I honestly don’t know what I would rate “The Collector” (2009).  I know it’s an effective horror movie, because it’s frightening and disturbing.  It was good and scary — especially when imperiled children come into play.  But there are some levels of gore and violence against innocents that are too much even for a horror fan like me.

I kept turning it off.  It was just too much.  And if you know my taste in movies, that’s saying a lot.

A glance at the imdb.com message boards shows that this movie is widely reviled.  I don’t think that this film is quite as bad as many make it out to be.

There are hints of real creativity here — there is a ton of character development, mood setting, and story.  You can tell that the screenwriters tried hard to present us with something different, and create something more than a standard slasher flick.

Some of this pays off.  We’ve got a pretty interesting anti-hero as a leading man — a burglar who wants to steal from a wealthy family, but who is yet noble enough to defend their lives from a brutal serial killer.  This role is excellently portrayed by Josh Stewart.  I like this guy.  He’s good actor.  I liked him as Bane’s creepy second-in-command in “The Dark Knight Rises” (2012).  He made a great bad guy in that movie, and he deserves to play the lead bad guy in a decent thriller.

There is a really nice little trick employed by the filmmakers too — contrasting the horrible violence with a dreamy, soft alt-rock soundtrack. Any movie that features Mazzy Star’s “Fade Into You” can’t be all bad.

This movie suffers, however, from the flaws that so many people point out. It’s confusing.  The sets are dark; the action is muddled at times.  Certain things happen for apparently no reason.  (One character fires a shotgun at another at very close range and misses.) 

The title antagonist’s motives are only hinted at.  “HE COLLECTS PEOPLE!” one victim screams.  And his modus operandi seems confusing.  How does he have time to set up all these booby traps in the homes he invades?  Why bother, if his victims there are already captured?  Why not just snatch people and leave?   Was he expecting Josh Stewart’s character to intervene?

At any rate, if you do watch this film, you’d better have a strong stomach.

“Carrie” (2013) was an unnecessary remake, but at least it was well made; I’d give it an 8 out of 10. Julianne Moore gave a beautiful performance as always, and Chloe Grace Moretz was mesmerizing — particularly in wrath mode. I recognized her instantly from the fantastic “Let Me In” (2010). I’m hoping she has a long career as a leading lady in the horror genre.

Beyond that, though, this remake brings little new to the table. If memory serves, “Carrie” was a relatively simple story when Stephen King originally wrote it (I read the book in high school), and I think this flick sticks to the book. There is minimal exposition about Carrie’s powers, how or why she develops them, or how many “others” there are out there like her. There isn’t much of a detailed or layered story that draws the viewer in. (Compare this to the above-mentioned “Let Me In,” which was disturbingly different and unexpected in so many ways.) This is really just a simple adolescent revenge tale with sexual undercurrents and an arbitrary horror-movie plot device. This is a competently made scary movie, but not classic horror.

A few things near then end confused me. There are … stones falling on the house? From where? Moved by Carrie?

What is the significance of the very final shot (and the screaming)?

Why the surprise plot reveal about the supporting character? I actually cannot remember if this was in King’s novel.

The stabbiest show on television is also one of the best; based on its first season, I’d give “The Following” a 9 out of 10.

The premise is a goddam creative and scary mashup. Cults exist (and are frightening) in real life; serial killers exist (and are frightening) in real life. Why not base a horror series on a cult of serial killers? With the advent of the Internet (as the show wisely incorporates) it seems so obvious that you wonder why it hasn’t been written before. 

Other aspects of the story are also highly creative and original. The cult’s “literary” ideology (as opposed to a strictly religious one) is a nice twist, and nicely plausible. Adding in the domestic terrorist angle also makes sense and makes for a scarier group of adversaries.

In the real world, I imagine such a marriage would be more difficult than the show depicts. I was a mediocre psychology student, but I do remember some things. Serial killers tend to work alone. Many are sociopaths who are incapable of empathy, and they’d therefore be actually less likely to be attracted to a cult out of a need to “belong.” Sociopaths are also egotists who aggrandize themselves; they would be less likely to idolize a cult leader than you or I would. Finally, they actually do not come from “all walks of life.” There is a preponderance of white males in their 20’s and 30’s, and they’re usually of above average intelligence.

All of the above are forgivable in exchange for a great story device.

This show has good acting all around, but especially from Kevin Bacon (of course) and Valorie Curry as “Emma.” Shawn Ashemore is really good. James Purefoy is great as the Big Bad — I’ve liked this guy as far back as his turn in “Resident Evil” 12 years ago.

If the show does have a problem, it’s that it spends too much time following characters that are thinly drawn and neither interesting nor likable. Does anyone really care about Emma, Jacob and … that other guy? Episodes devoted to them are less enjoyable. Clare and Joey are so thinly drawn that they’re usually boring. The most interesting character is Annie Parisse’s Debra — especially after we discover her motivations via flashback. The show might actually be stronger if it were centered around her, instead of Kevin Bacon’s Ryan Hardy.

There is an overused and predictable story-arc plot device. Various characters are kidnapped by the bad guys only to be rescued — I think the show went back to the well one too many times with this story concept.

There is also the occasional cliché, like the reluctant hero and the killer’s “we’re the same” speech.

Still, this is good stuff — it isn’t NBC’s superior “Hannibal,” but it’s still a terrific show.

“There are no compacts between lions and men, and wolves and lambs have no accord.”

Homer

ODE TO INSOMNIA:

O, Insomnia!
I thought I’d lost you,
You reappearing keeper of sleeplessness,
You ever awakening angel,
You fickle little midnight affliction …
(Seriously, though, fuck you.)

A friend e-mailed me and mentioned her diet, and I immediately read “Diet,” as in the Japanese legislature (which is controlled by the bad guys in “Debt of Honor.”)

Seriously, I love that book.

“Good little sunbeams must learn to fly,
“But it’s madly ungay when the goldfish die.”

— Adrian and Francisco, from W.H. Auden’s “The Sea and the Mirror”