Click image below to view full poster

Cinematical has just received this exclusive new poster for The Wolfman, due in theaters February 12, 2010. As you can tell from above, this latest bit of marketing for the Joe Johnston directed resurrection of Universal's classic shows off the gentler side of the moon-fearing creature feature. It's a simple image of Emily Blunt, who plays Benicio del Toro's romantic interest in the film, hiding with baited breath behind a tree in the mist-filled forest from del Toro's titular man cursed with an ancient affliction.

What works so great about the poster, other than the fact that Emily Blunt is always easy on the eyes (and even easier on the eyes when in a corset), is how it denies us a glimpse of the actual lycanthrope at the center of the movie. I find it a testament to how fantastic the character of the wolfman is that no amount of beauty is going to distract us from wanting to catch a look at the doomed soul who loses control of himself whenever the moon is full.

In addition to this poster, Ain't It Cool News has debuted a second Wolfman poster a little later on today, so make sure to hop on over there to catch another insight into the mystical, Victorian world brought to life by the likes of Benicio del Toro, Emily Blunt, Hugo Weaving, and Anthony Hopkins. After that, you may return to staring at the wonderful Emily Blunt, longing for February 12th to somehow get here sooner.

Check out the latest Wolfman trailer after the jump, and view the full poster by clicking the image below.

Ashley Greene's cinematic path hasn't been gradual. It all started with a couple one-ep stints on a few shows, a gig on a quickly vaporized show called Desire, time as a McDonald's customer in King of California, an uncredited moment on Shark, and playing Kim #4 in Otis. Then everything changed. She put on the superstylish clothes, added a pixie hop to her step, and starting divining the future on the Twilight series. Now she's got a handful of movies under her belt, and is circling her next starring gig.

Risky Biz Blog reports that Greene is looking into the ghostly side of supernatural life. The actress is in talks to star in The Apparition, Dark Castle's latest supernatural horror that will, most likely, wrench her out of sparkles and overprotective families. Written and to be directed by Todd Lincoln, the story focuses on a couple in college who are haunted by a "supernatural presence" they let out during a college experiment.

Supposedly, this is inspired by true events. Methinks true events in the same world where Blair Witch flies free, unless it isn't incantations that unleashes ghosts, but rather beakers of creepy substances. Or, they mean college experiment as in guy and girl make a witchy circle on their dorm floor and start doing spells all willy nilly. Whatever the case, the film hits production in February of next year.

By Todd Gilchrist (reprint from 10/28/09 -- L.A. Screamfest)

I'm not sure exactly what quality it is that real people possess and actors lack, but any time a film pretends to document real behavior, either literally or as a reenactment, something is almost always missing. Sometimes the problem is a deliberate decision to enhance events with artificial emphasis or drama, and sometimes it's simply too great a sense of self-awareness in the actor, who knows he or she is performing. But while there are a precious few movies that nail that authenticity, notably the recent underdog-blockbuster Paranormal Activity, such is certainly the case in The Fourth Kind, a film that purports to build an argument for alien abductions using "actual" footage from case studies.

While much of the movie's so-called source material carries the convincing roughness and deficiencies of homemade, handheld recording, too much of it seems far too calculated, both in its technical proficiency and the performances contributed by its "real" people. Further, its accompanying reenactments by recognizable actors undermine the possibility that audiences can take its case seriously, all of which adds up to thriller that unravels easily even if it nevertheless occasionally qualifies as a scary good time.

Horror fans will be slipping back into a new Nightmare on Elm Street on April 30th, 2010, but we're already being teased with new Freddy Krueger toys, thanks to Entertainment Earth and Mezco Toyz. You can buy a little Freddy of your own in plastic or vinyl next April just in time for Jackie Earle Haley's debut as the mutilated monster who haunts our dreams.

The first question I had when I saw the plastic toy was, why does he look like those little dolls with dried apple heads that are sold at craft fairs by sweet grandmas? But thanks to a wily blogger over at Albotas and the wonders of Photoshop, you can see that Earle Haley's Freddy definitely looks more like this toy than Robert Englund's Freddy.



I'm not sure which I prefer -- the menacing creep with a big smile or the flat-faced, expressionless killer. An early review from a test screening posted at Ain't It Cool News praises Earle Haley for his performance (although not much else in the movie), but will old fans be won over too?

Either one is sure to give me, well, nightmares. It's too bad that Johnny Depp won't be there this time around.

Do you collect movie toys? And, more importantly, do you leave them in the box or take them out?

Check out a larger version of the toy after the jump.

(Via Dread Central)

In the '90s, I adored exactly three parts of Hollywood: alternative music flicks like Pump Up the Volume and Empire Records, Gregg Araki, and David Lynch. The first always bled into the other two, Araki partaking in the musical joys of bands like The Jesus & Mary Chain and New Order, and Badalamenti creating his own unique world of music. But now the other two are combining. Sort of.

Remember how I posted a month ago about Araki's new film, Kaboom? Well, some images have finally popped up over at Quiet Earth, including the confused-faced Thomas Dekker above. There are also shots of Dekker in bed, and some looks of exasperation, but that's not the kicker -- it's the synopsis, which kicks off with "A hyper-stylized TWIN PEAKS for the Coachella Generation..." Yes, Araki's getting into a little small-town quirk.

Building on that whole all-too-brief sexual awakening description from last month, the movie is "a wild and sex-drenched horror-comedy thriller" about an ambisexual college freshman who trips on "some hallucinogenic cookies" and is "convinced he's witnessed the gruesome murder of an enigmatic Red Haired Girl who has been haunting his dreams." Is the girl in a room with a black and white floor and thick, red curtains?

What do you think about the idea of Araki getting a little Lynchian?

Halloween slowed down box office figures, but Michael Jackson's This Is It still managed the top honors for the weekend. Here's the top five:

1. Michael Jackson's This Is It: $23.2 million (total of $34.4 million)
2. Paranormal Activity: $16.3 million
3. Law Abiding Citizen: $7.4 million
4. Couples Retreat: $6.4 million
5. Where the Wild Things Are: $5.9 million

With only one wide release last week studios are making up for it with four new flicks this week.

The Box:
What's It All About: A couple in a tough financial situation are given a box that will grant them riches, except every time they use it someone somewhere will die.
Why It Might Do Well: Donnie Darko director Richard Kelly is at the helm, with a script based on a Richard Matheson story.
Why It Might Not Do Well: 55% at Rottentomatoes.com.
Number of Theaters: 2,500
Prediction: $16 million

A Christmas Carol:
What's It All About: Jim Carey stars in several roles in this 3D animated version of the classic Dickens Christmas tale.
Why It Might Do Well: This Robert Zemeckis guy has got some decent flicks on his resume.
Why It Might Not Do Well: Good lord, how many times has this been adapted before?
Number of Theaters: 3,500
Prediction: $42 million

If there were any justice, George A. Romero's Night of the Living Dead (1968) would be counted as one of the great movie debuts of all time. (Yes, up there next to Citizen Kane.) In some quarters it is, but the fact that it's a horror film and the fact that it has languished for decades in the public domain (and many, many cheap, sub-par VHS tapes and DVDs) counts against it. Not to mention that younger zombie fans that come to the movie for the first time will most likely be surprised -- and probably disappointed -- as to how slow and thoughtful it really is. But if you consider things besides gore and terror to be important in your horror movies, then Night of the Living Dead endures, not just as one of the great genre movies of all time, but one of the greatest movies ever made, period. (It's currently ranked at #260 on the list of the 1000 greatest movies of all time at They Shoot Pictures, Don't They?.)

Night of the Living Dead achieved several notable things during its time. Firstly, it established an artistic tone and a directorial signature that Romero would carry through the rest of his career, up to the present day. Secondly, it was an independent film (produced, of all places, in Pittsburgh) long before "independent film" came to be a marketing term. It was made by a cast and crew of people who genuinely wanted to make it, and -- somehow -- it was actually distributed and shown in theaters. Thirdly, by casting an African-American (the late Duane Jones) in its lead role, by introducing the "basement versus the ground floor" conflict, and by featuring gun-toting rednecks as the clean-up crew, it managed to subtly suggest a few ideas about America at the time, and indeed, it still suggests a few things about America in 2009.

Watch Night of the Living Dead on SlashControl!

The great Italian horror director Mario Bava isn't as well-known today as he should be; perhaps it's because his films relied more on mood and atmosphere than on plot and character, and very often his plots and characters were a little pathetic. But in terms of crafting a moody, moving picture with a genuine sense of nightmarish dread, he was practically unequaled. He had worked as a cinematographer in Italy for nearly 20 years when he made Black Sunday (1960), his official directorial debut. It was low budget, but considered rather sophisticated -- and even violent -- for its day (at least compared to things like Attack of the Giant Leeches). Today it's Bava's best known film and considered to be his masterpiece, which is ironic given that his greatest strength is his mysterious, majestic use of color, and that Black Sunday is in black-and-white.

Apparently based on a story by Nikolai Gogol, Black Sunday was a huge hit. It also made a star out of the haunting, sensuous Barbara Steele, who plays two roles here. She's a 200 year-old witch, Asa Vajda, who was burned at the stake and forced to wear a horrible mask with spikes on the inside. Two centuries later, she plays Katia who lives in a (haunted) castle with her father and brother. Some weary travelers become stranded near Asa Vajda's tomb and accidentally bring the old witch back to life (don't you hate that). She revives her old lover, turns people into vampires and plans to drain the blood of Katia so that she can gain immortality. Everything takes place in or around the creepy castle and the unholy graveyard. Bava's very simple use of the elements, like fog, light and shadow are still amazingly effective today. (No one could arrange spidery tree braches in the frame quite like Bava.)

Enjoy a day of rest and watch Black Sunday!

Well, it's just about 'All Hallows Eve' and if you're anything like me, then you have already depleted your candy supply and you've been watching as many horror movies as you can get your hands on. And as I've watched everything from The Wolf Man to 13 Ghosts I've been thinking how few movies actually scare me -- the rise of torture porn was nauseating, sure, but scary? Not really. Over at Den of Geek they've compiled a list of movies that scare them and it has inspired me to think about what flicks have given me the honest to goodness heebie-jeebies over the years.

Usually when I watch horror, it's with an eye for comedy and usually the lamer the film, the better. But occasionally there's a film that actually does what it's supposed to: scare the crap out of me. But as much as I tried to find a common denominator for what scares me on the big screen, I came up empty. In fact, there's never really any way to tell just what is going to hit the right buttons when it comes to horror, but I guess that's what makes it so much fun.

After the jump: 5 movies that guarantee me a 'bad night's sleep'...

By Eric D. Snider (reprint from 5/3/2009 -- Tribeca Film Festival)

The House of the Devil is a great name for a movie. It hearkens back to the days of grindhouse horror, when a film's title and its trailer told you basically everything you needed to know. Yet it's different from those movies, too, in that it prefers slow-building tension over frequent bloodletting and mayhem. You have to wait for "The House of the Devil" to deliver on its promises -- but when it does, holy crap. I know that isn't a very scholarly analysis, but seriously. Holy crap.

The film is set in the early 1980s, apparently, with appropriately synthesized rock on the soundtrack and lots of freeze-frames in the opening credits. Our perky young heroine, Samantha (Jocelin Donahue), is a college student who's sick of living in the dorms and is preparing to move into an apartment with her friend Megan (Greta Gerwig). Eager to earn some money to facilitate the move, Samantha responds to a flier posted on a campus bulletin board looking for a babysitter. Rather suspiciously (to me, anyway), the flier is blank except for a phone number and the words "BABYSITTER WANTED."

The clients are the Ulmans -- Mr. Ulman (Tom Noonan) is a tall, gentle-voiced man who uses a walking stick; his wife (Mary Woronov) is old-school sophisticated, a woman whose evening wear requires fur. Samantha learns when she arrives at the house -- a huge old isolated place, I needn't tell you -- that the babysitting duties will be slightly different from the norm, but it's not a deal-breaker. And the Ulmans are offering a lot of money.

If there's a thin line between confidence and arrogance, Ti West straddles it. Not unlike many of the characteristics ascribed to his films, however, that's a compliment rather than a criticism: his sense of self-worth as a filmmaker is predicated on personal responsibility, and because he participates in the writing, directing and editing of his films (among other duties), he is eager to take the credit, or blame, for the end result, which is why he's insistent – or, as he admits, "a little difficult" – about the fact that he wants what makes it to the screen to be his vision rather than the result of test-marketing or some other form of studio interference.

The House of the Devil is his latest film, and thankfully it arrives in theaters this week unimpeded by any such changes. Cinematical recently sat down with West at a Los Angeles press day for a short one-on-one discussion of the film, which follows a college sophomore (Jocelin Donahue) who gets more than she bargains for when a lucrative babysitting job turns into a night of abject terror. In addition to discussing the film's note-perfect recreation of 1980s horror conventions, not to mention period details, West talked about striking a balance between mundane boredom and mortifying terror, and finally, learning lessons even from lackluster filmmaking experiences.

Cinematical: How did this evolve, and how did you develop the aesthetic for House of the Devil? It's an incredibly faithful recreation of a 1980s horror movie.

I usually don't like kids in the movies all that much. Maybe I'm missing that maternal gene, or maybe I'm just not that into the little rugrats. But suffice to say that I sometimes have a pretty dark view of children, and that's why I love The Bad Seed -- and I especially love little Rhoda Penmark. The Bad Seed was based on William March's novel about a murderous little girl who terrorizes her family and friends, and by the time it's all said and done, she comes up with relatively respectable body count. The 1956 film was directed by Mervyn LeRoy and starred Patty McCormack as the pigtailed terror, and in spite of a tacked-on ending to satisfy the Hays code at the time, the film is still considered on of the penultimate 'creepy kid' flicks.

But what set Rhoda apart is that usually when you have murderous kids, the moral caveat is usually that they are outside the 'normal run of things', leaving our heroes to dispatch the bad guy without any hand-wringing about harming children. So most films give you kids like Damian (the Antichrist himself) or those creepy little buggers from Village of The Damned who come from another planet -- but with Rhoda, there is no one to blame but her. Although in both the film and the original book, there is an argument that she is just the victim of her family tree, but that's not exactly the same as the supernatural kids in those other horror films. There is no excuse for why Rhoda is the way she is, and she reminds you that evil can come in all kinds of packages -- and that's why to this day, the sight of her skipping away with her braids swinging remains as one of my most beloved movie villain moments.

After the jump; some of Rhoda's creepier moments and a tribute to her lasting inspiration to the macabre everywhere...

There are a lot of conspiracy theories swirling around as to why Warner Brothers intentionally let Michael Dougherty's excellent Trick 'r Treat collect metaphorical dust for two years before giving it an unjust, albeit successful, straight-to-DVD release. No matter what your own theory is, at Fantastic Fest Dougherty cited the film's anthology format as the reason for its shelving. Specifically, no one has made a popular, commercially successful anthology film since Creepshow, and today's audiences might not understand the concept.

Now we all know that's a load of two-week-old Jack-o-Lantern guts; that even the most cynical among us realize that the anthology film is not some kind of ancient cipher that kids today are too busy Twittering and MySpacing to figure out, but that was one of his bigger points of contention with The Suits at WB. Well, that and apparently large corporations with a vested interest in younger demographics don't like it when children are killed in movies, but that's beside the point. And that point is: Dougherty's labor of love has finally made the anthology film relevant again in America.

And as with all things that aren't failures, there are bound to be imitators. Enter Eminem, yes, that Eminem, who is now in talks to lend his considerable popularity to a film called Shady Talez; and yes, it is spelled with a Z.

More news at HorrorSquad!

Historical settings are severely underused in films today. Once upon a time in a cheesier Hollywood, you could find pulpy adventures set among knights, Vikings, or cowboys. They were horribly inaccurate, but I admire and appreciate their desire to just run with another time or place. Nowadays, historical films are considered too expensive. No one makes a movie set in Rome or medieval England just for fun. But I think we're starting to see a shift towards that mentality (after all, how much more expensive are Roman breastplates over CG?) with films like Centurion, Ironclad, Season of the Witch and now a little project called Mortis Rex.

Variety has the scoop on this intriguing movie-to-be, which will be the directorial debut of Hellboy writer Peter Briggs. Mortis Rex is set in 122 A.D. (or C.E. if we want to be proper), and centers on a disgraced Roman war hero. He's given the chance to redeem his reputation when he is sent to a Roman garrison that's being besieged by unexplained and brutal killings.

Sure, it could be lame, but a supernatural thriller set in the days of Hadrian? That's something you don't see every day, and a concept I'd like to see more filmmakers run with. Movies should have as much fun and license with history as literature does. If we're going to plunder the past for new movies, we could at least go back a little further than the 1980s.

I'm not sure exactly what quality it is that real people possess and actors lack, but any time a film pretends to document real behavior, either literally or as a reenactment, something is almost always missing. Sometimes the problem is a deliberate decision to enhance events with artificial emphasis or drama, and sometimes it's simply too great a sense of self-awareness in the actor, who knows he or she is performing. But while there are a precious few movies that nail that authenticity, notably the recent underdog-blockbuster Paranormal Activity, such is certainly the case in The Fourth Kind, a film that purports to build an argument for alien abductions using "actual" footage from case studies.

While much of the movie's so-called source material carries the convincing roughness and deficiencies of homemade, handheld recording, too much of it seems far too calculated, both in its technical proficiency and the performances contributed by its "real" people. Further, its accompanying reenactments by recognizable actors undermine the possibility that audiences can take its case seriously, all of which adds up to thriller that unravels easily even if it nevertheless occasionally qualifies as a scary good time.