Can you guess what movie or TV show we’re watching? We’ve turned on subtitles (when available) not to give you a clue, but to enhance that WTF effect! Leave your best guess in the comments to prove your true Flick Attackosity!
All posts by Rod Lott
Resident Evil: Afterlife (2010)
After being absent from the Resident Evil franchise director’s chair since the 2002 original, Paul W.S. Anderson returned for the fourth, Resident Evil: Afterlife, the first in 3-D. It’s a definite improvement over Apocalypse and Extinction, but still well below the sheer coolness factor of the first.
One problem is that Anderson has overestimated viewers’ previous knowledge of the franchise mythos. I’ve tried to wipe my mind of the awfulness that was Extinction, so while I was wowed at Afterlife‘s opening sequence of numerous Milla Jovoviches — Jovovi? — laying waste to the Umbrella Corporation’s underground Tokyo headquarters, I was lost as to why and how she had all these clones.
The film is more of the same, with Alice (Jovovich) defying gravity and kicking ass, saving friends from the occasional threat of zombies with mouths that open to reveal vagina dentata thingies. Here, she reunites with her Extinction pals, including lithe Ali Larter, hiding atop a big tower. Wentworth Miller is there in a cage, which is kinda funny considering he spent four years breaking out of them on TV’s Prison Break. (You’re right, it’s not funny.) There’s also Asian Guy, Sleazy Producer, Bald Tuffie, Hot Brunette, Not Scout Taylor-Compton and Evil Sunglasses Guy Who Shops at Big & Tall & Matrixy.
And don’t forget the zombie Dobermans! It’s weird how everyone in this movie responds to being shot at the same way: doing a backflip. It’s so predictable, that I’d just fake a straight shot and then aim high. Then the series would be over. I was excited that sexy Sienna Guillory was returning as Jill Valentine from Apocalypse, but she gets one scene, and it’s buried in the end credits. Oh, well, Resident Evil: Whatever 5 Will Be Called, perhaps. —Rod Lott
Rule of Three (2008)
Eric Shapiro is an excellent fantasist who churns out one great short story after another. In making the jump to storytelling for the big screen, he proves he can wring suspense visually, too. He directs Rule of Three from a script by his wife, Rhoda Jordan, although the idea generated with him.
And it’s a terrific idea, taking place almost entirely within one hotel room, but in three points of time involving three sets of characters. First, there’s Jon (Ben Siegler), a father distraught over his missing daughter, Lo (Jordan). Frustrated that the detectives are dragging their feet, he goes to the desert hotel where she was last seen and finds a vaguely threatening note promising him closure at 3 p.m.
Second are Lo and her boyfriend (Cary Woodworth), attempting to coerce one of their friends into a threesome, and finally finding a willing partner (Tiffany Shepis). Finally, there’s a sad-sack loner (Lee Schall) attempting to buy roofies for a girl he likes, so he calls a delivering drug dealer (Rodney Eastman, I Spit on Your Grave) who says, “The truth is a lot like pussy: It’s always a little uglier when you shine some light on it.” The link between the first groups of people is obvious, but the second? Your initial thoughts are incorrect.
Shapiro’s too smart for that. Although at times too slowly paced, this quiet thriller lulls you into a false sense of complacency, generating a rhythm that suggests the night is going to pass uneventfully. It’s not, and this is a good thing; it’s called unpredictability. Shapiro and Jordan have a last-minute ending in store that you’re not likely to see coming; as they pull those strings tight into a double knot, you’ll be shocked, yet you’ll smile at being cleverly duped. —Rod Lott
Confession Stand with Adrian Paul
Best known for starring in the Highlander TV series and its last two film sequels, Adrian Paul is the star of Eyeborgs, making its Syfy premiere tonight.
FLICK ATTACK: How many of your interviews start off with the interviewer saying, “Yo, Adrian”?
PAUL: Once or twice, perhaps. It’s standard.
FLICK ATTACK: Eyeborgs has kind of done the impossible for a direct-to-DVD movie these days and broken through, gaining quite a cult. What do you attribute this to?
PAUL: I think it’s the subject matter in a sense. You know, when they first came up with the idea, it was during the elections and the introductions of cameras into cities like New York and Chicago and London. To me, it’s kind of like a political statement slash thriller, with sci-fi. They did a really good job for the time they spent on it. The CGI is incredible. It wasn’t done by eight companies; most of the big work was done by one guy. It’s a slightly different slant on “We are being watched.”
FLICK ATTACK: Is there any talk of a sequel yet?
PAUL: Yeah, if it does well, there’s a possibility of a sequel. They’re talking about “is it possible to make it into a series?” I don’t know what the answer to that is, but there has been some sort of rumor about it.
FLICK ATTACK: And now it’s making its Syfy debut. How’s it gonna play alongside the lofty standards established by Mansquito and Blood Monkey and Mega Python vs. Gatoroid?
PAUL: I don’t know. Syfy comes out with some good product and other product they do for not a lot of money, and it’s pure entertainment, pure fantasy. I think they’re never going to go away. They’re just going to get bigger. They’ll do different types of film, but this one has a sci-fi element and there is an audience for it.
FLICK ATTACK: My 5-year-old wants one of those two-legged Eyeborgs for his birthday. Can you pull some strings for me?
PAUL: Well, if it does well, you can know for certain they’ll do merchandising on it, so I’ll let you know.
FLICK ATTACK: Is it more difficult acting against a spider robot that’s not really there or Christopher Lambert?
PAUL: Ohhh. That’s a harsh comment, actually.
FLICK ATTACK: No, it’s good-natured. All in fun.
PAUL: You have to have a very good imagination. All I was told was that I was given a rundown as to what these things might look like and what their capabilities were, in a sense. I actually choreographed the fight and sat down with the robot designer and the director, and came up with what could be done, how it would move. I was just fighting air, pretending there’s this eight-legged thing kicking my ass.
FLICK ATTACK: Speaking of Highlander, answer honestly: How long would it really take you to cut off someone’s head?
PAUL: How long would it take?
FLICK ATTACK: Yeah.
PAUL: Well, it would take you literally one slice. It depends on what you’re using. —Rod Lott
Additional question by Allan Mott.
Dead Set (2008)
One of the most satisfying zombie movies I’ve ever seen isn’t a movie at all, but the British TV series Dead Set, a five-episode wonder. You know how everyone talked about how awesome AMC’s The Walking Dead show was upon its debut in Halloween 2010? Well, Dead Set did the undead far better two years earlier, and makes our Yank efforts look like Sesame Street by comparison.
Don’t get me wrong: I liked The Walking Dead. But I didn’t love it, because every episode seemed to stretch half an hour’s worth of story into twice the time. There’s no such problem with Dead Set. With the exception of the extended first ep, each one is just a hair above 20 minutes; all are packed with survivor interaction and zombie action.
What sets it apart immediately is its concept, in that the housemates of UK’s Big Brother reality show are blissfully unaware of the zombie uprising outside their studio, until said uprising extends indoors. Suddenly, that week’s eviction ceremony is the least of the contestants’ worries.
Dead Set gets away with a lot that the U.S. tube wouldn’t allow. Remember Walking Dead‘s buzzed-about scene in which a couple of characters bathed themselves in zombie blood and entrails to go undercover? That’s tame compared to the Big Brother producer (Andy Nyman) personally stripping an expired player of skin and meat, right down to the bone.
Watch all five back-to-back for a bloody good 141-minute feature experience. —Rod Lott