Movie Zone
Here I will post movie reviews and recommendations, opinions and updates on the world of film, lists/rankings, and the occasional film essay/analysis if I am feeling brave enough
A review of the underrated remake of an all-time classic. WARNING: REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS Here we are in the most wonderful time of the year! After making my top ten favorite Christmas movies list, the 2006 revamp of Black Christmas really stood out to me as one I wanted to revisit and talk about more in depth this year. I’ve noticed (especially since the 2019 reincarnation) that people have thankfully been looking back on this a little more kindly than they have in the past, even within the film community in general, outside of the horror fandom. That has made me incredibly happy, seeing as I never really understood the vast dismissal this movie has seen in the years before. And I shall soon explain why. So, without further adieu, let’s get into one of my favorite Christmas films, remakes, and 2000s horror movies: Black Christmas, released on December 25th of 2006, written and directed by Glen Morgan, and starring Katie Cassidy, Kristen Cloke, and Andrea Martin. A familiar but refreshing retreadWhile the story of this reimagining is the same basic concept as the original (killer named Billy stalking and murdering the sisters of a sorority house during Christmas) I would say the best way to go into this is expecting something entirely different from the original. The slow, chilling, minimalistic approach of the 1974 film is not the route they utilize here. This one goes for in-your-face, bizarre atmosphere, and almost cartoonishly gory kills. Going in with that mindset I think is why people have had a much better time after going back and revisiting this one, particularly after a very long string of drab, gray-toned PG-13 horror that has dominated the mainstream for a few years. What the movie does is hold easter eggs of the original film rather than make a shot-for-shot remake, throwing in only one scene of the famous phone calls where you hear a couple of the famous derogatory lines given by the killer, and having the glass unicorn pop up multiple times. You get a few other nods throughout, like with the main character’s asshole boyfriend who becomes a pseudo-red herring, this time for the characters rather than us the audience, as it was in the original. The exterior shots of the house house are also used in a similar way as they were in the first film, with camera shots that make it look imposing and deadly despite the attempted warmth from the cheerful decor, making it obvious that something sinister is going to happen when we go inside. The use of the attic and crawl spaces as well lead to a similarly claustrophobic feeling that the original had, making kill scenes more intense. The main thing that people will remember from this movie is the bizarre backstory to the villains, Billy and Agnes. Agnes is simply a mentioned name in the original that we know nothing about. In fact, we know nothing about Billy, the killer in the attic in the first film, which is what makes that film so perfect and terrifying. In this film, we have both Billy and Agnes as the killers who turn out to be siblings… as well as father and daughter. We see that Billy had his revenge years later for that horrific situation however when he kills his mother and makes Christmas cookies out of her flesh. Yes, so, we have more of a Norman Bates type plot with Billy being abused by his mother all his life, in more ways than one. So while any and all instances of subtlety are completely gone, we have a story so disgusting and messed up, that it at least gives this film its own merit by taking a firm swerve into a new direction. It most definitely creates a strong divide. You will either be completely on board, or will never want to go near this movie after just hearing that plot line. And I have a lot of respect for the movie for taking such a bold step. I mean, we knew from the various clues throughout the entirety of the OG movie that Billy’s life was f---ed up in some way. And this is probably the most insane thing anyone could think of. So I do have to give props. Colorful Christmas cheerThe thing that will always stand out for me the most is this film’s use of color. Whenever I think of my favorite color tones in film, this movie is always one of the first to come to mind. The colors truly are stunning, with the soft glow of the multi-colored Christmas lights, again reflecting a similar aspect of the 1974 movie, giving a slightly distorted blur to the outside shots. And the inside of the sorority house is decked out in the lights and tinsel garlands as well, giving gorgeous shades of gold, red, white, and green that pop sharply on the screen. Whether it’s objects, lights, or shades, it all stands out exquisitely. Red on white especially stands out to me, with one shot of bright red blood splattering onto a glass of beaming white eggnog, and one of the vivid scarlet ink of a pen writing against stark white stationary. It’s such a breath of fresh air for a horror movie, a genre that, as I said before, is always more inclined to go for more drained and lifeless colors with the thought that it will add to a spooky atmosphere. But this to me is one horror flick, in a similar fashion to most giallo films, that proves color can be creatively used to enhance, and sort of make the macabre beautiful, if that makes any sense. The darker shades, like black and bronze are sleek looking as well, especially on the unlit Christmas trees and garlands. There is a wonderful gimmick used in both present time and flashback scenes within the house of the Christmas lights flicking back and forth between bright colors and dark colors that gives a nice blend of a warm and cozy Christmas feeling, and a cold and sinister mood. The entire movie is very festive with all of the decor and music throughout, making it a great movie to have on in the background while decorating or having a Christmas party to add a great touch to get into the holiday spirit. I suppose, however, that you will need to have the right group of people for that. Slaying BellsA fantastic element that is ramped up in this version is the gore. Again, setting itself apart from the original, this movie’s kills are loud spectacles all the way, with endlessly squeamish eye-gouging and bloody goodness that delivers. So if you have a thing about eyeballs, you might want to stay away. I feel almost as if mainstream horror movies have sunk back into the trend of just having one memorable and especially bloody kill, which of course is fine for some movies, but this is a slasher that gives you the blood and insanity with almost every single kill. It harkens back to slashers of the 80s, where you are excited to see what new things are going to happen for every death scene, and how each victim is going to get it. Things that movies like Freaky and Thanksgiving are hopefully bringing back. Here, we’ve got icicles, glass unicorn horns, ice skates, candy canes and calligraphy pens all being used to dismember the sisters of Delta Alpha Kappa and anyone who gets in Billy and Agnes’ way this Christmas. CastI’ve always enjoyed this cast quite a bit, even if the characters aren’t nearly as memorable and genuine-feeling as the actresses in the original. But it is a very fun group of 2000s stars, including Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Michelle Trachtenberg, and Lacey Chabert. They all have pretty good banter together that, again, is far from the most memorable part of the film, but is better than most 2000s slashers. Katie Cassidy plays the lead, taking on Olivia Hussey’s role from the OG, who is one of my favorite final girls ever. Cassidy is recognizable to us horror fans from being in two other horror remakes, A Nightmare on Elm Street and When a Stranger Calls. I’ve always enjoyed her as a scream queen, and I hope she returns to the genre sometime soon. She does a perfectly fine job here, though the character isn’t written nearly as interestingly as Jess was in the first movie. Again, since this movie was doing something in a very different direction, in-depth character development wasn’t exactly a priority, and I am perfectly alright with that. It feels like we are more meant to gawk at the insanity of Billy and Agnes’ side of things rather than the personal lives of the girls in the sorority house, and I’m perfectly alright with that. Apart from that, we also have the wonderful Andrea Martin, back from playing a sister in the original to now playing house mother Ms. Mac. She is an absolute star, and I am so happy she returned to do this. It was great that she even got to do the narration bit towards the beginning about Billy and his family. I know the director was a huge fan of the original and really wanted her to be in the movie, so that just shows how great it is to have a filmmaker who is such a fan of the original source material taking over for a reimagining. Scenes: MissingSo I of course can’t talk about this movie without discussing the trailer drama. If you’ve seen the trailer, you know there seems to be tons of footage that was completely cut out of the final cut of the movie. Happens all the time, right? Well, not exactly to this degree. The various flashes of clips in the trailer that are nowhere to be found in any cut of the film are missing because they were never shot to be in the movie in the first place. I guess someone along the line during the marketing campaign decided the trailer didn’t have enough pizazz to get people to want to see it, so footage seems to have been shot only to put in the trailer. The random clips include someone trapped under a sheet of ice and their arm popping out, one of the girls falling off a roof with Christmas lights strung around her, and Billy somehow stuck to the ceiling in the hallway above Michelle Trachntenberg with an ax in his hand. There’s also this thing they made look like was going to grind up Lacey Chabert. Ok, but honestly, that one does look pretty cool. Seriously, this is one of the craziest things I’ve ever heard happening with a movie. Why you would blatantly lie to the audience by flat out promising things you know for a fact are not in the movie, I will never know. I don’t know how they expected this to be received well, and I truly believe it had a lot to do with the film’s bad rap at the time. I know I would have been pissed, even though most of the fake footage does look a little stupid, admittedly. I honestly can’t believe the studio didn’t get into any trouble with that. It’s about as egregious false advertising as Jason Takes Manhattan, when all he “took” was a cruise to Vancuver. We also have a few deleted scenes that make the movie feel more in line with the original, with more POV shots, and Lauren’s death in the bedroom being much more similar to Margot Kidder's in the original film. I do prefer Lauren’s death in the theatrical cut of the film, again because it gives this film its own flare rather than just redoing the original scene. Michelle Trachtenbreg’s character also has two different death scenes, depending on which version you watch. In one, she gets her eye gouged out through the plastic bag over her head and is dragged away by the empty socket to be killed off screen. In the other version, she puts up a bit more of a fight against the killer for a little while before getting scalped with an ice skate thrown at her head. Not sure what the reason for this was, but honestly, both versions are pretty cool and equally gory, so either version you get, no worries. The… End?Along with all of this trailer and deleted/alternate scene business, this movie has four different endings. Four. My DVD had all three of the alternate endings, so I watched them all back to back after the film to compare. I’ll start by saying that I think the ending they chose for the theatrical cut is my favorite. Agnes gets fried with a defibrillator and Billy gets impaled through the top half of the hospital Christmas tree. It fits the over the top tone of the rest of the film and ends it with a gory bang that felt worth it. Ending #1: The characters of Kelli (Cassidy) and Leigh (Kristen Cloke) are both left alive, but Kelli receives a call from her deceased boyfriend’s phone. The camera slowly pulls out to the tone of the ringing, leaving us with the confirmation that at least one of the killers is still alive. This ending is ok in theory, but I feel like it doesn’t fit the mood of this film. It is much more in line with the original, and feels like such an odd way to end this version when the rest had been so crazy. I think they made the right choice going with something different, even though it is sort of cool that this is the only version where Leigh isn’t killed by Agnes at the hospital. Ending #2: Here, we have Billy burnt up like Anakin Skywalker and brought into the hospital as well. Agnes kills Leigh and Kelli kills Agnes all like how it goes in the theatrical ending, but Billy dies on the operating table and then we see Kelli leaving with her parents. This one I felt was just anticlimactic. I’m not sure what the point of bringing a burnt up Billy to the hospital was only to have him flatline and the movie to be over. I suppose it was meant for suspense, but it just didn’t work for me and left me a bit underwhelmed. Ending #3: This ending is pretty much the same as #2, except Billy’s body suddenly disappears from the hospital room, and we see a shot of his eye peeking out from a vent in the ceiling, as he has been peeking through spying on the girls throughout the rest of the film, telling us he is indeed still alive and kicking it. This ending is good enough, I feel almost as if it blends the tones of this movie and the original in a cool way. You get the craziness with Agnes’ death, and then the more creepy and mysterious part with Billy somehow ending up in the vent when he had just been dead before, making us wonder if there is something supernatural going on now. It’s not him just dying and then nothing else. Ultimately, I think this ending would have been alright too. I do have one question though with these two endings… has no one found Leigh’s body by the time Kelli is leaving with her parents? Why is no one concerned about where she went? I can understand why this might not be everyone’s cup of tea. As a movie itself, it is pretty out there and does a lot that makes it stand out viscerally from other remakes, regarding the brutality of the kills and the insane backstory of the killers. If you want movies more like the original, I can understand being turned off by this type of film. It does so many things so drastically different, but that is why I enjoy it so much. To me, if you are going to remake something, it should be because you have a fresh take on the original concept, and only want to do a remake as a way of paying homage to something that you presumably are very passionate about.
I am a sucker for the 2000s horror remakes, and I know not all of them are anywhere near good. But this one goes beyond just a guilty pleasure for me. I truly believe there was a great amount of creative effort and care put into this to make it stand out, and seventeen years later, I really think it still does. There is no way a remake would go in this severe of a turn today (as proved with the most recent Black Christmas attempt that we won’t even mention) and those involved with this film seemed to really want to make something their own, while keeping with the theme of a beloved classic. Black Christmas 1974 is still number one for me, but this remake will always be a worthy flick to stand alongside it.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorCertified non-professional who just enjoys giving her random thoughts on movies and books. Archives
June 2024
Categories |