Carved (2007)

CARVED: THE SLIT-MOUTHED WOMAN
2007
Directed by Koji Shiraishi
Starring Eriko Sato, Haruhiko Kato, Chiharu Kawai and Rie Kuwana

Horror is a genre that seems to move at light speed.  Trends come and go quicker than the rotating members of Menudo, and this has resulted in a great many things that are only a few years old having a lot of quaint nostalgic value for yours truly.  One of those things is the great Japan-style thriller brigade here in the States in the 00's, beginning with The Ring and ending (arguably) with the awful remake of Takashi Miike's One Missed Call.  As evidenced by those two titles, the spectrum in quality with these flicks ranged from the heights of awesomeness to the absolute depths of crap.  In some roundabout way, these movies had a big impact on my life, because they made me seek out a lot of the movies that they were based on.

Which brings me to Carved.  It's one of the few Japanese ghost movies that hasn't gotten the remake treatment yet, and that's understandable.  While it is about a ghost, it's really much more of a slasher flick, with plenty of killing and other sorts of debauchery to go around.  That's not to say that it lacks for atmosphere, however.  Far from it.

PLOT:  From what I can gather on the great grand interwebz, one of the most prevalent Japanese folktales is that of "the slit-mouthed woman," an angry, vengeful female ghost who kills anyone unlucky enough to cross her path.  This movie is essentially a modern retelling.  It begins with an earthquake that awakens a corpse matching the traditional description of this ghost.  From here, the woman begins causing all sorts of havoc at a local school, curiously enough asking the question "am I pretty?" before the butchering begins.  While these scenes are sporadic, they are effective.  Much of Carved consists of a core group of characters attempting to get to the bottom of the ghost's identity, and while there are portions of the story that drag (and really, guys, dragging is something that Japanese horror films specialize in), the surprisingly creepy score and atmosphere are enough to keep you lulled in.
PLOT RATING: *** out of ****.

CHARACTERS AND ACTORS:  The most important character in the movie is Noboru, a student at the school who seems to know a bit more about the slit-mouthed woman that he initially lets on.  Slight spoiler alert, Noboru has a heavy emotional background that gets explored in detail during the movie's "reveal" scenes, and the emotional resonance kind of hinges on this actor (Haruhiko Kato, for anyone who cares) being able to pull it off.  And...he doesn't.  Really, in all honesty (and man do I hate that phrase), the victim characters aren't especially captivating.  Having said that, Miki Mizuno is aces as the slit-mouthed woman herself.  Much like Takako Fuji does with Kayako Saeki (Google it, kids, if you're not one of my legions of readers or know what the hell I'm talking about), she takes a role that is mostly silent and fills it with danger and menace.
CHARACTERS AND ACTORS RATING: ** out of ****. 

COOL FACTOR:  There are more than a few very well-staged murder sequences throughout this movie.  As far as body count goes, Carved has the vast majority of J-horror epics that I've seen beat, as its tone is much more in line with what we here in the States are used to when the word "horror" is mentioned than the typical Onryo ghost film.  In addition to having lots of good red stuff flying around, this is one of the few movies I can think of where the dark/gray color palette is used to great effect, casting a pretty damn foreboding mood on the entire proceedings.  Countless American action movie directors, take note.
COOL FACTOR: *** 1/2 out of ****.

OVERALL:  While not exactly a classic, Carved is a fun little flick.  The first time you watch it, you will likely be riveted by the first thirty minutes and spend the next thirty wondering when the characters will shut up so you can watch the thrilling conclusion...and I say this mainly because that's exactly what happened to me.  Yes, the middle third of the movie has an almot suicidal dry spell.  But if you stick out this bit of tedium, you won't be disappointed by this movie's amazing and suspenseful ending sequence.

OVERALL RATING: *** out of ****.  Worth a look for both J-horror AND slasher fans.  How many movies can you say that about?

C.H.U.D. II: Bud the Chud (1989)

There's been a few films in my moviegoing life that I walked away from feeling that they were infinitely better than they had any right to be, and the original C.H.U.D. is one of them.  I went in expecting a good early-'80s style body count flick with lots of corny characters and dialogue.  The last thing I expected was a genuinely well-written and acted flick that did an amazing job maximizing its budget.  I also loved the serious approach that it took to its amazingly craptacular material.  Making a movie about human flesh-eating subterranean humanoids and managing to make it decidedly NON-cringe-inducing might seem like a very tall order indeed, but the flick managed to pull it off.

The sequel, though?  Not so much, because C.H.U.D. II: Bud the Chud just ain't very good.  Gone are the actors who were able to milk every bit of emotion and resonance from their characters and the simple-yet-effective story.  In its place are a group of dopey kids and a whole lot of cheese.  And not the good kind. 

PLOT:  Some indeterminate amount of time after the events of the original film, the military have taken control of the government's C.H.U.D. project and are looking - and failing - to mine the CHUDS as biological weapons.  The final remaining CHUD (named "Bud", hence the title) is stolen from the facility by cool teen Steve and his nerdy friend Kevin after they lose their soon-to-be-dissected cadaver for their biology class and need a replacement.  Of course, Bud soon springs to life and begins causing havoc, creating more CHUDS in the process while also acting out a whole bunch of nonsensical comedy scenes.  Most of the movie concerns itself with Steve, Kevin and their cute chick friend Katie tracking down Bud after he pulls his best Logan's Run routine, as well as the military guys trying to clean up their own mess.  All in all, not the most captivating stuff.
PLOT RATING: * 1/2 out of ****.

CHARACTERS AND ACTORS:  This was by far the saving grace of the first movie, as John Heard, Daniel Stern etc. put a whole lot of energy and honesty into their characters and managed to squeeze a lot of genuine emotion out of the proceedings.  While I can't necessarily fault the actors in this flick, the characters are all paper-thin stereotypes.  The kids are just as one-note as I described above, and the military douchebags...yeah.  That's all I'm going to say.  I will throw this tidbit out there, however: Steve is played by Brian Robbins, a guy who went on to direct movies like Good Burger, Varsity Blues, Hardball and....Ready to Rumble.  All hail the king!  Finally, Tricia Leigh Fisher (Carrie Fisher's real-life half sister), who plays Katie, looks pretty damn good in a swimsuit, so there's that.
CHARACTERS AND ACTORS RATING: * out of ****.

COOL FACTOR:  There's not much redeeming factor to the film in this regard, either.  It IS possible to have a movie that is "so bad it's good," where a film's cheesiness actually lends itself to group viewings and MST3K-style quips.  This movie, though, doesn't work in a crowd setting.  There just isn't enough in the way of over-the-top violence or cheesy sex scenes, and since the movie itself seems to be a self-parody, it's not really possible to mine it for more comedy with whatever friends (read: victims) you can con into watching this thing with you.
COOL FACTOR: * out of ****.

OVERALL:  Ouch.  At only 84 minutes long, this movie was a damn chore to sit through.  Tepid characters, bad scripting, and bad comedy would have been bad enough, but it's made all the worse by just how different the tone of this movie is from its far superior original.  As such, C.H.U.D. II didn't make much of a wave with the horror-going audience, hitting video store shelves (no theatrical release this time) in 1989 and vanishing from the public consciousness in short order.  Having said that, it was still better than, say, Leprechaun. 

OVERALL RATING: * out of ****.  It's times like this that I'm REALLY happy I don't do the mega-sized reviews anymore, because doing a total blow-by-blow of this film would have been torture.

Daybreakers (2009)

2009
Directed by Michael and Peter Spierig
Starring Ethan Hawke, Willem Dafoe, Isabel Lucas, Claudia Karvan and Sam Muthafuckin' Neill

God, it's almost been four years since this movie came out already?

I remember seeing the advance ads for Daybreakers and being very jacked about its prospects.  After all, it was released during the absolute height of Twilight-mania, when it seemed like every goddamn vampire in the entertainment world looked like they belonged on the cover of GQ and not, you know, in dark and dank places doing things like scaring you and sucking your blood.  A movie featuring vampires so starved for blood that they are attempting to craft an honest-to-goodness BLOOD SUBSTITUTE seemed like a very welcome proposition.  Throw in good production values and solid advance reviews and it sounded very intriguing indeed. 

For whatever reason, I didn't catch it in theaters, but I took the advice of a good friend and waited until procuring a Blu-Ray copy to check it out.  Needless to say, it was worth the wait, as this is one movie that looks freakin' glorious in 1080p resolution.  As I said a couple weeks back, directors of the world, take note.  THIS is how you take a film of somewhat limited budget and make it look epic and captivating.

PLOT:  A vampire plague hits humanity at some point in the future, and the creatures now rule the world.  This obviously presents many problems, the largest of which being a dwindling blood supply, as the vampires utilize their Army to capture the few scattere remaining humans in order to harvest them for blood.  The movie does a pretty damn admirable job painting this fictional world as well as the rules that it entails, as these vampires typically adhere to all of the usual literary rules - they burn like roman candles in the sun, they die by staking and beheading, they are scientifically undead, etc.  It's also got a pretty damn clever hook as far as its conflict, as a prominent hematologist finds himself kinda-sorta kidnapped by a band of surviving humans in order to find a cure for vampirism.  Having said all that...there is a fair stretch of Daybreakers that drags in the middle, as this is where a good portion of the "outside the mainstream vampire world" story takes place.  There's a fair bit of scientific lingo being thrown around here as blood testing becomes a focal point of the story.  However, sandwiched in between the fascinating first and action-packed third acts, it's forgivable.
PLOT RATING: *** 1/2 out of ****.

CHARACTERS AND ACTORS:  Ethan Hawke plays Ed Dalton, the hematologist for Bromley Marks pharmaceuticals and the man most directly responsible (not unlike Miles Bennett Dyson) for attempting to manufacture a "blood substitute" for the masses (and that early testing scene, by the way, is a doozy of unexpected gore).  He's also sympathetic to humans, and as your strong center of the film, Ed is someone who is easy to attach to.  But the real glory of this flick lies in the supporting characters, with Willem "Captain Manic" Dafoe playing the leader of the human resistance, Claudia Karvan as his loyal assistant...and then there's this guy.

Now, there are actors in the horror genre that I'm a fan of, but as far as I'm concerned, Sam Neill is the equivalent of the gold seal of approval.  He's done plenty of flicks of other types, but the sheer ability to vanish within dark characters is second to none, as evidenced by The Final Conflict, In the Mouth of Madness and Event Horizon.  In this film, he plays Bromley Marks himself, the business tycoon who virtually rules over this fictional world with an iron fist and serves as your star villain.  It's a role that suits Neill like a glove, and while he is only onscreen for perhaps fifteen minutes of Daybreakers, he owns it.
CHARACTERS AND ACTORS RATING: **** out of ****.

COOL FACTOR:  As previously mentioned (I won't say it this time), the Spierig Brothers are masters at getting the most out of their budget.  The dank world, while not quite a dystopia for most of the run time, has its own distinct look very different from the countless "steam punk" landscapes that seem to be all the rage with the kids these days.  There are multiple over-the-top gore set pieces in this film, the best of which occurring at the beginning and end of the film (and I think you'll know what I'm talking about when the scenes hit).  In addition to that, Dafoe's character is your classic "vampire hunting" action hero, a former vamp himself who has taken the name "Elvis" as his moniker.  While not quite as bitchin' as the King himself, I've got to say, he looks damn cool holding a crossbow.
COOL FACTOR: **** out of ****.

OVERALL: In the 3.75 years since Daybreakers was released, the "monster of the moment" has changed considerably in Hollywood.  Vampires are out, zombies are in.  This movie is nothing short of a wonderful return to form for the former, bringing them out of the "cool teen" dark ages and bringing the welcome tropes back with a vengeance along with a cool story involving plenty of tension and non-Michael Bay-ADD action.  I can only hope that, sooner or later, we get something different from the zombie genre, which has effectively been stuck in "rinse, lather, repeat" mode for what seems like eons now.  Here's the template to follow.  This is a flick that fires on all cylinders, and it comes with my highest recommendation.
OVERALL RATING: Bah Gawd, King, **** out of ****.  I'm trying to be a tougher judge now, and the four-star rating does not come lightly.

C.H.U.D. (1984)

You know, when I popped a movie whose title is an acronym for "Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dwellers" into the ol' DVD player, the last thing I expected was a fairly well-shot, decently written, and well-acted flick that - gasp - might actually qualify as a legitimately good flick.  Lo and behold, that's just what I got, and after absorbing the 96-minute director's cut I can report that C.H.U.D. is one movie that deserves its "cult classic" status. 

Since this was my first time watching the film, there's also some additional good news: no long-winded boring story involving my long childhood history with the movie in question.  With that out of the way...

PLOT: Shot entirely within New York City, the movie's plot is basically a modernization of the fascinating "terror in the sewers" urban legends.  A substantial number of the homeless population living in the subterranean bowels of the city have disappeared, and a massive government cover-up as to the "why" of the situation is going on.  A large portion of the movie involves various characters attempting to get to the bottom of this conspiracy, which involves the transportation of nuclear materials and a few weasely figures in power who summarily make every wrong decision along the way, as is customary with movies of this nature.  Oh yeah, and large monsters with big eyes and really sharp claws who sporadically attack people.  It might not be The Shining in terms of material, but it's all executed well, with plenty of slow burn and attention to the characters.
PLOT RATING: *** out of ****.

CHARACTERS AND ACTORS: This is where the movie really roped me in.  The movie introduces us to several people connected to the conspiracy and the monsters.  There's George Cooper (John Heard), a sarcastic fashion photographer who lives with his pregnant girlfriend (Kim Greist).  There's Captain Bosch (Chris Curry), the officer in charge of the precinct where the majority of the disappearances have taken place - and one of those disappearances is his wife.  And then there's A.J. Shepherd (Daniel Stern), the guy who runs the local soup kitchen, has seen firsthand the dropoff in the number of his customers, and knows something big is amiss.  All of these protagonists are fleshed out very well, extremely likable, and portrayed with tons of energy by legit talented actors.  The human villains (largely bureaucratic government types) are a little one-note and predictable, however.
CHARACTERS AND ACTORS RATING: *** 1/2 out of ****.

COOL FACTOR: So now we get into the "horror" aspect of the movie.  The general premise when it comes to the C.H.U.D.'s is that they have run out of available food (read: the subterranean homeless population) and now have to come to the surface for their meals.  The attack scenes are sparse in the movie, and truthfully are not particularly scary.  When we do get to see the creatures, the makeup effects seem to be fairly well done.
COOL FACTOR: ** out of ****.

OVERALL: Go figure.  I watch a movie with the express purpose of shuffling a negative review amongst my usual moronic bits of positivity, and the movie surprises me by actually being good.  From what I could gather on Wikipedia, Daniel Stern and Chris Curry rewrote more than half of the original screenplay, and their passion for the project comes through in their performances, as their characters really are the strong center that holds the film's admittedly preposterous plot together.  If you're looking for a horror movie with a VERY heavy emphasis on story over scares, you could definitely do worse than C.H.U.D.
OVERALL RATING: *** out of ****.  Worth a buy at a decent used price.