Drew On Movies #28: The Poughkeepsie Tapes (2007)

The Poughkeepsie Tapes (2007)

A few years ago, I read an article on a movie site that talked about movies that were not slated for release in the future regardless of extremely positive reviews. Since then, all three films have found their way onto the Internet, and one has actually received a home video release. The three films were the horror anthology Trick R Treat, the slasher All The Boys Love Mandy Lane, and the mockumentary The Poughkeepsie Tapes. The former is the one that was eventually released, and I can honestly say that it more then lived up to the hype and was well deserving of all the positive reviews it received. Mandy Lane was actually released theatrically in the United Kingdom, and more then made up it's budget.

However this review is not about either of those films, but instead the last one listed and the one that seems increasingly difficult to find even online. I was able to procure a copy from a streaming site awhile back but had not watched it until tonight. Now I have made it clear in the past that found footage films are not my cup of tea, and while this film is similar in style, it is much more a documentary exploring events then a found footage film with a loose plot. This of course makes my style of reviewing somewhat difficult to pull off, but I'll try my best. These are The Poughkeepsie Tapes.

Summary

The film begins with a reporter outside a house in the city of Poughkeepsie, north of New York, where hundreds of videotapes have been found, each part of the visual record of horrifying murders. Along with them are dozens of bodies buried around the abandoned house, and from here, the 'story' begins. Interviews are shown with various members of law enforcement, from police to Federal agents to profilers to morticians, each exploring the contents of the tapes and the man who made then. We also see some of the scenes of the killer's activities, from his first abduction of a young girl and her murder, to much more thorough and premeditated kills. We learn the killer is quite intelligent, as he seems to de-evolve in some kills, going from more advanced weapons to simpler ones as to keep the police unaware that the various murders are the acts of one man. His acts come to a head when he stalks and abducts teenager Cheryl Dempsey from her home after brutally mutilating and killing her boyfriend. On film we see sexual, physically and psychological abuse of Cheryl, reducing her to little more then his 'slave'. In a further effort to throw off the police, he changes his modus operandi and focuses exclusively on prostitutes, which, one psychologist explains, makes the population at large let their guard down- if the victims are a certain group, those outside the group feel safe. This sets in motion an even greater part of his plan, one that leaves law enforcement stunned and the public even more fearful then they were, and it is all on tape for the world to see.
 
Thoughts

It is extremely rare for a movie to present something that makes me want to turn it off. I have a very high tolerance for sick and twisted imagery on film and over years of movies like the Saw series and shows like Dexter and Criminal Minds, I like to believe I have a very strong stomach where serial killers and their actions are concerned. If this film is any indication, I have a long ways to go. There were a number of scenes, many involving the killers interactions with Cheryl after her abduction, that I had to mute or fast forward through because I could not watch without feeling ill at ease. This is the kind of mockumentary where after the fact you really need to confirm that it was all fake, because some aspects seemed way too real to have been done by actors.

There is a form of realism here that many of this kind of film seem to lack- when the actors in the law enforcement roles talk, you believe they are real police and Federal agents; when you see the families of the victims in mourning, you believe they truly lost someone. Most importantly, when you see and hear the killer on the tapes, you not only believe he is truly a serial killer keeping a video log of his crimes, but you also try to tell yourself that no one could be this twisted, even though in reality there are plenty of examples of it. To hear of events is one thing, to see such realistic reenactments is a whole other one.

That said, I think this may be the films biggest problem and the reason it has yet to be released- it works too well. I have read in the past how when it was originally released, the film Cannibal Holocaust (which is on my watch list) was so realistic that it was thought a snuff film and the director was jailed until the cast appeared to tell the world it was just a movie. I think this can be seen in a similar vein- I know now that it is just a movie, but the realism may be too much for the general public, and thus it may be difficult to secure a release that would be cost effective- i.e how big is the market that would buy the movie.

Conclusion

Essentially, this movie works as a mockumentary in that you truly do believe it to be a real documentary, but perhaps that is the problem. A little less realism may have secured it a release, but we may never know. I can honestly say that while I was disturbed by the film I appreciated what it was able to accomplish- it disturbed me, and that is rare. I can't say if I would recommend this film to anyone except the hardcore horror fans or those who have an interest in serial killers. Anyone else would likely not enjoy this film in the least, and even those groups may require a harder stomach then I to get through certain scenes. It is a dark, realistic, and disturbing film reel, but if it peaks your interest and you can find a copy, check it out- but don't say I didn't warn you.

2.5 Crates of Murder Memory Movies out of 5

That's all out of me, until next time I'm the Drew, and I need a shower or a Disney movie to make me feel better..

Drew On Movies #21: Saw 3D (2010)

Saw 3D (2010)

"Do you want to play a game?"

Ah the Saw franchise, if ever there was an example of sequels for sequels sake, you are it. We have an interesting history you and I- while skimming a horror website many years back I read an article about the second installment of the franchise, and while it unknowingly spoiled the first film for me somewhat, it also intrigued me. Sometime later a friend of my brothers lent me the first two films and I watched them with twisted glee- what can I say, I enjoy a good, albeit sadistic morality tale, and creative death traps are always fun. Suffice to say, while the first was no doubt the best and could easily have remained a stand alone film, the sequel wasn't too shabby.

As we all know there is nothing Hollywood loves more then perceived 'easy' money. Sequels are the cornerstone of this idea, as if it worked once it can work again, and again, and again. Quality doesn't matter as long as money is still being made, and horror flicks tend to be able to survive longer in this system for whatever reason- its why we have six sequels to Nightmare on Elm Street when only two are any good; they all made money.

So it was thus inevitable that yet another Saw would come to pass, and when it hit theatres I went to see Saw 3, and had to admit, while it was not even close to the original, the film's ending had me itching for more. Waited for the DVD release for part four, five and six, and the truth remained- while the quality was not good, elements of the films continued to intrigue me, most importantly the ever growing world of the film. Each movie, while the main plot remained the same, added to the foundation of the first film and answered questions that on first glance we were not aware needed to be asked.

Thus we find ourselves with the final film in the franchise, one that seeks to tie up loose ends and bring the series to a conclusion. Most horror franchises don't get this luxury, either they keep going one way or another or when they do stop making them little if anything is resolved. As the creators were aware this was gonna be the end they had a rare opportunity to finish what they started. Did they succeed? Let's find out as we play one more game- this is Saw 3D

Plot

The film begins as they often do, with a flashback to another film in the series- in this case, we go all the way back to film one, and the fate of Dr. Lawrence Gordon, played by Cary Elwes, who cut off his own foot to escape Jigsaw's trap and who has not been seen since. Dr. Gordon is seen crawling through hallways and using a hot pipe to cauterize his leg. We then cut to what the franchise is known for- a death trap, this time one in public. Two men are chained to band saws with a woman above them, tied to a platform with another saw beneath her. As people watch them through shatterproof glass, Billy the Puppet rides in and explain the rules of the game- the woman has been playing both men and they need to decide who gets to live- both of them, or one of them and the girl. I won't spoil who bites the bullet here but all I can say is it is gory. From here we return to where the last film left off, with Detective Mark Hoffman, Jigsaw's apprentice, escaping the reverse bear trap head trap placed on his head by Jill Tuck, Jigsaw's widow. Hoffman, played by Costas Mandylor, escape the building without finding Jill and begins to set things in motion for the final game. Fearing for her life, Jill, played by Betsy Russell, goes to see Detective Matt Gibson, played by Chad Donella, offering information about Hoffman and Jigsaw's work in exchange for protection. While this is going on we are introduced to Bobby Dagan, played by Sean Patrick Flanery, a self-help guru who has gained fame and fortune by claiming to have survived a Jigsaw trap and how it changed his life. He is filmed meeting with other survivors for a DVD, only to be rebuked by Dr. Gordon, who subtly mocks him and his story. Leaving afterwards, Dagan is kidnapped and awakens in an abandoned insane asylum and informed that he has sixty minutes to save his wife from a trap of her own. He is also informed that it is his lies that brought all of this upon him- he has never been tested and instead was inspired by a real survivor to fake the story and make money. As usual, he must save others along the way by going through various tests and traps, or else leave them to brutal fates. Gibson and his fellow officers attempt to find Dagan and Hoffman, all the while being sent cryptic messages by the latter claiming the game will end when he has Jill. Who will live, who will die, and who is really pulling all the strings?

Thoughts

As stated, I've stuck with this series despite it's gradual dips in quality for one simple reason- every film added more to the entire story, and  wanted to know how it was all going to come together in the end. Suffice to say, I was not disappointed. While there are still some questions I've trying to work out, that might take a full Saw marathon just to see everything in one shot. Regardless, the ending to the film and the franchise is done quite will in my opinion, and provided a satisfying conclusion.

Before I continued let's talk about the film on it's own, or rather, the traps. Let's be honest, most people who are watching the Saw movies are doing so for the traps and the violence they bring, and this film keeps the train rolling with some truly twisted little numbers. The main ones that Dagan deals with involve the every classic "see no evil, speak no evil, hear no evil" motif, and how the characters involved in each did just that. The opening trap deserves some mention because not only was in the first time we've seen one done publicly, it was one of the few I can remember that was not just about survival- yes as always that is the main point but this one involved a situation in which the characters really had to be involved and enact a definite change. The final outcome of the trap was not only be their survival but their lives. Something was going to be different because of what they did. Regardless, all the traps have their own twisted logic and when they do their jobs there is blood and guts aplenty, and really, that's what most people came to see. Forget the moral lesson entailed in each one, people want violence and they get it.

For the actual fans, we get a continuation of the plot we've been following for the last few movies, with the surviving characters of Det. Hoffman and Jill each continuing their game with one another and the grander scheme of the deceased John Kramer- who appears in a number of flashbacks as well as new scenes and still played to perfection by the great Tobin Bell. If there is one thing I really dislike about the franchise is that as a character John dies too early- yes he still has his hand in things but I would've liked to see him just a bit more, if only because he is a great character who truly believes in what he is doing, unlike those who follow after him.

As with all the movies the bodycount is pretty high and most of the victims are only known to us through the recordings played prior to their deaths. We never really get to know them but at this stage in the game that should be expected- they are their to die, nothing more. The characters we are meant to follow have been there for some time so our focus is rightly on them- we know it is highly unlikely anyone introduced now is going to be of much importance outside of the main game.

While the overreaching story continued and concluded, which is a plus, it also reminds me of the series biggest flaws- while they can be watched on their own for the games, the main story is lost if the films are not all watched. Likewise, while you can watch them all to get the entire story, to do so you need to deal with these one film only games. Of course this isn't always true- the game in the original movie is important as it's what sets everything in motion, and the one from the third film begins to tie things up, those from the fifth, sixth and final films really are filler- the players in each one don't serve much of a purpose as they are only central to their own stories and not the main one.

Still, given that there actually is an overreaching story that goes across the films I can't really complain- few other horror franchises can claim this, as most have sequels that are only loosely tied together or not tied together at all. So really I can't really fault the franchise or the film for doing what they had to for everything to fall into place.

I have no real complaints about the film itself- it's a Saw movie, you know exactly what you are getting into and if you go in with that knowledge you can't really complain because you seen it all before.

Conclusion

If you are going into this movie expecting something new, you are an idiot. After seven movies the franchise has no reason to change it's formula and to expect such is foolish. However if you go in knowing the movies and thus knowing what to expect you should be fine. I doubt anyone is going to watch this movie without having seen the others, if for no other reason then it'd be a really weird thing to do. This movie exists both to be another trap filled Saw movie and to finish the franchise up in a manner that will satisfy those who have stuck by it this far. Repeat viewings of the films may be a wise choice after this one ends, and I will likely do so just so I can put all the pieces together, joke notwithstanding. Basically, as a fan of the series I can recommend it to other fans if for no other reason then to get closure and answers to the questions we've found over time. For non fans, let's be honest, if you haven't watched a Saw movie yet a review of the final one won't get you started. If you want to see how it all ends, watch it. If you didn't have an interest before, doubt you will now. After seven movies, it's time for everyone to say it. Game over.

3 Creepy Pig Masks out of 5

That's all of me, until next time, I'm the Drew, and I Be Awesome.

Drew On Movies #20: My Bloody Valentine (1981)

 My Bloody Valentine (1981)


Ah Valentines Day, a holiday that owes its existence more to capitalism then to compassion- let's be honest folks, this is a day tailored made to be a marketing machine. You think Christmas is consumer driven, it has nothing on V-Day. See at least with Christmas there is this all encompassing idea of goodwill towards one another- it's a day where we give to family and friends to show how much we care. Valentine's is a day where people in relationships are expected to spend money to show the person they are with that they have disposable income and are willing to use it on them one day a year to show that they can. It's a day to show one's love through cards or candy or flowers- ya know, things that don't require much thought and can easily be disposed of.

Know what else is easily disposable and tailored made to be marketed to a specific group of people? Slasher flicks.

Slashers are a staple of the horror genre and have been for decades. While people debate which film started the trend- the general consensus is John Carpenter's 1978 film Halloween, what can be agreed upon is that the genre and it's conventions are not going anywhere anytime soon. Even as the landscape of horror and films in general change, there is always room for a simple story of a masked killer stalking teenagers and dispatching them in increasingly violent ways. While not my favorite subgenre of horror, even I admit there are some good slasher flicks out there- A Nightmare on Elm Street is in my top five horror films. What usually bugs me with them is either their predictability in the case of a slasher where we need to guess who the killer is, or the lack of originality- horror is a derivative genre to begin with, and slashers are the best example.

Yet sometimes one finds one that does not hit these hurdles, and while it may still be derivative it's still entertaining. This is where today's movie comes in- and as Halloween also started the slasher trend it also gave us the idea of the holiday themed killer- it's many sequels, the Silent Night Deadly Night series and other Christmas themed killers, April Fools Day, and so on. Cross your heart and hope to survive, because in honor of Singles Awareness- I mean Valentine's Day, this is the 1981 Canadian slasher My Bloody Valentine.

Plot

Now I am aware this film was recently remade, in fact, I have seen the remake and as I had no real knowledge of the original I enjoyed it as there was nothing in my mind to compare it to. The remake was a decent little slasher flick, however it suffered from one of the aforementioned hurdles- it was very predictable. Yes it tried to throw us some red herrings but anyone with half a brain knew who the killer was about halfway through the film. That said I still enjoy it, and it was thinking of that movie that got me to look for the original.

For the first time in twenty years, the small Nova Scotia mining town of Valentine Bluffs is having a Valentine's Ball. For close to a hundred years this had been a tradition for the townspeople, until a mining accident caused by two careless foreman leaving the mine early for the dance led to a cave in and the death of a number of miners. The sole survivor, Harry Warden, went mad and ate his fellow miners, and was sent away. The following year he returned and took revenge on the two foremen, and told the town if they ever had another Valentine's Dance he would return. However as in all such movies, after a certain amount of time people forget or try to forget, and old stories, whether they are true or not, start to be considered legends. Despite warnings, most of the town's young people are dismissive of the story and are excited for the dance. There is tension however, as Jessie 'T.J' Hanniger, son of mine owner and Mayor Hanniger, has returned to town recently and is having trouble fitting back in, especially since his ex girlfriend Sarah has moved on with his former friend Axel. The two men are at odds both in the mine and out over their love for Sarah. Likewise, two days before the dance Mayor Hanniger and Police Chief Newby receive a human heart in a candy box- Harry Warden's calling  card from twenty years ago. Though at first not looking to cause a panic, as the body count rises they decide to cancel the dance- not that those foolish young people care, as they decide to have a party of their own to celebrate the holiday- at the mine. Much violence ensues, as does the question of who the killer is- has Harry Warden really returned, or is it the withdrawn Jessie? Or is someone else in the quiet little town a complete lunatic dressed in a miner's uniform? The answer may surprise you, because it sure as hell surprised me.
 
Thoughts

Let's continue with the surprise I will not spoil it, but as I mentioned earlier the biggest problem with the remake in my opinion was that it was way too obvious who the killer was. In the original, not as much. Up until the last ten or so minutes, you are not sure who is really under that gas mask and mining helmet, and that is a plus in my book. Far too often with mystery slashers either the killer's identity is overtly obvious or a twist that make little sense occurs and the killer is someone who doesn't fit the character. In this movie, you are unsure until the end, and when the reveal occurs, you are satisfied because not only do you not see it coming but the identity makes sense.

Onto the characters- as with most slasher flicks, the majority of the cast exist simply to be part of the total body count. Still, most of the teens are developed enough that you like them- a good example being the character of Hollis, who was my favorite and whose death seriously bummed me out- he was a very likeable guy and the more you see of him in the film the more you want him to survive. The leads are pretty cut and dry, Jessie as the withdrawn prodigal son trying to make sense of the town he left, Axel as the badass trying to hold onto his girl, Sarah as the sweet young woman torn between two men, Chief Newby the determined lawman trying to keep his town safe, and Harry Warden is an intimidating masked killer. They are simple archetypes yes but they work because slashers are a genre built on a foundation of archetypes.

Now on to the kills- if there is one thing I love in a slasher movie is a good kill, and this movie has plenty. They are bloody and quite creative, even by today's standards. I especially like the film's opening kill because it is probably the simplest of the film and yet is done so perfectly that it can stand with the more imaginative ones found later in the film. While the film is not super gory, you have to remember it's from the 1980s and you didn't need extreme amounts of blood and gore to make a good movie then.

With all of this said the film still has it's flaws. Most importantly in my view is the pacing- the majority of the films action and kills happen in the final half hour or so, and while the preceding hour is good, it seems like they had a good conclusion in mind and just needed to find stuff to fill the time between the opening and the ending. However, this is not a big flaw- whereas a film like the original Halloween took forever for anything to happen, there are moments that break this films monotony and keep the plot rolling. Besides that, the only thing I can say is not mine to say. Researching the film I found that it was edited prior to it's original release, and while the version I watched, the "uncut version", has some of these edits put back in, a number of others have been lost. This is a bit of a pet peeve of mine when it comes to older movies- footage that is edited out nowadays will almost always end up on the DVD release either in a new cut or deleted/extended footage, but this was not always the case. Movies made prior to the early to mid 90s, unless they were important films (i.e block busters), tended to have that edited out footage destroyed or locked away. A good example being The Breakfast Club- that movie was originally over an hour longer, but the only remaining print of the full movie was in the possession of director John Hughes, as the studio had no use for it. While I don't know what these edits were I would like to see this movie as it was originally intended, but it seems that is not possible. This is not a flaw of the film itself but rather that of the industry as a whole.

Conclusion

My Bloody Valentine is a decent slasher flick. It is well filmed, acted and written, and has a great set of kills that should satisfy the twisted among you. While the remake is good I'd say this one is the better of the two, and well worth a watch. If you are a slasher fan and you have never looked at this little gem I say give it a shot, though unless your significant other is a fan as well I wouldn't put this on your Valentine's Day watch list. However if you are single and looking for a way to kill time and/or watch people in love get slaughtered, give it a watch. Or get help. Whatever works for ya.

3.5 Freshly Removed Hearts out of 5

That's all out of me, enjoy your Valentine's/Single's Awareness/Tuesday. Until next time I'm the Drew and I Be Awesome.