We start this list off with one of this year’s snubs – Albert Brooks, one of America’s underrated comedians, plays a mobster who leads a getaway driver in a cat-and-mouse game over a $300,000 heist. It’s one of Brooks’ best, but Drive was snubbed at the Oscars. Considering that Brooks was one of two favorites to win, this snub screams egregious.

In The English Patient, Colin Firth plays the husband of Kristin Scott Thomas. When his wife begins an affair, Firth naturally wants revenge, although it proves to be his downfall, in more ways than one. Firth was an upcoming star, and this was his breakout role.

Say what you want about him personally, but Richard Gere gave a career-best performance as smooth-talking lawyer Billy Flynn. Having claimed to have “never lost a case,” Flynn plays puppet master (literally and figuratively) in the film, making sure that his perfect record remains intact. In addition, his tap dance combined with his courtroom histrionics are one of the best parts of the film.

Philip Seymour Hoffman has been on a hot streak this past decade. Although The Ides of March was not the critical success it claimed to be, Hoffman’s performance as intensely loyal campaign manager Paul Zara steals the film from George Clooney and Ryan Gosling. His monologue about misguided loyalty and consequences proves that sometimes loyalty can be a fatal flaw. When he is betrayed by Clooney and Gosling at the end of the movie, his final scene is played with malaise and pain that pulls the audience to him. If there is a hero in this film, he is it.

Best known as Ben Affleck’s younger brother, Casey Affleck did receive a nomination that year in the supporting category for The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. He should have been a double-nominee that year, though, as his role as Detective Patrick Kenzie forces him to confront his neighborhood pride and still do the right thing. The very end of the film makes him realize how much of a misjudgment he has made in his investigation.

For me, the best part of the film is his scene where he talks back to a salesman, saying “I’m a Dapper Dan man!” The film is a little choppy as a whole, but Clooney’s take on Odysseus makes him an anti-hero in the Great Depression, a time when the public needed a “regular” guy. His banter and face may not have won him the award, but it should have given him his first nomination five years earlier than it actually did.

All you need to know about this film can be summed up in two words: The Dude. As the Dude, Jeff Bridges plays an unemployed pothead who becomes involved in a kidnapping plot. His nonchalance makes all the serious parts of the film seem farcical, and he provides a perfect foil to John Goodman’s Walter. To sum it up: “The Dude abides.”

Dylan Baker, in this writer’s opinion, is one of the more underrated character actors of our time. In Happiness, he plays Bill Maplewood, a supposed “family man” who is, in fact, a pedophile. He abuses two of his son’s classmates, and does it ruthlessly, bordering on being a stalker. The audience feels repulsed by his actions, as they well should, but it’s a testament to Baker’s acting talent that he can be so vicious under a cheerful façade.

Coming off a Best Actor nomination the previous year, Don Cheadle plays a detective in Crash, assigned to find his missing brother. It turns out that his brother is on the other side (i.e. the wrong side) of the law, and when Cheadle can’t save him, his confrontation with his mother forces him to re-evaluate his tardiness. His opening quote, about Los Angeles not being a “real city” and untrustworthy, sets the tone for a troubling film. Say what you want about its Best Picture credentials, but it’s a lot better than people give it credit for. Cheadle is a reason why.

In a double role as twin brothers Paul and Eli Sunday, Paul Dano provides the perfect foil to ruthless oil baron Daniel Plainview, played by Daniel Day-Lewis. Dano’s character Eli, a preacher, goes from aggressor to victim at the drop of a hat. One minute, he is forcing Plainview to confess his sins, and then being forced to admit that “God is a superstition” and “I am a false prophet” in order to prevent Plainview from killing him. I don’t think anybody would have beaten Javier Bardem that year, but Dano certainly could have given him a run for his money.

The only directing nominee on this list, Cold Mountain is just as good as his Oscar-winning directed piece, The English Patient. In many places, it’s better. Minghella leads an amazing ensemble class, including Jude Law, Nicole Kidman, Renee Zellweger, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Kathy Baker, Brendan Gleeson, Natalie Portman, and more. Both he and the film should have received top nominations.

I must admit, I kind of wanted to see Astin on this list so that Return of the King would lose at least one award (because, let’s face it, nobody was going to beat Tim Robbins that year). Still, Astin goes from ensemble to second lead over the course of the trilogy, and considering how far he rose from his child star status, he deserved the nomination, if not the victory.

Much like Dylan Baker, Jason Patric has developed into a fine character actor. The son of Jason Miller (a.k.a. Father Karras in The Exorcist), Patric give a career-best performance in Your Friends and Neighbors. As Cary, Patric shows that you don’t have to kill anyone to be a true sociopath. His character is a rapist, a sexual predator, and a misanthrope who takes perverse delight in sleeping with women, then breaking their hearts. He is probably the most immoral character that almost nobody knows about. While chatting with his male colleagues, Cary recalls that his best sexual experience was a homosexual rape in high school, which he claims “blew him away.” In arguably his most cruel moment, his refusal to wear condoms (because of his macho attitude) results in another character becoming pregnant. Not surprisingly, he blames her. To this writer, this is the Best Supporting Actor performance of 1998 (with all due respect to the late, great James Coburn).

As oenophile and wannabe novelist, Miles, Paul Giamatti plays an anti-hero for the 21st century. His character is the quintessential loser: unpublished, depressed, divorced, and in the middle of a mid-life crisis. And Giamatti is hilarious in this role. His interactions with Jack (Thomas Haden Church) reveal his hard side, while his softer side emerges with Maya (Virginia Madsen). One of my favorite scenes in movie history is the scene after his book is rejected for the final time: he waxes philosophical about how he is nothing more than a “thumbprint on a skyscraper window.” Always getting the last word, Miles later admitted he borrowed from Charles Bukowski. Always poignant, Giamatti always has us on his side, and we find ourselves hoping he can land on his feet.

“Good morning. Oh, and in case I don’t see ya, good afternoon, good evening, and good night.” As Truman Burbank, Jim Carrey reveals just how good he can actually be when given the right material. His heartbreaking portrayal of Truman Burbank won him the Golden Globe for Best Actor, but he was shockingly denied his best chance at Oscar gold (you could argue that he should have been nominated for Man on the Moon as well). I will say it – during the year 1998, there was no better performance: not Tom Hanks, not Roberto Benigni, not Edward Norton. How he slipped through the cracks is one of the most astounding Oscar mysteries.

Honorable Mentions: Jack Nicholson, The Departed; Kevin Spacey, L.A. Confidential; Ben Foster, 3:10 to Yuma; Denzel Washington, American Gangster; Gene Hackman, The Royal Tenenbaums

Some key characteristics of Film Noir include:

-A specific visual style characterized by low-key lighting, deep shadows, and obscuring camera angles.
-Disorientation through plot devices such as a non-linear plot line, an unreliable narrator, or flashbacks.
-A sense of impending doom or hopelessness.
-Stories about crime, either from the perspective of the criminal or the investigator. These crimes often include robberies, heists, or crimes of passion such as murder or suicide.
-Morally questionable protagonists that are not portrayed in a sympathetic light. They may be mentally unstable, corrupt, have a criminal background, or be involved with criminals.
-The “femme fatale” – a mysterious and seductive love interest who often leads the hero into compromising positions. She is not necessarily a bad person, although she is most often portrayed in an unflattering light.

Despite the classic Film Noir Period being put to rest at the end of the 1950s, the style and characteristics of the time period still influence Hollywood films to this day. The following is a list of ten outstanding films from the year 2000 or later that feature many of the characteristics of classic Noir cinema.

Starting off we have a psychological thriller that some may find controversial to include on this list. I would contend, however, that the dark journey into the psyche of our female lead is directly in line with the path of impending doom that is a cornerstone of classic Noir films. Right from the beginning, a feeling of despair permeates the screen and does not let go. Outside of crime drama, Film Noir often turned towards performers and their inner demons to create intense drama out of feelings of inadequacy and egotism (classics such as The Big Knife (1955) and Sunset Blvd. (1950) come to mind). The intense results that this can produce are powerfully portrayed in Black Swan’s ongoing struggle between Nina (Natalie Portman) and her ballet rival Lily (Mila Kunis). Despite twisting the more commonly seen “male seduced by female” structure of Noir cinema, Kunis’ seduction of Portman is a classic femme fatale at work. The only question is, did it really happen?

Key Film Noir Aspects: Feeling of Despair, Mental Instability, Femme Fatale

The Lookout makes the list with a classic Film Noir plot line: our “hero,” in this case Chris Pratt (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), gets mixed up with the wrong crowd and unwittingly finds himself at the center of a heist. The exploitation of the lead character through his feelings for the aptly named Luvlee (Isla Fisher) is a great look at the powers of the femme fatale at work. This is one of the more uncomfortable films on the list, as you can’t help but sympathize with Chris’ exploitation after learning through his narration early in the film that he has difficulties with day-to-day interactions after receiving brain trauma in a car accident. The Lookout, in a lot of ways, can be compared to the classic Scarlet Street (1945) and the equally brutal exploitation of the sheepish Christopher Cross (Edward G. Robinson).

Key Film Noir Aspects: Criminal Actions, Femme Fatale

Another trip into the psychological side of Film Noir, this one is weird. Really weird. This film is probably best known for Christian Bale’s incredible commitment to the role, dropping over 60 lbs in order to believably play Trevor Reznik, our “hero” who is struggling with some serious mental issues attributed to his insomnia. It takes the entire film for us to finally get a clear picture of what exactly is going on with Trevor, and along the way we are treated to a barrage of intensely dark scenes. Some are real and some are imagined, but the line is incredibly blurred. Classic use of a dark visual style, a slowly unraveling mystery, and disorienting flashbacks make this one among the more disturbing Neo-Noirs you will ever see.

Key Film Noir Aspects: Visual Style, Mental Instability, Morally Questionable “Hero,” Disorienting Plotline

I don’t think I’ve ever met someone who has seen this film who wasn’t blown away by it. One of Christopher Nolan’s best ever, it has Noir written all over it. Murder, classic Noir visual style, an unreliable narrator and non-linear plot, you name it and it’s here. To top it all off (without giving too much away), in classic Noir style, we find out in the big twist that our “hero” was doomed from the start. A must-see for any Neo-Noir fan (or any Christopher Nolan fan for that matter).

Key Film Noir Aspects: Visual Style, Mental Instability, Unreliable Narrator, Non-Linear Plotline, Murder Mystery

Think what you want about Tom Cruise’s religious affiliations, but he is a straight-up badass in this film. While it may be true that Jamie Foxx is the real hero, if you aren’t rooting for Cruise, you must be watching a different movie. It isn’t until late into the film that we realize that the suave businessman in the back of the cab may not be as admirable as we are led to believe he is. Cruise delivers as our Morally Questionable “Hero,” and in the end, in brutal Film Noir fashion, he learns the same lesson that Walter Neff (Fred MacMurray in Double Indemnity (1944)) and other classic criminals of the ’40s and ’50s always learned: crime doesn’t pay. The seedy nightlife and back alleys of Los Angeles are the perfect backdrop for this tightly woven crime thriller.

Key Film Noir Aspects: Visual Style, Morally Questionable “Hero,” Classic Noir Ending

Our only entry on this list from across the pond, make no mistake about it: In Bruges is funny. Get past the witty banter and midgets, however, and this is a dark film. While the city of Bruges may not be a classic Noir setting, the dark streets and cold atmosphere certainly are. In classic style, we don’t know much about our “heroes” at the start, but through the use of a well-placed flashback and smart dialogue, we learn all we need to know. And while it starts off slow, when this one gets going there’s no turning back. Does anyone fit a role more perfectly than Ralph Fiennes does here?

Key Film Noir Aspects: Visual Style, Criminal Actions, Flashback, Morally Questionable “Heroes”

AND Eastern Promises (2007). All right, I cheated a little here. Really though, either of these amazing films could fit in this spot. Both of them are directed by David Cronenberg and star Viggo Mortensen in two of his best performances put to film. History of Violence harkens back to the outstanding Robert Mitchum Noir, Out of the Past (1947), as an ex-criminal trying to forget his former life finally has his wrongdoings catch up to him. Eastern Promises is very more up-front and in-your-face with its criminal dealings, but shares the dark mood and odd sense of impending doom that are so common in Noir cinema. If you plan on watching these two, be prepared for some serious on-screen violence.

Key Film Noir Aspects: Feeling of Despair, Criminal Actions, Morally Questionable “Hero”

While Kiss Kiss Bang Bang is certainly a dark comedy, it is also very self-aware of its Noir style. In fact, the whole premise of the movie is almost Film Noir come to life: a private eye (played by Val Kilmer in one of my personal favorite roles of his) and bumbling companion (Robert Downey, Jr.) attempt to solve a murder that has been carried out in an eerily similar manner to a murder portrayed in a Hardboiled Fiction-esque novel. Throw in Downey, Jr’s unreliable (and at times hilarious) narration, some key flashbacks, and the beautiful Michelle Monaghan as Harmony, our classic femme fatale, and you’ve got a Film Noir through and through.

Key Film Noir Aspects: Murder Mystery, Morally Questionable “Hero,” Femme Fatale

Coming back for seconds on our list is Joseph Gordon-Levitt, this time in one of the most unique, yet obvious, Neo-Noir films on this list. What would happen if we took a classic Noir murder mystery, complete with characters, visual style, and dialogue straight out of the 1950s, but placed it into a modern day high school setting? Welcome to Brick, a direct homage to Film Noir with a New Millennium, young-adult twist. Rian Johnson knew exactly what he was looking for when he wrote and directed this one, breathing classic Noir characteristics into this film right down to 1950s vernacular. Don’t let the youth of the characters fool you, though: this is as dark and twisted a mystery as any of the films on this list.

Key Film Noir Aspects: Visual Style, Murder Mystery, Classic Noir Dialogue

It may start out a little slow-paced for some, but if you give Drive a chance, you’ll be glad you did. When I first saw this one, Ryan Gosling’s performance became an instant classic in my mind. If you’re wondering what Humphrey Bogart would look like in a modern day film, just watch Gosling as the nameless Driver in Nicolas Winding Refn’s spellbinding film. This is a classic Noir tough guy: soft spoken, calm, thoughtful, but never on the defensive and ready to do whatever it takes at a moment’s notice. We don’t know much about our “hero” to start, and there is a sense of despair as his relationship with his gorgeous next-door neighbor and her son gets him tangled up with the wrong kind of people. It soon becomes very obvious, however, that there is a lot more to this Driver than meets the eye. When the action happens, it happens fast and doesn’t pull any punches. The Los Angeles streets and back alleys are once again a classic backdrop for the Noir visual style of this amazing film.

Key Film Noir Aspects: Feeling of Despair, Visual Style, Morally Questionable “Hero,” Criminal Actions

M. Night Shyamalan is to movies what Michael Vick is to dogs. Trying to sit through his movies is almost as difficult as trying to pronounce his name. After his 1999 debut Sixth Sense, he evidently let fame and success get to his head and the rest is tragedy. His only recent, notable achievement is that he is one of the first ever directors to turn into a punch line: anytime his name appears on a screen now, it is immediately followed by audible sighs and laughter.

I’m sure every barista at Starbucks finds Wes Anderson’s hipster approach to comedy to be on the forefront of clever and witty. To everyone else, it’s completely disjointed and unfunny. The awkwardness is supposed to be where the charm lies, but instead is where the humor ends. Apologists of Wes Anderson will claim, “No, you just don’t get his shtick.” How incredibly convenient to accuse everyone else of being the problem and not him, and how smug and condescending as well.

The Coen brothers’ tactic of taking normal genres and then subverting them is interesting, original, and annoying. No Country For Old Men, for example, is a classic Western, except it is completely lacking of any action or sound. The result for the audience is a bored, frustrated feeling similar to that of sitting around at the airport and finding out your flight was delayed.

I’m not going to deny that George Lucas is a genius – the first three Star Wars movies are firmly rooted as three innovative and timeless classics. It is precisely for that reason that I find it so insulting when Lucas decided to slop together The Phantom Menace, revamping and subsequently ruining the series. The new Star Wars movies are completely over-saturated with special effects and utterly lacking in content. Characters like “Lord Dooku” and “Jar Jar Binks” represent the death of a once meaningful artistic vision.

Tim Burton’s only contribution to humanity has been to shoot up the sales at Hot Topic stores and indirectly encourage teens to cut themselves. He would be an amazing director if I were a prepubescent girl with emotional problems, but I’m not, so he’s not. Burton’s movies accentuate weirdness the same way that corn kernels highlight fecal matter. Not one for subtlety, his zany, hip personality seems to shine through all of his movies and muddy them up to the point where they all blend into one giant cesspool. Movies like Corpse Bride and Batman Returns really do make me seriously depressed, so I guess all that dark imagery bullshit worked.

Remember seeing Garden State back in high school and thinking, “Wow I can relate to this so well!” Go back and re-watch it. It’s an incredibly pretentious movie that feigns profundity by having a bunch of cheap, vaguely philosophical dialogue. Quotes like:

“You know that point in your life when you realize the house you grew up in isn’t really your home anymore?”

Whoaaaaa… Great insight Mr. Braff! Thank you for making us question the… well… nothing in particular? The characters are constantly pontificating, almost as if they have an invisible glass of wine they are swishing throughout the entire movie. And yet in the end, nothing is resolved, no questions are answered, and we are left with only vagueness and boredom.

Every time I think Adam Sandler has finally flat-lined I start to celebrate, when suddenly Dugan resuscitates him and we get more horrific, train-wreck comedies. I use the word “comedy” loosely because the only thing funny about his movies is the critic reviews. With Jack and Jill scoring a mighty 3% on Rotten Tomatoes, it’s questionable as to why Sandler is still ignoring all of his well-deserved feedback. The “jokes” in his movies range from bathroom humor to ethnic stereotypes. Sandler’s tagline should be: “Fuck comedy.”

Apocalypto and Passion of the Christ were stunning; Gibson seamlessly hit all the right notes at all the right moments. In fact, he’s not so much a terrible director as he is just a terrible human. Racist, anti-Semitic, homophobic, is there any group of people safe from Gibson’s rampant bigotry? It’s hard to support someone like this, regardless of how talented they may be.

There are few things more mystifying in Hollywood than the totally unwarranted success of these two. Epic Movie? Disaster Movie? Date Movie? It’s like a race to the bottom! To say these movies are horseshit is being generous. These movies are such a massive blight on cinema-goers, it’s actually impressive, in the same sense that eating your own puke is impressive. It has been speculated that Friedberg and Seltzer retain their audience solely through morbid fascination.

If you’re unfamiliar with Tucker Max, that’s because you should be. He’s a washed-up alcoholic nobody who is only famous within a microcosm of drooling, frat-bro idiots. His fame came when he wrote a book turned movie called I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell. The movie was a hilarious comedy —not at all because of its content— rather due to its rock-bottom failure, scraping in at 1.4 million against a budget of 7 million. Watching the movie is the cinematic equivalent to listening to your friends’ study abroad stories. It’s painfully unfunny, and you can’t wait until it’s over.

Dir: James Cameron, 1991

The first film to create a realistic CGI (Computer Generated Imagery) character in a major movie. Technological advancements have greatly impacted the cinema experience, and ‘Terminator 2: Judgement Day’ foreshadowed the CGI (and other film technology such as animatronic(s)) dinosaurs of Jurassic Park (1993)) and set a precedent for ‘The Matrix’ (1999) and ‘Avatar’ (2009) to continue to build on the technological tools for filmmakers to use. ‘Terminator 2: Judgement Day’ explored the notion that the future can be rewritten and we can choose and change our destines. Presently, CGI is the main visual effect technology used in the majority of science fiction films.

Dir: James Whale, 1931

James Whales’ ‘Frankenstein,’ based on Mary Shelley’s 1818 novel ‘Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus’ was a precursor for every science fiction film to date. It provides filmmakers with a universe of extraordinary creativity to prophesy (often with terrifying accuracy) and reflect on the present. The mad scientist/evil professor as the archetypal character who creates life (principally by electricity) from dead body parts, who then turns on Dr. Victor Frankenstein. This was the first incarnation of technology turning on man; technology progressing too far beyond our control and man warned not to ‘play God.’ With every development in technology, we see robots taking over; genetic engineering, a crippling class system developed. ‘The Day the Earth Stood Still’ (1951), ‘War of the Worlds’ (1953), ‘Invaders from Mars’ (1953), ‘Invasion of the Body Snatchers’ (1956) represent nuclear weapon/Cold War fears; while ‘Jurassic Park’ (1993), ‘Gattaca’ (1997), ‘The Fifth Element’ (1997) and more recently ‘The Island (2005) and ‘Repo Man’ (2010) use genetic engineering and cloning to deal with the concept of technology overreaching/destroying our society.

Dir: Terry Gilliam, 1995

“A story should have a beginning, a middle and an end… but not necessarily in that order.” – Jean-Luc Godard. This quote resonates with anyone we has seen ‘Momento’ (2005) and ‘Inception’ (2010), the non-linear structure, mainly time travel and flashback as the vehicle of ‘Twelve Monkeys’ is a shy away from Todorov’s Theory of Narrative. ‘Twelve Monkeys,’ like all science fiction, is communicating with societal beliefs. AIDs, the Ebola virus and Mad Cow disease dominated the medical field in the 1990s. ‘Twelve Monkeys’ like the movie ‘Outbreak’ (1997) examines these issues but with more flair and sophistication. It has one of the most mind-blowing plot twists and keeps you guessing even after the film has finished. But why has it changed the science fiction genre? Many people do not give enough credit to Terry Gilliam; Gilliam introduced us to the true horrors of knowledge. While James Cole wants to reject knowledge to embrace safety in ignorance, a contrast to the audience, we discover that society is also confused and misinformed about wars, global issues and everyday life. ‘Twelve Monkeys’ warns of the impeding doom that knowing too much (and too little) can create. It is the movies that followed this trend which have allowed ‘Twelve Monkeys’ to hop onto this list. ‘The Matrix’ (1999), ‘Minority Report’ (2002), ‘I, Robot’ (2004) and ‘Surrogates’ (2009) all deal with knowledge as our destruction, rather than our saviour. At the end of the movie we are left with an ambiguous ending, something many directors now use, ‘Inception’ (2010) is a notable example.

Dir: George Lucas, 1977

Arguably, several people consider the ‘Empire Strikes Back’ superior to ‘A New Hope.’ However, since ‘A New Hope’ virtually creates an entire universe, basically started the ‘blockbuster’ film and began the saga, it is only right it deserves the spot instead of the ‘Empire Strikes Back.’ ‘Star Wars’ is the definition of an epic space opera and the height of escapism – a dream-like, alternative world for every science fiction viewer. The technical brilliance, which now may seem aged, made the specials effects, set designs and aesthetics in ‘Star Wars’ a masterpiece in its heyday. (It’s a shame, and to some sacrilege, it has been digitally remastered and changed; as another example ‘E.T.’ has omitted the word “terrorist” and replaced guns with walkie-talkies). ‘Star Wars’ had such a profound effect that an entire religion was formed, based on the film and future films in the saga. Film review aggregator, Rotten Tomatoes, sums up why it has, not only, changed the science fiction genre but film itself: “George Lucas opened our eyes to the possibilities of blockbuster film-making and things have never been the same.”

Dir: Ridley Scott, 1979

‘Alien’ is considered one of the best science fiction movies, as here we see a turn from the ‘Star Wars’ and ‘Star Trek’ – to put it blatantly – bland (childish) imagery, to the more scary and real prospects of space. Rather than a “long time ago” in a “galaxy far, far, away” ‘Alien’ probes our galaxy and returns to the ‘science’ in science fiction. Rod Serling used to say that “fantasy is the impossible made probable, science fiction is the probable made possible.” Thus, science fiction was moving away from the element of plausibility in science. ‘Alien’ depicts a more realistic space ship than the Enterprise, examines aliens in a time when UFO sightings dramatically increased, and opened the door to the financial success of the science fiction-horror sub genre.

Dir: Steven Spielberg, 1982

Who could forget one of the most iconic and gut-wrenching lines in cinematic history: “E.T. phone home.” The line was ranked 15th on ‘AFI’s 100 Years… 100 movie quotes’ in 2005. ‘E.T.,’ unlike every other science fiction movie before, depicted aliens as benevolent, and humans as the ‘baddy.’ But who could blame the filmmakers? After the Iraq War in 1990, for example, American society’s morale was lower than ever. Science fiction helped place us on top in films such as ‘Independence Day’ (1997) and ‘Armageddon’ (1998). Our humanity is our secret weapon as we learn to work collectively to kill the ‘baddy’ or ‘other’ and make us feel positive for the future. ‘E.T.’ on the other hand, depicted a benign and loving alien, who becomes homesick. ‘E.T.’ also served as social commentary on how media and film have shaped our views. Mary and Elliot, the children, treat E.T. with respect and kindness, in stark contrast to the adults reaction. While the trend to depict aliens as the ‘baddy’ continues, films such as ‘District 9’ (2010) are rare theatrical exceptions.

Dir: Christopher Nolan, 2010

This may be the most controversial addition to the list, especially because it is so high up the order. Earlier, I examined ‘Twelve Monkeys’ non-linear narrative, but ‘Inception’ takes the viewer even further, blending the time-line more than twice, using a dream within a dream within a dream. What ‘The Matrix’ did for science fiction in the 1990s, ‘Inception’ will do for the 2010s. We may not see the ramifications yet, but ‘Inception’ had a profound effect in 2010. It mystified and annoyed some, and challenged others to go beyond the superficial aspects of action in film. ‘Inception’ does not insult your intelligence, it assumes you’re smart. Modern movies like to spell out every detail because it believes the audience do not want to work out anything dense. Like ‘The Matrix,’ the blur between reality and dream is inverted, and we are thrust into a world of possibilities. We all have our take on the way to ‘read’ the movie and that is its brilliance. The possibility of a minute aspect, a top spinning for ever or falling, defines the plot. ‘Inception’ dares to be original. It is not derivative and excites us for the potential for iron-laced plots in the future. Technology does not hold the film together, ‘Inception’s’ subtle special effects are the result of pure realism. The jargon and futuristic science (which is why we love science fiction) is a thin veneer underneath greater story telling. The idea takes center-stage, not mindless action or CG effects. ‘ Inception’ is a movie that has become part of our collective subconscious. It has changed the way we think about our lives and who we are.

Dir: Andy Wachowski, and Lana (Larry) Wachowski, 1999

‘The Matrix’ was a 1999 landmark film for science fiction, in which the makers utilize novel camera techniques known as ‘flo-mo’ and ‘bullet time’ in order to create an entire visual lexicon, as well as raise expectations for realism in action scenes, whilst also allowing the resurgence of loud CGI-ridden blockbusters. A legion of imitators still try to recreate the spectacle of slow-motion bullet time to not much avail, ‘Wanted’ (2008) for example.

‘The Matrix’ asked the simple question ‘what is reality?’ Is the world around us real or an illusion? Or more suitably, what is the ‘meaning’ of reality? This one philosophical question still puzzles us today, and is the reason why it deserves a number 3 spot. ‘The Matrix’ presents us with the choice between blissful ignorance, the ‘blue pill’ and painful truth, the ‘red pill.’ We are yanked from the comfort of our seats to a dystopian, derelict wasteland. The audiences’ perception of reality was even tested when we took our first steps out of the theatre and pondered for a second ‘is the world real or just an illusion?’

‘The Matrix,’ reinvigorated the genre, delivered 5 star quality, maintained science fiction lovers and gained legions of new fans.

Dir: Ridley Scott, 1982

‘Blade Runner’ always comes up on every top 10 science fiction list. Because of this there is no doubt ‘Blade Runner’ has influenced the genre and directors.

Unlike many science fiction films, ‘Blade Runner’ does not try to make a viewing experience pleasant. The film is slow and visually unattractive. But the sheer intellect and realism of the film is more than enough for any science fiction fan. During its time, ‘Blade Runner’ was not one of the most realistic films, and even now it is not. But a few years ago, the hyper-oriental and skyscraper dominated landscape of dystopian 2019 Los Angeles was a real prospect. Ridley Scott’s attention to detail is truly magnificent. Each viewing experience is never the same, you’ll notice a few details here, or catch a new aspect or theme that was right in front of your eyes. The movie is ‘layered’ with what is the meaning of humanity. What keeps us different from the replicants, clones or robots. A multinational Company, Tyrell, whose motto is “more human than human” allows men to play God. Again, the film is based on the typical science fiction themes that challenge our ethics and humanity, but to a greater extent. When cloning develops, films like ‘Gattaca’ (1995), where there is “no gene for the human spirit” keep technology in check. ‘Blade Runner’ is the type of film they build 5-disc special editions around and release 4 different versions.

Dir: Stanley Kubrick, 1968

While many ‘best science fiction films’ lists place ‘2001’ second to ‘Blade Runner,’ ‘2001’ completely redefined the science fiction genre, particularly during a time when the genre was almost debunk. The 1960s experienced an ebbing tide of tacky, low-budget films that were rampant in the 1950s. ‘King Kong vs. Godzilla’ and ‘Ghidrah: The Three-headed Monster’ to name but a few. Many people at this time viewed science fiction as mindless, far-fetched entertainment. ‘2001’ removed this misconception, but was not truly recognized until a few years later, due to its ‘elusive’ and challenging storyline. Like many science fiction films before, ‘2001’ did not dabble in new themes; technology taking over, yes, progress beyond our comprehension, yes, but what it did add was a sense of realistic, thought provoking and serious subject matter. Radical evolution of technology and the space race between the US and USSR began to intensify. There was much room to imagine the future of space exploration. ‘2001’ offered a glimpse of what technology the space program might offer, such as induced hibernation, liquified meals and long distance video calls from space. However, there was widespread fear of what technology could become, seen in HAL 9000′s malfunction and mutiny. The impressive, realistic, and indeed, groundbreaking nature, of the opening sequence, back-drops and clever use of soundtrack and sound (remember there is no sound in space) served to bestow much prestige in a flunking genre. ‘2001’ is filmmaking at its finest – technically masterful (the ‘match cut’), innovative, original, enthralling, aurally exquisite and unforgettable… this all places ‘2001’ at number one!

Dir: James Cameron, 2009

In 2008, there were only 8 films released in 3D, but in 2009 there were 20! 3D has enhanced the viewing experience, created headaches for some and polarized filmmakers and critics alike. 3D has also boosted box office receipts in the midst of ever increasing illegal file-sharing, there are 100 million users of ‘BitTorrent’ as of February 2010. Tickets sales have fallen in the U.S while box office receipts have increased. 3D, in 2009, racked up 11% of the total box office receipts, but accounted for only 4% of all films released. If ‘Avatar’ had not been successful or the highest-grossing film off all time, audiences might not be subjected to a barrage of 3D movies like the flops before it. However, what makes ‘Avatar’ so special? A derivative storyline, extensive use of motion capture and photo-realistic CGI or its blatant conformity to mainstream Hollywood film? ‘Avatar’ exemplifies how technological advancements can enhance the cinematic experience by using 3D to showcase the storytelling instead of a substitute but fail to veritably or genuinely change the genre itself. There is no doubt that ‘Avatar’ is a visual treat for audiences, but I cannot include it on the list just for this reason alone. While the future of 3D looks strong, James Cameron’s ‘Avatar’ has changed the way science fiction is filmed. It has changed the style of science fiction films, as directors’ camera shots adhere to the guidelines set by 3D, to really make films worthwhile to watch in three dimensions. American film critic Roger Ebert’s cover story in Newsweek (May, 2010) attacks 3D, ‘Why Avatar is bad for the movies,’ where he opines: “[3D] adds nothing essential to the movie-going experience. For some, it is an annoying distraction.” He also says: “It limits the freedom of directors to make films as they choose” because studios push for audience demand and, hence, profit rather than creativity.

Mute, efficient and deadly, Mr. Igoe leaves much (and occasionally nothing) to the imagination. What must his resume read like? The only reliable piece of info we get about him in the 1987 sci-fi comedy is that he has a prosthetic hand with a variety of attachments, that he apparently enjoys listening to rock & roll, and that he knows how to handle himself in gun-related situations. Played by Vernon Wells (as only Vernon Wells can play him), Mr. Igoe makes the list for his sheer tenacity in getting the job done – not that Martin Short is much of an adversary, but c’mon.

Although this list is concerned with “dangerous” individuals, everyone can agree that danger can take on many forms. That said – a scheming, erudite master of manipulation like Kobayashi (or is it all just Keyser Soze) cannot be ignored. Regardless of what actually happened in the backstory, it’s at least the presentation of the criminal mastermind’s lawyer that makes for good henchman devilry. Here’s a chess master who, even if it weren’t for his boss’s influence, we can surmise has all the pieces figured out.

Who is this man? He killed Omar Suarez at the behest of Sosa, blasted Nick the Pig in the back of the head, and, most impressively, tore through Tony Montana with a double-barreled shotgun. Clearly, the world was not his. Known only as “the skull,” this Bolivian assassin is one of the more brutal depictions of a cartel henchman, though one gets the impression that he takes no satisfaction in his job and that (if he spoke) he might tell us that it’s all merely business.

Michael Madsen has been a cop, a gangster, a bank robber, an assassin, a government agent, a henchman and the stepfather of the kid from Free Willy. Good or bad, his most notable roles are those in which he portrays a casual indifference to the well-being of others, while simultaneously portraying a twisted sense of poetic philosophy. Tying for the #7 spot, I give you Michael Madsen. Under the pseudonym of “Mr. Blonde” in Reservoir Dogs, Madsen portrays a twisted and depraved personality that (how surprising!) psychologists use to demonstrate the tenets of psychopathy. Though not technically a henchman – and more of a member of an ensemble – Mr. Blonde is still the vicious pack dog of Joe Cabot, played by Lawrence Tierney. Had he been Joe’s solo Dog, few could argue against him being Joe’s most vicious henchman. As for the tying role, Madsen does a delectable job as the titular character’s beer-swilling hillbilly brother, Bud. Madsen plays Bud as something akin to the Billy Carter to David Carradine’s Jimmy, with the exception that he is a deadly assassin who is the only person to get the drop on The Bride. Like all the other assassins under Bill’s tutelage, Bud is, of course, not a lone gun, but rather a henchman among henchman. However, just like in Reservoir Dogs, the rift between the group allows for the exception. It’s proof that henchmen have, and will, eventually go their own ways. And Michael Madsen is proof that a henchman can be just as likable as he is deadly.

As one of the most popular and successful movies ever made, it’s likely a shared understanding that Captain Hadley is one of the more brutal depictions of “justice” in a prison movie. Just look at this guy – he looks like a cross between Boris Karloff and Skeletor. Hadley’s sadistic streak probably has less to do with his job responsibilities, and more to do with his enjoyment of hurting lesser forms of life. Some have defended his actions for crippling Boggs as a favor to Andy Dufrense, but he was almost certainly doing this on orders of Warden Norton so that Andy could continue his embezzlement operation within the walls of Shawshank, unabated. What makes Hadley particularly evil as a henchman is the irony of his profession. As a corrections officer, he is supposed to be an operator of justice. No such luck. Whatever else makes him tick, Captain Hadley is proof positive that you can’t let the uniform fool you!

Do you know me? That’s right, it’s Mr. French, Jack Nicholson’s bloated and brutal right hand man in Martin Scorcese’s Irish mobster classic. Mr. French is reliable. In fact, he’s one in a million. Like a loyal dog, French remains with his boss to the bloody end, and, oh, is it ever bloody. As played by Ray Winstone, Mr. French is easily the best representation of your standard henchman, there for the bidding of thy master. Of course, with the added benefit of being a rather likable tough guy, Mr. French is #5 for the fact that he’s really right in between the evil and the truly evil. Now, whaddya drinking?

Evil Nazi Scum! At least one of them had to make the list! Ronald Lacey’s performance as Toht, in Raiders of the Lost Ark, is the stuff of pure cinematic evil. Dressed entirely in black, adorned with a National Socialist armband, and having the otherwise deceptive presentation of a four-eyed geek, Toht is clearly no one to be underestimated. Though he relies on henchmen of his own to exact physical force, it’s Toht’s mind that makes him the most exacting and deadly of henchmen, especially to the likes of Colonel Dietrich or the dirty Frenchman, Belloq. Having no qualms about throwing a woman to her death in a snake-infested pit, or ordering one of his thugs to shoot another that has failed to live up to his expectations, Toht makes us consider exactly what lengths an evil personality may be willing to go to. It’s thanks to Toht, that there was a time when people didn’t look at coat hangers the same way.

Yup, Vernon Wells is so effectively creepy that he deserves two spots on this list, of which his performance of “Wez” is undoubtedly the more unnerving. Apparently content with the post-apocalyptic carnage that exists all around him, Wez is the happy-to-oblige first lieutenant of the Lord Hummungus, the disfigured and maniacal ruler of an Australian wasteland. If not for the sheer size of Hummungus (for his name is no hyperbole), there seems to be a suggestion that Wez would happily usurp his leader. Alas, any mutiny Wez may or may not be contemplating is put on hold with the arrival of Mad Max Rockatansky, played by Mel Gibson. Aside from the role of reluctant hero, Max’s function in George Miller’s epic movie is to drive the rooster-feathered Wez into fits of furious and unyielding rage. So replete is Wez’s desire to utterly destroy Max, that there is palpable tension between the two throughout the entire film – despite the fact that they don’t even come within arm’s reach of one another for 99% of it! Incredible!

Before you disagree, please consider: He murdered a man right in front of his young son. He permanently scarred that same boy and left him in the depths of despair and humiliation. He happily taxes the local villagers for everything they’ve got. He plays something like a perverted consigliere to Prince Humperdinck, himself a greedy and arrogant snob. Oh, and if all this isn’t enough, Count Rugen enacts a plan to viciously torture (and eventually kill) Wesley, with his torture “machine” that looks like a cross between a Dutch windmill and a Willy Wonka candy machine prototype. Face it, the guy is pure evil, and evil is never more pure than when it is under the guise of a wise and noble member of society. There is nothing to suggest that, at any point in Rugen’s life, he wanted to be anything other than evil. Do you know someone else who tortures a person and then asks them: “be honest, how do you feel?”

Get out of this man’s way. He’s a dangerous, calculating psychopath who’s good with almost any weapon and not intimidated by the idea of being surrounded by a tactically well-equipped major metropolitan police force. Hired for a high-stakes robbery, Karl quickly devolves into a man looking to avenge his brother’s untimely death, and he’s essentially unstoppable. Those familiar with the character know that he is set-off by three simple words: “Ho-Ho-Ho…” What follows is a maniacal chase through the various floors, elevators and conduits of the Nakatomi Building. Heralded as the greatest action film ever made, the characterization of Karl Vreski, by Alexander Godunov, is as classic a depiction of maniacal search-and-destroy as Ahab’s pursuit of his great white whale. That’s right, I just compared a 1988 action film to Moby Dick, bitches! Bottom line – even someone as cool and quick as Officer John McClane needs to watch his step (no pun intended) around the likes of Karl – a truly formidable enemy, who isn’t even the criminal Mastermind!

Best Known For: Big Trouble in Little China, Born Invincible

Carter Wong is probably best known as the developer of Chung Hop Kuen, a martial art combining the styles of Hapkaido, Shaolin Kung Fu Mui-thai and Taekwondo. However, he’s had quite a bit of success in film – thanks to his unforgettable face, intimidating demeanor, and ability to pull off mind-blowing moves in fight scenes. He’s been in over 50 martial arts films, mostly made in Hong Kong. He’s never gained a large following stateside, but maintains a celebrity status to this day as a well-known martial artist.

Best Known For: Six String Samurai

When a martial arts movie made in Hong Kong needed a western actor, they usually went with whoever happened to be in town and was willing to be kicked through a wall for a few hundred bucks. It was notoriously difficult for any European to make it very big in the world of Hong Kong cinema. Jeffery Falcon perhaps came as close as anyone ever did. An Olympic silver medalist in Taekwondo, Falcon had the moves and the connections to have a brief but illustrious career in Hong Kong film as ‘the evil white guy.’ He rose to near stardom with his cult-classic Six String Samurai in 1998, but has done little since.

Best Known For: The Duel, A Fighter’s Blues

Considered one of the “Four Heavenly Idols of Cantopop,” Andy Lau is more known in his native China for his music rather than his films. While he’s almost an unknown in the States, some of his martial arts classics, such as The Duel and On the Wrong Track, have brought him some attention. He’s won several Hong Kong film awards and starred in many films, but his pop-music celebrity image has kept him from being taken seriously by many hardcore martial arts movie fans.

Best Known For: Dynamite Warrior, Born to Fight

While virtually unknown to western audiences, Dan Choupong is a legend of film in his native Thailand, perhaps only second to the more familiar Tony Jaa. Choupong is known for his willingness to do almost any stunt imaginable, such as hurling himself off a moving semi truck in Born to Fight, or going into battle with lit rockets on his back in Dynamite Warrior. His movies are shining examples of Thai action cinema, but rarely find widespread success in the rest of the world.

Best Known For: Bloodsport, Enter the Dragon

With his fierce gaze and legendary body-builder physique, many thought Bolo Yeung was going to be a big star. He was a martial arts master and body building champion, perhaps one of the best all-around athletes in Hong Kong at his prime. It’s even rumored that when Communism took over in his native China, he escaped to Hong Kong by swimming across the channel from the mainland! Despite his obvious skills, Bolo was almost always cast as the villain, and often a second-banana villain at that. While the characters he plays in the movies use a mixture of karate and pro wrestling moves, in real life Bolo Yeung is a well-known master of the more docile art of Tai-chi.

Best Known For: Enter the Dragon, Black Belt Jones

Martial arts cinema first found itself successful with African-American audiences in the 1970s when Bruce Lee broke the race barrier of martial arts, teaching anyone who came to him regardless of race, color or creed. One of his first and most promising students was Jim Kelly. Tall, lanky, and agile, Jim Kelly danced around his opponents, taunting them like a martial arts Muhammad Ali. His movies combined elements of Blaxsploitation and Kung-fu films, attracting audiences of all races.

Best Known For: Fists of Fury, Blood and Bone

As mentioned before, westerners had a difficult time making it in China, but thanks to his friendship with martial arts legend Bruce Lee, Bob Wall stared in several films as Lee’s constant nemesis. His hulking stature and willingness to take a fall made him the perfect bad guy. After Bruce Lee’s death, he only starred in a few movies, but his success was still uncharacteristic of an obvious westerner in China. Outside of the world of movies, Bob Wall is a 9th degree black belt in Karate, as well as a world-champion kickboxer.

Best Known For: The Bride with White hair, Deadful Melody

Taiwanese actress, Brigitte Lin, is a beautiful woman who is, oddly, best known for playing tomboyish roles. She once played a male sorcerer in Swordsman II, that slowly transforms into a woman when he castrates himself for power. She started her career with dramatic roles, but proved she could slug it out with the best of them in 1977′s 800 Heroes, where she won the Asia Pacific Film Festival’s award for best actress. She retired from film in 1994, after staring in more than 100 movies, marrying businessman Michael Ying.

Best Known For: Project A, Once Upon a Time in China

Acrobat and martial artist, Yuen Biao, is best known as one third of the Kung-fu-teers in the 1980s, along with Jackie Chan and Sammo Hung. As a trio, they changed the way martial arts movies were made and filmed, with elegant fight scenes and awe-inspiring stunts. Yuen Biao’s acrobatic antics got him a number of solo roles, including a role in The Prodigal Son, an action comedy that was moderately successful. After retiring from movies to spend more time with his family, he still worked occasionally as a fight choreographer and stuntman.

Best Known For: The One-Armed Swordsman, Island of Fire

He was the man who changed Hong-Kong cinema, but sadly most don’t know his name. Before his 1967 film, The One-Armed Swordsman, Hong Kong movies were usually dramas or musicals. The One-Armed Swordsman was a new kind of film, one filled with drama, but also finely choreographed fight scenes and plenty of blood and gore. It became the template for almost every Hong Kong action film for decades to come. Jimmy Wang Yu is a man notorious in Hong Kong for his shady connections to organized crime. When Jackie Chan was targeted by the Triad, Wang Yu was the one who came to his rescue. Most of the details are unclear except Wang Yu telling Chan, “It got a little sticky here, but they won’t bother you again.” Many theorize that he had someone killed, but no one knows for sure. As a favor, Jackie Chan appeared in a few of Jimmy Wang Yu’s later films, such as Island of Fire and Dragon Attack.

Not a movie about twins, but a boy played by a pair of twins who can now be seen in a bigger, teenager form on the Disney Channel as Zach and Cody. It begs the question why it takes two twins to play one character, considering the cost of one child actor, let alone the chance that a misplaced freckle might move around freely between scenes. The same question applies to why two Olsen twins needed to play one Michelle from Full House. Maybe the answer is sibling rivalry. Or so each has an equal opportunity to grow up completely screwed-up.

In this movie about unlikely twins, one being a gentler, smarter version of Mr. Universe. The other, Danny Devito, a border-line midget with an attitude. Therein lies the comedy of “twins” separated at birth who find each other and prove that not all twins have to be identical. Or share any ostensible DNA.

Seeing two girls, who were supposedly hacked up by their demented father, wearing the same blue dress speaking in an inseparable, flat-toned harmony is a perfect reason to high-tail it in a big wheel. This movie creates a chicken-and-egg scenario where it becomes uncertain whether twins make this movie so creepy, or does this movie make twins look creepy. Never again will a meiosis cycle instill so much fear.

Albino with trench-coats and dread-locks to match, the twins from the first Matrix sequel make an interesting addition to the villain line-up. While Agent Smith can replicate himself, dodge bullets, and even enter the real world, the twins can turn translucent and float through objects like true ghosts. An unfortunate situation when dealing with a high speed car chase, obligatory or otherwise. They are played by real-life twins Neil and Adrian Rayment.

These devious red-headed Brits make for the Potter franchise’s best source of comic relief – then again the whole Weasley family seem to exist for that job. Played by James and Oliver Phelps, these doppel-gingers offer the slyness and elusive trouble-maker status which their cravenly brother lacks, spine notwithstanding. They specialize in pranks, even make their own magical joke paraphernalia, and often take the lead when a storyline calls for rebellion and/or tomfoolery.

Siamese counts. Matt Damon and Greg Kinear play the literally inseparable brothers who act more like twins then they look. They are completely dynamic grill cooks at their Martha’s Vineyard burger joint, like acrobats with spatulas and ketchup dispensers. They also share a liver which punishes Damon’s character, who posses the smaller half, when Walt (Kinnear) feels like celebrating. Whatever body parts they do share, they split when it comes to personal interests: Walt is a gosh-golly sort of actor, Bob hyperventilates (as he is prone to panic attacks). Two halves of yin-yang are what this conjoined pair really are.

A remake of an older classic, this film casts heartthrob-era Leonardo DiCaprio as twins in polar opposite circumstance. One is a decadent, heartless king, while the other is locked cruelly in a dungeon within the eponymous iron mask, until he is freed by the Three Musketeers and replaced by the formerly fortunate former. This movie was a high point for DiCaprio who, in spite of his part in the wishy-washy romance-drenched Titanic, would go on to work with such greats as Martin Scorcese, Steven Spielberg, Sam Mendes and Christopher Nolan in the most substantial and enviable of lead roles.

What’s better than one snobbish Harvard jock? A twin to mirror his cry-babying when Mark Zuckerberg runs away with his idea for a Social Network. The twins, actually played by one actor, Armie Hammer, play off each other fantastically as one cools down the other’s blowout. It’s fun to watch the two eat it in the movie, but more so in real life as they continually fail to win a suit against Zuckerberg for his Facebook.

Michael J. Fox pulls an Eddie Murphy in the second Back to the Future as he plays the time-traveling teenager Marty McFly, Marty’s older, wrinkly future-self, and his future-son Marty Jr. The doppelgänger moment happens when he switches places with this cowardly, identical son to face future-Biff to whom he reassures “no one calls me chicken.” A lot of paradoxes happen, but comedy lies in how he tip-toes, or hover boards, around them without erasing his own existence.

Number one doppelgänger award goes to Nic Cage in the last movie he ever made as an ACTOR. And as a quasi-brilliant one. He plays twins as genius screenwriter Charlie Kaufman (who actually wrote the movie’s screenplay) and his daft, yet confident brother Donald. What ensues is hilarious interplay between the two, a spectacle as one actor carries on a scene with himself. And he does this throughout the whole movie. Seeing as he really had his work cut out for him, you’d imagine that Cage got paid for double-time. Which is no rare feat for a man who cranks out a new movie seemingly every week.

The highest praise that I can give any movie is that I was thoroughly entertained by it. I can love a movie like The Godfather, but only watch it maybe a couple of times in my life, but I’ve seen Big Trouble in Little China probably a hundred times, and it is only because I find it infinitely easier and more fun to watch. Even though a movie doesn’t do well at the box-office, or with critics, doesn’t mean that it doesn’t have some kind of huge intrinsic value. Going as far as we can to that side of the spectrum, we reach a wonderful kind of movie genre, the so-bad-it’s-good variety. I’ll go one step further and say that these are movies that are so bad that they are just hilarious. Hilariously bad, but endlessly enjoyable. These are movies I can watch over and over again, preferably in a group of like-minded friends.

So here is the Top 10 So-Bad-They-Are-Hilarious Movies. List courtesy of Cultural Atrocities.

One of the things you’ll notice about this list is that most of these are either horror movies or action movies. It makes complete sense, since these are the genres with the most action and have the most opportunity for awful special effects. The ’70s, ’80s and ’90s are a goldmine for unintentional comedy. The ’80s, in particular, were just a perfect storm of cheap, practical effects, cheesy acting and cultural madness. The best part, though, is how innocent most of it feels, like they are making these terrible movies but there is an underlying love for the crap that they are making.

Which brings me to Mosquito. The first thing that I will point out is that every single thing in this movie lends itself to the ’80s. Everything. Then when it is over you find out that, whoops, it was actually made in 1995. There are a few movies on this list that just have ’80s written all over them, but are actually firmly planted in the middle of the ’90s. This makes for a weird movie-going experience. You’re watching it and reveling in the bad blue screen Mosquito effects, but appreciating the effort involved for the time it was made, and then afterwards you realize it was made in 1995, and you could make better horror movie effects at a mall kiosk.

The plot is pretty straightforward. An alien spaceship crashes into the middle of the woods next to a popular camping area. A bunch of mosquitoes snack on the dead alien’s arm and its blood is like super steroids. The little critters grow to the size of a golden retriever and proceed to attack the campgrounds, and any other people that they come across. The rag-tag group of survivors includes a post-Stooges, but pre-Stooges reunion, Ron Asheton and Gunnar Hanson (Leatherface from the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre).

Golden Moments: Any mosquito attack scene is great. When Gunnar Hanson picks up that chainsaw it gives you B-movie fandom chills. The bad acting by the main couple is hilariously awful. Junior’s eyeball explosions.

In the ’70s, every studio executive was looking for the next Star Wars. And why wouldn’t they be? It was a glorified independent movie made on the cheap that became one of the most successful franchises of all-time. Enter the Italians. Writer/Director Luigi Cozzi had this script in development years before Luke and Han raided the Death Star, but it was only after the success of Star Wars that he was able to get financing for this film. The only caveat? It had to be almost exactly like Star Wars, and Cozzi’s script had to undergo a couple of changes.

The actual plot is a mess. It’s more of an enjoy-the-ride type of experience. The visuals though, more than make up for the absence of plot. This may be one of the coolest-looking low budget films ever. Everything pops onscreen, from the bright colors to the ridiculous outfits to the stop-motion effects (a la Harryhausen) that we’ll probably never see again in any current film releases. The score also gets major props. Sure it’s a Star Wars rip-off, but there have been far worse Star Wars rip-offs that were made, for far more money.

Last but not least, we have to talk about the cast. Caroline Munro takes the lead as Stellastar, and while her acting chops leave a little to be desired, she makes up for it by being really hot and wearing a bikini for most of the movie. Next we have Marjoe Gortner as Akton, maybe one of the most interesting guys ever. He got into the national spotlight as a child preacher, and then went on to work in both the recording and film industry. Rounding out the I-Recognize-That-Guy files are David Hasselhoff as a Han Solo clone and Christopher Plummer as the humbly-titled Emperor of the First Circle of the Universe.

Golden Moments: The Foghorn Leghorn-inspired robot is a real treat. Akton gaining superpowers as the film goes on without any explanation. Any and all of the special effects.

Ah, Ticks. I saw this movie when I was 11 and I still understood how glorious it was. When the internet took off, it gave me and other little pop-culture junkies the opportunity to hunt down those random movies that we watched on HBO at 2am when we were younger. Also known by its alternate title “Infested”, Ticks was directed by Tony Randel. No, not Tony Randall, esteemed actor, but the guy who directed Hellraiser 2 (which also totally rules).

Ticks is about a group of violent/anti-social/troubled teens being brought on a camp retreat by their psychiatrists/counselors. Included in this group is a post-child actor Seth Green, a thugged-out Alfonso “Carlton” Ribeiro, Mickey “The Monkey” Dolenz’s daughter Ami (star of all sorts of shitty movies), and some other social archetypes. Their counselors are esteemed actors Peter Scolari from Bosom Buddies and Rosalind Allen, who you might remember as the girl that George Costanza pretended to be a marine biologist for so he could bang. Joining this ensemble are a rich, sneezy guy and his redneck buddy, and Clint Howard as a gross guy (typecast much?).

Like Mosquito, the wood ticks eat some steroids and grow to the size of small crabs that are ridiculously fast. It’s a slow burn at first with the Ticks somehow choosing not to attack all at once, but by the end there are thousands of them raining down through the cabin’s ceiling onto our survivors. If you don’t get itchy and check your skin every once in a while then I’m not sure if we’re watching the same movie.

Golden Moments: Every scene with Carlton, including the climax where he turns into a tick the size of a crocodile. Seth Green’s lit broom throw. Clint Howard’s face exploding.

Slashers comes dangerously close to being a straight-up terrible movie. I mean, really, all signs point to this thing being a complete disaster. Acting on par with the worst I’ve ever seen, terrible effects, even worse sets. This thing literally looks like it was made in a paintball arena. While I’ve said that all of these things can make a transcendent bad movie into a very entertaining movie, we also have to look at things as they are. A terrible movie is not always entertaining, sometimes it can just be really bad and not enjoyable to watch. Like I said, Slashers comes woefully close to reaching that level, but it doesn’t.

Written and directed by Maurice Devereaux, and I’m going to make every effort to find the other three movies that this guy has made, Slashers is more of a spoof than anything else. Slashers is a Japanese reality show where six contestants must survive inside a building full of psychopaths, but if they do, they win a million dollars. Made in 2001, and riding on the coattails of Survivor and countless other reality shows that were made (and are still being made), this is an opportunity to look at the depths that people will go to become famous. Would you kill for it? Would you let yourself be hunted? What does it say about society when people not only will be on this show, but actively watch and cheer the slashers on?

This is an interesting film because I really like some of the stuff that they are trying to accomplish. One of my favorite gags is how even the slashers will stop trying to kill someone if a commercial break is approaching. They throw in numerous little jabs about reality shows and how ridiculous they really are, and a lot of them are actually pretty funny. Fortunately (or unfortunately for the makers of the film), this doesn’t counteract how shoddy the production values are. This is the definition of shoe-string budget, and there are numerous laugh-out-loud moments that are definitely not intentional, even though this was meant more as a black comedy.

Golden Moments: The Slashers theme song. Megan’s speech about how people can watch people get murdered, which is supposed to be serious but comes off as cringe-worthy and hilarious. Most of the scenes with the slashers are great, especially Preacher Man, who goes on a pulpit rant about how people don’t respect God anymore. Some real delightful over-the-top gore.

Mixing film and music is a risky proposition. For every musical I really like, Little Shop of Horrors for example, there are about a hundred I would never watch in a million years. The music can distract from the rest of the film and instead of it being beneficial it becomes more of a hindrance. A lot of my hatred of musicals has to do with the types of movies that they are in the first place. I get this pit of anger in my stomach when I watch a movie like The Music Man, because it is all whimsical cherry lollipops and bluebirds. Musicals are afraid to punch you in the side of the head with their tunes. They are much more inclined to make you want to dance a little jig with the rest of your boring town down Main Street.

Now I’m not going to say I like hair metal music, far from it, but there is something far more fascinating about that little period of existence when that was considered the coolest thing in the world. Call it my love for electric guitars, or watching grown men trying to get their hair as big as they can possibly get it, but it just makes me smile. Which brings us to Jon Mikl Thor’s magnum opus, Rock ‘n’ Roll Nightmare. Set in a rural farmhouse in Canada, which is also “the gates of hell” (the movies alternate title actually), Jon Mikl and his bandmates decide it would be the perfect place to record their new album for some reason. As soon as they get there, demons (in the guise of hand puppets) start to possess his bandmates and their girlfriends. As the movie progresses, Jon Mikl is the only one left standing to fight this evil.

Golden Moments: THE GREATEST PLOT TWIST ENDING OF ALL TIME. Jon Mikl Thor in all his David Coverdale-on-steroids glory. Hilariously awful live performances by the real band. Hand puppets spitting into people’s drinks.

B-movie aficionados got a real treat in 2008, with James Nguyen’s environmental love-letter to Alfred Hitchcock’s The Birds. I think what sets a great B-movie apart from a crappy B-movie is how much the people involved cared about what they were making. You can pretty much always tell when a director, writer or actor are just phoning it in. This leads to laziness, which can be hilarious in the right context, but usually just produces a bad film. Labors of love are just that, though, and you can tell when people care about what they are putting up onscreen. There is some kind of nonsensical joy that comes along with someone’s dream coming to reality, no matter how insane. No one loved this project more than James Nguyen, and this was never more evident than when he bombarded the Sundance Film Festival with his Birdemic van, adorned lovingly with attacking fake birds.

I’ll be blunt – Birdemic is a disaster. Nguyen has no business being in the film industry, but his faithfulness to this project can’t help but make you simultaneously feel bad for the man, while wanting him to succeed. There’s something so innocent and likable about what Nguyen is trying to do, that his subsequent cult success makes complete sense. The environmental slant that is the backbone of the movie is also a poor, yet hilarious, attempt at trying to make a political statement with this monstrosity of a movie.

The plot is about a software salesman named Rod (yes, Rod) and his subsequent meeting with aspiring model Nathalie. They start to date but notice troubling things happening around them, mostly to do with dead birds. Soon the entire town is being attacked by crazed birds and they have to do everything they can to survive.

Golden Moments: The bird CGI has to be seen to be believed. It’s like Nguyen took a gif of an animated bird from some internet forum and used it repeatedly for the duration of the film. “Hanging Out With My Family,” which is a song I have found myself singing on more than a few occasions. Seriously bad acting all around.

So I don’t really even know how to go about discussing Pocket Ninjas. Currently ranked #9 on the IMDB Bottom 100, it should be said without question that this is a bad movie. But it’s also the most confusing movie I think I have ever seen. Pocket Ninjas is the Lost Highway of children’s movies. I’ll try my best to explain the plot.

Our three protagonists, Rocky, Colt and Tum T… err… I mean Damien, Tanya and Steve are hanging out in their treehouse, talking about stuff most kids their age do: corporations fucking up the environment. While Tanya, the resident liberal, and Steve, the “fat” republican discuss this important issue, Damien urges them to stop because his feelings are hurt. He tells them about this magazine he found about a ninja called “The White Dragon.” Cut to The White Dragon beating up a bunch of thugs. Is The White Dragon real? Are we in a comic book? Welcome to the biggest problem with Pocket Ninjas. There’s seemingly four levels of reality that this movie is working on, and I’m not sure if two of those realities even exist! The kids learn karate from their sensei, who may or may not be The White Dragon. Also involved is Robert Zdar as Cobra Khan, but yet again I can’t tell you for sure if he exists, and his “son”(?), a 12 year old kid who somehow runs an underground crime syndicate.

Got it? The fun in watching Pocket Ninjas is trying to decipher exactly what is onscreen at any given moment. Clunky exposition scenes give way to excruciatingly long montages. Oh, and did I mention that the kids become little versions of The White Dragon, complete with roller blades? Have you ever tried to do a jumping karate kick with roller blades on? It can’t be easy, and the choreography here is proof of that.

Golden Moments: The fight between Cobra Khan and The White Dragon (from the comic book or real life?) is an amazingly surreal scene. Fighting while bouncing on balloons has never looked so genuine. The dialogue is over-written to sound cool for the time, and leads to some very awkward transitions. Damien’s mom getting all wet over White Dragon guy but then getting ten times wetter over a coupon book.

Action movies will forever be a treasure trove of unintentional comedy. There’s something so incredibly funny about guys trying to act overly tough. Undefeatable goes above and beyond. It takes itself so seriously and tries so hard to be a genuine action-thriller, but it fails in every respect. The main bad guy, named Stingray, remains hilarious even after revealed to be a murdering rapist. You have to have comedy ingrained in your bones to be able to pull that off. Joining Stingray in this chuckle-fest is Cynthia Rothrock, a marginally successful female kung fu star, and John Miller, some other kung fu guy. Lots of kung fu people hanging around here.

The plot centers around Rothrock as Kristy, a woman who competes in underground fights to pay for her sister’s college education (ha!). Another underground fighter named Stingray, in all his slobbery glory, is left by his wife early in the film. Because he’s a total nut-job, he begins to kidnap women who resemble his wife and rape and murder them, then steal their eyeballs and put them in a fish tank. One of these women just happens to be Kristy’s sister. Kristy enlists the help of police officer Nick DiMarco to track down Stingray and make him pay. They find Kristy’s sister and get her to the hospital, where she is kidnapped by Stingray again, naturally. Kristy and Nick have a ridiculously over-the-top fight with Stingray that has achieved youtube fame.

Golden Moments: The final fight scene which really must be seen to be believed. Any scene with Stingray, especially when he starts fighting random people for no reason (who are also inexplicably really good at karate). Kristy paying for three of her friends to go to college somehow.

Dear readers, I want to promise you that I will save any kind of egocentric blabbering for when they are only very, very appropriate. Now that that is out of the way I just need to say that I have loved Troll 2 since I was a kid. Just like Ticks, this was one of those movies that I saw a couple of times when I was a kid and just stuck in my memory for some reason. I rediscovered it when I got to college in 2001, and turned almost all of my b-movie watching buddies onto it. I’m only stating this because since Troll 2 has attained such a huge following in the past couple of years, I don’t want to come off as some kind of panderer to the masses. Troll 2 would have been on this list even if it never somehow wormed it’s way back into the world’s collective conscience.

If you’re reading this blog and haven’t seen Troll 2, then just stop right now. It will be required viewing for term papers later. Seriously though, it doesn’t get a whole lot better than this. Every single scene has something to behold. It’s the true definition of what a b-movie should be: low budget, unknown actors, bad effects, a plot that exceeds their means. It’s all here in its cinematic glory. Sadly, I haven’t yet seen Best Worst Movie, the documentary about the making of Troll 2 and where everyone involved has ended up over the years. I just wish this kind of treatment could go out to so many other amazing films that transcend their original purpose and become something far greater.

Golden Moments: Is it unfair to just say “everything”? No? Eh, I’m just gonna eat this double-decker bologna sandwich.

When talking about my very favorite movies, it’s hard to do them justice. I end up just talking about my favorite moments and it turns into a list rather than an explanation of why it is great. With a movie like Samurai Cop, I just can’t do it justice with words. I bought this DVD for two dollars at a used movies place and I think it is probably the most I have ever gotten out of 200 pennies. Now that I just wrote that, I’m imagining 200 tootsie rolls and I’m tempted to change my mind, but I digress…

Written and directed by Amir Shervan (you’ll find that most movies directed and/or written by and/or starring the same person are invariably the best b-movies), Iranian movie theater magnate and America fan. He produced a string of movies in the late ’80s, starting with Hollywood Cop and ending with Killing American Style. Sandwiched right in the middle was Samurai Cop. To put it bluntly, Shervan was a 60 year-old Iranian millionaire who decided that he could make great American action movies. It’s a pretty strange deal.

The titular Samurai Cop is named Joe Marshall (played by Matt Hannon), and everyone calls him Samurai Cop because he trained in Japan or something. You wouldn’t really know it once you get to know Joe, since he is not honorable at all and spends most of his time being racist or flirting (with a capital F) with every woman he sees. His partner Frank is the quintessential ’80s’ black partner, and he is pretty much used just for his reaction shots or his huge dick being referenced. Robert Zdar returns again as Yamashita, the head assassin for the Yakuza. Also huge bonus points for an appearance by Big Trouble in Little China alumni Gerald Okamura as a character named, what else, “Okamura.”

The plot is a little too complicated to really talk about, but it involves Joe walking around the city, getting shot at sometimes, and then relaxing around his house in a speedo. The level of ineptitude involved in this movie blows my mind. The dialogue is precisely what a middle-aged Iranian man would think an American cop would sound like. I really could keep going for a long time, but I’ll just say that this movie has everything that a b-movie needs to be hilarious x 10.

Golden Moments: Samurai Cop’s ever-changing hairstyles. His speech at the dinner club. Sped-up fight scenes. Poorly edited chase scenes. The lion head wall ornament. Ah hell, I’m just gonna do it again and just say everything. Everything in this movie is hilarious.

This list, published in June 2009, by “cdnnknght” offers some tips for those who find themselves often trapped in horror movie scenarios. A terse read and a checklist-of-sorts, this list is an amusing note of what most characters fail to do right before they die. Take a look.

Compiling 15 of the best lycanthropic movies of all time, and rarely leaving one out, this list from November 2007 is a handy one to refer to around Halloween time. Plenty of full-moon transformations and feral woods-play can be seen in any one of those mentioned, and special props to those in which prosthetic make-up and tedious still-shooting account for making a beast out of a man. You might recognize a scene from number 10, In the Company of Wolves, from your local costume emporium, via the famous mask of a wolf snout coming out of the man’s mouth. Read on for other hairy examples of great horror film making.

Any movie list is subjective, but this one does a good job at taking in the grander scope of the horror genre, from Steven King to slashers to Japanese squeamfest to Hitchcock. The Shining gets number one, which is logical: top notch director (Stanley Kubrick), top notch actor (Jack Nicholson), based on, arguably, the most identifiable work of a top notch horror writer (Steven King). Usually Psycho gets the top spot, but at least it’s only two spots away. Check out the list of this particular author’s top ten horror films here, published in September 2007.

Jessica Mauger came up with a list of shocking movies that are NOT banned, and that are available in particular at her local DVD store. Bullet-pointed are some notorious familiars of the shock variety (Hostel II, The Hills Have Eyes and The Human Centipede at number one) and a few lesser-known and foreign films that are guaranteed cringe-inducers, with Irreversible and Seed as high-ranking contenders. If you like the feeling of having nerve-endings strangle your stomach-lining, take a gander at the films mentioned in the author’s list, published January 2011.

Shane Dayton’s list throws together a slab of this author’s favorite bloodsuckers. It should be noted that four of them are based upon Bram Stoker’s Dracula (one is a Mel Brooks film), but the Bela Legosi-starring Universal Studios classic is left off. Interestingly, this list doesn’t just look at vampires as being horror icons: they can also show up in action and comedies. Take a look at this list, published April 2008.

This list, published in July 2009, by Colin H., presents a recap of some of the decade’s best, if not best-recognized, horror flicks. On it is Ginger Snaps, Final Destination, Saw, Hard Candy and Ju-On, as well as a host of films that were better than that which you ever heard about them. Read the list, make a few discoveries and see why Inside got number one (and perhaps why you should go look it up).

This list, by Elizabeth Kelly, compiles a handful of obscure horror flicks that have surely crept by the attention of the general public – and what a shame. The list offers a breakdown on a whole repertoire of movies that the author stresses should be added to the Halloween rotation cycle, including the likes of Jacob’s Ladder; Alice, Sweet Alice; Night of the Creeps; and Paperhouse, at number one (you’ll have to see it for yourself to fully understand why). Check out the list, which was published in June 2010, here.

Author “Randall” defines “Hammer” as being “a name synonymous with lush, Gothic horror with a very British tint.” This list, from October of 2009, compiles a 13-item collection of such so-called Hammer films, from the author’s extensive stash, taking a tour through “very British” takes on Frankenstein, Dracula, The Mummy (at number one) and Phantom of the Opera. You might just spill your tea in terror upon watching any of the entries. Take a look at which smashing Hammers made the cut and why.

You most probably only know a J-Horror film through its American adaptation, but what better way to get to the heart of the darkness than to go straight to the source: Japan. This list, by Jackie Huff, from January 2008, compiles a list of the ten best (i.e. skin-crawling) horror films from across the Pacific. Yes, the original inspirations for The Grudge and The Ring claim the second and first spots respectively, but the rest are reason to pay more attention to what’s happening in Japan, and why imported films will immensely improve the condition of your horror collection. Take a look.

This list, by Shane Dayton, from February 2008, takes a look at some of the best psychos in film, without mentioning the obvious Norman Bates. Mentioned are Anthony Hopkins as Hannibal Lector, Christian Bale from American Psycho and even Macaulay Culkin in little boy form. That and a good number of entries you will have to see for yourself, after thanking the author for enlightening you. A varied list of crazies, and we know how varied crazy can be. Check it out.

Examples include The Blair Witch Project, Cloverfield and Paranormal Activity. It hasn’t quite been overused, except to say that the Paranormal Activity franchise has milked the gimmick into a part three. It was this conceit that made a movie with a budget in the mere thousands extremely successful, as was the case with Blair Witch, raking in about $2.5 million at the box office. This idea of “lost footage” is admittedly creepy – just like any “real” footage of poltergeists or Big Foot is scary. Feigning that an elaborate Hollywood production is truth via this kind of trickery adds a dimension of false realism wherein which this isolated happening could just as easily happen to you.

There is no better place to find horror than in your local Catholic church, and, more specifically, in the bible itself. Why do you think it’s called “God-FEARING”? Fear has been the best incentive to keep church-goers in line since the dawn of Christianity. Between Puritan witch-hunts, fire-and-brimstone doom-saying and the Book of Revelations, Christianity is a wonderful tap for the most distressing horror material. Exorcisms alone have carried myriad film franchises to our worst, rug-staining nightmares. Then you have the reference to Satan, the best horror monster ever conceived in literature. When your soul is on the line, the consequences of a horror movie become all the more dire.

In this air-borne pathogen and human contact-fearing day and age, our greatest fears are also our most mundane. People can’t even go to the grocery store anymore without first applying a dollop of hand sanitizer from an onsite containment station. That used to be called something: Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. It has provided grounds for countless movies and T.V. series parodying the extremity of such problematic behavior. Now that it’s absolutely normal, it has been capitalized as a go-to source of our worst fears. The idea of an epidemic is nothing new (the Black Plague, Small Pox, Polio, etc.) nor is writing about one (Edgar Allen Poe’s The Masque of Red Death), but paranoia has never been at such an all time collective high. Movies like Contagion, The Invasion (the latest modern adaptation of Invasion of the Body Snatchers), and 28 Days Later amp up the apocalyptic overtones in simply being exposed to something impure. Next movie idea: Attack of the Tainted Cantaloupe.

When a scary plot alone will simply not do, on must come the gore. Movies have gotten progressively bloodier and grislier since the original Nosferatu, but not necessarily any scarier. The horror industry seems to think that stomach-churning equates to fear, as if the more you disgust and discomfort the audience, the scarier the movie will be. Take the latest installment of The Human Centipede, it is so chock full of twisted, explicit mutilation and torture visuals, that it is illegal in some countries, and virtually unwatchable by anyone but erudite serial killers-in-training. But to an extent, this graphic grossness is in very high demand, explaining the success of the Saw franchise, which has six parts and a 3D gimmick-fest. And with that bar set, the horror industry has done its best to out-Saw Saw, as if that’s how you make a better horror film. Meanwhile, warehouses worth of Steven King books are longing to still be made into movies.

“I Watched _______, and Now I Have to Die.” This is one of many hackneyed horror concepts that has taken its rounds through the industry. The Ring spawned a micro-movement in its centering around a Grim Reaper-esque videotape that leads to your inevitable demise upon viewing (this was actually done previously in David Cronenberg’s surrealist Videodrome, which makes great, and extremely over-the-top, commentary on the matters discussed in number seven). Then came Fear Dot Com, a WEBSITE that leads to your inevitable demise, a slight and modern variation on the murderous medium formula. What’s next: “140 Bodies or Less,” a movie about a killer twitter account.

When zombies and vampires lack the goods to keep people frightened over the course of several generations, out must come the steroids. In Blade 2 we saw genetically mutated vampires with weird flower-petal mouths and extra heart protection, as well as immunity to garlic and silver. In 30 Days of Night and 28 Days Later, both based upon graphic novels, the evil creatures were jacked up to superhuman levels. Vampires okay, but zombies are supposed to be slow and dumb – easily outrun, but effective in high, cornering volumes like lava. Human-based horror creatures alone aren’t the only ones getting hormone injections: sharks (Jaws, Deep Blue Sea), velociraptors (Jurassic Park), crocodiles (Lake Placid), snakes (Anaconda), and primates (Planet of the Apes, King Kong, Mighty Joe Young) have been made bigger and/or smarter than average for scary effect. In actuality, King Kong seems to provides the empirical origin of this idea of an overgrown common animal laying terror about a human civilization used to normal-sized things. To this day you can watch the Sci-Fi channel and catch a giant CGI frog terrorizing an island full of machine-gun-clad sexy people who can’t act.

A lot of movies these days don’t even qualify as horror movies until they reach the cutting room floor – there discordant violins and twitchy visuals add artificially-inseminated tension and suspense. All that really needs to be captured prior is Jennifer Connelly or Naomi Watts (or even Sarah Michelle Gellar) walking slowly through a dark hallway until something weird and blue does or does not show up. These movies are mostly smoke and mirrors, where ideas are left out in favor of these little maybe moments that need not pay off so much as keep the audience sweating. Its like the worst kind of sex, a frightening kind built on nothing really.

How many kids must we assign the sole responsibility of making a movie scary before we hate all kids by association (as if their acting wasn’t enough to do the job, but that’s another list). The drippy girl from The Ring, the blue Asian boy from The Grudge, the twin girls from The Shining, and little Damien from The Omen, the toddler from Pet Sematary, and The Children of the Corn are some of the leading examples of kids who took on the role of pure evil, at ages where innocence is usually found. Not so, in these cases – get out the crossbows and/or holy knives.

Guillermo Del Toro deserves credit for one thing: staying true to the latex and prosthetic ideals of 80s’ horror nostalgia – making terrifying creatures from scratch, and rarely letting computer animation fill in for a paint brush. Movies feel real when they contain real things. CGI only supplies an obvious cover-up for a missing part of a movie, precisely where writing and DIY ethos fall short. There are far too many transgressors to enumerate, but essentially every bluntly-scripted, high-budget horror involving some kind of over-blown creature is CGI-laden and always underwhelming. Take the movie Priest, about a vampire-hunting priest; the title actor was on a talk show (being where he gets paid to promote his movie) mentioning how this movie “makes vampires scary again,” which is hard to believe considering he appeared in NO scenes beside an ACTUAL vampire. Not sure how scary a blue screen is, but must be more so than these affected, unnatural-seeming digital renderings we see on the other side.

A time-tested way to fill seats an otherwise bad movie cannot: full-frontal nudity. Horror movies and sex have gone hand-in-hand since the first Jason movie hacked up a couple of teenagers getting lucky in the woods. Now these cliches are less gimmicks than vital institutions; the trailer for My Bloody Valentine 3D was easy to mistake for one of those sultry dating line commercials that come on late at night. It’s the reason most horror movies are proudly rated R (that and for the not quite NC-17-worthy amount of violence). If it weren’t for the occasional murder in between (or during) sex scenes, most horror films these days could be classified as softcore porn. What comes to mind is the scene from Species where the guy is doing it with the alien chick, and she tears him apart from the inside-out mid-act. The sex-deaths have gotten a lot sexier (and less death-ier) since, but seeing that scene is a great way to fear anonymous sex in the same vein as seeing Jaws would make you stop going to the beach for a while.