It’s nice when pleasant surprises come along. First up was the opening season of The Vampire Diaries which I confess I wasn’t expecting to like. It seemed a bit “american tv” (in otherwords safe and brightly lit) and after the likes of Twilight I presumed it was cashing in on the genre in the hope of providing more teenage girls with their vampire fix. After all who wouldn’t want a vampire as a boyfriend?…

And yet the series proved to be deeply satisfying. Dare I say it better than True Blood. For a start it actually had a proper story arc and a genuine end of season cliffhanger that has you screaming for more. But alas season 1 is finished so I decided to turn my attention to the books with some trepidation.

Other reviews seemed to fall squarely in one of two camps. Love it or loathe it. In fact my other half (who loves this kind of thing) hated it and struggled to get through the first four books when I returned home with them (yes I know 4 is a lot to struggle through but she perseveres and probably had nothing else to read). Like all relationships we don’t agree on everything and this is a good example. I loved it!

Initially the differences seem huge; Elena is blonde, Stefan and Damon are Italian, Bonnie is white, Damon is an evil, murderous (but charming) S.O.B and most noticeably of all Elena is the one of the biggest cows you will ever meet. She is the self-appointed queen of the school (think Mean Girls if you have seen it) who throws her weight around, treats her friends like servants and looks down her nose at everyone else.

And of course the story has its differences too. A lot more romance but equally a lot more suspense and menace (and the tv show certainly didn’t pull its punches). But after a while you start to realise the differences aren’t huge and if anything Elena in the books is perhaps a more realistic interpretation of a teenage girl – overly confident, somewhat deluded and nowhere near as worldly wise as she may think.

However the core of the story stays the same; a young girl who has lost her parents at a difficult time in her life, who needs to readjust to the world around her when in walks the mysterious stranger who steals her heart, but at a price – dating a vampire is one thing but dating one who has a homicidally envious brother is more than anyone could have bargained for.

There is however an important factor at the basis of this. L. J. Smith (Lisa to her friends) wrote this in 1991. Ok so some of you are lucky enough to either not remember ‘91 or perhaps weren’t even born then. But I was. And at college I met plenty of girls just like her. This was a time that predates the widespread use of mobile phones or that new fangled internet. Social circles were built on face to face communication and a hierarchy existed in every group.

There is no doubt that in the light of Twilight every suitable vampire property got snapped up and a new lease of life was breathed into The Vampire Diaries. The changes in the plot for the TV series are abundantly necessary – not only have almost two decades past rapidly but the target market needs to be able to relate to our heroine. Bella appeals to emos, goths and misfits everywhere, Sookie chimes a bell with, umm, waitresses and thick, self-centred people? and Elena hits home with girls on the cusp of womanhood who are fiercely determined to prove to the world that they are strong and capable.

But bitchy is so 90’s and so her arrogance and aloofness got re-channeled into leadership and integrity – which really aren’t that far away in the characteristic spectrum. Throw in a few tweaks here and there to round out the cast and move the love triangle along at a quicker pace and you have a winner.

I stopped to ponder at the end of book 1 whether my feeling of satisfaction would be the same if I read the book before watching the show. After all the True Blood books hooked me first (although I am now struggling to understand why I gave the first book such a high score – this is better and yet I am obliged to mark it lower to make this review as honest as possible. It seems I got swept away in the vampire frenzy like everyone else – sorry!) and I prefer them to the show and at times am annoyed at the changes. They skirt along the pretold storylines and yet make seemingly needless or irrational changes to the plot. And yet with The Vampire Diaries it feels like a different take on an established story – take what’s good and make it fit the medium for today’s horror hungry audiences.

Simply put this is a good read that I would whole-heartedly recommend. It’s well written, intelligent with properly fleshed out characters, has good momentum and unlike the True Blood series or Twilight you are not stuck in the viewpoint of one person. Seeing everything through their eyes or listening to their thoughts becomes hard work very quickly – especially if you cant make a connection to the protagonist (or find them annoyingly dense). And let’s face it I’m not exactly a 17 year old girl, though fortunately I find myself relating to Damon with worrying ease!

If you do take the time to read this and find yourself liking it I can guarantee you will rush to pick up the second (better) installment, especially as they are quite quick reads. It may not have the sex that Charlaine Harris is clearly getting off on (and is gaining the True Blood TV show such a healthy, mature audience) but I will trade that for a properly flowing story any day. 8 out of 10.

I have a confession. Some of you wont be happy to hear this and it may make you shun me in the street… I have never seen the original Friday The 13th.

And you know what? I don’t care. I have been unfortunate enough to catch a few of the first 11 (yes, you read that right) and they were the worst kind of excrement imaginable. In fact films like that are what gave the genre such a bad name for two decades. If you need proof go and rent part 10. Or take my advice and don’t.

I was able to watch the recent remake with low expectations and little baggage and I am so glad I had that opportunity. For a film directed by a guy better known for music videos and written by 4 different people somehow this just about comes out on top. Don’t get me wrong, it wont revolutionise the industry or make the world see horror in a new light but in its defense that was never its intent. If you want a few scares, slick production values, likable characters (and ones you love to hate) and lots of teenagers getting inventively butchered then this is right up your alley.

Yet another in the chain of remakes from Platinum Dunes (part owned by Michael “I blow things up” Bay), that seems enough for most people to dismiss it and yet I can’t help myself picking them up off the shelf. All of their films that I have seen I have enjoyed. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre was great and at times truly shocking; The Amityville Horror actually scared me; and this left me feeling guiltily satisfied. Except the ending – but we will get to that later.

Headed up by the ever likable, but slightly lightweight, Jared Padalecki we have your typical cast of throwaway teenagers and the only real surprises here are who will make it to the end. Will it be the asshole? Probably not, he deserves it too much and horror films always dish out that kind of justice. What about the goofy, but amiable sidekicks? Doubtful, you always have to have a few characters you like bite the big one so that you root for the hero even more. Perhaps the slutty, bitchy blonde who gets her knockers out? Ha ha yeah right!

So while you aren’t going to be overwhelmed by twists and turns it does allow you to comfortably sit back and know that you are going to get exactly the kind of entertainment you are hoping for. And lots of it!

After an extended intro giving us the back story of tragic, forgotten, mixed-up Jason Voorhees (who keeps his mother’s head in the bathroom – that just isn’t normal. I keep toothpaste in mine which is probably why my teeth are in better condition than hers. Minty Fresh and brilliant white! Mine that is – her’s probably have maggots living in them) and the obligatory slicing n dicing of a gaggle of students to set the tempo for the film, we meet Padalecki’s character, Clay, searching for his missing and presumed dead sister Whitney. Could there be a connection to the opening scenes? Yeah, of course. They aren’t exactly re-inventing the wheel here but I have to commend them on keeping the revelation of her fate secret for so much of the film – you never know whether he is chasing a ghost or whether there is light at the end of the tunnel.

Unlike earlier appearances in fare like House Of Wax, Padalecki assumes the mantle of lead character with convincing ease. It seems like playing second fiddle on Supernatural all these years has honed his skills and in a safe environment like this he is able to provide the backbone the story needs.

The recent glut of remakes seems to consistently get one thing right. The casting of the near-mythical protagonist (even with the latest, albeit underwhelming A Nightmare On Elm Street). I know for some this is heresy but in most cases I feel they have outperformed their predecessors and Derek Mears is no exception to the rule. Threatening, savage, cold and convincing all at the same time (and almost as scary without the makeup!). You could say this is a back to basics Jason; no prosthetic muscles for a start; but in a tweak of the original’s legacy he gets to don the iconic hockey mask from the word go. Most assume he had it from the start but he didn’t actually acquire it until part 3 – prior to that he sported the rather fetching bag-on-the-head look that is sooo in this season, which purists will be pleased to see used in the first part of this outing.

This raises an interesting issue. Most of the originals were dross and most people won’t have seen a single one of them and yet the recognition factor associated with the brand is off the charts. Even if you aren’t familiar with the name Jason Voorhees you sure as hell know what he looks like and that translates into box office credibility and the sound of cash registers ringing. His first cinema outing in ages brought in close to $100 million off the back of a relatively small budget – the simple truth here is that horror makes money when done well. Yes there will always be lazy crap that sneaks through and surprises us and inversely genuinely great films that tank but a recognisable property like this one is able to draw in over double what would be expected of a slasher flick. The film-makers must be so glad the majority of the audience were too young to have seen the steaming dog turds that went before!

Back to the film: Good levels of tension, a few “I didn’t see that coming” moments, spot on special effects and a smattering of crowd pleasing moments should deliver the goods for most. This isn’t psychological horror, it most likely won’t stop you sleeping at night and truthfully you won’t rave incessantly about it to your friends but its a damn good way to kill an hour or two. Right I’m off to hack up some teenagers so all that’s left for me to do is comment on the ending.

It’s pretty true to the original and is one of those throwaway “is the villain dead?” scenes that you always get after the main story has wrapped up – but I didn’t like it. The film didn’t need it and its addition was neither asked for nor plausible and ever so slightly leaves a bad taste in the mouth, which is a shame in what is otherwise a slaughterfest that you could almost imagine happening deep in the woods at the old Summer camp by the lake… if you are about to go camping try and have a good time and make sure your sleeping bag isn’t flammable because you never can tell when someone is going to invite you to a hog roast…

A solid 7 out of 10.

Despite my stereotypical male programming I have to confess I was pleasantly surprised by and dare I say it enjoyed both Twilight and New Moon. Which put me in an odd situation; derided by men but defended by women. Perhaps my ego should feel threatened by this but it doesn’t. In fact it seems to be embracing this hidden pleasure and as soon as the trailers for Eclipse started showing I found myself getting excited – not in any iffy way I assure you. Neither Team Edward or Team Jacob will be recruiting me.

The trailer looked good; more vampires, the Volturi re-appearing, werewolves sporting new and improved cgi and plenty of action. So off to the multiplex I sped full to the brim with anticipation and laden with peanut M&Ms. I was prepared to enjoy this film no matter what. And it was here that my master plan began to unravel.

I, despite expectations, enjoyed Twilight. Even finding the lengthy chatter and self-inspection somehow enticing. And then along came New Moon. And unexpectedly I enjoyed it even more than Twilight and was happy to meander with Bella through the trials and tribulations of how hard it is to be a teenage girl (not very hard it appears) and was thoroughly sated by the run in with the Volturi and getting to spend a bit longer with Alice (who with the exception of maybe Carlisle is the only member of the clan we have been allowed to get close to). I left the cinema with a happy feeling and knew all too well that while the books may never call to me as soon as it came out on Blu-ray I would be snapping it up to enjoy again.

So let’s fast-forward and get to the point. This was the first of the saga I had real expectations of and there lies my undoing. This is hard to explain, I enjoyed every minute of it and although I did feel a little bit mis-sold by the trailer (this isn’t the action fest it promised to be) I came out of the darkness quite happy but also slightly bothered. Eclipse is certainly a better film than Twilight but I have to disagree with the rest of the reviewing world who have decided it is the best of the three. It is a slightly flawed piece with a few annoyingly little inconsistencies and unanswered questions that managed to yank me out of my movie-going immersion and break the spell I was hoping to stay under for its rather lengthy running time.

I still recommend anyone go and see it as it is enjoyable and of course is a crucial piece of the saga but be prepared to be left a little wanting.

Curiously I have just noticed my review of New Moon stated that I preferred its predecessor. I am sure at the time that was true (maybe I was hung up on the big dogs) but it seems that with repeat viewing and the beauty of hindsight I was wrong. Twilight is a perfect setup but New Moon is a superior piece that allows room for character and story progression that make you feel instantly that you are in familiar territory and that you can let someone else take the reins for two hours.

Brief synopsis time: Bella still wants to become a vampire, Edward is still resisting despite wanting to marry her, Victoria is out for revenge and builds a vampire army, Bella is forced to face her feelings for Jacob (although he is now “Jake” as apparently that makes him sound cooler), the werewolves and the vampires join forces to face the new threat and the awkward love triangle finally comes out of the closet. Oh and the Volturi re-appear and don’t do much. And as an aside the poster for part three is pants – completely devoid of emotion and style.

The pacing is good and the effects are vastly improved. Taylor Lautner manages to up his game and bring genuine feeling and pain to the screen (and frankly if you don’t think Bella needs her head examining then you do too – or you’re a 13 year old emo girl, in which case you also need it examining. Deal with it.). However the parts that stood out for me were the backstories of Jasper and Rosalie. I half expected all the supporting characters to continue to be little more than wallpaper and so was pleased to see their parts fleshed out. Jasper has gone from creepy and starey to having history, strength and worth and Rosalie’s pain and sad tale not only bring out a sympathetic and comedic side but also make you understand why she is against Bella being turned. Both actors seize the opportunity and prove that they are capable of holding centre stage (if only for a while). The rest of the supporting cast are solid with Billy Burke (we need to see him in more films) again providing the emotional backbone to Bella’s human life. As per usual Mr Pattinson doesn’t do too much other than look uncomfortable about just about everything – but girls seem to love it so who am I to deprive them of that dubious pleasure.

There was a lot of hooha about Rachelle Lefevre being replaced in the part of Victoria by Bryce Dallas Howard. At the time the reasons didn’t seem too convincing and personally I feel it was the wrong move. I had been happy with her performance and assumed the producers felt they needed a better actress to take on the larger role that Eclipse required. Except that it wasn’t that big a part and Bryce Dallas Howard’s rather throwaway performance appeared to portray an entirely different character. Gone was the vicious and in came, well a bit wet and pathetic. I have no idea if this is closer to the books but when an actor is replaced surely we should still be left with the feeling that it is the same character?

A couple of times I had to whisper in the darkness to my better half as I found myself becoming confused and feeling I must have blinked or simply not understood something. Nope, apparently that was the film and not me. Point in case, Jasper. Previously when Bella got cut Jasper had a bit of an eppy moment and couldn’t control his blood lust – this was explained as him being a fairly new vampire and not fully in control of his urges. And yet now we are told that not only is he older than other members of the clan but he was a ranking military officer and a former vampire army trainer and executioner. All handled with skill and control and not at all reminiscent of his brief scenes in part two.

Then we have the inside of a vampire. So what exactly is in there? I know they are meant to be hard to touch but they now appear to be made of crystal and crack easily. In Twilight we clearly saw evidence of something different and I was left with the impression that anatomically they weren’t too different to us. This just didn’t make sense. How can a werewolf bite off a vampire’s hand without breaking all his chompers? How would you drive a wooden stake into a crystalline chest? Why does biting their necks make their heads fall off? And so on!

I can only assume this was to keep the ratings down. Eclipse features more graphic action than its earlier companions and presumably that amount of on-screen blood would potentially have blocked the film getting the rating it needed to allow it’s primarily early-teen audience to gain admission.

And while we are on the subject of the vampire army… New vampires are apparently more dangerous, less predictable and stronger than our friends the Cullens. Otherwise there would be no need for the alliance and so much worrying. But it all seemed too easy – they literally get taken apart at a lightning pace and with seemingly little difficulty. At no point do you actually worry about any of our permanent cast members. Don’t build up a threat to a credible level and then de-power them so badly! And while we are at it if an older vampire headbutts a newer, “harder” vampire why does the new guy’s head shatter but the old guy only sustains a bit of crazy paving in the forehead region? It just doesn’t make sense. Again.

These are admittedly small points in what is an otherwise thoroughly enjoyable film. If you liked the first two then this is a foregone conclusion and you will go and see it anyway. I just hope that come the final chapters (book 4 has been split into two films to milk the franchise even further) any inconsistencies are polished out of the script before filming begins and let’s hope there aren’t anymore cast changes – don’t forget Jacob almost bit it until he buffed up. Apparently casting agents and producers don’t seem to understand the concept of recurring roles being played by the same actor…

As a small aside, I, like most of the world, had heard about the knowing wink to the audience when Jacob says to Edward that he is hotter than him. It made me chuckle mildly but also made me cringe a little. However to the row of girls sitting behind me this might well have been the best 15 seconds in the whole film! Shrieks of glee and over-exuberant giggles served to remind me that yet again I was the only man in the audience

At the time I gave Twilight 7 out of 10 and New Moon got 6. If I had the luxury of re-scoring both I would have given them 7 and 7.5 respectively (even though we don’t do half points here) and for this installment I will pitch a happy 7 its way. It could have been an 8 but inconsistencies, a short lived battle scene and sub-par directing robbed it of the extra point it probably deserves.

“OY OY!”

A British horror film for the Skins generation. Erm, not exactly a description that would actually encourage me to sit through this film to be honest. Horror has always been a niche genre but it seems, before even watching this film they were trying to alienate as many different groups as possible. Very few British films are actually worth sitting through as of late and the Skins TV series is not something that really interests me but this film had great reviews. At least that’s what the poster had led me to believe. By the end of this flick I really had been tormented.

One of the reasons this is compared to the Skins E4 show is that it shares some of the same cast from the original series (every few seasons a new cast is introduced). I have seen Skins as my sister is a fan but it was never to my liking, the characters behave in such a depraved manner that shows our younger society as nothing more than barbaric. Even so the earlier seasons had a more comedic slant to them than the gritty realism the show now portrays and I expected this film to be closer to that (it’s also billed as a comedy). In the end I suppose it was.

The film starts off with our main character, Justine (Tuppence Middleton), being dragged off by the police in front of the pupils at her school. We then rewind to 5 days earlier. I don’t know if it is just me but I am becoming tired by this tactic in films and television shows, it occurs so often it’s becoming tedious. When films do this I am left to believe that the next hour or so is going to be filled with a lot of bland dialogue and not much of note. The only reason most do this is to show an event scene that the rest of the film is other wise lacking (in an attempt to draw the audience in), now I see this style as more of a warning.

The next 20 minutes introduces us to the school populace who are at the funeral of fellow student Mullet (committed suicide recently). Each group of kids represent a specific stereotype, the popular kids, the Goths, the nerds and so on. I had to check that this was actually an English film as this type of segregation only usually appears in American high school fare.

Despite being at the student’s funeral most have no clue who he is (probably a way to get out of lessons) except his best friend who is annoyed at the rest for not really caring. Mullet’s reasons for killing himself are revealed as the movie progresses with each of the cast being murdered one by one. Has Mullet returned from the grave to seek his revenge or is someone else a bit miffed about something?

This is standard slasher fare and yet the way the film is put together it never actually feels like a horror film. There are deaths a plenty (and pretty gruesome too) but the focus is never really on them, eliminating scares for daily school antics. This really feels like an extended episode of Skins with a few deaths sprinkled in. The characters, in keeping with this new antisocial behaviour that the kids are so down with today, make them absolutely dislikeable. I must say that the entire cast relish their roles and give great performances whether I like them or not.

The music never creates an atmosphere due to its constant use of contemporary tunes that the age group this is aimed at are sure to like. When the scary tones hit they don’t match with what just preceded it and the music becomes more laughable than ominous.

As mentioned before this is school drama fare for a large portion of the film with our main character Justine integrating herself into the popular group of kids (she’s one of the geek squad). Eventually after much sexual promiscuity she discovers that her new friends were indirectly responsible for the death of student Mullet. Their constant bullying at school and via online sources gave Mullet no escape but that of suicide.

The first half of the film focuses on this rather dark subject and was actually very well handled. I liked the idea that the bullies were now the ones being threatened. Sure the murder of their characters is a bit extreme but it sends a powerful message to the viewer that bullying is wrong. Only they cock this up by the time the end credits roll.

Now the main problem I had was with the tone of the film and its schizophrenic flip flop from one style to another. From this point on I will be delving into SPOILER territory so if you want to see the final verdict skip to the last paragraph. Halfway through the film the genre suddenly shifts from a murder mystery to a supernatural slasher flick as it is revealed that the students are being stalked by the ghost of Mullet out for revenge. This was fine but once Mullet was physically introduced he was portrayed as a far more malevolent being that took the edge off the whole bullying subject matter.

Aside from the main set of bullies, Mullet also attacks those indirectly involved such as a student who created a website that humiliated him. The student in question is shown to have been forced into it by other characters thus being the subject of bullying himself – was it fair to show him suffering? (he may not have been killed but he lost his hearing). Along with this his best friend who appeared as a suspect earlier is also murdered for no apparent reason. How are we supposed to feel sympathetic to a character that kills indiscriminately?

When we reach the final act the surviving characters have already seen the error of their ways without the threat of death so the final conclusion to the film is too harsh demeaning the lessons learned. SUPER SPOILER here, the end of the film has every character murdered except Justine who is arrested for the crimes. Her only fault was that she didn’t know who Mullet was. Mullet effectively ends the movie as a bully.

The one thing that really does work is the humour and unfortunately even that jars with the overall tone of the film. As the tale delves into dark territory the humour elevates things to a more light-hearted nature which helps muddle the message of the film. Even so I did chuckle a couple of times especially during a crass scene where two police officers find the bodies of two teenagers. “Found a full condom sir”, “at least he got his rocks off”, “No sir, full of his dick”. There’s even a post credit scene which is played for laughs where Mullet goes after his PE coach but after such a sadistic ending I didn’t want to see more of his mug.

Before we reach my conclusion I would like to address all the rave reviews this film gained. I get the feeling from reading a few of them that they were not giving their opinion of the film but rather what they thought the target audience would like. I respect that sometimes a film is not aimed at your age group but I feel I needed to give a true representation of what I experienced not the experience my sister would have (being a fan of Skins).

When the film ended I was sad that I had just wasted two hours then I realised the film’s only an hour and twenty minutes. Time really is relative. The film is not a complete shambles and I’m sure the Skins generation will love it but for someone who isn’t a fan of the show there’s not much else here. Tormented is about to start screening on Sky Movies (no wonder they gave it a great review) and I’d love to know what other people think of this film. 3/10

Trivia
Calvin Dean and Georgia King appeared in ‘The Duchess’ which two of the characters can be seen watching.
Calvin Dean’s make up took 3 hours each day.
Made for under £1 million.

“record every single thing”

Back in 2007 I saw a nifty little Spanish flick that had me biting my nails in the cinema. I’ve seen horror films from all around the globe but none that I can remember have ever come from Spain. REC went beyond my expectations and is one of the reasons why I have never seen the American remake Quarantine. I’m not condemning the remake as bad (I’ve heard good things) but as a shot for shot copy I have no desire to sit through the same events with characters that I won’t love as much as the original. When I heard that a Spanish language sequel was in the works, unlike the remake I jumped at the chance to see it.

Even with my haste to see this film I had a few reservations as to how the story would continue. A word of warning if you haven’t seen [Rec] or Quarantine yet stop reading now as the ending of those films (both end the same way) will be SPOILED. At the end of the last our hero Angela had been dragged off to her apparent death (Quarantine ruined this by having the final shot in the trailer and as their poster- shame on you marketing department) and as far as I could tell the story was over. When the next movie was announced I assumed we would get another outbreak in another location – pretty much same shit, different day (John McClane would be proud). This is the exact approach the Americans are taking with Quarantine 2 (changing the location to an airport) who are opting to create their own original story rather than remake [Rec] 2. For this sequel we were going to return to the apartment complex, only this time with the military.

I can’t say that I was overly enthusiastic at the notion of spending the course of the sequel with a government run outfit. Every time I have seen a film that uses a similar set of characters they always turn out the same way which is to say dull. Take for example the Hills Have Eyes 2 (remake/sequel), not that it was a terrible film (ok, not great by a long shot) but the characters lack the personality that would make me care if they lived or died. Sure it’s realistic that they follow orders and suppress their emotions but it’s not fun to watch in a horror film, these characters have a job in which they are expected to risk their lives. If they die it’s like another day at the office. [Rec] 2 found a nice way to combat this but overall not a set of characters I would have chosen.

[Rec] 2 picks up at the exact moment where the first ended. After once again watching Angela dragged into darkness we cut outside the apartment blocks where a group of SWAT officers or GEO’s (Grupo Especial de Operaciones) are about to head inside (along with an official from the ministry of health). To retain the theme of the first all the officers are equipped with cameras on their helmets to document all that transpires.

So it’s a bit far-fetched that this entire incident just happens to be caught on tape a second time but the way it is handled is fantastic. Clearly the original [Rec] mimicked the style of the Blair Witch Project but managed to pull off something which was far more engaging to watch. Many films have tried and failed (cough Halloween Resurrection cough) at this style and it surprises me how many different types of recording equipment are used throughout this franchise and to such effective means. The cameras that the GEO’s uses are all patched into one another so that each member of the team is able to see what the other is seeing. All this becomes very effective later on raising the tension as characters are only able to watch as their friends are attacked.

Moving at a brisk pace the GEO’s enter the building and are attacked by the infected before finding that there are more survivors in the building. I don’t want to ruin too much of the tale as there are various twists and surprises along the way. We find out that not everyone is in the building for the same reasons, we get a definitive answer as to what the infected are (zombies, disease riddled people, demons) and a few surprise faces turn up.

It’s hard for me to review this without spoiling the film so I’ll try to keep this as short as possible. When the film started up I thought I was going to hate it for the reasons stated earlier, I just couldn’t warm to the characters. On top of this things were getting confusing with random events and characters popping up that just didn’t gel with what was going on. Then 30 minutes in everything made sense which allowed me to appreciate what had gone before. Mild SPOILER follows. Suddenly the film rewinds to the opening moments and we now follow another set of characters whose storyline interconnects with the events we had already seen (they have their own cameras too). Eventually both groups meet up adding the human element that I thought was going to be missing due to the use of GEO’S.

The film is extremely scary and the infected remain the most dangerous threat seen on screen in modern horror cinema. A lot of the deaths are unexpected and original despite the limited range of a zombie-like menace. The tone in this entry is a lot more dire than the original due to knowledge of the previous event and a sudden shift in sub genre about halfway through. Changing the genre slightly is in no way jarring and actually stops the film from becoming tired and repetitive.

There are a few minor flaws that stop this from equaling the first. The pacing is a little mismatched with the sudden shift to a different set of characters. The film feels like it’s made up of three separate tales so its hard to shake off that anthology feeling but thankfully they weave together at the end. I’m sure on repeat viewings this will hold up a bit better as you know everything that’s going on but your first time through can be a little trying.

The acting is adequate as all the characters feel like real people but a few of the characters are nothing more than filler. With very few lines they only appear to be bumped off, where in the first flick every character felt as though they had a purpose.

This time out things are a little more exaggerated, the deaths sometimes require you to suspend disbelief, this is fine but we are close to stepping into cartoony territory.

One last niggle is with the ending of this film, surely as this was a SWAT mission someone was watching in on the camera footage via a live feed, just in case something went wrong, right? Who found this footage?

Even with these issues [Rec] 2 is a great sequel and enhances the original by adding an expanded mythology. Sure it relies on you having seen the first but let’s be honest if a film has a giant 2 as part of the title you watch it second. Just like the first this also has a dark ending but sets up a potentially epic story compared to the confined space of the apartment building. I would be excited to see how that one plays out. It may be on limited release here in the UK but if you have the chance track this film down, there are few films that give you such an experience in terror. Two more movies have been green lighted with the first next year, [Rec] Genesis detailing the first ever infection and in 2012 [Rec] Apocalypse. Due to this film I will defiantly be seeing both. 8/10

Trivia
Pablo Rosso who played the cameraman in the first [Rec] returns as SWAT member Rosso
The directors dubbed some of the infected voices themselves
Manuela Velasco wore the exact same clothes from the original

“No more kiss kiss for you”

This past Monday left me reeling with a devastating loss, it was the season finale of Lost. I was satisfied with the ending it was given (I know many were disappointed at the lack of answers) but was left with a desire to find something to fill the gap, something to pass the time while I mourn never being able to return to the island. This is what lead me to Dario Argento’s latest flick. He was known for crafting films that contained mysteries so I sat down to watch a season of his movies. Unfortunately Giallo is a poor substitute for Lost.

It’s known among the horror community that Argento’s glory days are behind him. We are no longer given greats like Deep Red or Susperia but pale imitations of his glory days. Even so I have always found something to love in these modern tales. I absolutely enjoyed Sleepless and Mother Of Tears for the over the top nonsense that it was. Who of you out their isn’t interested in seeing killer dwarfs and manic monkeys? Argento stated that Giallo was to be a return to the glory days of old by returning to the sub genre that the film is named after.

For those of you out there who are not familiar with the giallo genre that sprang up in the late 70’s, early 80’s of Italian horror films I’ll give you a brief run down. Giallo was the name given to films that were based on the pulp fiction books of Italy. Giallo literally means the colour yellow in Italian and was given as it was the colour most pulp books covers came in. The stories would revolve around a mysterious killer (usually wearing black gloves) whose identity isn’t revealed until late in the film. The deaths scenes are extremely graphic and prolonged. The music is loud and brash and unlike most movies you are completely aware of its presence. Oh and for the perverts out there, tons of nudity. Yes, this was Italy’s Grind House.

Giallo gets its name from the killer of the piece; our villain who at first is only briefly glimpsed has a strange yellowing of the skin. Driving around Italy stalking his pray he abducts beautiful women and forces them to watch as he mutilates his last kidnapee (is that a word? it works anyway). His latest victim turns out to be a famous model and a troubled detective teams up with her sister to track down her location before “Giallo” finds a new girl to replace her.

The thing about these type of movies is that their stories are hardly original but we don’t watch them for originality but to see the different way things are presented – much like the slasher film. Giallo unfortunately is not a Giallo film despite being sold as one, it fails all the trademarks and becomes nothing more than a glorified episode of CSI (I hate that show by the way).

As I said earlier Argento’s movies are poor but I am able to find something fun in each piece. Cool deaths, interesting stories, great music. What happened here? This is not a return to form and this is not even in the same calibre as his last three films.

The look of the film is very modern but it lacks that filmic quality and looks more like it was produced for TV. Many of Argento’s films have a theatrical feel to them. Every action is over exaggerated, the way the killer wields a blade, the postitoning of actors, delivery of dialogue and so on – they are all here but due to the look of the film it just doesn’t work this time around. The sets are real, the colours are bland and call for a more realistic portrayal of events but here things are in opposition of each other.

The music just plain sucks. No effort has been put into creating anything original and you’d be hard pressed to pick it out while watching. I know in previous reviews I’ve written for the site that a successful soundtrack is one you don’t notice but helps convey emotional weight to a scene. Giallo films are an exception to this rule, part of the fun comes from the difference in style so you should be aware of the music. Also in taking the soundtrack for what it was it failed to bring out any feeling of dread or tension.

The death scenes were poorly executed despite being set up in a torture porn setting. As I mentioned before the death scenes are usually prolonged, yes it takes the victim a long time to die but the focus is more upon the chase. Here we get brief scenes before cutting away (not to say what we see isn’t graphic) a hammer to the face, a finger cut off and a lip cut off. That’s about it, it was dull.

While all those things failed to create a convincing Giallo film it would have been fine if the story played out in a convincing way. I wouldn’t have given it a top score but it would have been a passable, a time filler film but this is bad.

I have to issue a spoiler warning as I will be discussing the mystery set up in the film and my absolute disappointment in it so SPOILERS ahead. The killer in this film throughout the first 45 minutes is never seen in full profile, just his hands (no black gloves this time but that’s fine as that part of Giallo was getting silly) or his eyes blocked by another object. The entire time I knew I had seen this man before; his voice sounded familiar but I decided to ignore it – that was until we were introduced to the main character.

Adrian Brody plays the detective in charge of tracking the killer down and at once I realised he was the killer. That was fine, it hadn’t ruined the film and there might be an explanation that justified it. He may have been driven crazy by his own terrible past or it may have been his twin brother (it’s possible this is similar to soap opera story telling) I was willing to let it slide until I found out they really were supposed to be separate characters.

You see the killer was played by Brody under heavy prosthetics to make him look ugly (yes I see the paradox there). As they were to be separate characters or to be used as a fake out for the audience (Argento does this a lot) the character is credited as Byron Diedra which is an anagram for Adrian Brody. The thing is halfway through the film the killer is revealed to the audience so why there was need to conceal who he was I’ll never know. We are never really introduced to more characters than the two leads which is why it’s never viable that this could be anyone else.

What amazes me the most is the portrayal of the killer whose dialogue ranges from the ridiculous to the offensive. Brody’s Inspector is meant to have been brought up in New York but the killer is an Italian. The murderer spouts the most clichéd dialogue which more benefits a 1960’s mob boss. From “Ah shut uppa your mouth” to “Kapishe” I really thought I was watching a dubbed movie despite the fact that this was filmed in English.

Once we reach the end of the film (which has the most anticlimactic ending I have seen for years) we are left with many questions. Why did the killer become a killer? Why did he want to kidnap the girl’s sister? What did the model whisper in the killer’s ear? What was the mystery of the movie that needed to be solved? The film itself essentially lacks a mystery and I don’t know if Argento meant this to be ironic in an attempt to send up the Giallo films of old or not, but it doesn’t make for good viewing.

Apparently Dario Argento has disowned the final cut of this film which had been edited by the producers. Maybe one day we’ll see what Argento intended (better get a move on… he’s pretty old) but you have to question a film in which both your main leads dropped out at the last minute (Ray Liotta and Asia Argento). With so many pointless things left unanswered at the end of the film it makes you appreciate how well crafted Lost’s mysteries were. Oh and there’s no nudity in this one. 3/10

Trivia
Argento’s first feature that wasn’t written by him (although he did touch ups)
Asia Argento quit production as she was pregnant
Vincent Gallo was originally set to play Giallo

“These kids are coming out here and killing themselves”

At my place of work I get to screen all manner of film and TV projects but on the most part I have an idea about what it is I’m about to show. When Tucker and Dale vs. Evil arrived on Digi- Beta (it’s like a giant VHS but far superior quality) for a screening I had no idea it was a big budget (well at least for a horror flick) horror movie and not another poorly made student project. Just look at that title, it’s Snakes On A Plane bad. Tucker and Dale was a genuine treat and is destined for cult status.

This film simply put is another in the American slasher genre and yet it manages to create something fresh and drops a huge twist within the film’s opening scenes that will leave any horror fan salivating for more. Throughout this review it’s best to remember that this screening is for a film that has yet to have a release date in the UK (it’s always possible it’ll go straight to DVD) and many things may change as last minute touch-ups take place such as the temporary soundtrack and unfinished special effects.

We start with a poor opening scene, a news crew investigate a burnt out cabin in the woods where a bizarre creature attacks them à la the Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake. I hope this gets cut as it doesn’t really fit in with the rest of the film’s tone, sure it becomes clear what was going on by the film’s climax but it sticks in the back of your mind leaving you waiting for the connection and truly detracts from the fun going on. After this we are introduced to a bunch of stock teenagers on their way for a weekend getaway in the woods. As I saw this I was waiting for the same old formula to repeat its self, one by one they were going to be picked off by the creature, umm not quite…

You see the teenagers are not our protagonists, that duty falls to two characters who drive past them in a truck. Tucker and Dale are two Hillbillies on their way to a fishing trip in the woods. Tucker is played by Alan Tudyk, best known for his role as Wash on Firefly (plus the movie Serenity) and Dale by Tyler Labine who was in Reaper as Sock. This was genius casting as I am a big fan of both these guys and find their brand of comic relief hilarious. As they are known more as supporting actors it was great to see them as the leads of their own film and by the way things started I knew this was going to be comedy gold.

The entire film works at turning horror cliché on its head. We get to experience moments we are all accustomed to seeing but from the other side of the fence, however things are never quite what they seem. Tucker and Dale look like the crazed rednecks you find in any “cabin in the woods” story but in truth they are just normal people who find it hard to act naturally in social situations. Early in the film the teenagers pull into the same gas station as Tucker and Dale. Dale is infatuated by the beauty of the girls but is too nervous to talk to them. Tucker is the more level headed of the two and convinces Dale into trying to interact with them by explaining they are just people too. In a fantastically funny scene Dale nervously walks towards the teenagers with a scythe he just purchased and utters “you guys going into the woods?” followed by nervous manic laughter. The teenagers jump into their car and speed off as fast as they can leaving Dale and Tucker looking at each other perplexed.

This scene is genius and is only the first of many that get far more outlandish as the real meat of the tale kicks in. Later in the film one of the teenagers played by Katrina Bowden (from 30 Rock) slips off a rock while skinny dipping and bangs her head. Tucker and Dale rescue her, shouting to the other teenagers “we’ve got your friend!” From the kids point of view it appears that the hillbillies are kidnapping her and they run off to formulate a plan to get her back.

The whole set up is great but left me wondering if this was really going to descend into an actual horror movie. The opening scene was quite violent and left me waiting for this creature to attack forcing Tucker, Dale and the teenagers to reluctantly team up but this is not that movie. Tucker and Dale take Allison (Bowden) back to their Cabin in the woods and treat her wounds. Fortunately she realises they are helping her so we don’t have to sit through our ‘heroes’ being called villains constantly. The other teenagers lead separate assaults on the cabin only to accidentally cause their own deaths which appear to others as murder. Its sounds crazy, it felt crazy to write down as well but on film it works.

Now I don’t want to ruin the death scenes as they are truly spectacular and you never know how they are going to happen. I will give one away though to give you an idea of the insanity. Tucker is using a wood chipper when one of the teenagers tries to punch him in the back of the head. Tucker bends down to pick up some wood causing the kid to plunge head first into the chipper (see image above). This is extremely violent and gory and yet at no point does the film drop the humour as Tucker and Dale’s reaction to everything around them defies logic. Believing the teenagers to be a suicide cult (Tucker and Dale are not the sharpest tools in the box) that want Allison back to make her commit suicide they decide to protect her from harm.

Now despite this being a pleasant surprise certain aspects just don’t work. The tone is clearly tongue in check but the makers ram it so far back they come close to choking. Even with the comedic aspects Tucker and Dale are played with such sincerity they feel like real people but the world around them feels like a sitcom. Both clash and things just don’t seem natural.

When I first realised that all the deaths were going to be self inflicted I thought it was a great twist on the genre but quickly realised why it had never been done before. It’s boring. There are only so many times accidental deaths can occur before the teenagers should notice something is up. The deaths although inventive eventually descend into complete farce which really takes you out of the film. This would have worked in far shorter bursts perhaps as a 45 minute episode on an anthology series such as Masters Of Horror, 90 minutes is too long. The impact is also lessened due to the lack of a real villain – even The Final Destination implied that Death was a force. The writers clearly realised this and did two things that I really wasn’t on board with.

Once the insanity kicks off with the first death the teenage group take a turn for the worse. Each and every character becomes a complete areshole devoid of any redeeming features. I understand that by doing this we are meant to distance ourselves from these characters so that Tucker and Dale shine as the true heroes and the death scenes are more justified but they went so far with these characters that I truly disliked them and didn’t want to spend any time with them. When these characters died I didn’t really get the satisfaction of seeing a disliked character die but was more relieved that I wasn’t going to see them again.

The second thing that didn’t work for me was the ending which I’m not going to spoil here. The last 20 minutes once again shift the tone of the flick but at this point we are returned to traditional horror fare with the title of the piece actually making sense. Rather than feeling satisfied I was disappointed that they abandoned the whole idea of turning the genre on its head despite having a hillbilly for a hero.

With all the shortcomings this is still an enjoyable ride and a different take on the slasher genre. Tucker and Dale are great characters who had me rolling with laughter and I hope the finished product improves the pacing to alleviate a few of the problems I found. I’m left wondering if this will appeal to people who are not familiar with the slasher genre as a lot of the humour revolves around familiarity but for me at least this made a nice change. 7/10

Trivia
Chelan Simmons who plays one of the hapless teenagers also starred in another accidental death movie, Final Destination 3
Premiered on 22 January 2010 at Sundance Film Festival
To see the trailer for this flick click the link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05mZuNTVw-c&feature=related

“Why are you screaming? I haven’t even cut you yet”

What better way to celebrate Jigsaw’s return to Ripped From The Crypt than with a review of another famous comeback, Freddy Krueger. This weekend I finally got around to seeing this flick more out of obligation (I’ve seen every Nightmare tale as well as the numerous spin off’s) than any real desire to see yet another horror remake. As I reached the credits I realised the movie’s tagline, ‘Don’t fall asleep’ was a guideline to viewers who had to sit through this nonsense. Yawn!

I personally have no problems with remakes, at least that’s how I used to feel. The Hills Have Eyes and Texas Chainsaw Massacre redo’s respected the original films and crafted something that was equal if not better. Lately we’ve just had a plague of crap churned out with Children Of The Corn, Blood The Last Vampire and Halloween 2 amongst their ranks, all hollow experiences. When it was announced that Nightmare was getting a reboot I wasn’t impressed.

There are certain films that should never be remade, classics that should be watched by people of all ages. If you were to hear that a remake of The Godfather, Back To The future or Die Hard was in the works the first question you’d ask would be, why? The usual answer is to modernise them for the kids. There’s no real reason today why we need to update films for the younger generation, it’s so easy with today’s technology to watch any film from any era, just buy the original on DVD, far cheaper than going to the cinema anyway. Nightmare On Elm Street is a classic.

Eventually I warmed up to the idea with Platinum Dunes producing. Their track record with remakes hasn’t been too shabby (Texas Chainsaw, Amityville Horror and Friday The 13th) and they promised to return Freddy to his darker roots. As the original Nightmare films had already received a resolution in Freddy’s Dead I was more open to a fresh start than say the Halloween franchise (Damn that Busta Rhymes for kicking Myers’ arse). I wasn’t prepared for the ride I was about to take.

I won’t describe the basic outline of whom and what Freddy Krueger is as the majority of horror fans know his history.

We open in a diner populated with a bunch of bland teenagers (it’s not until much later that I realised they were the entire main cast) within a matter of minutes one of the kids falls asleep and is dispatched by Krueger. After months and months of mystery of what the new Freddy looked like he is in full view of the camera with next to no build up, talk about anticlimax and we’re only two minutes in!

This introduces us to our heroine, Kris, who at the kid’s funeral (I have no idea what his name was and really don’t care as he’s never mentioned again) sees visions of a little girl, begins to uncover a mystery about her childhood and is accosted by a crazy arty chick who has seen things that you wouldn’t believe. Yes, this is the second scene of the movie.

From this point on I’m going to be throwing SPOILERS out there as the producers try to throw in so many “shocks” it’s hard for me to go into any more detail without ruining at least a small portion of the film. Most of the cast are abysmal but Katie Cassidy who plays Kris is actually excellent despite the terrible dialogue she has been given. It’s much easier to sit through a bad movie when you’re spending it with a great actor, unfortunately the writers disagree and 30 minutes into the film they brutally kill her off. I was in shock, they pulled the same crap that the original did with Tina. Unlike the first however no other characters had been introduced leaving us, the viewer, with no connection to the film’s universe. I was done at this point, the film had effectively ended at the 30 minute mark.

Passing the lead to the crazy arty girl from the funeral, she just happens to be… Nancy (Its possible they mentioned her name prior but it wasn’t made clear). I found every scene Rooney Mara (Nancy) in to be an absolute chore, she has no screen presence (she is definitely no Heather Langenkamp) and seems to be as disinterested in the film as the audience was. Within 20 minutes she figures out who Freddy is and spends the remaining hour meandering around Springwood. Dull.

Another reason we get remakes shoved down our throats is to make use of current technology. This is one area that that the new Nightmare should trump the original as the use of computer effects could give us a truly lavish dream world setting. For some reason the effects are uneven and at some places laughable. During the famous scene where Freddy stretches his face through Nancy’s wall the CGI looks cheap, you know something is wrong when the original’s trick of stretching a sheet far surpasses modern effects. I was also expecting a more lavish dreamscape rather than being dumped into the boiler room location time and time again. Even with this the death sequences are nicely handled and this extremely graphic ‘Nightmare’ earns its 18 certificate.

Now for the big one. The main reason I and many other fans of horror opposed this remake was the recasting of Freddy Krueger. As far as I was concerned Robert Englund is Freddy. No matter what incarnation of the dream master has existed one man has given him personality, out of all the other icons Freddy is the only one who really is defined as a character rather than just a cool looking mask. No matter who was cast in the role they would pale in comparison. Jackie Earle Haley was the brave man to step up to the plate and after this shambles of a film Robert Englund is no longer Freddy.

And that’s not a bad thing. Jackie Earle Haley is a revelation in the role creating a character that is far more menacing as Krueger than he has ever been depicted before. His delivery of lines is slow and controlled and he gives Freddy more power for it. The best thing about this version is the fact that the humour Freddy has become known for has remained but is used in a different way. The old Freddy would rely on puns (after cutting of someone’s nose he’d utter “got your nose”) but this new Freddy is far more sadistic, the joking is used as amusement for the character of Freddy and not the audience as it used to be. He is clearly a sick character who finds his own brand of humour hilarious much like the new incarnation of the Joker in Nolan’s Dark Knight. I also like the more realistic look of Freddy’s make up, he actually looks like a burns victim rather than old pizza face. The moment that really cemented this darker character was after he murders one of the teenagers by ripping his heart out. Once dead in the real world Freddy informs the kid trapped in the dream that the brain stays alive for 7 minutes after death and that they have 6 minutes to play. Vicious.

Now not everything about this new Krueger is great as we are given a new improved back-story that doesn’t quite work. At one point I was optimistic that we were going to get something new and incredibly impressive despite the poor narrative. Piece by piece we learn that Freddy was a gardener at a nursery school who becomes accused of being a paedophile. All the teenagers being stalked accused him of being a rapist and their parents tracked Krueger down and burnt him alive. It’s then suggested that Krueger was innocent and is returning from the grave to exact his revenge. I thought this was a fantastic idea that gave his character more depth, it had me questioning who to root for and then 10 minutes after this revelation it was debunked. No, he was a paedophile and he just wants revenge because they told. I suppose it works but I like the other set up better.

Despite my affinity for the new Krueger this is a terrible movie. The acting is awful; the story goes nowhere and it’s even more of a bore if you’ve seen any Nightmare On Elm street movie prior. I don’t want to encourage people to go and see this at the cinema as the studio really doesn’t deserve your money. I say wait for the DVD to see Jackie Earle Haley’s great performance. Out of all the Nightmare films that have been release this sits side by side with A Nightmare On Elm Street Part 2 (Freddy’s Revenge) – it’s not worse but at the same time it’s definitely not better. On a side note, in America this movie made enough money to guarantee a sequel which was announced the opening weekend. I am optimistic the sequel will be far superior with a fresh story not relying on the original and Hickey’s return, unfortunately this is not that film. 4/10

Trivia
Originally intended to be a prequel – maybe one day we’ll actually get that film
The film is a hybrid of four different scripts that went through 15 drafts – no wonder it was shit
Jackie Earle Haley would improvise lines to unease his co–stars

Somewhere between a period drama and a cheesy hammer horror. The exterior scenes of London are convincing and the claustrophobic, incestuous halls of the tower seem an ideal setting for a drama about greed, betrayal and murder. The horror aspect is somewhat over played by Universal’s marketing. It seems unlikely that any audience, even those in the 30’s, would not have been more thrilled than horrified by the medieval power struggles depicted in the film.

The scenery and lighting enhance a dark and ominous tone that reinforces the typical atmosphere of a horror genre film. So too does the presence of Boris Karloff, playing a sadistic club-footed executioner named Mord. This Igor-like caricature is hardly scary, and even adds a humorous element when viewed by modern audiences. Basil Rathbone plays the truly ruthless Duke of Gloucester, as both villain and protagonist. The plot revolves around his desire to usurp his brother’s throne, killing those who stand in his way. Vincent Price also makes an appearance, a weak portrayal of the Duke’s alcoholic half-brother, Clarence, who is dispatched by being drowned in wine. Oh the irony!

Rathbone’s intense stare and slimy charm as the Duke make for a compelling depiction, although somewhat overacted. His intensity is complimented by the comic relief provided by Ian Hunter as Edward IV. The film has been compared to Shakespeare’s Richard III, but to compare this disposable pseudo-history to the work of the Bard is both unfair and pointless. This film is certainly historical and also theatrical, but it is not a history lesson nor is it truly Shakespearean. The film is as raunchy and violent as was allowed in the 30’s, which by today’s standards means hardly at all. The performances carry the somewhat tedious plot along, combined with the intrigue provided by its historical significance and the striking cinematography.

The demonification of historical figures as depicted in The Tower of London may not correspond with the facts, but can be very entertaining. If a certain auteur has not applied fantasy to history, there would be no Count Dracula as we know him. This film is ideal for anyone with an interest in the War of the Roses, the mysteries of the Tower of London or the camp and theatrical horror of the black and white era. Those seeking an alternative depiction of Shakespeare’s Richard III should keep looking.

Just as last year’s Bronson was a huge step forward for Danish director, Nicolas Winding Refn, (from his Pusher trilogy), so too is Valhalla Rising a definitive progression in the formation of identity as an auteur.

The tension of this slow moving story, punctuated with explosions of ultra violence and fountains of blood, is heart stopping. The dialogue is sparse, the protagonist a mute Viking slave, who has killed his masters and is accompanied only by a young boy, who speaks on his behalf. The film is set against dark and ominous Scottish Highlands, occupied by Nordic pagans whose way of life is threatened by the spread of Christianity. A group of Christian Vikings find the pair and see the benefit of bringing the one eyed slave bezerker on a journey to Jerusalem for the first Crusade. After they embark, the Christians suspect that a mysterious fog that impairs navigation, is a curse brought upon them by the pagan slave. He is too powerful to kill and at any point in the film when he is challenged, there follows a gory scene with lashings of crimson and the barbaric sounds of axe cleaving flesh and splintering bone.

Without a background knowledge of the subject matter, the plot may seem far fetched and the violence gratuitous. It is remarkable that in fact every aspect of the film, from the decapitation of a chieftain, whose head is then placed on a pole (a magic rite to pagan vikings), to the accidental discovery of Canada hundreds of years before Columbus. All the activities of these fictional characters are based on archaeological and mythological sources.

The linear story of an escaped slave finding salvation amongst Christians is brought into question. The slave never confirms his beliefs, and is content to kill the Christians at the first sign of aggression. The name of the pagan protagonist is One-eye, a Viking nickname for their God of war, Odin. When questioned by the Christians as to the origins of of the slave, the boy responds, “he was brought up from hell.” It seems that One-eye is more of a symbol than a character. His emotions and intentions are never made clear. He is a source of fear for the Christians, who mistake Canada for Hell, believing the pagan slave has led them there using magic. But he is also a guardian figure, who takes the boy under his wing after killing the rest of his tribe. These characters are devices that explore the complex issues of cultural and spiritual conflict that were being played out in Europe 1000 years ago. The Christianisation of Europe, the slaughter of the pagans followed swiftly by the first crusade and the slaughter of Muslims in the holy land are both addressed. While in Europe, the pagans are said to live on “the edge of the world,” hunted and killed in their thousands. In Canada The tables are turned and the pagan Native Americans hunt the Christians. The Viking landings in the new world ended badly and foreshadowed the colonisation of the Americas 500 years later, resulting in more slaughter in the name of the Christian god. The repeating shots of crosses from obscure angles cut with One-eye’s premonitions of extreme violence seem to be a message of the danger of Christianity. The Christian Viking leader’s maniacal screams about “My new Jerusalem!” echo those of the early Christian settlers of America, who made similar declarations before slaughtering the native Americans.

The appeal of this movie for most, will not be the spiritual message, nor will it be the un-hurried cinematography and beautiful shots of the Scottish highlands. It will be violence. There is no denying the violent scenes are shockingly graphic, but they are too sparse to hold the attention of the average sociopathic gore-hound, baying for blood. Some sections are extremely drawn out and confusing, including a scene in which one viking rapes another, whilst under the influence of a hallucinogenic narcotic. Nothing is explicitly explained in the film. For some this will make the challenging story even more intriguing, for others it will simply be bewildering.