And so, it has finally arrived: the first trailer for the long-awaited sequel, “28 Years Later.” Like another sequel, “Beetlejuice Beetlejuice,” it was stuck in the deep, dark and despairing pit known as development hell. But like said sequel, this one finally emerged from its depressing depths and looks to promise us another round of infected zombies running way too fast and devouring everything in their path, and it looks to be a creative reinvigoration for Danny Boyle, the Oscar winning director of “Slumdog Millionaire.”
The story so far indicates that almost thirty years have passed since the Rage Virus was unleashed upon the world after a group of animal rights activists naively released an infected chimpanzee from its cage (the road to hell is always paved with good intentions). After what looks like a prologue in which a harried parent locks a group of children into a room where they watch the Teletubbies before blood starts flying everywhere, we are taken to an island where humans can find peace as they are surrounded by water which acts as a much-needed border between them and the infected. Like those characters from the “Dawn of the Dead” remake, they think this island will offer them a safe haven, but we all know this will not last very long.
This first “28 Years Later” trailer promises an especially visceral and bleak time at the movies as humanity still struggles in a post-Rage Virus world. But then again, remembering how “28 Weeks Later” ended with dozens of infected running towards the Eiffel Tower, we could not have expected things to get much better. And keep in mind, the tagline for this sequel states, “Time didn’t change anything.” With Boyle returning to this franchise as a director for the first time since “28 Days Later,” and Alex Garland returning as screenwriter, it will be interesting to see how life has evolved (or perhaps devolved) for the characters we see here and the virus.
Movie trailers for the longest time have been using special remixes of popular songs to get the audience’s adrenaline pumping as excitement is always promised for eager film buffs, and the hopes of a huge first weekend opening at the box office is always in the air. With “28 Years Later,” we instead get an old recording of Rudyard Kipling’s war poem “Boots” read by Taylor Holmes. Holmes’ increasing the intensity of Kipling’s words makes the images thrust at us here all the more horrifying, and it makes this one of the best and most memorable movie trailers I have seen in some time.
The big question I have, however, is this; where is Cillian Murphy? After winning the Best Actor Oscar for his role in “Oppenheimer,” it was said he would be reprising his role of Jim and also be serving as an executive producer on this sequel. While actors such as James Bond front-runner Aaron Taylor Johnson, Jodie Comer and an especially beat up Ralph Fiennes dominate this trailer to where no infected person could easily upstage them, I kept waiting to see Murphy somewhere in here. Rumor is, there is a corpse which rises up from the grass that looks a lot like him, and it makes me wonder what will become of Jim this time around.
“28 Years Later” is said to be the first of a trilogy, and the next film, “28 Years Later II: The Bone Temple” is currently being shot with “Candyman” director Nia DaCosta at the helm. Boyle’s sequel, which said to have been shot mostly on an iPhone 15 Pro Max, will be released on June 20, 2025.
Back when I saw it in 2009, Spike Jonze’s take on Maurice Sendak’s “Where the Wild Things Are” proved to be one of the few movies which I felt really dealt with real kids instead of the cliched ones which inhabit far too many motion pictures. Here, we get a young boy who has quite a vivid imagination which he retreats to when the real world becomes too scary to deal with, and who comes from a broken family where the father is not present. It was nice to see kids, one in particular, treated as intelligent and capable of learning more than they knew, and it combines them with things which are real, imaginary and, of course, wild.
The kid here is Max, and he is played by Max Records in one of the best performances I have seen from a child actor. Seeing him build an igloo out of a snow pile or making a spaceship in his bedroom with his stuffed animals as willing passengers brought back great memories from when I was a kid. But reality rears its ugly head when other kids thoughtlessly destroy his igloo, not thinking of what it meant to him. Then we see him in elementary school as his teacher explains how the sun will die one day. This is one of the funnier moments as the teacher just can’t stop talking about all the different ways our planet will die. Granted, this won’t happen for another billion years, but when you’re a kid, this can feel like it is just around the corner.
Everything comes to a head as Max becomes very resentful of his mother (the always terrific Catherine Keener) when she brings home a new boyfriend (played by Mark Ruffalo). The bond Max shares with his mother is very strong, but when he is no longer the center of her attention, he rebels and ends up biting her on the shoulder. Horrified at what he did, Max runs away from home and sails to a distant island where he does indeed come across the Wild Things of the title, and this is where the rumpus truly begins…
The Wild Things are a combination of puppetry and CGI effects, and it makes them all the more real as a result. The visual effects are used to give them facial expressions which vividly captures their happiness and sadness. As a result, it never ever felt like I was just watching a whole bunch of special effects. It really felt like I was watching creatures I could actually interact with.
Of all the monsters, the one with the most recognizable voice is the late great James Gandolfini who plays the most prominent Wild Thing, Carol. We first see Carol destroying some dwellings he had just built. For Max, breaking things has a wonderment to it, and Carol links on to this with the upmost enthusiasm. Gandolfini is wonderful, and at times truly heartbreaking as he takes Carol from utterly enthusiastic highs to downright angry lows. This is not him doing Tony Soprano as if he was all covered with fur. Also, Carol’s last scene is one which really choked me up, and Gandolfini sells it for all it is worth.
Among the other voices are Catherine O’Hara’s, and she plays Judith, the one monster who is very mistrusting of Max. Paul Dano plays the ever so sensitive Alexander, and he captures the painfully shy nature of this monster in a very truthful way. Forest Whitaker portrays Ira, and I barely recognized his voice here which is pretty impressive. Lauren Ambrose voices KW, and the moments she shares with Max form some of the movie’s best moments.
You know the saying of how we have met the monster, and the monster is us? Well, that is very much the case here. The Wild Things clearly represent the different parts of Max’s personality, and he soon comes to see himself in all of them. As a result, Max manages to see things a little more clearly in relation to his own family, and especially his mother. By becoming the monsters’ king, he realizes he has become much like his mother.
I really mean it when I say Records gives one of the best child actor performances I have ever seen. The whole movie really rests on his shoulders, and that is a lot to put an 11-year-old through. Jonze really lucked out getting him to play this part as the young actor makes his character’s transition from being just a kid to someone who is more mature and understanding very believable, and this really shows in the movie’s last half.
Jonze shot a good portion of the action with handheld cameras to give the proceedings more of an immediacy, and he thankfully does not overdo it. Some filmmakers fail to reign this camerawork in a lot of times to where it is hard not to feel sea sick. This was only his third movie as a director, following the creative triumphs of “Being John Malkovich” and “Adaptation,” and his directorial vision remains a very original one.
“Where The Wild Things Are” was originally supposed to be released in 2008, but Warner Brothers had considered reshooting the whole thing. It turned out Jonze’s vision was a lot darker than they expected it to be for something they thought would be an average family movie. The fact that Jonze’s take on this classic children’s book did make it to the silver screen and was not buried in a deep dark dungeon like “Batgirl” feels like a miracle. While it was not the box office hit the studio hoped it would be, it continues to have a long shelf life.
It also has a wonderful soundtrack done by Karen O and the Kids. It’s one of those soundtracks which has really great songs which are never easily forgotten, and it adds vividly to the strong emotions generated throughout.
Is this movie appropriate for kids? Well, it depends. If they are 6 years or younger, you may want to see it before they do. I was sitting near a boy and his mother, and the boy did get a little freaked out at times. Still, it is nowhere as traumatic as “Watership Down” or “The Neverending Story” was. If your kid can handle “Bambi,” they can handle this one as well.
One of my favorite scenes comes when Max and the monsters are jumping all over the forest, and Carol was creating big dust clouds when he landed. This all leads to a wonderfully heartwarming moment where the wild things pile on top of each other and fall asleep. Seeing Max befriend the somewhat alienated KW is especially great because their individual differences just evaporate at that point. These are two who can relate and sympathize with one another as they both come from worlds where they feel like outcasts.
If there is one weakness to be found here, it is that the plot does not always hold together. There are some moments which drag, and it takes a bit for the pace to recover. Then again, this movie is based upon a book that is only ten sentences long. The fact Jonze and co-writer Dave Eggers were able to craft a story for a feature length movie out of it is pretty amazing. But when you read or re-read the book, I think you will find that there is more to it than its simplicity of story might imply.
There was a bookstore next to the theater I saw the film at, and I dashed in there to read the book. I can’t even remember the last time I read this Caldecott award winner, and there is a lot of different ways you can look at it. You can see it as a story of how kids do not easily separate from their parents, and of how the further away from home they get, the more they realize the importance of a home. Or maybe you will see it as a story of the one person who becomes king and gets what he wants, but then finds it deeply unfulfilling and bereft of love and family which we largely thrive upon.
I think Jonze saw “Where the Wild Things Are” as a story which clearly take in a child’s point of view. Just about everything in this movie made me feel like I a child again, and of how we become shaped by the things which make us happy and sad. It is not meant to break down the imaginary worlds we create for ourselves, but of how they can make us understand the world around us and the people who figure most prominently in our lives better. Max comes to see why his mother treated him the way he did, and he grows up a lot quicker than most others his age do in the process.
For me, this film was something of a godsend when I first watched it. We see kids treated like real kids, and there is a wealth of genuine imagination and emotions throughout. While it doesn’t always hold together, it is a much more accomplished film than many others which get passed off as “family entertainment.” Too many movies then and now are dumbed down for audiences, and they often don’t treat children like the intelligent creatures they can be,
Indeed, no one could have brought this classic book to the silver screen the way Jonze did. And after all these years, it is definitely worth another look.
“Bad Teacher” so desperately wants to be a devious black comedy like “Bad Santa” but for teachers. Depressingly, it doesn’t even come close to reaching such devilishly hilarious heights. Despite some good laughs sprinkled throughout, this movie is a surprising bore with few surprises up its sleeve. You can see things coming long in advance, and the punch line deflates very quickly. Cameron Diaz, Jason Segel, Justin Timberlake and a talented cast do their best with a severely underwritten script, but the movie wears out its welcome within the first ten minutes.
Cameron Diaz stars as the teacher of the movie’s title, Elizabeth Halsey. She is dumped by her rich fiancé at the start as he figures out that she is only with him for his money, and this forces Elizabeth to go back to her teaching job which she claims is “the only thing I’m good at.” Her teaching style, however, consists of showing her students movies like “Stand and Deliver” and “Lean on Me” before moving on to the R-rated stuff. While they watch, she’s either nursing a hangover or working towards one with tiny little bottles of Jim Beam whiskey stashed in her desk. But while Jack Black played a somewhat similar character nursing a hangover in “School of Rock,” Diaz comes up short here.
The thing with movies like “Bad Santa” is that, as deplorable as the lead characters were in their actions and demeanor, there was something which made me want to keep watching what they went through, and in the hopes that they would reach some sort of evolution or catharsis. Whether they were likable or not, they were interesting. Billy Bob Thornton succeeded in “Bad Santa” in painting a complex portrait of a man who was as pitiful as he was cruel to others.
This brings us to a really big problem with “Bad Teacher;” Elizabeth Halsey is not an interesting character. She is essentially a shallow human being looking to manipulate those around her to get what she wants. Through schemes like school car washes and, as it is described, “extra tutoring,” Elizabeth works towards raising money to get breast implants as they seem more important than anything else. Aside from that, there’s not much to the character here. She comes across as one-dimensional without much to work with in terms of complexity or a back story, and this just sinks the film even further down into the muck.
Regardless of what has been said, I believe Diaz is a very good actress. She is endowed with great comedic talents which were put to good use in movies like “There’s Something About Mary,” and she has proven to be a strong dramatic actress in “Any Given Sunday” and “Being John Malkovich.” While she is game in making Elizabeth a despicable teacher, she never becomes like the ones everyone hated during school years, and the lack if any interesting and redeeming qualities makes this a waste of her talents. With a better screenplay, she would have been fantastic here.
“Bad Teacher” does pick up a little as it goes on, and it scores some great laughs when Elizabeth discovers that the teacher whose class gets the highest scores on the state exam gets a bonus of around $5,000. Seeing her switch her class from movie watching to reading the first 100 pages of “To Kill a Mockingbird” in one night for a quiz the next day is comedic gold. It gets even better when she uses unorthodox methods to make the students learn like standing them in a line and hurling balls at them when they give the wrong answers. Unfortunately, these are some of the highlights, and they all happen at the movie’s midpoint.
Other scenes like Elizabeth getting revenge on faculty members becomes anticlimactic as I could see long in advance how her vengeance would end. When she is running the school car wash and dresses scantily, it’s funny for a minute. I have seen so many movies over the years which have utilized this sight gag, sexy women at a car wash barely dressed, and it’s so old now. We have been there and done that, and nothing is done to make this particular gag look the least bit fresh.
One actor who fares better in this movie is Jason Segel who plays gym teacher, Russell Gettis. His humor is unforced, and he never strives too hard in making us laugh and succeeds in sneaking jokes when least expected. If only “Bad Teacher” had more of this humorous magic… I mean, I can dream, can’t I?
After all these years, I’m glad Justin Timberlake has singing career to fall back on as he has not had the greatest luck in movies despite his inspired turn in “The Social Network.” Watching him opposite Diaz is interesting in part because we all know they were once a couple, but the chemistry they had in life doesn’t quite translate to the silver screen. His character of substitute teacher Scott Delacorte is a rich guy who Elizabeth courts as she selfishly wants someone wealthy to pamper her for life. But it becomes far too obvious how this relationship will turn out, and while Timberlake does what he can with the material given to him, he can only do so much.
Other actors who have their moments include Phyllis Smith who steals scenes as the shy Lynn Davies. Her muted ways make for amusing moments as she argues about certain things bothering her at a very subdued level. Stealing even more scenes though is Lucy Punch who plays Elizabeth’s arch nemesis, Amy Squirrell. Punch fills her character with a certain joy brought on by an innocence which masks a deep resentment that eventually gets the best of her.
The director of “Bad Teacher” is Jake Kasdan who is of course the son of famed filmmaker Lawrence Kasdan, Jake’s a good director, and his movie “Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story” remains one of the most vastly underrated comedies of all time. But here, he is unable to find the balance between comedy and character. If the characters in this here movie were a little more down to earth and nowhere as contrived, he could have made this film truly work and give it a spark few comedies could have.
Many may watch “Bad Teacher” with high hopes that it will be a deliciously nasty comedy along the lines of “Observe and Report” or “World’s Greatest Dad,” let alone “Bad Santa.” The problem is this one is nastier than it is funny. Doing comedy is hard work, but making a black comedy is even more difficult. Hopefully, Jake will have more luck in the future with this kind of film, as he has done good work in the past. And I also say this because the recently released “Red One,” which he directed, is, like this one, far from ever being a critical darling.
Actor and filmmaker Edward Burns comes from a family of cops, and he always relishes the opportunity to play one in a movie. In “Alex Cross,” he got to portray Detective Tommy Kane who is partner and childhood friend to Dr. Cross (played here by Tyler Perry), and the boyfriend of Detective Monica Ashe (Rachel Nichols). While at the movie’s press conference which took place at the Four Seasons Hotel in Beverly Hills back in 2012, he talked about what drew him to the role.
Burns said he was aware of James Patterson’s Alex Cross books and that he had read a few of them. The character he plays, however, is not actually in any of Patterson’s books and was an original creation for this movie. He ended up getting a call from the movie’s director, Rob Cohen, who was determined to make this particular Cross film more of an action picture than a police procedural.
Edward Burns: Rob told me that he wanted to develop this new character opposite Alex that’s sort of a best friend. He said we’ll be working on this script up until we shoot and that he’d love to have some input from me. Anytime a filmmaker says they want you to collaborate with them that gets an actor excited, so I jumped in.
When it came to establishing the relationship between Tommy and Alex, Burns said there are two scenes in the movie that give viewers insight as to when these two met and how their relationship has evolved over the years.
Edward Burns: The thinking was we became friends as kids, and when we were little, I was a little more of the protector of him. When we got older, bigger and smarter, he then became the guy that looked after me. That’s what the tone of the relationship is between these characters in the film, and in our last scene together in the car we reminisce about how our roles have changed over time.
For Burns the one fun thing about playing cops in movies is that there’s always that period of when you have to do tactical police training.
Edward Burns:We had a great time working with the guys from the Detroit SWAT team and police department, and that’s always a lot of fun. It’s amazing because you always have to keep relearning that stuff (sweeping a room and proper weapons procedure).
Some actors hate being typecast as cops, but Edward Burns appears to be happy to play as many of them as he can. We look forward to him playing as many more cops in the future, and we applaud him on his continued dedication to the realm of independent film.
“Alex Cross” is now available to own and rent on physical media and digital.
WRITER’S NOTE: This interview took place back in 2012 and may contain outdated information.
Born and raised in Los Angeles, California, filmmaker David Twohy has left a strong impression on moviegoers everywhere. He got his start as a screenwriter on “Warlock,” “The Fugitive” and “Waterworld,” and he eventually proved himself to be an effective director with the underrated “The Arrival” which starred Charlie Sheen as an astronomer who discovers evidence of intelligent alien life, and the equally underrated submarine supernatural horror film “Below.”
But the movie Twohy is still best known for is “Pitch Black” which had him joining forces with “The Fast & The Furious” star Vin Diesel who played the dangerous criminal, Riddick. Its budget was only $23 million, but Twohy and Diesel created a movie that was intensely exciting and which made the most of its modest budget. So strong was the cult following for “Pitch Black” that the two later made “The Chronicles of Riddick” which had a budget of over $100 million. While the sequel was not a commercial success, fans were still craving another Riddick movie and kept pushing at Twohy and Diesel to bring this anti-hero back to the silver screen.
Fans got their wish when “Riddick,” the third movie in the “Pitch Black” franchise, opened in theaters on September 3, 2013. After dealing with a big budget and a Hollywood studio, Twohy and Diesel ended up raising the money independently to make this particular sequel a reality and maintain full creative control over it. It follows Riddick as he is left for dead on a desolate planet and ends up being sought out by bounty hunters who are prepared to bring his head back in a box. But soon they are stalked by vicious alien predators, and they are forced to join forces with Riddick in order to survive the long dark night.
I was lucky enough to attend the “Riddick” press conference at the Four Seasons Hotel in Los Angeles, California just before this sequel was released back in 2013. Twohy talked about the challenges of making this particular movie as well as what it was like working with Diesel who had just received his star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.
Question: How did the final film compare to what you originally envisioned, and were there any big challenges you faced in terms of the look of the film?
David Twohy: Did the finished product end up like we had imagined it? Yeah, it does because really, as a responsible filmmaker, I have to imagine the whole movie. After I script the movie, I have to storyboard it out, I have to budget it, and I have to understand if I can afford all those visual effects or not. So more than anybody, it looks like the movie I had imagined, sometimes better, sometimes not quite as good depending on how we execute the visual effects. But yeah, I’m not surprised by it because it’s what I do and it’s what I set out to make. Sometimes Vin, who is not privy to everything that’s in my head and all the work that I’ve done with the concept artist (and he likes it that way), is surprised, but I don’t have the luxury of being surprised. I can’t be surprised by anything in the filmmaking process if I’m doing my job right. So, it’s very much the movie we set out to make, and we set out to make something that would fit into the budget that we had ($38 million). I think you all know that this was an independent movie this time out instead of a studio movie. So, knowing that we would have limited resources, Vin and I sat down in his kitchen and we came up with a story that would fit that budget. It couldn’t be as grand as the last movie, and it had to be more contained. It feels more like “Pitch Black” to some people. It probably is more like that at least in its tone and scope (we limited it to one world), but it’s very much the movie we set out to make, and there were not that many surprises for me along the way.
Question: It was interesting to see that Dahl (played by Katee Sackhoff) was not a love interest in this movie. Usually, the girl ends up being the love interest of someone, but instead she was this independent woman who can hold her own. Can you talk about casting Katee and why you chose to make her this independent woman who can take care of yourself?
David Twohy: I remember Ridley Scott telling me this story about the original “Alien;” Ripley was scripted to be a man, and he decided to make her a female thinking that these parts should be gender-neutral. I’ve always remembered that, and the women in my movies do stand up on their own two feet and are not pieces to anybody, and I like that. In terms of Katee, she was the first person to read for the role of about a hundred actresses, and that I remembered her throughout the whole process speaks highly of her. So finally, I said, “Who was that girl who came in the first day, she had blonde hair and she kind of killed it? Who is she?” They said, “Oh that’s Katee Sackhoff from ‘Battlestar Galactica.'” Well, I didn’t really follow “Battlestar Galactica,” so I didn’t even know her from that, so I’m not casting or for that. I just thought she was the best available actress so we cast her like that, and I’m so glad we did because she was a joy to have on the set. And clearly, like the character, she holds her own amongst the men and swears worse than any of them. Her off-screen lines are just as good.
Question: What made you bring this franchise back to R-rated territory after the PG-13 “Chronicles of Riddick,” and is there going to be another “Riddick” anime, game or ride?
David Twohy: (laughs) A Riddick ride? Well, actually we are doing some D-Box seats in theaters, the motion platform seats. I just experienced them for the first time and it’s the closest thing to a Riddick ride as you’ll get. It’s watching the movie, but it’s motion based. I don’t know what that in between thing will be, but we embrace them, and I would like to do more. We published the motion graphic novel as well which helped with the back story of how Riddick went from King of the Necromongers to a man alone on a planet. We embrace those things, and it would be great to get another game off the ground, but those things are very hard to launch. They are costly and they need a lot of lead time, so it’s hard to sync those games to the release of a movie. But we would like to do another one and we are talking about it. The R-rated movie was important to us because, as a filmmaker, I have the flexibility I need to do what I want. With PG-13 I feel like I’m pulling my punches either in the script or working with my actors on the set and coming up with stupid analogues for the word “fuck.” I’m getting tired of that. It gets to the point where people aren’t talking like people talk anymore. Just because I don’t want to pull my punches anymore, I felt this was important to me. It also plants a flag in the ground for our fans as well and lets them know we are true to the character and the nature of the series. The reason for PG-13 last time is obvious. It was because we were a big studio movie funded by a big studio, and to minimize their risk they wanted to branch out to what they think is the widest possible audience and they think that’s PG-13. There is actually a sound reason for that, but Vin and I feel more comfortable back in the R-rated universe.
Question: In “Riddick” you deal with the Necromongers briefly and just move on from there. Do you plan on going back to that story thread if this movie is successful enough to merit a sequel?
David Twohy: Yes. If it is successful and if we have a flexibility to go wherever want for the next movie, and Vin and I are talking about two more movies and probably just that (it would be good to do a closed ended franchise rather than a franchise that just keeps spitting them out just to spit them out), we would like to get back to the Necromongers. I am currently cutting the director’s cut DVD right now which includes more of an epilogue which has Riddick returning to the Necromonger empire and actually setting things right there in terms of the guy who abandoned him on this planet and left him for dead, and his search for Vaako (played by Karl Urban) who he thinks has the answer to where his home world lies. The next few weeks will be telling for us, and we want to pay off the fans who have stuck with us all this time. They have never stopped talking about this movie to us, and it was them who made us open our eyes and say it will be honestly irresponsible to leave it like it was and not make another movie.
Question: How did you and Vin get back to the savagery of the “Pitch Black” with this one and made it look like “Conan the Barbarian” as opposed to “Conan the Destroyer?”
David Twohy: That was important too, and it was also part of the character who thinks at the story’s outset that maybe he feels that he is gotten a little slow, a little soft, who has dulled his own edge as King of the Necromongers and wonders what happened to him. Did he commit the greatest crime of all? Did he get civilized? So, the exploration of him trying to get back to basics to find his edge again, to get back to the lean thing he was, it’s a good evolution for Riddick and it’s also sort of a parallel to what the franchise has undergone
Question: What do you like most about collaborating with Vin Diesel?
David Twohy: That he doesn’t shut up (laughs). He’s a guy who aims high and pushes me to aim high. He’s a guy who dreams and thinks that anything is possible, and me I’m more of a practical guy. I try to be a responsible filmmaker, living with the constraints of what I’m given to make a movie with, but Vin doesn’t think like that. Vin thinks like anything is possible and he thinks big. Sometimes that’s almost a folly but other times it can be inspiring and it can open up my ideas to other ways of doing things. What’s great about it is that he’s a guy who has all the confidence in the world and always has ever since I cast him as just a guy, an actor, in “Pitch Black.” But he had an unshakable confidence in himself even back then, and he just seems to see the future or will it into being (laughs) so that he can say “hey I was right all along!” He’s great like that and he’s inspiring like that. Just about the time you think that Vin Diesel is a guy with big muscles and a big head and your kind of willing to dismiss him as that, you realize that this is a guy with a big heart too. He dreams no small dreams, and that’s good and that rubs off on everybody else he works with.
Question: Can you talk about crafting Riddick’s voiceover in the movie?
David Twohy: Here’s how I craft it, I sit in front of my computer screen and I write it. Then I’ll rewrite it, I’ll tweak it, I’ll rewrite it and then I’ll show it to Vin and he’ll say I’m digging this or I’m digging that. When he gets in front of a microphone, he’ll say 90% of it, but every once in a while, he’ll just stick in a line. I later find out it’s because it’s too similar to something else he said in another movie. We just work it out and then I’ll spitball three alternatives and when something pops up that he likes we’ll just lay it down. We’ve built a good level of trust with each other lately. As opposed to the voiceover in “Blade Runner” where it was just filling in stuff that you needed to know about the world and it wasn’t character-based, the one in “Riddick” is character-based and it comes with Riddick’s voice and how he sees the world. It takes a while to get it right.
Question: Riddick’s relationship with the puppy is one of the best things about this movie…
David Twohy: By the way, every woman who has interviewed me today talked about the damn puppy (laughs). I cut a trailer of this movie that was all about Riddick and his relationship with the dogs and I gave it to Universal and said, “Hey maybe we want to broaden our audience a little bit and make sure we get the women in here, you know?” Then they go, “It’s a little soft for a Riddick movie Dave.” God, I wish the marketing people were listening to this! I’ve been trying to tell Universal, I’ve been trying…
Question: Since the puppy was created with CGI effects and has a lot of interactive scenes with the actors, what did they have to work with on the set?
David Twohy: All the actors have plenty of reference whether its concept art which they can paper their trailers with or I’ll show them on the morning of the shoot. The puppy has stand ins. For the puppy, I got a 12-pound silicone puppy that looks like the real puppy. It’s furred, it’s got glass eyes and everybody wants to hold it, and it just feels right. The puppy made it into the movie in a couple shots. Plus, Vin has big dogs too, so more often than not he’s telling me how to greet the dog and how to pet it (I’m a cat guy, Vin’s a dog guy). So, he says, “No you don’t pet it like a cat. If you want to say hello to your big dog, you slap it on the shoulder.” So that’s what we do in the movie.
Question: What were the differences, both positive and negative, that you found making this movie independently versus working on a studio movie?
David Twohy: Mostly positive. We shot it in 48 days which was pretty streamline. During postproduction I showed it to an audience of 50 or 60 people and didn’t score it, didn’t test it. I just wanted to know what confused them so I could go back and clear up the confusions. I showed one or two cuts to Vin and then I locked the picture. That is as atypical as it gets in the professional filmmaking world because a lot those movies you saw this summer were focus grouped, tested, scored, recut, reshot, recut, tested, scored, and after a while there is a factory-made feel to those movies. So hopefully something this simple, streamline and filmmaking pure results in something that’s at least different and maybe better just in the handcrafted sense of it.
Question: So, would you say you had more fun with less money in some ways?
David Twohy: Yeah, we did, and I’m sure most independent filmmakers will tell you that. The downside is that we staggered to the starting line. We were up, we were down, we were up, and we were down. It all comes down to, is the paperwork closed? Is the bond closed? You have to close the bond to get the bank loan. It’s a lot of stuff I don’t know much about, and I wish it didn’t affect my life but it does. We started and we were shut down, kicked out of our studios, the doors locked. We had to come back three months later and pay our bills and start over. So those are the vicissitudes of independent filmmaking.
“Riddick” is now available to own and rent on DVD, Blu-ray, 4K UHD and Digital.
As this interview was conducted in the past, it may contain outdated information.
The following review was written by Ultimate Rabbit correspondent, Tony Farinella.
When it comes to comedy, it’s all a matter of opinion. Comedy, even more than film criticism, is subjective. For example, I’m not an Adam Sandler fan and I find his films terribly unfunny, but there is a reason why his films keep getting released by studios. There is really no right or wrong when it comes to comedy. With “Blazing Saddles,” I heard all of the praise surrounding it and how some critics considered it one of the funniest films of all time. While watching the film for the first time, I understood what they were going for and what they were looking to achieve. It wasn’t as though the film went over my head or I didn’t understand the style of comedy they were putting on screen. I just never laughed.
My first issue with “Blazing Saddles” was its lack of plot. It seems this is mostly a movie filled with random gags and one-liners that are intended to make the audience laugh. They throw everything but the kitchen sink at us. It must be said the film is filled with the N-word along with other racial and homophobic slurs. I understand this film was made in 1974, which was fifty years ago, but it’s still uncomfortable to watch. The film is not funny and the jokes don’t land. There is a way to be offensive and also be funny, but this movie did not accomplish that goal. With comedy, you can go almost anywhere if you know what you’re doing. We have seen films that pushed the comedic envelope in the past, but they have been done in a smart and clever way. This is just flat-out lazy.
The plot involves a railroad being built through the town of Rock Ridge, a railroad that will make a corrupt politician a lot of money if he is able to force the residents out of their town. One way he is hoping to do this is by having a black sheriff named Bart (Cleavon Little) come in and make some of the local residents uncomfortable. The sheriff is called Black Bart. Subtlety is not this film’s strong suit. Bart’s deputy is played by Gene Wilder. Even though they are hoping to get the locals out of Rock Ridge, they end up staying and fighting for their town. Bart must also deal with Lili Von Shtüpp, played by Madeline Kahn, who is looking to find a way to sink her teeth into him.
“Blazing Saddles” features performances from Mel Brooks, Alex Karras and Richard Collier, to name a few. However, no one can save this movie from its awful screenplay and bad jokes. It is unwatchable from start-to-finish. It took every ounce of strength in my body to not only watch this movie, but to finish watching it. I absolutely hated it in a way I haven’t hated a movie in a very long time. I understand they were trying to make a film that would be a satire on Westerns and how certain demographics view African Americans. It shows how they are exploiting African Americans because the money men are only focused on the bottom line. I know what the message was and what they were trying to do in this film. I just didn’t find it funny.
In the end, “Blazing Saddles” is considered a comedy classic and one of the funniest films of all-time. I wouldn’t be doing this film any justice if I didn’t acknowledge its reputation and its three Oscar nominations. It has clearly reasoned with a lot of people. With this being its 50th anniversary, I know a lot of people are very excited about this 4K release. One of the worst things you can do as a critic is to say a movie should not be watched by anyone, and if anyone likes this movie, they are a moron. I would never dream of doing that. I acknowledge the reputation of “Blazing Saddles,” but I simply shrug my shoulders and say, “This was not, at all, my kind of comedy.” As stated previously, comedy is subjective. If you love the film, you will love the 4K.
ZERO out of * * * *
4K Info: “Blazing Saddles” is released on a single 4K disc from Warner Brothers Home Entertainment. It also comes with a digital copy of the film. It has a running time of 93 minutes and is rated R. You can purchase either the 4K slipcover or the 4K steelbook.
4K Video: The 4K HDR transfer from Warner Brothers is fantastic and looks terrific. Westerns, when done right, can look great on 4K. This is a visual feast for the eyes, and I imagine fans of the film will be quite pleased with this 4K transfer.
4K Audio: The Dolby Atmos track is also right on cue, as it’s a strong audio mix throughout the film that hits all the right notes.
Special Features:
Inappropriate Inspiration: The Blazing Saddles Effect
Scene-Specific Commentary by Mel Brooks
Blaze of Glory: Mel Brooks’ Wild, Wild West
Back in the Saddle
Additional Scenes
Should You Buy It?
I imagine some readers might call me too sensitive or say the film went over my head. I’m a huge fan of standup comedy, and I believe just about anything in the world is fodder for comedy when it’s done right. I understood exactly what Mel Brooks was going for in this movie, and I know that one of its writers was Richard Pryor. It is my job to give my honest assessment of this film, and I thought it was painfully unfunny and wanted to turn it off after twenty minutes. Because I was reviewing it, I felt obligated to watch the entire film. If this style of comedy is not for you, you won’t find a whole lot to laugh about in “Blazing Saddles.” If you enjoy the film and it fits into your comedic sensibilities, you will be very happy with it. This is another top-notch 4K release from Warner Brothers. They are doing a great job with releasing 4K’s from their massive library. Overall, if you loved this film, buy it. If you haven’t seen it before, I’d recommend watching it and seeing how you respond to it.
**Disclaimer** I received a copy of this film from Warner Brothers to review for free. The opinions and statements in the review are mine and mine alone.
The following review was written by Ultimate Rabbit correspondent, Tony Farinella.
“North by Northwest” is my favorite Alfred Hitchcock film of all time, which is no small feat and it’s not hyperbole. It is my favorite film from the director because it is his most ambitious. It has a running time of over two hours, and it is never boring, not even for a second. It is wall-to-wall suspense, excitement and intrigue. The acting is also top-of-the-line. Cary Grant has given a lot of great performances in his storied career, but he’s at his best in “North by Northwest” because he’s asked to juggle a lot and he’s also on screen for basically the entire movie. He goes from being cool, calm and calculated to being overwhelmed, frantic and verklempt. He also has a terrific screen partner in Eva Marie Saint, who recently turned 100-years-old! She’s a living legend.
Grant plays Roger Thornhill, an advertising executive who is about to have his world turned upside down when he is mistaken for a man by the name of George Kaplan. A group of thugs grab him and throw him into the home of Lester Townsend, who is really Phillip Vandamm (James Mason), a foreign spy who is into importing and exporting government secrets. They set up an elaborate ploy to frame Roger by getting him drunk and putting him behind the wheel of a car, causing him to have a drunk-driving accident. In this situation, his own mother doesn’t even believe him, as it sounds made up. It’s all true, and it’s up to Roger to clear his good name and put the pieces back together in this intricate puzzle.
In his travels, he runs into a young woman by the name of Eve Kendall (Eva Marie Saint), who takes a liking to Roger, even though his picture is all over the paper for a murder he didn’t commit. Things have only gone from bad to worse for Roger at this point. She is willing to help him out and they become romantically involved. There’s more to her than meets the eye. That is the beauty of “North by Northwest;” everyone is not who they appear to be upon first glance. It keeps the audience guessing and it keeps the characters in the film guessing as well. Hitchcock made a very smart film here which is occupied with very smart people.
Even though there is a lot going on in “North by Northwest,” it never feels complicated or overly convoluted. The film doesn’t need to explain every little thing to the audience, as it trusts that the audience is smart and able to keep up with everything happening on screen. It also doesn’t hurt when you have the legendary Cary Grant on screen, who is so effortlessly charming and fascinating. He really rolls with the punches here, as Hitchcock puts him in all types of unique and challenging settings, including the crop-dusting scene and a near-death experience on Mount Rushmore. Hitchcock, who was notoriously tough on actors, has said his favorite actor to work with was Grant. It’s easy to see why as they made movie magic on screen together.
Saint is sizzling on screen with her sex appeal, confidence and charisma. She more than holds her own in her scenes with Grant. They go tit for tat with one another, and she smolders on screen. Whenever they are on-screen together, it’s impossible to ignore their charisma and chemistry. They play off each other so well. James Mason is a great bad guy with depth and complexity and he doesn’t overplay it and is never cheesy or silly. Mason knows less is more, and he knows how to read his lines in a way where he’s cooler than the other side of the pillow. He is too good of an actor to just play this role as a typical movie bad guy, and he gives this character sophistication and elegance.
“North by Northwest” is one of those rare movies where you never want it to end. As soon as it starts, it grabs you and never lets you go. I didn’t want to get up to use the bathroom during this movie, as I didn’t want to miss anything happening on screen. There is no wasted movement in this film. Everything adds up to something and means something. Every single character has a purpose, whether it is to enhance the story or the tension. I don’t like to use the word “perfect” too often, but when it comes to a movie like this one, it is absolutely perfect from start to finish. It’s one of my favorite films of all time.
* * * * out of * * * *
4K Info: “North by Northwest” is released on a single 4K disc from Warner Brothers Home Entertainment. It also comes with a digital copy of the film as well. The film has a running time of 135 minutes and is unrated. It comes with either a 4K slipcover or a 4K steelbook.
4K Video Info: This is not only one of my favorite films, but also one of my favorite 4K discs of 2024. The picture quality is stunning and breathtaking. The HDR brings out all of the beautiful colors on display. Warner Brothers has done an incredible job of making this film look vivid and colorful. Wow! It is all about the details here, and they left no stone unturned in making sure “North by Northwest” was brought to life.
4K Audio Info: The Dolby Atmos soundtrack also adds the right amount of suspense and excitement to the proceedings. It’s a great audio track which really makes you feel like you are in the film. Subtitles are included in English, Spanish and French.
North By Northwest: Cinematography, Score and the Art of the Edit Destination Hitchcock: The Making of North by Northwest
The Master’s Touch: Hitchcock’s Signature Style
North By Northwest: One for the Ages
A Guided Tour with Alfred Hitchcock
Should You Buy It?
HELL YES! This is a film that needs to be bought immediately and, lucky for you, there are two ways to own it—the standard 4K slipcover or the impressive looking 4K steelbook. Even though the special features have been ported over from the Blu-ray, these are lengthy and informative, and they add a lot of context and insight into the film. If you loved this movie, you want to know as much about it as possible. As far as the audio and the visuals of the 4K, this is why I love 4K and why I champion this format so much as a movie lover. My wife and I watched this together on a Friday night and we were transfixed by the film, the mesmerizing visuals and the incredible audio. Warner Brothers knocked it out of the park with this release. This release gets my highest level of recommendation.
**Disclaimer** I received a copy of this film from Warner Brothers to review for free. The opinions and statements in the review are mine and mine alone.
The following review was written by Ultimate Rabbit correspondent, Tony Farinella.
“The Terminator,” directed by James Cameron, is celebrating its 40th anniversary this year. Because of this, Warner Brothers released the film on 4K for the very first time. This has been one of the most anticipated 4K releases in years. James Cameron released a number of his movies this year on 4K, including “Aliens,” “True Lies” and “The Abyss.” Many YouTubers and physical media collectors have expressed mixed opinions on the transfers of these releases, and it has caused a lot of debate in the physical media community. Cameron himself has come out and expressed his frustration with their criticism and even suggested they move out of their parent’s basements.
As far as the film itself, “The Terminator” opens up by introducing the audience to a cyborg (Arnold Schwarzenegger) who has been sent back in time from 2029 to 1984 to eliminate Sarah Connor (Linda Hamilton). To the untrained eye, he looks like a regular human being with his flesh, his ability to talk, and his ability to enter a room without really drawing a lot of attention to himself. Standing in the Terminator’s way is a soldier by the name of Kyle Reese (Michael Biehn). He’s also from the future, and he has one job and one job only, which is to protect Sarah. The Terminator’s job is to stop at nothing to eliminate Sarah because her unborn son, John Connor, is going to be the one to attempt to stop the machines from taking over after a war in the future begins.
The battle between humans and machines is one we are still battling in today’s world, especially with the introduction of artificial intelligence. Will machines become so powerful that humans will be rendered useless and unnecessary? Cameron was way ahead of himself with 1984’s “The Terminator.” This is a movie with big ideas and big characters. Arnold Schwarzenegger as the Terminator is fantastic with his movements, his screen presence, and his aura. Whenever he is on screen, you are completely captivated by him as an audience member to where you can’t keep your eyes off him. Linda Hamilton is terrific at walking that tightrope to where she’s seen as tough but also a little vulnerable. Michael Biehn also turns in a stellar performance as Kyle Reese. It’s a hard role to pull off, as Kyle needs to talk about the future in a way that will not only convince Sarah he’s telling the truth but also win over the audience.
I might be in the minority on this one, but my one issue with “The Terminator” is the love story between Sarah and Kyle. It is why I can’t give the film a perfect rating, even though I absolutely love it. The love story feels unnecessary when all of this is going on in Sarah’s world. In a film where I was able to suspend my disbelief for almost its entire running time, the romance came completely out of left field for me. Besides that, there is a lot to like about this film. It has a ton of great supporting work from actors such as Lance Henriksen, Paul Winfield, Dick Miller, and Earl Boen. Los Angeles is a character in this film, especially late at night. In many ways, “The Terminator” felt like Michael Mann directed a sci-fi thriller. It’s a moody and dark film with an underbelly of seediness and gloom and doom.
I also felt as though “The Terminator” had a sense of humor about itself without being too jokey. When the Terminator himself encounters some street punks while he’s naked, it allows Cameron to have a little fun with his premise. He is wise to not make the film too silly or goofy, however, as then it would be a completely different film altogether. The comedic moments come more from the way people react to the Terminator and how he reacts to them. Because he is so laser focused on killing Sarah Connor, he doesn’t have time for pleasantries. He is a man on a mission and will eliminate anyone and anything in his way. This film is able to feel like a big budget Hollywood blockbuster and a gritty, down and dirty independent film at the same time. It was made for $6.4 million, but it looks top-notch and has a sense of danger to it as well. “The Terminator” is an almost perfect film.
* * * ½ out of * * * *
4K Info: “The Terminator” is released on a single-disc 4K from Warner Brothers Home Entertainment. It comes with a digital copy of the film as well. The film has a running time of 107 minutes and is rated R for intense sequences of sci-fi action violence throughout, some sexuality/nudity, and strong language. You can get this film either with a 4K slipcover or a 4K steelbook.
4K Video Info: Warner Brothers released this film on Dolby Vision HDR. It is a clean-looking transfer that doesn’t take any chances and doesn’t really need to when you consider its original source material. I thought the majority of the film looked impressive and it had a very cinematic feel to it. I don’t think there are too many things you can find wrong with this 4K video transfer.
4K Audio Info: The Dolby Atmos track is really good here. This is a film filled with a lot of action, explosions and big moments. Those scenes sound impressive and make for a good at-home theater experience. It wasn’t too loud or boisterous, but it made its presence known. Subtitles are included in English, Spanish and French.
Special Features:
Deleted Scenes with Optional James Cameron Commentary
Creating the Terminator: Visual Effects & Music
The Terminator: Closer to the Real Thing
Unstoppable Force: The Legacy of the Terminator
Should You Buy It?
This is one of the greatest sci-fi/action films of all time, despite my issues with the love story between Sarah and Kyle. It comes with a stand-out 4K transfer which includes Dolby Vision and Dolby Atmos. This is the best “The Terminator” has looked, and it looks much better than the failed “Terminator 2” 4K release from Lionsgate a few years back. It seems like they have found a happy medium when it comes to James Cameron and his 4K transfers. They know how to make the most out of the 4K format without changing it too much to where you don’t recognize the film you love. Much like the prior Blu-ray release, the special features are lacking, which is a disappointment. Overall, though, if you love movies, you have to have “The Terminator” on 4K in your collection. It is a must-own, whether you get the 4K slipcover or the 4K steelbook. It’s a revolutionary film that holds up incredibly well on repeat viewings. This one comes highly recommended.
**Disclaimer** I received a copy of this film from Warner Brothers to review for free. The opinions and statements in the review are mine and mine alone.
After the bloated motion picture that was “The Chronicles of Riddick,” filmmaker David Twohy and star Vin Diesel return for “Riddick,” the third in a trilogy which began with the riveting “Pitch Black.” This sequel proves to be a return to as the story here is a lean one and is not about to overwhelm us with too many plot points. Also, it proves to be a stand-alone film which does not require you to view the previous installments (or “The Chronicles of Riddick” at the least) to understand all that is going on.
As the movie starts, Riddick (Vin Diesel) is now King of the Necromongers, but he ends up being betrayed by his supposed followers when he is left for dead on a planet which he is led to believe is his home world of Furya. From there, this anti-hero struggles to survive in a hostile environment where all these scorpion-like creatures and dog beasts are out to eat anything that moves on at least two feet. To make matters worse, bounty hunters are once again on his tail as he is forced to expose his location in order to find a way off of this barren planet.
What I found interesting about “Riddick” is how being King has somehow robbed this anti-hero of his abilities to survive. Diesel has made it no secret of how much he loves playing this character, and he invests Riddick with everything he has. Whatever you may think of his acting, you cannot say “The Fast & The Furious” star is not dedicated to giving this character the respect he deserves. Riddick is a bad dude, but like the best anti-heroes in movies, I still found myself rooting for him.
This sequel is truly a passion project for Diesel and Twohy more than anything else. Because “The Chronicles of Riddick” was a big budget studio movie that didn’t do well commercially, the two of them ended up having to raise the money independently to make this one a reality. Going from a budget of over $100 to one of under $40 million may have forced them to cut a lot of corners, and this is probably not the “Riddick” movie they originally envisioned doing. Still, I liked what they were able to come up with given the limited resources at their disposal.
One of the joys of watching “Riddick” is seeing how Twohy deftly skewers a lot of sci-fi clichés and wonderfully plays on the bounty hunters’ collective fear of their prey. Once the hunters arrive on this barren planet, Riddick leaves them a warning to leave one ship behind for him or suffer the consequences. Right away, you know that a majority of these characters are screwed. The question is, how are they going to die? There’s a great scene where they think Riddick has gotten into one of their storage compartments which is protected by a highly explosive device. Did he or didn’t get inside? That’s the question. Whatever the answer is, it leads to one of the film’s most wonderfully suspenseful moments.
Among the crew of bounty hunters is Katee Sackhoff whom we all know and love for her work on “Battlestar Galactica” and “Longmire.” She plays Dahl, a female mercenary who can dish it out as much as the men can and then some, and the punches Dahl inflicts on the male population she is forced to deal with are exquisitely painful to say the least, and they leave scars which will not be easily forgotten. Sackhoff is awesome in a role that definitely reminds us of how much we love her work, but she isn’t just playing Starbuck all over again. Dahl makes it abundantly clear at one point that she doesn’t fuck guys, and Sackhoff leaves you wondering just what exactly her character means by this. Remember, a single word never has just one definition.
Also in the cast is Jordi Mollà who has been nominated three times for the Goya Award for Best Actor, but none of those nominations include the performance he gave in Michael Bay’s horrifically bombastic “Bad Boys II.” Here he plays Santana, the leader of one of the bounty hunter groups, and Santana does very little to hide just slimy of a bastard he is. Mollà clearly relishes playing such a despicable character, and I got a kick watching him go over the top as he hunts down his prey. I don’t think it’s giving away too much to say that his character gets the painful fate he so deserves.
Then there is Matt Nable who plays the leader of the other bounty hunter team (who have much better equipment by the way), Boss Johns. I have no idea if his mother gave him that name, but I can only imagine the playground beatings this character got as a kid. Talk about a name to live up to!
Anyway, Nable, a former professional rugby player, does good work in conveying the conflicted emotions of his character as it turns out he needs Riddick for more than just a simple bounty, and it gives this sequel a complexity I did not expect it to have.
Dave Bautista, a former WWE wrestler who has since given memorable performances in movies like “Blade Runner 2049” and “Spectre,” plays the most bone crushing bounty hunter of all, Diaz. With Bautista in the cast, we know he and Diesel are going to have an all-out fight. And yes, it is quite the fight.
Most of the visual effects we see here are rendered in CGI, but that’s understandable given the movie’s budget. While the overuse of CGI effects in movies tends to drive me crazy, many of them look really good, and the alien landscapes are memorably illustrated. Riddick also gets to adopt a dog in the process, and the dog turns out to be one of this sequel’s best characters. Despite all the snarling, this dog is a cuddly little beast at heart.
It is also great to see Graeme Revell back composing the score for “Riddick” as he also did the music for the previous two films as well. It also marks a welcome return to the electronic elements he utilized so well in both “The Crow” and “Dead Calm.” It’s a wonderful reminder of how Revell doesn’t always need a full orchestra to create suck a compelling score.
“Riddick” is not a great movie and does not reinvent the wheel for either the action or science fiction genres, but it kept me entertained throughout. It also says a lot about Diesel and Twohy that they managed to bring this character back to the silver screen despite the commercial disappointment of “The Chronicles of Riddick.” The fans still wanted to see Diesel’s most favorite character make a return to the big screen. It took almost a decade for this to happen, but Diesel and Twohy came through even though they had fewer resources to work with.
And now we have news that a fourth “Pitch Black” movie is in the works. I am intrigued to see what Diesel and Twohy come up with next, and it is nice to know Diesel has another character to rely on other than Dominic Toretto.
This teaser trailer for “The Silence of the Lambs” was my introduction to this film, and it immediately grabbed me in a way few trailers do. Back then, the internet had yet to be discovered by me, I only knew Jodie Foster from “The Accused” which she won an Oscar for, and I had no idea who Anthony Hopkins was in the slightest. I should also add that not once in this trailer is there any mention that this adaptation of Thomas Harris’ novel was directed by Jonathan Demme. Had Demme’s name been included here, it would have made me all the more eager to check this film out as “Married to the Mob” and “Something Wild” were still very fresh in my mind.
What I love about this particular trailer is how it gives this film a look which makes it feel like no other cinematic experience that was coming soon to a theater near you. Everything about it was full of darkness, but it was a darkness like no other. With its striking images and shrieking noises, and also Anthony Hopkins staring directly into the camera in a way few other actors could, I felt I was being promised an experience which not be average or cliched in any conceivable way. I also very much prefer it to the main theatrical trailer which, quite frankly, gave far too much of the story away to where I am so very thankful I didn’t see it before I saw this brilliant motion picture on the silver screen at Crow Canyon Cinemas.
For the record, “The Silence of the Lambs” is one of my favorite movies ever, and one which I am happy to revisit quite often. This teaser trailer is also one of my favorites as those who put it together made it clear to audiences that this was a motion picture you would be foolish to miss out on. While the darkness it presented could have frightened many audience members off, not once did it feel like your average slasher flick.
The Ultimate Rabbit 