Thursday, March 15, 2012

Man's Best Friend

***DISCLAIMER*** The following review is entirely my opinion. If you comment (which I encourage you to do) be respectful. If you don't agree with my opinion, that's fine. To each their own. I am just sharing my opinions and perspective. Finally, the reviews are given on a scale of 1-5. 1, of course, being terrible. 2, being not great. 3, being okay. 4, being good and 5, being epic!

Man's Best Friend -2 out of 5

Can this guy be scarier than demon children?
Nothing is sacred in the world of horror films.  The things you hold dear are the first things that become cannon fodder for the weapon of scary.  Think about how often our scary movies use innocent little children to scare the bejesus out of us--I'm not sure what bejesus is but it gets scared out of us enough that it must be an important part of our anatomy.  The very symbol of progress, the symbol of youth, the symbol of our continued existence as a civilization and species is embodied in our offspring and horror films can make them terrifying.  However, if you've ever spent 5 minutes with a crying, pooping and puking baby, you'll know that it doesn't take much for kids to become horrifying.  I'm glad there isn't a woman in the world he will accept my seed because horror films have ruined me to children.  Every time I would look at them, all I will hear is the creepy, "La la la la la la" and the little girls from The Shining.

You can't run away from this one, Lance.

Sheedy is getting a call from her manager informing
her she hasn't been good since The Breakfast Club.
In 1993, another sacred element of our safe world was violated by scary movies and this time the target was, as if you can't guess from the title, dogs.  Man's Best Friend is about a research company that breeds the perfect guard dog called Max.  Dr. Jarret (played by the man with a kick-ass voice, Lance Henriksen) takes all the best elements of hundreds of animals and puts them in the DNA of a Tibetan mastiff.  A nosy reporter out to get out of the fluff story biz and into real journalism (Ally Sheedy) stumbles upon the laboratory and accidentally befriends the dog.  Little does she know she is petting and feeding a powder keg ready to explode as the dog starts to make enemies quick.  It sets its sights on the neighbor's cat (real original), the mailman (even more original) and the journalist's husband (shades of possible bestiality is thankfully eliminated in this last one).

Wikipedia actually describes this scene as "gory."  Man, look at all that blood.
Notice the cat seems quite content with its impending death, as well.

Two elements to this film really sets it up for failure.  Number 1) It's a horror film about a genetically engineered dog (Cujo did it better and that dog was only fueled by rabies, not science) and Number 2) the poster shows a "cyber-dog."  After the debacle that was Man's Best Friend a half-dog/half-machine would have been preferable.

I actually wanted the robo-dog.

The film is far from scary but despite it being called a horror film, I didn't actually have any expectations of this one being scary.  Instead, I wanted a shitty movie I could laugh at and it gave me that in spades.  Bad effects, terrible acting from Sheedy, Lance Henriksen with bleach blond hair and one-dimensional characters that seemed like they were made for the sole intention of being a bit makes this film hilarious to watch--seriously, there is a cop duo where one is fat and eats a lot and the other is skinny and health conscious, you can't tell me that their intention wasn't to make a comedy here.

I like to believe the writers were high-fiving each other after they fooled themselves
into thinking that a scene with a mailman was somehow brilliant.

"I also genetically engineered my blond hair."
I have to believe that the intent was to make a bad film that would become a cult classic for people to smoke pot or get drunk watching it so they can laugh the night away because if I believe for one solitary second that they were trying to make a film to scare us, my intelligence would be so offended that my brain would melt and pour out of my ears.  For an example of this intelligence insulting writing, Dr. Jarret states that Max is "in the right hands, great" but "in the wrong hands, he's dangerous."  So, one could argue that a person can command Max to do evil but one can command him to do good, as well.  The problem that arises is the fact that Sheedy's character commands him to do neither.  Sure the film tries to show that Max is attempting to protect Sheedy but what's his motivation for wanting to eliminate her husband?  If you watch the film, Max hates the guy from the get-go and is stopping at nothing to kill him.  Sure, the husband tries to retaliate but is being married to Ally Sheedy, even in a fictional way, worthy of being murdered for?  Apparently yes.

"Walkies or death."

Basically, Man's Best Friend is a mock-worthy film that never scares but will make you laugh at the absurdity of it all--especially when the movie-train flies off the rails in the third act.  Nothing in this film works but it is in that inability to work that the film somehow...works.  It's not brilliant, it's not scary and it's not well made--hell, somehow Max has acid piss, what animal did they get that from?--but it's in all these non-functioning elements that makes this worth watching.  Like all bad movies that become entertaining, Man's Best Friend is a steaming pile squeezed out of your Best Friend's backside that is too horrid to pick up but you can't pass it by either.

Maybe I need to brush up on my biology but I've never heard of a animal that pees acid.

1 comment:

  1. der Film ist sowas von süss...ich liebe ihn...:)

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.