Movie Review: Cabin in the Woods

Back in November of 2010, MGM filed for bankruptcy. Doing so shelved a lot of projects, which included 007 Skyfall and The Hobbit. One of the more unknown projects the company took with it was Cabin in the Woods. The film has literally sat for two years waiting for distribution. A lot has happened in two years. The film’s star Chris Hemsworth has exploded in popularity, Joss Whedon has moved onto making The Avengers, and the horror genre itself has continued to evolve. Thankfully, Lionsgate picked up distribution rights and has finally released Cabin to the world. To say that the wait was worth it, and that the film was completely and unexpectedly brilliant, is still underselling it.

First and foremost, this movie is a gamechanger if I have ever seen one. If Scream was a movie that took the horror movie stereotypes and spoofed them and made them relevant, then Cabin in the Woods takes the same stereotypes of the genre, reinvents them and painstakingly goes into detail about why certain things happen. I can honestly say that this movie has made me view other films like The Evil Dead or Friday the 13th in a completely different way. It's difficult not to when you are educated on why certain things to happen to certain people within the rules of a horror movie.

The plot of a film like Cabin in the Woods is extremely difficult to review. Part of the fun of this film is in the discovery of exactly what is happening, so I will stay away from as many spoilers as I can. What it boils down to (on the surface) is 5 college kids who vacation at, you guessed it, a cabin in the woods. Upon making a discovery in the cellar, they unwittingly awaken the previous owners from the grave. To be honest, none of this even scratches the surface of what this movie is actually about. It's a self aware horror movie with some humor infused, but it is also so much more than that. This film has so many reveals, but at no point does it feel convoluted. Between the opening and the final act, you'll wonder if you're even watching the same movie as what is being advertised in the trailers. On one hand, if you're expecting a simple slasher flick, you'll be disappoined. On the other hand, it's best for you to go into the movie thinking that is all you're about to watch.

This is a movie for the true horror geek. As spill.com pointed out, the horror geek is a devoted fan. We'll see just about any pile of crap horror movie. Having said that, people like me who have seen it all will get a kick out of the numerous references this movie pays homage to. Everything from Hellraiser to Call of Cthulhu is up for grabs. Hell, the director has even stated that the cabin itself is a replica of the one used in Evil Dead 2.

Unfortunately the marketing for this movie is subpar, and makes it difficult to grasp the originality because knowing too much about this movie before going in ruins it. This is a movie that will rely on word of mouth, and with a 93% on Rotten Tomatoes, it seems to have gotten a head start. I was one of the people who thought this was going to be a flash in the pan, run of numbers horror movie. I should have trusted that Joss Whedon and Drew Goddard were capable of a lot more. Cabin in the Woods might turn out to be the biggest surprise of the year, and the new standard that horror movies should strive to be.

Movie Review: Evidence

Evidence is a movie that has been on my radar ever since I read the first review on Dread Central sometime last year. The film was praised for its balls-to-the-wall second half by DC, as well as several other reviewers. Apparently the film happened because writer Ryan McCoy purchased a copy of Paranormal Activity and felt he too could add to the ever growing "found footage" genre. While the film definitely earns its reputation, it also had me split in a few areas.

The film begins with Ryan picking up his friend Brett for what will be his first camping trip. The two pick up Ashley and Abi and head out to what appears to be a destination located in Southern California (although we’re never told exactly where the film takes place). The premise literally begins with four unlikeable characters taking part in a documentary…about camping. Do we care? I sure didn’t. Luckily the film’s pace moves right along and it isn’t too long before we move into the good stuff. On the first night, the characters hear inhuman screams coming from deep inside the woods. During a hike the next day, the group spot something at the cliffs below that is definitely not human. As if two days of weird stuff isn’t enough, they spend another night which is also accompanied by more screams, which happen to be closer than they were the night before. Sometime during the night, one of the guys is taken. It isn’t long before the girls are left alone to discover just what is hunting them, and it is here in the third act that the film’s tagline delivers in a big way: "it isn’t what you think."

What started as an average (at best) horror movie soon becomes a well-executed "what the fuck just happened?" sort of experience. It’s hard for me to elaborate on this without giving anything away exactly. Trust me when I say this is almost two different movies when looking at the first half compared to where you are by the time the movie ends. I went in knowing a little about the movie, but even I was surprised with where we ended up.

What keeps this from being a perfect "found footage" movie is the poor setup. The idea of a documentary about a guy camping for the first time is laughable. If they had simply went with a group of people video taping what was supposed to be a wild weekend outdoors, it would have been fine. The four characters in this movie are also very unlikeable. Granted, the film ends up being more about what happens around them other than being a character focus, but would it kill writer Ryan McCoy (who also stars) to make these people identifiable in some way. By the time the movie ends, not a lot is laid out for you to clearly get an idea of what just happened. It’s very open ended in terms of letting the viewer piece it together just as the survivors must do. This can work for and against the film depending on the type of person you are. If you need every last detail explained for you, then Evidence probably isn’t going to be your cup of tea.

Despite these complaints (which now seem minor in the grand scheme of the movie), Evidence is a movie well worth sticking with until the very end (the credits offer a lot of story). Ryan McCoy has stated that he’s had a favorable reaction to the film, and has since written a follow-up. Personally, I’d like to see a prequel helping to explain a little of what we saw in the film’s final half an hour. Despite its flaws, Evidence earns a spot among the best in the genre and is well worth your time.

The Greatest Year For Movies Part 1: April 2012

American Reunion
April 6, 2012
Click here for the trailer

The last entry in this series to go theatrical was American Wedding back in 2003. Since then, Universal has released four direct to DVD sequels, each dealing with Stifler's extended family. I've seen the direct to DVD sequels, and while Band Camp is passable, the rest are absolutely terrible. They forgot what made the original trilogy so great, which was that first and foremost it loved its characters. You'd think that direct to DVD is where a once popular franchise would go to die, yet these movies kept making crazy amounts of money. They were top sellers for Universal year after year, so it was inevitable that a true sequel would happen one day.

Over the course of the original trilogy, I grew quite fond of the characters in the American Pie series. The films themselves were crude, but had a sweetness to them. I attribute a lot of this to where I was in life with each new entry. High school, college, friends getting married, etc. Now comes American Reunion during a time in which I just attended my own 10 year reunion. The film catches up with all of the characters from the first two films (as a number of them were missing during Wedding) as they attend their high school reunion. The film is written and directed by the duo that has brought us the Harold & Kumar movies, so the signature gross out moments are sure to remain intact. As this is one of my favorite film franchises, I'm hoping the new script stays true to the characters and the nature of the original movies.

Cabin in the Woods
April 13, 2012
Click here for the trailer

Well, this should be interesting. Cabin in the Woods was made back in 2009, but due to MGM's increasing financial trouble, it was shelved until now. The film sounds promising enough, and why shouldn't it? The film is written by Joss Whedon and Drew Goddard, who have a pretty good track record. It even stars Chris Hemsworth, but back when this was made he was still an unknown. In fact, this is Hemsworth's second feature to get a delay due to MGM's financial crisis (the remake of Red Dawn is finally going to see a release). Due to the nerd love for Whedon, I've heard about this movie for years. The script was circulating the internet for awhile, and I was able to check it out. By watching the trailer above, one would assume it is going The Evil Dead route, which wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing. Then the trailer gives away the twist, and leaves you wondering what in the hell you just watched. I believe that this film would have crashed and burned back in 2009, but with Hemsworth being a star and Whedon directing The Avengers it could turn a profit. Just don't expect it to be any good.

Bullet to the Head
April 13, 2012
No trailer as of this time

This marks the first time since his career revival that Sylvester Stallone has starred in a film that he has neither written nor directed. His track record seems to indicate that he does better when he's in complete control of the project, so this could go either way. The film, based on the graphic novel of the same name, centers on a hitman (Stallone) and an NYPD detective (played by Sung Kang of Fast & Furious fame) who are brought together by the murder of their respective partners to take on a common enemy (Jason Momoa). The original director of the film was Wayne Kramer, who made the fantastic Running Scared, dropped out late in the game which was extremely disappointing. The saving grace is Walter Hill was brought aboard to make the film. Hill is no stranger to this type of action movie as he is responsible for genre classics like Last Man Standing, Red Heat, 48 Hours and The Warriors. Stallone himself has stated that his success now depends on whether or not he can transport audiences back to when action films were at their peak. With a production team like this, I don't think that will be a problem. I expect Bullet to the Head to bury Cabin in the Woods on opening weekend.

Honorable Mentions: Reportedly, the Weinsteins have been working hard at getting Scary Movie 5 ready for this summer. No word on cast or writers, but a release date has been eyed for April. Despite calling post-conversion 3D absolute crap, James Cameron has gone ahead and post-converted Titanic and will release it in theaters this April as well.

Movie Review: The Silent House

I had heard about The Silent House back in 2010 and was impressed by what it promised: "Real fear in real time." The film was shot in one continuous take. No cuts. No edits. Just a camera running for 72 minutes, which means if anyone missed their cue at the 70 minute mark they get to start all over again. After seeing this on a list of movies to look out for in 2012, I decided to seek it out and see if it lived up to its potential.

As far as I know this is the first movie of its kind, which is probably why it comes from Uruguay. God forbid Hollywood does anything this inventive. The film is based on real events that took place in the 40s. A father and his daughter Laura (played by Florencia Colucci) are hired by their friend Nestor to renovate a small cottage. They arrive late and spend the night in order to get an early start the next morning. Laura begins to hear noises outside and attempts to wake her father, but he shrugs it off. After Laura hears footsteps coming from the second floor, her father agrees to go upstairs and look. Like 100% of horror films, he doesn't come back and Laura is left to not only find her father, but also discover the secrets of the house.

With a mere budget of around $6,000 the film manages to look great. The only lighting comes from a pair of lanterns that Laura and her father use to get around the house. The crew appears to be minimal as only one camera is used to follow Laura at all times. Don't expect anything fancy here as it's low budget, and any steady cam work is out the window. The film also does a great job at keeping you guessing. When all is said and done, it was mostly unexpected. If you do manage to catch the film, be sure to stay after the credits for a creepy little epilogue.

The Silent House was a pleasant surprise, especially since Atrocious had ruined my expectations of similar types of movies. They manage to hide to small budget, the performances are on par, and it manages to tell a creepy little story. You'll hardly notice the way the film was shot, but once it is over it is quite impressive to see what the filmmakers have pulled off here. The format works extremely well for low budget horror, and I think it can be used as a platform to improve upon in the future. For now though, The Silent House is the one and only movie that can claim it has "fear in real time."

UPDATED: Apparently this is movie has a remake coming out in March, starring the forgotten Olsen sister, Elizabeth. No word on if the same gimmick is being employed or not, but either way get ready for an inferior remake, America.

"Prepare to Die"

The video game industry itself is larger than both films and music combined, so it was inevitable that I would write about it at some point. I'm a huge fan of video games. I've been playing since the days of Atari 1600, and have owned a next gen system ever since. I imagine that I always will. I love RPGs (Dragon Quest, Final Fantasy), survival horror (Silent Hill, Resident Evil), and first-person shooters (Call of Duty, Halo). The only question for me in terms of this blog has always been, "which video game would compel me to knock out an entire article?"

That question was answered when I picked up Dark Souls a few weeks back. Dark Souls is the spiritual successor to Demon's Souls, a PS3 exclusive from 2009 which at the time was being described as, "one of the first truly great Japanese RPGs of this generation, and certainly the most remarkable." The spark that ignites the human race is slowly burning out. People are dying, and returning to life all over Lordran. They become immortal and slowly lose their sanity, becoming violent monsters in the long run. You play as a chosen undead who must battle the forces of darkness and reignite the flames of humanity in order for the human race to thrive. The opening cinematic for Dark Souls lays out the bleak history of Lordran, and offers up a creative (albeit extremely dark) mythology. Once you actually get started, you'll quickly learn that this game isn't going to hold your hand with some tutorial. That's right, no handshake. Just a punch to the gut. Within the first 10 minutes, you'll encounter the Asylum Demon, the first boss that you are expected to beat. This isn't a cheap battle with a strong boss that you are supposed to lose either.


The only way to truly describe this game to you is to say "baby steps." Those who enjoy an entertaining, story driven experience taken at a brisk pace will probably snap their controller in half. This is a game that forces you to learn from your mistakes. Each enemy is different and requires a different strategy to defeat. Every enemy from the first you encounter to the last, has an equal chance at killing you, so finding a place to relax is difficult. Did I mention there is no ability to pause the game? That's right, you had better be paying attention because there is nothing forgiving about this game. You'll quickly find this out when you've died more times in the first 10 hours than you have in your collective gaming career. The enemies also become more difficult with every death. The game also saves CONSTANTLY. Ever play a game and make a mistake, only to hit the reset button? Dark Souls laughs at your cowardice. Accidentally kill an important NPC, or miss the opportunity to obtain a weapon from a major boss? Oops, better luck on your second playthrough (which is about 60-100 hours away. Sorry losers, only one save slot per character). All of this sounds cheap, maybe even unfair, but it never truly feels that way. Dark Souls is never unfair. It gives you every opportunity to succeed, thus making the mistakes all your own. Every death can be avoided by learning the pattern of your enemy.


The multiplayer system in Dark Souls is among the most original and creative I have ever seen in a game. Instead of sending a game invite to a friend, the game will only allow random encounters. Players can draw symbols on the ground in a certain location, and if a different player makes contact with those symbols, the original player can be summoned to assist a person in defeating the area boss. By the same token, if you choose to take a darker tone, you can invade other people's games and steal their currency, or items. This system can be extremely rewarding as I have tackled some of the more difficult areas of the game by summoning more experienced players. I think the best part of this feature is that there is no voice chat allowed in-game. If you summon a player, it will be all non-verbal cues. You won't be completely in the dark however. Players can draw messages on the ground warning other players of an ambush ahead, a safe location, or a hidden room.

This has been an extremely exciting time for video games. In the fourth quarter alone, we've seen games like Uncharted 3, Batman Arkham City, Battlefield 3, Modern Warfare 3 and Skyrim. For me, Dark Souls came out of nowhere. I had never heard of the original, and all I was looking for was a time filler until Arkham City was released. What I found was one of the best all around gaming experiences out there. I can't imagine that I'll be putting as much time and energy into any other game in the near future.

Movie Review: Paranormal Activity 3

Oren Peli must feel like a million bucks. His film, Paranormal Activity, was almost never seen by general audiences. The former video game designer decided to get into movies, so he purchased a high definition camera and wrote a rough outline for what the film could be (these movies are largely improvised). He financed the film himself ($11,000-$15,000) and used his own home as the setting. The film was finished in 2007, but sat for two years before Steven Spielberg saw a rough cut and decided that this needed to be seen by the masses. Slam cut to October 2011 and we have the hottest horror franchise of the last decade about to unleash a third entry. By most accounts, horror sequels are merely quick cash-ins with little to no love for the audience (ie. Friday the 13th, Hellraiser, Halloween, etc). Paranormal Activity 2 seems to have broken that trend by proving that creatively and financially, lightning can in fact strike twice. As with each new entry in a series, there is always a question of, "can they do it again?" Not only is Paranormal Activity 3 a scary movie, but it tops the previous entry in just about every way.

Much like PA2, this film is a prequel. It goes even further back in time than the second entry by showing us the events of what happened to Katie and Kristi when they were kids. The girls live with their mom, Julie (Lauren Bittner), and her boyfriend Dennis (the immensely likeable Christopher Nicholas Smith). Dennis is a videographer, which quickly explains why we have so many cameras available to us right from the get go. Dennis manages to catch "something" on camera during a small earthquake, and wants to see if this is related to Kristi's new attachment to an imaginary friend, Tobey. What follows is a series staple consisting of several nights worth of footage that in the end tie most of the plot up.

PA3 is first and foremost a horror film, and it delivers some of the best scares in the series. This is in large part due to the oscillating camera that shows us the living room and the kitchen. What made this so genius is that it played the audience with each and every pan. You could hear the nervous laughter and feel the tension amongst the packed house. Several of the film's biggest scares come from this device. Of course, no PA film would be complete without expanding on the mythology. PA3 gives us a few more pieces of the puzzle as to why this is happening to just one family. I believe that the person who deserves the most credit for this is Christopher Landon, who wrote the last two entries. For him to craft these sequels around the first movie is nothing short of amazing, and I believe that he is the key to success for the longevity of this franchise. I also believe that when Paranormal Activity 4 is officially green-lit, he should be given a chance to direct it as well. Henry Joost and Ariel Schulman (who made last year's Catfish) also deserve a lot of credit for upping the stakes this time around. The pacing is faster, the tension is higher, and the characters are extremely likeable (which helps when you want your audience to care what happens. Take note, horror genre). The four principle actors (Bittner, Smith, Brown and Csengery) all do a great job with their characters, with the true stand out being Smith, who really comes off as likeable, especially in his scenes with his business partner Randy (a very funny Dustin Ingram). No Paranormal Activity movie is complete without a cameo from the beautiful Katie Featherston, who returns along with Sprague Grayden and Brian Boland from PA2, to open the film (albeit briefly).

My friends and I knew this movie would be huge when we arrived for the midnight showing. The film was proving to be so popular that the theater added four more additional showings that night to keep up with the demand. When all was said and done, PA3 had grossed $54 million in its opening weekend. This has become the highest opening for a horror movie of all time, and the highest opening for a movie in October. This franchise shows no signs of slowing down, and really, why should they? This begs the question: where do you go from here? PA3 gives a few answers, but also leaves a lot of questions to be answered in a future entry. Do we finally get the true sequel about Katie and Hunter, or do we do a sequel to PA3 that is set in the 90s. Either scenario works out well as the filmmakers have planted hints that could go in either direction, or a new one altogether. Regardless of what they decide, I think the people who make these movies have earned our trust that no matter what happens, we'll be leaving the light on.

Your Guide to Paranormal Activity 3

The Paranormal Activity series has got to be my favorite franchise in the horror genre. The Blair Witch Project might have introduced me to found footage movies, but it's the hope that I can find one as good as Paranormal Activity that keeps me searching. The first film was made in 2007 and finally released in 2009 (thanks to the help of one Steven Spielberg), and on a budget of less than $15,000 went on to become the most successful film that year. It also did something that no other film could do: put a dent in the Saw franchise. By the time Paranormal Activity 2 hit the following year, Saw was an afterthought and officially died to make room for the new blood. For those not familiar with how these films are marketed, I wanted to write an article looking at the in-depth viral campaign that takes places late into the summer and continues all the way up to opening day.

The first news of a third film came on July 21, 2011 at the San Diego Comic-Con. Patrons were given fliers for a video conversion service by the name of Darren's Timeless Memories. The flier that people were given is features below:

When you actually went to the website listed, you were given a commercial for the business, as well as Contact information and several video examples of the quality that Darren provides. When you poked around, you were taken to the official teaser for the film. You could have also contacted Darren himself (as I did), but all you got a was an email in return stating that eventually Darren will send you more examples of his work. Sadly, nothing ever came of this, which is a missed opportunity in my opinion. When PA2 was being marketed, a website received a copy of the police report stemming from the ending of the first film. If you read carefully, you were able to find a phone number for the home of the characters in the first film. I called and got a message machine for the characters. I left my contact info and waited patiently. After a few weeks, I got a call from one of the characters warning me that something was in the house, and that I should take the kids and get out. This is the kind of creativity that more movies should be employing.

Once the teaser hits, it can be awhile before the actual viral videos are released. So far to date, five viral videos have been released, in addition to the official trailer. What makes these viral videos so cool is that they've followed the same model as PA2. Essentially, you get about 10 seconds of a clip before static takes over and plays roughly 5 seconds of something weird. You'll get the idea when you watch some of the clips. Of course, another marketing aspect that I love is the audience reaction cam. I believe this takes place earlier this month at Fantastic Fest in Texas. This footage, as well as every viral video from the first film, second film, and now the current entry (including the Darren material), can be found here. A fan was kind enough to compile everything into one YouTube channel, so you won't have to dig around for all of the good stuff.

It takes a lot of balls to show a film three weeks early, but it seems to have paid off for the filmmakers. There are already more than a dozen reviews online for PA3, and they all seem to indicate that lightning can indeed strike three times:

• "But the most impressive aspect of PA3 is that it's basted in a series of memorable moments that rival that of any franchise. The audience will remember scenes from PA3 and be talking about it for years to come." (bloody disgusting)
• "Paranormal Activity 3 defies all odds and delivers yet another hellish reason to be afraid of the dark." (dread central)
• I like this series. I like the sort of horror it represents. I like the audiences it seems to attract, audiences that aren't typical horror audiences. I like that it killed the Saw franchise. Sorry, but I am. I like ghosts more than I like people torturing other people. I like being in a theater watching a haunted house movie that's working on audiences and I like hearing screams and seeing jumps and the nervous laughter after something works. I like that. That's one of the things that attracts me to horror." (hitfix)
• "The last fifteen minutes of Paranormal Activity 3 will fuck you up for life." (movie buzz)

This year my friends and I are continuing the tradition of opening night at midnight. We've got our tickets, and we're looking forward to (hopefully) being scared out of our whits just as we have been since 2009. Look for my official review on the film next Monday.