Sci-Fi

March 3, 2018

Movie Review: Annihilation

What do extra terrestrials have in store when they finally come to Earth to check the place out, enslave us and take over for us since we’ve done such a great job. That’s a question that’s been asked in books, radio theater, video games and films for over a century. Whether they are benevolent visitors like “E.T.”, curious visitors from “Close Encounters of the Third Kind,” or killing machines on the hunt in “Predator,” the idea of aliens and and their relationship with Earth has been an interesting one to say the least.

Our latest odyssey into extra terrestrials and their fascination with the Earth comes in the form of “Annihilation” directed by Alex Garland, who brought us our impending nightmare we’ll face with Artificial Intelligence in “Ex Machina.”

Based on the “Southern Reach” trilogy of books by Jeff VanderMeer from 2014, in which a meteor lands and the land surrounding begins to re-claim itself and continues to expand. “Annihilation” is based on the first book in the series where a squad of tough women enter what is called Area X to explore and find the reason for the expansion of what is called “The Shimmer.”

What works for “Annihilation” is that it never holds your hand or tells you what is happening. You also have some very strong performances for the entire cast which includes Natalie Portman, Gina Rodriguez, Tessa Thompson and Jennifer Jason Leigh, all of which comprise most of the squad who enter “The Shimmer” for answers on why previous expeditions have disappeared to never return with the exception of one person, played by Oscar Isaac.

The female leads all come from different background, yet share a commonality; they are flawed in either a physical or psychological way, which eventually leads to their breakdown and eventually succumbing to “The Shimmer” There are a lot of blink and you miss it moments which gives you a reason to watch this film over and over to pick up the subtle nuances that Garland throws in.

Where “Annihilation” might lose some people is once again, the same way it will bring people in. Garland isn’t interested in spelling things out for the audience. None of the characters are painted as either protagonists or antagonists, they are all searching for meaning, just like us, the audience.

“Annihilation” can be read into as much or as little as you feel necessary. Is it a standard sci-fi film where aliens are taking over slowly? Sure. Is it a film about becoming one with nature again, becoming self-less, and giving yourself up to something that might be bigger than you? Sure. There are so many ways to read this film, and that’s what makes it great, and where it leaves the audience come the end opens up more conversation for, hopefully, the next two films to complete the trilogy.

While I love the bright shiny colors and psychedelic trip Garland took me on, I especially love the attention world he creates and the conflicts it creates within the characters. It reminds me of what I love about “The Thing,” Sure, the creature effects are great, but give me conflict and something with stakes.

As far as I’m concerned, Garland is two-for-two in the directors chair and if this trilogy is allowed to be seen through, I could see it as some of the most epic science fiction in the last 20 years or so. So please don’t judge “Annihilation” yet as it’s still incomplete week as far as I’m concerned.

October 30, 2017

(Ep. 93): Killer Klowns from Outer Space – Movie Commentary: October 2017

Killer Klowns from Outer Space

PG-13  1988 ‧ Science fiction film/Cult film ‧ 1h 28m

When teenagers Mike (Grant Cramer) and Debbie (Suzanne Snyder) see a comet crash outside their sleepy small town, they investigate and discover a pack of murderous aliens who look very much like circus clowns. They try to warn the local authorities, but everyone assumes their story is a prank. Meanwhile, the clowns set about harvesting and eating as many people as they can. It’s not until they kidnap Debbie that Mike decides it’s up to him to stop the clowns’ bloody rampage.
Release date: May 20, 1988 (USA)

What could be better then watching some Killer Klowns this Halloween!? Well with the Simplistic Reviews crew! Join us as we watch a movie that was made to be wacky and goof, yet its still better then half the shit that comes out today! So grab that frankenberry! Pour some of that Halloween themed choice of beer because… this Movie Commentary is gonna scare your socks off!


October 15, 2015

The Horror Time Capsule – 1993: Body Bags

BODY BAGS: UN-FILLING

91 mins | Horror/Sci-Fi anthology | 1993

HBO had Tales from the Crypt, Showtime had nothing. But that all changed on August 8th 1993, Body Bags an anthology TV movie aired on Showtime…and that was it.

A star studded of a cast came together to make an extremely un-filling 91 minutes. Tales from the Crypt had the Crypt Keeper hosting its episodes, Body Bags had “The Coroner” played fantastically by the great John Carpenter. Yes I know I’m comparing apples and oranges, TV show with TV movie but clearly this is what Showtime had in mind. They had the power to do something unique but instead came up short.

The three best things are John Carpenter playing The Coroner, who is the most entertaining piece in this puzzle of a film. The second is the first story, “The Gas Station” which is a solid story that sets you up to be disappointed. The third is the cast, a balls to the wall of this guy and that comes up short. I liked this cast alot. It’s a shame they didn’t make more, it would of been fun to see where it goes with others making special appearances.

“The Morgue”
John Carpenter as The Coroner
Tom Arnold as Morgue Worker #1
Tobe Hooper as Morgue Worker #2

Is the glue that holds everything together. The Coroner is the Crypt Keeper here hosting the stories in a flat out entertaining performance by John Carpenter.

“The Gas Station”
Robert Carradine as Bill
Alex Datcher as Anne
Wes Craven as Pasty Faced Man
Sam Raimi as Dead Bill
David Naughton as Pete
Lucy Boryer as Peggy
George Buck Flower as Stranger
Molly Cheek as Divorcee
Only story that makes me feel like I didn’t waste my time. The others aren’t horrible but the this one just works. It’s a simple slasher, which paired with guests set the bar way too high. Seeing the likes of Craven, Raimi and Carradine peeked my interest. But I guess its just too good for this film, because sadly the others don’t come any close to “The Gas Station”.

“Hair”
Stacy Keach as Richard Coberts
David Warner as Dr. Lock
Sheena Easton as Megan
Dan Blom as Dennis
Gregory Nicotero as Man with Beautiful Hair
Kim Alexis as Woman with Beautiful Hair
Deborah Harry as The Nurse

Stacy Keach plays a guy who isn’t happy with his thinning hair. Sheena Easton says no and she loves him anyway. But it’s just too depressing 🙁 …He tries a few comical treatments but nothing helps. I’m pretty sure this whole story was suppose to be the funny one then again it was the 90’s. And let me say its very 90’s, very very 90’s.

He see a commercial and decides to try it. “Dr. Lock” played by David Warner (Titanic, Tron, The Omen) is the doc that can help. He asks Stacy what kind of hair he’d like using a 90’s computer generated program, you know how that looks without me saying anymore. Keach picks the Stallion. Yep it is its name, long black hair (see picture). And the whole things was done over night, without surgery! Sounds to good to be true hun? Well it is… And when you find out why, it feels like a copout. When its revealed I could hear myself say, “Really?!” I didn’t care much for it but I did like it more then the “Eye”. “Hair” was so bad yet I honestly think I liked this story about a guys hair more then the guy and his eye.

“Eye”
Mark Hamill as Brent Matthews
Twiggy as Cathy Matthews
John Agar as Dr. Lang
Roger Corman as Dr. Bregman
Charles Napier as Baseball Team Manager
Eddie Velez as Baseball Player


Were “Hair” was about hair I bet you can’t figure out what “Eye” is about?…NOPE

Your wrong it is about…

A eye. Let that settle in a bit. We have a film that is made up of three stories. Two are about something on your body. Not much to pick from apparently. “The Gas Station” stands out for its pacing and the fact its different then the others. “Hair” and “Eye” are about two guys getting transplants. And its goes wrong, like it feels like they didn’t try. “The Gas Station” isn’t a perfect film, but the “Eye” and “Hair” come off like they ran out of ideas and gave it to their 8 year old son to write. When you have three films it should feel like three and not two.

“Eye” is about a baseball player with an annoying accent. His wife played by Twiggy losses her American accent a few times and that too becomes annoying. Mark Hamill here is somewhat a joy to watch. The thing is he has always been but here I feel he was wasted. When he gets into a bad car accident in which his right eye is destroyed. He ends up losing it but receives one from a donor. The donor ends up being a serial killer who killed woman and had sex with them. This eye begins to take over the good old southern wholesome baseball player who was making his way to the top.

And thats it. Still feel hungry for more don’t you? Yeah thats how I felt.

“The Gas Station” = Solid

“Hair” = Short

Should of been left out. Or give us more. I didn’t mind the story but there could of been more, the story came up short for me on creativity.

“Eye” = Weak

Like the “Hair” I think it should of been left out. What would of been cool if they connected it to “The Gas Station” and its serial killer. Maybe that was his eye, sure it sounds like Im doing a copout but at least it’s something.

Because what we got in the end was very un-filling.

Kinda felt this way after the film but The Gas Station saved me

December 12, 2014

Under the Skin

Under the Skin – Alien
Sometimes I simply find it difficult to preface a film. So without further ado I’ll jump right into it. “Under the Skin” is one of those films that defies preconceptions and to be honest with you, just might be one of those films that will surprise many, if said many are willing to give it a chance and really try to understand an alien concept; a woman who is willing to sleep with a man from Scotland…..(I kid, I kid).
“Skin” is the story of a mysterious woman, played seductively and as sultry as ever by Scarlett Johansson. She drives a van, lures men into said van, and leads them to their doom. She is followed by a duo of mysterious motorcyclists who seem to clean up whatever mess she leaves behind. Things start to spin a little out of control after one of her encounters has her letting loose one of her quarries and going on the run. This is where they say, “the plot thickens.”
To go any further would be to do a disservice to the rest of the film, and going cold into “Skin” is one of the best things that you could do for this film. Director Jonathan Glazer, best known for “Sexy Beast” combines the best of art house cinema with trippy effects to create an engrossing, thinking-persons, science fiction weird-fest. What also stands out is the excellent score by Mica Levy, which plays like combination of Radiohead, Aphex Twin, and Wendy Carlos.

What I think has been missing from sci-fi flicks for a while is the notion that a setting needs to actually be alien, or cosmic, in order to make it a real sci-fi film. What I think is the most underrated aspect of “Skin” is the fact that the film takes place in Scotland. Let’s be honest, how much do we all really know about that land of Scotland outside of “Highlander” and Sean Connery. The landscapes and dialect almost become a character in and of itself and add a wrinkle to the story you wouldn’t expect.

Now the elephant in the room; the performance of Johansson, and I’m not just talking about her acting ability. One of the things that got a lot of attention leading up to the release of this film was the fact that Johannson shed all of her clothes for the role. While it’s nothing new for well-known actresses to ditch the clothes and show the goods, it’s a tad more newsworthy considering we are talking about an actress known for playing Black Widow in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. However, her disrobing shouldn’t take away from her simple, yet effective performance. Most of her acting isn’t done through dialogue, but rather her movements and body language, and I might go as far as saying this is her best performance to date.

Another misconception is that “Skin” is simply a “Species” rip-off with stronger feminist undertones. Yes, on paper the fact that you have a mysterious women seeking men out and later dispatching them is pretty “Species”-like, but the comparisons can stop there. “Skin” features a very strong female character whose intentions aren’t truly discovered until close to the start of the third act, and even at that point we see that character’s intentions shift after a chance encounter with a specific character she picks up and is ready to dispatch. However, while I do enjoy the power that Johansson wields over her quarry, the third act flips the script and changes who may or may not be in control. I know some of this sounds cryptic, and that is the point. My intention is to entice you to watch a film that is certainly worthy of your attention and is an interesting take on male/female relations and interactions.

So, with that being said; should you see “Under the Skin?” See above please, of course you should. It’s one of the most original sci-fi films in quite a while, with a daring performance by Scarlett Johansson and some of the most “alien” cinematography of 2014. Sure we’ve gone to the far-reaches of the Marvel Universe, Earth under the rule of talking Apes, and even traveled back into Biblical-times on an ark, but the way Glazer created a practically alien world out of something that exists on Earth hasn’t been done since Peter Jackson created Middle-Earth with the help of New Zealand.

Fun Fact: In 1979, Robert Taylor claimed to have been nearly abducted by aliens in Dechmont Law in Livington, West Lothian, Scotland in what has been called the Dechmont Law Encounter.

August 16, 2013

Simplistic Reviews Presents: Cinema and Suds, A Film Quadruple-header and Mamma Mia! Pizza Beer

When I think of pizza I automatically think of beer.  Nothing goes better with a slice of pepperoni and mushroom than an ice cold beer.  We also know that beer goes with movies, but what happens when you combine pizza, beer, and movies?  Episode 2 of Cinema and Suds happens.

What I’m sure started out as a joke, has become a reality for beer and pizza lovers; PIZZA BEER!  Yes, pizza beer, folks.  A beer that tastes and smells like an actual pizza.  You might be thinking; were these people stoned when they came up with the concept to combine pizza and beer into one convenient 16 oz. bottle.  Probably, but you know what else goes great with pizza and beer…..I’ll leave that up to you of course.

So, you got your Mamma Mia! Pizza Beer in your glass (hopefully a wine glass since this is such a classy beer) now it’s time to pick a film.  You could go the safe route and pick “The Godfather” or “Goodfellas” but where’s the fun in that?  You’ve got a damn Pizza Beer in your hand!  Be adventurous, or since you’re already pizza drunk (you might need a few of these since the ABV only clocks in at 4.7%) and don’t care what you’re watching, why not pop in one of these classics, and I have four of them for you today.

Why not start the night with “Date Night” starring Tina Fey and Steve Carell.  Continue on with “Superbad” followed up by “Spaceballs.”  And why not finish up the night with “The Thing” considering the fact that by this time you’ll be talking to Mamma Mia! Pizza Beer asking, “What is this thing?” Or, “How and why did they make this thing?”

Enjoy the video companion to this review, and check back every week for another edition of Cinema and Suds.

August 12, 2013

Elysium (Matt’s Take)

Elysium – Preaching

PREACHING

As the Summer movie season winds down, we start to enter this zone of thoughtful Summer fare where the lines are blurred between balls-to-the-wall action and films with a message.  When Fall movies begin to roll out in the next month or so we’ll start to see legit Oscar contenders and not as many giant-robots-punching each-other-in-the-face films.  It’s the natural order of things.  This brings me to “Elysium” a solid, yet heavy-handed, sci-fi epic from “District 9” director, Neill Blomkamp.

“Elysium” is the story of Max Da Costa (Matt Damon) a former car thief who now works for Armadyne, an infrastructure/munitions manufacturer for the aforementioned city in space.  An accident at Armadyne forces Max to seek the help of local hacker and gangster, Spider, who offers him a way up to Elysium if he puts on a metal exoskeleton that resembles what Mickey Rourke was wearing in “Iron Man 2.”  Political intrigue, exotic sci-fi weapons, and weird accents are the highlights of “Elysium” which is a little ham-handed with the way in which it deals with class issues and immigration, but at least one movie this year will call out the elephant in the room we are all dealing with as a global society these days.

Coming from a middle class family and living a middle class life, I know the class gap is widening even as I write this sentence and who knows, one day there very well might a space station where all the rich One Percenters live, while the Earth degenerates into a cesspool of crime and poverty, hey, have you seen Detroit lately?

The one problem ‘Elysium” definitely DOESN’T have is how it looks.  This broken vision of Los Angeles looks beautiful, on par with what Alfonso Cuaron did with London in “Children of Men.” The world looks lived in and is populated with actual people, not CG fill-ins.  The fact that Blomkamp decides to shoot scenes in actual trash heaps and squalor shows his dedication to his world and how he intends on making it look. You feel gritty and grimy on your time on Earth, but funny enough, that grim and grit carries over when you visit the world of Elysium.  Despite it’s pristine surface, there is a rotten underbelly to the wealthy off-planet with it’s ID-scarred citizens and the use of primitive looking robot helpers offering cocktails and Hors d’oeuvres.  There is something off-putting about Elysium, but at the same time you have to ask yourself; would you prefer Elysium to Earth?  I think most of us would sympathize with the citizens of Elysium, who seem to be under attack a lot, even though these people were likely the cause of the Earth’s plight in the first place.

The acting is solid in “Elysium” with Matt Damon leading the way.  But the real revelation is Sharlto Copley, who plays Kruger, a sleeper agent for Elysium’s Secretary of Defense, played by Jodie Foster.  Copley plays a villain with deranged glee, almost of the level of Heath Ledger’s Joker in “The Dark Knight.”  Kruger is built up as a psychopath, which fits the bill nicely based on his enjoyment in his job, namely killing immigrants without a second thought.  But there is a certain mystery and sadness behind his eyes.  Was he a psychopath before he was made a sleeper agent or did years of death and Med-Pod treatments warp his mind into what we see on screen.  I’d love to see a prequel with just Kruger.

Speaking of Med-Pods, this brings me to another important aspect of the film; healthcare.  In the time of “Obamacare” and free healthcare for all citizens, at what cost could free healthcare mean for us as a society.  Yes, we all love free, but when government is in charge of what we put into our bodies just because it’s free, is it plausible to believe that something could go bad.  Most of the citizens of Elysium seem to be in a haze, almost dead from the outside, as they live their carefree and safe lives.  Could too much exposure to medicine and these “Med-Pods” cause some long-term damage, and psychosis?  Take Kruger as an example.  In his line of work I’m sure he’s met plenty of bullets, knives, lasers, and grenades where he’s had to make some pit stops into a Med-Pod.  The “free” healthcare could have some side effects, couldn’t it?

This is just me reading in-between the lines, and who knows, this could just be be preaching at this point as well, but Blomkamp has said, quote, “No, no, no.  This isn’t science fiction.  This is today.  This is now.”  Now who’s preaching.

Bottom line, “Elysium” is a step in the right direction for “intelligent sci-fi,” but with films being a medium for escape, especially during the Summer time, it’s odd to see such a preachy film in August.  However, Blomkamp raises the question(s) as to what should we need to do in order to stop this potential future only 140 years away.  Are we doomed to live on Earth while the most wealthy skip town and leave us the scraps?  If Blomkamp is the minister to this sermon, we should listen up, but still keep an open mind and hope that there is still some humanity left in our future.

Fun Fact:  “Elysium” marks TriStar Picture’s return to big budget pictures, their first since 1998’s “The Mask of Zorro” who’s budget was $95 Million, compared to $115 Million for “Elysium.”

August 12, 2013

Elysium (DJ’s Take)

ALLEGORICAL

Neill Blomkamp tops the list of my five favorite great directors of the future.  (Duncan Jones, Rian Johnson, Matt Reeves, and Josh Trank are the others)  His first film out of the box, District 9, is probably the most original, groundbreaking, sci-fi action film we’ve seen for two decades.  Though, that film’s faux documentary style allowed Blomkamp some leeway to radically tell a story.  A style that worked like gangbusters.  However, I hoped and knew that Blomkamp wouldn’t want to be pigeonholed to that type of filmmaking.  The question was how well could he tell a story in the more traditional fashion.  His sophomore effort Elysium proves that Blomkamp can be a multifaceted director.  However, he might need a bit more subtlety as a writer.  Because for all Elysium’s pulse pounding action and jaw dropping visuals, its message seems to clumsily get in the way.

The concept is great.  The rich and affluent people of earth depart for a super advanced space station called Elysium.  There, food shortages, crime, and diseases are nonexistent.  A small group of earth rebels, led by a recently dying Matt Damon, fight to get up to Elysium before his time runs out.  An ALLEGORY that is clear enough to understand even for the normally oblivious.  However, Elysium’s flaw is not allowing the audience to absorb the “We Are The 99%” ALLEGORY on its premise alone.  The film seems to beat you over the head with it over and over again.  So much so, the last three minutes become a montaged commercial for financial equality.  Now, I know what you’re thinking.  District 9 is also based on the huge ALLEGORICAL message of racial inequality and South African apartheid.  However, I believe District 9’s documentary style and alien creatures mask that film’s message a bit smoother than Elysium.  Elysium suffers from not being able to sugarcoat what it wants to say.  Thus, distracting from and sadly short-changing all the things great about it.  And trust me, there is a lot of great here.   The world building is strong.  The acting is solid.  And the action is tremendously outstanding.

It always floors me how Blomkamp seems to make every action scene he does original, gritty and exciting.  No one does a clusterf%*k action scene like Neill Blomkamp.  NO!  NO!  Not Michael Bay.  Bay’s action direction, admittedly one of the few things he does well, is hyper-stylized.  Blomkamp’s action direction feels out of control.  Out of control in a good way.  You feel exhausted after each crazy entanglement Blomkamp puts you through.  Did you forget that mech suit battle in District 9?  His fights are sloppy, unpredictable, harrowing and great.  Elysium is no different in this regard.  The fighting style of the exosuits, the spaceship crashes, the corridor battles, the desert plain assaults.  They are all amazing.  Blomkamp also flexes his muscles again in the futuristic tech department.  He seems to always know how to introduce and use unique weapons and technologies just enough so we buy them as an audience, but not get bored of them.  Sanctimonious self indulgent statement here but…THEY DIDN’T WANT THIS GUY TO DO HALO!!!  DAMN IT!!!  Sorry.  It always bothers me.

As stated before, the performances are solid.  Matt Damon, while not breaking any new ground here, is still his usual charismatic self.  Jodie Foster playing a baddie always seems to vibe with me.  Though, her accent is a tad inconsistent.  A joyfully over the top performance by actor Wagner Moura as Spider also entertains.  However, there is one actor that steals EVERY SINGLE scene he is in.  One performance that people will talk about when they talk about Elysium.  And that is Sharlto Copley.  I was partially avoiding any spoilery trailers leading up to this film’s release.   This led to my surprise when I saw Copley was in Elysium as much as he is.  He’s Blomkamp’s boy, so it makes all the sense in the world.  However, he isn’t really promoted as much as he should be.  The guy completely owns this film.  After his role as the psychotic Kruger and his apparently terrific performance in Spike Lee’s Old Boy, Copley has got to be a star on the rise.

Elysium is another strong sci-fi follow-up from Neill Blomkamp.  Its only sin is a slight difficulty to get out of the way of its own ALLEGORICAL message.  If you aren’t prone to eye rolling from preachiness or a registered Republican, you’ll enjoy the hell out of it.  Even if you are, you’ll still be entertained.  Suit up…be careful of hand grenades to the face…watch it…then tell me I’m wrong.

March 13, 2013

London Calling: Children of Men

Children of Men – Captivating

Lately in film, especially futuristic sci-fi fare, the preferred city of devastation is London.  It used to be that Godzilla would stomp Japan into oblivion, but of course we all know that giant lizards bred out of nuclear irresponsibility is completely far-fetched, right?  But putting fantasy away, London has been a hub the past decade or so for apocalyptic visions of the future.  From Rage viruses to an infertility pandemic, I’m not sure “Keep Calm and Carry On” would be enough for even London’s strongest citizens to get behind.  This brings me to 2006’s “Children of Men” one of the most captivating sci-fi films to be released in recent memory.
Here’s the scoop; we visit London in the not too distant future where there hasn’t been a reported new birth in nearly 18 years.  Just when you thought things couldn’t get any worse, the youngest person in the world, lovingly named Baby Diego, has just been murdered.  With the world in mourning, we follow happy-go-lucky Theo, played by Clive Owen.  Theo is the type of guy that loves to get high with his hippy friend Jaspar and get kidnapped by a terrorist group called “The Fishes” led by his former activist wife, Julian, played by Julianne Moore.  The plot thickens when it’s discovered that Theo is carrying some precious cargo, namely a baby in the belly of a young refugee girl named Kee.  With the government, crooked cops, and members of the terrorist group hot on his heels, Theo has no choice but to protect Kee and try and deliver her to The Human Project, a mysterious group researching why humanity become infertile so many years ago.

“Children” went largely unnoticed during its theatrical run, which is odd for how good this film really is.  The acting is spot on, the setting couldn’t feel more real, and the message is relatively universal.  Sure, there are some preachy moments, and even some of the imagery and names are obvious, case in point, the young girl Kee, (even though it’s technically pronounced “chi”) who just might be the “key” to civilization’s survival.  But those are minor quibbles.

Directed by Alfonso Cuaron, who some might know for “Y Tu Mama Tambien” or to an even wider audience as the director the best Harry Potter film installment “Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban.”  Some might disagree with that assessment of the “Harry Potter” franchise, but it was the moment that the series went from light-hearted and childish to dark, brooding, and serious.
Cuaron lends that trademark style to “Children” and creates a dystopian London where all hope seems to be lost, refugees are treated like Jews during World War II, and ethnic tensions are slowly coming to a head.  With all of that being said, Cuaron is still able to capture small glimmers of hope in a hopeless world, and some humanity in some of the more monstrous characters.  But the highlights of the film revolve around the long take action sequences which last upwards of 6 minutes.  Even though it has been debunked that these scenes are not one long take, the fact remains that these scenes highlight the film and create the most memorable moments in “Children.”

Despite the fact “Children” was critically praised, the fact it didn’t bank more at the box office was a crime in and of itself.  It’s also a movie I’m always shocked people have never seen; at that moment I slap them in the face, hand them the DVD, and bid them Godspeed.

Fun Fact:  In the Bexhill block scene, Theo can be seen wearing a London 2012 Olympics fleece jacket.

August 7, 2012

They Live

They Live: Brilliant

There will and always be a personal favorite list that any movie viewer has. A list that if you ever crashed landed on a desert island, which films who you like to have?

Today I share one of mine, They Live.

They Live is a fav of mine that always gets played over and over. I found this film years ago on TV one night. Back when VHS recorders where the shit. The station played a trailer for the film before they played it and it caught my eye. I jumped over to the remote and pressed record! I still own that copy, even though it is worn out it still gives it a special feeling effect DVD’s and Blu-rays can’t give you.

This film might not be a classic to everyone. It really only appels to a small group of people, in fact I find it hard to find people I know that have seen it. But to me this film is a classic. It gives you 93 minutes of pure joy.

I love this film! I even drove down just to see Roddy Piper when a Horror convention came to town. It was him at a desk next to Robert Englund and a few others. No one was at Piper’s desk, so I went up to him. Now I’ve met a few high profile people in my time but Roddy Piper was the best! Nicest guy I ever met (well expect for this guy). He was so happy, we talked and talked. He gave me a  autograph, They Live sunglasses with a piece of gum (if you watch this film you will know why) and asked me,  thats right ASKED ME to take a photo with him! One of the best moments of my life, thank you Roddy for that and the film. I just hope I get to met him again, possibly get to work with him on a film?…man that would be awesome!

I adore this film. Even more then the first time I saw it. When I first saw it the next day I called all my friends up to come over and watch it. It’s fun, different, a ton of action, thought provoking and entertaining. I recently watched a new high def transfer (which looks amazing and comes out this November on bluray). When I watched it the other day, I found it to touch on the world we now live in. It’s odd how close we are to this film now, with the whole obey thing. Sure it’s a bit goofy but a cult classic like this still lives up better then films of today.

Whats the film about?
They Live is about a drifter who discovers a pair of sunglasses the allow him to see that there are aliens living in our world. In fact they have taken over the Earth. They run our lives with TV and Billboards everyday. The film stars Roddy Piper, Keith David and Meg Foster. It’s directed by John Carpenter based on the short story Eight O’clock in the Morning by Ray Nelson.

Quick notes: Two actors from Back to the Future are in this film.
Longest fight scene…O and

I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass… and I’m all out of bubblegum.

Welcome to the new home of SimplisticReviews.net - We're currently still working on the site. You might notice a few issues, please be patient with us. Thanks! (Store also in testing — no orders shall be fulfilled.)
Scroll to top