Wednesday, April 30, 2003
Some really great news to impart this week. My buddy Dan Keohane and I collaborated on a story entitled, "Mermaids." It's a good story and I thought maybe somewhere cool would want it. Well, it's been accepted by none other than Cemetery Dance!! Woo-Hoo! Can't get much cooler than that. CD is probably the number one horror magazine in America, and has published all the big names. Like Dan says, "it's like The New Yorker with fangs." This is a market both Dan and I have been trying to break into for a long time - so this acceptance was extra sweet. This is a really big deal for us horror writer types. The story should be appearing in the magazine either late this year or early next year. I'll be writing more here as I find out more. But this is really great news.
Also, Laura and I just got our free copies of her father's book, Luck Was A Stranger. We published this via iUniverse and it looks great! Very good quality and the binding looks great. The cover came out really good too - it's an old photograph of Bill Cooney from the 1960's. Laura wrote the jacket blurb and the foreward. If you think a book about a man's life growing up in Ireland and then immigrating to America sounds interesting, and believe me, this guy is quite a character, then you might want to check this out. Right now, you can get it from iUniverse and Barnes & Noble . It should also be available on Amazon.com soon.
Also, my partner in crime, Laura Cooney, and I have been working on a new novella lately, and it's been coming out really good. Right now it's about 50 manuscript pages and should be ending soon. I'm surprised how easy this one was. After several times of trying to collaborate on a story, this time it finally worked. More on this as it develops as well. We've got big plans for this one.
Wednesday, April 23, 2003
Saw the Conan O'Brien Show. The White Stripes aren't the house band this week after all. They didn't appear until the end of the show - but they are the musical guest for the rest of the week. So if you're interested in them, but not the other guests, I guess just check out the last ten minutes or so of the show. Last night they did "Seven Nation Army," which is great. Hard to believe it's just two people. Jack on guitar and Meg and drums. They have a big sound for two people.
Saturday, April 19, 2003
Well, I think I'm a convert. I picked up the new White Stripes cd, Elephant. This was after I was disappointed by their (last) big breakthrough cd, White Blood Cells, and I was figuring they had to be the most overrated band in awhile (well, since the Strokes anyway, lol). But they got me. First I got hooked on their first single from the new album, "Seven Nation Army." And that led to buying the whole cd. And I really dig it. Doesn't sound quite as retro/derivative to me this time around. Not that they've changed their sound much - they haven't. I just think it's a lot stronger batch of songs this time around. This time they actually seem deserving of the hype.
Speaking of Jack and Meg White, they're the "guest band" on Conan O'Brien this week, from Tuesday until Friday. I don't think Conan has had a band on for a whole week before - I guess this means they'll be filling in for the Max Weinberg Seven for four days, and not just playing at the end of the show like bands usually do. Might be worth checking out.
Friday, April 18, 2003
Well, my father-in-law, William Cooney's, book, Luck Was A Stranger, is currently available for preorder from iUniverse. Nice to see it's finally close to being done. The cover's all set, all the corrections have been made, and all the marketing copy (blurbs) have been written. It doesn't sound half bad. This is the culmination of a lot of work, and I think he'll be very happy with the finished result. We haven't gotten our copies yet, but it's a good sign that the book is listed on their site. I guess in a month or so it will also be available from places like Amazon.com and BarnesandNoble.com. So it's nice to see things happening.
Wednesday, April 16, 2003
Well, first off, almost every newspaper review I’ve read so far of House of 1,000 Corpses has been negative. One and a half stars. One Star. Half a star. Most of them just don’t “get” what Rob Z was trying to do, or they don’t see the appeal of trashy movies, or they’re too squeamish. It's funny - even in the horror community, people are divided. I think a lot of people were disappointed because the movie's reputation was more like this was some intense, serious horror film that would revolutionize horror. Instead, it's more funny than scary and is just a fun trashy movie. Basically, if you’ve ever stayed up til 3am watching a Herschell Gordon Lewis marathon and laughed your ass off at Blood Feast while passing around a bottle of Jack Daniels, then chances are good you’re going to enjoy this one. I even went to see it again during the weekend and enjoyed it even more the second time, knowing what I was in for. But this one is going to divide a lot of people.
But you don't listen to newspaper critics about a movie like this. It's something either you'll love or hate. And I don't put much stock in most critics anyway. They've gotten it wrong before. I remember when Eyes Wide Shut came out, just about every review I read didn’t even understand what Kubrick was trying to do. It wasn’t a failed “erotic thriller;” it was all about a character who has a fear of sex. Tom Cruise’s character is thwarted every time he tried to have an affair, because it’s supposed to be a study in frustration. And that masquerade party scene is still one of the best horror movie sequences I’ve seen in a long time. It’s note perfect, as spooky as anything in The Shining. But the critics almost universally panned it, except for a few ballsy types like Roger Ebert (although this is the same guy who panned Blue Velvet, so nobody's perfect). I still predict that in ten years, these same critics will be declaring Eyes Wide Shut a neglected gem. Kubrick was that much ahead of his time.
Which brings us to The Panic Room. I remember when it came out, it got some pretty nasty reviews. So much so that I avoided seeing it in the theaters. Which is a shame because this is another movie by David Fincher, the guy who gave us the postmodern masterpiece Fight Club. I should have trusted him enough to give the flick a chance, despite what the critics said.
I recently caught it on cable, and all I can say is, this is one kick-ass thriller. And the ending, which a lot of people seemed to have a problem with, wasn’t all that bad at all. What was the fucking problem everyone had with this movie?? It’s suspenseful, the acting is great, and the script was pretty solid. And Fincher once again directs circles around most other “thriller” directors. For those who haven’t seen it yet, this is the one where Jodie Foster and her daughter move into a new apartment that has a “panic room:” a safe room to flee to if anyone breaks in. Their first night in the new place, some thugs come looking for some missing loot, which just so happens to be in the same panic room that Jodie her kid flee to. And it’s a showdown as the thugs do whatever they can to get inside.
Jodie Foster is great in it. The thugs, made up of the compassionate Forrest Whitaker (always terrific – I still always think of him as Ghost Dog these days), the more merciless Jared Leto (who I’ve thought was good since his days on My So-Called Life, but who was also very cool in Fight Club) to the most psychotic of all, Dwight Yoakum (who knew a country singer could be so good! But then again, he also turned in a memorable performance back in Sling Blade as another bad guy). Even the kid is really good.
I watched the movie in a state of suspense throughout, and I didn’t think the ending was a cheat at all. In fact, it seemed to be in character. I think Fincher got ripped off on this one. It should have gotten better reviews and it should have been a bigger hit. Although I remember it doing pretty well anyway.
So, if you were curious about Panic Room, and haven't seen it yet, then check it out on cable or on video. It’s definitely worth a rental. It’s not as important as Fight Club, in fact it’s kind of a trifle in comparison, but it’s a solid thriller that will keep you on the edge of your seat throughout. And sometimes that's good enough.
Friday, April 11, 2003
THE RETURN OF HARDCORE HORROR?
Well, I saw the first showing today of Rob Zombie’s directorial debut, House of 1,000 Corpses, and I gotta admit, I’ve been waiting for this one for a long time. After all the hype surrounding Universal being too afraid to release it, and Rob Z having to find another distributor (Lion’s Gate), there was no way a movie could live up the reputation this one had. Despite some flaws, however, it’s a lot of fun.
One thing I got was the sense that Rob Zombie has a helluva lot of potential as a director, especially as a director of horror. And if he didn’t hit a home run his first time out, he might just do it next time.
Why was I so excited about this one? Well, ya' see, my favorite time periods for horror movies are the 1930’s and the 1970’s. The 30’s were when Universal were at the height of their powers, churning out classics like the original Frankenstein, Dracula and The Mummy, one after another. These are amazing movies that still hold up just fine. They’re studies in light and mood and atmosphere, and despite the restrictions of the time, they are powerful stuff. Then the 70’s were when the studios lost their domination over movies, and independent filmmakers started flexing their muscles. It was a time of George Romero’s Dead movies (especially his masterpiece, Dawn of the Dead), Tobe Hooper’s Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Wes Craven’s Last House on the Left. Suddenly horror was actually disturbing! It was intense and violent and there weren’t any limits anymore.
Do you remember the first time you saw Texas Chainsaw? I’ve got to admit, that first time we see Leatherface, when he pulls that metal door to the side and hits one of the “innocents” in the head with his hammer, and the guy just drops to the floor and starts spasming – it’s one of the most intense scenes in horror movie history. I mean, that really scared you! It was unexpected, it was severe, and it went further than you were used to seeing on the big screen. No matter how many times I’ve seen Chainsaw since, I can’t recapture the way I felt the first time I saw that scene. But I remember how powerful it was.
House of 1,000 Corpses is no way in the same league as Chainsaw, but it’s definitely a homage to it. And if Zombie’s movie seems a little too over the top at times, and the humor a little too much (verging on self-parody), he can be forgiven for his shortcomings. If the balance of humor and horror is a little off sometimes, at least he tried to juggle the two, and it’s not that easy. At least he had enough ambition to do something that’s a breath of fresh air.
After the 80’s turned the slasher film into generic, assembly-line product, and the 90’s brought us the ironic wink wink of Scream (Wes! What happened!!), it’s been a long time since we got to experience some real bonafide horror when going to the movies. This is hardcore horror. Distriburing imagery, hopeless situations, blood and cruelty. This is the goods that have been absent too long from the cookie-cutter product Hollywood has been spoonfeeding us. Fuck pablum! I want some meat and potatoes!
Horror is supposed to make you uncomfortable. And while there have been a rash of interesting subtle horror films lately (from The Sixth Sense to The Others to The Ring), there hasn’t been much hardcore horror to fill the gullets of those of us who grew up in the 70’s.
House of 1,000 Corpses may not be an absolute feast, but it’s a pretty good meal after such a long wait.
So what’s it about? Well, luckily when I saw it, nobody had reviewed it yet. I hadn’t read one review. This is because I guess they made critics wait an extra day to see it. Usually this is bad sign, it often means a studio knows it has a dog on its hands and doesn’t want bad reviews to ruin it’s opening day at the box office. But it’s clear that the reason why House of 1,000 Corpses was delayed for viewing by the critics, is because this is not the kind of movie that is for everyone. But there is a definite audience for this one – and it will probably be pleased.
The plot is basic as all hell. Two couple traveling across country looking for weird roadside attractions comes across Capt. Spaulding’s Museum of Horrors. From there, they stumble across a rather insane family in the middle of nowhere after their tire blows out (heh heh). But it ain’t so much about the plot. It’s about the execution. Sure it's derivative as hell, but Rob Zombie grabs the ball and runs with it.
It starts with a scene between Sid Haig (the great 70’s actor who was in everything from Spiderbaby with Lon Chaney, Jr. to Coffy with Pam Grier), in full clown makeup as Capt. Spaulding, and Michael J. Pollard (the funny looking guy from Bonnie and Clyde). These two greats are a lot older, but just as cool as they ever were. Along the way, we see more familiar faces from Karen Black (70’s staple and star of classics such as Trilogy of Terror) to Bill Mosley (Chop Top from Texas Chainsaw 2). Even a cool new face (Walt Goggins, who plays Shane on one of my fave shows, The Shield, appears as a no-nonsense deputy).
Like I said, the flaws mostly revolve around the balance of horror and humor. Sometimes the humor verges on self-parody, and the crazy family seems a little too over the top at times, but it’s a definite homage to stuff like Chainsaw (they even got a Granpa!), and you’ll laugh as much as you scream. Although, I gotta admit, it could have been a lot scarier. But I'll reserve final judgment for the uncut DVD version.
Some of the stylistic elements reveal Rob Z’s roots as a music video director, too, like his frequent use of negatives, animation, old movie clips and slo-mo. Some of it works, but some it comes off as a bit too self-conscious. But this is RZ’s first feature film as a director. And frankly, I thought it was a kick-ass debut, showing this guy has a lot of potential for the future.
But once things get gruesome, you’re in for a non-stop rollercoaster ride. And as long as you can forgive the lack of logic in some parts, you’re going to find this a really fun movie.
Is this movie going to herald the return of harcore horror to movie theaters again? Well, that all depends on how well it does at the box office, since the only thing studios react to is the bottom line. It's going to be hard for this one to be a big hit when it's only in limited release, though. But what a nice antidote to all those Scream and I Know Who You Screwed Out of $10 Last Summer bullshit movies!!
RUN RABBIT RUN!
Thursday, April 10, 2003
Not much news this week, but I am planning to see Rob Zombie's new movie, House of 1,000 Corpses this weekend. It's supposed to be a throwback to the horror movies of the 70's, like Tobe Hooper's The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Wes Craven's The Last House on the Left. If so, it could be a real shot in the arm to cinematic horror - one that's long overdue. Zombie originally made the movie for Universal, but they passed on it after finding it too intense. So the movie was in limbo for two years while Rob tried to find a distributor. He hooked up with Lion's Gate and the movie comes out this weekend. I am really looking forward to this one and I hope it lives up to its notorious reputation. I'll write about it as soon as I see it.
Infernally Yours,
LLS
Thursday, April 03, 2003
Lately, I've been working on editing my father-in-law's book. A few years back, Bill Cooney wrote his memoirs, entitled Luck Was A Stranger. And Laura and I are publishing it through iUniverse in time for his birthday in June. I must have read the thing five times so far - the latest time being the final galleys - and it's been a lot of work. The book is basically about his life growing up in Ireland, then his stint living in Canada, then his coming to America in the 50's. Some of it is pretty interesting. He has a good sense of humor for an old curmudgeon, and even gets in some political rants at the end. It seems to be ahead of schedule. I'm curious to see how this comes out.
Also saw the movie Minority Report on cable recently, and I have to admit, I dug it. And this is from someone who isn't much of a fan of either Tom Cruise or Steven Spielberg, but this movie is pretty damn good. It doesn't hurt that it's based on a short story by Philip K. Dick, one of the best sf writers of all time (his books are also the source material for the amazing Blade Runner and the pretty good Total Recall). It's basically about a future where murders can be predicted before they happen, and Cruise is a cop who arrests these people. Until one of the "precogs" sees him commit a murder in the future, at which point he becomes a hunted man. Cruise does a fine job as the cop, and for once Spielberg doesn't fuck this one up at the end. It's almost like AI was a trial run for this - that one started out good and then turned to shit at the end. Minority Report stays good and smart all the way through. I guess Spielberg isn't all bad - he did direct Jaws and Empire of the Sun (based on the book by J.G. Ballard) after all, but he also has a lot of movies that are ruined by too much emotional manipulation. I just can't stand sappy endings, and Spielberg seems to be a sucker for them, which can get pretty annoying at times. But he hits all the right marks with Minority Report. As for Cruise, I always thought he was kind of a shallow pretty boy, but he's actually been taking some real interesting chances lately in movies like Eyes Wide Shut (which will be declared a masterpiece ten years from now - you'll see - as usual Kubrick was ahead of his time), Magnolia (where Cruise actually plays a real asshole, and does it well), Vanilla Sky (which I haven't seen yet, but which sounds really interesting) and Minority Report. I've got to admit, he's been doing some interesting stuff lately.
