Mayhem

I could not sleep so I turned on the TV and this seemed to be the only movie that got my attention, at first, it seems that the movie will end after few torture scenes or what so ever but there are huge twists in the history that makes this film remarkably good besides not having an unique history it does make itself unique.

There are some actual stuff related to cannibalism such as it being heriditary and other sick stuff, the movie explores some bit of it but I didn't like so much how they introduced and put the history together, there seemed to lack an excuse to the main character be there and doing what he was actually doing.

Despite it's bad reviews, it's a worthy and interesting movie to watch and it develops very well along the theme.

I received a copy of "Suspended Animation" in the mail earlier this week. It was postmarked from a company in New York, with attached sheets of paper naming the cast and crew, and an interview with the director, John D. Hancock, from Phantom magazine.

I'm still not quite sure why I was sent a copy, and I'm not really that sure how I was sent a copy. I don't have any mailing address on my Website, and I don't have it listed publicly on the Internet. I can only assume the DVD was given to me so that I could review the film. But it's a puzzling affair of how that company in New York got my address.

The movie was filmed in 2001 and given a limited theatrical release in October of 2003. I believe that the DVD I received is a preview DVD of what will hit stores some time in 2004. Perhaps the company in New York thought I'd review the DVD, too? I suppose I can, although there's nothing to review -- it has fine quality and sound, basic picture menus, and a single theatrical trailer. It probably doesn't need much more.

The film is about an animator named Tom Kempton (Alex McArthur), and his fascination with his own kidnapper. It all starts when Tom and his buddies are out on their snowmobiles during winter. Tom gets behind and flips his snowmobile when he's trying to catch up; he seeks shelter in a nearby log cabin, which is home to a pair of strange sisters -- one rather obese and the other frail and sickly. They slip Tom a drug and he wakes up tied to a chair. It's then that he realizes the sisters are cannibals, and that they plan to make him their next meal.

After making a daring escape with the help of his friends, Tom finds himself unable to move on with his life. He can't think of anything but the small sister, Vanessa, who kidnapped him and chopped off his pinky finger (which was successfully re-attached, or so I can only assume). Tom hunts down Vanessa's adopted child, draws her as a cartoon out of fascination, and eventually fights and helps murder her serial killer son, Sandor (Fred Meyers), who has a pimple-popping scene so stomach-turning it could rival the most gruesome horror films.

The only thing worse than the killer getting up one last time for another scare is the two-killer theory. Here, it's a three-killer theory. There's a surprise twist at the end that leaves open one of three options: the remaining killer is one of the sisters, back from their graves, their brother, or Vanessa's daughter. And, if you're enough of a horror freak, you may even think it's Sandor coming back from the grave.

I've got to say that though the surprise ending didn't surprise me, I was expecting something else to happen. I expected something much cleverer and much more startling than what did happen at the end. I had worked out a complex theory of who the real killer might be and it never happened. By the time the credits started to roll, I wasn't quite sure what the message of the film was. First it starts out as a sort of "Misery Redux," then it turns into "Deliverance" on snowmobiles, then it turns into "Single White Female," then it turns into "Psycho," then it turns into nothing. Is the point that the gene for wanting to kill people runs in families? Is it that you should not dig deeper into matters already resolved? Or is it just a wandering horror-thriller that isn't sure what it wants to be?

The movie was penned by Dorothy Tristan, John Hancock's wife. It's based on her novel, which I have never heard of -- and now I can understand why. I'd like to give "Suspended Animation" a good review because I enjoyed the beginning as a sort of remake of "Misery," and I feel bad picking on a movie sent to me in hopes I would do the opposite. But if I followed that, it would be nothing but a bribe.

I won't be totally unkind to the movie. John Hancock, the man behind Robert De Niro's "Bang the Drums Slowly" and the cult family classic "Prancer" (also very dark), directs well -- for what it's worth. And to be fair, "Suspended Animation" has a few interesting scenes, but the casting of Alex McArthur never helps much, and the flimsy script only harms what could have been a really tense and scary movie.

2.5/5 stars.

What struck me was the remarkable similarity of Fred McArthur-who played animator Tom Kempton-to Gene Kelly both in looks and voice. Its a typical film of today's horror genre where everything is thrown in and you get the impression they never knew how to end it. The cannibal theme was quite interesting but rather pointless as we only saw a pair of women who talked about it.Kemton,by this time tied to a wheelchair and pleading to be set free,suddenly found himself minus a finger as one of the mad sisters chopped it off.Later when he was rescued by his snowmmobiling buddies who'd gone ahead of him,the finger was "reattached" with sticking plaster though you had to assume he later went to a hospital. Placing Kempton there in the first place was the stock plot of going to the house for help after he crashed his machine Here though is where the story began to go haywire as the animator makes a film based on the mad sisters-he'd previously promised to put them in the movies if they let him go!! Next up comes a meeting with a woman who turns out to be the adopted daughter of the youngest sister-she agrees to be a model for Kempton's next production.She in turn has a son who gives insanity a bad meaning and hes suspected of being a serial killer when Kempton discovers a pile of rings presumably trophies kept from his victims. Its not really that frightening when you think of what happens in real life but if you watch this movie don't blink too much or you may lose the plot! The ending was the kind thats been used over and over again-the villains are presumably killed but still keep coming back.we have the landrover which gets bogged down in the mud-as a variation to being unable to start-and you think no way would Gene Kelly have played in a film like this-he would probably have found it difficult keeping up with the plot!

Interesting movie, but I don't feel it was casted well. The movie seems influenced by Misery, but the cannibal sisters are nowhere near as convincing as Kathy Bates. There is another actor in this movie who plays the grandson of one of the cannibal sisters, and is a budding serial killer. The actor is almost laughable at his attempt to portray a young psycho, I believe he was from the Disney channel originally.

Overall, besides these faults, the movie is disturbing at times & is worth a watch. Maybe I'm just desensitized, this probably could horrify some folks out there. I'm interested to read the novel that the movie is based off of, it at least piqued my interest that much.

Tom is a Hollywood animator who heads out on a snow trip with some pals. Where he crashes his snowmobile and seeks refuge from two sisters, who just happen to be cannibals. But before he becomes dinner, his pals find him and rescue from this horror; but the police only find one of the bodies. 3 months later, Tom plans to make an animated feature about his experience and he learns that the police have discovered the body of the missing sister. But this ordeal has hit him so hard that now he's truly obsessed about the sister that he learns that she had a daughter who she gave up. Which she just happens to be an aspiring actress. So through work-related meetings he becomes good friends with her. He gladly finds out she has no idea about her real mother and his horrific incident, although he realises her teenage son has inherited his grandmother's evil frame of mind.

Oh, what torture! Well, some scenes and dialogues were excruciating, but actually, I didn't think the flick was too bad, but again it was far from good. The fundamental problem was that it's overlong and there's just too much on the plate to congest. I found this independent flick an intriguing attempt in the thriller foray and there's some skill behind the camera, but the unbalanced material isn't a particularly successful mix. After what I thought was an okay opening 40-minutes that simply revisits "Misery" with its icy and isolated backdrop and a pair of kooky cannibalistic sisters, it just loses steam. The mid-section is very stodgy - by virtually becoming more of a character study involving the survivor Tom becoming infatuated by this whole ordeal and wanting to make something out of it by getting involved in one 'insane' family. It's one really strange fixation! But during this chewy period I found the story's progression rather colourless and the continuity lacking. So many details that are brought up are left unexplained or simply pushed aside. While, the dry dialogues really do stretch creditability and sometimes ramble on pointlessly. Although, a little of the sardonic humour helps a bit. The over-exaggerated climax isn't remotely surprising, but the constant use of three different endings was just too contrived. Every time I thought it was finished, something else was tacked onto the following scene.

Now the performances would fit right into a soap opera… say like "Passions". Pretty scratchy and at times rather hokey was the acting. Alex McArthur gives an understated performance, but Maria Cina as the daughter Clara Hansen is surprisingly good. Fred Meyers as the teenage brat Sandor Hansen is simply laughable with his angst and blimey; he has one real nasty habit. Angelo Badalamenti's score is extremely harrowing by playing around with many sequences and it gives the film a touch of elegance. The direction by John D. Hancock I could give the cold shoulder, but I thought he done an adequate job with what he had to work with. He staged one or two suspenseful and minor grisly scenes, despite most of it be telegraphed. But more often you could say I found it hard going and terribly cliché-ridden to be entirely effective entertainment.

"Suspended Animation" takes on a systematic pattern that has a decent looking production, but the material is pretty much a scramble and saps most of the suspense right out of it.