Change Your Image
jefctaylor
Reviews
Primer (2004)
confusing, fascinating, but ultimately not rewarding
Just watched Primer and now I'm watching with Director's Commentary trying to figure out what the hell happened in it. Unfortunately, the former engineer and director/writer/ editor/star of this intriguing low-budget sci-fi noir is more interested in talking about how camera shots were obtained and how locations were secured than unraveling the labyrinthine overlapping time travel story. I feel like if I watched the movie over and over again, I might start to get it. It's similar to Donnie Darko in that way, I think. But while Donnie Darko is a time travel mystery set on the backdrop of an interesting small town drama with creepy atmosphere, Primer is a time travel mystery set on the backdrop of two engineers having boring conversations with one another as they slowly become more alienated from one another and the rest of the world. Donnie Darko draws you in, while Primer pushes you away. It's a fascinating movie, and given its budget, a remarkable achievement, but ultimately a failure. I'm not a dummy (I don't think) but I needed more clear exposition, and I would have appreciated a more gripping story.
Night Creature (1978)
Poor choices = failed movie
With its muddy sound and blurry, grainy film stock, Night Creature is a real chore to watch. Poor choices in casting and music serve to underscore the queasy tone of the movie, which verges on a "Manos: The Hands of Fate" level of badness. The filmmakers have an odd preoccupation with Donald Pleasence' "crazy face," that has earned him the villain role in countless 70's horror. In this "jungle adventure advertised as a horror film" (thanks Psychotronic Film Encylopedia) Pleasance is supposed to be a big game hunter with an Ahab-esquire obsession with his quarry. The repeated fade from Pleasance' beady staring eyes to the black leopard's eyes is supposed to emphasize the connection between them (is Donald Pleasence the "Night Creature?" whoa, deep, man.) None of the human characters are likable; not the "hero," played by the producer in an ugly suit with an unbuttoned shirt, not the two female leads (one to be eaten by the monster, one for a love interest) and not even the little girl, whose peril is supposed to evince some suspense out of this mess. The black leopard, while acting unlike any real animal, behaves like a movie monster, killing for fun not food. Unfortunately, the decision to shoot nearly every scene in bright sunlight (what's the name of this movie again?) and to show the monster in full body view from the very first frame, rob the animal of its ability to be menacing. This movie comes close to "so bad it's good" status, but without the cast of MST3K to help you through it, you'd better give it a miss.
Bite Me! (2004)
Not bad, even though it wants to be.
This premeditated camp aspires to be "so bad it's good" and nearly succeeds. Shot with direct-to-DVD porn-like production values and some "Ice Pirates" level monster effects, it manages to be somewhat entertaining. There are no scares, little gore (the monsters are fragile, tarantula-sized ticks, that can be dispatched into a pint of splashing fake blood with a rolled-up newspaper), some laughs and a few groans. The presence of naked ladies seems calculated to win the movie a Friday night pay channel spot. Extras include an interview with star Misty Mundae--herself an aspiring filmmaker. One suspects that if the makers of "Bite Me!" aimed just a little higher they may actually hit the mark, but they are content to stay on the low road.