Sketchy Details

Midnight Rec: Exte: Hair Extensions (2007)

Do you like weird films?

No really, this is a serious question. Can you handle a really strange film? Like, just shy of two hours of "I abandoned my child/I drink your milkshake" strange? Little Miss Sunshine toss grandpa in the trunk and compete in the pageant strange? The Wicker Man late night orgy strange?

Good. I'm glad.

Equally important: can you accept a film that requires camp and utter sincerity to be effective?

You can? Great.

Find a copy of Exte: Hair Extensions. You will not be disappointed.

Sion Sono has made some of the most bizarre and riveting horror films of the 2000's. In Suicide Club, a wave of mass suicides has hit Japan and no one can explain why. Schoolgirls jump in front of subway cars, comedians incorporate actual death into their acts, and mothers slice off their own limbs. What is the cause? And why does Japan have such amazing pop music like Dessert (no fair, they were made up for the film) while we get Justin Beiber? It's just not fair, I tell you. I'd take "Mail Me" any day over "Lonely Girl."

Then there's the follow-up (but not really) film Noriko's Dinner Table. This is the story of a family during the same period as Suicide Club that is designed to elucidate some of the events of the first film while completely destroying the interpretation of others. A web community exists that sometimes encourages teenage girls to leave home and join up with a quasi-prostitution ring, wherein young escorts take on the role of a daughter, a friend, a mother, or other female relation for very lonely men with no one else. It's actually stranger than Suicide Club. Only far, far less bloody. Except, of course, where scenes from the original film are recreated or reedited for inclusion in Noriko's Dinner Table. Then it flows like Kill Bill: fast, hard, and all over the place. Clean-up must be half the budget for your average Sion Sono production.

It would be irresponsible not to mention Strange Circus, as the title is very apt. There is a minor trend in modern Japanese horror involving authors writing horrific stories, recreating horrific events through fiction, or altering the world with fiction. Sono's attempt is unique, disturbing, and challenging. Picture Flowers in the Attic, only less hopeful and with more characters.

As a director, Sono seems to believe in allowing the audience to figure out what is going on rather than spell everything out. That's probably why his films, rather than his own reputation, is what gets international attention. Modern horror doesn't really try to challenge the viewer. If there's a struggle, it's because of a poorly written screenplay or inconceivable twist. Sono's craft is in opening up what could be a strange but straightforward narrative into something far more open to interpretation and discussion.

In a way, Exte: Hair Extensions is a departure from that. There is a definitive answer to what's happening in the film and it's a doozy. The twist at the end (well, one of them: Sono always has twist upon twist upon twist in his films, mostly to their benefit) is genuinely surprising. And confusing. And perfectly rational in the context of the film. But no less easy to watch.

There are two divergent plot strands in the film. First, killer hair extensions. As in, hair extensions that kill. This is handled with a very interesting balance of high camp and high suspense; they are not mutually exclusive. There will be scenes where you are laughing and groaning one second, covering your eyes the next, then rolling them to the top of your head before shuddering in terror and shedding a tear.

Second, child abuse. I was not expecting this plot element in the film (kind of gets overshadowed by the promise of killer hair extensions in recommendations) but it is handled with such sensitivity and skill by Sono and the cast that I wish more people paid attention to it. Basically, the main character's sister is a crazy party girl (too old to be partying) who abandons her child at the main character's house so she can do more partying. The main character and her roommate discover bruises and cuts. They witness first hand the horrors the mother is subjecting her child to and do everything they can to bring some sense of normalcy to the young girl's life. Even here, there is a blend of camp and suspense that is unpredictable. Well, ok: the results are utterly predictable as a story arc, but the events themselves are shocking and brutal.

If you are in the mood for a fresh horror film that requires you to be engaged in the narrative, give Exte: Hair Extensions a try. I don't think you'll regret it.

I'm not embedding the trailer because it has way too many spoilers. I doubt I would have enjoyed the film nearly as much if I saw that. Literally every death and scare is telegraphed in the trailer.

So, here's another tactic: Did you like Kill Bill Vol. 1? Do you remember the Crazy 88 school girl with the fantastic fight against The Bride? Or the track star character in Battle Royale with the ultimate rape/revenge fantasy? Yeah, she's the lead in this film, playing a totally different character from either film, and she's amazing.

Full review later today.

Film Review: Otto; or, Up with Dead People (2009)

Before watching provocateur Bruce LaBruce's latest film Otto; or, Up with Dead People for the first time, I proudly recounted my understanding of what the film was like, "quasi-porn foreign satirical indie semi-horror film." Technically, the description is accurate. There are light pornographic scenes. It is a foreign film. There are elements of satire. It does behave like a horror film at times. The experience of the film, however, is far greater than its separate parts.

Otto is a young man in Germany who has risen from the dead to rejoin society. He does not remember who he was or how he died. He just knows he craves raw flesh of any kind. He is discovered by Madea Yarn, a filmmaker, creating her political opus--a gay zombie revolution film. The line between reality and fantasy is blurred as it becomes impossible to tell if Otto is actually a zombie or simply playing a role in a film within the film.

Bruce LaBruce uses a variety of great visual tricks and showpieces to bring his vision to life. The film opens in black and white as Otto rises from his single-name grave to embrace the tombstones of his fallen brethren. Madea Yarn's death-obsessed girlfriend, Hella Bent, is only filmed in grainy, 1920s-style back and white. Her dialog is presented as silent film cut away cards and her ghostly appearance remains unchanged even when interacting with the colorful world around her. Otto's perspective is always cast in a bright pink hue, distorting reality into a blood-tinged fantasy of forbidden flesh and social taboo. LaBruce also makes great use of open roads, abandoned amusement park rides, public transportation, and cemeteries to continually ratchet up the tension in the film.

The controversial pornographic scenes are not nearly as explicit as I was led to believe. To start, there are only two. The first involves a pair of zombies dining on each other while one penetrates the other in an open flesh wound. Yes, nudity is shown, but it is so cartoonish and outlandish it could hardly be called pornography anymore than Heavy Metal. The second scene is the much talked about gay zombie orgy, which is no more clear in action than the much-maligned orgy at the end of Perfume: The Story of a Murderer. The only difference, and I assume the source of the controversy, is the the actors in both scenes are men. It's the reaction to homosexuality more so than sexual acts that is feeding into a negative perception of the film.

Some have objected to the high level of camp without the compliment of humor. To me, this is a failure of interpretation. The film is meta-theatrical, focusing on a zombie in a society where a gay subculture of zombie-players exist who happen to be recruited to star in a film about gay zombies overtaking society. I would assume the camp factor goes without question from the conceit of the film. Without camp, this film would be pure melodrama, a few stray sex scenes away from being a movie of the week. With the camp, LaBruce is able to broach a wide range of subjects in an inventive way.

Zombie films, at least the ones that are remembered, have a long tradition of exploring the failings of society. For George A Romero, rampant consumerism is the greatest ill infecting America, a theme he's reflected on from Dawn of the Dead all the way through Diary of the Dead. For Danny Boyle and Alex Garland in 28 Days Later, it's rage, violence, and isolation that hold society back. For Bruce LaBruce, it's homophobia and the failings of mental health care. More than other attempts at socially aware zombie films, LaBruce is knocking on risky territory. Showing Otto be chased by teenagers for clearly being different--gay--is one thing in a post-Matthew Shepard/Laramie Project world. Exploring how warped people can become to be pushed to make films about gay uprisings saving humanity or stumbling about in a haze of alcohol fantasizing about eating flesh is quite another. Together, it's uncomfortable. It's difficult to watch. And it's utterly compelling in the context of Otto.

I'm aware that Bruce LaBruce has a reputation for making films dealing with homophobia, explicit sexual content, and an arguable anti-heterosexual mindset, though I have not seen them myself. Otto; or, Up with Dead People is a sensitive examination of a lost soul doing everything he can to find out who he is and what he should do. It's not a perfect film, and I doubt that was the point. Otto is about the messages, thoughtfully and stylishly presented, and they deserve to be heard.

Trailer embedded below the jump:

Midnight Rec: Night of the Living Dead (1968)

There are three reasons why I've chosen Night of the Living Dead as today's Midnight Rec:

1. My questionable horror film a month wall calendar commanded me to. I don't go against a sign that strong. It's why I relaunched the feature with The Brain that Wouldn't Die.
2. George A. Romero turned 70 years old two days ago (4 Feb) and I thought it would be a fitting tribute to the godfather of zombie cinema. The man's still kicking out ...of the Dead films like they're going out of style. Well, technically they are. What with the influx of fast zombies with superpowers and the ability to learn, use logic, and love.
3. It's a wonderful zombie (technically living dead, but the terms have practically become interchangeable) film. I think that's the key here. It's not just fanboy praise: it's solid filmmaking.

Night of the Living Dead is the unassuming brainchild of writer/director George A. Romero and writer John A. Russo. It sets the standard for all future living dead films. Take a ragtag group of strangers from a community, lock them up into a questionably safe locations, and watch them struggle to survive each other and the unending assault of the living dead.

While Romero would certainly add social, economic, and political subtext to his later films (he loves riffing on consumerism, hence Dawn of the Dead in a shopping mall and Land of the Dead with its towering wealthy shopping oasis), Night of the Living Dead is all about interactions in the face of a disaster. The zombies are great. That's hard to question. The character development through choices made in a chaotic situation is far greater. From the initial "They're coming to get you Barbara" to the family in the basement banding together against living and undead intruders, how the characters choose to deal with each other is the key to the film's success.

Yes, meaning was created with the casting of Duane Jones as Ben, the leader of the survivors. No, Romero did not set out to create a film exposing the dangers of unquestioning racism. He's said many times that he cast Duane Jones because he was the best actor for the part regardless of the color of his skin. Jones knew when he was cast the film would be seen in a different light, and Romero and Russo realized that soon enough.

Through a stupid loophole in copyright law that destroyed many films in this time period, the creators lost the rights to the film by omission of the (c) symbol in the final theatrical version. This means that anyone can use and manipulate the material however they want. There are rereleases with five seconds of new footage where the profit goes to the new "creators." There are unlicensed remakes, colorized editions, and redubbed recordings constantly shooting out at consumers. It's a risk to pick out any edition. Some are cropped, cut, edited, rerecorded, reorganized, or digitally manipulated without warning. Others are so low quality you can't tell what's happening on the screen. I've yet to find an edition with subtitles, probably because the economic appeal of the film for companies is a free film with a built in audience.

I've embedded the cleanest copy I could find online below. Of course, I feel any film fan should have a watchable copy in their DVD collection, though not everyone would agree.

Jump.

Grammy/Oscar Round-Up

Grammys: The awards split in ways I didn't expect, with the exception of Gaga. I nailed NARAS viewing her only as a dance artist with a breakout hit. Swift takes Album because Kanye West is a braying ass; Beyonce takes Song because even NARAS doesn't understand that award recognizes the songwriting, not the finished product; Kings of Leon take Record because they sure weren't going to give Dave Matthews Band Album of the Year and something rock needed to be in. Sadly, with the exception of Beyonce, I see every other nominee's career on the decline in the very near future. Country cross-overs have  a very short life span, dance acts are replaced by the next new sound, and older rock acts get nominated just because enough people remember they exist.

Zac Brown Band took Best New Artist, probably because the country branch could band together and win over the smaller R&B branch while everyone else scratched their heads over who MGMT, Silversun Pickups, and The Ting Tings were.

Eminem won every rap award he was up for. The Yeah Yeah Yeahs lost Alternative Album. A musical comedy album beat stand-up comedy albums. A revival won Theatrical Album category over new shows. And the sky is still blue.

And now for less cynicism.

Oscars: Tomorrow morning, we will know who is nominated for the Academy Awards. This will be a momentous occasion for many possible reasons.

For one thing, we'll see how the return to 10 Best Picture nominees plays out. It seems certain for Avatar, Precious, The Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds, and Up in the Air to be nominated, but what else? Will we see populist choices like Star Trek or The Hangover? Acting vehicles like Julie & Julia or Nine? Animated films like Up? Foreign films? Documentaries? Wait, scratch that last one. That'll never happen. 

Another possible change is the Best Original Song category. It's not obligatory any longer. If the shortlisted songs didn't score high enough at the music branch's required screening, there will be no Best Original Song category. So there could be 0, 2, 3, or 5 nominees tomorrow.

Then there are the acting categories. Every single one seems to have one spot up for grabs, at least. Best Supporting Actress is the least clear, as everyone and their kindergarten teacher has given the award to Mo'Nique. Will we see multiple Up in the Air's or Inglourious Basterds or Nines to fill out the category? Will they be selected by performance quality or their ability to sit politely with a genuine smile on their face when Mo'Nique wins the Oscar?

Speaking of the muddy acting categories, could Avatar's massive green screen acting campaign pay off with a nomination for Sigourney Weaver in Supporting Actress? The campaign is smartly showing stills of Weaver in her human form in the film, in the green suit, and the corresponding animated shot showing how much of her performance transferred to the CGI of the film. A similar campaign is brewing for Zoe Saldana, tough Weaver has the edge in being a two-time previous nominee who is also the only woman ever nominated for a sci-fi film. If the Academy remembers how much they used to love Weaver, we could really be making history.

Most important of all is Best Director. Why? Katherine Bigelow is the favorite to win Director at this point. If the domination of precursors didn't push her that way, the DGA did. As Roger Ebert tweeted enthusiastically, 57 of the 60 DGA winners went on to win Best Director; 58 of 60 went on to win Best Picture. Unless the Academy really votes for the creation of new jobs in the industry (it happens), Bigelow will most likely win if nominated.

Of course, this could all be moot tomorrow when Clint Eastwood and Rob Marshall receive Best Director nominations over Bieglow and Lee Daniels, Nine, Invictus, An Education, The Last Station, and A Serious Man fill out Best Picture out of familiarity, and Best Song is announced with five nominees coming from Disney, an adapted musical, a foreign film, a music-influenced character piece, and another animated film. But a guy can dream.

Midnight Rec: I Bury the Living (1958)

I don't know how the weather is by you, but it is absolutely freezing in my neck of NJ. It's cold enough that I've called off plans to take a trip into NYC for research and a movie. I have two schools of thought on dealing with inopportune conditions: watch something that takes place in far greater conditions, or watch something that makes me realize things could be a lot worse. Today is the day for the latter.

I Bury the Living is a polarizing B-Movie classic from director Albert Band. You hear stories about producer interference in films all the time. Sometimes an ending is too dark; other times, too confusing or otherwise off-putting. With this film, all three have been cited as reasons why the original ending of the film was changed. 

I Bury the Living is the story of man who discovers he has the ability to cause anyone to die with the use of a funeral plot map. It's an effective device within the film that results in a very nice build of suspense. Originally a purely supernatural tale, the film's ending was changed to offer a logical explanation for everything that occurred. Some hate the hackneyed twist ending, claiming it makes no sense (it doesn't); others embrace the film for its style and performances (they're good). There are some very disorienting and unnerving visual effects used in what's mostly a one-room film. The transformation from cemetery office to psychological landscape is slick and stylish. The constraints of the budget do not show.

Sadly, this is a horror film that often gets dumped into 5/10/25/50/100 Scary Movie collections with a poor transfer and unexplained cuts to the running time. You could do much worse than this YouTube upload, but I'm sure there's a better quality torrent available. The problem is how the film lacks an actual DVD release by itself. 

The trailer is available after the jump.

Film Review: Red (2008)

I would consider myself a fan of Lucky McKee. This is the writer/director that brought forth some of the more engaging horror films of the 2000s, including May, The Woods, and Roman. He's the type of director I like to see do well in the industry because he genuinely cares about the collaborative aspect of filmmaking. He surrounds himself with a talented cast and crew and remains loyal to those he really worked well with. Angela Bettis, for example, has collaborated with him on four projects, including a jump from actress to director in the role-reversal scenario of Roman. However, McKee seems to be struggling to actually break into the studio system. His film The Woods went from being so protected and cherished M. Night Shyamalan had to change his film title to The Village to being dumped straight to DVD with all special features erased from the disc. More unnerving is his role in the 2008 drama Red.

The short version is this: about halfway through filming, McKee was removed as director of the film and replaced with Trygve Allister Diesen. Rumors of tension between producers and director abounded over the web and it was unknown how much or little of Red would actually be taken from McKee's filming. Thankfully, the finished project not only bares his credit but a clear indication of his influence on the production.

Red, based on the novel by Jack Ketchum, is the story of Avery Ludlow, a kind old man whose best friend in the world is his dog Red. One day, while fishing, a group of teenagers attempt to rob him at gunpoint and eventually shoot Red at point-blank range to punish the old man. Avery decides to seek an apology from the boys, but it seems their families have a bit too much power and skill at lying for him to resolve the issues in a civilized manner.

McKee's fingerprints are all over this film and have never been used to greater effect. Instead of exploiting the violence against Red, the film focuses on the interactions between characters. The dialog moves at a natural pace with realistic responses. There is no overacting even when the film should be reaching made-for-TV level histrionics. The film is natural. McKee's skill as a director lies not in an innovative vision, but execution so believable that any last act twist or turn he can toss at you feels like the only conclusion. This is not meant to downplay the abilities of Diesen as a director. Obviously, replacing someone on a film shoot is a difficult position to be in and the fact that the film comes off as cohesive as it does is a testament to both directors' capabilities.

The cast is a great mix of veterans and newcomers that work well off of each other. Brian Cox, as Avery, would have been in consideration for the Best Actor Oscar if this was a higher budgeted film with a wider theatrical release. His performance is likable and gruff at the same time. This is a beautiful portrait of a man who loses everything he has yet still chooses to be a good outstanding citizen. As the trio of wayward teens, Noel Fisher, Kyle Gallner, and Shiloh Fernandez accurately portray the dynamics of a group of young people knowingly acting out just because they can. From the remorseless ringleader (Noel Fisher) to the reluctant whipping boy (Kyle Gallner) to the thrill-seeker (Shiloh Fernandez), the commitment to realism in their rebellious mindset makes the circumstances of the film all the more disturbing. Also noteworthy is Robert Englund as one of the fathers, riding on the coattails of the richer family to upgrade his home at the price of silence.

The only thing that seems to be out of place in the film is the score. It's a bit too predictable for this type of film. It's almost like someone wanted a very standard score for a thriller that didn't actually watch the film. The film is quieter than that, more subtle. It did not require pounding music cues and sudden bursts of melodramatic orchestrations to get its point across.

The line of believability is blurred when the action sequences begin. As far as I'm concerned, all of the major stunt set-pieces of the film could have been achieved with a very light hand and crafty editing like the murder of Red. However, the film jumps from nuanced drama to explosive action film and back again all throughout the climax. This film didn't need all the bells and whistles of your standard high-octane thriller and the ending suffers for it. It's not that these big scenes aren't well-executed; they are simply out of place in what could have been a quiet, powerful film.

Red is an upsetting film in the best way possible. It's very easy to grow attached to Avery, making the entire arc of the story that much more important. If you are in the mood for a well-acted drama with clean execution, Red is a great choice.

Film Review: The Butcher (2007)

Warning: The reviewed film is so stupid and poorly made that a potential viewer must not approach the content lightly. Caution must be exercised to preserve your brain power.

Even with the diminished expectations that come from a fake snuff film, The Butcher serves as an example of everything that can possibly go wrong in modern low budget horror. Four average citizens are kidnapped, gagged, chained, and fitted with helmet-cameras for their direct to video debut as victims in a snuff film. The film randomly jumps from the perspective of the director and staff to the victims. The camera inexplicably shakes as if anyone with a viewfinder is constantly seizing. The quality is grainy, the color washed out, and the sets as drab as oatmeal on dry white toast.

Anyone going into a fake snuff film knows not to expect high production values. But there is a difference between a film with a shoestring budget and a film that doesn't know what it's doing. The Butcher is clearly the latter. From the quality of sound to the believability of the effects, the film fails at every possible angle of technique. I'm almost willing to say the film would have been improved if they left the lens caps on and forgot to turn on the mics.

It's almost impossible to review a film like The Butcher. There is a clear audience for this type of film and they only care about the gore, not the film quality. Even at this The Butcher fails. The effects are cut away from with a jump to a different camera every time something interesting happens. The most you see is a puddle of blood or low-rent bruising/cuts in a reflection. I normally am against gratuitous unjustified gore, but in this sub-genre that's the name of the game. If nothing else, the room should be a hazard to the actors from the amount of goo pumped onto the floor. Karo syrup and food coloring aren't so expensive as to require a delicate hand and moderation. Toss in some dish soap and clean-up is no longer an issue.

Perhaps most offensive of all is the ending. The implausibility reaches unforetold heights as the conceit of the production of a snuff film told from multiple perspectives is rendered impossible by the last ten minutes. If the footage primarily used during the film is removed from the rest of the footage, how can it possibly have been pieced together for what the viewer sees? It can't. I'm willing to accept a pig-masked muscle-man raping his victims in any hole, natural or carved out, in a warehouse with big open windows completely surrounded by a business district, but I can't get past this ending.

Even die-hard snuff fans should avoid this film. There's a reason the film lacks DVD distribution: it doesn't deserve it. I can't imagine what possessed Netflix to carry it at all.

Film Review: Shrooms (2007)

It never ceases to amaze me how someone can come up with a novel idea for a horror film and drag it straight into the ground. It’s rarely a matter of execution. The problem often lies in a doubt that sets in. A good film can become a forgettable film through unnecessary inclusion of clichés just to better meet audience expectations and genre standards.

Shrooms starts as a promising small horror film. Five friends from the US visit an Irish friend for a drug filled vacation. Their target is a rare hallucinogenic mushroom described as one of the strongest that can be found. While gathering their crops, one friend consumes a poisonous mushroom that can either kill a person through organ failure or imbue mystical psychic properties on a survivor. This friend begins to have horrific visions of each of the friends dying. Is any of this really happening or is it merely a side effect of the drugs?

That would have been a unique horror film. The narrative might not have held up for a full feature leading to a satisfactory conclusion, but it would have stood out as something different in the realm of modern horror. Too bad writer Pearse Elliott began laying the clichés on thick. The friends get into a car accident early on that puts them on edge. Backwoods rednecks (their Irish equivalent, at least) show up to eat road kill and wander off with menacing grimaces. A long-haired ghost is spotted toying with the friends in an impossibly jerky, jumpy style of movement. A killer with a strange weapon and a cloak appears to torment the friends. Worst of all, a mysterious abandoned home for wayward boys looms in the distance with a dark secret history. Instead of enhancing the narrative, the clichés act as a distraction to the interesting psychological elements in play.

All of this is a terrible shame. The cast is great. They all sell some very tricky emotional shifts on top of a convincing hallucinatory haze. The cinematography is great for being shot with mostly natural light. Colors are used to great eerie effect in gorgeously composed shots of natural and artificial landscapes. The music cues are a bit generic and some of the effects editing is a bit derivative, but the placement and execution are solid. Director Paddy Breathnatch was rightly nominated for Ireland’s biggest film award in direction. Even if the film falls short of greatness, Breathnatch’s direction is superb.

When the film is allowed to breathe in its own fumes, it’s quite startling. The problems all lie in the clichés. This was not a film that needed added familiarity. It’s well established in horror film history that drug abuse and sexual activity will lead to bad things. Even if placed in a whole new context, these temptations will send out a signal that the characters will suffer for their behavior. I could look past the clichés if the twist ending was anything different; it’s not. In fact, it’s so well tread and out of place in this film that I feel it necessary to discourage others from watching this film. It is essential to have a high tolerance for very predictable, uninventive horror films to get any joy from Shrooms; everyone else will see the film drift away into a numb cloud of cluttered memories.

Midnight Rec: Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon

In a thread at Pajiba, I wound up getting into a discussion (sort of) about Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon. This just so happens to be one of my favorite films from 2007. The lead, Nathan Baesal, is still my Best Actor winner despite constant protests from film buffs on various forums.

The film can be polarizing, but at the very least, it has a solid concept. Leslie Vernon has contacted a documentary crew to follow him as he works towards becoming the next slasher icon. He has the help of his mentor - a slasher icon himself - and his wife - the former survivor girl  - and undergoes many milestones, like getting his own Ahab - the crazy doctor/scientist/policeman who obsesses over the killer. Leslie has already picked out his survivor girl and stalks her until the night of the big killing. The film shifts from first person to third person perspective going into the final act as the documentary crew realizes that Leslie Vernon actually plans on putting on the mask and killing a house full of teenagers. It's a polarizing change in an otherwise loved film, as some embrace the shift to new stars while others dispise the change in filming technique. Regardless, the performances are excellent and the screenplay's references to horror cliches amusing.

It's available on Netflix Instant service (wow, have they ever beefed that up since the last time I was a member), and I'm embedding the trailer below the jump.

Opening Today: 15 January 2010: A Guide to New Release Films

This weekend is not a packed as last weekend. There are only three wide and four limited releases. Fortunately, some of them promise to be doozys.

Opening Wide: