Connect with us

Editorials

Dear Filmmakers: Subvert A Genre All You Want, But You Have To Respect It First.

Published

on

Black Rock

A little while ago I tossed up an article about the sale of Black Rock at Sundance. In fact, it should be the piece right below this one.

Right after doing so I saw that Devin Faraci, one of my favorite critics, had already filed his review of the film over at Badass Digest so I headed over there to check it out. You can do the same by clicking here.

Now I’m gonna state in bold letters that I have not seen Black Rock. For all I know it could become my favorite movie of 2012. I don’t always agree with Devin (maybe 70% of the time), but he’s one of a handful of about 5 or 6 critics whose reviews are my “go-tos” when I’m deciding what films to spend my time or money on as a consumer (I don’t always see everything for free, especially non-horror stuff). Whether or not I ultimately agree with his take on something, he’s got a knack for thoroughly explaining the reasoning behind his reactions that’s in a language I can relate to.

So I was surprised to come across a couple lines in his piece on Black Rock that echoed something that’s been on my mind for sometime in regard to genre and people who think they’re slumming in it.

Hit the jump to see what I’m talking about. From his review, “I rarely take such things into consideration, but at the Q&A after the movie Aselton said the script was written in 18 hours. I’m surprised it took them that long. There’s something so contemptuous about this movie – such a sense of ‘We can do one of those, no problem, no effort’ – that I find myself going from disliking ‘Black Rock’ to actually hating it. ‘Black Rock’ plays like a movie made by people who have never seen stalk and kill horror films; it’s easy to believe that Aselton and Duplass thought they were doing something unique with the genre by having the girls fight back, but this has been happening in the genre for decades now.

Again – I have not seen the film. And until I do so, I can’t speak to whether or not I personally feel this sentiment applies to it.

But I do feel it’s applicable to more and more genre efforts these days. In the case of horror, it sometimes seems that studios and indie filmmakers alike think of it as a way to just get something made. A product. After all, horror’s often cheap(ish) to make. And there’s a built in audience – you. And a lot of people don’t think you’re as smart as you actually are.

At least half the horror movies I see are made with an utter disdain for the genre and its audience.

It’s often assumed that it requires almost no effort to craft a horror film that will satisfy its audience. I find it especially strange that people who are successful in other genres of filmmaking could somehow believe that making a good horror film is somehow less difficult. As filmmakers in the trenches they have to know by now that making a good film – of any kind – will always require, thought, consideration, sleepless nights and thousands upon thousands of hours of hard work.

Ironically, I think it’s these exact people who have the skill set required to make the very best horror films. While horror is one of my favorite genres, I don’t think it’s possible to make a truly great horror film without embracing a ton of other styles of film and filmmaking as well.

If Alexander Payne were to followup The Descendants with a slasher film I would hope that he’d put as much consideration into the characters he’s slaughtering as he did the King family in that film. If Diablo Cody ever returns to horror (Evil Dead polish aside) after hitting a new creative peak with Young Adult I’d want her to imbue her new protagonist with just as much inner turmoil as she did Mavis Gary. While the genre often dictates that just as much screen time is devoted to kills as it is to character – neither should be skimmed on in terms of effort and imagination.

And that’s not even speaking to the technical/editorial side of things, which I don’t have time to get into right now (and which it sounds like Black Rock bungles as well).

It all boils down to this – anybody working on any film should be always pushing themselves to the best of their abilities and beyond*. It doesn’t always mean the film will be great, but it’s kind of the nature of the game. And it’s part of the nature of paying respect to those paying to see your film.

*As an admitted fan of Friday The 13th: Part 2 I feel somewhat hypocritical saying this. As with anything, there are no absolutes, and I must admit that some films I do like don’t exactly qualify as “pushing the envelope” material.

Some of my favorite horror films (admittedly a muddled mix off the top of my head) where I can feel the filmmakers pushing themselves are: Halloween, The Thing, Friday The 13th: Part 6, An American Werewolf In London, The Shining, Scream, Kill List, Shaun Of The Dead, Seven, You’re Next, Let The Right One In, Psycho, and, of course, Jaws.*

How about you? What are your favorite horror movies that make you taste the filmmakers’ blood, sweat and tears?

*EDIT – perhaps I should clarify that list and clear up some confusion. I don’t mean that all of those films are of equally quality, or are all classics. It’s just that I love them all. I know JASON LIVES is not as good as JAWS.

Editorials

‘Arachnid’ – Revisiting the 2001 Spider Horror Movie Featuring Massive Practical Effects

Published

on

arachnid

A new breed of creature-features was unleashed in the 1990s and continued well into the next decade. Shaking off the ecological messaging of the past, these monsters existed for the sake of pure mayhem. Just to name a few: Tremors, The Relic, Anaconda, Godzilla, Deep Rising and Lake Placid all showcased this trend of irreverent creature chaos. Reptiles and other scaly beasts proved to be a popular source of inspiration for these films, but for that extra crawly experience, bugs were the best and quickest route. Spiders, in particular, led some of the worst infestations on screen in the early 2000s. And on the underbelly of this creeping new wave — specifically the direct-to-video sector — hangs an overlooked offering of spider horror: Arachnid.

In 2000, Brian Yuzna and Julio Fernández launched the Spanish production company Fantastic Factory. The Filmax banner’s objective was to create modestly budgeted genre films for international distribution. And while they achieved their goal — a total of nine English-language films were produced and shipped all across the globe — Fantastic Factory ultimately closed up shop after only five years. Arachnid, directed by Jack Sholder (Alone in the Dark, A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge, The Hidden) and based on a script by Mark Sevi, was the second project from the short-lived genre house. Yuzna was drawn to the concept largely because of its universal appeal; a monster was marketable in any region, regardless of cultural preferences or restrictions. There was also the fact that spiders give everyone a case of the heebie-jeebies.

By having extraterrestrial forces be the cause of the spiders’ mutism and immensity as well as other urgent problems within the story, Arachnid incidentally pays respect to Hollywood’s golden age of schlock filmmaking. The opening sequence indeed shows a stealth plane’s pilot (Jesús Cabrero) trailing a UFO and its translucent passenger to an island in the South Pacific, but the alien business is kept to a minimum going forward. There is no time to process this seismic revelation of life beyond Earth before moving on to the film’s central plot. 

arachnid

Pictured: Alex Reid, Chris Potter and Neus Asensi’s characters get trapped in the spider’s web in Arachnid.

Several months since the E.T. was last sighted — and after being snuffed out by one of its own accidental creations — a medical team from Guam heads to Celebes (better known as Sulawesi nowadays), in search of whatever is behind a new illness. The doctors (played by José Sancho and Neus Asensi) already suspected a spider bite, although they failed to consider the biter could be the size of a tank. With The Descent’s Alex Reid as the snarky pilot of this doomed expedition, one who has ulterior motives for accepting the job, the film’s core characters go off in search of a spider and, hopefully, a cure.

The title makes it seem as if there is only the one arachnid in the story, but once Chris Potter and Reid’s characters plus their team step foot on the island, they encounter other altered arthropods. Yuzna felt Sevi’s script needed more creatures along the way, especially before the spider showed up in full view. The bug horror commences as one gunsman succumbs to a burrowing breed of crab-sized ticks, and random characters fend off a horrific centipede with reptilian qualities. These are just the appetizers before the greatest arachnid of them all arrives. The late Ravil Isyanov, here playing a zealous but sympathetic arachnologist, becomes a human Lunchable for the spider’s eggs. And one of the doctors gets a face full of corrosive spider spew. So, there is no shortage of grisly predation in the film, with a few bits of the monsters’ handiwork possessing a haunting quality to them.

Shot quickly and cheaply, Arachnid is fast-food horror. It’s convenient and designed for immediate consumption, and will likely not linger on the palate. Usually there is not a lot worth remembering with these slapdash genre productions, however, this is one case of spider horror where the extra effort made a difference. Apart from the egregious use of digital imagery in the outset, Jack Sholder’s film primarily employs practical effects. And these are not rubber spiders dangling from strings or being flung at the actors, either. Fantastic Factory aimed much higher by securing DDTSFX (Pan’s Labyrinth, Hellboy II: The Golden Army) and creature designer and makeup artist Steve Johnson (Species, Blade II).

arachnid

Pictured: One of the spider’s web-covered victims in Arachnid.

Arachnid, while far from flawless, somewhat redeems itself by having chosen practical effects and animatronics over CGI, which had become the new normal in these kinds of films. And this class of creature-feature was definitely not getting the sort of advanced VFX found in the likes of Eight Legged Freaks. Steve Johnson’s spider was not the easiest prop to work with, and it lacks the movement and versatility of a digital depiction. However, there is no beating that sense of weight and occupation of space that makes a tangible monster more intimidating. Viewers will have trouble recalling the human characters long after watching Arachnid, yet the humongous headliner remains the stuff of nightmares.

Over the years, the director has spoken critically of the film. He originally held off on agreeing to the offer to direct in hopes that another project, a Steven Seagal picture, would finally manifest. No such luck, and Sholder accepted Arachnid only on account of his needing the work. He said of the film: “I thought I could […] make it halfway decent, but I discovered there wasn’t a whole lot I could do.” Nevertheless, Sholder’s experience as a director of not exactly high-brow yet still rather entertaining horror is evident in what he has since called a “dud.” While there is no denying the reality and outcome of Arachnid, even the most mediocre films have their strokes of brilliance, small as they may be.

Arachnid

Pictured: The poster for Arachnid.

Continue Reading