The Visit (2015)

So, I have a love/hate relationship with M. Night Shyamalan.  Sixth Sense, loved! Unbreakable, hated. Signs, loved. The Village, meh. Devil, double meh. Lady in the Water, hated. The Last Airbender, I loved and the rest of the world hated. The Happening, parts of it I thought could turn out to be a decent creepy movie. Then of course, Wahlberg spoke, and that killed the creepy, and turned it right to corny.

The Visit..I can't say I loved it, but close, so close.  I really, really enjoyed watching it. I actually laughed a lot, and not in a bad way, genuine laughter from lines like Sarah McLaughlin said out of fear, to a scene where the boy is imitating his grandmother's "Sundowning" syndrome, that boy stole the whole movie. This kid delivered.

So we've got characters Becca and Tyler (Olvia DeJonge, who is also brilliant in this film, and Ed Oxenbould). Just a month ago or so I watched the movie Paper Planes about World Paper Plane Championships in Japan.It's an Australian film, and Ed is an Aussie, though you wouldn't know it in The Visit, so it was really refreshing to see him again so soon, and in a much more complex and mature role.

Becca and Tyler are brother and sister, and their mom has this I haven't spoken to my parents in 15 years issue. Her parents want to meet their grandchildren for the first time, and she hesitatingly agrees.

Becca and Tyler's grandparents, played by Deanna Dunagen and Peter McRobbie, seem a little off from the start. Becca is creating a documentary about the visit, and at first when I saw part of the movie was done in the "found footage" genre, I thought I was going to hate it, because I'm getting really tired of the hand-held camera point-of-view shooting that seems to be over saturating the industry right now, but this was nicely done. M. Night did a good job of using some hand-held footage, but kept a majority of the film in a nice level view. 

The last 10 minutes or so, that's worth the whole movie. It took off in a direction that with all my film viewing experience, I probably should have seen coming, but I didn't and I loved it, especially when you started piecing together some of the things that had been said, like visitors from the hospital that the grandparents counseled at.

I loved the acting. The pace was decent. It wasn't an in your face horror movie by any means. It has that subtlety you can expect from M. Night where you only gets peeks of the creepiness that lurks within, and that works for this story.

If I were to rank this movie, I would give it a very generous 4 out of 5, because the bits of unexpected humor, especially from M. Night, I really enjoyed. It was those little bits of humor that I loved in the Signs that endeared me to it so much.

Pop some popcorn, turn the lights down low, and watch this movie.

Somm (2012)

Somm is a documentary I discovered when typing for a financial advisor who had a client who was in some capacity, a oenophile. I love documentaries...and wine, so to Netflix I went.

I enjoyed this documentary. You follow a group of men who are looking to become Master Sommelier's or master wine tasters. The three part test they have to pass is according to the documentary, monumentally challenging. It's being able to tell what wine it is, how old it is, what region of the world it comes from, what it's components are, down to the grape variety, all from blind taste testing.

I think as of 2013, they had their 197th Master Sommelier, to give some idea as to what a small and elite club this is.

The documentary is interesting, sometimes funny, very intense, and after watching it, my husband told me how much it reminded him of when he had to take the exam for his PhD in Physics, and the similar vein of small groups of people studying and conversing about the questions after the exam.

If you're looking for a wine documentary that will teach you about wines...this is not that documentary. This is a look into the challenges that people undertaking the Master Sommelier test face, the stress it puts on their lives and families, their desire and dedication to receiving the diploma and pin, and the career paths that are a result of achieving this diploma.

This documentary got such a nice reception, that a sequel has already been made, Somm; Into the Bottle.

Movie directors--stop with the black eyes already

After watching Lazarus Effect which I gave a review on previously, I noticed a trend that I'm feeling annoyed with now. It's the big bulging black eyes movie directors are doing to elicit a fear response from movie goers. It's getting old.

Lazarus Effect

Exorcism of Emily Rose

It doesn't even have to be the horror movie genre that gets afflicted with this, like beautiful Jean Grey in the X-Men movies.

There are scarier tricks that you can do with eyes than just turning them black, special effects people. I'd like to think by now, things could be a bit more savvy.

Speaking of eyes, I have yet to see one movie starring Hannibal Lecter, portraying his eyes on the big screen as they were written in the book. The books said "Lecter's eyes were a shade of maroon and reflected the light in "pinpoints of red".

I haven't seen one attempt of any director giving Hannibal this shade of eye color, when the books and movie posters all have him with red eyes. Try to think outside the box a little bit movie industry.

Brian Cox as Lecter - not maroon eyes

Anthony Hopkins as Lecter - not maroon eyes

Mads Mikkelsen as Lecter - not maroon eyes

Babadook (2014)

My first reaction is--what the fuck?

This one is complicated. No matter how you look at this movie, it leaves you feeling uncomfortable.

I think there's some very real psychological stuff in this movie. What if you did have a child that you just didn't like and didn't want? What if you were also alone in all this and had no support group? Would you start to go crazy?

I am pretty much going into the team mental illness versus team real monster on this. My best guess, without wanting to spend a whole lot of time dwelling on it, is that the mom had a mental break. I think they portrayed with some accuracy how stressful it would be to have a child with a behavior disorder, on top of being a grieving single mother. They show in the beginning a sense of this child consistently clinging to her, not letting her sleep, pulling her hair at night, screaming, having severe episodes. I've read some stories of parents with challenged children, and I don't know how they do it. In no way to be insensitive at all, I have often asked myself, if I had to raise a child with a mental handicap or disability, would I be able to do it? I feel a scary sense inside that I would not be able to handle it.

But see, this is where the movie takes you. It's supposed to be a scary movie, not quite horror, not quite a thriller, lost in limbo somewhere. There are parts of this movie that are chilling, like when it seems the mom is floating across the floor and she looks possessed, or when she's tied up in the basement and tries to choke her son. There's also some very strange Jacob's Ladder/Requiem for a Dream quality to it.

One thing to keep in mind when pondering Babadook, is that at her niece's birthday party, she stated she used to be a writer, and of children's books. Being armed with this bit of knowledge, I believe she in fact wrote the Babadook book herself, so that also leans my opinion that this was a case of mental illness and no scary monster in the house. 

Also, there were times where the Babadook actually reminded me of Stitch from Lilo and Stitch, particularly when it was hanging around near the ceiling and all you saw was a black blob and silver teeth.

I would recommend anyone to watch it. It's different. It feels different than other movies. I can't say that you will enjoy it, as I don't feel any particular sense of gratification after seeing it. Echoing the sentiments from other's comments I have seen online, it probably is a conversation starter at the very least. I also love that it is an Australian/Canadian film. How other countries approach a film can be very refreshing.

Poltergeist (2015)

I'm very conflicted on my review of this movie.

What is the hardest for me, is I absolutely love the original. Even to this day, 30 plus years later, I actually watch this movie at least once a year.

Even though by today's standards, in some scenes the special effects look a little sad in spots (namely the tornado scene), this movie in my opinion, holds up very well. A large part of that is the connection and chemistry of Steve and Diane (Craig T. Nelson and JoBeth Williams). This was the aspect that I think ruined the remake. As soon as I saw Sam Rockwell was the dad, I knew the movie lost a lot of credibility. It's not to say Rockwell is a bad actor, well maybe that is what I'm saying, but what I'm really saying is Rockwell is no Nelson.

When I try to appreciate the 2015 version as a stand alone and doing zero comparisons between the two, I would still be disappointed in it. I think it was a smart move to make Rockwell's story line different. Instead of being the very dependable hot shot real estate seller that Nelson is, Rockwell is a recently unemployed John Deere employee. Their stress dynamic in the marriage is financial problems. There was no real stress dynamic between Nelson and Williams. Nelson's stress dynamic was a lot more low key in the 82 version. The only time you really got a glimpse was when he looked a little wounded when Tangina (the medium) told him that Carol Anne could only hear her mother's voice, which was actually an untruth. Not more than 15 minutes later, the only voice that was able to break Carol Anne free from the "beast" was Nelson's voice threatening to spank her as a way to motivate her through fear, to pull away from this otherworldly thing that was holding on to her.  In Poltergeist 2, there was a stress dynamic for Nelson's character because they had lost their home, was living with Diane's mom, he was unemployed and he did feel like more of a failure, so it was weird/interesting plot change they chose with Rockwell's version, which was more of the Steve Freeling in the sequel. They tried to give Rockwell the same dry, edgy humor of Nelson, but it felt flat to me.


The things I did like about the Poltergeist reboot was the imagery of what it was like for Carol Anne. This was something you can't see in the 1982 version. She's just in the TV and trapped in some extra dimension between her closet and a spot in their living room. We only hear her voice in the 82 version. In the 2015 version, you get a glimpse into what that space looks like. That was a nice touch.

All attempts of making any fear jerking response though in the reboot, didn't grab me. In the original we have the chairs that are balanced on the table like wooden acrobats, Carol Anne sliding across the floor of their kitchen and complaining of friction burn, the camera guy who watched a T-bone steak gut itself and then proceeded to peel his own face off in the bathroom, angelic creepy spirits coming down the staircase in slow motion, to that ever incredible scene of the hallway getting longer and longer the faster Diane runs, these are the badass visuals that you remember forever from the original. The reboot has some guy getting his arm grabbed through the wall and some black goo grabbing the oldest daughter when her parents are out of the house. Just not the same caliber at all. Very disappointing.

When I watch the original of which I did just a few months back, I still freaking tear up when Diane claims Carol Anne "passed through my soul," and the way Nelson looked panicked and tearful when Diane and Carol Anne came out of the ceiling, covered in pink slime and not breathing. There is an emotional tug. It feels real.

The only tears you'll shed in watching the reboot is when you realize how much you actually miss being a kid in the 80's.

The real star of the reboot--the squirrel. Hands down, the best acting in the entire film.

Bottom line is, you don't reboot ANYTHING written by Spielberg. Just don't.