The Goods: Live Hard, Sell Hard

Where to begin. I should probably start with a little disclosure. I do not care for Jeremy Piven. Not since the 'PCU' days. And odd that he seems to grow MORE hair as he gets older. Maybe it was that mercury poisoning... Anyway, I do my best to go into all films with an open mind, as I did with 'The Goods'. I had heard good things about this film. Friends of mine whose opinions I respect. Sadly, they were wrong. Very, very wrong.

The conceit of the film sounds promising enough. And Piven's given a pretty damn good bullpen to work with. David Koechner, Ed Helms, Ving Rhames, Rob Riggle, Craig Robinson... I could go on, but that may only serve to infuriate me (and you) more. It's quite a talented cast, with a below average script. And what makes it maddening is that it holds so much promise. It's the Ryan Leaf of comedies. Every time it sets up a joke, it always go for the lowest common denominator. It could have been smart and funny. Sadly, it's neither. The whole affair just felt lazy to me. Take a chance. Reach a little farther. Then maybe we would have had something here, instead of the crappy used car salesman of a used car salesman comedy that we got.

Report Card: C-

Inside Job

Angry. That's how I felt when I walked out of 'Inside Job' This enthralling documentary covering the market crash of 2008 is revelatory. Director Charles Ferguson details the factors that caused the crash, as well as the individuals responsible. Ferguson is able to translate the highly confusing world of derivative trading into plain, understandable English. Damon does a fine job narrating this tale of greed spun horribly out of control. Is it 'Gotcha' film making at times? Sure, but it has to be.

I'm resisting the urge to turn this into a tirade involving my own personal politics. Though I must say that I do feel a healthy bit of regulation would go a long way to correcting some of the problems inherent in a strictly capitalistic system. When your only goal is the bottom line, with no care for the people impacted, people are going to get hurt. It's part of the human condition that we need to push back against. We, as individuals, tend to develop a certain tunnel vision which leads to the blatant disregard for people with whom we do not come into any regular contact. Couple this with the amount of power and money at stake, it's easy to see how one can become corrupted. Though I am in no way granting permission or creating an excuse. Many of the subjects in this documentary are only concerned with being on the top, having the most money and toys. And I guess that is inherently wrong, possibly even evil. There. Off my soapbox.

Perhaps the most upsetting conclusion I drew from this film is that nothing has been done to prevent this type of collapse from occurring again. In fact, the financial firms are bigger than they were before, and continuing the exact same practices that nearly destroyed the world's economy (instead of just bringing us to the edge collapse).

Is this a film you need to see? Yes. Just prepare yourself for a healthy bit of disgust and spite. Oh, and write your congress person or senator.

P.S. Eliot Spitzer gets a bit of redemption as well. Was he ultimately responsible for his all down fall? Sure. But the context is a whole lot more interesting than you may have known. It shouldn't taint what he was trying to do, or possibly could of stopped...

Report Card: A

Inside Job is still available in select cities.  No Blu-Ray/DVD release date has been listed at this time

Inside Job Site

Never Let Me Go

I know we've neglected our 'Outtakes' page for quite a while now.  So I've dedicated myself to post at least twice a week going forward.  How lucky for you!  Let's start our renewed romance with the English sci-fi love triangle, based on the book of the same name.

Never Let Me Go is a sneaky sci-fi film. Science fiction is more the skeleton that the film is draped around. The real story of this film is the love triangle between our 3 stars, James Garfield, Kiera Knightley, and Carey Mulligan. The less you know going into this film, the better off you'll be. Our story starts off in a boarding school for young children as we track the genesis of the relationships between our three stars as they grow, mature, and are prepared for their inevitable fates. The performances by the three leads are all fantastic. This is my first exposure to Ms. Mulligan (I shamefully have yet to see 'An Education'), but the talent she possess is clearly visible. Her performance is the strongest of the three. Her understated strength and fragile longing is captivating.

While the film is beautifully made, the style and presentation never truly allows you to become invested in their tale. The premise is truly thought provoking, unfortunately for me the execution seemed overly artificial and distant. Is it worth checking out? Yes. The romance at the heart of this film, coupled with the beautiful, dream like imagery, and performances make this a film you should see.

Report Card: B+

Never Let Me Go is set to come out on Blu-Ray & DVD on February 2, 2011. You may still be able to catch it On Demand.

This camp is less than monstrous. Or interesting.

So I ended up watching quite a few documentaries over this past weekend, two of which had a common theme. What was the common theme you ask? It was nerddom. Utter and glorious nerddom. I feel a special affinity for nerds because, to be frank, I kind of am one. I understand the attraction of games and genre fiction. However, these films showed some of the more extreme examples that are out there. Let the awkwardness begin!

Let’s start with “Monster Camp.” “Monster Camp” follows the trials and tribulations of the Seattle branch of NERO, the New England Roleplaying Organization. NERO is basically a live action fantasy roleplaying game where players assume the roles of wizards, warriors and various monsters. Face paint, homemade costumes and foam rubber swords are everywhere you look. Think Augie from “Role Models” and you get the idea.

The first thing that struck me about this “game” is how ridiculously complicated it is. In one scene, a man named Fern (yes, Fern) is instructing a new recruit on the finer points of dealing damage in a melee battle. Fern explains that your weapon deals out a certain number of damage with each strike and may have enchantments that make it deal out certain types of damage. It is your responsibility to then yell out what type and how much damage you are doing with each strike of your mighty Nerf sword of doom. For example, you would yell out “Normal 2!” for 2 points of normal damage. Got all that? Of course you do.

How this actually plays out in practice is a bunch of grown men and women spastically swinging “weapons” at each other screaming “NORMAL2NORMAL2NORMAL2!” in a swarm around some poor sap that is playing a monster. This really underscores what I think is the major problem with the film. The game is boring to watch. Really, really boring. It’s needlessly complicated and they all take it very seriously. While the film goes for the predictable “look-at-how-ridiculous-this-all-is” laughs, that pretty much gets old after the first ten minutes (although a very husky man playing the part of a giant death moth or something shouting “HYPNOTIC STARE!” while spreading his cape “wings” is pretty hilarious).

The film’s attempt to humanize the players is mostly done in such a way that we pity them. Two best friends/roommates that are profiled haven’t finished high school, one a seventh year senior and the other a fourth year senior. Of these two, one of them doesn’t even have a job. He plays World of Warcraft all day while his roommate is at work and then moves to videogames on the TV when his buddy gets home. Another player is criticized by his daughter for playing too many games and his solution is to buy her a computer so they can both play in the same room together. You just never get any more emotionally invested with these people because they seem so alien, to me at least. And if your documentary can’t make you connect with the subjects, what’s the point?


Grade: C-

"Salt"y goodness? Not so much.

Hi there. It’s Matt. I know I haven’t posted anything in awhile. A long while. But the truth is I was a little mad at you. We both know why. So let’s just try and put this ugliness behind us ok? Ok!

Now that we have gotten THAT out of the way, I would like to talk to you about a little movie called Salt. Oh where do I begin? Let me first start with the title. I think this title is stupid. You think the title is stupid. I realize that there are people in this crazy world whose surname is synonymous with a vital chemical compound, just like there are people named “Jane Water” or “Peter Vitamin C.” However, a good movie title it does not make. Is it supposed to be some kind of play-on-words that I’m missing? Like “salt” of the earth (which would make no sense) or “salt” in the wound (which makes slightly more sense maybe)?

Anyway, Salt stars Angelina Jolie, she of the strange facial amalgamation of angular and puffy, as CIA operative Evelyn Salt (ugh) who is accused of being a Russian sleeper agent. That is pretty much the whole plot of the movie, sorry for not giving you a SPOILER ALERT. The rest of the film basically revolves around the question of “Is she or isn’t she?” set into the framework of chase sequences and obligatory, balletic beat downs/gun battles that you expect from a summer action vehicle. In that aspect, Salt doesn’t disappoint. The action sequences are thrilling, if not totally original. They do manage to strain at the limits of believability without crossing them, which is really the goal of any action movie of this type.

That being said, Salt does have a couple of major flaws that, when combined, prove too much. The first problem is Ms. Jolie herself. Now, calm down, let me explain myself. Angelina is a badass. I totally buy into her killing black op mercenaries with her bare hands. She exudes such power, confidence and badassery that she should have been in The Expendables instead of Randy Couture. But because of that, I’ve always had a problem with her when she has to play vulnerable. A critical aspect of the film is Salt’s love for her husband and her need to protect him. It drives the action and is pretty much the entire basis for the movie. So it’s unfortunate that Jolie and August Diehl have all the onscreen chemistry of a cardboard cut-out and an inanimate carbon rod. Since Diehl’s total screen time is about 10 minutes, I’m afraid most of the blame has to go on Jolie. Even when she is talking about him or begging her now-suspicious CIA cohorts to help him, it seems like so many crocodile tears. It appears that, much like Chuck Norris, Angelina Jolie only seems to have two settings: Wait and Kill.

The second problem I had with the film is the bloat it develops as the story progresses. I was into this film for the first third of it, right up to what turns out to be the FIRST twist. This first twist comes early enough that you are like “Cool! Now that that is out of the way, let’s see how the rest of this plays out.” And it is exciting up to and after the first twist! I was all, “Yay Salt!” But then twist number two comes up and I’m all “Ummmm…ok…well, I guess that kind of makes sense. On with the plot!” Then the third twist comes (really?), then a fourth (Oh come on!). By the last set of twists and reveals, you’ve figured this whole thing out way in advance and you’re just not interested anymore. To top it all off, they’ve worked so hard to make it complicated that the ending seems lazily thrown in there. It’s an ambitious bit of storytelling but in the end, it’s a mess and is ultimately unsatisfying.


Grade: C-

Cyrus

Huh.  Welcome to a bit of Mainstream Mumblecore.  If you're unfamiliar with the movement, it's lo-fi film making.  Ultra low budget, non professional actors, and improvised dialogue.  Here we go a bit more mainstream.  John C. Reilly, Jonah Hill, and still sexy Marisa Tomei star in Jay & Mark Duplass' 'Cyrus'.  In a nutshell, lonely guy John C. Reilly meets Marisa Tomei at his ex-wife's new engagement party.  They hit it off (wink), and quickly fall for each other.  There is one problem, Tomei has a son she hasn't told him about.  And he lives at home, is 21, and will do anything to stop a man from coming between him and his mother. The film is darkly funny.  Anyone viewing the film, prepare yourself for some truly awkward moments.  At its heart, it's a sweet film about growth and acceptance.  At times I found it a bit too 'indie' for me.  The movement is known for it's shaky hand held camera work, as well as the numerous close ups.  I have to admit that I'm on the fence regarding the Mumblecore movement.  But I'm interested in exploring some of the films more representative of this style.  Perhaps a viewing of 'Hump Day' is in order...

Is 'Cyrus' worth your time?  If you enjoy your comedy on the dark side, with some uncomfortable moments, then 'Cyrus' is for you.

Rating: B-

The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo

The first film based on the 'Millennium Trilogy' by Stieg Larsson introduces us to Lisbeth Salander, one of the more complex and rich female characters to come about in a long time.  Mikael Blomkvist, played competently by Michael Nyqvis is a journalist recently released from prison after being framed for libel when publishing a piece on defaming a local business tycoon.  He is hired by the patriarch of the wealthy Vanger family, who value their privacy with good reason.  Harriet Vanger disappeared 40 years ago, and her uncle is convinced it was murder.  Blomkvist agrees to investigate the case, eventually teaming up with Noomi Rapace's Salander.

There are twists and turns aplenty, as well as some true genuine chills.  I must admit at times I was more interested in Salander's story, than the main mystery concerning Harriet's disappearance.  Nonetheless, the film is grossly engaging, as well as just plain gross at times.  There are some brutal scenes in this film, and I'm curious how far the remake will go in recreating them.

Yes, the inevitable US remake is coming, and could quite possibly out do the source film.  It's is being helmed by David Fincher, and Daniel Craig has signed on to play the Blomkvist role.  The Salander role is still uncast at this time.  Fincher's involvement alone fills me with confidence.

I enjoyed the movie immensely, and am excited to see the sequel, 'The Girl Who Played With Fire' (currently playing).  If you enjoy an exceptionally well crafted adult thriller, 'The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo' is a can't miss and a blind buy (if you don't mind subtitles).

Grade: A

Harry Brown

Michael Caine channels his inner bad ass Septuagenarian with this import from across the pond.  (How hip am I to use that phrasing?)  You can consider this your Euro-Death Wish, but much better acted.
Michael Caine is Harry Brown, living in the English version of the projects.  He is a war veteran and widower, grieving over the recent passing of his sister.  He has one friend in his neighborhood who has been harassed by the delinquents that haunt the area.  His friend finally snaps and fights back, resulting in his murder at their hands.  Caine is now left with nothing to lose, and decides to avenge his friend's death, and clean up his neighborhood.

Caine portrays the isolation and loneliness chillingly well.  Director Daniel Barber routinely frames Caine to further emphasize his disconnect from his surroundings.  This is a dark film, thematically and cinematically.  Caine has to make some heavy decisions, but once the he takes his big step, it's full on 'Get Carter' Caine.  Emily Mortimer plays the police officer investigating the rash of vigilante attacks.  She plays her role with an unusual amount of apparent open emotion.  It's an interesting choice for a role usually played as cold and stoic.

Caine elevates the film above your traditional revenge pic.  It's a dark, desolate film, that focus more on the characters involved rather than relying on cheap thrills.  Harry Brown is well worth your time.

Grade: A-

Up Next: The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo

Trick r' Treat

Hello kids!

To get in the mood for our upcoming scary movie episode, I decided to watch something from the genre. There are so many classics to choose from, but I thought it might be fun to check out something I hadn't seen. The piece of, "s," I picked... Trick r' Treat.

The story is set in a small suburban, friendly Ohio town on Halloween night. Kids are all dressed up and trick or treating, and adults are partying and getting wasted. Pretty standard. Then, all hell breaks loose, the plot starts to develop! Then it stops. Then it starts to develop again! Then it stops again. Then the movie is over! Hooray! Sound boring? Don't worry, it's stupid too.

Initially it looks like there's a stalking killer on the loose, with an opening similar to Halloween or Scream, but not interesting or good... or original. Then, there's a crazy satanic father who lives next door to the town shut-in. He goes nuts. Then, "That Kid," pukes his guts out. Literally (oh, what a mess!). Then Dracula's there! That's the first 15 minutes of the movie. The story gets more and more off track from then on, but I don't want to spoil the rest for you. If for some reason (not sure what that could be?) you are subjected to watching this movie, I want to you to at least have fun, seeing how it makes no sense at all.

Now, trying to give it the benefit of the doubt, halfway through the movie, I thought, "The stories will eventually tie in and make sense." Nope. Well, maybe a little, but still, no. Even if they did, they were all dumb anyway. I also thought, "Perhaps that isn't the point, and there are just supposed to be a bunch of separate tales that take place all at once." There were comic book page story breaks, so that may be it. Characters come into the story long enought just to start to seem interesting, but for the most part not, and then the story shifts to someone else before the first character even had a chance to propel their part of the story.

I must say there is one story line in the movie, which is actually really enjoyable. If you see the movie, I think you'll be able to tell which one I'm talking about. Unfortunately the movie spends so much time on the other ones, when it should have just been a full movie based on this one story.

The preview for this movie looked great, and the cast had a few stars I'm a fan of. Brian Cox (Hannibal Lecktor, yes, I know, that's how it was spelled originally - Manhunter, Richard Morgan - The Ring). Anna Paquin (Sookie Stackhouse - True Blood, Rogue - X-Men. She's no Anna Kendrick, but who is really?). Leslie Bibb (Carley Bobby - Talladega Nights, Christine Everhart - Ironman, and she is in # 2 too. She is another one of my favorites. She's so sweet, and funny, and gorgeous). They all do a fine job, but they are only in a few minutes of the movie, so there's only so much they can do. How they were all signed on for this, I have no idea.

Another interesting fact about the movie is when it was made. It was supposed to be a theater release... in 2007. After several delays, it was instead featured at film festivals, through 2009, and it was noted that it closed out Montreal's 2009 Fantasia Film Festival, and actually was well liked. Thankfully, the studios thought differently, and it wasn't released until 2010, on DVD. That's a super straight to DVD release! I read that after watching the movie, and it felt good to know my opinion was obviously shared by the general public. If this was the type of movie they were showing at the Montreal festival, I'm not sure the happy reactions were necessarily for the film, or the fact that the festival was over.

I can't recommend this movie to anyone. Don't buy it, don't rent it, or even look at it in the store. If you're thinking of watching it, or you're bored and looking for something to do, I suggest channel 9 instead. It's the breast exam.

Grade: D-

Living in the Lymelife

Lymelife - 2009 - Rory Culkin, Keiran Culkin, Alec Baldwin, Jill Hennessy, Timothy Hutton, Cynthia Nixon, Emma Roberts

I recently was channel surfing, and happened to land on Lymelife. I hadn't heard of it, but the cast interested me, and honestly, there wasn't much else on.

I was hoping that it would be a comedy, and that Alec Baldwin would unleash some of his Jack Donaghy (or Canteen Boy's Scoutmaster) humor. That didn't happen, but the longer I watched the movie, the more interesting it became to me.

The story is a drama, with some comedy thrown in at times, and centers around a couple of neighboring families, and the family members' individual struggles. The philandering parents trapped in unhappy marriages, dealing with the disappointment of their children's disappointment in them; the childrens' pain of adolescence, crushes, experimentation, bullying, and trying to figure themselves and their place out; the early real-estate boom fueled by the baby boomer generation, and, hence the title, the initial knowledge of lyme disease. All of them play as intensely influencing factors in the development of the story, and with all of the separate plot focal points, it would be impossible, at any age, to not identify in some way with the characters, whether reminiscently or present-tense. I didn't grow up in the 70's, but the late 70's long island setting was a common landscape, extremely relatable to any suburbanite, with it's own victories and difficulties.

The screenplay by Derick and Steven Martini, who appear to be newcomers, is brilliant and relative, but what impressed me the most about the movie was the acting of everyone involved. The characters were clearly robust, and the actors sunk their teeth right into them. Everyone was incredible! The performances you would expect from some of the veteran actors and actresses involved, though not typically all in the same project, were all delivered in this case. For some of the less experienced, or less showcased actors and actresses, it served as a document of their truly strong acting abilities. The Culkin brothers were amazing and interesting to watch, Jill Hennessy was perfect as their mother, and Emma Roberts shed the Nancy Drew, Hotel For Dogs, good time family character we've seen from her before, and showed her capability as a young, but clearly skilled, actress.

As the plotline develops, the viewer delves further into the motivation, frustration, and triumphs of the characters, ultimately remembering similar personal experiences and relating to them in ways few films can facilitate. I obviously became a big fan of the movie, recommend it to anyone, and am looking forward to other films that may deliver what this one did for me. If you have cable, Netflix, or a video store near you, and I'm sure you do, I'm confident that this would be a DVR or rental that you would enjoy and hope you do as much as I did.

Grade: A

Remember kids...if it ain't a GMO, it ain't goood eatin'!

Here are two facts about myself I’m going to share with you, our loyal loyal fans, one pretty obvious and one lesser known. Fact the first…I am a fan of food. I don’t just like to eat per se but I like to experience and try new foods. I am a foodie if you will, but I am in no way a food snob. This is the obvious fact as evidenced by my ever expanding waistline. The other fact is that while I enjoy documentaries, I try not to watch ones that have a political undertone since I get all fired up about them. I don’t really watch the news for that same reason. Politics are bad for my mental health. So it was with some slight trepidation that I watched “Food, Inc.”

Let me start off by saying that you should never trust a documentarian. They usually seem to have an agenda and it often times seeps into the film itself. So with that in mind, “Food, Inc.” is a film about the way we eat. Or more correctly, the way our food is produced and packaged and brought to the consumer. It is a fascinating subject because it is something that effects every person in the country but it is a topic that most of us never stop to consider. The film touches on many aspects of the food industry: the industrialization of farming and the changes to reality that it has brought to our farming communities, both physically and economically; the virus like spread of corn into all of the products we eat which is often not immediately apparent to consumers; and the genetic tampering and short-cuts the food industry has taken to give the consumer what it wants at the cost of nutrition and, as a consequence, our health. These points are presented well and are thought provoking.

But the real revelation of the film, at least for me, was the depiction of the food industry as a shadowy and powerful cabal in the US government. According to the film, they have positioned themselves into power by exempting themselves from trust laws, keeping their operations a strictly guarded secret, and paying low wages to employees who work in dangerous and filthy environments. All of this leads to risks to the health of the public at large. What is truly shocking, if true, is how the food industry has effectively made the USDA and FDA powerless to regulate and enforce sanctions on them. Realizing that they have made organizations that are meant to protect us toothless in the pursuit of capitalism is, well, part of what gets me all fired up and why I try to avoid these things.

The above is contrasted by images of the local farmer, the organic grower, companies that care about the well being of the public and the environment. So the message is to eat local, eat organic, eat seasonal, stop The Man. (By the way, this is spelled out explicitly in an interminable “you-should-do-this” sequence at the end.) And that is my main problem with the film. I understand they are trying to get a message across. But they only pay lip service to the negatives, if at all. For one, the film does touch on the expense of eating organic and local yet it is a short segment and incomplete at that. The fact of the matter is that it is significantly more expensive to buy organic and local products. Many families simply can’t afford to do this. The film seems to suggest that this is also the doing of the food industry. While the industry does play a part, the flip side is not significantly explored. Also, zero mention is made (from what I recall) of what organic produce does to the population of the world at large. I have heard jokes told that for every “progressive” yuppie enjoying their organic apple, 100 people are dying of starvation in the third world. The simple fact is…if all we produced was local and organic, we couldn’t support the worlds population. Who knows if we could even support our own. While it is all well and good to say it is better for your health, I’m sure those starving appreciate your moral stance against a genetically modified kumquat.

“Food, Inc.” is a good film and I encourage you to see it. Listen to what it has to say but don’t go off the deep end and keep it in perspective. Oh yeah, and in case you were wondering, there isn’t much in the way of gruesome animal slaughtering. The most graphic things involves chickens (at a small farm no less.) Bon appétit!

Grade: B+

"Teeth" needs to go to the orthodontist to get straightened out.

So I watched a charming little movie called “Teeth” the other day. This is the tale of a virginal, promise ring wearing, inspirational chastity speech giving teen by the name of Dawn (Jess Weixler). Dawn is a little different. I don’t mean different in the sense of being a young woman of strict religious principals struggling to find love and acceptance in high school. No, Dawn is different because she has lamprey teeth. In her lady parts. Yes, you read that right. Dawn has a condition known as “vagina dentata” which is Latin for “Jaws pu$$y.” (I had to censor myself…this is a family website.) You can guess where the film goes from there.

Where do I even begin with this one? I’m going to get this out of the way right up front…I am not a huge fan of comedy in my horror movies, even black comedy. The line between inspired filmmaking and ridiculous bore for horror comedy is razor thin in my opinion. It fails more often than it succeeds, which is unfortunately the case with “Teeth.” The jokes, when they come, are not really that funny because of all the screaming and blood. Imagine a movie where every joke is the date rape joke from “Observe and Report.” Yeah, sounds hilarious right?

At this point, you are saying “Matt, so it isn’t that funny but isn’t it scary? I mean, emasculating female revenge is TOTALLY SCARY.” Well, chief, you’re wrong there too. The biggest disappointment is that the scares are pretty dull. You know when they are coming (since anything that goes into the vagina of doom meets the same end), they are pretty much the same every time (because how many different ways can you put something into the vagina of doom without it becoming a horror comedy PORNO?), and they usually have some of the “comedy” tossed in there that makes the whole exercise just fail epically.

To top it all off, I just couldn’t get behind any of the characters. Dawn is annoying and everybody she comes into contact with is a doucher. Which begs the question…how does one person run into this many rapists/molesters/douchebags in a period of a FEW DAYS in a SMALL TOWN and manages to get all kinds of stuff shoved up there to be bitten off?! I understand that if the entire conceit of your movie is to have a vajayjay with a blender in it, you need to find a reason for stuff to go up there. But the filmmakers don’t want Dawn to be a monster, they want her to be sympathetic. It just left me blasé. Of course, I guess it is a moot point anyway since how many people have teeth in their vagina?

This film received positive critical response and was a hit at Sundance in 2007. I mean, I understand “the message.” I understand the point that it makes about female empowerment and the metaphor for sexuality and yada yada yada. I guess “Teeth” should be given its due for that if nothing else. But purely as a piece of entertainment, it just isn’t satisfying.

Grade: D

Lo Squartatore di New York aka The New York Ripper

The Movie: So, I endulged myself last night with one of my favorite guilty pleasures, Italian horror.  I caught up with the Lucio Fulci film The New York Ripper, rather recently released on blu-ray.  So, let's talk about it.

There's a killer stalking the streets of New York City.  He's killing young women rather graphically with a knife.  The killer has an unusual trait...when the killer strikes, or calls the police to mock them, he talks with a Donald Duck voice, with some maniacal quacking thrown in for good measure.  No, I am not making this up.  Now the reason for the voice is explained at the end, but the explanation does not make it any less ridiculous. 

Anyone who follows Fulci's work will not be disappointed.  You're going to get a healthy dose of gore and nudity, everything you'd expect.  Now, it's not on par with his seminal works, like The Beyond or Zombie, but still enjoyable.  The scares are nominal, but let's be frank, that's not why you'd watch one of his films.  If you're a fan of graphic Italian horror, I'd say rent it.  Nothing worth really holding on to and owning.

Disc Details: The film transfer looks suprisingly good.  It's a 28 year old, low budget film, so my expectations were muted.  There is a heavy amount of grain present.  Over all, Blue Underground has done a fine job of cleaning up the film.  They've included a beefed up 7.1 surround mix, though it didn't seem to be a vast improvement.  Granted the original sound was a mono mix, I just wasn't blown away.  They've also included some forgettable extras.  I would like to have been able to see the film in Italian with English subtitles, sadly, this was not an option.

Genre Specific Rating
The New York Ripper: C+