SHIT, ROSEMARY!

REC 3: GENESIS [2012] is an excellent film, but that's not the word I would actually use to describe it. 'Gleeful' is the word. REC 3 is a gleeful film.

I haven't seen a trilogy of [horror] films that managed to not only maintain but build upon the energy of the previous entries into the franchise since RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD (or, all right let's get the reference in cos it's popular at the moment, EVIL DEAD). Let's pretend for a moment that there aren't plans for a REC 4 so as not to spoil where I'm going with this.

REC took place in an apartment block as a zombie outbreak took hold. REC 2 either takes place at the same time or directly after (I can't remember which) but it flowed wonderfully. It also revealed that the 'infected' were actually possessed. Nice little curveball there. REC 3 carries on this idea and plays with it in an organic manner - the infected can't enter churches, are burned by holy water, and don't like Bible quotes. And it's lucky this is the case, since REC 3 takes place at a wedding reception.

The happy couple, moments before the shit hits the fan - or rather, the uncle hits the table.

Koldo and Clara are in love. We know this thanks to one of the best film intros I have ever seen - the film starts as if we've just loaded up their wedding day DVD, before cutting to 'live' filming from the big day itself. But, just as things appear to be settling into a (well done) 'found footage' groove, BANG! a drunk uncle falls off a balcony, things go mental, and we're hit with the title card. 20 minutes into the film. Bravo. The transition from cinéma vérité to normal film is a little jarring at first, but the film soon finds its feet. And when it does, it does not stop running.

Always remember to brush twice a day.

REC 3 asserts itself with an absurd enthusiasm that reminded me of 80s horror films [although to be fair, lots of things remind me of 80s horror films. Going to shops can remind me of 80s horror films] but particularly DEMONS 2. But whereas that film doesn't quite seem aware at its mentalness/can't maintain a level tone, REC 3 is and can. At one point Koldo's wandering about in a suit of armour, for one thing. Then, Clara gets hold of a chainsaw...it's from about the halfway mark that the film really earns the gleeful descriptor, as some of the kills are violently over-the-top in a manner reminiscent of oh hell let's namecheck another cult favourite: BRAINDEAD aka DEAD ALIVE.

TIMBEEEERRRRRR!

It's important to note REC 3 isn't scary. Perhaps this is the price of progress, for if the film repeated the tone of the first film (which really shit me up in places) it wouldn't have the same impact. Arguable, of course, but taking a full-on marathon of a film like REC 3 and sticking spooky bits in would undoubtedly feel shoehorned in, as a way to pay homage to previous entries (REC 2 has one well done scary bit that is only tempered by its closeness to the first film's standout scare), not to mention drag down the pace and overall feel of the movie.

But it's not just the sheer energy that makes REC 3 so goshdarn brilliant. The leads feel natural, whether they're (in the case of Clara, especially) portraying doe-eyed love or wide-eyed terror. Damn, if that girl hasn't got the sort of eyes a guy could drown in.

See?

The editing is tight and only confusing when it's clearly meant to be (re: the initial panic right before the title), the sound design is top notch, from the unearthly guttural roars of the infected to the cheesy wedding tunes that soundtrack the horror in a nice juxtaposition. The script feels tight and polished - for instance, every set-up has a punchline, even things you didn't realise were a set-up (hello, Grandad!). It also engenders a true sense of fear, in so much as horror is the true inability to do something eg being forced to watch a tragedy unfold beyond your reach. There are moments in REC 3 where the filmmakers are clearly telling you, the audience, that "Nobody is safe", no matter how much you might hope this to be the case.

I, personally, would rather take this type of horror over jump scares and musical stings any time of the day. Or night. It's weirdly more realistic and believable. How often do we find ourselves in a situation where our loved ones are in danger but we are literally powerless to act? With any luck, many of us will never encounter this sort of situation, but it does happen, because that's life. We're not truly scared of the masked maniac jumping out of the shadows with a machete as that is implausible; it's the terrorist who detonates a bomb without warning that terrifies us, because we can't do anything about it.

I may be belabouring the point a little, as well as undermining my previous point that REC 3 isn't scary. What I should probably have said is that it isn't Hollywood scary. But, sometimes all we want is a good fake scare. A good movie scare, because after all, if it gets too much, we can just turn it off, right?

MARVEL VS DC

Red and Blue vs Red and Blue

Which is better? For me, that's like choosing between butter and margarine. Both are good on bread and do, essentially, the same thing. At times, sometimes they even taste the same. I like to collect Justice League of America comics, but my favourite comic character is Ghost Rider. So, apples and bananas.

However, I am in confusion [I am in confusion?! Isn't English your first language?--Ed] as to who I think makes better films: MARVEL. If we're talking live action. Those guys have got their shit together behind the scenes, as evidenced by the run-up to AVENGERS. And AVENGERS itself, of course. Plus, MAN-THING remains one of my favourite comic book films. Seriously. Let all those who know fear burn at the touch of the supposed Swamp Thing rip-off. Up yours; he's a THING who lives in a SWAMP. There the similarities end. [Stop digressing!--Ed] ANYWAY...

DC, however...I just don't think their live action films are very good. I like The Dark Knight, but don't like Batman Begins, and wasn't too taken on The Dark Knight Rises. The early Superman films were good, but very much a product of their time. The Tim Burton Batman films were good (although the first one is also something of a product of its time - thanks, Prince) but the other Batman films...we don't need to go there. Why don't I like them? I don't think they do the source material justice. I don't think they're disrespectful to the characters (except for YOU, New Version of Bane) but, compared to Marvel's [recent] output, they're somewhat...lacking. Can the new MAN OF STEEL rectify this? We'll see.

HOWEVER. DC always pull it out of the bag when they do animated films. I have not seen a shit one yet. Some are better than others, but they're all respectful of the source material, if not quite faithful adaptions. Recently, I was flixing through Netflix when I stumbled across SUPERMAN/SHAZAM: THE RETURN OF BLACK ADAM. I've always been intrigued by the character of Captain Marvel--a kid who turns into a superpowered man when he says 'Shazam!'--so thought I'd give it a whirl. Turns out, it was actually the 'first part' of a 'DC SHOWCASE', which I have never heard of before.

SUPERMAN/SHAZAM is a lot of fun, being as it is an extended fight scene between these two and Black Adam/the origin of Captain Marvel. 13 year old Billy Batson is a sweet, good-natured kid who believes "Good will be followed by good" ie be nice to people, and they'll be nice to you. Black Adam is some sort of pointed-eared Communist wizard who wants to murder him, before Billy can gain the power of Shazam. Superman has a pop at Black Adam, but because Supes is allergic to magic, he doesn't fare too well. Billy is rescued by a magic train (really) and becomes Captain Marvel. He fights Black Adam. The good guys win (but not in a way I quite expected). This segment, at around 20/25 minutes, feels rushed to some extent, but enjoyable.

Next is THE SPECTRE, which I did not expect at all; weirdly fitting since, in the comics, he always seems to appear from nowhere to dispense vengeance. This 'Showcase' is written by horror scribe Steve Niles, and is a suitably violent/horrific introduction to The Spectre (and his human alter ego of cop Jim Corrigan) as The Spectre dispenses vengeance upon murderers via animatronic monsters, a brilliant CHRISTINE homage, and a mini-whirlwind of money that rips someone to shreds. For some reason, this segment has a 'grindhouse' filter on it and a wakka-wakka 70s style soundtrack. This bit's as dark as the Superman one is light, and ultimately as vacuous. That's maybe a little harsh. It's fast food for the eyeballs.

Hello, GREEN ARROW! Boy, DC really want you to stand on your own two feet, don't they? The version of GA in SMALLVILLE was an enjoyable take on the character, though the JUSTICE LEAGUE cartoon version has always been closer to the comic character. I enjoy the new ARROW tv show, even though the creators of that have basically turned GA into Batman [I said, stop digressing!--Ed]. This animated short falls between SUPERMAN and SPECTRE in terms of tone - Green Arrow is full of quips and heroics, but there's a fair bit of violence (people getting shot, mainly). This is the 'Showcase' that I think actually showcases the titular character the best - we find out he's a member of the JLA, that he is willing to put his life before that of a young girl's, that he has some interesting villains to face, and that he's in love (small cameo from Black Canary at the end!). More please.

JONAH HEX finishes the Showcase off with a snappy ten minute piece of poetic justice. Penned by noted genre writer Joe R. Lansdale, this is a suitably violent/quip-leaden slice of pulp Western goodness. Jonah is on the hunt for an outlaw, and his travels bring him to a saloon populated by that hotsy totsy above. She's running a murder racket, and it's up to Jonah to stop her and her goons. This is the shortest segment, but it gets the job done. I think I preferred the tone of this piece the most, as it was dark without being excessively violent, and had some decent one-liners in it. Would it work as a self-contained show? I don't think so, unless Hex was put up against a really interesting nemesis and/or a lot of it was penned by Lansdale (and he was allowed to go balls-out).

So: MARVEL VS DC. What would be the outcome? Why, the AMALGAM COMICS, of course!

WHERE'S WALLY?

So where is he?

"WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN, WAYNE?" is possibly the question on someone's lips right now. I've been offline, that's where, person-who-I-may-or-may-not-know! But now I'm back. Online, that is!

So what's the crack, Jack? Well, I'm knee-deep in a funding bid for an arts festival (some of which you can find out about HERE) and editing (someone else's) novel! (Also more about this in the not-too-distant future). I'm also tweaking some music I wrote as part of February Album Writing Month (which you can hear HERE if you're intrigued in dirty beats mixed with vintage PSA samples) and settling into a new house.

A little while before I went offline, I decided that it'd be nuts if I didn't try to get back into editing stories, but on a more professional (freelance) level. Therefore, I'm now offering said services  I'll have full details via my website/here soon, but for now if you're interested, then by all means get in touch. I'm also trying to put together a proper 'resume' regarding this, but I'm not entirely sure how such things should be laid out, especially since three books I edited never saw print (due to financial reasons with the publisher, not cos I did a shoddy job).

In any case, I have a decent amount of experience in not just general proofreading but interior formatting (although I am more than aware that this latter point can vary wildly from publisher to publisher) and believe I can offer competitive rates. I think that'll do for now as a 'teaser' until I get something a little more solid spelled out.

I think that's about it for now. Keep safe, kids. I mean it.