Film Review: The Mandela Effect (2019)

Over the past few years, I became acquainted with a bizarre new theory that suggests our reality is changing. You remember Nelson Mandela, the South African leader who passed away in prison in the 1980s? No, he was alive up until 2013. You remember the Berenstein Bears? Look again--they've always been spelled as the Berenstain Bears. Was it Jiffy peanut butter, or just Jiff?

People are noticing small details everywhere that seem slightly off, and they'd swear that it was never this way. I read up on many of these details, and I gotta say--it's mostly baloney. Especially the movie lines--these are so easy to misremember, especially when they're erroneously repeated or spoofed by other people and sources. Even movie titles can be hard to remember properly (I knew a guy who always pronounced Mel Gibson's Apocalypto as "Apocacrypto" and I couldn't fathom why he pronounced it that way--but hey, the Mandela Effect really got to me when I realized the Tom Cruise vampire movie was always Interview With THE Vampire and not "a" vampire). There are many factors that contribute to an individual misremembering things, but it can spread into the public consciousness when biases are constantly reinforced and all humans share a similar thinking pattern. Yes, I believe our public forgetfulness of Nelson Mandela's fate was purely natural, and not some malevolent force changing reality. If nothing else, Occam's Razor would favor the former as the more likely explanation. But come on people, some of us can affirm that these details were always one way and not the other--I only had to ask my mom about the Berenstain Bears to confirm that it was always spelled "-ain," and I had simply been spelling it wrong all this time (phonetic and cultural influences affect that memory). To suggest that a person's memory is flawless and it's the world that changes--that's just arrogance.

Suffice to say, I don't believe in the Mandela Effect, beyond the notion that people's brains are fallible. But that's not to say that the phenomenon isn't fascinating--I do find myself drawn to reading and studying it, even though most cases people bring up make me roll my eyes.

It's only inevitable that some filmmaker would use this as a premise to drive a thriller in which a character's reality changes all around them--this is the kind of thing that could invoke Franz Kafka's or Philip K. Dick's strangest nightmares. Hell, even I've been inspired to spin this into a possible novel idea. It's just as well though that David Guy Levy beat me to the punch with The Mandela Effect movie.

The film follows a typical guy (Charlie Hofheimer) who has a wife and child, but in a tragic accident his daughter passes away. In the course of everyday life, he catches onto the small details that seem off (the real-life details mentioned above--the misspelled Berenstain Bears, the misquoted Star Wars lines, whether or not Curious George has a tail). Inevitably, he digs into the details behind the Mandela Effect and discovers that reality is indeed changing all around him--even to the point where reality changes before his eyes.

The film casts its net wide, encompassing the typical conclusions you might have already heard about (most especially Simulation Theory--which, like The Matrix, simply suggests we're all living in a computer simulation). The Mandela Effect layers on the ideas of String Theory and some brief philosophical musings on free will to create the illusion that there's a reason behind all of this madness. However, the film never really delivers a satisfactory answer--maybe we're supposed to speculate on our own that a higher intelligence (or God) is running our universe as a simulation, but this is never made explicit, and if anything it comes off as an unfocused babble. What's really disappointing is that the film paints itself into a corner--when reality seems to finally break, it has no choice but to fall back on the old Donnie Darko trick and use a quick and dirty montage to take us all back to the beginning. Only, in this case it feels like a repeat of the Futurama joke where the characters can't go back in time--they wait trillions of years for the universe to die, become reborn, and wait for everything to happen exactly as it had before. Played straight though, it comes off as a cheap and uninspired--maybe even pretentious.

It's not all a total wash though--the film is perfectly watchable, thanks to the fair photography, grounded performances, agreeable pacing, and an wonderful electric music score. The film only suffers because its script feels like a first draft--so full of unrefined ideas and musings, but made even worse with blunt dialogue, random voice-overs, and bland characterization. It's at its worst when it tries to beat viewers over the head with its ideas--it's pretty clear the film wants to draw cosmic connections and deliver thought-provoking existentialist themes, but there's no nuance or clarity. On the other hand, the film also tries its hardest to make you care for the character and his family--but once again, there's no nuance behind the emotions.

I can't help but to think that Donnie Darko achieves the film's goals in a better, more succinct way, and it does so while maintaining its enigma. And without any bloody Mandela Effects. The difference is in the scripts--one successfully shows more and tells less, and one does not. I can't buy The Mandela Effect, but it is watchable and its finale does have a few interesting effects. When it comes to thrillers that involve changing realities, there are much better titles worth watching.

4/10

More Days Of The Pandemic (May 2020)

It's now been about two months since I last worked. I've been home on leave the whole time, leaving the house only for exercise, the grocery store, and maybe one visit to my parents' house. Anything else--shopping, theater trips, travel, appointments--just hasn't been happening and likely won't for a long time yet.

Living with the pandemic this long has made the last 50-60 days pass by as a homogeneous blur. It's surprising how fast it can fly by, but I imagine it drags for other folks. As an introvert with no shortage of home media, I've always managed to pass the time. What helps the most is that I've taken the time to accomplish a number of things that I've previously pushed off--this way, it hasn't been merely a matter of filling time as it was setting goals and finding a sense of purpose.

It's amazing what one person can achieve with two months to oneself. In all this time, I've managed to do all of the following:

• Clean the house more thoroughly than usual.
• Organize all the stuff in my closets.
• Organize some of my collections of stuff (primarily buttons, keychains, cards).
• Organize and rip my CD collection.
• Organize all the stuff in the bathroom cabinets and such.
• Clean and reorganize the garage.
• Yard work.
• Write a novel.

That last bullet is probably the thing that's preoccupied me the most, since I spent many mornings getting up, going straight to the computer, and typing all morning. When that routine is set, reaching 50,000 words in a month became a breeze. With a plotline already mapped out, blocks rarely stopped me. The book is still unfinished, but it's exceeded 70,000 words now and coming close to the end. Chances are strong that I'll reach the end before June--I might even start editing by then, following a break.

When I wasn't working on anything specific, I managed to fill the rest of my time with these activities:

• Played with Legos. Why not?
• I must have seen over 100 movies. Biggest highlights include:
• Some recent films: Onward, Ip Man 4, Underwater, Birds of Prey, and Easter Holocaust. 
• Caught up on some 2019 films: Ford vs Ferrari, Maleficent: Mistress Of Evil, Judy, High Life, the Charlie's Angels reboot, Midway, The Dunes, The Mandela Effect, and Doom: Annihilation.
• Ten Star Wars films in 4K (the only one I skipped was Solo). Proceeded to view the vast majority of documentaries and interviews.
• Viewed 1974's Rollerball in 4K, an imported UHD from Germany. I'm surprised it actually shipped to me.
• Several Clint Eastwood movies: Joe Kidd, Two Miles For Sister Sara, The Beguiled, Coogan's Bluff, Play Misty For Me, and The Eiger Sanction.
• A handful of martial arts movies: Police Story I and II, Project A I and II, Eastern Condors, The Magnificent Butcher, and Zu: Warriors From the Magic Mountain.
• All of Shoah--a nine-and-a-half-hour documentary on the holocaust.
• The last two thirds of the Human Condition Trilogy (I had seen part one almost a year ago). The two parts combined are over six hours, but these really are some of the best films ever made.
• The entire Bolshevik Trilogy--three silent films from Russia, best seen for their innovative cinematography: Mother, The End of St. Petersburg, and Storm Over Asia.
• Viewed three movies with commentaries: Big Trouble In Little China, The Last Temptation Of Christ, and The Passion Of Joan Of Arc.
• Revisited old favorites: The Great Escape, The Fifth Element, M, and McG's versions of Charlie's Angels.
• Rewatched and re-evaluated Up and The Mask of Zorro, both in 4K.
• Viewed some that may be considered classics, some for the first time: Dog Day Afternoon, Midnight Cowboy, Assault on Precinct 13 (1976), Dark Victory, The Ox-Bow Incident, Alfie, Stagecoach, and Late Spring.
• Viewed a few TV shows. I had started watching all of The X-Files some time ago, so I picked it back up again with Season 8 and finished it. I also finished McGuyver Season 1, all of The Tiger King, and all of Seven Worlds, One Planet.
• Listened to music. In retrospect, I tend to be a rather passive listener, so there are some albums I've tried to evaluate more actively. I did start a thing so that I may eventually post about my favorite albums, but I wanted to make sure I listen to more of the classics first.
• Heard some newly released material: NIN's Ghosts V and VI, Delain's Apocalypse & Chill, and Nightwish's Human .||. Nature. From a recommendation on a forum, I also listened to Architect by a band called Ist Ist, and it seemed like just the right thing to inspire some of my writing projects.
• I acquired Def Leppard's Early Years collection, so naturally I listened to all of On Through The Night and High 'N Dry. Hot dang, these are great. Also listened to Hysteria, which is an album I've been familiar with since childhood.
• Led Zeppelin I. I had heard it a few times before, and I still find it enjoyable--probably my favorite of theirs.
• Black Sabbath's Vol. 4 might be one of the best albums I've heard over the past two months.
• The Beatles' Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band--I'm not even a big Beatles fan, so this was my first time hearing the whole album, but it was surprisingly solid. 
• Quite a few David Bowie albums: Diamond Dogs, Aladdin Sane, Earthling, Outside, Blackstar. 
• Went through a phase where I listened to a lot of prog rock. This includes Yes' 1969 album, Close To the Edge, and 90125. Also listened to Emerson Lake & Palmer's Brain Salad Surgery. If it counts, I also listened to Colosseum II's Strange New Flesh. It's all quite interesting.
  
• Santana's Abraxas--so smooth.
• Queen's News Of The World--few big hits there, but the rest is just okay.
• Norah Jones' Broken Little Hearts, one of many CDs I own that I wanted to review to see if I even want to keep them. This one's a keeper--the melodies got to me.
• Death In Vegas' Dead Elvis. Just because. I've heard this one a few times before, it's a good album to pop in when I can't think of anything else worth playing.
• Surprisingly, I've played very few video games. There are some though.
• Doom Eternal--duh.
• Saints Row: The Third. This in itself has taken up 40 hours, and I'm still a ways away from finishing it to earning the platinum. It's an easy grind though, I expect to plat this by summer at the latest.
• Started White Knight Chronicles--one of the last few PS3 games I've had sitting around that I never touched. This one could take a while, but hot dang, the first couple of hours have me hooked.
• Dabbled with my Steam library a bit. Played the first part of Space Quest 1 (yep, the original, non-remastered version--I usually can't even with these text-input type games, but I might be getting the hang of it). Also played a bit of Frostpunk (dang, this one's brutal), and a few smaller games (Runes of Avalon, Big Money, and...I'm not sure if this is appropriate of me...but Plague Inc is still really addicting).
• One game I have played frequently is Warcraft III, largely because my dad is on it too and we play together online with it. We mostly do co-op against computer players. I know lots of folks hate the Reforged version for various reasons, but it's been working just fine for the two of us.
• Few books read. Wish I could have had more under my belt, but everything else tends to suck up all the time (maybe in the future I'll watch fewer movies).
• Finished reading a horror anthology entitled What The #@&% Is That? Loved it.
• Finished Time's Eye by Arthur C Clarke and Stephen Baxter. This was a book I checked out of the library at random, and I found it enjoyable.
• Finished Fan-Tan by Marlon Brando and Donald Cammell. Even though this was the actual Marlon Brando who co-authored this book, I was not a fan of it.
• Read a book on the artwork of HR Giger. And I read it, not just flipped through the pictures. This guy was wicked.
• Read the first three volumes of the graphic novel version of Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?
• Finished reading Michael Crichton's Rising Sun. It was alright.
  

There are a few little things that I thought about doing, but never actually made time for. This includes sketching, doing origami, and playing with some of the other tools I have on my PC (like the music-maker program). I could probably find time for these things by cutting back on other activities, but I don't begrudge the time I've spent. I've accomplished much, even if a lot of this seems passive.

It is getting to the point where I'm becoming restless. Movies and games can pass much time, but when you binge too much it becomes more of a chore. I might actually come out of this with a desire to spend less time on such things. As events and weather permits, I'll probably look forward to getting outside more to explore and take photographs, just like I used to in other places.

Tomorrow, after so much time off, I will return to work. I question how much of an e-mail and tasking backlog I'll have to wade through--however, it will be gratifying to spend my time on something meaningful, rather than something idle. Even if I have to do it with a mask on and staying six feet away from people, it's still more engaging and healthy than spending day after day being idle.

It's funny, because I've had my fair share of days where the stress of work, expectations, and personalities made me yearn for a lifestyle where I could just bum around the house and work at my leisure. You know, like a novelist. And while working on a novel project, I didn't mind spending my days that way. However, if it wasn't for my writing, my days would have been a pointless slog. To spend a career doing this requires many income streams set up through many novels. And for a writer to remain relevant and profitable, one would need to write, edit, and publish constantly--the number I've heard is around six books a year. Professionals can handle this effortlessly, thanks to sharp skills they've refined through years of practice, and some may have better aptitude than others.

I chose to work a standard, eight-hour workweek because living independently demands money, and writing just doesn't pay unless you're well-established. Even if I was established like that, I have the feeling this hobby would become droll work. If I garner any success, I'd rather it be for a good off-brand piece of hand-crafted literature, and not a bunch of mass-produced trade books. And that's something I expect to handle as a side thing. On top of that, work offers experiences, skills, and knowledge I would have never had otherwise.

In short, spending the last two months cooped up at home had the perverse effect of helping me see the value of a day job. Any workplace has its drawbacks and dramas, but without it, life would be surprisingly stagnant. It's strange how an event like the pandemic can make one appreciate the things that once seemed mundane.

Film Review: The Fifth Element (1997)

In a unified and harmonious universe, life thrives amidst the forces of nature, often epitomized in certain mythologies with four elements: earth, air, water, and fire. For humanity, however, a fifth element exists in the center of all these forces, and is necessary to defeat absolute evil.

So goes the bizarre mythology behind The Fifth Element, in which all five elements are made into literal artifacts that were once kept in an ancient Egyptian ruin, but were whisked away by aliens for safe keeping. When the year 2263, a mysterious cosmic force manifests in deep space and seems to grow more powerful when attacked. Per the guidance of a priest named Vito Cornelius (Ian Holm), Earth has 48 hours to find the elements and reunite them, or else life will perish. A chain of events leads to the rebirth of the fifth element: a supreme being named Leeloo Dallas Multipass--no, wait, sorry, just Leeloo (Milla Jovovich). She inevitably crosses paths with cab driver and ex-space-fighter Korben Dallas (Bruce Willis), and he embarks on an adventure to save the planet.

All of this craziness is the brainchild of Luc Besson, who penned his ideas and storylines while only sixteen years old. Twenty-two years later, the final product stands as one of the most unique sci-fi extravaganzas ever made. In terms of immersion, the sheer amount of detail, worldbuilding, and eccentric design gives Star Wars a run for its money. In terms of action and effects, the film dazzles with a calculated use of models, pyrotechnics, and eye-popping CGI. Viewing it today, you might see some creases showing in the older effects and some of the sets (seriously, there's one set where the wall is just tin foil, and Jovovich just runs right through it--I dunno, just roll with it). Regardless, most of it holds up handsomely, and the film leaves you with memorable sights of a futuristic New York full of flying cars, on top of fantastic spaceships, an exotic flying hotel, and a literal space opera.

The film flies by a mile a minute--not with explosions and action, even though both are in abundance (seriously, the last act feels like Die Hard in space--Willis' own charisma keeps it just as badass). The cast fills the gaps between the action with arousing levity. Even in the robes of a mystic priest, Ian Holm's deadpan reactions will elicit chuckles. The film's villain, Zorg (Gary Oldman), is a hammy, one-dimensional mustache-twirler you'll love to hate. In the last half, the obnoxious antics are cranked to overdrive thanks to Chris Tucker's hyperactive performance as an effeminate pop radio star who just can't shut up--this guy might actually make or break the film for many viewers. The whole cast is populated by zany, cartoony expressions and reactions--the sheer spunk of the cast and script makes the film snappy, even when narrative momentum dries up in the middle. All of it is accentuated by the stylish visual palette, the sumptuous production design, and Eric Serra's strangely clanky music score (some of these music choices are head-scratching, but hot dang, the Diva's Dance is hip!).

Judging the story is probably a futile task--it's a strange hodgepodge of vaguely-defined mysticism, ancient aliens, prophecies, and tropes that feel ripped from other sci-fi and action movies. It suddenly occurred to me that the premise of using the five elements--earth, fire, wind, water, and heart--to save the planet is literally the same as Captain Planet. I'm not sure if that's an intentional parallel. Besson did collaborate with Jean-Claude Mézières, who penned the Valérian comics, which in turn fed more inspiration into The Fifth Element (especially the decision to make Dallas a cab driver, although this was also something that 1981's Heavy Metal showed, itself based off of the French comic The Long Tomorrow--between all of this and Besson producing all those Taxi movies, I feel like the French love taxi drivers). The characters feel archetypal, especially Bruce Willis, who plays Dallas like a futuristic John McClane with less cursing. In the same vein as Besson's other films (especially Nikita and The Professional), the relationship between two characters from two completely different backgrounds (worlds even) becomes the through-line that makes the funny scenes funnier, the romance cuter, and the action weighty. Can't say that any of these characters have a firm arc, but Dallas' search for love seems to be good enough in a movie that's already packed. Few scenes are wedged in to give Leeloo doubt over the value of the human race, and it might feel like something ham-fisted in the last minute. But if there's any consistent point to the movie, it is the conflict between forces of life and forces of destruction. I'm certain the film wants to say more about it through exploring armed conflict, political corruption, industrial espionage, environmental damage, rampant consumerism--it's all shown in brief flashes, but never explored in explicit detail.

What I admire about the film is that the whole thing--all its eccentricities, its far-reaching ambitions, its twists and double-crosses, its bizarre premise--is perfectly digestible thanks to the steady and careful way it unveils the story. Exposition is delivered in short punchy bursts, which always keeps the audience informed, but also stays within character and never feels like a droll infodump--and that's the way it should be. Nothing is confusing because every important piece of the characters' journeys are shown to us. The film's strongest moments are the ones where the camera lingers with the characters as they explore the city, the ships, the planets, and through their eyes, we experience their adventure and become invested in the stakes. This is just good storytelling, plain and simple.

Understandably, the film will lose some people. Rudy Rhod is only slightly less annoying than Jar Jar Binks--frankly, Rudy's cartoony antics never made me cringe as much, but I know it bothers many viewers. The whole film has awkward tics, quirks, and neurotic reactions. You know what though? I love how snappy, spirited, and unique the experience is. It's never boring, even when it's obnoxious. Everything is just pop pop POP!

If you want to see a great sci-fi adventure unlike any other, this may be your ticket. It's cartoonish and not particularly deep, but it's well-crafted with a lot of zest and heart.

10/10

Book Review: Fan-Tan (Marlon Brando and Donald Cammell)

I don't know what caught my eye first--the exotic cover art, or Marlon Brando's name. Yes, Marlon Brando, the Hollywood legend, co-wrote a book with struggling filmmaker Donald Cammell. My curiosity compelled me to read their adventure for myself.

Anatole Annie Doultry is a convict in a Hong Kong prison, who bets everything he has on cockroach races. When he saves the life of another prisoner, he inevitably finds a way out and crosses paths with
Madame Lai Choi San--a sultry and mean gangster. When these characters team up, they take to the high seas with a plan to a ship-load of silver and treasure.

What's more interesting than the actual novel may be the history of its inception and writing. As far back as the 70s, Brando and Cammell hit it off well and brainstormed potential movie ideas together. There is likely an alternate universe where Fan-Tan exists as a gritty 70s thriller (they try to sell this as a "swashbuckling adventure," but I get more of a film noir vibe out of this). They decided to try their luck penning the story as a book first, then maybe adapting it to film. A series of disagreements and conflict inevitably caused the project to remain shelved until 2004, just after Brando's passing. What's printed now is a patchwork made from Cammell's and Brando's unfinished drafts, but pieced together by the editor. I have a feeling the actual text is mostly Cammell's work, with Brando supplying the ideas (especially behind the character, for whom Brando could have easily been typecast).

The slapdash quality of the text may not help much, but I have a stronger feeling that Cammell and Brando never invested much time in honing their novel-writing or editing skills. The result is a 230-something page tome that feels like 230,000 pages. Most pages are spent effusing detail and purple prose on the reader--so much that it kills narrative momentum. When action actually happens, it's presented very dryly in long passages of unengaging commentary. Personality exists in bursts, but the book's overall voice is stiff and distant. The book even jumps between points-of-view without breaks (headhopping).

What little story exists is made even less palatable with the characters. Maybe they'd be more likable on a big screen, but on paper they just come off as mean, angst-ridden, manipulative, selfish, and racist. The main character comes off as misogynist, especially given what happens in the end (and yet, it also comes off as wish-fulfillment--I'm not sure if it's disgusting or laughable). There are moments where Annie just starts raging out and cursing people out, and I never really understood where it all came from--it's like, chill out dude. Moments like those, all the sex and womanizing, the gritty tone, and the run-down settings betray the authors' intents to be edgelords, but it all falls flat given that I can't really root for any of these characters, and their overall adventure amounts to little more than a gross punchline.

It's a shame, because there are moments that work. I just don't feel that the book was refined enough to work--the text bored me, and the story it tells is a stale, shallow one populated with unlikable characters. Don't let Brando's name (or ego) fool you, this is a pretty droll affair. It's a shame given the amount of collaborative passion (and research, they really went all out) that was poured into the work. Some things probably need to remain buried for a reason, although less-picky readers might consider this buried treasure.

3/10

Book Review: Time's Eye (Arthur C Clarke and Stephen Baxter)

So, you're telling me there's a space odyssey AND a time odyssey now? And the co-author is the guy who penned the authorized Time Machine sequel? Sold!

Time's Eye is the first in a series, conceived as an offshoot of Clarke's A Space Odyssey, but with very slight (if any) connection. The novel follows a group of soldiers from the year 2037 on a UN peacekeeping mission, and a group of astronauts from the ISS. They are all caught in an event in which the Earth inexplicably becomes a hodgepodge of landscapes from different eras in history--everything from 2037 all the way back to the Ice Age. The soldiers happen across a group of 19th century British soldiers marooned in time--surprise, one of them is Rudyard Kipling! When they team up, they come across a group of ancient warriors--surprise, it's Alexander the Great and his army! Meanwhile, the astronauts make their way to the changed Earth and are captured by barbarian horsemen--surprise, it's Genghis Khan and his army! Once cultural and language barriers are overcome, two sides form and they make they way to the site of Babylon (halfway destroyed and abandoned by the Discontinuity). As you might surmise, war inevitably breaks out between the Macedonians and the Mongols, each side aided with the knowledge given by their 21st century allies.

I thought this whole concept was great, and it was enough to keep me hooked all the way through. By nature, the premise staggers the imagination and I'm quite satisfied with the way the book slams its historical heavyweights into the battlefield together. I'm not personally well-informed on the exact history of these cultures, but it appeared well-researched to me--if there are any inaccuracies I couldn't tell you. In fact, I was smitten by the meticulous way each cultures' history and lifestyles are shown. There are enough details to bring the sights, sounds, and smells of each side to vivid life, but without beating the readers over the head with prose. It's a breezy and immersive read.

However, I can't say that I'm in love with any of the lead characters. I barely even remember them. Most introspection is spent on observing the changed world and the magnificent cultures they experience, but little is spent on developing character depth, personality, or arcs. Maybe it's intentional to let the premise and the mystery of time's eye take the center stage (those are the aspects that intrigued me the most anyway). Most of the protagonists are simply good people--some are well-informed, some aren't, one dude is Muslim, one lady is a single mom, one other lady is evil and betrays everyone to the Mongols because reasons. Strangely, Kipling comes out as the most lovable and memorable character. Alexander and Genghis have their moments too, but even though they have whole chapters detailing some of their thoughts and personalities, they say surprisingly little. There are a few directions that are probably supposed to bear weight (like Bisesa's relationship with Josh), but relationships like this aren't given the time or text to develop--they simply happen.

It may boil down to the way the book's written sentence-by-sentence. Even though it does a fair job of animating the story with detail, it often breaks the "show don't tell" rules by over-using vague descriptions, using an awful lot of adverbs and adjectives, and skimping out on character voice. There are chapters that stand out more than others (such as the ones where a "man-ape" named Seeker becomes the POV character, reminding me so much of the opening for Clarke's 2001: A Space Odyssey). Strangely, the ones focusing on Alexander and Genghis remain distant, as if the text talks about them but never embodies their thoughts or feelings in a specific way. Because of this, the "why" of certain actions and relationships fall short, and the main characters come off as flatter, less interesting this way.

There are other pieces that stick out oddly (especially one fleeting scene in which the characters encounter Buddhist monks in their own isolated niche--this scene is invoked once in speculation, then never brought up again). The book reaches an interesting cliffhanger that promises more to the lore of the alien intelligence that masterminded the Discontinuity, and more adventures are presumably given in Sunstorm. It is a little reminiscent of the monoliths and mysteries that A Space Odyssey showcased, and I probably wouldn't mind following up with the sequels (although as I understand it this series remains incomplete due to Clarke's untimely passing).

This book is probably more Baxter than Clarke, even though trademarks of both are present. I found the book interesting and readable, but taking a step back I can't help but to see that the characters could have used more finesse and the style could have been refined. Regardless, I enjoyed reading this a lot for its concept, the details it gives, and the adventurous way it pushes its characters into historic battles and cosmic mysteries.

7/10

Al's Bottom 100 Films [2020 Update] Part 5

Introduction and Updates
Part 1 (100 - 81)
Part 2 (80 - 61)
Part 3 (60 - 41)
Part 4 (40 - 21)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

20: Osombie (2012)

Osama Bin Laden is a zombie. Funny, right?

The film plays its absurd premise rather straight, resulting in a pretty boring affair. It's nothing more than a handful of Army characters running around the desert, shooting at zombies. There's no real plot, story, or characterization worth noting here. It strives to be a gritty, serious zombie flick with action, but it's as dry and boring as desert sand. It's coarse, and irritating, and it gets everywhere.

It's pretty clear to me that the filmmakers just bummed around Utah, shot some scenes, and slapped it all together. Having lived in Utah for a while, I can't unsee this scenery. I'm pretty certain parts of this film were indeed shot around Eagle Mountain, where my house was--sorry guys, but I can't buy this as the Middle East at all. It all just falls apart from there.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

19: Apocalypse Mercenaries (Mercenari Dell'Apocalisse) (1987)

Kill these films with fire!

Pretty typical WWII adventure, this time patched together cheaply from recycled action footage. It's all bland, droll, stale, and ugly-looking--pretty much the opposite of everything I want and enjoy out of a good adventure picture. A repetitive score and lackluster characters don't help much. I really don't remember much of this film at all, but when I did see it I dismissed it as weak trash.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

18: Mission Hunter 2: Battle Warrior (Nuk Soo Dane Song Kram) (1996)

It's hard to really like or understand this film much when so much of it looks so dark and shoddy (and I'm not really sure if that's the way it was filmed or if I was watching a shoddy DVD). Even then, there's not much to see--it's a bland and cliched action flick that sends a bunch of burly soldiers into the jungle to rescue somebody. There is action, but not much narrative momentum. Boring story and characters makes this very unmemorable. Tony Jaa is barely in the film--the actual leads don't have nearly as much presence. Turn the disc's English dubbing on though, and it becomes a pretty funny farce (especially one guy trying so hard to sound like Arnold Schwarzenegger).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

17: Revenge Of The Spacemen (2014)

I'm pretty sure Troma put this out as another slice of "so bad it's good" schlock. Their films are at their best when they focus on the absurd--Revenge of the Spacemen is not really as crazy as it looks or sounds, and it's all the weaker for its lack of ambition.

If you've seen the pilot episode for South Park season one, then you've probably already seen the same tasteless jokes about alien abductions and anal probing, and you might have laughed a little harder at it. Revenge of the Spacemen relies on those same tiresome cliches, but it's not all that funny anymore. Showing it all with a handful of dudes wearing cheap rubber masks--a production that's purposefully cheap and campy--doesn't really elicit as much laughter as it aims for (and I'm a guy who laughed at Trail of the Screaming Forehead). The film just fails to engage at every turn--most of it is focused on a handful of stock characters who try to tickle your funny bone with their bad acting and stereotypical dialogue, but they all come off as bland, boring people. Their story is a stale and uninteresting one, leaving the titular spacemen to appear only in a couple of scenes. It's simultaneously an unfunny comedy and a cheap monster flick. It fails as both.

Home video quality did not help this one at all--the frame rates looked very choppy and weird, and the dialogue is barely audible. I can't even tell if this was the way the film was made, or if it's just a poorly-made disc. Either way, I found it dang near unwatchable.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

16: Dracula 3D (2012)

How the mighty have fallen. I'm not even much of a gaillo fan, but even I can see how Dario Argento made his mark in films like the original Suspiria. His take on Dracula though? Yeesh. So cheap, bland, and boring. It seems like the whole movie takes place in one or two empty rooms. Performances range from bland to cringey. Gore effects look fake. You know the film's bad when the only memorable or forgivable thing are the few scenes involving topless ladies--that's literally all I remember out of this junk. There are way better Dracula adaptations out there, just as there are better 3D movies, better Argento movies, and better movies period.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

15: Recon 2020: The Caprini Massacre (2004)

There comes a point where it feels like there are too many military sci-fi films trying to copy the formula of Aliens, and they all start to look and feel equally boring (examples of note: both the Doom movies, Starship Troopers 2, and this schlock).

Recon 2020 seems to be a film that was shot around some ghetto construction yard, then added a yellow filter over everything (and it looks quite ugly). The actors are a bunch of guys and one or two ladies in cheap-looking BDUs and armor--they shoot at each other, and boom, you have a movie. Despite one or two laughable lines, the film fails to engage with its been-there-done-that story, its cast of unmemorable characters, and repetitive action.

It looks as though more Recon 2020 films were made. I've never bothered to see them--I doubt I'm missing anything. But why watch this when I could just pop Cameron's Aliens in for the trillionth time?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

14: Leprechaun: Origins (2014)

Just kiss it already. It's Irish

Leprechaun is pretty notorious as a bad series--it's been bad for six straight movies. Warwick Davis kept it fun and campy, even through its lowest points (like the times they went to space, or into the hood).

The seventh Leprechaun movie ever made is a sad disappointment in a series where the bar is already set way low. Without Davis and without any of the camp that made the other movies "so bad they're good," Origins is just boring. It plays the myth so straight and conventional that it breaks no new ground at all. Photography is bland, performances are grating, and the story moves slowly. The actual Leprechaun is an ugly mofo. In the grand scheme of horror cinema, it feels like just another monster movie--worse yet, it's unoriginal, uninspired, and droll. Charmless to the last.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

13: The Brink (2006)

This B-movie offers an interesting premise: Thomas Edison invented a contraption that could communicate with the dead. Supernatural killings ensue. Sadly, the film’s execution is just stale, bland, and cheap. Nothing about the film held my attention. The storytelling is weak. The film looks bad and it should feel bad. Now that it's been some years since I stumbled across this bargain-bin DVD, I barely even remember the film much.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

12: Raving Maniacs (2005)

In better hands, this premise (in which pills turn people into the living dead) could be scary. Or funny. Or both. This film is neither--it's a droll, forgettable B-movie with weak plotting. The film looks horrible and cheap, which is a shame considering the make-up effects and the use of colored lights. How is it that a movie with this much techno music and rave scenes could turn out so bland and boring?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

11: To Kill A Killer (Para Matar a un Asesino) (2007)

Many years ago, a movie like this would have had me fooled into thinking that a story pitting one killer against another would be exciting and cool. This film makes such a poignant premise droll though, thanks to its ugly shooting style, cheap production, and poor acting. The pacing is an absolute slog, and it makes every gaudy scene pass by the eyes in the most agonizing way. It's barely memorable and it offers nothing new to see.

At the time this came out, I actually had a killer-vs-killer story idea in mind, and I intended to make my own screenplay out of it. I half expected this film to mirror what I had in mind--nope, not even close. Especially now that the concept has evolved into more of a strange fiction novel, but that's still a work-in-progress. Maybe I have this film to thank for making me challenge the idea and jazz it up some. Thanks film, now I know how to not tell the story!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

10: Cult (2007)

Some of the worst movies are the ones least memorable. And I really can't remember any bloody thing about this film, even though I know I had it on DVD (bought it together with The Brink, quickly dumped them in equal measure--what a horrible double-feature).

What I do recall of Cult is that it's a dark, droll, cheap, boring movie that feels like a caricature of other occult-themed horror movies. The script offers a droll story populated by weak characters, and their respective performers offer bad performances that fail to resonate. The film's as stale as they come, and it's made less watchable with its cheap-looking quality. This film is a time-waster in the most literal sense--watch anything but this.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

9: Machine Head (2000)

Hey, stick a lawnmower on somebody's head, and you have a movie!

Yeah right.

Everything that can go wrong with a film goes wrong with this one--the script, the performances, the look and style, the direction, all of it falls way flat, making it a boring, cheap, forgettable flick. Even with all its stupidity and cheapness, it still fails to become "so bad it's good," coming off as simply bad. Without any blood or guts, it doesn't even aim for shock or schlock. I don't remember much about the film now, but my life is probably all the better for it.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

8: Alien Abduction (2014)

Found footage movies grate on me personally (heck, I previously had Blair Witch Project in my bottom 100). Of all the ones I've seen, Alien Abduction annoyed me the most. Not even the final shot, showing the camera falling from space to Earth, really wowed me--99% of the film is cheap, ugly, and filmed with an agitating quality. The actual alien scenes aren't anything new (it can't top what Fire From the Sky already showed, now that was some scary stuff). Story and characters don't amount to much. I barely even remember the film now, other than I came out hating it.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

7: August Underground (2001)

Fred Vogel crafted this film with one singular goal: to create a film that creditably resembles a found footage tape that could belong to a serial killer. I have to admit that Vogel achieved what he set out to do just fine--this is exactly the kind of ugliness and depravity you can expect from a serial killer's private home video. That doesn't mean I have to like or value it though.

The film is barely watchable--partly because of the gaudy VHS quality (a purposeful effect to lend the film a greater sense of reality), and partly because of the content. There's literally no plot to this--just like with an unedited tape, you see random segments of the character doing random things, inter-spaced with some of the ugliest scenes of killing and rape imaginable. There are no heroes to this film, and it demands no respect or empathy for the killer--the only thing you can do is watch endless victimization and feel sick about it. And...is that the point? What is the point? Why would I watch this?

I wanted to believe at one point that there could be value in exploring the depths of human evil through art, as a way to reflect on it, recognize it, learn from it. That's easy to do on a film like Schindler's List. This though? Vogel's goal is to remind us that anybody, even your next door neighbor, could be a scumbag and a murderer. Unfortunately, when the film is so boring and ugly that it becomes unwatchable, I question the film's value. I have a feeling most people only watch this to challenge themselves on the violence and depravity--in which case, this becomes just exploitative tripe.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6: Chaos (2005)

Not to be confused with the other 2005 film Chaos starring Jason Statham (what are the odds?!), this exploitative horror film is pretty much a rehash of 1972's Last House on the Left (itself, a rather sleazy and ugly picture). This was advertised as the most brutal movie ever made (although I'm pretty sure Fred Vogel with his three August Underground flicks is all like "hold my beer"). In my ignorant youth, I must have challenged myself to rent this and see how much punishment my eyes could take.

The film is cheaply-made, poorly acted, and largely bland. As promised, it doesn't hold back on the brutality and violence--the plot is nothing more than a bunch of horrible guys killing girls, and that's it. The opening title card directly tells the audience that the film's point is to underline the real-life horror of real-life killers who could stalk and murder your daughters at any given time. And yet, it's a thin mask that fails to justify shock value with no purpose. Beyond mere unpleasantness, it's tasteless and valueless.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5: August Underground's Penance (2007)

Third in the series, this film continues the trend of its predecessors, showcasing rape and murder in a found footage format, made to simulate the kind of depraved video a serial killer might have in his own private belongings. The distinction of this film is that it's no longer horrid VHS quality, it's moved on to low-quality digital camcorders.

It's still a very ugly affair. The change in medium is still garish with its macroblocking and interlacing--but the content continues to be grating, showcasing nothing more than random killings intercut between random scenes. There is maybe a slight semblance of an arc emerging as one of the characters eventually decides she doesn't want to keep doing this evil stuff anymore. It's too little too late though, and does nothing to justify the heaping amount of violence and shock endured across three whole films. I can understand the first one existing to showcase the chilling prospect that anybody--your friend, your neighbor, your family--could be a killer behind your back. Three of these movies though? Nah, it's just too much now. The shock value wins out in the end, and all sense of value or taste is lost.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4: Ilsa: She Wolf Of The SS (1975)

There came a point when watching Ilsa: She Wolf of the SS where I stopped and asked myself what the heck I was watching and why. It was the first time I had done so for an exploitation movie, and I had to admit for the first time that I had absolutely no good answer for myself.

Ilsa has her fans (somehow), and apparently she has a number of films in her name, in which she tortures people and...we're supposed to like it? The thing is, I had mistakenly gone into She Wolf of the SS falsely believing this would be a werewolf movie--nope, it's a straightforward Nazisploitation movie where a camp full of people are tortured, they eventually push back, and that's the whole story. What makes it unwatchable in my eyes is the gaudy, boring photography, which makes scenes that are supposed to be engaging clinical and cold. A terribly uncomfortable amount of time is spent on their torment, which is clearly meant to be the film's main draw. And that's the problem--why should I be entertained by humiliation (tastelessly set in a concentration camp nonetheless)?

I can forgive a number of exploitation flicks simply because I don't take many of them seriously. I would have probably laughed this one off if Ilsa was a literal wolf--as grounded, tasteless, and ugly as the film actually is, I found it largely droll and despicable.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3: Acid Bath (2006)

With this title and the film's poster, I wasn't going into this expecting high art. But even by horror standards, this film doesn't offer much. The actual acid bath is garish and bloody, sure, but everything else is just too hard to watch for many other reasons.

Biggest problem is that this film is hyper. The editing is just way too fast and choppy. Cinematography is amateurish. As cheap and bland as the film is, it never looks like anything beyond something some dudes shot around the hood and slapped together with annoying music. Acting is atrocious. There's literally no redeeming value to this schlock--there are Asylum films that look better than this.

If the film's intent is to make you feel like you're taking an actual acid bath, well then good job. It burns.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2: Birdemic: Shock And Terror (2010) 

So Bad, It's Good!

This film. This bloody film right here. This might be the one so bad that it makes all those Asylum and SyFy pictures look respectable, makes those god-awful Dungeons & Dragons videos look genuinely epic, makes the Leprechaun series seminal Halloween gold, makes Tommy Wiseau look like a modern Hollywood genius, and it might make you run off and rent The Birds 2: Land's End just to take your mind off of it.

I kid you not--literally every scene in Birdemic brims with pure fail. It's shot with barely palatable video and sound quality (sound recording is especially wacky with clipped dialogue, airiness, terrible sound effects--my ears shudder at the memories). It takes forever to get past the opening credits (seriously, four whole minutes of driving, and the theme song loops like a billion times). It takes an eternity to get to the actual Birdemic--the first act is filled with the blandest, most contrived, and most mundane love story ever conceived. When birds finally attack, they go straight for the eyes with their gaudy, low-quality pixels obviously superimposed on unconvincing fight scenes. The rest of the movie is no less abysmal as environmental messages are beat into the audience with agonizingly horrible monologues.

This only scratches the surface. Birdemic is by far the most amateur film I've seen, giving The Room a run for its money.

However...

The film is so bad, it's genuinely funny. I mean, who would think to fight off killer birds with coat hangers? And how about that scene that unconvincingly ends with mountain lion noises driving the characters away? Even the boring dating scenes in the beginning are laughable thanks to the terrible performances, poor writing, and poor shooting. The only reason this doesn't come out at the very very bottom is because the it's ultimately harmless. Still, Birdemic ought to stand as the most incompetent film ever made.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1: August Underground's Mordum (2003)

The first August Underground, alone is a gaudy and harsh watch that'll make you feel sick. It has enough notoriety among underground horror fans, so a second film exists. How much worse can a second video tape from serial killers be?

It's worse. So much worse. Somehow, Fred Vogel found a way to crank everything up to the highest degree, crafting a film that's almost completely full of the most sickening violence imaginable. The blood, gore, and rape are so prominent that some things are shown that nobody has any real business seeing. All of this is brought to life by the worst characters imaginable--they spend so much of the film screaming at each other, spouting hateful words, and spreading their evil everywhere they go. A few random shots of them doing nonsense doesn't help, even if it adds to the realism.

As before, all of this is rendered on degraded VHS quality. It's nearly unwatchable this way, but it also has the uncanny effect of appearing too real. And that's the filmmakers' goal. While it's chilling to think that such people could exist anywhere--in your neighborhood even--this experience is not worth the message. There's only so much the eyes, ears, and mind can take, and this film pushes it way too far. It's by far the ugliest film I've seen, in terms of both content and style. It's plotless, I despise the characters, the narrative momentum is lacking, and there's just way too much blood, humiliation, and filth. I wouldn't wish this film on my enemies, and I hope my friends can be spared this monstrosity.

There are literally thousands of films that are worth your time. Watch an Academy Award winner. Watch a blockbuster, even if it's a flop. Watch a Disney movie for freak's sake. Anything but this.

Al's Bottom 100 Films [2020 Update] Part 4

Introduction and Updates
Part 1 (100 - 81)
Part 2 (80 - 61)
Part 3 (60 - 41)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

40: Future-Kill (1985)

This might be the worst movie with the best poster. HR Giger's artwork definitely drew my eye, whereas the movie itself drove my eyes away towards better movies of the era.

Future-Kill is basically one of those Terminator knock-offs. An especially cheap and cheesy one that looks garish and leaves no lasting impact. Some of the line delivery may be a bit laughable, but I struggle to recall any specific scene that would make this movie worth the time.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

39: Inglorious Bastards 2: Hell's Heroes (Eroi Dell'Inferno) (1987)

This is advertised as the sequel for 1978's Inglorious Bastards (although I'm sure many folks would confuse this as a plug in for the 2009 Tarantino film). Hell’s Heroes shares the cheesy and absurd spirit as its predecessor, but without any particularly good story or characters worth rooting for (not even the Hammer can save this). Despite all the explosions and shootouts, the film looks so poor and bland that it becomes stiff and droll. It's not a memorable experience, not even for the wrong reasons.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

38: Vampires: The Turning (2005)

Yikes, they made yet another sequel to John Carpenter’s Vampires! Only this time, it takes place in Thailand and now there's martial arts and biker gangs. Sounds fun, right?

Sadly, the film does little to cement its cooler aspects into anything cohesive. The story is bad, and it's crafted in poor quality. Even with the promise of exciting fight scenes, the film is surprisingly boring and forgettable. At this point, it doesn't even bear any resemblance to Carpenter's film.

Blade is not impressed.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

37: Gamera: Super Monster (Uchu Kaijû Gamera) (1980)

Gamera in the construction business

I'm not really a huge Gamera fan anyway, and the copy I have for this has really horrible quality. There is a chance I'll reevaluate this when it hits Blu-Ray later this year--you might have to take this one with a grain of salt.

This particular Gamera adventure is actually stitched together from previous films. Oddly, the film is further convoluted as it splices in additional footage from Battleship Yamato and Galaxy Express 999. Why though? I can't even handle seeing my animes mixed up with my live-action kaiju, this is madness!

It might be more an indication that many of the older Gamera pictures are cheap and silly, but I did find just about every scene in Super Monster to look stiff, garish, and cheap. Editing, especially in the slapdash way it mixes in the old footage with the new, is illogical and horrible. New scenes feature pretty bad acting and cheesy effects. I found it all borderline unwatchable, although seeing this with degraded VHS quality doesn't really help.

English dubbing is pretty dang funny though.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

36: Doomsday Machine (1972)

Have a relaxing apocalypse

So Bad, It's Good!

An ambitious end-of-the-world picture, in which astronauts leave a doomed Earth behind to find a new world to populate. Considering that the spaceship consists of a bunch of armchairs, the film becomes quite a laughable and entertaining hoot for its camp and cheapness. The story is marred by some really stupid twists and turns. It's definitely something that can't be taken seriously--if you don't, then you might get a good laugh out of this schlock.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

35: Battlespace (2006)

Kinda Good?

This straight-to-DVD flick earns its place on the list only by default--you only need a quick glance at select scenes to see just how cheap, gaudy, and amateurish the film is.

I gotta say though, for a movie this bad, it does show surprising ambition in its script and the way it optimizes its settings and special effects. The story has a way bigger scale than most sci-fi films Hollywood spits out. It aims to be thought-provoking and twisty, but it's ultimately a hard narrative to follow (or care about) that intimately. I do admire the way the special effects are used--however, they are pretty weak. There's more bad than good with this one, but it's an odd case where I find some of the good details interesting.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

34: Hard Gun (1996)

There are some nifty action scenes and stunts, but it's few and far between. And don't expect to see that much of Tony Jaa, even though his name and face are plastered all over the DVD cover. This is a disappointingly bland and aimless mess--the story is bloated with too many scenes that could have been excised easily, and the rest doesn't amount to much. It's all captured with bland photography and editing. I also can't overlook the fact that this film uses Eric Serra's score from GoldenEye--they couldn't be bothered to find their own music, huh?

On the other hand, if you watch this with English dubbing, it's pure comedy gold!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

33: Zaat (1971)

What is zat?

So Bad, It's Good!

The film showcases a mad scientists who turns into a gaudy green monster and attempts to transform all sea life on Earth. He proceeds to do so by using a squirt bottle.

The terrible laughs keep rolling in from there. There's a scummy, exploitative vibe to this cheap production, but it's hard to take this seriously when the bad acting, lack of logic, and rubber suits fail to impress. It is a hoot though to watch the guy in the terrible rubber suit terrorize ladies and deliver pompous evil monologues. Something this mutated and crazy could only come from Florida.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

32: Bridge To Hell (Un Ponte Per L'inferno) (1986)

Of all the Italian war adventures I managed to swallow, I remember this one the least. Cheap, cheesy, and droll, like all the others. I'm sure some folks will find some kind of "so bad it's good" charm to this, but I couldn't. I primarily remember a lot of shootouts, something something something bridge, and that's it. I don't remember much of a story, and I don't remember rooting for any good characters. This is a bridge too short.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

31: The Incredible 2-Headed Transplant (1971)

I was willing to put up with all kinds of schlock for a laugh. Unfortunately, this one didn't elicit so much as a chuckle from me. The film is painfully bland and poor in its quality. I can't even take this seriously, seeing as the titular transplant is literally two guys in the same suit. I can barely even watch the film thanks to its ugly filming style, cheap production, and lame acting. Most of the characters are unlikable, and the story they go through is threadbare. Worst of all, the film bored me. How can a film this absurd and cheap be so boring? Somehow it succeeded.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

30: Auschwitz (2011)

Dr. Boll I presume?

Uwe Boll really wants you to feel for this one. He even goes so far to bookend the film with video of himself telling you directly how horrible the Holocaust is and the importance of not letting history repeat itself. Thanks Uwe, message received.

Auschwitz aims to elicit shock and tears by coldly focusing on the supposed ways Nazis massacred their victims in concentration camps. Unfortunately, Boll doesn't have nearly enough money to give Schindler's List competition. He must not have had enough actors to work with either, given that he plays one of the guards himself--I get the feeling he rounded up some buddies and shot this on a weekend. I found out recently that he had cut a large chunk of the story that found to be overly melodramatic, but to make up for it he patches in interviews--it does little to mask the film's shortcomings or make up for its lack of focus.

The film was famously controversial amidst fears that it would be overly-exploitative and tasteless. While it's not nearly as graphic or horrible as its reputation would suggest, I think it's still rather tasteless, thanks to the transparent way he chooses to show sadism and cruelty without subtlety. We're supposed to be moved and reach an understanding of the Holocaust's evil--instead, I can't help but to see this as a gaudy exercise in beating audiences over the head with shock, and the bad production quality doesn't sell it that well.

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

29: Eaten Alive! (Mangiati Vivi!) (1980)

Cannibal movies are hardly high art as it is. I could forgive certain ones for specific reasons, but I couldn't find any good reason to forgive Umberto Lenzi's Eaten Alive! It's already a trashy, gut-wrenching experience with its gore, scenes of animal cruelty, rape, and of course cannibalism. What hurts this film the most is that it's so stale--the boundaries had already been pushed in better films within the genre, but this one offers nothing new to the story, characters, or style that sets it apart. It results in a very boring, tiresome affair that leaves no impact, despite how shocking it aims to be.

I don't even remember a thing about this movie now--I had only bought it for the soundtrack CD, because these Italian movies have pretty rad scores. Roberto Donati's music for this is really groovy--that's probably the film's sole highlight.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

28: The Human Centipede Part 3 (Final Sequence) (2015)

There's no classy or artistic way to mask just how disgusting and malevolent Tom Six's Human Centipede trilogy is. The first film is just stupid and schlocky, almost laughably so. The second one though--yeesh. Some of that can't be unseen. I give those two some leeway for some reason or another--for the third one though, I can't even...

While not as disgusting as the second film, the third sequence still has enough grotesqueness and violence to make the experience ugly and grating. It's almost unwatchable, thanks largely to Dieter Laser constantly yelling at people. I especially hated the few scenes where he blatantly exploits or violates Bree Olson's character. When there is an actual human centipede shown (the longest of the series), it doesn't really elicit shock, it's actually kinda boring at this point.

An alternate ending was filmed that would have tied this up with the first film and turned it into something meta. I actually would have appreciated that angle a little more than what's in the final product. The whole series is trash though.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

27: Moonshine Mountain (1964)

One can't expect that much class out of a Herschell Gordon Lewis film, but even by his standards, this is pretty lame. Moonshine Mountain looks cheap and bad. Some folks might get a "so bad it's good" vibe from the campy performances, but the god-awful country singing, poor quality, and a surprising lack of gore makes it a forgettable farce for me. I found it boring and borderline unwatchable. It really says something when I'm more willing to sit through Blood Feast or The Wizard of Gore than 90 minutes of this hillbilly nonsense.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

26: Zeta One (The Love Factor) (1969)

To be fair, I couldn't expect much from this psychedelic exploitation comedy. The film does deliver on its promise to show off as much skin as tastefully possible, so I ought to appreciate that.

For a film that directly parodies the British spy genre and classic sci-fi, it's not particularly funny. It's a long, dry, plot-less affair, offering no characters worth rooting for and no specific scenes that makes this worth watching (except maybe that strip poker scene, but even that's rather dry). I'm especially not fond of the film's style, which manages to look even cheaper and more garish than Barbarella. I would watch anything for love, but not The Love Factor.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

25: Police Academy: Mission To Moscow (1994)

Seventh in the series--the returns had diminished so greatly at this point that the cast scrapes the bottom of the vodka bottle to find any good laughs. Most of this movie consists of pratfalls, buffoonery, and shenanigans that try too hard to elicit laughter that's never fully earned--the setups and payoffs simply don't line up. The film really beats you over the head with funny faces, cartoony sound effects, and people tripping over each other, and it all comes off as cringey. The story is daft and it gives the characters little time to shine. Even the remaining cast from the originals struggle to maintain their charm--they're champs for staying in the series this long, but aside from the horse stunts in the end credits, they deserved a better send-off.

Easily the worst and least-funny comedy I know of. Heck, Blubberella is funnier than this. It's rather disappointing since I still admire the first Police Academy and consider it one of the best. Compare the two and maybe you'll have a good lesson on what comedy works and what doesn't.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

24: Return To...Return To Nuke 'Em High (aka Volume 2) (2017)

When people think of indulgence in the cinematic arts, they might point to George Lucas and his Star Wars prequels, Spielberg's Hook, all of Baz Luhrman's musicals, and countless more examples. There's only so much the eyes can take before it all starts to become an ugly blur, so full of noise and mayhem that it makes you want to throw up. Fortunately, most films don't push me that far--but this one did. Of all the messes that exist, this abominable thing that Lloyd Kaufman smashed together represents the absolute worst qualities of indulgent creativity (if it can even be called creative).

I mean, sure, it's a Troma film, so what could I expect? I enjoyed so many of these on a "so bad it's good level," including the original Class of Nuke 'Em High. The thing is, most of these films managed to pace themselves and inject comedy that elicited genuine laughter. But Volume 2 of Return of Nuke 'Em High shows no restraint at all--it's a bizarre and plot-less menagerie of obnoxiously unfunny jokes, sickening gore and filth, and garish special effects. The film is barely even watchable. Kaufman inserts himself into the film repeatedly, aiming for some kind of meta-humor as if trying to lift the film into some kind of wall-breaking avant-garde masterpiece. I get the feeling the dude locked himself in the editing room and had way too much fun playing with the CGI though--he goes so far as to make naked ladies jiggle more, add more blood and goo, and make the entire film an ugly mess.

Less is more, Kaufman, even for Troma. I don't want to know about what goes on at Nuke 'Em High anymore, thanks anyway.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

23: BloodRayne: Deliverance (2007)

At one point, I had this pegged as the all-time worst movie I'd seen. It's still very much worthy of that title, but shockingly, I have seen worse movies now.

This might stand as the worst western I know of though. The fact that Uwe Boll took the BloodRayne franchise to the wild west is head-scratching as it is, although I suspect he wanted to ape other western horror hybrids like John Carpenter's Vampires or From Dusk Till Dawn. Boll's film doesn't have the energy of either, or even the first BloodRayne. Deliverance hardly ever moves--the whole movie is stuck in one place, focused on a fistful of drab characters with very little redeeming quality or action. The boring story is captured with wavering cameras that will make you sick, and shoddy editing. Zach Ward and Natassia Malthe do the best they can, but that's it. Watching this movie is like panning for gold--you'll be hard-pressed to find any valuable nuggets.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

22: Murder By Television (1935)

The 1930s might be my least-favorite decade in film (sorry Marx Bros fans). Bella Lugosi might be one of my least-favorite actors (sorry Dracula fans). He put out some stinkers back in the day--I'm pretty sure Murder by Television is one of the worst, if not THE worst.

In the days before television, this film presented the terrifying concept that a television might just kill you! The film plays out as a whodunit, limiting the action to a single house and a roomful of boring characters. The mystery is not that compelling, and it takes way too long to reach a conclusion that's ultimately pretty daft (if not predictable--I mean, it's in the title, what do you expect?). There's some rather deplorable racism in the movie, on top of it being boring, bland, and weak. Lugosi does little to elevate this--the man has done better, and the 30s has seen greater cinematic heights than this.

And no, your TV won't kill you, this movie's science is pure nonsense!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

21: War Of The Robots (La Guerra Dei Robot) (1978)

See, it's films like this that makes me dislike Italian cinema sometimes.

War of the Robots looks ugly and cheap, but it's further unwatchable thanks to such weird acting (dubbing?), lame effects, and a boring script. There is some pew-pew-pew action, so I guess the film deserves points for its groovy sound effects. But the messy plot and nonexistent story makes this nearly unwatchable.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To be continued...