La zampa di scimmia

I had never heard of the story before, so I didn't have any preconceptions. It's not too bad, but it switched back and forth between dead serious and camp and not very effectively.

Thomason and Lang both do a job, but Thomason plays it completely seriously while Lang plays it like a Freddy Krueger.

There's also a hint of a subplot that goes nowhere, where the cops and others suspect Thomason's character is doing the murders. Not the newest plot and it would take it in a Hitcher direction, but it could have worked here. The cops SHOULD have suspected him.

The Monkey's Paw! - started out with pretty much, no expectations whatsoever. So glad I did that! The story behind this one is quite easy to anticipate, wont have any sick twists to it, but it will have a normal presentation, and it will follow its course quite nicely. The acting is good, especially from Stephen Lang, who made the film happen (my opinion), the death scenes are more than OK I'd say, and it has a nice pace. Doesn't slow for anything, has no dumb reactions as many modern horror got us used to, so all in all, a perfect movie for a late, cold, night!

Without going on and on about a simple, natural, yet effective horror, I would definitely recommend this one. A small surprise, a great add-on to one's collection, something that will put its mark upon you.

Such movies are hope that modern horror will not ultimately present itself as a complete failure. Aw, and of course, I recommend "Monkey Shines", if you wanna see a horror, with a monkey! That one is also truly great! Hope you'll enjoy both of them.

Cheers!

The Monkey's Paw was written in 1902 by W. W. Jacobs, but if you didn't know that and you read the message board for this film, you'd be tempted to think it was originally a Simpsons or Goosebumps episode.

While so many iconic stories like the one Jacobs penned lend themselves to parody or adaptation, the writers of this version actually created something original - which is why, I would guess, the ratings here are so much lower than they should be.

Instead of giving us one more pass through of the "be careful what you wish for" scenario, the filmmakers take us in a different direction. Saying much more would ruin the story, so I'll only point out that it's not only the protagonist who suffers for his choices.

All aspects of this film are competent or better. The length is also very appropriate to the overall arc and pacing. I'll also mention that the connection to the original story is so subtle that many will miss it.

I don't know how many of these movies I've seen, that take an interesting premise (albeit one that follows the monkey's paw trope... a story dating back more than a century), and completely falls apart in the final act. I mean, practically everything out of Hollywood does that, but this is a low budget indie horror film shot in Louisiana.

Ok, Jake's former boss, who he may or may not have gotten fired, gives him a monkey's paw... with vindictive undertones. I really enjoyed how the first wish led to trouble (namely, the death of Jake's co-worker, Cobb), which leads to more trouble, the second wish, to bring Cobb back to life. Which, well you get the idea. If you've seen Pet Sematary (and the like), you know how this re-animation stuff goes. Some of Cobb's killings even made sense within the scope of this story, but what we ultimately get in the end, is a psycho killer on-the-loose, killing everything in his path. *Yawn*

And the end result of the final wish? WTF. The writers definitely ran into a brick wall around the 55-minute mark of this one. If you have a craving for this sort of story (in movie form, that is), check out the Wishmaster series, especially its off-the-rails 3rd sequel, Wishmaster 4: The Prophecy Fulfilled. Watch out for some crazy gore, which this film was severely lacking. Hell, watch the Monkey's Paw segment in Treehouse of Horror from The Simpsons, for a genius take.

Seriously. This is a far much better film than its current, weak rating. There is also a serious flaw in IMDb's rating system. I think maybe members should have to actually be members for more than 1 day to leave a vote for ratings. 30, 60...maybe 90 days before you can vote or review a film unless you are a legitimate film critic with your own online site. Too many terrible films get very high ratings because people involved in the films get to create a new account and leave "Best Film Ever" reviews and "10 out of 10" ratings. Then, films like this one, which obviously deserves a much higher rating, end up having people leave "Worst Film Ever" reviews and "1 out of 10" ratings. Do you have a grudge against someone involved in this film? Not get the part you so desperately wanted? Did the director boink your girlfriend? No problem! Come on over to IMDb, create a new account and you can instantly voice just how terrible, poorly written and horribly acted the film was. Not to mention the director has a small penis.

I seriously need to set up my own film review site. You may not always agree with my reviews, but you can sure as hell know they are honest and not because I had something to do with any particular film one way or another, good or bad. Chiller Films' remake of THE MONKEY'S PAW is a very good movie with an original story. It's very well acted, shot, directed, and edited. It is not the "Best Film Ever," but it is damn well worth viewing and one of the best horror/comedies I have watched all year! Yes, this is indeed some serious monkey business! Now give me your paw...