BEETLE'S 2ND ANNUAL FRIGHT FEST: THE THING (2011)

I honestly don't know where to start with this review. I guess the beginning would make sense.

I have been a big fan of John Carpenter's The Thing for a long, long time, so when a prequel focusing on the Norwegian camp was announced I was fairly psyched. At least their not going the remake/re-imagining route with this, I thought. The original Thing was a true masterpiece, and while I never expected the prequel to be anywhere near as good as John Carpenter's version I never thought that it would have the balls to spit in its face. BAD MOVE

The Thing 2011 follows a group of Norwegian and American scientists at a Norwegian outpost in the Antarctic who have made the discover of a lifetime, little do they know that their discovery is about to turn on it's finders and slowly, painfully assimilate every last one of them. Ain't Science a bitch?

The cast here is a mixed bag. Mary Elizabeth Winstead looks bored as the main protagonist Kate Lloyd, an American who is summoned to the Norwegian Outpost (called Thule Outpost) to help dig up and examine the creature that the Norwegian crew have discovered. She does the whole take charge thing that Kurt Russel did in the original (except she is SO NOT a bad-ass), but doesn't quite pull it off like she should. I was expecting much more from this truly talented actress, so I was super disappointed with her performance here (maybe it's the scripts fault?).

Eric Christian Olsen plays Adam Finch, research assistant to Dr. Sander Halvorson. He isn't really given much to do here. That said, he is one of the few character's I really liked and felt I had a connection with. He's the good natured American who is kind of like a normal Joe you'd meet on the street. Warm, friendly, and kind...it's pretty hard not to like this character, and that's why one of his scenes is so agonizingly painful to watch (you'll know which one I'm referring to when/if you see the film).

Ulrich Thomsen plays the head scientist at Thule Outpost, Dr. Sander Halvorson. I couldn't believe how much of a raging asshole this character was. He is the typical ego infused scientist, but his portrayal of this role goes waaay over the top to the point where I really wanted to punch him. Adam Finch says it best with a line that goes something like this: "So now you're an asshole?" (that's as best as I can remember it).

Joel Edgarton is one of the best actors here, he's got some real emotion and a believability to him in this film, both things some other characters lack. He plays the American Pilot for Thule Outpost, Braxton Carter. He is another Kurt Russel-esque character, but like Kate he's really not a bad-ass. He doesn't really enjoy being at the Thule Outpost, and just wants to go home so he can enjoy his basketball games. Unfortunately for him, what occurs when he's at the research outpost may prevent him from ever returning home again. He's another super-likeable character and it's a damn shame what happens to him in the end. Joel Edgarton is really proving his acting chops this year, this guy has got the shine.

Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje is another great actor here. He plays another American at the Thule Outpost, Jameson, the best friend to Braxton. While he isn't in the film much, he does make somewhat of a lasting impression.

The last actor/character I'm going to talk about is my personal favorite. Jorgen Langhelle is great as Lars, the only real bad-ass character in the film. He doesn't speak a lick of english, but is unwavering in his determination to destroy every single Thing he comes across. He also plays a big role in a sequence that plays out during the credits that ties the prequel directly to the John Carpenter film (I'm sure you Thing Fans can guess what I'm referring to, sadly this is the best part in the whole film). Right from the moment he says "Get Back, Demons!" (subtitled, of course) I was hooked on his character.

While The Thing prequel does succeed in coming up with believable explanations for what we see of the Norwegian outpost in John Carpenter's film, The Prequel doesn't understand The creature or the message in John Carpenter's version. In the prequel, The Thing has been dumbed down to a mindless alien that blindly attacks whoever is closest to it at the time. It doesn't plot or plan, it just slashes, kills, and assimiliates anything and anyone it can get it's claws on (perfect example: one of The Things in human form sets Kate up to suspect someone else as The Thing and even gets her to go to a room to get some keys which Kate will use to disable some snowmobiles. However, as Kate is searching for the keys the Thing attempts to assimilate Kate...WHY WOULD IT DO THAT??? KATE WAS ABOUT TO DO EXACTLY WHAT IT WANTED HER TO DO!!! SHE WAS ABOUT TO SPREAD SUSPICION AND STRAND EVERYBODY THERE!!!! WHY ATTACK HER, WHAT DOES THE THING GAIN FROM THIS???!!!! IT JUST THWARTED ITS OWN PLAN!!!!! ARGH!) This is the single biggest sin the film commits, it destroys everthing the Carpenter film set up. Gone is the smart, intelligent monster from another world and in its place is essentially a mindless monster that only cares about killing/assimiliating as many people as possible. This was not what the original Thing was like, and thus it detracts ALOT from this film.

As I said in the previous paragraph The Thing not only gets the monster wrong, it also fails to create any real sense of paranoia, tension, or suspense. Don't get me wrong, the film does try to create these things...it just doesn't know how to correctly do this. The result is the audience ends up feeling empty during these scenes. What is a Thing film without Tension, paranoia, and suspense? Nothing, that's what. Don't believe me? Go see the prequel.

Another thing that turned me off of this film was it's insistence on using CGI (most of which was just ok, to be honest). Now I'm kind of tired of seeing CGI being used so heavily in films, and The thing unfortunately continues this trend. For me, it runs the illusion of "this is real". As far as The Thing goes, when the CGI kicks in, all you'll see is CGI... not a cool Thing, but "oh, that's CGI...ok." Yeah, I was disappointed.

A troubling thing about this film is no matter how much it insists it's a prequel, it still manages to replicate events found in the first film. Man who gets injured Things out and attacks people, CHECK! Head scientist is assimilated and attempts to escape in a spacecraft, CHECK! Crew stand around a burning thing and talk about the problem at hand, CHECK! A test is concocted to see who is human and who is Thing, CHECK (in The prequel, they try to come u with a blood serum test but someone sabotages it so instead they come up with a filling test. Since The Thing cannot replicate inorganic material, they decide to check and see who has fillings in their teeth. Of course, this test has many variables and by no means truly points out who is Thing and who is not...it's pretty useless). The Thing may bill itself as a prequel but it's got the spirit and feel of a remake. Think of it as a hyrid of prequel and remake, a not too successful hybrid if one must be honest.

While the first half of The Thing is slow and plodding as it goes over stuff Thing fans already know, the second half is all action, kills, blood, gore and gross-out moments...but there is no meaning or message here. The thing prequel is all surface, no substance. What I'm saying is that it's an empty thrill, and while I did catch myself having fun at some moments I had to stop and remind myself that I was watching the bastardization of a classic horror film. The Thing prequel is all mindless kills, gore and gross outs purely for the sake of mindless kills, gore and gross outs, there's no reason or meaning in the film. In the end, The Thing is in reality a cool piece of fan fiction done by people that never fully grasped what John Carpenter's The Thing was and what made it such a huge success. It will piss off die hard Thing fans (such as myself) and will tarnish the legacy and meaning of Carpenter's version to newcomers, thus I can't really recommend it to anyone, it really should not have been made. What does it say about your film when the best part happens during the credits, and the best character disappears for most of the second act (I'm talking about Lars).

The Thing prequel really is just a lame assimilation of Carpenter's classic horror flick and thus there is only one thing left to do...Torch the fucker and walk away. Good thing I brought my flamethrower.

As a Thing Fan I'd give it 0.5 / 5 STARS FUCK YOU (got everything about the classic film wrong)

As a normal moviegoer I'd give it 1.5 / 5 Stars (mainly a dull film, but did have some mindless action scenes and kill scenes near the end...admittedly some were kind of cool)

IN PREPARATION FOR THE THING (2011)

Hello beetle-heads....this your Ghost Host with the most-most here...and I'm currently ripping my hair out.

If you have read my review of John Carpenter's The Thing, you will know that I am a HUGE fan of the original film. I remember after I saw it for the first time I had the thought pass through my mind: This is my favorite horror film of all time (it still is). So, of course I've been following the prequel quite closely ever since it had been announced. I had high hopes for this film. I had always been curious about what had actually occurred in the Norwegian camp and it had seemed like I was finally going to get my answer.

Well, The Thing (2011) officially opens in just a few short hours (2 hrs and 54 mins to be exact) and already my high hopes have been dashed against the rocks by my fellow reviewers. Currently, The Thing (2011) sits at a low 31 % on Rotten Tomatoes (LOWER THAN THE WOLFMAN REMAKE!!!!). I am crushed. Could it be that the film I have been so avidly looking forward to not only will be bad, but could possibly ruin the legacy of the original film for newcomers? OH SAY IT AIN'T SO!!!!!

So, here I sit, fists clutching handfuls of dark brown hair and eyes misty and wet. I'm still going to see The Thing (2011), and have decided that I want to treat it like a band-aid. Rip it off quickly so it doesn't hurt as much (let's hope it doesn't hurt at all...PLEASE FILM GODS...should I go in with a flamethrower in case The Thing is actually an assimilation of the first?) I will be back tomorrow with my review and my recommendation, but for now your usually genial ghost host is looking more pale than ever.

WISH ME LUCK (I'LL NEED IT)

BEETLE'S 2ND ANNUAL FRIGHT FEST: MOVIES I LOVE- THE THING

Welcome to a special Fright Fest edition of Movies I Love. This edition WILL CONTAIN SPOILERS, YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.

With the 2011 prequel to The Thing (which is confusingly enough also titled The Thing) due out this Friday I figured that now would be a good time to curl up under the covers and take a look back at my personal favorite horror film of all time: John Carpenter's The Thing.

The year was 1982. Before bluescreen and cheap looking CGI effects were the norm (both of which have been a thorn in my side for quite some time, give me old fashioned practical effects any day). It was this year that a new kind of horror would be unleashed onto this Earth and movie going audiences everywhere.

The Thing follows a group of twelve American scientists stationed at a research post in Antarctica as the harsh winter season starts. Soon enough, the cold won't be the biggest problem they have to face. Shortly after two crazed and frantic Norwegians from a nearby research outpost chase a sled dog into camp (shooting and throwing grenades at it all the way there, both are killed for safety reasons), a foreign invader is set loose upon the unsuspecting American camp creating tension, fear, and paranoia amongst the crew as it slowly becomes clear that one or more crew members may not be who they say they are.

The Thing takes its time building itself up, the big reveal of the film's main antagonist coming in at minute 28 of the 109 minute run time. These 28 minutes give us time to build connections with these characters, and also gives us some backstory for the film. When The Thing begins, tension has already grown considerably among the crew of outpost 31 (the name of the American camp), they have been stuck in Antarctica for a while so it is safe to assume that most of the crew are already suffering from cabin fever. They are tired and weak, making them the perfect victims for The Thing (This is the creature's universally agreed upon name, it is never referred as anything else in the film besides It and that Thing).

Among the crew members, most fans seem to latch upon R.J. MacReady as their favorite. Mac is the main helicopter pilot for the camp, and appears to suffer from alcoholism. We first meet him while he's playing a game of computer chess, when the computer outwits him Mac mutters that it is a "cheating bitch" and pours alcohol into it, frying the computer ( a nice parallel and foreshadowing to the end). When things get rough, he would appear to be the last person who would take control, but he is in reality the first. As crew members point fingers at each other and tempers flair, Mac remains the only one with a clear head and so ends up becoming the captain of sorts for the camp. As played by Kurt Russell, Mac is all too human and is not without his faults. Although an apparent alcoholic (in fact, most crew members can be seen drinking alcohol throughout the film) Mac is able to sober up enough so that he is able to take charge as only he can. The great thing about The Thing is that anyone could be infected, even the hero. Despite this possibility, most (myself included) still latch onto MacReady, and is it really hard to imagine why? Not only is Mac bad-ass, but he's also smart and is all too aware of The Thing's purpose in spreading paranoia among the group. With a flamethrower at his side, Mac easily emerges as one of the coolest characters that can be sampled in a Carpenter film.

The Thing deals heavily with themes of paranoia and trust. When anyone could be a traitor, even yourself....who do you trust? It is this basic idea that results in the camp's ultimate destruction. The beautiful thing about The Thing, is that it wants paranoia to spread, and does it's part in framing certain members of the camp. If everyone is pointing fingers and fighting with each other, it makes the group as a whole weaker and thus makes The Thing's job that much easier.

The Thing is a creature from a far away world that crash landed in Antarctica and promptly froze in the harsh climate. Norwegians discover it, and presuming it to be dead, dig it up and drag it into their camp thinking they have made the discovery of a lifetime (this leads me into another theme in the film, Greed and curiousity will ultimately be our downfall). Once in camp it thaws out and proceeds to wreak havoc on the area, eventually getting chased into the American camp. It's fatal weakness is fire (hence the large use of flamethrowers in the film). The Thing is an inherently selfish being, it will sacrifice one of it's own without a second thought if it means it's own survival. The Thing is also very smart, it creates a plan and carefully follows it through. Every action The Thing takes is calculated and thought out in advance.

I love The Thing because it is one of the rare intellectual horror films that manages to mix in a good deal of gross out gore into it's proceedings. The Thing's transformations are stomach turning in all the right ways. It's completely revolting to see human limbs stretch and twist into other worldly shapes and contours, but it's so fascinating that it's hard to look away. Most will probably feel their stomach twist into pretzel shaped knots during these parts. All of the effects seen in The Thing are practical, remember, this was before CGI and bluescreen were super popular like they are today. To me, seeing practical effects being used in a film makes the proceedings more believable. It's like a breath of fresh air (Unfortunately, The thing prequel will be using lots of CGI...such a shame).

The Thing is also neat because the paranoia spreads out to the viewer as well. During the first viewing, most will find themselves pointing fingers along with the crew. During repeated viewings (and trust me, there WILL be repeated viewings. there's so much to digest and think about in this film that repeated viewings are just about guaranteed....myself, I must have seen the film at least 5 times thus far) they will find themselves thinking about when someone got infected or why one of the Things acts the way it does.

The power of The Thing comes from it's refusal to provide any answers to the numerous questions encountered in the film, including it's satisfyingly ambiguous and dark ending. Viewers are encouraged to come up with their own answers and explanations to what is witnessed in the film. Perhaps that's what I love most about this horror classic: it doesn't talk down to it's audience. It presumes that the viewer has some semblance of intelligence and leaves him/her to create answers for him/herself.

The Thing is one of the best horror films you can find today. It deftly mixes intelligence, sci-fi, horror, ample gore, and even has a surprising message in the end. It's my personal favorite horror film. Chalk it up as another great film from master director John Carpenter.

5/5 STARS BETTER THAN SEX

Fun fact: The character names of Mac and Windows are also names of popular computer software we use today. Macintosh and Windows.

BEETLE'S 2ND ANNUAL FRIGHT FEST: DEAD SILENCE

Beware the stare of Mary Shaw

She had no children, only dolls

and if you see her in your dreams

make sure you never, ever scream

Dead Silence has quickly become one of my personal favorite horror films of all time.

Dead Silence is the story of Jamie Ashen who is happily married. One day after receiving a mysterious ventriloquist doll dropped off at his door, he steps out to grab some takeout and returns to find his wife brutally murdered. With a nosy detective hot on his trail, Jamie hi-tails it back to his hometown of Ravens Fair to bury his wife. Shortly there after he begins his own investigation into his wife's murder, and into an age old mystery that surrounds the town that may hold the explanation to everything.

Dead Silence is yet another film that's main appeal to me is it's outstandingly creepy, tense atmosphere. The town of Raven's Fair seems to be in an eternal state of night and is filled with fog. Ravens Fair is just about deserted when Jamie finally arrives there, shops are boarded up and there is barely anybody in the streets. This gives the whole area an almost sleepy ghost town sort of vibe that I really dug, not to mention there is also a creepy cemetery and an old abandoned theater that play pretty big roles in the film. Ravens Fair is a perfect setting for the film, serving to keep the audience on edge throughout the film.

As with any sleepy old town, Ravens Fair has its own mystery/ghost story surrounding it, that of Mary Shaw. The legend of Mary Shaw resembles that of your "classic" ghost story that you could probably hear around a campfire late at night. The story goes that Mary Shaw was an aging ventriloquist who was murdered after a young heckler at one of her shows mysteriously disappeared a few days later. Now, according to legend, she lives on in her dolls and if she should pay you a visit and you scream she'll rip your tongue out. This is where the horror aspect of the film comes in. I love that the main storyline centers around this old ghost story, this makes Dead Silence almost a throwback in a weird way.

Another great thing about Dead Silence is that at first glance it would appear to be about killer dolls. In a way this assumption would be correct, and in a way it wouldn't. The dolls don't have a mind of their own, each is controlled by the spirit of Mary Shaw so in reality Dead Silence is really an old fashioned ghost story of sorts. The dolls do quite a bit of killing, and for most of the film they serve as the scary antagonists. The audience is made well aware of the fact that Mary Shaw's spirit is probably behind the whole thing, but we don't see her until the end of the film.

Another neat, original aspect of the film is the killing scenes. Most of the scenes take place with absolutely zero background noise, creating a great deal of suspense and tension as we wait for the inevitable scare and kill. Once a person's tongue is ripped out, Mary Shaw steals away their voice and tends to use it to trick people. This adds a whole other scary dimension to the film, it's extremely unsettling to hear the person's voice and know that it's not them speaking. This alone will probably give me enough nightmare fodder for several years.

I guess it's time to talk about the actors for a bit. Ryan Kwanten plays Jamie Ashen, the protagonist of Dead Silence. He has a good deal of intelligence to him even though he does make a few dumb mistakes (like in one part where he attacks a cop for taunting him, and another where he follows a disembodied voice even though he already knows not to do this after the first scene in the film). Donnie Whalberg plays Detective Lipton and is completely unlikeable. The character is a complete dick that taunts Jamie about his loss and is just an all-around jerk. I couldn't wait for this character to die (and interestingly enough Jamie does more detective work in the film than Lipton does, what up with that). Judith Roberts plays the ghostly Mary Shaw and nails it, probably being the only truly memorable actor in the film. She doesn't say much, but she succeeds in creating plenty of tension and scares. She is perfect at embodying the ghostly central figure to this ghost story, and is sure to stick with most after the credits run.

Dead Silence is one of the few really good modern day horror films. It succeeds at creating a great atmosphere, great tension, a fantastic score (Mary Shaw's theme is definitely one of the more memorable modern score pieces I've heard), and some pretty good scares. I think it was an ingenious idea to have the central focus of Dead Silence be a "classic" ghost story, an original idea in an era full of rip offs. Probably my only complaint with Dead Silence is nothing really happens until the end of the film, luckily the atmosphere here is strong enough to keep most happily distracted until the final 20 mins or so. With a cool gimmick in the form of a bunch of killer dolls (although we have seen this one before, it still works here and surprisingly doesn't grow old after the first few kills), a great ghost story, superb creepy atmosphere, and a killer stomach turning twist Dead Silence has all you could want in a good horror film and it makes for highly recommended viewing during the Halloween season.

4/5 STARS

BEETLE'S 2ND ANNUAL FRIGHT FEST: TRANSYLMANIA

This year I decided to start my Fright Fest out with a different kind of film. Imagine if someone had the idea to blend one of the straight to dvd american pie films with a vampire film? Well, the Frankenstein of a creation you would end up with is Transylmania.

Transylmania follows the comedic sex-ploits of a group of college students that decide to attend a semester or so at a Transylvanian college located inside a castle. When one of them inadvertently discovers an ancient music box containing the soul of a vampire, the whole group is placed in great danger.

That's pretty much it to the plot. The first half of the film is nothing but sex jokes and focuses on the students getting acclimated to their new school. This part is exceedingly dull and painfully unfunny (but what do you expect from the geniuses that brought us Dorm Daze 1 and 2). The sex jokes feel very forced and aren't funny in the slightest. During this portion I had to struggle with the urge to turn off this film, I'm glad I was able to resist because the 2nd half of the film is where Transylmania more or less begins to pick up.

The 2nd half of the film is where chaos begins to ensue, and the sex jokes begin to disappear. This is where everything starts to come together and where the build up to the climax begins. A female student opens the music box and is possessed with the spirit of the vampire, this wakes up the vampire's lover who commences a hunt to reunite with her, a vampire slayer mistakes one of the students for another vampire slayer and teams up with him to fight off the undead hordes, and another student bears a striking resemblence to the main vampire (I'm sure this won't come into play in any way....SARCASM). There are a few surprisingly funny bits in the 2nd half of the film, and it is here that Transylmania begins to actually resemble something FUN (I know, surprising, right?) The climax that everything is leading up to is incredibly zany to an insane degree, but I like that.

The acting seen in Transylmania is never anything noteworthy. The few college leads do a good enough job, fulfilling what is required of them (which is the bare minimum), and the script is seldomly clever enough to warrant attention. With that said though, I must say that I slowly found myself beginning to enjoy the film despite it's coffin sized flaws.

So if you enjoy the vampire genre or the straight to DVD American Pie sequels I suppose that there is a chance you could enjoy Transylmania. It's definitely NOT a film for everyone, it's filled with unfunny sex jokes and just about every character cliche in the book. Transylmania is really not a good film, but I enjoyed it for what it was: an attempt at mixing two very different genres, and while the result is less successful than either genre alone, Transylmania still manages to have fun with the proceedings. The only question is: Will most viewers find Transylmania fun too? I say give it a try, what's the worst that can happen?

1.5/5 STARS

MOVIES I LOVE: THE KING IS BACK IN THEATERS- LION KING 3D

Lion King was released on June 15, 1994. I was just 3 years old, yet I clearly remember some of that theatrical experience. It's amazing what you find you remember. I always thought most of my 3 year old life would be lost forever, yet some memories are still as clear as ever.

I feel silly going over this films plot, because I think I can safely assume that most of us have seen this animated classic. Lion King is about young Simba, a king to be who witnesses his dad's death and flees for the hills due to the false belief that the death was his fault. In reality, it was his evil uncle Scar's doing and with Simba gone Scar is free to usurp the throne and bring forth some pretty dark days to Pride Rock, Simba's home. Only Simba can put an end to Scar's madness, but is he ready to face down his past?

Lion King is one of the films in what is regarded as Disney's New Golden Age: Some other films from this period include Beauty and The Beast, Aladdin, and The Little Mermaid. Lion King seems to be heavily influenced by some notable Shakespearean works, mainly Hamlet. The film appears to acknowledge this since Timon comments during one scene: "What's in a name?", a famous line from the Shakespearean classic Romeo and Juliet.

While I have seen this film numerous times, never before did I realize how nuanced the film can be at times. Like the scene where Simba accidentally steps in one of his dad's paw prints and realizes how much bigger it is than his. Without saying one word, this shot perfectly conveys to the audience that Simba still has much to learn if he is going to be as great as his dad. Another chilling scene is when Scar is urged to move the pride (a pack of lions) to a new area since they had greatly depleted their resources and food. In response, Scar says something that is eerily similar to one of Simba's previous lines : "I'm The King, I can do whatever I want". Does this imply that Simba could have ended up being a king as bad as Scar was? The lion king is full of little messages and nuances such as these, and the film's all the more brilliant for this.

This release of Lion King features one fairly big change to the film, as its title imply's The Lion King has indeed been given a 3D makeover. Now, I know this probably upsets most fans of the film, and for good reason, 3D is an art form that is often mishandled, and with a film like Lion King the results could have been disastrous. Luckily, I am happy to report that there is no need to grab your torch and pitchfork, The Lion King's 3D post-conversion is one of the best that I've seen.

From the first scene of Zazu's flying over the crowd of animals gathering around Pride Rock a small flame of hope ignites, maybe this won't be so bad after all. You'd be right. While most people think of things popping out of the screen when they think of 3D, what most forget is that 3D is also capable of producing a good deal of depth to a film. While Lion King does try to have a few things pop out of the screen (Mainly dust, debris, smoke, fog, character's faces, and in one scene Scar), there's not much there that the 3D team can work with, and instead of trying to force this aspect of the 3D technology they instead chose (very wisely if I must say s myself) to focus on adding depth to the film.

A good deal of depth has been added to each location found in the film. From Timon and Pumba's jungle paradise, to Pride Rock, to The Savannah, to The Elephant Graveyard, just to name a few. The extra dimension of depth brings the film to life in ways you could never imagine. A side effect of the added depth is that the beautiful backgrounds of the film just pop out at you, never before had I realized how fantastic these backdrops were, it's a truly jaw-dropping effect.

There are several scenes where the 3D really shines through; these include (but aren't limited to) I Just Can't Wait to Be King (The zany multi-colored glamour of this musical number made it a perfect fit for the 3D tech), Be Prepared (The bursting green and red steam with Scar sleeking through it, Scar towering over the goose stepping hyenas, and Scar's final ascent to the top of the mountain are fantastic), The scene where Mufasa appears in the sky (wow, just wow),The scene where Timon, Pumba, and Simba are staring up at the night sky (great, amazing depth here), Every scene in Timon and Pumba's jungle is breath-takingly beautiful, and the final fight between Simba and Scar (From their first tension filled confrontation to the final stand-off is superb, the fire below them and the red hues to the scene really make it a treat to watch). There is also some unexpected sense of movement in the film due to the 3D and the fast zoom in shots work surprisingly well with the new tech.

While my eyes were a bit red by the end of the film, I still say that it's definitely worth the money to see this beauty in 3D. You can tell that the 3D team put a good amount of planning, work, and effort into making the 3D the best it possibly could be. Even though the Lion King was not made with 3D in mind, the new tech fits surprisingly well into the film. Was it necessary to add in the 3D? NO. Does it work perfectly with the film nonetheless? YES!!!

For me, The Lion King 3D is the most emotionally satisfying 3D film I have seen in a while. It was a real treat to get to see Lion king in theaters for a 2nd time, and to relive those emotions I must have felt when I first viewed it so long ago. It's obvious that the 3D team went into their project with a great deal of care and respect for the original film, and that's why it works so well. So if you're looking for a good, fun, nostalgic time in theaters I highly suggest you run out and see Lion King in 3D (It's leaving theatres super soon, The 3D Blu-Ray hits shelves on Oct. 4. So if you still want to see it in theaters you'd better run out to see it sometime this week), just don't be surprised if you shed a few tears during the film (Don't worry,It means you're human).

5/5 BETTER THAN SEX

BEETLE SUMMONS THE CREATURES OF THE NIGHT FOR HIS ANNUAL FRIGHTFEST

Last night a cold breeze blew in and I remembered.....It was the first of October.

Yes, the haunting season has officially begun. This is the time of year where fear rules over all and his monstrous minions do his evil bidding. From werewolves, to zombies, to demons, to vampires, to ghosts. The human race is in for a surprise this Halloween, for on the 31st of every year the collected forces of the night will be unleashed unto this unsuspecting Earth for one night only. Be afraid, be very afraid.

I, your humble ghost host with the most most, will be your guide on this frightful and horrific journey. I will be reviewing various scary movies during October and will lead you down the path of screams that leads to Halloween.

So, grab your popcorn and a crucifix, Beetle's 2nd annual FrightFest is about to begin.