This is a movie about a manned mission's Last Days on Mars. So this makes it one of the few movies that says it all in the title itself.
Aurora Mission...
Duration: 6 months...
Remaining time: 19 hours...
It is their last excursion out in the sands of the Red Planet. Kim, an ambitious and now disillusioned scientist, is busy collecting the last samples they would take back home. Samples, that she dejectedly observes, are as sterile and fruitless as the ones they have been collecting for the past 6 months... As she is driven back to base by the team 'chauffers' (would the term "Rover Driver" sound funny?) Campbell and Lane, another scientist, Marko, prepares to go out. He claims that he needs to check "a Gamma sensor that's not responding", something he confesses he forgot to check. As he heads out, Kim, his obvious rival, becomes suspicious. She checks his workstation. What she finds out implicates two things: one - Marko lied, and two - he may have stumbled upon a profound discovery... And then disaster strikes...
The story is strictly okay. On the sci-fi front, it does not explore any new ideas. On the action front, it does not add any unnecessary and unrealistic stunts. On the thriller-horror part, it delivers shocks and jolts with the pitch-perfect timing. The characters are neither too shallow, nor too detailed. Some of the characters are well-sketched enough to fit into the plot. <Spoiler> The idea that the very first discovered extra-terrestrial bacteria should turn humans into zombies, is quite preposterous, not to mention a bit difficult to digest... </Spoiler>
The special effects are quite nice. The spaceship, the base and the rovers are depicted very nicely. Can't comment on the depiction of the Mars itself. Never been there, you know ;-P... But it looked too drab, like some desert on earth itself viewed through an orange red filter. Maybe the red planet is as arid and drab as depicted in the movie? Who knows? The sets and props of the insides of the rovers and the base are good enough enough. Some of the scenes shot through the dark, abandoned and wrecked corridors and rooms of the Base well shot enough to make one's hair stand on end.
Almost all the performances are good enough. Liev Schrieber, who plays the role of Vincent Campbell, steals the show. He fits the role of the reluctant protagonist like a glove on the hand - so much so that he almost defined the character by his performance. I also liked the performances of Olivia William (as Kim Aldrich, the scientist), Elias Koteas (as Brunel, the leader of the team) and Romola Garai (as Lane).
This is the second sci-fi movie of this year (2013), that I liked because it steers clear of unnecessary dramatics (the first one was Europa Report - which is a better movie than this one though). And therein lies its charm... It refrains from taking the well-trodden path of a typical action-packed horror-thriller in space. It keeps everything low-key. And yet manages to deliver thrills and jolts at exactly the right places and manages to maintain a steady pace. There is action, yes, but its pretty realistic. No extraordinary stunts. No super-human feats. And yet, it manages to entertain. In short the movie is very well executed and well directed.
In short, it is certainly worth a watch at least once.
My Rating: 2.5
After watching V/H/S, the first Horror Anthology in this series, I was a bit apprehensive about watching this one. Not only because such serial movies tend to become repetitive, losing the novelty of the first one. But also due to the fact that the first movie did not impress me so much. Yet, I decided to give this one a try. And I can't say I was disappointed. Not that this movie was very impressive or ground-breaking or anything. For it suffers from the same handicaps that the first movie did. But it also scores as good as the first one for exploring some original ideas.
Just like the first movie, this too is an anthology of horror short films, each one directed by a different director, and each one exploring an individual unrelated story. Each short film uses the now well-worn found-footage format. And one of the shorts is used as a frame narrative, which also acts as an individual story on its own.
The movie starts off with "Tape 49" directed by Simon Barrett. This one acts as a frame narrative, within which the other stories take place. It tells the story of a P.I. who has been commissioned by a college student's mother to investigate her son's disappearance. While searching through the abandoned and dark home of the college student, they stumble upon a series of VHS tapes. While the P.I. search the house, his colleague plays the tapes to get a clue as to the missing student's whereabouts. This frame narrative story is even more drab and mediocre than the frame narrative story of the first movie. It tries to explain how viewing the tapes can lead to disastrous circumstances (duh!). There are hardly any surprises and shocks. The story is uninspired. The direction appears awkward. On the whole, I personally did not like it very much.
The next story is "Phase I Clinical Trials" directed by Adam Wingard. There is one thing I really liked about the first movie. That is the use of various types of hidden cams, including a spy cam on eye-glasses. This movie takes a giant leap further in that regard. For example, in this story, the hidden camera is located within the eye-implant of the protagonist. Neat, huh!? A guy, who has nearly lost his vision of one of his eyes in an accident, is fitted with an artificial implant that will help him see again from his impaired eye. It is an experimental device and hence the company will be capturing the footage of whatever the man views through his eye and saving it for a few days, for testing purpose only. But guess what? The guy starts seeing people that aren't supposed to be there... The premise of the story is pretty interesting. Its jolts and shocks are effective enough. So is some of the explanation that comes forward in the form of a girl who comes to the protagonist's help. On the whole, this story was quite better as compared to the other stories in the lot...
The next one is "A Ride in the Park" directed by Eduardo Sánchez and Gregg Hale. It is a short story about horror that takes place inside some sort of national park. Its a zombie story (which is not surprising considering that the Z-word is the new magic buzz-word in Horror movies nowadays, isn't it?). There is one area in which this movie pushes the boundaries of the shaky camera genre even further - that area being, the placement of the camera. In this short story, the camera is located on the helmet of a cyclist who has turned into a zombie. Apart from this very novel idea and an excessive amount of blood, gore and disemboweled zombies, this short film doesn't have anything interesting.
The next one is "Safe Haven" directed by Timo Tjahjanto and Gareth Huw Evans. This one is Indonasian. It is also the longest story in the batch. And personally, I think it is the best one in the anthology. A news crew approaches the "father" of a reclusive religious cult. They are invited to interview him and visit the cult's abode. What they discover there makes a pretty interesting good old-fashioned traditional horror tale.
The last story is named "Slumber Party" directed by Jason Eisener. It is about a slumber party held by a bunch of kids at their home - an open property complete with a barn - near a big lake. There is sibling rivalry and fun and frolic. All is going well until they spot unusual lights on the lake. This one is the most uninteresting story of the lot. Except for one novel innovation. The hidden camera that captures most of the footage of the episode is mounted by one kid on the head of their pet dog!
This movie certainly scores points for pushing the frontiers of the shaky camera sub-genre beyond what its predecessor did. And it loses some points for a few script as well as directorial failures similar to ones evident in some of the stories from the first movie. It has a lot of unnecessary blood and gore and a couple of unnecessary sexually explicit scenes. But some of its stories are so good that they make it a worthwhile watch, at least once, if not more.
My Ratings: 2
For me it started with 28 Days Later. There was something about the idea of the world and the life as we know it, being shot to hell, that sucked me in... Empty streets, abandoned houses, crashed lonely vehicles, not a being in sight... And add to that, the danger of your fellow humans gone wild, crazy and, technically dead... Zombies out to get you on the mean streets of a deserted city, chasing you down dark corridors of apartment buildings... It was your worst nightmare come true...
I lapped them all up. Right from Rec and Rec 2 to I am Legend and Frank Darabont's Walking Dead TV Series. Some of them were groundbreaking and stunning. Many others were just copy-paste jobs with hardly any inspired or original contributions to the genre.
World War Z does expand the horizons of the Zombie genre by portraying the zombie apocalypse on a global scale. Its does for zombie movies what 2012 did for natural disaster movies.
It is the story of a former United Nations investigator who is out with his family when the streets around him abruptly erupt into chaos. He manages to flee with his wife and two daughters as they try to survive the sudden outbreak of a rabies like disease (what a cliché) that turns a human bitten by an infected one into a frenzied biting zombie within seconds. He gets help and shelter from his former boss, a high-ranking official in the UN. His family is safe for now, but on one condition. He is reluctantly entrusted the task of accompanying a virologist and a team of soldiers, as the venture out into the midst of danger and chaos, in search for the origins of the disease, hoping to find a cure. Thus starts his perilous journey which will take him round the globe, in search for a possible cure to this apocalyptic disease.
Seriously speaking, story and concept-wise, there is hardly anything original about this one. Some of the ideas are almost preposterous. The plot and the story are too over-dramatic and unrealistic. And yet there are two things that make this movie worth watching at least once. Awesome visuals and breathtaking action sequences.
It portrays the zombie outbreak pretty nicely. Throngs upon throngs of frenzied infected zombies fill up the screen like hundreds of ants. The action is intense. The story roars ahead at breakneck speed, hardly allowing the viewer a moment to mull upon the ridiculousness of some of the ideas. Arial views of fallen cities and zombie-infested landscapes are visually stunning. An international cast of actors that ensure good acting that went waste thanks to an over-dramatic script.
If you don't mind switching off your brain and watching the movie for pure entertainment's sake, then you are in for a pretty intense joy ride. For me, the movie earns no points for realism and originality. But it succeeds to entertain pretty well.
My Rating: 2.0
This is an anthology of six unrelated horror short films, each one directed by a different director. Each story is depicted in found-footage format using the shaky camera-work technique.
The movie starts off with "Tape 56" directed by Adam Wingard. This one is used as a frame narrative, where the other 5 stories are shown within this as the central story. It shows the exploits of a group of criminals who record their exploits and post the videos on the net. Someone has hired them to break into a house and retrieve a VHS tape. The house belongs to some old guy. When they break in, they find him dead in a room with multiple TVs and VCRs. While the others search the house for any more VHS tapes, one guy has to sit in the room with the old mans dead body and go through the tapes available there. As the guy plays each tape, we are taken into the narrative of each of the other 5 stories. Needless to say, this story ends with a nice but predictable twist ending. Except for the short sequence in the basement, the story lacked much of a punch and on the whole, turned out to be just a simple filler between the other stories.
The first video the criminal guy from the frame narrative watches is "Amateur Night" directed by David Bruckner. A trio of young guys have recently bought a spectacles with a camera in it (Google Glass???). They ask the most nerdy guy among them to wear it. Then they go have some fun in the bar. There they pick up a couple of girls and return to their apartment to spend a night of obvious debauchery. But they are in for a nasty surprise. This story had potential. But they ruined it for me by putting in way too much gore. Not to mention it was sexually explicit. And the camerawork was at times too shaky. But I give points for the interesting twist at the end.
The next story is called "Second Honeymoon" directed by Ti West. I have watched his famous movies The Innkeepers and The House of the Devil, and I enjoyed them both. So I had great expectations from this one. But I was quite disappointed. Apart from a bit of suspense and a very unexpected and original ending, the short lacked entertainment for me.
"Tuesday the 17th" (sounds like Friday the 13th? You bet it does) directed by Glenn McQuaid is about a bunch of two guys and two gals who visit a lake deep in the woods. This one is a pure no-brainer that lacks originality, but certainly adds the thrills (if you prefer slasher movies, albeit with a possible supernatural twist)
"The Sick Thing That Happened to Emily When She Was Younger" directed by Joe Swanberg has a pretty original but utterly preposterous story. It does have some good thrills. But overall, I would rate it as average.
The last one is "10/31/98" by a group of directors who call themselves Radio Silence. It is about a bunch of guys who visit a friend's house for the Halloween party. But it seems that there is no one in the house... Or is there? Personally, I think this is the best one among them all. Its your good old-fashioned horror tale. Where it lacks in originality, it makes up for in suspense, thrills, scares and the supernatural.
The beauty of any short film is that it does not beat round the bush. It delivers the goods quickly without the overhead of character or story building. And that is its drawback too. It is too short for explanations. One is left to assume certain things, concentrating more on delivering the gist of the story and the action involved. The same is true for these short films. They deliver the punch pretty effectively. But please don't go around looking for explanations or background stories.
These short films do aim to push the boundaries of the found footage horror genre. And to some extent they do succeed. For there is a certain uniqueness in each of the story, that deserves appreciation. But somewhere, I think, it failed to deliver the stories to their full potential. May be the direction could have been a bit better. Same can be said for some of the scripts. Overall, it is a case of hit-and-miss, where some stories are good, while others are disappointing.
Some of the stories have sexually explicit scenes, which is a bit of a turn off. Also some of them show way too much blood and gore. Call me a prude if you will, but according to me, a good horror story need not take help of unnecessary sexual scenes or excessive blood and gore in order to entertain.
On the whole, this one is worth watching once, but not more than that.
My Ratings: 2
Right from the time shaky camera / found footage genre captured my imagination after watching Paranormal Activity and Rec, I have searched for and viewed quite a lot of similar movies. Some were mediocre. Many were disappointing. After a while, it just becomes s.o.s (same old story). Boring and repetitive.
But sometimes, a movie comes along, that does something different with a worn out formula, and leaves a mark on your memory. One such movie was The Last Exorcism... When I read that the movie used shaky camera technique, my first impression was: "Paranormal Activity meets The Exorcist"... Which proved wrong.
To be frank, the movie does not have anything new to add to the well worn shaky camera technique. The acting is strictly ok. So is the direction. But the real winner was the story. I will not disclose exactly why, except for stating that its a pretty rational take on the ritual of exorcism. The only thing that one might not like is the twist ending that might leave a bitter aftertaste for the rational viewer. Personally, I enjoyed the end as well.
My rating (for "The Last Exorcism"): 3.5
And then I stumbled across a sequel to this nice flick. I was surprised, because as far as I could tell, there was nothing left in the climax of the first movie to warrant a sequel. Maybe it won't be the continuation of the same story. But a different story with different characters but same central theme? I was wrong...
If you enjoyed the first movie, and expect something similar, you will be disappointed. First of all, the sequel veers away from the shaky camera technique used in the first movie. It has your traditional movie camera work. Secondly, it continues the story from the first part, which by all means should have ended right there in the first part itself. And thirdly, the theme of the story is entirely different from the brilliant theme of the first part. So by all counts, the sequel is a disappointing flick.
But why do I mention it here? Because there are two things that make the movie stand out.
First is the brilliant direction and camera-work. Its pretty neat for a horror flick. They have made good use of the light and the settings instead of excessive and unnecessary use of CG. The direction is nice too. Throughout the movie, they have managed to maintain the pace. Instead of using blood-and-gore or horror, the movie creates an unsettling atmosphere, which manages to satisfy the hunger of the horror movie fan.
Second thing worth mentioning in this movie is the acting of Ashley Bell who enacts the lead protagonist. Sometimes a bit overdone, her acting still manages to seem very convincing and professional. She certainly has good acting potential and I hope she does not get stereotyped for these kind of roles only.
But both of these good attributes cannot hide the disappointing fact that the story of the sequel is really below average. Yet these two points make it worth watching once, if not more.
The movie ends with an opening for yet another sequel. But I seriously hope they don't go for it. As it is, the current sequel was stretching it a bit too far. Stretch it more, and the rubber-band will break...
My ratings (for the sequel "The Last Exorcism II"): 2.5
