The Tell-Tale Heart (2020)

(Written by Jason Manriquez, Assistant Editor/Paddy Jack Press)

McClain Lindquist's short-film adaptation of Edgar Allen Poe's classic, The Tell-Tale Heart, is a moody, well-photographed ode to that particular strain of gothic theatricality that marries old-world airs to a distinctively American strain of macabre depravity and violence. There is no skimping of blood in any ill-conceived attempt to make this more acceptable to the tea and crumpet circles. Nope. This is a horror short with a vision, and it stays true to that vision throughout its modest 22-minute runtime. The Narrator, played by Sonny Grimsley, remains the one fixed constant throughout a series of vignettes meant to tease and discombobulate the audience. Time and space itself are continually made questionable, with clocks running backward, and the various scenes shifting locales, never quite sure if what’s happening is taking place at the home of the Old Man (James C Morris), or at some police station, or who-knows-where. Officer Sharpe, played by the wonderfully assertive Mikah Olsen, and Detective Tucker, portrayed by Teren Turner, appear as archetypal law enforcement from divergent eras, further heightening the spatio-temporal confusion. Officer Sharpe looks as though she was culled from an 80’s police drama, while the Detective looks like someone pulled from a pulpy Mickey Spillane novel. The auteur's commitment to Poe’s literary vernacular is clearly meant to create tension within the viewer habituated to a uniform vernacular. All the characters speak from a distinct place, almost as if they all existed in separate worlds. Regardless, the film does a great job drawing the viewer in for a closer look at the simmering surface of an unhinged mind.

To learn more about this film, visit www.telltalemovie.com

Underwater (2020)

Written by Jennifer Manriquez, Editor-In-Chief, Paddy Jack Press

I was really, really excited about this one. I've always had an affinity for anything that happens underwater, and I've always had a slightly paralyzing fear of the open ocean. But The Abyss is one of the best films I've ever seen, and I generally enjoy Kristen Stewart's performances, so I couldn't wait to see what Underwater had to offer. Don't worry, I won't spoil it. Read on...

THE PROS

• The cinematography was beautiful. It looked like water. It looked like metal. It looked like two things that don't belong together: humans with their concrete, glass, and steel structures, and the wild, deep, serene, natural ocean. I thought it was confining and claustrophobic and dirty and fantastic. Right from the get-go you're struck with the feeling that people don't belong down there, and for a horror flick that's set underwater, that's a great place to start. 
• K-Stew. I like her. Yeah, fuck you, I said it. I LIKE HER! She might always be singing the same note no matter what movie she's in, but it's a note that I enjoy listening to. And, yeah, she's beautiful, but not in the same way her Hollywood peers are. There's something different and special about her. And there's always a fragility and vulnerability to her that charges her characters with a weird, spastic energy that I love. To me, it makes her feel more "real." She was great in this. She gave a solid performance and I applaud her work. 
• The monsters are really damn scary. I've seen so many horror films, it's hard to get me to jump. I always joke that "I can't get got," but the first jump scare in this film (there are several) sent my arms flailing and I did an audible squeal. That's saying something. That's high praise! 
• The sound editing was spot-on! Every little creak and glass-crack was nerve-wracking perfection. 
• The opening credits music was fantastic. 

THE CONS

Kristen Stewart in Underwater (2020)

• Underwater is a terrible title. 
• If you've been reading my blog for a while you'll know that I canNOT stand when a woman is wearing makeup during parts of a film where she would absolutely not be wearing makeup. Kristen manages to keep the perfect smoky eye shadow and mascara going through the whole thing, no matter how bloody or wet she gets. She even gets cleaned up after some pretty harrowing action scenes and still has makeup on. Why?! Did she re-apply it after she took a shower? It's so insulting. Seriously, I had to stop watching Fear the Walking Dead because it drove me absolutely nuts that the teen girl in it always had the perfect blow-out and makeup on. She might have slept in the desert for two straight weeks, but that hair was always loose and shiny and perfectly, professionally blown-out. No. No. No. So dumb. Directors, women are allowed to get marred, okay? They can be without makeup for a scene or two. Stop this madness!



Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio in The Abyss (1989)

• There is absolutely ZERO character development in this film. The action starts almost immediately. Like, way too soon. When you want an example of how to perfectly pace an underwater action film, look no further than The Abyss. Before anything action-y happened, we knew those characters, we understood their lives and their motivations, and we cared about them. We even cared about the bitch, who later became the heroine (who, by the way, is not wearing makeup, or at least a very minimal amount, if any). We get some haphazard character cards placed hither and thither throughout Underwater, but they feel pointless and silly by the time you see them. And, since those characters were never developed initially, you don't really care. 
• The character played by TJ Miller wasn't necessary and felt disingenuous, like forced comic relief. I hope there's a DVD cut that leaves his character out of the film entirely.   

The film felt rushed and unfinished for me. It felt like a short film. The special effects were fantastic, but I needed more character development and I needed it to be a bit longer, with more life stuff happening outside of the action. I didn't find myself caring when a character died, or when a character lived because I didn't know them. That said, however, I can honestly proclaim that I enjoyed the film. There wasn't much of a story, which is a shame. It could have been loads better with a longer, more fleshed-out script. But, for what it was, it's worth seeing. I also want to support any original film that puts in an honest effort, even if it's not perfect. I'm so damn sick of remakes.

In conclusion, go see it and be sure you see it in a theater. The sound editing alone will jangle your nerves enough to make you enjoy it. And go support some original film-making. They're not all going to be Jaws or The Abyss, but that doesn't mean they're not going to be fun. Well... except the sequel to 47 Meters Down. That was a piece of shit.

Greta (2019)

Written by Jennifer Manriquez, Editor-In-Chief, Paddy Jack Press

Two words: hot mess.

Do you remember in Scream when Sidney Prescott said of scary movies, "Whats the point? They're all the same. Some stupid killer stalking some big-breasted girl who can't act who is always running up the stairs when she should be running out the front door. It's insulting."

This film personifies that quote to a tee. The young protagonist, played by Chloe Grace Moretz, makes the most inexplicable choices. At one point, she smacks Greta on the head with a rolling pin, then runs to the front door, which of course is locked from the inside and requires a key (yes, a key, to get out the front door; what?), but since she can't find the key she goes running down a flight of stairs we've never seen before into a basement, where she proceeds to bang on a tiny thick window to no avail. Oh, did I not mention that the door had a standard window in it that she could have easily fit through? My bad. Did I also fail to mention that right next to the door there was a huge window that she could have just busted out with the rolling pin and simply walked through without even hunching over? Again, my bad. I mean, give me a break! I think the director is hoping viewers won't notice these glaring errors, but no dice buddy.

I'm also thinking the director gave Chloe Grace Moretz instructions to never close her mouth because every other scene is her doing this...

Now, I don't mean to malign the performances of Moretz or Isabella Huppert, who played title-character Greta. Honestly, both actresses did a very professional job with a garbage script. If it weren't for their strong performances, this would have been a B movie at best.

My opinion is, don't bother unless you're a fan of either of the actresses. Go see it for them, don't see it for literally any other reason.

The Belko Experiment (2016)

Written by Jennifer Manriquez, Editor-In-Chief, Paddy Jack Press

If The Hunger Games had a baby with an industrial office building one drunken night in Colombia, The Belko Experiment would be birthed from that union.

I caught this movie on HBO today and, man, did I enjoy it! It's really fun, guys. At least, it's fun for us horror nerds. I don't know how a "normie" would tolerate it, but I thought it was great! I know it's gotten some less-than-stellar reviews, possibly based on the brutality or inconceivability of some of the scenes. I don't think bad reviews are warranted, though. If this movie had come out in the 70's everyone would still be worshiping it. 

It was written/produced by James Gunn, and directed by some other guy. I kid, I kid... It was directed by a guy named Greg McLean, whose directing credits thus far don't stack up to much, but I was impressed with his direction of this film, so I'll definitely be keeping an eye out for his work in the future.

If you haven't seen it, stop here and go watch it first. 

I'm definitely going to get into some spoiler territory and don't want to wreck it for you. 

The movie is about a non-profit company named Belko (whose purpose is vague) in Bogota, Colombia. There are forty such companies around the globe. The employees are mostly American, although I think a Brit or two may have sneaked in. The main character is Mike, a nice guy and regular Joe who has friends around the office, as well as a girlfriend. The girlfriend, whose name is Leandra, is constantly eyeballed by John C. McGinley, who plays the office creeper, Wendell. Leandra does not take kindly to Wendell's bullshit, a plot point I assumed would lead to a rapey scene later on, but thankfully it didn't. There's also a new gal to the office, Dany, and she gets some kind of tracking implant put into her head because it might help them find her if she gets kidnapped. Oh, you were wondering how many offices do a minor surgical procedure on new employees? Yeah, you're right, exactly none. So, that bit was a tad unbelievable. But, just like in the Purge films (of which I'm a big fan), if you can suspend your disbelief just enough you can really go for a fun ride. So, just ignore that minor thing that makes no sense and stick with it. 

As the employees are coming into the building, their cars and IDs are being respectively searched and scanned. And a new set of guards they've never seen before are turning away the usual security team, much to the suspicion of the employees, but a job's a job so what are ya gonna do?

After a standard morning at the office, a voice comes over the loudspeaker and tells everyone in the building that if they don't kill two of the eighty employees in the building - it's their choice which ones - that six will die. A bunch of metal blockades go shooting up over all the windows and doors, which is a cool effect and helps us to feel the characters' sense of isolation more fully. Of course they don't choose anyone to die, so six people randomly drop dead, the backs of their heads inexplicably blown out. Was it a gunshot, you ask? Why no, it's those goddamn weird tracking implants they have. This bit, again, is just a little too convenient, but it ends up working pretty well to drive the plot along as you have no clue who's going to be killed next, or by whom. If the people in the office aren't doing the killing, some rando in a warehouse will just flip a switch and blow some heads out. Without this plot device, I don't see how the story would have worked, so as unrealistic as it is, I support it. 

You can imagine where it goes from here. Madness and mayhem. A group of assholes, led by Barry the C.O.O., takes control of the weapons cache. Oh... why does an office building have a weapons cache, you ask? Don't ask! It just does! (Personally, I feel that the weapons cache thing could have been left out entirely and the story would have been fine.) It clearly apes Lord of the Flies here. You have Mike's (Ralph's) side, the good guys, and Barry's (Jack's) crew, the bad guys. The two factions ally themselves early on, which results in a lot of chaos and killing. Hey, that's why we wanted to see it, though, right?

I feel there were some wasted opportunities in the plot. At the beginning of the film, there's one super bitchy older lady who causes trouble. You'd think the people she wronged might take advantage of the opportunity to fuck with her later on, but that never happens. And, like I said before, there's an office creeper hanging around one of our heroines. There's a little bit of throwback to that later in the movie when he accuses her of teasing him, but that's really as far as it goes.

Our main hero, and our final guy Mark (you know from the first scene he's going to be the lone survivor; it's broadcast pretty hard) never actually kills anyone until the very end, when he bludgeons the main asshole, Barry, to death with a tape dispenser. It's a pretty thrilling and cathartic scene as you have now come to despise Barry, and you can't help but to rejoice in Mark's triumph over him. With Mark the winner and sole survivor, the walls come down and Mark is escorted to the warehouse where the army guys were controlling whose heads exploded and whose didn't. There are monitors everywhere and a main baddy who wants to sit Mark down and ask him questions. Well, Mark's not having it. He rushes the control panel and blows up all the army guys with tracking devices that he secretly placed on them just moments before. For a split second, the camera lingers on Mark eyeballing his own control switch and I thought he might make the choice to blow himself up. But, alas, he walks outside and looks up at a beautiful sky. As the camera pulls out on Mark, we are transported to a panel of monitors, all showing similar lone survivors, with Mark's monitor in the middle. Presumably, the Belko experiment has happened at other Belko buildings as well, and even the army guys were pawns in a much bigger game. An off-screen voice tells us that phase 1 was a success and now phase 2 can begin, then the credits roll. 

Will there be a sequel? Not likely, which bums me out super hard. I read a couple of interviews with James Gunn saying that he has the next two films worked out in his head, but it's "up to the fans" whether or not they will get made. Up to the fans? What does that mean? What can we do? I feel like Michael Scott, from The Office. When he wanted to declare bankruptcy, he just walked out into the main room and said loudly, "I declare BANKRUPTCY!" I want to walk out onto my front porch and yell, "I am a fan, and I want a SEQUEL!!!!" If that will help, I'll seriously do it, guys. 

Final thought: It's like Lord of the Flies meets the Stanford prison experiment. It brutal, gory, and fun. It's perfect for horror fans. Go watch it!

Cargo (2017)

Written by Jennifer Manriquez, Editor-In-Chief, Paddy Jack Press

I watched this film on a whim, only because I love Martin Freeman and I'll watch almost anything with zombies in it. I didn't expect much. I hadn't heard of it. With a shrug and sigh I started it up and, by the end of the thing, I was crying my eyes out, completely emotionally devastated, and yet somehow weirdly comforted - totally drained of energy, but in a strangely good mood. I don't know how to explain it. Very few films can do this to me. This one is a rare gem in a valley of celluloid boulders.

Cargo is still new, so I'm not going to talk about the story at all. I want you to unpack and experience it for yourself. I'm only going to tell you that the acting is phenomenal, the scenery both breathtaking and frightening, the story simple yet superb, and the practical effects impressive.  

I referred to Cargo on Twitter as a "zombie-ish" movie, because while there are zombies and the plague that has swept Australia is what drives the plot forward, the zombies are really just backdrops to a much more personal story. I don't think it's correct to refer to this simply as a zombie film. It's much more emotionally driven, with characters you get to know fairly intimately as human beings, and that you can't help but to care about. Because they could be you. They are real, not superhuman, not bad ass zombie killers, not heroes. Just ordinary people. And that's what makes Cargo stand out. Nobody in it is particularly special. Everyone is either trying to survive, or they're tired and they're giving up. And that's it. 

Cargo is based on a short film by the same title and from the same writers. The short film is equally impressive. I do not, however, recommend that you watch the short before you see the feature-length film. I know it came first, but trust me on this. If you watch the short first, it might spoil the feature for you. Watch it after. You'll be glad you went into the feature film knowing nothing. 

So, when you're ready, here's the short...

In conclusion, I was so moved by this film that I'm still thinking about it days after watching it. It's a testament to human bravery, steadfastness, survival, hope, and love. I highly recommend it to everyone. Don't forget the hankies! You're definitely going to need them.

A Cure For Wellness (2016)

Written by Jennifer Manriquez, Editor-In-Chief, Paddy Jack Press

Guys, I liked it. I know a lot of people didn't. And I generally H-A-T-E body horror, but this body horror was tolerable, the setting was kind of Giallo-gothic, and I'm a Dane DeHaan fan. So, what's not to like? Let's get into it, shall we?

Dane DeHaan plays lead character, Lockhart, who is sent to a sanatorium in the Swiss Alps on a quest to retrieve a colleague who has inexplicably decided to spend the rest of his life there. They are stock brokers or financiers or some-such that I can't even force myself to care about. During all the shop talk I kept thinking, "just get to the guts of the story already!" Douchebags discussing douchery does not interest me - in fact, it makes me feel dirty, like maybe I need to douche. Luckily, the douchbaggery bit doesn't last too long and our hero is soon on his way to the land of Swiss cheese and Swiss chocolate! (Great, now I'm hungry...)

I won't recount all of the minor details here, but I will say that it doesn't take our boy Lockhart long to figure out that something's amiss at the sanitorium.

Speaking of the sanatorium, the whole Swiss vibe reminded me of Dario Argento's Phenomena. There are a few shots of a train crackling through the wilderness and some beautiful frames on the Alps. Gorgeous! And, yet somehow haunting. It's wide open, yet serves to make the viewer feel claustrophobic and alone, which hearkens to how Argento so masterfully accomplished it. Wellness is missing the Goblin soundtrack and the tourist yelling for help, but you get the idea. The setting puts you in the middle of a beautiful nowhere and there is nobody around for miles to help you. Enjoy the view!





And, just for fun, here's the opening scene of Argento's Phenomena, for your reference files and viewing pleasure. (P.S. Fun fact! The girl in this scene is Dario Argento's daughter, Fiore Argento.)



Beautiful and haunting setting aside, the story moves along at a decent pace, with the introduction of villains, allies, and worms at the right times. It's all very mysterious and I never found myself wanting to stop the movie and just see what happens on the internet. I felt compelled to let it unfold.

There's a girl, there's a boy, there's some weirdness going on. I don't need to get into every detail, but I liked the story, even if it did become a hair predictable at times, and I thought the acting and the effects were great. Like I said before, I am not a fan of body horror and there are some teeth things in this movie, along with some mouth and throat things, maybe some eyeball stuff, maybe not. I don't want to spoil! So, two of those things is true and one isn't. I'll let you find out for yourself.

There's a very claustrophobic water tank scene that had me holding my breath as well!



The whole scene in the tank was very involved and took ten days to shoot. The experience sounds utterly terrifying to me, so hats off to DeHaan for going through with it. I hope his paycheck reflects his fortitude. You can read about the making of this scene and a couple of others from the film here: http://www.vulture.com/2017/02/how-a-cure-for-wellness-pulled-off-its-creepiest-scenes.html

It's difficult not to go into spoiler territory, because there are some specific scenes near the end of the film that I really need to discuss with fellow horror fans over coffee, but alas the movie isn't old enough that I feel like I can go whole hog with the ending. Let me just say that it's weird and gross, but also not exactly what I was expecting and therefore provided a pleasant, albeit cringe-worthy, surprise.

In conclusion, I enjoyed it. I think you will too. Hit me up on Twitter and let me know what you think!

Oh, before I go, on July 13th, legendary horror host Joe Bob Briggs will be treating Shudder viewers to a 24-hour movie marathon, complete with Joe Bob's cuts chock full of info and commentary. There's no way I'll be able to watch the entire 24 hour run, but I'm sure gonna try! My sincere hope is that Shudder will make a Joe Bob Briggs channel and allow us to watch the films at a later date with his cuts inserted. Please do this for me, Shudder. No, not for me. For US!!! Here's the ad that's been making it's way around the Twitters.

Heir (2015)

Written by Jennifer Manriquez, Editor-In-Chief, Paddy Jack Press

Heir,  a Canadian-born short film from Fatal Pictures, funded via a Kickstarter campaign, was written and directed by Richard Powell, and produced by Zach Green. It's less than 14 minutes long, so I'm not going to go into great detail about the plot or post any spoilers. You'll just have to go check it out for yourself. It's still in post-production right now, but it will be available soon. In the meantime, you can go to the Fatal Pictures website and check out some of their other short films. 

What I will say is that Heir does a good job of creating tension and curiosity for the viewer. The mix of ominous music and lighting, combined with some stellar practical effects, made for a gross-but-enjoyable little watch. It leaves you thinking about the film's metaphorical statement because there clearly is one. It isn't obvious at first glance, though. I had to read the director's statement to get the skinny on the subversive story's meaning. Go ahead and read it. It won't spoil the movie for you - in fact, I think it will make your viewing experience even more rife with tension, which is a good thing when you're watching spooky stuff.

Director's Statement: FATAL PICTURES' HEIR (2015),
Richard Powell

"HEIR is a monster movie unlike any other, it is a bleak and fantastical examination of one of societies darkest taboos that aims to stimulate the mind and wrench the gut with equal power. HEIR suggests that victimization through sexual abuse leads to mutation of the psyche, soul and in our film, flesh itself. As our film aims to examine the cycle of victimization it only makes sense to depict the various stages of victimization through a trio of characters; Father, Son and the Monster. Just as the Son represents the potential beginning of the cycle the monster reflects the dark and twisted ending and stuck between these two extremes is the father who is faced with a choice which may either break or continue the legacy he was unwillingly included in years ago in his own youth. HEIR is ultimately about the confrontation with that monster, literally and figuratively, which dwells in Gordon's mind and compels him to continue the chain of victimization. This film operates between the worlds of Drama and Horror and takes equally from both in terms of aesthetics, structure and style. As much as I'd like the audience to think about what they are seeing I want them to react viscerally to it as well and with that in mind we set out to create striking, often grotesque and extreme imagery which serves it's own purpose in addition to reinforcing the overall thesis of HEIR. I had originally intended to tell this story as a straight Drama with none of the fantastical Horror trappings. I thought a realistic version of this story would be more disturbing, truthful and effective but as I began to think about what this story really means I realized the metaphor I would end up employing tells a deeper truth despite the monster makeup and Argento-esque lighting. I realized the truest way to tackle the horrors of child abuse and victimization was to pull away the exterior of the human monsters who walk among us and expose the malignancy within. Any time I've been asked to describe HEIR I reply with a simple elevator pitch "They say that anyone who abuses a child is a monster, well what if they really were monsters?".

I also want to yawp a hearty "thank you" to Fatal Pictures for using practical effects (I've said it many times before and I'll say it again - CGI monsters are not scary!) and for hiring actors that are not only very good at what they do but also normal-looking people. I have a difficult time relating to way-too-beautiful-to-be-real actors and actresses in films, battling CGI monsters no less. I prefer characters that look like anyone I could know or meet on the street. It makes the whole thing feel more real and relatable. Are you listening, Hollyweird?!

This short film takes itself seriously and is well-done, yet also somehow manages to be fun. Keep your eyes out for a release date and give it a watch! Until then, here's a teaser trailer to keep you "hungry"...

Why Horror? (2014)

Written by Jennifer Manriquez, Editor-In-Chief, Paddy Jack Press

Why Horror? is a feature-length documentary by Tal Zimmerman, a lifelong horror fan who dares to ask why we all love horror films so much. (Are we sure we really want to know?) Are we crazy? Desperate for catharsis? Looking for a way to vicariously live out and watch our most violent fantasies via a movie screen? Turns out the answer, according to this documentary, is both none and all of these things. 

Through autobiographical interviews with Zimmerman's parents (who are quite charming), and home video footage of his childhood, he opens the doors to his obsessions, giving us a glimpse into the boyhood of a super horror fan. This really spoke to me, personally, because I was that kid too!

In addition to his own background, he provides interviews with industry royalty, such as George Romero and John Carpenter. The biggies! He also interviews myriad horror fans, directors, actors, collectors, convention visitors, and even a psychiatrist or two. And this guy goes deep, like way deep. He allows himself to be studied both in a research lab and in an MRI machine while watching horror clips. The results of both tests are somewhat underwhelming, but I do respect the effort.

My favorite part of the documentary was the 'Too Short History of Horror Films' montage he created. An animated Tal Zimmerman marches us from the silent films of the late 19th century to the Universal classics of the 50s, the Hammer films of the 60s, the slashers of the 70s and 80s, right up to today's horror hits and misses. He left out one of my favorite heroes in horror history, William Castle, but he did specify that his history montage was "too short" so I'm sure there were lots of greats that had to be cut to get to the point in a respectable amount of time. Vincent Price, anyone?

I also really, really love the respect he pays to women in the horror industry. For decades critics of horror have complained that it's too misogynistic, and I get where they're coming from. Looking at it from the outside in, one might think that women get the short end of the stick in all these films. But they're wrong! Isn't it always a woman who makes it to the end, the "final girl?" It's almost always a strong (though she rarely knows it), smart, crafty lady who kicks the bad guy in his crocuses and gets out alive. How's that for girl power? And I was shocked to learn from the documentary that 60% of horror viewers are women. So, there.

I hate to do it, but I have one criticism, and it's not a quality issue. It's just a personal preference. My least favorite thing about the film was the research into raucously depraved artwork from centuries past, like a painting of a dog getting an arrow rammed up its butt. I get why he included this section, but to me, this isn't horror or even a precursor to it. This is something else entirely. Horror is entertaining, that was not. For lack of a better adjective, it's just icky.

Ultimately, what I took from this film was not an answer to the question, "Why horror?" but rather a renewed spirit for my love of horror, and an excitement to meet all of these kindred spirits who love weird, spooky movies as much as I do. It's all too easy to start feeling like an outcast and a freak when you are the only one in your peer group who likes these things. I'm a 43-year-old wife and mom, bibliophile and podcast junkie, who volunteers at church, and loves to cook. And I also happen to love horror films. Now I know I'm not so weird after all. Thanks, Tal!

The Two Carries

Written by Jennifer Manriquez, Editor-In-Chief, Paddy Jack Press

I know I'm late to this party - comparing the two Carries, the one from 1976 and the newer 2013 version. It's been done before, probably a lot. But I found the 2013 version of Carrie on Hulu this morning and, since I've seen the old one about eight zillion times, I automatically started to draw comparisons, not only to the films, but to my own life. Read on to see what I mean.

1. The Two Posters

 

Poster #1 tells a pretty distinct story: something happened to this chick at the prom and now she's covered in blood and looking deranged. While Poster #2 says: hey, look, a bloody girl. That's it. Also, the first poster uses proper grammar while the second does not... "You will know her name Carrie." What does that even mean? With the insertion of a comma it would have a totally weird meaning. "You will know her name, Carrie." Whose name will Carrie know?! Maybe it should have been a colon. "You will know her name: Carrie" or an elipses, "You will know her name... Carrie." I don't know, but the fact that I'm having to analyze the tagline for meaning doesn't work for me.

2. The Two Carries (Sissy vs. Chloe)

Sissy is a beautiful woman, but let's face it. Redheads look weird without makeup. I can say this because I am a redhead myself and I have the same wan complexion and lack of eyelash color that Sissy has, which is maybe why I identify with her so much better than I do with Chloe. Chloe Grace Moretz is adorable, a little too adorable to play the scorned Carrie White. In real life, Chloe's Carrie would just be a drama weirdo, but probably wouldn't be the subject of such intense ridicule and hatred, while Sissy's Carrie, who looks ghoulish and strange, would definitely be at the butt of some jokes. How do I know this? From experience! More than once as a child I was told, "I don't like your face, freak" and "You look like a ghost" by a member of the cooler class. When I was twelve, my mom and her cousin, Jackie, sat me down and forced me to learn how to apply makeup because "Even a new barn looks better with a coat of paint." Yes, really. That was said to twelve-year-old me, and I still to this day feel ugly when I go outside the house without makeup on. I do it, of course, because makeup is expensive and I'm not about to put it on to go pick up a prescription, but there's that voice of the Cold War-era Southern woman telling me never to leave the house without it, and shouldn't I just be embarrassed! But I digress. Sissy played her Carrie with a cringe-worthy awkwardness that made her almost hard to watch. Chloe's a good li'l actress, but she was clearly miscast in this film. She plays Carrie like a caricature, hyperbolic and overdone. There's no finesse to the performance, and unlike Sissy's, I just can't identify with it.

3. The Two Margaret Whites (Piper vs. Julianne)

I'm too lazy to look this up right now, but didn't Piper Laurie win an Oscar for this role? I think she did. Feel free to "pipe" in on Piper's win (or lack thereof) in the comments. Again, original Carrie's Piper takes the win for me. Julianne Moore is amazing, and she plays the character wonderfully, but I feel that the direction she was given led her to be more menacing than the original mother. Piper played Margaret White with such a deranged glee that it made her just so, so creepy! She smiles as she lunges in to stab her daughter. There's no regret, apology or fear there, just happiness in the knowledge that she's doing the Lord's work. And that is terrifying!

4. The Two Sue Snells (Amy vs. Gabriella)

I liked both Sues. I really did. I thought they both turned in good performances. As with most newer films, the actors are all just a little too perfect for my liking. So, I tend to lean toward Amy Irving's Sue when casting a final vote. And there was a sense that she actually really cared about what happened to Carrie, and wanted to make amends, while Gabriella's Sue is just a touch more distant. But, in the grand scheme of things, both were good.

5. The Two Tommys (William vs. Ansel)

This one's a toughie, because I love William Katt and can sing the entire theme song to Greatest American Hero. But I am also one of those creepy forty-something women who thinks Ansel Elgort is adorable. If I were eighteen again I'd have his Teen Beat posters all over my wall. Is Teen Beat even still around?? Anyway, it's hard. I feel like William Katt gave a nice, albeit corny, performance. And Ansel was his usual adorable self, so it's super hard to cut up anything he does. And I loved the nod Ansel gave to William during the prom-prep montage, where he stopped and looked at himself in the mirror of a tuxedo shop, sporting a ruffly dress shirt and bowtie. I can't pick a winner here - I love them both!

6. The Two Chris'es (Nancy vs. Portia)

Nancy. No contest. When she licks her lips right before she pulls the rope to release the blood, you just know she's a total sociopath. 

7. The Two Whatever-Her-Name-Is'es (P.J. Soles vs.......)

P. J. Soles vs. No-one because P. J. Soles is the queen of everything! I can't even put her up against the actress who played her role in the newer movie, because I just love her so much I'm blind to imitators. You rock, P. J. Soles. You are my hero. I would hang your Teen Beat posters too, just because I want to study and mimic your awesomeness.

8. The Two Gym Teachers (Betty vs. Judy)

I'm giving this one to Betty Buckley, not only because she was raised (and her mom still lives) in the city from which I currently hail, but also because she added a real tenderness to the role that Judy Greer just didn't manage to pull off. 

Don't get me wrong - I love Judy Greer. She's hilarious in everything, because she's a friggin' comedian! She straight-up doesn't belong in this movie. When she says, "You did a shitty thing, a really shitty thing" to the girls on the football field, it feels like she's just phoning it in. But Betty's coach is really pissed and you can tell! There's a genuine sense of dread from the girls in that scene. 

I can imagine being on that field, knowing I'd done something completely idiotic, and knowing that hell was about to be paid because Satan himself was standing right in front of me barking orders. 

9. The Two Proms (DePalma vs. Peirce)

Both prom sequences have their positives, but the original has so much more finesse, and just genuine creepiness to it. There's something to be said for watching William Katt mutter "What the hell?!" but not being able to hear it versus actually hearing the words come out of Ansel Elgort's mouth. The cool thing about the Katt version is that the silence of the scene puts you right inside Carrie's brain. She doesn't hear squat until the laughter of her peers tunnels into her ears all at once and makes her lose it. Plus, you get this awesome split-screen thing.

Carrie's pissed and nobody's getting out of that gym in one piece. The most ingenious thing behind this original 1976 scene is that you are actually rooting for Carrie. Yeah, eff 'em! They all laughed at you and now they get their comeuppance. You don't so much feel that way for the new Carrie. 

Plus, the original has this iconic stage-fire eruption scene that trumps every competitor!

In the new Carrie, you get this...

Fire doesn't so much erupt as it just gets awkwardly flung. In fact, there's a lot of awkwardness to Chloe's final showdown in the new Carrie - it's like she didn't quite know what to do with her arms and face. 

While Sissy knew exactly what to do with her arms and face. Nothing! The only thing that moves is her head when she whips it back and forth to cause mayhem, and then her feet as she walks out of the gym. It's amazing and it totally works!

No weird facial expression here. Just a wide-eyed trance face, expressing nothing. It's so perfect.

I think it's obvious that we have a clear winner here. And, no, Carrie didn't vote for herself. If you've seen either movie, you know she's not into that and only does it under duress. Therefore, I crown thee the superior winner and queen of the Carries.... CARRIE 1976!

CONGRATULATIONS!

Sorority Row (2009)

Written by Jennifer Manriquez, Editor-In-Chief, Paddy Jack Press

The movie that hates women.

I loved the original 1983 version of The House on Sorority Row so much that when I saw this remake - titled simply Sorority Row - on Netflix, I just had to check it out despite the abysmal star rating. And you know what? I can describe it in two words: hot mess.

*** SPOILER ALERT ***

Why would any self-respecting female even deign to participate in this misogynistic tripe? Only the main stars' characters even have names. The remainder of the females in the film are listed in the credits as "bra-clad sister, slutty sister, naive girl, trampoline sister, already drunk sister, over-it sister, etc." Okay, fine. So, they don't have names. What about the fact that these girls are NEVER without full makeup, even in the shower. I repeat, EVEN IN THE SHOWER! The water might be running over their faces, but that makeup does not budge. They are also ALWAYS in heels and skirts, even when the scenario definitely allows them time to change into something more practical and seriously requires better activewear than heels and skirts, like the time they - oh, I dunno - decided to rappel the innards of a deep, but somehow magically not dark, abandoned mine shaft. Just do it in your heels and skirts, girls. Because that makes total sense. 

Yeah, this is how college girls dress when they're partying. Just like this.

What about how they roofie their friend so she can play dead? Did I mention she's in skimpy lingerie and they're filming her? It's all a part of a dastardly prank to get revenge on said girl's boyfriend because he cheated on her. By the way, the girl in question is Audrina Patridge, made famous from the reality TV show, The Hills, which I'm not gonna lie, I loved. And there was something really satisfying in watching her eat it because, when she took back notorious douchebag Justin Bobby on The Hills, we kind of all wanted to kill her, right?

In addition to the myriad scenes of girls in short skirts and heels, girls getting drunk, girls getting felt up by random passersby, girls being catty, girls willfully playing subordinate roles to both boys their age and men much, much older (one girl consents to having sex with her rancid old therapist so she can score some OxyContin), we also have titties, titties, and more titties. There are so many boobs onscreen, I felt like I was watching a Three Stooges marathon. Hey-ohhhh!
During a party scene (I say "a" because there's more than one party scene), one girl runs through the crowd in a hooded graduation gown, then whips it off to reveal her bare tits while the crowd whoops and hollers. She loves the attention so much, she decides to dance around. Yep, apparently that's all we ladies are good for, showing our tits with the hope of pleasuring men's eyeballs and wieners. I'm so glad this one movie finally managed to get it right! I should stop writing right now and just go to a place crowded with men and show them my big, droopy, post-baby, mom boobies. You think they'd like that shit? 

Now, check out this dumb-as-hell murder weapon. It's a pimped out tire iron. Yeah, you read that correctly. A tire iron, but all jazzed up. And, when we finally learn who the murderer is, the fact that he's using a pimped out tire iron, because that's what the first girl was killed with, makes no sense! He wasn't avenging her at all, he wasn't even related to her or connected to her in any real way. So, why would he take the time to jack up a tire iron in effigy to her murder? 

Because this. Yes, this is how you'd be dressed while running from a psychopath.

By the way, the killer is Andy, who is played by British actor Julian Morris, whom you may know as Ryan on the TV show New Girl. Our two major final girls are Cassidy, played by Briana Evigan, the kick ass girl dancer from the Step Up movies, and Ellie, played by Rumer Willis, the daughter of Demi Moore and Bruce Willis.

Thankfully their perfect makeup made it all the way to the end of the movie.

I didn't think I'd ever see more ridiculous "Final Girl" boobies than those prominently displayed by one Jennifer Love Hewitt in I Still Know What You Did Last Summer...

But I was wrong. Hewitt, your boobs have been challenged by Evigan's boobs. Fight, fight!

Also, I want to let you know that if you are one of those Playboy "readers" who subscribes to the magazine "just for the articles" and doesn't even see the boobs, you won't be bored! The writer of this script is a total genius, who gives us such wonderful and insightful lines as, "Ellie, you're being borderline retarded right now" and "Easy now, Lezzy Lohan" and "Too bad it doesn't prevent bulimia, that's something Megan could actually use."

Carrie Fisher. All hail.

Lastly, worry not. There's one shining gem in this film, in the form of Ms. Carrie Fisher, the queen to all of us who have bipolar disorder. I effing love her. And she does not disappoint. She calls the girls out for being idiots, and then goes after the killer with a buck shot. Her best line is, "Well, he, she or it is about to get two rounds to the face." Carrie Fisher, please be my best friend.

Only these final three have lived to twerk again.

Final thought: Don't watch unless you want to take the feminist movement back about a thousand-zillion years. Don't watch if you hate predictable movies that suck. Do look for Carrie Fisher's scenes on YouTube. Fin.