TV REVIEW: HANNIBAL - SEASON 1 EPISODE 1 - "Apéritif"

After a certain other horror prequel show failed to completely deliver on it's promise, I had severely managed my expectations for NBC's new take on the charismatic cannibal Haniibal Lecter. Much to my delighted surprise, the inaugural episode comes out of the gate swinging and works like all pilots should: as a mini-movie. In fact, this episode is probably better than the majority of Brett Ratner's Red Dragon (Ralph Fiennes performance excluded). It sets everything for the series into place perfectly while simultaneously succeeding at telling its own self-contained story.

The opening scene lets us into the head of our main character (don't let the title fool you) Will Graham, as he visualizes how a murder occurred. It's a fantastic bit of flourish by director David Slade, and I hope the stylish liberties shown in this first outing stay consistent throughout the run. It gives the show an aesthetic that is sorely missing in genre television. Seeing what a character experiences isn't anything new, but given the dark nature of Will's ability to empathize with anyone (specifically murderers), it allows for some delightfully ghoulish bits of eye candy while also furthering the plot along in a compelling way.

Hugh Dancy plays Will with shaky certainty. He's a man afraid of the abilities he possesses, and Dancy conveys that fearful resolve very well. We also get a little peak into who he is at home, and it's a touching (if kind of goofy and sad) piece of character development. It's definitely the most complete performance of the character we've seen on the screen. Sorry, Edward Norton and William Petersen.

I'm sure plenty of people will complain about Mads Mikkelsen's accent, but those people would be taking into account only the most superficial aspect of his performance. While I didn't have trouble understanding him, I can see viewers getting caught up with that nitpick. Too bad, because Mikkelsen is doing some great stuff here. Instead of going the Shakespearian villain route Hopkins took with the character, Mikkelsen plays Lecter as cold and sharp as the scalpel he uses to sharpen his pencil. There are so many tiny moments in this hour of television that help formulate the kind of monster Lecter is. I love when he places the scalpel and pencil down and neatly arranges them on the table. It's an almost unnoticeable moment, but it adds serious legitimacy to the work Mikkelsen is cultivating. I'm very interested to see his more toned down and shark-like take on America's favorite cannibal.

The rest of the supporting cast are just as solid, specifically Laurence Fishburne doing his authoritarian thing like he wrote the book on it. I'm sure we'll be getting to know more about the investigative team we've just met, and I'm actually interested in that. Just as long as it doesn't take away from Will and his serial killer second sight.

Bryan Fuller is the showrunner for Hannibal and he also scripted this pilot. I hope his (and David Slade's) presence is kept strong, because this is a great introduction into this version of the story. It's tightly paced, a visual smorgasborg, transgressive yet not exploitative (there's a bit with Lecter chopping up some newly acquired meat that was pitch perfect), and has crafted multi-layered characters that leave me wanting to know more about them. I may have to jump ship from Norman Bates and his mother's hotel and start making appointments for Dr. Lecter's therapy.

MOVIE REVIEW: EVIL DEAD Is the Best "Cabin in the Woods" Movie Since... CABIN IN THE WOODS

If there was a way to make every character in Evil Dead mute, but keep the sound effects and music in tact, this 2013 remake would be one of the most astounding horror releases since the original Saw and Hostel. With a fantastic visual tone, an almost throwback kind of score and jaw-droppingly excellent practical effects work, Evil Dead excels with its excess but doesn't come up with much in terms of substance.

The plot device that sees our typical twenty-somethings stuck out in the woods is actually deceptively clever: one of their friends is going cold turkey off of heroin and they are all there to help her through the withdrawal. Not too much is exploited with this premise, other than to have the characters make excuses for the obviously demonic behavior the former junkie starts participating in, but it sets a very different aura over the film as opposed to "kids going out in the woods to have fun." That atmosphere and tone may be one aspect of the film that I didn't fully enjoy. Sam Raimi's original certainly had its fair share of scares and eerie atmosphere, but there was always this feeling of "we're off in the woods making a crazy horror flick" that injected some fun sensibility into the proceedings. This is even before Raimi really let the comedy loose in the sequel. Evil Dead '13 doesn't have that (except in the pre-credits sequence, which I absolutely loved). In fact, it's a very mean-spirited movie. It's more like the movie people thought the original was when it gained its notorious controversy. Nothing is played for laughs, and while that does help set this film apart from its progenitor, it loses some of the spirit the Evil Dead brand is known for.

Another knock against the movie is that none of the characters have even a tenth of the charisma Bruce Campbell brought. The only interesting character (Mia, our junkie) is forced to spend almost the entire running time being possessed. I will say that Jane Levy's performance is the highlight of the cast. She knows how to play creepy and when to go just over-the-top enough to let us know she's having a blast. There's a little speech she gives near the end that is honestly chilling, but all the dialogue feels ripped from Regan in The Exorcist rather than something wholly original.

Everyone else in the ensemble is fair to middling. Mia's brother David (Shiloh Fernandez) is the stinker of the bunch, delivering lines like he belongs on a CW show. His backstory with Mia is an attempt to give the characters some weight, but it flounders. It comes off as far too saccharine, and we only get a dose of it at the beginning of the film before things get crazy. Olivia (Jessica Lucas) is the know-it-all nurse who convinces everyone to stay once Mia starts turning into Satan's bride, and she sells her bitchiness appropriately, but there's not much else to her. Eric (Lou Taylor Pucci) is another friend (possibly Olivia's boyfriend? I never really felt that came across well enough) who finds the Book of the Dead and summons the demons. He mostly serves to expulse exposition, but he does okay as the punching bag of the group. He definitely receives the most punishment, almost to the point of unintentional hilarity. Rounding out the cast is David's girlfriend Natalie (Elizabeth Blackmore), who maybe had four or five lines. She does get one of the best visual gags in the picture, but there's nothing at all to her character.

Before you assume I'm nothing but down on the film, let me tell you the things I overwhelmingly enjoyed. There are a ton of nice little nods to the original, but nothing that feels like winking fanservice (stay after the gorgeously gory credits if you want that). It's all integrated wonderfully into this version of the tale, even original audio from The Evil Dead is managed effectively without taking you out of the experience. I also like that this movie is not self-aware at all. There's no references to other films or the acknowledgment by the characters of their cliched predicaments. Nothing is "meta" and that makes the story far easier to get into. I'm glad that Evil Dead is unapologetic in the format it chooses to be. I was worried how this movie would play after living in a world where Cabin in the Woods deconstructed the very fabric this film is woven out of. It was a smart decision to play things straight.

One aspect of the film that I thoroughly loved was the score. There were tons of very old school cues that sounded like they were plucked from a Universal classic monster movie. Composer Roque Banos creates an appropriate tone that helps make the movie seem timeless. And this movie does "timeless" with a capital T. No one even does the hackneyed "I can't get a signal on my cell phone" scene that has become mandate for all horror films. Cell phones aren't even mentioned. The fashion and design of the movie will ensure that (just like the original) it will be able to play twenty years from now and be just as relevant.

However, the real standout star of the show is every visual component in the film. The framing and cinematography is superb, and maybe even a little too good for as grungy a picture this is striving to be. There are a few Raimi-esque zooms, but for the most part, director Fede Alvarez cultivates his own style that works surprisingly well. I'm certainly on board for whatever project he next attaches himself to, especially if it's as gonzo a picture as Evil Dead.

And the aspect that everyone is talking about (the effects) is not without merit: The effects are phenomenal. While there are a few CG touchups here and there (I only know this because there were VFX crew in the credits), they have to be so minimal as to be practically nonexistent. The majority of what you see on screen is happening in-camera, and it's a knockout. While not as cringe-inducing as I'd been hyped to expect (we'll have to wait for the unrated DVD to dissect every little vestige of unused viscera), they are still an absolute joy to see on the big screen. Blood flows in fountains and it's all being pumped by someone off-screen. I hope this movie is successful enough to help usher a return to more practical effects, especially in the horror genre. Evil Dead proves that the art of actually doing an effect in-camera can still be effective and most of the time superior to the digital alternative. The final big effect during the film's climax is the grandest of Guignol, and filled me with the urge to actually applaud its awesome audacity. If you want nothing more than to sate your inner gore-hound, Evil Dead will scratch that itch raw.

It's too bad that that's almost all the movie really has going for it. The near-ending has a bit of sappiness slapped on it, and when I walked out of the theater, I didn't really have any care for what happened to anyone, even Mia. While the movie didn't need another obvious hero like Ash, it did need someone who I actually wanted to see survive. But, most people will just want a goopy distraction out of this movie, and I can't begrudge them that. I'm sure all the 13-16 year old kids who sneak into this film will have a hoot. Too bad they won't be able to recognize that the script is a tad lacking.

Evil Dead is an excellently crafted film and will certainly provide an appallingly enjoyable time at the movies, but it doesn't hold a candle to any of the previous films. It's definitely a textbook example of style over substance, which isn't necessarily the worst thing for this kind of picture, but it does leave you wanting something more. It will provide a great service as that movie that's playing on your TV during your Halloween party. Just make sure the kids are already in bed. ...Unless you're one dementedly awesome parent, because a young kid with an interest in the grotesque will eat up this new Evil Dead. Mom and Dad can go to sleep to the original.

TV REVIEW: BATES MOTEL - SEASON 1 EPISODE 3 - "What's Wrong With Norman"

Last week, I had accepted the defeated position that Bates Motel was not going to be the show I wanted it to be. Instead, I decided to embrace the soapy and overwrought nature of the material as best as I could. With just the third episode, Bates Motel is trying my patience even in the realms of trashy pulp nonsense (until the ending, which we'll get to).

Just as I had feared, Dylan's adventures in rural Crimetown are the worst kind of filler: they advance practically nothing of the plot and service no one but him. And surprise, he's still not interesting in the least. Even his little attempt to bond with Norman comes off as forced. I can't believe it's only taken two episodes for me to be completely over a character. Unless things take a drastic and heavily dramatic turn for him, I will easily crown Dylan the worst aspect of this series.

Even Vera Farmiga feels tired in this episode. Her usual sly looks and dark demeanor are almost nonexistent this week. When your show's secret weapon is faltering, the whole ship is in danger of sinking.

I don't know if it's just me, but I find it really hard to like any of the secondary cast in this show. Norman's two love interests are such stereotypes that they feel plucked from some MTV teen drama. Both Bradley and Emma are given goofy lines and are such one-note characters that there's only one way they'll become interesting: if they are murdered by Norman.

And now we get to the one part of this episode that (while not completely a triumph) is at least intriguing and somewhat compelling: Norman. His obsession with his Chinese murder book causes him to faint in class, whilst having visions of his teacher bound with rope. Now we're in some Psycho territory! He's admitted to the hospital and during this time, the local sheriff obtains a search warrant (somehow for some reason. Who cares? DRAMA!) for the Bates house. This is when Norman has to divulge to his mother that he kept the belt from the body they disposed. Fearing that the police have found it, Norma meets up with Deputy Do Good in an effort to squeeze some info out of him, and finds out that Officer Nice Guy hid the belt from the police in order to protect Norma. By now, Norman has returned home from the hospital (thanks to Norma forcibly checking him out) and is anxiously waiting for his mother to come home. Dylan tries to give Norman some advice but doesn't manage to connect with his half-brother.

Then, one little exchange plants the seeds of an entire season's worth of plotting: Dylan apologizes for fighting with Norman and for Norman almost killing him with a meat tenderizer. What does Norman say? He doesn't remember that. We now cannot trust anything that happens from Norman's point of view (although we actually can, much to the writer's chagrin. More on that in just a sec), and that is compounded even more near the end of the episode when the truly big "reveal" happens: Norman hallucinates his mother telling him that he has to go and retrieve the belt.

This one scene gives me extremely mixed feelings. Noticed that I say mixed, not definitively bad or good. On the one hand, this is exactly the kind of material I wanted from the show: the discovery and revelation of Norman Bates as a serial killer that is "powered" by his (eventually dead) mother's influence. And the scene between them is the best Freddie Highmore has done at being creepy so far. However, while this makes Norman more interesting as a character, the side effect is that it has the potential to demystify and actually soften Norma as the domineering figure we've known her to be. Is it really Norma who drives her son to become the monster he is destined to be, or is it actually Norman's perception of his mother? The performance Vera Farmiga gives as the vision Norman sees is exactly the Norma Bates we came to be familiar with through the original film. So will the real Norma actually end up being more sympathetic? That seems like a missed opportunity at showing us one of the greatest unseen villains in cinema history. But, Norma has been shown to be the manipulative and controlling figure we expect in the very first episode. I'm very excited at seeing Norman start to spiral into his eventual insanity, but if it comes at the cost of his actual mother's wickedness...I don't know if that's the best trade-off.

Anyway, Norman goes to the cop's house and looks for the belt, only to find that the guy has a porn dungeon in his basement and...a Chinese girl? Wow! They've already given us the answer to that plotline? Fantastic and honestly surprising! I'm very pleased that we weren't going to drag out all season with the mystery of Injector Man, but guess what? Now that Norman is "seeing things", we're going to get a whole episode that discredits his discovery when we all know it's the truth. Ugh. Just when you've given me hope, Bates Motel, you make me dread your next move.

Even with all of its meandering blandness, I still feel this is a good show going through its birthing pains. When the show keeps Norman and his mother at the forefront, things at least have some momentum. And when you give particular focus to one of them (in this case Norman), there is some real meat to digest, even if some of it may not be fully cooked (Can you tell I'm anxious for that other horror prequel show starting tomorrow?). Bates Motel, stop flopping around town and just be the show your title promises: A show about the crazy family Bates (Dylan excluded, please). You'll be much more fun to watch.

TV REVIEW: BATES MOTEL - SEASON 1 EPISODE 2 - "Nice Town You Picked, Norma..."

I've resigned myself to the fact that Bates Motel is not going to be the show I expected it to be. Instead of a serious examination of what turns an innocent child into a monster, this is a soap opera through and through. That's not necessarily a bad thing (we'll get to some of the glee-inducing trashiness later), but it would be easier to swallow if there weren't tiny hints of something really smart and seductive popping up here and there. All of that has to do with Norma and Norman's relationship (the reason any Psycho fan has tuned in), and it's a shame the show's creators seem more interested in every other possible plotline they've come up with. With this episode, Bates Motel has said that the titular location isn't going to be what drives the stories, but rather the town Norma and her son have moved to. While that can provide plenty of wacky and nasty diversions, it doesn't feel very original. A town with a secret (or in this case what seems to be HUNDREDS of secrets) is an old plot device, while the concept of using the motel to wheel in various mysteries and characters seemed fresh. I'm sure that will still end up happening, but with the current setup in place, it'll only over-complicate a show that's already weighing itself down with too much.

I don't want to sound like I'm completely down on the show, so let's look at what's really good about this episode. Like I said before, anything where just Norma and Norman are together is great. The highlight is easily the comfortably disturbing scene where Norma changes in front of her son and assures him that her "date" with the local deputy is nothing more than a strategic maneuver, helping to keep the cops from discovering the body they recently disposed of. The little looks they give each other, the casual demeanor about familial sexuality, and the devotion bordering on control are all perfectly executed in this one little scene. I also love seeing the two of them scrubbing the kitchen clean, looking completely innocent while covering up a dastardly deed. If the show focused on more moments like these, it'd be more like the show I signed up for.

The other fun bit comes at the end, when we get to see what "justice" looks like in the town of White Pine Bay. I'll never bemoan seeing a flaming corpse on television, and this one is a nice bit of spectacle. Crazy little things like this are what the show is going to need to keep it afloat amidst its sea of subplots.

Now, let's get into some of these subplots. Obviously, the biggest one is the addition of big brother (well, stepbrother) Dylan. While I really dig the idea of Norma having a son that she feels practically nothing for (and him feeling the same way), I wish I could feel anything at all for Dylan. Max Theiriot is trying way too hard when it comes to Dylan's "don't give a shit" rebel attitude. Not helping the matter is that Dylan is nothing but a dickbag who only cares about money, but then the writers want us to feel bad for him simply because "he has nowhere else to go." His adventures into the criminal underworld of White Pine Bay are something I'm dreading, since it will require me to give a shit about a guy who... doesn't give a shit. When he pretty much blackmails Norma into letting him stay, it's fairly obvious that the show is trying to craft a more intimate foil for Norma, and that just doesn't work. Maybe it would if the foil was interesting.

However, Dylan does provide Norman with one of his best scenes yet. When Norman find out that Dylan has Norma listed in his phone as "The Whore", Norman attacks his older stepbrother and gets promptly shut down. Then comes the real gem of the scene: Norman spots a meat tenderizer near the sink. Any other show would just leave it at that, implying the murderous urge and setting it up for later. Not Bates Motel! Norman immediately grabs the hammer and lunges at Dylan again! He doesn't connect and ends up down on the floor, venomously stating, "She's not a whore." It's in these darker, more vicious moments that Freddie Highmore is selling me on his version of Norman Bates.

What I'm not buying into is the sweet Norman and his high school hijinks. Now that he's been partnered Hardy Boys-style with classmate Emma (whose cystic fibrosis will certainly be used for a ticking clock scenario once she gets abducted by Injection Man), I'm officially checked out of that storyline. It feels like it belongs on a whole other show, and to help complicate matters even more is when the mystery they are investigating gets interrupted by another town secret: someone's making money off of a seriously huge marijuana farm. Geez, Bates Motel. Should I be expecting aliens and the Devil to pop up eventually? You need to tighten the stories you've got before piling up more and more eventual mysteries. Could Carlton Cuse's Lost influence already be at play?

There's a couple little tidbits to like as well. Norman's first interaction with taxidermy is a plus, and since Emma's dad is the local animal corpse stuffer, expect Norman to take up some kind of apprenticeship with him, leading into more knowledge about the town and its dirty dealings. Vera Farmiga proves she's still the show's main draw, playing the doe-eyed deputy like a harp from hell. I could watch a whole episode of just her being salaciously conniving.

If the show remains as all over the place as this episode, fatigue could set in pretty quick. A little bit of focus goes a long way, and if this upcoming episode seems to be as Norman-centric as its title would imply, maybe things will get a bit tighter. The wackiness is keeping me intrigued, it just needs to be channeled more efficiently. Also, don't be afraid to let Freddie Highmore let loose. There's gold to be mined in those moments.

MOVIE REVIEW: SPRING BREAKERS - Come for the James Franco, Stay for the Social Commentary

Some movies work better as essays more than pieces of entertainment, focusing more about what they are trying to "say" rather than attempting to be narratively engaging. Spring Breakers is such a picture. While not at all boring or extraneous, you leave the film thinking about the ideas behind everything onscreen instead of caring about what happened to the characters.

The story is deceptively simple: Four college girls (Selena Gomez, Vanessa Hudgens, Ashley Benson and Rachel Korine) want nothing more than to go to Florida for spring break. In order to raise the money, three of the girls rob a diner and then they are all off to St. Pete for bikinis, booze, booties and blow. After getting busted at a party, they are bailed out by a whiteboy rapper/gangsta named Alien (James Franco) who proceeds to indulge their lust for danger and excitement.

That's really the entire plot in a nutshell. There isn't much else that actually "happens" throughout the picture. There's a feud between Alien and his former friend/associate (played with a convincing mumble by rapper Gucci Mane) that drives the movie towards its ending, but the rest of the film is more a meditation on the idea of Spring Break (capitalized to emphasize its importance) and what it means to each of the characters. And while that might not be the most enthralling of plots to watch unravel, it does provide plenty to chew over.

It should be noted that James Franco is truly transformative as Alien, disappearing into a mess of cornrows, teeth grills and giant sunglasses. Everything you have heard about his performance is spot on: he's amazing. It's definitely a showcase of his diverse talent, and that there is no way you can pigeonhole him into one specific role or archetype. Every time he's on screen, he is bizarrely captivating. His accent, mannerisms, and posture fuse together into a totally realized character that will certainly be one of the highlights of his career.

The other girls have little snippets of individuality, primarily Selena Gomez as Faith. It's unfortunate when she exits the film (fairly early, too), since her religious beliefs and reasons for coming to Spring Break seem like the most interesting and multi-faceted. The other three girls all seem to have the same motivation: they want to completely let loose, so much so that they are willing to let their animalistic dark sides take full control.

And while the movie may not be exciting in terms of pacing or storytelling, where it does excel is exploring those wild urges and presenting them as a strangely enlightening experience. Director Harmony Korine always has this hazy, dreamlike feel in his movies and Spring Breakers benefits heavily from this. The movie really does feel like a deep and probing look into the subconscious of the beast known as Spring Break, all told through a neon-colored nightmare.

Probably the biggest concept on the table is the idea of shallowness as substance. These are characters who honestly feel moved and inspired by Britney Spears songs (the movie makes the best use of a Britney Spears song ever, actually justifying her music's existence), and whose idea of self-discovery and spiritual awakening involves getting stupidly wasted and half-naked on a beach. But, this really does mean something to these girls, so what does that say? Is it an expose on the slutty anarchy hiding beneath the surface of every pretty young college student? Spring Break is treated like the only escape these girls have from their humdrum existence, and they never want the feeling of it to end. It's soul-crushingly sad when you stop to digest it, and maybe that's what the filmmakers are trying to tell us.

There will be a lot of viewers who take the antics and viewpoints of the main characters as meaningful, relatable, and worth endorsing. This is a sentiment that has been misinterpreted before with movies like Brian DePalma's Scarface (a point that is directly referenced in Spring Breakers), but the way the film ends doesn't do much to dispose of that idea. Did what these characters do really matter? Did it change them in a positive way, even though that experience involved violence and self-induced stupidity? The movie gives you a lot to mull over, even if the actual plot is lacking in substance (apropos for this subject matter, I guess).

Spring Breakers certainly isn't a bad film (it'd actually make a great kind of Grand Theft Auto: Vice City double feature next to Nicolas Winding Refn's Drive), it's just not a very entertaining one. But, not all movies necessarily need to entertain to provoke interest and discussion. The movie definitely succeeds on that front, which is more than can be said of most mainstream Hollywood releases. With the exception of James Franco's astounding acting (I can't stress how phenomenal he really is), the movie doesn't warrant a theatrical viewing. Save it for home, when you can lie back and let the smoky mysticism of whatever the hell Spring Break means to you really ferment in the back of your mind.

MOVIE REVIEW: STOKER Would Make Sir Alfred Hitchcock Proud (And Maybe Even Blush)

The best thrillers (or horror movies. Debate semantics in the comments) often explore the corners of human life we'd rather leave alone. That's usually why they are so important for artists to delve into: we need to swim in sin and ugliness for a while so we are reminded that such a world isn't too far removed from our own. Stoker plumbs these depths with masterful finesse and ends up being one of the best of its ilk. Taut, tawdry and handled with classical expertise, this is a film that demands discussion and appreciation.

After the sudden death of her father, young India (wraith-like beauty Mia Wasikowska) and her mother (Nicole Kidman in subdued vamp mode) welcome India's uncle Charlie (a devilishly cherubic Matthew Goode) into their home. Very soon, India begins to suspect that her father's brother may have some very disturbing secrets lying underneath his sweet demeanor, and as the movie unfolds, their relationship dives into a darkness that might be inescapable.

Director Chan-wook Park (making his American debut) is not slacking off in any arena. He crafts a sense of beautiful menace that is strung throughout the entire running time, building slowly and purposefully without sacrificing character or pacing. It's a feat that all suspenseful stories strive for, but most cannot fully attain. Stoker is in no danger of that, proving that well-constructed and slow-burning pictures don't need to let up on the tension and unease in order to put its players into place. I sincerely cannot wait to see what Chan-wook's next English outing will entail. This film has guaranteed my ticket for his following endeavor.

All three principal actors give performances that define the idea of "less is more." Understated acting choices make each facial expression tell more about the characters than pages of dialogue could ever attempt. In particular, Mia Wasikowska plays India with quiet, childlike malice. Both her and Matthew Goode take a measured approach to revealing more and more of the wickedness inside of them as the movie progresses.

And oh is Matthew Goode enticingly wicked. The character of Uncle Charlie (a perfectly on-the-nose reference to the Master of Suspense's Shadow of a Doubt) is disgustingly charming, wooing India's mother while simultaneously stalking after his niece with the grace of a shark. He even adapts the always welcome foreboding whistle (a la Fritz Lang's M) into his own brand of warm malevolence. The more the movie lets us know about Charlie, the more complex and interesting a villain he becomes, all the way up to his very last scene. It's a stunning achievement for Goode, and for screenwriter Wentworth Miller for piecing together a monster we can't turn away from.

But, at its core, Stoker is a dark and dirty coming-of-age story told from the viewpoint of India, and Mia Wasikowska anchors the movie with a role that is a blend of Wednesday Addams and Nabakov's titular Lolita. The journey of her becoming sexually aware is nowhere near typical or pleasant, but it feels skin-crawlingly easy to relate to. The discovery that forbidden and often appalling things can arouse you is one of the most invasive undertakings we experience as sexual creatures, and Stoker is talking about that very, very loudly. India experiences what has to be one of the most astoundingly horrific orgasms ever put in a widely released movie, and it's easily one of the best moments of the film. It's a moment that clearly blends together the shockingly similar concepts of sex and death, something Western audiences try to avoid at all costs.

In fact, the majority of the concepts in this picture are taboo areas that most major American filmmakers don't really want to examine: incest, the joy of murder, perverse sexual urges and how tragedy and evil can be what truly bonds a family together. Sometimes, this movie will be analyzing all of those concepts in a single scene! It's the best kind of transgressive filmmaking: thought-provoking but not simply there for shock value.

We're at a point in film where visual excellence is hard not to get right. Even some of the worst movies look good, so it becomes less about how a film "looks" and more about how it's composed. It should be noted that while Stoker does "look" gorgeous, it's the composition and staging of the frame that show the kind of professionalism at work. Chan-wook's frequent director of photography Chung-hoon Chung shapes each shot with impeccable precision, and editor Nicholas de Toth deserves any award you can bestow upon him. This is Oscar worthy work here.

Clint Mansell delivers another stellar score, proving that he's the go-to guy for this kind of intimate musical work (his score for The Fountain shatters any shred of manliness I pretend to have). It should also be mentioned that music plays an integral role within the movie's plot, as India and her mother both play piano. Mansell takes full advantage of this, and composes themes and feelings that permeate the entire mood of the picture. The scene where India and Charlie both play a piece together is another chillingly effective highlight of the film, and it shames me to say, is immensely erotic and sensual. Yeesh, I feel like I need to shower after that.

If there is one piece of the puzzle that is just a tiny bit crooked, it would be the mother played by Nicole Kidman. She's certainly not giving a bad performance (her silent contempt throughout the movie builds to a great monologue near the end that is drenched in bitter animosity), but it feels like we're one scene away from completely knowing her and relating to her. We learn that she's been cooped up in her home since marrying India's father (she does get a melancholy line about being able to speak fluent French in a house all by herself) and that would seem like enough to feel bad for her, but it just didn't sell me 100%. It's probably more to do with the relationship between India and Charlie being far more intriguing (and the real crux of the story), so it's certainly not that big or distracting of an issue.

Stoker is certainly not a movie for everyone. It'll probably turn away half of the people who see it. It goes to some of the ghastliest places you can think of, but if you relish a chance to stare into the abyss, this is a film that stares back at you and never averts its gaze.

MOVIE REVIEW: OLYMPUS HAS FALLEN Is As American As Blood Pie

Propaganda action films reached their peak in the eighties, and never seemed to find their way back to the lofty heights set by the likes of Red Dawn. Funny enough that the recent remake of that movie was a diluted helping of weaksauce, hampered by studio tampering and the lack of a believable onscreen threat. So, it seems that director Sam Strange (under his pseudonym Antoine Fuqua) decided to rectify things by churning out the best "America, fuck yeah!" picture since Team America: World Police.

Olympus Has Fallen isn't going to win anyone the Oscar, or probably even be notably chronicled in the annals of cinematic history. That's too bad, since it's one of the most hedonistic bits of fun to come out in 2013. It's a very by-the-numbers kind of flick (all of your cliche expectations will be gloriously met), but what makes it work is the seriousness of everyone involved. No one is winking into the camera or phoning it in, which is surprising considering the talent that has been amassed. You'd figure that someone would be counting the hours until their paycheck, but if that attitude was present, it's nowhere to be found. Gerald Butler is one hell of a leading man, giving his most enjoyable performance since Reign of Fire (thought I was going to say 300, didn't you? I could have gone with Gamer as well) and I really hope this movie catapults him into the action man leading status he so rightly deserves. Once all of The Expendables crew have kicked the bucket, we'll be hard up for some kickass stars, and Butler proves with this film that he is more than up to the task. He can be both charming and funny for the ladies, and brutal enough for all of us testosterone junkies.

Everyone else does serviceable justice to their parts. You get some pretty standard (but nonetheless effective) turns from Angela Bassett, Morgan Freeman, and Robert Forster playing the officials in the "crisis room" scenes. They deliver exposition with just enough character that it never manages to slow the pace down. Rick Yune gives head baddie Kang the proper heft needed for this kind of role. It's almost good enough to forget he had anything to do with Die Another Day. ...Almost. Aaron Eckhart is reduced to mostly grunting throughout the picture, but the few scenes we get with him early on establish a very warm and likable character. He's not just another lame duck president character. I'd vote for him. Probably the only actor who gets shafted due to the constraints of the screenplay is Dylan McDermott. His ex-Secret Service agent feels like he's a rewrite away from being the real foil of the piece, and it's a shame because McDermott is doing some really entertaining work with the time he's given. Between this and his recent turn on American Horror Story: Asylum, McDermott should land a really juicy antagonist role. He's definitely got the chops.

But, most importantly for a movie like this, the action is what is mainly on trial. And Olympus Has Fallen has breakneck pacing in that department. People get cut down in swaths left and right, fight scenes are choreographed well, and explosions happen just frequently enough to keep you on your toes. There is some less-than-stellar VFX work early on (apparently due to the digital artists being rushed to completion), but it passes quickly enough that it doesn't bog the movie down, and there are enough old fashioned gunfight scenes to make up for the more bombastic bits. And if you like your action movies red and goopy, this one will satisfy your cinematic bloodlust. I was actually quite shocked at how much red stuff (digital and...analog?) was spilled throughout the running time. It's nice to see an action movie that isn't worried about getting gory, since most action affairs these days are fluffy PG-13 hero flicks.

When we look back at 2013, I think Olympus Has Fallen will be viewed as an incredibly early kickstarter to the summer action extravaganzas. And that's a good thing. It's certainly not a perfect film (there's some cheesy emotional beats and a bit of an anti-climactic climax after the final fight between the hero and villain), but it bypasses that kind of criticism by being pure uncut American fun. If we could churn out such patriotic popcorn diversions like this once a year, it would be a stronger loving 'Merica.