WORLD CUP + ADIDAS + STAR WARS

Review: A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984)

Horror is a strange genre. Movies are supposed to entertain, excite, thrill, tickle your funny bone and even move or inspire you, if done right. Generally, they should affect you in a positive way. Horror movies, on the other hand, strive to affect you negatively, by shocking, provoking and/or frightening. Sometimes, you can admire the craft and thought put into the work, especially with The Exorcist, The Blair Witch Project, The Sixth Sense, etc. On a personal note, despite my respect for the genre, horror isn't my most favourite of genres, and I don't normally rush out to see the next big scare.

This may sound lame, but to me the most frightening movies are those with evil spirits resembling long haired women in white, which are probably the horror villains with the least amount of costume and makeup budget ever. (See The Ring, Ju-On, The Eye, A Tale of Two Sisters, etc.) They are frightening to me in a way clowns or lifelike dolls are frightening to some people.

That said, most Western horrors aren't very scary to me. Shocking, repulsive, maybe. But the scares rarely made me want to cower behind my blanket like the Asian varieties sometimes do. Vampires, zombies, werewolves, the Frankenstein monster, Michael Myers, Jason Voorhees, Leatherface and Freddy Krueger... they're more supervillains in a movie than something fearful on a subconscious level. They don't crawl under your skin like a good old apparation or just plain weird shit happenings could do. For example, a man standing and facing the corner of a decrepit room for no reason (The Blair Witch Project) does a lot more than the sight of a raised kitchen knife.

Yet, I still enjoyed movies like A Nightmare On Elm Street, although for the wrong reasons. Freddy Krueger, a very iconic horror staple recognisable through his trademark fedora, red and black striped sweater, Wolverine-like blades and charred face, is a memorable baddie more in the lines of The Dark Knight's Joker than a malevolent supernatural force like in the other movies I mentioned. With villains like The Joker, Hans Gruber, and Hannibal Lecter, you find yourself rooting for them despite their nefarious nature. I doubt anyone was in anyway concerned about Dr. Chilton at the end of Silence of the Lambs, and probably wished Lecter got to "have him for dinner" sooner!

Unlike other horror villains, Krueger dispatches his victims in their dreams (or nightmares) where logic and the laws of physics don't apply, which allows for creativity beyond the usual hack-and-slash-with-the-common-garden-utensil death sequences. One infamous scene depicts a teen being swallowed by his own bed, only to be regurgitated as a geyser of blood. This makes Krueger's nightmare attacks a constant highlight in every impending sequel. The Nightmare On Elm Street series becomes more of a morbidly humourous special effects showcase than a true fright fest.

"A Nightmare On Elm Street" is the kind of "must-watch" movie for the movie and horror buffs, simply because the popularity and iconic stature of the series cannot be ignored. I find the movie above-average, with some nice subversion of cliches (a trademark of director Wes Craven) marred by bad acting performances. I also didn't find it frightening for one second, but that doesn't mean you should show this one to your mum or kids either.

Also stars Johnny Depp and John Saxon.

Next: A Nightmare On Elm Street Part 2 - Freddy's Revenge

Related links:
The stuff of Nightmares

The stuff of Nightmares

I used to be the type who goes for the O.G., the original stuff. The days of breaking the bank for collector's editions and McFarlane movie-theme figurines are over. There's no bargain I could refuse. Thus begin my mild obsession with 4-in-1 DVD packs!

Two-in-ones, three, four, sometimes fifty-in-ones (ah, MP4s) are quite the norms in pirated wares, but the legitimate faction is also into the bargain pack game, although almost usually with older, evergreen titles. The great thing in going legit here is the quality: pirated bundle-packs usually cram several movies onto a single disc. Depending on the movie lengths, an 8.5 Gb double-layer disc (affectionately called by the pirates as "DVD-9s") is quite a tight fit even for just two movies. Video quality is sacrificed in the process.

Get an original many-in-ones though, and you'll not find such compromise. Using dual-side DVDs (equivalent to taking two DVDs and glueing them together on the label side), each movie in a way occupies its own entire disc space, no different than when the movies were produced and sold individually. The Nightmare on Elm Street 4-in-1 DVD pack has Parts I and II printed on the first disc. You watch one movie on one side, then flip it over to see the other. I don't know how the company is able to save cost and lower the prices significantly by using this format, since they would still have to burn the same amount of sides if the movies were produced and sold individually. Physically compacting 4 movies into 2 discs also helps a little in maximising shelf space.

One of the disadvantages of dual-side DVDs is that its "sensitive" regions are exposed on both sides, which encourages easy smudges and all other manner of scratches, the hassle is worth the price tag. Another problem is that one of the mainstays sacrificed in the name of bargain hunters is the second-disc special features. Unless the movie is truly one of your favourites, special features can be quite a chore to sift through. There aren't many titles (with more than two sequels) given the economy pack treatment, probably due to their everlasting appeal (e.g. the pricey Aliens Quadrilogy box set, Harry Potter, Die Hard, James Bond, etc.) So far, I've only found A Nightmare on Elm Street (pictured above), Lethal Weapon, Ocean's Eleven, Batman, Rush Hour, etc. There are some eco-packs that are a mixture of unrelated titles, but these are usually two-packers than four.

In conclusion, original 4-in-1 DVD sets are great value for money and takes no more shelf space than a standard DVD box does. Titles available on these four-packers aren't wide, though, and special feature discs that accompany the main feature on the individual DVDs are usually left out of the set. The highly exposed discs get easily damaged too, if you have butter fingers.

Next up: A Nightmare on Elm Street - The Review!

Review: Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time

When I think of an action adventure movie set in the beautiful, golden desert of a Middle Eastern land, I expect picturesque cinematography, exotic locales and people, and brave, noble warriors who greet each other by tapping their lips and forehead before finishing with a hand wave, like Ardeth Bay in The Mummy. In this world, things are either said to be blessed, while others are cursed. People smile alot. Warriors are proud, hold their honour in high esteem, and are penitent towards God/Allah. They wield curved sabres, and the sword fights are intricately choreographed, often along stairwells or at the topmost edge of a castle wall. The beautiful heroine is usually feisty, while the hero smiles in amusement. Yeah, these stuff are cheesy as hell, but that's also why it is so fun.

Sadly, Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time achieves only a few of these things. Picturesque cinematography was replaced by CGI landscapes. There were a few nice shots of sand dunes, but they were really tight shots, so you don't really see the full expanse of the desert. This is also one of the movies where the British accent doesn't work, especially with Prince Dastan's Cockney-like English. Nobody does the Middle Eastern hand-wave greet thing. And the "heroes" all started off doing something that is far from noble or honorable, trick or no trick. They behaved more like barbaric Vikings than proud Persians.

Another weak part is the use of the Dagger of Time. The use and limitations of this device are sketchy. No doubt, it is a magical artifact that can reverse time, but how far back does it turn the clock? Does it depend on how long the button is being pressed? Why is there a modern-day red button on the hilt of a medieval dagger in the first place? How much magic sand do you need for say, a 30-second jump back in time? How do you even measure the amount of sand per second of time travelling? Why does Princess Tamira wears a vial of magic sand around her neck even though the use of the Dagger is forbidden, apart from giving the hero (and hetero male audiences) an opportunity to check out her cleavage? None of these questions were answered in the movie.

The worst offender is the action, which is close to terrible. I heard some people calling the movie "Prince of Parkour", but associating the art of freerunning to this movie is an insult to the discipline. The action was filmed and edited in such a disjointed way that makes it very difficult to appreciate the parkour and swordfights on display. (For a good example of parkour action, see the Daniel Craig James Bond movie, Casino Royale.) Perhaps there never was much choreography in the first place, and the rapid edits serve to hide this shortcoming.

Still, I can't fully diss-miss this movie, as it does try its best to charm its way through humour, camaraderie among the cast, and some unexpected dramatic turns. Average at best.

Street Fighter Short Movie

Created by this guy:

"Desh" (Joey Ansah) from The Bourne Ultimatum.

A layman's lesson in anamorphic transfers: Red Cliff DVDs

Just wanted to share my experience renting the DVDs to John Woo's excellent Red Cliff bilogy. It is also a good opportunity to make known the importance of anamorphic DVDs.

Back to Red Cliff: The movies are not really sequels, but two parts of an entire storyline. The movies were shown separately in the cinemas, and were also released in two separate DVDs.

Red Cliff was a big hit in Asia, so it was a surprised to discover how poorly conceived one of the DVDs were.

The subject in scrutiny is DVD Part I, which was not an anamorphic transfer, meaning that the the video was recorded as a 4:3 fullscreen video (a near perfect square, like what you see on free TV). This isn't an issue if the video was cropped to fit a fullscreen TV, but they used the widescreen format (a rectangle, like in the cinemas) and "squeezed" it into fullscreen. This means that on a classic, square TV, you will see the two black bars on the top and bottom of the screen instead of a video that fills the entire screen. Not much problem there. But on a widescreen TV, the picture looks overstretched width-wise. Worse, the black bars eats up screen and data space, reducing the picture quality of the actual video presentation. If you are not familiar with anamorphic transfers, there's a bit of a technical explanation to it, but essentially it's a recording technique that efficiently retains video quality of movies shot in widescreen format on DVDs. Most good original DVDs would indicate whether it's an anamorphic transfer at the back of their covers. Red Cliff Part I DVD is not anamorphic, thus the video quality is glaringly low on a hi-definition LCD.

Red Cliff Part 2 DVD is anamorphic, though, and the picture fits my LCD correctly. Picture quality is a lot better than Part I DVD, but then I noticed that the video seemed to have fine, horizontal "black stripes". I was about to blame the DVD again, until I read this article about video interlacing and progressive scan. Nevertheless, the video quality is still not to my satisfaction when compared to other original DVDs I owned.

Bottom line: Don't buy Red Cliff Part I DVD (unless they release an anamorphic version), but Part II is ok, though you may see some interlacing issues if your player or TV isn't "progressive". Chim... The Red Cliff Blu-Rays are a better bet, but no comments on those until I finally get them.

All the Red Cliff discs in Singapore are currently distributed by Scorpio East.

Review: Kick-Ass

Fight like a little girl

Kick-Ass is a parody of superhero movies, particularly Spider-man. But unlike other spoofs, Kick-Ass is a notch better than the rest of its ilk, with cleverer jokes and no cartoon-illogic, anvil-dropping nonsenses, if I remembered correctly. Without a PG-rating restrain, the movie gets to spice things up with some gratuitous violence and darkly, morbid humour. Still, the movie was a few steps short of greatness because of the way it unevenly handles two different storylines that don't seem to gel all that well together.

The two main reasons to watch Kick-Ass are Hit Girl (Chloe Moretz) and Big Daddy (Nicolas Cage). They are the most compelling characters in the movie, and a strange mix of realism and exaggeration of some of your favourite comic book heroes. They are a bizarre and unhealthy father-and-daughter vigilante team where one of their crimefighting training involves the dad shooting his ten-year-old daughter in the chest with a gun. They do the most ass-kicking in the movie, especially the ten-year-old. Imagine O-Ren Ishii from Kill Bill during her prepubescent years.

Less interesting is the titular character, Kick-Ass (Aaron Johnson). Although he is the more realistic character, his storyline takes a too-obvious jab at Spider-man, from the Tobey Maguire-like voiceovers to the rooftop-jumping trials. Such smugness somehow doesn't really fit the realistic tone the movie was obviously aiming for. His story shows how completely stupid it is for a completely average guy to try and become a costumed hero. For a character named Kick-Ass, Kick-Ass spends more time getting his ass kicked than kicking asses.

As I said before, the two really doesn't mix when one is more fantastical while the other plays it real. Maybe it would have worked better if it is a story about an average dude who tries to be a superhero in a superhero world and not the real world. Or if the director or writer just removed some of the snide remarks about superhero cliches, which doesn't help when the movie actually plays to the cliches later on. Another idea is to relegate Kick-Ass' character to a supporting role and reduce his screen time. I had the same indifferent feeling when I was watching Watchmen, which later warmed me over on Blu-Ray. Perhaps I will like Kick-Ass more after a few home viewings. Right now, it's just a high Average for me.


Some cool taglines from the movie:
With no power comes no responsibility.
I can't fly/read your mind/be invisible/see through walls. But I can kick your ass.
Whenever Hit Girl swears.

Review: Clash of the Titans

The 2010 remake of the thirtysomething's childhood favourite tries to be grittier and Gladiator, but succeeds only marginally. Clearly wanting to separate itself from the original's childish leanings, the remake blatantly snubs Bubo the mechanical owl in its strive towards seriousness and "realism" (if that's even possible for a fantasy fest like this one.)

Still, the remake's story is actually weaker than the original. At least the motivations of the hero and other characters in the original were straightforward: kill the good/bad guy, get the girl, win the day. When you have a hero that just wants to kill the bad guy for revenge, doesn't give two poops about the girl, and couldn't care less about winning the day, it makes you wonder why he even bothers with the Kraken deadline. I'm sure if he taunts Hades long enough, the evil god would eventually show up for the hero to kick his ass. I mean, it worked pretty well for those Argos soldiers who smashed down Zeus' statue, though they were sorely lacking in contingency planning.

The action definitely benefits from a CGI facelift. Well, mostly. I enjoyed its version of the Kraken finale, which was able to convey the monster's immense and frightening scale through low-position camera angles, and did the job far better than Kraken 1981. The new Pegasus the winged horse is the most impressive special effect I've ever seen! The movement of its CGI wings are just so seamless and real, and it's impossible to tell where the CGI ends and the real horse begins. If someone tells me that what I saw wasn't even a real horse to begin with, I will take my 3D modelling course certificate and shove it up an orifice. Sadly, Clash of the Titans 2010 failed miserably in the Medusa sequence, which was easily the best scene in the 1981 movie. The original Medusa was a genuine Grade A uncompromising badass movie monster, while 2010 Medusa kept reminding me of The Mummy Returns' (2001) crappy CGI Scorpion King.

I thought Sam Worthington did a pretty good job with a lacking material, though he was much better in Terminator Salvation. Was surprised to see Ralph Fiennes, Danny Huston and Pete Postlethwaite, and Bond alums Gemma Arterton (Quantum of Solace) and Mads Mikkelsen (Casino Royale). The cast was put to ample use in a men-on-a-mission type of storyline, though it needed a little more humour and feeling of camaraderie.

Overall: Average actioner. The original wins by nostalgia and Medusa.

P.S.: I heard they haphazardly put in the 3-D effects at the last minute (upon hearing word of Avatar's success) and the end result was a murky, headache-inducing mess. Thus, I sensibly did not order the upsize, and opted for the regular.

The price you pay for original?

Caveat emptor... let the buyer beware! According to the Sunday Straits, video stores have been unwittingly peddling pirated wares forged by the Jack Sparrows of the movie industry, whose scanning and Photoshop skills have shown marked improvements.

However, this is not the first time poop like this has happened. Many ages ago, a video store with a name that rhymes with "taser" brought in purportedly original VCDs of Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers and Return of the King from Thailand, mere weeks after the theatrical release. Took a while before anyone noticed the aquatic stench, including yours truly, who was at the time just too elated to have the opportunity to revisit Middle Earth at such short notice. The company was slapped with a million-dollar fine for its efforts; unfortunately I can't seem to track down the original news article about this fiasco. Hopefully, the evidences of my gullibility, as pictured on the left, would suffice.



Anyway, the article suggests that we should all become digital artwork analysts and look out for slightly "pixellated" graphics, in order to guard ourselves from these fakes. We know how busy the officials are, catching those pesky teen downloaders and fining holiday-ers who bought the same fake DVDs abroad; we must do our part to protect the billion-dollar movie industry from losing millions. Actually, there is an easier and quicker way to spot a dodgy DVD - if an English movie has big Chinese titles on its cover, avoid buying it. This will reduce your chances of making a bogus buy by about maybe 99, 100%?


Left picture: The Maltese Falcon DVD, a made in Taiwan variant (with an all-English cover art) sold at Suntec Carrefour for a measly S$6.99...

Err... Then again, maybe not.

Subtitles: An Opened Mind is Advised