CineNiche

ONLY ORIGINAL HORROR PLEASE As we all know, our beloved genre has been overrun by economically safe films. In the past two decades we were bombarded with remakes and sequels. Some were wins, while most were fails. It is up to us to champion the original ideas that fly under the radar and not give in to another Michael Bay / Platnium Dunes era of horror remakes produced for the lowest common denominator. I know I'm in the camp that after years of hating on Friday The 13th, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and Nightmare On Elm Street I look back now at them with a fondness that no one should have. Then I kick myself in the ass for developing some sort of nostalgia for these shit remakes. We understand that the studios dole out larger budgets to these “safe” films, while many horror filmmakers are able to scrap funds together and create something brilliant. Today, the 10 million dollar horror extravaganza and the 1 million dollar personal horror film, can each become ...

Here is another example of semi-independent cinema.  The Purge was made for 3 million and grossed more than 30 million in its opening weekend which hopefully allows more original concepts through the studio doors. Since the collapse of our economy the film industry has made it a point to only fund remakes, sequels, and adaptations.  They only put up funds on guarantees.  During the last ten years there have been films based on original concepts, but they have been created independently then purchased by studios and in some cases serialized after-the-fact.  Saw is an example of this, the original was funded by the Saturn Award received by its makers, then done to death by Lion's Gate.  Now this was done in the 80's with Michael, Freddy, Chucky, Jason, and Pinhead.  They were icons created by the economic turmoil suffered then.  So, as anything tried and true, the cycle is back.  Instead of creating new icons (except Jigsaw) all of the 80's mani...

CineNiche Graphic Design Purchase poster at Zazzle Brian De Palma's Carrie represents a first in menstruation horror.  This packed phrasing simply means Carrie shows the fears of adolescence through the eyes of a sheltered girl on the verge of womanhood.  The opening sequence features Carrie's first period and through extreme repression at home Carrie has no idea what is happening to her.  All the other girls laugh and throw tampons and pads at her.  In her state of frenzy Carrie has smeared her blood everywhere.  Miss Collins, her gym teacher, comforts her while secretly wanting to laugh as well.  In the principle's office she describes the situation to him and when he sees the blood on Miss Collins he recoils.  Carrie's anger and frustration manifests itself through telekinesis. One could argue that her ability develops out of repression. Without a healthy outlet for her feelings or knowledge of her body, everything bottle...

David Fincher's eccentric film resume gives him the upper hand in this needless remake.  The tone of the film is in perfect balance with last years Social Network.  In the future people will discuss the pre Social Network era of Fincher and the post as if one film divided his work.  There is a sense of authorship in Alien 3, The Game, Seven, Fight Club, Panic Room, Zodiac, and Curious Case Of Benjamin Button.  Each of his films relied heavily on inventive cinematography, whether it was amazingly orchestrated movements of the camera or his ability to light his scenes in a way to aide in character development.  There is a contrast on the celluloid that cannot easily be explained - a mysterious secret ingredient that allows for an immediate identification that the film is indeed a Fincher creation. The Social Network is Fincher's transitory film within his oeuvre.  The cinematography and lighting are the same, while less extravagant. ...

Instead of a lengthy comparison between Let The Right One In and Matt Reeves remake , we'll just stick with the basics.  Yes, this is an inferior remake of a foreign film.  Yes, Reeves takes out the subtlety and ambiguity that made the original such a powerful and beautiful work of art, and instead replaces these elements with bouts of action and decent make-up effects.  We would like to say that there is no merit to Let Me In , but that may be too harsh so lets look at the facts.  The in-medias-res beginning we thought would take this film into the realm of the book, but instead it is needlessly placed to spruce up the twenty minute test (for non-screenwriters out there this is the captivating twenty pages/minutes that will ultimately capture your viewer and if this fails then the rest will as well).  Our new Hakan is now played by the brilliant Richard Jenkins and is miscredited on IMDB as "The Father," this may shed some light on how exactly Reeves ruins...

When the original Night Of The Demons premiered in 1988 it was considered the best of B-Horror and created a franchise that lasted two sequels. It is still the only Kevin Tenney film that highlights his ongoing terrible reel – with possible exception to Witchboard made before Demons. The ’88 version gives us gore, bad acting, ridiculous scripting, and a non-sequitur ending. These were elements every 80’s slasher film wanted the perfect combination of. To remake a great trash film does not give you license to try to make it modern cinema. Adam Gierasch, the director of the updated version, does not provide his audience with anything more than a revamping over-sexualized depiction of a once innovative concept. Cineniche does not blame Gierasch, we believe he did the best with what the studio gave him. He is just another young filmmaker that wishes to create horror again – but unfortunately the American horror film is dying. Here is where we’ve decided to rant on remakes ...

Dear George A. Romero, We here at CineNiche have been long time fans of your work, we eat up any information on your new projects and each of us buy any Fangoria that has an interview with you in it.  We love your films, from the genre changing Night Of The Living Dead onward, your films have always been an inspiration to our own indie spirit.  Your ability to provide a social commentary more blatant than other horror directors and your simple yet highly effective camera work has shown us a good story means everything.  And what better story than your forty plus year ongoing tale of humanity's inability to help each other.  Even in Dawn Of The Dead your characters help themselves and guard the fort against the living and the undead.  Your films are important to us and even when they are not at their best, they still offer something toward the genre.   Martin was a revolution to the vampire film.   Monkey Shines was a pitch perfect adapt...

Watch Michael Cain as Paul Kersey in Death Wish VI: Pensioner’s Revenge.  The similarities between Harry Brown and Paul Kersey are endless: both have war time backgrounds and through the loss of someone close to them and no help from the police, decided to take the law into their own hands and become vigilantes for blood justice.  The biggest difference between Harry and all of the Death Wish films is that we care about him.  Charles Bronson couldn’t emote even if you slowly ripped every appendage from his body.  He made a career of being a masculine stoic.  If my wife was murdered, then a few years later my catatonic daughter and house keeper were raped beaten and murdered, and even later my best friend during the war was killed by a gang of thugs – I might shed a tear or two. Harry is older than Paul was and suffers from emphysema.  He has lost his wife child and friend and he mourns – we watch this man break down.  He is all alone in a w...

When Wes Craven first pitched this screenplay he was turned down by every major studio, they said it was absurd - unfilmable - and uninteresting. That was 26 years ago, and over the course of those years we've been given 9 Freddy related films and an unnecessary 44 episode TV show . So, keeping in mind that Freddy is a modern icon or modern urban legend/myth and there isn't a single person that doesn't at least know of Freddy Krueger - "he has knives for fingers." It is a lot of pressure for a first time feature length filmmaker to create or recreate something so iconic. Now, the general consensus is: why remakes? And no matter how good a remake is you'll always - I repeat always for emphasis - have to say I liked the original better. This leads to the second part of the why remakes question, why remake something that will never live up to or be as good as its original? The simple Hollywood answer: Money! We are in economic crisis and even though y...