Change Your Image
jbbeverley
Learning the drums and guitar, J.B. formed his first band The Bad Habits in 1993 (or 1994?). An old-school punk sound, rooted in influences like The Misfits, FEAR, Black Flag, and Mot�rhead, the Bad Habits made an small name for themselves in the DC area. The band broke up in 1996, and J.B. went through two short-lived bands inside of a year.
With the Bad Habits gone, Beverley drifted around off and on. Working odd jobs and traveling by bus and freight train, J.B. began writing old time country blues songs and busking on various street corners to get by. He soon began commuting between the Washington DC area and New York City in 1998 when he became the front-man for The MURDER JUNKIES, former band of the late GG Allin. The gig lasted over a year, but ended when Beverley found himself at odds with the law back in the DC area.
In 1999, after dealing with the legal issues, J.B. spent several months in Florida compiling his country blues songs, and re-learning some old standards. He emerged back in the DC area later that year with his honky-tonk outfit J.B. Beverley and THE WAYWARD DRIFTERS, and subsequently began touring locally and regionally with the band.
In the fall of 2002, J.B. formed another punk rock band in the same vein as the Bad Habits called The Little White Pills. Reminiscent of the Bad Habits, the Little White Pills were a heavier, more refined band, with a rough edge and some mature playing. The Little White Pills released a self-produced CD in 2003 called "Live At The Velvet Lounge", and did a summer tour that year, and a couple of weekenders the next year.
In 2004, J.B. rejoined the Murder Junkies for two tours, and the Wayward Drifters released a self-produced CD entitled "Highball". J.B. also found time to record some local projects and work on new material for all of his respective bands.
In 2005, the Wayward Drifters launched a spring tour called "The American Highball Tour", and spent most of the summer touring with friend Hank Williams III. The Wayward Drifters immediately hit the studio after the summer touring and have recorded their debut studio CD titled "Dark Bar & A Juke Box" for HELLTRAIN RECORDS (Beverley's own label). The CD was met with rave reviews and praise from all over the world, and the band toured virtually non-stop from 2006-2009.
In June of 2009, J.B. Beverley & The Wayward Drifters released their sophomore CD "Watch America Roll By" to rave reviews from The U.S. and Europe. Early in 2010, the Wayward Drifters toured Europe for the first time, and in 2011, J.B. announced not only a forthcoming book, but some film-related projects in the works as well.
Reviews
A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010)
A Few Nice Shots Here And There, But An Epic Failure
As someone in his mid-thirties, I grew up with the original NOES films. I can remember seeing the first two films sometime in 1986 while at a friend's house. Back then, renting VHS videos wasn't that old a concept, and the idea of renting a couple scary flicks with my buddy and his older brother was quite the adventure to me.
I know that a lot of people set out to hate this film. They wanted to hate it. To be candid, I didn't want to hate it at all. I sat down to watch it with as open a mind as once could have. However, much like all the other "re-imaginings" that have come out in the last decade or better, I found this attempt at NOES to be nothing more than a quickly thrown together attempt to make money.
For starters, there is virtually no character development at all. We are introduced to a kill scene immediately, and the follow-up kills are not only half-ass thrown together, but poorly executed. I have seen better special effects in no budget indie horror than the FX used for Dean's death scene. It's an utter insult to my intelligence. A four inch steak knife goes plunging into his neck and rips across from side to side, and all we see is a trickle of blood? Come one! Likewise, Kris' death pales in comparison to Tina's death scene in the original, and yet the industry has had 25+ years to compete with it, if not top it. I won't dissect the other kills, but all I can say is that they were a disappointment.
For a film cast with some great talent, I was let down by the delivery. Rooney Mara is a great actress, but comes off as a powerless mute in this film. She doesn't seem to have any sense of herself until the final scene, and by then it is too little, too late for the viewer. Likewise, Jackie Earle Haley and Clancy Brown are both seasoned veteran actors.. both amazing in their own right. Yet, Clancy has a virtual non-existent role in this film, and Jackie Earle Haley's take on Freddy has him coming off like a mongoloid with a speech impediment rather than a vicious killer. I know, I know.. "You're just biased because Robert Englund was Freddy for so long!" - YES I AM. No one on Earth could play Krueger besides Robert, and to be candid.. had the producers wanted to make this film at least watchable, they SHOULD have cast Englund in his most notable role. At least then it might have been on-par with some of the worse original sequels.
I was impressed with a few of the shots that they used, and I enjoyed some of the holes they filled in this time around that were too risky to emphasize in the original. The molester aspect was cleverly inserted, and Freddy's human death scene weren't horrible, but by and large this film was the rushed out product of a studio trying to capitalize on a name. Much like the re-imaginings of Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Hills Have Eyes, Last House On The Left, Friday The 13th, and others, the Nightmare on Elm Street remake falls way short of what it could have been. Not only as a fan of the original series, but as a fan of horror films in general, I couldn't dare to give this film more than 3 out of 10 stars.. and I think that is being very generous.
So long as the studios keep butchering classics (what next? JAWS? The Exorcist?)there will be plenty of room for disappointment. If you want to see modern-looking kids with laptops, cell phones, and Emo haircuts being stalked by a mongoloid who isn't scary at all, then surely check this film out. However, if you want to be scared and moved, I suggest you either stick to the original, or you let Freddy sleep.
Storm Warning (2007)
Modern Horror Fans Won't Like It.. But Old School Horror Fans Might Just Appreciate...
Before WWIII erupts: THE FOLLOWING IS MY OPINION.. Nothing more than that.
In an age where movies feature zero character development, a very thin plot, and a kill every three minutes.. I was pleasantly surprised to find Storm Warning a more traditional and fun movie to watch.
I have heard the comparisons:
"Another Wolf Creek" - WRONG. This film has a much more rich plot than Wolf Creek, and has a completely different flow and style.
"Another Texas Chainsaw Rip Off" - UNFAIR STATEMENT. This film is NOTHING like TCM. The backwoods loonies are not half-retarded inbred yokels, rather some sadistic fellows who have been in the brush for a bit too long.
"Boring" - Compared to what? This film is constantly moving..
Granted, we've all seen the "innocent couple / group of people lost in the woods" set up before. True enough.. HOWEVER, the plot specifics are original (by today's standards) and the writing is superb. The lighting and cinematography are exceptional, and the acting and direction of the film are tip-top.. Especially given the admitted low budget.
I think that modern horror fans who are used to a kill every three minutes will hate this film due to the lack of gratuitous splatter. However the kills that are featured are ALL brutal and unique. I'd prefer a movie with some good build up and powerful turns over a film that is just mindless gore any day.. To see the same people who praised the Friday the 13th remake bashing this film is laughable.. So in detail, here is my assessment:
The Plot: We've seen it before.. City folk trying to fight off crazed hillbillies. Nothing new here. However, the specifics of the story, the characters, and the build-up are very realistic and human... not formulaic and tired. I had no trouble staying locked into the story.. and despite a hint of predictability, the film delivers.. I love the fact that had the city-folk not tampered with the house (nor the shed) that it's implied they might have been left alone.
The Writing: This story moves, and the dialog is very well-crafted. Everett De Roche did a phenomenal job making the story-line believable and realistic.
The Acting: The actors all deliver. Period. No weak links in my opinion. I have heard people talk trash about both Nadia Farès and Robert Taylor's performance.. especially the latter. However, given the types of people they are supposed to be, the delivery comes off as very real and true to form. Personally, I think that they both gave strong performances, and stayed true to the nature of their characters. Also, I must say that David Lyons won me over as an actor. That guy steals the show, and his performance alone is worth watching the film. I haven't seen an actor with that much physical command in a while, and his performance was a pleasant surprise.
The Cinematography: This film was beyond "well shot", especially with budget constraints.. I was highly impressed with the movement and the camera angles.. Very smooth and very bold. I did notice a couple repeat shots.. one of which is used both backwards and forwards within a couple minutes of one-another.. but it doesn't take away from how wonderfully filmed this movie is.
The Directing: Personally, I think this is Jamie Blanks' best work to date (that I have seen), and I will be keeping an eye out for future films by this very talented director. Personally, I enjoyed this film way more than the (more modern and trendy-styled) Urban Legend. I must also commend the tasteful use of CGI. I am so sick of computer-based shots that insult my intelligence.. and the use of CGI in this film (while present) is very tastefully done.
For the older, more old school horror fans, this film is a breath of fresh air. I am extremely picky about horror films.. Even a bit snobby. I am not easily impressed, and this film is impressive. It is rare to find a modestly budgeted film that has solid writing, directing, acting, and flow... and Storm Warning delivers.. This film is anything but "another Wolf Creek", and it is surely no TCM.. Although, I did enjoy the nod to TCM when Poppy meets the hidden bottle. The sound effect was an eerie reminder of the original TCM. Beyond that, this film stands in a class of it's own. Nicely done.
Masters of Horror: Homecoming (2005)
Masters of Horrifying Me With Garbage
The only reason I gave this episode of "Masters of Horror" a 2 instead of a 1 is because the two lead actors are good, and it wasn't shot on VHS. The story, the dialog, and the plot are ridiculous.
Talking / Driving zombies who come back to vote and sway the political tide against the war! Give me a break! What next, zombies who come back to go skydiving? Maybe zombies who come back to host QVC shows?
I never supported the Iraq war, but I do support the courage and sacrifice of the men and women of our armed forces; and "Homecoming" was disrespectful in that it mocks the TRUE horror of war.
With zombies being mass produced in today's market... this is the SPAM of zombie-related entertainment. How "Homecoming" made it onto "Masters of Horror" is beyond me.
Staunton Hill (2009)
Let's Be Fair About This
I viewed "Staunton Hill" last night, and I did so expecting it to be absolutely worthless. I have read the horrid reviews and listened to all the know-it-all crap being slung on various message boards. Having given the film a watch, I have to say that certain criticisms of Cameron Romero are unfair.
The Writing:
We've all seen it before; a group of kids in some remote wilderness get chased down and murdered by some oddball inbred family. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt. I can accept that played out formula if the characters take their own shape, and if there is a fresh take on said formula. However, I never saw that happen in this film. But rather than throw stones at Cameron Romero, one needs to look at David Rountree, the writer. The weakest element of this movie was by far the writing. The characters are predictable, one-dimensional, and poorly defined. The back-story is very vague, and there isn't much "horror" to the film until the last 15-20 minutes. The first 50+ minutes of "Staunton Hill" basically equal the first 15 minutes of similar films using that same "formula". That much is all true, but those criticisms should be directed at David Rountree rather than at Mr. Romero.
The Acting:
The acting in this film is hard to gage. I know that there were some talented people involved in this movie, but I fear that the poor writing ruined any chance these actors had to do their best. I've seen well- written scripts tackled by average actors in a respectable way, but I have never seen good actors be able to do good things with a poorly written script.
The Directing:
Where the directing suffered the most was in some of the jumpy edits and unsteady hand-held shots. There was good use of cam-cables and dollies at times, and there were a few really nice shots, but there was also some under/overdeveloped shots that didn't match up in certain scenes. With that said, I have to point out that this low budget film was indeed shot on Super 16, and thus presented a bit more of a challenge to shoot than HD.
The Characters:
To be fair and honest, I don't know what the script called for, but I feel that the characters could have been brought to life a lot more. I felt that the character of Buddy was a bit scattered and senseless, and I felt that the back-story on both the kids and the family was too vague. If you are going to tap that old "formula", than it is essential to make the writing as fresh as possible. I found that I couldn't identify with any of them because I didn't know enough about them. They all became caricatures rather than characters. Is Cameron Romero guilty of taking on a poorly-written and under-budgeted movie? Yes he is. However, it is unfair to blame him for either the writing or the budget. Could some of his shots have been more steady? Sure! But there are also some nice shots in there too.
The Gore:
I am picky about gore. I love it, and I am tired of CGI special effects. One redeeming quality about this film is that while we see no real "horrors" until the last 20 minutes of the movie, what we do see is decent... and not done on computers.
"Worst Movie Ever" Tag:
I watch a lot of films. My collection is vast and large. I have read the comments by people talking about this film as a "1 out of 10" worse. To be objective about it, I don't think this film is quite a "1" or a "2". The latest remake of both "Night of the Living Dead" (3D) and "Day of the Dead" were both 1000 times WORSE than "Staunton Hill" could ever be. A friend of mine brought me a DVD of 2006's "Night of the Dead". I'd dare ANY of you who gave this film a "1" or "2" rating to go view any of those films and then tell me that "Staunton Hill" is that terrible?
Don't get me wrong, "Staunton Hill" is nothing groundbreaking. Not even close. It is an old story that you have seen before. However, I will give the cast and Cameron Romero credit for their efforts. I know it's hard to please a modern horror audience when someone isn't getting their guts or brains strewn across the screen every 3-5 minutes. But with that as a given, the writing MUST be as strong as the cast and crew... otherwise you can't really do much.
I will write this film off as a "4.5" and wait to see what Cameron Romero does with a stronger script and a little more money. I think he's capable of great things if he plays it right, and I hope to see him make his own name in the horror field. We need to remove his wonderful father for a moment, give Cameron enough room to grow into his own shoes, and to learn from his own mistakes. As for "Staunton Hill", I'm going to pass at adding it to my collection... but as for Cameron Romero, I think the future might be bright when it is said and done. Time will tell.
-JB
Zombieland (2009)
I wanted to HATE it... I really did
After seeing the trailer for this film, I didn't think it was going to be all that good. I am an old school zombie fan, and I don't care for many of the modern films. I like a few of the European films from the 70's & 80's, the original Return of the Living Dead, and of course.. Romero's films TOP the list. In recent years, the only zombie movie that has really jumped out at me was Shaun Of The Dead. Barring those films, I haven't likes too much of the zombie sub-genre. Zombieland however, is a very noble effort.
The idea of Comedy Zombie movies doesn't sit well with some people, and I understand that... But I do think that a lot of time and attention to detail was put into this movie. The casting was (overall) good, the story-line was decent enough, and the action/gore is well spaced and fluid. For the most part the writing is good. There are however a few awkwardly written exchanges, and a few humorous lags. But these problems are VERY minimal, and the momentum makes up for said lags.
Will Zombieland go down in history as an "epic" zombie film? I don't know. What I do know is that if you like the genre itself, and want to see a good stab at it with a budget, then this is worth a viewing. -JB
Drag Me to Hell (2009)
The Return Of Raimi
As a guy in his 30's, I grew up on the early work of Sam Raimi. After "Army Of Darkness" though, I noticed a change in his style and format. To be honest, I didn't care for any of the Spider Man films. I don't think they were terrible, just not as wonderful as the hype. Moreover, I don't think that they reflect the style of film that I came to know as Raimi's.
I opted out of seeing DMTH at first. I didn't think the trailer was all that interesting, and I figured I'd catch it on DVD down the line. At the suggestion of an old friend I went and saw it tonight, and was pleasantly surprised. More so than I expected to be. Although it is no "Evil Dead" film, the work embodies what I had come to define as Sam Raimi's style. With Spider Man and such, I felt like he played to his audience: kids. With DMTH, it becomes obvious that the guy felt like making a real horror film again.
I'll give him a pass on the CGI, as it is tastefully done compared to most these days. I'll also note that the acting was good, the flow of the film was good, and some the shots themselves are amazing. This film is by far the closest thing to Sam's older work that he has done since "Army", and should please his older fan-base. The kids today who aren't happy unless someone gets killed on screen every five minutes don't like this film, but those of us who are on the other end of that debate may just find a little slice of something worth a damn.
The Devil's Tomb (2009)
A Major Let Down
I don't know where to begin with this flick. Maybe here: Soldiers who don't at all act & move like trained soldiers, female soldiers with make-up on while in combat, some third rate CGI effects that I could do on my PC in fifteen minutes, and enough plot-holes and unexplained crap to lose count of fairly fast.
In fairness, Cuba Gooding Jr. and Bill Mosely made the film ALMOST watchable. But those two alone couldn't save the horrid storyline, and the above-mentioned things. I tried very hard to get past some of the issues that I found with this film, but it was to no avail. After 48 minutes I found myself being thankful that I was more than half way into the film.
I thought years ago (in the 80's) that low-end horror flicks couldn't get any more lame, but was DEAD WRONG. It is sad to see someone as talented as the Oscar winning Cuba Gooding taking roles in such ridiculous movies. I hope that his appearance in this one didn't ruin his career long-term.
-JB
To kako (2005)
Nothing too special, but a decent effort!
"To Kako" (aka "Evil") was a film that I didn't expect much out of. A Greek zombie film seemed like a disaster waiting to happen, but I was pleasantly surprised to find it a noble effort despite it's flaws.
The film does come off as fairly novice. It may be cultural boundaries, but I am also picky. Certain people around here call this film "trash", but I don't think that is fair. Compared to Romero's films, EVERY zombie film COULD be considered somewhere between second rate and "trash". This film is somewhere in between, but is worth a look if you like the genre.
What I did like about the film what what they were able to do with an obviously limited budget. The acting is nothing above average but also not "horrible" as some have suggested. Given the budget, the prosthetics and other optical FX were passable. I was relieved to not see an assault of CGI animated gore. I found a couple of the effects laughable, but others to be much better.
There are come continuity flaws, and some moments where the film drags, but the story is fairly well crafted, and the the gore-hounds in the audience will be happy at the amount of splatter and nastiness. Also, some of the dialog moves rather fast, and you may find yourself having to read a bit quicker than usual. But if you can get past these few limitations, you may find this to be an enjoyable movie. I would give it a 4 or 5 normally, but since it is a cut above the majority of non-Romero zombie films, I gave it a 6. You zombie buffs see it for yourselves and decide for yourselves.
Death: The Ultimate Horror (1995)
The Real Deal
Lets be real: "Faces of Death" and other "death scenes" films are 2/3 re-enactments, sprinkled with occasional footage. "Death The Ultimate Horror" is no such movie. It is a compilation of international news footage, documentary newsreel, and candidly shot accidents. There are assassinations, car-bomb aftermath, bull-fighting gone bad, people burning, etc.. and all of it is SICKENING.
I first viewed the film when it came out on VHS about 12 years ago, and it messed with my head. I had been let down by "Faces of Death" and other films of that sort. "Death: The Ultimate Horror" surpassed anything I had ever viewed up to that point, and to this day holds the distinct rank of most sickening real footage I have ever seen in my life. If you want to see what it looks like when life ends on film, check out this film, but I warn you.... it is the REAL DEAL. -JB
Hood of Horror (2006)
Don't waste your money (spoilers)
I read the reviews that called this film "Tales From The Crypt" set in the ghetto. It's more like a bunch of characatures and stereotypes put to motion picture.
In the opening scene, Snoop Dogg (playing the role of either the devil, or some demon pimp) tells us that the Hood Of Horror is even too much for the "toughest OG's" or something like that, but the only scary thing about the film is that I paid money to rent it.
The first tale features a girl out tagging who looks like she was living in North Hollywood rather than "the hood". She runs across some tough OG's... tough if you live in Mayberry. The gang of three (a latino, a brotha, and a white boy) made me laugh out loud. None of them look too tough. The latino looks the closest to convincing, but I couldn't help but picture the character not having boy bands in his CD collection. The brotha looked too "quarterback jock" to come off as a ghetto thug, and the white boy couldn't wash Eminem's boxer shorts.
Anyway, the girl is out tagging... she gets caught tagging over the gansta's wall, and runs for her life after getting threatened at gunpoint. she runs into Danny Trejo in bad makeup. He gives her a irezumi style tattoo against her will and tells her she now has a gift. She then gets to witness the gangsta's who were chasing her just moments before suffer untimely deaths... The most laughable being the 40 oz. through the mouth. Give me a break. I almost split a rib at that one.. Then as soon as they are death, their corpse/ghosts come back to life and kill her. That is, after Danny Trejo in bad makeup takes her tattoo away for tagging over their names after they die.
The second tale is the most offensive and ridiculous. Its about a southern white couple who come to the hood. He is a textbook stereotype "tex", and his bubbly white bimbo wife is about the most annoying creature I have seen on film in a while. The story is that they (the couple) are moving into a housing unit that his "daddy" left him in his will. Daddy had been a COLONEL in the US ARMY, and had presided over an all-black unit. His dad supposedly was good to the men, and good to others, but yet his son came up a smack-talking racist. I know that it can happen, but I had a tough time seeing such an ignorant stereotypical character be the product of a Colonel in the US ARMY. Sorry.
Anyway, the dialog becomes so predictable and hokey that it actually made me a tid-bit uneasy. And the actual unfolding of the story (although a cool idea: teaching the young racist some honor and respect by torturing him and his wife to death) winds up being ruined by crappy writing and a HORRIBLY awful CGI climax. A almost didn't watch the last installment, but I am glad I did because it was ironically the ONLY one that is tolerable.
It's about a hip-hop duo that disbands because one of them dies. Only, the survivor is plagued by not only a strange woman (Lin Shaye)and the ghost of his dead "partner", but by the notion that OTHERS know what his role had been in the mysterious murder. It's not enough to save the film from ridiculousness, but the third story IS the closest thing to an episode of "Tales From The Crypt" or "Tales From The Darkside" that this film offers.
Love ya Snoop, but next time, make a hood movie that comes off with some street cred. -JB
The Accountant (2001)
My Favorite All Time Film
The Accountant is nothing short of genius. Thank you Ray McKinnon for standing up to the "characatures and stereotypes", and for exposing the cultural conspiracy for what it is.
If you like serious messages coated with great humor, brilliant writing, and wonderful acting performances, you MUST check out this film! This is a moving portrait of the modern American Landscape in it's true light.
It is rare in this day and age for a writer/director to show such guts and intelligence in one swoop. Ray McKinnon delivers three-fold, and The Accountant has honestly become my favorite all time film; short or feature length.
-JB