Category Archives: Movies

Movies

About that Khan reveal…

…so director/writer J. J. Abrams noted in an interview that the reveal that Benedict Cumberbatch’s character in Star Trek Into Darkness (from now on I’ll refer to it as STID) was Khan was perhaps not handled as well as it should have been:

http://www.slashfilm.com/j-j-abrams-admits-keeping-khan-secret-in-star-trek-into-darkness-was-a-mistake/

I think Mr. Abrams states the obvious by this point and, no, I’m not trying to be snarky.  In fact, this is perhaps why Mr. Abrams has succeeded as well as he has in a business as cut throat as the one he’s involved in.  It shows he’s capable of looking around, assessing, and adjusting.

I’m certain there are plenty of directors who in his shoes would never in a lifetime admit something they did was “wrong” in any way.  For that matter, there are plenty of people in many other lines of work who would be loathe to admit they ever did anything wrong (I have yet to hear a mea culpa for anything that occurred during the previous Republican President’s term).

I suspect that those working behind the scenes of STID came into the venture clearly wanting to put their spin on the Khan storyline.  Unfortunately, they got so wrapped up in trying to “surprise” their viewers of the character’s identity that they ultimately tripped over their own feet in that reveal.

The fact is that the original 1982 Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan had the villain’s name in its title and yet other than die hard Star Trek fans, few knew who the heck Khan was or why he was all “wrathing” on the Star Trek characters.  But the movie filled you in on all the information you needed in very short order.  In his introductory scenes, Khan and his group were given a complete backstory that allowed audiences to know he was a very dangerous and clever villain.  By the time Captain Kirk and Khan were about to cross paths for the first time, my stomach was in a knot, knowing that Kirk and his crew were innocently walking into a lion’s den…and there was a real doubt as to whether he would be able to survive that first encounter (check out Kirk’s reaction to seeing Khan at the five minute mark).

Excellent, excellent stuff.

But STID tried to hide Khan’s character from audiences until he was face to face with Kirk by the film’s second half.  Then, when Khan reveals his identity, actor Benedict Cumberbatch delivers the line as if it is some major revelation…yet in this Star Trek universe, this is the very first meeting between the characters and therefore the whole thing is decidedly anti-climactic.

In The Wrath of Khan, Kirk is surprised, amazed, and more than a little horrified by the return of this very bad man.  In STID, however, since the characters haven’t met this person before and have no knowledge of his backstory until he tells them, this big reveal is a big…nothing.

In the end, all that effort to hide the identity of the villain proved useless or, even worse, distracting from the overall film.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: I enjoyed STID when I saw it in theaters but thinking about the film and the passage of time have certainly dulled my enjoyment and thoughts of the film.  I’m not completely down on it, however, but feel that while it did succeed in certain respects it surely did fail in others.

General, Movies

Busy weekend…

…at least for me.  Plenty of stuff to do and things to see and read.

Perhaps the one thing that stunned me the most was the death of actor Paul Walker.  I was never a huge fan of his though I have to admit I’ve seen a large number of his films.  Early reports of his death via a terrible automobile accident state he was a passenger and not the driver of the car but that “speed was involved”.  I feel for those he left behind, particularly his young daughter and family.

At the time of his death, he was scheduled to film more scenes for the upcoming Fast & Furious 7, obviously the seventh film in this popular movie franchise.  Hopefully without sounding too crass, I couldn’t help but wonder what the status of that film is.

Given the fact that he was scheduled to film some more scenes, Mr. Walker obviously didn’t finish all his work for the movie.  Was there enough to finish the film without making major changes to the script?  Or will extensive reworking become necessary?  Unlike the death of Heath Ledger before the release of The Dark Knight and given the way Mr. Walker died, the idea of seeing him in a film about people who recklessly drive fast cars might seem a tad…uncomfortable.  In light of this, is it better to remove his character entirely from the film?

I suppose all that is irrelevant for the time being.  A life was lost in a most tragic way.  It reminds me of the death of James Dean so many years before, also in a car accident.  Both were young men who were peaking in their fields and likely had bright futures ahead of them.

James Dean made only three feature films before his career was prematurely ended.  He also made an eerie public service announcement that I’ll embed below.  Getting behind the wheel of a car and driving fast can be an exhilarating, adrenaline rush.  But our bodies are fragile and we must be sure that whatever we do, we do it with safety in mind.  Otherwise, the consequences can be tragic.

Movies

21 Real Deleted Scenes…

…That Completely Changed Famous Movies:

http://www.cracked.com/photoplasty_707_21-real-deleted-scenes-that-completely-change-famous-movies_p21/

Now, let me be upfront and say the following: Some of these deleted scenes didn’t really change the famous movie they’re from.  Not all that much, anyway.

For example, the deleted scene from Jaws is amusing but hardly a game changer in terms of what occurs in that movie.  The same goes with the J. J. Abrams’ directed Star Trek.  Interesting little scene, for sure, and it adds information to the young James Kirk’s hardly idyllic life, but it doesn’t radically alter what comes afterwards.

On the other hand, the slide show points out some genuinely interesting cut sequences that do indeed change the film, sometimes for the better.  For example, I wish that Superman II had kept the three Kryptonians being hauled off by the police at the very end.  I always felt that having them fall into what seemed like a very deep pit was…disturbing.  Superman should not kill or allow someone to die.  And, no, I have not seen Man of Steel yet.  I’ll give my opinion on that soon enough.

The cut sequence regarding Dallas’ fate in Alien, likewise, is a fascinating bit as well.  Interestingly enough, that sequence wound up being the entire basis of Aliens!  Ironically enough, Aliens featured a scene similar to this Dallas scene, and it too wound up being cut.  It isn’t mentioned in the above article, so I’ve embedded it below.  Check it out:

Finally, I thought the cut sequence in Star Trek II was interesting and certainly added to the pain Scotty felt for the deceased crew member.  But, was the scene necessary in the end?  Shouldn’t Scotty -and the rest of the senior crew, for that matter- feel bad about every young crew member’s death?

Books/Literature, Movies

5 Great Movies…

…That Were Turned Into Terrible Books:

http://www.cracked.com/article_20681_5-great-movies-that-were-turned-into-terrible-books.html

Gotta hand it to the folks at Cracked.com for this list.  There was a time when novelizations of movies were quite in vogue.  We are not talking about novels that were written and released and subsequently made into films.  We’re talking about hiring an author, while a movie is being made, to write a “novelization” of the film in production.  Said novel is then released concurrently with the film to allow the studios to make more money off their product.

I used to read a few of the ones that interested me, in particular those that were about films I was dying to see.  Oftentimes, the novelization of the film would be released a month or more before the film was in theaters, and in those pre-internet days it was rare to hear much about the film before its release.

Way back in 1989, for example, I would literally kill to see the Tim Burton directed Batman. All that was known was that Michael Keaton was playing Bruce Wayne/Batman (and the fan base was really confused about that choice) but, on the bright side, Jack Nicholson was playing the Joker, and that had everyone thinking good thoughts.

Some time shortly before the film was released I got my hands on the Batman novelization.  As it turned out, I didn’t get a chance to read it before seeing the film…

I was of two minds with the Batman film.  While I really, really loved the first half of the film and my young(er) mind would easily give that first half four stars, roughly from the point immediately after the Joker states “Wait til they get a load of me!” on, the film became overly weird and…silly.  It was as if the movie’s makers were winging (no pun intended) it from that scene, allowing the Joker to do his increasingly crazy (and for the most part pointless) stuff while Batman slowly comes after him.

A little after seeing the film, I decided, just for the heck of it, to read the novelization.  What I read wound up surprising me.  The first half of the book, if memory serves, followed the film pretty closely.  However, the second half of the book -again, if memory serves- was almost nothing like the second half of the film.  Not that it was any better, mind you, than the film, but clearly this was a movie/novelization that featured a pretty good first half but never could come up with an equally good second half.

I can only guess that the novelization followed the screenplay and the screenplay, as the film was being made, was essentially tossed out in the second half and reworked “on the fly”.

My most vivid memory of something in the novel not featured in the movie is a sequence where Bruce Wayne goes to visit Vicki Vale (Kim Basinger) in her apartment for a date.  The Joker, it turns out, has developed an interest in Vicki and, as Bruce and Vicki are about to leave the apartment on their date, the Joker appears at the door.  Bruce and the Joker talk to each other (a sequence I can only imagine was designed to allow Michael Keaton to actually act opposite Jack Nicholson without having a disguise on) and in the end the Joker either knocks out or shoots Bruce Wayne, apparently killing him, and kidnapping Vicki.

Bruce, it turns out, was carrying a metal tray or had some kind of bullet proof suit on and the bullet was stopped by said item.  Bruce leaps out the window after the two (who still think he’s dead) and jumps from building to building (sans Batman suit) while pursuing them, in touch with Alfred and telling him where he is so that he can bring the Batman suit to him.  Eventually, he does.

Yet again, I must warn you: I’m going by very old memories here, so some of the details presented above may not be quite right, but this sequence, obviously, wasn’t part of the Batman film.

A curiosity, for sure!

 

Movies

The Kings of Summer (2013) a (mildly) belated review

Found the trailer for The Kings of Summer attached to another movie and found it quite humorous:

So I put the film on my Netflix que and soon enough it arrived.  Yesterday I finally had a chance to see the film.  Did it live up to this delightful trailer?

Well…

Kinda.

The first half of the film, which is most in evidence in the trailer, is damn good as we meet the three leads, a trio of high school friends who decide to make a home in the woods so they can live as “men”.  First up is Joe (Nick Robinson), the instigator, who finds it increasingly difficult to live with his moody widowed father (Nick Offerman in a role that while still using what are his standard -and very humorous- comedic tropes, nonetheless gives him a chance to present a character who is genuinely hurting inside).  Next up is Joe’s friend Patrick (Gabriel Brasso) who also has considerable trouble with his parents, to the point where he has developed hives.  Rounding out the group is the genuinely bizarre Biaggio (Moises Arias), who is given the lion’s share of funny lines and reactions.

Along with a need to get out of his house, Joe also pines for Kelly (Erin Moriarty), a High School crush who likes him as a friend, though it is his sincere hope that one day they might become more.

In that first half of the film the boys run away from their homes and build their “new” house in the woods while their worried parents engage the police (a bungling -and also quite hilarious- duo played by Mary Lynn Rajskub and Thomas Middleditch) to help find them.

With me so far?

As I was saying, I loved the first half of the film but, unfortunately, the second half was nearly as good.  The second half of the film tries to tone down the humor and bring in more drama.  I didn’t really mind the shift that much but was bothered by a feeling that Jordan Vogt-Roberts, the director, was drawing things out and, to be blunt, becoming too “artsy” in his presentation.

What was until that point a delightful rush became a slog.  There were several sequences that didn’t feel like they needed to be in the film and should have either been cut down significantly or removed entirely (why did we need to see the extended preparation of the rabbit?  Why did we need to see those two young impulsive lovers who bump into Joe in the river?).  The “artsy” bits and pieces presented here and there, of nature and flowers and animals and water, after a while also felt like overkill.

By the time the film ended, I was truly torn.  On the one hand, the first half plus of the film was delightful and achieved a beautiful balance between being laugh out loud funny while still presenting a realistic/serious picture of what it is like to be a young teen with “difficult” parents.  The adults, who could have been treated as cardboard “jokes” were given more depth than initially met the eye, in particular in the portrayal of Joe’s father.

But that second half of the film ruined most, if not all, that goodwill.

In the end, I find it difficult to recommend this film in spite of the many, many good things to be found within it.  Truly, that is a shame.  However, even if the movie didn’t ultimately work for me in its entirely, director Vogt-Roberts created enough good stuff for me to keep him on my radar.

I’m looking forward to seeing more from him.

Movies

The return of…Blofeld and S.P.E.C.T.E.R.?

Interesting article from Huffington Post regarding the settlement between MGM, the production company Danjaq, and the estate of Kevin McClory.  What does this have to do with James Bond’s arch-villain and head of the evil organization known as S.P.E.C.T.E.R., Ernst Stavro Blofeld?  Read on and learn:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/17/james-bond-settlement-blofeld-return_n_4291697.html

For those who wondered what the deal was with Sean Connery’s last (until now unofficial) outing as James Bond, 1983’s Never Say Never Again, a thinly veiled remake of the 1965 Bond film Thunderball, the answers can be found in that article.

For those unwilling to check the article out, the bottom line is this: Mr. McClory collaborated with James Bond creator/author Ian Fleming with some concepts that he felt Mr. Fleming eventually “appropriated” without attribution and in the novel Thunderball.  In the making of the 1965 movie, Mr. McClory came up with both the white-Persian-cat petting Blofeld and S.P.E.C.T.E.R.  Blofeld, always played by a different actor in film, would become Bond’s arch-villain and appear not only in Thunderball but in the three subsequent Bond films You Only Live Twice (1967), On Her Majesty’s Secret Service (1969) and Diamonds Are Forever (1971).

After that four movie run as Bond’s archvillain, Blofeld abruptly disappeared from the series until returning in the intro segment of the 1981 Roger Moore Bond film For Your Eyes Only (perhaps due to the McClory lawsuit, the Blofeld-like character in this segment went unnamed even though he looked, acted, and carried a white Persian cat suspiciously like the one Blofeld had).

Mr. McClory apparently managed a favorable enough legal ruling regarding his contributions to Thunderball that this allowed another studio company to use the Bond, Blofeld, and S.P.E.C.T.E.R. concept and story in Sean Connery’s very last (unofficial) outting as James Bond in Never Say Never Again.

So fast forward to the above article.  If the issues regarding Thunderball have been resolved, it means that not only could Never Say Never Again become part of “official” Bondian lore, but the character of Blofeld and his organization might just make a return.  I suspect this is what the makers of the recent Daniel Craig Bond films are eager to do.  They hinted to a worldwide organization behind the villains of the three Daniel Craig films though they never outright stated that the organization was S.P.E.C.T.E.R.

Could be interesting…

Books/Literature, General, Movies, Music

Blockbuster, RIP

Interesting article by Dana Stevens for Slate magazine regarding the news that the owners of Blockbuster are closing all remaining retail centers, effectively ending the era of the big video rental stores:

http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/movies/2013/11/blockbuster_closing_why_even-those_of_us_who_hated_the_chain_will_miss_it.html

When Blockbuster first came along, there were more than a few “Mom & Pop” video stores around renting those pre-historic VHS tapes for film fans to watch.  Those who weren’t around back then don’t remember the way the film market used to be.  Recent movies took forever to be released to the home market and, when they were, they cost a lot to buy.  It wasn’t unheard of to see “new release” films go for as much as $50-85.  Further, that “new” film often took over a year -sometimes much more- before it even reached the home video market.  I distinctly recall the amazed reaction by many when the original Tim Burton directed Batman film was “quickly” released to video.  I can’t recall the exact time it took for the film to be released, but it was perhaps three to six months or so after its theatrical release, a turnaround that was completely unheard of back then but not so much now.

But this was the exception that eventually proved to be the rule.  Again, at the time and given the high price of films, video stores were a necessity.  If you didn’t rent and only bought the films you wanted, you would very quickly go quite broke.  When Blockbuster showed up, the Mom & Pop stores in my area were doomed.  These small stores couldn’t compete against the sheer bulk of material Blockbuster offered.

Even then, one had to be quick as even if Blockbuster had a large number of the latest “new” film available for rent, there were plenty of others trying to get their hands on it as well.

But for me the greatest thing about Blockbuster wasn’t so much the new and desired films, but their vast library of older classic films..  It was thanks to Blockbuster that I became aware of the movies of Stanley Kubrick.  It was also where I discovered Metropolis (the Giorgio Moroder version, which of course lead me to eventually want to see the original, uncut version) and Orpheus, two of my all time favorite films.

I could go on and on…

For all its flaws (and there were many) Blockbuster was a great place for its time.  The first big signs of trouble for the company probably came from the arrival of the DVD and the significant lowering of movie prices.  You could rent a film from Blockbuster for about $5 for three nights, but for another ten dollars or less you could purchase the DVD and own the film outright.

The straw that broke the camel’s back was likely the same as the one that killed music stores (and, sadly, looks to be doing the same to bookstores): computers and the internet.  Not to mention more choices in general.

Why would one go out to a Blockbuster to rent a film when you could Netflix it or stream it or Pay on Demand?  For those far less honest, you could steal a film via downloading it through one of many torrent sites.

So no, I’m not at all surprised Blockbuster has seen its end.  It was expected and, if anything, the only surprise one feels is that it lasted as long as it did.  Yet like Borders, like Circuit City, and like Peaches, I’ll miss her and the era she inhabited.

The world moves on and all that remains are the memories of what once was.

Movies

Lost “Return of the Jedi” Scene Answers Questions…

By now most Star Wars fans have probably heard about the laserdisc bought on e-Bay containing cut scenes/bloopers from Return of the Jedi, among other original trilogy Star Wars films.

The person who bought the laserdisc has a Facebook page wherein they’re posting all the scenes, and it can be found here:

https://www.facebook.com/rotjeditdroid

Now, the scene I’m referring to above involves Yoda making mention of the fact that both he and Obi Wan perhaps lied to Luke Skywalker about the identity of his father…

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/06/return-of-the-jedi-yoda-deleted-scene_n_4224976.html

I’ve mentioned many times before that the Star Wars features were never my cup of tea, despite the fact that I was of the right age and a big fan of sci-fi when the original feature film came out.  The fact is the film should have been right in my wheelhouse.

Yet the original Star Wars didn’t register and, while I knew everyone around me in the theater was going absolutely crazy about what they were seeing, I was/remain curiously indifferent about the whole thing.  So much so at the time, in fact, that I didn’t bother seeing Empire Strikes Back until it aired on network TV (I did, however, catch Return of the Jedi in theaters…go figure).

Upon seeing Return of the Jedi, what struck me was the revelation of Luke and Leia being twin siblings.  It was proof that much of the Star Wars saga was “made up” as it went along. After all, when Luke first sees the hologram of Leia pleading for help in the original Star Wars, the expression on his face is one of absolute love at first sight, not a feeling of “oh, I must help this damsel in distress”.  Even in the original theatrical cut of Empire Strikes Back it is obvious the idea that Luke and Leia are brother and sister is still not there, evident from this (amusing) clip:

Anyway, I still found the Yoda clip linked to above interesting, at least to show that the creators of the series were considering some of the ramifications of the unfolding story line they were creating.

All stories, after all, are “made up” as you go along.  Unfortunately for Mr. Lucas and company, some of the ideas they choose to follow invalidated previously created material and, I suspect, this in part was what made Mr. Lucas go back to the original films and edit out parts of it.  It’s a short step from that to “fixing” the effects or adding things that weren’t originally there.

The danger, of course, lies in spoiling what others cherish…even if the material is yours to begin with.

Movies

Back to Cracked…

A couple of fun/funny lists via Cracked.com, both dealing with movies…

First up, 6 Mind-Blowing Easter Eggs Hidden in Famous Movies…

http://www.cracked.com/article_20649_6-mind-blowing-easter-eggs-hidden-in-famous-movies.html

Perhaps my favorite bit is #5, the many references in Toy Story (Particularly Toy Story 3) to, of all movies, The Shining!  A curious choice to make references to an “R” rated horror movie in a “G” rated (primarily) kid’s movie!

As for some of the other items, the one I was most familiar with (and which most fans of the Evil Dead movies already know as well), is the famous Oldsmobile featured in several Sam Raimi directed/associated films.

Next up, 5 Clever Movie Schemes You Didn’t Realize Were Stupid:

http://www.cracked.com/article_20659_5-clever-movie-schemes-you-didnt-realize-were-stupid.html

I was more familiar with several of these.  The Django Unchained one, in particular, I couldn’t agree with more.  When I originally reviewed the film, I noted that so much pain and possible death could have been avoided by, of all damn things, simply shaking a person’s hand.  But the reality is that the whole entire climax made very little sense.  As noted, there was no reason for Django himself to be involved in the entire climax, and Dr. Schultz could have come up with a far less bloated plan to buy Broomhilda from her owner.  Then again, had they used a far more logical means of getting to this end, the movie wouldn’t have had its “explosive” climax.

Still…

As for the #1 entry, the latest James Bond film Skyfall, I likewise agree with the points being made.  I have to admit enjoying the film as it moved along and it was only afterwards and as I thought about what I had just seen that I realized how nonsensical the whole thing was.  Case in point was the whole climax, as noted in the Cracked entry.  Why was Judi Dench’s M there at all?  She didn’t need to be.  There was no way the villain could have known if she was when he attacked.

And the bottom line is this: The villain essentially accomplishes everything he set out to do, despite Bond.

Way to go, James!

Movies

Prince of Darkness (1987) a (very) belated review

Bear with me on this…

The first -and until yesterday- last time I ever saw the John Carpenter directed/written Prince of Darkness was in a theater with a friend back in 1987 during its initial theatrical run.  I remember both of us walking out of the theater in disgust at having wasted a perfectly good afternoon watching a perfectly wretched film.

Fast forward to last week, when I had to buy some stuff via Amazon and, to make the delivery free (I’m cheap that way! 😉 ), I added a few items to meet the minimal free shipping total.  For whatever reason I was thinking of the 1967 film Quatermass and the Pit (aka Five Million Years to Earth)…

…but had never seen the supposedly better TV show it was based on (this according to several people who had seen both), also titled Quatermass and the Pit, that aired nearly a full decade before in 1958.

So, being in an adventuresome/curious mood, I ordered the 1958 Quatermass and the Pit but still needed another order to make that all important free delivery (Yes, in order to save $5 in postage I was willing to spend another $20 for merchandise…never said I was logical!).  Anyway, I looked around the DVD/BluRay sections and, having been pleasantly surprised by SHOUT! Factory’s BluRay release of John Carpenter’s The Fog, a movie I didn’t think all that highly of but proved quite the revelation on BluRay, I decided to bite the bullet and, after 26 years (!!!) revisit Prince of Darkness.

The order arrived a few days ago and yesterday, finally, I had a chance to take a look at Prince of Darkness.  Watching those first few minutes of the film proved a pleasant surprise.  The establishing mood was good, almost deliciously Lovecraftian, and Jameson Parker, who I didn’t recall thinking all that much of when I originally watched the film ages ago, proved to be compelling…at least in those initial moments.

Without giving away too much of the plot, Prince of Darkness involves a fraternity of Catholic Priests who have been tasked for centuries to secretly guard a container of glowing green liquid that, they fear, holds a great evil.  The last of the Priests to oversee the material has passed away, and the Priest investigating this order (played by the always interesting Donald Pleasence) contacts Professor Howard Birack (Victor Wong) a teacher of high level theoretical physics at a University to assemble a team of students and professors to find out what this container actually holds.

Spoiler Alert: It isn’t anything good.

The students, teachers, and Priest hole up in the old rundown church hiding this liquid and soon experience odd sensations while noting an odd assortment of apparently homeless people surrounding the church, intent on keeping them there and, should they try to leave, doing them great harm.  The killings soon start and, yes, the film becomes a “siege” tale, something director/writer John Carpenter has worked on plenty of times before and since.

By the time the movie reached its climax and I realized Mr. Carpenter was using a familiar element from one of my favorite films, 1949’s Orpheus (the mirrors) and another familiar element related to the legend (the loss of Orpheus’ lover, Eurydice)…

…I abruptly came to another realization: Prince of Darkness was essentially a remake or reimagining of Quatermass and the Pit!  Basically, Mr. Carpenter (writing under the alias of –how could I miss this?!– Martin Quatermass) took all the main elements of Quatermass and the Pit -the strange object found in a run down area of the city, the impulses it creates in people around it, the world level threat, the bizarre “mind transmissions”, and, especially, the sacrifice of one of the major characters to end the threat- and added a few other elements (perhaps a pinch of the Exorcist) and, voila, he created Prince of Darkness!

What are the odds?!

I purchase Quatermass and the Pit (the TV version) and Prince of Darkness on the same day via Amazon and come to the stunning realization that one film very much influenced (or, if you’re less forgiving, was ripped off) the other!

Ok, now the big question: Is Prince of Darkness any good?

Before I get into that, let me state that many consider this movie John Carpenter’s last truly “great” film, even though he followed it up with They Live and a little later, Into the Mouth of Madness, both works which are considered “good,” if not “great” Carpenter.  There are others, however, who consider Prince of Darkness Mr. Carpenter’s first really big misstep and a harbinger of the lesser works that followed.

Myself?  Well, after watching the film once again I find myself in middle.  I have to admit I didn’t hate Prince of Darkness quite as much as I did when I first saw it in 1987.  On the other hand, I certainly didn’t walk away loving it.  The story features too many characters who are bland and ultimately unrealized.  The script really could have used some tightening and the direction, while decent, wasn’t quite as interesting as I’ve seen in other Carpenter works.  A good example of this is the attack of the green water.  Though it pains me to say this considering how much I admire so many of John Carpenter’s films, this proves to be quite laughable.  Unintentionally so, alas.

So in the end, I can only recommend this film for someone like me who has a fondness for Quatermass and the Pit and is curious to see John Carpenter’s reinterpretation of the themes/story.  SHOUT! Factory’s BluRay is a beauty and features razor sharp images and clarity probably not seen in the film since its initial release.  If you’re interested in seeing it, this is certainly the way to go.