Editor’s Note: This review was published during our coverage of Fantastic Fest. But seeing as Daybreakers is hitting theaters today, we decided to repost. The movie has not changed, nor has Brian Salisbury’s excellent review.

If there is one thing movie-going audiences have been saturated with of late it is vampire films. I’m not sure if it was the dreadful Twilight film that got the ball rolling, but it seems we cannot go a month without another vamp film forced into our eye sockets. At this year’s Fantastic Fest alone there were two big release vampire films screened: Cirque Du Freak & Daybreakers. Don’t misunderstand me, I love vampire cinema as much as the next overgrown child. But you can only be told the same old story so often before it gets repetitive and tedious. We invariably get an über violent blood orgy or a sappy forced romantic angle, but typically the result is a forgettable or laughably bad film. I was excited by the trailer for Daybreakers, and even more so when I heard it was to be the closing night film. But I harbored some trepidation as to whether it would fall into one of those two slots. What I wasn’t expecting, and what I most assuredly got, was an incredibly smart vampire film that delivered all the gore without skimping on subtext.

Daybreakers takes place in an alternate future wherein a plague has changed nearly the entirety of Earth’s population into vampires. The remaining humans are gathered and farmed for their blood which is now the sole food source for an entire planet. The problem is that the human race is now nearly extinct and a crippling blood shortage is causing world-wide starvation. When vampires starve, they degenerate into nasty, winged demons that lose all capacity for rational thought. These creatures, fueled by a primal, predatory instinct, begin feeding on other vampires causing massive panic. The only hope is to find a synthetic blood substitute that can reduce or completely eliminate the need for human farming. Enter hematologist Edward, Ethan Hawke, whose experiments with blood substitutes have thus far been explosive failures. Edward, God I wish they had picked a different name for their vampire protagonist, is motivated by an overwhelming sympathy for the human race and a desire to see them revived. When he is contacted by one of the last human tribes in existence, he must choose between upholding his morals and a grizzly death at the hands of his people.

Daybreakers is one of the smartest vampire films I have ever seen. By making vampirism a universal trait, the writers have taken a good deal of the gimmick out of it. The movie is less about vampires as it is two warring clans of people both facing extinction. Granted, there are a lot of clever inserts pertaining to how society would change if vampires were the ruling class, but those feel more in line with societal alterations of a dystopian story. I thought the cars fitted with shields for driving during the day and the underground walking tunnels designed as a subway of sorts to help them avoid sunlight were brilliant. I also really loved the little depictions of vampire traits that still seem really cool to us but are played with such normalcy by the characters (child vampires, dark subway tunnels lit by glowing, yellow eyes, and toothpaste advertisements featuring fanged models).

Daybreakers is a dystopian film and the Spierig brothers, who both wrote and directed the film, were obviously striving to create exactly that. All of the classic elements are here: the stark hierarchy of society, those in power lying to the masses and hiding a crippling problem, the lone hero questioning the system, and the constant scapegoating. It’s also a commentary on our current society and how our dependence on oil has the potential to undo our way of life. But on an even broader scale, it’s about how absolute power corrupts even the most inherently powerful beings. I loved watching Edward’s Montag-like journey from moody distrust, to unwilling conspirator, to outright defiance. I also loved Sam Neil in the Big Brother role. All of these elements mix nicely with a dark, cold overtone to the vampire world to establish Daybreakers as much more of a sci-fi film than a horror film. I felt a far stronger Blade Runner vibe from this film than anything else and that really impressed me.

Don’t let the intelligence of this film lead you to believe it is boring. Daybreakers delivers the action and the gore when it needs to. The Spierig brothers don a third set of hats for this film in that they also worked on the special effects; no stretch for them given that they did all of the visual effects for their first film Undead. There is some gorgeous brutality in this film that really needs to be seen. I think my favorite scene was a slow motion, wide-angle view of an absolute bloodbath between a horde of vampires that had the entire audience howling with delight. The deformed vampire creatures born of starvation are vicious as hell and the dispatch of one these creatures in particular was spectacular. I love that the Spierig brothers still know how to use corn syrup and latex as aptly as they do CG.

I love Daybreakers. It will sit on my top shelf of vampire films in good company with the likes of The Lost Boys, Near Dark, and Let the Right One In. The reason this movie works so well is that the Spierig brothers demonstrate terrific writing prowess first, then competent directing skills, and finally a knack for visual effects. From the page to the execution these guys nail it and the result is something truly remarkable. It doesn’t hurt that they were able to pull not only Ethan Hawke and Sam Neil but also Fantastic Fest V workhorse Willem Dafoe; Mr. Chaos Reigns! Seriously, the guy was in three Fantastic Fest films this year. This is a great example of how a filmmaker (or filmmakers) can take an old hat concept, deconstruct the genre in which it typically exists, and piece together a brilliant, unique viewing experience.

The Upside: It is a dystopian, sci-fi vampire film that is every bit as entertaining as it is thought-provoking.

The Downside: If your penchant is whiny, wussy vamp love stories, you will be sorely disappointed

On The Side: For their next project, the Spierig brothers are apparently working on a remake of the classic Errol Flynn swashbuckler Captain Blood.

Not only did Fantastic Fest audiences get a glimpse at the upcoming Ninja Assassin two months before its wide release, FSR was lucky enough to sit down with director James McTeigue who had a ton to say about the MPAA ratings process, the concept behind creating a live-action anime and his forthcoming murder mystery The Raven (which he describes as Poe meets Se7en).

Oh, and we also talk about kicking ass. Naturally.

A veteran of the film industry, McTeigue had a lot to say about the difficulties faced by studios, claiming that they didn’t know what the next hot subculture would be (and that they need one for when comic book characters go on the decline).

So for those of you who demand an interview that deals with the inner politics of the film industry and a discussion on Kusarigamas cutting through human flesh, gird your loins and prepare yourself:

]]> http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/features/exclusive-james-mcteigue-talks-ninja-assasin-interview-colea.php/feed 4 http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/news/a-town-called-panic-trailer-insanity-reigns-neilm.php http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/news/a-town-called-panic-trailer-insanity-reigns-neilm.php#comments Tue, 17 Nov 2009 07:11:42 +0000 Neil Miller http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=58680 If Fantastic Fest is going to be credited for starting this year's great cinema meme (Chaos Reigns), then it must also take credit for launching A Town Called Panic into the spotlight. This wild little film did win the Audience Awards, after all.]]>

At Fantastic Fest this year in Austin, one meme crept out of the woodwork (and the mind of unofficial Alamo Drafthouse mascot Nacho Vigalondo) and has been taking Hollywood by storm. It is the tagline of the third act of Lars von Trier’s film Antichrist, “Chaos Reigns!” However, while Antichrist provided this year’s edition of “I drink your milkshake,” a fact upon which Fantastic Fest can hang its hat, perhaps one of the most memorable films from this year’s selection was the Belgian stop-motion animated pile of insanity A Town Called Panic, from directors Stéphane Aubier and Vincent Patar.

In his Fantastic Fest review, Dr. Cole Abaius called A Town Called Panic “pure spectacle that has the power to transport you to the younger, joyful mindset of the sandbox.” It is a healthy mix of insanity, children’s toys and humor that is wildly inappropriate. In a sense, just the kind of movie that anyone who reads FSR would absolutely love. It was one of our best-reviewed films of Fantastic Fest, as well as the festival’s Audience Award winner. And as any Fantastic Fest attendee can tell you, this is a very serious thing — as its a very serious, movie-loving audience.

Have a look at the trailer below, courtesy of Apple and Zeitgeist Films. A Town Called Panic gets a limited release starting December 16, 2009.

Press junkets can tend to be a drag. Having said that, we were particularly excited to get to interview Dr. Ronald Chevalier, most notable for his extensive corpus of stately science fiction novels. Chevalier was in Austin for the premiere of Gentlemen Broncos at Fantastic Fest, where actor Jemaine Clement portrays him.

Chris Tilly from IGN UK and I teamed up during a chat outside to talk with Chevalier about the film, the state of modern video simulations and the joys of science fiction.

Adam Sweeney: Can you give me three items that I could write a book about?

[In that deep, faux-British accent] Wellll….The conflict, the deep inner conflict between human and robot has always been a fascinating problem and one I’ve explored in forty-three novels. I still don’t think I’ve solved that conflict.

Chris Tilly: What are your favorite sci-fi films, Doctor?

Well, as you probably know, I abhor cinema. I loathe it. I wish I could enjoy it. My favorite cinema would be anything featuring the wonderful Jane Seymour. I originally chose her to play Gorgana, the Cyborg Queen. She turned it down because of her commitments to “Dr. Quinn” at the time. I won’t allow it to be made until she has agreed to do the part.

AS: Have you heard of any rumors of Kevin James being the lead in your next film, Bisontennial?

Who is this Kevin James?

AS: Paul Blart.

I am sorry. I do not step inside the multiplex.

CT: Do you play video games at all?

I don’t think of them as video games. I think of them as simulators. And, yes, I have been in a few simulations. Do you know Geo Defense on iPod? That is one I recommend. You defend a base of lives and you have laser types to protect bases.

AS: Speaking of saving lives, you’re a doctor…

I am an honorary doctor. I got my doctorate from a university I started online.

AS: Have you considered going into the medical field to cure the masses?

[Scoffs] Again, I harken back to the cyborg field. The medical practice would be helped with robotic body parts, particularly noses. Robotic noses.

AS: It’s an important science.

It’s an important sense! I dedicate whole paragraphs to the particular fragrance of a character.

AS: If you came up for science fiction nicknames for us, what would they be?

Chris Tilly would be…Chris Till-odious. And you are?

AS: Adam Sweeney.

I would call you The Proton Kid.

Be sure to check out our interview with Jemaine Clement.

Press junkets can tend to be a drag. Having said that, we were particularly excited to get to interview Jemaine Clement, most notable for his hit band/television show “Flight of the Conchords.” Clement was in Austin for the premiere of Gentlemen Broncos at Fantastic Fest, where he steals the show as Dr. Ronald Chevalier, a critically acclaimed science fiction author that has run out of fresh ideas.

Chris Tilly from IGN UK and I teamed up during a chat outside to talk with Clement about the film, the pressure that comes with working on “Flight of the Conchords” and the recent news that FOTC will be featured on a Rock Band game in the future. Along the way, we ran into a scheming crow while the humble and always clever Clement let us into the world of Dr. Chevalier.

Chris Tilly: What was it like seeing the film last night?

I didn’t see but about the last twenty minutes. We all went and had a dinner reunion because we all live in different places

[As Jemaine speaks, a crow approaches the table.]

Look at this ominous crow just spying. He’s probably from The Omen. He does have a beautiful color though. He’s sort of blue. I don’t know why he’s so angry.

Adam Sweeney: He’s probably going to steal all of the good parts of this interview. [Laughter]

Yeah, he’ll take it to a witch. [Laughs]

AS: How did you prepare for this role?

I spent a lot of time looking at pictures of authors because the words are already there in the script. You’ve got how they talk, how they walk and what they were. Jared and Jerusha [Hess] are so specific about the characters. All I could decide was my hairstyle and my voice, just a little bit.

CT: As a Brit, I was hearing a little bit of James Mason and Michael York.

Michael York was a big influence. I am pretty sure Jared wanted Michael York to play the part. When you read it, it describes Michael York. He’s a guy in his 60s with silver hair in the script. So I didn’t really envision myself playing it when I read the script.

CT: Is it hard to do the voice?

Yeah, I could hardly do it last night at the screening. I was like, ‘how does it go?’ You have to imagine a plum is in your throat.

CT: Were you looking for something different than your “Conchords” character?

I guess so.

CT: What was it about this script that particularly drew your attention?

Well, do you read scripts?

CT: Yeah.

Then you’ve probably read scripts of movies that are made. There’s another level of scripts that aren’t being made and they’re quite bad. But I don’t think I read them well. Sometimes I think they’re going to be terrible, and they’re excellent. This one was just really different in their detail for the characters. I know this style of filmmaking isn’t for everyone. It’s in a different universe. The characters aren’t quite real. I really liked that. So many films are just boring real life versions. This takes real life and adds to it. But some people say, ‘That’s not real. It wouldn’t happen.” But that’s what makes me like this script.

AS: They tend to highlight the eccentricities of people.

Right but they’re real. Like the guy who makes the films in the movie. Jared has a friend who does that stuff. He makes these films with terrible lasers. He does hundreds of these things. A lot of real life is in there. Some people think it’s too much. I think it’s perfect.

AS: You’ve written before. Do you have any plans on writing a screenplay in the future?

Yeah. I am working on one right now. At the time, I could really relate to Chevalier because we were right in the middle of Conchords and writing for the next season. I was like, ‘I have to come up with twenty more songs and ten ideas!’

CT: Was it nice playing such a bastard?

Yeah, it was fun. I try to make him sympathetic. I wanted him to just be a guy who tries to make people inspired. But it was really fun picking on the kids in the class.

CT: That look you gave the girl was great.

You mean the troll girl? [Laughs]

CT: Yeah. You could feel the tragic side of him. Could you do a spin-off of Chevalier?

I don’t know. [Speaking in the Dr. Chevalier voice] It would be very interesting. [And back to normal] But I’d like to see a Bronco and Brutus one. Those guys would be great to team up.

CT: Well, we know Sam Rockwell can handle two characters.

Right, Moon. I haven’t seen that yet. I am so interested in it that I couldn’t help but read things about it. They were hidden things.

AS: How have you dealt with the success of “Flight of the Conchords” given that the joke is–

That we’re not successful?

AS: Right, but then you have a party at The Highball for this film and you’re doing a reading at Book People.

Isn’t Book People a really small store? [Laughter] I wouldn’t take that as a huge success to be in a small store, right?

AS: Well, I am sure it will be packed, right? [Laughter]

I was actually quite nervous doing the reading last night. I haven’t done anything like that since school plays.

AS: If it goes bad you can start reading from The Crucible.

[Laughs] Only certain people watch the show, but I mean, I can walk around this place and nobody will recognize me. It’s only a small subsection of the TV watching populace.

CT: What’s the status of the “Conchords?”

We don’t know yet. We may do a short season or a sort of special. Like a Christmas special sort of thing. Maybe nothing.

CT: A friend of mine was interviewing Rhys Darby the other day in London and he was talking about the possibility of a movie.

He’s uncontrollable. [Laughter] We created a monster. But we’ve been thinking about a movie. But it goes in stages. I’ve been doing this for five years and there are times where I say, ‘I am never going to do this again. I’m not going to sing another silly song!’ Then time passes and we say, ‘ya wanna do another? Hmm, maybe…’ It goes on, I do it and enjoy it, hate it. Never going to do it again. Do it again. I think of Larry David and how each season of ‘Curb Your Enthusiasm’ you have to take it one at a time because a hundred episodes is daunting. Right now I am in ‘I’m not going to do it again’ mode.

CT: I think of all the directions you could take into a film.

By all means, email them to me. [Laughter]

AS: Would you consider a dramatic role?

I love comedy but it’s more as a fan of comedy. That’s how I got into it, watching it. But I like taking on challenges. I wish I had come up with a more interesting word than challenges. [Laughter] But when you’re scared of something, you have a reason to do it.

AS: It motivates you.

Yeah. You take steps to get over it. But yeah, I would do that. I haven’t been actively looking for a dramatic part though.

CT: I had a question about Rock Band. You guys are going to be on Rock Band in the future, right? Do you know what songs are going to be on there?

We’re open to suggestions. I’d love to see what the results are. I hope they don’t choose obscure ones. But I would love to get the payout for the “Stairway to Heaven” royalties.

AS: We will talk to Jimmy Page about giving you that part.

He has enough money already.

AS: Well, thanks for the interview.

Sure thing.

Be sure to check out our interview with Dr. Ronald Chevalier himself.

Over the years, I’ve been exposed to a lot of animated filmmaking. You could say that when it comes to feature-length animated works, I’m a connoisseur of sorts. And whether it is the CGI-driven stories of Pixar and Dreamworks or the 2D hand-drawn fairy tales of Walt Disney, I’m always jumping at the chance to see something new and different in the animated world. And that love for animation doesn’t end with the borders of the United States, but expands out into the rest of the world, reaching all the way to Japan and even as far as Denmark (as we saw earlier in Fantastic Fest when I reviewed Journey to Saturn).

Which brings me to the Russian/Japanese hybrid film First Squad. Writer by Russian scribes Alijosha Klimov and Misha Sprits and animated by the folks at Japan’s Studio 4ºC (the same studio that put out Batman: Gotham Knight last year), First Squad follows a young Russian girl with special telepathic powers named Nadaya, who was once a member of an elite squad of psychic warriors trained to fight the Nazis in World War II. But after a deadly attack leaves the rest of her squad dead and her without anywhere to go, she sets out on her own. That doesn’t last very long, as she’s quickly picked back up by the army and brought in for a very special mission. You see, the Nazis are in the process of bridging the gap between our world and that of the dead, and they intend to bring back Baron Von Wolff, an ancient knight whose power is unmatched in either realm. Von Wolff and his army of the dead would have no problem taking out the Soviets, thus ensuring Nazi victory on the Eastern front. To counter, the Soviets use Nadaya and a special dimensional travel machine to make contact with her old squad, now on the other side of death, and get them to stop Von Wolff before he can cross over into our world.

It’s a very unique and interesting concept for a film, which unfortunately gets bogged down in its own desire to create a method of narrative delivery that is completely unique. Allow me to explain. The film begins with some incredibly beautiful animation, mostly of news reel-style footage that leads in with the history behind the story, explaining what is happening on the Eastern front as Germany and the Soviet Union wage war. It melts quickly into some incredibly intense and visceral action. Then, the film begins to cut to live-action, documentary-style talking heads — Russian scientists and historians who give additional background information to support the animated story at hand. This wouldn’t be so much of a problem, if it wasn’t stretched throughout the film, causing the entire feature’s pacing to be painfully clunky. As well, the doc-style moments get lost in minutia, with one scientist taking several moments to explain what sedatives are — a little too much talk, with too little substance.

Between these boring, drab live-action moments though, is where First Squad shines. The animated portion of the story is deeply engaging, fast and furiously vibrant. The only downside to the onslaught of action is that, when set against the somber tone of the live-action, some of it comes off more like the banging of pots and pans in a once quiet room. It is a storytelling strategy that is intended to be jarring, but ultimately ends up being quite an annoyance. And that’s where First Squad ultimately loses its audience — in its inability to maintain a consistent tone. Or for that matter, ever decide what sort of story it wants to be. If it were recut as a strictly animated film, it could be a very entertaining, blistering 40-minute adventure. But as a 73-minute hybrid of many colors, it falls on its own sword in the same hard and fast manner that characterize its visceral action sequences.

The Upside: Animation is beautiful, action is visceral.

The Downside: The story is paralyzed by the infusion of live-action, doc-style interview footage.

On the Side: The human realm battles shown in this film are all based on real World War II battles and are choreographed exactly as they happened, with the exception of the army of deadites that ultimately show up.

Fantasy films are a tough genre for any but the biggest studios to produce. They’re usually large in scope, require copious amounts of expensive CGI, and ideally stem from a well-known literary source to give the film a built-in audience on opening weekend. This is doubly true for children’s fantasy as the wee little ones require enough spectacle and effects to keep them coming back to the theater again and again. So what do you do if you don’t have a production deal with Walt Disney or Walden Media? What do you do if your film is based on a book with immense popularity… in New Zealand? You hire WETA Workshop for their special effects wizardry and Sam Neill for his general bad-assery. That’s what. But will it be enough…?

Theo (Tom Cameron) and Rachel (Sophie McBride) are twins living in New Zealand who share the gift of psychic ability and the curse of being red-heads. They’ve recently lost their mum, and their dad’s way of dealing with it all is to send the teens to Auckland to stay with relatives. They’re welcomed warmly by their uncle, aunt, and horn-dog older cousin Ricky (Leon Wadham), but the siblings find themselves at odds with each other as Theo shuts Rachel out emotionally in his grief. The twins try to settle in, but problems quickly arise when curiosity and script necessity lead to them exploring a creepy old house across the lake. It belongs to the Wilberforces, a family of shape-shifting mausoleum employees with waxy features, who’ve been waiting for just such a pair of red-headed twins to complete their centuries-old effort to destroy the Earth with gigantic creatures residing beneath the city’s multiple dormant volcanoes. Humanity’s hope comes in the form an older man named Mr. Jones (Sam Neill) who has a fondness for gingers, a tale the size of a T-Rex to tell about aliens and destiny, and a pair of stones in his pockets that need to feel the warmth of young teenagers’ hands.

I haven’t read the best-selling “Under the Mountain” novel by Maurice Gee, nor have I seen the very popular Kiwi TV series made from it, but I have to imagine both of them did a better job at telling an engaging and interesting story than this new film does. Theo and Rachel are introduced briefly as being quite close before their mother dies and grief forces Theo to shut down emotionally. That makes fine dramatic sense, but Theo also develops an anger towards Rachel and an unexplained loss of faith in her that affects their psychic bond. It becomes important to the plot later on but it makes no sense in its inception. Instead of naturally grieving teens we’re left with a prickish boy and an ineffective girl. She literally can do little to nothing without him which isn’t exactly a message you want to spread to young girls is it?

With uninteresting leads it falls to the film’s story to captivate and engage the audience, but it’s only slightly more successful here. Using psychic twins as a catalyst is nothing new (see Escape to Witch Mountain), yet the specificity of their being red-headed seems extraneous (and offensive to those of us allergic to their ilk). The basic setup is also a bit too convoluted when it comes to the dueling alien races, their motivations, and their abilities. Twins have the inherent power of ‘twinness’ and therefore are the only ones who can stop the Wilberforces, and yet they need magic pet rocks in order to do so. The fate of the entire world is at risk here but the most threatening thing we see is a bunch of guys in suits who look like they’ve spent the last few weeks dead under water. Director Jonathan King has done a 180 degree turn around from his last film, the fun little gorefest called Black Sheep, but he seems to have bitten off more than he can handle here. The film needed a grander scope to tell a story about aliens trying to destroy our world, and King just can’t seem to find it.

The acting and characters in Under the Mountain are a mixed bag. Neill obviously shines in his role as a cantankerous alien because the man is awesome in every role, but even he can’t make the term ‘twinness’ sound anything but stupid no matter how many times he says it (about thirty-four times). Silly terminology aside, he still has that adventurous and playful glint in his eyes that reminds you positively of films like Jurassic Park, In the Mouth of Madness, and Sirens. Wadham has nothing memorable on his resume, but he still manages to steal each of his scenes in the film as the constantly interrupted and sexually frustrated teen who simply wants a taste of his girlfriend’s Kiwi. He’s got the film’s best lines and some solid comic timing as well. Less fortunate are Cameron and McBride as the twins. I’ll admit I have a general bias against gingers, but their serviceable acting and one-note characters don’t help any.

There are parts of Under the Mountain that do work, and they start with Auckland itself. This is an absolutely beautiful location and King has captured it brilliantly from the volcanic landscape to the lush forests. He shows us a world both inviting and dangerous, and the shots of Auckland’s incredible geography are as much moving postcards for New Zealand as The Lord of the Rings films were. WETA also impresses with creepy and gross practical effects for the Wilberforces and various other creatures. They’re effectively slimy-looking and frightening, but the same effectiveness doesn’t hold for the film’s digital work.

Under the Mountain isn’t a bad film, but I can’t help wonder what it would have looked like with more money behind it. Not that money equals quality, as big-budget fantasy stinkers like The Golden Compass have showed us, but a grander scale behind the story’s setting and dangers could only have helped. As it stands we’re left with a film that will probably play extremely well in its native land where viewers can fill in the narrative gaps with knowledge they possess from the book and TV series, but international audiences will probably be left wanting quite a bit more.

The Upside: Sam Neill; some cool creature effects

The Downside: Too silly to take seriously; the two teens are morons; the danger feels arbitrary and underwhelming; gingers!

On the Side: This is actually my 100th review for Film School Rejects. Ideally it would have been for a better film…

When I was thirteen, I remember specifically complaining that there weren’t that many books being written for 13-year old boys. There are children’s books, classics, and novels, but nothing really made featuring the interests that come between youth and adulthood. Most likely because the only thing 13-year old boys are interested in is 13-year old girls.

I’ve had the same complaint about movies since I was about that age. It seems like directly aiming for PG-13 is harder than it looks, but The Vampire’s Assistant nails down a story and action that seems perfect for that age.

Darren (Chris Massoglia) and Steve (Josh Hutcherson) are best friends despite different upbringings and personalities. They both attend a mysterious Freak Show populated by fantastical beings, and Darren joins the ranks of the undead by becoming a vampire, but Steve will have his own, darker journey to go through.

This movie is a ton of fun. It shoots for the middle in the ways that it has to, but it’s tailor-made for a younger crowd that needs the sex and violence toned down a bit. Even without the geysers of blood that I love so much, the action is engaging, well-choreographed and shot strongly. Plus, the whole thing benefits greatly from John C. Reilly (in the mentor role as the vampire Crepsley). He brings a weight of dramatics and the ease of a dry sense of humor for a character who has been alive long enough to have seen almost everything.

But it’s not without its flaws – most of which stem from having to shoot for the middle. Chris Massoglia is a passable talent, but he’s nothing to write home about as an actor. Essentially, he fulfills the role of an un-noteworthy kid with the incredible skill it takes to be un-noteworthy. Hutcherson has been around longer and flashes a bit more acting strength in a role that’s new to him. Unfortunately, although most of their performances are clever and sweet, the freaks have very little screen time which makes it hard to tell a movie about a boy rejecting his former family for a new one a little lopsided. This is probably most symbolized by Jane Krakowski’s character where the production had to do an intense amount of CGI for a character with less than ten lines of dialog.

There are also some scenes that lay flat on the screen without much life to them – hampered mostly by line delivery and the generic pitch of the script in the first place. The problem with a movie like this is the problem lying at the core of why there aren’t many movies like this. It’s aiming at an audience in limbo between childhood and adulthood and has to self-lobotomize a bit in order to keep the emotional range (as well as the sex and violence) muted. It’s a hindrance to good storytelling, but it’s probably a necessary almost-evil.

In a lot of ways, it feels like a lot of young adult entries from the 90s – like Blank Check mixed with Little Monsters. The premises are straight from the fantasy-life of a pre-teen, the world is a little more grown up, but the emotions and dramatics are a bit too schmaltzy to be remembered. And maybe it’s because it’s such a confusing time in the life of the target audience that the movie (and others like it) come out looking gawky and awkward with more blemishes than we’d normally want a film to have.

But the filmmakers walk the line fairly well here, only tripping off the balance beam a handful of times. For the most part, the flick is engaging with an interesting take on the best friend dynamic and the ultimate question of whether a friendship can survive as two people grow up and grow apart. Toss that in with some strange carnie folks, a vampire civil war, and a love interest with a tail, and it makes for a fun family movie.

The Upside: Some good characters inhabiting a strange world and John C. Reilly calling everything bullshit.

The Downside: It dims the lights but doesn’t go too dark, and it stays middle of the unremarkable road from time to time.

On the Side: This is Chris Massoglia’s first movie.

Mandrill, fresh off its selection as Best Film of Fantastic Fest 2009, is a hell of a movie. Director Ernesto Diaz Espinoza brings his love for classic 70s exploitation and James Bond films, and adds a unique style to a great piece of storytelling. Couple that with having Marko Zaror, one of the most amazing martial artists alive, as your lead man, and you should get a sense for why so many people love this film.

I had the great privilege of sitting down with both Diaz Espinoza and Zaror to talk about their movie. We also talked about how to get the ladies and discussed Mirageman, the film that made these two Fantastic Fest royalty two years ago. Over several cocktails, we talked in a secure karaoke room while Andy Cheng, director of the Mirageman remake Defender 3D provided some color commentary from off-camera.

What do you think?

German cinema seems to be undergoing somewhat of a revival in recent years. Some may disagree (but some aren’t writing this review), but if you look beyond the turn of the century there seems to be only sporadic films that really made any kind of mark on the international stage. And then in the past five or so years we’ve seen Downfall, The Lives of Others, Der Baader Meinhof Komplex, Goodbye Lenin!, and several more receive critical acclaim outside of Germany. Most of the films that have crossed over have been relatively straight dramas, but once in a while those sneaky krauts deliver something more genre oriented. The latest example of German filmmakers expanding their cinematic boundaries is the recent fantasy Krabat. Imagine an under-funded Hogwarts school for grimy, asexual boys…

Krabat (David Kross) is a young beggar barely surviving a harsh winter in 18th century Germany when a flock of ravens appears before him and calls his name. That’s pretty standard fare for German black birds, but they truly get Krabat’s attention when they start to whisper promises of food, shelter, and warmth. He follows their psychic directions to an old mill where he meets several other young men and their one-eyed master. They all welcome him in to their family, train him in the ways of the mill, and introduce him to a little something called ‘the dark arts.’ Telekinesis, the ability to transform into a raven, and a complete loss of his sex drive are just some of the magical powers he picks up, but they come with a price. There’s no escape from the mill or it’s surrounding countryside, and he will eventually die there. Oh, and eventually is just a few years away…

Krabat has a pretty solid premise and does a good job of setting up the groundwork for an interesting fantasy or fable, but then does absolutely nothing with it. Some examples of plot threads teased but never fully pulled… The boys work in the mill where they grind flour and bones. Bones you say? Yes, bones delivered by a demonic-looking man called the Gevatter who pulls up on moonlit nights driving a horse-drawn buggy. Who is he and what comes of that storyline? No idea. Krabat meets a sweet young lass in a nearby village, but he’s warned by Tonda (Daniel Bruhl) that the master can never learn her name. If he does both the girl and the boy will meet an unnatural (but natural-looking) demise. Why can’t the boys have lady friends, why do their names matter, and why must they die? No idea. We also never really learn the end goal for either the mill or the master. We know he’s doing someone else’s bidding and the boys are doing his, and we see that he needs the boys in more ways than one in order to survive, but very little is done with that.

Other issues with the film are more obvious including a lack of emotional attachment to the characters or their lives. Part of the problem is that all the boys (or young men actually, seeing as they all appear to be in their early twenties) blend together into a gaggle of dirt and flour-covered guys. Only Krabat and Tonda stand out… well, the one that looks like a retarded Baldwin brother (or Stephen) is identifiable too. The rest are mostly interchangeable and instantly forgettable. There’s also not enough action to sustain the two-hour running time. And when the film’s singular real action scene does occur it’s filled with no-impact combat. It’s magic! It needed more (and better) action to make up for the slow build to an unexciting resolution.

It isn’t all doom and gloom in Krabat’s world. A few of the effects are so-so, but most of them are actually pretty impressive. The transformations into ravens and back again are done well. And for as dark as the film’s palette is, it’s still presented quite beautifully. From the seasons passing in the valley to soaring overhead shots showing the expanse and beauty of the natural world around them, the cinematography is sharp and often stunning. The acting from the three leads is strong too with a nod to Christian Redl as the evil master who likes to surround himself with young men.

Krabat isn’t a bad film necessarily, but while it has the ingredients to be so much better it never puts them to good use. Characters and events lack motivation, parts of the story that seem interesting are never explored, and the film’s resolution is incredibly underwhelming. Also, something involving the master and the dying boys that seems fairly obvious is treated as a major revelation by way of matter-of-fact exposition. It all makes for a rather ho-hum film that feels longer than it is and fails to sustain any real sense of entertainment. Watch it if you want to see something new from German filmmakers, but just don’t expect it to be all that good or interesting. It’s a start though, and seeing how well they’ve done with dramas in recent years I don’t doubt their genre output will improve.

The Upside: Some interesting effects; cinematography is beautiful; different from a lot of other films; people look sufficiently filthy

The Downside: Seemingly pointless; some poor effects; a slow build to nothing; too many unanswered questions

On the Side: Daniel Bruhl’s big American cinema break came this past summer in Quentin Tarantino’s Inglourious Basterds.

Dirty Mind opens with a simple conceit of our reality – that the most complex of human experience can be traced back to simple chemical brain functions. It’s a fascinating concept, especially for film, but it’s also scary territory when trying to lay the groundwork for a narrative that’s meant to be meaningful and matter. But it’s an anchor the film gladly wears even as it piles on the dramatic weight. It never quite reaches where it’s going, but it’s achieved something in at least trying.

The lowest on the totem pole, Diego (Wim Helsen), is laughed at on the job working with his confident, stunt man older brother Cisse (Robbie Cleiren). He’s shy, struggles with a need for love he can’t fulfill, and is generally walked upon by everyone until an accident sees him waking up in the hospital as Tony T – a brand new personality that comes complete with cockiness and catch-phrases. He becomes everything he’s wanted and finds a new conquest in the pretty researcher Jaana (Kristine Van Pellicom) who’s in charge of monitoring his change for a brain study.

This interpersonal drama is mostly a character study of the unchecked id of a macho-man with hints of the stock story about being careful what you wish for. Wim Helsen pulls double duty effectively as both a languishing wallflower and the life of the party, showing both to have more depth than they probably should. Granted, Tony T is more fleshed out because he has more screen time and proves to be a confused, scared man hiding behind empty bravado and a growing need for more danger. And how can you deny someone who spouts, “We’re more reliable than Mac, and we crash like Windows” when unapologetically selling his Stunt Team?

Still, Diego is flat as a walking pity-magnet, but ultimately more sympathetic because of it.

The personality pendulum swing is accompanied by some strange, flawed characters around him. Jaana starts off loathing Tony T because he’s a chauvinist with questionable interest in her, but, for some reason, becomes enthralled by his man-act to the point of near-obsession. Diego’s brother Cisse gains a new, cooler brother that essentially mirrors his own persona until Tony T gets out of hand and starts stealing thunder. Ultimately, Cisse becomes the best character of the entire film. Or at least the one closest to genuine.

The directing is passable with good performances and camera angles that edge toward interesting. Nothing groundbreaking, but there are a few standouts including a scene where Jaana and Tony T finally begin to connect while sitting pic-nic style on a small hill. Otherwise, it’s all pretty par for the course.

The film suffers greatly though for one major reason: it’s far too long. I’ve searched for a run-time to no avail, but the flick feels like 3 hours. Unfortunately, it’s not necessarily a matter of wasted scenes. It’s a matter of how slowly he progresses from becoming Tony T to going out of control. There’s a systematic destruction of relationships, sure, but it all starts to feel much, much too heavy. The entire second act is layer upon layer of new segments showing Tony T doing a new stunt, taking people out to a party, wooing Jaana each time with a millimeter of distance gained by the characters. Just when there seems to be some momentum, Dirty Mind crawls.

To its detriment, it’s enough to drag the film all the way down. There are some good ideas rumbling around here about people, especially very troubled people searching for a version of love or acceptance just out of their grasp, but in some ways those worlds just aren’t explore enough while the slow saga of Tony T and his newest, slight bit of character growth.

The Upside: Some great drama aided by strong performances.

The Downside: Snail’s pacing that turns something interesting into something excruciating.

On the Side: Wim Helsen was a comedian before turning to the world of acting.

Terror in the home can be some of the most effective use of fear in horror. We can stay out of the ocean and avoid Camp Crystal Lake, but when the call is coming from inside the house, you have to take it. So it’s clear what the potential for a film like Salvage is – the use of an unknown enemy and a gun-toting military force in your backyard. That potential, sadly, is never brought to fruition, and what results is an ultimately frustrating film experience.

A strange cargo container washes ashore near an idyllic cul-de-sac in Liverpool, and with it comes a strange killer and the full force of the black ops who take over the neighborhood. With a monster lurking in the shadows and the automatic-weapons-wielding force lurking in plain sight outside, there’s no safe haven for the residents, but Beth (Neve McIntosh) is desperate to find her daughter and take her to safety.

The first few minutes of the film are incredibly inviting, pitching the audience directly into the back seat of a car where a father is taking his daughter to stay with her mother for the holidays. Their rapport is sweet, disarming, and it’s clear the love that exists there. Unfortunately, after she’s dropped off, we never see the father again, making the entire introduction almost useless. What makes it completely useless is that we introduce the girl’s mother as she’s riding a near-stranger in her bedroom on Christmas eve afternoon full-well expecting her daughter to be on her way. I’m all for flawed characters, but Beth digs a pretty deep hole right from the beginning which calls into question almost everything else she does the entire film.

The dramatic thrust of the film rests entirely on her shoulders as she searches for her daughter amidst a living nightmare. With a neighbor gone crazy, screaming in his yard with a kitchen knife being mowed down by the military, it’s clear that the black ops aren’t messing around. It’s also clear that what they’re hunting for isn’t messing around either, but for some reason Beth spends most of her time on screen doing only that.

Instead of actively searching for her daughter, which should take a few minutes since she knows where she is, she holes up in her house wasting a lot of time on lame dialogs with the No Strings Attached she hooked up with that morning. He sort of goes crazy, but not really, and then with nothing else to do, they bring a soldier to safety in the house. Fortunately for them, and for the audience, Sergeant Exposition explains to them about the medical experiment gone wrong that now stalks the sleepy little hamlet.

There are a few solid scares in the midst of all the random character development going on – mostly Beth running from an unknown assailant where glimpses are enough to create enough fear to hope the damned thing doesn’t get into the attic with her. There’s also a great environment created when Beth finally gets out of the house and starts looking for her daughter in earnest.

However it’s all squandered behind the almost nonsensical nature of everything else. Beth spends most of the film idle and then, prompted by nothing, begins a heroic search that comes too little too late. In fact, her daughter gives her the finger when she sees her next, but all is forgiven when the two have to hide from the monster.

I realize this may be a spoiler, but it succinctly exhibits the sheer incompetence in making a scary creature. As Beth searches through the house she knows her daughter to be in, she comes upon the sound of someone urinating. In a (admittedly cool) tense moment, her daughter pokes her head out from around a corner – quietly alerting the audience to the fact that it’s not her going number one. That cool moment lasts as long as it takes to realize that the monster is using the facilities. That’s right. The monster is peeing in a toiler. I wondered if the inhuman beast that stalks, blood-thirsty in the night washes its hands. I hope so, because it shortly shoves them through the door in a post-bowl-relief attack.

This film is sadly marred by a low budget that wasn’t used all that effectively. Granted, there are some scare set ups that pay off, but for the most part the character development goes nowhere, and the characters are generally unlikable in the first place. The most glaring problem is with the full force of the military being four or five guys. Leaving aside the logical inconsistency that they kill some people so that word won’t leak (but not others), there’s no shock and awe to their presence so it ultimately becomes more comical than anything else.

With a fascinating premise about the supernatural and the very natural invading a quiet suburb, this movie had a lot going for it, but the pay off is weak, the characters aren’t likable, and it ends up flushing all that good will down the toilet with a healthy dose of monster urine.

The Upside: Neve McIntosh delivers a strong performance for what it’s worth, and the premise is solid.

The Downside: Characters are weak, the story goes nowhere for a long time, and the flick is hurt badly by its low budget.

On the side: The movie was shot on the unused sets from an old British soap opera.

A black and white film in French that’s from Canada basically has three strikes against it before it gets out of the starting gate, but Truffe gives more than enough reasons to give it a chance. Funny, insane, and randomly poignant, the film has a lot going for it and has some strong performances to back it up.

After that damned Global Warming has messed up the environment, it’s also created a massive boon in truffles in Montreal where a new business has taken over. Unfortunately, supplies are finite, and a new company has moved in under the guise of a pelt-selling shop that, of course, is more intent on sending out furry mind-control drones to take over the wealth of the truffle-hunting biz. On the outskirts of the war is freelance truffle-miner Charles (Roy Dupuis) who has to struggle to make a living and not get choked by a muppet.

This movie is an odd house built on a strange foundation, but for the most part it’s harmless and fun. The opening notes on the future of class warfare and impending economic meltdown are created in a fantastical world that seems like it’s only a few doors down from our own. The black and white actually aids this in evoking both “The Twilight Zone” and classic cinematography where the use of shadows and light is more important than anything else.

The main draw in this new world of truffle-hunting (which on its own seems pretty ridiculous), is Charles and Alice (Celine Bonnier) who play their character with absolute seriousness. After all, it’s their reality no matter how quirky it seems to us, and the chemistry between the two is undeniably fun. Add on top of that the enigmatic Miss Kinsdale (Michele Richard) as the delightful, bowl-cut-wearing, psychopath, and you have a trio that makes the film as rich as the foodstuffs they’re hunting.

And then it turns into a creature feature. Sort of.

As if the visual styling, the concept, and the array of men with refrigerators strapped to their backs wasn’t odd enough – director Kim Nguyen tosses in some of the cutest monsters I’ve ever seen. Imagine a ferret puppet that chokes you and controls your mind, and you’re on the right track. In what could have been a severe drag on the film (and more proof of its low budget) Nguyen makes the creatures work the old fashioned way by not showing a lot of them, playing some of their shots for laughs, and giving them a sci-fi power right out of the paranoid days of the 1950s. Plus, the black and white helps out again.

Over all, the film doesn’t leave much to take home – it’s quick, quirky, and it delivers on laughs and its unique fantasy element. It’s often beautiful to look at, the acting is fantastic, and if you dug down deep enough you might come up with a few questions that it raises, but ultimately Truffe works best by being fun and not overstaying its welcome.

The Upside: A strange fantasy that looks great, has solid performances, and anthropomorphic coon-skin caps.

The Downside: It’s a little too digestible, there are some amateur moments that stick out, and many of them belie how low-budget the film is.

On the Side: Stars Roy Dupuis and Celine Bonnier are a couple in real life.

The only thing a solid muay thai action flick needs is a loose enough plot to get the characters from point A to fight scene B, but once you get everyone ready to rumble, you have to point the camera in the right direction and showcase some great martial arts. Seems simple enough, but Fireball proves that not all martial arts movies are made equal and that aiming the camera in the right direction is tougher than it seems.

Tai (Preeti Barameeanat) gets out of jail thanks to bail money from his twin brother (played by the same actor) who is sadly in a coma from all the money-raising/underground mob activity he’s engaged in. So, Tai goes underground and joins a Fireball team as well to avenge his brother’s coma.

First of all, I understand that this is an action flick first and foremost, so the story doesn’t necessarily have to be of the highest caliber, which is fortunate because it isn’t. It’s pretty bare bones, although it’s a little unnecessarily confusing at times and it throws in a strange, also unnecessary, love story between Tai and his twin brother’s girlfriend Pang (Khanutra Chuchuaysuan). Beyond that (and the wholly uninteresting quiet moments between them), there’s a lot of guns and money being exchanged and drugs and all the great stuff you’d expect from a mob film. Plus, we get the added bonus of a convoluted sport that the underground has organized (it’s always nice to see mortal mob enemies working together on something even if it’s not a Fantasy Football Pool).

The sport is incredibly simple – five on five, first team to make a basket wins, and if no one makes a basket, the team with a person left standing at the end wins by default. Also, watch out for shivs.

This sounds great. After all, it essentially means that there will be a lot of fighting, wanton violence, and a great deal of blood spilled in the paint. All great things. Unfortunately, this is where things begin to derail for the film.

The first reason, I admit, is because I’m usually too logical even when watching a film like this. Even when expecting the bare minimum to get the violence ball rolling, I guess I demand too much when it comes to fitting those pieces together, and the basketball concept just seems far too gimmicky to work as long as writer/director Thanakorn Pongsuwan wants it to. As soon as the ball is thrown into the court, the players start fighting (which is great), but it kept me wondering why they kept up the ruse of the game. No one seems interested in actually getting the ball in the hoop, which would probably keep some of them from breaking bones or ending up dead. So why have the game at all? Just put ten guys into a cage and have them battle it out.

On a personal note, and decent advice if you ever find yourself in the situation, I would not dribble the ball if elbows and knees were flying at me. So at least the film was educational.

So the game seems like a thin, silly premise for fighting – which would have been cool if the ball had been incorporated more into the fighting. There are a couple great hits when someone goes up for a dunk and gets an elbow to the face instead, but not nearly enough to avoid the grand question of what the appeal of the court was. As it stood, there was just no reason for the game to exist. But, yes, I realize that I’m questioning the gimmick of a muay thai film.

On the more serious front, the fighting just isn’t all that impressive. Not nearly as fast as other muay thai films, and a lot of the moves are pretty basic – never escalating, never jaw-dropping. There’s even a Parkour segment of the team training by trying to get from one apartment building complex down to a neighborhood basketball court that looks like everyone is running on half-steam. There are some cool moments, but for the most part, everything is a bit underwhelming – especially considering how much fat is built up around the meat of the movie.

My other major problem was the camera work. Not only are the moves not all that exciting, the camera has trouble focusing on the fighters in any clear way. It moves like an unseen eleventh man on the court, randomly checking out different fights, but missing the best hits. Imagine you’re on a basketball court with ten men all fighting each other all over the place. You wouldn’t know where to look, and, unfortunately, the cinematographer couldn’t figure it out either.

Over all, there will be some nuggets here for fight fans, but it’s a lot to sit through for some lackluster moves. There are other, far superior action films out there. Obviously Chocolate and Ong Bak, but even an average fighting flick outshines this one.

The Upside: A few interesting moves, and a final fight scene that makes absolutely no sense but delivers on the blood.

The Downside: A thin gimmick, a strange love story plot, and camera work that doesn’t even capture the mediocre fighting all that well.

On the Side: There are no actual basketballs on fire in this film despite the title and the image on the DVD case.

The two most entertaining films at this year’s Fantastic Fest both came out of Asian countries. (This is where I get accused of being biased towards Asian cinema due to my supposed fetish for the ladies of the region…) Neither film is among the best of the fest though, which is an important distinction. As pure pop entertainment both Japan’s K-20: The Fiend With 20 Faces and Korea’s Private Eye succeed at being fun and exciting flicks that engage you by way of action, humor, and an almost Hollywood-like presentation. But as elated as they make you feel during the film, both of them leave you with a hefty share of questions and confusions once the credits have rolled. (Check out Brian’s excellent K-20 review here.)

It’s 1910 Korea, and Kwang-su (Deok-hwan Ryu) is a young medical student in the Japanese-occupied capital of Seoul. Walking through the woods one night he comes across a dead body, and with the costs of school supplies being so high he decides to bring the corpse home to help with his studies. He soon discovers that the murdered man is the son of a prominent politician and that the police have begun a major investigation into his disappearance. Fearing he’ll end up being held responsible for the death, Kwang-su hires Jin-ho (Jung-min Hwang) to find the real killer. Jin-ho isn’t entirely interested at first as his only detective experience consists of finding lost goods and photographing cheating spouses, but he eventually takes on the case. The duo soon discover a second corpse, the killer soon finds them, and before you know it we’re off on a rollicking adventure filled with thrilling action scenes, comedy, a dash of romance, a traveling circus, early 20th century spy gadgets courtesy of a very cute inventor, and intrigue and conspiracy that leads higher than anyone would have imagined.

The first two-thirds of the film are almost flawless popcorn entertainment. The characters are interesting, the story is intriguing, the mystery evolves organically, and the movie just looks incredibly slick. But the third act… it may just be me, but the third act manages something incredible (and not in a good way). It somehow manages to be both incredibly convoluted and out of left field and too easily wrapped up and explained at the same time. It’s both terribly complicated and ridiculously simple. It almost made me doubt the attention I’d been paying to the film until that point, but I’ve since confirmed it with some other audience members. The discoveries and revelations before this third act flustercuck came about naturally through a combination of minor detective work and right place/right time good fortune, but these darker events come to light purely because the script says they have to. And make no mistake, the mystery evolves into something very dark indeed.

Even with that third-act fiasco though writer/director Dae-min Park has crafted a fantastic and entertaining debut film. It’s an immersive period piece that never hits you over the head with the details, but if you look for the little touches they’re there. From the wardrobe to the old-school gadgetry to the beautiful wide shots of 1910 Seoul, this is a beautiful movie. One of the many highlights is a foot chase through a market that enthralls on it’s own merits while simultaneously invoking positive memories of the Bourne films as well as The Good The Bad The Weird. The sensation of the latter’s epic train robbery scene is especially strong thanks to a combination of stellar action, sharp visuals, and a musical score that moves you and makes you feel like part of the chase. It’s fantastic stuff all around.

As beautiful and fun as the film is overall, it’s the character of Jin-ho (and to a lesser degree his chemistry with Kwang-su) that will keep you engaged to the end. He starts as a cynic whose sole interest is financing his way to America where he imagines an endless supply of infidelity cases, but throughout this adventure he finds there are more important things worth caring about. He pairs nicely with Kwang-su, but the med student isn’t fleshed out as well as he could have been. That said, they do work well with one as the deductive thinker capable of action when necessary and the other the intelligent scientist filled with useful knowledge. Even more of a tease is his relationship with the aristocratic inventor played by Ji-won Uhm. There’s something between them but we never get more than a hint of what was or what could be. Luckily Hwang gives a strong enough performance to keep you interested even with those gaps.

So Private Eye is far from being a great film, but it’s still an immensely entertaining one. If you have the festival opportunity to catch it on the big screen I highly recommend you do so, but if not the movie is already available on import DVD. This isn’t really a spoiler as it’s been discussed extensively in previews and interviews, but the duo of Jin-ho and Kwang-su will most likely be returning for another adventure. This is excellent news for fans of the increasingly rare detective genre and kick-ass entertainment.

The Upside: Consistently entertaining, suspenseful, thrilling action scenes, funny, rousing score, introduces two strong characters we want to see again

The Downside: Third act manages to be both convoluted and resolved too easily, several unanswered questions and plot threads

On The Side: This would make a fantastic double-bill with the Don Knotts/Tim Conway classic, The Private Eyes. Those messenger pigeon scenes never fail to crack me up.

If you had told me that my favorite film at this year’s Fantastic Fest would be a drama I would have called you a fool who obviously didn’t know me very well. In a festival filled with oddball comedies, foreign thrillers, Japanese Pinku sex films, and crazy horror movies, what are the odds that I would be most affected by a completely unglamorous gangster drama about the circle of familial abuse and violence? Very good apparently, as my favorite film at this year’s festival is just that… a powerful drama from South Korea called Breathless.

Sang-hoon (Ik-joon Yang) is a brutal and brutally foul-mouthed debt collector for a low-level loan business he co-founded. His day starts with a small notebook filled with names, addresses, and dollar amounts that he checks off one by one. Sounds simple, but it’s often terrifying to behold as Sang-hoon almost literally beats the money from those in debt. Mercilessly violent isn’t a mode he saves exclusively for work either, as Sang-hoon is just as liable to beat down a stranger on the street for staring at him the wrong way, and some nights find him retreating to a small apartment where he pummels the small and silent old man who resides within. Sang-hoon meets his verbal match one day when he nonchalantly spits on a passing teenage girl. Yeon-hue (Kot-bi Kim) doesn’t put up with his shit, and after a brief unconscious spell courtesy of his fist she works her way into his life first through guilt and persistence but eventually through friendship. Unbeknown to Sang-hoon, Yeon-hue endures her own violent reality at home at the hands of a father with dementia and a listless and confused brother prone to taking his frustrations out physically on his sister.

Sounds terrible doesn’t it? Bleak, depressing, and painful to watch… and yet somehow it isn’t any of those things. Sang-hoon is introduced as a completely unlikable prick and an extremely odd choice for a protagonist, but he’s also a character with a sympathetic past. We want to see him change and we get to witness the birth of his desire for the same. The bastard becomes someone you actually care about, and when paired with Yeon-hue the duo manage to fill the film with more heart than you’ve seen in any ten blockbusters. They’re an oddly engaging pair who create a friendship from tattered and confused lives. That friendship also serves as a catalyst for much of the film’s suspense as both of them seem headed towards disaster. There’s real drama where you expect melodrama and real emotion where you expect sap.

Credit for the film’s success goes mostly to Yang who not only delivers a powerhouse and heartfelt performance as the uncontrollably violent Sang-hoon but also serves as both writer and director on the film.  This is Yang’s debut behind the camera, and while it suffers from one or two amateur mistakes, it’s a remarkably self-assured film. He reportedly pulled some of the events from his own childhood which sadly aren’t that uncommon in South Korea. It’s reportedly gotten much better in recent years, but in many ways it’s still a very patriarchal society where misguided corporal punishment towards wives and children takes on a definite abusive nature. The film explores the cycle of violence from those who inflict it to those who receive it and shows that often these are the same people. More importantly, we meet the indirect victims of the violence and see the reverberations that are felt by all. From the reason Sang-hoon beats the old man to the seemingly inevitable future that lays before Yeon-hue’s brother, the effects of abuse may be never-ending.

If a negative aspect of the film needs highlighting it’d have to be that the film could have used a slightly tighter hand in the editing room. At just over two hours, it comes dangerously close to overstaying it’s welcome with the audience. It’s a testament yet again to the performances though that even though the film feels too long, we never get tired of watching the characters. All of the actors do a fine job, but Kim stands out in addition to Yang. This is apparently her debut and she absolutely nails the sarcastic teenager with a hidden pain. I don’t make a habit of tearing up during movies (and I admit to it even less often), but her and Yang’s performances made these characters real enough for me to care about and powerful enough to cry over.

There were several movies at this year’s Fantastic Fest, but Breathless is the one that remains with me. I’m a sucker for redemption movies where the ‘bad guy’ truly earns not only the other characters’ sympathy and forgiveness but that of the audience as well. (And yes, I’m a sucker for the cute Asian schoolgirl too.) Sang-hoon and Yeon-hue will entertain you, make you laugh, and make you cry, and when you finish the film it’s with a mix of inevitable sadness and unstoppable hope. You will carry these people and their lives with you for a while. I can think of no higher compliment to a film and it’s characters than to still be feeling something for them weeks after the credits have rolled.

The Upside: Filled with brutal beat-downs, surprising tenderness and humor, damning social commentary, and utter heartbreak.

The Downside: This movie will never get the attention it deserves.

On the Side: Breathless won the Jury Prize for Best Film at the Fant-Asia Film Festival, and came in second for the Audience award at Fantastic Fest. That may not sound impressive, but as Tim League acknowledged that’s an incredible feat for a drama at a genre film festival.

Fans and box office receipts have spoken, and what they are saying is that Zombieland is a hit. The fans are saying this. The box office receipts can’t actually talk.

After receiving critical acclaim for the film and getting a disgustingly positive reception at Fantastic Fest, writers/executive producers Paul Wernick and Rhett Reese were nice enough to sit down with us to discuss the ins and outs of zombies, bad asses, and the future of their careers.

Also, you should know that no matter what the record states, Paul was not giving Rhett a prostate exam during the interview.

You guys have essentially created a snarky love letter to zombie flicks. After seeing it, I have to imagine that you guys love the hell out of zombies.

Rhett Reese: Well, it’s interesting. Paul, you wanna confess?

Paul Wernick: I’m a zombie virgin.

No way.

PW: The only zombie genre movie I’d seen before we sat down to write Zombieland was Shaun of the Dead, and Rhett…

RR: And I’m hardly a zombie slut. If he’s a zombie virgin, I’m hardly a zombie slut. I’d be, what, a zombie serial monogamist or something? I’d probably seen six of 7 zombie movies before this, so I certainly wouldn’t call myself a buff, but I do love the ones I’ve seen and did love the genre and was more recently inspired – we wrote the script four and a half years ago, so it’s been a while – but at the time I found inspiration in 28 Days Later and the new Dawn of the Dead, and their new approach to the speed of zombies. To me, that invigorated a genre that had been around a long time, and it was one of the reasons we wanted to explore the fast zombies. Some people even call them non-zombies because they aren’t actually undead, but we tend to take a pretty broad view when it comes to the zombie canon. We don’t get too worried about a Zombie Bible that’s been handed down from on high, and you have to follow certain rules. We like to play a little fast and loose.

But your zombies don’t move too quickly. They sort of bumble around.

RR: They do.

And they’re easily killed. It’s surprising to hear you say you guys aren’t major buffs because you really have focused on some tropes of the genre and walked a fine line of making fun of its flaws while still celebrating it.

RR: Yeah, we didn’t want to make fun of zombie films. We wanted to have fun with zombie films. If that makes sense.

Well, you’ve clearly done the homework and understand the genre.

RR: We’re honored to hopefully be entering the zombie club, because it certainly has attracted some wonderful filmmakers and writers over the years. I’m hoping at some point we’ll get to sit down with the Edgar Wrights, and the Alex Garlands, and the Danny Boyles, and the Peter Jacksons, and the Sam Raimis of the world and talk zombie.

I think [the genre] gets a bad rap as, “Well, zombie films are inherently stupid,” and I think it’s the opposite of that if anything. They tend to be very smart movies that are dressed up with a lot of blood and gore that distract you from the fact that they’re pretty smart.

PW: You know, the world, this zombie apocalyptic world, is such an interesting playground that we wanted to take full advantage of. There’s huge wish-fulfillment in a world without people. Where you can kill without consequence and drive any car you wanna drive and shop in any store you wanna shop in without worry of not being able to afford it. So there is this wish-fulfillment in a post-Apocalyptic zombie world that we wanted to take full advantage of.

Sure. There’s no real downside except for what’s already happened. There’s no humans, and there’s ravenous beasts constantly…you know, the more I say it out loud, the more it sounds like the price is pretty steep.

RR: [Laughs] We wanted to find the silver lining in the dark cloud of the post-apocalypse and not neglect the fact that it’s sad. Because we do have sad moments in the movie and we do have our characters longing for the innocence of days gone by. But we also have them reveling in this sandbox full of toys, and they now are afforded the opportunity to break stuff and beat zombies over the head and ride roller coasters without a line, and things like that. That was a big part of it for us. We always wanted it to be funny. We didn’t want it to take itself too seriously. We wanted it to be fun, and a ride, and a romp as opposed to a real serious polemic.

PW: Rhett’s been reading too many reviews…

RR: I know. I’m using all the – It’s a ride! It’s a romp! It’s a blast!

PW: [Laughs]

RR: Sad.

I’m pretty sure we didn’t use those terms in our review.

RR: If you did, it’s okay. We like to be called a Blast or a Romp.

I don’t even know what a romp is.

RR: I don’t either. It came out though. I apologize.

It sounds like something you take with a loved one through a field of daisies.

RR: [Laughs]

PW: Much like a prostate exam, it involves rubber gloves snapping against your forearms.

RR: [Laughs]

[Laughs] You know when you talk about sadness and the human connection between the characters. How did you achieve that balance with the carefree comedy?

PW: More than anything, we wanted to write a movie about a dysfunctional family which is what our four characters are essentially. They’re all looking for something, and that something is love. So, at its core, it’s a character piece. We didn’t want to forget that. Rich characters make every moment that much better – where you care about them, whether they’re happy or sad. We spent much of our time developing our characters in this very rich world that we were living in to be such that they had heart, and you do care about them, and when Columbus does brush Wichita’s hair over her ear, it’s a really goosebump-inducing, heartfelt moment where you just want to cheer because you’ve cared so much about them over the course of 83 minutes or so.

You got me sidetracked. I was gonna ask a question about bad asses, and you got me all misty-eyed.

PW: [Laughs]

RR: [Laughs]

PW: That’s what we do.

Woody Harrelson’s character Tallahassee is a complete bad ass. What film bad asses did you look to for inspiration?

RR: The concept for the character came out of this idea that we’ve all flirted with in life. Maybe we’re great at something, and we haven’t discovered what that thing is yet. You know, if you’ve never picked up a golf club, maybe you are Jack Nicholas waiting to happen. If you’ve never tried pole-vaulting, maybe that’s your secret skill. And we loved the idea of a guy who had been largely a failure in life but that, by virtue of this post-Apocalypse and zombies breaking out, realized that he was actually really good at killing zombies. Not just good. The best.

In terms of specific inspiration, the answer is no. I mean, a character like Ash from Sam Raimi’s movies like Army of Darkness and those movies, is at least somewhat inspirational because he’s a bad ass, he spouts one-liners, and we wanted Tallahassee to do the same. But really, it stemmed more out of this idea that 1) a guy who’s finally discovered his skill and 2) a guy who is the perfect foil to Columbus – who is a very passive character who’s always retreating from violence. We needed a character to balance that by always diving in.

I do appreciate that they are great at killing. There are a few scare moments, but mostly this group doesn’t see much danger anymore and knows how to have fun.

RR: That’s great. I think what you’re picking up on there is partly due to the fact that we decided to start the story in the middle. So many zombie movies, and I’d have to add them all up, but so many of them start at the beginning. They start when the zombie outbreak first begins and so you are seeing that What the Hell Thinking and the fear, and we wanted to jump into the middle of the story and meet people who had highly honed their survival skills by virtue of the characteristics they had before the world of zombies. There’s Columbus who’s a real wuss, and he’s very careful, and that has proved adaptive to this world. Tallahassee is really tough and likes to fight and seek danger. That has proved adaptive. For the girls, they’re really good at thinking ahead, and conning people and being smart. That has proved adaptive. So we wanted to jump in the middle and not begin at the beginning where the General comes on and tells everyone to stay in their house. We thought it would be nice to flash back a bit, to show the first meeting with a zombie and the first zombie attack, but largely we wanted to view people who had already learned to survive.

I want to switch gears just a moment and bother you guys about your upcoming projects. The first being Earth vs. Moon – which is titled really directly.

PW: It’s genius in that the title says everything you need to know about the movie. It’s a high concept movie with an even higher concept title. Earth vs. Moon is the story of the Earth versus the Moon 400 years in the future. A big, sci-fi epic war movie. A civil war movie. And caught in between that war is a fractured family on either side of that battle.

I love that high concept films are usually described in one sentence.

RR: We’ve boiled it down. One word. Zombieland! We’re gonna try to do it with just one letter pretty soon. You know – F! – and then everyone’s gonna get it.

P: It’ll be A instead of F, though.

And this project isn’t based on “The Moon is a Harsh Mistress” by Heinlein?

RR: No. You know we’d actually never heard of that story. We’ve now heard of it. Is it a short story or a novel? I can’t remember.

It’s a novel.

RR: Yeah, we’ve heard of it subsequent because we’ve been accused by many internet folks of having ripped it off.

Sure.

RR: We read enough of a synopsis of it to assuage ourselves that ours is really different from it which made us feel relieved. But no, we haven’t read it and we had not heard of it when we wrote [Earth vs Moon].

So there’s no libertarian political theory abounding in Earth vs. Moon?

RR: Well, interestingly I am a libertarian. But no, that’s not what’s at the core of our movie. It’s not even in our movie at all actually.

And the second project is Venom. A pretty hot property.

PW: Venom is one of those we put in a lock box and can’t unfortunately talk about.

RR: Unfortunately Venom is one that’s shrouded in very high secrecy. We’re just unfortunately not allowed to comment on it. I hate to say that, but we gotta do that.

PW: Even the slightest bit of…

RR: People like to run with…even if we say one line about it, it becomes a headline because people are thirsting for it. So we need to stay quiet on it.

Could you even talk about what particular skills you have as writers that lend themselves to the project?

RR: I think we probably shouldn’t. Just because we’ve had situations before where we think something is innocuous and then suddenly it’s the headline of an article. I think everyone involved would rather it stay as secretive as possible.

Wow. I’m impressed. I just gave two writers the chance to brag, and they stayed silent.

RR: It’s not our choice!

So can I safely report that you two aren’t cast in the movie? That Paul Wernick won’t be playing Venom?

RR: I think that’s safe.

PW: I would run with that.

RR: Paul’s got some acting chops.

PW: I may play Venom.

So there you have it. The casting scoop of the century. Paul Wernick might play Venom.

What do you think?

Speed, agility, violence: Parkour, it’s not just something that gets parodied on The Office, it’s the way of the French. Rather, it is the way of building jumper turned action star David Belle and French martial artist Cyril Raffaelli, both of whom were made famous by their performances in the Luc Besson produced, Pierre Morel directed District B13. In 2004, this fast-paced, high-flying actioner took the world of genre cinema by storm, unleashing Parkour upon the world. It has since been seen in other films such as Casino Royale and Live Free or Die Hard. And if you’ve seen it in any of these movies, you know how impressive this efficient mode of obstacle navigation can be. Then again, if you haven’t seen it in District B13 or its subsequent sequel, District 13: Ultimatum, then I would argue that you ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

Flash forward to 2009. Director Pierre Morel has moved on to direct the Liam Neeson-led revenge hit Taken, and Luc Besson has since gone on to deliver (as both producer and writer) several badass action movies, including two more Transporter films. But Besson hasn’t forgotten about District 13, and neither have his two stars. They’re back as the Leito (Belle), the D13-born kid who’s just trying to make the slum a better place for himself and his neighbors, and Capt. Damien Tomasso (Raffaelli), the super-cop who will do anything to see that justice is served with a gracious helping of kicks to the face. This time around, we begin at the moment where the first film left off — Damien has returned Leito and his sister to D13 with the promise that the government will clean up the streets, build schools and wipe out the gangs once and for all. After a flash forward of a year, we see that the infamous slum has not changed one bit, and now the head of the French secret service has set in motion a plan that could lead the president to destroy District 13 once and for all, freeing up precious real estate and wiping out its lowly denizens.

If this story sounds familiar, it’s okay — this movie follows a very similar path as the first District 13. As a writer, Luc Besson has never been one for in-series innovation. When he delivered the sequels to The Transporter, all we got was a similar story with minor tweaks. But along with those subtle differences in narrative, we also got kicked-up action each time, something that he and director Patrick Alessandrin accomplish handily with Ultimatum. Early on, we meet Damien as he’s deep under-cover, trying to bring down a mob boss in a Chinese gambling parlor. Aside from having to see Cyril Raffaelli in a very interesting light (and wardrobe), the scene plays out much like the casino sequence in the first film. Except this time, there are twice as many bad guys and twice as many amazing shots of Raffaelli whirling around to inflict pain with his various limbs. It once again proves that Raffaelli is one of the most impressive silver screen martial artists around.

After the initial setup, the film launches into a singular race against time, in which Leito and Damien must uncover the mysterious plot that has District 13 ready to burst with civil unrest. As you can imagine, what follows is a predictable (but no less impressive) series of action sequences involving Parkour chases through the city, plenty of hand-to-hand combat and a slew of wildly tattooed, mean-as-hell gangsters. The violence is brutal, especially when we see Damien going hand-to-hand against any of his foes. The difference between this and much of the other martial arts movies that we’re seeing nowadays is the brutality. When Damien leans in and delivers a knee to the sternum of one of his attackers, the audience feels it as if they themselves have been kicked in the chest by the bald, European version of Tony Jaa. Credit goes not only to Raffaelli, who choreographs his own fight scenes, but also to cinematographer Jean-François Hensgens, who shoots it all in a very wide-frame, clean and in-your-face that draws the audience into the action. On top of that, the sound design team led by Guillaume Bouchateau brings it all home by adding the loud, booming thumps that would really exist, should you one day find yourself on the wrong end of a Damien Tomasso spin-kick. Also notable: keep an eye out for a sweet (though somewhat out of place) fight scene featuring the quite hot Elodie Yung. Let’s just say that she makes you think twice about a woman with a long pony-tail.

The first District 13 was clearly the coming out party for Parkour and its co-creator David Belle, but at its heart, Ultimatum is Cyril Raffaelli’s film. His charismatic, energetic performance delivers an all-out adrenaline rush of ass-kicking and name-taking. And even though Ultimatum’s story is painfully formulaic, producer Luc Besson and team have shifted it far enough to make it feel right. They make up for a paper-thin plot by pushing the audience back through the world of District 13 and repeatedly hitting them square in the chest with an intense string of action beats. Put simply, this is exactly the type of sequel we’ve come to expect from the Besson camp: one that does not disappoint.

The Upside: Adrenaline-filled, high-flying and brutal. A truly impressive action film that will hit you in the chest with awesome.

The Downside: A painfully formulaic narrative that is all too similar to its predecessor.

On the Side: This film was released in French theaters in February, earning $1.2 million dollars. It is also currently available in France on Blu-ray and DVD, for anyone who has a region free player and a few extra bucks for international shipping.

We come to Fantastic Fest for the weird. I’ve said it a few times before, and it is worth saying again. When you come to a festival such as this one, you see plenty of action movies, plenty of martial arts, sci-fi and of course, some horror. You also see some weird. In the weird column, I would like to enter Kenny Begins. It is quite simply the weirdest, most insane and possibly most deviously enjoyable films that I’ve seen here at Fantastic Fest. It’s Swedish. And that’s just the beginning.

The film follows the converging stories of two misfits, a “galaxy hero” wannabe from a distant sector of the universe, who is trying to graduate starfighter school before the money runs out and his mom makes him become a hairdresser. On Earth, we meet Pontus, a gimpy, slow outcast who is picked on daily because he lives “on the other side of the tracks.” When a power crystal from Kenny’s world is flushed through a black hole, it ends up on Earth and in the hands of Pontus. Upon touching the crystal, the young Earthling is given an untold amount of power. Now he must work with Kenny (who landed there by accident) to defeat a large-brained mastermind who wants to use the crystal’s power for the purposes of evil. They also must figure out a way for Pontus to win over Miranda, his school’s most popular (and hot) girl.

It’s two hero stories wrapped in one. Well to be fair, it’s two classic hero journeys that converge in the land of absurdity. And for all intents and purposes, it’s a rather fun ride. The central performance from Johan Rheborg as Kenny is well over the top, as is the deviously fun villainous performance from Jan Mybrand, who plays the mega-brained bad guy Rutger Oversmart. The film ultimately wins on the shoulders of these performances, as well as the completely ridiculous costumes and sets — all of which lend to a Starship Troopers meets Mystery Men vibe, but really Swedish.

What we can appreciate most from Carl Astrand and Mats Lindberg’s film is that it doesn’t take itself too seriously, but also delivers when dramatic push comes to comedic shove. It’s not brilliant satire or an astounding visual feast, but it is a fun, well-paced ride. We are talking about a story set in a world when “Clown Ice” (a Popsicle made of frozen water) is the number one economic driver and there are hairdressers who engage in Moonwalking competitions. It’s not to be taken seriously, not one bit. But you should check it, if you have the chance (or if you’re Swedish), as it is one space comedy that delivers the laughs when it counts, even if it is completely ridiculous.

The Upside: A few incredibly fun performances, some fun action and a dude with a really awesome mullet who just wants to be a Galaxy Hero.

The Downside: It’s very strange (and Swedish), which might not work for everyone.

On the Side: This film is based on a Swedish television series called “Kenny Starfighter,” which ran for one season back in 1997.

Ten years ago, a movie came out that traded on the idea that found footage of some people wandering around the forest looking for a witch could be frightening because of how real it seemed. With The House of the Devil, audiences will once again be reminded of innovation in horror. Innovation comes directly from the past. Plus, they’ll also be reminded of how awesome owning a Walkman was.

Samantha (Jocelin Donahue) is desperate for money to get out of her sex-addicted-slob-roomate-infested dorm room and into a great apartment, so she takes on a babysitting job with a strange family on the night of a full lunar eclipse.

There is one major way that this film works and another one in which it fails.

First off, if House of the Devil was put in a stack of horror flicks from 1979-1984, no one on the planet would ever realize it was made thirty years after the fact. What Ti West has achieved here as a director is creating a movie that’s not an homage – it’s a full on re-creation of the style, tone and story of the horror world of the early 80s that blends satanism and a nation’s deep concern for its babysitters.

Somehow, they even found a lead actress who looks like she popped right out of the era in Jocelin Donahue. She’s a beautiful girl next door who does a fantastic job of creating a character that’s sweet and innocent but still burdened by youthful self-centering. Plus, anyone who can hold her own against the creepy genius of Tom Noonan (and he’s just as creepy as he needs to be in this) has clearly got talent. Speaking of which, how Tom Noonan finds new ways to be creepy is beyond me. Seriously. I feel sorry for his children.

However, beyond being a first (as far as I know) culturally, the movie isn’t all that great.

I fully recognize that I’m not a huge fan of the genre in the first place, so emulating it isn’t exactly a formula for success in my eyes. The problem with it, and with House of the Devil, is that it’s mostly pedestrian stuff leading to a pay off that’s just not enough. The bulk of the film is Samantha walking around, especially the first hour or so which consists of Samantha being hired for the job and little else. Why it takes this long to get someone into the house, why it takes that long to get from the first act to the second, is beyond me.

Even once inside the house, the tone isn’t as tense as it needed to be, but it’s passable. Her encounter with Noonan’s Mr. Ulman makes skin crawl even faster when aided by her encounter with Mary Woronov’s Mrs. Ulman. The two are a perfect duet of subdued villainy. But then we get right back into watching Samantha turn on the television, turn off the television, order a pizza, wander around the house, and basically wait for the full moon and the action to arrive.

This wouldn’t be such a bad problem if the pay off was as shocking as it could have been, but over all the time invested watching A Day in the Life of Samantha doesn’t yield dividends. It’s not that the ending isn’t frightening or shocking (and I imagine it was even worse in the early 1980s), but it’s just not frightening or shocking enough. Especially for a modern audience that isn’t watching news stories constantly about Satan worshipers living next door.

As a piece of nostalgia come to life in modern times, it’s an incredible feat, an achievement that’s laudable. But the genre it’s flat out aping isn’t a great genre to begin with, featuring more filler than killer, and House of the Devil suffers because of that fanatical adherence to one of the blander section of the rental aisle.

The Upside: Good acting, Tom Noonan, and an achievement that hasn’t been done before.

The Downside: A huge first act where nothing happens and a pay off that’s good but isn’t enough.

On the Side: The film was shot on 16mm to achieve the retro look.