Zombie Movie Twists: "Maggie"

[Totenkindly]

The market is saturated with zombie flicks, although occasionally one comes along that was unexpected either due to tone or approach (e.g, "Warm Bodies" AKA Romeo & Juliet as a zombie movie).

Here's another that I just heard of. Apparently the script was also on the infamous Blacklist in 2011 and got picked up. Now it's become a vehicle for the big Ah-nold himself... so I'm totally unclear how it'll pan out. But... still sounds interesting.

... when [Lionsgate] buys a movie for distribution, they will pull it from festivals so that no one can see it. I'm frustrated with them right now over the film "Maggie," which was announced as part of the line-up for the 2014 edition of the Toronto International Film Festival.

I'm trying to remember if there's ever been another Arnold Schwarzenegger film that's played a festival. I don't think so. This was a lovely surprise when it was announced. I don't know director Henry Hobson at all, and the same is true of John Scott, the film's writer. I like the premise, though. A man whose daughter has been bitten and is turning into a zombie decides that he's going to protect her, no matter what. When you cast Arnold Schwarzenegger in that role and you have him play it looking like he actually does now, embracing the age, that's a big choice. That's potentially very cool...

IOW, you've got Arnold fighting off other human survivors trying to kill his zombie-fying daughter. Who do you root for? Hell if i know. (Okay, fine: Arnold, of course. Until she bites him. Although maybe then too.)

The film is on demand and in theaters apparently around May 8.

https://www.yahoo.com/tv/s/schwarzeneggers-father-daughter-zombie-movie-124000658.html

 

[Totenkindly]

Forgot I started a thread with this.

FIOS actually is showing this simultaneously with theaters (like they did with The Babadook), so I watched it last night. I have mixed feelings. It's flawed in some ways, and yet I actually still like it a lot.

The movie itself feels more "arthousy" than big-budget, in both the look and the sounds of it. The "zombie" motif is really about flavor, the themes are more broad -- "how do families deal with terminally ill kids who can prove a threat to the rest of the family as the disease progresses" -- versus movies that have been labeled as "zombie flicks." The move is really focused tightly on Maggie (the girl) and Wade (her father) and their relationship and manages to evoke sympathy and connection with those two characters despite the fact we never really learn much about "who they are" per se.

The movie, unlike a typical "zombie" movie, is also on a slow burn. VERY slow. Maggie slowly changes over the course of the movie and there are very few traditional "kill the zombie" shots in the movie; in fact, other humans are more threatening because the cops are balancing the need for family privacy versus community safety. If Wade falls afoul of anyone who don't like him keeping his daughter out of quarantine, it could easily be other people.

With Arnold Swarzenegger, they took a lesson here from the Keanu Reeves' vehicle "John Wick" -- where dialogue is concerned, less is more, because both Keanu and Arnold tend to deep-six a script if they have to talk too much. Accordingly, there's only 2-3 clumsy bits by Arnold here, and they all involve him having to deliver more than one short sentence at a time. Otherwise, when all he's doing is offering facial expressions, the directing is smart enough to shoot him in ways that lift what little natural performance he has to offer and he does decently with hit (more than you'd expect). This is easily Arnold's most introspective and pensive role, and while he's the weakest member of the cast in some respects, the movie itself lifts his performance to something almost interesting (which is high praise for an actor who has been built a career mainly just being himself on camera).

... and of course Abigail Breslin, who does a really nice job with her role as a girl who is changing day by day, and both has to hold things together and be strong, while also being terrified and just wanting someone to lean on. She's easily the most talented actor in the movie (and one of the few things M. Night Shyamalan did right -- her first role, at age 5, was in Signs). The movie highlights how isolating a disease like this would be, especially when it juxtaposes the love a family has for one of its members with the reality that the loved one is eventually a threat... and this is played out in various examples in the movie.

I think the rural/small-town setting also allowed the movie to exist; in a big city, the cops would just throw all the infected in a prison and let them wipe each other out. Here, that "small town" feel ends up respecting the individual ... and the wide spaces between homes allows for the possibility of privacy as well as reducing the threat of a zombie explosion in an urban setting. So the town cops are more lenient in allowing families to look after their loved ones... but only up to a certain degree.

Discussion of the ending (don't read unless you've seen the movie or don't care):

Some reviewers had issues with this. I understand why; I felt momentarily jerked sideways. The movie does build an expectation that it doesn't then fulfill. But I'm not really sure what that kind of ending would have done for the movie. When Wade reaches down to pick up the shell, that is the culmination of his character arc and decision process; everything else is superfluous arguably, and an "Old Yeller" climax really might not contribute anything new to the discussion. He has finally made the decision to do what he can for his girl; and that's what matters.

When I accepted the ending and looked for a way to integrate it, I recognize that the movie is called "Maggie," not "Wade." Arnold is not necessarily the "star" of the movie. Maggie is a girl trying to be an adult, rising about her own fear as a "dying animal" and take volition for her actions in a situation where she is slowly losing volition. In that sense, the ending provides HER with a true sense of power, and she is able to find courage and be brave both for herself and spare her father some pain out of love; it reminded me a bit of the end of "Road to Perdition" where Hank's character takes on a burden himself so that his son might be spared it. In that sense, I didn't really see the ending as a cop-out but a choice to return agency to a victimized character who feels she has no control over her fate.

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

This one looks pretty good. Looks like Arnold is going through his "copland" phase.

Otherwise, as a zombie film lover, I think an immediate 10 year moratorium on new zombie films might be a good thing.

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

Personally, I still find this to be Arnold's best

YAAARRGHH GIB DIS PEEPUHL AYAHRAAARRRRGHHHAHAAAAAGGRRRARRGHHH

 

[Totenkindly]

Otherwise, as a zombie film lover, I think an immediate 10 year moratorium on new zombie films might be a good thing.

I do think the vampire / zombie flicks have kind of burned themselves out at this point. (Although I did appreciate this movie and Warm Bodies as interesting twists on the theme, even if they probably won't ever make the National Film Registry.)

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I do think the vampire / zombie flicks have kind of burned themselves out at this point. (Although I did appreciate this movie and Warm Bodies as interesting twists on the theme, even if they probably won't ever make the National Film Registry.)

Frankly, I want a movie about ghouls. Ghouls are a spooky monster that American cinema has barely scraped the surface on.

 

[Totenkindly]

Frankly, I want a movie about ghouls. Ghouls are a spooky monster that American cinema has barely scraped the surface on.

What are the specifics of ghouls that you think would help distinguish them from zombies in a movie? (I'm familiar with D&D ghouls.) A lot of the supernatural critters can overlap in appearance and/or function, so it can be difficult to cleanly separate them.

Moving sideways, "I, Frankenstein" didn't go over well in the theater. I could only watch about ten minutes of that piece of crap at home before I watched something else.

Let's swipe more stuff from NWoD to make a movie!

--

I'm a big fan of ghosts, but more of when they seem human but do creepy/unpredictable stuff that highlights how they are no longer human and/or are driven by other instincts. I really like the girl under the bed in "Sixth Sense," for example -- there's a non-blinking hollow look of compulsion there that I've seen in a few other ghost pics. Even the ghost in the tower in Deathly Hallows Part 2 was pretty eerie in how she's seem briefly accessible and then could erupt in anger.

Anyway, all supernaturals tend to fall into broad categories that have generally been explored...

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

What are the specifics of ghouls that you think would help distinguish them from zombies in a movie? (I'm familiar with D&D ghouls.) A lot of the supernatural critters can overlap in appearance and/or function, so it can be difficult to cleanly separate them.

Ghouls are clearly different.

A ghoul is a folkloric monster or evil spirit associated with graveyards and consuming human flesh, often classified as undead. The oldest surviving literature that mention ghouls is likely One Thousand and One Nights.[1] The term was first used in English literature in 1786, in William Beckford's Orientalist novel Vathek,[2] which describes the ghūl of Arabian folklore.

See, it's totally different.

I suppose that the term Ghola in Dune Messiah is a reference to ghouls. The word's probably etymologically connected. So, maybe if David Lynch's Dune was successful, we would have a movie about ghouls.

We do have ghouls to thank for the name of a Batman villain (Ras-Al-Ghul, the Demon's Head), and Algol, the Demon Star, so named because it's a variable star in the constellation Perseus thought to represent the eye of Medusa. Ghouls have contributed that, at least.

 

[Totenkindly]

Ghouls are clearly different.

See, it's totally different.

I suppose that the term Ghola in Dune Messiah is a reference to ghouls. The word's probably etymologically connected. So, maybe if David Lynch's Dune was successful, we would have a movie about ghouls.

We do have ghouls to thank for the name of a Batman villain (Ras-Al-Ghul, the Demon's Head), and Algol, the Demon Star, so named because it's a variable star in the constellation Perseus thought to represent the eye of Medusa.

But I'm asking in terms of visual presentation in a movie.

So a bunch of undead critters go eat... things that are already dead. Would a bunch of movie-goers used to seeing fast zombies (28 Days Later) chase the living find it even interesting to see more undead shit that look like dead critters eating... dead people?

Visually, it's not much different... and even less interesting.

I did llike the X-Files episode about Donnie whassisname who was into necrophilia, and how they did a kind of "overlay" on him to suggest he was really a ghoul in human form, although I think it was more allegorical and reflecting the state of his soul.

 

[Olm the Water King]

The first time I heard of ghouls was when I was a kid and playing the game Quest for Glory 2. This is what they looked like there:

Actually looked more like a skeleton lol.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

.

Would a bunch of movie-goers used to seeing fast zombies (28 Days Later) chase the living find it even interesting to see more undead shit that look like dead critters eating... dead people?

The movie could also include the terrifying concept of dead people being replaced by skeletons. I think that is sufficient to add interest. Behold, the ravages of time!

I did llike the X-Files episode about Donnie whassisname who was into necrophilia, and how they did a kind of "overlay" on him to suggest he was really a ghoul in human form, although I think it was more allegorical and reflecting the state of his soul.

Do you remember the name of it?

The first time I heard of ghouls was when I was a kid and playing the game Quest for Glory 2. This is what they looked like there:

Actually looked more like a skeleton lol.

I played the Quest for Glory that was based on ancient Greece and had dragons. There was a Minotaur character that I remember being pretty awesome. I thought playing as the Thief was the most interesting... somehow they worked in references to Bogart films there, too.

Regarding terminology for undead creatures, I really like the word "wight," and I thank J.R.R. Tolkein and George R.R. Martin for bringing it back.

 

[Totenkindly]

yeah, "Wight" is a cool name.
It's too bad they got dropped from the LOTR movies (the barrow wights, I mean).

I was just telling Sultan I played every QfG that WASN'T the dragon one. (It originally was called "So You Want to Be a Hero," which expresses the tongue-in-cheek attitude it often exuded.) It was one of my favorite game series at the time it came out. I think you can find updated versions that run on modern computers, online.

X-Files episode:
Irresistible (The X-Files) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Donnie Pfaster was the character. Usually makes the top 10-15 episodes of the series list.

OMG. There were two episodes with Donnie Pfaster in them. The later one had another star who I didn't recognize at the time -- it was the 90's. I recognize him now.
Scott Wilson (actor) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I love this stuff -- rewatching old things and recognizing people I didn't know at the time.

 

[Olm the Water King]

[MENTION=4660]Vulcan[/MENTION] Oh you liked the dragon one? well, that's cool. but it was actually my least favorite game in the series haha. it was sort of a disappointment to me.
[MENTION=7]Jennifer[/MENTION] I think you can buy the whole series on gog.com

Also, there's a free remake of QFG2 somewhere, with better graphics and a point and click system instead of the text input parser thing which the original 1 and 2 had (1 already got a Sierra remake a long time ago) . I can't remember where.

Oh and there's Heroine's Quest, fan made game inspired by the series. I like it a lot.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

[MENTION=4660]Vulcan[/MENTION] Oh you liked the dragon one? well, that's cool. but it was actually my least favorite game in the series haha. it was sort of a disappointment to me.

It was the only one I played. I remember enjoying it, though.

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

I want a period zombie film, maybe set during the late Roman Empire or something.

But a good one.

 

[violet_crown]

[MENTION=7]Jennifer[/MENTION] [MENTION=4660]Vulcan[/MENTION] Watched Maggie yesterday. Exceptionally well done film. Intriguing premise and really well executed. I'm not huge into body horror, but each step of Maggie's transformation is more awful in a heartbreaking kind of way than gross out horrible. I also don't think I've seen a horror movie this beautiful from the standpoint of cinematography since Stoker. Casting Arnold in the film was also pretty genius on a lot of levels. Somehow watching this powerful person fighting as hard as he can to save his daughter from every threat but be so ultimately helpless in the face of the one that's actually destroying her is just devestating to watch.

Definitely took a page from the Babadook playbook with the idea that the monsters are almost besides the point of what is truly terrifying about the film. Editing is also brilliantly succinct: gets in, breaks your heart and its done. Great film.

 

[Totenkindly]

Glad someone else really liked it; it continues to grow on me as I think about it, and I thought many of the reviews were unfair in regards to the ending:

The opening is actually Maggie talking over opening credits. She has chosen to run off to the city to spare her family. She's being brave, going it alone to protect the people she loves. Her last words are telling her dad she loves him... although instead of being mad when he finds her, she breaks down crying... obviously she didn't want to leave, she did it with courage to protect them.

Bookend to the final bit. She approaches him from off-camera; great prolonged scene where it seems like she is struggling over following her disease instincts [he smells like food to her at this point] and/or expressing her love for him, and it's not clear what she'll pick. She kisses him finally, gently, and leaves. She goes up to the roof. It's just exactly what she did before the movie started, removing herself so that her family would be safe and because she loved them; and at this point, he's finally ready to let her go, out of love. The journey takes us on a convoluted route through the middle of the movie, but the beginning of the movie telegraphs the end; she dies as herself, the way she originally intended -- except her dad loved her so much he didn't want her to be alone and so brought her home until closer to the end. And that was okay. They had that time together, time to learn to say goodbye.

That scene where she talks at the campfire and then sits in the bus with the other diseased kid... wow. Honestly, "The Fault in Our Stars" didn't have anything on that, it felt more real to me in this movie even though far less is said.

 

[violet_crown]

Glad someone else really liked it; it continues to grow on me as I think about it, and I thought many of the reviews were unfair in regards to the ending

Couldnt give less of a shit of critical opinion after the tedious farce that was It Follows.

 

[Totenkindly]

Couldnt give less of a shit of critical opinion after the tedious farce that was It Follows.

Yeah, did you respond to me on that one yet? Sounds like you really hated it.

 

[violet_crown]

Yeah, did you respond to me on that one yet? Sounds like you really hated it.

VM or elsewhere?

Unrelated, but I also just heard they're remaking The Craft. Somewhere my 10 year old self is weeping impossibly bitter tears.

Sony Remake The Craft | Variety