DVD STORE   |   CONTEST GIVEAWAYS   |   MOVIE POSTERS   |   LINKS

 

 


MOVIE REVIEW

John Dies at the End

 

Rating: R

Distributor: Magnet Releasing

Released: January 25, 2013

 

Reviewed by Sara Michelle Fetters

 

Psychedelic John Eccentrically Messy Gobbledygook

 

Are far as a list of pointless undertakings would be concerned, attempting to describe the plot of Phantasm and Bubba Ho-Tep creator Don Coscarelliís latest oddity John Dies at the End would rank pretty high upon it. The movie is absurd melding genres and ideas that would have the likes of David Cronenberg or David Lynch scratching their heads, the whole thing a bizarre cavalcade of gruesome thoughts and grotesque ideas sent crashing into one another with gleeful abandon. Itís a psycho-sexual mess of the absurd, all of it delivered with tongue so firmly planted in cheek trying to take any of it seriously is never a concern.

 


Chase Williamson and Paul Giamatti in John Dies at the End

© Magnolia Pictures

 

Which I guess is the point. Coscarelli, working from a story by David Wong, throws images and concepts at the screen with furious abandon, bringing up the possibility of parallel dimensions, sentient mind-altering hallucinogenic drugs, truck driving canines and out-of-body heroics with flippant seriocomic glee. Itís noir of the absurd, horror of the droll, everything tinged with a waggish lunacy that goes from being deadpan to dead serious at the drop of a hat.

 

Is that enough? For some it certainly will be. There are some astonishing sights, not the least of which is a humongous creature made entirely of slabs of meat leapt out of the freezer or a cartoon subplot featuring carnivorous man-eating spiders and the cowering masses sent to the for an impromptu dinner. There are some odd running penis gags that are funnier than they probably should be, while a series of Chinese Restaurant conversations between maybe psychic Dave (Chase Williamson) and nonplussed journalist Arnie Blondstone (Paul Giamatti) are remarkably engaging considering the conversation itself is really nothing more than Lewis Carroll meets H.P. Lovecraft nonsense.

 

But whatís the point? Do the tissue fragments Coscarelli seems so gleefully excited to rip to shreds ever feel like they have even the slightest chance of connecting together? Do references to works as varied as Eyes Wide Shut to Ghost in the Shell to eXistenZ (as well as Videodrome and Naked Lunch) to The Evil Dead to Fast Times at Ridgemont High mean anything substantive? I donít have easy, maybe even any, answers to those questions or a heck of a lot of others, the majority of the movie just sitting in some eccentrically whimsical fantasyland thatís nowhere near as clever or as daring as part of me feels it thinks it is.

 

Granted, canít say I was ever bored, and pretty much from the start I was always curious what Coscarelli was going to choose to show me next. Better, not only does he bring in Giamatti (who also produced) he also has intriguing bit parts for the likes of Clancy Brown, Doug Jones and Glynn Turman, giving proceedings a whiff of surrealistic class it arguably would never have had otherwise. Heck, he even gets Tall Man himself Angus Scrimm in on the act, his diabolically silly little cameo reducing me to a flood of cheeky grins I didnít want to end.

 

As for the story, thereís lots to tell but, as I stated up at the front, trying to boil any of this gobbledygook down to a simple cohesive statement borders on pointless. Just know that Dave is telling the story to Arnie, thereís a bit of otherworldly black goo nicknamed Ďsoy sauce,í the fate of the world is on the line and John (Rob Mayes), well as for John he might just be dead, but even so thatís not keeping him from talking and engineering a plan to save the day.

 

You already know who you are if something like John Dies at the End is your cup of tea. Fans of Coscarelli, of which there are surprisingly many (and I say that as admittedly being one of them), are sure to want to give this darling of the midnight festival circuit a look, while the genre curious will give it a cockeyed gander at their peril. Overall, though, Iím still not entirely sure what to make of this messy, blood-splattered anomaly, and I might just have to take the plunge and watch it again before I can ultimately weigh in one way or the other.

 

Film Rating: ÍÍ1/2 (out of 4)

 

Additional Links

 

Digg!

 Subscribe to Movie Reviews Feed

 

Review posted on Feb 22, 2013 | Share this article | Top of Page


Copyright © 1999-infinity MovieFreak.com  


 

Back to Top

 

SUPPORT OUR SITE