(2009) ** 1/2John and Mary are two happy farmers living together growing corn. John stops going to church though, and his corn starts to fail. Then he finds a creepy scarecrow, plants it, and good things start to happen. His water pump starts to work. The banker who was going to foreclose on his house gets run over by a truck. The guy who flirted with his wife commits suicide. Oh, and the neighbor starts to randomly undress too.
So, this wasn't a good movie, but there were a few unique things that made it worth at least 2 1/2 stars. First of all, the audacity of using two subtitles for a straight-to-dvd film is worth admiring. I can't think of any other films besides the Star Wars prequel trilogy that felt the need for two subtitles. However, it's kind of funny that the subtitle contradicts the original title. "Messengers part 2, the beginning." How can part two be the beginning? They're trying way too hard to let the consumer know that this is a prequel.
This movie developed slowly, which is fine, as most films like this develop slowly in an attempt to build tension. This film did successfully build tension at times, but it would then stumble over itself as it got distracted with shots of John's hot wife, hot daughter, and hot neighbor.
Also, this is kind of funny, but I think this was a republican's horror film. The main characters, John and Mary are obvious bibilical references to begin with. Then, it is noted that John's troubles really only began when he stopped attending church. How do we know that the bad guy is so bad? He brings over a six-pack of beer? Who's the victim who we feel sorry for? A wealthy banker who was about to foreclose. But simultaneously, the movie offers so many skin shots, it's like it's trying to cater to middle-American conservatives and horny fanboys.
To sum it all up: a straight to video mix of the shining meets children of the corn minus the children.
7 comments:
Nice summary, we seem to share the same opinion about this film. Love the Republican analysis! This is what I said last year,
"I fell asleep during the final third of the original “The Messengers” and never went back to it. I managed to remain awake for this completely unrelated sequel, which was marginally entertaining despite its paint-by-numbers predictability. The scarecrow stuff was largely unimpressive and it was difficult to get a good view of the thing, which was no doubt intentional in order to conceal the film’s meager budget. Oddly enough there are a few sex scenes that rise to the level of soft core porn. In one inappropriate and uncomfortable scene John essentially rapes his wife (blame the scarecrow!). The Messengers 2 is the kind of film you might toss in at the 11th hour if you don’t have better options and you’ve been drinking wine from a box."
That first paragraph is so funny I had to read it twice. Nice review!
I think I stayed awake for the first one, but hated it so much that I couldn't be bothered to review it.
Nice review. I wonder how many horror movies with a religious or political agenda actually exist.
I laughed about the two subtitles - my exact thought on reading the post title, "With so many titles, it can't be good"
jsp -- i'd say any of the Exorcist movies. they're all pretty much saying, "look how bad it is in hell. if you didn't have priests around to save the day, you'd be so fucked."
50 makes a good point but I think that's a fine slice of The Exorcist cake, the rest of which is similar to almost every story involving a Christian good vs. evil framework. Which, I'd argue, is more about instantly good narrative power (that I love) than politics.
This flick seems more directly pushy. Hilariously, the main character turns evil by not doing something. And not something important like making sure the Zuni warrior doesn't get out, but instead something that millions of people do because life is busy and they just don't have the damn time to waste in church.
Post a Comment