First an apology, then a quick note on Sinister

So I'd like to apologize to my followers, (if I actually have any, I don't know, I don't think I actually do, but you never know) for the lack of posts these past few months. I'm currently in a transitional period in my life and everything is different. I'm still making changes, adjusting to these changes, and then making more changes and honestly, posts aren't high up on the list of priories. Still watching a ridiculous number of films of course, but just not finding the time to be able to sit down and write down my thoughts on them. I do miss it though, and I keep a log of the ones I see so that I can go back and write something someday if I can, but so far I haven't gotten off my lazy ass to do so. So I figure if I try one small one right now, I'll be motivated to do the rest. lol. Let's see. If you all have stuck around, I'm forever grateful. My opinion on films might not mean much, but the fact that you all take the time to sit and read them means the world to me. So here we go........

Review: Sinister (2012)
Directed by: Scott Derrickson
Category: Horror

You know, I generally don't ever see these new horror films. They all just look, feel and play out the same. No originality and usually having nothing new to bring to the table. Call me old school, but 80's horror is where it was at. Maybe some 90's too, but I just can't get excited about any of these new films. They all share the same look, the annoying hand held shaky-cam look, whether it's a "found footage" film or not, they all look like them. But they keep making them because they cost almost nothing to make and almost always make money. So yea, I just don't bother. But I had read that this one was written by a former reviewer on one of my favorite movie sites and curiosity got the better of me on this one. And I must say, the premise seemed intriguing and I liked that you could tell what the fuck was going on even in the trailers. It looked like it was filmed pretty straight forward with no lame camera gimmicks to cover up the fact that the director might not have any talent. 

I'm happy to say that this was pretty good. Not excellent, but much, much better than I was expecting it to be. Pretty unusual idea to begin with, and though they don't explain a whole lot in terms of this "Sinister" character, I still enjoyed it. Director Derrickson keeps the movie moving along nicely and gives the film a stylish and consistent sheen that immediately makes it better than most of the horror stuff coming out these days. At least, that's my opinion anyway. I like when a filmmaker takes the time to frame a shot, put it on a track, a dolly or whatever. Things like that go a long way with me. 

I'm sure you've heard this before, as I've read it in several reviews myself, but it's true. Ethan Hawke carries this film squarely on his shoulders. I don't think it would have been as good had he not been the star. He really surprised me in this. He's always been a great actor, no doubt, but it's his passion that constantly amazes me, no matter what genre he's tackling. Here you see him put his heart and soul into this deeply flawed character. A loving family man on one hand, but a conniving shallow person on the other. Some of the decisions he chooses to make in here make you laugh, as well as make you gasp. Nobody's perfect, but he surely seems to make it a point to prove this to the audience. 

The ending was also a surprise, one that I did not anticipate but still left me wanting more unfortunately. But hey, that's just a minor complaint. All in all, it was made really well, plays out smoothly with a healthy dose of jumps and with a unique villain that really only leaves you asking more questions when it's all over. 

1 comment:

  1. Good to have you back sir. I hope all is well and look forward to you to completing the rest of your Friday the 13th reviews.