Count Gore De Vol Horror Crypt

This is where I tell you what I think of current Horror, Science Fiction and Fantasy Films!
Click on the first picture for each movie for a link to the official site!

This is my rating system designed for blood suckers!
Type A = Excellent Type AB = Very Good Type B = Good Type O = Rather Ordinary

I've decided to stop reviewing movies because I don't think I'm very good at it and there are just so many other reviews that I wanted to help eliminate the clutter. I suggest that the best place to find out about a movie is www.Rottentomates.com There you can get a rating based on hundreds of reviews nationally. that seems to be a much better way to go then relying on just one person's opinion! ---- Gore

Yes, I finally saw a 2008 horror release that boosted my faith during such a lousy year. And then I couldn't leave well enough alone. And then a local phenomenon perked things up again... oh, let's just get to it, shall we?

THE RUINS is the first film of 2008 to truly deliver the goods with intelligent, well-crafted, grisly, monstrous HORROR. Oh, and did I mention that it stands out as something ORIGINAL? And by "original," I mean "not a remake, not an obvious rip off," not "you have NEVER seen anything REMOTELY like this," okay? If you want to boil things down to the premises themselves, we'll be here all week. And the premise is simple--young travelers, practically on a dare, decide to check out the ruins of a Mayan temple--one that doesn't appear in the guidebooks. They've got to go to great lengths to reach their destination--and by the time they realize that something horrible is waiting for them, it's too late to leave.

The trailers, for once, were perfect--they got the idea across WITHOUT spelling out the exact nature of the menace--and it's a
pure "monster movie" type of menace we see far too little of these days. Remember what I said about CLOVERFIELD? I liked the movie, but people were eventually put off that it was NOT about the revelation of the monster, after all they'd been put through with the truly aggravating teaser trailers. THE RUINS, on the other hand, shows you just enough in the ads and then provides PLENTY of payoff--even though, again, the menace may not be exactly what you're expecting it to be. Unless you've read the book.

Ah, yes. The book. Scott B. Smith adapted his own novel (which, I admit, I have not read)--and he accounts for his story and characters most admirably. Besides the initial "don't wander off the beaten path" instinct, he provides clear--in fact, inescapable--motivation and logic for everything that happens once the film reaches the point of no return. Yes, they HAVE to try to climb down into the dark pit because the cell phone that might save them can be heard ringing from below. Yes, the women HAVE to go down the shaft on the rescue operation instead of the guys because the guys are the only ones strong enough to turn the crank and bring them back UP. And yes, one of them is a medical student well aware of the imperatives... etc, etc. In other words, nobody gets to yell "NO, IDIOT! DON'T DO THAT!"

First-time feature director Carter Smith (no relation to the author) does an excellent job straight out of the box (excellent suspense
scenes and genuine tension), the cast is quite likable and sympathetic, the scenery (not actually Mexico, you might have heard) and photography (CGI-enhanced or not) get the point across...

...and oh, yes, the horror and gore are ladled on thick with equal emphasis on "gross out" material and pure psychological discomfort. The "get the cell phone" scene, in particular, is a masterpiece with a wicked punch line--when you realize what's really going on here, you'll be quite frustrated, but you'll hand it to the filmmakers all the same...

Yes, we've seen films "like" THE RUINS before, but this is its own animal, and it plays as a completely new thriller. Something almost unique in 2008.

My good friend Karlos Borloff has been telling me that it's time for the return of the great monster movie! After all the secrecy and Internet hype, I can honestly say that "Cloverfield" isn't it! It's not that the monster isn't cool or dangerous. On the contrary, I loved the monster and it's off spring. I loved the way the military tried to deal with it. I loved seeing the head of the Statue of Liberty roll down the street. I did NOT love the way they decided to shot the movie and tell the story!

Without wanting to ruin what little suspense there is for those intent on seeing the film, let me tell you that this film is a cross between "Blair Witch Project" and the last American version of "Godzilla"....CGI monster meets two hours of hand held home movies! I found myself closing my eyes just to center myself and avoid a splitting headache. While I didn't get motion sickness as some have reported, the idea of watching bad home movies for that long was intolerable.

The story is simple. We are watching (just like Blair Witch) a tape recovered from the after math of a monster attacking New York. The tape belongs to Rob (Michael Stahl-David) who documents his encounter with his childhood friend Beth (Odette Yustman) as they go to Coney Island the day after they first have sex. A couple of months later, the same camcorder and tape is then used by Hud (T.J. Miller) to tape goodbyes to Rob at a surprise party thrown by Lily (Jessica Lucas) in honor of Rob's new job in Japan. After way too much party footage, the monster attacks, Rob decides to rescue Beth and Hud, along with Lily and Marlena (Lizzy Caplan), tag along to shoot the whole thing. Rob continually makes all the stupid choices that you know will lead to his end and his friends continue to go along.

I understand how clever this must have looked on paper: the ultimate point of view movie with the ironic cutting back to the fun filled glorious day at Coney Island. But for me, it was an exercise that taxed my eyes and brain to the limit. I'm sure there were ways to mix this POV footage with, say, news footage and maybe even Army footage, but this was the road not taken. The only time the camera was still was when it was on the ground....usually on it's side!

What scares me the most is that this may be establishing a whole new style of film shooting. I can already see hundreds, if not thousands of copies, rip offs and parodies shot by anyone with a camcorder...just like we had after Blair Witch. You Tube here we come. I'll pass on all of that and go watch "The Host 2" for my next dose of monster movie.

Who else would direct a movie that was musical about a serial murder? Tim Burton directed the 2007 adaptation of the award-winning Broadway musical by Stephen Sondheim about the Demon Barber of Fleet Street.

Sweeney Todd gives his customers the closest shave they've ever had-- slitting their throats, with a pathological hatred of Victorian English society.

Todd (formerly Benjamin Barker) was unjustly sentenced to a life of hard labor in a prison colony by the Judge Turpin, who trumped up the charges because he lusted for the barber's beautiful wife, Lucy Barker. This tale set in corrupt Victorian London begins with Todd's return 15 years later. Todd's opening song is about the filth of London.

Upon his return to his old home, he is told by a sympathetic Mrs. Lovett (his former landlady) that his daughter, Johanna, has become the ward of the judge who sentenced him to Australia, and that his wife, in despair, took arsenic poison. Todd desires revenge upon those who have destroyed his life and family and, in fact, is angry with all of English society. Mrs. Lovett offers to help.

Johnny Depp does an amazing job as the brooding Sweeney Todd. At the thought of revenge, a spark of glee enters his eyes.

Helena Bonham Carter plays Todd's partner-in-crime, Mrs. Lovett--and she also does a wonderful job. Mrs. Lovett, owner of Mrs. Lovett's Meat Pies shop, suggests that she dispose of the bodies, by baking the corpses of victims into pies--what with the price of good meat now days.

My husband and I saw this movie for his birthday on December 24, and we loved it!

Quite likely, if you enjoy musicals, and if you enjoy horror and melodrama, you will enjoy this movie.(My niece, big fan of musicals, loves the film sound track but won't see any movie with blood squirting from throats.) If you've seen the play, I've heard much of Todd's spoken dialogue was cut from the movie. The lyrics sung by Depp serve the purpose. Actually, I think that worked extremely well in the movie. I've also heard that the sub-plot of the love relationship between Johanna and the young sailor had likewise been paired down to a point that it simply advances the main plot. However I haven't seen the play and I really can't compare them.

The movie's tag line is "Never Forget. Never Forgive."

When reading up on Sweeney Todd, the Demon Barber of Fleet Street, I was rather surprised to find that his origin was fictional. I thought I read Todd was a real Victorian serial killer in my youth.

Sweeney Todd was a fictional villain in Victorian England, who had appeared in various English language works starting in the mid-19th century. He is an early example of a serial killer

Todd was apparently a creation of the "penny dreadfuls." The first appearance of this character was probably in a British penny dreadful called The People's Periodical, in issue 7, dated November 21, 1846.

The story in which Todd first appeared was titled "The String of Pearls: A Romance," and was written by Thomas Prest.

In Victorian literature, Sweeny Todd was a barber and his weapon of choice was a straight razor, with which he sliced his victim's throats. In some tales, he drank his victim's blood--being sort of a bloodthirsty chap and all. Some versions likewise feature Mrs. Lovett, who is alternatively his lover, friend, and/or partner-in-crime. Mrs. Lovett's first name changed in different stories and she has been called Sarah, Shirley, Marjorie, Nellie, or Claudette. .

In the Victorian stories in which Mrs. Lovett appears, she baked meat from the corpses of his victims into savory meat pies.

Todd also had a young, unwitting servant lad. He is often called Tobias, and was instrumental in unmasking the fiendish crimes of Todd.

It is possible that I did read that Sweeney Todd was originally a historical criminal in Victorian England.

The horror and crime story writer Peter Haining argued that Sweeney Todd was indeed a historical figure who committed his crimes around 1800.

Peter Haining, The Mystery and Horrible Murders of Sweeney Todd, The Demon Barber of Fleet Street. (1979). ISBN 0-584-10425-1. (Yes, 1979 was about the time I read up on some historical serial killers and this title sounds familiar.)

Alas, I since learned other researchers have not succeeded in verifying sources which support Haining's claims.

Quite likely Haining was where I got the idea that Sweeney Todd was a historical figure.

I'm fairly sure I did later read Haining's Doctor Who: The Key to Time A year by year record (1984) (ISBN 0-491-03283-8) Ah so many books, so little time...and after awhile they blend together in my memory.

Cast of the 2007 movie
Johnny Depp--Sweeney Todd
Helena Bonham Carter--Mrs. Lovett
Edward Sanders--young Tobias Ragg
Laura Michelle Kelly--Lucy Barker
Alan Rickman--Judge Turpin
Jayne Wisener--Johanna Barker
Jamie Campbell--Bower Anthony Hope
Sacha Baron Cohen--Signor Adolfo Pirelli
Timothy Spall--Beadle Bamford

screenplay by John Logan

To borrow from the Count's rating system "type A+" for Sweeney Todd, the Demon Barber of Fleet Street.

L.W. Woods