Saw IV

Here it comes again. For the fourth Halloween running, the Saw franchise is crawling its bloody way out of the horror-swamp.

Remember the original Saw? A smart, intriguing thriller in the vein of Se7en that was less about gore and more about mystery, it was simple, ingenious, and made by a couple of clever Aussies with a real eye for good horror.

But with every Saw, the watchwords seem to be bigger, better, and more. Based more on grotesque traps to stimulate plot than a riveting plot that happens to include one or two neat traps, Saw IV follows on from Saw III’s decline and arrives in a muddled, if adequate mess on our pumpkin-festooned doorsteps.

Wan and Whannell have jumped ship, and it’s obvious. The former gleeful quick-cutting graininess feels stodgy under the direction of Darren Lynn Bousman and the plot has found itself crammed awkwardly together, with a gaping hole for every revelation. It's an imitation of the franchise's former glory, with emphasis on all the wrong elements. Rather than be intriguing, it’s frustrating. Rather than be rewarding, it’s simply sufficient.

The plot is decent enough, though revealing it here would ruin the mystery, which is threadbare and the film’s saving grace. It is interesting to guess what’s going to happen next, and it makes for an average thriller, but it’s impossible to even summon the vague gag-reflex that made the original (and to a certain degree, the first sequel) so rewarding. There is the occasional satisfying comeuppance, but the endless march of gory, momentary set pieces is desensitising at best, and the rabid puppy of sentimentality gnaws its boring way through every non-violent scene.

In short, it’s too much of not enough. Too much plot, too much violence, but ultimately meaningless.

Monkeybone

Remember Brendan Fraser? The wacky guy from George Of The Jungle and The Mummy who proved he could act in Gods & Monsters? Yes?

Remember Monkeybone?

No-one seems to remember this wacky, comic-book inspired, semi-animated flash-in-the-pan. But they really should. Because… well, it’s wacky, comic-book, semi-animated goodness

In short, Monkeybone is about Stu Miley (Fraser), comic-book artist and creator of the titular character: a rascally, vulgar primate who’s about to go to television and make him loads of money. But, after a series of unfortunate events (no, Lemony Snickett, I am not stealing your lines), Stu ends up in a coma and trapped in a purgatory nether-world filled with monsters, freaks and figments of various imaginations…including a certain stop-motion monkey (voiced by John Tuturro).

It’s a delicious freakshow all up – Stu whinging his way around limbo with all his new friends (including Rose McGowan, Thomas Haden Church, and a delightful Whoopi Goldberg as Death), while his sister (Megan Mullally) tries to pull the plug. And of course there’s Monkeybone, who only wants to steal Stu’s body and shag his hot doctor girlfriend (Bridget Fonda).

Got all that? Right.

It’s not perfect. At times it does lag and become mundane, despite all the stop-motion, costumed freaks available for viewing. But the slumps are few, and are bolstered by inspired plot-lines involving an ‘evil’ Stephen King, a possessed corpse (Chris Kattan) chased through town by organ-coveting surgeons, some unsettling nightmare scenes, and a lot of tongue in cheek.

Nothing

Canadian director Vincenzo Natali has a tendency toward a certain kind of film. Wildly original, warped sci-fi that seems comfortable with ambiguity, he’s made such mind-fucks as Cube and Cypher.

He certainly doesn’t disappoint with Nothing. Yes, that’s right. A film called Nothing.

Obvious puns aside, Nothing is intellectual silliness at its most enjoyable. Along with Natali’s best friends and usual stars David Hewlett (Cube, Cypher, Stargate Atlantis) and Andrew Miller (er… the autistic dude from Cube), the three craft a fable so original that its simplicity comes as a surprise.

Best friends David (David Hewlett) and Andrew (Andrew Miller) are a sad pair. Acutely agoraphobic, Andrew spends his days selling holidays to people over the phone, while David is tormented by cruel workmates. The only person they can depend on is each other, and their childhood bond seems limitless and eternal.

Then disaster strikes. David decides to move in with his girlfriend of two weeks, who unbeknownst to him has been embezzling money from his place of work. Meanwhile, Andrew is accused of fiddling up a girlscout. Their house is about to be torn down and them evicted, and the lynch mobs are coming from every direction…

…then suddenly: Nothing.

The film rests heavily on its two leading men. As Andrew and David are cast into their world of nothing, with only the house and their pet turtle still in existence and white space all around, it’s up to them to carry the film, which they do with surprising skill for two unknowns. Though Andrew can be a little whiny and clunky at times, the two are perfectly matched as their friendship turns to irritation and the relationship is tested by paranoia and buried feelings. The dialogue is inspired – at times unpredictably funny, there’s a genuine sense of normalcy about our two losers as they traverse this new world and discuss tofu, cheerfully chase each other with garden tools, and ruminate on whether the afterlife has cable.

It looks fantastic as well. The special effects aren’t perfect – there’s clearly not much of a budget – and of course there’s not much to see in a huge, empty space, but the newspaper-cut-out backstory to open and the overall cartoonishness smack of Roald Dahl and Dr Seuss.

If anything, the film doesn’t quite live up to its running time. It provides no definitive answers, not that they’re really expected – this is all about the characters, not the science (you’ll want to stay after the credits, by the way). Anyone who’s seen Cube will know about Natali’s frustrating, ambiguous finales. At times it seems as if the director is just trying to fill in space somewhere between the funny bits at the beginning, and the emotional bits at the end. Still, the brief running time means it doesn’t lag long, and for the most part Nothing is a satisfying, genuine, and truly weird experience.

The Condemned

Sadly, I've seen this Battle Royale/Running Man rip-off.

Also sadly enough, I quite enjoyed it.

Basic plot: Wrestler Steve Austin (aka Stone Cold) and a bunch of death-row crims end up on an internet reality TV show and have to pick each other off until there's only one survivor

It's hardly a great film, and is probably most suited for drinking games where we take a shot every time Steve delivers a line more braindead than a retarded gorilla, but it's enjoyable enough. Vinnie Jones is good fun as the bad guy, and there is a fair bit of good violence, even if you've seen it all in much better films. The romantic and political subplots could have been explored a bit more, but they’re not really what you’re there for – I just wanted to see some people get blown up.

The big drawback is the heavy handed and seriously contradictory anti-violence message. Come on, kids. Just because you fake-fight, it doesn't mean the viewers are watching you because they think TV violence is a bad thing. Yes, reality TV shows suck, but if you're going to blow up/stab/rape/torture/shoot nine people, please don't tell me you're doing it to prove how bad violence is. Because you're targeting the wrong audience.

That aside, it's good, clean, violent fun for the same kind of people who though DOA wasn't that bad.