Have I ever mentioned how much I love internet radio? It's kind of a recent discovery for me, because I live in a cave, and I don't come out of it very often, so I'm generally late on stuff all the kids are doing. Which is why I dress like a Victorian/punk hobo from the 80's. Z has no concept of time. But yes, now I have discovered internet radio, and I love it.
My two favorites would have to be IHeartRadio and Last. FM. Especially Last. FM, because it gives more details about the various bands and songs you're listening to. I have discovered so many awesome bands through this thing...Oh, hold on. I can hear my iPod, Fluffy, crying softly in its docking station.
"Noooo, data overload! I am a mere 16 gig contraption! No more, please!"
Poor thing. I'm going to have to replace it soon.
"If you just liked movie soundtracks and Josh Groban like you used to, I'd be totally cool, but you just had to get into goth music and every other musical genre ever conceived by man!"
Shut up, you can retire when I have money.
"I thought you preferred CDs anyway!"
CDs are expensive, you little Steve Jobs spawn! Now be quiet!
Sorry about that. Fluffy is getting a little cranky these days since he barely has two free gigabytes to his name. Can't say that I blame him, but I would kind of like new music. Fortunately, my internet radio stations can sate my everlasting musical thirst for the time being.
Z's glorious art debut on this blog. So yeah, I actually own this one!
The only problem is, when I'm listening to some customized goth station, some odd things sneak in. Dangit, when I listen to goth music, I want to listen to goth music! Not Radiohead! Or when I want wumpity-thump oontz-oontz music, I do not want scream-o.
I do not like Radiohead. I'm sorry. *watches tiny readership shrink even further*
Blagh, in other news, I am sick. Allergies on top of a cold I'm getting over. Boo. But who cares? I don't. I'm boring myself. I'm going to go find food. What's your favorite kind of music? And if it's goth, what's your second favorite? I like metal (even Within Temptation!), classic rock, and random Britpop. And New Age. I really dig the hippie-dippy stuff. Peace out, dude.
Sorry I disappeared for a while, guys. I've been known to do that. Danged space aliens.
I have another movie review for you all. Better yet, I have TWO reviews! And one of them is even from a recent movie! Yaaaaay!
First, we've got The Woman in Black, a ghost story set in Victorian England, and below that is a review of Bram Stoker's Dracula, the 1992 rendition of the classic vampire tale.
The Woman in Black
In which Harry Potter may now boldly wear a mustache!
I was highly disappointed to find that this wasn't a biopic about my life, but at the same time I was relieved. That would have been one boring movie.
As it was, I came very close to run screaming from the theater. Woman in Black is a horror movie of the creepy haunting variety. It stars Daniel Radcliffe, or as you may know him, that guy who played Harry Potter. He's gotten very handsome, by the way. I know he's gained quite a few fan-girls from his Harry Potter days, but I never found him all that appealing. Maybe it's because in this movie, he's wearing late 1800's period clothing.
The story concerns Arthur (Radcliffe) going to an old house to put the deceased previous owner's papers in order...Or something. Due to my ADD or whatever it is, the details escaped me. Anyway, when he gets to the village close to the place, the townsfolk don't seem too keen on the idea of him going there.
Of course, in true horror movie tradition, he ignores their warnings and heads off to the suspiciously creepy, deserted(?) old manor, which sits out in the middle of a huge misty swamp. The scenery in this movie is absolutely gorgeous, for those of you inclined to like brooding, foggy landscapes. The whole film is beautifully shot.
Once at the house, it doesn't take very long for things to get eerie. He first spies the eponymous woman standing out in the estate graveyard. He runs outside to see who she is, but he finds no one. From here, weirder and weirder things start happening, the creepiness escalates, children start dying all over the place, and Z gets a heart attack while consuming too much buttery popcorn.
If more men dressed like this, fewer of you would be single. Just sayin'.
Radcliffe is a competent, though not very interesting actor, and he does a competent, though not very interesting job in this movie. But let's face it, this is hardly a character piece, and he's not given much to work with. As usual, he's very good at looking sad and angsty. In Woman in Black, he's a young widower, still depressed about his wife who died in childbirth four years ago. He has a little boy, which is his main reason for going through with his scary assignment. If he doesn't, he'll lose his job. Good father + grieving widower x cute Daniel Radcliffe = Sympathetic protagonist, I s'pose.
Issues
This was a rather disappointing movie as far as creativity is concerned. All the things happening in this film, you've probably seen before. It employed just about every horror trope you can think of, including creepy children, said creepy children staring out windows, bloody writing on the wall, vengeful spirits, terrifying wind-up toys, a swamp boy, the doubting scoffer, possession, the haunted house with suspicious noises in the night, etc. It almost felt like an extended "Supernatural" episode, and I kept expecting Sam and Dean Winchester to show up. It only lacked the goofy humor, though it did seem to have a very subtle self-awareness that I found amusing.
Oh, and potential plot-hole! It looked to me like Arthur just had to go through a bunch of paperwork to do whatever his job entailed. Why didn't he just pick up all the paperwork in the house and work on it elsewhere? Instead of, you know, SPENDING THE NIGHT AT THE HAUNTED HOUSE?
There also dadgum freaking jump-scares EVERYWHERE.
The Good Stuff
Like I mentioned before, this is a gorgeously shot movie. All the scenery, sets and costumes and camera work are wonderful. There ought to be more horror films set in the Victorian age, because it just works, and you can milk all the horror tropes for all they're worth. This movie certainly did so with relish. There was so much awesome gothic imagery, it's almost worth watching just for that.
It also relies more on psychological horror than nasty gross-out stuff. When not using the annoying-but-effective jump-scares, it utterly takes advantage of that heinous fear most of us have of seeing a ghostly face peering out of the darkness at us. You know, when you think you see something weird out of the corner of your eye, you turn around, and nothing is there? This movie knows. And it nearly sent me into cardiac arrest. It also feeds on parental instinct, because the plot involves kids dropping like flies. I'm glad I don't have kids, because otherwise I'd be having some freaky nightmares.
So despite not being very inventive, it was still pretty scary. It does what "Supernatural" does by taking all your typical horror elements and wallowing in them like a happy hippopotamus. It didn't really leave an emotional impact on me, though I've had a hard time going into a dark room for a few days. So it wasn't a great film, but it was worth the price of admission, and I would probably watch it again.
My Movie-snob Rating: ***
My Personal Rating ***
Bram Stoker's Dracula(1992)
He's ashamed of his odd hairstyle choice.
Oh boy. This was a weird one.
The 90's brought us some good movies. Interview with The Vampire, Sense and Sensibility, Ed Wood, all those classic Disney animated films, etc.
But the 90's was also one of the most awkward decades ever. Looking back, it seems like, "durr...The 80's are over...Now what?"
Fittingly, this was a super-awkward vampire movie. Not like Twilight, heavens no. That's uncomfortable-silly-teenagers-plus-hideous-acting awkward. Bram Stoker's Dracula was more like an-epic-goth-parade-through-Wal-Mart awkward. You have to admit that it's awesome, but it is so incredibly bizarre.
OK, so the story is straightforward enough. Dracula wants to buy a house in England. Real-estate guy Jonathan Harker goes to his castle in Transylvania. Dracula sees picture of Jonathan's bride-to-be, Mina, and thinks she's a reincarnation of his tragically deceased wife from centuries ago. So while seducing his beloved, he decides to terrorize London while he's at it. Van Helsing and friends band together to put the undead creeper permanently back in his grave.
Issues
But what's weirder than "Zardoz", anyway?
Holy crap, where to begin? The camera work and editing were nuts and there was narm aplenty. Bizarre imagery was thrown in with little-to-no reason behind it. There were disconcertingly cheesy special effects. Weird stuff was constantly happening with no explanation, there was that somewhat infamous scene of gratuitous werewolf sex (yeah, eat your heart out, Team Jacob!), some more random erotica, and oddly-behaving characters. I got the sense that a lot of it was weird for the sake of weird. It wasn't necessarily scary, just weird. Not quite "Zardoz" weird, but in that same vein.
And as usual, Keanu Reeves is pretty muchly pointless except for being a plot-device. Maybe he was supposed to act as a dull contrast to Gary Oldman's Dracula, but "act" may be too strong a word, here.
...What was with Aged Dracula's hair?
Good Stuff
Fantastic cast. Oh my gosh, what a great cast. Winona Ryder as Mina, Gary Oldman as Dracula, Anthony Hopkins as Van Helsing, Cary Elwes as Lord Holmwood, Tom Waits as Renfield the crazy guy...The cast was definitely the saving grace of this movie, Keanu Reeves aside. Gary Oldman is utterly badass as Dracula. He hams it up, but only the the best way possible. He's everything a good Dracula should be: Grotesque, sexy, scary, powerful, tragic, and evil, all at the same time.
The sets and costumes are also magnificent. OH THE COSTUMES! This was costume porn at its finest, especially if you're a kook like me when it comes to gothic and steampunk fashion. The whole movie is just loaded with over-the-top gothic imagery, and like The Woman in Black, it happily wallows in it. As well it should! Everything is simply gorgeous and extravagant, and if it weren't for the crazy editing and camera, the visuals would be perfect.
EXCELLEEENNT!
Vampire makeup was terrific. Dracula as an old man was freaky-awesome. Creepy, creepy. Pale white, saggy skin, long fingernails, the works. Can't say as much for the werewolf/gorilla suit, but the vampire getups were very nicely done. Seriously, though, what was with that werewolf, and what was with Aged Dracula's hair?
The characters are interesting enough that you care about them, even though you probably know what's going to happen. Mina falls for Dracula, though the romance is written a bit shakily, and you really do want her to be with him. It may be only because you know her alternative is Keanu, but otherwise I found this movie to have a pretty good emotional strength. It was so artsy-fartsy, that it sure as heck ought to.
OMNOMNOMNOM
In the end, I'm still not sure if I liked this one. There were things that I loved about it, but it was just so danged weird and a little pretentious for all the narm and cheese it presented. It seemed confused, and didn't really blend the horror and romance as well as it wanted to. But I can see it becoming a film classic in years to come and I enjoyed it for sure. I would definitely watch it again.
My Movie-Snob Rating: ***1/2
My Personal Rating: ***1/2
One last note: The 1992 Dracula is the source of one of my favorite songs! "Love Song for a Vampire" by Annie Lennox has been on my iPod for years, and even though I knew it was from this movie, I'd never seen the movie until recently. So now I have! Go me. I'm sure you find that utterly not-fascinating, though, so I'll just leave you with the music video.
