As it stands at this moment I am only able to recommend four of his films (The Last House on the Left, Summer of Fear, Deadly Blessing, A Nightmare on Elm Street). Invitation to Hell came close but it just missed (by 2%) becoming a film that I would feel comfortably recommending to somebody else. If I was to average the score of these nine films I would get a score of just under 57% but a roster of only perfect films does not a good director make.
To be a good director one must make enough movies that would warrant a recommendation. Craven has not yet done so. He needs at least seven more to even qualify in that category. To be a great director one must make enough movies that would and could live on as the years roll by. Craven so far doesn't come even close to that. But as I continue to move through his catalogue I have high hopes that he will at least turn out to be in that first category, to be a good director.
After all, I am now firmly within his second phase as director. A phase where he is more confident and more self assured and a phase where the rest of his films haven't disappeared to the bottom of the five dollar bin at Walmart. And when phase two ends, we have phase three to look forward to and amongst the remaining 13 films I am confident that there will be a hell of a lot more films that will be better than most of what has come before.
Which brings me now to The Serpent and the Rainbow, another Wes Craven film that I have never seen before. When I was around ten or eleven my parents were sort of watching this film on TV. Sort of because they were flicking back and forth and not really paying attention. I remember a scene with a guy being buried alive and I remember Voodoo. That's all I got for this film. I know nothing else other than that Bill Pullman is the star.
I am expecting good things from this film though. This is after all, the first film that Craven chose to direct following the enormous success of A Nightmare on Elm Street, the film that made him famous and resurrected his film career. Before making this film though, and as the Nightmare series found it's own legs in slasher sequel heaven, Craven did return to the characters he created and wrote A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: The Dream Warriors. That film is considered one of the best of the series and gave Craven even more respect in the horror world.
So what can I expect with The Serpent and the Rainbow? I don't expect murder after murder and I don't expect it to be very gory. I do expect it to be scary, and if not scary at least very very eerie. I expect to to be well done, at least better than Deadly Friend, and to show signs of someone who has improved at his job since he started back in 1972. I'm hoping for quality and I'm hoping I'm not bored. I've got my fingers crossed that Craven can do something good that isn't a slasher film and I'm banking on The Serpent and the Rainbow being just that film. I guess then that there is nothing left to do then but find out exactly how good (or bad?) it actually is. Here we go...
Filmthoughts:
The Serpent and the Rainbow is a different kind of horror film than the usual slate of horror films that come out. It is not your typical horror film, at least not one that you would expect from Wes Craven. While not the greatest film I have ever seen I did enjoy it and I actually thought it was pretty good. At almost an hour and forty minutes the story had me intrigued for most of it's running time.
The story was rather unique dealing with Voodoo and to a certain extent zombies. Dennis (Bill Pullman) is a man who travels the world finding new and rare drugs that the western world can utilize for the greater good. When dead men and women are seen alive and (almost well) walking around Haiti he is sent on a mission to find out why, how and what made it possible. While there he can't escape the feeling that things are going to go horribly wrong.
The script is well written with some great scenes and some great dialogue. Not all the dialogue comes off as crisp, and some of it is to expositional. The story starts with a bang, hits you with another bang and then takes its time building to the climax. Along the way, the film had me engaged and guessing what would happen next. I did feel abruptly thrown into the story at the beginning and the ending went to far into fantasy that it put a hamper on the film but overall it did keep me enthralled and guessing what would happen next. I give the script a 6 out of 10.
One thing that helped keep my attention was the music. Right from the opening credits the music was gripping and unique. It sounded different and original and mixed an eerie studio designed sound with sounds straight out of Haitian Voodoo culture. It's not an oscar winning score but none the less it plays well over the film. I give the music a 7 out of 10.
Like the music, I wouldn't say the acting is award worthy or anything but for the most part the performances are pretty good. Pullman does a fine job as the lead and is a great screamer. The bad guys here are menacing and exude evil. Unfortunately Cathy Tyson, who plays the female lead and love interest to Pullman, comes off as a little wooden. Not a terrible performance but she delivers the worst one in the film. She brings the acting down to a 7 out of 10.
Another thing about The Serpent and the Rainbow is that it looked really good. The cinematography captured the Amazon and Haiti in all their glory, and made confined spaces look very claustrophobic. The camerawork was good, with lots of movements and some great use of foregrounds and backgrounds. A 7 out of 10 for cinematography.
I couldn't be sure but it seems that the film was shot on location, with no sets so to speak of. And boy did it look good. The effects too, were simple but effective and the gore looked good and realistic. The only problem with the effects was the ending, where they looked and felt worse than what I had seen before. This could be just a problem stemming from the age of the film but they do end up hampering the film a tad thus the production design gets a 8 out of 10.
But it's not just the effects and the locations that look good. The Voodoo Haitian's look real, the Haitian local's look poor and the American's stand out comparatively, looking different and more affluent than the poor folk that surround them. The make-up is well done too, with realistic deep cuts, sun burned victims and pale sickly victims of poison. Costumes and Make-up get an 8 out of 10.
Craven directs The Serpent and the Rainbow with the skill of a seasoned pro just coming into his own. He does a great job keeping the film intriguing and enjoyable and overall has put together a well made film. I did find though, that the editing could use some work. Like I said, the opening feels a little rushed and by the time the climax happens the film does start to a feel a little long. Just a little though. The Serpent and the Rainbow gets 6 out of 10 for editing and 8 out of 10 for directing.
Overall this film turns out to be a unique and original horror film. It never ends up being that scary, but it does keep you guessing and it is rather eerie at parts. It's more of a mystery film with horror elements (until the ending rolls around and it becomes straight out balls to the wall horror). It's a fun hour and forty minutes that I'd see again, if not to many times, and it is a film that comes with my stamp of approval. If you are thinking about watching this film, give it a shot as there are a lot worse things you could end up watching. Re-playability gets a 6 out of 10 and originality gets a 7 out of 10.
Total Score: 70%
***ALERT: THE REST OF THIS REVIEW MAY CONTAIN SERIOUS SPOILERS: ALERT***
***ALERT: THE REST OF THIS REVIEW MAY CONTAIN SERIOUS SPOILERS: ALERT***
Afterthoughts:
I shouldn't be surprised that The Serpent and the Rainbow was as good a film as it ended up being. After all, I did believe that when A Nightmare on Elm Street was released it did give Wes craven a lot more credit in the industry, one where he was now working within the studio system, making movies with bigger budgets and released to wider audiences. He had, what I have been calling, entered phase two of his career.
But with Deadly Friend I found Craven had sunk to the almost low point in his career so far, second only to Swamp Thing. So even though I had previously thought that Serpent was going to be an alright watch, I had changed my mind after his dismal last film. It was so bad it soured me a little towards the rest of his films and so just a few hours ago I sat down to watch Serpent and see how good or bad it would be. Would Craven disappoint yet again?
An hour and 38 minutes later I finished watching Serpent and instead of disappointment I was happy with what I just watched. It was a pretty enjoyable movie. It is also no surprise that Craven was approached with this script as it involved a lot of nightmares and who better to handle such scenes as the man behind A Nightmare on Elm Street. It also had a lot of fun scenes, it looked good, it was well acted and it had a good story. Yet there were also problems which prevented it from becoming Craven's second great film. Cathy Tyson brings down the film with her poor performance and it does feel too long for its own good.
From the beginning of the film I knew that Dennis (Bill Pullman) was going to be buried alive. Craven made that clear from the very beginning. It was going to be a fun ride watching how, if Dennis could, he would stop the fate that was awaiting him. While the film wasn't really scary it involved a lot of horror elements, was gorier than I expected and it even had some nudity. But I was certain, with out a doubt, the whole time that I was watching, that he was going to be buried. I thought that would be where the film ends.
And he does get buried but once he does Craven chooses to continue the film. And this is where the biggest problems lie. Dennis should of stayed buried but instead he ends up alive and well and fighting the bad guy while bad special effects float around them. And then when he defeats said bad guy he comes back one more time in ways that make no sense. The film should of ended when Dennis was buried. It would of made of given the film a stronger impact and it wouldn't of ended up being longer than it needed to be.
It is the ending of Serpent that prevents Craven from making his second great film but it is a vast improvement over Deadly Friend. It is a more mature film, made by a more confidant and mature filmmaker and one that I have no problem recommending. Only two movies of the so far 10 that I've gone through with you, dear reader, have been better than Serpent. Things haven't been consistent with Craven but Serpent has given me a preview of what is hopefully to come.
I had and have and still do expect, here in phase two, that Craven's films will be better and stronger films than I got in phase one. Stronger than Swamp Thing and the disappointing The Hills Have Eyes and also stronger than the better films from his early phase like The Last House on the Left and Summer of Fear.
Serpent is a good sign that things are going to get better for Craven. It's a good sign that the Craven, who now has offers coming out of his ears, is making the right choices and picking the right scripts. It's a sign that he is taking more time in crafting his pictures and therefore making better pictures. Serpent has brought me a new found rush of excitement to continue on with my journey into the films of Wes Craven. A journey that is constantly disappointing and enthralling me at equal measure. I wonder what I'll feel next?
Afterthoughts:
But with Deadly Friend I found Craven had sunk to the almost low point in his career so far, second only to Swamp Thing. So even though I had previously thought that Serpent was going to be an alright watch, I had changed my mind after his dismal last film. It was so bad it soured me a little towards the rest of his films and so just a few hours ago I sat down to watch Serpent and see how good or bad it would be. Would Craven disappoint yet again?
An hour and 38 minutes later I finished watching Serpent and instead of disappointment I was happy with what I just watched. It was a pretty enjoyable movie. It is also no surprise that Craven was approached with this script as it involved a lot of nightmares and who better to handle such scenes as the man behind A Nightmare on Elm Street. It also had a lot of fun scenes, it looked good, it was well acted and it had a good story. Yet there were also problems which prevented it from becoming Craven's second great film. Cathy Tyson brings down the film with her poor performance and it does feel too long for its own good.
From the beginning of the film I knew that Dennis (Bill Pullman) was going to be buried alive. Craven made that clear from the very beginning. It was going to be a fun ride watching how, if Dennis could, he would stop the fate that was awaiting him. While the film wasn't really scary it involved a lot of horror elements, was gorier than I expected and it even had some nudity. But I was certain, with out a doubt, the whole time that I was watching, that he was going to be buried. I thought that would be where the film ends.
And he does get buried but once he does Craven chooses to continue the film. And this is where the biggest problems lie. Dennis should of stayed buried but instead he ends up alive and well and fighting the bad guy while bad special effects float around them. And then when he defeats said bad guy he comes back one more time in ways that make no sense. The film should of ended when Dennis was buried. It would of made of given the film a stronger impact and it wouldn't of ended up being longer than it needed to be.
It is the ending of Serpent that prevents Craven from making his second great film but it is a vast improvement over Deadly Friend. It is a more mature film, made by a more confidant and mature filmmaker and one that I have no problem recommending. Only two movies of the so far 10 that I've gone through with you, dear reader, have been better than Serpent. Things haven't been consistent with Craven but Serpent has given me a preview of what is hopefully to come.
I had and have and still do expect, here in phase two, that Craven's films will be better and stronger films than I got in phase one. Stronger than Swamp Thing and the disappointing The Hills Have Eyes and also stronger than the better films from his early phase like The Last House on the Left and Summer of Fear.
Serpent is a good sign that things are going to get better for Craven. It's a good sign that the Craven, who now has offers coming out of his ears, is making the right choices and picking the right scripts. It's a sign that he is taking more time in crafting his pictures and therefore making better pictures. Serpent has brought me a new found rush of excitement to continue on with my journey into the films of Wes Craven. A journey that is constantly disappointing and enthralling me at equal measure. I wonder what I'll feel next?
No comments:
Post a Comment