HMaM Global Mod
Post by GL on Jun 25, 2006 13:25:29 GMT -5
“House of a 1000 Corpses” is a little bit of an overrated film.
**SPOILERS**
Traveling through the country to do a book on roadside attractions, Jerry Goldsmith, (Chris Hardwick) Bill Hudley, (Rainn Wilson) and their girlfriends Denise Willis, (Erin Daniels) and Mary Knowles, (Jennifer Jostlyn) and find an attraction called Captain Spaulding’s Museum of Monsters and Madmen. Finding it to be the perfect addition, they stay around and the owner, Captain Spaulding, (Sid Haig) and learn the legend of a serial killer that lived nearby and want to seek him out. While searching, they puck up a hitchhiker, Baby Firefly, (Sheri Moon) who takes them to her house where her family, Mother, (Karen Black) Rufus, (Robert Allen Mukes) Grandpa Hugo, (Dennis Fimple) and Otis Driftwood, (Bill Moseley) live. When they inadvertently insult the Firefly’s, the family snaps and holds them captive and begins torturing the travelers.
The Good News: This is one of the hardest movies to review. It’s either a real love-it-or-hate-it kind of movie. As an homage to the films of the 70s, this one actually delivers and becomes something that could almost be made from the 70s. The different little short films that are included every so often with a grainy look, soft-focus flashbacks, and the general hostile tone taken throughout the film. It’s got a much more deranged feel to it than any other film made recently that says it attempts a 70s feel to it. The fact that it takes place during daylight hours for the most of the time is it’s main claim, as that allows for some brilliant daylight shots and sequences. This style of film is a direct retaliation to the self-referencing style of films that had come out around the time, and to repeatedly hit them over the head with the iconography of fear with repeated instances of blood and gore, skeletons, devils, monsters, madmen, killers, and creatures appearing liberally throughout the movie. The supposed gore that should’ve been in here makes the film seem even more desolate. The repeated amputations, dismemberments and slashing marks that there isn’t some enjoyment to be had when looking for a nice, gory romp. It still looks hopeless hacked up, but enough got through that its still nice if that’s what you’re looking for. Every now and then, there was a cool scene thrown in that didn’t seem like it was homaging something from the 70s. Zombie sure is far more comfortable with all the underground sequences, as those provided some of the greatest moments in the film. As our last remaining teen stumbles through a corpse-lined corridor is easily the greatest example, which really got the hair standing up and delivering some real suspense. The first fifteen minutes is some of the best and moist creative parts in horror movies recently, and is a real highlight.
The Bad News: Firstly, everyone should just stop doing homages to “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre,” as everyone does it and it just seems overplayed. Its quite obvious this is the case here, with this being a virtual remake of that movie, even down to several characters, scenes, and ideas. Having a small group of teens wander upon a demented backwoods family that relishes killing the wanderers? Having the clan enjoy acts of necrophilia, wearing dead a person’s skin, and keeping artifacts around the house? The family and their positions within it? Those are major influences right there, and that amounts to a good portion of the film’s running time. There are a lot of other influences spread throughout the film, and they are a great distraction at time. These references are either too obvious in getting it’s point across or so obscure in their joke that they fail to achieve their goal of happy recognition. We either get it, got it a long time ago, no longer want to see it, or leaves you scratching your head wondering why that particular set-piece or sequence was included. It often seems as though the entire reason for this is just as a series of scenes that show off the influences from Rob. If he wanted to make a truly frightening film filled with dark and disturbing images, he also misses the mark. Oh sure, moments of gore and vivisection that try to develop some sense of fear are present in most stages, but the uneven editing and obvious exclusions for the sake of a rating undermines the effort. He is far too gimmicky at times, using the modern media shortcuts of jump cuts, shaking cameras, and obtuse lens and camera angles to really revive the '70s sense of horror films. For as much as he claims not to like those styles, they are surprisingly evident in here, and just make more head-scratching scenes than normal. This is also not a gonad to the grindstone exercise in non-stop thrills and blood spills; the movie never builds up enough of a head of steam to succeed on that level. It kinda peters out around the half-hour mark, and doesn’t pick back up until well into the third act. The nonsensical plot is also hard to figure out. It goes off on wild tangents that cut away from what is the true reason for the film: the torture of the kids from the psychopathic killers. That is nowhere near as vicious as it should’ve been, and doesn’t feel as demented as it should. Sure, the characters come out at the end completely scratched up and bloody, the on-screen stuff is surprisingly minimal. They’re tied up and are forced to listen to rants from one of the characters for most of their torture, and then the remains of the off-screen torture is later found. There really should’ve been more ons-screen torture. Yet, for all these problems, the main one is that the film has been cut to shreds. The rumor mill began before the movie came out and told that it was going to be a shocking gorefest. Yet, the film that was delivered is mainly a shell of what was supposed to come out. The moments of gore and suspense that were injected into it to substitute for the missed glory are almost nonexistent. I don’t blame him for this, and don’t even hold it against him, but it is evident.
The Final Verdict: Not at all the classic it was said to be, but it’s still a refreshing horror film in the sense of actually being a throwback to the films of inspiration rather than just claiming to be. It’s still worthy of a watch, and it has enough to entertain, but don’t expect the return of the 70s horror films it claims to be.
Rated R: Extreme Graphic Language, Graphic Violence, Nudity, torture and acts of sadism
Mate I edit for a living... can turn 1000 words into 500 lickety split. And I try to use a scalpel instead a chainsaw.
Grizzled HMaM Vet
