Carrie (2013) review

 Unlike the 1976 original the 2013 adaptation of Stephen King's horror novel did not feature on the top 1000 films of all time.

Carrie White (Chloe Grace-Moretz) is the most unpopular girl in school. She is bullied mercilessly by her classmates and tormented by her fanatically religious mother Margaret (Julianne Moore). Carrie soon discovers she has telekinetic powers which she uses to exact her revenge on all those who have wronged her.

Something that always bothered me about the 1976 film was its portrayal of Carrie.

*spoilers ahead*

Up until the ending, it showed her as an innocent victim pushes too far by her classmates. That is until she is shown haunting her classmate Sue (the only person who tried making up for how she treated Carrie) from beyond the grave. This was a move that very much countermanded all of Carrie's character development. She was no longer a bullied victim, but a vengeful, malevolent spirit. I was pleased to see that the remake didn't follow this same idea even if that was their original plan. Carrie remained a symbol of what happens when the bullied kid finally snaps. 

In the 1975 film, Sissy Spacek received universal praise and an Oscar nod for her portrayal of Carrie. Chloe Grace-Moretz was just as good in creating a balanced and nuanced character who was both sympathetic and pitiful. I saw this in theatres over ten years ago and the scene I still remember is Carrie breaking down in fear when her mother locks her in the prayer closet. Some have said this horror film is light on scares, but I'd argue this scene is pretty damn scary.

Julianne Moore was also great as Carrie's unhinged, religiously fanatical mother. Out of the different villains in this film, she is probably the scariest. When you understand the way she is, it's no surprise that Carrie turned out so socially awkward. Moore was definitely better than Portia Doubleday, Alex Russell and Krissa Strain who played Carrie's bullies. A mixture of subpar acting and thin characterisations made them little more than your standard, two-dimensional high school bullies.

You could certainly argue that this remake of Carrie wasn't necessary, but as studio executives pointed out, high-school bullying is as much of a problem now as it was in the seventies - worse with the advent of phones, social media and cyber-bullying. If we don't more to protect victims, we're going to have a whole load more Carries on our hands.

The Cabinet of Dr Caligari review

 Number 289 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 2005 horror film 'The Cabinet of Dr Caligari.'

Dr Caligari (Daamen J. Krall) id a mad scientist who has secretly brainwashed the somnambulist Cesare (Doug Jones) into becoming a murderer. When Francis' (Judson Pearce Morgan) friend is killed, Francis swears to put a stop to Dr Caligari's madness.

This film is a remake of the 1920 original, which was a classic of the German Expressionistic genre. Director David Lee Fisher recreated the genre perfectly. The scene and set-design were so perfect that it felt like I was watching a Fritz Lang film. They brilliantly evoked a chilling atmosphere. Everything had a surreal tinge to it, making it all the scarier.

The houses had been built at strange angles and trees didn't resemble trees at all. They were abstract outlines from a waking nightmare. The monochrome only added to the creepy atmosphere.

The original film was silent, lacking any dialogue, so perhaps that explained all the over-acting and corny dialogue. The dialogue was cheesy. It didn't sound good coming out of the actor's mouths. I'm not sure whether this was intentional on Fisher's part. Having said that, the performances were good. The ever-great Doug Jones was very creepy as the brain-washed murderer.

Either way, this was still an entertaining if weird and surreal film.

3:10 to Yuma review

 Number 489 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 2007 remake of the Western action 3:10 to Yuma.

Christian Bale plays Dan Evans, a down-on-his-luck ranchers and family man. With steadily mounting debts, he decides to risk everything and earn a big reward by bringing outlaw Ben Wade (Russell Crowe) to justice. Gretchen Mol, Ben Foster, Peter Fonda and Alan Tudyk all co-star.

Since starting this challenge, I've watched my fair share of Westerns and I can safely say that I don't care for cowboy films. Cowboys and gunfights have never been something that's interested me and, as such, I was pretty bored throughout this film. This isn't a valid criticism, but more personal preference. Obviously it has to be good, otherwise it wouldn't be on this list, but it wasn't for me.

As I wasn't interested in this film, I wasn't particularly invested in any of the characters. Yes, they do have arcs and they show some growth, but I don't think it was enough. Throughout the film, we're led to believe that Daniel wants to deliver Ben Wade to the law, so he can collect the reward and pay off his debts. Admirable motivation for sure. But at the end, it's revealed that all he wants is to make his sons proud of him. Yet I think that this happened too late for it to have any input. And I don't think it's very credible.

Yes it's established early on that he has a rocky relationship with his son William (Logan Lerman) but that doesn't stop him from accompanying his dad on his mission. The two of them fight side by side on multiple occasions.

Ben Wade's arc was a bit more interesting. he's quickly established as a ruthless outlaw - brutally robbing an armoured stagecoach and killing all but one of the Pinkerton guards. Wade later kills another man in his sleep, but as he and Daniel grow a burgeoning respect, Wade starts to reform his ways. In the end, he voluntarily goes to prison so that Daniel's family can have the reward money. Characters are never wholly good or bad.

Having said that, Ben Wade's right hand man Charlie Prince (Ben Foster) was pretty evil. In a hell-bent mission to rescue his boss, Charlie executes surrendering federal Marshals and shoots a man in the back. This unwavering loyalty was by far the most interesting part of the film and I wish they explored that further. I don't think they properly addressed why Charlie was so loyal.

While Western afficionados might love this film, it wasn't for me in the slightest.