I saw 1982: Greatest Geek Year Ever!

1982: The Best Geek Year Ever! is a four-part miniseries, available on DVD and Blu-Ray, directed by Roger Ray, Jr. and written by Mark A. Altman, now presented in a seamless, movie format. It chronicles the biggest year in imagi-movie fandom, which was also buffered by a number of additional, popular/cult submissions (drama, action and comedy) that comprise its copious, Reagan-era queue. 

Comprising the documentary's staggering rundown, we get E.T., The Extra-terrestrial (the year's biggest blockbuster); Poltergeist; Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan; Conan the Barbarian; The Beastmaster; The Sword and the Sorcerer; Mazes and Monsters; Blade Runner; Tron; Cat People; Swamp Thing; The Thing; Megaforce; The Road Warrior; Creepshow; The Slumber Party Massacre; Friday the 13th Part III in 3D; Parasite; Forbidden World; Halloween III: Season of the Witch; The Dark Crystal; Firefox; First Blood; Rocky III; 48 Hrs.; The Year of Living Dangerously; My Favorite Year; Night Shift; Airplane II: The Sequel; Grease 2; Diner; Gandhi; The Verdict; Missing; The Last American Virgin; Zapped; Tootsie; The Toy; Porky's; and Fast Times at Ridgemont High. Yeah, quite a powerhouse line-up if ever there was or ever will be. 

Though The Amityville II: The Possession (a significant hit during Fall 1982) receives only a flyby image and Author! Author! (that summer's prime, "adult" alternative) receives no mention at all (let alone Filmation's Masters of the Universe, which was on the pop-cultural ascent), the documentary still does a commendable job covering its vast and varied content. In this respect and in contrast to Super/Man: The Christopher Reeve story, which places fleeting, political pundits over those more directly involved with the actor, 1982's cinematic string receives a non-rambling, journalistic analysis.

Within its eyewitness faction are Leonard Maltin, William Shatner, Barry Bostwick, Sean Young, Joanna Cassidy, Dee Wallace, Keith David, David Clennon, Andrienne Barbeau, JoBeth Williams, Mick Garris, Paul Schrader, Don Coscarelli, Marc Singer, Cameron Crowe, Amy Heckerling, Raffaella De Laurentiis, Dean Devlin, John Sayles, Roger Corman, Lisa Henson, Ron Howard and Henry Winkler, among others who offer detailed insights. (The way in which the unmade Night Skies morphed into E.T. and how Wrath of Khan, Rocky III and Friday the 13th 3D empowered their franchises is also essayed. There's even admirable acknowledgment given to how Blade Runner, Tron, Beastmaster, The Thing and Swamp Thing have endured to reach classic status, despite initial, lackluster turnout; in addition to how Sword and the Sorcerer was a much bigger deal than some may recall and how Halloween III is a far better chapter than many might admit.) 

1982: Greatest Geek Year Ever! is a labor-of-love made for those who experienced the period, and for those who didn't, a worthy, history lesson. Be wise and check this one out through Amazon Prime, or pick up the DVD or Blu-ray. For certain, 1982: Greatest Geek Year Ever! is one to revisit time and again.  

HAPPY 2017!!! MAY IT BE THE HAIRIEST, HOWLING YEAR EVER!!!

I visited 10 Cloverfield Lane...

I visited "10 Cloverfield Lane", knowing full well from what I'd read that it wasn't a direct, obvious sequel to Matt Reeves' giant-monster "found footage" hit. However, like that film, this one was also produced by J.J. Abrams, and based on what he's conveyed, a series of seemingly unrelated films could emerge, which will later connect like a puzzle to complete a vast, coherent tapestry. 

This claim, in itself, implies that first-time director Dan Trachtenberg's effort is disjointed in context, and it is, which for the sake of originality is good, but for those desiring a precise, now-we-how-and-why explanation regarding the Cloverfield Monster, well, it ain't gonna happen, despite the title's insinuation. At the same time, the film offers further (if not solely implied) food-for-thought on the creature's origin. 

While "Cloverfield" set the action on many planes, "10 Cloverfield Lane", thanks to Daniel Casey and Drew Goddard's script, is a claustrophobic installment, which for a time plays like John Fowles' "The Collector"; George A. Romero's "Night of the Living Dead" and Rod Serling's "The Shelter". It also smacks of Richard Matheson's "Dying Room Only", with a prolonged, ominous tease, but does the bait land a tasty catch?

The bait is as follows: during a major power outage, a young lady named Michelle (imagi-movie veteran, Mary ElizabethWinstead) gets into a auto accident. She awakes in a farmhouse (i.e., a bunker within such) where two men, Howard (John Goodman) and Emmett (John Gallagher, Jr.), reside. She's informed by Howard that she's being contained for her own good, that to taste the forbidden fruit of escape is unwise, for something now taints the outside, but what exactly is it?

Well, I don't think I'm spoiling much by saying that it's...well, hard to say. It might be a poisoned atmosphere, mutating humans, militant extraterrestrials, or all of the above. One thing is for certain: inside the tension-wrought confines, Howard seems to know what's brewing, but is it through intuition or the roundabout implications of his survivalist know-how? Also, his petulant, enigmatic presence makes one consider the notion that monsters can rise from out the human condition, making this weird tale more "Psycho" than "Godzilla". (Bear McCreary's excellent score also helps drives the atmosphere in that direction.)

According to legend, "Cloverfield Lane" began as a project entitled "The Cellar", with characters hiding from the effects of nuclear fallout. On this basis, it's easy to deduct that the concept was merely recycled into what now stands as a wannabe "Cloverfield" companion piece, but without knowing the intended scope of possible upcoming entries, who can say how this chapter might be viewed in the long run, or even how it should be taken presently? 

In the end, it feels more like a prequel to the 2008 film than a sequel, but if these films are linked (or are to link, as Abrams says), then damn it, let such link in some tangible way. A few pretentious leads here and there aren't enough to do the job, and with that in mind, yes, "Cloverfield Lane" does, offer interesting bait, but its catch is, to say the least, unfulfilled. 

Nevertheless, thanks to its taut direction and performances, the adventure is certainly worth experiencing. (By the way, Goodman is gripping throughout and if this weren't an offbeat horror picture, he'd be a shoe-in for an Oscar.) At the same time, the story may have been more suspenseful as a stand-alone, inspiring us to ponder Howard's sincerity on a grander scale. With "Cloverfield" in the title (whatever the hell that banner means), one realizes that something horrifying does, in fact, exist beyond the shelter, and this blunts the climax's impact, though visually it remains eerie and striking. 

If "Cloverfield Lane"gains widespread favor on the basis of its premise, it's likely because viewers will have granted it through their collective imagination, and perhaps on this basis, the filmmakers deserve credit for fostering this tactic. After all, the new "Cloverfield", like the old, is destined to be discussed, debated and dissected for years to come. Let's just hope that, whether we fancy the ultimate reveal or not, such culminates in something solid.