One Half of 'Key & Peele' Steals the Show in Sundance's Horror Comedy 'Hell Baby'

"Some people believe the Devil is fake, like Santa Claus. I assure you, the Devil is real. And he is a dick."

Robert Ben Garant and Thomas Lennon do it all: they're performers, having appeared in the sketch comedy group The State and Comedy Central's Reno 911; they're writers, for projects big (Night at the Museum, The Pacifier) and small (Let's Go to Prison); and now, they can add directors to the list, as they debuted their first feature film, Hell Baby, at this year's Sundance Film Festival.

Hell Baby treads familiar territory while taking the windiest road to hit its beats. If Scary Movie was the horror comedy for the mainstream, Hell Baby is the version for the alternative crowd, aligned more with Garant and Lennon's time on The State than their Hollywood scripts. Rob Corddry and Leslie Bibb star as a couple expecting their first child and moving into a new home — the ominously named "House of Blood," located in a dilapidated district of Louisiana. As they settle into the residential nightmare, the two are startled with their first jump scare of the movie: an unexpected greeting by a neighbor (or housemate?), played by Keegan Michael Key. He informs them that their new home might be haunted — a fact that becomes apparent when Bibb, pregnant and possessed, starts serving Corddry glasses of paint thinner and washing her hands to the point of bloodshed.

Garant and Lennon pack every horror trope into their script — an old, scraggly woman who lurks in the house's shadows, a terrifying dog who may or may not be a demon, and gore galore — but Hell Baby rises above spoof thanks to its off-kilter ensemble, similar to another State-born project, Wet Hot American Summer. Alongside Corddry and Bibb, the directorial duo appear in the film as a pair of chain-smoking Vatican priests who arrive to the scene in hopes of wiping out the Devil, while Human Giant stars Rob Huebel and Paul Scheer pop in as two aggressive cops with a deep love for Po' boys.

The real standout is Key, who elevates the material and carries Hell Baby across the finish line. Often, Garant and Lennon's bits feel padded — there's a stretch of the film where Corddry, a very funny physical performer, attempts to cover up his murder of a "ghost" who was attempting to perform oral sex on him, and it fails to elicit laughs. But when Key, of the Comedy Central sketch show Key and Peele, appears out of nowhere to give Corddry a scare, he jump starts the movie. Words roll off his tongue like comedic beat poetry — hear Key utter the phrase "pizza salad" and you will find new meaning in life. Whether he's casually diving into the bloody backstory of Corddry and Bibb's home or discussing the finer points of dog poop, Key hits a rhythm that the rest of the film only sporadically slips into.

Even in its down moments, Hell Baby is a hundred times funnier than most of Hollywood's run-of-the-mill comedies. There's a risk to crafting comedy — what makes one person laugh won't necessarily play for others. Garant and Lennon have written broad comedies in the past, but with their directorial debut, they let their weird side come out. In one scene, a stoned cable repair man trudges back to his van before sloooooowly driving away. The scene is provoking — when will it end?! — but Garant and Lennon take their time and stick to their guns. That independence is the backbone of Hell Baby, and it works like magic for Keegan Michael Key, who should be leading his own movies in no time.

[Photo Credit: Darko Entertainment]

Naomi Watts and Robin Wright Sleeping with Each Other's Sons Is as Creepy as It Sounds

I remember reading a review of the Meryl Streep movie It's Complicated that said it was "kitchen porn." The premise was that women of a certain age just want to see Meryl having some easy sex, drinking white wine with her friends, and building her dream kitchen. Well, 50 Shades of Grey has ushered in the age of "mommy porn," and Two Mothers, an Australian movie that debuted at Sundance on Friday night, has changed that idea all over again.

To boil it down, the movie is about Naomi Watts and Robin Wright (and a Penn written with invisible ink) sleeping with each others' sons. But it's not just about that. They play best girl friends from childhood who live across the street from each other. And not just across the street, they live on the beach on an ocean so blue it could play in a jazz club. They live in stone and glass boxes that would make a cover of Archetectual Digest feel like it looked fat and would never come out of its room again. And these aren't just sons, they are buffed, bronzed gods. They are castaways from Twilight movies (one of them, Xavier Samuel, is actually in a bunch of the films in the vampire franchise). 

This is perfect mommy porn. Here are middle-aged women with impossibly good skin, tight tummys, and a collection of floppy hats that would make a Chico's outlet jealous (all the better to cover up Wright's hideous '90s lesbian cut). They get reamed by hard-bodied boys standing up in their perfect houses. They bask in the glow of their friendship, the love of their boys, and the love of their mates. They are a perfect unit. They have everything they could want. 

Then it all goes bad. Of course it goes bad. This thing is not supposed to go well. It's two best friends f**king each others' sons who are also best friends. That is going to screw you up in the head. Not only is it that, but there is a homoeroticism that the women (who are constantly mistaken for lesbians) get to sleep with each other by sleeping with their progeny and the boys, the only two people on earth who can call each other "motherf**ker" and mean it, get to touch each other through their mothers. And then there is the idea that the women are bonding with their sons by sleeping with their surrogates. It's like a strange psychotic rhombus of romantic entanglements. 

While the romantic entanglements are fun to watch (neither Samuel nor James Frecheville wear a shirt very often and we see both of their bums), we never really get quite to the bottom of them. They fail spectacularly not because of anything innate to the characters but something innate in the situation. It is meant to fail because it is never meant to happen in the first place. That is the only takeaway we get. When asked how the actors would face this situation in real life during the Q&A after the premiere, they all responded that this would not happen in real life. No, it is porn. It is not just porn in terms of what women want, but emotional porn too. Some sort of exquisite joy and pain that is too good that we don't deserve it in real life, it is only reserved for the movies. 

The other odd thing about the Q&A is that director Anne Fontaine (a Frenchwoman working for the first time in English) said she didn't understand why the audience laughed so much during the movie. She did not intend it to be funny. No, the movie finds nothing funny about this odd situation and treats it with a sort of reverence and sincerity that makes many of the overwrought scenes into camp. It's a rare gem when we get something that isn't trying to be funny to get a laugh (though Fontaine says it is "ironic," but her English is as good as Wright's haircut) and that just underlies the main problem with the movie: no one ever gets over the premise. Basically this is a log line fleshed out into a 100 minute movie. Since it never bothers to deliver emotional stakes, we just get to watch people going through the motions, their most intimate moments laid out for our vicarious enjoyment and titillation. Yes, it serves the exact same purpose as porn. 

'Mama' Inspires 5 Short Films We'd Like to See as Features

It is often be the case that great things can come in small packages. In the realm of cinema, this translates to under 10 minutes. There is a distinctive artistry in short filmmaking. One could make the illusory coloration that the job of a short film director or writer is somehow easier, given the brevity of their resulting creation. The reality, however, is that the stunted time-frame requires the filmmaker to become adept at the economy of storytelling, and therefore to actually work harder to develop a narrative in a more concise framework.

It’s not a frequent occurrence, nor is it exceedingly rare that a short film will be picked up for adaptation into a feature film. This week, the wonderful Spanish horror short Mama sees its full-length iteration hit theaters. The Guillermo del Toro-produced Mama centers on two young girls found living alone in squalor, in the middle of the woods. When their new adoptive parents bring them home, it becomes clear that something terrifying has come along with them. Andres Muschietti, who also wrote and directed the short, helms the feature version. This got us thinking about some other short films we’ve seen over the last couple of years that would also be ideal for full-length big screen treatment.

The Legend of Beaver Dam

John Landis would be proud of this horror comedy short from writer/director Jerome Sable. It’s the story of an awkward young outcast, out on a camping trip with his scout troupe. As the night’s activities turn to ghost stories, which in turn accidentally awakens an evil monster, unlikely hero Danny is called upon to save the day. What is so outstanding about The Legend of Beaver Dam, and what we’re aching to see more of, is the spectacular musical element, and how this feeds an imaginative narrative structure. It would be great to see Sable team with Darren Lynn Bousman and Terrance Zdunich (the twisted minds behind Repo! The Genetic Opera) to turn Beaver Dam into a large-scale theatrical horror musical.

Grey

A carjacker witnesses a shooting, and inadvertently becomes the only one who can help a dying man. His conscience will not be the only thing tested. Marko Slavnic’s gritty crime drama is fairly simple in its construction. But within these few moments, we are presented with a probing, brooding character study that takes a phenomenal turn in its final act. It would be fascinating to see this twist altered to serve a running, tension-fostering conflict. Slavnic clearly has the directing and screenwriting chops necessary to hook an audience, and it would be great to see him expand this tale into a dark crime thriller somewhere in the neighborhood of Headhunters.

Dirty Laundry

This is a bit of a cheat, we are not afraid to admit that. Directed by Phil Joanou (State of Grace, The Gridiron Gang), Dirty Laundry centers on a familiar skull-tee-clad comic book vigilante who, in this adventure, stumbles upon a nasty assault while he’s just trying to do his laundry. Yes, we’ve already had two Punisher films, and yes one of them already starred Thomas Jane, but Dirty Laundry is a sterling example of how the right director, and the right tone, can make all the difference. Dirty Laundry is edgier than 2004’s Punisher, and yet more grounded (if only a hair less violent) than 2008’s Punisher: War Zone. Hopefully, the overwhelming response to this fan film will earn Jane another shot at the role of Frank Castle. Gotta love that Ron Perlman cameo, too.

No Way Out

Even abstract shorts films can provide a compelling appetizer for a potential feature; more than any other type of short, they leave us wanting more. If there is one short that left us ravenous, it was 2011’s No Way Out. Directed by Kristoffer Aaron Morgan, and co-written by Eric Vespe, No Way Out is a violent, cruel descent into madness wherein a man, House of the Devil’s A.J. Bowen, is pushed to his breaking point by hideous monsters in the dark. The production design, the cinematography, and the ghoulishly delightful practical effects make for a superb and haunting Lovecraftian nightmare that begs to be expanded.

Portal: No Escape

It would be impossible to construct this list without mentioning what is conceivably the best fan film ever made. Dan Trachtenberg’s ode to Valve’s sci-fi video game was artful and immaculately shot, tantalizingly hinting at the potential for a feature-length Portal movie. No Escape was so exceptional that it actually just netted Trachtenberg a gig directing New Line’s movie version of the graphic novel Y: The Last Man. Our guess is that if Trachtenberg were to also then direct the cinematic Portal adaptation, something for which we are all crossing our fingers and toes simultaneously, Guillermo del Toro would produce. That may seem like a stretch... unless you happened to notice the voice of GlaDoS in the Pacific Rim trailers.

[Photo Credit: George Kraychyk/Universal Pictures]

John Dies at the End' Director Talks How Cult Movies Can Help You Get Married

It's hard to define, let alone predict or try and control, what makes a "cult movie." A good few directors have a knack for the construction of the rare, beloved entity — Don Coscarelli, the man who has delivered thePhantasm series, Beastmaster, and the more recent triumph Bubba Ho-Tep, certainly seems to have the secret formula on file. Coscarelli's latest cinematic venture, one

with no deficit of the weird in which he has stuffed each of his previous films, is John Dies at the End.

As a screen adaptation of the horror comedy novel by David Wong, Coscarelli's odd vision of the even odder story might well vie for a cult status of its own. And whether the denotation pertains to his movies or otherwise, Coscarelli admits an unbridled fondness for the growth of the phenomenon that is a cult movie, and for the people who celebrate them so passionately. In our below interview with Coscarelli, the filmmaker discusses his latest unusual project, the challenges in transforming such peculiar material to screen, and what he sees in the future of cult movies in general.

The idea of “stranger” movies is clearly not anything new to you. Is that what drew you to this? Knowing the nature of the book and how bizarre and offbeat it was?

Absolutely. I’m a great fan of things that are different. This book came to be, basically, in an e-mail from Amazon.com. I read this zombie fiction book, and it said, “If you like this zombie fiction book, you’ll loveJohn Dies at the End. That they’re able to actually, using their algorithms, figure out what people like... So I guess they knew what I liked and sent me that book. I always had an interest in “What is reality?” And I think I have a good sense of humor, and the film and the book have a pretty wild and wacky sense of humor.

When you were turning this book into a movie, and you had all this strange stuff to draw from, was there anything that you felt like you couldn’t put in? Anything that was too weird? Maybe you had pushback, or just didn’t think it would be accessible? 

Oh yeah. There were a number of items in there that didn’t work. Some of them had to do with scale. There were ideas that would have really challenged James Cameron to pull off — requiring huge and epic effects, and what have you. So those were not possible. There were a few tonal things that were maybe a little too out there for a movie. They had scatological things and references that just got way too weird, that I took out. Generally, I stayed as true as I could to the book, because I thought it was brilliant. And I thought that this writer, David Wong in particular, definitely had a feel and a voice for his generation.

Speaking of David Wong’s voice, when you do adapt a book to a movie — you said you stayed pretty faithful, but I’m sure you want to inject your own voice. Especially with a story where the character is actually named after the author, is there influence to stray toward his voice as opposed to your own? Or did you find that the two melded well? 

I think just by the nature of making a movie — screenwriting and directing and editing —my voice and my tastes come through loud and clear, just by doing those things. I had a good experience with the other adaptation that I did, Bubba Ho Tep. With that one, I treated the author’s work almost like the Bible, in that if we ever had a question, I’d come back to the source novel. If you’re going to embark on the insanely huge amount of work involved in making a movie like this, you’ve got to step into it what’s phased in the source material. I think it would be kind of odd to take it and only use a few different pieces of it.

What about visually? There’s a lot of room, when you’re turning something literary into a visual medium, for your own interpretation. How did you decide what the monsters and creatures would look like? Were there ideas that you had to scrap there? 

Certainly, form follows function. I was always grasping around at times, trying to figure out how we would realize some of these effects. Because it was so ambitious. One of the breakthroughs was the major monster in the movie that we refer to as the “meat monster.” And for a while, I thought that the only way I could pull something like that off was digitally. But I was working with a really talented illustrator, and one of his drawings came back. And for the first time, I could see that it could be done as a man in a suit. And that was so much more comfortable for me to be able to have something tangible that the actors could really work with. Luckily, having been around the horror block a few times — I’m friends with a number of different effects companies. Robert Kurtzman, who is the “K” of K.N.B. Effects, volunteered to come on, and just did us a favor. He created this masterwork of a suit for the guy to wear. This piece is really a work of art. So, we were able to shoot it without having to rely on digital. In terms of the style, I was trying to go outrageous with some of these things, but also trying to keep the world relatively realistic.

Considering the presence of ghost doors and gigantic spiders. 

Yes! [Laughs]You did mention Bubba Ho-Tep, and just thinking back on the Phantasms andBeastmaster, and all the movies that you’ve made that have been strange in different ways through the ‘70s and ‘80s, do you think there’s a different attitude now on strange, niche movies? 

Oh yes. There’s no question that movies that movies that have resonance with audiences, cult movies if you will, that they now play forever and ever. With DVD and Internet, everyone can have them and watch them whenever. When I was watching movies before I made movies, you’d have to go to revival houses to see things. It’s fantastic. It’s also interesting that folks develop an affinity for particular movies. I don’t know how, in advance, one can ever cause that to happen, really. To develop that cult audience is kind of a magical thing.

Yeah. It can’t be forced, for sure. 

No. And the weird thing is, having made a couple of what are called “cult movies” … some people use it in a pejorative sense, almost looking down a cult movie, but I’m so honored. Because in my mind, when I’m looking at a cult, I’m thinking that cult equals passion. If people really have passion for your work, what’s not to like about that?

What do you think about the future of cult movies in general? In what direction do you think the attitude on that is heading? 

I think that there’s no question, with the rise of the Internet — I’ve done some reading about it — there’s a strange form of tribalism, where people in their own “tribes” can connect through the Internet, making it so much easier to follow something passionately. You can find the likeminded souls through various social media, on the web and etcetera. So, I think that the modern age, the Internet-driven age, is ripe for cult artworks of all different kinds. A celebration of them. It’s so much easier now.

And your attitude is, this is a great thing? 

I think so! I think it’s good. People can really follow their passions, and find likeminded souls to discuss, and possibly marry. [Laughs] I think it’s a good thing.So cult movies are kind of like matchmakers? 

Yeah, in a weird way! There’s no question that the people that love certain movies love to find people who share their passions.

[The final exchange involves a major spoiler about the conclusion about John Dies at the End.]

Maybe this is looking at it in the most literal or the most surface value sense, but one can argue that John does not die in the end. I’m just curious about your attitude on presenting a movie with that title, where it doesn’t necessarily pay off in the literal way. 

I learned early on that David Wong had created a rabid fan base — back when he was publishing the book free online, before he even got any kind of a publisher, that everyone was embracing his title and his book. Which is obviously similar to what the film is. The way I qualify it or justify it is, he sort of dies in the beginning, and he dies in the middle. So, he does die, maybe it’s not at the end. And then other people feel that he does die at the end, if you interpret it correctly.

Right. That’s why I say only “literally.” I’m sure there are plenty of interpretations that went over my head. 

Agreed. I think I can say that there’s not any blowback from angry fans that he didn’t die. [Laughs] So, I think we’re okay there.

John Dies at the End reaches theaters on Jan. 25. You can watch it now on iTunes, Amazon.com, and VOD.

[Photo Credit: M3 Alliance]

Can't We Get Sundance Star Jennifer Coolidge Her Own Movie Already?

How many times has pillow-lipped actress Jennifer Coolidge saved an otherwise awful movie? And she's built a career saving scenes in American Pie, Legally Blonde, and every David Gest — no, wait, that'sLiza Minnelli's ex-husband — every Christopher Gest mockumentary. She does it yet again inAustenland, which debuted Friday afternoon at the Sundance Film Festival. 

Director and co-writer Jerusha Hess (who also co-wrote Napoleon Dynamite) joked before the movie that everyone had come to see Bret McKenzie's abs, but not only did the flying Concorde not take off his shirt in the movie (sadly), it was Coolidge who got just about every laugh from the reluctant audience. The movie stars Keri Russell, her Felicity mane tamed and mousey, as Jane, a nerdy, lonely woman obsessed the Jane Austen who travels to England to spend two weeks at Austenland, a resort where all attendees must dress and behave like their in one of the Regency Era literary heroine's novels. Love awaits each female traveler thanks to the amorous attention of an actor. 

But it's not Jane's story we care about, it's Miss Charming's, a fellow traveler who has more money than sense. Like just about every Coolidge character, has no idea what is appropriate in any given situation. Coolidge tries on different accents, different mannerisms, and all sorts of outlandish fabulosity to play the most charmingly self-unaware woman you would ever meet. 

Don't we want a whole movie of this? Melissa McCarthy, another scene-stealer, got an Oscar nomination forBridesmaids and is now popping up everywhere, including a lead role in Identity Theft with Jason Bateman. What will it take for Coolidge to get the same treatment? Maybe something with her and Anna Faris as a dim but enthusiastic mother/daughter team who travel to a tropical resort looking for love? (That's a free idea for all you development executives out there.) Or even just a simple comedy where she gets to be the star of the show rather than being second banana. Let's make that happen already.

As for Austenland, it's as much of a beautiful looking trifle as the resort itself. The production is astounding in terms of period dress and the performances by Russell, Coolidge, McKenzie, the dreamy JJ Feild (as Russell's love interest), and an astounding Jane Seymour – well-preserved and underused on whatever back shelf Hollywood has placed her since her medical days as Dr. Quinn – as Mrs. Wattlesbrook, the owner of Austenland. The trouble isn't with the people, but the story, which sort of goes in all directions at once and makes what should be a quick and sweet movie into something of an ambling slog. It starts out with good intentions, showing women that being obsessed with fictional romance at the expense of living their real lives is dangerous, but ends with the sort of tired rom-com tropes that it purports to be smarter and better than. We have only Coolidge to thank for it's best gags, a comment on her stunning ability to turn even the lightest line into a comedic explosion. Can't we get that for 90 minutes? Pretty please, already? 

ANNAPURNA BASE CAMP TREKKING

One of the famous trekking route in Nepal for both teahouse and organized. Ghorepani trek offers a wonderful opportunity to witness the beauty of the Annapurna region with a shorter trek. This place is rich of hidden treasure of Nepalese culture and tradition. During the trek the trail passes through world's famous 'the Gorkha warrior' clan the Gurung and Magar's charming village, dense rhododendron (Nepalese national flower), Oak forest full of birds, green hills and patchwork valleys. Just about every angle is a tantalizing glimpse of Mt. Fishtail (6,993m,) Annapurna (8,091m) and Dhaulagiri (8,167) range on the initial part of the tour is breathtaking. On an excursion to Pun Hill one can observe the entire mountain ranges; covering red and pink rays of the Sun in full bloom at the Sunset and Sunrise. Rewarding treks that can be enjoyed by every lover of nature.

ITINERARY IN DETAIL
Day 01	Arrival in kathmandu Upon arrival at Kathmandu International Airport transfer to your hotel in Kathmandu or Bhaktapur. Short briefing will follow concerning the necessary formalities and your trekking itinerary. Depending upon your arrival time you may spend free time visiting nearby sanctuaries or resting.
Day 02.	Sightseeing / Cultural Day in Kathmandu Valley Half day sightseeing around UNESCO Bhaktapur / Kathmandu where your guide will escort you on a tour of Buddhist and Hindu temples and shrines reflecting ancient local traditions. There is time to explore the city’s many places of interest on your own or take a rest while trekking permits are finalised. In the evening sample a delicious traditional Nepali dinner. Overnight in Kathmandu.
Day 03	Kathmandu to Pokhara Fly or drive to Pokhara, from where you will depart on your trek. Overnight in Pokhara. NOTE Based on the required travel time between Kathmandu and Pokhara we may depart for the trek a day earlier than shown on the itinerary.
Day 04	Pokhara to Tikhe Dhungha (1525m) Breakfast. Our Trekking guide will come to the hotel around 06:30 hrs to pick you up for a short drive to the airport from where we fly to Pokhara. Drive for an hour to Naya Pul and commence our trek to Birethanti, a large and prosperous town beside the Modi River. We head up the main trail to Sudami where we climb gradually up the side of the valley, reaching Hile (1495m) before pushing on to Tirkhe Dhunga (4:30 hrs).
Day 05	Trek to Ghorepani (2750m) Today we spend a pleasant day’s walking, trekking through rhododendron and oak forests and across the Bhurungdi Khola stream before making a short, final climb to Nangethanti (2460m). After lunch in Nangethanti we head up to Ghorepani (2750m) (5:30 hrs).
Day 06	Ghorepani to Poon Hill to Tadapani (2520m) After an early start at around 04:00 hrs we will ascend to Poon Hill (3210m), this is steep climb, but not to hard and it will take us about 1 hour and leads us to a brilliant viewpoint, providing an unobstructed sunrise over the high Himalayas. After spending about 40 minutes on the hillside and enjoy a good cup of coffee or tea, we come back to Ghorepani, have a hot breakfast, and start walking to Tadapani. From Ghorepani the trail climbs along ridges and through pine and rhododendron forests to Deurali (2960m). We descend to reach Banthanti, before winding our way down to Tadapani (2540m) (6 hrs).
Day 07	Tadapani to Chhomrong (2210m) Dropping down from Tadapani Gurjung the route offers good views of the upper Modi valley. The path then starts the long ascent high above the west bank of the Modi Khola. We then arrive in the village of Chhomrong (2210m) which lies tucked at the very base of Himal Chuli. Chomrong is the last permanent settlement in the valley (5 hrs).
Day 08	Chhomrong to Doban (2540m) From Chhomrong the trail descends until Chhomrong Khola, then the trail begins a slow climb as we head up to our first destination – Sinuwa. We then proceed to Kuldi Ghar (2470m) about 2 1/2 to 3 hrs walking. The trek now enters the upper Modi Khola valley. We can expect snow from here on in the winter months (Dec-Febr.) We continue our trek going down to Bamboo through an uninhabited forest area, scattered with big rocks. From Bamboo the road will take us through bamboo and rhododendron forests to Doban (2540m) (6 hrs).
Day 09	Doban to Deurali (3170) After climbing 300 meters up we will first pas the Himalayan Hotel at 2840 meters. We then continue on to Hinko Cave (3100m) and then onto Deurali. During this day if we are lucky we can see interesting wildlife like deer, jackals and peacocks. Here we will also have great views of Machhapuchhare mountain (6997m) and you will understand why the translation of its name means fishtail mountain. In Deurali we will stay overnight (5:30 hrs).
Day 10	Deurali to Annapurna Base camp Today we climb on past the Machhapuchhare Base Camp (which isn't really a base camp since climbing the mountain is not permitted) to the Annapurna Base Camp. This area is called the Annapurna Sanctuary since it is totally surrounded by mountains. From here it is a two-hour trek to Annapurna Base camp, which offers spectacular views (5:30 hrs).
Day 11	Annapurna Base Camp descend to Sinuwa Today we follow our way back to Sinuwa, it’s more easy as we descend the most part of our route (5 hrs).
Day 12	Sinuwa to Ghandrung (1940m) From Sinuwa we continue to Chhomrong from where the trail descends through forests to Gurjung Khola and then the trail ascends slightly until Kimrong. Then we reach the top of the Deurali, from where it is an easy way to reach Ghandrunk. Ghandrunk is a village of Gurung people, one of the ethnic groups of Nepal; they have their own dialect, culture, costume, and life style. Ghandrunk is one of the most famous destinations for trekkers known for its beautiful mountain views. (It is an easy reach from Pokhara or Kathmandu.) Our early arrival means we have the afternoon to visit the one of the Gurung Museum and explore the village (4:30 hrs).
Day 13	Trek to Birethanti, Naya Pul; then drive to Pokhara (910m) From Ghandrung it's easy walking, all down hill, to Naya Pul where our trekking ends (4 hrs). Our private transport to drive us to Pokhara about an hour away. Overnight at the hotel
Day 14	Drive Pokhara to Kathmandu. Tourist bus to Kathmandu by the early morning flight. Overnight stay at hotel.

GHANDRUK TREKKING

This is a beautiful shortest trekking you can do in Annapurna region, the trek is easy and much romantic walking through the beautiful villages. This trek starts from Bire Thanti after 2 hours drive from Pokhara by public bus or by private vehicle. The most attractive part of this trek is to explore the Ghandruk Village where lots of Gurungs are inhibited The trek will go up to 1951 meters maximum and the trek can be organized 3 to 4 days This short trek offers you a magnificent views of annapurna range as well as massive dhaulagiri. The gurung community has many festivals so, its wise to check festival occasion before booking the trip.

Itenary detail

ITINERARY IN DETAIL
Day 01	Drive from Kathmandu to Pokhara (914m.) takes about six hours. You depart for the six hours drive to Pokhara (915m,), 200 kilometers west of Kathmandu. Pokhara is tourist's paradise with full of natural as well as cultural heritage sites such as lakes, caves, temples of Buddhist and Hindus along with mountains. You can observe views to the north across the hills and Phewa Tal (lake) to the white peaks of the Annapurna and Dhaulagiri ranges. You can also fly from Kathmandu to Pokhara which takes about 25 minutes.
Day 02.	Drive from Pokhara (915 m.) to Phedi (1130 m.) and trek from Phedi to Pothana takes about five hours. From here you begin your trek to Pothana (1900m.). The trail ascends all the way to Pothana through forests till you reach the village called Dhampus. It is a Gurung village which gives you an opportunity to look at the magnificent views of Annapurna ranges, Lamjung Himal and Manaslu. The ascent trail follows to Pothana through the forests. This is a small village which is surrounded by forests having marvelous mountain views.
Day 03	Trek from Pothana to Ghandruk (1950 m.) takes about six hours. The early part of trek is gradual ascend for almost an hour up to Deurali (2100 m.) which passes through oak and mixed forests with splendid views of Manaslu, Annapurna ranges and Mardi Himal. Leaving Deurali, you begin to trek steep downwards to reach Tolkha (1840 m.) , a beautiful Magar and Gurung village. To reach the next destination Landruk, a village inhabited by mostly Gurung and few Brahmins the trail is gradual descent passing through terraces and few settlements. Now the steep descent trail moves downwards to Modi Khola river and crossing iron bridge you follow steep uphill to reach Ghandruk.. There are many lodges, Gurung museum and traditional houses made of stone slabs. You can enjoy from here are Annapurna South (7229 m.), Hiunchuli (6441 m.), Annapurna III (7755 m.), Glacier dome (7200 m.) and Fish tail (6997 m.).
Day 04	Trek from Ghandruk to Nayapul via Birethanti takes about 5 hours. This day you descend through Kimshe to Shaulo Bazaar. From here your trail goes quite flat until you retrace back to Birethanti. You need to walk almost half an hour to get to Nayapul. Drive from Nayapul to Pokhara by taxi.
Day 05	Drive from Pokhara to Kathmandu by tourist mini bus that takes about seven hours. While driving from Pokhara to Kathmandu, you head up to Damauli, Dumre, Muglin and Kurintar where the Nepal's first Cable car is operated to reach to Manakamana Temple. En route, you can enjoy the mountain views, green sceneries, rice terrace fields, vegetable fields and people engaged in their daily life activities. From Naubishe you climb up to Thankot, the gateway to capital city. You can also fly from Pokhara to Kathmandu which takes approximately 25 minutes.

PRICE: USD 400
Price includes:	Airport Pick up/drop, 2 nights accommodation in kathmandu & 2 nights in Pokhara at three star*** hotels, all inclusive trek such as Ground transportation, necessary permits entrance fess, professional guide, porter/porters, and their expenses including their insurance and equipments, accommodation at lodges en route, all food (breakfast, lunch & dinner) with tea/coffee, etc.
Price excludes:	Beverages, Tips, your insurance, personal/natural expenses, Food in Kathmandu & Pokhara