The Last House Horrors

Late, late night here. Been up all night like a vampire. Almost time to go to sleep. But before I crash I thought I'd review "The Last House On The Left" since the original was done by Wes Craven, which is a total shock. If you like his other stuff and his newer works then you should see what he did in the beginning. The original is a very disturbing sort of exploitation horror movie. You gotta see the creativity for what it is though. Back then they didn't have super great EFX and so stories were somewhat limited. I liked this idea for what it was. A couple of female friends go to the city in the original and meet up with some drug dealers and then end up taken to a house where they get brutalized and forced into submission, then murdered. The really disturbing part was how the killers in the first movie played with the bloody organs as if transfixed on the blood, pulling out the entrails, and then looked at each other afterwards with a look of guilt or shame and walked off. The second one is equally disturbing, albeit not as graphic in a literal sense. It was just as much hardcore as the predecessor but it's got a more modern horror feel. The subject matter itself is just as disturbing but the extreme side won't be found in this one. That's not a bad thing. I liked it and you have to remember the original is a real exploitation piece that's meant to be over the top. The new one is horror strictly. That doesn't mean they can't be over the top but they use discretion when deciding those things. They both work equally well. Wes Craven also directed this one. It's a new trend to be cool enough to remake your own movie. You wish you were that cool. Me too, lol!
Digg this article here

Guest Commentator BRAINSUCKER says: "I'm busy relishing the way the blood turns black if you stare at it long enough... oh never mind!"

The New World Work Ethic

Versus Movie #109. In a scientifically prominent future where people are able to get rejuvenations for the right price anything is possible. That future might be one akin to the one in "Gattaca". This movie stood out to me for a lot of reasons but there was one really big thing that stood out. Looking for work in a future like that would possibly make things even harder to get a job. Actually it would. Definitely. Can you imagine a future where you get better jobs based on having better DNA? It'll be the new racism. Color of skin wouldn't even matter anymore in the far future. Most of the prejudices we have now days will probably be replaced with new ones down the road. Much further down the road that is. Now days people pick on others for being bigger, or less cool, or any stupid thing they can think of but the prejudices of the future will most likely be far worse. It makes sense that things would change for the better in some areas and for the worse in others. You can't have everything be perfect in a future where everyone will judge you based on what science tells them. How do you argue science right? It sounds like science is the new witchcraft because it may well be the religion of a future world. This movie did a good job of showing what someone might go through with so much pressure to be perfect. And you think we got it bad now but we have no idea of knowing what the future holds for any of us truly.  The grass is always... oh but there might not be grass in this future.
Digg this article here

Guest Commentator THE GRAVEROBBER says: "If things get really bad we'll be eating dead people in thin, green wafers. Saw it in a movie!"

KILLWHITNEYDEAD Or Die

Versus Music #59. This new underground band KILLWHITNEYDEAD are taking the world by storm. They're a deathcore band from Greensboro, NC. This ain't yo mama's deathcore though. They're what I would refer to as evolved deathcore. It's hard hitting, vicious, and catchy as hell. The lead singer has a voice that just emanates evil incarnate. I can honestly say I've never heard vocals like his ever. That's astonishing. They started out as death metal and they were really good for death metal I must say, but their deathcore stuff is much harsher and power packed. What's really cool is their gimmick. Every band has a gimmick and theirs is writing songs about love gone really, really wrong. They're like psycho love stories that you can imagine teenagers spewing out about how much they hate their last girlfriend or something. It's kinda funny but their music is no joke. It's the real deal. They've gotten so popular in such a short time that they already have a box set available. And what's really crazy is they recorded most of that material in the span of 6 months. I say they have a major grindcore influence but that is up for debate. The irony is their packaging would dictate that Whitney, if it's her, botched the killing and took her revenge. Whitney is a hard girl to kill I'd say. Hell hath no fury like a woman... well you know the rest. Don't mess with Whitney. She's pissed!
Digg this article here

Guest Commentator BLOOD MISTRESS says: "Mess with a bull you get the horns. Mess with a woman you get the ax!"

Vendetta Revisited

It's true I've reviewed this movie "V For Vendetta" before but I thought I'd use it as a basis for a side rant. This sort of follows the last post about internet freedom. Internet freedom is closely entwined with physical freedom. They go hand in hand. If we're being suppressed on the internet then it wouldn't be long before something happens in real life. In that movie was depicted a future in the U.K. where the world is so censored that it's appalling. They were censoring everything and damn near everything was illegal. The government was going after people for having their own voice and covering up anything. What if the debates we have now were crimes? You could end up committing a crime so easily in a future like that. If the government was corporation run then they could outlaw anything, even love if they wanted to, like in "1984". The internet is not a good place for censorship because if it got too extreme then websites would vanish and news would be altered. People would only know the truth they would want to show us. I don't agree with piracy but when people share a download they bought it's not exactly piracy since they're not charging for that copy. What they want is to stop us from having the right to copy our own personal items but its been that way for a long time. As the law is now you can copy a DVD or CD as long as it's for personal use. So is P2P really that bad? Are tube sites really bad? You can make copies for yourself but they would rather you don't share them. Well, I doubt those copies are killing the music industry. Some bands, like Nine Inch Nails, have sold work online to cope with this. Stephen King also sold a book online because he knew he could get more profit that way, as he should. Now people sharing that stuff with others is inevitable. I would rather blame war for the big economy problem, not P2P. That's just what they want you to think. They've ran our budget into the ground and they're blaming a mortgage crisis on it. Tube sites are cool no doubt and if someone really wants the DVD they would buy it. If that's supposedly damaging sales then blame the job crisis on them, but it won't work. To eliminate file sharing is an injustice. Imagine a world without it. You would have to suffer during these times if you can't afford anything. People wouldn't like that at all. It's not a crime until they want more money. Then they make the rules. The internet war has started.
Digg this article here

Guest Commentator BLUE FIEND says: "Times are rough man. I got thrown in this cell for selling white bread out of my van!"

Cyberpunks Are At Attention

Recently some of you may have heard about the Wikipedia blackout. They were protesting something called SOPA. An act to stop online piracy. This whole piracy thing is getting out of hand if you ask me. I mean you could say that Limewire was taken down as censorship because taking down Limewire won't stop P2P from being harmless. What they're after is a way to stop pirated songs, or movies, or whatever from moving but P2P itself is harmless and taking down Limewire was pointless. Now it's leading to the possible censorship of websites that might infringe copyright. What that means is even if you're not directly infringing copyright they can put an order to shut down your site immediately just like in that movie "I Am Number Four" where they were hacking and taking sites down. That means they don't need direct justification for erasing a site except that it might be because an image was used. Even as simple as a blog image. My blog is full of free images from the net but I am in no way infringing copyright and I already know it for a fact. But that wouldn't stop an act like that from allowing corporations from doing it. That would destroy blogging as we know it. That would also destroy internet freedom. If such an act were to go into power then that would be the start of the "real" cyberpunks taking back the internet. You know those movies where the cyberpunks save the world, well life could be like that if they keep trying to censor things. This could affect Youtube too. There are videos, including my own, that use songs, and now they have a technology that reads the song and reports it back to the corporation that owns the song. The only reason my video isn't taken down is because I'm not assuming to be the owner of the song and I'm not trying to make money from the video directly. You want to know what real censorship is like? Look at China. They have a completely censored internet. People there have to use VPN just to see American Youtube videos not allowed there. You know musicians and movie directors and even porn creators are furious about this uprising of free information being hosted everywhere for people to watch or listen to but maybe it's not for them to control. Maybe they could use it to their advantage if they knew how to make even more money. I don't agree with censorship because it could affect other things indirectly, even Wikipedia, if they felt there was too much information about someone or something out in the open. Do you want a future like something out of "Johnny Mnemonic"? If not then we must protect freedom because then the only freedom left would be VR and that's a bit ahead of our time. In a way our news could even be censored. What this could allow is any corporation to whitewash our reality. I don't like the thought of corporate rule but if cyberpunk movies predict it then it might be inevitable. But even still, internet censorship is where the line is drawn for everyone. Piracy should be made clearer. If I download a song I'm not hurting the economy. Now I know some people like those convenient tube sites that have videos available to view without charging. They have this uncanny knack of having the most amazing selection. They're like libraries of awesomeness. I don't know how you protect against piracy but those sites aren't really doing anything anyone hasn't thought of. It's like accusing teens of making illegal porn for taking nude pictures of each other with camera enabled phones. And then teens get put in prison for it. That is ludicrous! Tube sites are a different matter, and I say it shouldn't matter because if people would rather watch a less than stellar copy of a movie then they won't get the blu-ray quality. If people download a song they won't get the actual CD so let them I say. A song for a dollar or a song shared; it's not a big deal except for those that feel they're losing money. But what about Hulu? It's o.k. because they only show movies with expired copyrights? What about new shows? I have seen clone sites and they have amazing selection. If you ask me I don't think it's worth it to keep people from downloading shared info. What will keep people from downloading is the economy getting better. When more jobs are available more people will make more money to spend on goods. During a recession it could cause war so let it be.
Digg this article here

Guest Commentator HARVESTER OF SORROW says: "Wow this is so exciting boss. I feel like Christian Slater in 'Pump Up The Volume'!"