HNT
Grizzled HMaM Vet
Horror in General & Everything Else Moderator[/i]
Kiss my tuchis
Posts: 6,296
|
Post by HNT on Dec 16, 2012 8:20:29 GMT -5
I actually enjoyed this one alright. It had some fantastic gore, and was rather well made. Much better than the original in every technical aspect. Some of the dialog was intentionally comical, but it was a bit overdone. Malcolm McDowell is a scenery chewing pleasure as long as you don't take him too seriously. He is about as believable as a small town sheriff as Danny Devito would be playing Shaquille o'neil. Still, I've been yelling "where's my figgy pudding!" At random I opportune times since I've seen it, so some of the goofy dialog pays off.
Many of the deaths were well done, but the film relied far too heavily on the flamethrower, which was both an entirely illogical weapon choice and also probably the least convincing effect in the movie. The worst problem with the film is it couldn't decide whether it wanted to have a mystery killer or a nameless, faceless stalker. I am perfectly fine with there being no explanation for the killer, but once you start deliberately challenging me to solve the mystery of who the killer is, you owe me a better reveal than this movie delivered.
Overall, it is a high quality remake, and one of the few that is just fundamentally better than the original in every respect. I don't mean for this review to sound overly critical, because I definitely had a fun time with it. I give it a 3 or 3.5.
For those of you deciding whether to buy it, the bluesy and DVD package is absolutely bare bones on extras, so a rental should suffice unless you find that you really love the film.
|
|
|
Post by The Walking Dude on Dec 17, 2012 17:55:43 GMT -5
The worst problem with the film is it couldn't decide whether it wanted to have a mystery killer or a nameless, faceless stalker. I am perfectly fine with there being no explanation for the killer, but once you start deliberately challenging me to solve the mystery of who the killer is, you owe me a better reveal than this movie delivered. My thoughts exactly at one point I thought they were leaning towards the deputy's Dad being the killer but that didn't last long. And Santa Jim's story went nowhere I thought for most of the film that he was on the trail of the killer Santa,his 'Loomis' so to speak but that never eventuated.
|
|
HNT
Grizzled HMaM Vet
Horror in General & Everything Else Moderator[/i]
Kiss my tuchis
Posts: 6,296
|
Post by HNT on Dec 19, 2012 16:19:43 GMT -5
I also thought it might be the dad. At one point, I was even leaning toward it being Malcolm McDowell's character, becuase that would've explained why his decisions as police chief were so asinine that they basically impeded the whole investigation. Who was Santa Jim? Now I feel like I didn't watch so carefully, becuase I don't even remember who that character was.
|
|
|
Post by The Walking Dude on Dec 20, 2012 5:08:24 GMT -5
Santa Jim was the Santa that the deputy went to speak to early on and was locked up at one stage.
|
|
|
Post by Jen on Dec 24, 2012 16:12:17 GMT -5
Still, I've been yelling "where's my figgy pudding!" At random I opportune times since I've seen it, so some of the goofy dialog pays off. LOL I agree about the reveal, which was just lame. I enjoyed Malcolm McDowell, even though he was a completely ridiculous character, and there was some good gore.. Enjoyable overall, but nothing great. And Donal Logue was sadly underused. I'll give it a weak 3.
|
|
|
Post by GL on May 1, 2013 10:37:36 GMT -5
Well, my prediction elsewhere in the thread was a bit early in time but stilly entirely noteworthy, as I caught up with this one last night and felt it was a 3.5, but I'm feeling nice (he he) and go with a 4 in the ratings. There's a lot to like about this one, most notably the fact that it indulges in it's genres exploits quite handily and gets a lot of good mileage out of those factors. As a slasher, there's a wide assortment of deaths in here that are pretty bloody and graphic but also incredibly diverse and really don't repeat themselves all too often. As well, there's a few genuinely creepy stalking scenes that work to the movie's advantage and delivers when it needs to, even providing a real action-packed climax that's quite enjoyable. While the story itself works rather nicely, the fact that there's some pretty big holes of logic all ensuing from the rather irrational manner of making this a who-dun-it rather than a faceless slasher effort is the biggest problem here, the forced inclusion of red herrings being quite needless and not really providing this with any real purpose. Otherwise, this was a really enjoyable effort.
|
|
|
Post by stinger on May 3, 2013 2:11:04 GMT -5
It had some really good kills (specifically the woodchipper) but I was overall disappointed with it. I didn't find anyone likable. I prefer the original even though its cheesy. The original would get a four, this would get a 2. I'll try to watch it again down the line. Right now, I would prefer to watch paint dry.
|
|
|
Post by GL on May 3, 2013 10:17:36 GMT -5
I found it highly enjoyable for the most part, mainly because as a slasher it does what it's supposed to do in deliver a high body count with plenty of gruesome deaths and tons of bloodletting. It did it's job and did it well, the hell with liking the characters. They're there to be slaughtered, that's all.
|
|