My Bloody Valentine (2009)
***/*****
So some movies are made for pure entertainment intended for
a particular audience. I could tell from the get-go, director Patrick Lussier
wanted his film to atone for the ills of the tame Scream PG-13 era and his My
Bloody Valentine re-envisioning (and homage) sure seems to do just that. This
bad boy has a definite interest in going right for the jugular, viscerally
offering some elaborate gore effects that show a psychopath in Harry Warden
persona leaving bloody bodies, with their torsos slit and hearts plucked
asunder, left in Valentine’s candy boxes. A good many of the most gruesome of
scenes are aftermath revelations of the psychopath’s handiwork. Heart shapes in
blood painted on walls indicating a sign of Harry appear around the victims.
That is when the psychopath has the chance to leave his mark in blood…
Jensen Ackles is the Tom Hanniger character played by Paul
Kelman (he goes by TJ, mostly, though) in the original MBV from 1981. Kerr
Smith is the adversarial Axel (played by Neil Affleck in the original), coming
between Tom and his former love, Sarah (played by Jaime King in the 2009
version and the lovely Lori Hallier in the original). Tom had left for ten
years but what he was up to is the ultimate mystery that might or might not
reveal whether he is or not the psycho running around with a (pick) axe to
grind. The film reveals that Axel has been having an affair with his wife’s
co-worker, Megan (Megan Boone, known primarily for The Blacklist, starring
James Spader), a nice piece of eye candy who happily complies to meeting him
for sex at his pop’s old cabin in the woods. She reveals a bun in the oven. She
winds up gutted in an alley later when the psychopath goes on the assault
inside the supermarket Sarah and Megan works in town. The film casts a spotlight
on two people: Tom and Axel. Axel’s main link to the killing is Megan who has
no link to Harry whatsoever. Axel’s an ass but is he a psychopath? The film
needs to cast suspicion someone other than just Tom, but it’s mighty difficult.
Nothing again happens until ten years when Tom returns to town. Then all of a
sudden someone is savagely murdering folks. It is indeed hard for the grand
mystery of “who is the killer?” to resonate when few are all that suspicious.
Key to the film’s success is that once the killer puts on
the miner suit and mask, he’s all business: kill the human target. Regardless
of who it is in disguise, once on the move anyone could be a pick axe pin
cushion. What casts a doubt on Tom being the killer is how the psychopath goes
full throttle right after Sarah. She has to duck the swinging pick axe just
like everyone else. There’s a moment where he nearly pulverizes her, instead
smashing through a food freezer in the supermarket. Another moment has her
narrowly escaping the pick axe when the psychopath comes after her in Axel’s
old cabin, bursting out a upper floor bedroom window, fleeing in the nick of
time. So what would motivate Tom to go after Sarah, the woman he loves?
Key to the film’s success is that once the killer puts on
the miner suit and mask, he’s all business: kill the human target. Regardless
of who it is in disguise, once on the move anyone could be a pick axe pin
cushion. What casts a doubt on Tom being the killer is how the psychopath goes
full throttle right after Sarah. She has to duck the swinging pick axe just
like everyone else. There’s a moment where he nearly pulverizes her, instead
smashing through a food freezer in the supermarket. Another moment has her
narrowly escaping the pick axe when the psychopath comes after her in Axel’s
old cabin, bursting out a upper floor bedroom window, fleeing in the nick of
time. So what would motivate Tom to go after Sarah, the woman he loves?
======================================
Betsy Rue's *Cough* Big Moment
I think where this film doesn’t quite succeed quite as well
as the original is in the love triangle. Jensen is just too detached from this
development, unlike Kilman who made his presence known throughout the 1981 film
he wanted to be the head man in Sarah’s life. Kerr’s Axel is this rather
unpleasant individual, intense and sometimes temperamental. While Jensen’s Tom
is guarded somewhat, when (most of the time) he’s with Sarah, this young man
seems to be less evasive and more willing to compromise. His early plans were
to sign away the mine and leave as soon as possible. Sarah doesn’t have to use
too much convincing to shake him from this position, adhering to how his
decision would affect the lives of those *she* cares for. Since he cares for
her, his decision changes.
As far as how this 2009 film honors the original that came
before it, the remake offers a few nice signatures in the 1981 film. Like when
the suits drop down to scare a person trying to avoid the psychopath, as Jaime’s
Sarah runs into a mining tunnel as the Harry Warden clone follows close behind.
Or the body that falls out of a running drier, looking worse for wear as steam
emerges from the heated flesh. The whole Axel/Tom/Sarah dynamic ultimately ends
with a scuffle as a pick axe and shovel determine a victor, with Harry actually
rearing his haunt, which signifies his existence…in a sense.
========================
Alls well that doesn't end well for Kevin Tighe!
The emphasis on special effects (3D, specifically) is
inherent, particularly when a log bursts through the windshield of a jeep after
wreck, a jaw flies towards the screen after the infamous pick axe pulls it from
the face of a victim (!), and an eyeball protrudes from its socket when the
pick axe pops it out when impacting the poor victim’s head. In regards to the
pick axe, the film gets a ton of mileage out of its pointy ends. And you get
plenty of psycho in the mining costume and mask. Lussier and company knew us
slasher fans of the original loved the costume of the killer. It certainly gave
the killer a bit of personality. This is not amiss from those involved in
putting Harry Warden’s copy-cat front and center often. In fact, this film puts
so much emphasis on the killer in disguise, less care is actually afforded the
leads. That, therein, is where I think the two films differ exponentially. The
2009 film is about the formula and mystery, and less about the characters and
their lives in town. The town and its mine are minor backdrops, while the
killer is most important. The killer and his onslaught, that is.
Then there is the Betsy Rue scene. This is an extended
stretch of nakedness that so few actresses outside of the porn industry are
just not so willing to do…particularly in the context for which she is exposed.
Rue’s Irene had dated Axel before Tom left town, the two splitting thereafter.
Irene has been involved with a trucker and the two use a sleazy hotel (operated
by a female dwarf, with a rather big chest) to get that sexual feeling. Well,
the trucker is revealed to have a camera recording their sexual exploits, for
which Irene responds unkind. Naked from head to toe with just a gun, she
threatens the trucker, but he gets it in the skull with the pick axe. The
remainder of the scene has Irene unsuccessfully attempting to use a metal bed
frame as protection. Her gutted body is one of a few to show the gory aftermath
of the heart removal procedure.
The gore effects are legitimately savage and bloody. The
early work of Harry Warden shows what he left behind in the hospital taking
care of him. Atkins’ sheriff takes it all in and wonders why he hasn’t already
retired! He later shows up at Axel’s home, believing (correctly) that the killer
is around somewhere. His jaw pays the price. Atkins’ casting was inspired, but
I do wish he had a little more to do. But still, I can imagine he received the
Christopher Walken reaction when he showed up on screen: sheer delight that he
was once again appearing before us in the theatre in another cult film.
One of my personal favorite touches is how the film
*integrates* Harry and the person he has *influenced*. This takes the route
similarly to the original: Harry’s nasty work left a lasting stain, a type of pollution
upon another because of the horrible trauma that resulted from the event
itself. There are these instances where the miner appears before another, and I
think you can see what the point is of them: Harry is a firm part of someone
else and because of his existence, the urge to destroy exists wholeheartedly.
The film follows specifics slasher fans can expect. The killer appearing dead, seemingly impervious to destruction (I mean, for shit's sake, an explosion blows him off his feet!), arises as if a phoenix from the ashes. There's the great reveal and how the killer came to be. Flashbacks and the unearthing of Harry's mask and pick axe buried with him work as a type of lure and bond between the dead psychopath and his "replacement". I don't think the film does anything too out of character from what a slasher fan is accustomed to, so if you like the status quo, this just might be your kind of movie.
Comments
Post a Comment