Resident Evil: Afterlife trailer = Uh-Oh

In all honesty, that Twilight Saga: Eclipse trailer that I ripped on last month didn't really stand much of chance of impressing me right from the get-go. So, in the interest of fairness, I figured I'd show that I can be equally critical of shit I like, as well.

Well, the teaser trailer for the fourth Resident Evil movie hit the Interwebs today. Check it out:

OK, look, if you know me, then you know I have no problem admitting that I love the Resident Evil film series. I know what you're thinking, but it actually goes beyond my love of zombies and my well-documented obsession with appreciation of Milla Jovovich. Those two things are certainly a factor, but believe me, there are plenty of other zombie movies AND Milla movies that I can't stand, so it's not as simple as me blindly falling in line for any film that combines the two. That being said, I'll also be the first to admit that there's not exactly a lot of good reasons for me to enjoy these movies. You'll never hear me claiming they are great movies or anything (although I think the first one is actually pretty decent and slightly underrated. They're just good dumb fun, is all...and it works for me.

That's why my reaction to this new trailer is so surprising. It's not like there was some great precedent that this fourth film has to live up to. And yet, this trailer...this is not good. I realize I sound quite silly saying that I'm worried about the quality of the fourth film in a B-grade zomebie/action series, but then that's my point. If I was oddly entertained by the previous three, it says something as to how crappy this trailer is if I saw it and thought, "yikes."

So what exactly is my problem with this? A little bit of it probably has to do with my disappointment that the movie looks to be ignoring the "army of Alice clones" cliffhanger from the last movie. I know, I know, this is just a teaser, so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they're not outright ignoring it - but judging by what we see here, I'm wondering if it's just something that is quickly addressed and then ignored. Perhaps the multiple Alice's are all wiped out in the film's first act or something. I hope I'm wrong about that. And no, it's not just because of my warped desire to see multiple Millas in my dreams on the big screen. I just hate when a series introduces a legitimately intriguing idea and then just abandons it rather than see it through.

But, whatever, that's actually a minor issue, and one I need to see more footage of the movie before I can really start commenting on. No, my main problem with this trailer can be summed up with one simple number and one simple letter: 3D.

Sure, I appreciate that RE: Afterlife was at least smart enough to actually film in 3D, rather than just go with this "convert to 3D afterwards" bullshit. And I give them credit for actually using the same cameras and technology that James Cameron employed for Avatar.

But, judging by this trailer, it seems that while they may have borrowed Cameron's tech, they sure as shit didn't learn anything from his methods. What made the 3D in Avatar so great was how Cameron used it - as a way to enhance depth of field and thus make everything in front of you seem more real and lifelike. He didn't just do 3D for 3D's sake; never resorted to just throwing crap at the screen for the audience to "duck and cover" from. But, alas, what's the very first thing we see in this trailer after the corny declaration that they're using Cameron's cameras? Why, it's Alice...throwing freaking ninja stars at the screen! Sigh. So, instead of wisely using 3D to just enhance the realism of otherwise unrealistic environments and FX, this is instead obviously going to be just another "here comes more shit flying at us" kind of 3D movie. Ninja stars, pieces of wall, sunglasses, Milla herself. It looks like Afterlife has no small supply of things to shoot out of the screen at us. It gets old in this two-minute teaser...can you imagine how it's going to feel sitting through an hour and a half of this nonsense? It's one thing for a movie that is obviously playful and tongue-in-cheek (like Piranha 3D) to resort to this approach, but any movie that even feigns some level of seriousness (like Resident Evil does) is probably better off leaving the 3D alone, lest it just become distracting and silly.

And it certainly won't be helped any by what looks to be a ridiculous over-reliance on slo-mo. Seriously, aren't we past this whole Matrix thing by now? It's alright in small doses, sure. But this trailer suggests just non-stop "look how cool this shit is" slow-motion shots of people jumping, shooting, fighting, falling, etc. This series continues to consistently (and somewhat surprisingly) make money, so I certainly don't need to tell Paul W.S. Anderson how to do his job. But, really, at this point in the Resident Evil series, why not worry less about trying to make it look fancy and cool, and just see what happens if you make a more visceral and nasty movie? It's already rated R...why not just go for it? Forget the Matrix crap for awhile...just give us Milla kicking the bloody shit out of zombies in real-time, and make it as brutal as possible. The Resident Evil games don't resort to this sort of fancy-dancy visual gymnastics - the movies shouldn't have to, either. And yes, I know the games and the movie series are pretty far removed from one another by this point, but my point remains.

Like I said, this is just a teaser, so I could be overreacting. Plus, truth be told, I know I'll end up seeing this movie, and I'll probably end up liking it. I mean, hell, Resident Evil: Apocalypse is probably one of the stupidest movies to ever get a wide theatrical release, and I liked that movie. It seems hard to believe that Afterlife could really get much worse than that. Like the other three, I'm sure this new one will probably be a decent way to turn off your brain for awhile and just have fun. But, I don't know...this trailer just does nothing for me.

At least Wesker looks alright, I guess.

Here lies Trevor Snyder...

Alright, truth be told, I don't really give a damn what happens to my body after I die. At that point, I'm really just an expired bag of guts and stuff, so do with me what you will. However, I've been thinking about it, and I've decided I DO want a grave site. Well, actually, it doesn't even matter if my body is buried there, so it's not so much the grave site I want, but rather just the headstone.

I mean, sure, I don't really have any interest in what happens to my body, but let's face it - my existence is way too awesome to just let it pass without some kind of reminder for people. That's why I need a headstone - the hundreds of eventual mourners will need some place to congregate, after all.

But, have you ever noticed how boring headstones are? Oh, sure, some people gussy them up a little...include little statues or funny little sayings. But still, at the end of the day, if you've seen one tombstone, you've seen 'em all. Well this is where I want to be different. I want a kick-ass headstone to reflect a kick-ass person.

First off, forget the simple "beloved son, father, uncle, first cousin, etc., blah-blah" crap. Here's what mine should read: "Trevor Snyder. 3rd Man on the Moon, 23rd President of the United States, and the guy who renamed Constantinople to Istanbul." I'd also like an engraved image of me walking hand-in-hand with Milla Jovovich. Obviously, none of this is true, per se. But once you're dead, you no longer have to answer for your lies.

As for the birth and death dates, I want to keep that interesting also. Let's say, for instance, that I die on April 23rd, 2053. Well, I don't want the dates on my headstone to just read "Sept. 19, 1980 - April 23, 2053." Booooring! How about this:

Born: Sept. 19, 1980

Buried: April 23, 2053

Died: April 24-25, 2053

OK, finally, and I'll admit this is a weird one. Have you seen that new fad in headstones, where people actually have little TV screens built into them, that show home video packages of the person? I guess they're battery powered, and last for years for a time. Cool idea...but I don't want to bore anyone with video of me. So, I am gonna get one of those TV's, but instead of my home videos, I want it to just show the classic film Bats, starring Lou Diamond Phillips, on a constant loop.

Why Bats? Why not? It does have one of the best theme songs ever. "Bats, bats, bats, they're gonna suck you dry!!" Fuck yeah, they will. Actually, come to think of it, I want my headstone to read: "Trevor Snyder - Killed by Bats."

Avert your eyes! It's the Eclipse trailer!

I hate to follow up a post discussing one of the all-time great vampire movies with a post about the series that seems dead-set on destroying vampires; but hey, that's just how it works out sometimes.

Oh, look! It's the brand new trailer for The Twilight Saga: Eclipse!

Are they freaking kidding with this shit?

Seriously, this is getting ridiculous. How is it that a series that was so bad from the beginning continues to somehow devolve more and more with each entry? Now, I know this was just a minute and a half teaser, but still - let me just share my initial thoughts upon watching this tripe.

• The trailer starts off as I believe we want all vampire movies to start off - with a couple uncharismatic douche-bags sitting in a field of flowers talking about love. More specifically, Edward is telling Bella he will love her for all time...which might be a more powerful statement if he hadn't hightailed it out of town and potentially left her at the mercy of powerful enemies in the last film. "My bad," I guess he would say.
• Next up we get Dakota Fanning (and you already know how I feel about her). She arrives to tell Edward and Bella that "the Volturi don't give second chances." Which is odd, because I'm pretty sure that's exactly how the last film ended. With the Volturi giving Edward a second chance! Oh well. Anyway, Edward meets this obvious threat with his usual response - a blank look that can barely be legally called an expression (pictured above).
• Now we get to Bella asking Edward why he is against turning her into a vampire and ARE YOU FUCKIN' SERIOUS?? Didn't we already go over this ad nauseum in the last movie? In my review of New Moon, I pointed out Bella's constant annoying nagging about this issue...and now we have to sit through it again? I'm convinced that Edward must eventually turn her just to finally shut her up.
• Jacob enters the picture next, and in case you didn't get that this series is all about a love triangle, he lays it out for you with some of the most direct, lazy dialogue imaginable. "I'm in love with you, and I want you to pick me instead of him." Wow, really spelling it out for us there, aren't you, Jake? Oh, by the way, he also tells her that she wouldn't have to change if she picked him - but wasn't his whole deal last time that he was worried he might lash out and horribly disfigure her face if he got angry and his inner-wolf took over? I guess he got over that. Here's hoping if that happens he doesn't claw off Bella's lower lip, leaving her with nothing to constantly bite.
• Speaking of Jacob, what's the deal with Taylor Lautner in this trailer? Lautner showed the slightest hint of actual likable charisma in New Moon (which put him miles ahead of the human mannequin, Robert Pattinson). But now suddenly in this one he's delivering every line with the same sort of sleepy non-interest as Edward. Why is it a requirement for this series that the characters have to be as boring as humanly possible?
• Now shit gets serious, as the film's apparent chief villain shows up. And, oh snap, it's...that one red-headed vampire chick that didn't really do anything in the first film and then showed up for a few minutes in the second one but still didn't do anything! Oh no! My opinion of Stephenie Meyer as an author is well documented, but this is just more wood for the fire. She has no concept of how to build an intriguing villain. Heck, in the first book it felt like she outright forgot she even needed any sort of conflict, and then when she remembered she just awkwardly wedged it all into the final couple chapters. Now here we are supposed to give a damn about a villain that we know pretty much nothing about. Keep in mind, this is not a new character. This chick has been in the last two films...but has not been given one single moment to develop even the slightest hint of a personality. Did she even have a line in New Moon? She's essentially the equivalent of the useless enemy henchmen in a Bond movie, except oddly elevated to the main villain role. Because we have no connection to her, we know that she doesn't pose any sort of serious threat to our main characters. And yet the movie wants us to be all excited that she is back. Fuck you, Twilight.
• I hate to beat this dead horse, but check out the official synopsis of Eclipse. "Bella once again finds herself surrounded by danger as Seattle is ravaged by a string of mysterious killings and a malicious vampire continues her quest for revenge. In the midst of it all, she is forced to choose between Edward and Jacob — knowing that her decision has the potential to ignite the struggle between vampire and werewolf." Now, you tell me - couldn't that also be the exact synopsis for the last movie? It's like they're not even trying at this point. And, you know what, they probably aren't. Because dumb teenage girls and even dumber middle-aged moms are gonna eat this crap up no matter what. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna sit here and patiently wait for Daybreakers to come out on DVD.

13-Year-Old Girl > Stephenie Meyer

Alright, I realize I've been letting this blog just sorta sit here and collect dust, so starting today I'm gonna try to make a real effort to write on here more often. Typically, it will be my thoughts on whatever news I come across, particularly pertaining to my beloved horror genre. For instance:

I have mixed feelings on wise-beyond-their-years kids. On one hand, they sorta creep me out. I remember hearing about how Dakota Fanning, when meeting with producers of films she was trying out for, would leave her parents and other adult handlers outside, and come into the room with her own copy of the script that she had already made extensive notes in regarding the character she was auditioning for. That's not "cute." It's scary. Think back to how dumb and scatter-brained you were when you were a young child. Now compare that to what I just said, and everything else we know and have seen of Fanning. We better hope that, as she grows older, Fanning continues to focus primarily on acting. At the rate she's maturing, she could probably rule us all one day if she turned her attention toward it.

Now, on the other hand, as someone who has worked in retail and had to deal with the usual dumb-as-bricks kids (and their equally stupid parents) on a fairly regular basis, I can see the positives of these way-too-smart kids, as well. Sure, Dakota Fanning's maturity might be a little off-putting, but at least you can probably trust her on her own for a while, without the fear that she is going to randomly tear open packages and try to stick things up her nose for no reason (that would be Lindsay Lohan, actually).

Plus, the other nice thing about these kids is that, sometimes, it's nice to hear that they really know what the fuck they're talking about. Take Chloe Moretz, for instance. This 13-year-old is best known to most for her role in 500 Days of Summer. Not to me, though, because I still haven't seen 500 Days of Summer, and am in no hurry to do so. Actually, one of the biggest reasons I avoided 500 Days of Summer was how annoying Moretz' character looked in the trailer. Sure, she only had one line ("alright, start from the beginning"), but it was delivered in such an annoying manner that I wanted to punch her. And I've found it's probably best if I avoid any movies that have a by-product of making me want to assault small children.

Still, I can't avoid her forever. And, in fact, I'm quite looking forward to Moretz' next film, the gleefully raunchy and violent superhero satire Kick-Ass. If the film's red-band trailer (which depicts Moretz dismembering bad guys and uttering the c-word) is any indication, Moretz is poised to be a breakout star thanks to her role as Hit Girl. What does this mean for horror fans? Well, it means there will be an extra level of attention paid to her next project - one that many fans like myself are naturally worried about: the American remake of the excellent Swedish vampire film Let the Right One In.

Now, as I have already documented in this very blog, I have nothing against the idea of horror remakes in general. But I think most of us can agree that this is one of those remakes that is pretty darn unnecessary. For one thing, Let the Right One In is from 2008! It's not like this will be a re-telling for a new generation. Plus, the original is widely considered by many horror fans (including this one) to be one of the best vampire movies ever. It seems doubtful that a new version can really improve upon it.

That being said, I have to admit that there are slight positive signs starting to emerge regarding Let Me In (as the American remake has been bizarrely re-named). In terms of its writer-director, there could certainly be far worse options that Cloverfield helmer Matt Reeves. That giant-monster movie showed an impressive talent behind the camera - at least in terms of big-budget mayhem. I'm not sure if that necessarily translates to the more subtle chills that Let Me In demands, but still, I'd rather see it in the hands of someone like Reeves, who has made at least one excellent movie, than some no-namer or someone with a sketchier resume.

But the real interesting developments so far have been in the casting department. The always great Richard Jenkins will be playing the young vampire's guardian - a creepy role than could be even creepier if this version hews closer to the original novel than the first film (although I somehow doubt that). Meanwhile, there are the all important lead-roles, which it's only natural to worry about since, let's face it, talented child actors aren't exactly one of America's most abundant resources. Thankfully, it appears this, too, has gone better than it could have, as the central role of the young boy is being played by Kodi Smit-McPhee, who recently impressed by sharing the screen and totally holding his own with Viggo Mortensen in The Road. And, as the film's mysterious young vampire? Yup...Chloe Moretz.

I realize this isn't enough to really start getting excited for a project that still seems like a pointless idea, if not an outright bad one. But, like I said, there are positive signs. Take, for instance, this quote from a new interview Moretz did for Movieline, in which she shared her take on her role in Let Me In.

"The character of Abby…I mean, usually a lot of movies glamorize being a vampire. It’s pretty, it’s cool, you look awesome! It’s scary, deep, and dark, this devil inside of her. The vampire is different than Abby. It’s like her alternate personality, and when it takes her over, she has no control."

So here we have a 13-year-old girl, not only showing a better understanding of what makes vampires interesting than a bestselling hack author like Stephenie Meyer does, but also saying exactly the right things when it comes to the hoped-for tone of this movie. Now, once again, it's way too early to start getting my hopes up. And I realize that, just because Moretz "gets" the character, doesn't mean the film (and Reeves) will actually live up to that understanding. Although, worse comes to worse, maybe they could just let her direct the damn thing. Hell, that one comment above sounds a lot more intelligent and with-it than anything I've ever heard come out of, say, Brett Ratner's mouth.

All things considered, though, Moretz' comments at least hint at some possible good signs in what at first seemed like the mother of all bad ideas. I'm still reserving judgment, and I still feel that even a decent Let Me In will probably not come close to equaling Let the Right One In. But a decent film would obviously be better to have out there than an awful one. Look at it this way - best case scenario, the film actually does stay true to the original and hit the right tone, and maybe finally starts weaning American audiences away from their Twilight-induced wimpy-vampire leanings. Do I want a Let the Right One In remake? Not necessarily. But with three more Twilight films on the way, I'm certainly not going to complain about any new American vampire movies that actually give the creatures their teeth (and balls) back.

The Best Movies of the Decade (2000-2009)

In this weekend's edition of the Top 5, the column I host over at the Movies zone of 411mania, I and some of my fellow writers shared our personal opinions on the Top 5 Movies of the Decade (2000-2009). My Top 5 list, though, was taken from a larger version that I've been working on for a while now. So, here is the rest of my full list of what I personally feel were the Top 20 Movies of the Decade (with a link to the Top 5 column at the end). Keep in mind, there are plenty of movies I haven't seen which might have ended up on here instead, so this is just how this list stands as it is now.

20) Requiem for a Dream (2000)
Horribly depressing? No doubt about it. But it is also impossible to shake. I still think it would be beneficial to show this one in schools...although the whole "ass to ass" thing probably prevents that.
19) The Incredibles (2004)
Despite not being based on an actual comic-book, Pixar still made one of the best comic-book movies ever. In fact, this is a much better Fantastic Four movie than Fantastic Four was.
18) Traffic (2000)
I honestly believed Soderbergh's gripping examination of the drug trade would be a much bigger classic than it ended up. But oh well, I still find it fascinating.
17) Inglourious Basterds (2009)
Tarantino's strongest work since Pulp Fiction, and a film that reveals more (and gets better) with every viewing.
16) The Hurt Locker (2009)
By wisely removing the politics and just focusing on the men doing the fighting (or, in this case, defusing the bombs), Katheryn Bigelow made the smartest and best war film of the modern era.
15) Pan's Labyrinth (2006)
I suppose someone might make a better dark fantasy movie than this someday...but I highly doubt it.
14) Crank (2006)
No...seriously. Crank was one of the most original action movies to come along in some time. Heck, one of the most original movies, period. You hadn't seen anything like this up until this point, and I'm sure its reputation and influence will only continue to grow.
13) Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004)
A film about losing love, and wanting to forget about it, actually ends up becoming a poignant tribute to the power of love.
12) Shaun of the Dead (2004)
I know, I know...Shaun was my #2 Horror Movie of the decade, and yet here it is on this list, while my #1 Horror Movie of the decade, The Descent, isn't. That's simply because I feel The Descent is more effective as a horror film, but I won't deny that Shaun is a more appealing movie overall. If you still think that doesn't make sense, well, it's my list, so oh well.
11) Oldboy (2003)
One of the most twisted revenge sagas ever filmed, with a mind-blowing ending you'll never forget.
10) The Dark Knight (2008)
Nolan's follow-up to Batman Begins is not just the greatest comic-book movie ever made, but one hell of a crime drama, period.
9) Mulholland Dr. (2001)
It doesn't matter if you understand it or not (although, for the most part, I think just about everyone ended up coming to the same conclusion about what its mind-bending narrative means) - it's impossible not to get drawn in and completely engrossed by Lynch's storytelling here. The more I think about it, the more I wonder if this might not surpass Blue Velvet as Lynch's best.
8) No Country for Old Men (2007)
The Coens did the smart thing and stayed extremely faithful to Cormac McCarthy's brilliant novel. McCarthy's writing teamed with Coens' filmmaking strengths proved an incredibly potent combo.
7) Memento (2000)
Nolan again, this time with one of the coolest experiments in movie history - one that probably shouldn't have worked, but that just goes to show how talented the man is.
6) Brokeback Mountain (2005)

I still get angry thinking about Crash beating this for Best Picture. So many people made fun of this movie when it was first announced, but all but the most homophobic morons were forced to shut up when it turned out to be not just a "gay cowboy" movie, but in fact one of the best romantic stories ever put on film.

Check out my Top 5 Movies of the Decade here.

Trev's Top 20 Horror Movies of the Decade

HONORABLE MENTIONS:

GRINDHOUSE (2007) - Probably one of the better theater experiences of the decade for horror fans, but Planet Terror is too goofy for the Top 20, and Death Proof is more of a tribute to car and girl-gang movies than it is horror.

WILLARD (2003) - Glen Morgan's criminally underrated remake probably threw some off by being more of a Hitchcockian character study than just a slasher about a guy who controls rats. But it needs to be seen for Crispin Glover's performance, which might be the best of his career.

1408 (2007) - A very effective ghost tale, thanks to a very good performance from John Cusack (who more or less has to carry the whole movie by himself). But I've found its power slightly diminishes with each viewing. Besides, there's a much better Stephen King adaptation to lavish praise on, and we'll get to that in a bit.

LAND OF THE DEAD (2005) - Yeah, it's fun...but it doesn't really stack up to Romero's first three Dead films.

SESSION 9 (2001) - I went back and forth on whether to give this the #20 spot over the film that I eventually did choose. Session 9 is an excellent creepfest, make no mistake about it. I don't know...maybe I just couldn't bring myself to include a David Caruso film in my Top 20.

THE TOP 20 HORROR MOVIES OF THE DECADE (2000-2009)

20. PITCH BLACK (2000)
Not a horror movie, you say? Well, it is about being stranded on a completely dark planet with a vicious serial killer and a race of man-eating aliens. I'd say "horrific" sums that situation up pretty well. Plus, it just really delivers, thanks to great mood, tension and - yes - a damn good performance from Vin Diesel. I don't know why Diesel and writer/director David Twohy thought the natural follow-up would be inserting Riddick into a mythology-driven space opera, but hey, the resultant disappointment of The Chronicles of Riddick is their cross to bear, not mine. At least we'll always have Pitch Black.

19. SLITHER (2006)
James Gunn's hilarious tribute to the gross-out horror comedies of the '80s would probably be higher on my list if I was able to watch it without thinking of how much better Night of the Creeps did essentially the same story. Still, this film is a blast, and it's always great to see Nathan Fillion in a lead role.

18. THE MIST (2007)
Here's that other Stephen King adaptation I mentioned earlier. Frank Darabont had already proven his mastery of King's dramatic work with The Shawshank Redemption and The Green Mile. Here, he showed that he could knock King's horror out of the park as well, with a perfect old-school monster movie. And that ending? Oh, man. Darabont made up for the fact that King's novella ends on a somewhat flat note by creating one of the best endings in horror history. King himself said the film's climax was so good, he wishes he had thought of it.

17. MIDNIGHT MEAT TRAIN (2008)
I remember when I first read Clive Barker's awesome (and gruesome) short story Midnight Meat Train. I thought about how cool it would be if it was made into a movie...and then resigned myself to thinking it would never happen - at least not with that title, and certainly not with that ending. And yet here it is, with title and crazy finale intact. The best Barker adaptation since Candyman.

16. HOSTEL: PART II (2007)
It has become cool to hate on Eli Roth, but screw that. Yes, he's a sometimes overzealous self-promoter, but he's also an enthusiastic advocate of the horror genre as a whole, and I don't see anything wrong with that. At least the guy actually knows his stuff. As for his own movies, Cabin Fever has its flaws, but its very oddness is also what has made it grow on me more and more over the years. Then we have the two Hostel films, which are often accused of being nothing more than "torture porn," which unfortunately ignores the sly wit and satire that Roth actually employs in the two movies (and, for the record, there's really not as much torture and extreme gore in these films as some critics make it sound - definitely not as much as there is in other films that fell under the torture porn label). I'm giving the nod to the second film because I think it's Roth's most confident film-making job. It never veers into any unnecessary tangents, and I think interweaving the two stories of the girls who are destined to become victims and the businessmen who have paid to victimize them works very well.

15. BUG (2006)
William Friedkin, director of The Exorcist, finally returned to the horror genre...and nobody cared. Huh? What happened? Well, perhaps it's the fact that film's marketing mislead people into believing this really was a movie about microscopic little bug, when really it's all about the most frightening thing of all - a shattered human mind. Michael Shannon's turn as a paranoid ex-soldier convinced he's the victim of government experimentation is one of the better genre performances of the decade, and Ashley Judd is quite good as well. The final scene, where Judd not only buys into Shannon's madness but then goes on to take it to a whole new level by herself, is scary in a way that even the best slasher or supernatural film could never hope to achieve.

14. AMERICAN PSYCHO (2000)
Mary Harron's adaptation of Bret Easton Ellis' controversial novel is nowhere near as graphic as the book, nor does it ever become bogged down in long rants about consumerist desires. Oddly enough, this makes it work almost better than the novel, as we can instead fully concentrate on the twisted psyche of (possible) serial-killer Patrick Bateman. Even if Bale continues to turn in disappointingly boring performances like he did in Terminator: Salvation and Public Enemies, he'll forever be in my cool book for his work here.

13. JEEPERS CREEPERS (2001)
There's a part of me that doesn't enjoy liking this movie, given that it's written and directed by convicted child molester Victor Salva. But if you can separate the art from the artist, what you find is one hell of a well made monster movie - the kind of film that just doesn't get made all too often anymore. I love the mythology of the Creeper (and I especially love how neither this film nor its sequel even bother to try and explain his origins), and I think the first 30 or so minutes of the movie is some of the best filmmaking the genre had seen in quite some time.

12. THE SIGNAL (2007)
A very under-appreciated gem that will hopefully find the cult audience it deserves. The Signal tells the tale of a fictional city where, on New Year's Eve, a mysterious transmission over every television, radio and cell phone drives everyone in the city insane. There are two things that make this film so memorable. For one, it is written and directed by three different filmmakers, with each one helming his own section of the movie and giving it its own distinctive flavor. But what I enjoyed even more is that 9 times out of 10 in a movie like this, the main character will be the one person who was somehow not affected by the transmission. But not here. Everyone is affected, including the hero, which means you can never really trust what the movie is showing you. It's a nice and unique touch.

11. BATTLE ROYALE (2000)
What can I say? You make a movie about a class of middle-school students forced to kill each other on an island or else their heads will be blown up by an explosive collar around their neck, and I'll include it on my list of the top horror films of the decade.

10. INSIDE (2007)
The wave of extreme French horror that hit in the second half of the decade was one of the most exciting movements the genre had seen in awhile (personally, I'll take these over J-horror any day). The best of the bunch was Inside, which takes the typical "victimized woman" horror story to a whole new level. Here, a young pregnant women is terrorized in her home the night before she is scheduled to have labor induced, by a psychotic woman obsessed with cutting the child out of the other woman's stomach. Both actresses give excellent performances, making these real characters, and you just can't believe how far this film continues to push the envelope.

9. SAW (2004)
This is another one of those series that horror snobs are not supposed to like, even though it's ever evolving storyline is actually a pretty cool and unique approach to a horror franchise. Let's face it, most horror franchises eventually begin ignoring their own continuity, whereas Saw makes it so that you really can't watch a new entry without being familiar with what came before. It's the ultimate fan-service series. But, anyway, I could go on and on about how this series is unfairly maligned as a whole, but instead let's just concentrate on how good the first film actually was. Sure, there's the pretty terrible Cary Elwes performance to deal with, but other than that the original Saw movie was quite the treat - buoyed by a great villain, an awesome twist ending, and a slightly more intellectual approach than one would probably expect from a film of this kind. In terms of the whole series, I enjoy the second film the best. But the first movie is one of the most innovative horror films of this era, and deserves this spot accordingly.

8. LET THE RIGHT ONE IN (2008)
Alright, are you happy, vampire fans? Actually, this is much more than just throwing the current fad a bone. In fact, Let the Right One In came along at just the right time, when the depressing teeny-bopper vampire craze was threatening to permanently file down the teeth of one of horror's most indelible monsters. Then this movie (not to mention the excellent novel on which it is based) showed up, reminding us all how powerful a well-done vampire story can actually be. If you would rather watch Twilight than this, there is something very wrong with your taste.

7. 28 WEEKS LATER (2007)
I was going to include both 28 ____ Later films as a tie here, but at the last moment decided that was too much of a cheat (although know that, in my heart, that's really the case). So why did I go with Juan Carlos Fresnadillo's sequel over Danny Boyle's more acclaimed original? Well, although I think 28 Days Later is a better movie than its sequel, I think 28 Weeks Later is a better horror movie than its predecessor. I know, I know...that's one of those statements that makes a lot more sense in my head than it does when I actually say it. So let me just say that I think 28 Weeks Later's slightly more nihilistic tone makes it even more disturbing than the first film. After all, the first film shows an epidemic created out of an accident, but ends in a somewhat hopeful manner. The follow-up says "forget that...you might think we have this solved, but this problem ain't going anywhere." Here's hoping if a third film is ever made, it's up to par with the other two, and can be included in my Best Horror Movies of 2010-2019 list.

6. DAWN OF THE DEAD (2004)
When I first heard of this movie being made, I was pretty furious. If you had told me then that it would later end up on my Best Horror Movies of the Decade list, I would have thought you were crazy. But it earned it. OK, forget about the name for a second (if this had been called anything else, there wouldn't have been half as much bitching about it). And let's finally get past this whole silly "zombies can't run" argument. They're fictional creatures...they can do whatever the hell the story demands them to do. Plus, they ran in Return of the Living Dead and Re-Animator, and you sure weren't bitching about it then. Once you get past these two actually-unimportant criticisms, you find one hell of an exciting zombie film, with a fun mix of characters, and one of the best opening sequences in horror movie history.

5. DRAG ME TO HELL (2009)
Will we ever get Evil Dead 4? Who knows? I'm certainly not hopeful. But at least now we know that if it ever does happen, Sam Raimi is certainly still up to the task, as he proved with this triumphant return to the genre (well, triumphant in quality, if not in box-office). Even with a PG-13 rating, Raimi reminded us that sometimes the old tricks still work the best, and gave us one of the most fun horror films in recent memory.

4. MAY (2002)
I've been championing this film to just about everyone I know since first seeing it years ago, but at this point I've given up hoping for it to ever have the huge following I think it deserves. But oh well, it's everyone's loss, as Lucky McKee's dark fairy-tale of a weird, lonely girl (a superb Angela Bettis) who just wants some friends (or at least parts of them) is one of the best off-beat character pieces in the genre's history. It also has one of the best (and unexpected) final shots of any film I've ever seen. It's a testament to both McKee's script and Bettis' performance that I would totally date May if she was a real person...even if it meant risking my life.

3. THE DEVIL'S REJECTS (2005)
In between his "Texas Chainsaw Massacre on a diet of MTV and LSD" House of 1000 Corpses and completely fucking up his Halloween films, Rob Zombie somehow delivered one of the greatest exploitation tributes I've ever seen (this is the movie I think Rodriguez and Tarantino wanted to make with Grindhouse). Whether or not it was just a happy accident is beside the point - this is a damn powerful film, and I love how it messes with its audience in getting them to eventually root for some of the most psychotic and unappealing characters you could have. And now I can never hear Freebird and not think of this movie.

2. SHAUN OF THE DEAD (2004)
What is there left to say about Shaun of the Dead? Yes, it's a horror-comedy, but it's also the best non-Romero zombie movie ever made, period. And although it is primarily played for laughs, it's real strength comes in the fact that it doesn't ignore the actual horror of the situation, either. The last act contains some pretty emotional stuff, and it works because you really do care about these characters. Just brilliant filmmaking, any way you look at it.

1. THE DESCENT (2005)
Oh, how I love this film. From it's perfect use of darkness and claustrophobic setting, to its memorable creatures, to its brilliant decision to use an all-female cast (we usually assume the final survivor will be a girl, so this movie wisely cuts out the middle-man, literally, and doesn't give us any male characters to waste our time with). Neil Marshall created an instant horror classic with this one. I'm not all that excited about the upcoming sequel (especially since it follows off of the far-inferior American ending of the first film, instead of the much-better British original ending), but no matter how that movie ends up being, this first film will always be one of my all-time favorite horror movies.

Trev's Top 20 Horror Movies of the Decade - The Exclusions

Alright, call me a bandwagon jumper all you want, but I've been intrigued by the vast number of "best horror movies of the decade" lists I've seen popping up in various horror mags and websites, and I decided to do my own. But before I get to the list itself, I figured I might as well do a little prelude. You see, I know when I put my list up I will probably have people ask why I didn't include certain movies (assuming anyone actually ends up reading the list, that is). So I figure I might as well get it out of the way, and take a moment to share some of the films that will NOT be appearing on my "best of the decade" list, and explain why. These are all films that I think a large number of horror fans might argue should belong on a list like this, so I have no problem explaining why they're not making my cut. Alright, here we go.

THE DEVIL'S BACKBONE - This has just has always been one of the films that I wanted to like a lot more than I did. I love pretty much every other Guillermo Del Toro movie (well, except for Mimic and the first Hellboy film, but I at least like those). Truth be told, I've been meaning to go back and give Devil's Backbone a second chance, but I don't know...the first time I watched it, it just didn't really grab me. The visual of the little boy ghost and the blood floating out of his head is excellent, but I found the story to be a little slow-moving.

CLOVERFIELD - I've seen this included in some of the other lists. It is an awesome movie, and I do dig it. But I don't really consider it horror. And I say that knowing at least a couple films that are on my list are debatable as being horror, but hey, it's my list.

AUDITION - This would probably be in my Top Five...if not for the fact that it came out in 1999. A few lists have cheated the system by using it's US release in 2000 to squeak it in. But I'm gonna play by the rules. If it's any consolation, I'd probably say it's the best horror film of the '90s.

THE RING/JU-ON/PULSE/etc. - I liked Hideo Nakata's Ringu quite a bit, but that was 1998. I wasn't really that into Gore Verbinski's remake. And, for that matter, I wasn't really into the massive wave of Asian ghost movies that followed as a whole. Sorry, this is just one sub-genre that never appealed to me the way it did to many others. The films really started to feel interchangeable, and although some were technically impressive, I never found any of them particularly memorable.

HAUTE TENSION - This is all about the ending. The much discussed twist, which doesn't make a lick of sense. I don't know how all you feel, but I think it's awful. And it's a shame, because the movie really is as awesome as all the hype promised up until that moment. But the ending just pulls me out of the movie and ruins everything. I know the story is that Aja never really intended for there to be a twist, and it was something of a concession to the financiers. Bit whatever the case, it's just bad enough to keep this one off my list.

MARTYRS - I'm glad I saw Martyrs...the one time. I will almost certainly never watch it again. It's not even that it disturbed me that much (although it certainly is disturbing). It's just more that the seemingly unending torture the film's heroine endures does begin to feel repetitive. I think it's funny that some horror fans criticize films like Hostel and the Saw series as being "torture porn," but then go ga-ga over something like this, which is far more brutal and unrelenting, but gets away with it because it supposedly has some sort of deep message. Whatever. Like I said, it's not that I think it's a bad film. But it's not really a great one, either. It is an interesting film, and one that any horror fan should probably see at least once to form their own opinion.

BEHIND THE MASK: THE RISE OF LESLIE VERNON - This is one I came close to including, but much like Haute Tension, the end spoiled it. No, the ending here doesn't piss me off and ruin the movie like it does in Haute Tension, but it does make an otherwise great movie just "pretty good." The idea of a documentary crew following an up-and-coming slasher is a tremendous one, and the movie makes the most of it. But once the final act abandons the "mockumentary" approach, it pretty much just becomes the exact same kind of movie it's been poking fun at. I know, I know...that might be the point. But even so, I just feel like the film loses some of its momentum there.

ZOMBIELAND - Unlike the other zombie-comedy movie that did make my list (I'm sure you can figure it out), Zombieland just feels much more "comedy" than "horror." It's essentially a road comedy that just so happens to take place inside a zombie movie. Don't get me wrong - it's fucking awesome. But there's not really one moment of real horror to it, so I gave it a pass.

TRICK 'R' TREAT - This is a fun movie, and one that I might indeed end up watching every year as a Halloween tradition. But it's also a tad overrated by many horror fans, who I think were reacting more to Warner Bros.' treatment of the film than they were the quality of the movie itself. I appreciate its attempt to bring back the anthology format to horror, but a couple of the stories feel a little short-changed, and the movies desire to link together every story actually ends up hurting it a little (am I the only one who finds it odd and just a little stupid that *spoiler* the nebbish, nervous principal killer ends up also being the dark, mysterious vampire imposter?). The biggest problem here is that the movie is too concerned with the tricks of its storytelling, and not at all with the characters, not a single one of whom are well-developed or memorable. And now I'm gonna say something that is gonna really piss off some fans - Warner Bros. may have been right not to release this to theaters. Like I said, it's fun, but c'mon...a movie like this was never going to be a hit in the theaters. Rabid horror fans always seem to forget that the movie business is just that - a business. Put some of these fans in charge of a studio, and they'll bankrupt it within a year. Anyway, we all should just be happy that Warner Bros. even financed this movie at all. It's a movie that was made for a cult audience, and it thankfully found one. But there are definitely 20 better horror movies from the past 10 years.

PARANORMAL ACTIVITY - Yeah. Right. Look, I'm sorry, but this is the most overrated horror film of the decade, not one of the best. I'm happy for those involved that it did so well. In fact, the story of the film is a hell of a lot more interesting than the film itself. I'm sure I'm not the first person to make this joke, but the problem here is that the movie's title is a damn liar. Not the first word, mind you. There is indeed "paranormal" here. But activity? I wish. If your idea of a scary time is watching two annoying characters sit up in bed and listen to footsteps for 90 minutes, than yeah, this is the film for you. Otherwise, I don't know. To me, there is no sadder statement about the current state of the horror genre (or at least its fans) than the fact that this was considered by many to be the scariest movie to come along in years. Have our standards fallen that low?


So that's it. Feel free to bitch about these all you want. Just make sure you save some of that emotion for my next posting, in which I'll reveal my official list of the "Top 20 Horror Movies of the Decade (2000-2009)."