Skip to main content

So, I'm just supposed to keep dying until I figure out who my killer is?

Happy Death Day
(2017)

(SPOILERS) A delightfully tongue-in-cheek Groundhog Day horror from Blumhouse, which gave the project the greenlight a decade after its former studio abandoned it. Director Christopher Landon (writer of Disturbia and no less than four Paranormal Activitys) ensures his mysterious masked murderer on campus and repeat is glossy, upbeat, self-aware and full of vim, making it the natural inheritor of Scream’s post-modern mantle, right down to the manufacturer of the murder’s mask.

The picture’s greatest asset, though, is Jessica Rothe, whose comic touch is absolute perfection, and who essays Tree Gelbman’s transformation, Bill Murray-like, from superficial bitch to empathetic soul with effortless charisma. Landon (uncredited) rewrote Scott Lobdell’s screenplay, but structurally one wonders if Danny Rubin and Harold Ramis shouldn’t get a credit (which they kind ofdo; the movie’s penultimate scene asks “How do you sleep at night? You’ve never seen Groundhog Day?”) We have the thawing of the initially standoffish lead character, refusal to accept her situation transforming into stark realisation, her romance with someone she barely gives the time of day first time round, and a montage of her going about helping people she was formerly dismissive towards. Of course, this is also true of Edge of Tomorrow to a degree, so one might simply argue it all comes with the subgenre.

One might also reasonably suggest Happy Death Day diverges significantly in where it ends up, though, since it requires Tree to kill her murderer in order to release herself from the loop, notthe most life-affirming of solutions. It’s also less easy to pin down on the rules of Tree’s stir-and-repeat, and since she only goes through the experience eleven times, rather than Murray’s thousands, there’s a sense at times that that Langdon and Lobdell have brushed over some of the salient points in favour of the highest impact hits. We never find out if Tree’s day would have reset anyway, had she successfully avoided being murdered, and her methods of attempting to avoid such an outcome aren’t entirely convincing (just what is she doing all day, besides nursing a hangover?)

In contrast to most of these loop tales, there’s a ticking clock of sorts applied, the signs of major trauma her body exhibits when she gets a check-up (“Technically, you should be dead”); we aren’t informed if her waking on the 19th resolves this issue, so one assumes so (but, the sequel…) There’s also a very horror movie disinclination to follow logical procedure except when it suits; a very funny sequence sees Tree pulled over by a cop and fail to get sent to jail so as to avoid any further violent encounters (which may suggest the rules are that she simply can’t escape the killer, no matter what countermeasures she takes, until she IDs her, but if so it would have been fun to see some of the absurd lengths she goes to – hop aboard a transatlantic flight?) But when she disarms a police officer and shoots dead the serial killer he’s guarding, there are apparently no repercussions that would detain her for the rest of the night, and she’s allowed to go home and eat a poison cupcake (likewise, her elaborate preceding plan, to right wrongs including visiting her estranged father, somehow doesn’t include checking how a firearm works).

I’ve seen some commenters suggest the identity of the killer was very obvious; while my first thought on seeing the binned cupcake early on was the it was poisoned, I’d argue the picture does a largely commendable job throwing red herrings to distract us (I note too that, in the rough drafts of the screenplay, Charles Aitken’s Doctor Butler was also in on it, and that a cut final ending had Butler’s wife, disguised as a nurse, kill Tree after Tree killed Lori, which seems positively De Palma-ish). The conveniently located serial killer (Rob Mello) is fairly blatant, but it isn’t as if the movie’s solefunction is as a whodunnit.

Carter: I don’t think you should be taking that many. I mean, you could die.
Tree: If only it were that easy.

There’s strong support from Israel Broussard as geeky Carter – the right sort of geek clearly, as he has posters of They Live!, Back to the Future and Repo Man on his wall – whom Tree develops affection for and Rachel Matthews as sorority queen bee Danielle, but everyone’s a good fit for their roles. Langdon propels the picture along punchily and confidently, ensuring the campus encounters are replete with the wit and attention to social strata expected of the high school/college genre (at its best) and that the switches into the slasher antics (PG-13 style) don’t miss a beat; one of the best murders comes quite quickly in the repeat scenario, as the killer repeatedly stabs Danielle’s boyfriend, whom Tree is also seeing on the not-so-sly, while Tree is on the phone in the foreground, the scene all the while timed to deafening techno.

In the end, while I’ve quibbled that Landon might have imbued Happy Death Day with that crucial extra finesse, the picture’s considerable plus points far outweigh its deficits, most particular Rother’s star-making turn and the guilelessness with which it encapsulates the romantic aspiration of John Hughes at his best (right down to a lead who’s a wee bit too old for the age she’s playing). And anyway, it very much looks as if Happy Death Day 2 U will be diving straight into the whys and wherefores of the original’s scenario, in Rothe’s words, Back to the Future Part II-style. I can’t wait (and don’t have long to).


Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Nanobots aren’t just for Christmas.

No Time to Die (2021) (SPOILERS) You know a Bond movie is in trouble when it resorts to wholesale appropriation of lines and even the theme song from another in order to “boost” its emotional heft. That No Time to Die – which previewed its own title song a year and a half before its release to resoundingly underwhelmed response, Grammys aside – goes there is a damning indictment of its ability to eke out such audience investment in Daniel Craig’s final outing as James (less so as 007). As with Spectre , the first half of No Time to Die is, on the whole, more than decent Bond fare, before it once again gets bogged down in the quest for substance and depth from a character who, regardless of how dapper his gear is, resolutely resists such outfitting.

Maybe the dingo ate your baby.

Seinfeld 2.9: The Stranded The Premise George and Elaine are stranded at a party in Long Island, with a disgruntled hostess.

Big things have small beginnings.

Prometheus (2012) Post- Gladiator , Ridley Scott opted for an “All work and no pondering” approach to film making. The result has been the completion of as many movies since the turn of the Millennium as he directed in the previous twenty years. Now well into his seventies, he has experienced the most sustained period of success of his career.  For me, it’s also been easily the least-interesting period. All of them entirely competently made, but all displaying the machine-tooled approach that was previously more associated with his brother.

I’m giving you a choice. Either put on these glasses or start eating that trash can.

They Live * (1988) (SPOILERS) Don’t get me wrong, I’m a big fan of They Live – I was a big fan of most things Carpenter at the time of its release – but the manner in which its reputation as a prophecy of (or insight into) “the way things are” has grown is a touch out of proportion with the picture’s relatively modest merits. Indeed, its feting rests almost entirely on the admittedly bravura sequence in which WWF-star-turned-movie-actor Roddy Piper, under the influence of a pair of sunglasses, first witnesses the pervasive influence of aliens among us who are sucking mankind dry. That, and the ludicrously genius sequence in which Roddy, full of transformative fervour, attempts to convince Keith David to don said sunglasses, for his own good. They Live should definitely be viewed by all, for their own good, but it’s only fair to point out that it doesn’t have the consistency of John Carpenter at his very, very best. Nada : I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick a

Ladies and gentlemen, this could be a cultural misunderstanding.

Mars Attacks! (1996) (SPOILERS) Ak. Akk-akk! Tim Burton’s gleefully ghoulish sci-fi was his first real taste of failure. Sure, there was Ed Wood , but that was cheap, critics loved it, and it won Oscars. Mars Attacks! was BIG, though, expected to do boffo business, and like more than a few other idiosyncratic spectaculars of the 1990s ( Last Action Hero , Hudson Hawk ) it bombed BIG. The effect on Burton was noticeable. He retreated into bankable propositions (the creative and critical nadir perhaps being Planet of the Apes , although I’d rate it much higher than the likes of Alice in Wonderland and Dumbo ) and put the brakes on his undisciplined goth energy. Something was lost. Mars Attacks! is far from entirely successful, but it finds the director let loose with his own playset and sensibility intact, apparently given the licence to do what he will.

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) (SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek , but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan . That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

It's something trying to get out.

The Owl Service (1969-70) I may have caught a glimpse of Channel 4’s repeat of  The Owl Service  in 1987, but not enough to stick in the mind. My formative experience was Alan Garner’s novel, which was read several years earlier during English lessons. Garner’s tapestry of magical-mythical storytelling had an impact, with its possession theme and blending of legend with the here and now. Garner depicts a Britain where past and present are mutable, and where there is no safety net of objective reality; life becomes a strange waking dream. His fantasy landscapes are both attractive and disturbing; the uncanny reaching out from the corners of the attic.  But I have to admit that the themes of class and discrimination went virtually unnoticed in the wake of such high weirdness. The other Garner books I read saw young protagonists transported to fantasy realms. The resonance of  The Owl Service  came from the fragmenting of the rural normal. When the author notes that he neve

Isn’t sugar better than vinegar?

Femme Fatale (2002) (SPOILERS) Some have attempted to rescue Femme Fatale from the dumpster of critical rejection and audience indifference with the claim that it’s De Palma’s last great movie. It isn’t that by a long shot, but it might rank as the last truly unfettered display of his obsessions and sensibilities, complete with a ludicrous twist – so ludicrous, it’s either a stroke of genius or mile-long pile up.

Beer is for breakfast around here. Drink or begone.

Cocktail (1988) (SPOILERS) When Tarantino claims the 1980s (and 1950s) as the worst movie decade, I’m inclined to invite him to shut his butt down. But should he then flourish Cocktail as Exhibit A, I’d be forced to admit he has a point. Cocktail is a horrifying, malignant piece of dreck, a testament to the efficacy of persuasive star power on a blithely rapt and undiscerning audience. Not only is it morally vacuous, it’s dramatically inert. And it relies on Tom’s toothy charms to a degree that would have any sensitive soul rushed to the A&E suffering from toxic shock (Tom’s most recently displayed toothy charms will likely have even his staunchest devotees less than sure of themselves, however, as he metamorphoses into your favourite grandma). And it was a huge box office hit.

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.