Hancock (2008)

A lot of superhero movies have a certain something in common. No matter how much damage or destruction is caused during their exploits, superheroes eventually get a free pass from the public at large because he or she is serving the greater good. Sooner or later, though, there was bound to be a superhero whose actions didn't exactly endear him to the general public. That superhero finally arrived when Columbia Pictures brought us Hancock.

Hancock spent over a decade languishing in developmental hell, going through five directors, numerous rewrites, and three name changes. But Hancock was finally released in the summer of 2008, telling the tale of a cynical superhero who isn't concerned with the fact that he's thoroughly unappreciated by the people he's supposed to be protecting. Though the movie's concept is one that could have made for a fun commentary on superheroes and the genre they populate, but unfortunately, Hancock ends up being a big ol' letdown.

John Hancock (Will Smith) is a superhero, blessed with the gifts of super-strength, flight, invulnerability, and immortality. He's also a homeless bum, a raging alcoholic, and someone who just doesn't give a crap about anybody or anything. That works just fine for the citizens of Los Angeles, because they don't particularly care for him either. The city's general displeasure with Hancock is caused not only by his bad attitude, but thanks to his recklessness, his attempts at fighting crime often go very awry. In one instance, his interception of a gang being chased by the police causes nine million dollars worth of collateral damage in the process. In another, he saves a man from being hit by a freight train, but his lackadaisical attempt results in the train's derailment.

But after the train incident, Hancock's life is about to get a little different. Ray Embrey (Jason Bateman), a struggling yet idealistic public relations executive and the man Hancock saved from the train, is genuinely grateful for having been rescued. And much to the chagrin of his disapproving wife Mary (Charlize Theron), Ray offers to repay Hancock by helping change his image for the better. With better interpersonal skills, a few public apologies, a customized leather costume, and some help from Alcoholics Anonymous and anger management classes, Ray thinks Hancock could go from being an antisocial drunk that receives more jeers than cheers to being the respected hero he could be. He even suggests Hancock do a stint in prison for the various misdemeanors he has committed, theorizing that the crime rate would rise high enough during his absence that the police would be begging for his assistance. Though hesitant, Hancock eventually agrees to heed Ray's advice and starts to change his ways. But as Ray and Hancock's business relationship blossoms, there soon grows an odd spark between Hancock and Mary. And as we all know, every superhero has a weakness, and Hancock's quickly reveals itself.

Hancock is perhaps the most bipolar movie I believe I've ever seen. It doesn't know whether it wants to be a conventional superhero movie or a satire of them, or whether it wants to be a melodrama, an action movie, a dark comedy, or something with a little more slapstick. There is so much potential in Hancock's concept, but its indecisiveness and its inconsistency in regards to its own identity really affects it in a bad way. It ends up becoming a number of completely different movies crammed into one ultimately disappointing 92-minute package. The first of these movies starts promising, but once we reach a certain point, the movie takes an incredibly sharp turn for the worse. If I may borrow a metaphor from the review written by Kenneth Turan for the Los Angeles Times, the creators of Hancock had a tiger by the tail with the movie's initial concept. But once they let it go, the tiger turned around and devoured them. And that, my friends, is the story of Hancock.

As per the usual in my reviews, let's begin with the direction. Peter Berg is at the helm here, and admittedly, his work isn't too bad. He's competent, at the very least. It doesn't help Berg, though, that he's stuck working from a script that feels like it was cobbled together from a bunch of other scripts. It feels like several movies put into one, which puts Berg in the awkward position of having to make sense of it all. He does do the best he can, though. He and cinematographer Tobias A. Schliessler manage to make a movie that at least looks good. Their work goes a long way, making the intimate scenes feel intimate and the action scenes feel exciting, for the most part. (It also helps that they have John Powell's effective musical score helping them along.) There are some parts that don't quite work, but it's mostly due to the bad writing or the occasional instance of less-than-stellar special effects. But Berg and Schliessler put things together solidly, and any complaints I have are minor at worst.

Up next is the writing, which is the worst problem Hancock suffers from. Credited to Vincent Ngo and Vince Gilligan, the script got its start as "Tonight, He Comes," a spec script written by Ngo back in 1996. Going through all kinds of rewrites between then and now, the script ended up becoming a brutal mismatch of ideas, none of which properly gel together. Does the movie want to be a standard superhero flick? A parody or deconstruction of them? A comedy or a drama? The superhero version of Leaving Las Vegas? It could have been any of these and none of these, but it's hard to tell because all the rewrites have diluted the movie into a total mess. It's hard to really get into a movie if you're not sure exactly what kind of movie it's supposed to be. The script ultimately makes Hancock a confused movie unsure of its own identity. It's bad enough to ruin the entire movie.

It doesn't help anything that Hancock doesn't even really have a villain. The way the movie is structured leaves precious little room for an antagonist. But since they have to do something to create tension in the (rather lame) climax, they end up shoehorning in some random thug that Hancock encountered halfway through the movie. The character, played by Eddie Marsan, only has three scenes at most, and is a complete non-factor until the end. I don't think they even bother to give the character's name until the cast listing in the closing credits. The whole thing is an exercise in futility. Maybe they could have ripped off the twist from Unbreakable and made Ray the villain. Jason Bateman doesn't seem like the villainous type, but that's what would've made it work. Nobody would have seen it coming.

However, the cast does make attempts to overcome the lame writing. Casting Will Smith proved to be a wise move for two reasons. One is that the producers guaranteed themselves box office success. Unless the movie ends up being as terrible as Wild Wild West, a midsummer blockbuster starring Will Smith is going to make a lot of money. The second reason it was a wise move is that Smith's charisma and charm make the character worth following. It's weird seeing Smith play a character that starts out being so abrasive. It's like a character that would have been played by Tom Cruise in the mid-'80s. The truth is that if he were played by anyone else, you'd end up absolutely hating Hancock's guts. But Smith's naturally charming nature makes hating him really tough. He is good in the role, though. His performance as the cynical drunk version of Hancock is so engaging, in fact, that you almost want the character to stay off the road to redemption.

He's so good, in fact, that he almost totally overshadows the supporting cast, as small as it is. Jason Bateman is effective as Ray, infusing the character with a much-needed sense of earnestness (and a little naïveté, as well). It really suits the character well. Bateman is endearing in the role, and you can't help but like him. And in the role of Bateman's character's wife, Charlize Theron's performance is acceptable, but I'm not quite sure if she was the right person for the role. I can understand why she was hired; if I were a movie producer, I'd want to hire an Oscar winner too. But the character is an enigmatic one, one whose background sets up an absolutely ridiculous plot twist halfway through the movie. The character comes across as way too mysterious for her own good before the actual twist occurs, and it's only exacerbated by Theron's presence. She is way too famous to be playing a simple housewife in a movie like this, so you know something is up as soon as you see her. If the role had been played by a B-list character actress instead, maybe things wouldn't have been so... I don't know, obvious? Is that the word I'm looking for?

Financially, Hancock was a success. It further cementing Will Smith's status as the king of the Fourth of July blockbusters. But creatively, the movie is almost bankrupt. Things start out so well and with so much promise, but after a certain point, Hancock ends up becoming just another stupid, hollow movie with nothing to give besides a bunch of flickering images on a movie screen. The initial concept behind Hancock had boundless potential, and it could have been the best deconstruction of the superhero myth to come along since DC Comics first published Watchmen back in 1986. But all that potential goes to waste, and we end up with this. That's a real shame, too. So I can't really justify giving Hancock anything higher than two and a half stars out of the usual five. Really, it takes more than just a couple of big-name actors and an inspired concept to make a good movie.

Final Rating: **½

Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008)

When you think of comic book publishers, you'll probably think of DC and Marvel first. And that's natural, since they're the biggest fish in the pond. But similar to movies and music, comic books also have their own independent publishers who release books quite different from those carrying the DC and Marvel labels. Among the most prolific of these publishers is Dark Horse Comics, whose initial comic books hit newsstands in 1986. Dark Horse has seen many characters grace the covers of their books over the years, but one of the most memorable has been Hellboy. Created by Mike Mignola, Hellboy's supernatural adventures have earned a cult following since his first appearance in 1993.

He also caught the eye of filmmaker Guillermo Del Toro, a fan of the comics who brought Hellboy into the mainstream with a live-action movie released in 2004. The movie performed modestly during its theatrical run, bringing in 99 million dollars worldwide. A sequel was announced, and after spending years in pre-production and bouncing from Sony's now-defunct Revolution Studios to Universal Pictures, Hellboy II: The Golden Army saw its release on July 11, 2008. And as someone who enjoyed the first movie, I can say that the sequel lives up to all of my expectations.

Centuries ago, there was a war between humans and mythical creatures for dominance of Earth. King Balor (Roy Dotrice), the ruler of the elves, released a platoon of 4,900 mechanical soldiers called the Golden Army in an effort to win the war. But when he saw the amount of merciless devastation caused by the unstoppable Golden Army, the regretful King Balor forged a truce with his foes. Humans would be allowed to live in the cities they had built, while the creatures would stay hidden in the shadows. To prevent the reactivation of the Golden Army, Balor broke the crown that controlled them into three pieces. One piece would stay in the human world, while the elves would retain possession of the other two.

Fast forward to present day. King Balor's jaded son, Prince Nuada (Luke Goss), has had enough of a life spent hidden away from what he considers his people's rightful kingdom. He declares war on the human world, choosing to unleash the Golden Army to accomplish his goal. Nuada violently raids an auction house to collect one piece of the fractured crown, and kills his father to acquire the second piece. When his frightened twin sister Nuala (Anna Wilson) flees with the final piece of the crown, she crosses paths with the Bureau for Paranormal Research and Defense, who themselves were investigating the attack on their auction house. The BPRD's agents — surly demon Hellboy (Ron Perlman); his pyrokinetic girlfriend, Liz Sherman (Selma Blair); amphibious fish-man Abe Sapien (Doug Jones); and their ectoplasmic supervisor, Johann Krauss (the voice of Seth MacFarlane) — offer Nuala their protection, but quickly find that opposing Nuada will be more than they bargained for.

I've read many a review that has hailed Guillermo Del Toro as a visionary filmmaker. The success of The Devil's Backbone and Pan's Labyrinth have placed him at the top of the fantasy genre, earning him a reputation as a filmmaker whose creativity and imagination are worthy of respect. Del Toro has brought that creativity he's known for to Hellboy II, building a movie that will appeal to anyone who enjoys movies of its ilk. Hellboy II was released just seven days before the moneymaking juggernaut that was The Dark Knight, meaning that it probably wasn't as financially successful as it could have been. But now that it's been on DVD for a while, I hope that people will be able to discover it and see just how imaginative the movie is. Hellboy II is one of those rare sequels that actually exceeds the quality of its predecessor, and is a great movie in its own right. So let's get to the meat and potatoes of this review and see just what makes Hellboy II so great.

First up to bat is Del Toro's direction. Having been given free reign to make the most of his creativity, he uses the opportunity to build a movie whose visual flair allows the viewer's imagination to run just as wild as Del Toro's. Working with cinematographer Guillermo Navarro, Del Toro creates not a series of images on a movie screen, but an entire world to get lost in. Seriously, the movie's effects wizards and production designers totally earned their paychecks. Scenes like the BPRD's visit to the Troll Market are beautifully rendered, while the digital effects are at the pinnacle of what can be done with CGI. The practical effects are no slouch either, as characters like Nuada's hulking bodyguard look fantastic.

I should also give props to the score composed by Danny Elfman. I don't know if I would list his music here amongst his most memorable, but it is most certainly effective. It really assists the visuals by helping establish the mood, and I'm not sure the movie would have the same impact without Elfman's work. The only part of the music that doesn't really work is the use of the occasional pop song, none of which really suit the movie. The only song that really does work is Barry Manilow's "Can't Smile Without You," the use of which is actually pretty funny.

Next on the list is the screenplay, penned by Del Toro and Mike Mignola. The story isn't very deep, and there really isn't any sort of underlying message or anything like that. There're also some small plot holes that are created by the denouement, though they really only bug you if you bother to linger on them long enough. I was also a wee bit disappointed that they never really delved into the potential subplot regarding Hellboy's interactions with mainstream society. But Del Toro and Mignola really do what they can to craft something entertaining. Their characters and how they interact with one another are a huge boon for the movie, and do a lot to give us something to follow besides all the pretty special effects.

Del Toro and Mignola also succeed in giving us a villain that whose intentions we are, in a weird way, able to understand. He's not a megalomaniac or someone who wants to blow up the planet or anything like that; he just feels that he has been unfairly slighted, and wants to reclaim the kingdom that he believes belongs to him and his people and punish those who he feels have stolen it from him. Yeah, he's still a villain, but you can kinda understand his motivation.

But let's move on to perhaps the movie's most entertaining component, its cast. Once again playing the titular demon, Ron Perlman is pitch perfect. I honestly cannot imagine anyone else playing Hellboy, because Perlman completely owns the role. His portrayal of Hellboy is a layered one, as his surly, mischievous behavior is a cover for a longing to be accepted by the outside world and to understand his proper place in the universe. Perlman pulls this off convincingly, and I hope he continues to play the role in any future sequels. The Hellboy movies just wouldn't be the same without him.

But despite the movie being titled Hellboy II, it features an ensemble cast, many of whom are also returning from the previous movie. Selma Blair reprises her role as Liz Sherman, and improves upon her performance in the previous movie. Whereas she was a troubled, confused, frightened woman before, Blair's Liz is now strong-willed, confident, and assertive. Blair handles this evolution fantastically, handing in a likable performance that I found to be different yet equal to her great work on the first movie.

Doug Jones also returns to play Abe Sapien, now having been given the extra responsibility of doing his own vocal work as well. With David Hyde Pierce of Fraiser fame doing Abe's voice in the first movie, Jones was stuck in a thankless position as the physical half of the character. But now voicing the character as well, Jones is allowed to put forth a more rounded performance. He's likable in the role, making the character stand out more. And considering that Jones plays two other characters as well, so I'd say he earned his paycheck.

Supplying the movie's comic relief, Jeffrey Tambor and Family Guy creator Seth MacFarlane are both quite funny. Their dry wit in their roles as the de facto straight men goes a long way, and I enjoyed their work. And since MacFarlane's role was limited to only voiceover work, as the character was physically portrayed by John Alexander and James Dodd, he wasn't really able to interact with the rest of the cast. But he still manages to contribute some funny bits.

Rounding out the cast are Anna Wilson and Luke Goss. Wilson is okay, though the role isn't what I would call demanding,. All that's really required of her is to be a doe-eyed damsel that sits in the background while the fighting happens. Del Toro could have had her be a bit more proactive, a bit more like Princess Leia, but he didn't. It's too late to change it now, but the fact that Princess Nuala is just kinda there doesn't give Wilson any real time to shine.

Goss, meanwhile, is good, but never really strikes me as being an intimidating villain. Yeah, Prince Nuada is a strong character, but ultimately, he didn't feel as threatening as he could have. Outside of kicking the crap out of Hellboy once and unleashing a monster or two, Prince Nuada is really just a big-talking megalomaniac. The only truly intimidating thing about Nuada is his fighting skills, which really begins to make you feel ambivalent towards him after a while. That's a shame too, because Goss's performance is pretty good.

It's a funny coincidence that Hellboy II was released in the same summer as Iron Man and The Dark Knight. Because if those two movies are evidence that mainstream comic book movies can be viewed as having grown up, then Hellboy II can be viewed as evidence of their artistic potential as well. Guillermo Del Toro knows exactly what he's doing, as he uses all of the tools at his disposal to craft a great movie. I'll admit that there are a few flaws, but overall, the positives far outweigh the negatives. Hellboy II: The Golden Army is an entertaining piece of fantasy escapism that I can't help but like. So on my Five-Star Sutton Scale, I'm going to give it a solid four stars and a big thumbs up. It's definitely worth a watch.

Final Rating: ****

The Rocketeer (1991)

Following the tremendous success of Tim Burton's Batman in 1989, movie studios began looking at comic books for ideas they could translate into motion pictures. Many of them were inspired by little-known characters, and pretty much all of them were awful. But believe it or not, a handful managed to rise above the rest by actually being good.

One of these good movies was The Rocketeer, based on a relatively obscure character created by Dave Stevens for Pacific Comics in 1982. Distributed by Walt Disney Pictures in 1991, The Rocketeer had the unfortunate luck of being released in the same summer as blockbusters like Terminator 2, Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, and City Slickers. It ended up falling through the cracks and just barely managed to break even domestically. That's a shame too, because it isn't really all that bad.

Welcome to Los Angeles, circa 1938. It is here that we are introduced to Cliff Secord (Billy Campbell), a test pilot who loves his job in spite of the crummy pay. He's also hopelessly devoted to his girlfriend, an aspiring actress named Jenny Blake (Jennifer Connelly). However, she erroneously believes that he loves his planes more than her, which makes it all the easier for her to become smitten after she captures the attention of the suave yet shady movie star Neville Sinclair (Timothy Dalton).

And as Cliff's love life hits a rough patch, so is his career. A plane Cliff had intended to fly in a competition was left seriously damaged after a crash, and he and his talented mechanic sidekick Peevy (Alan Arkin) are left with no time or money to rebuild it.

But he soon discovers that a wrecked plane will be the least of his worries. Two thieves have stolen an experimental jetpack developed by Howard Hughes (Terry O'Quinn) for the government. With the FBI on their tails, the thieves stash the jetpack in Cliff and Peevy's hangar. They discover it and after running a few experiments to figure out what it actually is, Cliff decides to hang onto it for a little while. A man with a rocket strapped to his back would definitely draw a paying audience, and paying audiences would definitely help them through their current financial crisis.

But little does Cliff know that fate is about to take him in a different direction. He's forced to strap on the jetpack and save a fellow pilot who loses control of his plane during an air show, and the rabid media is quick to dub the unknown hero "the Rocketeer." While he vows to use the jetpack for heroic purposes before eventually returning it to its rightful owners, Cliff soon finds himself being pursued by the FBI, a mob family ran by notorious gangster Eddie Valentine (Paul Sorvino), and the Nazis, all of whom want his new toy for themselves.

It might have been listed in a respectable spot on Wizard Magazine's list of the fifty greatest comic book movies of all time, but The Rocketeer has never really been considered a top dog in the genre. Sure, I will admit that the movie isn't exactly on the same plateau as more recent fare like Iron Man or The Dark Knight. But why does it have to be the recipient of such extreme neglect? Is it because the movie was made by Disney? Is it because of the obscurity of the Rocketeer character? I don't really know for sure.

But as I wrote in the introduction, the lack of recognition the movie has received is a shame. The Rocketeer is actually a fun little throwback to the cheesy Republic Pictures serials like King of the Rocket Men and Commando Cody: Sky Marshal of the Universe. It's simply a fun way to spend 108 minutes without having to worry about complicated stories or heavy-handed messages, or anything like that. The Rocketeer is escapism with the young and young at heart in mind.

Joe Johnston is in the director's chair for this one. Considering that he was coming off Honey, I Shrunk the Kids two years earlier and would go on to make Jumanji in 1995, he was probably the best person for the job. Say what you will about the guy, but he can make a heck of a family-friendly adventure movie. The Rocketeer is no exception to that, either. Johnston knows exactly what he's doing, keeping the pace lively and every scene engaging.

With Hiro Narita handling the cinematography, Johnson hasn't made some glorified love letter to the '30s and '40s, but instead crafted a movie that feels lifted directly from the era. The movie has a particularly nostalgic feel without fetishising the time period. And that's part of what makes the movie so darn charming, too. Johnson's direction really draws you in, and with James Horner's fantastic score on the soundtrack, you really end up getting hooked by the end. Sure, the special effects could have been a little better, and they could have made the green screen effects a little less obvious, but it's acceptable. It's never really bad enough that it pulls you out of the movie, and it actually adds to the retro feel.

But as I said, the direction is only part of what makes the movie work. Another part is the screenplay, penned by Danny Bilson and Paul De Meo. It has everything you could want from the old movie serials. There's a "gee whiz" hero with his beautiful girlfriend and quick-witted sidekick, a villain who looks like he's fighting the urge to start twirling his mustache, gangsters, G-men, Nazis, and an enormous thug for hire who looks just like B-movie actor Rondo Hatton. Oh, and explosions. Can't have a movie like this without a few explosions.

Bilson and De Meo skip all the formalities and choose not to write something that doesn't worry about making any deep messages or anything like that, instead choosing tow write a movie that focuses more on being entertaining than anything else. And there's nothing wrong with wanting to write a fun movie, either.

Last on the list is the cast, who all put forth their best efforts. Bill Campbell has been accused by some reviewers of being a little stiff here. But actually, I think he makes for an entertaining hero. His performance really suits the character, and you really believe that Campbell is a somewhat naïve but well-meaning pilot with a tendency to get in over his head. Campbell is charming in the role, to say the least.

Playing his sidekick is Alan Arkin, whose performance is a lot of fun. He's a little on the hammy side, but you can't help but be entertained by his repartees with the other characters. And although she was nearly a decade away from the career breakthrough that was Requiem for a Dream, Connelly proves to be quite capable as the Rocketeer's doe-eyed love interest. She exudes a certain sexy innocence that really makes her feel as if she's stepped right out of those old serials. It also helps that Connelly is a very good actress, because she nails the role.

Timothy Dalton does a fantastic job as well, playing his character as a cross between Errol Flynn and Snidely Whiplash. He's obviously having a lot of fun playing such an over-the-top villain, and that fun becomes infectious. Dalton steals practically every scene he's in, and I would say he's probably the biggest reason to watch The Rocketeer. And although their characters end up being small in the long run, Terry O'Quinn and Paul Sorvino also make positive contributions to the movie with their performances.

Though I think it may have developed a somewhat small following, The Rocketeer remains a pretty much neglected entry into the genre of comic book movies. It's one thing for movies like Judge Dredd or Barb Wire to be forgotten, because they're terrible. But The Rocketeer is actually really entertaining. Just like the old serials I've mentioned so many times, the movie is a fun way to spend a slow Saturday afternoon. It's an exciting movie with really good acting, and it's a bummer that it does not have a broader audience. So I'll give The Rocketeer three and a half stars and my seal of approval. I would totally like to get one of those jetpacks for myself, but knowing my luck, I'd probably set myself on fire with it instead. 

Final Rating: ***½

Jackass Number Two (2006)

Perhaps the most prevalent trend in the history of arts and entertainment is the sequel. From novels to motion pictures to video games, sequels have seemingly become both an important part of storytelling and — depending on the success of the source material — a guaranteed moneymaker. Sequels are an especially major part of the Hollywood process, with movies like Superman II, The Godfather Part II, Terminator 2: Judgment Day, and The Dark Knight becoming some of the most popular sequels of all time.

But then Paramount Pictures went and released a sequel that few expected, and only the most diehard of fans really wanted: Jackass Number Two. Both fans and critics thought they'd seen the last of the Jackass crew back in 2002, as the original movie was billed as the final farewell for the cast of MTV's controversial franchise. But I guess they had more raunchy pranks and extreme stunts to feast upon moviegoers, because the crew reunited four years later for Jackass Number Two.

As with the original movie, the movie has no plot whatsoever. It is merely a feature-length episode of the show, only a million times filthier. The movie features the crew's nine main members — Johnny Knoxville, Bam Margera, Chris Pontius, Steve-O, Ryan Dunn, Dave England, Jason "Wee Man" Acuña, Ehren McGhehey, and Preston Lacy — performing stunts that are outrageous, hilarious, disgusting, and offensive. Some of the lesser, more ancillary Jackass cast members are also along for the ride, as are notable names such as Luke Wilson, Tony Hawk, NFL star Jason Taylor, filmmakers John Waters and Jay Chandrasekhar, and Oscar-winning rappers Three 6 Mafia.

Honestly, the truth of the matter is that I could half-ass this thing by copy-and-pasting my review for the original movie here. There wouldn't be much difference either way. The only difference is that Jackass Number Two is far more disgusting than either the TV show or the first movie. There's more uncomfortable male nudity, a copious amount of a certain male bodily fluid, more than a little feces, a little blood, and just about every other revolting thing you could think of. It's legitimately one of the nastiest, grossest movies I've ever seen in my life. It's one thing for horror movies to have blood and guts in them, but that's all fake. All this Jackass silliness is the real deal. And that makes it even more disgusting than anything else.

Like with my critique of the first movie, there really isn't a whole lot to say about Jackass Number Two. Humor is always subjective, but when it comes to stuff like this, it's really subjective. The Jackass franchise is one of those things that more than likely will not appeal to anyone outside of a particular niche audience, those who have followed the franchise and those who enjoy schadenfreude in general. And just like the previous movie, the segments can be hit or miss. There are some bits I thought were hilarious, some I thought were good for a chuckle, and others I didn't particularly care for. And then there were some that I thought could have been completely excised with no ill effect on the movie at all. I mean, where's the humor in watching a guy take a dump on the floor for no reason? Or seeing people eat and drink things that had been expelled from a horse? That's not funny, that's repellent.

But like I said, humor is subjective, and Jackass Number Two is no exception to that. It's an incredibly subversive movie that doesn't just push the boundaries of tastelessness, but beats the snot out of them. It's not going to appeal to everybody, but only about half of it appeals to me, and I'm a Jackass fan. But I would say that it's worth a watch if you enjoy extreme frat boy humor and guys risking life and limb by doing incredibly stupid things just to get a laugh. I don't really know what else there is to say, other than I wonder just how they'll top themselves if they ever decide to make Jackass 3.

Final Rating: **½

Silent Night, Deadly Night (1984)

Every type of mass media has stirred some form of controversy. Books, television, music, video games, radio broadcasts... all of them have caused people to just lose their minds and indignantly go on the warpath. And motion pictures are no exception. Even something most people wouldn't give a second thought to can raise an incredibly huge uproar, as evidenced by the amount of people who complained about Tropic Thunder's use of the word "retarded."

There have been so many movies that have stirred the pot like that, but no discussion of controversial movies would be complete without mentioning the 1984 cult classic Silent Night, Deadly Night. Though the movie has fallen into relative obscurity nowadays, screenings of it were regularly picketed by PTA members upon its release twenty-five years ago. It was publicly condemned by such notable critics as Gene Siskel, Roger Ebert, and Leonard Maltin. Why such vitriol for the movie? Read on.

Our tale of yuletide horror begins — appropriately enough — on Christmas Eve, circa 1971. Five-year-old Billy Chapman (Jonathan Best) and his family are on the road, heading for a visit with Billy's grandfather (Will Hare). The catch? Grandpa Chapman is currently a resident of the Utah state mental hospital. Thus, the old coot isn't exactly the best of company. He just kinda sits there staring off into space, not even acknowledging that anybody is even in the room with him.

Eventually, Billy's parents step out of the room to discuss business with the hospital's proprietor, leaving Billy all alone with Grandpa. And wouldn't you know it, that's when he decides to snap out of his catatonia. And he doesn't just have a friendly conversation with Billy, no. Instead, he proceeds to frighten the everloving crap out of the poor child with tales of Santa Claus. According to Grandpa, ol' Saint Nick doesn't just reward the good kids with presents. No, he also punishes the naughty kids. He punishes them with lumps of coal in their stockings, not violence and death, right? But just as soon as Grandpa manages to warn Billy of Santa's punishing ways, Billy's parents return and Grandpa falls back into catatonia.

That night, the Chapman family starts making their way back home. But who do they cross paths with on their journey? Why, Santa Claus, of course! Turns out this particular Santa (Charles Dierkop) is having car trouble. And little do the Chapmans know that that Santa's also really, really crazy. When Billy's father (Jeff Hansen) pulls over to help, Santa shoots him dead, then drags his mother (Tara Buckman) out of the car and rapes her before slitting her throat. Though Billy watches the entire thing, he and his infant brother manage to survive. But don't worry, it's not like this will be anything to scar little Billy for life, right?

Billy and his brother are sent to Saint Mary's Orphanage, where three years pass. And in those three years, the eight-year-old Billy (Danny Wagner) has become a little bit of a freak. When asked to draw a Christmas picture, Billy cranks out an illustration of a decapitated reindeer and a Santa stuck full of knives. While the sympathetic Sister Margaret (Gilmer McCormick) rightly assumes that Billy could use psychological treatment to deal with the trauma of watching his parents die, the headmistress, Mother Superior (Lilyan Chapman), just thinks he's being weird for weird's sake.

Billy is sent to his room as punishment, but when Sister Margaret allows Billy to leave to go play, he stumbles upon a couple having sex. Mother Superior stumbles across the whole thing and whips the couple with a belt, then whips Billy for having left his room, permission or not. She even ties Billy to his bed when he starts having nightmares about the murders.

One morning shortly thereafter, Billy awakens to find all the kids opening their Christmas presents. All goes well for a while, but then Mother Superior announces that Santa Claus will be visiting the orphanage. And come Hell or high water, she's going to make Billy cut through all the bullcrap and sit on Santa's lap. That Mother Superior is a progressive thinker, believing that if a child is haunted by the murder of his parents, then the only natural way to relieve him of those problems is to force the child into a confrontation with a man dressed exactly like the killer. That would totally make sense if it weren't for the fact that it's an incredibly bad idea.

But it's that sort of logic that leads to one of the most glorious moments in the history of the horror genre. When Mother Superior forcefully deposits Billy onto Santa's lap, he struggles for a moment before popping Santa right in the face with the wildest haymaker I've ever seen. I thought seeing a character hide in a refrigerator in Madman was the craziest thing I'd ever seen in a slasher movie, but this comes close to topping it. But seriously, Mother Superior might have been onto something. Being beaten and forced to relive horrifying memories isn't anything that will scar Billy for life, right?

Let's fast forward another ten years, where the 18-year-old Billy (Robert Brian Wilson) has — with a little help from Sister Margaret — acquired a job at a local toy store. And for a few months, things go swimmingly. Billy enjoys his job, and he even finds a love interest in a coworker named Pamela (Toni Nero). But then the Christmas season rolls around and causes things to get weird. And as you've probably figured by now, Billy isn't exactly comfortable during the holidays. Just the thought of Santa Claus is enough to cause him to have nightmares and panic attacks. These are just the least of his worries, though. Why? His boss has drafted him to play the store's Santa. Uh-oh. If you watch Billy's face during the scene where he tries on the costume, you can actually pinpoint the exact moment that he starts down that slippery slope to Crazy Town.

But it's during the store's Christmas Eve festivities that things really start going nuts. Towards the end of the party, Billy ends up in the stockroom, where he discovers a coworker trying to rape Pamela. Reminded of that terrible night all those years ago, Billy goes completely off the deep end and strangles the would-be rapist with a string of Christmas lights. But instead of being grateful, Pamela just calls Billy crazy and smacks him. And that sort of naughtiness just won't do. He guts Pamela with a box cutter, and then makes short work of the rest of the store's employees after they discover what he's done. Armed with a fire axe and a renewed sense of purpose, Billy prowls the town's streets to punish all those he deems naughty.

As I said in the introduction, Silent Night, Deadly Night has been pretty much forgotten by mainstream audiences over the years. But for horror fans such as me, its notoriety remains. Even when I was an 11-year-old kid living in a world yet to witness the full-blown proliferation of the Internet, I had managed to hear about Silent Night, Deadly Night, and was both intrigued and frightened by the idea of it. I would see the old, beaten-up VHS box on my almost weekly visits to the local mom-and-pop video store, and I just knew that something horrifying was lying within it. Simply the picture of an axe-wielding Santa Claus climbing down a chimney was enough to send my mind racing with thoughts of what the movie could possibly be like.

But I could never bring myself to rent it. For years it remained a movie I would hear about, yet never actually see. But now, two and a half decades since its controversial and short-lived theatrical run, I finally saw the holiday horror movie that I first encountered offhandedly so many years ago. And it turns out that the movie wasn't as bad as I expected it to be.

In the director's chair is Charles E. Sellier, Jr., whose has spent the majority of his career producing documentaries and made-for-TV movies. Judging by his IMDB profile, he doesn't exactly have a very prolific résumé when it comes to being a director. But in watching Silent Night, Deadly Night, it's a bummer. Sellier could have made a few more slasher movies if he'd wanted to, and I wouldn't have complained. His work makes the movie a little bit sleazier, a little dirtier, and a little more provocative. Teaming with cinematographer Henning Schellerup, Sellier allows things to linger. It's all about drawing things out. Either scenes are drawn out before the payoff to amplify the tension, or we stay with the payoff, allowing it to sink in and really get a reaction out of the viewer. And with Schellerup's camerawork, it's successful.

The only bad thing about the whole production is the music. Perry Botkin's score is inconsistent, alternating between moments of efficiency and moments where it sounds really generic. Really, it's like Botkins cribbed the music from every other independently-made slasher movie made between 1982 and 1986. And seriously, what's with the horrible Christmas songs composed specifically for the movie? Was there no money in the budget to license real Christmas music? Go watch the "Billy's getting his life together" montage, set to some cheesy song called "The Warm Side of the Door." It's like the theme song to some awful sitcom from the '70s. I would rather get stuck under the mistletoe with the wood chipper from Fargo than hear that song again.

Next is the screenplay, penned my Michael Hickey. Critiquing a slasher movie's writing often proves futile, because most of the time, the script isn't really all that important. They're basically, "Blah blah blah, a character dies. Blah blah blah, another character dies. Blah blah blah, sex scene, one more character dies. Repeat ad nauseam for eighty minutes. The killer is defeated, the end." And that works for pretty much every slasher movie. Even the bad ones can at least get the formula at least a little bit right. But Hickey does something different with Silent Night, Deadly Night. He actually takes the time to make us understand just why Billy is homicidal.

Roughly half of the movie is dedicated to this, as we're privy to all of the torture and abuse — both physical and psychological — that Billy is forced to endure. He's almost the complete antithesis of Batman; both watched the murder of their parents, but while Bruce Wayne used that pain to become a hero, Billy's childhood trauma inadvertently molded him into the thing he had feared the most. This sort of look into the killer's psychology really sets Silent Night, Deadly Night apart from other slasher movies, creating a murderer that is (dare I say it?) sympathetic. He isn't the typical "I didn't get invited to the school dance, so you've all gotta die" type of killer, because it's actually somewhat realistic.

Last on my list is the movie's cast. I know you're probably thinking that a critique of the acting in a slasher movie could be a blanket statement like, "All the actors sucked. It's no wonder they're still nobodies." But doing that would be a great disservice to the good performances that some of Silent Night, Deadly Night's actors put forth. Granted, the majority of the cast is disposable, as is the case with most movies within this genre. But the major players, the actors who really count, are worth watching.

Perhaps the best performance comes from Lilyan Chauvin. She has over 120 credits on her IMDB profile, but I'm willing to bet that none of them are quite like Silent Night, Deadly Night. Chauvin's performance is a believable one. She is so mean, so scary, so domineering, that it's almost enough to make me afraid of nuns as a whole. Chauvin plays the role as such an evil bitch that you can't refrain from absolutely hating her guts. You almost want Billy to skip all of the other victims dictated by the script and go straight for her. Her performance is that effective.

Another effective performance comes from Will Hare. Sure, his total screen time is limited to one three-minute scene at the beginning of the movie. But his character is an important one, and his work here as the crazy old codger that serves as the first catalyst for Billy's fear of Santa Claus is entertaining. It's a wacky three minutes, no doubt about it. I also liked Gilmer McCormick as Sister Margaret, the one nun from the orphanage who sees all the warning signs ahead of time. Any ‘80s slasher movie worth their salt featured some variation of a prophet of doom, and in that role, McCormick shines. She is quite likable in the role, and you almost feel bad that nobody listens to her until it's too late. Then again, if anyone had listened to her, we wouldn't have had much of a movie.

The final actors I will mention here are the three who play the movie's main character in the various stages of his life. Jonathan Best is okay as the five-year-old Billy, but not a whole lot is asked of him, other than to stand around and look precocious. Next is Danny Wagner, the eight-year-old Billy. The kid looks absolutely nothing like Best, instead looking more like the kid that played Oliver in the Problem Child movies. But once you get over it, it's not that much of a problem. Besides, Wagner is sporting a rockin' mullet, which is endearing all on its own. He is convincing, I'll give him that.

Lastly is the version of Billy we're all here to see, Robert Brian Wilson. Wilson does a very good job in the role, making you sympathetic for him at first. He maintains that sympathy to a lesser degree once he turns homicidal, because after a while, you're too busy being afraid of him to feel sorry for him. Seriously, that scene where he's stalking a victim and starts reciting "The Night Before Christmas" in this totally-detached-from-reality kind of voice? That was some creepy stuff, man.

Most keyed-in horror fans know that Silent Night, Deadly Night is not the first horror movie to use Christmas as its backdrop. It wasn't even the first one to feature a villain dressed like Santa Claus, thanks to movies like Tales from the Crypt in 1972 and Christmas Evil in 1980. But with the notable exception of Bob Clark's Black Christmas, it's probably the most famous Christmas-themed horror movie. It's also probably the most tasteless and mean-spirited horror movie this side of Eli Roth's Hostel movies. There's guys in Santa costumes killing people, two attempted rapes that end in murder, and a kid being beaten by a nun for no other reason than because the nun's a stone cold bitch. Yeah, I can kinda understand why the PTA might have been a wee bit upset.

But as a horror movie, Silent Night, Deadly Night works. I'm not going to sit here and say that the movie is actually good. But I will tell you that if you're not easily offended, it just might be right up your alley. So in my honest opinion, I'm going to give it three stars and tell the horror fans reading this to go check it out. Leonard Maltin wrote in his review of Silent Night, Deadly Night: "What next, the Easter Bunny as a child molester?" He says that like it would be a bad thing.

Final Rating: ***