Messages

There's nothing suggesting it's been pre-cut prior to being submitted to the BBFC. The Region 1 DvD/BluRay releases are saying they're 'Unrated' so I'd imagine the additional footage is likely to be included.

Hmm.

[spoiler]There's a bit of online research but I don't remember anyone biting off their own arm.[/spoiler]

Southland Tales, likeable?

Sure, it is! As an arrested moment of self-important teenage ridiculousness, it's rather sweet and more deserving a patronizing pat on the head than ridicule. And it's got yer man Dwayne in it.

The Box - is this the movie that's got Cameron Diaz's mum in it?

This being Richard Kelly, Cameron's probably playing her own grandmother.

Fleetway experimented with it briefly in the 80s . . .

And LOOK-IN. They even had E.T. on the cover wearing the free 3D glasses.

Okay, so no it's not (and was never likely to be) the most pants-shitting movie in the history of ever. It's unsettling at best, although far more so than THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT.

Why? For one, better actors. The characters at least seem real. With the exception of one scene (see below), I don't think there was a moment when someone reacted in an unbelievable way. At times Micah and Katie are quite likeable, even if the first five minutes of the film are obligatorially annoying if you've already seen REC./CLOVERFIELD/QUARANTINE/DISTRICT 9. It helps also the actors seemed to have at least bothered rehearsing their scenes, rather than relying on some bad improv in a forest in the middle of the night. Otherwise, it's mostly dull, mundane stuff the makers just about get away with for the film to work.

Stuff that doesn't work, however: The ouija board's fate is just plain silly. And as alluded to already, Dr. Fredrichs' "I CAN'T HELP YOU!" is hilariously bad. As for the (cinema) ending, it's nicely horrible right up until [spoiler]THAT shock as something hits the camera. Effective, sure . . . until the demon then decides to reveal itself[/spoiler]; as if that wasn't one misstep too far, they also give us some dreary epilogue by way of a caption.

But a sequel? Another pseudo-documentary that does actually terrify might be worthwhile only if it has little or nothing at all to with the original. Knowing for sure what Katie did next (or, for that matter, expanding on what the demon did previously) won't be anywhere near as disconcerting if it's ever put on film.

Hmm. That gives me an idea . . .

Not as likeable as SOUTHLAND TALES, nor as much a mess. At times the film even feels it was made in the decade in which it's set (the 1970s, in case you're wondering and no bad thing, that).

It's all still a bit muddled, however; due not from Kelly's compulsive musings on free will and fate (the ending's a nice summation of this) but his quirks as a writer/director. Things seem to simply happen for the sake of being weird, often undermining what little menace the film does create. The letter V is throughout a motif serving no real purpose, reaching its nadir during the library scene. And nosebleeds are so 1990s.

Still, I quite enjoyed it; although I've no idea how it compares to Matheson's (Mmm! Matheson's) short story. Also, the ad campaign really does need some Boo Radleys obviousness.

but "Killing in the Name" is fairly inappropriate

Some bloke called Matthew may beg to differ

What an absolute turd.

Artistically. Commercially. Dramatically. POINTLESS. Yes, I knew going in the basic premise; yet, instead of opting for some sub-ALIENS fun, however, it's to the 2005 original what BENEATH THE PLANET OF THE APES is to its predecessor. BUT WITHOUT THE BOMB-WORSHIPPING MUTANTS.

Nor is there ANY sense of irony that Sarah and Juno both come back from the dead only to die all over again. There's some token gubbins about redemption towards the end but it in no way justifies the film's existence. If Shauna MacDonald really must reprise her role then bloody-well have her join the crawlers.

And the ending makes absolutely NO bastard sense.

Grrr.

They're still doing 2000 AD?

I'll take 'em off your hands if Pete's unable to. The Souster woman be damned!

Like the minimum wage waitress in "Friends" who managed to keep her end of the rent up in a well-appointed and large flat.

Tch. You obviously don't get irony.

And Richard E Grant. Twice.

Gahh! Which means we then have to include Rowan Atkinson, Jim Broadbent (twice, once unofficial), Hugh Grant, and Joanna Lumley. Yikes.

And then there's that interloper 'Dr. Who' in his various incarnations and the non-canonical Audio Visuals plays . . .

Ah, it's unlikely. What I remember of it, though, is the three of us counting in unison and after 'two', the fourth voice joining in, taking the piss.

'Three-er.'

'Four-er.'

'Five-er.'

'Six-er.'

'Seven-er'

'Eight-er'

'Nine-er'

And cue Danny #1 (albeit younger than Danny #2) chipping in:

'Ha ha! Ten, you're out!'

Played back the tape. All three of us bricked ourselves and shot right out of my bedroom.

About twenty-five years ago, the two Dans and I decided to hold a seance in my bedroom. We even tape-recorded the whole thing. I remember it comprised nothing more than us counting to ten, followed by much guffawing and pre-teen innuendo ("Get down, Shep!", although I've got bugger-all idea what elicited that particular response).

Except on the second of maybe six attempts to contact the other side, what seemed to be a fourth voice joined in with us.

Scott Nestle.