Thursday, December 29, 2011

Something was "lost" for sure...

Welcome back readers.  It hasn't even been a week since my last blog (I know, I'm just as surprised/impressed with myself as you are) but I figured it was time for a new one.  That and Netflix is clearing out a bunch of movies for the new year so I'm watching my way through my queue and figured I'd write about the first one I watched.  So settle in, hopefully this will be entertaining to read, cause I have a feeling it's going to be entertaining to write...

For this blog, I'm writing on a movie I just watched entitled "The Lost Boys".  This is a vampire film from 1987 directed by Joel Schumacher and written by three people whose first name begins with "J" and that I don't want to take the time to write out (although, it probably took me longer to write that sentence than their names).  This film has gotten a lot of hype and popularity and has been recommended to me several times by various people.  I enjoy a good vampire flick, and this has some pretty interesting actors; Jason Patric, Kiefer Sutherland, and the two Coreys!!  (Haim and Feldman for those of you who are way out of the cool kid loop).  So I figured I'd give it a go and actually learned several very important lessons.

1.) Contrary to popular belief, two Coreys doth not a hit ensure...
2.) While late 80's movies give most people an air of latent homosexuality, they couldn't have made Sam (played by Corey Haim) more gay if they tried.  For further reference, see his clothes, musical stylings, and the poster in his room of Rob Lowe undressing and rubbing himself.  I wish I was kidding about that last statement.
3.) If this movie is an accurate representation of vampire films in the late 80's and where the genre was heading, then I'm glad Stephanie Meyer "revamped" the idea of a vampire.  That's right, I said it.  I'll take that glittery and charismatic group of vampires over the chuckleheads in this film any day.
4.) "The Lost Boys" is the worst vampire film I've ever seen (yeah, worse than Buffy the Vampire Slayer which came out shortly after and featured the much better Sutherland actor).

But let's not get ahead of ourselves here...  First, a quick rundown of the movie.  The film takes place in a city called Santa Clara, CA.  A woman and her two sons have just moved there to live with her father after a rough divorce.  Enter the (grand)father, aka, the creepiest guy in the entire movie (and he's NOT a vampire...).  His house looks like a Jason Vorhees nightmare but for some reason, the family fits in like it's the most normal thing in the world.  While out exploring the town, the oldest boy, Michael, sees a girl that he apparently falls head over heels for but who ditches him for her rough and tumble gang of bikers.  So, the only logical thing to do is to spend the next day trying to change everything about himself (appearance, attitude, etc) to catch the girls eye.  And whaddya know, it works!  Until her "boyfriend" and leader of the group comes along and invites Michael to join in with them in their misadventures.  They go off on a wild night and visit the group's secret underground hangout place (hint) full of all sorts of creepy and bizarre items that make the place look like a tomb (hint hint).  They give Michael some "wine" to drink that he initially thinks is blood (because they tell him it is) and the next thing you know, POOF.  Michael trips out and wakes up in his own bed and is sensitive to sunlight (if you don't get the hints by now, you should just stop watching cause guess what, he's gonna start doing some more vampirey things).  All this time the younger brother Sam meets two teenagers in a comic book store who deem him a worthy being (because he knows about comics, which is apparently the true characteristic of any worthy being) and warn him that the town is full of vampires and to call if he needs help.  Sure enough...through an incredibly awkward bath scene and being saved by his pooch, Sam learns his brother is a vampire.  After his initial (and solid) first idea to run away screaming, he decides to help his brother out.  Through the help of the Frog brothers (Feldman and some other guy) they learn that if you kill the head vampire, all the other "half" vampires go back to normal (a huge cop out in my opinion but whatever).  They have a list of people who it might be (including their mom's new boyfriend and Kiefer Sutherland) and set out to destroy the head vampire  (and any others who get in their way) and save the girl (also a vampire but apparently just your classic Damsel in Distress) and the day.  They have a few ups and downs but like most horror movies, the ending is happy and all is returned to normal...OR IS IT?!?!

As I stated above, this movie flat out bombed.  Just terrible.  I saw very little good points in this film at all.  But, I am always one to give credit where credit is due.  They did a good job with the scenery and backgrounds by showing both the safe and friendly side of the town in contrast to the dark and dreary part (guess who lives in which one).  The gang's secret hideout was done well and sadly, had the most back story of any other part of the movie (go figure).  Albeit, I'm not sure what a giant Jim Morrison painting has to do with the undead, but different strokes for different folks I guess.  Along with the setting, the movie did a really cool job with the make-up.  The vampires looked pretty impressive and believable (and not just for an 80's film) and the costume and make-up concepts for the deaths were pretty well done.

And yet...that's about it.  This movie failed in almost every other major category necessary for a film.  Want a solid and easy to follow plot?  Strike one.  The movie had almost no continuity and even the scenes that went together didn't have enough significance or appeal to keep you really interested.  OK then, how about some cool lighting or music to set the tone?  Strike two.  This vampire movie had more sunlight and brightness (even underground) then I've ever seen before.  And playing a song that just repeats various Commandments to a rock backing without addressing any sort of religious aspect is literally the dumbest thing I've heard in a while.  Well how about cool costumes?  Foul.  It's an 80's movie...need I say more?  This movie tarnished the reputation of suave and sophisticated vampires the world around and made them look like they would've fit in "The Warriors" or any other lame rocker/badass wannabes.  Well there's got to be some strong character development then right?  Swing and a miss.  Almost no background or buildup was given for ANY of the characters; there were so many random and unnecessary characters that it almost got hard to keep up with them.  And even the ones who were presented as significant, ended up having so little significance, it would've made more sense to not include them. The actors did, at the ABSOLUTE best, a mediocre job and were just not believable nor was their dialogue.  Especially the girl love interest...  Her name is Star (::sighs::) and she's a cool girl vampire in a little group of vampires, but somehow is the only one who doesn't feed or change appearance throughout the entire movie...?  um....lost me.

Overall?  This movie blew.  And not just compared to vampire movies as a whole, cause it blew to proportions of blowyness that I can't even comprehend when compared to the greats.  But as a movie in general, it was pretty sucky.  There was nothing to make you stay interested, the characters were all annoying and seemingly pointless, it wasn't even scary in any way shape or form.  "What's that?  The wind is blowing really unnecessarily loud and there's the mixed sound of bats and motorcycles?  Dude, it's totally those vampire A-holes..."  (not quite verbatim but they could have saved trouble and just through that line in there; at least the dialogue would've been better).  I saw nothing to like about it, let alone warrant 2 sequels (no, that's not a typo).  I'll give this movie a 2 out of 10, solely for the make-up job and the best looking and best acting characters in the film (and if you ask me, the true stars and heroes of the film).  I'm referring of course, to the dogs.  Because in the end, when you're in a new town and within 2 days you realize you're surrounded by vampires and even your own brother is a vampire, who else can you rely on but man's best friend (and a vampire's worst nightmare).  Killer kill yo!!!   Until next time, happy viewing.

3 comments:

  1. Well, even though this movie got a worse rating than the last one, I think if there were nothing else on TV, I was bored out of my mind and it had just started, I would watch it! What can I say I'm a sucker for the corey's and vampires 0:). I'm a little surprised by how many baseball reference there were, as you don't even LIKE baseball. But SO GLAD you've come to realize the value of Stephanie Meyer! lol. On one point I would totally agree: Killer kill to indeed as I would run for my dog as well! I think next time you should write a review about a movie you actually like though... Maybe "Children of Men", "Shoot em up" or even "In Bruge" would be AWESOME! Fucking midgets!!

    ReplyDelete
  2. And to think this movie was on my list. Maybe I'll go get those Twilight films out of the way instead. Great review, and props for finding something to like about the film.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I encourage you to watch the movie Rachel, that way you can see if I'm right or not. The baseball references just came to me as I was writing it. We'll see what the next review is on...

    Thanks anonymous, whoever you are. I always try to find something. And I'm not saying the Twilight films are necessarily good (although the later one's are pretty decent), just the vampires are better.

    ReplyDelete