Horror movie review: Dead Snow

DEAD SNOW (Død Snø)

Made in: Norway
Language: Norwegian
Director: Tommy Wirkola
Starring: Charlotte Frogner, Vegar Hoel, Lasse Valdal, Stig Frode, Jeppe Laursen, Evy Kasseth Røsten, Jenny Skavlan, Ørjan Garnst, Bjørn Sundquist, Ane Dahl Torp
Year: 2009

Review written by: Joe Yang

Originally published at: www.foreign-films-for-you.com/dead-snow.html

Synopsis: Seven med school students on Easter Vacation arrive at a cozy cabin near the region of Øksfjord. The cabin is in the middle of nowhere, there's still plenty of snow on the ground, and there's no cell phone signal (gee, I wonder what's going to happen?)

The group is led by a guy named Vegard (Lasse Valdal), whose girlfriend Sara (Ane Dahl Torp) is supposed to meet them the following day. Sara owns the cabin, but instead of driving with the rest of them, she has decided to ski through the region instead...on her own...at night (gee, I wonder what'll happen to her?)

That evening, an old, grizzled hiker (Bjørn Sundquist) happens upon the cabin and warns them about the region's dark history. During the Second World War, a group of Nazis occupied the area and terrorized the local populace.

Near the end of the War, as the Russians advanced, the Nazis began plundering the towns for any valuables (gold, jewels, etc) they could get their hands on. They were driven from Øksfjord by the citizens, and fled into the woods where they presumably froze to death.

The hiker leaves, and the horny youths pretty much dismiss his ghastly tale. However, the old man was telling the truth! Before long, the group finds themselves confronted by a horde of Nazi zombies. Decapitations, mutilations, and disembowelments ensue!

Think Black Friday at Wal-Mart only with more chainsaws and Norwegian expletives.

Remarks: Dead Snow tries way too hard to be a campy cult classic. It contains just about every horror movie cliché you can think of, and attempts to cover for itself by dropping a few half-hearted self-referential jokes.

Director Tommy Wirkola obviously drew inspirations from movies such as Shaun of the Dead and Sam Raimi's Evil Dead series, and the end result is an often sloppy mess that feels embarrassingly adolescent.

Are there blood and guts? Yes. Literally. But beyond that, there isn't much else. Even the customary sex scene isn't all that interesting. I get that Dead Snow isn't meant to be taken seriously, but throwing in loads of cheesy, over-the-top gore that's just supposed to make you squirm doesn't work if that's all there is to the script.

The characters aren't all that memorable, and the plot is flawed. Again, I understand that a movie involving Nazi zombies who want to eat sexually frustrated Norwegians probably doesn't lend itself to much intellectual discourse. But within the realm of the story itself, no matter how ridiculous, there needs to be some sense of logic.

For example, we're never told how the German soldiers became zombies in the first place. And we don't know really get to know any of the characters enough to care about what happens to them.

The actors play their roles enthusiastically and some of the cinematography is quite beautiful in places. Some of the sight gags are creative, but most of the jokes fall flat. Not even the obligatory chainsaw can liven things up.

The editing is awkward, the dialogue is pretty lame, and even though Dead Snow is just under ninety minutes, most of it is actually pretty boring.

Who would like this movie: Dead Snow seems geared towards those who like over-the-top, campy, disgusting horror movies. However, I wouldn't recommend this one because it doesn't add anything new to the zombie (or horror) genre.

I'll admit that there were enough elements in the film that could have made it into a pretty interesting tale. Unfortunately, Tommy Wirkola didn't capitalize on them and went for a few extra disembowelments instead.

Overall, this is pretty much a waste of time, and the c'mon, it's supposed to be a bad movie excuse won't fly.

What's scary these days anyway?

By Joe Yang

A few years ago, when "torture porn" schlock such as the Saw and Hostel movies arrived in cinemas, people really started getting scared that the nation's youth was (yet again) headed down the path of destruction.

For a brief moment, people wondered if the initial popularity of such films was going to become a major trend. Parents to pundits, including Fox News commentator Bill O'Reilly, voiced concern over what these torture movies said about modern society. These movies, after all, were brutal. And they made millions.

But years later, the Hostel sequel and the Saw franchise haven't enjoyed the same kind of box office successes that they had when first released. Although still somewhat popular, they don't seem to pose any kind of major cultural threat.

In other words, the world didn't come to an end because of a few sick movies.

So what scares people these days? As a horror writer, who's undoubtedly also fascinated with horror movies, I wonder if there are any ideas out there that can grab people the way Tobe Hooper's original Texas Chainsaw Massacre or Hitchcock's Psycho did.

When director Wes Craven methodically deconstructed the modern horror movie with the Scream series, he exposed every laughable flaw and formulaic plot turn of most scary movies. This was fun for a while, but seems to have had unintended consequences for later horror movies.

Freddy Krueger and Jason Voorhees have practically become caricatures of themselves. Aliens and Predators have made more of a mess out of their reputations than Democrats and Republicans. Edgar Wright's Shaun of the Dead took the scariness out of zombies (albeit brilliantly), and now it seems that all we're left with are remakes. Sure, an original killer is created every now and then, but when's the last time a slasher's name carried the same weight as Freddy or Jason?

And with the rise of ultra-realistic video games on advanced game consoles, it looks like the horror film industry only has more to compete with.

However, I remain optimistic. Horror is an element of popular culture that will always be in demand. The basic instinct to purge our deepest psychological fears is as necessary as breathing. So what will they think of next? I have no idea.

But believe me, it's coming...

New Short Stories

I've posted 2 new short horror stories at my website. You can find them here.

They'll give you a good idea of what my writing style is like, so please have a look (unless you're too scared).

More stories will be posted as soon as I finish writing them. Enjoy!

I like horror, not extreme violence

By: Joe Yang

Every time I tell someone that I write horror stories, very often they assume that I must like watching horror movies too. The reasoning seems logical. I write "scary" stuff, therefore I must always be the first one in line whenever a new Saw movie comes out, right?

Wrong.

I'm not sure how it is with other horror writers, but for me, horror isn't actually my favorite cinematic genre (comedy is). That isn't to say that I avoid horror flicks altogether. For instance, Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho is one of my all-time favorite scary movies. Tobe Hooper's The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (the original, not the terrible remake) was a brilliantly made psychological horror movie, in that there was very little (if any) gore but plenty of frightful stuff left to the imagination. Night of the Living Dead captured the nihilism and emotional despair of the Cold War 60s, and the recent Spanish film, The Orphanage (El Orfanato), is not only a great ghost story, but a moving drama as well.

Whenever I find myself talking about horror, I inevitably get into a discussion about movies containing extreme violence. Or "torture porn," as it is better known (what an overused term). I have not, and absolutely have no interest in seeing movies such as Wolf Creek, Saw, Hostel, or Barney vs. The Teletubbies.

But at the same time, I'm not going to rant about how depraved society is becoming, and that the movies mentioned above will breed a generation of desensitized Columbine copycats. The films of Eli Roth and his oft-criticized compatriots simply aren't my cup of tea, and I'll leave it at that. And for one, I don't think movies like Saw or Hostel will bring about the end of civilization as we know it.

After all, people thought that Elvis' swinging hips, the Beatles, and shows like The Simpsons were going to spell doom for the children of tomorrow. But did they? Hmmm. Let's see. Today, Elvis' songs are innocent, the Beatles were actually pretty well-dressed (in their early days, at least), and The Simpsons is now arguably one of the cleaner shows on TV.

So no. I don't think the fleeting popularity of "torture porn" movies is evidence that the world is going to hell in a Happy Meal. In my opinion, it's pointless shock value (but I can't say for sure since I haven't actually seen those movies). The controversy and hype will draw a lot of curious viewers. But like pinball machines, the new Volkswagen Beetle, and MC Hammer, it's probably just a fad until the next big thing comes around. And I'm almost certain that civilization, and all the iPods included therein, will still be intact when it does.

So just what kind of horror do I like, if you must know?

First off, I like the kind of horror story (a book and/or movie) that actually has a coherent storyline. Secondly, I like a horror movie that has some sort of purpose beyond the story being told. This can include, but is not limited to, social/political commentary, satire, the exploration of personal or collective fears, and why we shouldn't build giant robots that can't be controlled.

To me, a horror story that scares the piss out of you without being in-your-face graphic is always a winner.

The horror of 80's videogames...

by: Joe Yang

With scary games such as House of the Dead, Resident Evil 5 (or 6, or whatever number they're up to these days), you practically participate in a horror movie where you get to control the outcome of the story.

With sophisticated game platforms such as XBOX 360, Playstation 3, and the Wii, computer generated gore has never looked more realistic. With the help of a game console or PC, you can almost experience the life of a mass murderer without the inconvenience of getting shot by the police, going to court, or dealing with the media.

That's today.

But what about the videogames of yesterday? Sure, those cute graphics, beeps, and boops seemed so innocent and harmless. But were they? Let's examine a few favorites, and before long you'll discover a darker side lurking underneath all of them. You see, I believe the next videogame-to-horror movie shouldn't be made from the likes of modern favorites such as Resident Evil or Silent Hill. Try this:

PACMAN: An old favorite. A yellow circle goes around eating a bunch of dots while being chased by a group of multicolored ghosts.

Why it's terrifying: The enemies are ghosts. Ghosts can't be stopped, because you can't kill what's already dead. The best Pacman can do is slow them down temporarily after he's taken one of those power pills. The game just goes on, and on, and on. It gets harder and the pills become less effective as you progress. A never-ending quest, unstoppable enemies, and drug use...sounds like a pretty dark premise if you ask me.

Who would direct if it's made into a movie: George Romero or Stanley Kubrick (if he were still alive).

DIG DUG: Here, the main character's job is to eradicate a group of critters that are goofing about underground. Yes, they're a nuisance. And yes, some of them breathe fire and are dangerous.

Why it's terrifying: All the hero has to do is go down there with a gun, and the problem can be solved in a timely, humane manner. But no! Not only does Dig-Dug, or whatever the hell his name is, NOT use a gun.

He goes down there with an air pump, methodically tracks the creatures down one by one, and when he finds them, begins inflating them full of air. Then Dug watches as the animals literally explode! Somewhere, Charles Manson and Ted Bundy are slapping their foreheads for not thinking of that first.

Who should direct if it's made into a movie: Paul Verhoeven or maybe Wes Craven

MR. DOO'S CASTLE: Little girls love unicorns. And even as guys, we associated unicorns with things that were good because some princess with an impressive rack was always riding one. Mr Doo's Castle threw me for a loop when I saw it in the arcade for the first time, because on the side of the game machine, there were these pictures of cute little red unicorns running around.

Then I realized the unicorns were bad.

The story is simple: Mr. Doo is a guy running for his life from a horde of rampaging unicorns that are bent on impaling, goring, or otherwise trampling him to death for reasons unknown.

Why it's terrifying: Mr. Doo, who also doesn't own a gun, never thinks to leave his castle to call animal control or the police.

Instead, he dresses up like a clown and picks up a giant mallet. As he's being pursued, he knocks out sections of the castle floor (that are all conveniently shaped like blocks). Whenever a unicorn gets stuck in a gap where a block has been knocked out, Mr. Doo has to quickly get to the level above.

The strategy is to whack out the block hanging directly above the trapped unicorn. The falling block then falls on the offending unicorn, killing it on impact. You pass the level once you've helped Mr. Doo massacre all the animals.

Who should direct if it's made into a movie: Rob Zombie. And I think Jason Statham would make a good Mr. Doo.

There are many more games out there to comment on, but the point is clear. "Simple" 80's videogames leave plenty of room for more in-depth storytelling, and their violent premises should satisfy the sickest gorehound among us...

My kind of scary

When I tell people that I write horror, instead of doing some real job like working in a cubicle or doing stuff in a lab, they always give me this odd look. Then they probably start wondering if I have a secret room in my place where I carve up dinner guests and serve them to chipmunks and hungry college kids. I don't, in case you were wondering (there's no room for one of those in my apartment).

When we think of horror fiction (or horror writers), we generally think of blood and guts, socially inept geeks who collect porn and comic books, and stressed-out individuals who are one step away from taking a power saw to someone they don't like. The first two are seldom true of horror writers, while the third applies to more people in the general population than you might realize.

No, horror writers aren't much different from you or the crazy people we distance ourselves from. Maybe we just think about it more.

Blood and guts. No, that isn't what horror writers are obsessed with. At least I'm not. Speaking for myself (and this is may be true of most horror writers), I do have a tendency to think about scary stuff a lot. Not stuff like ghosts and axe murderers, but things that could go wrong at any moment. Things like job security, freak accidents, and what we'd do if the people you once trusted turned out to be hiding something really sinister.

Or what about stuff that you're supposed to believe is good? Like hybrid cars, for instance. Yeah, they get great mileage, but has anyone thought about what to do with the highly toxic (and environmentally unfriendly) battery that powers that thing when it comes time to junk the Prius for a new one? You can't just toss it in the garbage can and let the city handle it, you know.

Hey, I'm all about green energy. But let's think it through before we jump on every green bandwagon that comes along. Remember, zombies are green too. And maybe there's a good reason why...