House of the Wolfman = House of Boring Exposition (review)

I really wanted to like this flick. I have a deep love of monster movies and a high tolerance for cheese -- but here's what you really need to know about this film:

We don't see any monsters (not counting a scary servant and granny) 'til more than an hour in -- and the film is only 1 hour and 15 minutes long.

Then, we get a complete cluster-fuck of monsters -- 6 to be exact, all crammed into about the last 10 minutes of the flick.  And most of those monsters come from the "House of No Foreshadowing At All" (an entirely different -- and probably better -- movie).

The movie has good lighting, costumes, sets, makeup, and general production values.  The music, heavily Salter/Skinner influenced, is passable.

But the direction and camera work are pedestrian at best.  (They squander the production values.)  The dialog is suitably 40s in most places, but the plot... Well, there really isn't one.

Oh, wait, there's the standard "Old Dark House" plot where a bunch of heirs are invited to a mysterious mansion/castle.  But, why were they invited?  The audience figures that out in under 5 minutes, but the characters spend the first hour talking about it.  And talking, and talking, and talking.  And the acting...?

SUPER 8 came out this weekend, and it's about kids making their own movies.  Within that film, there are other films: the ones the kids are making.  In a meta-film twist, in SUPER 8 we get to see young actors portraying both naturalistic kids (in the main movie) and kids performing what they think a movie should be in the film-within-a-film.  The acting in this film is mostly on the level of that film-within-a-film.  That is, it's someone's idea of what 40s monster movie acting should be, rather than just letting the actors act.  Lots of line recitation, very little acting (or reacting).

Step One for making a successful 40s (or 50s or whatever) Monster Movie Homage/Parody: Decide whether you're doing a homage or a parody.  And if you're doing a parody, it better damn well be funny.  This one isn't funny enough to be parody or good enough to be homage.

As an author, I know a film is in trouble when I'm constantly rewriting it in my head as it progresses.  That started pretty early in this flick.

My friend (and award-winning short-film maker) Paul McComas, who was watching this with me, walked out before the end of the first hour; Universal Films are holy writ to him, and he just couldn't take it any longer.  (Glad he missed the closing line, which pissed even _me_ off.)  I stayed 'til the end mostly because of the lighting and sets -- and a morbid desire to see how it turned out.  If the movie had started with the last 10 minutes, it could have been better -- but it didn't.

If you want to see a well-made modern "old movie," see ALIEN TRESPASS (very good 50s homage) or CALL OF CTHULHU (brilliant silent treatment) or even FRANKENSTEIN VS. THE CREATURE FROM BLOOD COVE (good effort, but could have used HOTWolfman's lighting director).

Avoid this unless you're looking for a lesson on how to squander good production values.

I know the people making this were trying hard, but see "Step One" above.

HOUSE OF THE WOLFMAN (2009)

Area 51 Declassified

National Geographic Channel - Original Air Date: Unknown

Just a short review about this program to note it's probably not what you expect.  When I watched it last night, it was paired (in ads) with When Aliens Attack (largely a wargame scenario, positing a long campaign against an invading force).  From that juxtaposition, you might thing this would be another "aliens hidden in Area 51" program.  It's not.

Instead, it's a serious look at what really went on in Area 51 in the 50s and 60s (largely), during the testing and development of the U2, SR-71, and other top-secret airplanes and projects.  The interviewees tell their stories in a way that will be familiar to anyone who's ever watched a History Channel war program -- that is to say with candor, humor, and professionalism.  My favorite moment was when they discovered that a Soviet satellite had seen the shape of a top-secret plane on the runway; the enemy knew what our best plane looked like!  To counter this, the Area 51 crew started making cardboard silhouettes of fake aircraft for the satellite to "find."  They even put heaters on the cut-outs to simulate cooling engines.  Great deception.

No aliens here, just good, old spy vs. spy Cold War era politics.  Highly entertaining and informative.

The Truth Behind Bigfoot

National Geographic Channel - Original Air Date: unknown

"The Truth Behind..." series has been something of a mixed bag -- some scientifically sound, some cluttered with people trying to "scientifically" prove their own beliefs -- so I was a bit concerned about this show going in.  They start with the infamous Patterson Film, and by declaring "If it's a fake, then it's the work of brilliant hoaxers," which almost immediately tips this show into the believer category.  (As professional magicians know, there are no people easier to fool than those who think they can't be fooled.)  They chopper a research team into the area where the film was shot to laser scan the terrain for a digital recreation of the film.  Next, they plan to collect details about the sighting to recreate the creature, and thereby, determine if the film is real.

Next they get Patterson's widow to loan them a 1st generation copy of the film (which removes some artifacts that have been mistaken for anatomical details, like finger curls); where the original is, they don't say.  They scan the film frame by frame in hi-def, and then stabilize the frames to compensate for Patterson's "shaky cam."  Then they overlay a 3d skeleton to try and match the "compliant" gait seen in the film.  They should try to match the gait of Bob Heironimus, but they bring in their own 7' tall actor to do motion capture instead.  Eventually, they get the actor to duplicate the gait (so much for the other no-human-can-duplicate-that-walk shows).  Next, they start talking about rumors that a Hollywood SFX suit maker created the creature from the film.  They claim that the details seen in the suit were "almost unheard of" and "virtually unavailable" in costumes of the day (1967).  (Notice that it was heard of and available.)  They pile on more and more details like this until it become obvious that this is a show that wants to believe in the Patterson film.

And as they keep telling us how "impossible" it would have been to make a suit like this during 1967, I should point out that many of the same kind of arguments were made about the Michigan Dog Man film, which was fairly recently revealed to have been a hoax using a simple ghillie suit.  Sometimes, simple tech in the hands of a hoaxer can fool very sophisticated people.

Meanwhile, they talk to "the world's foremost bigfoot expert" Jeff Meldrum, who has many footprint casts and other "evidence."  He says it's not strange that no actual bones of the creature have been found, because of natural conditions where these creatures would die.  He also thinks bigfoots have flat feet to help navigate difficult terrain.  Others think the casts in his collection are from prints made by hoaxers.  Meldrum cites sheer numbers to dismiss hoaxers, while others note huge variation in such tracks, including the number of toes -- supporting multiple hoaxers with different ideas about the creature.  Meldrum believes the woods could support this type of large animal, and the anecdotal evidence is strong.  He also claims to have 15+ (hair) samples that defy identification, yet show primate characteristics.  (But unidentified samples do not make bigfoot real, any more than unidentified lights in the sky mean we're being visited by aliens.)

Back at the film, Bill Muns lines up a CGI actor with the monster, but can't make both shoulders and hips match.  He notes that the anatomy would be unusual for a human -- but, again, there's Bob Heironimus, whom they haven't tried to match.  Could it be that all this science is being thrown off by a random choice of a disproportionate model (Heironimous) to wear the costume; sure seems like that to me.  Calculating from the sighting distance reported and the lens (25mm) Patterson claimed to have used, the height of his creature would have been a mere 4' tall.  (Clearly absurd.)  Based on foot casts, Meldrum calculates it would be 8' tall.  (For the record, Bob Heironimus is 6' 2" tall.)  Note that this "scientific" TV program now assumes that the reported lens length was wrong, and they substitute their own lens length to fit their 8' creature theory.  I can just as easily, and with more evidential support, assume that Patterson lied in order to line his own pockets.

They conclude that while there is no actual proof, their evidence suggests the film and bigfoot are real.  I conclude that they had a horse in this race when they started, and are therefore unreliable witnesses -- and scientists.

There's a lot of interesting science brought to bear in this show.  Sadly, it's all misused by believers to support the pre-supposed truth of the Patterson film.  Thus, the only real value I can see here is a new, more clear scan of the film.  (And, oddly, that seems less clear that some of the duplicates we've seen before.)  Every person in this show, all of them should be forced to watch National Geographic's own Is it Real? program on the same subject before they're allowed to do another TV showof this type.  Turns out my concerns for this episode of The Truth Behind... were well founded.

FACT OR FAKED: Whaley Ghost House - Muck Monster

SyFy - Original Air Date: 4/27/2011

Videos passed over for investigation this week include Hawaiian Halo, which seems to show circling objects over a Hawaiian landscape. Looks like doves to some in the group, something mechanical to others, possibly a new RC toy.  Fire Fairy seems to show a sprite-like thing dancing around a fire, "an angelic fire elemental" according to the film's creator.  It looks like a lens flare to many in the team (and to me, too).  So, the two remaining cases are...  Muck Monster shows a strange aquatic mass moving in the waters near Jupiter, Florida.  It's an intriguing video and seems to show a large creature with a serrated fin.  Some biologists have ruled out local fauna, including seals and manatees.  The Whaley House (museum) boasts many mysterious still photos, showing hovering lights and shapes, and almost daily reports of strange happenings from visitors.  One photo (which looks like matrixing to me) seems to show a face in a window.

Bill, Austin, and Chi Lan head to San Diego to check out the Whaley House and hear it's haunted history.  The team sets out to replicate some of the famous "ghost" photos.  Some are obvious reflections in the glass blocking off access to the rooms, so they choose a more ghostly courtroom shot.    They set up lights and replicate the image using reflections off of objects in the courtroom; mystery solved.  To replicate the "ghost in the window," they try various things, including reflection of the photographer and a person (Austin with funny mustache) in the room behind the window -- but those don't match it.  And it still looks like random shadows (and human pattern finding: matrixing) to me.  So, they do the usual ghost hunting at night stuff and get the usual mysterious sounds on EVP sessions -- including one they think is a gavel sound (though I remain unimpressed).  Good work on debunking the photos, though.

Ben, Jael, and Devin head off to Florida to search for the Muck Monster.  They talk to witnesses and then set out to recreate the video.   I suppose I might as well go on record that any FOF show that puts Jael in a bathing suit is a good show for me, so take that into account when reading the rest of this review.  First, she and Devin go diving to look for the monster and check out the terrain; there's plenty of debris to be mistaken for a monster.  They try filming a discarded raft, but it doesn't look as alive as the original footage.  Next, they construct their own monster and try to hoax it; closer, but still not right, the original is much more fluid and alive.  So, they decide to go to a the Miami Seaquarium and check out actual local marine life.  Talking to biologists there, they quickly come to the conclusion that the scientists quoted in the myth were wrong; this biologist quickly recognizes the "creature" as a herd of mating manatees.  The strange "flipper" is merely a tail that has been mutilated by a close encounter with a speed boat.  Case solved.

One occasionally wishes that the original rumor mongers would do a better job with their science, and thereby spare Fact or Faked from investigating cases like this.  But then, we wouldn't get to see Jael in a bathing suit quite so often.  Some sacrifices I suppose we simply must endure.  Thus ends another "Syfy season" of FOF, which, happily, will return in the fall.  Like Destination Truth, I wish they would do less ghost hunting, but I'm glad they're out there shooting down some of these very popular -- if absurd -- viral videos.  Good job, team!

DESTINATION TRUTH: Ghosts of Antarctica

SyFy - Original Air Date: 4/19/2011

On the "season finale" (whatever that means), Josh & crew head for Antarctica to look for ghosts.  They stop in the tip of South America (Tierra del Fuego) and pick up a 50-foot sailing boat to make the trip across some of the world's most dangerous waters, including Drake Passage.  The trip takes most of a week and doesn't look like much fun, with choppy seas and cramped quarters.  Naturally, there are icebergs, too, but eventually they reach the remote, inhospitable, and beautiful continent.  They party with some Russian scientists and hear the local legends of Deception Island, first stop in the DT ghost hunting tour.  Though the sun never quite sets (being Antarctic summer), they set up camp and haul out the IR gear to investigate.  Soon, people begin seeing and hearing things: Josh thinks he sees a shape inside a building (but I"m not convinced, and the FLIR evidence seems like video artifacting); Gabe sees a light in a hut, but it looks like an IR reflection to me; Josh and Ryder hear strange bumps in a warehouse-like building -- they don't see big pieces of fallen debris, but there's of junk plenty around to fall, and in a place like that.... Ryder sees a dark shadow by a door.  "This whole place is freaking me out." And therein lies a common ghost-hunting problem.  They never discover the source of the noises or shadow, naturally.  So it's on to their next stop.

Wordie House is an old British base supposedly haunted by its former occupants, after being abandoned in 1962.  The team picks up the house key from some Ukranians, who collect bras to decorate the only bar in Antarctica.  Wordie remains pretty much as it was when abandoned, and while Josh pokes around inside, Ryder discovers a noisy leopard seal outside -- perhaps explaining some of the local weird sounds.  Naturally, the team starts hearing strange sounds within Wordie House.  They set up watches, and hear even more strange sounds.  (Sitting alone in the dark will do this to you.)  Things also seem to mysteriously fall off shelves or tables.  (Vibrations of humans moving about and entropy, anyone?)  In his isolation session, Josh thinks he sees someone outside a door, but finds no one.  They keep recording and having weird feelings, and eventually it's time to head for home and analyze.

They think the FLIR hit at Desolation is something moving; I think it's a video problem.  (Really, these people should become more expert with their cameras, especially, and other equipment.)  Enhanced audio when someone hears something "reveals" a set of "pulses" in series that the team notes could be SOS in old Morse code.  But to me, that's a stretch, and as they note, there's only one series and it could be coincidence.  Really, it seems pretty much within the range of background noise to me.  The "light switch" sound from Wordie isn't much more convincing to me.

One of the troubles with these type of ghost hunter shows is I always have the feeling that the investigators have never lived in an old house, or in the woods, or in any place with an odd variety of natural sounds.  Houses creak and groan (woods do, too, as does ice) and most natural places are filled with sounds (animal or otherwise) if humans will just shut up long enough to hear them.  And wear and tear and vibrations and entropy... boy, that can make strange things clang and clack -- just ask my dish rack.  Also, if Wipeout can put cameras on people that show their POV, I think it's high time that DT did the same, rather than merely having cameras that focus on the team members.  I'm really tired of people exclaiming about something cool they saw just in time for the cameraman to miss it.  POV cams might help capture evidence that's now being missed -- or help show just how prone people are to optical illusions and jumping at their own shadows.

In the end, though this remains my favorite of the supernatural shows, and I like the cast -- in my humble opinion -- this is just another hunt for ghosts that aren't there.  I wish DT would do less of these and stick to searching for monsters -- maybe doubling their time on each case by skipping the ghosts.  We already have Ghost Hunters and GHI, if ghosts are what we want.  More hard science would be welcome, too.

FACT OR FAKED: Dashcam Chupacabra - Nightly News Alien

Syfy - Original Air Date: 4/20/11

"Haunted Funeral Home" features two knuckleheads breaking into a funeral home that's supposedly haunted; tissues fly into a lamp, chairs fall over -- but it looks staged.  The "Lake Lure Ghost" seems to show a ghostly figure near an ice sculpture - but it looks like a long exposure motion blur to Chi-Lan (and me, too).  So the two cases to check out are... From Argentina (again) comes "News Alien," which seems to show a "nightcrawler" like alien walking casually behind an interviewee.  The alien was only spotted when the film aired on TV.  It looks like a fake to me, but off they go to investigate (probably along with last week's haunted swing -- ganging up a trip, I suspect).  "Dashcam Chupacabra" is a video from a squad car showing a strange, hairless doglike animal running down a dirt road in Texas, and a rancher claims to have a carcass.

In Dewitt county, chupacabra rumors run rampant, so they go talk to the rancher who has one stuffed and mounted.  The specimen is a strange, dog-like creature with big fangs and long claws.; the ranch owner claims to have seen another one 3 days ago.  She also has the carcass (meat) of the stuffed one in her freezer -- and is happy to provide samples for genetic testing.  Then, they talk to Sgt. Carter who took the original video.  Could it be mistaken identity?  They set up a simulated dash cam and bring in local animals to check against, including a miniature horse (nope) and an Peruvian Inca orchid dog (very similar, especially in the run - but the snout is wrong).  So, they do a night watch to try and find a live one and use a helicopter drone to help them look.  (Nice tech!  That'll generate UFO reports!)  They hear howls and see something on their IR and night vision cameras, but it's only cows.  The DNA sample comes back as a hybrid of gray Mexican wolf and coyote.  Case solved.  But is this beast the "real" chupacabra?

Austin claims they blew the alien case in Patagonia "wide open"; let's see how they did it.  First they test a stray wind sock blowing past to see if it could be mistaken identity -- but it's too windy to even pull that hoax off.  Could it be a worker moving some kind of equipment?  Nope. Then they notice the alien is casting a shadow opposite that of the reporter in the foreground.  Looking like a hoax, so they go and ask the videographer flat out: Is it a hoax?  "No. Not completely."  Did you fake it? "Yes." He says he did it as a joke, and he then shows us how -- using an animation program that looks like Poser.  (I use the same program to make art.) The hoaxer thinks local people have a predisposition to believe in such things, because of local UFO sightings.  Naturally, because you always have to do a night investigation, they now set up one to look for UFOs on the coast.  Bill suggests that local thunderstorms might attract aliens -- though I think it more likely to create ball lightning or other electrical phenomena.  Jael also mistakes what looks like lens flare for some kind of "gray halo."  (Nailed by Chi-Lan, later on.)  The local sea lions begin acting up, and Jael hears strange whistles, from atmospheric electrical events -- an approaching thunderstorm, it turns out.

Aside from the night investigations, which seem increasingly silly and irrelevant to me, this show featured some very good bringing the truth to light.  I know that "Ghost Hunters" has made tromping around in the dark popular -- and viewers are more easily creeped out at night -- but I wish there were less of it.  A lot less.

FACT OR FAKED: Playground Poltergeist - Alien Intruder

SyFy -- Orginal Air Date: 4/13/11

Passed over this week are "Pantry Ghost," in which a door mysteriously opens, is closed, and a face appears behind the pantry door window.  (Too convenient, no reaction, and a subtle edit for the SFX.)  "Dome UFO" seems to show a light hovering over the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, before shooting into the sky.  The fact that there are no other witnesses to this, and that it looks like CGI rule this out.  Leaving the two cases to follow up: Alien Intruder, in which a Florida couple claims to have caught on camera an alien spying into their bedroom.  Now they have a second strange video, seeming to show a hovering, ghostlike alien.  The second case is of a swing set in Argentina that seems to swing on its own -- but only one of the three seats.  Legend has it that the swing is haunted.

In Argentina, the team talks to the original witness, then they try pulling the swing with mono-filament wire.  It looks good, but you can see the line, plus the swinging swing is ongoing; surely no one would hang around for this long a hoax.  Next, they build a duplicate swing set right next to the "haunted" one.  But, when set in motion, the new swing does not keep going like the original.  Next, they put up an air-supported dome to isolate the swing and use a fan to simulate various wind directions.  Doing this, they discover the center seat is slightly wider than the other two, and the right angle of wind sets it going while the other to remain stationary.  (They don't mention that the swing stopped swinging when they put up their dome.)  So, no hoax, just normal fluctuating wind conditions.

In Milton Florida, the team talks to the people supposedly being harassed by these "aliens;" they also claim worm infestations on their lawn.  The homeowner has set up elaborate mirrors (and even strobe lights) to fool the aliens into thinking that they are not being filmed.  It seems ripe for a hoax to me, but the crew takes it very seriously.  First they use an art mannequin and try to replicate the alien in the bathroom -- they come pretty close.  Next, they set up to see if cast shadows (from a coat rack) could cause an optical illusion of the floating "alien."  Close, but not close enough.  So they set up a puppet to fake the video.  This is closer, but not as eerie as the original. This could be either an illusion or an intentional hoax, but they decide to do a stakeout and see if they can find any evidence on their own.  They set up lasers and one-way mirrors, and monitor the homeowner.  They get electrical interference, the homeowner thinks he hears things, and they find a mass of worms on the lawn.  Did they cause their own electrical interference?  Is there something paranormal going on here.  Voice analysis says the homeowner is telling the truth -- but I'm still not sure I trust that tech.  The case remains baffling; the homeowners seem to believe something is going on.  But what?  I wonder if local electrical interference could be setting up a hallucinatory "fear cage" effect for the people living in the house.

Not a bad episode.  The swing debunking was really well done.  But the "alien" problem would seem to require more long-term surveillance.  (Something I wish was routinely done with contactees.)  Just because people believe something is real, doesn't mean it is real.