Monster's Blog

HG Wells' classic novel about Martian invasion has been adapted a number of times for radio, film and stage. Byron Haskins' 1953 film 'The War of the Worlds' is one of two film adaptations, along with Steven Spielberg's 2005 version. Whilst Spielberg's version undoubtedly has its merits, Haskins' movie is the most successful, being a solid and entertaining slice of 1950s sci-fi.

The film relocates the action from the Victorian London suburbs of Wells' novel to 1950s rural America, where a strange meteor crash lands in the desert. It soon transpires that the meteor is in fact the first of many cylinders containing Martian invaders determined to conquer Earth. These scenes involving the strange unearthly cylinder contain the same air of expectant menace as Wells' book, and when the cylinder opens the Martian reveal is just as scary.

There's one very noticeable difference between Haskins' Martians and those of Wells, and that is that there isn't a tripod to be seen. Instead of towering fighting machines striding across the landscape, the film depicts the fighting machines as hovering spacecraft with a cycloptic eye. The tripods are so iconic to the book that you'd expect such a fundamental change to their appearance to be detrimental, but in fact it works very well, their silent, watchful eyes being full of impenetrable malevolence.

When the invaders finally attack, the special effects department do a tremendous job at conveying a sense of their awesome, inescapable power. The screen is filled with fire and showers of laser fire, and characters and vehicles are literally vaporised in the fighting machines' path. Special note should be made of the sound effects department who bombard the audience with the sounds of this weapons fire to the point where you want to run for cover yourself.

The story then opens up to show the progress of the invasion worldwide while our protagonists desperately search for a way to combat the seemingly invincible Martians who have so far withstood tanks, aeroplanes and even an atomic bomb. When the 'route of civilisation' finally takes place, and the streets are filled with panicking citizens trying to escape the major cities, Haskins does a terrific job of conveying mankind's desperation, and the final scenes taking place in various churches and cathedrals while the city collapses around them are poignant and humane.

The film isn't without its flaws. It makes the mistake of revealing the Martians who pilot the fighting machines midway through the film. The creatures are somewhat silly in appearance (and I would say influential in the design of Spielberg's 'E.T.') which undermines the overwhelming sense of power that the invaders have had until that point. There's also some jarring and unconvincing use of stock footage of military vehicles which the film could easily have done without.

But these are minor quibbles. Exciting, visually arresting, and occasionally moving, 'The War of the Worlds' is 1950s science fiction at its best.

Having never seen Wes Craven's original I can't judge how successful a remake Alexandre Aja's 2006 version is. What I can say is that judged on its own merits, Aja's 'The Hills Have Eyes' packs quite a punch.

The story follows a family travelling through remote desert territory, who stop briefly at a gas station. They are told of a shortcut via an old dirt track, unaware that they are being sent delibrately into the hands of a vicious family of mutant hillbillies.

Plots don't get much simpler than that, and Aja treats the nuclear-era subtext apparently present in Craven's original as little more than a means of injecting some sinister colour and atmosphere. It soon becomes clear that Aja is interested in one thing only - scaring the wits out of his audience through a barrage of uncompromising violence that transgresses just about every barrier of taste you can think of.

That may not be your cup of tea - in fact it isn't really my cup of tea either, but it is impossible not to be impressed by the skill Aja displays in achieving his intentions, and it is impossible not to appreciate the intensity of the emotional turmoil that you the viewer are forced to endure.

The first hour is an exercise in the art of the suspense, as the protagonists separate in an attempt to get help after their vehicle breaks down. The audience knows the mutants are out there, but the protagonists don't, and we sit there biting our nails waiting for the attacks to begin.

And when the mutants do strike, it is jaw-droppingly brutal, extraordinarily perilous and nastily cunning. It is real body blow for the viewer, and a trauma that the protagonists reel from for the rest of the film, amplified by some strong acting throughout the cast.

And from then on things just get gorier, and more desperate, reaching a bloody and satisfying climax which is likely to have the viewer wanting to grab a heavy weapon and join in the battle, so much do we wish those mutants dead.

This film is not for the fainthearted or the squeamish, but if you believe that sometimes good horror needs to be endured rather than enjoyed then 'The Hills Have Eyes' is an excellent example of how it should be done.

If you're tired of Hollywood churning out inferior remakes of horror movies instead of supporting scripts of new stories, then the imminent release of the remake of "A Nightmare on Elm Street" is unlikely to generate much excitement.

Despite them being very much "of my time" (I was a teenager and VHS was sweeping the nation) I wasn't a huge Freddy or Jason fan in the '80s. However I do now appreciate the qualities of the first 'Nightmare' film (and rather liked the post-modern twist that 'Wes Cravens New Nightmare' gave the series), so will approach the re-make with some trepidation.

There's no reason why the Nightmare remake can't be a good (or even great) movie. Its themes - the fear of dying in one's sleep, the power of nightmare, and the constant threat to our children - are universal and as relevant now as they ever have been. If the filmmakers approach the story from their own perspectives, and invest their own experience and ideas, then it could be as good a remake as John Carpenter's "The Thing" or David Cronenberg's "The Fly".

Unfortunately the current trend in Hollywood is toward the 'safe bet'. No new ideas, no variations on a theme, just shoot the same film that was made 20 years ago, just with a different cast and some undemanding CGI. Its a recipe for mediocrity.

I just hope the makers of the Nightmare remake tear up that recipe and take some risks - if they do, then perhaps they'll concoct something worth watching...

'The Hand' is an early film from director Oliver Stone, and one which receives much criticism. But I can't help feeling that it is a far better movie than most people give it credit.

The plot involves a comic strip artist (Michael Caine) who loses a hand in a road accident. The hand is never found, but before long it comes back to haunt the artist in hallucinations. His life begins to fall apart, his relationship with his wife collapsing, before eventually the hand comes to life and goes on a murderous rampage, acting out the artist's own anger and frustration.

Sound silly? Well I guess it does, but then so do most horror movies. Sound original? Again, no - its an idea that's been done before. But does it entertain? Yes, it does.

The film's strength lies mainly in the central performance of Michael Caine. His portrayal of an individual struggling to come to terms with the loss of a limb is extremely convincing, his reactions to others sympathy and his own frustration nuanced and moving. As the character disintegrates over the course of the movie Caine rises to the occasion, delivering a performance that is genuinely unnerving.

It is true to say that Caine can always be depended on, no matter how bad the material, but 'The Hand' does have more to offer than its main actor.

The scenes involving the murderous hand are scarier than you might expect, managing to overcome the inherent silliness of a mobile, sentient dismembered hand with strong direction, atmospheric lighting and camera work. And the murders are gruesomely effective.

Admittedly the film is flawed. There's a slightly unpleasant whiff of misogyny in the film's portrayal of women, and although the audience knows where the plot is heading from a very early stage, Stone takes a rather long time getting us there, creating a slightly laborious mid-section. And it could be said that the epilogue betrays the conclusion reached in the climax, though personally I found it to be a great way to end the film, with Caine pulling out all the stops for a memorable scene.

'The Hand' may be no masterpiece, but I'd say its definitely worth a look - you may be pleasantly surprised.

'Captain Kronos Vampire Hunter' is an enjoyable movie from Hammer, featuring the eponymous swashbuckling vampire hunter and his hunchbacked sidekick Grost arriving at a village in which young women are having their youth drained from them by a shadowy, cloaked figure.

The film takes itself less seriously than most Hammer movies, and though not a comedy as such, their is an air of irreverence throughout and some scenes are played for laughs (the most effective being the one in which the duo unsuccessfully try out various vampire-destroying methods on a captive vampire).

Comparisons with Roman Polanski's 'The Fearless Vampire Killers' are inevitable, and such comparisons don't do 'Captain Kronos Vampire Hunter' any favours, simply because it isn't in the same league. But it would certainly not be true to say that Hammer's film plagarised Polanski's, as it has more than its fair share of original ideas.

If there is a problem with the film it is that the male lead, Horst Janson, doesn't quite have the charisma or energy to make the character of Captain Kronos as engaging as he should be. His efforts aren't helped by the presence of love interest Carla (Caroline Munro), a character who serves no purpose to the plot, and whose relationship with Kronos detracts from the far more entertaining one he has with his sidekick Grost (and Munro's embarrassingly wooden performance makes matters worse).

But despite these flaws 'Captain Kronos Vampire Hunter' has plenty going for it, and as an overall film it works. It is well paced, nicely shot, and original enough to keep the viewer on their toes. The vampire is also well used, its sinister, faceless presence a refreshing change from the usual portrayal.

Sealing the deal is the climax, which is particularly good, featuring a well-placed twist, a thrilling swordfight and possibly the creepiest ancestral portrait in the history of horror cinema!