Mirrors

[Bourne101]

http://l.yimg.com/img.movies.yahoo.com/ymv/us/img/hv/photo/movie_pix/twentieth_century_fox/mirrors/mirrors_galleryposter.jpg

Directed by Alexandre Aja

Written by Alexandre Aja and Grégory Levasseur

Genre: Horror

http://l.yimg.com/img.movies.yahoo.com/ymv/us/img/hv/photo/movie_pix/twentieth_century_fox/mirrors/kiefer_sutherland/mirrors2.jpg

Tagline: Reality is relative.

Plot Outline: A man is head of security at a department store plagued by unexplained deaths The store is also the target of demonstrators wanting compensation for an earlier staff fire tragedy. The man becomes intrigued by a disturbed woman. She claims her sister, who died in the fire, is exacting revenge, using mirrors as a gateway back into the living world.

http://l.yimg.com/img.movies.yahoo.com/ymv/us/img/hv/photo/movie_pix/twentieth_century_fox/mirrors/kiefer_sutherland/mirrors3.jpg

Starring: Kiefer Sutherland, Paula Patton, Ezra Buzzington, Erica Gluck, Cameron Boyce, Amy Smart

Rated R for strong violence, disturbing images, language and brief nudity.

Runtime: 110 minutes

Although the previews have been kind of meh (albeit fucked up) I have enjoyed Aja's previous work, it does have a hard R rating, and it looks better than most Asian horror remakes. I will definitely check it out, but will go in with low expectations.

[ilovemovies]

I wasn't looking forward to it at first but then came the red band trailer and that was pretty cool. And Kiefer was on Regis and Kelly this morning and I really liked the clip they showed. Really, the more I see of this movie the more I'm looking forward to it. Some great behind the scenes stuff as well. Some great visuals like mirrors breaking all around Kiefer's character.

[detective mills]

I'll definately see this because I enjoyed High Tension and The Hills Have Eyes, but I'm not expecting much from it.

[Scarfather]

When I saw the commercial for this I thought it was a parody, like another Scary Movie, because of how lame it looked.

Then I realized it was supposed to be serious, and I laughed even harder.

[Cosimo]

you got to give alexandre aja some credit. switchblade romance was pretty good in my book and parts of hills have eyes was dope also

the problem however is the casting of kiefer the chief sutherland. lame

[Moviefan1234]

MIRRORS doesn't look good at all.

[Mr.HyDe807]

The commercials look half ass, but i'm gonna check it out anyway due to enjoying The Hills Have Eyes and Haute Tension!

Hopefully it wont be worse than the awful Happening

[KingofKings2525]

Didn't even know this movie was coming out - Bad marketing - Terrible looking movie.

[chinton]

The problem I have is I'm just worried that this will be a one note film. I mean how many times can they do the mirror does something freaky. Just seems like it could be a very repetitive movie.

[Lazy Boy]

If it looks like an August dump and it smells like an August dump, chances are that it will taste like an August dump -- rancid and putrid cabbage in the dying weeks of summer filmdom.

Pass.

[john_rambo]

KIEFER SUTHERLAND!

I'm in.

[visual_tension]

It doesn't look great but hopefully, Aja will go three for three with this one.

[Bourne101]

Does anyone know if it's being screened for critics?

[Danger^Cart]

I'm pretty sure High Tension was a fluke.

[gyro_44]

Kind of mildly excited to see this just for Mr. Aja and Kiefer.

Trailers have been mediocre, but I'll give it a chance. At least I know it's going to be gory as fuck.

[LordSimen]

Definitely excited for this. Aja's last remake was one of the best remakes of the fad and this next one looks just as good.

[xseanymacx]

This looks like shit.

[ilovemovies]

I'm pretty sure The Hills Have Eyes was a fluke.

Fixed.

[CreeperBEATNGU]

Tension and Hills were both great, and I'll take a "dump" movie like this over the overrated Oscar bait tripe I'm annually subjected to later in the year.

[dellamorte dellamore]

The problem I have is I'm just worried that this will be a one note film. I mean how many times can they do the mirror does something freaky. Just seems like it could be a very repetitive movie.

Isn't that why people watch the film , to see what they do with the concept .

I think it looks good , and it should do well , not great but decent . I agree the marketing has been almost nonexistent , and that will hurt it .

Aja is on a roll , i hope it keeps on going and i eagerly await his eventual zombie movie ;) .

Is August really a dump month anymore , it doesn't seem like it .

[JCPhoenix]

Yeah the normal trailer for this was terrible but like ilovemovies said, the red-band trailer has gotten my hopes up.

[ilovemovies]

Aja is on a roll , i hope it keeps on going and i eagerly await his eventual zombie movie ;) .




God, I hope Aja never does a zombie movie. It's one of the least interesting subgenres in the horror field and it would be such a waste of his talent.

[dellamorte dellamore]

Nothing wrong with " slumming " every now and then . He's a master of gore and visuals , he could really do something special with that genre . It doesn't have to be some big studio deal , he could do it in France with a small budget , it's a must .

[muttly69]

Going to wait to rent this one.

[chinton]

Exactly what does he do with the concept.

All I see in the previews is various scenes of the same thing i.e. people getting scared of something in the mirror. It looks very one note.

It just doesn't look nearly as good haute Tension minus the stupid ending.

[FireCaptain4]

God, I hope Aja never does a zombie movie. It's one of the least interesting subgenres in the horror field and it would be such a waste of his talent.

I'm with you on that one. I like a few zombie movies, but there's only so much that can be done with that sub-genre. I wouldn't be pissed off at Aja making a zombie flick, but if he would do an adaptation of something like say- Charles Burns' "Black Hole" (yes, I'm name dropping and being wishy/washy) I would be giddy with joy.

[someguy]

I've seen the original film this is based on (Into The Mirror) and honestly this is probably the best way they could have gone about doing a remake of it. Into The Mirror played out more like a supernatural CSI despite having an excellent opening scene (looks like they made a gorier version in the movie with the reflection stabbing the guy's throat, the original had a girl's reflection cut her own neck). I actually thought that concept of the reflections being possessed was neat, but aside from the opening the film didn't really use it again. Mirrors looks like they took that idea and just ran with it to make their own story. Plus I think Aja isn't a bad director at all (I liked Tension and even the Hills remake). My only problems with it is that the trailer material doesn't make it look good, plus it probably gives away all the good bits in the movie. That and, as chinton said, it looks pretty one note. I'll wait for the word from critics/public before deciding to see it.

[MisterChristian]

I dig Aja's work and I'm actually looking forward to seeing what he does with 2009's Piranha :D in 3-D!! :P

[Cronos]

Loved the original and didn't like the idea of another remake, but Aja directing and Sutherland starring means I'll be giving it a look.

[fervors]

Can we stop pretending this man will be responsible for the future of good horror films now?

[dellamorte dellamore]

Can we stop pretending this man will be responsible for the future of good horror films now?


I don't think anyone is , but it's nice when a director that's obviously dedicated to the horror genre comes along and it doesn't hurt that's he's actually talented and enthusiastic also . So many times you see someone who could have contributed so much more to the genre go mainstream and leave their horror roots behind , i'm looking at you Snyder , where the heck is the Dawn remake sequel that was promised during the end credits :) .

I want someone like Aja to make as many horror films as he can before he makes a rom com or a comic book adaptation or a film with men running around in speedos . This guy is only going to get better and i always look forward to his next projects .

[Shockwave]

God, I hope Aja never does a zombie movie. It's one of the least interesting subgenres in the horror field and it would be such a waste of his talent.


I honestly think its one of the most intersting types of horror movies, u just have to have a good take on the subject and play the idea abit.

28 Days/Weeks Later, Shawn of the Dead, and the Dawn remake were all great takes on the zombie genre. Id love to see him take the genre in a new direction.


Im looking forward to this. THE HILLS HAVE EYES remake was great and a much better movie then the original was.

[LordSimen]

Can we stop pretending this man will be responsible for the future of good horror films now?

Pretending? Who's pretending. Aja, Roth, Marshell, among others, are the future of the genre and will be responsible for continuing to allow the genre to maintain it's balls.

[DME]

I'm interested in seeing how Aja does with a film that might have a fleshed out storyline to it.

[MisterTwister]

I think I might be seeing this. Not sure.

[fervors]

Pretending? Who's pretending. Aja, Roth, Marshell, among others, are the future of the genre and will be responsible for continuing to allow the genre to maintain it's balls.

The only balls about these director's, bar Marshell, are the quality of their films. Balls.

[LordSimen]

The only balls about these director's, bar Marshell, are the quality of their films. Balls.

No, the balls they bring are the balls Hollywood cut off from the horror genre in the 90's. They brought the balls back. They gave horror fans a reason to be proud and the kind of movies they were asking for for years.

They are the future of horror. And their fans will continue to love them. No one's pretending, my friend.

[fervors]

I don't think there was any less "ballsiness" in 90's horror films, there was just a genre shift. Films such as Nightbreed, Braindead, Candyman, Body Melt, In the Mouth of Madness, Scream, Event Horizon, The Blair Witch Project...they're not "ballsy"? You talk of the films fans were asking for for years, what type of films are these? I think the fans just like to see change, and it's important for this genre especially to shift from time to time. Nothing is ever new, though. Roth and Aja have made films that just don't stand out that much from some of the best in the 90's. They're not the sort of films I ask for. The Descent was brilliant. The Mist was brilliant. The Devil's Backbone was brilliant. Bug was brilliant.

And, possibly the most "ballsy" horror film in donkeys years is 'Begotten', from the 90's funnily enough. I can see why fans do like these films you speak of, in no way am i saying they shouldn't. It's a fun genre, have fun with it. But, when we're speaking 'The Future of Horror'...Roth and Aja? They may have both had promising debuts, but I think people are putting too much hope in them. I mean, Kiefer Sutherland trying to stop spooks pulling faces at him in mirrors? Hopefully the future is cut short.

[ilovemovies]

I don't see what is so special about The Descent. It's not a bad movie but it's completely average. Nothing special.

Bug is a movie that wants to be the kind of truly disturbing movie that it gets under your skin but IMO it fails and just comes off as incredibly silly.

I liked The Mist a lot though.

I'm going to get crap for this but I think one of the better horror movies of recent years was (the incredibly underrated) Pulse. Now that is a movie that did manage to get under my skin. Very creepy movie. Never got the hate it got. I damn near loved it. I mean maybe some of the acting was spotty but otherwise I thought it was terrific.

I still say though the best recent horror movies are The Blair Witch Project and Open Water. Both are absolutely great movies.

And I disagree that Aja has made movies that don't stick out. The Hills Have Eyes had me on the edge of my seat for nearly the ENTIRE second half of the movie.

If it weren't for the stupid ending, I'd be praising High Tension, but the ending was bad enough that it did kind of ruin the movie.

So I'm half and half on Aja. I think this movie will be the tie breaker. If it's good then I'll be a big fan of Aja. If it sucks, well, I'm not sure.

[dellamorte dellamore]

I don't know man , i think the 90s was a sort of transition period for horror , kind of like genre purgatory . There were a couple of directors who seemed to experiment and looks as if they were the next big things like Larry Fessenden(Habit) , Soavi(DD), Myrick and Sanchez(Blair) , M Night(6th Sense , he became big after that but some people feel his output has gone downhill since , even if i disagree ) , then you had the uninspired stuff like Scream that only existed to cater to the mtv crowd .

There were some great films in that decade , Night 90 was one of the best , but there really was noone that took the genre by the nutsack and made it their own like Aja seems to be doing . It's not just him though , this past decade is to me another golden age of horror , some of the best films the genre has ever seen have been released in the 00's . You never really know how good these films are or what their impact will be until some time passes and you reflect on what has been released .


I wouldn't say Aja is leading the way , but he seems to be one of the few directors working today that is genuinely passionate about horror , and he's not in any rush to go mainstream like Snyder was in such a rush to do .

He's not using the genre as a springboard to mainstream fair , recognition , or acceptance , he truly respects it and his reverence for it can be seen in the two films he has already made . We need someone like this , not a hired gun who is looking to move on to other genres , but someone who embraces it to it's fullest extent , not just anyone though , someone who is immensely talented to carry the torch .

I remember when Carpenter was it in the 80s , he was all about horror and sci fi ( and a bit of goofy Kung Fu adventure :) ), he was dedicated and passionate about it , and he wasn't looking to do anything else , that's the type of directors we need .

Aja is one of the most intriguing horror directors working today , we should be encouraging someone like him not lamenting the state of the genre , because once again , some of the best horror of all time has been released this decade and Aja has made one terrific one and one great one , i'll let you decide which ones .

Now about that french zombie movie , ah , i have to see Mirrors first .

[Bourne101]

I don't see what is so special about The Descent. It's not a bad movie but it's completely average. Nothing special.

I agree. I thought it was above average, probably a 7 or 8/10, but it is nothing compared to some of the great horror films of this decade such as The Mist, and The Others.

I liked The Mist a lot though.

Yeah, easily one of the best horror films of the decade.

If it weren't for the stupid ending, I'd be praising High Tension, but the ending was bad enough that it did kind of ruin the movie.

Yep.

As for Mirrors, it's not playing at my theatre this weekend surprisingly (it's in 2600 theatres), so I probably won't be seeing it until it comes out on DVD. Shame, because although I don't think it looks like anything special, I was looking forward to seeing a horror movie in theatres for the first time in a while.

[dellamorte dellamore]

Personally , i always felt that Dog Soldiers is far superior to The Descent , i think that one is Marshall's best film so far . Descent is good , sometimes great , but overall it's only slightly above average and it becomes redundant , but there are enough inspired moments and creepy atmosphere to raise it above mediocre .


Yes , The Mist is one of the best horror films to come out this decade , but i would put Silent Hill on that list also , there's so many , we won't know just how important this time period was for horror until some more time passes .

[ilovemovies]

I definitely agree about Silent Hill. Great movie although I prefer the creepy and atmospheric elegance of the first two thirds to the rather over the top nature of the climax. Still great though.

[john_rambo]

I think this movie looks good... I dunno if I will catch it in theatres (I Doubt that mine will get it), but definitely on DVD.

[LordSimen]

I don't think there was any less "ballsiness" in 90's horror films, there was just a genre shift. Films such as Nightbreed, Braindead, Candyman, Body Melt, In the Mouth of Madness, Scream, Event Horizon, The Blair Witch Project...they're not "ballsy"?

They're the rare films with balls from the 90's. There's a couple more too, but they were in the minority during the 90's. Overall, mainstream horror was getting much outside of inferior Scream clones.

Then films like Cabin Fever came out. And awesome, ballsy horror films started becoming more abundant from there on out! Brilliant horror films like High Tension, Dog Soldiers, The Descent, Hostel, Saw, Dawn of the Dead 04, The Ring, The Hills Have Eyes, Dead & Breakfast, The Mist, Bug, Feast, 30 Days of Night, 28 Days Later, Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon, Hatchet, Bubba Ho-Tep, Land of the Dead, Shaun of the Dead, Undead, Sublime, fuck man I could go on and on.

We are in another golden age of horror films, one which I believe has recently surpassed the 80's and come close to the 70's as far as the quality of horror films being released. Aja, Roth, Marshell, these are the guys leading the pack. Bask in their glory! :D


I think the fans just like to see change, and it's important for this genre especially to shift from time to time. Nothing is ever new, though. Roth and Aja have made films that just don't stand out that much from some of the best in the 90's.

They stand out just as much as Candyman and Scream, because they're classics much like those two films.

They're not the sort of films I ask for.

They're the sort of films I asked for, as well as many other horror fans who complained throughout the 90's.


But, when we're speaking 'The Future of Horror'...Roth and Aja? They may have both had promising debuts, but I think people are putting too much hope in them.

They are the future because they combine the new with the old while also emueing their own style into the films. Not only they, they are the return of the old school horror directors who predominately directed horror films. The kind of directors who grew up watching horror films, love horror films and want nothing more than to keep making them.

[SpikeDurden]

I'll be seeing this first thing in the morning. There hasn't been a great horror film yet this year. (And I don't count Funny Games.)

[Mr.HyDe807]

I was gonna see this, but after the bad reviews and mostly giving bad reviewed horror movies the benefit of the doubt, I'm just gonna skip this one and avoid another "Happening".

I'll probably catch it on TV though.

[PreySlayDisplay]

I'll be seeing this first thing in the morning. There hasn't been a great horror film yet this year. (And I don't count Funny Games.)

No love for Midnight Meat Train? I mean, maybe it was only a 7/10 movie, but that's phenomenally better than the crappy One Missed Call or The Eye movies.


Anyways, just got back from Mirrors. Being a fan of High (Haute) Tension and The Hills Have Eyes remake, this was definitely the movie I was checking out this weekend, especially after this site gave The Clone Wars a 0/10. It was interesting seeing Alexandre Aja try his hand at a supernatural horror/thriller. Does he succeed? Not entirely, but the film still kind of works despite its many faults. He throws in enough startle moments, shock value and gore to make it's rather formulaic story passable. After it's incredibly boring start, the film picks up and gets interesting about half way through. Kiefer Sutherland did pretty well, but there were times when his acting seemed forced, just a little. So overall, not the best outing from Aja and crew, but it's definitely worth seeing once in my opinion. Cool opening title sequence from film editor Baxter. I give Mirrors a 6.5/10.

[FireCaptain4]

No love for Midnight Meat Train? I mean, maybe it was only a 7/10 movie, but that's phenomenally better than the crappy One Missed Call or The Eye movies.


Anyways, just got back from Mirrors. Being a fan of High (Haute) Tension and The Hills Have Eyes remake, this was definitely the movie I was checking out this weekend, especially after this site gave The Clone Wars a 0/10. It was interesting seeing Alexandre Aja try his hand at a supernatural horror/thriller. Does he succeed? Not entirely, but the film still kind of works despite its many faults. He throws in enough startle moments, shock value and gore to make it's rather formulaic story passable. After it's incredibly boring start, the film picks up and gets interesting about half way through. Kiefer Sutherland did pretty well, but there were times when his acting seemed forced, just a little. So overall, not the best outing from Aja and crew, but it's definitely worth seeing once in my opinion. Cool opening title sequence from film editor Baxter. I give Mirrors a 6.5/10.


Thanks Prey for your insight, it fills me with a little more hope. Unfortunately I got my wisdom teeth cut out and was unable to catch it today, but if I'm feeling beter tomorrow I'll definately be stopping by albeit with lower expectations. I made the mistake of stopping by the imdb boards earlier and not only heard an abundance of negativity, but even had spoilers thrown my way with no warning whatsoever.

One question though, without spoiling- is the films' CGI that bad, or is it passable?

[Bourne101]

I got my wisdom teeth cut out and was unable to catch it today, but if I'm feeling better tomorrow.

Eat dude, eat as much as possible. Just eat, eat, eat. Otherwise, you'll take the experience I had where I didn't feel like eating, didn't eat, took hardcore pain meds, and then puked like a motherfucker. EAT! Those meds needs something to absorb into!

Sorry for the off-topic medical tip, but I felt it was necessary.

[SpikeDurden]

I'll be seeing this first thing in the morning. There hasn't been a great horror film yet this year. (And I don't count Funny Games.)

Mirrors is really three films put into one, and because of that it is mostly unsuccessful as a complete package. First we have a ghost story remake of a Japanese horror film, the likes of which we have seen since 2002's The Ring. The second is a mystery film in which an ex police detective (have you seen this before? hmm) investigates a missing young girl, an old hospital, a dead security guard, and a burnt down department store. The third is a gruesome and violent gore-fest, the likes of which nobody has done better in recent years than Alexandre Aja in the Hills Have Eyes, who also directs this film.

There are certainly a few things that work in this film. Kiefer Sutherland is as solid as always, and he capably carries the film on his shoulders, playing a man trying to get his life back together all the while dealing with the crazy horrors around him. The gore-fest aspect of the film is also successful, because Aja knows what makes a truly disgusting and terrifying gory scene and he shoots them well and with real zest. Javier Navarette's score is also very chilling and sets the mood well. The rest of the film really falls flat. Paula Patton is nearly awful as Kiefer's wife, and the rest of the cast makes literally no impression. The ghost scenes are dull and lifeless and we've seen them thousands of times before. The mystery aspect of the film does come to something of an interesting and satisfying conclusion, however the majority of the investigation consists of Kiefer sitting at a table or a desk reading over files and newspaper clippings. Interesting cinema that does not make. To top it all off there are plot holes a many, things left unexplained, and one of the stupidest, poorly shot, melodramatic endings in recent memory.

I suppose the film entertained me for its runtime, but it is definitely a mess and I sadly can't recommend it. And I had decent hopes.

5/10

[SpikeDurden]

No love for Midnight Meat Train? I mean, maybe it was only a 7/10 movie, but that's phenomenally better than the crappy One Missed Call or The Eye movies.


Anyways, just got back from Mirrors. Being a fan of High (Haute) Tension and The Hills Have Eyes remake, this was definitely the movie I was checking out this weekend, especially after this site gave The Clone Wars a 0/10. It was interesting seeing Alexandre Aja try his hand at a supernatural horror/thriller. Does he succeed? Not entirely, but the film still kind of works despite its many faults. He throws in enough startle moments, shock value and gore to make it's rather formulaic story passable. After it's incredibly boring start, the film picks up and gets interesting about half way through. Kiefer Sutherland did pretty well, but there were times when his acting seemed forced, just a little. So overall, not the best outing from Aja and crew, but it's definitely worth seeing once in my opinion. Cool opening title sequence from film editor Baxter. I give Mirrors a 6.5/10.

I haven't had a chance to check out Midnight Meat Train. I guess after not really liking Mirrors my favorite horror film of the year so far has to be The Strangers (only a 6/10) or Cloverfield (7/10) if you count that as horror, which is definitely debatable.

As for the upcoming horror films of the year, nothing looks that good. The Haunting of Molly Hartley looks pretty bad, as does Saw V obviously. The only one I'm kind of looking forward to is Repo: The Genetic Opera, which I think could either be kind of awesome or absolutely terrible. But I seriously love me some Anthony Stewart Head, and I love musicals and horror films, so it could be a great mix. Anything I'm missing?

[FireCaptain4]

Eat dude, eat as much as possible. Just eat, eat, eat. Otherwise, you'll take the experience I had where I didn't feel like eating, didn't eat, took hardcore pain meds, and then puked like a motherfucker. EAT! Those meds needs something to absorb into!

Sorry for the off-topic medical tip, but I felt it was necessary.

Thanks for the advice man, much appreciated. I've been forcing down milkshakes but my appetite is shot to shit.

[Rapture27]

The trailer for this movie looked terrible.

Don't see how anyone can be amped for this. Aja needs to stick to strait up horror. High Tension was excellent and to all who said the ending sucked , wtf did u want to happen? The end was perfect.

Mirrors looks weak.

[ilovemovies]

I'll be seeing this first thing in the morning. There hasn't been a great horror film yet this year. (And I don't count Funny Games.)

Rent Rogue. It's a damn good movie. Probably the best horror movie of the year so far unless there is something I'm forgetting.

[FireCaptain4]

Rent Rogue. It's a damn good movie. Probably the best horror movie of the year so far unless there is something I'm forgetting.

I'm backing ilovemovies on this one, he's right. Rogue is a very good example of "less is more" horror and is one of the biggest suprises I've stumbled upon this year. I wouldn't say its great- but it's much better than any of the horror fair I can recall seeing this year so far.

[Bourne101]

Rent Rogue. It's a damn good movie. Probably the best horror movie of the year so far unless there is something I'm forgetting.

Saw that last night, it was pretty damn good.

[detective mills]

Spoilers




This movie irritated me a lot. For one thing, it's marketed as a gruesome horror movie, when in fact it's a mediocre ghost story with a couple of bloody death scenes. Also, you're never really sure what the limitations of the mirrors are. At first we're made to believe that one can only be hurt if they're looking into a mirror. However, then Amy Smart's character is killed after looking into a mirror and walking away. Then later, Paula Patton's character is slashed with a knife by a reflection, that is not even a reflection of anyone, and she herself isn't in the reflection. This doesn't make sense when only minutes prior she saves her daughter by taking her away from the mirror before more damage is done to her. There's no consistancy here.
The whole ending was also pretty stupid, with Keifer Sutherland fighting a poor-looking CGI old woman demon, and then ending up in the "mirror world" after apparently dying. It doesn't make any sense.
The acting is competant, but Keifer is pretty much playing Jack Bauer. I didn't expect much from this movie and I didn't get much. I had hoped from more from Alexandre Aja after Haute Tension and The Hills Have Eyes, but this is very disappointing, and I honestly have very little interest in his Pirhanna remake. I don't think I'll be checking for his work anymore in the near future.
The best part about this movie is the opening credits, which were done very well with the mirror images.





End Spoilers

4/10

[visual_tension]

The worst of Aja's films so far, but still nowhere near terrible.

I'll start with the bad stuff. Some of Sutherland's lines just don't fit. It's hard not to think of Jack Bauer when there's a constant flow of "Dammit!" being yelled throughout the movie. Also, too much time is spent with his character exploring the department store. Once or twice is fine, but three times? The running time could've been cut down a bit, especially when it came to the unfolding mystery behind the mirrors. And although the twist ending was cool, it felt awkward and could've been handled better.

Now, the good. The production design of the store itself is fantastic. Aja and DP Maxime Alexandre really utilize it and the whole mirror aspect to get some nice shots and build some effective tension. There are some creepy moments that reminded me of Silent Hill (both the games and the movie). Despite the delivery of some of his dialogue, Sutherland is good for the most part.

Overall, Mirrors is a decent horror film that should've been great. Aja didn't go as far as he should have with what the mirrors could do. It could've been taken to another level, but I was satisfied with what I got.

7/10

[chinton]

i was going to see this. I mean after all i've seen Ajas last two films even though Hills Have eyes is wildly overrated by most people here. Still it sounds like from reviews this film did exactly what i was fearing it would. even from the previews it looks like they either didn't bother to give rules or just messed them up. I mean maybe the film gives a coherent working mythology behind why the evil in the mirrors can suddenly go to mirrors to any reflective surface.

Anyway ill probably rent.



By the way I fucking hate the phrase balls to the wall or ballsy horror films. what does that mean? That doesn't even denote quality it simply a phrase to describe how gory it is.

And by the way I hated Cabin Fever. Ya I said it. I liked it once but I've seen the error of my ways. Films like Session 9 will always scare me more than any Hostel, Saw, or Cabin Fever.

[MovieMaven73]

Rent Rogue. It's a damn good movie. Probably the best horror movie of the year so far unless there is something I'm forgetting.

Is that a joke? Rogue is as scary as pile of dog shit.

[chinton]

Rogue is actually very good. The story is basic but all the actors treat the subject seriously and there are several well- rounded and likable character. Its also beautiful to look it. Its one of the better horror films to come out in a while. Of course a horror that is actually good gets relegated to STD.

[MovieMaven73]

I have to admit the alligator was done well. But it really wasn't "scary". A fun movie if you had nothing else to watch. But if you wanted something with to really scare you Rogue ain't it. And to categorize it in the best horror movie of the year in any sense whatsoever....is stretching it too far!!

[Bourne101]

And to categorize it in the best horror movie of the year in any sense whatsoever....is stretching it too far!!

Then what do you propose is better. I'm not sure if it is the best horror film of the year, but it was damn good and I would be 100% supportive of someone if they said it was the best horror film of the year.

[Lazy Boy]

I haven't seen Rogue yet, so I personally can't comment on it's quality, but I think Inside is the best horror film (so far) this year.

[Bourne101]

I haven't seen Rogue yet, so I personally can't comment on it's quality, but I think Inside is the best horror film (so far) this year.

It would be my favorite too... but it is a 2007 release.

[Lazy Boy]

It would be my favorite too... but it is a 2007 release.

Okay, but it wasn't released in any U.S. theater as far as I know in '07, unless I overlooked it...it's sort of a slippery slope, the IMDB says 2007, but did it really play here in the states, at least until DVD release of this year? I'm sort of confused about where to place it.

[chinton]

Honestly very few horror films genuinely scare me. The few that did I think are well-known on this board.


I'm just saying that I think Rogue is best well-rounded horror film. It had beautiful landscapes, well done characters, nice acting by mostly everyone and a well done crocodile. The end was a bit overkill but it was a well made film.

[Bourne101]

Okay, but it wasn't released in any U.S. theater as far as I know in '07, unless I overlooked it...it's sort of a slippery slope, the IMDB says 2007, but did it really play here in the states, at least until DVD release of this year?

I don't know if it ever played in a theatre in the US. It opened in theatres overseas in 2007, and premiered in the US at a film festival in 2007. If we look at it from a foreign film standpoint it's a 2007 release. Kind of like when a film is nominated for Best Foreign Film. Generally those films don't get released into the States until the next year.

[visual_tension]

It would be my favorite too... but it is a 2007 release.

Rogue is 2007 as well.

Since it's being discussed, I might as well throw in my opinion about the film. I liked it a lot. Wolf Creek was a gorgeous-looking film, so I wasn't surprised that Rogue had the same quality.

[Bourne101]

Rogue is 2007 as well.

Since it's being discussed, I might as well throw in my opinion about the film. I liked it a lot. Wolf Creek was a gorgeous-looking film, so I wasn't surprised that Rogue had the same quality.

Yeah, Wolf Creek is criminally underrated. It has more balls than nearly every horror film released this decade.

[MovieMaven73]

Then what do you propose is better.

I can make a list if you want.

Okay, but it wasn't released in any U.S. theater as far as I know in '07...but did it really play here in the states, at least until DVD release of this year?

I don't know if it ever played in a theatre in the US. It opened in theatres overseas in 2007.....Generally those films don't get released into the States until the next year.

It went straight to DVD.

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd184/jason_1973/Movies/Rogue/rogue-small.jpg

[Bourne101]

I can make a list if you want.

Please do.

It went straight to DVD.

No actually, it played in theatres overseas, and even received a limited release in the States earlier this year.

[MovieMaven73]

Please do.



That is just some. I could go on and on......


Them (Ils)
The Tripper
The Girl Next Door
The Reeker
All the Boys Love Mandy Lane
Rob Zombie's Halloween
Rec
Vacancy
Shrooms
The Deaths of Ian Stone
Zodiac
Alone
Dead Silence
The Mist
The Cottage
Waz
Funny Games

[Bourne101]

That is just some. I could go on and on......


Them (Ils)
The Tripper
The Girl Next Door
The Reeker
All the Boys Love Mandy Lane
Rob Zombie's Halloween
Rec
Vacancy
Shrooms
The Deaths of Ian Stone
Zodiac
Alone
Dead Silence
The Mist
The Cottage
Waz
Funny Games

I meant 2008, I guess it has been established that it was a 2007 release, but even still...


Them (Ils)- 2006 release
The Tripper- 2006 release
The Girl Next Door- Not really what I would call a horror film
The Reeker- Terrible
All the Boys Love Mandy Lane- 2006 release
Rob Zombie's Halloween- Maybe
Rec- Agree
Vacancy- Not that good
Shrooms- Dreadful
The Deaths of Ian Stone- Medicore
Zodiac- Not a horror film
Alone- Terrible
Dead Silence- Medicore
The Mist- Agree
The Cottage- Terrible
Waz- Terrible
Funny Games- Agree

So really, I agree that REC, The Mist, and Funny Games are better than Rogue, possibly Rob Zombie's Halloween. Other than that, the rest you listed were either shitty movies, movies that weren't horror movies, or movies that weren't released in 2007 or 2008. And if you were going by 2007, Funny Games doesn't count, it's a 2008 release.

[MovieMaven73]

I meant 2008, I guess it has been established that it was a 2007 release, but even still...


Them (Ils)- 2006 release
The Tripper- 2006 release
The Girl Next Door- Not really what I would call a horror film
The Reeker- Terrible
All the Boys Love Mandy Lane- 2006 release
Rob Zombie's Halloween- Maybe
Rec- Agree
Vacancy- Not that good
Shrooms- Dreadful
The Deaths of Ian Stone- Medicore
Zodiac- Not a horror film
Alone- Terrible
Dead Silence- Medicore
The Mist- Agree
The Cottage- Terrible
Waz- Terrible
Funny Games- Agree

So really, I agree that REC, The Mist, and Funny Games are better than Rogue, possibly Rob Zombie's Halloween. Other than that, the rest you listed were either shitty movies, movies that weren't horror movies, or movies that weren't released in 2007 or 2008. And if you were going by 2007, Funny Games doesn't count, it's a 2008 release.

I saw all those in 2007 (except for Funny Games) Funny Games just was added to the list another film better than Rogue.

[DME]

I'd consider The Girl Next Door a horror film. But I tend to favor inclusiveness. Still, it's based on a horror novel by a well-regarded horror author and has a very horrific tone, even if it's also dramatic. Just my two cents.

[FireCaptain4]

Yeah, Wolf Creek is criminally underrated. It has more balls than nearly every horror film released this decade.

The first time I watched it was back whenever it first came onto DVD and I hated it then. Of course, I was much younger and my tastes where very different. I just rented it two weeks ago (interested after seeing and enjoying Rogue so much). I loved Wolf Creek the second time around. For such a violent and shocking film, it really only has a few scenes that worthy of the term "bloody"; it's probably the closest thing to a modern Texas Chain Saw Massacre we have. On the day I returned it to Hastings, I ended up buying myself a copy.

[MovieMaven73]

I'd consider The Girl Next Door a horror film. But I tend to favor inclusiveness. Still, it's based on a horror novel by a well-regarded horror author and has a very horrific tone, even if it's also dramatic. Just my two cents.

Thank you DME. Girl Next Door is known to be one of the best horror films of 2007 by many horror sites and by me as well. It is hard to watch at some points, which gave it the perfect tone for the picture. I watch plenty of movies to know what really is worth my time. And Girl Next Door was well worth the hour and a half that it lasted.

[Bourne101]

I saw all those in 2007 (except for Funny Games) Funny Games just was added to the list another film better than Rogue.

It doesn't matter when you saw them, a lot of them are 2006 releases.

[Bourne101]

Thank you DME. Girl Next Door is known to be one of the best horror films of 2007 by many horror sites and by me as well. It is hard to watch at some points, which gave it the perfect tone for the picture. I watch plenty of movies to know what really is worth my time. And Girl Next Door was well worth the hour and a half that it lasted.

I'm not saying that it's a bad film, in fact, it's a pretty good film, but I just don't see it as a horror film. It's much more of a drama.

[Bourne101]

Regardless, we've gotten way off topic... back to discussing Mirrors.

[TheHutch23]

I trust Aja's work, so eventually at some point I am going to see this. The main concern that I have is this feels like one of those movies that can really get into your head, but by the second half most questions are answered and we are left with a more singular and flatter story through to the ending.

As much as I liked Haute Tension, like many others (In this thread and elsewhere) felt that the ending was a disappointment. Far too many films, not only of this particular genre, seem to be stuck not knowing how to finish things off. More often than not, things get taken in the very directions we as viewers hope that they do not take.

As previously stated, however, I will certainly give this a chance for the sake of being an Aja fan.

[LordSimen]

I'd definitely consider The Girl Next Door to be a horror film.

[Backstabba]

I'd definitely consider The Girl Next Door to be a horror film.

Coming from someone who thought the book would suck..Then read the book and loved it. The movie was realllllyy disappointing. In MY opinion, at least...
What did that have to do with the genre argument?
I'd say it's a drama with horror elements. Like a crime drama.

[MisterTwister]

Rent Rogue. It's a damn good movie. Probably the best horror movie of the year so far unless there is something I'm forgetting.

Rogue is pretty good but far from the best horror film of the year.

[MisterTwister]

I meant 2008, I guess it has been established that it was a 2007 release, but even still...



Waz- Terrible


.


Waz was fantastic and among the best horror films of this year. I'm not convinced you watched it. Re-watch I say! (makes whipping motion)

[someguy]

The Tripper- 2006 release
All the Boys Love Mandy Lane- 2006 release


You're wrong on these two. The Tripper was shopped around at fests before being released in the US on April 20th last year (it got a DVD release in October of 2007). All The Boys Love Mandy Lane had its premiere at the Toronto Fest's midnight madness line-up in 2006 before being held hostage by the Weinsteins. It's now coming out this year from another production company.

[ilovemovies]

Rogue is pretty good but far from the best horror film of the year.

There has only been a few decent horror movies this year.

Rogue, The Ruins, Rec, Cloverfield and I also liked The Eye though most people hated that one.

But most of the horror movies this year are shit like One Missed Call, The Strangers, The Happening, Shutter.

So I don't think it's a stretch to call Rogue the best horror movie of the year.

[MisterTwister]

There has only been a few decent horror movies this year.

Rogue, The Ruins, Rec, Cloverfield and I also liked The Eye though most people hated that one.

But most of the horror movies this year are shit like One Missed Call, The Strangers, The Happening, Shutter.

So I don't think it's a stretch to call Rogue the best horror movie of the year.

Well you haven't seen the whole lot of them yet but I agree The Ruins, Rec and Cloverfield were aces.

No comment on The Eye and The Strangers because I have not seen them yet but agree Shutter, One Missed Call and especially The Happening were shit.

[ilovemovies]

Which horror movies did I miss then? I'm curious because I've pretty sure I've seen most of them.

[MisterTwister]

Which horror movies did I miss then? I'm curious because I've pretty sure I've seen most of them.

Have you seen Inside, Frontiers, Them, Storm Warning and countless others. Looooong list man.

Looking at your list, again, you have seen some really good ones. Didn't mean to fart on your parade.

[ilovemovies]

I've seen Them and it is really good but I'm pretty sure it's a 2007 movie.

[MovieMaven73]

I agree with Inside and Storm Warning. Two excellent films. Frontiers was ok. Cloverfield i own on Blu-Ray and I enjoyed that immensely.

[daddiefatsacks]

is it true a piece of glass bites kiefer sutherland?

[FireCaptain4]

Hey guys, I caught Mirrors yesterday but just got around to writing a review. Here it is:

(*****Review Contains Minor Spoilers*****)

"Mirrors" is the third horror feature directed by young and aspiring horror maestro Alexandre Aja. Now, as a fan of the horror genre I enjoyed both of Aja's previous films quite immensely, despite their flaws, and was greatly anticipating Aja's take on the supernatural side of the horror realm. Asian horror films are a major target of movie studios nowadays and their remakes flood the market with mostly poor results. "Mirrors" itself is a remake of the Korean horror film "Into the Mirror". While Aja's remake is more interesting than quite a few of the more recent Asian remakes (such as "The Eye", "Shutter", and "One Missed Call"), it is still a highly flawed and ultimately disappointing, especially since it's from a director I've come to admire. Let's start with the acting department.

Kiefer Sutherland carries the film by himself at times, most notably the first 30 minutes or so. Once the film continues, Kiefer's acting bounces in and out of believability. Sometimes his acting feels forced and other times his reactions are laughable. The rest of the supporting cast does virtually nothing to help Sutherland. Sutherland's wife, played by the beautiful but immensely untalented Paula Patton, is perhaps the most irritating characters during the 110 minutes journey. I must mention, however, Amy Smart's brief role in the film. She is easily the most intriguing character inside of Ben Carson's (Suthland's) horror story, yet she is only in the film for a brief time before she is (in rather gruesome fashion) taken out of the picture.

One of the films' most notable flaws is its a times' extremely weak executed CGI. In one scene, Sutherland is tricked by a mirror and believes he is "on fire". The resulting scene is one of the most ridiculous and laughable in the film. Several other effects scenes in the film seem rushed as well and come off as ineffective.

The story is also disappointing since many threads are left hanging and the ending, while trying to be clever, is ultimately unsatisfying. Half of the film seems to be in a mental hiccup and much of the movie's runtime could have been cut down in order to better service the story and attention of the audience.

Despite my major disappointment, I must say Aja's directing and style wasn't a problem. Every scene shot within the confines of the "Mayflower" has haunting and creepy. Aja states his biggest inspiration while working on "Mirrors" was Kubrick's "The Shining" and it becomes evident with how he manages the atmosphere within the burned building. Aja also gives us a few scenes of great gore, but this is easily the most tame of his works yet. Thus, another disappointment since many horror fans will be expecting much more bloodshed.

The films' score was one of the biggest surprises for me and will probably be missed by many viewers. I found myself listening to Javier Navarrete's score during many of the more uninteresting scenes.

All-in-all, "Mirrors" is a heavily flawed film that held much promise. In the end, Aja relies to much on cheap gimmicks for scares and doesn't spend enough time on other important elements of the film. Although I'm undoubtedly frustrated in his latest effort in the horror genre, I will still line up for whatever Aja makes next since I believe this could have been a thorough learning experience for the still young director.

5/10

[Bourne101]

Waz was fantastic and among the best horror films of this year. I'm not convinced you watched it. Re-watch I say! (makes whipping motion)

Oh I definitely saw it, and it was pretty terrible.

You're wrong on these two. The Tripper was shopped around at fests before being released in the US on April 20th last year (it got a DVD release in October of 2007). All The Boys Love Mandy Lane had its premiere at the Toronto Fest's midnight madness line-up in 2006 before being held hostage by the Weinsteins. It's now coming out this year from another production company.

Well, regardless, The Tripper sucked ASS. I have yet to see Mandy Lane though. I can't imagine it is too good if it's been delayed since 2006.

Have you seen Inside, Frontiers, Them, Storm Warning and countless others. Looooong list man.

Looking at your list, again, you have seen some really good ones. Didn't mean to fart on your parade.

Again, Inside is a 2007 release. Haven't seen Frontiers, although I'm going to check it out soon. Them is a 2006 release. Storm Warning wasn't bad, but it wasn't anything special. I also believe it had an official release in 2007 in Russia.

Here is an official list of horror films released (in theatres, limited or wide release) in 2008:

One Missed Call
Teeth
The Eye
Diary of the Dead
The Signal
Funny Games
Shutter
The Ruins
Prom Night
Pathology
Rogue
The Strangers
Midnight Meat Train
Mirrors

None of those had a positive general consensus (save for Rogue), which would mean that anyone saying that to categorize it in the best horror movie of the year in any sense whatsoever....is stretching it too far!! is simply pointless. I think Funny Games, The Ruins, and The Strangers are better than Rogue, but that doesn't mean that someone else has to agree, or that if someone said they enjoyed Shutter, I should condemn them for it. Let's face it, 2008 horror has been SHIT, with the really only great horror film being Funny Games, which draws subjectivity up the ying yang. The point of this argument wasn't to prove how many films were better than Rogue, but to prove that it is just plain stupid to condemn someone for thinking that Rogue is the best horror film of the year so far.

That is all.

[someguy]

Well, regardless, The Tripper sucked ASS. I have yet to see Mandy Lane though. I can't imagine it is too good if it's been delayed since 2006.

Yeah, The Tripper was a pretty bad movie but I was just correcting you on the fact that it's not an 06 release (I guess IMDB determines the year based on the first screening or when production is completed instead of when it's released in its home country).

By the way, you should know that Mandy Lane isn't actually being pushed back because it's not good. It actually got good reviews at the Toronto Fest when it premiered (Arrow gave it a highly positive review) and the Weinsteins immediately bought it up. They were planning to give it a nice theatrical release but after Grindhouse bombed they pulled it off the schedule since keeping it would save them more money than releasing it. It took nearly two years before another distributor came in and bought it off of them. I can also say that I've seen the movie and that it didn't deserve the treatment it got.

[Bourne101]

By the way, you should know that Mandy Lane isn't actually being pushed back because it's not good. It actually got good reviews at the Toronto Fest when it premiered (Arrow gave it a highly positive review) and the Weinsteins immediately bought it up. They were planning to give it a nice theatrical release but after Grindhouse bombed they pulled it off the schedule since keeping it would save them more money than releasing it. It took nearly two years before another distributor came in and bought it off of them. I can also say that I've seen the movie and that it didn't deserve the treatment it got.

Good to know.

[FireCaptain4]

By the way, you should know that Mandy Lane isn't actually being pushed back because it's not good. It actually got good reviews at the Toronto Fest when it premiered (Arrow gave it a highly positive review) and the Weinsteins immediately bought it up. They were planning to give it a nice theatrical release but after Grindhouse bombed they pulled it off the schedule since keeping it would save them more money than releasing it. It took nearly two years before another distributor came in and bought it off of them. I can also say that I've seen the movie and that it didn't deserve the treatment it got.

Cool, I was wondering if Mandy Lane was worth adding to my queue. I'll keep my head up for it.

[MisterTwister]

Again, Inside is a 2007 release. Haven't seen Frontiers, although I'm going to check it out soon. Them is a 2006 release. Storm Warning wasn't bad, but it wasn't anything special. I also believe it had an official release in 2007 in Russia.

.

Inside was not OFFICALLY released until 2008 in the USA, same for Them. They count as 2008 films. Storm Warning, too.

[MovieMaven73]

I have yet to see Mandy Lane though. I can't imagine it is too good if it's been delayed since 2006.

It had distribution problems. Mandy Lane is one of this years best films. Yes this years. It was finished in 2006 and had premieres in "festivals" in 2006-2007. It received a theatrical release in the UK on February 15, 2008, and receives a U.S release sometime (supposedly) this month.

Here is an official list of horror films released (in theatres, limited or wide release) in 2008:

One Missed Call - http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd184/jason_1973/Misc/0box.gif - Sucked like shit.
Teeth - http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd184/jason_1973/Misc/5box.gif
The Eye - The original was better
Diary of the Dead - http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd184/jason_1973/Misc/1box.gif - Sucked
The Signal - http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd184/jason_1973/Misc/5box.gif
Funny Games - http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd184/jason_1973/Misc/5box.gif
Shutter - Sucked like shit.
The Ruins - http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd184/jason_1973/Misc/3box.gif
Prom Night- - Mediocre. The original was better all the way.
Pathology - Haven't seen it
Rogue - http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd184/jason_1973/Misc/35box.gif
The Strangers - http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd184/jason_1973/Misc/35box.gif - The original was better
Midnight Meat Train - No grade. It hasn't been released yet where i live. :(
Mirrors - Haven't seen it yet


I think Funny Games, The Ruins, and The Strangers are better than Rogue, but that doesn't mean that someone else has to agree, or that if someone said they enjoyed Shutter, I should condemn them for it. ...The point of this argument wasn't to prove how many films were better than Rogue, but to prove that it is just plain stupid to condemn someone for thinking that Rogue is the best horror film of the year so far.


You are right. Some people might agree with your opinions, some people might not. To condemn someone for not liking a film is not right. Correct. If someone thinks Rogue is the best horror picture of the year, its their opinion. I am not condemning them. :eek:

[Bourne101]

Inside was not OFFICALLY released until 2008 in the USA, same for Them. They count as 2008 films. Storm Warning, too.

Inside, yes. Them, no. Them was released in August of 2007 in the USA. Storm Warning, sure, but it wasn't that good anyway.

[MisterTwister]

I'm actually glad people are digging Rogue. It's a pretty decent film. Mandy Lane is one of my favorites of the year. Great flick.

[MisterTwister]

Inside, yes. Them, no. Them was released in August of 2007 in the USA. Storm Warning, sure, but it wasn't that good anyway.

I'm sorry but limited theater screenings or film festivals don't count. Them was not offically released until this year.

And what does Storm Warning not that being that good have to do with the release date? Makes no sense.

[FireCaptain4]

One Missed Call - http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd184/jason_1973/Misc/0box.gif - Sucked like shit.
Teeth - http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd184/jason_1973/Misc/5box.gif
The Eye - The original was better
Diary of the Dead - http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd184/jason_1973/Misc/1box.gif - Sucked
The Signal - http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd184/jason_1973/Misc/5box.gif
Funny Games - http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd184/jason_1973/Misc/5box.gif
Shutter - Sucked like shit.
The Ruins - http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd184/jason_1973/Misc/3box.gif
Prom Night- - Mediocre. The original was better all the way.
Pathology - Haven't seen it
Rogue - http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd184/jason_1973/Misc/35box.gif
The Strangers - http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd184/jason_1973/Misc/35box.gif - The original was better
Midnight Meat Train - No grade. It hasn't been released yet where i live. :(
Mirrors - Haven't seen it yet


So is Teeth that good? I've had it shelved on my Netflix Queue for awhile but haven't heard enough to make me want to put it on the top.

From your ratings, it seems I have simular tastes to your own. I'll probably take your word for it.

[Bourne101]

It had distribution problems. Mandy Lane is one of this years best films. Yes this years. It was finished in 2006 and had premieres in "festivals" in 2006-2007. It received a theatrical release in the UK on February 15, 2008, and receives a U.S release sometime (supposedly) this month.

I highly doubt it's one of the years best films. Maybe one of the best horror films of the year. And by the sounds of it, Mandy Lane won't be getting a theatrical release, and if it does it will be dumped like Midnight Meat Train.

The Strangers - http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd184/jason_1973/Misc/35box.gif - The original was better

There is no original.

You are right. Some people might agree with your opinions, some people might not. To condemn someone for not liking a film is not right. Correct. If someone thinks Rogue is the best horror picture of the year, its their opinion. I am not condemning them. :eek:

to categorize it in the best horror movie of the year in any sense whatsoever....is stretching it too far!!

Hmm...

[visual_tension]

Inside was not OFFICALLY released until 2008 in the USA, same for Them. They count as 2008 films. Storm Warning, too.

If a film gets its first theatrical release or major festival screenings in 2007, it's a 2007 film. Being released in the USA in 2008 doesn't change that.

[Bourne101]

So is Teeth that good? I've had it shelved on my Netflix Queue for awhile but haven't heard enough to make me want to put it on the top.

Teeth was pretty shitty, IMO, but some people have really enjoyed it, so I'd say check it out.

[MisterTwister]

I highly doubt it's one of the years best films. Maybe one of the best horror films of the year. And by the sounds of it, Mandy Lane won't be getting a theatrical release, and if it does it will be dumped like Midnight Meat Train.





Why can't it be among the best of the year? Because it's a horror film?

[MisterTwister]

If a film gets its first theatrical release or major festival screenings in 2007, it's a 2007 film. Being released in the USA in 2008 doesn't change that.

WRONG-O!

Try again.

[Bourne101]

I'm sorry but limited theater screenings or film festivals don't count. Them was not offically released until this year.

So There Will Be Blood is a 2008 release? Pan's Labyrinth was a 2007 release? No. Limited releases certainly count, and you realize that the world is more than just the US. Them was released all around the world in 2006 and 2007.

[Bourne101]

Why can't it be among the best of the year? Because it's a horror film?

If it was one of the best of the year, I'm pretty sure someone would have made an effort to get it out in one of the past THREE years. And from what I've heard, it's a solid film, but nothing spectacular.

[visual_tension]

WRONG-O!

Try again.

LOL. Seriously?

If Battle Royale were to get its official DVD release in the USA next year, would that make it a 2009 film?

No.

[MisterTwister]

So There Will Be Blood is a 2008 release? Pan's Labyrinth was a 2007 release? No. Limited releases certainly count, and you realize that the world is more than just the US. Them was released all around the world in 2006 and 2007.

I'm not counting other places. I could give a flying fuck if it was released in Russia or elsewhere in 2006 or 2007, I'm only counting the USA because that's all I care about release date wise.

[Bourne101]

I'm not counting other places. I could give a flying fuck if it was released in Russia or elsewhere in 2006 or 2007, I'm only counting the USA because that's all I care about release date wise.

Well, you do realize that you are on a board with people on it from all around the world. Just because you live in the USA doesn't mean that a movie has to be released in the USA to be an "official" release.

And even so, limited releases in the US still count. There Will Be Blood was a 2007 film, Pan's Labyrinth was a 2006 film. Not 2008 and 2007 respectively.

[MisterTwister]

LOL. Seriously?

If Battle Royale were to get its official DVD release in the USA next year, would that make it a 2009 film?

No.

You can get it on DVD on Amazon and Hot Topic so you can easily watch it.

So WRONG-O to you, AGAIN. Damn you're on a roll.

[MisterTwister]

Well, you do realize that you are on a board with people on it from all around the world. Just because you live in the USA doesn't mean that a movie has to be released in the USA to be an "official" release.

And even so, limited releases in the US still count. There Will Be Blood was a 2007 film, Pan's Labyrinth was a 2006 film. Not 2008 and 2007 respectively.

Sorry I meant official US release. Sorry that wasn't clear.

[Bourne101]

You can get it on DVD on Amazon and Hot Topic so you can easily watch it.

So WRONG-O to you, AGAIN. Damn you're on a roll.

Well, I could buy Them online in 2006 and 2007, so I guess going by your criteria Them is a 2006 release.

[Bourne101]

Sorry I meant official US release. Sorry that wasn't clear.

What? You make no sense.

There Will Be Blood is considered a 2007 release, no matter how you cut it. Jutst because it didn't receive a wide release until 2008, doesn't mean that it's going to be on the top 10 lists of 2008. Them was also released under similar circumstances and is a 2007 (American) release. In actuality, it is a 2006 release.

[MisterTwister]

I'm through with this. Going nowhere. Same shit back and forth. I think it's 2008, you think 2006/07.

The end.

[visual_tension]

You can get it on DVD on Amazon and Hot Topic so you can easily watch it.

So WRONG-O to you, AGAIN. Damn you're on a roll.

Wow. Re-read my post.

I said OFFICIAL release. It has not been OFFICIALLY released on DVD in the USA.

Having access to the film doesn't change a thing.

Your logic is flawed.

[MisterTwister]

So has anyone else seen Mirrors?

[MisterTwister]

Wow. Re-read my post.

I said OFFICIAL release. It has not been OFFICIALLY released on DVD in the USA.

Having access to the film doesn't change a thing.

Your logic is flawed.

Wrong, AGAIN AND AGAIN. Please dude, STOP:D

[MisterTwister]

What? You make no sense.

There Will Be Blood is considered a 2007 release, no matter how you cut it. Jutst because it didn't receive a wide release until 2008, doesn't mean that it's going to be on the top 10 lists of 2008. Them was also released under similar circumstances and is a 2007 (American) release. In actuality, it is a 2006 release.

What the hell? I wasn't even talking about There Will Be Blood!?

[FireCaptain4]

This thread has gone really off topic. I can't even remember how we went from A to B, guys? I wanna know what others think about Mirrors because I was on all kinds of meds when seeing it yesterday.

[Bourne101]

What the hell? I wasn't even talking about There Will Be Blood!?

That's beside the point. You said Them didn't get an official release until 2008, yet I would assume you would consider There Will Be Blood a 2007 release (if you don't you're simply wrong), which would mean that Them is a 2007 release.

[MisterTwister]

This thread has gone really off topic. I can't even remember how we went from A to B, guys? I wanna know what others think about Mirrors because I was on all kinds of meds when seeing it yesterday.

I tried but they pulled me back in.

I am curious to see what more people think of Mirrors.

[MisterTwister]

That's beside the point. You said Them didn't get an official release until 2008, yet I would assume you would consider There Will Be Blood a 2007 release (if you don't you're simply wrong), which would mean that Them is a 2007 release.

Please stop. You won, even though I still disagree. Let's hug and get back to Mirrors...

[MovieMaven73]

There is no original.








Goes to show you how much you know about horror films. The original is entitled Them (or Ils). Here (www.themthefilm.com) is its website.

Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wlv4XrMpC48&feature=related) is the trailer for Ils, which came to America translated to Them. Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFTbcDRkG1o&feature=related) is the (longer) trailer for it in English by Dark Sky Films. Them is now on video. It then was remade to The Strangers.

An Ils came out 2006 ...not 2007.

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd184/jason_1973/Posters/ils.jpg

[MovieMaven73]

Goes to show you how much you know about horror films. The original is entitled Them (or Ils). Here (www.themthefilm.com) is its website.

Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wlv4XrMpC48&feature=related) is the trailer for Ils, which came to America then translated to Them. Here is the (longer) trailer for it in English by Dark Sky Films. Them is now on video. It then was remade to The Strangers.

And Ils came out 2006.....not 2007.

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd184/jason_1973/Posters/ils.jpg.

[Bourne101]

Goes to show you how much you know about horror films. The original is entitled Them (or Ils). Here (www.themthefilm.com) is its website.

Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wlv4XrMpC48&feature=related) is the trailer for Ils, which came to America then translated to Them. Here is the (longer) trailer for it in English by Dark Sky Films. Them is now on video. It then was remade to The Strangers.

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd184/jason_1973/Posters/ils.jpg

Uh... goes to show how much you know about horror films. The Strangers is NOT a remake of Them.

Try backing up your useless insults with some facts.

End of story.

[Bourne101]

And Ils came out 2006.....not 2007.

I've always said it came out in 2006. I was simply talking under the "criteria" of MisterTwister. You were the one who originally said it came out in 2007.

[MovieMaven73]

You were the one who originally said it came out in 2007.

I said I saw it 2007.

[Bourne101]

I said I saw it 2007.

Well whoopdy fuckin' doo. That's beside the point. You just corrected me saying that it came out in 2006, when I've said it was a 2006 release all along.

Wow...

[TheHutch23]

Well whoopdy fuckin' doo. That's beside the point. You just corrected me saying that it came out in 2006, when I've said it was a 2006 release all along.

Wow...

No sense in arguing with an account that's about to be banned, hello cooder pictures... :eek:

BTW that profile is definetly NSFW, if anybody's thinking of clicking on it.

[Bourne101]

No sense in arguing with an account that's about to be banned, hello cooder pictures... :eek:

BTW that profile is definetly NSFW, if anybody's thinking of clicking on it.

Indeed.

Thanks for the heads up. ;)

[Max Cady]

So was this movie good or not?

[LordSimen]

Strangers was not a rip off or a remake of Them. They were simply based on the same real life incident. Kind of like how all three Silence of the Lambs, Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Psycho were all based on Ed Gein.

[FireCaptain4]

So was this movie good or not?

I thought it was average. Nothing really special, but then again I was drugged when watching it so maybe a second opinion would give you a better idea.

[FireCaptain4]

Strangers was not a rip off or a remake of Them. They were simply based on the same real life incident. Kind of like how all three Silence of the Lambs, Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Psycho were all based on Ed Gein.

If that's indeed true, then what the hell where they based on? I mean, nobody has REALLY been able to uncover the event that The Strangers was based on. Can anyone find details on these supposed "Hoyte family vacation murders"? Honestly, I think it's all shenanigans- a selling point for the film.

[Danger^Cart]

Jack Bauer...DEMON SLAYER!

5/10

The style/direction during the climax was pretty fucking good, though. And Amy smart looks better now.

[Rant]

Just got back. I would say it was about 90% Horror Cliches. *SPOILERS* Loud Music Cues, Check. Animal that pops out during loud music cue, Check. Follow the person in front of the mirror down to the sink, only to rise up and have there be something spooky in the reflection (I'll admit, with the title, this one was bound to happen, but still, come on.), Check. The Flashlight is on the Fritz, Check. Ridiculously hot Ladies barley clothed, Check. Dumbass that sticks around in a scary place while weird shit is going down, Check. The 'Nobody Believes Me?!' routine, Check. The Kid who sees "ghosts" with a parent that doesn't believe them until too late, Check. The I'll get to the bottom of this by seeming crazy and risking everything driving out to bum-fuck-Egypt 3rd act, Check. Bunch of shit I could have cared less about, Check. All this film lacked was the Cell phone not working routine, but wait! Super Hottie Mom drops her cordless in some water and it stops working, that counts right? CHECK!!!

And 10% Gregory Nicotero doing what he does best, making shitty horror flicks just cool enough for me not to get pissed off about spending money on them.

I have to say, at the end when Sutherland fights the Demon, I was so hoping that Kiefer would turn into a Vampire and fly around the room exchanging blows with that crazy bitch in some crazy non-sequitur fuck the audience, but please the '80's Fanboy extravaganza! But alas, no.

[Danger^Cart]

I thought Aja's direction during the demon fight was fantastic. He really invoked a sense of claustrophobia.

Though completely retarded.

[Ender]

GETTING BACK TO THE MOVIE...

Since horror movies these days are pretty stale fare, MIRRORS had a pretty low bar to clear. Although the trailer and concept looked cliche, it had some good things going for it, with the always-brilliant Kiefer Sutherland in the lead and the truly sadistic Alexandre Aja at the helm. Although most American audiences now Aja only from the mediocre THE HILLS HAVE EYES and it's really lame sequel, his earlier HIGH TENSION was one of the most gruesome, nerve-straining horror flicks of the last decade (it didn't make a speck of fucking sense, but hey, neither did ZARDOZ). So what'd we end up with?

Average.

MIRRORS starts off very strong, setting things up on a psychological note, with Sutherland playing a man haunted by inner demons and alcoholism in the same key as THE SHINING. Alright, so the whole "External demons as a metaphor for inner ones" has been done (lots), but it's still pretty solid ground, and Kiefer's the man for the role. Early on we get some truly appaling gore, a set that's creepy as hell, and some gruesome apparitions that really get under your skin. Add Amy Smart's beautifully heart-shaped ass and Paula Patton doing surprisingly well while grappling with not-the-best dialogue in the picture and we're pretty well on our way. Is it original? No. Enjoyable? Sure.

But there's only so much momentum in that first act before you've got to switch gears. Eventually we have to get into backstory, detective work, and finally some sort of "explanation" for it all, and the result is pretty underwhelming. The movie shifts from psychological horror up into psuedo-action and it becomes hard to take seriously. Worse, the longer the movie goes on, the more important the kid becomes to the plot, and as we all know, nothing makes for a dryer horror flick than having some damn kid as the focus. The climax increases the cliches, as well as the shoddy CGI.

I smell heavy editing on this flick. Not as pertains to the violence, but the movie seems very "jumpy". We hear about scenes in passing that we never actually see. Sutherland's character gets a lot help from a minor character whom we never get propertly introduced to and the movie never makes it clear the extent of their relationship. I wonder if we'll get a director's cut DVD.

I really have to praise the gore here though. Unlike in a lot of movies, the violence in MIRRORS isn't gratuitous; the sheer sadism of the images we're shown is important for getting us into the head of the main character. Although I have to point out that we already saw the jaw thing in THE GRUDGE; that could have gone better.

MIRRORS is decent fare, especially by the standards of this year, but more could have been accomplished with this. Sutherland really delivers, even if he does shift into Jack Bauer mode at the end (can't seem to get away from that these days), and Aja has a very good sense of tone and atmosphere, and provides some decent surprises. The script is the Achilles heel, as it is in many films. Watch it, but don't expect to be bowled over.

THE GOOD:

-Sutherland is pretty much good in anything. He's never going to be a great thespian, but he's never going to stink either. He's a solid dependable actor who can do a lot with a little and he anchors the flick.

-Weak supporting cast is backed up by Patton, who is given just the worst-written part in the whole movie but does the best that can be done with it.

-Ya know, I'm pretty jaded when it comes to flicks like this, but I gotta admit, MIRRORS sometimes made me wince in a very good way. Something about those flaming screaming women in the department store gripped my guts. Then that's followed up with an unflinching look at a woman burning to death in slow motion, but sans the flames, thus affording us a detailed view of just what happens to charring flesh without any obstruction. I could go on, but you get the idea.

THE BAD:

-My advice to any and every screenwriter working on a horror movie: DITCH THE KID! Whoever he is, whatever the movie is, however important you think that kid is to the plot, get rid of him/her right this instant. The quality of your movie will rise 10% overnight.

-Good buildup but the payoff is pretty tame. I guess no answer would have been satisfying, but we've seen this one used too many times, and it's pretty much the catch-all for movies like this. I really would have preferred no answer at all.

-Climax a sequence of cliches that have all been done better decades ago. Seemed like a rush job.

THE UGLY:

-Something tells me if you just promised Alexandre Aja an unlimited supply of cow entrails for future shoots that he'd be set for life. Just a theory.

[ilovemovies]

SPOILERS!




Mirrors begins with a lot of premise. It opens with a really good, horrific scene of a guy picking up a piece of glass and then slitting his own throat (well, actually the mirror image of him does it but he still dies from it). And then we are introduced to Kiefer Sutherland's Ben Carson. Carson is an ex cop who is a recovering alcoholic after shooting a guy and still suffers guilt from it even though it apperantly wasn't his fault (the details of the shooting are fuzzy to me since the movie never really goes into it). Carson is a mess but he's trying to get himself together so he can get his family back. He's taken a job as a security guard for a burnt down mall. And the movie begins with great promise as Carson is being shown around the place.

Unfortunately, it doesn't take long for the movie to turn to shit. Infact, I was shocked by suddenly it happens. All of a sudden wierd shit happens and all of a sudden Carson is going bezerk. It all happens WAAAY too fast. There is no time spent trying to develop a sense of dread. This is a movie that should be unnerving and get under your skin but director Alexandre Aja fails to do so because he instead of taking the time to develope the movie's intense atmosphere, he sends a lot of boo scares and none of it works. Furthermore, so much of the movie is unintentionally hilarious, whether it's Aja's pathetic atempt to scare his audience or if it's because the Ben Carson acts like such a fucking lunatic. The movie is shockingly bad at times. Only one scene is very effective and that's when Ben comes to his sister's apartment and sees her dead, her jaw ripped out. Sutherland's performance in this scene is terrific. It's a very powerful scene. Then the movie resorts to it's howling bad nature.

But fortunately that is only for the first two thirds of the movie. The movie then takes a turn and fortunately it's a turn for the better. As Carson investigates the nature of what's going on and searches for a woman with a connection to what's going on the movie gets much better. And the climax is VERY good. Aja doesn't rely as much with boo scares and instead there is some actual suspense. Plus, it all ends with a very cool twist. It's so good infact that it's ALMOST good enough to save the movie. Almost being the key word.

Unlike a lot of people it seems, I had no problem accepting Kiefer as Ben Carson and not think of him as Jack Bauer. Infact, there is only one moment in which I even thought of Bauer and that when he utters a dammit. Fortunately, that's only one time. For the most part Sutherland gives a fine performance, especially in the aforementioned scene where he finds his sister dead. But there are moments when he strikes an off note. But that's not so much his fault as it is with the writing and directing.

It's a shame the movie isn't better to me since it happens to have 2 actors from 2 of my all time favorite shows. Sutherland being one of them of course and the other one being Mary Beth Peil. Grams from Dawson's Creek who plays the woman that Sutherland's character goes off looking for.

I can't ultimately reccomend the movie and it's a real shame the movie ended up being a miss. The production design of the movie is amazing. Too bad they don't do enough with it. The idea that inside the mirrors is another dimension is a pretty cool one. But the movie never really does anything with that save for the twist ending. I would actually like to see a sequel to this exploring this part of the movie.

But the movie is just too stupid and too laughable with too many plot holes and inconstancies for me to recommend. However cool the ending may be. Aja's High Tension was a decent movie ruined by a lousy ending. This time his Mirrors has the opposite problem. It's a really bad almost saved by a really good ending. Almost, but not quite.

6/10

[DME]

It usually bugs me when a horror movie can't be troubled to follow its own rules. It typically contributes toward the cheapening of the genre, and Mirrors is no exception.

The first two kills clearly establish that whatever the reflections do to themselves will happen to the victims. A simple, efficient and (near as I can tell) unstoppable means of murdering someone. And yet, by the end of the movie, the reflections resort to every method except the proven-effective self-mutilation to kill the wife and kids.

Why? Because the screenwriter wanted them to survive.

If you're going to employ the "Rule of Scary" (generating scares trumps logic) in your story you better make sure the scares you generate are frightening enough to excuse the gaps in logic.

[Danger^Cart]

What happened to Kiefer really doesn't make any sense, either.

[shawnxmonkey]

I don't care what you are all gonna think about me after this one but I really hardcore enjoyed this movie. This year has been hit or miss for the Asian Remakes and this one was one of the better ones.

Enjoyable film with the crapfest that is out this summer was nice to see a decent movie

[jaw2929]

I loved this one. Aja is a fucking brilliant director. More of a thriller/suspense film, with elements of horror. Kiefer did a decent job, but I was disappointed to see that Amy Smart didn't get more screen time. Though her eventual demise was fucking hilariously executed! :)

Also would like to say that Paula Patton was looking fucking SMOKING hot as usual in this one. I couldn't stop staring at her wet titties (or dry titties, whenever she hadda scene with her low-cut shirts) all throughout the flick.

I loved this movie. The concept was pretty fucking original (or at least I thought so), but I do agree with others, this is Aja's weakest effort from the 3 flicks I've seen of his. Still will be buying this on DVD though when it comes out.

[unspoken]

Some minor spoilage ahead...









I just got back from this, and wow was it a piece of crap.


Other than Kiefer, the acting is horrible. The plot holes are so big you could drive a Mack truck through them. So many tired cliches, and several characters that had no use in the story whatsoever. Then of course, they had to go with the stupid twist ending like 95% of the horror movies today, just in case they needed to sequelize.

It was a cool concept that ended up ruined when put into action. I think Aja might be hanging out with Shyamalan a little too much, or just taking way too many cues from him, because twice now (this and High Tension), it's the big twist in the ending that especially ruins the flick. I will give him credit though for making the Mayflower look pretty cool. Still not enough to make up for it though, and now officially replaces Hancock as my Worst Movie of the summer.


2.5/10