Reviews

MINOR SPOILERS

I like a good horror movie and over time I've seen some pretty gruesome stuff. Alone, most of the times, with just one little light to add to the atmosphere. Usually I don't scare easily, but Dark Water really gave me the creeps.

I didn't expect it to work that well, judging from the first half. The action develops rather slowly and I had a bit of trouble to adjust to the Japanese language and custom. The strange things that started to happen seemed rather harmless at first. Eerie but not very scary. But the movie gains momentum in its second half. Not just because it starts moving at a faster pace, but also because all the seemingly minor incidents start adding up to something that crawls under your skin instead of punching you in the face, like most horror movies tend to do.

Director Hideo Nakata also directed Ringu, another movie that relies on suspense and not on shockers that are heavily supported (if not induced) by the soundtrack. The other similarity is that both plots are classic ghost stories about the restless souls of wronged children. This gives these stories an interesting angle. Being victims themselves, the ghosts cannot be regarded as 100% evil. Maybe we even would feel some sympathy for them, if they weren't that creepy... and angry. Or maybe if Nakato didn't have the habit to leave us with endings that are not altogether happy.

I wasn't blown away by this movie, but it was certainly worth the couple of euros I spent on renting it. I'd rate it just over 7/10.

SPOILERS AHEAD

I completely missed the discussion about this movie being 'banned' from the theaters in the US. I don't think it's a big loss though. There's just too many Big Topics in this movie to be dealt with in 96 minutes. At least for this director and/or his team of writers. Stories and confessions that are supposed to have a lot of impact, just fall flat. And before you know it there was another member of the cast sharing a terrible secret. In the end I just went: 'Oh dear, so your father killed himself. Bad luck, bro...'

The acting was interesting though. I've never been a Leo fan and that didn't change after seeing Don's Plum. But I thoroughly enjoyed Toby Maguire as a total wacko. Meadow Sisto was very convincing too, although her character was rather dull.

The gimmick with the bathroom mirrors worked well in the beginning. But the novelty wore off rather quickly and it soon turned into nothing more than that: a gimmick. And of course it matters a lot who's in front of the mirror. Some of the performances (like the 'Okay, so I was abused!' scene or the 'hurt hippie' sequence) were just pathetic.

I'd say see it if you're a fan of one or more of the cast members. But don't go out of your way to get hold of it. It's just not a good movie.

*SPOILERS AHEAD* Watching Phone Booth I noticed something weird in my reactions to it. Although I was entertained for the total duration of the movie (which is only 80 minutes) at a certain point - say after 45 minutes - I realized I was rather more listening to it than watching it. Phone Booth doesn't offer much to look at. The action takes place in a Manhattan phone booth and its direct surroundings. A guy is called by a hidden sniper who orders him to come clear and confess his general dishonesty in life. *SPOILER* The only thing that disappointed me is that it was very clear that the guy that was found in the building was not the killer. Keifer Sutherlands voice was just too recognizable to have me fooled.

SPOILERS AHEAD

I must admit that I didn't watch this movie under ideal circumstances. I watched it on my computer screen in broad daylight, so I missed the atmospherical stimulation of a cinema full of screaming people. But still I think it would be safe to say that this is a movie that nobody would've missed if it wouldn't have been made. The story (teenage siblings get in the way of a man-eating supernatural monster that decides to put one of them on that night's menu)is very weak to begin with, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the movie should be bad. Lots of Wes Craven flicks have an even thinner plot, but still work. I'm still trying to figure out why Jeepers Creepers doesn't. The acting is okay, the special effects are not that bad and the overall look and feel of the movie is convincing, even on a far from perfect monitor. Maybe it's just the fact that everything this movie wants to do has been done before. Every element you'd expect in a middle of the road horror movie is there, turning the story into a sad vehicle that has to come to a halt at all the far too familiar stops. There's the teenagers to begin with, followed by their discovery of the ghoul and their predictable decision not to run for their lives but to go back and investigate the terrors that they could've just walked away from. There's also a number of 'false alarms', moments that should make you jump while actually there's nothing to be scared of. Well... I didn't jump. The mid section of the movie is 'the hunt'. The monster works his way to the main characters and kills a number of irrelevant victims while he's at it. It is in this part of the movie that, as an afterthought, a psychic woman is introduced who's supposed to shed some light on the otherwise meaningless proceedings of the monster. However, the only important thing she knows is that either the brother or the sister will be the final victim and when she finally arrives at the scene this dreadful fact is just about to happen and her psychic viewings don't help a thing!

The only good thing about the ending of the movie is the fact that the makers had the guts to let one of the main characters die. The bad thing is that the monster survived, so guess what... the sequel is already in the making.

I'm still not very sure why I found this movie so boring. I've seen other predictable horror movies that still amused me. Maybe the teenage-slasher genre is finally dead after the Scream series made explicit fun of its rules and cliches. Or maybe we can't be scared by surreal monsters anymore now that we see so many real life ghouls on television...

I'm not going to write a plot summary, there's enough of them already. This may contain SPOILERS though.

What I liked about The Hole is also what makes it a not very convincing and not very interesting movie: the twist. In itself it's nice to see a story unfold in different versions. The idea of somebody who's experienced something terrible and can't quite remember what happened, isn't very original but it can work for the suspense. However, in 'The Hole' the twist lacks subtlety.

Liz changing from a sobbing victim into a confused and obsessed girl who loses control over her manipulating and scheming behavior is an interesting change of perspective. The scenes in which she wants to use the key and something prevents her from doing it I found psychologically convincing. We all know where a lie-going-wrong might lead to and we all recognize that feeling when we want to get it out in the open but are too afraid to do so.

But when the movie goes on, Liz's character takes another turn. We find out that she's not just the victim of her own sick obsession, but downright evil. TMHO: that turn is a wrong turn. From that point on you just know how the ending will be, up to and including the final shot where she gives us her wicked little smile.

I always feel just a little bit insulted when I'm sitting back and let that last couple of minutes roll by....

I really couldn't accurately describe the contents of this movie. It's about a destructive love affair between a man played by Art Garfunkel and a woman played by Theresa Russel. Russel has attempted to commit suicide. In the hospital they're fighting for her life as Garfunkel is interrogated by a detective (Harvey Keitel) about what really happened. Slowly the real story unfolds and the viewer learns about the darker sides in both characters.

Roeg switches back and forth in the chronology of the story and that makes Bad Timing an intriguing but difficult movie. The secrets that are uncovered are very shocking but one can still 'empathize' (if not sympathize) with the characters.

In my opinion it's about stretching the line between good intentions and evil doings. The good part is that you can't really tell in which moment the line is crossed.

See it and then see it again.