Grave Encounters 2
Plot: Alex Wright (Richard Harmon) is a film student who becomes obsessed with “Grave Encounters”. He believes the footage to be real and not staged as the producers tout it as. Dragging along his friends, he goes to the psychiatric hospital to prove his theory correct. He gets a bit more than he bargained for.
Review: I liked the first of “Grave Encounters”, but felt the direction it took in the latter half tampered the film. With the sequel, I didn’t like the first half, but felt it picked up halfway through. My issue with the first film was that the ghosts were eventually shown in full form. I found them more frightening when they weren’t visible (this is why the first “Paranormal Activity” film works so well, in my opinion). That issue should carry over to the sequel, but me knowing that ahead of time softened the blow.
With that being said, the reason I liked the second half isn’t because of the ghosts, per se. While they obviously play a heavy part in the film, it’s their actions and reasoning that are diabolically clever. That’s not to say they’re without their flaws. The first film had the first forty minutes or so to build tension and atmosphere. That’s mostly nonexistent here. I believe John Piliquin (who is taking over the directorial duties from The Vicious Brothers, who opted to only write the film this time out) felt that the atmosphere of the building was already felt and opted to forego rebuilding it.
To his defense, our protagonists don’t get to the hospital until roughly the forty minute mark. The first half of the film is spent in developing Alex’s obsession with the footage being real. While that works (thanks to Harmon’s fine performance), his obnoxious friends quickly got on my nerves. What helped in developing tension in the first film was the connection I felt with the characters. Outside of Alex and his girlfriend (played by the lovely Leanne Lapp), the rest of the group are douche bags who take up too much screen time.
If you stick with “Grave Encounters 2”, you’ll see some brazen originality spark through. It doesn’t all work, but I appreciated the effort and finesse. The twist is likely to rub some viewers the wrong way, even those that loved the first. I think those anticipating this will find enough to salivate over. Like the first film, I only like “Grave Encounters 2”. It’s a mixed bag with some good scares here and serious lulls there. It’s still worth a watch for those curious, especially around this time of year.
Final Rating: B-
Gut
Plot: Tom (Jason Vail) and Dan (Nicholas Wilder) watch an apparent snuff film and their lives begin to spiral out of control. Tom loses focus and worries that his wife, Lily (Sarah Schoofs) and daughter, Katie (Kirstianna & Kaitlyn Mueller), are in grave danger. Dan, on the other hand, worries that his already strained friendship with Tom is ruined, as well as endangering his girlfriend, Sally (Angie Bullaro).
Review: The wisest decision Elias does with “Gut” is starting it out as a character piece. The first twenty minutes are devoted to Tom and Dan. We get a glimpse into their strained relationship. The two have been growing apart over the past few years, with Tom focusing on his family and Dan seemingly drifting through life. Dan misses the good old days when the two would sit around watching horror movies while Tom wants to move on (quite literally).
While this may sound like padding, it’s not. Not only is this stellar character development, it factors in heavily to the supposed snuff film. The only reason the two watch it is because Dan twists Tom’s arm into coming over and seeing it. He feels it’ll reinvigorate their friendship. Instead, it bruises it even more. Tom tries to blow it off, but the visceral images on the video haunt him.
This is where the film becomes very chilling. More in the psychological sense, mind you, but effective nonetheless. Despite his hatred of the video, Tom can’t seem to shake it off. It slowly consumes him to the point where he seemingly starts enjoying it. He and Dan get more copies, only for Tom to feel dirty and guilty afterward. Dan’s opinion is up in the air. Wilder’s fine performance has one guessing whether or not he gets off on the video and/or if he has more of an involvement in the films outside of being a viewer. Vail’s performance isn’t to be scoffed at either (though I’ll admit both actors can be a bit flaky at times, mainly in the beginning), as he handles the tough job of struggling with emotions quite well. His interactions with his wife and daughter after the video consumes him can be quite chilling.
The twist at the hour mark is a kick in the pants that works. Elias took a gamble with it, as it could have all been for naught had the finale crashed and burned. Thankfully, it doesn’t! It’s as visceral an ending as any film could have and leaves the viewer cold (which was the intention). The only issue I had with it (and it’s very minor) is that it’s dragged out a bit too long. I won’t spoil it, but there’s a certain spot where it would have been perfect to end the film. It only goes on for another minute or two, so it’s no big deal. I just felt that, if Elias truly wanted a shocking ending, he would have stopped it a minute or two prior.
“Gut” isn’t torture porn, for those worried. Yes, the video Tom and Dan watch includes bloody incisions of the gut (hence the title). However, they’re only showed briefly and even then are shown solely to drive home the impact they have. This is a psychological thriller, not a gorefest. It’s a damn fine one at that!
Final Rating: A-
Klown
Plot: When Frank (Frank Hvam) impregnates Mia (Mia Lyhne), she doesn’t believe he’ll be a good father. To prove her wrong, he takes his nephew, Bo (Marcuz Jess Petersen) on a camping trip with him and his buddy, Casper (Casper Christensen). Casper’s original intention for the trip was to get high and sleep around and he doesn’t intend on changing that because of a thirteen year old kid. Naturally, hijinks ensue.
Review: Forget about “The Babymakers”. Pass up “Bachelorette”. I’d even argue you can bypass “Ted”, which I enjoyed. If you’re in the mood for a raunchy comedy, “Klown” is the way to go! Unlike those films mentioned, this one’s consistently funny, never feels forced and actually has a heart. Sure, “Ted” has a mixture of those things, but it falls flat in spots and isn’t nearly as funny as this!
Mikkel Nørgaard is a talented director. Not only does he have a great handle on comic timing, but he knows how to keep his characters likable and engaging. This no easy feat, as both Frank and Casper can be downright despicable. When Bo is originally dropped off at Frank’s house, a burglar breaks in during the middle of the night. Frank hightails it out of the house, purposely leaving behind the youngster he’s supposed to be looking after. Cruel and dark, but very funny!
In Frank’s defense, he tries to make up for this every step of the way. Mikkel takes this character and has him grow as a man throughout the film. He starts off as a lout who shouldn’t take care of a child and, by the end, you end up rooting for him. His change of heart scene is rather well done, mostly because Mikkel slowly built towards it. Comedy writers and directors, take note!
Casper, on the other hand, is a jackass the entire time! This is good, as he’s the butt of most jokes. Some of the film’s biggest laughs come from him. His proclamation that this is the Tour de Pussy, his man flirting, his ribald sex scene where he has Frank stick a finger up the woman’s ass; it’s all hysterical! I’d argue the two biggest laughs come from Frank’s end (one involving bullies and the other being the finale), but he wouldn’t have these comedic situations without Casper.
“Klown” could be labeled as a dark comedy. A lot of the jokes root from heavy material (mainly the endangerment of a child). Mikkel handles it in such a light tone and with a surprising amount of heart that it doesn’t play out like one. There’s never a time where you feel uncomfortable or are forced into laughter. During all of the shenanigans, the film keeps a jovial tone intact. One that never dissipates during the hour and a half running time.
Final Rating: A
Bait
Plot: A tsunami traps a group of people in a supermarket with a 12-foot Great White Shark.
Review: Kimble Rendall should have had either followed in the footsteps of the two latest “Piranha” movies and embraced the camp or made the drama and tension palatable in order for “Bait” to work. He tried the latter and failed, so I come to the conclusion that he should have went with the former. This is, after all, a movie about a shark in a supermarket. There’s not much room open for serious melodrama. Some films, such as “Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter” were able to balance the outlandish plot with a serious tone, but Rendall couldn’t achieve such a feat. In the defense of ALVH, that had a historical background it could lean on. “Bait” did not.
Rendall wants us to care about the people stranded in the supermarket, but doesn’t give us any reason to. They’re all either too annoying or too bland. They’re all caricatures (heroic male and his former flame, rebel daughter and her cop father, annoying preppy couple, two criminals who previously held the place hostage, etc.) and most are simply present to be shark fodder. This isn’t a problem, per se, but not having a single person worth rooting for is. Any and all tension that was built was lost the moment I stopped caring about the characters. Let me correct myself; any and all tension that was built was lost since I never started caring about the characters.
I’ll give the special effects team some props. While some of the shark effects are lousy, the tsunami was staged well for a smaller budgeted film and the gorey aftermath is done well. Bodies are strewn all over the place which added a nice obstacle for our crew to hurdle over. This added more to the atmosphere, which included the supermarket and the car lot. Surprisingly, not much is done with either. Once the film gets broken down, you notice that a shark in a supermarket isn’t much different from one being in the ocean. The result is still the same; stalking followed by chomping. The only difference here is a few frozen TV dinners floating around.
“Bait” is a gimmick film that doesn’t deliver on the goods. Maybe it’s our fault for expecting much out of a film where a shark is in a supermarket. Most of us laughed at the premise, after all. That should have been a sign. That this film is nothing more than a one-note joke. A joke that the director seemingly doesn’t get. He tries for serious, resulting in a rather boring shark flick.
Final Rating: C