There's nothing funny about these games...

Unsettling, disturbing, harrowing.

Such words could be used to describe the plot of many a horror film that has seen the light of day recently. Given the nature of the stories and scenes in the Saw and Hostel franchises, to name a few, unsettling, disturbing and harrowing should certainly fit their bills. Indeed, horror’s now rather stale renaissance has seen a new sub-genre coined for them, the wonderfully withering ‘torture-porn’. For a second time Michael Haneke now asks, so this is our entertainment?

The Austrian auteur first made Funny Games in German in 1997, and now ten years later gives us a US remake with Naomi Watts and Tim Roth. I can't say that I have seen the original, but from what I hear it’s almost a shot for shot remake. So, with that being said, I can't make any comparisons between the two films. So, not to spoil anything for you, here's a short summary of what you should expect:

A family consisting of Anna (Naomi Watts), husband George (Tim Roth) and their young boy Georgie (Devon Gearhart) arrive at their lakeside retreat for a sailboat and golfing vacation. All is serene. As father and son set up the boat a diffident young man, introducing himself as Peter (Brady Corbett), calls in on Anna, asking to borrow eggs for her neighbour. When Peter drops the eggs his menacing reserve and insistent politeness leads to a curious confrontation. Soon Peter’s companion Paul (Michael Pitt) joins them, as do George and Georgie. The two visitors start loading their well-spoken and courteous language with intimidation – and then a brutal act of violence is unleashed. So begin Peter and Paul’s funny games as they subject the family to a series of terrifying ordeals.

This is a horror film. But there's no over-the-top gore scenes. That's the beauty and the whole point of Funny Games. The whole movie is a criticism on our fascination with watching people get killed and in turn, it doesn't give the audience the satisfaction - and dare I say excitement - of seeing the victims get killed, which truthfully makes it even more disturbing than if we had seen some special effect. Although I feel like a hypocrite by originally renting it for that exact reason, to catch some cheap thrills and watch some family get killed. It may sound disturbing, but it's without question the truth. There's no other reason anybody wanted to see this film, or any other horror film for that matter, other than to see somebody get brutally slaughtered. I think it was so brilliant of Haneke to pull off a disturbing horror film and yet have it at the same time be a commentary against disturbing horror films.

There's a certain scene where, not to spoil nothing, but one of the main characters actually manages to attack one of the killers and try to escape. But their plans are thwarted when the other killer switches the rewind button on the remote control to prevent this from ever happening. Although this may be unrealistic and provoke a tone completely different from the rest of the film, it makes a statement: no matter what these people do, there is no way they will get out of this alive.

Jennifer's Body (2009) Movie Review

I wonder why so may people hate this movie so much, especially horror-fans. All I hear are rants and complaints about how terrible it was. Rants about how it wasn't bloody enough or scary enough, or how it wasn't funny enough, or even how it lacked a nude Megan Fox (I know, right?). But what I thought from the start was, what did you people expect? Psycho? A major milestone in horror or something? With a title like 'Jennifer's Body' and a plot surrounding a hot high school girl hosting a man-eating demonic spirit (or whatever she was), you shouldn't expect nothing more than a modern teen B-movie.

That's precisely what it is. Although, thankfully, it does not follow along the 'typical' teen horror movie path. It's got plenty of sappy dialogue (I won't even get into the whole Diablo Cody conversation) that you'd expect to hear in a high school in this day and age. It has your average paper thin teen characters, like a Friday the 13th film you'll find all the stereotypes are here. But besides that it's actually pretty gory in some parts. Megan Fox looks as good as always (her acting is the same, too). It's just what I expected, and I found myself very pleased with the end results.

Go back and re-watch a movie like 'Night of the Creeps' or 'Fright Night' and see how much of a trip back to the 80's they were. How enjoyable they are to watch, some cheesy horror/comedies that you'll just keep on going back to year after year to watch. Not to confuse you into thinking Jennifer's Body is anywhere near as good as those two films, but it'll surly leave the same impression when you look back on it in twenty-odd years and fondly remember being a decent representation of it's times.This isn't a bad film, nor does achieve cult-classic status.

I Sell the Dead (2009) Movie Review

The loosely strung-together story turns on the ghoulish adventures of Arthur Blake (Dominic Monaghan from “Lost”), trained at the crooked knee of Willie Grimes (Mr. Fessenden). Having been sentenced to death for murder, Arthur confesses his sins to a priest in piecemeal flashback. Played by the son for the Satan himself, Hellboy star Ron Perlman is no ordinary priest, as we realize from the moment we witness him kick a homeless man in the gut on the way into the holding cell. Arthur’s troubles began, he explains, when he and Willie started disinterring troublesome corpses, like the one with the stake in her heart. Deciding she would fetch a better price if she didn’t look like an appetizer, Willie tugs out the stake. She attacks. He thrusts it back in. She quiets down. He pulls it out, and so it goes, as the Hammeresque shivers give way to Abbott and Costello-style slapstick.

This scene in particular is very 'Evil Dead' style, and you'll find other small homages to several other cult horror favorites through-out. Under a heavy Hammer horror influence, the sets are full of eerie gothic decor - set in a thick constant fog - providing great atmosphere for such a low budget picture. And, like any film following under a mentor such as Hammer studios, it's crawling with undead monstrosities - zombies, vampires, hideously deformed psychos, and even aliens - 'I Sell the Dead' is packed with all sorts of ghouls. When I picked this up at the video store, I couldn't wait to find out what I was in for. I figured with a line up like this I could be in for either one hell of a ride, or I'd end up sitting through 1&1/2 hours of pure nonsense once again. Guess which one.

To no surprise, 'I Sell the Dead' was just another cheeseball horror/comedy that wasn't scary nor funny enough to be fondly remembered by. Now, I didn't hate this movie mind you. It's not a complete waste of your time, for some parts are actually worth the watch. A film about a pair of down on their luck grave robbers who stumble upon all sorts of trouble when unearthing these strange corpses is a great idea for a movie. Sounds like a unique buddy film to me, with a nice little horrific twist. But alas, like many other films such as this, it sounds much better on paper.