THE CRAZIES (2010 - Cert 15)

Remakes are a bit en vogue at the moment in the world of cinema. It seems as though there is a bit of a drought in the imagination department as studios are taking the safe option of remaking fondly remembered films from the 80's and before, plus in some cases rebooting 'franchises' that aren't exactly dead (Spiderman, I am indeed looking at you). Horror is the genre that has been the victim more than others in this epidemic with all sorts of flicks being 're-imagined' (ruined), A Nightmare on Elm Street, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Last House on the Left, I Spit in Your Grave, The Amityville Horror and Dawn of the Dead. I could go on, but I wanted to stop that list at a George A Romero one because last year this generation got their hands on another of his classics, although not a zombie flick this time. On this occasion, it's his pop at the American Military via a nasty virus called Trixie that turns the infected into killers. Not like the Rage virus, but in a way that you don't really know who is infected. Who do you trust?

Mr Romero is on exec producer duties here, giving his blessing to director Breck Eisner, the only thing of note that he's done previously being Sahara. Scott Kosar, seasoned pro of horror remakes having already written The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and The Amityville Horror, is drafted into bring the tale into the 21st Century. The first thing to note is that it is a very different beast and isn't a full on remake. The comical tone of the original has been completely lost and it's clear that the focus on this version is very much to thrill, chill and scare. They've kept the small town America location, and persisted with the origins of the virus and the military reaction, but it is all done very much as you would expect, straight-faced with no hint of the satire of Romero. 

If you can get past the fact that they are remaking a film with such a comical and critical undercurrent, without the comedy and the undercurrent, or haven't seen the original at all, then this film does exactly what it sets out to do, namely, thrill, chill and scare. It does all of those in abundance. There is something undoubtedly creepy about your neighbours turning into bloodthirsty, ruthless killers, but looking exactly the same as they did before. Paranoia and tensions are ramped up as any odd behaviour can be construed as symptoms of infection. In terms of scare set-pieces Eisner does do well with some good little scares. The best scene involves our heroes being under attack in a car wash. Doesn't sound particularly much, but there it plays out in a wonderfully chaotic way as outside of the windows all we see is movement, unsure where the attack is going to come from. There's some good action as well, ticking all of the relevant boxes that you would expect with aplomb. I do wonder what would have happened had Romero had the budgets that are chucked around today, people are often critical of the dated, ramshackle look of his early films. But imagine if that criticism was taken away....?

In order for horror to work, we must feel a connection to the characters involved, otherwise they just become fodder that we are waiting to get picked off. In this instance we follow the reliable Timothy Olyphant as the sheriff and Radha Mitchell as his Doctor wife as they try to escape the town and the madness left behind. Both are good, Olyphant, although the hero and alpha-male, still retains an everyman quality and remains believable throughout. Mitchell is slightly less interesting but only because much of her role involves getting into trouble for Olyphant to save her, but she does well with it nonetheless. It's also nice to see Englishman Joe Anderson in something like this, and doing it very well, as the deputy along for the ride. 

As the film rolls on, it starts to become critical of American Military policy and the doctrine of Shoot now, explain later. It was inevitable that it was going to do this as it was such a fundamental part of the original, but it's done with all the subtlety of a baseball bat. Whereas with the original The Crazies, you didn't know whether to laugh or be shocked, with this one it becomes an incidental plot element, not a statement. It's not necessarily a bad thing, this type of film banging a political drum may just not have fit well either. 

It's perfectly fine, worth a watch, and does raise the pulse rates a few times, but if you want to watch a horror film about a virus turning people into killers, then you may as well watch the 1973 version because it's the more superior, all be it dated, film. 

SURROGATES (2009 - Cert 12a)

We all love robots. We especially love real robots. Everyone loves to watch footage of those Japanese Tech Expos where the latest and greatest in artificial intelligence is revealed, which ultimately turns out to be something that resembles a pedal bin that can only really polish your shoes or warn you when it's about to walk (rolL or waddle) into something. We love watching those things because essentially they are a bit shit and that is inherently funny. They are a bit shit of course when compared to the offerings that films, TV and comic books have been giving us over the years. They even make Johnny 5 look a bit tasty.

Cinema has been obsessed with the robot, or android or cyborg, whatever you want to call it, for years. Think back to iconic films such as Star Wars, Blade Runner, The Terminator, AI, Robocop, Metropolis, Westworld, Alien, Aliens, Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, all films that are either about or feature robots. Recent years haven't done anything to stem the tide of the onslaught either, so what is it with robots? Why are film makers and cinema goers so keen on them? Well with the exception of the frankly stupid Transformers films, robots are the perfect device to explore what it means to be human. As people strive to create machines that can do all that we can, what is that we possess that they never will. It's a compelling theme and one that continues to be revisited, with varying levels of success.



Surrogates is one the latest films to have a crack at it. Directed by Jonathan Mostow, who has brought us U-571, Terminator 3 and Breakdown (all solid and dependable films), it's set at some point in the near future where Surrogates have been invented to lead our everyday lives. A surrogate is essentially a remarkably human-like, idealistic (a more beautiful and younger version) remote control robot. The humans sit at home, not getting dressed or washed, in a matrix-like chair set-up, controlling their unit with their thoughts. The main selling point is that it is safer for humans as they will not encounter violence or disease as it is their surrogates that have to face the elements. That is until a weapon is found that kills both the surrogate and the owner at the same time.

That's where Bruce Willis steps in as a detective who is assigned to the case, along with his partner played by Radha Mitchell. They are of course playing their Surrogates, who are creepy and expressionless, very Stepford Wives looking. Willis looks particularly odd with hair, in fact my girlfriend who was dipping in and out of the film, said at one point 'Ah it's an old Bruce Willis film'. He clearly enjoys himself, playing this weird version of himself with a blond Hitler haircut. He is his usual watchable self. During the first part of the film it very much resembles a standard detective thriller/film noir. The monotone surrogates adding to the downbeat tone already created by the slow score over the top of the action. It's a decent and mysterious opening to the film and I must admit that it exceeded what I was expecting.

Then Willis loses his surrogate and has to head out in to the big wide world on his own. It's an interesting idea, a human thrust into a now alien world full of robots. That's it really though, thats as far as it gets. An idea. Nothing is made of him stepping out of his comfort zone and back outdoors. It's a shame because I imagine that there should be a lot of material and mileage in that. It's just an older version of the Willis before but grumbling a bit more and aching.

The film itself loses it's way as well. The plot tries to twist and turn to keep up the film noir vibe, but struggles despite some nice espionage/disguise touches. The supporting cast including Ving Rhames and Rosamund Pike (who I didn't recognise at all) have a go at keeping it interesting with sub plot attempts at making the film worthwhile sci-fi which ultimately fail, not through any fault of their own, but more because the strands of story are overly contrived and totally signposted. Ideas we've seen before but done much better and much more subtly.

The final sequence has the surrogates acting like super-heroes, bouncing around with ridiculous strength, only making me wonder why they were just strolling around the streets if they were able to leap 30 feet in the air. All a bit silly. Then there is a plot point at the very end that feels tacked on just to give the film an ending that is supposed to make us think. It's shoe-horned in with an incredibly poor piece of shoddy exposition. One of those moments where you really are in shock, how did someone get paid for that?

It's all perfectly watchable but totally unremarkable, not remotely memorable and unoriginal (it more than whiffs of I, Robot). It's 90 minutes that do whizz by, but you can't help feel that that time could have been better spent, perhaps by watching any of the films I mentioned a few paragraphs ago. Or by watching a Japanese robot walking into cupboard doors.