Perfection Comes With A Price

What can I say about 'Black Swan' that for the most part has not already been said by people who have enjoyed Darren Aranofsky's (quite frankly more compelling) rendition of popular ballet 'Swan Lake'? Nothing. Seriously, I got nothing to add. Now, while I didn't think this was a brilliant film across the board, that it not to say that it hasn't earned the positive praise it has garnered, especially the tour-de-performance of Natalie Portman as troubled ballerina Nina Sayers who just wants to be the best she can be. This is one of those movies that you have seen time and again, but as I always say, it's all in the execution and this one takes off splendidly. Now what has THIS got to do with possession? Read on.

This movie has all the right ingredients to be an effective psychosexual thriller that deals with the losing and finding of identity, repression, fighting personal inhabitions and giving it to the great void. If we look at this movie from the angle of demonic possession, it may make you scratch your head, but look at it from this perspective- you have a fragile human soul in the form of Nina being victimized by her own insecurity, an insecurity that takes many forms, one of them being free-spirit Lily (Mila Kunis). Lily isn't the BEST ballet dancer like Nina, but she does her dancing with more emotion than Nina ever has, and this affects Nina profoundly. On top of that, Nina is haunted by her demanding stage mother who wants to live vicariously through her daughter, to feel the glory she misses now that she is 'old hat'. Nina is babied, coddled and shaped by her mum, even her room looks like that of a girl child's. Then there is the matter of her ballet instructor, Tomas (Vincent Cassell), a man who uses some pretty unorthodox methods to coax the best out of his dancers, one of them being sexuality, something Nina finds almost foreign.

                                                  I will keep my own thoughts here quiet :D

All of these things comes to a head when Tomas surprisingly gives her the role of the White and Black Swan in his upcoming re-imagining of 'Swan Lake'. Nina is brillaint as the White Swan, but she lacks the passion and lust for life the Black Swan possesses, a fact that frustrates her when she sees Lily who is the very embodiment of that. So encompassing is this desire of Nina's that she subjects herself to various methods of becoming like Lily, one of them being striking up an actual friendship with her (and you know where THAT leads.). In another case, after a... shall we say, STIMULATING rehearsal with Nina, Tomas encourages Nina to pleasure herself so she is not so frigid in her performance. She does this, but then is inhibited by an outside presence which only inflames her frustrations. All of these things are demons that are possessing Nina, following her, getting into her mindset, influencing her actions, pushing her towards the very edge with devastating results.

                                                  Creatively smashed mirrors being a bonus

Forgive me for giving in to the elephant in the room, but seriously, Natalie Portman for the most part IS the movie. Certainly not to take anything away from Kunis and Cassell, both of whom are in fine form, but this movie is all about Nina and her affliction, and Portman commits herself to her character. You have to remember that not only is Portman dancing, she is also acting through her dancing, and trying to emote what Nina is feeling must have been no small feat for Portman when she was preparing for this role. I'd say that the awards she has been given were DAMN well earned.

                                                     Well done. Now eat this burger, woman!

Hopefully now somehow I have convinced you that this is more than just what it has been sold to be, and more than just an excuse to show (admittedly steamy) sapphic sex. This film is for all intents a movie about possession, but this time, it's not Satan, Legion or Glenn Beck. It is about the demons of the mind and how they are perhaps the most potent demons of them all. In the case of 'Black Swan' while succumbing to your demons may lead you to glory, there is still a price to pay- would you be prepared to pay it?

The Last? Pffft.

I believe there is some sort of unspoken convention when it comes to making contemporary horror films that I'm sure a lot of you have seen as well- the revered or reviled 'shaky cam'. Relied on to offer up a more 'realistic' atmosphere, it can go either way from the effective ('Blair Witch Project', [REC], 'Paranormal Activity') to the not so effective and quite frankly, annoying (any of the later Romero 'Dead' entries... sorry George). Another device that is commonly used to promote a film is the association it has with a prominent figure in genre film making, in this case, unknown director Daniel Stamm's 'The Last Exorcism' has Eli Roth to thank for the fact it had been released on the big screen rather than simply being dashed straight to DVD. Usually when you hear about something like this, you may assume that the film really ain't all that and it was used as a simple ploy to make a little more money on the side. While 'The Last Exorcism' won't cater to every genre fiend's taste, I must give kudos to Roth for making sure this film got a good look.

                                        Okay, who is it this time? Pazuzu? Beezelbub? Ann Coulter?

Believe you me, this is a film you have seen many times, just with different actors and directors, and perhaps different demons. Hell, many of the possession/exorcism sequences will harken to other films, some superior, others... well... let's not go there. Given the mockumentary approach, there is a sense of realism that must be given credit, as well as the reletively unknown cast, the possessed lead actress who plays Nell being one of them (we are treated to some outstanding physical acting on her part. If there was any CGI enhancement, none of it really stood out, at least to me). By the way, I know I'm not the only one who has noticed this, but have you ever noticed that demons almost always seem to be after women? Almost all of the stories and films I have encountered usually involve the demonic possession of a female character rather than a male. Why is this? Let me be an intellectual for a moment, I promise to be brief.

I think the reasoning behind females being more suseptible to demonic menace reflects how the patriarchial society sees women- oh don't say I'm being too paranoid, look around you. Despite the fantastic advances women have made in today's society, there are still club-weidling bigwigs disguised as modern men who believe that women are not human, but things, UNKNOWN things. What happens when we encounter something we do not fully understand- we fear it and we react to this fear by spreading rumours, nurturing hatred and ignorance. Additionally, when it comes to works of fiction like the Bible (oh yeah, I'm going there, baby), when we look at the chapter of Genesis, it is Eve who is supposedly responsible for the suffering that humanity endures after she and Adam are cast out of Eden, a place of unimaginable paradise, never mind the fact that it was the Devil, whose power is far beyond human comprehension, much less the comprehension of the first human female who, like Adam, doesn't know what is right and wrong and was only given a crytpic warning about the apple tree. Why couldn't God say "Look, honey, don't take anything from that tree because you will be tempted by my greatest enemy  because if you do, you and your boyfriend will be removed from this lovely place and be forced to endure pain after pain after pain." Another example- the story of Pandora. She was warned not to open the box containing wonders beyond comprehension, without being told that if she did it, she would unleash unending calamity on humanity. Another? Cassandra- she had the gift of foresight, but society (led by men, surprise surprise) didn't believe her warnings until it was too late, THEN, she was deemed to be evil. Going back to my point, women seem to be the blame for everything, and one of the ways of disguising this sadly inbuilt uncertainty is to tell tales of which the female is the cause of calamity. 

Sorry, I really didn't mean to get on a high horse there, but honestly, think about all of those things, heck, conduct some of your own research then think about how demonic hauntings seem to center around females rather than males.

BACK TO THE MOVIE!!!!!

For the better part of the movie, Nell's possession is an object of doubt- she is afflicted with a dysfuntional family situation plus mental illness- when you think about that, all of her contortions, speaking in tongues and profane behaviour could very well be the trait of a mentally unstable person... but then there are other things that psychology and physiology cannot explain. Is she or isn't she? This is for the audience and the characters to speculate throughout the film, but let me assure you, there is a lot of freaky goings on to keep you entertained and to keep the characters uncertain.

                                                       Demonic possession or back pain?


Another notch on this one's belt is that even though there is bloodshed and general nastiness, this film is more about questioning what you didn't see rather than examining what you did (given Eli Roth, who had thus far made a career out of bathing us in gore and blood has had a hand in making this see the light of day still surprises me :D) all of which makes up for the fact this film is for the most part predictable and nothing new. Rather than focusing on what we do know, let us look at what we don't- the best advise I can give is to just watch it and enjoy it, but I certainly wouldn't hold it against you if you read between the lines.

1, 2, Freddy's re-made for you...

You know what? I liked it. More than that, dare I say, I enjoyed it a little more than it's original ancestor.

                                                         "What did you just say, bitch?"

            I SAID, I ENJOYED THIS MOVIE!!!

Before I get pelted with criticism and "HOW DAR U!1!" messages, please hear me out.

I saw the original Elm Street when I was 24 years old, and by then, I had just about seen it all in terms of horror/gore/suspense. Hostel made me flinch in some moments, I got a buzz (tee hee) from the first Sawand my perceptions about what was real and what was not changed when I watched the magnificent Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me. So when I slapped Craven's seminal classic into the DVD player, I wasn't scared or shocked. Now please don't get me wrong, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie and I thought that Robert Englund is revered by horror lovers quite rightly. The movie on it's own is worth a watch by any and all horror fans. Even if they don't like it, at least they were able to watch it and make a decision for themselves. The dream sequences were trippy and the blood-letting was abundant, but at no moment did my jaded mind feel frightened of Kruger or his pointy friends.

On the other hand, we live in a world where movie remakes are panned before they are even released. I remember when a then-unknown Zack Snyder announced he would be doing a 're-imagining' of Dawn of the Dead, I kinda rolled my eyes until I decided to see it out of curiousity when it was released. And it blew me away. Big time. Same thing with The Texas Chainsaw Massacre with Jessica 'Tighty Heiny' Biel. I really enjoyed that one because of how it didn't pull any punches. Oddly enough, I watched Tobe Hoopers' milestone afterward and save for those iconic moments featuring Leatherface and his beloved chainsaw, I was very underwhelmed. These days, I tend to give remakes a benefit of the doubt- I will watch it and decide for myself. Goodness me, I AM getting more mature as a film-goer, whoda thunk?!

Which brings me to approaching 2010's re-imagining, re-jigging, re-whatever you wanna call it of A Nightmare on Elm Street which for the first time is Robert Englund-less. Recently re-emerging actor Jackie Earle Haley received the honor of the role and quite frankly? I thought he worked a lot more as Freddy.

                                                              "Bitch, I'll gut you!"


Wait, wait, hold your horses, I'm not done yet.


When I say I preferred Haley's Freddy more to Englund's I'm talking about the original, menacing, down-to-business Freddy. See, even in his first incarnation, Englund's Freddy didn't quite have what it took to be truly unsettling. Later as the series progressed, he became more endearing- we didn't WANT him to die, we wanted him to continue stalking those silly sex-crazed, dope-headed teens. He's like a rebellious friend who will noisily pull up your driveway at midnight, beep the horn and be singing at the top of his lungs dirty limerics about nuns.

                                                Plus, he's so darn cute in doll form


While Englund will always be Pop Culture King Freddy, he was never the Freddy the original should have been- a cold, calculating, violator of children. While the remake doesn't get into the gritty details of Freddy's dealings with minors (thankfully so at that), you still get the heavy notion that he thinks young people are the perfect prey- they think they are young and indefatigable, but Freddy knows a lot better and gets them where they are at their most vulnerable- in their dreams. He plays on their fears and their minds by making them suffer insomnia for so long until they have no choice but to collapse from exhustion. Then in this weakened state, he preys maliciously on them, assaulting their bodies and psyches. That is pure sadism, folks. When Haley's Krueger tortures his victims, he isn't a loquatious man about town- he devours them slowly like a spider, making sure they feel everything.


                                     
                                                    Don't fall asleep in class, kiddies


Addtionally, while Haley is slighter in stature compared to Englund, his robust form works to his advantage- Kruger is a burnt, deformed demonic looking boogeyman. A face of nightmares personified.
Another factor that works in this Freddy's case is the make up which actually looks closer to a burn victim than Englund, which, at least in my eyes, works a lot better for selling the character's appearance and his motivations of revenge. You can almost taste the burnt flesh, bad breath and decomposition by looking at him.

                                                                      Hello, ladies


Now as for the movie itself... well, let's put it this way in terms of remakes: on one end you have Dawn of the Dead, TCM, and yes, even Piranah 3D, on the other side you get Prom Night, Sorority Row, Black Christmas and Gus Van Sant's senseless shot by shot of Psycho. In the middle you have offerings like NOES. While, save for some choice dream/micro-nap sequences and inventive blood-letting it offers nothing new, but at the same time, it's hardly a crime against cinema that is to be vilified to the end of time. In fact, aside from a few weak performances (one of them being from Rooney Mara's dreary Nancy), the acting ain't too shabby either. It was also refreshing to see that this movie wasn't subjected to the dreaded PG-13 curse and it was allowed to at least dip it's toe in a few nasty situations involving child molestation and murder.


 All in all, while it will not be considered a classic as it's original predecessor, NOES ala 2010 isn't a bad way to spend an hour and 30 minutes in front of a television on Friday night.

                                          "You were lucky this time, bitch. Sweet dreams."

Hunters Become The Hunted

Life wasn't looking too promising for the Predator franchise after the first movie. While the second found a respectable cult status, their Xenomorph counterparts from the Alien series arguably got a little more attention. And let's not even fucking START with the Alien Vs. Predator movies.


Okay, the first one was tolerable, the second was absolute CACK. Moving on.


When I heard the announcement of Predator receiving an upgrade, I was hopeful and apprehensive. I'm not one of those folks who are are in the TEAM XENOMORPH or TEAM PREDATOR camp. I love both for a variety of reasons. At the same time, there was word in the pipeline going around that it was going to be a virtual remake of the the first which made me incredibly nervous. Yeah, the first is a B-Movie, but what SF/horror film isn't deep down? Even the Gucci of SF/horror Alien was made with B-Movie at heart despite Ridley Scott's talent. What also made me cautious was that some guy named Nimrod Atal would be directing. Yeah. That's the guys' real name.
As time went on though, and as I heard more about the story and talent (Robert Rodriguez producing? The amigo can churn out 5 movies or so in a YEAR!), Adrien Brody (the guy from The Pianist, oh yeah, and new Mexploitation hero Danny Trejo). All of these things combined with the story of a bunch of strangers of questionable background being dropped on a Predator game reserve and engaging in a battle of wits and survival with the titular hunters, I started to warm further and further to the idea. Regretfully I wasn't able to catch it at cinemas, much to my displeasure (work and university commitments), so I wasn't able to enjoy my first Predator film on the big screen. When it was released on DVD though, I just HAD to get it and here are my thoughts.
This film was a blast. Never a dull moment from beginning to end with a lot of nifty ideas and cheeky winks to the audience. Some have viewed this movie was one big rehash of the first, but I disagree. Yes, it had the humans who knew how to kill and the steamy jungle setting was treading familiar territory, but what separated this from the first movie was that these folks had ambiguous backgrounds, on top of that, they did not know each other which made dynamics in the group more interesting. On top of that, nobody is built like a brick house- these people served in armies, death squads, drug cartels, gangs- these folks were built for their work.

                                  "Say 'The Pianst'sucked once again, motherfucker! I dare you!"


Another factor that removes itself from the original is that it plays on who really is the predator on this planet? Given all of these characters have conflicting beliefs and methods, are the Predators the ones to run from?
Philosophical stuff aside, this movie was made with the term FUN in mind. Pure, crazy, popcorn fun and it delivered admirably. Perhaps the possibility why I enjoyed this movie was that I was in a state of mind when I was just happy to go along for the ride- if you go to a movie such as this to watch a chronicle of the human spirit, you will be fiercely disappointed. Same thing if you are looking for a film that is wholly original and clever- this one ain't, well, not in the way you want anyway. Special props must also be given to Alice Braga who plays a strong, sensible female character who isn't objectified the way so many other women in films of this caliber are. My inner feminist thanks you most sincerely, maám.

There goes the neighbourhood

The movie naturally isn't without it's faults though. One of the most glaring examples are the new Predators themselves. While they were still a joy to watch, they did not possess the grace, speed and brutality of the original Predator. I can't exactly express why, but I felt the Pred in the original was much more of an efficient hunter. The ones in this movie are more prone to simple barbarism with small moments of cunning, but overall, they were mostly bruisers. They were supposedly a new species, but they lacked the intensity and soul of their predecessor.

You might be a redneck

Secondly, it doesn't offer us anything particularly new. Personally I would love to see a Predator film set in the Classical Era, or during one of the World Wars. Here, once again, we are plonked in the middle of a steamy, labyrinthine jungle. Come on, Predators are able to adapt to anywhere- give us a new battleground!
Another factor was that the prisoner character played by Walter Goggins was irritating up the whazoo. Then there was the disturbing idea that this guy was meant to be somebody you cheered for, cracking wise and having 'funny' lines even though he was a serial rapist and murderer back on Earth. If anything, this guy should have been the first to go.
In addition to this, while the action sequences were still a blast to watch, the stalking sequences were underwhelming. The Predators like to play with their opponents by messing with their heads, using psychological warfare to draw out their prey but they almost always just popped up out of nowhere and BANG! You're dead!


Sigh.


There are other factors that worked against the movir, but I won't put them here because overall, this was an enjoyable (if derivative) movie. While it may not be memorable in 20+ years time like Predator, it was still a welcome return a franchise that just doesn't get enough love. Hopefully if and when a sequel comes about based on the film's success, it won't be afraid to move away from the established fomula and have the Predators do battle somewhere else. What say you?