A review of "Dracula" (1931)

Confessions of a Film Junkie: A Review of “Dracula” (1931)

By: Brian Cotnoir

     Regarded as one of the best horror films of all-time, Bela Lugosi plays the alluring and mysterious Count Dracula in the 1931 classic film “Dracula”.  One unique thing about this film is even though it is based on the novel by Bram Stoker, the film focuses more on the relationship between Count Dracula and the attorney Renfield, rather than Counts relationship with Jonathan Harker, Mina, or Doctor Van Helsing.  If anything those parts are played down in this film. 

     The name of the person who plays Renfield—a British attorney turned psychotic slave by Count Dracula—is Dwight Frye.  Frye’s performance sent chills through my body; he was that good.  Unlike the other films I’ve seen based off the novel, Frye’s, Renfield is definitely the best I’ve seen.  You really feel the sincerity that he’s been transformed from a proper English gentleman to an insect eating mad man.  I actually believe that Dwight Frye is the real star of this film and not Bela Lugosi.  Don’t get me wrong, I am a huge fan of Bela Lugosi and his films, but his character is very boring compared to the other Dracula’s I’ve seen.  He barely speaks in the film and when he is on camera they mostly show him doing poses and glaring.                                   

     Another great thing about this film is the setting.  Dracula’s castle in this film actually looks like the kind of castle Dracula would live in.  Compared to the 1992 remake, the Castle in the 1931 version is dark, decrepit, dirty, dusty, and looks very uninviting.  The castle in the 1992 version, though marvelous in its appearance, doesn’t really say, “I-live-here-alone-with-my-vampire-brides-and-we-don’t-have-any-servants”; the castle is just simply too neat and modern to be the real Dracula’s castle. There is one question, though, I feel must be asked by anyone who has seen this film and that is; why where there armadillo’s living in Dracula’s castle?                     

     The original Dracula film is also very short; running time is around 75 minutes.  Also, this film doesn’t show any violence, like Dracula attacking his victims or Van Helsing driving the stake through Dracula’s heart.  That stuff you have to leave up to your imagination.  Nonetheless, “Dracula” is a film classic and it is quite enjoyable.  If you’re looking for a classic horror film to watch this Halloween, you really can’t go wrong with the one-the-original “Dracula”.  

A Review of "Hard Candy"

Confessions of a Film Junkie: A Review of “Hard Candy”

By: Brian Cotnoir

     “Hard Candy” is a fantastic psychological-thriller that stars Academy Award nominee Ellen Page who plays Haley, a 14-year-old girl who begins an on-line relationship with a 32-year-old photographer named Jeff.  After conversing and flirting with one another on-line, Haley makes the suggestion that they should finally meet.  Jeff is more than happy to meet the young and alluring Haley.  Haley appears to be naïve, which Jeff tries to exploit.  Haley eventually convinces Jeff to invite her over to his place so they can listen to music and maybe take some photographs.  Jeff makes screwdrivers for him and Haley and together the two begin drinking.  After a while Jeff starts to feel ill and blacks out; when he wakes up he’s tied up and the once sweet and innocent appearing Haley begins an intense interrogation.  Haley tells Jeff that she believes he is a pedophile, that he has child porn hidden in the house, and that he had something to do with the dissaperance of a local girl named Donna Mauer.  Jeff denies any wrong doing and tries to convince Haley that shes making a mistake and that he is actually a nice guy.  What follows next is a journey of torture (both physical and psychological) and self-gratification.         

    This film is fantastic; its scary, mysterious, and absolutley mind bending.  This was the first film to be directed by director David Slade and he easily hit a homerun his first time whe he directed “Hard Candy”.  Then there’s the great acting from the films two stars; Patrick Wilson’s portrayal of the photographer, Jeff is eerie and enjoyable.  Wilson is definetley one of the most underrated actors of today in my opinion.  Ellen Page is also fantastic in this film; she went from appearing as a naïve, fun loving, young girl to a violent and sedistic psycopath throughout the course of this film and I can easily say that after watching this film I would not ever want to be on Ellen Page’s bad side.  Page gained internation noteriety after appearing in the hit cult film “Juno”, but I have to say that if you watch “Hard Candy”, you’ll never be able to watch “Juno” without having the same plesant thoughts you once had, ever again.                                   

a Review of "Pecker"

“Confessions of a Film Junkie”: A Review of “Pecker”

By: Brian Cotnoir

                A truly great comedy is the John Waters film “Pecker”.  “Pecker” tells the story of a young photographer known to everyone in town as “Pecker”.  Pecker wanders through his hometown of Baltimore, Maryland snapping photographs of people around town.  Pecker’s photographs eventually capture the eye of a New York art dealer named Rorey Wheeler.  Rorey turns Pecker into a famous artist in New York and his photographs become hot items among New York’s elite.  However, upon returning home to Baltimore with his new found celebrity takes a toll on Pecker, his family, and everyone around him.  Pecker must make the choice of giving up his celebrity status or risk losing the ones closest to him.                               

           One thing that makes “Pecker” a truly great film is the cast.  Edward Furlong’s portrayal as the lovable young character Pecker is just superb.  Furlong’s performance is very believable; he definitely gives off that “small-town boy-having-a-hard-time-adjusting-to-his-new-fame-and-fortune” vibe.  The only other really big name star in this film is Christina Ricci, who plays Pecker’s girlfriend, Shelley.  Shelley manages a Laundromat in Baltimore and is very supportive of Pecker’s photography until his fame and Rorey start coming between them.  Her character is tough and has a “you-don’t-want-to-mess-with-me” attitude.                                                                                                                                                                          

         As for the rest of the cast they’re just simply fantastic.  Pecker’s father runs a bar in town, that’s losing all of its business to a strip club down the street and his mother manages a thrift store where she tries to help those less fortunate find a “new look”.  Pecker has two siblings; an older sister, Tina, who works as a bartender at a gay bar called “The Fudge Palace” and a younger sister, called “Little Chrissy”, who has a severe addiction to candy and sugar products.  Pecker’s grandmother is a devout Catholic who talks to a statue of the Virgin Mary, which she sometimes uses as a ventriloquist-dummy.  Finally, there’s his best friend, Matt, who is a “professional thief” and makes his living stealing things from stores around town, until Pecker’s photographs expose him and he is forced to get a real job.                                             

         After watching “Pecker” you’re first impulse should be to grab your camera and go around your neighborhood snapping photographs of all the people you know, and here’s little trivia fact for all you film aficionados out there is that the music for “Pecker” was done by Stewart Copeland of “The Police”.  If I had to some up Pecker in one sentence I’d say its like “Little Miss Sunshine” meets “My Own Private Idaho”.   What else can I say other than, I really, really like this film and think director John Waters did a phenomenal job making it.

A Tribute to the Jim Henson Company

Confessions of a Film Junkie: A Tribute to The Jim Henson Company

By: Brian Cotnoir

     When people look back and reflect on the television and movies that were such a large part of their childhood things like Disney’s Mickey Mouse & friends and the Warner Brothers “Looney Tunes” stick out as the two main cornerstones of everyone’s childhood, but there is another major player in the children’s entertainment company that is often overlooked; a company that spans through multiple generation’s.  I of course am talking about the one the only Jim Henson Company.     
         
     Jim Henson was a brilliant creator of puppets and a master puppeteer.  His family—along with other creative visionary Frank Oz—helped create some of the greatest and longest lasting shows of our childhood. Henson is responsible for creating some of the most beloved children’s television shows and movies such as “Sesame Street”, “The Muppets”, “The Dark Crystal”, “Labyrinth”, and “Bear in the Big Blue House”; just to name a few, and that’s just the tip of the ice berg.        

     In 1979 Jim Henson & Frank Oz founded the Jim Henson Creature Shop in Hampstead, England.  There Henson and Oz created the Puppets for and shot their first film together; “The Dark Crystal”.  After the “Dark Crystal” Henson and Oz went on to create even more elaborate puppets for the film “Labyrinth” which starred Jennifer Connelly and David Bowie (who also did the music for the film).                               
     
     The Jim Henson Creature Shop wasn’t limited to only films, though, and they began creating puppets for television shows too.  Jim Henson’s “The StoryTeller” debuted in 1987 and was centered around old folklore and myths acted out on camera with live-action actors and custom puppets made in the Jim Henson Creature Shop.  Shortly after Henson’s tragic and untimely death in 1990, another show emerged to show off the Jim Henson Creature Shop’s new puppets combined with animatronics.  This show was called “Dinosaurs”; A show that featured actual full animatronic puppets that could be operated with a machine instead of human puppeteers.                                  
       
     The Jim Henson Creature Company is also responsible for creating all the talking animals/creatures in films such as “Babe”, The Live Action “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles” (1990) film, “George of the Jungle” and “Dr. Dolittle”.  More recently the Jim Henson Creature Shop has done work such as creating the stolen tiger in 2009 Comedy “The Hangover”.   

    What I think is most great about Jim Henson and his film company is that even after all these years his creatures and creations have stood the test of time.  Pretty much everyone remembers watching “Sesame Street” as a child, and “The Muppets” have given us many beloved childhood characters such as Kermit the Frog and Miss Piggy.  Henson’s earliest films have become cult classics with a new generation of adults who remember fondly seeing “The Dark Crystal” and “Labyrinth” for the first time in theatres when they were young children.  Henson was a great visionary who helped keep alive an almost lost art-form of puppeteering.  In a world today where films are dominated with green screen effects and CGI, the Jim Henson Company reminds of a simpler time when all it took was a person (or in some cases a whole team of puppeteers) and a puppet to create magic.  Click the Link Below to see some of the amazing work that had to be put in to create parts of “Labyrinth”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEOpymTMj8s&feature=relmfu

    
     The Jim Henson Company still exists today.  The Company is actually located at the old Chaplin Studios (a site founded and made famous by silent film star/writer/director Charlie Chaplin).  Henson’s family still works on creating films.  Henson’s son, Brian, has kept his father’s puppeteering legacy going with such films as “The Witches”, “A Muppet Christmas Carol”, “Muppet Treasure Island”.                
                
     Jim Henson really was a one-of-a-kind creative visionary.  The legacy he left behind is kept alive by his family, the film Company & the Creature Shop he founded, and shall go on hopefully forever.      

A Review of "A Serbian Film"

Confessions of a Film Junkie: A Review of “A Serbian Film”

By: Brian Cotnoir

     Back when I used to post weekly film reviews on blogspot and facebook, I would always ask my friends and anyone else who read my film reviews to recommend films that they would like me to review.  The second most popular film that I was requested to review was a foreign film, simply entitled “A Serbian Film”.  I got a synopsis of the story from someone I used to work with, and I was so appalled by some of the things he told me, that I flat out refused to ever review this film.            
    One year later, another co-worker and I were reminiscing about the first time we watched Ruggero Deodato’s “Cannibal Holocaust”, he simply asked “I wonder if there’s anything more violent then [Cannibal Holocaust”, too which I replied, “Oh yes, there is.”  After a couple weeks he convinced me that we should give it a try.  In the days leading up to the films screening, I was absolutely terrified as too what horrors I would have to endure to get through the Director’s Cut in just one sitting.  Now that it’s over, here is my review.     

Boo Yeah! Made I through This Film in Just One Sitting!

     So here’s the background to the film first:  A retired Serbian Porn star, named Milos, is living a typical suburban life with his wife and young son.  Milos and his wife are having some financial issues.  Since Milos is retired he and his wife don’t have occupations, and are living off of the money Milos form his porn films.  However, the money is drying up quicker than Milos and his wife had ever expected, so Milos is approached by an old friend/porn star who tells him of a man named Vukmir who is planning “a New Age of Porn” and wants Milos to be his star.  Milos agrees to do it and in exchange Vukmir promises to make Milos wealthy enough that he won’t have to worry about money “until his son is a full-grown man”.  Unfortunately, for Milos, Vukmir has something much darker in store for Milos, and everyone he is close to.                 

     Now without giving away too many spoilers, I want to tell say that Yes, this is a graphic movie, and No, it is not the most violent movie I’ve ever seen.  For the first half of a movie, it’s pretty boring. It’s just Milos and his family living day-to-day life; they are pretty much regular average people.  As the film progresses, however, it gets more and more violent.  People die some pretty horrendous deaths in this film, and a good portion of them are related to/or caused by sexual pleasure.  I didn’t have much of a problem with the graphic deaths because they weren’t just violent for the sake of being violent.  The graphic violence in the film, to me, represents Vukmir’s mental and sexual control over his actors and film crew, and we later find out that before becoming a Pornographer, Vukmir used to be a psychologist, so that would explain why he has this “Puppet-Master” like control over everyone in the film.      

    I am NOT a fan of rape scenes in movies, typically when one is happening in a film, I’ll look away or fast forward the film.  There are three rape scenes (that I counted) in this film, and for two of the rape scenes the victims were unconscious.  So for the most part they’re not typical in the sense that they show their victims being forced against their will or tortured because they’ve been drugged unconscious and have no idea what is going on or happening to them.  One of those scenes shows Milos stumbling upon a tape of him being sexually assaulted by one of Vukmir’s Male workers while he was heavily sedated, and Milos until seeing this tape had no memory or any idea that he had been sexually assaulted.                                         

    This film does break a lot of taboo’s on what you should and should not show in films, but they do actually draw a line at pedophilia.  One of the (many) horrible things Vukmir tries to convince Milos to do is have sex with a very young girl on camera, and Milos flat out refuses to.  Milos is so against the idea of pedophilia in film that there a part in the film where he actually holds a knife to his own genitals and threatens to cut it off if Vukmir does not let him leave.  He agrees to let Milo’s go, but devises a plan to get his scene of pedophilia in a way that is sure to humiliate Milos and his entire family.       

    So is this film really as violent and as horrible as everyone says?  In my opinion, no.  I think “Cannibal Holocaust” was way more graphic and violent then “A Serbian Film”.  Yes, there were a few parts in the film that made me cringe and look away from the screen in terror, but overall the film had a good story, good actors, and for the most part the violence had relevance to the plot, and was done in good taste—at least in my opinion.  I would not consider this film controversial, but I would not recommend this film to anyone who is under the age of eighteen. 

THERE I REVIEWED IT!  ARE YOU ALL HAPPY NOW?????????

A review of "Dear Mr. Gacy"

Confessions of a Film Junkie: A review of “Dear Mr. Gacy”

By: Brian Cotnoir

American’s for some reason or another have always had some unique and unknown fascination with serial killers.  Lately I’ve been noticing a lot more independent film releases which are essentially biographies of famous serial killers, and they’re not just films loosely based on actual events—these films stay as true as they can to the stories and the methods of these madmen murderers.  For decades before serial killers such as Ed Gein, Jeffrey Dahmer, and Charles Manson have provided inspiration for some of horrors most notorious villains and bad guys, but now it appears that the real life murderers are finally getting recognition for their life’s work and legacies.  Recently, I watched a film about serial killer John Wayne Gacy, entitled “Dear Mr. Gacy”, and I almost never say this about horror films/thrillers, but this film scared the crap out of me.  I am dead serious this movie is so chilling; I actually had to pause the movie a few times and splash my face with cold water to help calm myself down.                                          

William Forsythe is Terrifying as
notorious American Serial Killer
John Wayne Gacy

    The story of “Dear Mr. Gacy” is based on the true events and conversations that took place between Gacy and a young college student named Jason Moss.  Moss wants to write his thesis paper on John Wayne Gacy and believes that he can get Gacy to open up about his life and find out what makes him tick.  Moss begins to send letters to Gacy.  In the letters Moss lies to Gacy and says he’s from an abusive home, that he thinks he might be homosexual, and that he’s thinking of becoming a street hustler, and how he believes that Gacy is the only person who could understand him.  Jason Moss’ lies (along with a few homoerotic pictures he sent to Gacy) eventually get the stoic murderer to open up to him.  Moss has Gacy eating out of the palms of his hands, and the whole time Gacy believes that it is he who is taking advantage of Jason Moss.  At one point Moss contemplates if what he is doing is wrong or harmful as he begins to exhibit erratic and destructive behavior—he manages to push through and it all comes down to one first and final encounter with Gacy himself in prison.  I don’t want to give away the thrilling (and 100% true ending), but I will tell you once you see it, you will be left with a feeling of terror and unease.     

Forsythe & Moss's characters meet for the 1st time

The Real Gacy and Jason Moss

     The acting in this film is fantastic.  Jesse Moss (no relation to the real life Jason Moss) is fantastic as the films protagonist, and actor William Forsythe is absolutely terrifying as the serial killer John Wayne Gacy.  I actually read parts of Jason Moss book The Last Victim years before this film was made and this film made the stories he told all the more frightening.  It’s actually quite a good book.  I believe that John Wayne Gacy was the most dangerous serial killer the world has ever seen and this film does a excellent job of not sugar-coating this psychotic murderer or distorting the truth of his horrible and bloody legacy.      
      
   I would recommend this film to anyone who is a fan of Serial-Killer Horror films and/or Psychological Thrillers, but be warned this is a terrifying film based on true events and is one of the more accurate films I’ve seen that is based on real-life events, which I think adds to the terror because they didn’t have to add or make up anything to make him more scary because he was already one of the most shocking and evil people to have existed in history.

A review of "Freaks"

Confessions of a Film Junkie:  A review of “Freaks”

By: Brian Cotnoir

     Director Tod Browning broke all sorts of barriers and standards of film when he directed his 1932 film, “Freaks”.  Browning first gained his notoriety in the cinema world in the early 1930’s for his collaborations with early horror movie icon stars Lon Chaney Sr. and Bela Lugosi; Browning was the director of the original film “Dracula” (1931).  One year later Browning decided to push the envelope of shock value in horror films and make the movie “Freaks”.                                         “Freaks” is set in France in the late 18^th century and tells the story of a group of circus performers.  One of the circus performers, a midget named Hans, falls madly in love with a trapeze artist named Cleopatra.  Hans begins to buy Cleopatra gifts and lend her money because he believes that she loves him, but Cleopatra doesn’t really have any feelings for Hans; she’s just using him to get whatever she wants.  One day Cleopatra finds out that Hans has inherited a large fortune and decides that she will marry him and then poison him so she can inherit Hans’s fortune and run off with her lover—the strong man, “Hercules”.  However, if the other circus performers find out about Cleo’s plans they could be ruined and she and Hercules could be in a lot of trouble.                                      
     I really like how Browning cast actual circus “freaks” in this film.  Many people who saw this film in theatres walked out before the films shocking ending because they were appalled and repulsed by the people that appeared on the screen.  Browning actually posted in a disclaimer at the beginning of the film that basically said that the people that appeared in his film were real people and just because they look different it doesn’t mean that they should be judged or looked down upon and that everyone is unique and special.  I was absolutely blown away at how sensitive and ahead of its time this film is on the issue.  All the freaks that appear in the film are memorable and really likeable and here’s a fun trivia fact; the actor who played Hans in this film, Harry Earles, was also a member of the “lollipop guild” in the “Wizard of Oz”.                   
    I cannot say enough nice things about how great this film truly is; it is definitely my current favorite classic-film, and I think it should be seen by everyone.