I apologize for the delayed writeup, but please, read on and find pearls of wisdom.

Like I said, The Host had been high on my to-see list for some time now, but every time I had a chance to see it something came up. So, when I had a chance to show it at my double-feature…I was nearly foiled again. It turned out the one place I had hoped to rent a copy from was out, and it was only thanks to a last minute run to Best Buy by a friend of mine who wanted to own the movie himself that I was able to show it.

I was thrilled, and by the end of the film, I was also satisfied.

The Host is nothing like Cloverfield, really. It doesn’t try and use any fancy cinematography, and it’s not a one trick pony, more of a jack of all trades. The Host has a bit of comedy, a bit of thrills, some action, some drama, and a balanced mix of happy moments and sad ones which sum up to give the viewer a good deal of empathy for the characters. The one other big difference is that there’s no real suspense about what the monster is or what it can do–it starts eating people in broad daylight about fifteen minutes in to the film.

For what it’s worth, the creature is phenomenally weird. It swims, it climbs, it stumbles when it runs a whole bunch…you wouldn’t think it would be a particularly effective or terrifying beast, and frankly, it isn’t to a viewer. There’s not much awe because it’s just the size of a school bus. But still, for the characters–and more importantly, the government–the beast is a force to be reckoned with. And because of that same government, the woe begins.

A strong environmentalist theme is prominent in The Host, along with some anti-American sentiment (basically, the Americans are responsible for the whole thing and then bungle their management of it). The most wrenching part of the film is seeing an ordinary family–an out-of-college drunk uncle, the industrious grandfather, the olympic medalist archer sister, and the somewhat brain-dead father–trying to rescue the daughter who ties them together and having to do everything they possibly can just to get a shot at finding her. Discomfort is yet another one of the emotions the film brings to bear, and it proves over its course that it can bring them back again and again for increasing effect.

If you like monsters, films about families against the odds, or films that have universal appeal strictly by being dabblers in moods, The Host is worth a look.

A Tale of Two Sisters is a horror film which really does need to be experienced twice. When I first saw it, I didn’t see the ending twist coming, and then with the revelation that gives I simply had to watch it again to understand everything that was going on.
It’s a horror film that’s light on gore and big on mystery, or at least big on weirded-out sections. It was, simply put, right up my alley.

The plot’s a little on the simple side–two girls move back to their country residence with their father and stepmother, and pretty quickly things start getting weird. The film is tightly written, tightly acted, and keeps tipping just enough of its hand to keep you watching until the end. The first big revelation hits probably half an hour or forty five minutes from the end, and even after that things only keep getting stranger.

If you’re looking for hugely terrifying things, this is also probably not a film to rely on. There are a couple of chilling moments in the film that are never really explained in whole, but they probably won’t cater to a real thrill seeker. The pacing is mostly what does it–there’s a lot of points in the film where the dialog’s pretty light, and much of the rest of the time it doesn’t make sense to the viewer (and not in a bad way, but more of a spooky way).

I’m rather surprised I don’t have more to say about A Tale of Two Sisters other than to give it my recommendation. I’m not big on horror films–I despise most of the franchises in that genre put out from Hollywood today–but this film really struck a chord with me. It’s about psychology, loss, and fraternal bonds.

Next This week: Elvis! Showing Bubba Ho-Tep and Six-String Samurai.

Maybe.

Or possibly I’ve just started a little tradition for myself: a tradition of a Friday-night double-feature! That’s right, years old films or at least nothing recent, rented on DVD (or, heaven forbid, VHS) and viewed with a company of comrades. Each week will purportedly have a theme, and this past one was “robots run amok.”

The films for this week were 2001: A Space Odyssey and the lesser-known Westworld. Who’d have thought that before Jurassic Park, the directorial claim-to-fame of Michael Crichton would be a movie about a cowboy robot Yul Brynner?

Spoilers follow for Westworld but not for 2001.

I had never seen 2001 before and was perhaps expecting a slightly less artsy film. This isn’t a slam, but I think the problem is that it’s been parodied so many times (I didn’t keep count but I think it approached half a dozen major scenes) that going into it someone like me has no clue what it’s actually about.

2001 is about sweeping shots, taking its good time with storytelling, being scientifically correct to a level that’s refreshing and beautiful, and having positively haunting scoring, almost to the point of discomfort. It’s got long stretches with no dialogue that still held the attention of a room of rowdy individuals fairly well, and when there is dialogue it’s tightly written by necessity. If you’re in a contemplative mood, want to have a glass or two of your favorite beverage, and watch something that’s challenging but entertaining nonetheless, 2001 would be a good choice. Granted, I can’t really think of the last time I was in a mood like that, and there is something weird about going, “hm, I’m in a contemplative mood, Kubrick would be good!”

Seriously, though, for someone born way after the film came out, I wasn’t disappointed in its quality–2001 has withstood the test of time admirably. If you’re like me and you’ve never seen it, it’s aged extremely well and if you like sci-fi it’s worth seeing just to note how it’s influenced the genre.

Westworld is a little more of an oddity; I first heard of it through some dudes I worked with. My original plan was to also view Spartacus (as in the internet meme) but it was sadly unavailable. After some hunting to try and go for a sci-fi double feature, I admitted Westworld with a smile.

The basic premise of Westworld is there’s a futuristic tourist resort with a lot of sexbots who don’t mind when the patrons shoot them and/or sex them up. And everything peachy until everything breaks down simultaneously. This has several predictable responses and several not so predictable ones.

Predictable responses:

1. Vacation becomes less fun.
2. People die en masse.
3. Things don’t get put back in order by the end of the film.
4. Similarities to Jurassic Park come out of the woodwork.

Not-so predictable reponses:

1. The scientists shut off power to try and deactivate the robots and are stunned that they have batteries.
2. Furthermore, the scientists cannot get the power back on, the doors to the rooms cannot be opened, and are apparently airtight. They all suffocate.
3. COWBOY ROBOT YUL BRYNNER INEXORABLY PURSUES THE PROTAGONIST AND TRIES TO KILL HIM.

This last one should be stressed as the highlight of the film and the reason to continue watching. Yul Brynner stalks the unnamed main-character vacationer like a cowboy Pepe Le Peu, to positively comic ends. Unfortunately, the film also doesn’t have much to go on other than this hence my decision to spoil almost the entire thing.

It was enjoyable, I’ll say that much. But I can’t really endorse renting Westworld unless you’re a big fan of strange sci-fi or you really like the thought of a maniac cowboy robot Yul Brynner.

Next week: I move forward past 1973 and away from America to South Korean, with The Host and A Tale of Two Sisters.