This Story Should Have Remained Untold

I love movies. Really. Scary movies. Funny movies. Serious movies. Low budget movies. MOVIES!

Whenever I watch a movie, I want to be entertained. I never go in, hoping to be disappointed. I'm not looking for problems. But, sometimes, as much as I want to just relax and get sucked in, problems jump out and smack me in the face.

Before I get too far, I should probably mention that I am not a big fan of Vampires. I don't HATE them. One of my favorite horror novels, The Light At The End by John Skipp and Craig Spector, is about a vampire. I like the movies Near Dark and 30 Days of Night. I love Marvel's version of Dracula.

All of that being said, watching Dracula Untold was excruciating. My overall impression is that someone came up with a bunch of scenes that they thought would look cool, and found a way to shoehorn them into a movie. The story wasn't horrible, but so many things stood out as either bad or lazy storytelling. Some things WERE pretty cool, but there weren't nearly enough good things to outweigh the bad.

You may think I'm nitpicking, and that's okay, but these are just some of the things that bothered me.

Ahead be SPOILERS!

I'm not a huge fan of the film makers trying to make Vlad a hero, who becomes a monster to save his people, but that's not a deal breaker.

At the beginning of the movie, Vlad, and a couple of his dudes, travel to Broke Tooth Mountain, in less than one day. I thought this was a bit of a stretch, but, when Vlad leaves, he is on a horse, so I figured maybe they could have made it, if that's how they were travelling. BUT, later, when Vlad returns, looking for the ancient vampire, we see him scaling the cliffs. Now, first of all, if that's how he and his dudes did it the first time, I no longer believe that they could have made it in a day. Secondly, the entrance in the second scene looks nothing like the entrance in the first scene. Are there two entrances? If so, Why does Vlad assume that the second would lead to the same place as the first? (Okay. This one does seem really nitpicky.)

Vlad is selfish. He keeps saying that he is doing these things to save his people, but it's actually only about his wife and son. SO many of his people die, while he's focused on his family. Yes, family is important, but don't tell me it's about more than that, when it obviously isn't.

When the Turks attack Castle Dracula, they have hundreds (thousands?) of soldiers. To keep things simple, lets say they have 20 ranks of 20 men. That's 400 soldiers. Vlad flays through the middle of, let's say, 15 ranks, taking out three or four men in each of those ranks. That leaves at least 240 men, that Vlad has already passed by, who, instead of continuing on to the castle, turn around to fight Vlad. All 400 (again, it could be many more) soldiers focus on one man. Not a single one thinks "I should keep going, and do the job I was sent here to do."

Watching the scenes in which Vlad and his people are camped out, on their way to the monastery, there is NO WAY that much sunlight could reach Vlad's tent.

When the citizens of Castle Dracula are schlepping to the monastery, and are attacked by the Turks, Vlad turns into a bunch of bats, and quickly takes out some bad guys. BUT, when his wife and son are in danger, he DICKS AROUND with the guy who is threatening them. Of course, this means that that guy lives, so that he can come back to kill Vlad's wife.

Speaking of a dead Mirena, she falls from an incredible height, and there is no indication that Vlad caught her before she hit the ground. (I watched it over and over, looking for some sign that he did.) She would be nothing but a huge red stain on the ground. BUT, not only is she still alive, she TALKS to Vlad! No. Just no.

Oh, yeah. Right before that, Vlad is talking to his wife, and says something like "It's almost dawn. If we don't defeat the Turks before the sun rises, I will be helpless." Uhm...ALMOST DAWN?! What the fuck have you been doing all night?

The timing of many events is this movie seems to be pretty wonky.

An army marching blindfolded? I call bullshit.

How freaking long did Mehmed have to set up the silver trap, in his tent? And, again, why does Vlad dick around with Mehmed? Just swoop in, as bats, and kill him!

Why does the sun burn Vlad more slowly than it does the other vampires? Maybe it's because Vlad fed from the ancient vamp, and the others fed from Vlad, but it's never made clear.

Dracula can control the weather?

You know what would have been a great ending? If Vlad had listened to his buddy, and killed his own son, completing his transformation into a monster.

In the very last scene, the ancient vampire is following Vlad and Mina, in 2015, and he says "Let the games begin." Uhm...you waited over 500 years to begin your vampire games? Sure, this is a set up for a sequel, but I can't see myself watching it, so I guess I will never know why he waited so long.

That's less than half of the things that popped out at me. I really wanted to enjoy this movie, but when things like this are so obvious, I can't let it slide. (Don't get me started on The Dark Knight Rises.) I wasn't looking for problems; problems found me.

There. I've vented. Do you agree? Disagree? Am I being a douchebag? Let me know.

Game On! or Curse You, Wil Wheaton!

I have always loved playing games. As a child I played the classics: Candyland, Mousetrap, Don't Break The Ice. A few years later, I was the first kid on the block to own Dungeons & Dragons (1st Edition!). When collectible card games came along, I eventually acquired a few dozen different games (Magic: The Gathering being a recent addition.).

So, yeah, I like games. The thing is, until recently, I have only purchased a few games a year. Then, well...

All I was doing was looking for a Youtube video about the great Lovecraftian game Elder Sign.

          (Explore an Arkham museum, using dice to complete tasks and fend off maddening horrors.)

So, looking on YouTube, and what pops up? Some Wil Wheaton hosted show called Table Top. I like Wil Wheaton, I like games, I like watching videos. I hit play, and was whisked away to a wonderland of fun and...well, what I got was a video of Wil Wheaton and his friends playing Elder Sign.

You see, Table Top is a show on the YouTube channel Geek & Sundry, on which Will and a revolving group of friends play different, well, table top games (Duh.). Wil introduces the game, then the folks who will be playing, and then the games, and the fun, begin.

Here's the problem. Since discovering Table Top, just a few months ago, I have purchased a DOZEN new games. And them things ain't cheap! (Well, some of them are, but most seem to average around $50.00.)

Everything from SmashUp, Castle Panic, and King Of Tokyo

to Small World, Tsuro, and Forbidden Island

has been added to my collection of games.

Because of Wil Wheaton (WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEATOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOON!) I have spent way too much money on games, over the past few weeks. 

But...

It's been worth it. Not only have I found the fantastic Geek & Sundry channel on YouTube, which is full of wonderful people and videos, but, my friends, family, and I have had hours and hours of fun playing some great games.

So, while my bank balance curses Wil Wheaton, I thank him. (And I'm pulling for you, Wil. I know you can get another win, one of these days.)

Duane Swierczynski Does It Again

Unputdownable. It's not a literal term. Otherwise we would be walking around covered in books, which would make it kinda difficult to eat, sleep, and, well, do just about anything.

But...

Figuratively speaking, Duane Swierczynski's Point & Shoot definitely fits the bill.

Picking up exactly where Hell & Gone left off, the latest Charlie Hardie adventure is a rocketing thrill ride of non-stop craziness.

Fun & Games (the first Charlie Hardie book) was a fast paced thriller.

Hell & Gone (book number two) was an action packed mind game.

Point & Shoot...well, Point & Shoot is a bizarro, buddy road tripping, action adventuring, identity swapping, serial killering, conspiracy filled masterpiece.

As always, Swierczynski's writing is as sharp as a scalpel. With just a few words, he is able to bring each character to life. The dialogue crackles, and the action bursts from the page in a cloud of gun powder and blood. (Again, I'm speaking figuratively. Literally, well, that would be rather gross.)

For anyone looking for a well written, thrilling, breathtaking story, I highly recommend Point & Shoot. I do suggest you read the first two books. Not just to get the whole story, but because they are all fantastic fiction.

Not So Elementary

Seventy-five percent of the time, when I go to the bookstore, I am not looking for anything specific. I like to wonder around, perusing the shelves, hoping to find something new. And so it was, last week, when I entered the local Barnes & Nobles.


As B&N does not have a section just for horror, I start in the “Literature” section, where the horror novels dwell. Then I move on to “Science Fiction and Fantasy.” Finally, I check out the “Mystery” section, and it was here that something caught my eye.

There, on the “new book” shelf I saw a picture of a boar-headed soldier, astride a horse. Below this wonderfully bizarre image was the title: Sherlock Holmes: The Army of Dr. Moreau. Finally, at the very bottom of the cover, the author's name: Guy Adams (The World House; Restoration).

This is not the book I will be reviewing today.

Looking over the book, I learned that it was the second Holmes adventure penned by Mr. Adams. I rushed, well, strolled, well, turned around, and right there, in the “A” section (shocking, I know) was Guy Adams first Holmes novel: Sherlock Holmes: The Breath of God.

This is the book I am reviewing.

A body, killed by mysterious means. A dire warning, brought to Holmes by a semi-reputable source (more on that, in a moment). A second bizarre death. And with that, Holmes and Watson are drawn in to a horrifying mystery.

I'm trying to avoid giving anything away. Except...

The characters. Adams has drawn on some rich literary history, for his book. First, we have the semi-reputable, at least in Holmes' eyes, Dr. John Silence, Physician Extraordinary, created by Algernon Blackwood. Next, we meet Thomas Carnacki, The Ghost Finder, created by William Hope Hodgson. Followed by The Demonologist, Julian Karswell, created by M.R. James. Finally, we have Aleister Crowley, created by his parents, I guess, rounding out the cast.

While doing his utmost to stay true to the characters, Adams manages to add some depth to their personalities. While all are quite similar in occupation, the author makes each of them distinct. And Crowley is, well, Crowley.

Adams does a fine job, capturing the voice of Watson, the narrator (of course), without slavishly copying the style of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. The plot moves at a brisk pace, with plenty of spooky scenes; perfect for reading on a dark and stormy night. He captures turn of the century London, at least the way that I have always envisioned it, quite well.

As for Sherlock, he is as brilliant, arrogant, and snarky as ever. As a life long fan of Holmes, I find no fault in Adams' portrayal of the “Consulting Detective.”

As Sherlock Holmes rides a new wave of popularity, due, in no small part, to the feature films starring Robert Downey Jr., and the BBC television show, I hope that fans, old and new, pick up Sherlock Holmes: The Breath of God, and feel the thrills and chills that Guy Adams has wrought.

Oh, and I will be reading Sherlock Holmes: The Army of Dr. Moreau very soon. So, stay tuned

City of the Lost

A few weeks ago, I went to Barnes & Nobles to pick up the new Jonathan Maberry novel, Assassin's Code. It was sitting on the new book table, at the front of the store, so I grabbed a copy on my way in, and carried it around, as I looked over all the other goodies on the shelves.

And that's when I saw it.

Bright orange spine. Title in black. Author's name in yellow. City of the Lost. Stephen Blackmoore. I'd never heard of the guy, but, what the hell, I'm always looking for something new. I pulled the book off the shelf. Right off the bat, an interesting cover. A cityscape in shades of orange. And in the foreground, a tough guy with a cigarette, a black leather jacket, and a smoking hole in his chest. Ok. You've got my attention.

I flip the book over; read the back cover. Mm hm. Joe Sunday, Leg breaker for the mob, goes out on a job and ends up a zombie. Sorta. And then the freaks come out. Joe is thrust into a dark world of supernatural horror. Sounds good.

And then...those seven words that had me putting Maberry back on the table (Don't worry, Jonathan. I picked up Assassin's Code the next week.) and taking City of the Lost up to the register: "Cover and interior art by Sean Phillips."

I know Sean's art from his work with Ed Brubaker on Criminal, Incognito, and, most recently, Fatale. To me, Sean is the go to guy for noir artwork. His splash pages for the essays in the back of Brubaker's comics are masterpieces. So, yeah, I want this book.

And what a book it is. It's Criminal, with monsters, and I mean that in the best possible way. It's Richard Stark's Parker, stuck in a horror film. It's supernatural noir! (Not to be confused with Supernatural Noir, a great anthology edited by Ellen Datlow, from Dark Horse Books.)

Joe Sunday is a bad guy, but you will find yourself rooting for him, as he goes up against bizarre foes, even badder than he is. You've got a nazi wizard, a feral dwarf, an incubus bartender, and, of course, a beautiful femme fatale. Everyone is looking for a magic stone. Most want it for something nefarious. Joe needs it to keep from rotting away. They all walk the dark streets of L.A., wheeling, dealing, and dying, as the clock ticks down to the final confrontation.

Blackmoore's writing is slick and fast, like his characters, and Sean Phillip's art is as fantastic as ever. The violence is nice and bloody, and the story is filled with twists and turns. This book is great as both horror and noir, and I would recommend it for fans of both.

I certainly wish for Stephen Blackmoore to have a long and fruitful writing career. Purely for selfish reasons, of course. I want to read much more of his work. (That's the problem with discovering a new author. No backlog to dig up and enjoy.) So, thanls to Stephen and Sean for some great entertainment. Keep it up guys.

The Inkeepers

Before I get into The Inkeepers, Let me tell you a little bit about my history with Ti West. Years ago, I heard of this movie, The Roost, by some hot shot young director (That would be mister West). The reviews I read were all positive, so, when I found a used copy of the movie on DVD, I picked it up, took it home, watched it, and...was not impressed. Flash forward to Cabin Fever 2: Spring Fever, another film directed by Ti. I loved the first Cabin Fever, so I had high hopes. Not impressed. (At the time I was unaware that Mr. West was not happy with the final cut of the film, but that's neither here nor there.)

I decided to give up on what I assumed was an over hyped writer/director.

Jump ahead to just a few weeks ago, when I was asked to guest co-host on Fangirl Radio. (Check it out, on Jackaloperadio.com. You won't be disappointed.) The guest was Ti West. I knew that The House of the Devil was streaming on Netflix, so I decided it was time to reacquaint myself with the works of the man.

And...

LOVED IT!

The House of the Devil is a beautifully shot movie with great acting, great dialogue, and a slow burn story that builds to a bloody climax.

Shit. I forgot. Not long ago, I ran across The Roost on late night tv. As I had nothing better to do, I decided to give it another chance, and I quite enjoyed it.

Anyway, The Inkeepers came out on bluray (and DVD, of course) the day after we (we being Jessica Dwyer [THE fangirl], Ren Willocks, and myself) spoke with Ti, so I ran out and picked up a copy. I have just finished watching, and I figured I should write this, whikle it's all fresh in my mind. (Not that it will make me any more coherent.)

Claire (Sara Paxton) and Luke (Pat Healy) are working at The Yankee Pedlar, during it's last weekend of business. The only guests are an angry woman and her young son, and an old actress (played by Kelly McGillis) who has psychic powers. Claire and Luke are searching for proof that the inn is haunted. Funny stuff happens. Spooky stuff happens. That's all you need to know about the story. You ARE going to watch the movie, right?

Despite a rocky start to our "relationship," The Innkeepers has solidified my fandom of Ti West. I think that one of Ti's strengths, which shines in this movie, is his natural sounding dialogue, which the actors deliver with top notch ability. Hopefully you will understand when I say that it doesn't sound like actors delivery their lines, it just seems like two (or three, or whatever) people talking. To me, this is a sign of true talent.

The story itself has that Ti West slow build, that eventually leads to a truly frightening end. This movie isn't a splatterfest, or one scare after another; it takes it's time, letting us get to know, and care about, the characters. Again, another sign of a master storyteller.

Sara Paxton (The Last House on the Left [remake], Shark Night 3D) is quirky and cute, as Claire. Ti said that this role is the closest to the real Sara, and I think it shows. She doesn't seem to be acting. And, I know, good actors never seem like thay are acting, so Sara may take my statement as a double compliment. She is NOT "glammed up," and I think that is why I find her cuter here, than in any other movie I have seen her in. I didn't dislike her, in her other films, but I like her very much in this one.

Pat Healy (Ghost World, Magnolia)...well, the first thing I thought, when seeing him, was "Hey! He looks kinda like Jeffrey Combs!" (I think it's the nose.) That is, Jeffrey Combs with a fauxhawk. Pat plays things low key, imbueing Luke with a dry humor and quiet charm.

Sara and Pat work well together, giving the film a warm, friendly, easy going feel, until, well, until the shit hits the fan. Ti West picked two great leads, for his best film to date. If he keeps up with the top notch writing, casting, and directing, I will keep up with purchasing and watching.

So, do yourself a favor, and check out The Innkeepers. And The House of the Devil. And Fangirl Radio (On jackaloperadio.com!)

SHANE! PART II

SPOILERS!!!

I take it all back.

Ok, not all, but dude went nuts and got what he deserved. I still would have prefered seeing Carl do the deed to LIVE Shane, as opposed to UNDEAD Shane.

And that's all I have to say about that.