Tag: Drama

Prince Avalanche has the distinction of being the only indie movie this week to come out and actually catch my interest. That interest is easily described coming from two factors.

One – It has a name of Prince Avalanche. What is going on there? I want to be a royal disaster, too!

Two – It has Paul Rudd in it. This might have helped my decision even more than note one.

Well, it is good that the people in this movie work hard.

Alvin (Rudd) and Lance (Emile Hirsch) are construction workers, more or less, working in a remote area. Super remote. Like, only tagging three actors overall remote. It is also set in the 1980s, so a lot of technological luxuries are not present. Just two guys and a truck. Monday through Friday, they work and camp out in the area, drawing lines on the high way, random other bullshit work, who really knows. But on the weekend they can continue with their social lives and interact with their loved ones.

Alvin has a girlfriend, and that girlfriend’s brother happens to be Lance. Aw. It is like they decided together to work this summer because they already knew each other kind of.

They are pretty different, Alvin is a lot more calm and stern, while Lance isn’t an exceptionally hard worker and not really self confident. So he is learning a lot from Alvin.

But things happen in their social lives, those things bringing back both positive and negative energy back to their work environment, making it potentially very difficult.

Also, there is a truck driver (Lance LeGault) who has some speaking lines more than once in this film. Hello truck driver man!

Oooh, they play hard as well!

I really do hate writing reviews out of movies that I get practically nothing out of.

Prince Avalanche is an indie comedy/drama, a pretty standard one at that. What do I mean? I mean not a lot happens in this movie, despite being the length of a normal movie. Realism is taken to the extreme, and we have two guys who work, play, and talk with each other, sometimes yell, and that is about it. Writing that plot description pained me because I really didn’t imagine writing more than two sentences. So if it sounded like stalling, yeah, it basically was.

Not a lot from this story grasped my interest in any way, so it really felt like a battle to get through. The acting? Sure, its okay. Pretty “regular” if anything.

I’d say avoid. It isn’t a complete piece of shit, just felt like a complete waste of time.

I try to not go into movies biased, but with going to a lot of movies, I am forced to see a lot of previews. Mother fucking movie previews bias the crap out of me. I miss the days where I could watch most of my movies without knowing a lot about it before hand.

The good news is, I never saw the trailer for 12 Years A Slave, nor did I know what it was about. I mean, I can guess, with a title like that. But I don’t know the real plot details. That is awesome.

However, I did know a lot of hype from my reviewer friends. Every single damn one of them loved this movie and there is much talk of Oscar buzz. I guess I should make note: that type of stuff biases too. Whoops. Oh well.

Oh man. Enjoy that dinner guy. It is all about to suck for you after this.

Soloman Northup (Chiwetel Ejiofor) is a free man. He lives in Saratoga Springs, New York, with his wife and two children. They are pretty well off too, living in a nice home, fine clothes, and instruments! Soloman plays the violin, and he is quite good at it. Performs at very exquisite dancing balls.

Well, his wife and children go on a trip that will take them away for about three weeks, leaving Soloman all alone. Later that day, in town, he meets two gentlemen, performers, who offer to bring Soloman on trip to Washington and back, overall two weeks. They need a man to play music for them and their other acts, a fancy circus of some sorts. He agrees, given his current free time, and hey, good money is good money.

Then, after a night of drinking in Washington, he finds himself in chains. Hmm. This must be some misunderstanding. A pretty serious and unforgiving misunderstanding. There is only so much you can do in chains however, and when people with whips say otherwise, you must listen.

And so began the unfortunate story of Soloman, a free educated and wealthy black man, kidnapped into slavery for, you guessed it, 12 years of his life. Away from his family, friends, and any sensible human being. There is a huge cast of characters in this film, including: Michael Fassbender and Benedict Cumberbatch as slave owners, Paul Giamatti as a slave trader, Brad Pitt a Canadian sympathizer, Paul Dano as an overseer, Lupita Nyong’o a hardworking female slave that becomes an obsession of her master, and Adepero Oduye a woman who becomes separated from her children.

FUCK YOU FASSBENDER. I HATE YOU NOW. I HATE YOU. YOUR CHARACTER WAS A DICK AND NOW I THINK YOU ARE A DICK!

So gritty and unforgiving, and so true. The film is adapted from a book of the same name, written in the 1850s by Soloman Northup. The book gives a first hand experience of years of being a slave, by a man educated enough to accurately recall the events and get them written down. A vague book, that not a lot of people are aware of, but a book that will have sales boosted exponentially due to this movie. Shit, the book was even verified later as being very factual and accurate on all the accounts that could be fact checked.

But it being a true story shouldn’t affect the rating of it as a movie.

Thankfully, it doesn’t even matter, as this movie was incredible in every way. It was emotionally draining, as bad event after bad event occurred to our hero. Yeah, we know he obviously eventually gets out of his predicament, or else how could he write the book? That fact doesn’t change any amount of agony that the watchers and character feel during the events in the story, and it is very eye opening.

I am super stoked this movie isn’t political in nature or trying to change anything (because how could it? It already stopped), but instead focuses only on telling a full, accurate and strong story.

Chiwetel Ejiofor was stupidly good in this movie. The emotion he carried with his eyes alone made everything seem so believable. I already mentioned Fassbender, who had an almost equally powerful performance, enough to make me hate his real life self.

I will warn that there is some graphic stuff in here. I am talking whip scenes, rape scenes, just general beatings, and an incredibly long and well shot hanging scene. You might have to look away, and you might feel squeamish. “12 Years A Slave” is probably the current front runner for Best Picture this year in my book, with only 1.5 months left to go int he year. Shits good. Slavery is bad. I am sad.

I am afraid I am going to turn into a total fanboy of Richard Curtis. He is the director of About Time, but before that he also directed Pirate Radio and Love Actually. Two movies that I could watch again and again and gave high marks to. Let’s just say I went into About Time with a bit of a bias.

A bit of a bias, and a bit of a romance-boner. Mmmm, love.

Time travel in movies can be a hard topic to get right. There are many ways they can set up the time travel concept, but the hard part comes in being consistent and still following the rules they set up logically. Plenty of bad films fail at this, About Time keeps it consistent and follows its rules throughout.

Tim (Domhnall Gleeson) was living a loveless and sad life until he learned a family secret. Before then, he always felt like he was missing something. That is when his dad (Bill Nighy) informed him that the men in his family can travel through time once they hit 21. A genetic condition or something.

They can’t go to the future and they can’t travel anywhere in time, but they can revisit moments in their own life, as long as they can remember that moment. They can relive them just for the experience, or they can change their actions, if they dare. Pretty awesome, but also very dangerous. They have to worry about the Butterfly Effect, so the changes can’t be too drastic. Once Tim makes his first trip, he knows exactly how he will use his new power. For love.

He quickly learns that using time travel to make someone love you doesn’t really work. No, he still has to find someone who finds him generally interesting, like the American Mary (Rachel McAdams). For whatever reason, she thinks he is charming, he just uses the time travel to fix his awkwardness. After all, practice makes perfect.

The good news is that this movie deals with more than just romance. Traveling through time gives an individual a lot of power, the power to affect the lives of those around you in meaningful ways. But could you morally handle the pressure of interfering with your friend’s life, instead of letting them choose their own destiny? Can you cope with the death of a loved one, if you know you have the ability to just visit them again in the past over and over again?

On the other hand, if you had some really sweet cake, you could always go back to that too.

By the end of the movie, I found myself crying as it attempted to tackle these hard subjects. About Time doesn’t fall into the same cliches that other films of the genre get caught up with. A lot of comparisons are being made between this movie and The Time Traveler’s Wife, and not just because Rachel McAdams is the the main love interest in both. They deal with love and time travel, but in completely different ways. The Time Traveler’s Wife was sad, but purely a drama/romance. About Time has equal parts drama and comedy, while dealing with more than just love, but life in general.

Gleeson hasn’t been in a lot of movies, and he currently is known for playing Bill Weasley in the later Harry Potter films, but he was a great choice as the lead role. He had a lot of help of course, with Nighy, a staple in Richard Curtis movies playing his father, his guide to the world of time travel, and the main source of drama in the final act. McAdams is really sweet in this film, and plays a character quite different than any of her previous roles. I also enjoyed the mother (Lindsay Duncan) and the sister (Lydia Wilson).

Overall, I think About Time will turn out to be one of those films that I can watch again and again, possibly getting something new out of it after every viewing. My opinions on it will also probably change as I get older, and experience events that the movie touches upon. It is a charming movie in every way. Thank you Richard Curtis, consider me a total fanboy now.

I first heard about As I Lay Dying a few months ago. I mean both this movie, and the book version. Don’t think I ever heard of the book, despite being on a list of best American books of all time.

No, I first heard about because James Franco directing it became a pretty big deal. I thought it was his first directed thing too, but turns out this guy has directed a shit ton, mostly shorts, but there are movies in there too. Go figure. What a secretly passionate man, that Franco.

Dat passion.

As I Lay Dying is a sad movie. You might be able to figure it out from the title. Or by reading the book.

Addie Bundren (Beth Grant) is dying, and her wishes are to be buried in Jefferson, a town nearby, but one that requires some travel.

Her husband, Anse (Tim Blake Nelson) tries to take care of her, while the eldest son, Cash (Jim Parrack), builds the coffin. The other two sons, Jewel (Logan Marshall-Green) and Darl (James Franco) continue with their job, but of course, she dies almost as soon as they leave.

It is their only wagon, so it sets their journey back a few days already. The daughter Dewey (Ahna O’Reilly) also joins the trip to Jefferson. Basically, everyone who goes has selfish and non selfish reasons, and enough shit hits the fan that it is basically a modern Odyssey. Also, Danny McBride is in this movie as a small role, and is no way comedic.

Also, split screen. This split this movie in half time wise I think.

The movie was supposed to come out to theaters sometime this fall, but I guess they changed their mind and went straight to DVD. Poor Franco.

I also found out this book was written as a steam of consciousness thing, with about fifteen or so narrators, often switching between them without a moments notice. That means you constantly get different points of views and don’t have to guess the true intentions of any single character. Which brings me to my main point: this movie was shot in a really weird way. You see that split screen? A lot of the film is in split screen, and I think it is to represent the constant different point of views represented in the book. To see multiple reactions after the same event. To tell the story in a better way.

Shit, that was really smart. Well done Franco. And creative.

I will say this story took a long time for me to really get into it. A lot of fucked up things happen by the end, a lot of which I did not see coming and definitely kept my interest. But the first half is what killed me. I hate it when a film doesn’t keep it interesting the whole time.

All of the people in this movie acted great though, which is a shame. I wonder how it would have fared if it got a theatrical release versus just a straight to DVD situation. I can’t say whether or not the movie follows the book closely or not. If it does, then the book must be pretty boring early on, and if it doesn’t then I guess it is Franco’s fault.

Probably best watched by people who love the book, and want to see it visually. Shit, if you have read the book, let me know how it compares. I know I won’t ever read it.

Honestly, when I was first told about the movie Parkland, I just had to wonder why.

Why do we need a movie about the death of John F. Kennedy? There are a few out there, some of them considered classics. Some tell the true story, some focus on conspiracies, but they all get the same point across. It was a tragic event, that people alive then remember where they were. Everyone was confused. Cold war, Russia, Nuclear Bombs, Vietnam. All this shit was happening or on the horizon, so the last thing we really needed was a dead president to shock our country.

But hey, why not Parkland. Why not another movie? Fuck it. We got about a thousand on Lincoln as well.

Besides, where else can we get these two young actors as brilliant doctors?

This movie is based on a book, which tells a story of the day President Kennedy (Brett Stimely) goes to Texas and a few days after. Johnny does Dallas, so to speak. For instance, we got the story of Abraham Zapruder (Paul Giamatti), a man who was happy to see his president, he filmed the event, including The Event. His footage was quickly taken custody by the FBI, used in the capture of Mr. Oswald, and then later made as a way to get mad moneys to survive.

We learn of the doctors on duty at the Parkland hospital (Zaf Efron, Colin Hanks), who tried their best to save the president, but found the task impossible. These gentlemen were later given the task to try and save Lee Harvey Oswald after he was gunned down, and, you know, that is sort of fucked up.

We get the story of James Hosty (Ron Livingston), who realized after Lee was picked up as the shooter that he was supposed to investigate him a year earlier and found him clean. We look at Robert Oswald (James Badge Dale), the brother of the shooter, who had no idea what was going to happen and someone who would refuse to run. There is also a look into the presidents security team, their presumed failures, and Lyndon B. Johnson taking over the presidency.

Also in this movie are Billy Bob Thornton, David Harbour, Mark Duplass, and Marcia Gay Harden.

No, I don’t find Paul Giamatti behind this camera creepy at all.

Can we all just take a moment to acknowledge Brett Stimely? He got to play the president, and you probably never heard of him. Sure, most of the scenes are actual footage taken by that dude, or him just lying on the table. Never his face. But he got to play the president! Actually, this is the fourth time he has played John F. Kennedy. He also played him in Watchmen, Kill the Dictator, and Transformers: Dark of the Moon.

What? Why the hell has this random guy played JFK four fucking times in film?

That is besides the point.

I learned a shit ton from this film. From what I could tell, it didn’t really bias a damn thing, just showed people being emotional, and getting sad, and doing things from their sadness.

That sounds dumb. But it is not. First off, I never felt emotional about the death of JFK before. Why would I? I wasn’t alive. But this film did a good job of conveying the emotions people felt and passing them on to the viewer. Secondly, it gave so many sides and showed so many people affected, it just really opened up my eyes to the whole situation. A lot of stuff went down, it was a big investigation, and you know what? I want to watch more. Bring on the JFK. Bring on the conspiracy shit. Bring it all on. I am sorry for claiming there was too many movies about this subject.

I got to see the trailer for Girl Most Likely only once, and that was at an independent movie theater before I saw Fruitvale Station.

And I made plans to wait for it on DVD. Wasn’t an appealing trailer, looked super low budget. It looks like one of those stories, written by someone who doesn’t write normally, but is secretly writing about her own life, and this is a way of telling her story.

Yes, I determined that out a trailer once a few months ago. Shut up.

I said shut up, not hold open your mouth. That is just awkward.

Imogene (Kristen Wiig) is about to have a break down. She used to be considered very bright. She was a great writer. She won a huge grant for $30,000 to write a play and have it performed in NYC. But all of her dreams came crashing down and she has been slowly unraveling, enough to chase her long time boyfriend away. So she tries to kill herself.

Oh. Erm. Shit.

She isn’t too good at it though, so she gets hospitalized instead. Even worse than that, she has to be released from the hospital into a loving environment, which they assume is her home in Jersey. Nopenopenope. Her child hood sucked! She was in a single parent home, because her dad died when she was young and her mom (Annette Bening) was trash. Her brother, Ralph, (Christopher Fitzgerald) had it worse, having some form of autism. He is smart, just a recluse. At least he will be there when she moves back.

Oh, and her mom’s new boyfriend, Geourge Bousche, who talks about spirtuality and is quite mysterious (Matt Dillion). And some dude, Lee (Darren Criss), who she has rented out her old room too. Shit, she can’t even stay in her old bed. Oh well, she just has to survive three days until she can go back to her apartment in NYC. Or if her boyfriend comes to pick her up.

One of the two.
One. Of. The. Two.

Ah, Glee has turned Criss into a boy band member. That was unexpected.

Alright, my original thoughts may have been wrong, but I can’t get that same feeling out of my head.

The main character is a play writer going through a tough time. She has to get out of a slump, and is in freak out mode. Like every movie ever about a struggling writer, the events in the film eventually turn into inspiration, and aww, she is accepted again. That isn’t a spoil, because that is a stupid movie cliche, and it totally happens in this one.

So I feel like this movie of this happening is the third level of realization or something. A movie about a writer who writes a play about her life, and this movie might be about her life too secretly.

I think I am babbling.

This movie had some nice moments, I laughed out loud a few times. It also had a lot of whatever moments, like the first part, and the ending. It was just full of rookie movie mistakes. Things were cut oddly, and it all just felt like a lot of rookie movie making mistakes. Full of jokes that just fell flat.

So overall, it was okay. I enjoyed what they tried to do, and some of the things that were done, but thought a lot of it was just not up to par.

Byzantium came out on a day when few movies felt like coming out, apparently. I counted maybe four or five new releases, half of which ended up being stuff that made it to the theaters.

Wait, Byzantium went to theaters too, just not a lot. Indie theaters and such. Well, why does no one care about this random tale?

Hard to say, probably just no one has heard of it. Yeah. I know personally I have no idea what this movie is about.

Hey, blood imagery. Hopefully its not another period movie!

Vampires. That is what this movie is about. Sneaky vampire movie. I have seen quite a lot of bad vampire movies, but they tend to go the teen / romance / comedy route, while I am pretty sure this one features almost none of those genres.

Hookers gonna hook. That is what I learned from this film, as Clara (Gemma Arterton) has abandoned her (daughter? I can’t tell if she was her actual daughter or like, taken in, now basically, daughter), Eleanor (Saoirse Ronan) sometime during the time of Napoleon, in order to get her affair on. Shit goes badly, like in all movie affairs, and they go on the run.

200 years later, the times are more modern, and they find themselves at some coastal resort town area. Clara finds a hotel called Byzantium, under new management (Daniel Mays). It used to be popular, now it sucks! Using her “cunning,” she is able to convince the owner to transform the inn into something even greater than an inn, a brothel!

Hookers gonna hook.

The brothel serves as a way to lure in travelers, to help their drinking blood habit, without anyone realizing what is actually going on. At the same time, Eleanor starts to fall in love with a young waiter, (Caleb Landry Jones), and she tells him stories and tells him far too much personal information. But they are just stories. He won’t start to believe her ever, right? He won’t figure out the missing patrons and assume vampires, right? That would be incredibly preposterous!

Sigh. I guess they gotta do what they gotta do to survive and run.

Tis a shame, really. This is a vampire movie that tries to do things different than the norm. They definitely do! It is very serious, it is very specific, and its amount of T&A is somehow still limited in comparison. It has everything going for it to be a great cool new movie, except for my interest. It holds zero of my interest.

Byzantium is a slow moving movie. It tells a nice story, with nice acting, and isn’t a complete piece of shit, yet I still find myself overall bored, and halfway through it just waiting for it to end. That is upsetting to me. Maybe it was a long day and I’d rather just do nothing, but I couldn’t enjoy the movie in any real way.

If it was a bit more entertaining, sure, it’d be higher rated. But that’s why movie reviews are all subjective anyways. I will put a pin on this movie, if I ever have time and a huge interest, I might try to rewatch it. But I need a bit more razzle dazzle. Not explosions, or sex or gore or anything crazy. Just something to move the story along at a quicker pace.

I have no idea where I first heard about Stories We Tell. But it totally happened sometime in the last 0-2 years. I think. It was either something I read, or a friend’s post on facebook, or a trailer. Shit I really don’t remember. Which is funny, because this documentary is about memories not being infallible.

Sarah Polley is an actress that really no one cares about. She had a major role in Go, but since then its been mostly random stuff. She has made a project to honor her mother, maybe. She has gathered all of her older siblings, her dad, her parents friends, and others to just tell the complete story of their mother, as they remember it.

The film on IMDB is described as “A film that excavates layers of myth and memory to find the elusive truth at the core of a family of storytellers.” We are told that basically their stories will show that not everyone has the complete story, that some people have contradicting thoughts about what happened and the only way to really know is to hear every single angle.

Angle means different person, not where the person is talking from in relation to where you are sitting.

But then I watch it.

And uhh, their stories really aren’t that different. A lot of people mentioning different things, but they are all really similar, so the stark differences we were promised don’t really come up.

I mean, this is no Rashomon, the first movie to have an incident occur, and people retelling it all have different memories, til we find out the truth is somewhere in between. It is now a pretty famous plot device. So we would hope for big differences in order for the time to be worth it.

What inspired this video was that she had heard rumors her whole life that her dad wasn’t her real dad. Surprise, it was true. The real dad knew he was the father, but he didn’t tell people. So that guy had part of the story that others were unaware of. A secret love. Maybe. The last line of the film makes us wonder if it was really that good of a love.

But here is the issue I have. Sure nothing crazy happens overall, this is real life. It is an issue a “Character” in the documentary brings up. People are talking for hours about her mom. This movie is less than two hours long. Sarah herself has to pick and choose what memories get told, leaving still an unstructured half truth of her mother, which is not what she set out to do. It is the exact same thing our mind/memories do, but at an editing table.

I just demand the 60 hour version, is all.

I saw the trailer for Love and Honor accidentally before the movie As Cool As I Am.

I didn’t like As Cool As I Am, and usually I wouldn’t go out of my way to watch a movie that I saw previewed before a lame movie, if I have never heard of it.

But here I am! The trailer made me kind of interested in the movie. War! Love! Going AWOL! Hot and sexy topics, and all dealing with the little brother of Thor, who of course never disappoints.

Except for Paranoia, Empire State and The Last Song.

This story is set in 1969, so we get to hear Spirit in the Sky and Magic Carpet Ride, because sometimes filmmakers don’t want to be creative with their song choices anymore.

Dalton Joiner (Austin Stowell) and Mickey Wright (Liam Hemsworth) are both soldiers in the US Army, over at Vietnam. They are volunteers and are halfway through their year long tour. After six months, they have earned a whole week off! They get dropped off in Hong Kong to have a week of fornication, tomfoolery, and who knows what else, as long as they are back at that airport to leave in 7 days.

But Dalton has other plans. He was dating this girl, Jane (Aimee Teegarden), but she broke up with him while he was away from the war. The only thing keeping him going was the thought of going back to her, so he was super good at finding traps and shit. His plan is to fly back to America, because troops fly for free, see her again, and that will rekindle everything they had, and she will know that waiting is the best thing.

So of course his buddy Mickey goes along for the ride.

But when they get back to the states, things have changed. Jane has become Juniper, and she is living in a house of war protesters. Hippies. She broke up with him because she couldn’t support the war (and probably started protesting because it took him away!). She is a free spirit now, perhaps too free, but Dalton doesn’t care. They lie and say they abandoned the war in protest, in order to help win her back, but the lies build, and bad things happen. Also Mickey falls in love with Candace (Teresa Palmer). That is important too, I guess, because they become our main characters.

Hey, girl from Warm Bodies (warm bodies). I like Aimee better, no lie. But you are cool too.

The movie being set in the 1960s was actually surprising. I mean, it makes more sense, but I am still surprised.

From the trailer, it looked like bad stuff would go down hard. Like they didn’t make their flight in time and getting arrested for AWOL charges, then presumably a big political affair that would change everything and end Vietnam.

But when they were arrested? They solved the problem in a few minutes, tricked one officer, and that was it. Too quickly, leaving me with nothing but romance based drama. Silly, romance based drama, because it is just all based on lying to loved ones, like most uncreative movies. I give this one props for technically trying a different angle, only by setting, but this isn’t a fantastic romance story in any way, and the romance between Stowell and Hemsworth doensn’t feel real at all. No chemistry, no tissue box for my tears.

I have found the month of October to be pretty disappointing in regards to major horror releases. All we got for a wide release was the Carrie remake. There aren’t even any Paranormal Activities, because the next one got pushed back to January. Yes, I find them pretty bad now, but come on, just Carrie?

That is where the indie theaters step in. They have one more addition to the month, We Are What We Are, a remake of a Mexican film of the same name from a few years prior. Well, same name, but in Spanish.

The religious elements are exemplified in the foreign version, where every male is named Jesus.

The Parker family is a strange family. They mostly keep to themselves, the dad, Frank (Bill Sage), his two daughters, Rose (Julia Garner) and Iris (Ambyr Childers), and their younger brother who doesn’t know much, Rory (Jack Gore).

Doesn’t know much? Yeah, because he is young and hasn’t learned a lot yet. He knows about Jesus. But he hasn’t learned anything about math, or science, or books, or their family secret.

Oooh, a family secret. You can probably figure out what it is. Look at the creepy fucking photos. I mean, I could tell what their secret was just by reading a small plot description and seeing the cover.

Well, they totally do that. But then a big rain storm happens, and it causes flooding. Flooding that might accidentally tear up enough ground to reveal their secret, that they have kept in the family hidden for over a hundred years. I am sure no one in the town is smart enough to figure it out. Oh, except for the wily Doc Barrow (Michael Parks), who doesn’t know he is about to discover a secret that big, but is just looking for his missing daughter, and enlists the help of a local deputy (Wyatt Russell).

That ain’t bean juice there, fellas.

Outside of their family secret, there is not a lot of surprising things about this movie. It is not your standard horror, that is for sure. There isn’t a killer stalking victims throughout, all of the deaths are quick and not built up for tension.

In fact, the whole movie is kind of set up like a regular drama. It moves incredibly slow, with the family just doing their thing, the doctor just doing his investigation, until a confrontation near the end. Because of the downpour, the dad is off doing other things, and so the two daughters have to take part in their family activity for the first real time on their own. So that is a bit awkward and creepy.

I really enjoyed the ending, I think it made sense from the build up. However, the time it took for the build up to occur is what killed me. It is a rather slow moving movie. Even though the payoff at the end is worth it, I still dislike how I wasn’t really scared or completely freaked out until that point. At that point I wanted to vomit a little bit.

But hey, at least we have an alternative scary movie this month in theaters…kind of!