Dracula's Daughter

AUGUST 31, 2007


One of the Scotts recommended Dracula’s Daughter after I pointed out how much I loved the part in Herzog’s Nosferatu where Van Helsing gets arrested for murder. I wish he had pointed out that the rest of the movie wasn’t as interesting, or that Van Helsing was needlessly renamed VON Helsing in the film. I like to be prepared.

Instead, DD, as its known to me, is otherwise pretty goddamn slow. There’s some interesting ideas thrown in here and there (not to mention some always welcome lesbian undertones), but there’s too many things copied from the original. There’s still a girl in peril, an aversion to “drinking… wine”, and a town full of folks who don’t seem to mind living in an area with an abnormally high fatality rate.

It’s also pretty lazy. It’s supposed to take place directly after the original, but technology is of the era the film was produced instead of from the period setting of the first film.

Not that it’s a bad film; it’s just there are only so many Dracula movies a man can take in one year. This makes I think 6. Enough I say!

What say you?


The Ghost (aka Lo Spettro)

AUGUST 30, 2007


Well The Ghost started off promisingly enough. The instant the film begins, someone says “That’s enough for tonight.” Who he is, what they are doing, and how long they have been doing it is none of our goddamn business. It’s enough, and that is all we need to know.

But then it goes downhill, as it’s a slow and fairly standard “Horrid shrew of a woman plots with her lover to kill her rich husband” movie. And there’s no ghost. When the title of a film only has one actual word, you’d think it would describe something in the movie. But not here. There’s a guy PRETENDING to be a ghost, but that doesn’t count. The end of the film is also too needlessly loaded with double-crosses. All of these people are despicable, so I don’t even know if the good guy ‘won’ or not.

Still, there’s enough here to warrant a view. The scene where Barbara Steele goes nuts and slashes one of the other characters to death is pretty gory for its day (1963 by my watch and warrant), and, well, it stars Barbara Steele. Mmm. There’s also an exchange that may or may not have given Jim Steinman the idea for one of his most famous songs:

“If you loved me you’d do anything.”
“Anything, yes. Not that.”

Hahahaha whoa! So maybe that’s what “that” is! Meat Loaf would do anything except plot to kill his lover’s husband in an attempt to get his gold! Oh Meat, you old softy.

There’s also a guy who sounds like Vincent Price, and another named Canon Owens. It’s a fairly stupid name (won't just Canon, or just Owens, suffice?), but it’s made even more nonsensical in the scene where he talks to the husband, who is named Dr. Hitchcock. For whatever reason, the two of them continually repeat each other’s name as they talk. So it’s like:

“Hi Dr Hitchcock.”
“Hi Canon Owens.”
“How are you, Dr Hitchcock?”
“I am fine, Canon Owens, and you?”
“I am very good, Dr Hitchcock. Thank you for asking.”

But this got me thinking – I realize when I write a lot of my reviews that I have to go back to the IMDb or something to find out the characters’ names, and that’s because no one writes like that anymore. You get a character’s name spoken maybe once in the movie (if that), and that’s it. You have to pay attention these days!

Well I don’t want to! I have ADD, and I want my viewing experience to be perfectly...

What say you?


Ju-On (2003)

AUGUST 29, 2007


The release of the American remake of Ju-On, called The Grudge, nearly ended my desire to go to the movies. The kids in the audience were so fucking annoying, I am still amazed I got out of there without bludgeoning one of them with a Milk Dud (it’s possible). Suffice to say it wasn’t an enjoyable theater experience, and I was so irritated I still to this day have no idea if I actually liked the movie or not. I don’t think I did though, so I was in no rush to watch the Japanese original that the film was based on (itself a remake – confused yet? I aren).

This was more or less confirmed while watching Ju-On today. It’s a movie with almost zero plot and yet told in a needlessly confusing manner. Following multiple timelines, characters who don’t get introduced into well over an hour into the film, and ghosts with apparently no ‘rules’ seems like a lot of work for a movie that essentially boils down to “if you go into this house you’ll die”.

That’s not to say the film is horrible, but when you consider that there is something like 834 versions (and respective sequels) of this movie, I would think it should be a compelling and unique enough story to warrant all the attention. But it’s not. And besides, I’ve gone on record with how un-scary I find the idea of little Japanese kids looking at me and croaking.

Still, there IS a strange sort of appeal to the film. I think it’s probably due to the fact that the film is essentially an anthology film, so no character really wears out their welcome. And since everyone dies, and it becomes more of a matter of WHEN they will die, there is some minor suspense to be had when they are in danger (unlike say, Ob-Ewan McGregor in the prequels, who was constantly in danger we knew perfectly well he would escape from). “Will they die here, or in the next scene?” Usually it’s the former, and then another character comes along.

The DVD has an odd extra: a commentary by Sam Raimi and Scott Spiegel. Raimi produced the remake; Spiegel I guess just had nothing better to do. They chat about horror movies in general, how much they like this movie, and offer some delightfully bad puns throughout (“I married my wife for her looks, just not the ones she’s been giving me lately”), making it worth a listen. Spiegel needs to brush up on his IMDb though, attributing Cat People to John Carpenter (???). They also contradict themselves, saying at one point that when a horror film gets too complex that it becomes harder for an audience to be scared, and then marveling at how the audience is expected to figure out most of the film’s timeline and plot threads themselves a few minutes later.

There’s also some deleteds and interviews, but I had no interest.

What say you?


Raw Meat (aka Death Line)

AUGUST 28, 2007


Every now and then, I get a movie from Blockbuster that just sort of puzzles me when it arrives in the mail. Such was the case with today’s movie, Raw Meat. I didn’t know anything about it, have no recollection of adding it to my queue, and in fact wasn’t even sure if it was horror movie for a while (other than the title).

The film begins with a guy who looks like Magritte’s Son of Man endlessly walking around a blurry city as the opening credits drag on for eternity. Ordinarily this would be enough for me to shut it off to at least confirm it was a horror movie, but since I spied both Donald Pleasence AND Christopher Lee in the cast, I figured it HAD to be. About a half hour later I got my confirmation, as a mutant guy living underneath the subway slits a dude’s throat and lets the blood pour into the mouth of his wife (also a mutant thing). Hurrah, it’s horror!

Even if it wasn’t I probably would have kept watching though, because Donald Pleasence is an absolute delight in this one. He’s not as batshit insane as usual; instead he just seems sort of drunk throughout the movie. He randomly throws darts around, obsesses about tea (he IS British), makes inappropriate jokes, etc. He also reminds me a bit of John Hodgman, one of the best Daily Show personalities (and fellow blogger!). There’s a scene late in the film where he just sort of argues with a bartender while his partner plays pinball that had me in stitches. Oh Donald, why couldn’t you have survived watching Halloween 6? Everyone else did.

As for Christopher Lee, I am at a loss to explain his appearance here. He almost literally appears out of thin air in the middle of a scene, has a little face-off with Donald, and then is never seen or spoken of again. I suspect he happened by the set one day and they quickly threw him in there and had him just say whatever came to his head (Donald’s reaction to his appearance certainly seems to support this theory).

This one isn’t too well known, and that is a shame. It’s a wonderful little British chiller with a decent enough horror villain (by the way, the film Creep, with Franke Potente run Lola running around a subway chased by a monster, really ripped this one off) and as said, a truly wonderful Pleasence appearance. I urge you to go check it out at once.

“But the first thing you gotta do is get some TEA!!!”

What say you?


The Relic

AUGUST 27, 2007


Back in 1997, I read an interview with Tom Sizemore (of whom I was a big fan from his work in Natural Born Killers, Heat, etc.), concerning his starring role in The Relic. He pointed out that it was his first starring role, but in a film people were seeing for the monster. “No one goes, ‘Hey let’s go see the new Tom Sizemore movie,” he was more or less quoted as saying. I showed it to my friend Mike, who was also a big fan of Sizemore, and we were like “We do!”

Well I didn’t go see it. And Tom got arrested on opening weekend for slapping his girlfriend around. But hey, still a big fan.

Ten years later I finally got around to seeing the film (though I did try to watch it at a hotel once, but I fell asleep before Sizemore even showed up). In a way I am almost glad I waited until I had a TV with a 10,000:1 contrast ratio to view it on. Since this is a Peter Hyams film, the levels of black and slightly less black that make up 90% of the imagery require a strong picture in order to see what the hell was going on. Had I seen the film in the best theater around at the time of the film’s theatrical release, that would not have been possible. Oh Hyams... you light hating bastard you.

It’s not the worst film I’ve ever seen, but it’s painfully generic. The Jurassic Park influences are annoying (and now, dated), and the effects are fucking terrible for the most part (especially when the monster runs around aflame during the film’s climax). I got the impression I could walk out for a half hour or so and know exactly what I missed, since the film works off of a template. 1:10 into the film – time for Sizemore to deliver some personal back story. 1:25 – time for the human character we dislike to get his just desserts. Etc.

There’s a scene early on that makes the film worth watching though. The monster kills a security guard off screen. Sizemore is investigating (via being a prick that is smarter than all the other cops), and Penelope Ann Miller walks in and sees the bloody mess. Her scream provided me the biggest laugh I’ve had in ages. Thank you, Ms. Miller. Part of the film’s problem is trying to make her into an interesting heroine. She isn’t, and having Sizemore sit the climax out while she runs around screaming (and delivering the lamest final line in a monster movie ever) certainly doesn’t help.

And why the hell is David Proval, a recognizable character actor who had already chalked up a number of good roles by the time this movie was released, play a vague security guard who appears for maybe two minutes during the 3rd act? His partner, as well as almost everyone else in the movie that wasn’t Sizemore, Miller, or Linda Hunt, is some no name, so what’s he doing stooping to their level?

Anyone ever play the game Shivers for the PC? It came out in the mid 90s. It was a Myst style adventure game where you are trapped inside a museum. I kept thinking about that game when I watched this movie. Good game.

Not a very good movie.

What say you?


Invasion Of The Body Snatchers (1978)

AUGUST 26, 2007


Tonight, at the last minute, I found out about a great double feature, John Carpenter’s The Thing and Philip Kaufman’s Invasion of the Body Snatchers. They were showing at the New Beverly Cinema, aka the best revival theater in LA. It’s a great idea for a double feature: both were superb (and in Carpenter’s case, superior) versions of 1950s films, and deal with paranoia, isolation, etc. while delivering the suspense and scares one would want from a movie about alien takeovers.

The Thing of course I have seen several times, so it’s ineligible for a Horror Movie A Day review. Suffice to say I think it’s a masterpiece, one of only three in Carpenter’s career (the others are Assault on Precinct 13 and of course, Halloween). The cast is perfect, the makeup is phenomenal, and I still jump at the blood test every goddamn time.

But the ‘78 Body Snatchers was new to me, in fact it was the only one of the four “legitimate” versions of Finney’s novel I had never seen. And like the original and 1993 ones, I dug it a lot. The sound design alone makes the film worth seeing, as it is eerily quiet at times, and unnervingly loud at others. There’s a scene early on, before anything has even happened, with a random Robert Duvall as a priest on a swing, that is more terrifying than anything in the new version with Nicole Kidman. And he’s just swinging! The makeup effects, sparingly used, are also fantastic.

Why aren’t more horror/thriller movies filmed in San Francisco? It’s got such a distinct look, and when used right (The Game comes to mind) it really does become a character in itself.

The great thing about all versions of the film (even the new one) is how it was able to tell the exact same story and yet totally reflect the fears of the respective era: Communism in the 50s, post-Vietnam lack of faith in the government/cover ups in the 70s, pro-war/military might in the 90s, and self medication/global war in the 00s. The 80s were pretty much covered by They Live.

Jeff Goldblum made one of his earliest appearances in this one, and he’s already got his trademark oddness down to a science. But, and I don’t know if it’s intentional, for some reason Leonard Nimoy seems just as cold and alien-like when he’s human as he does when he’s taken over. The Kevin McCarthy cameo is great, and while it’s a bit of a wink at the audience, it’s far more effective than Veronica Cartwright’s likewise appearance in the 2007 one.

Also the film offers a nude Brooke Adams back when that wasn’t a horrible thing to imagine.

There’s a new 2 disc DVD of this one, I can’t see why you shouldn’t own it if you’re a fan. Since it’s such a sparse, somewhat intimate version for the most part, I think it would play even better at home.

What say you?


Bloody Reunion (aka To Sir With Love)

AUGUST 25, 2007


What is this? A modern slasher movie I am totally behind? One that’s not Hatchet??? And even more surprising, an Asian horror movie I really like? Is Bloody Reunion a fluke, or have I just not been watching the right ones?

This one was recommended by... someone (I apologize I can not find the comment with the name, but regardless I thank you for the suggestion). For a slasher, it delivered what I expect – one or two kills I don’t see coming (at least not at the time they do), some decent splatter, an interesting killer disguise (a giant bunny mask! Gah!!), non ignorance of basic suspense, and a good back story. The back story is what impressed me the most. Sort of like Lost, we learn mainly through quick flashbacks what led the characters to be the way they are today. And I admit I was pretty surprised at what was revealed along the way.

Which brings us to the ending. Some folks have hated the “twist” in this one, but I am not two of them. And I sort of have to spoil it to talk about it, so apologies in advance.

See, the ending reveals none of the movie really happened, that it was all a story told by the “final girl”, similar to High Tension in a way. But the difference is, we KNOW right from the start that the whole film is her account of what happened. In Tension, we didn’t, so the twist seemed more of a cheat than it does here. Hence why I am not as angry as I was after I watched that movie.

That said... I’m not sure if it all adds up. Being an Asian horror, there has to be SOME confusion, and this is no exception. Some of the characters’ individual traumas are never fully explained, and the ending seemingly has a giant chunk missing (how do the two survivors, one of whom is telling the story from the hospital, end up back at the house?). But that’s forgivable, and possibly even explained if you watch it a 2nd time (something I certainly plan to do).

The only real flaw is the director’s ridiculous usage of zooms in a couple of scenes. There is one where two characters go to talk to the teacher and he just keeps zooming in and out, multiple times in one shot. It makes no narrative sense and it’s headache-inducing. Christ, Fulci himself would declare the zooms unnecessary. To be fair, he admits it as a weakness on the extras (one good thing about Asian imports over American movies – they will admit their mistakes. Whereas we get the Scarecrow guys talking like they made the next Halloween). There are also some bizarre subtitling quirks, such as putting everyone’s last name in ALL CAPS and substituting “me” for “you” (“Good to see you!” “Yes, me too!”), but again, forgivable.

Like almost all Tartan releases, there’s a good deal of extras on the DVD, most of which are subtitled. The making of is refreshingly lacking in “I love this person and this person and that person” type asskissery and focuses on more “day in the life” type footage, so I highly recommend it (though it does spoil some of the ending). I just wish they would stop forcing me to watch their promo reel at the head of the DVD though – you can’t skip it or go to the menu until it’s complete. Annoying.

So whoever recommended it, thanks and recommend more like it!!!

What say you?


Shadow Walkers

AUGUST 24, 2007


I knew right from the start that Shadow Walkers was going to be bad. For starters, the credits were presented in back-and-forth-vision, where you see one credit, then some quick movie footage, then another credit, then more footage... and so on. This is possibly the most annoying thing any editor/director/janitor can ever do in a film. I can count on one finger the number of movies where it was done in any effective manner (unless the intended effect is pissing me off royally, in which case it's a blinding success). Also the font is like, Atari graphics style, and each credit zooms at the screen. Oh and they are all out of order too. The music credit comes right before the director's, and there is NO casting person listed.

But once the movie starts you'll see why - none of these people could have possibly been 'cast'. They're all awful, and all no names, which leads me to believe they are all merely friends of someone on the production team. And shitty friends at that, if I was in a bind I would never stoop to asking one of my friends to appear in Shadow Walkers.

The script is a harmless enough Resident Evil ripoff, complete with dialogue that sounds like it was mistranslated ("Is that... people?") and a Wesker style human villain played by a guy who really REALLY wants to be Josh Brolin. In fact, nearly all the actors share a resemblance to the type of actor the director probably wished he could get: in addition to Brolin-lite, there's a fake Josh Lucas, a fake J.K. Simmons, a fake what's her name from season 2 of 24...

But as bad as the credits (and everything else that followed) were, the movie actually elicited a "OH FUCK YOU MOVIE!" from me when the hero shoots a zombie monster, which does nothing, and he says "We're gonna need a bigger gun." If you have the balls to reference Jaws, you better damn well earn it, otherwise you're just reminding us of something we'd rather be watching. Assholes.

There's a scene a bit earlier that almost made me wonder if the film was actually some sort of subtle parody of such types of movies. Along with the worst green-screen I have ever seen (and I have seen A Sound Of Thunder), there's a record THREE railing kills in about as many minutes. And one guy's scream makes even the most liberal usage of the Wilhelm seem nuanced in comparison.

Hilariously, I looked on Youtube to see if anyone had uploaded the trailer so I could show a friend, and BOTH of these scenes were presented in their entirety. Go check em out, and multiply it by 15, and you'll understand the severe torture and boredom I experienced while watching this wretched piece of shit.

There's also an unhealthy amount of technical errors, such as when they are cutting back and forth during a conversation between three people and one of them was clearly absent when they shot the reverse angle. The makeup on the zombies is as lazy as it gets, and there's no real gore to speak of. Even the DVD is a complete wash, literally, as the color black never appears in the transfer; everything dark just looks a faded gray. Terrible.

By the end of the film it seemed like they were simply making it up as they went along. There's an Eddie Deezen type guy who suddenly begins knocking things over, stammering for no reason, running into people and sending all of their papers flying... it's as idiotic as it sounds. There's also something called a "Night Vision Room" ('the judo range?') with a bunch of ninjas, not entirely unlike that scene in Wayne's World where he opens the back door of the donut shop.

Will it surprise any of you to learn that this movie was distributed by Lion's Gate? Just like all 4 or 5 other movies I declare the worst I have seen thus far for Horror Movie A Day were! Go LG!

What say you?


Bad Reputation

AUGUST 23, 2007


I think I might have to take time out of my life to learn about the process of making a movie anamorphic for the DVD release. It must be an extremely difficult and time-consuming process that adds significantly to the budget, because otherwise there is NO FUCKING EXCUSE for any DVD pressed in the past few years to be released non-anamorphically, such as Bad Reputation. There is no discernible reason for not making your DVD 16:9 ready. If you have a 4:3 TV, it will still appear at the correct ratio, so what is the fucking problem here?

Plus, it sends a message of “we don’t care” to the viewer. If you don’t want your film to at least LOOK good, what’s that say about how you feel about its content? I am sure DP Forrest Allison doesn’t want everyone who owns a 16:9 TV to watch his compositions zoomed in or stretched horizontally. Sorry, Forrest, that’s what Maverick left us with, because they were too lazy to check their compression settings when they pressed the master DVD.

Anyway the movie itself is OK. There are some nice little nods to slasher classics (the school’s name is Smith’s Grove) and combining the rape revenge story with a standard slasher climax is pretty interesting. Unfortunately the direction is unforgivably boring. The whole benefit of shooting a film on DV (and for the record, they do a nice job with the lighting quality of the darker scenes, usually a low point in any DV film) is the freedom to move the camera more, as well as shoot lots and lots of coverage due to the low cost of DV tape compared to film. But that’s a benefit Jim Hemphill and his crew did not take advantage of, as the camera is more stationery than your average Kevin Smith film. Not that they need to “Bay it up”, but watching entire scenes go by from one angle or two angles without any camera movement is amateurish, and severely lessens the impact of more than a couple events (such as when the main girl argues with her mother early on).

It’s saved by the script though. There are so many oddball and uncommon touches throughout the film that the directorial blandness can be almost forgiven. For example, early on a dude dry humps his girlfriend. After they ‘finish’, they stand up to talk, and while they do, the dude spends the whole scene wiping off the visible cumstain on his jeans. What the hell? Hahahaha. Amazing. There’s also some choice dialogue, like the girl's mother randomly berates the Pico Blvd hookers. Look, everyone knows that the really trashy whores in LA are all on Cahuenga. There's also the strangest response I've ever heard to a girl asking if a guy likes her dress. "Like I like breathing!" he replies. Either this guy has an odd oxygen fetish, or he is actually telling her that he considers her appearance akin to something he does without noticing he's doing it.

The film skimps a bit on the gore though. One character is killed via head bashing (on a toilet – bodily fluids are pretty common in this one), but we see no blood after the body is thrown to the floor. And in another head bashing scene, we are treated to purple paint thrown on the wall? OK. There’s a pretty good beheading though.

And I couldn't tell if it was a meta-reference to Jason or not, but there's a moment during the climax that made me laugh out loud due to its stupidity. The girl, in another slasher reference, wears a hockey mask for some of her final rampage. That's fine, I would have preferred something more obscure, but that's just me. Anyway, at one point she is seen downstairs with some of the other kids. We cut to a bedroom, where two of her bullies are fooling around, and suddenly... she's hiding in the closet! So she snuck into the bedroom without them seeing her, and then got into the closet, then peeked outside of it? What the hell? I know the real Jason teleported a lot, so like I said, maybe it was an intentional joke. If not, yikes.

All in all, a decent enough no-budgeter, but it’s a shame such a great concept was used on such a technically lazy film. But hey, it's still a rape-revenge film, so all... one of you who voted for it in my genre poll, consider yourself served!

What say you?


Mystery Of The Wax Museum

AUGUST 22, 2007


Seems like it was only Monday that I was watching the exact same goddamn movie... Hell, I even got to copy/paste all the above formatting!

Completing my reverse viewing of the entire American cinematic legacy that is House of Wax, Mystery Of The Wax Museum reveals that Price’s film reached almost Van Sant Pyscho levels of sameness at times (particularly the beginning and climax). However, the middle is pretty different, since the protagonists’ were overhauled in the 50s one (and since this movie was pre-code – there’s a junkie! Who is just a mere drunk in the remake). This time, the would-be Marie Antoinette is the victim (Fay Wray herself – whatever happened to her? That delicate, satin-draped frame…), and her friend, sassy Glenda Farrell, is not dead, but instead a reporter who suspects that the wax statues are real bodies.

It’s interesting watching the films in reverse order, since each subsequent re-telling upped the action and horror. So as it becomes less and less surprising for me as I watch the story unfold, I also get less action for my trouble. Someone PLEASE just tell me there’s no 1911 version with Lon Chaney or something.

Unlike Price’s version though, everyone is pretty much on the same playing field. Lionel Atwill is good, and since he starred in one of my favorite 30s films (Doctor X), he’s A-OK in my book (it’s a short book). Farrell is amusing as the wiseass broad who has about three actual lines and a couple hundred quips. Wray does her thing. Everyone else is typical of the era (over excited about every little thing – including a stranger’s suicide).

The set of the wax lab is pretty impressive for the time too – it’s huge! And I got a good laugh out of the giant dial that says “WAX TEMPERATURE”. Isn’t simply “Temperature” enough information? What if someone wanted to use it for their oven? It would be chaos!

Sorry for the short review. There’s really only so much I can say about wax in a 48 hour period.

What say you?


Werewolf In A Girl's Dormitory

AUGUST 21, 2007


Some professor: “I believe it was a lycanthropist.”
Some other guy: “In other words, a sort of werewolf.”

That’s just a sampling of the plethora of worthless dialogue that you’ll hear in any given minute of Werewolf In A Girl’s Dormitory, which barely even lives up to its boring, SOAP-esque title, as only like two scenes find the wolf inside the dorm. It'd be like if you called Titanic "Treasure Diving".

Whether the dialogue has any relevance or not doesn’t even matter, because all of it is dubbed by folks who never quite reach “Bad SNL host reading his cue cards” levels of laziness. Whether they were just trying to match the mouth movements of the original actors (who are almost as wooden as their dubbers anyway), or they are just stupid people, lines like “I’ll call…. police” delivered in this manner only serve to make a bad movie worse.

But the biggest problem is how dreadfully boring the goddamn thing is. Rather than simply have a werewolf run into a dorm, find a girl and kill her every 10 minutes or so, which is all anyone would want out of a movie with such a title, they try to legitimize the damn thing by adding a plot involving blackmail, affairs, etc. Werewolves and Dormitories don’t show up nearly as much as threatening letters and courtyards. So again, it’s a lot like SOAP.

One scene in particular nearly sent me into a fit. Early on in the film, the werewolf hurts one of its front legs, so naturally the human everyone is seeking would have an injured arm (this leads to having to come up with an excuse for an injured arm for every red herring). As the scene begins, one suspect is in a bar, and someone says “Hey, his right arm isn’t functioning!” The suspect responds by pulling out a knife with his left hand… and then easily opening it with his right. And no one notices. Then a guy just sort of mentions offhand “You’ll never get away,” in the same tone one might point out someone’s untied shoe. Then another guy calmly grabs him, which results in the suspect’s friend yelling out “Stop it! You’re all going mad!” When in reality everyone is just sort of standing around not saying anything. In less than one minute of screen time you can see pretty much everything wrong with this movie.

Main girl’s kinda cute though. And her character’s name is Priscilla, which resulted in my singing of the appropriate Meat Loaf song every time her name was said. “Priscilla! Priscilla! Nearly sixteen but they treat you like a kid…”

What say you?


House Of Wax (1953)

AUGUST 20, 2007


The cinematic history of House of Wax is bafflingly hard to follow. When Dark Castle announced a remake of the “original” with Vincent Price, many pointed out that the Price film itself was a remake of a movie called Mysteries Of The Wax Museum (which is included on the DVD – a literal ‘extra feature’). And then Dark Castle’s film was really a remake of Tourist Trap! What the hell? It's like we need a damn chart.

Of the three films, or four if you count Trap, this is the only one filmed in 3-D. Which means it’s the only one featuring a guy playing paddleball into the camera and talking to the audience. There’s also a lengthy scene of dancing girls, presumably kicking their way out of the screen and into your lap. Padding: IN THREE DIMENSIONS!

Of course, any film with Price will feel like it’s padded whenever they cut away from Price himself. As one of the most charming and delightful screen presences of all time, you can’t help but get a bit bored whenever they focus on the less murderous characters. Especially when their actions don’t make any goddamn logical sense. At one point, the lead girl, suspicious of Price, tells her boyfriend that she thinks one of the wax statues is really her sister’s corpse. Her boyfriend doesn’t believe her, and to drive his point across, he convinces her to go the cops and tell them her story “so they can tell you the same thing I did: You’re crazy!” Who would actually do something like that? But the story has to be moved along, and dammit that’s how they are going to do it.

Price is in top form, shaming everyone around him as he delivers double entendres like “I’ve done her over a dozen times and she hasn’t complained,” without even having to try, while the others cause groans with their (thankfully infrequent) attempts at humor. Speaking of which, if anyone can understand why the guy sneezes at the end, feel free to explain.

Also there’s an Igor type character, named Igor, who resembles a young Tommy Lee Jones. Sweet.

I picked this DVD up the other day at Best Buy, since it was on sale for 5 bucks and I had a 5 dollar gift certificate (I am a cheap bastard). Sadly, it came in the damn snapper case. What the hell ever possessed Warner Bros (and for a while, New Line) to use these goddamn things? Not only are they flimsy and ugly, but they stick out another centimeter or two when you put them on your shelf. Does they not consider OCD folks such as myself when they make their product? Go to hell, snapper case!

What say you?


Phantom Of The Opera (1998)

AUGUST 19, 2007


And so it has come to this, an Argento film in the Crap genre. I tried really hard to think of a reason why Phantom Of The Opera should be kept out of it, but it really offers nothing more interesting or entertaining than the sight of Warlock fucking Asia Argento from behind. And I am sure there’s another movie that features the same.

It’s borderline depressing that Argento, arguably one of the greatest horror filmmakers of all time with unparalleled ability for creating memorable images and setpieces, couldn’t even make the chandelier sequence interesting. The best murder in the film is when a midget rat catcher gets randomly beheaded (in a scene that is an obvious allusion to Silent Night Deadly Night and Friday the 13th Part 5), a character who isn’t even in the original story that I can recall. Which isn’t much of a surprise; I’ve said before I don’t like the Phantom story anyway, and it seems the further they get from the source material (Phantom of the Mall, or Argento’s own Opera) the better.

But even if the story remained in any way compelling after some 30448560856 versions, everything seems lazy here. The dubbing on the first scene of Asia singing is atrocious (it’s not even in English anyway so why not just use her voice?), the makeup effects are week (this Phantom doesn’t even have a facial scar)… even the goddamn opening titles look like they’re photoshop files with poorly matted out backgrounds. Hell, the character of Raoul disappears for so long I actually forgot who the hell he was when he finally showed up again.

The main problem is everyone except Asia and Julian Sands has apparently stepped in from the musical version (stage or Schumacher, your pick) of the story, acting broad and gestating wildly, while Asia just does her “I’m hot and everyone wants to either fuck me or kill me or both” shtick she always does, and Sands channels Fabio. And the rat catcher guys are seemingly inserted from Delicatessen or City of Lost Children.

Christ, what a fucking mess. I’m not even going to bother with the extras.

What say you?


Island Of Dr. Moreau (1996)

AUGUST 18, 2007


Much like Gilliam's The Brothers Grimm, Island Of Dr Moreau the film is nowhere near as exciting or entertaining as the behind the scenes troubles that accompanied it. Sure, a film like Waterworld has a lot of ‘bad press’, but it was all “filming was delayed because of the weather” type stories. There was nothing totally batshit like the stuff that came out of Moreau. Like, I dunno, Marlon Brando, one of the greatest actors of all time, having his lines fed to him via walkie talkie, one which would occasionally pick up other radio chatter, leading The Don to say thing like “There’s a robbery at Woolworth’s” in the middle of a scene.

My favorite story involves the film’s original director, Richard Stanley. Fired after only four days (allegedly for not getting along with Kilmer, who at that time was considered box office gold thanks to Batman), he actually snuck back into the film as one of the random monster extras. Some crew knew, but the other actors and new director John Frankenheimer (poor sod) had no idea. That is amazing! Yet, the DVD has no commentary, and the featurette is worthless.

The film itself is just a bore. David Thewlis’ character goes back and forth between desperate to escape and fairly at peace with his imprisonment at random, and nearly all of the novel’s ideas and themes are either botched or missing entirely. It felt like one of those films that could end at any given moment and no one would care or even notice.

At one point I had so many questions I couldn’t even follow what passed for the movie’s plot. Why the ice bucket on Brando’s head? Why the blue thing on Kilmer’s arm? Why is Brando top billed when he only shows up during the film’s 2nd act? Why does Kilmer suddenly act (and talk) like Brando? Why does this monster movie end with a goddamn True Romance-style shootout? Why aren’t I just playing Far Cry instead?

The DVD has poor compression too. Like the film itself, you gotta wonder why they bothered at all. We all have better things to do, like refill our ice helmets. “Forcefully, forcefully…”

What say you?


A Bucket Of Blood (1959)

AUGUST 17, 2007


"Smokey says, only YOU can prevent Roger Corman." - Mike Nelson

You gotta love Corman though. Who else would make not one but TWO movies that are about nerdy guys accidentally killing someone and finding fame, only to continue doing it more and more? Seeing that he would often write a film just to use up remaining time on a set, it shouldn't come as no surprise that Little Shop Of Horrors, which came a year or so after A Bucket Of Blood, had similar themes. Bless him.

Any movie with Dick Miller can't be altogether bad, but this is the rare film that actually STARS the beloved character actor. He plays the worst kind of person in the world: one who aspires to be a hipster (back in the 50s, they were called beatniks). And he's a whiny bastard. But it's Miller, so all is forgiven. Plus, the audible sight of hearing a guy refer to Dick Miller as 'kid' is worth the price of admission alone (which, since this was on the budget pack, was precisely 40 cents).

You also gotta love a movie that is only 65 minutes long and yet still has padding. There's a guy who they cut to singing a folk song every 10 minutes or so, and perhaps his songs are commenting on the story, like Dead & Breakfast, but the audio is so bad I can't understand a goddamn word he is saying. This is in stark contrast to the beginning of the film, where the lyrics/dialogue are simply drowned out by the score itself. The film also features the hippie version of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern; two guys who are seemingly always around, occasionally helping propel the plot forward and often just sort of waxing rhapsodic about things like vitamins. Whether Gary Oldman and Tim Roth will star in a spinoff that focuses entirely on these guys remains to be seen.

Naturally, the intended scares of the film are totally dwarfed by the terrifying sight and sound of a room full of hippies saying nonsense like "Life is an obscure hobo, bumming a ride on the omnibus of art." and doing spoken word poetry. The scene where Miller finally 'becomes' an artist is also horrifying, as he dons a french artist's hat, long cigarette, and all black clothing. Dammit hippies, leave Mr. Futterman alone!!!

The short running time means some things are left unresolved: How did the cat get into the wall? How does a cop managed to get killed via frying pan when he has his attacker at gunpoint? Why is there a guy hanging out in a fireplace?

No matter, this one's pretty damn good for a Corman movie. And it was remade with Anthony Michael Hall. He was the first famous person I met when I came to LA. So... there's something?

What say you?


Wrong Turn 2: Dead End

AUGUST 16, 2007


Today marks the 6 month anniversary of the last (and only) time I missed a movie since I began Horror Movie A Day. With the occasional double feature, that makes somewhere around 200 horror movies I have more or less watched in a row. Needless to say, the term ‘desensitized’ is pretty appropriate.

So how did movie #201ish, Wrong Turn 2: Dead End, endear itself to me? Did it stick out in a way that I can actually write a review without having to check my notes to remember what it was about? Fuckin A YES it did.

For starters, it begins with a girl being split in half (and that’s vertical splitting, not horizontal). You think the head chopping scene in the original was awesome? This tops it. And it’s the first kill! And then a few minutes later, the words CHEVY CHASE appear on screen. Now, granted it’s for the Maryland town, and not the beloved actor, but still, you know how long it’s been since I saw a movie that had “Chevy Chase” listed ANYWHERE and liked it? Does the phrase “it’s a bit nipply out!” mean anything to you?

And it doesn’t let up. A few minutes later someone insults a vegan (yes!). Then Henry Rollins tries to win over the West Virginia officials who decried the first film for making WV look like a redneck state full of inbred murderers (which it didn’t at all. It just re-enforced what we all already knew) by claiming he has never seen anyone fuck a pig. And so on and so on. I shit you not, my cheeks hurt a bit right now, because I was smiling like an idiot for most of the running time. Is the movie going to win any awards for storytelling? No, but what’s important to know is that it won’t be nominated for a Razzie either. Character development is presented perfectly; we are given just enough information to care a bit about everyone, but not in a shoehorned way that slows the movie down. Joe Lynch and writers Al Septien and Turi Meyer know perfectly well what the people are there for, and they deliver. But they deliver without treating the audience like they are idiots, or worse, forgetting basic filmmaking principles. And that is to be lauded. A horrendous and insulting movie like Drive Thru has just as many kills, but without the slightest shred of evidence anyone involved has any respect for the audience. Therein lies the crucial difference. I want to have fun, but I don’t want to feel like I need to smoke a bowl or maybe just give myself a lobotomy before I am able to do so.

Fuck, I even REWOUND the movie at one point when I had to minimize the window for a minute. I haven’t even bothered to hit pause when I physically left the room on most of the movies I watch (even the ones that are in another language), but at that point the movie had earned its wings and I felt I owed it that much. How’s THAT for confusing praise?

Now, one thing the movie didn't make too clear was that the mutant that survived the original is back, but he's played by a different actor (his name is 3 Finger. Hi!). Or maybe it's just me, the last time I watched Wrong Turn 1 was when I was working overnights, and on my night off I tried to keep my sleep schedule the same, so rather than go to bed I watched it at like 2 am while eating cereal... I was a mess. Either way, the house they live in is different. But the old man that Desmond Harrington (where the hell’s that guy been anyway? I liked his work) stole the map from at the end of the first one shows up again, still drinking his Pepto, and even dishes out some backstory. I would have liked another nod or two along those lines, but oh well. Lynch also uses the dreaded body-mounted camera facing up at the person’s head shot during one scene. You know the one (they also used it a bit in Hostage and The Hitcher remake). Whoever invented the rig that allows this shot should be, well, shot. Luckily he only uses it once AND the character gets killed to boot.

Actually, ironically (shut up irony police if this isn’t irony), for a movie that deals with a reality show gone awry, there is very little “POV of the video camera” style shots that were used in a lot of the other reality/horror movies such as Halloween Resurrection (apologies to all WT2 cast and crew for bringing up that POS in this review). Maybe one minute of the entire film is shown this way, so kudos to Lynch and DP Robin Loewen for using actual film as much as possible, even when video is expected.

And, again, I have seen more horror movies in the past 6 months than I probably have in my whole life. I see all the tricks coming a mile away (if you recall, yesterday I recognized an actor simply by his friggin foot). And yet, I totally failed to pick the survivors. My two picks both got the axe (one lasted quite a bit, but the other bought it before the halfway mark), but I didn’t read the opening credits so maybe that was a giveaway. Don’t read the opening credits!

I should also talk a bit about the gore. It’s 99% practical, and 100% great. Unlike Feast, which sprayed so much mutant and human grue across the screen in the first 20 minutes that it got a bit tiresome, WT2 dishes it out in a nice even pace, walking a fine line between too much and too slow. And the one digital effect that I spotted was used in possibly the best ‘shock’ kill in the film, so it evens out. The DVD has a brief featurette about the makeup, so fans should be happy.

Hell, I dig this movie so much I’ll even have the very first HMAD contest!

Along with the DVD, FOX sent the super cool promotional magnet for the film. I had already grabbed a couple at Comic Con (I never did do my “Con Review” did I? Oh well, let’s just say it was chill.), so I will part with this one. How do you win? Very simple…ish. On August 31st, buy a ticket for DEATH SENTENCE instead of Shitoween. Preferably the 7:30 or 10 show, i.e. when most people are (sadly) most likely seeing Zombie’s shitpile. Then be the first to post a photo of your DS ticket stub in THIS comment section. That’s it! You see a movie that can’t possibly be worse and get the most R rated magnet possibly ever printed… or, manufactured… look I don’t know how magnets are made. But it’s yours.

I can’t believe FOX would send Hills Have Eyes 2 into theaters and not this. It boggles the mind. Here’s a movie that almost DEMANDS to be seen with a big group of like minded friends and yet they favored a movie that made the US Army look like a bunch of idiots AND had some decidedly non-crowd pleasing mutant on human rape. At least in this movie, the mutant fucks his sister and it’s consensual, the way all mutant sex should be.

What say you?


The Covenant: Brotherhood Of Evil

AUGUST 15, 2007


You gotta wonder the reasoning behind calling a movie The Covenant: Brotherhood Of Evil, knowing that it’s going to possibly trick people into thinking it’s a sequel to Renny Harlin’s magnum opus of the same pre colon name. Because A. no one in their right mind would want to be associated with that movie, and B. there is no Covenant in the film that I can recall. Or a Brotherhood for that matter.

No, the film is mainly just about one guy, who we’re supposed to believe is a successful PR exec, but he’s played by Ed Furlong, so he just looks like the copy room guy trying to work his way into middle management. We’re also supposed to believe he has a super hot wife (Chandra West), not to mention a huge home when he’s supposedly financially struggling. Well, whatever. It’s Canada, maybe that whole 30% currency difference worked in his favor. I can never figure it out.

The movie is the usual “Make a deal with a Devil and slowly realize he’s sort of a dick” story, and suffice to say they don’t really try to do anything out of the ordinary, at least from a storytelling point of view. However, while it’s not a good film by any stretch, they put just enough effort into it to keep it safely out of the Crap page. For example, there’s a scene in the film we see in a lot of modern horror movies, where someone calls another’s cell phone only to hear it ringing in the same room. The way this was staged was pretty impressive compared to the others, so gotta give em props for that.

But there’s also some other stuff that isn’t so much impressive as it is confusing, like when they use four shots of houses to establish one residence. Or why they would give a line like “Successful men make their own luck” to a guy who peaked with Brainscan. Or why the movie, which looks like it had a decent enough budget and was relatively well shot on HD video, would only be available in a full screen version.

And goddammit, what have I told you people about logos and production companies at the head of the film? We get the Insight logo, and then the Fries logo, followed by the Fries production title, and then the Insight production title. What the Christing fuck? Knock that shit off!

The most disturbing scene in the film occurred about 30 seconds in. A car pulls into a spot, and the camera cuts to the bottom of the car door. We see someone’s foot, and I shit you not, I KNEW it was Michael Madsen. Just from his shoe touching the ground. I think you can officially say you have seen entirely too many direct to video movies when you can instantly recognize the podiatric region of someone whose biggest theatrical role in the past 7 or 8 years was in Bloodrayne. Ah, such is life.

What say you?


Revenge Of Dr. X (aka The Double Garden)

AUGUST 14, 2007


Well it had to happen sooner or later… Ladies and Gentlemen, an Ed Wood movie!

Technically. Revenge Of Dr. X not REALLY one of his, as it was merely written by the lad and directed by someone slightly more competent. But the title makes up for it. You see kids, the name of this movie is actually The Double Garden, or sometimes Venus Flytrap. But for whatever reason, the credits on the film (which are presented out of order and timed erratically) are from another movie all together. But really, would you expect any less from the unholy alliance of Ed Wood and Mill Creek? It’s amazing there’s anything on the disc at all.

So for obvious reasons, there’s no Doctor X, nor is there any Revenge. I'm not even sure if there's an “Of”. But I can’t understand why the description basically gives away the climax of the film. The Creek includes this in their synopsis: “Using radical techniques and falling into madness, the scientist eventually (note – that’s a key word: EVENTUALLY) creates a plant creature that feeds on flesh and blood, which then sets off to find food in the form of the people of a nearby community.” It’s a flurry of prepositional phrases that describes something that occurs far past the halfway mark of the film. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: anything that occurs past the halfway mark should NOT be included in the synopsis. But this is a new benchmark in what I call “Capritis”*, as the plant doesn’t even come alive until past the two-thirds mark and doesn’t “set off” until the final reel.

Until then, we are stuck with our hero, a man so grouchy looking and just plain assholish that he makes Walter Matthau look like Santa Claus. The film begins with him literally yelling at clouds, only to then order a shuttle launch based on the assumption that the wind will continue blowing in a favorable direction (good to know they leave it up to chance). He then spends 5 minutes or so screaming and yelling at two guys who made a miscalculation (we never even know the nature of the error, for all we know they just split the lunch check wrong). Thus, he is ordered to go to Japan to ‘relax’, but he pretty much yells at everyone there too. In his least charming moment, when the plant has come to life, he orders his assistant to get him some chickens and goats to feed it. Then he grabs a small puppy and goes “In the meantime…”, fully prepared to toss the poor thing into the monster’s claws. Our hero.

I’m not sure if Ed Wood could have done a better job directing the film either. Kenneth Crane emulates him well, with stock footage, confusing editing, and the occasional image like this:

There’s also an endless scene of the two leads driving around a mountain, with lots of shots seemingly taken from a camera loosely strapped to the roof. All set to what could best be described as Japanese circus music.

Still, I can’t call the movie crap, because the design of the plant is just so goddamn amazing I wanted to kiss my monitor:

That’s pretty much exactly what I imagine the baby would look like if all of the Super Mario Bros 2 enemies gang-raped a radish.

What say you?

*So named for Frank Capra’s It’s A Wonderful Life, a film everyone will describe as being about a guy who sees what life would be like without him, an event that occurs in the film’s final act. It’s really about how you shouldn’t trust fat men with your money if they’re finished reading their newspaper.


Vampire Assassin

AUGUST 13, 2007


Most of the recommendations I get for Horror Movie A Day are pretty standard… someone says “Oh I watched this awful movie, you should watch it.” And with that undeniably positive plug in mind, I queue it up. But the story of how Vampire Assassin was suggested to me is and probably will be the most hilariously sad tale of them all. Join me, won't you?

My buddy Devin Faraci, who writes for CHUD, recently moved to LA. And of all the furniture movers he could have hired to unpack his pod (you know, those giant fucking things you see taking up perfectly good parking spots all over the city), the one he got was none other than Ron Hall. Ron Hall is the writer, director, and star of Vampire Assassin, a film CHUD had negatively reviewed. Hall didn’t hold it against him (it wasn’t Devin’s review anyway) and apparently did a damn good job with the furniture. You can read the whole story here if you like; it's wonderfully depressing. Oddly, Mike from Blair Witch is also a furniture mover now. I imagine a future horror movie about furniture movers, all played by horror movie stars who are now actual furniture movers. And I imagine myself hating that film.

Anyway, for a furniture mover, Hall is a piss-poor director and an even worse actor. The camera barely moves, the film is ugly to look at, and apparently he knows nothing about color timing. And as an actor he's as wooden as the stakes that you never see actually hitting anything throughout the film. His script isn’t a total waste, though. Yeah, it’s generic, and he apparently doesn’t know the difference between zombies and vampires, but it’s serviceable enough for a DTV movie, despite the occasional nonsensical line like “Remember, and remember it well: DON’T FORGET what I’ve told you!”

But everything on-screen is just an abortion. Every single shot of the film looks like it was videotaped in someone’s house or a toilet paper warehouse, and that’s probably the least of its problems. There’s an Asian girl who is speaking English yet still sounds dubbed, cue-card delivery on “Arnold-style” one-liners that make them sound even dumber than they already are, the worst special effects I’ve seen since the heyday of Ed Wood, and just an overall feeling of “Oh I forgot we were filming tonight, quick, call your cousin and see if him and his friends will come play vampires” throughout the duration of the film.

Christ, even during the opening titles, there’s a frame or two of a “slug” left in there. For non-editing folks, a slug is a placeholder for an effect or shot you currently do not have. So right before the title, you see SLUG and some other text under it. Nice work. I tried to screen cap it but my PC’s DVD player doesn’t have slo-mo and I don’t have the patience to keep trying to pause it at the right frame. It’s there though (someone else saw it too so I’m not crazy).

As previously mentioned, Hall isn’t much of an actor, making Snipes (the obvious inspiration) look like Olivier, even in Blade: Trinity! So with the hero (who is not the guy on the cover, by the way) a total wash, who should the audience care about? My pick would be the wise old Asian guy, a character that your Keye Lukes, Makos, or John Lones would normally play. This guy is just some surly drunk, emphasizing words at random and generally just having a grand old time. I laughed every time he appeared (then again I laughed at pretty much everything in this movie – I let out three belly laughs before even the fucking “slug” appeared).

The main vampire heavy is a howler too. He’s sort of a Joe Estevez-y type who spends a full minute of the film waving his magic cape around in order to deflect After Effects bullets. What exactly his goal is, they never actually make clear, but I’m guessing it has something to do with ruling the world. No matter. You haven’t lived until you’ve seen a supposedly threatening vampire lord throw his cape over a guy in order to subdue him, and afterwards, you wouldn’t want to.

Christ, even the goddamn props are laughable. We have some obviously plastic chains (which are merely just placed over the guy instead of wrapped around him), a set of torture knives that are just some random steak knives from any kitchen drawer, and box after box of paper towels and toilet paper. Why the police station and vampire home would have so many boxes of these things in their strikingly similar basements, I do not know, but that’s just part of the unparalleled ineptery that is Vampire Assassin.

At this point I expect nothing from Lion’s Gate (go to the Crap page and see how many are LG related), but this is a new low for them. They took what is little more than a home movie of some dudes pretending to fight each other in a toilet paper distribution center and had the audacity to charge 19.99 for it. It’s one thing for Ron Hall to make a movie and use it to show folks that he can (theoretically) make said movie for no money; it’s another thing for a legitimate company to actually distribute it with blatantly false advertising and ask people to pay for it. The movie doesn’t even look like it COST 19.99, why the fuck should anyone pay that much for the privilege of owning the goddamn thing???

And for the love of Mike, he’s not even a fucking assassin! No one pays Derek Washington (yes, his fucking real name is more badass than his “badass” character’s name) to hunt vampires; he does this shit for the hell of it! I’d blame LG for the stupid title (which varies from Assassin to Assassins, which makes even less sense) too but it’s actually a line in the movie.

So forget what I said earlier, the script is fucking stupid too.

What say you?


Trauma (1993)

AUGUST 12, 2007


You gotta wonder what family gatherings are like at the Argento home. Stendhal of course had Dario directing his daughter being raped, and in Trauma, when she was only like 16, he’s got her nude in one scene, and making out with a guy 2x her age in another. He also is apparently confused as to where the vocal chords are located in the human body, as no less than 3 disembodied heads are seen talking in an otherwise realistic movie. What the hell’s with this guy?

Oh but I love him so. Like almost all of his films, I enjoyed every minute of it, even when I hadn’t a clue as to what was going on (why the dream sequence with Asia breaking a VHS tape?). There’s a bit with a little kid who you think is going to decapitate himself that ranks as one of my favorite bits in his modern career, the only disappointing aspect is that the kid doesn’t go all the way, as it were.

This one is a lot like Deep Red at times, but that’s a good thing, since that’s one of his best. I’d rather be reminded of Deep Red than, I dunno, Jenifer (“Hi, I’m Steven Weber, and I’m gonna write myself into a movie where my character is constantly getting blown”). There’s also a lot of moments that made me laugh out loud, like when a pharmacist punches a guy out for trying to fake a prescription. I think the world would be a better place if more pharmacists dealt out their own unique brand of justice.

Also the motive behind the killer’s… killings (look, YOU write 200 horror movie reviews in as many days, see how witty you get), is pretty goddamn disturbing and awful. Expectant mothers should decidedly NOT watch this film. I would even go so far as to say it’s the most genuinely horrifying thing I have seen in a horror movie in ages.

The Anchor Bay DVD has a good collection of extras as well. A 20 minute ramble from Argento about his experience on the film, some behind the scenes stuff of Savini at work, and a commentary by Alan Jones that is similar to the Tim Lucas ones on the Bava films, except he sounds like he actually wants to be there (unlike Lucas) and occasionally offers some wonderfully random asides (“I saw Demons with Clive Barker, who looks terrible nowadays”).

Dario, if you’re reading this: Not that I ever totally understand any of your movies, but this in particular troubled me: Why the ending with the reggae music and dancing girl?

What say you?


Movie & TV Show Preview Widget