MANDY; Full-Tilt review

“They lit her on FIRE! They were weirdo, hippie-types, whole bunch of 'em. 

And then there was some muscle - it didn't make any sense. 

There were bikers, and gnarly psychos, and... crazy evil.”

Red Miller

Hard day at the office, Nic?

Synopsis:

1983, the Shadow Mountains. Free-spirited artist Mandy and her timber-working partner Red live together in a secluded cabin. The pair, both of whom have known past hardships, share an intimate and profound love. However, their idyllic life is shattered when Mandy inadvertently attracts the attentions of deranged cult-leader Julian Sands and his sinister followers. What transpires is a surreal decent into tragedy, lunacy and carnage- with chainsaws.


Script: 1/2

Mandy, as a script, is a fairly simplistic affair- a generic part-A-into-part-B revenge plot; man goes on the warpath to avenge the death of a loved one. However, director Panos Cosmatos, something of an auteur (with the equally striking Beyond The Black Rainbow also under his belt), would likely be the first to admit he's not really all that interested in the story- his passions are undoubtedly rooted in the aesthetic and mood of the film. This, and the general hallucinogenic nature of the film, make reviewing the script in isolation quite difficult. While the plot may be fairly standard, the dialogue is tight and well judged; both Mandy and Red are given ample time to develop as characters, and their relationship is portrayed with a raw vulnerability. After the portentous first half, the film takes a fast nose-dive into the more grime-house elements, and from here the dialogue becomes minimal, although offers up a few memorable lines destined for cult status.


Pace: 1/2

The film really unfolds in two sections; the first and slowest part belongs to Mandy Bloom, as played by Andrea Riseborough. It's a slow-burning scene-setter that, while it may feel meandering at the time, does pay dividends later- without this, the films emotional core, all that follows would ring far more hollow. Bloody revenge is all the more cathartic because of the tender relationship at the film's heart. After this point, with Mandy dead and Red having survived his ordeal, things move at a fair lick, with our now dead-inside hero out for blood, and it moves from one bizarre and grotesque set piece to the next.  One small nag I did have with this is concerning the structure of the film, which sees Red overcoming the biggest dangers at the start of his quest, rather than working his way through a string of progressively harder trials (which would be more traditional in a film of this nature), but it's not big deal in the scheme of things...


Acting: 2/2

Given the confines of the world Panos Cosmatos has conjured (which clearly lies somewhere between a lucid nightmare and a prog rock record sleeve), everybody acts in, if not a believable, then at least an 'emotionally honest' way. Riseborough's Mandy is transfixingly off-kilter, and given enough screen-time that she doesn't feel like a plot-point just to get Nic Cage's Red dueling with chainsaws. This brings us to cage himself. Now, he's a man who's had to endure some slack in the past; as much derided for his choice of projects as he is for his scenery-chewing portrayal of losers, loners, lunatics. It's easy to overlook the fact that, actually, Nic Cage can act. Here, he imbues Red in with a sense of taciturn pathos- you can see very clearly just how much he adores and is in awe of Mandy and her imagination. This makes what might otherwise have been a fairly exploitative death-scene into something very heart breaking. In those scenes you can literally see the light going out in Cage's eyes, enduring a loss that has all but killed him also. This isn't the goofy-meme Nic Cage we know and love, but a glimpse of something real, and a fierce reminder that the man still possesses some true talent. That said, after this, we get to see Cage do what Cage does better than anyone else, only taking time out from his mission only to forge a silver ax, snort cocaine, and sample demonically-tinged LSD. Oh, that, and to watch a TV advert for the Cheddar Goblin (must be seen to be believed). Linus Roache is on villain duty as the cult leader Julian Sands- dangerously manipulative and unhinged, driven by a ravenous and fragile ego. Like cage and Riseborough, he also brings a little something extra, making his character skin-crawlingly vile. Sands may be a caricature, but that makes him no less of a monstrosity. But, before we discuss the asthetic, I can't move on without a special mention for 80's movie veteran Bill Duke (of Predator and Commando fame- he's barely aged a day) as Red's loyal friend Caruthers. Duke, effortlessly cool here, delivers possibly some of the best lines in the film, and the delivery of his monologue is a thing of pure style- which makes me wish I'd seen him in far more films.


Aesthetic: 2/2

So, this is pretty much the raison d'être of the film; pockets of mist and shimmering lakes, the geographical splendor of a forbidding temple, neon gleams and deliberate sun-spots, a lurid spectrum of colour, garish green strobes, and the grain of dirty celluloid. And that's all without mentioning the animated sequences! Really, there's no way to describe the film's look in a way that does it justice- although anyone who's watched the trailer will have a clear understanding of what I'm referring to. While it may make the occasional nod to the likes of 80's horror cinema, including the garishness of Dario Agento, the film is really it's own thing. For me, the stand-out visual cue came with the arrival of the Black Skulls, a demon-like posse of of bikers, resembling the Cenobytes of Hellraiser by way of Easy Rider. Their motorcycles appear from out of the forest as silhouettes in blood-red smoke- and given Nic Cage's presence in the film, a sad reminder of the Ghost Rider film which could have been.


Intention: 2/2

The film is self-consciously, unapologetically, ludicrous. By turns inventive, macabre and darkly tongue-in-cheek, and never less than intriguing, Mandy is a kaleidoscopic experience of phantasmagoric imagery and dreamlike dialogue set to an ominous synth soundtrack. Best viewed as an experience rather than a narrative, it's sure to divide it's audiences. Those looking for grungy blood-letting may leave disappointed by the leisurely pace, while those of a more patient and 'arty' disposition may find it hard to difficult to stomach the decapitations, mutilations and other explosively repulsive gore scenes. But it is what it is, and I have a suspicion that nothing has been left to chance- this is exactly the film its director had intended to make- something of a rarity in this day and age.


Final Word: 8/10

Mandy is a fever-dream of a movie, with all that this entails; it's disjointed, excessive, idiotic and haunting. It's also a love-letter to 70's & 80's genre-cinema in a way that's less obvious and more deftly handled than anything pumped out by the likes of Rob Zombie or Quentin Tarantino. My advice to anyone watching it (and I do recommend watching it) would be to 'feel' your way through it rather than 'think' your way through it. To go back and ask yourself questions such as “were the bikers actually demons?” or "what's the deal with that crazy closing image?" would be to almost miss the entire point of the film- that is, if there is any point to it, outside of it's guilty surface pleasures. Sit back, drink-in the imagery, revel in the ambiguity of its mumbled dialogue, allow yourself to be carried along, and succumb to the arch-dread of the late Jóhann Jóhannsson's dazzling soundtrack.

“THERE'S SOMETHING OUT THERE WAITING FOR US, AND IT AIN'T NO MAN.”

Billy (Predator)

Hot on the heels of my success with the Alien figure (well, I saw it as a success), I decided to tackle another little model-and-paint job. Hold up in a dust covered box in the attic, I’d been keeping this little kit.

It’s a 14” model kit of the Predator, as seen in the first Arnold Schwarzenegger film. It was a gift when I was about 13 years old, and at the time (and still to this day, if a little less so) a big fan. The kit itself is pretty basic under close scrutiny; the casting isn’t particular good (the bones in particular worn across the chest are terrible) and it doesn’t fit together snugly when assembled. Many years ago the thing came to pieces, and some, like the wrist blades, were lost entirely. Other aspects, such as the wires and pipes which connect the shoulder weapon to the arm and the mask, never even existed.

The kit (in pieces) and some colour references.

Now, I’m presently 35, so back when I was 14 there was little in the way of publicity stills and (even if it existed at the time, which I doubt) our home certainly didn’t have internet. Therefore, my father, who first painted this for me, took a running guess at the colours. I only noticed ion later years that he’d come up short, and being colour blind (which we both are) probably didn’t help any. Anyway, as you can see here, he went for greens and bronze, which, to his credit, in the jungle light it often looks this way. This time around though I opted to find the right colours.

A quick internet search turns up some great images. The creature’s skin is actually a pallid flesh, with browner patches and darker spots. The finger and toe nails are shiny black, like the ‘hair’, with bronze adornments. The bones he wears are polished and near-white, the clothing is earthy, and the amour is a dirty metallic silver. I figure every Predator is a little different, so while I probably won’t be able to match this pallet exactly, I can at least get pretty close to it.

Amended base and new bones added.

First I assemble the Predator, and when I’m happy (my God this was a fucking pain, for some reason it just would not stick), I add a few extra touches; I use plastic pipes and electrical wire to the shoulder cannon, I seal up the gap in the hair with extra dreadlocks made of model putty (although, in all honesty I kinda mess this up and hope to fix it somehow), and I cut-up a small plastic dinosaur toy for the bones on the necklace. Then I glue the predator to the base and coat in black paint.

Next I tackle the base. My father originally glued real twigs and plants to it, but these perished pretty fast, so this time I’m going to use plastic plants, which I acquire in cheap shops, with the exception of the tree stump. For this, I actually venture out to find a suitable piece of wood, which I then proceed to cut and hack to fit. It’s already dried-out, so I give it a clean, and a very thorough black paint job to seal-in anything unpleasant (yes, this may well be the final resting place of some unfortunate centipede or woodlouse, this I will have to live with).

Painting under way.

I paint the base first with a mixture of greens, grays and browns and various ink washes (again, detail not as important as it will be on the Predator itself), along with the feet, before I attach the plastic plants- because I know doing this will obscure and make it difficult to paint anything below the knees.

Next I tackle the bones, which are a pretty straight forward white, and then the skin. I start with a fleshy hue, and onto this, with a drab brown, I add the mid-tone markings. On this I add another layer of spots, this time in very dark brown, and use a pale cream on the meatier parts of the Predator’s body and limbs. After this, the fabric and the armor. It all comes together quite fast, but a little bright, which was my intention, as I then use a dark brown ink-wash over the whole figure, which runs into the cracks and grooves, bringing out the detail while also muting the colours a little. Onto this I add a few minor highlights to the folds in the fabrics and gloves, the bones, and to the lighter patches of the skin.

Near completion.

By this point the Predator is almost complete, but there's an issue I've been wrestling with; the mold of the model does not include the 'body netting'. I consider painting and tacking a fruit net, but this is a job beyond my skill, I'm more a bodger than I am a model artist. So, instead, I opt to carefully paint this directly onto the model. The danger here is that if I go wrong, I ruin the skin and may need to start from scratch, but in the end (a few mistakes aside) I'm generally pleased with the result.

And it's finished. Here it is, in all it's otherworldly glory, my repaint / fixer-upper Predator figure (Although I have yet to add replacement wrist blades to the right arm)...

“…FOR WITHIN EACH SEED, THERE IS A PROMISE OF A FLOWER, AND WITHIN EACH DEATH, NO MATTER HOW SMALL, THERE'S ALWAYS A NEW LIFE.”

Dillon (Alien 3).

...And to think, till this point it had all gone so well…  

Anyway. There I was, thinking I’d finished the damn thing. I’d painted, highlighted and sat it proudly on my writing table with a custom-made backdrop and- SNAP. It broke off at the wrist, the one on which took the weight. With nothing to further support its weight, the whole figure arched forward, uprooting the right foot. Alien, stand and backdrop inevitably came crashing down. In the fall, the Alien also lost his entire right leg. I considered gluing the thing together, but I figured it would be too complicated to exactly match the colour tone, even with the same paints. All in all, it was fucked. I gave the thing a few weeks, then resolved to start over.So, the first thing was to reassemble the figure. I glued the limbs back together, reattached it to the base, and then used a little modelling putty for good measure. I also used this as an opportunity to correct a few things I felt I’d got wrong the first time.

Colour references, behind the scenes of Alien 3.

I removed the odd ‘sticking out slab’ from the base. It was a holdover of the base’s original function, and this slab would have housed the original model’s leg (seeing as this base is a holdover of an actual model kit, for which I had lost the other pieces). This left a hole, which was alright, seeing how I nearly always stand the Alien facing right, but as I intended to be able to position the alien in any direction, a small piece of putty was discreet enough to mask it. 

First time around, due to a mishap in the gluing process, the alien took to leaning on one side. This time I ensured the beast was straight. A slight lean may have looked dynamic, but this time I went for stability over style. To this end, I also made use of a supporting beam to take some of the weight, connecting the lower rib-cage to the base.

Building up the colours.

I also cut-off some of the more lumpy looking putty work, especially from the knees and elbows, for a more natural shape. I also carve-in a little detail to the putty under the neck.
The backdrop, while it looked pretty good for being made from home-only materials, never sat quite right with me, made worse by the fact I hadn’t glued the pipes straight, and polystyrene (no matter how well painted) always looks like polystyrene. So this time round I ditched the elaborate backdrop for something more simplistic. I was always happy with the way the scaffolding, chains and canister turned out, but it was difficult to find a pleasing way to suspend it over the creature, so I just reused the canister. Seeing how I cut a tile from the original base to make it more symmetrical, I reused this tile to base the canister onto, so that whatever way the alien faces, the canister can be moved bend it.

Next came the painting. The backdrop and base was simply a whole bunch of browns, grays and reds all smudged together, I felt detailing here was less important as it would not represent the final focus- it simply had to set the mood. That left the beast. I muted the colours with a thick black wash.

Movable canister.

Now, for all my work last time around, the alien ended up looking a very similar ruddy colour to the actual figure you can buy pre-painted. Sure, it was nice, but I still; felt I wasn’t getting the ‘natural lighting colour’. I went back to some of the behind-the-scenes photography, and discovered without the orange hue that the alien was in fact a dirty grey, with a touch of cream and green here and intermittently. So I begin by base coating my alien grey, and over the top of this I dry brush predominantly a fleshy / bone cream, along with browns, greys and a little olive green. The overall look is bright, but this is soon dulled by a thick brown ink-wash, which also helps to merge all the colours into a pleasing whole. Final touches include highlight work around the lounge and gums, the spine, and detailing on the metallic teeth.

I finish by coating the alien in a shiny varnish. This not only gives the thing a little more protection from knocks and bumps, but gives it a nice wet-and-slimy look.

Facing both directions.

And now, once again, I’m finished. Here it is, in all its vile glory. Hope you like it?

“AS LONG AS IT'S ALIVE, SISTER, YOU'RE NOT GONNA SAVE ANY UNIVERSE...”

While the third Alien film has always been a problematic guilty pleasure of mine, I've always maintained that the creature design was the standout highlight of the whole franchise. After James Cameron's unceremonious decision to not call back Swiss surrealist H.R Giger, whose seminal monster design in the first Alien film helped elevate it into movie legend, director David Fincher reached back out to the artist for his take on a more animalistic beast. While the creature in Alien 3 may not entirely be Giger's own, the surrealist definitely helped to shape the monster into what was seen on the screen; a slick, quadrupedal thing. This time, born of dog (or ox, depending on which edit of the film you watch) the bio-mechanical styling had been dialed back in favor of a more naturalistic bone-and-sinew aesthetic, while the phallic domed head also returned. It is, in an odd way, a thing of horrific beauty.

Anyway, my youngest son (with a little help from his mother, I'm certain) bought me the NECA figure of the aforementioned Dog Alien for Christmas. NECA may make beautifully crafted figures, but read any review and you'll see that craft is somewhat let down by the way they are put together. Sadly mine was no exception, and straight out the box my wonderful new model was missing a shoulder blade. This led to a debate with the seller, who eventually credited me with a free replacement. This still left me with the damaged figure, and an unusual opportunity to try my hand at some amateur modifications. The NECA toy, as articulated as it is, was not designed to be put on all-fours, which seems odd seeing how it spends most of the film in this way; the legs do not bend in on themselves, and the neck and skull don't lift enough. The end result is an alien left staring at the floor, looking like its in the throes of an unusual yoga pose rather than running on the heels of its next victim. So I resolved to force this damaged figure into a dramatic running pose and re-base it. The following is what came to pass...

First I assembled a few items; polystyrene, garden mesh, straws and some of my oldest son's old toys. I used the polystyrene as a wall, which I hoped would act as the backdrop for the alien. I pinned some of the garden mesh to the back to act as type of metal grill or fencing. The purpose of the backdrop is not to be anything specific, just to hint at the sort of backdrops from the film; bricks, pipes, chains, etc. Wallpaper cut into squares and mounted on card were used to replicate the look of uneven bricks. After applying the decorative touches I coat the backdrop in black. The base is, funnily enough, a leftover from a plastic Alien 3 model kit. The alien itself broke long ago, I held onto this for some unknown reason. I paint it concrete grey and give it a black wash. Here you can see a the hand of the Alien figure, used for scale.

I use a number of browns and grays on the brickwork, and a combination of gun metal and silver paint on the pipes (formally drinking straws) and metal-work. The canister was an old plastic toy, repainted. I used a silver paint to make the thing looked scratched, and a black wash again to make it appear suitably grimy. Again, the scaffolding was another toy. I gave it a similar treatment to the canister. A fine bronze chain is also applied and left hanging irregularly, again to hint at the type of imagery from the film.

Next I take the alien figure apart, stripping it into its individual components. I discard all the joints, as when in place they don't look particularly natural and only elongate the limbs. I take some time to play with these, and to work out the final pose. The tip of the tale was crooked from how it was packaged clumsily, so I used Milliput to straighten it. This is mostly successful. Clay failed to hold the limbs together, so I'm forced to splash out on more expensive modeling putty. It works, but keeping the thing together while it sets presents issues. Finally I manage to balance it on a combination of household items. Amazingly, and by pure luck, the thing actually balanced on its own without being propped up.

I examined a number of photo references from Alien 3, film stills, behind the scene pictures and other models and figurines. The colours seemed often contradictory, and the sepia lighting of the sets often just bathed everything in a brown hue. Finally I opted to begin with an olive green base coat. The second coat of paint was a tan brown, although I'm sure not to coat the thing entirely, so in areas the olive green still breaks through, especially on the fleshier parts. I base the backdrop (which couldn't support its own weight) onto a piece of MDF. It's cut so that it's wide enough for the whole wall, but cut into an angle that should compliment the alien's base. I add further highlights to the ribs, spine, shoulders, teeth, tongue and lips. I also use modeling putty to fill in the gaps between the dome and lips, and use black paint on each end of the dome.

... All in all, coming along nicely.

IT, THE LOSER'S CLUB; Full-Tilt review

"Derry is not like any town I've been in before. People die or disappear, six times the national average. And that's just grown ups. Kids are worse. Way, way worse..." 

Ben Hanscom

They sat gaping in fear at the horror on the TV-  Noel's House Party.

Does this scene remind anyone else of Apocalypse Now?

Synopsis:

Based on Stephen King's novel of the same name, the story follows a small group of misfit children, self deprecatingly called 'the loser's club', who band together to seek companionship and respite from the hardships of their daily lives. But, after a spate of recent disappearances, the group must confront an age-old evil that lurks beneath their hometown- a shape-shifting entity which exploits the fears of its victims as it preys on the weak.

As I've often said, films do not exist within a vacuum....Stephen King wrote his seminal book It in 1986. He'd already had quite a prolific career, and this was to be his 22nd novel (18th under his own name). As well as the book, most people are also quite familiar with the 1990s TV series adaption, staring the wonderfully unnerving Tim Curry. While most people, including myself, have fond memories of this series, it's not aged particularly well given its low budget, a cast of hit-and-miss talent, and the stark fact that much of the novel would be unpalatable to TV audiences of its day (including sexual abuse, animal torture, underage sex and the graphic mutilation of children) And don't forget, these were long before the days where Stephen King adaptions were considered a box-office goldmine, and hardcore violence was commonplace. Much has since changed. However, despite a weak second half, most people will fondly remember the show's flashbacks featuring the children (the younger cast being arguably more believable than their adult counterparts), which provided the narrative spine of the series. So it was with a feeling of trepidation that fans of the book and TV series alike reacted to news of a film re-imagining. I, like others, felt the TV show left room for improvement and would have been quite happy to see It on the big-screen, save for the nagging fact that, after the TV show, which despite flaws has become something of a cult classic, and Curry's performance now being so firmly cemented in most people's perception of Pennywise the Dancing Clown, a film would seem destined to fail... The following review proves that concern to be misplaced.

Script and Direction: 2/2

Firstly, as already widely known by now, the film is a sassy, scary and entirely justified retelling of King's most famous novel. Yet, we should be clear that this film is not a wholly faithful adaption of said book- there are differences. For starters, the film is now being retold in the same era where the book found it's main characters as their adult selves, the mid 80's being, what was at the time, the present day. It was written chiefly for people who, like the author, had grown up through the 50's and were now reminiscing on the hardships and excitement of their own youth. So, given that, it feels perfectly natural that film makers of my generation approach the material of the film in the exact same way- this is a story about the childhood of our middle-aged generation. Along with this change of setting, the film has had to embrace certain other changes, but all of which feel entirely justified and, dare I say it, even necessary. I feel that this change in setting came from an honest place, and not simply a way to cash in on the success of the similarly 80's set Stranger Things, which was probably born of the same feeling of nostalgia. This new treatment is intriguing. Sure, it's a horror, but it works on so many other levels; it's a coming-of-age tale, a kitchen-sink drama, and, most surprisingly, hugely funny. Funnier than a straight-laced horror has any right to be, and so much so that you could almost call this a horror comedy (although the elements of comedy are played straight and dark).


Casting and Acting: 2/2

Most of the young cast get a chance to deliver a funny line or two, but most of the hilariously sweary wit goes to the character of Richi Tozier, as played by Stranger Things' own Finn Wolfhard. His frizzy hair, be-speckled and innocent face and diminutive height go a long way to helping his laugh-out-loud delivery. While Richi will prove to be an audience favorite, most of the more dramatic moments are handled by Sophia Lillis who, as the gang's only girl, Beverly Marsh, faces the most distressing moments. Testament to the youngster's talent, these scenes feel all too uncomfortable, and ground what's otherwise quite a light-heated take on child murder (if you can say such a thing). Yet, these scenes never feel entirely out of kilter with the rest of the film and are handled deftly. There were points where (because we might as well be honest at this point, we're talking about child sexual abuse) I felt “actually, these bits are probably worse than the friggin' child-eating clown”, and that these parts were in danger of undermining the chief ghoul- yet, in a stark and beautiful moment of realisiation, I understood this was actually the point, and this conceit pays dividends later on. Jaeden Lieberher plays Bill Denbrough, arguably the lead of the film, the stuttering lead of the misfits, and along with Lillis takes on the more serious aspects of the story. Bill's character is a sad case, haunted by the disappearance of his younger brother and is as yet to come to terms with the very likely fact that the boy is dead (something the audience is already aware of). His grief is what galvanizes the characters into a confrontation with the creature It. Jeremy Ray Talor, Chosen Jacobs, Jack Dylan Grazer and Wyatt Oleff all offer fine and adoring support as the remainder of this gang of friends... Which leaves us with Bill Skarsgård, as the epinonimous It. Now, Tim Currey was always going to be a difficult act to follow, and in the age of Heath Ledger's Joker and the need for artistic integrity and originality, there seemed little breathing space for a new Pennywise the Clown. However, Skarsgård (a few little nit-picks aside) may have just found such a niche. With a voice pitched somewhere between a drooling imbecile and the horse-groan of a gravel-dry throat, his puppet-with-the-strings-cut sagging shoulders, a walk like a clockwork toy, and the highly-sprung tension of a coiled spring, his Pennywise truly is a sinister creation- director Andrés Muschiett, who cut his teeth on indie-horror Mama clearly has a penchant for juddering movements and unnaturally crooked limbs, bringing some of that ghost's near stop-motion way of movement to bear on this Pennywise. At times the ghoul threatened to teeter too readily into creepiness (Its guise of the clown was initially meant to lure children in, rather than send them running in fear for their lives), and this version also lacked Tim Curry's comically nasty quips, but all-in-all, a very original and successful take.


Pace and Focus: 1/2

While nobody among the cast ever feels like they're letting the side down, you can't help but feel that the script certainly favors some of the characters over others. Love it or hate it, this is arguably something the original TV show has over this big screen adaption- a more balanced story. Here, the characters of Stan, Ben, Mike and Eddie are mostly peripheral, there to make up the numbers, which is a shame because given the talent of the young actors you can't help but feel they've been a little wasted. And, rather oddly, while Bill is, academically speaking, the main character (it's he who leads the group and drives the story onward towards it's conclusion), I felt like this was Beverly's film; her character has the lion's share of the screen time, and the harder obstacles to overcome. While I'd have welcomed the film to allow her to take starring role, this wasn't to be the case. It's here that the film loses some of it's focus and momentum, struggling to find a line to walk between the lead as it appears on paper, and the lead which comes through strongest on screen. Another issue I had while watching the film, slight as this may be, was the lack of any real build-up. While the surreal and bizarre set-pieces are definitely creepy and jumpy, the characters are given very little introduction before 'shit gets real', and given how the film boasts a run time over 2 hours, it would seem odd that the first 90 mins of the TV series again manages this task more successfully. Perhaps this is symptomatic of a modern audience and its demand for things to get going, but personally I'd like to see a little extra character-building. Who knows, maybe I'll get my wish in the DVD release, because it did at times feel like we'd had moments trimmed out; a quiet before the storm always makes the thunder sound a little louder and the lightning seem a little brighter.


Aesthetic and Style: 2/2

The film invokes an accurate sense of time and place, and it's not for nothing that the film finds itself often compared to The Goonies (and not just in as much as a group of humorously foul mouthed kids having an adventure). For me, the film is at it's creepiest when it's dialed back slightly, I always find when CGI is obviously in use, somehow things become less tangible- CGI has no heft or presence, which is important to suspend an audience's disbelief. But, again, it's a minor grumble, seeing how CGI is the go-to of modern cinema, and I'm obviously hankering for the latex and physical effects which simply aren't in use any more. The film has done well to carve out a unique version of the Pennywise character, although it's possibly on the over-stylized side of things, again, a preference rather than a criticism... I guess my biggest gripe with the film, and I'll mention it here seeing how it doesn't really belong anywhere else, is with the opening moments of the film. We're introduced to the character of Bill first, and his ill-fated little brother Georgie. Their chemistry is believable, and while it's touching it's never saccharine-sweet. Watching this I begun to feel really uncomfortable. I was thinking “Jesus, I know what's going to happen and it's awful, this is gonna' be heart breaking”. Then little Georgie goes into the basement, and spies what he thinks are two eyes staring at him in the basement, and a genuine chill went down my spine. The lights come on, and low-and-behold, it was the reflection on two glass ornaments. Was this just the overactive imagination of childhood innocence, or, was this some evil presence, already marking its next prey? The screen lingers here in the basement for an ominous moment before cutting away. It was in this moment that the film was, for me, at it's absolute apex of horror. All at once it was a lament of childhood fears I'd long ago abandoned, and what was probably the most inexplicably creeped-out I'd been in over 20 years of watching horror films. But the film was soon to lose that edge of intensity. Georgie goes out into the rain, encounters It, and is inevitably slaughtered. This is the films weakest moment, served up only moments after it's strongest genuine scare. And why? Because the film, at pains to prove that it's got the courage to 'go there' and eviscerate a child on-screen, over plays it's hand. Not only is there some obvious CGI (a personal bugbear), but also because, if you lob the arm off of a person, said person is going to be crying out in the most extreme pain imaginable while the wound explodes in a fountain of gore: this did not happen in the film. By simple fact that a child this age cannot act in this amount of pain convincingly, or that there was nowhere near enough blood, or that the then injured child attempts to crawl away from his attacker when, in truth, he should be screaming out till his vocal chords break, this destroyed the magic and subtlety of the previous scene. The moment would have been all the more terrifying to simply cut away at the penultimate moment (perhaps just to see the wellie boots disappearing into the storm drain?), but instead the film plays it's hand and you realise it's a bluff. However, the film then turns on a pin, and instead of subtleties and spine tingling horror, what you get instead is 2 hours of jump-scares, grotesque set-pieces and playful banter.


Intention and Originality: 1/2

The interplay between identity and belief that was present throughout the book is more visible in this big screen adaption than the TV series; Bill becomes leader of the group because of the belief his friends install in him, while Beverley assuming the identity of 'womanhood' creates it's own issues. Likewise, It feeds on fear, and it's possible the creature only feeds on children as a way of promoting this fear- it's easier to scare children with night-terrors than it is to scare adults, and similarly It finds itself powerless if you don't believe It can harm you, or moreover, you believe you can harm It.

Despite early concerns and minor misgivings, It is an amazing film. The problem facing the sequel, which will probably focus on the adult versions of these characters in the 'present day', will be the same which plagued the second part of the TV series; the most enjoyable parts of the book, indeed, the book's unique selling point if you can call it that, is the fact that the story concerns children. When it's children up against It, they're all the braver for their vulnerability, and far more interesting than a bunch of middle aged people. A follow-up, focusing on adults in a different era, will by definition feel like a different film entirely. And to be frank, it's the children that make this movie. Without the Goonies-like friendships, or that Stand By Me coming-of-age aspect, the film is a fairly generic horror re-make that plays to well used troupes; Evil-Dead without the brutality, or Ring with red balloons. Perhaps the film would have been wiser to drop any notion of telling a later story about adults, and instead invest it's time in a story where the children actually manage to vanquish the monster at the end of the film? Instead, and possibly to bend cap-in-hand at the alter of money-money-money, this is clearly setting up a future installment, and following that maybe even a franchise? Integrity will always take a back seat to success because, movie making like any other business, is still just a business.


Final Word: 8/10

The success a of horror depends more on our own individual tolerance than it does on movie-making technique. As this story is at pains to explain, we each fear something different. It's opening scare may be something everybody felt, but likewise might only be speaking to me and my experiences personally rather than on any tangible communal fear. For me, It isn't so much scary as it is a grotesque carnival of attractions. However, given the nature of the story, as well as the sense of mischief and fun present throughout the film, that seems quite a fitting detail. In closing, It earns it's stripes and ranks among the better Stephen King adaptions. It may only get 8/10, but it's a very high eight, and if genre pictures are more your thing (as they are mine), you can't really ask for too much more than this. That said, you may well find yourself leaving the cinema still humming the carousel-like theme tune from the 90's TV show; a sign that, while this may stand on it's own achievements, this It never quite manages to distance itself from the shadow of that same-titled cult. Still, it marks director Andrés Muschiett as one to watch out for, and all the more impressive when you consider It is only his second feature film.

"A MAN'S GOT TO KNOW HIS LIMITATIONS!"

Harry Callahan (Dirty Harry).

It's been a blast.

Well, this is it. I'm hanging up this blogging lark. Not for ever, but at least a good long while. "Why" you ask? Well, I'm concentrating on my other creative endeavors for the time being. I'm probably going to see the remainder of the year out in some minor capacity; so expect a review of the new Planet of the Apes film (which I had the pleasure of seeing recently), and soon the new IT, possible The Dark Tower. But after that the lines of communication are going to close.



See you on the other side of success, or not.

It's been fun.

Take care you all.

Paul Michael Carlisle.

"Final report of the commercial starship Nostromo, third officer reporting. The other members of the crew - Kane, Lambert, Parker, Brett, Ash, and Captain Dallas - are dead. Cargo and ship destroyed. I should reach the frontier in about six weeks. With a little luck, the network will pick me up. This is Ripley, last survivor of the Nostromo, signing off..."

Ellen Ripley (Alien)