Still Missing On DVD: PEACEMAKER (1990)

A couple of days after posting my "Nine Movies I (Still) Want On DVD" article here, I decided to look around online for a cheap VHS copy of one of those titles, the 1990 sci-fi actioner, Peacemaker (not to be confused with the 1997 George Clooney flick), starring Robert Forster (Jackie Brown). Sure enough, I found one for around $5 (including shipping), so I ordered it. Well, it showed up on Monday, and Wednesday afternoon I transferred it to DVD-R. I just finished watching it.

I'm pleased to say that it lived up to my vague but positive memory of renting it back in '90. Although clearly a very low-budget film, it has a smart and genuinely witty screenplay that keeps you guessing almost until the end, strong B-movie performances from Forster, Robert Davi (Licence To Kill) and leading actress Hilary Shepard (a lovely woman who really should have had a bigger screen career), and amazing stunt work of the kind you rarely see today, even in big-budget studio flicks.

The plot borrows elements of The Terminator and The Hidden, but has a fresh twist. The story basically chronicles a running battle in 1990 Los Angeles between two humanoid extraterrestrials. One is a serial killer, the other is the Peacemaker (policeman) chasing him. A pretty young coroner, Dr. Dori Caisson (Shepard), gets caught up in their conflict, but isn't sure which one is the criminal and which one is the cop - and neither is the audience until late in the third act. In the meantime, the two aliens shoot, beat and blow each other up - but since they can regenerate their damaged bodies, none of the mayhem does much more than force brief interludes between clashes so they can heal up for the next.

Surprisingly, the movie was directed by Kevin Tenney, who is best known (by those of us who possess encyclopedic knowledge of exploitation films - not that that's a good thing, necessarily) for directing a handful of cheesy - but profitable - horror films in the late 80s-early 90s like Night Of The Demons, Witchboard and Witchtrap. I say "surprisingly" because, while those films were somewhat entertaining, nothing in his directorial resume suggested that he would prove so adept at an action flick... and it is with the action sequences that Peacemaker truly excels.

Seriously, you're lucky today if any DTV flick - even the so-called "action" films - have genuine stunts in them at all. Fight scenes are all shaky-cam and quick cuts, car chases are listless and boring, explosions and gunfire are all cheap CGI... but Peacemaker is loaded from front to back with terrific stunt work. There are tons of gunfights, fistfights, jumping through glass, car chases and crashes (and I mean like the kind you used to see on CHiPs back in the day - with cars flying through the air end-over-end), huge explosions... it really is glorious. The list of stuntpeople in the end credits is nearly twice the length of the list of speaking cast, and contains the names of a number of well known stuntmen and women.

Yes, it's a cheap, direct-to-VHS movie from 1990. The opening spaceship footage is culled from Roger Corman's Battle Beyond The Stars, and some of the acting is marginal at best. But damn, it's fun.

If you still have a working VCR and are willing to hunt around for it - or search on YouTube long enough - it's well-worth watching. Peacemaker is a genuine B-movie gem.

Wednesday Cover: A Princess Of Mars

I first collected Edgar Rice Burroughs' John Carter of Mars paperbacks in the early 80s, when Ballantine/Del Rey issued the series with gorgeous, colorful cover art by Michael Whelan. This is the cover to the first volume in the series, A Princess Of Mars, and it's one of my favorites. A lot of fantastic artists have visualized Burroughs' Barsoom over the years, including masters like Frazetta and Roy Krenkel, but I find that I keep going back to Whelan's interpretation. I just love the way he sees Mars and its wonders.

On a related note, Brandi and I went to see Andrew Stanton's John Carter last night. Saw it in 3-D because it was the most convenient showing, time-wise. Overall, I was pleased with it and look forward to watching it again on Blu-ray when it comes out. The effects were extremely good (I had no problem believing that the CGI Tharks were actual, living characters), and Taylor Kitsch was better than I expected as Carter.

As for the most important character - considering that it's impractical to travel back in time and bring 1976 Caroline Munro to the present to play Dejah Thoris, I am quite satisfied with the actual casting of  the lovely Miss Lynn Collins, who did a fine job as The Princess of Mars.

I have a few quibbles with the changes and alterations made to the story, but really, it was a terrific movie, and should be raking in money like nobody's business - but we were virtually alone in the theater. It's a shame.

Some people just refuse to have fun, I guess.

Made In The U.S.A.

I've seen three out four of the major studio super-hero movies in the theater this Summer (unfortunately, I missed X-Men: First Class). I thought Thor was pretty good, but I had some issues with it (especially the ending), and didn't like it quite as much as most people seemed to. On the other hand, I liked Green Lantern somewhat better than most reviewers and fans did - but, admittedly, I have a soft spot for the character, and was thus willing to forgive certain plot problems.  Most recently (a few weekends ago), Brandi and I went to see Captain America: The First Avenger... and I loved it!

I suspected from the trailers that it would be right up my alley, and that suspicion was reinforced by the fact that it was directed by Joe Johnston, whose film adaptation of Dave Stevens' The Rocketeer is among my favorite comic book movies of all time (I really want Disney to re-issue it on Blu-ray). Johnston really has a feel for period adventure fare, and his handling of the WWII setting and the various pulpy elements of the Christopher Markus/Stephen McFeely screenplay was exemplary. I've heard a number of fans bitching online about the changes to Cap's origin story (especially the changes made to the character of "Bucky" Barnes), but considering all the retcons and embellishments made to the original, 60 year-old Simon & Kirby story (which, remember, was 8 pages long and aimed at an audience of ten year-olds), I thought the movie pulled off a brilliant balancing act, capturing the essential spirit of the character and concept, while interpreting it in a way that appealed to a mainstream audience of all ages.

The cast was fantastic. Chris Evans made a great Cap and even greater Steve Rogers. Tommy Lee Jones and Hugo Weaving were perfect in their respective roles. Hayley Atwell was sexy, smart, and capable. Neal McDonough as "Dum Dum" Dugan - small a part as it was - was inspired casting. There wasn't a single miscast role in the film.

Even the extensive CGI (which I have a reputation for hating) didn't bother me, because it was executed with care, thought and some genuine artistic style. A shot or two might have jarred, but overall, it enhanced the storytelling, and that what it was supposed to do. What people misunderstand about my criticisms of CGI and other modern filmmaking tricks, is that I only hate them when they interfere with my ability to engage with the story. Nothing yanks me out of a movie story faster than an unnaturally-moving cartoon monster or obvious CGI "stunt" - fortunately, Captain America: The First Avenger, had very few moments like that.

Anyway - if you haven't seen it, you probably should (I think it's still in theaters, right?). I know that when the Blu-ray disc comes out, it'll be going straight into my home video library. It's really good stuff.

It can only be one thing – Prehistoric!

In the Seventies, producer John Dark and director Kevin Connor made a series of fantasy adventure movies based on and/or inspired by the works of pulp writer Edgar Rice Burroughs, creator of Tarzan. These films (all starring beefy TV cowboy Doug McClure) were The Land That Time Forgot, The People That Time Forgot, At The Earth's Core and Warlords of Atlantis.

The other night, I re-watched The People That Time Forgot.

People, American International Pictures' sequel to the Amicus Studios-produced The Land That Time Forgot, was released in the Summer of 1977. A square-jawed aviator played by Patrick Wayne, son of John, and star of the same year's Sinbad And The Eye Of The Tiger, leads an expedition to the prehistoric island of Caprona in search of adventurer Doug McClure, still marooned there after the events of the previous film. The expedition consists of Wayne, his mechanic (Shane Rimmer; The Spy Who Loved Me), a female reporter (Sarah Douglas; Superman 2), and a paleontologist (character actor Thorley Walters). After their biplane is forced down by an attacking pterodactyl, the adventurers discover a beautiful cavegirl (the gorgeous Dana Gillespie, below) who eventually leads them to Skull Mountain and the evil, samurai-like Nagas who have McClure locked away in their skeleton-strewn dungeon.

People is a full-blooded, old-fashioned Saturday matinee adventure, with vicious cavemen, clunky dinosaurs, an evil Tor Johnson lookalike, volcanic eruptions, swordplay and plenty of heroic deering-do. As in Sinbad, Wayne makes an acceptable, if not particularly charismatic, hero, while Douglas, an underrated actress who's appeared in tons of fantasy films, makes the most of her spunky girl reporter role. Gillespie provides the eye-candy, and Walters and Rimmer provide solid support. McClure, who shows up late in the film, looks a little tired of these cut-rate lost world epics, but acquits himself adequately.

The production design and special effects have a charming, nostalgic cheesiness about them, with obvious matte paintings, miniatures and mechanical monsters adding to the cliffhanging fun. Although primitive by today's high-tech standards, I'll take this kind of hand-crafted filmmaking over today's CGI-dominated 3D toons any day. The photography is magnificent, making good use of the rugged, prehistoric-looking locations, and the score by John Scott is rousing, if a bit sparse.

The Land That Time Forgot and People That Time Forgot were released as a double feature DVD by MGM Home Video some years ago as part of their marvelous, consumer-friendly "Midnight Movies" line, and might still be available from some retailers. The disc is bare-bones – just the two movies and their theatrical trailers – but the widescreen transfers are beautiful.

Star Trek: First Impressions

What can I say?

It works.

J.J. Abrams and his collaborators have pulled off something remarkable – make that astounding and perhaps unprecedented – a reboot that not only respects the continuity of the franchise, but still comes up with a way to throw it all out the airlock without actually compromising it.

I'll try to keep spoilers to a minimum, but I will mention some plot points, so if you want to see the movie completely fresh, you may want to wait and read this after you've seen the film.

Here's the big spoiler, and the only one that I plan to reveal, because it's necessary, if I'm to discuss my reactions to the story overall: the whole plot hinges on one of the classic Trek tropes – time travel and the dangers of changing the past through one's actions. But this time the cast doesn't – and cannot – fix everything by the end of the episode. This creates a whole new Trek timeline, an alternate universe where the original characters can have all new adventures and the future is unwritten. It also introduces to the series the concept of Fate with a capital "F"– that this particular group of characters are meant to be together, and that even when history is changed and their paths are different, that somehow, the bridge crew of the Enterprise is destined to adventure together.

Now, "fate" and "destiny" aren't very Gene Roddenberry-esque concepts, but they are appealing (at least in a fictional context), and solve the filmmaker's biggest challenge – making a new Star Trek that will appeal to a wider, more mainstream audience, without pissing all over the loyal fanbase that kept the franchise alive for forty years.

For this to work, the film does have to trot out a few scenes that, upon reflection, are almost ludicrously contrived, but, they are handled so well and fly by so quickly, that they don't hurt the film at all.

And there are some surprises here, BIG ones, things that will knock old school Trekkies for a bit of a loop. I know, I'm one of them. This is absolutely a new continuity, and nothing is set in stone. At the same time, there are numerous call-outs to various past Trek adventures, subtle and not-so-subtle references designed to warm fan's hearts.

Star Trek is a fast-paced, almost fully satisfying adventure story that is not only recognizably Trek, but Trek with a scope and budget and filmmaking acumen that we've never seen before. This one does not look like a two-hour TV episode. It's loud, bright, sexy and funny – like the original show was before all the spin-offs and sequels bled away the humanity. Like TOS, these characters get angry, get drunk, get laid, and take incredible risks and make giant leaps of faith. There's no sitting around conference tables endlessly debating courses of action, no retreats, no surrenders. Our hero may look different and his path to the center seat may be considerably different, but in the end, he's still James Tiberius Fuckin' Kirk.

And that brings me to the elephant on the bridge; how do the new guys live up to the legends? For the most part, very well. Chris Pine doesn't imitate Shatner (wisely), but he's got much of the swagger, the humor, the sly glint in the eye. Zachary Quinto doesn't have the gravitas of Nimoy, but then, he gets to play a slightly different Spock than the one we're used to. This is a young Spock, still struggling with the emotions seething within him, and Quinto handles the role well.

In fact, almost everyone plays their roles well. I think Zoe Salanada's Uhura is too skinny, but she gets considerably more to do with the role than Nichelle Nichols ever did. John Cho's Sulu is suitably professional – and delightfully swashbuckling, when required. Simon Pegg is a bit more Simon Pegg than Montgomery Scott, but he's fun to watch. Unfortunately, Ben Cross and Winona Ryder, as Spock's parents, didn't quite do it for me. Cross is no Mark Lenard, and Ryder is definitely no Jane Wyman. I was also underwhelmed (as usual) with Eric Bana as Nero, the villain/plot device that drives the story. He simply doesn't play it "big" enough. He's just sorta there.

The real standouts among the players are Karl Urban as Doctor McCoy, and Leonard Nimoy as Spock Prime. With Urban, he's so perfectly Leonard McCoy that it's almost as if he's been temporarily possessed by the spirit of the late DeForest Kelly. And Nimoy is the heart and soul of the picture, the one who makes it all hang together and assures us longtime Trekkies that this is, indeed, truly Trek. If the real Spock recognizes these kids as his friends, then, really, who are we to argue?

Any complaints? Well, I don't like the interior Enterprise sets at all, but it didn't ruin the movie for me. I do have a few minor quibbles with the story, but no deal breakers... and, well, that's about it.

Oh yeah, the effects work is pretty spectacular; Industrial Light and Magic really pull out all the stops, and give us outer space as we've never really seen it before in Trek. Even though the Enterprise has been slicked up, I still got that warm feeling in my gut when we get our first good look at it – she's still the most beautiful starship around.

I haven't seen a movie more than once in the theater in years, but I'm going to make every effort to see this one again as soon as I can. It's good. Maybe great.

Star Trek lives!

Punisher: War Zone

Once again, I'm going to stubbornly contradict the arbiters of cinematic taste – and the terrible box office grosses – and say that I thought Punisher: War Zone was a terrific, 80's-styled action film. In fact, although I'm a Thomas Jane fan, I thought that War Zone was a considerably better film adaptation of the Marvel Comics character than than 2004 version of The Punisher.

For one thing, Ray Stevenson – who I don't believe I've ever seen in anything before – looked a lot more like the way I picture Frank Castle. He's not a pretty boy, but instead has a weathered, rugged face with some maturity on it. And he played the part well, too, even if his British accent occasionally slipped through.

For another, the main heavy, the hideously disfigured Jigsaw (Dominic Green), was an appropriately bigger-than-life villain and not just another smarmy crime boss – though he starts out that way. Some critics/reviewers complained that the part was played too broadly and campy, but again, I thought it complemented the comic book tone of the film.

It was set in New York and not Tampa, so it was much darker and grittier, and has some very noir-ish scenes.

The violence in the movie was really amped up and very comic book-ish. I could have done with less CG gouts of gore (I would have preferred old school Karo syrup + red dye, personally), but the outrageously gruesome "kills" were kinda cool and fun.

Finally, War Zone demonstrates the absolute best use of a rocket launcher ever. (Rent the film, and you'll see what I mean.)

Now, bear in mind that I actually like the much-maligned 1989 version with Dolph Lundgren. And I liked the Thom Jane version, too. In fact, I think all three Punisher films are enjoyable action flicks. And I kinda dig that each flick has a different lead and that each one stands alone with its own continuity and "universe." (The flashbacks to Frank's past in War Zone match the comic, not the 2004 film, so it's clearly not really a sequel.) But then, we all know that my taste in films is questionable.

I rented this from Netflix, but I'll definitely be picking it up for my collection eventually. It's not a superhero film, but it is definitely a comic book of a movie and manages to accomplish all I want from a Punisher flick – it has Frank Castle kill lots of mobsters in violent and graphic ways. And he wears the skull.

I liked it a lot – of course, your mileage may vary.

March's Last Monday Morning

This weekend, I did a little writing, but mostly watched movies with the wife. It was pretty dreary, weather-wise, and it just seemed like the kind of weekend that was best suited to vegging out in front of the TV. Also, last week just seemed too long and rough, so we headed out to the local video store and brought home a stack of light entertainment.

And light was the word. A Disney film and a bunch of (mostly lowbrow) comedies.

Let's see if I can remember everything... we watched Role Models, with Paul Rudd, and thought it was pretty fun. Then the Seth Rogen double feature of Pineapple Express and Zack & Miri Make A Porno. Neither was quite as good as I'd hoped, but they were both entertaining. Pineapple Express almost worked as a stoner homage to 80's buddy action films, while Zack & Miri was a pretty decent – if vulgar – character study from Kevin Smith. Too long, though.

We also picked up a Simon Pegg comedy that we hadn't heard of before, How To Lose Friends & Alienate People. It had a good cast, and was a fair satire of entertainment journalism and the cult of celebrity, but lacked the spark of his collaborations with Edgar Wright.

The best of the comedies was Nick & Norah's Infinite Playlist, a sweet, smart teenage romance with some bite, featuring remarkably sincere performances from Michael Cera and Kat Dennings. In fact, I've got a bit of a crush on the pretty young Dennings, which, since I'm in my 40's is probably a little creepy, but if I had known her in high school, I would so have been in love with her. She's going to be a big star, I'm guessing.

Finally, we spun Disney's Bolt, a charming if predictable little flick, with some funny gags and a fairly smart script. Hell, I didn't even mind John Travolta's voice work.

Anyway, that was the majority of my weekend, though I did do a bit of development work on a new graphic novel idea and lettered a few pages of that Western comic I'm doing for Image's Outlaw Territory anthology. I also finished the Nick Carter spy paperback I'd been reading, and am contemplating cracking another one.

Have a great week, everyone!

Another Monday, More Miscellany

• I want to express my gratitude to those who posted encouraging comments to my last post. It is greatly appreciated. Like I said, if I can actually make myself sit down and write it, Ravenwulf will be mostly an exercise in long-form prose. Posting it online is simply a motivational stratagem, something I've seen numerous other writers do of late. If it turns out halfway decent, that'll be an improbable bonus.

• Watched The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian over the weekend. Personally, I liked it vastly more than the first film in the series. It was darker, more violent, and more dramatically satisfying. It was considerably less "cute" than the first, as well, with the young protagonists actually getting their hands – and swords – dirty. The sword fighting was very well staged, and the CGI effect were much more consistent and well-designed than in the previous installment. (Probably the best centaurs I've seen realized for a fantasy film yet.)

I'm not a fan of the Narnia books (of course, I haven't read them since I was in grade school), and found the first film tepid, but this one was an entertaining couple of hours. Good, if not great, stuff.

• My Femme Noir publishers, Ape Entertainment, sent me a few of their other titles this week, maybe as a consolation prize since I wasn't able to attend the big New York Comic Con. I was able to finally read the complete White Picket Fences miniseries (& one-shot Special), and catch up with The Black Coat Special, too. WPF tells of three young boys living in the small-town world of 1950's sci-fi films, with Martian invasions, giant insects, and mad scientists, while The Black Coat chronicles the adventures of a masked crusader operating in pre-Revolutionary America. Fun stuff, very well executed. Gabriel Hardman's art on The Black Coat one-shot is especially awesome.

You really should buy some of this stuff.

• If anyone reading this blog is a fan of vintage horror and genre films, has either an extensive DVD collection or mastery of their Netflix queue, and is looking for a good excuse to spin some classic discs once a week... drop me a line. Especially if you're frustrated that you can't find anyone to hang out and watch them with you. I've got something brewing that you might be interested in....

Quantum of Solace

I don't recall being so underwhelmed and disappointed in a James Bond film since sitting through A View to A Kill in 1985. And at least then I liked the theme song.

Quantum of Solace isn't quite a disaster, but it's a remarkably inept piece of filmmaking, and a frustrating film to watch. The script clearly needed a few more passes through the word processor, but being rushed to completion just before last year's writer's strike prevented that. Also, the decision to hand arguably the most action-driven Bond film ever to a director whose sole previous credits are art house indie dramas was a major miscalculation. And that theme song! Inane lyrics can be tolerable if they're accompanied by a memorable melody, but Alicia Keyes and Jack White's "Another Way To Die" (a rejected film title?) has no discernible melody at all.

Much has been written comparing Quantum's action scenes to those in the Jason Bourne films, but they really have nothing in common besides frenetic, rapid fire cutting. In the various Bourne films, the action is fast and brutal, but it can be tracked. The action scenes in Quantum are so badly edited that the viewer is uncertain as to how many players are in the scenes (how many cars were chasing Bond in the teaser?), the geography of the sequence (the rooftop chase), or what's actually happening (can anyone tell me exactly what the grappling hook in the Haiti boat chase was actually hooked to?). Coupled with director Marc Forster's arty cut-aways, the action sequences of Quantum have no sense of place, no rhythm, no rise and fall, no cohesion at all.

The plot has tons of potential, but is riddled with subplots and elements that are introduced and then promptly forgotten, non-sequiter dialogue (what exactly was the hood in Haiti supposed to "pay better attention" to?), unmemorable supporting characters (Mr. Greene's henchman, "Elvis"), and tediously repeated exposition (how many times do we need to be told how our governments have to deal with bad guys or how M just isn't sure she can trust 007?). As in Casino Royale, Bond once again comes across as a thug, indiscriminate in his use of violence, and, now in this film, a klutz who can't seem to hang onto his gun. (Surprisingly, though, he's now invisible – able to tail suspects in plain sight and never be noticed!) The script also fails by not giving Bond and villain Dominic Greene (Mathieu Almaric) any good face-to-face confrontations – they only exchange dialogue twice; the first time Bond has two or three lines, and the second is at the climax.

Oh, and putting the gunbarrel at the end? Yeah, I know what they were going for there, but it was stupid decision. The whole point of that trademark sequence is to kick off the movie on a note of eager anticipation; here it just felt like a rerun of Casino Royale's closing scene. And what was with that horridly tepid title sequence? Daniel Klienman, where did you go?

So, did I like anything? Well, yeah. The cast, almost without exception, rises above the limitations of the script, delivering excellent performances across the board. Forster obviously knows how to work with actors. Daniel Craig, who has to work with probably the least amount of dialogue ever given to Bond, still manages to carry the film on his intense, thoughtful performance. The death of Mathis (Giancarlo Giannini) is powerful stuff, well played and directed. Olga Kurylenko's Camille is one of the best and most interesting Bond girls in the series – a marred beauty with a mission and motive of her own, and her climactic scenes with Bond are magnificent. Jeffrey Wright returns to the role of Felix Lieter, even if this time his part mostly consists of silently scowling; his one scene with Bond in the bar shows great chemistry, though, and is a highlight of the film. Judi Dench, as usual, shines.

David Arnold's score was excellent – he seems to actually get stronger with each film.

And I do like the introduction of the Quantum criminal organization; it's almost like having SPECTRE back again, even if the name's not nearly as cool, and Mister White's (Jesper Christensen) a pretty humdrum substitute for Ernst Stavro Blofeld.

Now, bear in mind that I've only seen the film once so far, and maybe upon subsequent viewings, my opinions will change. But, I've had mixed feelings about this "Bond: Year One" approach all along, and Quantum of Solace seemed to really emphasize the elements I've had the most misgivings about. All this talk about returning the character to his Ian Fleming roots is just a lovely-sounding PR routine – Fleming's Bond wasn't the near-sociopathic killer/imitation Bourne that Craig has been given to play. And, while I've always preferred the more down-to-Earth Bond films – From Russia With love, Thunderball, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, For Your Eyes Only, Licence To Kill – part of the charm of the Bond franchise has been its slightly bigger than life quality; it's what separates Bond from the other spies. Mister Greene's plot to corner the Bolivian water supply just doesn't seem worthy of 007's attentions.

I hope that they've got this tyro-Bond thing out of their system now, and that the next film opens with the gunbarrel, brings back Moneypenny and Q, and gives Daniel Craig's Bond a chance to save the world – or at least England – from a dire threat.

Then Bond will truly be back.

The Dark Knight

I finally got to see The Dark Knight.

Thursday evening, Brandi and I went to see the second highest-grossing movie of all time, director Christopher Nolan's second stab at translating the Batman mythos for the big screen, and...

...I loved it.

It is a remarkable movie. It's riveting, thrilling, exciting, frightening, uplifting, suspenseful, visceral, haunting and ultimately heartbreaking. While long, the film never drags, and I found it to be a considerable improvement over the admittedly excellent Batman Begins, with a layered, engaging story that relentlessly drives forward to an amazing and emotionally satisfying conclusion. This powerful story is further seasoned with a plethora of delightful subplots and details – the brief reappearance of The Scarecrow, Gotham City's other "batmen," and the guy who figures out the hero's secret identity.

First off, Heath Ledger's portrayal of The Joker is – as I'm sure you've heard – astounding. From the moment of the character's first appearance in the film, I completely forgot that it was Ledger. I never once thought, "Hey, Ledger's doing a great job;" the transformation was so complete and terrifying. In fact, it wasn't until the movie ended and his name came up in the credits that I was suddenly struck with a pronounced sense of loss as I remembered that the actor was dead, and we would never see this Joker again.

Gary Oldman spent so much of his career gleefully chewing the scenery in movie after movie that his subdued, thoughtful interpretation of Commissioner Jim Gordon is nothing short of a revelation. For the first time on film, the character finally has the depth, emotional layering and dignity of his comic book counterpart, and Oldman flat-out nails the role.

Veteran thespian Michael Caine once again brings substantial emotional weight, genuine wisdom and a delightfully sardonic wit to his portrayal of Bruce Wayne's faithful manservant, Alfred Pennyworth. While his screen time is limited, he has several memorable moments, and he remains the heart of the Nolan Bat-universe.

While a bit light on chin, which still makes him look odd in the cowl, Christian Bale has once again triumphed as the titular Dark Knight, portraying Bruce Wayne as a complicated, obsessed man with astounding abilities and resources, but all too human frailties.

The rest of the cast – Aaron Eckhart, Maggie Gyllenhal, Morgan Freeman, Eric Roberts, et al – are uniformly excellent. I'll say this for Nolan: he knows how to get great performances out of his actors.

Is it the best comic book movie ever? Quite possibly, though I'll have to watch it a few dozen times on DVD before I'm certain. It is a surprisingly mature, thoughtful film that isn't afraid to unnerve its audience, and it delivers the requisite action and thrills with aplomb.

I can't wait to see it again.

The Incredible Hulk

Last night, Brandi and I saw The Incredible Hulk. In some ways, I liked it better than Iron Man, but then, I've always been a Hulk fan, while I never had too much interest in Iron Man. I never read the armored avenger's book on a regular basis, but I collected ol' greenskin's title for a number of years, and as a kid, I loved the TV series.

That's probably why I enjoyed the latest film incarnation so much; it's a canny amalgamation of elements from the comic book and the 70's television show. I think that was a smart move, along with the choice of making it more of an action film than Ang Lee's 2003 adjectiveless Hulk film. Director Louis Leterrier – a veteran of the first two Transporter films – wisely raises the action level and stages (with the assistance of several armies-worth of computer animators) several exciting "Hulk-out" scenes, beginning fairly early in the film.

In general, the cast is a large improvement over the 2003 film. While Ed Norton's not quite as amazing as everyone seems to think, he's still a huge improvement over bland Eric Bana. Liv Tyler (who I've lusted for since the crappy Empire Records) is an effective love interest, and her character is much better-handled than in the previous film, where Betty (portrayed by a dour, emaciated Jennifer Connelly) betrayed the love of her life repeatedly. At least this Betty stands up to her military father (played by William Hurt very much like Sam Elliot in the previous film), and doesn't keep turning poor Banner over to the clutches of the Army.

Even the obligatory Stan Lee and Lou Ferrigno cameos are cleverer and actually integrated into the story.

The script is decent, the pace is good, and the CGI Hulk is considerably more convincing than in the earlier film. Even though – like most super hero movies – the film eventually degenerates into two computer-generated cartoons beating up on each other, the rest of the production was executed well enough that I actually managed some emotional investment in the big FX scenes.

Anyway, I liked it and am looking forward to owning it on DVD. I have a feeling I'm going to re-watch this one a lot in the years to come, as opposed to the Ang Lee version, which I've watched just twice....

Indiana Jones and the Yadda Yadda...

Let's get one thing straight, right off the bat: no Indiana Jones sequel (or TV prequel) will ever equal Raiders of the Lost Ark.

With that first film, Lucas, Spielberg, Kasdan and Ford captured lightning in a bottle, and created a modern classic with a character that was so original – ironic, considering the film's pulp & serial inspirations – that he became an instant cultural icon. There was no way that that lightning could be captured again, and it never has been.

That said, both Temple of Doom and The Last Crusade have their merits, and while none of them can match the original, they're fine entertainments in their own rights. And the same can be said of the long-awaited Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.

Now, I never thought that there was a need a for a fourth film; The Last Crusade made a fitting and mostly satisfying conclusion to the trilogy. I also never really thought a fourth movie would ever get made. I've got film magazines touting this fourth film going back to at least 1990, and as the years whipped by and Harrison Ford became more and more bland and wooden in his rare film appearances, not only did I figure that the possibility was a pipe dream, but kinda hoped it wouldn't happen at all.

Well, last weekend I finally saw the movie, and I liked it. Not loved it though, and I wanted to. It was too long and had too much CGI (waay too much CGI), but at least Ford appeared to be conscious, alert and engaged, and I found myself enjoying visiting with the character again. Like Temple of Doom, much of the action is too cartoony and over the top for my taste – which robs the scenes of any sense of genuine danger or consequence – but overall, I had a good time with it.

The science fiction elements didn't bother me; the theological stuff in the previous films are just as far-fetched to me, anyway. And while I hated the idea of Indy having a son to share his adventures with, the character was written and performed well enough that I was able to bear it. Finally, I was pleased to see Karen Allen in there; not only has she aged well, but her smile is as devastating as ever.

I look forward to watching it again on DVD. Going into the theater I couldn't help but bring decades of expectations and apprehensions to it. When I was a teenager, Raiders was probably my favorite movie ever. I saw it at least four times in the Summer of 1981, and paid to see it at least six different revival showings over the next decade or so.

On DVD, I'll be able to look at it more objectively, and have a chance to discover any hidden/subtle pleasures that may have whipped by me the first time. It often happens for me upon rewatching – I never cared much for Temple of Doom, but since I got the DVD, I've watched it a few times and found a lot more to like about it than I did before. I expect that the same will be true of Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.

At least, I hope so.

The Sword & The Statham

Well, I guess I just have no taste at all, as once again, I found myself enjoying another nearly universally-reviled movie.

For the last five years or so, I've been reading about a film director named Uwe Boll, who, if his critics were to be believed, was the living incarnation of Ed Wood. Specializing, as he does, in cinematic adaptations of video games, I had never personally encountered any of his work before last night. However, this weekend I got my chance to sample his wares, when I rented his sword & sorcery opus, In The Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale, starring my favorite film badass of the moment, Jason Statham.

Now, I was unaware of Boll's connection to the movie when I picked up the disc – I was simply intrigued by the thought of The Transporter starring in a sword & sorcery saga. I was further intrigued by the film's offbeat cast: Statham, Ron Perlman, Lelee Sobieski, John Rhys-Davies, Matthew Lillard, Kristanna Loken, Ray Liotta and Burt Reynolds (!), so I rented it.

Now, maybe Boll is a terrible director, but I couldn't prove it with this film. Sure, it's a pretty by-the-numbers fantasy film, with the usual cliches and corny dialogue – but you know what? I liked it. The fight and battle scenes were really quite well done, the CGI was limited and rather restrained, costume and set design were both excellent, and I never got bored. Granted, Ray Liotta's portrayal of the evil magus was pretty laughable, and I had trouble with the sight of good ol' boy Burt in fur robes and armor (tho he was actually okay in his role), but Statham was a fine, kick-ass hero and Ron Perlman and Rhys-Davies brought some dignity and a touch of class to the flick.

From the reviews online and at the IMDb, you'd believe that this thing was the Plan 9 of fantasy epics. In The Name... isn't The Lord of the Rings or Excalibur, but it's sure as hell not the worst movie I've seen – not even the worst in it's genre. I grew up watching and enjoying stuff like The Beastmaster and The Sword & The Sorcerer, along with Roger Corman's shot-in-Argentina S&S films like Deathstalker, Barbarian Queen and The Warrior & The Sorceress, so I'm obviously pretty forgiving when it comes to the genre. Hell, I rather liked last year's Pathfinder, too, and that one was panned almost as badly as In The Name of the King!

Would I recommend it? I don't know. People seem to be pretty hard to please these days, and determined not to enjoy things. But I plan to buy a copy, if and when I find a cheap used one somewhere, and I'll definitely be watching it again.

But then – I clearly have no taste at all....

Iron Man Soars

Finally got to see Iron Man this evening. I'm not going to gush and declare it the best comic book movie ever... but it's damned good.

I'm not as critical of comic book film adaptations as many comics fans, and I've liked several films that have been generally dumped upon, including Daredevil and Ghost Rider (in both cases, the DVD Director's Cuts), League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, The Phantom, The Rocketeer, etc. Iron Man is much better than most of those, and ranks up with the first two Spider-Man and X-Men films for me. It may even be marginally better, but until I'm as familiar with it as I am with those, I'll say it's about the same.

John Favreau, like Sam Raimi, just gets it. He understands the nature of the super-hero story, and knows how to realize it on-screen. There's no sense that he feels he's above the material (and thus, sneering at it), nor embarrassed by it (thus playing it as "camp."). Robert Downey Jr. owns the role of Tony Stark, and makes the character far more interesting than he ever was in the old comics. Gwyneth Paltrow is surprisingly warm and human as Stark's aide and confidante, Pepper Potts... and she's prettier now than she ever was. Maturity looks good on her. Jeff Bridges is nearly unrecognizable as the duplicitous Obidiah Stane, and plays against type brilliantly.

Favreau made the wise choice to handle a considerable amount of the effects work "practically," with real suits of armor and other gizmos on-set, saving the CGI mostly for the big action stuff. Worked great, and it was refreshing to see a little restraint in a Summer FX blockbuster.

With Iron Man, Marvel has taken personal control of their characters exploitation on film, and the attention to detail, character and even continuity shown in this first production, makes a big difference. Can't wait for The Incredible Hulk, the second flick from Marvel Studios. Bring it on, guys!

If you haven't seen it yet, and you like comic book movies at all... see it in the theater. It's worth the hassle.

Speaking of hassles – didn't really have any this time. My back pain made the experience uncomfortable, but the audience was small and well-behaved, for a change. Saw some trailers of interest, too – I grinned like an idiot through the previews for both Indiana Jones & The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and The Dark Knight, while the trailer for Frank Miller's adaptation (or is that, "abomination?") of The Spirit, just plain made me want to cry. God, it was just so wrong....

Weekend Flicks

We've been watching a lot of movies here this weekend. We went out and rented a handful of DVDs on Thursday, and I had a few new ones here that I had recieved for reviewing purposes that I was eager to see, so....

Unfortunately, our local Hollywood Video didn't have the two films I went there specifically to rent – the 2006 horror comedy Black Sheep and the 1983 Roy Scheider classic Blue Thunder. I still can't believe they didn't have Blue Thunder!

Thursday evening we watched – as our Valentine's Day flick – was Must Love Dogs, a 2005 romantic comedy starring John Cusack and Diane Lane, written & directed by Gary David Goldberg. While it was formulaic and predictable, the cast – all of them over 40 – was great, and the movie was very well-written and acted. It was also nice for a change to watch a movie about grown-ups – I just wish the story had been fresher.

We finally got to see Robert Zemeckis' Beowulf. While I kept waiting for Shrek to show up, it was a fairly entertaining and straight-forwrard telling of the ancient story. The motion capture, computer-generated actors were, as usual, distractingly plastic, and I never really saw the point of making the movie that way if you're just going to make the cartoon characters look like the actors voicing them, but... it was okay. Liked it about as much as 300.

Was very impressed by Ben Affleck's direction of Gone, Baby, Gone, based on the Dennis Lehane P.I. novel of the same name. Now, I'm not much of a Lehane fan – I don't feel that he's quite as impressive an author as he and his followers seem to believe – but I thought the movie turned out quite good. Casey Affleck was decent enough in the lead, I still have a huge crush on Michelle Monaghan, and Ed Harris was brilliant, as always. The supporting cast was particularly impressive, and big brother Ben did a remarkable job of capturing Boston and its people on film. Definitely worth checking out.

Another flick I'd been eager to see was the Korean-produced D-War (Dragon Wars), director Hyung-rae Shim's second attempt at making an international monster movie blockbuster, after 1999's Yonggary (known in America as Reptilian). Like that earlier film, D-War was shot in English with an American cast, but the story is deeply rooted in Korean mythology. basically, it's about a war between two giant serpents – one evil and one good – both of whom need to get ahold of a young woman containing the power to allow one of them to become an all-powerful celestial dragon. Unfortunately, while the premise is pretty cool, and the extensive creature effects were extremely well-realized by Shim's own, homegrown FX house, the script is inane, filled with gaping plot holes, inconsistencies, underdeveloped characters and banal dialogue. That said, I have to admit that I enjoyed it despite its many weaknesses. I guess I'm just a sucker for giant monsters wreaking havoc. Besides, it tickled me that Shim filmed several scenes in L.A's Bronson Canyon; it gave the flick a nice tie to all those old Hollywood B-movies that I love so much. Intentional or not, it was a nice homage.

The movie we watched that had probably the most impact on me though, was Julie Taymor's Across the Universe, a musical set during the turbulent Sixties, written around and incorporating the songs of the Beatles. The story is slight, predictible and filled with Beatles references, but the cast of mostly-unknowns are all very appealling (and good singers), and Taymor's background as a graphic designer really showed in the film's truly astounding visuals. My wife reviewed the movie in considerable detail in her own blog, so I won't bother here. But I will say that I really enjoyed it, and while it's not perfect, I found it charming, involving and frequently impressive.

Besides – any movie that has five Salma Hayeks in nurse's uniforms is worth seeing.

Monster Movie(s)

Brandi and I went to see Cloverfield last night. I enjoyed everything about it – except for the idiots in the theater.

Why do people pay to see a movie if all they're going to do is play with their cellphones and talk to each other? Every time I get excited about seeing a movie in the theater, it seems like these same damned teenage assholes show up and just cheat me out of my enjoyment. It's bad enough that they talk loudly, but those friggin' cellphone screens are so bright, it distracts me and pulls me out of the movie.

Jerks.

Anyway, Cloverfield.

It's about as inherently goofy as any other giant monster movie and doesn't hold up to a lot of heavy critical analysis, but you know what? It's a GIANT MONSTER MOVIE. It doesn't need to. All it needs to do is be fun, and I thought it was definitely that.

Awesome giant monster? Check. Massive and spectacular scenes of destruction? Check. Surprises? Check. Scary scenes? Oh yeah. Moderately interesting characters? Close enough.

And, for what it's worth, I really enjoyed seeing a giant monster movie from the perspective of the civilians on the ground, rather than from the POV of yelling generals, brilliant scientists and heroic soldiers. The creature design by the Tippett studio was really cool, too.

SPOILER: Some folks are going to be frustrated by the lack of an explanation for the creature's existence and/or its motivations, but I thought leaving it unexplained was a great touch... although if you watch carefully, there's a hint to the beastie's origin near the end.

As a warm-up for Cloverfield, I rented the direct-to-DVD knock-off, Monster over the weekend. It was made by a low budget studio called The Asylum, which specializes in fast, dirt-cheap imitations of big studio blockbusters. Among their other titles are I Am Omega, AVH: Alien Vs Hunter, and Transmorphers. (!)

Working from the same basic premise of a giant monster attack on a city being recorded on home video by civilians in the middle of things, Monster was mildly entertaining, with a couple of good moments scattered amidst a lot of really boring crap. Still, it could have been worse. At least Monster was set in Tokyo, traditional stomping grounds of gargantuan critters. The cover art is particularly amusing as it not only riffs on Cloverfield, but the Korean monster film from last year, The Host. Those Asylum guys are sneaky.

Anyway, I recommend Cloverfield. It's may not be the greatest monster movie ever made, but it's damned good, and a heck of a thrill ride.

Winter Bloggin'

Brandi and I caught up with some recent movies courtesy of a discount coupon from Hollywood Video this past weekend. We saw Live Free or Die Hard, 1408, Stardust, Hairspray, and Shoot 'Em Up.

The fourth Die Hard was entertaining, but, like the other DH sequels, just didn't live up to the original. 1408, based on a Stephen King story, was disappointing and non-scary. Stardust, based on a graphic novel by Neil Gaiman and Charles Vess, was actually a pretty decent fantasy film, with a great cast and solid story. I can only assume it didn't do better theatrically because it didn't have any CGI talking animals for the kiddies or pop songs. Speaking of songs, Hairspray was a fun musical version of the 1998 John Waters film, with very good retro-60's tunes and a surprising performance by John Travolta in drag (in the Divine role). It's always nice seeing Christopher Walken dance, too.

My favorite of the batch, though, was Shoot 'Em Up – an hysterical action film spoof with Clive Owen. Imagine a live-action Bugs Bunny cartoon turned gun porn. I loved every ridiculous, over-the-top minute of it. I'm going to have to pick this one up for my collection.

Writing-wise, I expect to be extraordinarily busy over the next six weeks or so – I've taken on a bit more work than I can probably handle, and all of my procrastinations have caught up with me – so I may be kinda scarce in these parts for the next month or so.

Nonetheless, I'll still try and post here whenever I have a few minutes and can think of something to write about, and even moreso at the Guns In The Gutters site (which I'm determined to update at least once a week) and Planet X Production Blog, both of which have new material today, so keep checking in, okay?

Matinee at the Grindhouse

Despite being a dedicated, compulsive – okay, obsessive – film buff, I don't get out to the movies nearly as often as I'd like, especially over the past couple of years. Now, usually it's okay – I can catch up with the films I'm interested in on DVD, and don't have to deal with annoying audiences or bad projection. But, I really regret missing the Robert Rodriguez/Quentin Tarantino double feature, Grindhouse, in the theater.

At the time, I was in the middle of that post-surgery sciatica "attack" that all but crippled me for two months, and there was no way I would have been able to physically manage – even with prescription painkillers – sitting in a theater seat for the running time of one movie, never mind two.

Last month, though, I finally managed to see Grindhouse – or more specifically, I purchased and watched the DVDs of the two films that comprised the Grindhouse double bill.

Now, it's not quite the same experience. For one thing, the two discs currently available do not include all the bogus trailers included in the original theatrical version (only Rodriguez' Machete trailer), but until the Weinsteins decide to release a combined special edition (I'm still waiting on the long-promised Kill Bill "The Whole Bloody Affair" SE), I guess these discs will have to do.

Now, I'm a fan of Quentin Tarantino's films, and have been since the weekend I rented the VHS tapes of John Woo's The Killer and Reservoir Dogs back in '93 or so. (That was a hell of a weekend and really kick-started my film obsession!) I like all of his features to date, and I like Death Proof, too – I just think it's his weakest film so far.

For an exploitation film, it's too talky and just terribly paced. The big action scene at the end is so adrenaline-charged and exciting that it nearly makes up for those faults, though. Kurt Russell is perfect in his role as Stuntman Mike, Rose McGowan is great in her small role, and the four girls that feature in the second half of the film are all excellent. Kiwi stunt woman Zoe Bell – playing herself – is particularly charismatic and fun to watch.

I like Death Proof, but it's far from my favorite Tarantino film.

Director Robert Rodriguez’ half of the Grindhouse double feature, Planet Terror, is a loud, violent, and cheerfully incoherent zombie pulse-pounder, filled with gruesome gore effects, over-the-top action scenes, and a game cast comprised of such familiar faces as Freddy Rodriguez, Michael Biehn, Michael Parks, Bruce Willis, Josh Brolin, Jeff Fahey and pretty much all of the director’s pals and family.

Rose McGowan was particularly great (again!) and is now my choice to play my comic book character, Femme Noir, if they ever make a movie.

I loved Planet Terror. I know a lot of folks found it uneven, but I consider that part of its charm.

I really wish the Weinsteins had released the theatrical version of Grindhouse at the same time as these "extended and unrated" versions of Death Proof & Planet Terror. I'm betting a lot of fans would have bought all three, and they still would have made their money.

Oh well. One of these days...

DVD Review: The Monster Squad

"Wolfman’s got nards!"

After two decades of grotesquely panned and scanned, grainy VHS dupes and late night/early morning pay cable airings, Fred Dekker’s heartfelt valentine to the Universal monster films of Hollywood’s Golden Age, THE MONSTER SQUAD (1987), finally makes its way to the digital format with a beautiful, 2-disc 20th Anniversay Edition from Lions Gate.

Best described as "The Little Rascals meet The Monsters," THE MONSTER SQUAD tells of a group of 80’s kids who must save the world when Count Dracula, The Frankenstein Monster, a werewolf, a mummy and the Creature from the Black Lagoon’s clone show up in their small Southern bayou town in search of a magic amulet. The amulet is the key to keeping Good & Evil in cosmic balance, and Drac wants to tip the scales.

A charming, Spielbergian family film, SQUAD features a top-notch cast of talented young and veteran actors, fantastic monster make-ups by Stan Winston (PREDATOR) and his crew, a superior musical score by the underrated Bruce Broughton (SILVERADO), and a funny, yet suspenseful script by director Dekker and a young Shane Black (LETHAL WEAPON, LAST BOY SCOUT), filled with quotable dialogue and memorable moments.

For fans of classic horror, the movie is a treasure trove of references and homage – armadillos inexplicably haunt Dracula’s castle, just as they did in the 1931 Tod Browning DRACULA, the Monster first encounters little Phoebe (Ashley Bank) at the side of a pond, evoking strong memories of Boris Karloff and his doomed playmate in the original FRANKENSTEIN – but more than that, the film treats the classic creatures with respect and allows them to be scary. Most notable, perhaps, is Duncan Regehr’s Dracula, who combines Christopher Lee’s imperiousness with Lugosi’s reptilian menace, in a portrayal that ranks among the undead Count’s finest.

Lions Gate new 20th Anniversary Edition DVD is a 2-disc package. Disc 1 contains a gorgeous, 2.35:1 anamorphic widescreen transfer from pristine source material, and a new, 5.1 Dolby Surround mix. This disc also includes two commentary tracks. On the first, Dekker sits with cast members Andre Gower ("Sean"), Ryan Lambert ("Rudy") and Ashley Bank ("Phoebe") for an anecdote-filled, trip down memory lane. On the second, Dekker is joined by Director of Photography Bradford May for a more technically informative audio commentary.

The second disc is dominated by "Monster Squad Forever," a five-part documentary that recounts the making of the film and it’s slow rise to cult status, with extensive interviews with crew and cast. A lot is covered here, including the studio’s concerns over the kids’ occasional use of expletives, the difficulty in marketing the film back in ’87, and the disappointing downward arc of writer/director Fred Dekker’s filmmaking career. It’s a great, nostalgic documentary, filed with fascinating anecdotes. Disc 2 also includes a few deleted scenes, the original theatrical trailer and TV Spots, a still gallery, and a "Conversation with Frankenstein" – an amusing interview with actor Tom Noonan in the Frankenstein Monster make-up, conducted during the original filming. It’s cute, but runs a little too long.

I’ve been a dedicated fan of this flick for years, and I’m grateful to Lions Gate for finally bringing it to DVD in a well-produced, thoughtful special edition. They’ve really treated the film well, and I cannot recommend this set – and this movie – more highly.

DVD Review: Behind The Mask

"It is going to get wet in here tonight. Lace your boots up, kiddies..."

I recently watched the Starz Media DVD of BEHIND THE MASK: THE RISE OF LESLIE VERNON (2006). This unique take on the slasher subgenre had been garnering a lot of positive reviews in recent months, and although I haven't really been in a horror movie mood of late, I was curious.

I persuaded my wife – who grew up on 80's slasher franchises like FRIDAY THE 13TH and NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET – to join me, and we gave the disc a spin.

The premise and plot of the film is that a small group of college journalists are offered the opportunity to accompany and interview an 80's-styled psycho killer as he goes about his preparations for a full-blooded killing spree. From selecting the right female victim to terrorize – a virgin, of course – to planting the seeds of an appropriately spooky "legend," to setting the scene for the final slaughter, the "mockumentary" portion of the film is both amusing and occasionally chilling, with plenty of dark humor and thought-provoking insights into the conventions of the genre. Now, if that was the entire film, it would probably be fine and fun, but in the final reels, BEHIND THE MASK metamorphoses into a genuine slasher film, complete with last minute twists and – despite the fact that the whole formula has just been deconstructed in front of you – a suspenseful and frightening edge-of-your-seat climax.

Virtually everything about this film works. Lead Nathan Baesel is excellent, sliding startlingly from charming and amusing to terrifying with no apparent effort. Freddy Krueger himself, Robert Englund, is well-cast in his small role, as is POLTERGEIST's Zelda Rubinstein, who delivers a long expository speech in one perfect take. Especially good is veteran character actor Scott Wilson, from 1967's IN COLD BLOOD, as Leslie's "mentor" and confidante.

The screenplay by Scott Glosserman and David J. Stieve shows not only a deep understanding for the genre, but a genuine affection for it as well. Glosserman's direction is brisk and breezy during the mockumentary sequences yet taut, atmospheric and chilling once things get bloody. It's great stuff.

Starz Media gives BEHIND THE MASK a sterling, 1.85:1 anamorphic widescreen presentation, with Dolby Digital 5.1 and Dolby Stereo audio. There's a fun and informative commentary by the main cast members, two "making of" featurettes, deleted and extended scenes, and some nicely-edited trailers. As usual, Starz has included the screenplay as a DVD-ROM downloadable bonus.

For fans of the slasher film subgenre, BEHIND THE MASK: THE RISE OF LESLIE VERNON is highly and enthusiastically recommended. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that it's one of the best horror films I've seen in the last two years.

Check it out.