhys Wakefield) so politely demands they hand over the stranger or they will quite simply, break in and murder everyone inside. With time running out, the Sandins try to figure out if they should turn into the monsters they intend on keeping out, and hand over the stranger, or try to stand their ground, and fight against the system they’ve so flourished upon.

                                                  

          For a premise that leaves more questions unanswered, it’s an interesting concept to explore and ponder. To have the freedom and commit whatever act of violence without any repercussions leaves to question the morality of humanity, and how violent we can be, and the cost of life to preserve such perks like low unemployment or crime rate. But what’s sad is that DeManaco seems more interested in keeping the moral dilemmas associated in trade for a cheap, run-of-the-mill, home invasion thriller that has been done far more better. We get everything: the creep behind one of our heroes, as they are oblivious to the fact; someone coming up from behind with the music crescendoing, only to be revealed as a jump scare; characters making moronic decisions that put everyone at risk for danger (I feel as though I’m beginning to sound more repetitive than the film is with the tropes), etc. Ultimately, all the allegorical messages become lost in this mundane, cheap thriller, more concerned with providing thrills than any contemplation on the issues at hand. What’s more insulting is how forced and contrived the ending is, as it tries to raise a question in greed and feeding off the weaknesses of others. Tonal consistency is the least of the film’s worries; with creepy intruders being menacing with their eerie masks and the moral conundrum of James surrendering a human life for the sake of his family, the premise becomes extraneous.

     Hawke is regrettably wasted, as the setup to his character paints an optimist, cheery, rich yuppie, who fully supports the purge, as he sells security systems. His change from higher-class father to hard boiled killer lacks any pathos, or mere understanding for what he does throughout. Only one scene signifies any inner turmoil, as he is conflicted whether to hand over the innocent man over to the faceless goons waiting outside. Lena Headey is simply there to react and be the nurturing figure in charge of keeping the family together (which she fails numerous times). Both Burkholder and Kane are resorted to being throwaway stock characters, and ultimately make the decisions that further the dangers for all the family. Without any exploration into their psyche or resonance, they become walking figures, ready to be put in peril for the sake of “amping up” the film. Particularly Zoey’s boyfriend, who decides to express his true love for her in an illogical, completely inane scene that is never brought up for discussion (why). The only semblance of any character is Wakefield’s Bateman-esque delightful, gentleman personality as the leader for this deranged entourage of killers. With only his menacing smug plastered on screen for a good portion, it’s safe to say the creepy theatrics wear off momentarily

                                                 

     Despite a rather thrilling third act, in which the villainous creeps finally break in, forcing the family to fend them off in the most brutal, crowd-pleasing fashion, all the self-importance subtext is tossed aside. It struts along a tone of both social commentary and home invasion thriller, that it ultimately fumbles and embarrasses itself before regaining any mobility. It’s rather disappointing than angering to see such rich ideas and moral complexity being replaced with a generic plot that it could have had both, and kept its dignity. It’s a traitor-made crowd flick without any much enjoyment to be had. If any personal cleansing can come from the purge, then DeManaco certainly doesn’t show it, rather have it beaten into us by the very same family squeamish around violence. The Sandins exemplify pure 101 horror movie cliche-ness that it’s surprising in this future, people aren’t more keenly smarter than the average citizen. Alas, once the body meter count starts and the axe-welding begins, it’s probably best to sweep it under the rug, lest the film actually provoke any conversation.

                                                     D by Amritpal Rai

                                           

Texas Chainsaw 3D Review

          The newest installment in the "Texas Chainsaw" series is a direct sequel to the original classic (even though Hooper has already made his sequel), however, "Texas Chainsaw 3D" feels like another remake with a last half of anything remotely new. Its ineffectual attempt to recreate and pay homages to the original by having slight nods, lines, and even re-creating similar set-ups from the original, this is the very definition of "hackneyed." This is trite in every sense of the word. Nothing original in the minds of both the writer's and director is explored, yet we're treated to the similar set-up of the original "Texas Chainsaw Massacre," where we have five teens travel to an abandoned house, only to get picked off one-by-one by a chainsaw wielding maniac until our remaining heroine is left alive. Only in here, it's blatantly insulting. From just retreading from the original story to even having a dead armadillo on the side of the road, it seems clear this film is just to re-establish an already dead franchise in the public's conscience by using 3D technology to guarantee a theatrical release. Even by having the film go off the rails in the last half doesn't serve up to anything, other than making us feel all mushy and gushy to the character of Leatherface. 




  

        What I can admire is the opening title sequence by incorporating footage from the original classic in a 3D effect where it makes the images of the old film grain seem more cool to watch. This film starts right after where the original ended. We see both police and mob rioters flock the Saywer house where the gruesome murders happened. But apparently this town is comprised of slack-jawed yokels who prefer to shoot and burn first and ask questions later, as they engage in a shootout with the Saywer family (it seems they can reproduce in seconds as there are more members than what was hinted in the original). This ends with the all the Sawyer family dead and their house burns in flames, with Leatherface escaping his doom (very vaguely, I might add) and one sole survivor: a baby. This infant is soon adopted by one couple involved in the shootout. 


                                         

        Cut to present day, where that baby girl has grown into a beautiful 20-something teenager, Heather (Alexandra Daddario), who is quickly informed that her distant grandmother has died and left a huge estate in her will to Heather (she blatantly ignores the will, which explains Leatherface residing in the basement). Together, with her boyfriend, Ryan (Tremaine "Trey Songz" Neverson), her promiscuous blonde friend, Nikki (Tania Raymonde) and her boyfriend, Kenny (Scott Eastwood), who take the trip down to Texas to claim the property, unaware that the creepy Leatherface awaits them. What happens in the last third of the film is best left untold, but sad to say, it's very stupefying, to say the least. Now, I know what you're thinking: "how can Heather be in her 20's in the present day of 2012 when she was born in 1973?" Trust me: this problem is the beginning of the many other problems of what's wrong with the film. In fact, there's so many problems riddled with this film that it's remarkably beautiful how badly constructed this film is. Hardly any effort is done to punch up the script that they could have easily avoided the problem with Heather's age if it wasn't for one blatant product placement. Honestly, this had the feeling of taking place somewhere in the 90s, which would have been reasonable, but leave it to the film to fumble in its own mess with an unnecessary visual of an IPhone. 

    
  

         Hollywood has no shame of releasing title after of title of pointless horror remakes/sequels or trying to reinvent the wheel, especially with this sequel that disregards every other movie made after the original film. It's a business and you're either in or out. But how can a trio of screenwriters lack the sense and imagination to come up with anything new or thrilling? It's more so infuriating that a film has to recycle even old kills and set-ups from the original. We get our girl in the freezer scare. We get our person stuck on a meat hook. We get our first victim getting smacked with a hammer. I'm not spoiling anything; I'm setting the record first that "The Texas Chainsaw 3D" can't even think of any new or decent kills. It was tiresome just seeing the same set-up and kills in the Platinum Dunes 2003 remake, which wasn't bad at all, but compared to this dull mess, it's a godsend. Director John Lussenhop feels as if he doesn't care for his audience, or their intelligence; just as long as he puts in enough gore and kills, he can guarantee himself a big pay-day. Added to that, the blatant inconsistencies with the plot is more gaping than the obvious cash-grab marketing to having this be in 3D. It's even more saddening when cameo appearances from cast members of the original are not used to any potential, except to satisfy fans of the original. Gunnar Hansen (the original Leatherface), Marilyn Burns, and John Dugan make brief appearances that weren't worth the trouble of getting.



          With three screenwriters involved ( Kristen Elms, Adam Marcus, and Debra Sullivan) it's almost astounding how awful and cringe-inducing certain lines are when the actors have to force themselves to take it seriously and hope audiences can buy it. Almost every character is written as if they're either lonesome scum, or just oblivious and dumb. Even more so, how flimsy and contrived the narrative is. The big twist in the end only enhances the absolute ridiculousness and the unintentional hilarity that follows through. We leave with the image of Leatherface not being the mystique, over-powering, inhuman monster we remember and loved, but the image of a sad, misunderstood madman with a personal vendetta against all the townspeople responsible for murdering his family (oh, and on the sidelines, it's a good exercise to chase and kill innocent victims. I'm assuming he's just bi-polar). As for Heather, well, we’ll say she makes some of the most irrational decisions ever seen in a horror film by the main protagonist (if she qualifies for that). It’s irksome to think she’s considered a protagonist, considering she is a walking, talking robot without any personality to make her stand out as her own, except for her body. Not that I condone the decisions to showing nudity, but when the film excessively taunts and tantalizes by showing this poor actress (including her friend) in skimpy clothes and teasing at the very idea of revealing anything, it’s safe to say this movie is a total bore without any direction. In fact, it kind of defeats the purpose of an R-rating if one is not inclined to use it to its full advantage. 




    The acting is far from “mildly decent,” with Daddario being the main lead, she comes off as incompetent and clumsy - falling down whenever possible while running away (even that is a tired old cliche) from the chainsaw-wielding maniac. The rest of her friends are just there to be killed, and one couldn’t possibly care less if something bad was going to happen to them. Dan Yeager takes the role of Leatherface, and while from his expressions alone there is some humanity to the character, it just comes off as bland and unsympathetic. It’s admirable for Lussenhop to take this film outside of the box in the third act, but execution-wise it fails, miserably. This is a perfect example of a horror film done with sloppy care and little to no respect for the material, and for that reason alone, it irritated me to no end. Added to that, the horror cliches, inconsistencies to the plot and timelines, and just shlock film-making at its lowest, “Texas Chainsaw 3D” is offensive to the human sensibilities; all the while I was wondering if this film had any sense to begin with. I can safely say the first addition to my “Worst Films of 2013” list belongs to the atrocious “Texas Chainsaw 3D.” What a way to start off the new year. 



                                              Rating: F by Amritpal Rai

                                 

The Master Review

                   With such a sparse filmography from writer/director, Paul Thomas Anderson (There Will Be Blood), his films are not catered to the whims of mass moviegoers. He makes films that interest him. He creates characters and story arcs that may seem ambiguous and non-directional, but the more views given to his films, the better the experience becomes and gives one the full grand picture of the film as a whole. “The Master” defies Anderson’s structure. This is unlike any Anderson film ever made, or even any film in general. And for that, it’s a monumental achievement. “The Master” is destined to both infuriate and enrapture audiences with its slow, meticulous build-up that may seem unfulfilling, but pays off massively in the end. This is not a film made to entertain audiences; this is made for the sake of art and painting a portrait of disturbed, perplexed characters to the lengths of which we’ve never seen. Speaking of characters, it’s the performances from Joaquin Phoenix and Phillip Seymour Hoffman as the film’s leads, which elevates the material that may seem bland and boring to fascinating heights. Anderson’s new bold achievement may not seem accessible to mainstream audiences, or even some film enthusiasts overall, but for those who those who can endure Anderson’s subtle pacing, his undefined, dissonant characters, and his ambiguous meaning can see this as being one of the year’s best films. 
    
  

               As some are confused and wondering if this is a look into the beginnings of Scientology, it’s not entirely about that. While some things may resemble the Church of Scientology, it’s not what the film is about. Instead, we open up with Freddie Quell (Joaquin Phoenix), a tortured, disturbed, alcoholic world-war II veteran, who’s abrasive and unrelenting behavior disconnects him from any society he tries to live in, as he tries to adjust in the real world, which only draws him over the edge of insanity. Soon after, his wondering around the American landscape finds himself in the company of Landcaster Dodd (Phillip Seymour Hoffman), a self-affirmed religious leader of a cult known as, “The Cause,” who inhabits the body and persona of L. Ron Hubbard, but that’s as close as it will be near Scientology. As Freddie seems to find comfort and peace in Dodd’s hands, he becomes the experimental animal for Dodd, as he is subjected to menial tests, which go far beyond comprehension. Soon it’s two dueling forces battling it out as Freddie struggles to deal with Dodd’s innocuous teachings. With Freddie trying to find direction in his life while Dodd manipulating and taming Freddie into his own cause. 


                                   

                 As is all of Anderson’s works like the 70’s porn industry in “Boogie Nights,” or the boom in capitalism in “There Will Be Blood,” this is an exploration in not only the influence and dynamics of religion, but as to what effect it can have on people. In “The Master,” people generally fall into two categories: those who truly believe in Dodd’s beliefs and those who can easily see the holes and fallacy in it. Freddie falls directly in the middle - where he can’t decide for himself on what to believe but desperately wants to find a side and stay put. His undetermined behavior and reluctance is the main driving force in Freddie as we experience both his frustrations and and submissiveness and loyalty to Dodd’s authority. To say this film is aimless and wanders is to miss the point - the only story we get is the father-and-son relationship between Dodd and Freddie. It may be more subtle than what we’re used to Anderson’s film-making sensibilities or just not enough to sustain a two-and-half hour film, but this was thoroughly absorbing and mesmerizing from start to finish. Not a single frame is wasted in this superlative work of art. 

   

               If anything people can take away from the film, it’s the the performances from both Phoenix and Hoffman, which are to say the least; astounding. Phoenix’s uncompromising determination to bring a character like Freddie come to life is worth alone to witness the film. He commands the screen in every frame, even as he goes toe-to-toe with Hoffman, yet he maintains a sense of unique authority as an actor. His performance is remarkable in that it’s unlike anything one has ever witnessed. He pours all of his energy into this role, even to just physically look the part with his crooked hunches or by molding his appearance. His determination is sealed into this film even when it requires to do something physically impossible, as he bravely without hesitation surrenders his body to physical brutality in destroying a jail cell by throwing himself against everything or going all-out crazy on bystanders around him, it’s inarguable that he gives the one of the best performances of the year. His behavior alone and reactions give the sense that Freddie is mentally ill and requires more than a father figure in his life. And at the opposite end of the spectrum is Hoffman, whose cool and collected manner gives him the chance to absorb the character of Dodd. Hoffman is more than capable of bringing a character like Dodd, who may seem delusional and admirable, a feeling of humanity as he convinces his peers to his ideas and tries to reign in Freddie with his unorthodox techniques. When both appear on screen, it’s acting of the highest degree. Just one scene in particular as Dodd asks Freddie questions that sound random but give the sense of what auditing must feel. As Freddie is interrogated and Dodd is unrelenting with his questions, seeing both perform against each other is gripping and enthralling to watch. 


                              

             While the supporting cast isn’t particularly developed with characters like Dodd’s son, Val (Jessie Plemons) who all the while charades with Dodd, is detached from his cause and ultimately sees it as a joke, and even Kevin J. O’Conner as a member of the church, who has one scene of any character where he voices his true opinion, only to end up being attacked by Freddie are given less to do and act as noise in the background. Only Amy Adams, who plays Dodd’s wife, Peggy, gives her limited scenes a true depth of character. She acts more of a catalyst behind Dodd than just a supportive wife. Almost shows the true brunt and brains behind the whole operation, whereas Dodd seems to be the image. While these are lightly touched upon, it gives the picture more depth than imagined. One scene in a bathroom where Dodd seems defeated, only with Peggy’s assurance and sexual gestures gives him the motivation. 



         This almost leads to another point of the role of women around this time period. While Peggy seems to be the dominating force behind Dodd, Freddie is more of a personal of the male cravings for sexual desires. As he sees women as mere sex objects, it gives the viewer in the type of world where Freddie comes from. With flashbacks showing Freddie’s love partner as he leaves for the war, gives a feeling of abandonment. He has no one to care for him. Added to that his aimless sense of direction and purpose - fills his lost void with alcohol and sex. Are women meant to keep men in balance? Are they the real driving force behind a man’s instinct? All of these questions are of great discussion once viewing “The Master.”



                                  

                 Shot in luscious 65mm format, this immediately transports the viewer into the world of the 1950s. The first shot of the bow of the ship showing the endless blue oceans proceeding it, along with Johnny Greenwood’s immensely captivating score, is a feast for the eyes. The wide angle shots of motorcycle riding the in the deserts to the expertly framed statures of Freddie and Dodd are the work of an artist. With newcomer, Mihai Malaimare Jr. (long-time collaborator Robert Elswit out of the picture), the decision to film in 65mm (last time it was filmed in 65 mm, was Kenneth Branagh’s Hamlet in 1996) is an experience quite unforgettable. Anderson wisely takes advantage by never cutting, but letting the camera capture everything in one take and having the viewer within the scene. It’s classic film-making of the order. Forget Hollywood’s newest extravaganza, this is vibrancy and perfectionism truly to be seen to be believed. The digital age still can’t match the finer beauty of film. 

   
        Whether Anderson’s newest work is lauded as “audacious” or “painfully dull and unmemorable,” there’s no denying Anderson’s daring ability to experiment and create out of the mold. He’s a filmmaker of higher caliber, and is not one to be working within the confines of mainstream Hollywood. He makes daring films, that whether you can accept them, deserved to be seen regardless, and “The Master” is no exception. It’s a meticulous work of art, blending in themes and ideas never forged unto film, and creating discussions and conversations among its admirers and detractors. It’s fearless, thought-provoking, and best of all, “uncompromising.” The art of film has never felt more alive than watching “The Master,” with performances, especially from Phoenix, soaring higher than the stratosphere, images more alive than any blockbuster, and ideas more intriguing than any film this year. Call this reviewer a believer, but Paul Thomas Anderson is one artist whose work transcends beyond the delusions of grander. 


                                                       Rating: A by Amritpal Rai

                                  

The Expendables 2 Review

      Stallone has decidedly so to step down from directing this sequel to the disappointing 2010 "The Expendables," which was more boring and bland than fun. Now stepping behind the camera is Simon West (Con Air) who for better or worse, breathes some new life in a genre that has become more of a joke than anything. Bringing some of that "classy 90's freshness" to it while making a movie more about the 80's action genre, "The Expendables 2" for better or worse, knows what it is and goes for all the low-blows and excitement that made these guys the cultural icons of our time (Don't worry, the action genre has its own place in history). By utilizing some of the highlights of the 2010's "The Expendables," such as Willis and Schwarzenegger, and bringing in new players to join the fun (Norris and Van Damme), oddly enough, this film proves to fair better than the original. Its story is simplistic enough for the bullets and explosions to ensue and hams it up more than it ever could in the first film.  However, it still feels more retained to expectations rather than (no pun intended) blowing them away. It's more safe than daring, and sure, action doesn't have to be more daring than it already is (most of these guys have broken more bones than anyone) but after this year's 'The Raid," one can't help but feel a slight disappointment when all "The Expendables 2" has to offer is more explosions and heads blowing up with dialogue lampooning some of these action stars' careers. At least this is what the first film promised to be from the trailers when it was anything but.

      Barney Ross (Stallone) is yet again forced to complete a task from the ominous Church (Willis) which requires the whole gang to bring back important information about a deadly weapon. However, after the death of a team member from the hands of Vilain (Van Damme) who takes the information away, it becomes more of a revenge tail to not only avenge their comrade, but stop Vilain and his sinister plans.

                                        

        There's no denying it, when the intro to this film is all explosions and blood sprinkling the screen, your in for what you expected; a fun, no-nonsense thrill ride with an energy more invigorating than the original film. The intensity given from the cast well enough supports the film's enjoyment. Statham once again is a lot of fun to watch as Lee Christmas, more deadlier and dangerous with his knives and Stallone shows once again how biceps can overcome an incoherent speech pattern. His performance is not something to take away from the film, but it’s not something irritating to see on screen. Surprisingly, Lundgren is given more to do and has some great moments of pure hilarity. Crews and Coture still feel underused but with the moments given, they don't disappoint. Now, the real meat of this is ultimately from the three icons we've been waiting for; Norris, Willis and Schwarzenegger are a blast to watch on screen and their interaction is well-worth the price of admission. Just the back-and-fourth banter between Willis and Schwarzenegger of nothing but self-deprecating humor of their films is joyous to watch and wishing they had their own starring vehicle of a film. Van Damme is back, and it’s a pleasure to see him chew up the screen as the obvious pun-intended villain, Vilain. Just his presence alone with his smug look make you wanna just hate him automatically, and that's it. There's no need to add any more useless filler to him than he can already compensate for.

       Simon West certainly brings an overwhelming sense of joy and fun that was necessary for a film of this type. He doesn't distract the viewer with crazy, frenetic editing as most commercial directors would, but just presents the action in full frame without the need to specialize it with any more ridiculous tricks. The cast is the main appeal, and West definitely knows it and never wastes their screen time. But while he may boast his cast as the main attraction, he seems to devote time to create new characters that eat up more screen time than the real stars should. Certain characters like Billy (Liam Hemsworth) and Maggie (Yu Nan) are dead weight and serve no purpose other than the provide more members into an exclusive club reserved for the very best action stars. "The Expendables 2" is all about being able to have these action stars in one movie that is both nostalgic and entertaining. Just unnecessary scenes with Maggie and Barney discussing meaningless character development has the movie come to a full stop, thereby halting any tension or momentum that was already built.

       It's a movie made for the auto-pilot button. Nothing to take away from it, except cool action scenes, that's is. "The Expendables 2" doesn't aim to break or form any ground, much less just make it's own stamp on a genre that's starting to become more stale than the plots in any action film. It's definitely a vast improvement from the first one, where that was just potential wasted and squandered by Stallone's inadequate direction. West, having dabbled in his own fair of cheesy action flicks, knows what he's doing, and accomplishes it with some minor speed bumps. If only there was more to the action than what was expected. It's a middle-of-the-road action flick that just so happens to inhabit an all-star cast with more macho-manliness than one's average sugar-coated straight-to-DVD action film.

                                                              Rating: C by Amritpal Rai

                                              

Sinister Review

    Without being needlessly grotesque with its violence nor exploitative as any other generic horror thriller, “Sinister” proves to be an absolute home run for director, Scott Derikson (Exorcism of Emily Rose) and screenwriter film critic, Robert C. Cargill (Ain’t it Cool News) as they have constructed a marvelous work of terror that leaves you with a sense of coldness and dread than ever feeling satisfied for watching. Very high in its concept yet, using the bare minimal of sets and the classic method of old-school horror where the horror comes not from seeing the beast, but having it linger in your mind, “Sinister” is a wake-up call to filmmakers and producers in charge of these dreadful, unapologetic horror films without any heart as “Sinister” proves to give something horror fans have always appreciated; a sense of care for the characters on screen and terror not cheap, but natural and realistic. It's been a hard road to trudge through the barren filled wilderness of unnecessary horror remakes and cheap horror thrills done unapologetically, selling exploitation in exchange for any thought given to the material or characters, "Sinister" is a an example, glimmering with all of the qualities to make a classic horror film in the traditional sense, with a few modifications.

     Taking place in a small, subdued town in wood barren Pennsylvania,  true-crime novelist, Ellison Osbourne (Ethan Hawke) relocates his family to a seemingly cute house where unbeknownst to his family, including his wife, is aware of the ghastly history of the house as the previous owners were found hung from the backyard. But Ellison is not hesitant-being desperate to write another hit and reclaiming his fame he once had ten years ago with his first book "Kentucky Blood", Ellison means well and dearly loves his family, but as a writer, he is driven by passion and dreams unexplainable except for himself. While his family is tentative about moving repetitively house to house, they trust in Ellison as his supportive wife, Tracy (Juliet Rylance) reassures their children, Trevor (Michael Hall D' Addario) and Ashley (Clare Foley) of a new life to begin.

     While moving in, Ellison finds a box of old six super-8 film canisters and a camera. As he's perplexed by the findings of these films, his curiosity gets the better of him as he decides to view them the first night. It doesn't take long for him to realize that the films are of the previous owners and makes the shocking discovery of bizarre images of a ghost-like figure plaguing the images themselves. Soon after, he starts to experience strange things happening to him at night, and soon realizes that he's delved more than what he bargained for as he is haunted by bumps and noises and horrific night terrors his son experiences, he's about to experience first-hand as what happened to the previous owners and what might happen to him and his family as well before it's too late.

                                        

Right within the first frame, the tone is perfectly set. Nothing at all is cheap about "Sinister." Sure, the jump scares are of the same format we've been witnessed to, but the build-up and tension arising underneath the floorboards as Ellison investigates odd noises in his house at night create an atmosphere almost missing in horror films in that what separates "Sinister" from anything else. The cinematography helps allude to the frightening images not seen to the human eye, yet effectively create a sense of seriousness and a state of being petrified at what is to come. All throughout, the scares and frightening jumps are earned than cheap, with the aid of the looming ambiance and tension surrounding the scenes, "Sinister" is a more classical approach to horror with a modern edge and a serious attitude that makes it more grounded in reality than amid the air of imagination.

There are perhaps two things that are the most satisfying to take away from this genuine flick. The first being the performance from Ethan Hawke and the script. Ethan Hawke outdoes himself here. While nothing to make the assumption of a career defining performance, however, he conveys a sense of careful dedication and understanding to a character like Ellison. Ellison is not a nice character, at all. In fact, it wouldn't be surprising to feel utter contempt for his decision by continuing putting his family at peril, yet, Hawke gives a sense of pathos that really gives a sympathetic quality that makes the character all the more real and engaging. Ellison is a writer and has a true passion for it, but amid all the success that had been bestowed upon him, one can't feel if his hunger for fame is his aim.It make his character so conflicted and perplexed by the situations that it really makes you more involved in the narrative.

      The writing is surprisingly clever and well crafted for the way it not only spins the whole genre of found footage and gives it a new angle, but just with the precise delicacies given to both the characters and situations at hand. There's layer upon layer that throughout, each new discovery gives the narrative more depth and meaning until the finial end where you're left with a cold disturbed feel than anything hopeful. Some of the twists in here are not random and feel natural, but totally off-putting and surprising. Surprising to find that amidst the fright-fest lies bits of real genuine comedy sprinkled throughout that never feels forced but more natural as one involving sub-plot involving Ellison enlisting the help of a somewhat naive deputy of the sheriff, who's a fan of his work but comes off being more the voice of reason with Ellison than a bumbling idiot. It walks a perfectly balanced line of fear and dread with lighter moments of humorous  comedy that it's hard to think it actually worked. The writing is very tight as to when to evoke a feeling at an appropriate time. 

                                        

   While the use of some jump scares will make audiences very weary and feel they've gone this routine route before, the scares the creators have in store for us are still realistic and have a disturbing like quality around them. It's just a matter of one's endurance for jump scares. Again, these are more earned and suspenseful instead of feeling cheap and exploitative. Just certain imagery still lingers in one's mind, especially the home footage Ellison finds that's just pure macabre reincarnated. Added to the, a luscious hair-raising soundtrack that is definitely one of the more unique and creative soundtracks for a horror film of recent memory. Yet, it never delves into outlandish over-the-top gore or special effects that just numbs the audience's sense after a while. Instead, we get a slow-burning meticulous horror show of smart writing, enthralling performances, and sheer spine-tingling terror that brings back the feeling of old-school classical horror induced with some clever deceitfulness that's missing in modern horror these days.

                                         

                                                      Rating: A- by Amritpal Rai

Detention Review

  Proudly assaulting the audience’s senses and intellect “Detention” offers the same inane style of a Michael Bay film, and yet, even his films are more cohesive than a single frame of “Detention.” Written and directed by music-video director Joseph Kahn, he offers little to no narrative or any care for characters that it ultimately becomes pointless to care about anything and leaves one to anticipate for the end credits to come. If anything, Kahn definitely brings a unique freshness to the Scream-esque genre with dialogue composed of mostly 90’s references and a visual style that at times, is quite invigorating and something to latch onto this train wreck of a film. However, his efforts proves to be fruitless as this edgy meta pop-cultured inspired mess elongates further and further to heights of ridiculousness and randomness, it becomes hard to be engaged and just feel a sense of numbness to anything the film throws at you. A combination of horror movies with high school savvy comedy with a quirky attitude thrown in, Detention comes off being more bloated and indulgent than anything to come out so far this year.



  Right from the beginning, a young, promiscuous girl tells you right up front (Yes. That’s you) about “how to avoid being a reject in high school” and lays it all out in screen texts and images while hollering at her parents. Only to end up being murdered by a serial killer known as “Cinderhella.” Then we’re quickly introduced to the cynical yet lonely outcast Riley (Shanely Caswell) the skateboarding hipster Clapton (Josh Hutcherson) the ditsy cheerleader friend of Riley, Ione (Spencer Locke) a nerd (Aaron David Johnson) and a whole slew of walking cliches who have become the next targets of this serial killer’s reign on a Saturday afternoon detention. Yet, that’s just the first twenty minutes. Throughout, the film is jam-packed with pop culture references dating back to late 80’s to early 90’s era to teen movies and a heaping wad of meta humor more excessive than any of the Scream films. Yet, what Kahn thinks he may be doing is fresh, invigorating and worthwhile, only adds up to being a cringe-induced migraine headache of a bloated narrative without any cohesiveness to be found, characters so thinly written without any dimensions to be had except with the archetypes they play of high school movies and overall; a achingly  pointless endeavor of edgy humor passed off as “new” and “original” when it’s just incomprehensible to take in. 


                                        

  Despite the inane script, Kahn does pull off some freshly executed visual/editing style with his camera as he does pump some original stylistic decisions as in certain scenes, the editing makes it more tolerable and to convey the sense of the hyperactive lifestyle of a teenager to a marvelous montage sequence involving the passing of school years in the detention room. The hyperactive energy is interwoven around Kahn and Mark Palermo’s dialogue, which is composed of anything within range of nostalgic memorabilia that might indicate that Kahn resents this generation of 140 Twitter character texting degenerates that he attempts to make all his characters cold, miserable wrecks. Almost everyone is unlikeable. The bitterness that comes off these characters almost seeps through the screen as one can’t help but feel trapped in a room full of despicable ingrates. Despite the loner Riley being a hopeless sympathetic character, nothing inhabiting these empty vessels resemble anything remotely related to a character. They’re all walking dictionaries for your pop-culture obsessed pleasure. Unfortunately, those pages are void of any characters or any depth to be had with them.



  The cardinal sin this movie commits is that it torpedoes itself in its own uniqueness and ballsy narrative. Kahn desperately wants to break out of the normal conventions of narrative storytelling and wants to create something different yet enjoyable to be viewed upon. Yet, what he doesn’t realize is, without a narrative or any thread of cohesiveness to be had within this world, there’s no point to even be watched. The film is a jumbled mess. For the whole duration, it takes different turns of genre by introducing science fiction and teen drama all mixed in with an ambiguous horror element that by the end, it looses focus and direction to where the script might as well pull out any random genre element just because it can. For any consolation for those who see it, the first twenty minutes or so are the only story to be had with, after that, it’s “No Man’s Land.”



                                           

  Being fully self-indulgent in its own craft, it tries to be as edgy and clever with all the visual gags and texts that appear on image, as if using referential humor were as easy as breaking the fourth wall several times just to slide in a smart-alecky comment or a “wink-wink” nod to the audience. Attempting a similar style that of 2010’s“Scott Pilgrim,” yet, does it with so much staleness and dry-crass jokes that it doesn’t justify their attempts and comes off as trying too hard. Imagine the film having an “autopilot” button but pushed to a level of randomness with just random 90s references wrapped around a dull narrative polished as a tongue-and-cheek attitude, only to come off as ostensibly assaulting the viewer’s time and intelligence. 



  This is begging for the “cult hit” status that horrifyingly, might have its wish come true. It’s concealed by a fake guise of savvy dialogue and an eccentric tone that under the veil, it's an infectious attempt at originality, boasting a narrative without any respect for the convention of storytelling in general and is a blatant wastage of a person’s time. Every frame is composed with the intention of entertaining the mind while delightfully mocking you in the realization that it has gleefully wasted ninety-minutes of precious time. Truly, this is the absolute worst of the year that it can proudly proclaim the mantle of being “horrendously loathsome.” It ultimately becomes so scathingly exhaustive to decipher this barren-ridden wasteland of forgotten ideas, that one is praying for the closing credits to come to one’s rescue. Dismally, they couldn’t come soon enough. 



                                                         Rating: F by Amritpal Rai

                                   

Beasts of the Southern Wild Review

Remarkably enchanting and poignant that, never for once is there a moment of unbelievability as a narrative so wholly original and undetermined can easily enrapture audiences, "Beasts of the Southern Wild" is evidence of a filmmaker making art from the soul and mind rather than a financial perspective prevalent in movie studios. While art films do tend to gain notoriety for their artistry and style that they find themselves drawing a line between the cynics and optimists, however, anyone delving into the mystifying world taking form throughout the commentary by little Hushpuppy (Quvenzhan Wallis) as she experiences a rough taste of a world gone to hell are certainly in for a cinematic treat. Along with her story and narration, it becomes surprisingly entrancing and engrossing as this tale of growing up and coming to terms of themselves among the universe without it ever feeling pretentious or resembling any narratives that are implanted in a society of a savvy meta culture. This debut from director Benh Zeitlin proves not only to be an auspicious film, but more a bold and incredible exercise in craftsmanship of classic narrative story-telling.  

Narrated by the young, precocious, charismatic yet nice Hushpuppy, who lives in a scummy environment with her harsh, alcoholic father, Wink (Dwight Henry) in The Bathtub, a bayou near an industrial establishment on an island off the Louisiana coast, yet, this world is so foreign and unrecognizable that it may seem as if Zeitlin has transported us to a world of wonder and mystique. Soon however, a hurricane starts to take effect, ultimately destroying this tight-knit community. But to Hushpuppy, this is her world and she inhabits every moment of it where people drink and eat while surviving harsh conditions and suffering malnutrition. As she and her father luckily survive the storm, they set out to fend for themselves, but for Hushpuppy, this is a time of growing up and being self-resilient, even if her father must be mean and over-bearing as he treats her not with kindness, but with roughness. But as he teaches her, it's roughness out of love and compassion he has for her as she is more precious to her than the liquor he consumes constantly. 

For being only six years old at the time of filming, Quvenzhan is a revelation here. In every frame, she stands proudly and firmly as her performance requires a lot more than acting like a mere child, rather she must gradually grow from her father's ethics and influences from her peers and elders, to eventually  coming to a full realization of herself in terms of the universe and her place in the world. She is a force to be reckoned with, blending in innocent child-like qualities of curiosity and wondrous enjoyment from the others around to adult behavior of responsibility, endurance, maturation and ultimately, purpose. All the while, never being flashy or underwhelming, she is to be commended for her ability to inhabit a picture full of themes well beyond a child's sensibilities. 

Along with her paternal father figure: Wink, who fills each screen with a certain intensity that both confuses and captivates an audience. For never having any acting experience, Henry shows true rawness to a role that for a while, one is confused with. With every scene he and Hushpuppy share, its scary and fascinating to see the dynamic between a father and daughter relationship while unconventional, is sincerely honest and beautiful without ever spoon-feeding people their love for each other. Wink may be brutal to Hushpuppy, maybe even too extreme, but in a world of utter chaos and shambles, Hushpuppy can benefit more from his methods than a cozy, optimistic and warm-hearted parenting most people are familiar with. As with the rest of the cast is wonderfully exceptional. All the quirky and unique personalities that inhabit The Bathtub are hilarious and beneficial for the world Zeitlin successfully constructs that gives off a mystical resonance to experience. 

Unbelievably original in its storytelling narrative, Zeitlin doesn't play to any conventions, yet, plays out as a cohesive narrative. With the gritty, omnipresent cinematography able to capture the damp, steamy and drenched environment of The Bathtub. As realistically it looks, with a story unpredictable and setting uncommon for casual movie going audiences, it is marvelously captivating and at times, confusing with what is the come next. While at times being snobby or even hints of pretentiousness, it's not being flamboyantly preached as some other art-house dramas. It has a point and with Hushpuppy's narration giving clarity to situation that may seem thin and abstract, it makes all the messages and themes all the more tolerable simply due to the enthralling performance from Quvenzahn. 

At times being touching and emotionally endearing and while being abstract and directionless, "Beasts of the Southern Wild" proves to be more of a quintessential experience rather than another narrative to parade around for awards. And being a fascinating reminder of the strong endurance of the human spirit in face of insurmountable obstacles and challenges awaiting everyone in their lives. Lets hope for Hushpuppy's sake, the world can still remember this genuine gem of film-making. 

Rating: A by Amritpal Rai