Dark Harvest 2: The Maize (2004)

SEPTEMBER 30, 2008

GENRE: GHOST, SUPERNATURAL
SOURCE: DVD (ONLINE RENTAL)

The original Dark Harvest was one of my unofficial trilogy of “Dark” films (Harvest, Fields, Ride) that pretty much epitomize what is wrong with horror movies nowadays. But it’s the only one that has a sequel (though a Dark Ride 2 has been threatened), and I figured it couldn’t possibly be worse. However, Dark Harvest 2: The Maize is not really a sequel, just possibly the most blatant ripoff in Lionsgate history.

It’s actually a movie simply called The Maize: The Movie (LOL), without even the slightest resemblance to Dark Harvest (it’s not even the same subgenre). What happened was, Lionsgate bought the film and renamed it, and even put the scarecrow killer guy from the “first” movie on the cover, which is the icing on the douchecake. Making matters even more confusing (for me anyway), The Maize has its own (legit) sequel, but I can’t find any evidence of it being released on DVD, by Lionsgate or anyone else. I DID discover that Dark Harvest 3 is another unrelated film, so I look forward to watching that one soon. And people bitch about Halloween III not having Michael Myers...

But it’s easy to see how it could be sold as a sequel, as it is also a completely inept and overlong bore, like the original, and it also has a cornfield. But instead of a kid with variant hair seeking retribution against the killer scarecrows who dare to believe he has a different last name, this one’s about a dad who spends the entire movie looking for his daughters inside a corn maze. And he has ESP.

And it’s an hour and forty five minutes long.

Now, it’s a terrible movie, and nothing could save it, but while the length is unforgivable, it also adds to what makes it such a trainwreck delight. I spent more time laughing at this movie than I have at any other film in recent memory, and a lot of it was due to my disbelief at just how long certain scenes go on. For example, there’s a bit where the two girls, who are for some reason filming a movie about them getting lost (using the same camera that I suspect was used to shoot a good chunk of this actual film. It’s meta-low-budget!). One of them tells the other to keep screaming into the camera. We watch this, not exaggerating here, for 3 straight minutes. Director Bill Cowell (who also wrote, produced, and starred) occasionally has editor Robert Imbs cut in some shots of birds flying in a V formation (Gordon Bombay, are you out there?) to break it up a bit, but it doesn’t diffuse the sheer non-energy that this scene delivers. The fact that the little girls (one of whom is Cowell’s daughter) can’t act worth a shit just adds to the greatness.

Random cutaways and inserts actually make up what seems like half (or more) of the movie. Shoes, shovels, clocks, birds, pumpkins, hands... if it’s a noun, chances are at some point it gets a jarring closeup in the film. It’s actually kind of impressive how many cuts there are in this movie. A lot of these no budget indies suffer from “Master Shot-itis”, in which entire scenes are filmed from one stationary angle, but not The Maize! There’s a cut every couple seconds or so, and some of them even match.

Another wonderful element of this film is the fact that Imbs apparently just learned how to use Adobe After Effects, and by golly he wanted to prove it. So whenever the dad (Cowell again) uses his ESP, we get concentric circles emanating from his head, courtesy of AE’s ripple effect, set at about 100 radius, 40 width (for those of you at home who want to make your very own Dark Harvest 2 homage film). Another thing he likes to do is get use out of extra footage by having it float around the screen in little windows:

I am guessing he had a vague memory of the double/triple/quadruple type images you see on 24 and was trying to replicate it. It’s a shame though, I really cannot do the effect justice by describing it. You just have to see it, over and over throughout the film. But hey, anything that breaks up the hour or so of footage in the film that is simply Cowell wandering through rows of corn yelling “Girls!?” over and over is fine by me.

There is also a supernatural element of some sort. The reason the two girls can’t escape the corn maze is because they are being trapped by the ghosts of two OTHER little girls who were killed there a year before. They need to do this so that the dad will come looking for his daughters and help the ghosts solve their murder, or something. I didn’t care much once it became apparent that the only real reason that they were in the movie was to rip off the little girls in The Shining (possibly the reason for the ESP nonsense as well).

Also, the first half of the movie takes place in the daytime, and that’s fine. But when night falls, Cowell apparently didn’t take on a 6th role as “Guy who rents a generator and some lights”, so the scenes are all lit by a light on the camera. This wouldn’t be as big of a problem if the camera wasn’t constantly moving around, or if they had some sort of narrative reason for a small circular light that shines on our actor’s face and upper torso and nothing else, but nothing is offered in that department. More than once I thought I was watching a “found footage” type film as a result.

So add all that together, and you have a modern Plan 9, a movie so inept and yet made so earnestly (if Cowell was just looking to make a buck, I’m sure he could have come up with a plot that was more marketable than “A guy runs around a cornfield”) that you can’t really hate it. There may not be a seconds’ worth of intentional entertainment in the entire film, but what it offers in unintentional hilarity is more than enough to make up for it, and a few other movies to boot. It currently ranks 5th on IMDb’s bottom 100 (1 being Disaster Movie), which is pretty good for a film that went DTV and was never featured on MST3k. Everyone involved should be proud of their non-achievements here.

And there are extras! There’s a trailer, in which I learned that the film was rated R (for what, I have no idea. Nude corn?), and it succeeds in making the film look exciting, though it gives away the non-sequel angle by having someone explain that it’s “been one year” since an event that wasn’t in the first movie. Then there’s a “making of” that’s really just a blooper reel. And even that rips off The Shining, as Cowell (presumably) jokes that it took 127 takes to get a simple “walk and talk” down correctly. Hey, we read that trivia on the IMDb too, pal. And while they may find it amusing, it’s kind of sad how many takes are blown by tripods and microphones in the shot (and not like “oh I didn’t realize the camera would catch that on the side of the frame” type mistakes; some of the damn things are dead center in the image).

I can only hope Dark Harvest 3 (aka Scarecrow, but not the Scarecrow I already watched) lives up to this non-franchise’s promise of inept nonsense, corn, and false advertising. If anything on the cover of the film is actually IN the film, I will feel ripped off.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Candyman: Day Of The Dead (1999)

SEPTEMBER 29, 2008

GENRE: SLASHER, SUPERNATURAL
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

On the DVD for the first Candyman, Tony Todd discusses the franchise as a whole, and while he talks about Farewell to the Flesh for a few minutes, when it came to Candyman: Day Of The Dead (the DVD art has a "3" in the title but the film itself does not) he pretty much just pointed out that it exists. But since it was written by the same guys who wrote Wrong Turn 2, and featured Nick Corri, I figured it might be reasonably entertaining. And, well, it sort of is. But it’s like a vacuum; I already forget most of what happened in it. This may be the first movie in history in which both the creators and audience are in agreement that the movie is in fact, well, THERE, and that’s about it.

Really though, at no point during the film was I angry at any dialogue or idiotic character decision, nor was I particularly engaged by anything on screen either. It could have ended twenty minutes earlier or twenty minutes later and it wouldn’t have any effect on how I felt about the movie as a whole. Even some of my notes are pretty vague: “Tree”. The fuck does that mean?

There were occasional moments that got a rise out of me, good or bad. One was the delight in seeing that Nick Corri is basically playing the same guy he played in Nightmare on Elm St, that of a suspect in a murder that we know he didn’t commit, but no one will believe who the real killer is because “it’s just an urban legend”. Also, in my review for the first film, I pointed out that some of Candyman’s dialogue sounded like bad goth poetry. The line I used as an example is repeated here... by a goth kid! I had a nice chuckle at that.

Also, Wade Williams is in it. You might know him as Bellick on Prison Break. And if you don’t, that means you are missing the finest ridiculous hour of television to air since the heyday of Melrose Place. One recent episode found Michael Schofield (the show's hero) getting all night laser surgery to remove his full torso (front and back) tattoo, a process that took a few hours and didn’t leave him in the slightest bit of pain. Seriously, watch it, it’s amazing.

There are a couple of minor concerns though. One is that our heroine, a beautiful blonde woman, takes the subway out of East LA. Uh, no. No one uses the subway in LA at all anyway, especially not in that situation. Another is that the music sucks. I guess they couldn’t afford or just didn’t want to use Philip Glass’ amazing theme, so they just have a generic ripoff and some hiphop beats instead. Not the best substitution.

But the only real issue is that the film is more or less a remake of the first two, as it concerns yet another blonde woman who is investigating the Candyman legend. At least in the 2nd movie the girl had reasonable doubt on her side, but this broad is the daughter of that character, so she should know better than to go poking around “trying to learn more” (even dumber, she doesn’t really believe in the guy, even though her mother’s entire family was killed by him). I’m not sure why after two other movies with this scenario that no one thought to try a different approach. If nothing else, at least the Hellraiser films were constantly doing something new.

But I mean, if you’ve never seen the other films, or even if you just skipped the 2nd one, this wouldn’t be an issue, and you could enjoy the movie for what it is. It’s hardly great, but it does its job – there are gory kills, some nudity, a memorable killer (though Todd seems a bit bored this time around), and, as usual, an interesting backdrop not often used in horror movies (Day of the Dead in Los Angeles... I think the last one I saw with this setting was The Dead One, and this movie, flat as it may be, is much better).

Oh now I remember what “tree” meant – in the obligatory origin flashback, Daniel Robitaille is seen tied to a tree as he is covered in bees and being be-handed. But in the last movie, he was on the ground, right? Then again, if our heroine is the daughter of the woman in the last movie, then this movie should be taking place in like 2020, not 1999, so whatever.

The DVD, like the movie itself, is pretty lazy. The main menu is one of the messiest I have ever seen, and the only extras are the trailer and some production notes. Also, the back tells us that it’s a full frame version when it is in fact presented in widescreen. Since I almost skipped buying it due to the “full frame” transfer, it’s kind of a silly mistake to make. Artisan is risking a loss of the lucrative “anal retentive bastard” crowd.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Pathology (2008)

SEPTEMBER 28, 2008

GENRE: HERO KILLER, THRILLER
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

I wanted to see Pathology in theaters, but someone talked me out of it, saying it sucked (Spooky Dan really liked it, but that dude liked the Halloween remake, so that was sort of like a 2nd strike against it). But I promised to rent it as soon as it hit DVD, and I did. Five days after it hit DVD.

Well it was neither terrible or good. It’s certainly well made, and the cast is on their game (although Milo Ventimiglia really needs to stop playing the brooding good guy who constantly flirts with his darker side), but it’s just not a very enjoyable film. The script is by Brian Taylor and Mark Neveldine (I’m sorry, Neveldine/Taylor, as they credit themselves on the film and introduce themselves on the commentary. Apparently they have fused together), who wrote and directed Crank, a fact that the poster/back of the DVD doesn’t let us forget. But comparing it to Crank sets up a different movie; it would be like going out of your way to point out that Schindler’s List is from the same guy who made Hook. Crank is a blast from start to finish, excessive and ridiculous with no point other than to have a good time. But that’s not what this film is like at all; there’s some occasional (and hilarious) black humor in the first half hour, but after that its just a dark, kind of depressing movie, with no characters to root for and no real suspense to drive the narrative either.

See, like all of these sort of “good guy joins a club of bad kids and then realizes they are crazy so he tries to get out” movies, you pretty much know the entire plot structure right from the start. Guy will meet the “group”, they will dislike him, then welcome him, then he will get “too close”, do something he regrets, back out, get the “you can’t just LEAVE!” speech from the bad guy/group leader, sides will be drawn, and our hero will eventually prevail. Unfortunately, our “hero” is Milo’s character, who cheats on his fiancé (though I can’t blame him, Lauren Lee Smith is fucking hot as hell), smokes crack, and kills at least two people who never did anything wrong to him. It would be one thing if he were to pay for his crimes in the end, but no, he actually becomes MORE of an asshole in the final ten minutes, killing everyone rather than report them, and even roping in another med student who is seemingly in love with him to aid him with yet another murder. Go Milo!... I guess?

It does have its moments though. Milo and Lauren have a super hot sex scene after they kill her abusive father (Larry Drake!), fucking the shit out of each other with his fresh corpse just a few feet away. And Michael Weston is wonderfully sneery as the main antagonist/would-be best friend. There’s a bit where he knocks over a bunch of champagne glasses that floored me; between that and the one in Dark Knight, it’s a great year for spilled drink gags.

But these moments aren’t enough to give it more than a very slim pass. The uneven tone really hurts in the long run, and since the basic idea has been done so many times, there aren’t enough new ideas to keep viewer interest. Also, at no point does anyone get fucked on a mailbox.

Hi, I’m the WORST DUMMY IN THE HISTORY OF CINEMA.

The DVD has a nice smattering of extras, including an amusing commentary by Neveldine and Taylor, plus alleged director Marc Schollerman (since N&T also produced and even worked as the camera operators, I am guessing it was a Poltergeist type of deal). Schollerman barely speaks, but N&T are pretty hilarious at times, mocking each other’s dialogue and camerawork, making things up, etc. They even mock the Lakeshore logo, which I appreciated since I hate that goddamn thing. Schollerman actually has the best line though, when he mocks the Twister MPAA rating ("intense depiction of very bad weather") when discussing the lengthy reasons for this film's R rating (which is pretty impressive in its own right). There are also a pair of featurettes, a music video, an extended autopsy scene (worth watching for the fantastic score that accompanies it), and for some goddamn reason, the AVP2 trailer, listed as an actual extra (instead of like “Also from FOX”). It also replaces the original, pretty cool poster with a generic cast lineup that attempts to make Alyssa Milano's role look substantial, when she's really only in the movie for about 10 minutes.

So if you’ve ever watched House, MD and wondered what would happen if they all started killing each other, this might be the movie for you. Otherwise, it’s a good concept that is ultimately weighed down by the script’s schizophrenic and rather generic execution. Oh well. Bring on Crank 2!

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Tragic Ceremony (1972)

SEPTEMBER 27, 2008

GENRE: BREAKDOWN, ITALIAN, SUPERNATURAL
SOURCE: DVD (ONLINE RENTAL)

Both Rue Morgue and Screem magazine carried reviews of Tragic Ceremony (aka Estratto Dagli Archivi Segreti Della Polizia Di Una Capitale Europea*) in their most recent-ish issues, and thus I queued it up so I wouldn’t feel left out. I had never heard of it, but I was surprised to discover a couple of things in it that pre-date the films I always thought originated certain horror movie clichés.

For example, there is a gas station attendant who leads our heroes to their doom. I thought this was an invention of Texas Chain Saw Massacre, but nope, it was the trinity of screenwriters Mario Bianchi, José Gutiérrez Maesso, and Leonardo Martín, a year or so earlier. I also thought that the rapid fire edited montage of previous footage to help explain a twist in the finale was a relatively new technique, but Tragic Ceremony, from 1972, has one (and it’s even more impressive when you consider that they didn’t have an Avid with copy/paste shortcuts back then). Rock on you crazy Italians!

Alas, it is not the first or the last film to be a bit unclear as to what exactly is going on during key points of the film. It’s kind of a slow burn, with a strange structure to boot (the “breakdown” segment is only the first half of the film, the 2nd half takes place in one of our heroes’ own home), so it’s not like its wall to wall death and dismemberment without any time to stop for plot. Quite the contrary, there is relatively little violence (a lot of the deaths are offscreen) and 90% of it is limited to a single sequence. So you’re left with a lot of talk, but for some reason, they never find the time to talk about WHY any of this stuff is happening. Like Psycho, there is a shrink at the end to explain things, but how exactly he knows any of this stuff (involving family curses, ghosts, possession, etc) is beyond me. Also, the gas station attendant seems to be a ghost himself, but again, this isn’t really explained.

Damned if it’s not entertaining though. Even when there’s no real horror stuff going on, I was being delighted left and right. There’s an ancient organist who keeps looking directly into the camera, a guy who seems to be trying to nail his mom, and one of the finest news reports I have ever seen in a film. The newscaster first guesses that the massacre was the result of either “a monster or a steamroller” (hell of a range there), and then he points out that a guitar found at the scene of the crime could be explained by the presence of hippies.

And the horror stuff is great too. Carlo Rambaldi (ET!) did the makeup effects, and they are pretty impressive, particularly a 99% accurate dummy head being split in half. There is also a pretty great mangled jaw during the finale to enjoy. Like I said, the gore is pretty limited (then again, this predates the sort of late 70s early 80s “splatter craze”, so I wasn’t expecting much), but then it’s onscreen, it delivers.

Another thing I dug is how much they milk the breakdown angle. The car runs out of gas, so they push it to the gas station. He gives them like half a gallon of gas to get them to the next town, but it doesn’t get them there. So they push it again and find a house (the house with the villains, obviously), and look for gas in the numerous cars that are there. When the lady of the house finds these four strangers in her home, looking to steal their gas, she doesn’t seem to mind much. If anything, she acts like its pretty common that folks are breaking down. For an early breakdown film, it definitely sets the bar pretty high in terms of setting up just how incapacitated the car is.

I also learned that the Italian for Bill is “Bill”. Actually, for an Italian movie, they all have pretty generic, more American-y names: Bill, Jane, Tom... not a single Romeo or Antonio in the bunch.

The DVD only has one extra, an interview with the female star, one Camille Keaton, who is more infamous for her turn in I Spit On Your Grave. She just sort of rambles about her career, and doesn’t spend too much time discussing the film at all, really. Still, a nice little piece, and since these obscure 70s Italian flicks often have nothing of note, it’s nice to have.

What say you?

*Which translates to Taken From The Secret Police Files Of A European Capital, which manages to be the longest and yet least informative title of all time.

PLEASE, GO ON...

Blood Angels (2004)

SEPTEMBER 26, 2008

GENRE: CRAP, VAMPIRE
SOURCE: DVD (ONLINE RENTAL)

I must hunt down and kill (or at least mock) whoever told me that Blood Angels (aka Thralls) was a lesbian vampire movie. Because not only are there absolutely NO lesbian scenes in the entire film, there is hardly any straight sex either. Titanic had more nudity, for Christ's sake (and felt shorter than this interminable bore). Why bother having a movie about a team of slutty vampire women and then not bother having them fuck anyone?

Worse, none of them can act, which makes the lack of skin even more baffling. It's like, if you need women to bare their bodies for a film, you take the ones who would be willing to do it, regardless of acting ability. But if they are NOT required to do any such thing, then why cast these vacuums of screen presence? These broads can't seriously be the pick of the litter, right? If so, how bad were the girls director Ron Oliver actually turned down?

But even if I had cast this film (for the record, that would be Rachel Nichols, Sophia Bush, Michelle Monaghan, Amanda Righetti, and Evangeline Lilly, with Jordan Ladd as the random 6th girl who disappears from the film after a few minutes), it wouldn't improve matters. The real problem is the mind numbingly boring plot. Or the horrendous attempt at campy comedy. Or the CG that makes the fake vent in Doomed look good in comparison. Or the fact that no one told the writers that a nerdy Asian dude trying to pass himself off as "gangsta" hasn't been funny since the moment it was created, 10+ years ago. Take your pick.

Oh, and the fucking head vampire is Lorenzo Goddamn Lamas. Unless he's got a laser pointer in his hand, he's the least threatening (or interesting) "tough guy" actor of all time, yet for the movie to work we have to accept him as some sort of suave Dracula wannabe (he even has a Renfield, who is even more annoying). What, was Jeff Speakman unavailable? Mark Dascascos too expensive?

OK, let's just point out what is good. Shawn Roberts (from Diary of the Dead) is the only one in the cast who seems to be even trying, and he manages to exude some charm, despite the script's best efforts. And the fighting is more or less well-staged (as it should be, since a fight breaks out every 4-5 minutes in this movie), which is perhaps what the girls were really cast for:

"Will you do nudity?"
"No."
"Can you kick a guy?"
"Yes."
"OK, we'll rewrite. Welcome aboard!"

And, boring as it may be, I liked that the movie all took place in one location (a club), in one night, but it wasn't a siege/From Dusk Till Dawn type thing. It kept me from thinking about better movies the whole time. That's about it though. Otherwise, it's so bland I've already forgotten half of the movie (and I actually stayed awake for the whole thing!).

Here's something kind of interesting (much more so than anything in the movie anyway). When I hit "play movie" on the main menu, I was treated to a bunch of trailers, something that should be BEFORE the main menu (if at all), and the MPAA logo was missing all the usual text. "Wait, I've rented from this company before!" I thought, but couldn't remember what movie it was. Then later, when I opened up HMAD to post the review, I clicked on a random old review to read (which I do every now and then to look for mistakes, edit Amazon links if necessary, etc). The review was Satan's Little Helper, and that was the movie I was trying to think of! Weird, huh?

Again: that is much more interesting than anything in Blood Angels.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

The Phantom of Soho (1964)

SEPTEMBER 25, 2008

GENRE: SERIAL KILLER
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 4!!!)

One of my favorite movies since I started HMAD was Raw Meat (aka Death Line), a delightful British monster movie that featured Donald Pleasence in one of his best roles ever that didn’t once require him to talk about “it as if he were a human being” or something along those lines. Since then, I have sought a British film that would equal that film in terms of sheer bliss and dry humor, but unfortunately The Phantom Of Soho did not fit the bill.

Actually, it's a German movie, but it takes place in London, so I hoped it would be more like a British film (fun) than a German one (depressing). But it's not really funny (or depressing, for that matter). It's just sort of there, for the most part.

Not that it’s entirely humorless. I don’t think it’s possible for a movie with two London based detectives to not have any dry humor, just as it is impossible for me to write a review that didn’t have profanity. And it's clear that the Germans were obviously trying to emulate typical British humor, but something was apparently lost in the translation.

And translation is the best way to describe it, because it has been (poorly) dubbed. While a few lines here and there deliver, many of them just sound a bit awkward, due to the bored guy or gal dubbing in the lines. So unfortunately, you’re left with the actual plot, which is pretty ho-hum. Worse, the killer’s identity is painfully obvious from the start, which leaves all the investigation scenes feeling a bit useless.

That said, some of the kill scenes are pretty cool, with a surprising number of POV shots from the killer (so Halloween stole from Black Christmas, and Black Christmas stole from Phantom of Soho?). And despite the dubber’s best efforts, some of the humor shines through. There’s a great bit where the rookie inspector guy pulls out not one, not two, but three magnifying glasses from his jacket so he and the other two cops can inspect a photo. I know that doesn’t sound particularly funny, but trust me, it is. And even though I figured out the killer’s identity pretty early on, it was still a pretty interesting story, much better than most serial killer movies anyway (i.e. it has nothing to do with religious beliefs or being abused as a kid).

I was also happy to discover that this is the rare horror film with a title that begins Phantom of ____ and yet it is NOT a modern/alternate/whatever version of Phantom of the Opera. Once I read that the film revolved around a club in London called Zanzibar (where one would order his lady’s favorite dish, I presume), I assumed it would have a swinging disfigured killer hacking up dancers and cokeheads that threatened to undermine some mod chick he was particularly fond of, so discovering that it was more like a Jack the Ripper story by way of Agatha Christie was pretty sweet.

Mill Creek once again provided a widescreen transfer (though it’s a bit off, the left side is partially cut off while the right has a black spot), but it’s far from their best work. The picture seems to be recorded off of a fuzzy cable station, and for some reason, the sound has an echo. When someone speaks and there is silence after, you can hear the line again, sounding like it was coming from the next room. But I dunno, maybe the guy in the office next to mine is also a Mill Creek enthusiast and coincidentally happened to be watching the film today. Either or.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

This Darkness (2003)

SEPTEMBER 24, 2008

GENRE: INDEPENDENT, VAMPIRE
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 3!!!)

You know my situation is dire if I am dipping into the incredibly aptly named Decrepit Crypt set. Since I had no time to watch a film before work, and as of this writing (10:30 pm) I am still AT work, I had no choice but This Darkness. Usually I can’t watch Decrepit movies at work due to the nudity they always revel in, but it’s so late that everyone else has gone home (except of course, for the people who are slacking and thus keeping me here, but they work in a different office), I figured I'd be OK. And I had nothing else that I would even consider horror.

While slightly more competent on a technical level than most of the other DC movies, this one is ultimately just as bad as the others. There are a couple reasons for this. One is the insane length. 107 minutes is fine if it’s wall to wall action, or a complex story, but this is just yet another “science makes vampires” story, and a very boring one at that. Our hero is a descendant of Van Helsing (somehow I don’t think they cleared those rights) who has people call him “Van” (fuck you) who has accidentally created a new vampire strand that allows them to be in the sunlight. Fine, but around 90 minutes of the movie is about other crap, like a kid who wants to buy a surfboard, a drummer at odds with his former band, a little girl learning her multiplication tables, etc. There are also long extensions to scenes that seem more like the actors goofing off than the characters improvising, such as during an already lengthy “training” montage when our hero begins whacking a training dummy with a broom over and over. If anyone with any sort of sense had edited this film, it would be roughly 34 minutes long at best.

Another problem is the atrocious acting of the lead, one Dylan O’Leary. Normally I wouldn’t care too much, but since he’s also the writer/director, I think it’s just an ego trip. There are about 3 too many good guys anyway, why not just take one out of the script, use that actor as the lead, and focus more on the directing? You’d be taking care of three problems at once: the length, the terrible lead, and the direction that made it incredibly hard to tell how much time had passed in between scenes.

Not helping matters in this department is the abysmal continuity. Either the main character is an obsessive compulsive who needs to change his clothes every 5 minutes, or O’Leary wasn’t paying any goddamn attention. I was under the impression that a couple weeks had gone by, and then halfway through the film a character points out that his friend, killed in the opening scene, has only been missing a day.

Luckily, there is the occasional terrible line of dialogue to amuse you. When flirting with the hero, a fellow scientist says “Oh, I love chains... DNA and all!” Another howler comes during the finale, when the villain reveals “I’ve killed dinosaurs....” Yay for Creationism!

Oh, and the hero fucks a woman half his age who somehow turns out to be his mom. It’s too baffling to be hot, but it’s better than nothing.

Like I said early on, it’s technically OK at least. DP John McLeod clearly has at least a basic understanding of blocking and things like that, and the audio is never muffled or coming out in wildly different levels. The gore, while pretty rare (as is the nudity – it’s the least gratuitous of the DC films yet, which is ironic because it’s the one that could have benefited the most from those elements), is also decent. The blood looks like blood, not Kool-Aid, so they got something on Zombie Town anyway.

Unlike the last DC movie I watched (Burning Dead), this one has an IMDb page. Like all indies, half of the comments come from friends and family (and O’Leary himself), praising the film and neglecting to point out any of its flaws. However, 2 of them are from angry crew members who apparently weren’t credited, which is pretty unique. One woman is particularly bitter about not having her name alongside all the other names no one will actually care about besides the other people in the movie. It reminded me of this time in college when I was a featured extra in a student film, and before I watched it, the director told me he forgot to put my name in with all the others. I was initially bummed, but then I watched it, and instead thanked Christ that my good (pfft) name wasn’t sullied by that piece of crap. Thus, I remain proud of my entire IMDb filmography (another student film).

Like me, O’Leary has no other credits to his name as of yet, but there is some hope for him. As long as he stays behind the camera and hires a better editor, I think he could definitely make a worthwhile no-budgeter on the level of Dead 7 at least. I only ask that if his sophomore film once again involves incest that he takes the time to make it A. hot and B. an actual plot point. His character never seems even weirded out by the fact that he totally fucked his mom. Come on man, it’s not like you have an aversion to slowing the movie down.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

The Eye 3 (2005)

SEPTEMBER 23, 2008

GENRE: ASIAN, COMEDIC, GHOST
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

Since The Eye 2 was so good, I figured The Eye 3 (aka Eye Infinity; Chinese: Gin gwai 10) would be a safe “blind buy”, but I was wrong. While not terrible, it’s certainly nothing I’d ever want to watch again, and it’s a damn shame that they couldn’t sustain the level of quality from the previous films (the original Eye being one of the better of the ones that got American remakes).

I guess I should have been more suspicious about the film’s quality when I read the description on the back of the DVD, which is one of the most vague synopsii I have ever read. “Some believe that our world is one of many, that our existence is merely an intersection between countless dimensions – known and unknown. We run into strangers we don’t see, hear tunes we don’t hear. Most of us remain ignorant. But there are always those who are a little different, they would risk everything to find the truth if not the thrill – that is, to see the other side – just once in their lives.” Oh yeah? So who is the main character? Existence? The tunes we don’t hear?

But I can’t blame the back of the DVD guy (or gal, it’s an equal opportunity shit job) for not putting much effort into trying to explain this thing, as there isn’t really much of a narrative. Some kids bang chopsticks on bowls in order to make some ghosts appear, and then spend the rest of the movie wondering why ghosts are bothering them. It eventually just becomes a collection of setpieces, some of which are pretty entertaining, others not. However, none of them are suspenseful or scary, which is kind of a problem.

A big reason why the film lacks any tension whatsoever is that the kids never really seem scared about the ghosts after their initial encounter. At one point, two of them are in the land of the dead, trying to escape (I think; maybe they are just looking for a summer place there), and they discover that their breath will scare the ghosts away. As they breathe over and over (exciting!) they begin laughing and making fun of each other’s stinky breath. Then they fart at the ghosts. Granted, it’s supposed to be a funny movie (it borders parody at one point, when a kid asks about his report card, a la the original movie, but with a pretty hilarious punchline), but it should be suspenseful as well. Even the kids in Scary Movie seemed a bit more concerned about their predicaments.

Plus, the tone is all over the place. It’s funny one minute, then they attempt to scare you, then back to funny again; never blending together seamlessly like the more successful comedic horror films. Also, the end is just a downer, which is about the only thing it has in common with the (superior) first two films other than the rather general concept of ghosts.

That said, there are some great bits. Right after the awesome report card scene (and yet another elevator scene, the weakest yet), one of our guys inexplicably gets into a dance off with two street kids. It makes absolutely no sense at all, but it’s fucking hilarious. And in one of the few good horror bits, a kid is lost in the woods and a ghost begins shadowing his movements. Good stuff.

And to the Pang brothers’ credit, they make their intentions known right from the start. The opening credits seem like they are lifted from the Chinese version of 90210 or something, and the events of the first two films are dismissed as “scary stories”. Speaking of the credits, they are entirely in English, which is strange. Especially since the subtitles seem to think otherwise:

For those who are hard of hearing and
of reading the middle of the screen.

There is also a guy who appears to be speaking English, as his voice is quite clearly dubbed. It’s funny to see it the other way around for once, but the guy doing the dub is obviously like 20 years older than the actor. Luckily, he’s barely in the movie.

The DVD comes with a pair of extras, making of type stuff that isn’t particularly interesting, other than the Pangs explaining that they didn’t want to keep telling the same story (this coming from the guys who just remade their own movie, and quite badly, with Bangkok Dangerous), hence the complete change in tone from the first two films. They also point out that there is a fourth film, but that one does not have the Pangs’ involvement, so maybe the new team (Tsui Hark is directing) can either revive the franchise or kill it off for good.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Soul Survivors (2001)

SEPTEMBER 22, 2008

GENRE: GHOST, PSYCHOLOGICAL
SOURCE: DVD (STORE RENTAL)

I hate when I watch a movie like Soul Survivors, which takes place on a college campus, because it makes me think my college experience sucked in comparison. First of all, movie college kids always have their own rooms (or room with their best friend) and the place is huge. I, on the other hand, shared my 10x10 room with a guy who listened to Hello Nasty on a continuous loop and wouldn’t answer the buzzer the night I lost my keys and was stuck outside in the freezing cold for like 2 hrs until someone who lived in a different room came back from a party. Also, movie college kids tend to get into a lot of car crashes, chases around the campus, see lesbian trysts in the library, etc. The most excitement I had in college was probably the time... I lost my keys and got stuck outside for like 2 hrs in the freezing cold.

I also hate when I watch a movie that is as fucking pointless as Soul Survivors.

I have never heard anything good about the film, but I was still pretty curious about it, and even hopeful I might be one of the few who liked it. After all, it is one of two movies Casey Affleck says he leaves off his résumé, and the other is Drowning Mona, which I consider to be one of the most underrated films of all time (look for my review next month, when I dive into October Extras 2: The Non Horror Version!). And, along with Casey, Luke Wilson also appeared in the film. That’s two brothers of cast members from Armageddon for the price of one! But sadly, Casey was right to disown this piece of crap. Not sure how Luke feels about it.

Like Wind Chill, it’s a movie that tries to trick you into thinking you’re watching a Carnival of Souls ripoff, but is actually just pointless and seemingly made up as they went along. We learn at the end that the entire film is just the coma-dream of our lead, but why survivor guilt would lead her to imagining that her best friend has become a lesbian, I have no idea. The traditional end of the film flashback sequence is also intercut with new footage, dream footage, flashbacks within flashbacks... it’s possibly the least helpful “answers montage” in cinematic history. Also, there are two killers in the movie, but I never even came close to understanding what their objective was. All I know is that the entire film was consistently boring, annoying, and incredibly light on horror.

And this is the “killer cut” version, with “More blood, more sex, more terror!” than the theatrical version. According to the IMDb, a lot of the things that were edited back into the film were the scarce horror elements, such as the opening scene, where a girl is walking home alone before being killed by what looks like a metalhead and another guy dressed as the killer from Valentine. And the movie is only 85 minutes, so I can’t imagine how short (and even more boring) the theatrical cut was. I feel bad for the 19 or 20 people who went to see it.

So what’s worth seeing? Well, it’s kind of funny seeing Wes Bentley playing a somewhat normal guy for once. He’s kind of a douchebag, but at least he’s not locking up beautiful women so they will eat leftover turkey with him (oddly, his co-star, Melissa Sagemiller, looks a bit like my beloved Rachel Nichols), or pontificating about the beauty of plastic bags. And Eliza Dushku has a lesbian scene with Angela Featherstone (best known to normal people as Sandler’s ex in Wedding Singer; best known to me as Cusack’s assistant in Con Air), which is kind of hot. It would be hotter if Featherstone looked normal instead of like k.d. lang, but whatever, take what you can get. Also, and this is more of a general observation, I was happy to learn that I’ve seen enough movies shot in Chicago that I can instantly recognize it from a suburban house or two, without needing a title card or a shot of the Sears or whatever.

The DVD comes packed with worthlessness. Right from the start, the DVD offers us 3 different animated menus (this is actually listed as an extra feature). What this means is, you get a different shitty song and a different shitty overlong clip montage that plays before you are able to select anything. Thanks, Artisan. And you’re bankrupt, you say? Then there are some pointless deleted scenes (including an alternate epilogue, which is kind of hilarious because it shows that Dushku and Bentley’s characters are buried together, despite the fact that they were a pretty casual couple who were only together for a few months before they died), a typical featurette about the making of (you can see how Affleck already regrets taking the role in this), and some animated storyboards. There are also a few scenes with Sagemiller commentary, in which she explains some of the things that the movie never bothered to make clear, so it’s actually sort of helpful. Oh, and for no real reason, a piece about Harvey Danger. Since the song in the film (and in turn, the piece itself) isn’t the “Paranoia, paranoia, everybody’s coming to get meeeeeee” one, I have no idea why anyone would care about this. But since I can’t fathom why anyone would care about a goddamn thing on this disc, I’m sure there is an audience for it somewhere.

This movie was written and directed by Steve Carpenter, who made one of the few slashers I ever got so bored by that I just shut it off and never finished (Dorm that Dripped Blood, which, even though I wasn’t aware it was the same guy, I tried to watch right around the time Soul Survivors was stinking up empty theaters). But if I made it all the way to the end of this rubbish, I’m sure I can finish that one someday.

I should note that I can keep my rental for 1.99. That’s about 2.08 more than it’s worth.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

The Keep (1983)

SEPTEMBER 21, 2008

GENRE: SUPERNATURAL
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (REVIVAL SCREENING)

The first friend I made in LA was this guy Steve that I worked with at E! (the absolute worst job I’ve ever had in my life, by far). He was a fellow movie nerd, and when the subject of Michael Mann came up one day, I told him how I had never seen his film The Keep. Steve was kind enough to make a DVD copy for me, duped from his laserdisc. But then I discovered that the film was cut in half by Paramount, so I never watched it. When I know a film is truncated, I don’t bother to see it; I will wait until the full version is made available. However, I have another even nerdlier rule, and that is I prefer to see a film in theaters if possible, rather than at home on DVD. So when my beloved New Beverly scheduled The Keep for a midnight screening, I made an exception to the former rule.

(Plus, according to my traditional post-screening internet research, it seems as if the full version will never see the light of day, sadly).

I also wanted to go for the irony, as today is Peace Day, and the film concerns a ghost/force that is killing Nazis during WWII. I kind of like the idea of a horror movie in which the “victims” are despicable Nazis (the film is NOT sympathetic toward them at all). And their deaths are incredible; the ghost thing sucks their soul (?) out until their bodies harden and explode like mannequins.

Of course, at least that’s what I THINK is going on. This is the third movie in a row now that I spent a lot of it going “huh?” But at least with this film I know why; half of it is missing. Ironically, it’s actually not too incoherent. You can pretty easily see where chunks of the film were removed, but otherwise it’s not the hardest film to follow. It’s just the gaps make the action jump ahead at an awkward rate. For example, we first meet Ian McKellan’s character on a boat, as he is heading toward the keep (a cave/structure in the side of a mountain). But in his next scene, he’s already inside the damn thing, trying to keep the Nazis in check by decoding some of the symbols written on its walls. Obviously, there is at least one scene of him arriving in town and being brought up to speed that is missing, but you can sort of mentally fill in the blank.

One of these edits makes for a hilarious experience, especially at the Bev. Scott Glenn’s character (Glaeken; oddly enough in F. Paul Wilson’s book the character’s name was Glenn) meets McKellan’s daughter, and less than 5 minutes later in the film, they are fucking the shit out of each other. Either there’s some missing character stuff, or Glaeken went to the Dan Challis school of baiting women. Adding to the hilarity is the “pillow talk” which follows, as she begins asking him where he’s originally from and shit like that, and he just goes “Go to sleep...” and brushes his hand over her eyes, as if to shut them (and he has magic powers so maybe he actually DID knock her out, the movie cuts away right after).

Now, this was a midnight movie, so naturally I dozed a few times. So when I would wake up, it would seem like I missed a lot of stuff, but in reality I had only missed a few minutes (I finally watched Steve’s homemade DVD later on today to see what I missed, which turned out to be less than 20 minutes spread over 4 “naps”). There's a weird sort of charm in that that I need to come up with a nonsense term for.

Some stuff still doesn’t make sense though, such as when Robert Prosky’s character seemingly goes insane and eats a dog. The next time we see him, he’s normal. No idea what the fuck was up with that. Also, the daughter is supposedly taken away to be kept safe, but she’s like, a 30 second walk from where she was being kept before?

Speaking of Prosky, the cast is pretty awesome. McKellan is always a joy to watch (especially in his face off with the killer ghost thing; he tells it about what the Nazis have been doing and the thing shouts “I WILL DESTROY THEM!” – it’s awesome). Plus, Glenn is at his most Lance Henriksen-y, and Jurgen Prochnow plays a sympathetic German soldier (NOT a Nazi). And Gabriel Byrne is great as the most Irish Nazi of all time.

Also awesome is Tangerine Dream’s score. It didn’t help me stay awake any, because it’s so pretty and lulling, but it’s great nonetheless. The sound design is also pretty impressive, especially the final half hour, which has an overbearing wind howl over almost every scene. Some of the effects aren’t as impressive (a character is shot to death, his wounds keep changing color and somehow not a single bullet goes out the other side), but the makeup/design of the ghost thing is pretty great.

Sadly there is no DVD release (or even one planned, best as I can tell). There is obviously a wealth of lost material, a cast and crew that are pretty much all still alive, and Michael Mann’s name alone will generate interest from the non-horror crowd. I really hope it sees a proper release someday so people can check it out. It’s unintentionally goofy and not entirely coherent, but there is definitely some magic going on in there, and I would definitely recommend it to those among you who enjoy a trainwreck for its sheer audacity.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

The Other (1972)

SEPTEMBER 20, 2008

GENRE: KILLER KID, PSYCHOLOGICAL
SOURCE: DVD (ONLINE RENTAL)

I didn’t know what The Other was when it came (Netflixnesia strikes again!), but since the DVD began with trailers for The Omen (both versions) and The Good Son, I assumed it was a killer kid movie (when HMAD reader Nonymouse recommended it, she pointed out how it's best to not know the plot, but oh well). I am pretty sure my assumption was correct, because the kid in the movie seems to be the killer, but the film never offers us any onscreen violence (even today, I think it would keep its PG rating). One lady dies and I have no idea why, because she seemingly just falls off her chair onto the floor.

Actually, our tyke, Niles, keeps seeing his deceased twin (named Holland) and talking to him, and it’s the twin doing all the bad stuff. But whether it’s actually the kid seeing things, or if the dead twin has taken physical form is never explained. At one point there is a murder when Perry is clearly elsewhere, but his grandmother (a bit odd herself) seems to think the family has the ability to project themselves into birds, so I dunno. Plus, I think the fact that the brother is dead is supposed to be a surprise, but it’s kind of obvious since no one else mentions him and we only see him in scenes when he’s alone with Niles. A much faster paced and scarier version of this “dead sibling uses living sibling to kill” idea was used in the 80s TV movie Don’t Go To Sleep. Definitely check that movie out.

Anyway, another odd thing about the movie is that the twins are played by real life twins (Chris and Martin Udvarnoky) but you never see them both in the same shot. Why bother hiring twins when everything is shot as if there were only one actor? I’m sure there’s some sort of creative reason for this, but it’s still kind of odd. Both actors are pretty good though, as is the rest of the cast. Other than a brief turn by John Ritter (I miss that dude), I don’t recognize a single name in the credits, except for Jerry Goldsmith, whose score here will definitely appeal to fans of his work on Poltergeist.

The last 20 minutes or so make it all worthwhile (it’s a slow burn of a film to be sure; the first hour is dreadfully dull at times). Niles/Holland commits a truly despicable murder, there’s a frantic search for a baby, and the ending is a real downer. And I like that they leave it ambiguous as to whether the ghost was real, or if Niles was schizo. Personally I think he was just a wacko, because I tend to be more Scully than Mulder, but I don’t mind the ambiguity; it leads to IMDbates 36 years later.

Other than the trailer, which gives a bit too much away (don't watch it, even though I took time to copy paste it below!!), the DVD has no extras to speak of, which is a bummer. I think the Udvarnokys could make a terrific commentary track together, as long as they use their outdoor voice. I swear, 90% of their dialogue in the film is whispered. It’s like David Lynch’s Dune, except instead of spice they are all whispering about rings and magic tricks. Oh, and there are no giant worms.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Nympha (2007)

SEPTEMBER 19, 2008

GENRE: CRAP, RELIGIOUS, SUPERNATURAL
SOURCE: DVD (STORE RENTAL)

There are few easier ways to attract the attention of a horror fan by casting Tiffany Shepis as a nun in an Italian horror movie called Nympho (actually Nympha; I read the box wrong). So it’s kind of impressive that the movie turned out to be so goddamn awful; it’s not every day you see a movie with lots of nudity, a nun (not Shepis) getting fucked from behind, incest, and above average amounts of gore, and yet the first word that would come to mind to describe it would be “boring”. Christ, even a brief lesbian scene between Shepis and some random woman isn’t enough to warrant recommending you ever bother to watch it.

Some movies don’t make a hell of a lot of sense, such as Halloween 6, but they have an interior logic that can be followed. There is no such luck with Nympha. Scenes come and go without any sort of narrative buildup or semblance of tension, it is impossible to tell where and when people are in relation to one another, and I went through the entire film without ever really knowing who the “villain” of the film was supposed to be, if any. There’s an older guy who seems like kind of an asshole, so I guess it’s him, but he never really threatens Shepis, who is, as usual, the only bright spot of the entire film.

I take that back. Throughout the film, Shepis is put through some torturous procedures meant to cleanse her of sin or whatever. So they blind her (“see no evil”), gouge her eardrums (“hear no evil”) cut off her clitoris (“fuck no evil”, I guess?), etc. So for speak no evil, they cut out her tongue, and it is presented rather effectively, in that it’s a practical effect and not a CGI one.

On that note, it’s a technical disaster as well. The CGI (which makes up most of the effects in the film; the tongue is one of incredibly few practicals) is some of the worst I’ve seen in ages. It’s one thing when you have a CGI monster and he doesn’t blend well with the footage, but this is just a lot of stuff that could have been done practically, such as a wooden door that bursts apart, and it all looks awful. CGI blood, CGI bugs, etc... none of it looks even remotely decent, and the fact that 90% of it could have been created for real with an effects guy who wasn’t a lazy asshole just makes it seem even worse. Plus, the movie has that strange film processing that makes it look like a soap opera.

A featurette about the awful CG is one of the few extras on the disc, but it’s as worthless as the film itself. It’s just a still shot of a computer monitor showing a wireframe image of the door (or the bug, or the church itself), and then you see the finished (pfft) effect in the film. No one narrates or explains how things were done; the only audio is some looped music from the film and what I swear sounds like someone grunting and sighing at the computer. The other featurette is about the making of the film proper, but unless you speak Italian it’s entirely a waste of time, as again, there are no interviews or commentary by the cast or crew, just the occasional muttering from crew members. There’s even a bit of irony, as Shepis listens to Depeche Mode’s “Enjoy the Silence” over a shot of her getting her arm cast, since it's the only audio of note in the entire 20 minute segment. There are also some deleted scenes, one of which is in Italian without subtitles. I’ve imported DVDs from other countries that put more of an effort into allowing English-speaking audiences to follow them than this one did.

Oh, and the back of the DVD has a still from the film’s final scene. I would call it a spoiler, but since I hadn’t the slightest clue as to what the fuck was happening after watching the 90 minutes that came before it, I guess the image won’t technically ruin anything for you.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

The Last Broadcast (1998)

SEPTEMBER 18, 2008

GENRE: MOCKUMENTARY, MONSTER (?)
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

Shortly after the (deserved) success of Blair Witch Project, some dudes began more or less claiming that BWP was a ripoff of their film. Curious, I picked up a copy of their film, The Last Broadcast, sometime in 1999. However, I apparently wasn’t curious enough to actually watch it, because I never touched the damn thing until today, 9 years later, when I decided to make it my daily movie. Hey kids, this is how you end up in credit card debt! Never buy a movie unless you plan to watch it within at the MOST, 3 years after you buy it.

Anyway, I don’t think it’s much like Blair at all. It’s more like that Sci-Fi special about the Blair Witch, in that it’s more about an event than the video of that actual event. Even when the titles tell us we are about to see footage from the doomed video shoot (the only thing they have in common, really, is that some kids making a documentary are killed in the woods), we only see about 4-5 minutes of it. As such, we never really get to know a single character in the film, and thus I couldn’t care less that they all died. The film’s most interesting character is the technical video guy at the cable station that they make their show for, and that’s mainly because he looks like Christian Slater with a beard.

Also it has the single worst ending in film history. You think High Tension has a stupid twist? It's “Bruce was a ghost the whole time” worthy compared to this bullshit. We discover that the killer is actually the documentarian, who set all this completely benign stuff up (even inspiring the victims to do their doc in the first place) just to make a point about “What is reality?” or whatever the fuck sort of pretentious drivel he spits out is.

Worse, the film even shifts its entire goddamn aesthetic, as the final 10 minutes are presented as a typical narrative instead of from a character’s point of view. This is clumsily implemented (I spent 3 minutes wondering who was shooting the events I was watching) and just a cheat as well. Plus it defies logic – we learn he is the killer from his own videotape, which he sends to a video technician to fix. He then waits until she sees that he is the killer to actually kill her. Why would he do this? Even if we can buy that he needs her to reconstruct the video (which he was the one who destroyed in the first place), why not kill her once she was done fixing the footage he could actually use in his movie? Is he planning on using the footage of him killing the girl in his own film? That would make for a pretty awkward post-screening Q&A, at the very least. Of course, switching the perspective prevents the filmmakers from having to answer these questions. “Oh he’s just a nut”, the end of the film seems to be saying. Fine, then why the fuck did you have to spend 80 minutes presenting him as otherwise? Make a movie about him being a really crazy filmmaker; it’s a hell of a lot more interesting.

Or, you know, make a movie about the goddamn Jersey Devil. These guys are supposedly doing a doc about it, but they never provide even basic info about the real case. I’ve learned more about the damn thing from the back of cereal boxes than I did in this movie. It’s kind of funny, people thought Blair Witch was real because the movie had so much “factual information” about it, and this movie, based around a REAL urban legend, can’t even be bothered to tell you anything beyond its name. Why bother using a real life case if you’re not going to actually, well, USE it?

Luckily, it’s at least pretty good up until the end. The (non) actors are all believable, and like Poughkeepsie Tapes (my favorite “found footage” movie since BWP), it’s interesting to watch the investigation/trial type stuff unfold in an Unsolved Mysteries/America’s Most Wanted sort of way. Also, one of the random characters looks like the intriguingly curious offspring of Ric Ocasek and Jim Steinman:

"Just What I Needed (Is Not What You Want)"

Also, I got a lot of enjoyment out of the idea of public access guys making a movie in the woods. I had a public access show in high school, and we did a movie based on that show that was shot in the woods (a Blair parody, natch). So I felt a kinship with these folks. Like our show, one took it way too serious at times (that would be me), and also it was poorly shot. However, I don’t think our show was ever in danger of being canceled because of low ratings, like theirs is. Probably because there’s no such fucking thing as ratings for a goddamn community television studio.

The DVD is seemingly packed with extras, but it’s sort of a cheat. Three different “behind the scenes” pieces are advertised, but they are simply the two filmmakers/stars talking to camera and showing appropriate film footage. Then again, I guess that is preferable to watching documentary footage of an actor playing a documentarian who is investigating the disappearance/murder of three guys who were making a documentary. There is also a commentary track, but they mute the movie and also fall silent more often than not, so it’s annoying to listen to. Plus, they mix the sound so that one guy is on the left speaker and the other is on the right, which makes for an awkward aural experience.

However, much props to Stefan Avalos and Lance Weiler for their biggest innovation, as this is the first major-ish film to be shot, edited, and even distributed through entirely digital means. Rather than ever make a 35mm print of their shot on video film (which is what is usually done), they developed a way to beam it into theaters, and thus was the first digitally projected film in a multiplex (sorry, Lucas). Too bad that in the end it wasn’t one of many films to squander so much goodwill on a completely shitty and misguided ending.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Carved (2007)

SEPTEMBER 17, 2008

GENRE: ASIAN, POSSESSION, SERIAL KILLER
SOURCE: DVD (ONLINE RENTAL)

“Chop off my head!”

See, that’s the problem with American films. You never see a female character demanding that her son behead her. Luckily we have Japan to bring us films like Carved (aka A Slit-Mouthed Woman, aka Kuchisake-onna), which is the 2nd film this month that more or less focused on mentally unbalanced women killing their children. One more and I get a set of steak knives!

(Wow, totally inappropriate prize.)

Carved is one of the most coherent and straight-forward Asian horror films I have ever seen. At no point during the film did I need to rewind it, check an IMDb synopsis, or consult a friend to understand just what the hell was going on. Women get possessed by an urban legend known as The Slit Mouthed Woman (not “Carved”, so the new title doesn’t make much sense), and kill their kids. Some get a bit of control over the possession and ask their children to kill them instead. Either way, the father’s gonna be pretty depressed when he comes home.

It’s also unique in that it’s a fairly bland looking film. Even when completely incoherent, Asian horror almost always has a unique look and top notch cinematography to enjoy, but this one is shot rather blandly. The location is very dry and sparse; it looks like they shot it in the upper North Hollywood section of Japan. Not that this is a bad thing, just a bit odd.

Another unique thing is that it’s short! 90 minutes is all the time director Kôji Shiraishi needed, and God bless him for it. I am quite sick of the seeming law that all Asian horror films clock in at no less than 110 minutes, especially since that limits the occasions I can watch it to “When I am not in the mood to play Rock Band and thus I can deal with a 2 hour movie instead of a 85 minute one”, which is pretty rare these days.

Oh and the movie itself is actually good. It’s not overly violent, but its disturbing when it is, and since its shorter than usual, everything moves along quite nicely. Also, I kind of like that the film is populated with the least comforting adults of all time. When a little kid asks if the Woman is gone for good, the guy answers “I don’t know” (and his expression is totally “No way, kid!”). Plus, again, mothers asking their children to behead them.

There is one part of the movie that sort of annoyed me. The male lead is a guy who’s mother is the original slit mouthed woman, something he knows. At one point they learn that the woman is taking kids to a house with a red roof. At first the dude is like “There are lots of houses like that!” but then a few moments later he realizes that his house growing up had a red roof. He knows his mother is person he’s tracking, and he never thought to check his own house, even if he didn’t know about the red roof? Nonsense.

Tartan skimped on the extras again, with only 5 minutes of cast interviews (zzzz) and a brief making of that is no better or worse than any of the other brief making ofs you’ve ever seen. Granted, Oldboy is amazing, but I wish they would put that much effort (3 discs!) into some of their other releases every now and then.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Ghost Town (2008)

SEPTEMBER 16, 2008

GENRE: COMEDIC, GHOST
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (PRESS SCREENING)

I’ve covered comedies, and ghost movies are certainly in the horror vein, so I guess it’s OK to review Ghost Town here. Two non-horror movies for the day = 1 actual movie, right? Ghost Town is actually more “scary” than Swamp Women, with two violent deaths and a naked dude walking around for half the movie.

You know that scene in Ghost where Whoopi is being harassed by a ton of ghosts because they all found out she could hear/see Patrick Swayze? Well Ghost Town is essentially a full length version of that scene, as Ricky Gervais is pestered by ghosts (after he dies for 7 minutes during a colonoscopy) who all need him to do something in the living world that will allow their souls to rest. Most persistent is Greg Kinnear’s character, who died after his wife more or less discovered that he was having an affair. He wants Gervais to break up her impending marriage, but of course, Gervais starts to fall for her.

Even with the rather odd plot, the movie is pretty generic. Without the ghost angle, it’s little more than the umpteenth love triangle romcom, right down to the fight/break-up type scene 20 minutes before the film ends. I expected some more originality out of David Koepp, who made one of the best ghost movies of all time (Stir of Echoes) and has written some truly great modern movies: Carlito's Way, Jurassic Park, Spider-Man... But here he seems to be phoning it in.

However, it does have a saving grace, and that is the fantastic cast. Kinnear is always reliable, and few actors can play what is essentially a jerk and still get an audience to care about him. The brilliant Kristen Wiig has a few scenes as the surgeon who performs the colonoscopy that sets the plot in motion, and you’ll probably spend the rest of the movie wondering when she’ll come back into the story. And Tea Leoni acquits herself nicely as the put upon woman who has to deal with a dead husband, a new fiancé, and a neighbor who she cant stand at first but of course eventually begins to fall for.

That neighbor is Gervais, the film’s star and probably the biggest draw for audiences. He has the cranky jerk routine down to a science, and while the PG-13 rating restricts him a tad, he’s as cynical (and thus hilarious) as ever. You’ll be too busy laughing and cheering at his “I wish I would say that” remarks to notice the rather bland plot development. I think it’s his first starring role in a feature film, and I think it’s a great way to introduce him to US audiences who may not really be familiar with him yet other than “the guy who was on the original Office.” Also, it’s nice to see a film starring 3 middle aged actors. Other recent ghost romcoms (Over Her Dead Body, Just Like Heaven) are populated with young TV stars and starlets, but other than a couple of minor one-scene characters, its an adult cast with actors who are seasoned enough to sell the occasional lame joke and entertain the audience enough to forgive its storytelling issues.

There are some nagging flaws though that even the cast can’t help you ignore. For starters, it seems like the film was cut down, as several subplots are never really explained. For example, Kinnear is in a tux when he dies, but you never know why. Certainly they wouldn’t bother putting him in a tux if there wasn’t a scripted reason for it. Also, Gervais explains his accent by saying he moved from London to NY because London got too crowded and he hates everyone. When asked why he would pick NY, he says its complicated, but never explains it at a later time. Also, the best joke in the trailer (the difference between ghosts and zombies) isn’t even in the film, which is a damn shame.

Also, and this sort of tickled me, one of the ghosts is a mob stooge who wants Gervais to whack a guy for him. When Gervais (predictably) begins helping the ghosts out, we see a few examples (reuniting two sisters, finding a kid's favorite toy), and then he's not being bothered by the ghosts anymore. Does this mean he actually DID go murder a man to get the mob ghost to leave him alone? Awesome!

But, it’s a comedy, and on that level, it works. I was laughing a lot, which is what a good comedy should do. It’s a shame that someone of Koepp’s talent couldn’t have put a more unique spin on the story, but you will be entertained nonetheless.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Swamp Women (1955)

SEPTEMBER 16, 2008

GENRE: PREDATOR, HORROR?
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 2!!!)

IMDb says Swamp Women is horror, and it is included on the 50 Horror Classics box set. Which begs the question: who the fuck watched this movie and said “Yes, this is most definitely a horror movie”??? Some jerk I bet. Roger Corman may be involved, but that doesn’t make it horror. If I was being generous, I would call it a light thriller, which is one of my categories. Also, there IS a scene where our protagonists are menaced by an alligator, so that’ll just have to do.

Swamp Women (which I assumed would be about females with the powers of Swamp Thing; no dice) is a pretty straightforward movie. Some broads break out of prison, bicker, take a male hostage, flirt with him, argue some more, and then the cops show up to arrest them for whatever it is they did (breaking out of prison, and something about stolen jewels). About halfway through, an alligator is seen swimming near one of them and there is some minor suspense over whether or not the girl will get out of the water OK, and the final 5 minutes is pretty much just two of the women punching and tossing each other around (which is pretty awesome), but otherwise nothing really happens in this movie. The body count is... one, if I am counting right. Two if you count a rather unthreatening snake that serves as a “monster” for the finale.

The most entertainment I got out of this flick was how laidback the girls were in their hostage-taking. They untie the guy like 3 or 4 times during the film, let him walk around their camp, etc. Plus at one point or another I think they all hit on him, and when their boat gets stuck at one point, he is never made to help them get it out. And apparently Stockholm Syndrome took fast hold of him; less than 5 minutes after being captured he seems pretty content with the whole thing. It’s the most pleasant kidnapping I’ve ever seen in a film.

I also like how quickly they escape from jail. Really, the whole “imprisonment” section of the film runs under 4 minutes, which kind of kills any real sense of desperation the characters might be feeling. More screentime is devoted to shots of the parade that the first scene takes place at than the prison which is ostensibly the main crux of the film.

Then again, maybe Mill Creek just really botched this one. The IMDb claims there is a version that runs 84 minutes (this one was about 68); maybe that 16 minutes included some legit horror elements. Since about 2-3 minutes of the film is presented in what appears to be footage that was taped off of someone’ TV screen, it’s pretty obvious that the Creek wasn’t too concerned with providing its customers with the most respectful transfer/version of this junk.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Madhouse (2004)

SEPTEMBER 15, 2008

GENRE: PSYCHOLOGICAL, SLASHER
SOURCE: DVD (STORE RENTAL)

I had a pretty heavy internal debate over whether or not to watch Madhouse. On one hand, the last time I watched a horror movie with Josh Leonard and Patrika Darbo, it was Hatchet. On the other hand, the last time I watched a movie directed by William Butler, it was Furnace.

Then I saw that the borderline illegally cute Jordan Ladd was in it too, so off to the rental counter I went.

Popping in the DVD, I was flooded with pleasant memories of when Lions Gate was a more trustworthy studio. It had the old Lion logo, Lions Gate was two words, and I could hit the menu button when the DVD started and actually go to the menu, not be forced into 3 FBI warnings, a lengthy animated studio logo, and 40568906 trailers for bullshit I already saw. Ah, the good ol’ days... three years ago.

Plus the movie itself was pretty decent. It didn’t amaze me or anything, but it was a solid little thriller with a sort of decent twist and some fantastic gore gags. I’ve seen a lot of horror movies (2,613) and I don’t think I’ve ever seen an electrocution kill that resulted in the victim graphically biting their own tongue off (you see the thing sort of dangling between the teeth before finally becoming completely severed). And while it’s not exactly nonstop action, it moves along nicely, offering up a kill or some creepy stuff every 5-10 minutes or so.

You also get a nice cast of genre folk. In addition to Leonard and Darbo, the great Lance Henriksen plays the head of the hospital, and he’s in top form here (faring far better than some of his other recent DTV stuff), though he’s not in it as much as I’d like. Leprechaun’s Mark Holton also shows up as one of the stable of crazy people, and Leslie Jordan (“Jesus, Pookie!”) plays one of the other doctors. Plus, the aforementioned hotness of Jordan Ladd, who despite a fully clothed love scene (once again, thank you, Club Dread!) looks as good as ever, and makes the most of some occasionally terrible dialogue.

One thing really irked me though: the umpteenth usage of the “Patient pretends to be a doctor” gag seen in just about every fucking movie ever made that is set in a hospital. I would rant longer, but I already ranted about it in the review for Bad Dreams. Seriously, filmmakers: knock it the fuck off. Why not have a doctor pretend to be a patient to see if he can catch the new guy/hero off guard? Or just stop setting horror movies in mental hospitals? Either or. Also, the DVD box makes a big deal out of the appearance of Natasha Lyonne, an annoying actress to begin with, and she is only in the movie for about 3-4 minutes, in a largely inconsequential role. Maybe she was too busy shitting on the floor or molesting dogs to film all her scenes, I dunno.

Butler and Leonard provide a commentary track, and it’s pretty decent, despite some occasional lengthy gaps. Leonard seems a bit drunk (or high) and they have some choice words for some of the crew and the producers who made them change the ending (Leonard’s comment is particularly hilarious, especially since I thought the same thing when I watched it), so it’s pretty entertaining. The only other extra is a brief collection of deleted scenes (3) and outtakes (3) that combined are under 10 minutes, nothing essential.

According to my Blockbuster receipt, which they actually gave me for once (lately they’ve been being more “Green” and not printing them unless asked), I can keep the movie for 3.99. I won’t, but if you see it for that cost, it’s a pretty safe purchase (especially since most rental places charge 4.49 or so). However, since Ladd keeps her clothes on, that would mean the proportional value of Club Dread is some 800 million dollars, which is a bit much.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Hellraiser: Deader (2005)

SEPTEMBER 14, 2008

GENRE: SUPERNATURAL
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

Rock Band 2 was all I cared about today, so I needed a short movie that wouldn’t benefit from my full attention. Enter Hellraiser: Deader, aka Hellraiser 7, which I knew was actually written as another movie and molded into a Hellraiser film. Also it was from the same people who did the last one (and the next one, where Pinhead goes “online”... sigh) . Also it starred Kari Wuhrer, an actress who has never starred in a good movie. Needless to say, I wasn’t going to be surprised if the movie stunk.

And actually, it’s not all that bad at first. I like the investigative reporter plot, and Wuhrer is hotter than ever. And yeah, Pinhead isn’t in it much, but that’s not only a given nowadays, but also sort of a good idea in theory – he’s barely in the first one either. The one he’s in the most were pretty much loathed by fans (III and Bloodline) so why not try to emulate the original?

The problem is, the story here just ain’t as good. Like I said, it starts off OK, but it eventually just becomes needlessly confusing (why is Jacob’s Ladder the seeming influence for all of the DTV Hellraiser’s?). Worse, there isn’t anyone in any real danger for the bulk of the film, since Wuhrer is pretty much our only character. The folks she is investigating are dead (or “deader”); her editor is pretty much the only other human character of note, and he’s in it less than Pinhead. And while killing off the lead is sort of par for the course for these movies, we know it won’t occur until the film’s final 5 minutes, leaving 80 that are almost entirely without suspense or even violence (this is possibly the least violent film in the series). 90% of the film is merely Wuhrer walking around looking at shit.

It’s also got some pretty idiotic filmmaking. The thing that sets the whole movie off is a video where a girl is seemingly killed and then resurrected, and that’s fine. But the video is obviously shot and edited! There are conversations with both angles, reaction shots, etc. Kind of hard to buy into the “reality” of the video when it looks as manufactured as the film in which it is contained. And I had to laugh when Wuhrer sees her article in the paper, seemingly unhumorously titled “How To Be A Crack Whore” (given Wuhrer’s penchant for nudity, I’m surprised this minor subplot wasn’t more promiment). Also, there are only two other cenobites this time around, and director Rick Bota can’t even be bothered to really show them off. One of them is never even really seen in full, which is a shame, as Gary Tunnicliffe’s makeup is great (as it always is) and I would have liked to have seen it in more detail.

That all said... it’s got its moments. There’s a bit where Wuhrer finds herself with a knife in her back (no idea) and spends a good 3-4 minutes splashing blood around her bathroom and finally getting the damn thing out. I also like that the movie is actually set in Romania; Dimension films pretty much every one of their movies there, so it’s nice to see them actually admit it rather than try to pass it off as America like they usually do. The concept of a subway car that is permanently filled with lowlifes (it looks like a traveling opium den/S&M club) is also pretty fantastic; it’s the only thing in the film that seems like Clive Barker himself may have come up with. And, in pretty much the one constant of the franchise (other than the complete lack of any continuity from film to film), the score is fantastic.

Speaking of all the movies, how the fuck does everyone know how to open the box almost instantly? They pick it up, all confused, and then within 10 seconds they randomly decide to rub their thumb around the circle. If I found the damn thing, first thing I would do (besides check its Ebay value) is attack the thing with a nice screwdriver and vigorous shaking.

Bless Dimension for going all out with the extra features though. If you dig this one, you’re in for a treat, as there’s about 4 hours’ worth of stuff here including the two feature length commentaries. I only listened to one, with Bota and Pinhead himself, Doug Bradley. It’s a pretty informative track, and Bradley points out the same thing I (and others have), anyone who complains about the lack of Pinhead in these films clearly doesn’t remember the original very well. Then there are also a few making of featurettes (two about the effects, one in general), some location scout videos, and about 20 minutes or so of deleted or extended (mostly the latter) scenes. Most of it is worthless (one is just Wuhrer endlessly walking to a subway station, riveting stuff), but there are a few character bits one might enjoy. Strangely enough, there is actually a couple minutes’ worth of deleted Pinhead material here. I would think they would use as much as possible.

There is also an Easter egg worth noting. If you go into the 2nd page of the extras, go to down to “Play Movie”, and then hit left and then up (or right and down, I forget. Look, just fuck with it until you light up the Lament Configuration on the right side), you get this wonderfully odd little film with Pinhead (not Bradley) as an old man, lamenting about the state of the world and things of that nature. He then opens the box himself and two cenobites kill him. I haven’t the slightest clue what the point of it is, and the quality of the video is beyond terrible (it looks like Youtube), but it’s definitely worth a look. It reminded me of one of those Marvel Comics called “The End” which tells the ‘final’ story of certain Marvel heroes.

I still have one more to go, but I think it’s safe to say that of all the horror franchises, none fell harder than Hellraiser. All of the series got pretty bad, but they were still in the same spirit as the original films, to some extent. And it’s the only major horror franchise that got sent direct to video, which is a bit of a shame. Had Barker or even Pete Atkins stuck around, I am sure it would be a wonderfully original franchise, and it’s a shame Dimension just couldn’t let it die after Bloodline (which pretty much served as a series finale anyway). It’s ironic; the past three movies were done in more by the expectations one would have for a Hellraiser film more than anything else. If they were just unrelated genre films, they’d probably fare better with audiences.

I’m sure the online one sucks no matter how you slice it though. Christ.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Trapped Ashes (2006)

SEPTEMBER 13, 2008

GENRE: ANTHOLOGY, SUPERNATURAL
SOURCE: DVD (STORE RENTAL)

Even though I’m not a big fan of anthology movies, I figured I would enjoy Trapped Ashes, due to the filmmakers involved. Joe Dante and Sean Cunningham are pretty reliable, and even if I disliked it, Ken Russell would probably do something at least interesting. But had I noticed the positive blurb from ShockTillYouDrop’s Ryan Rotten, an otherwise good man who hated Wrestlemaniac and The Return, I probably would have (rightfully) assumed it was actually quite bad.

Like all anthology films, the quality varies from story to story, but unfortunately that spectrum never gets to the “good” end. At best (Monte Hellman’s Stanley’s Girlfriend) it’s merely underwhelming, but at its worst (pretty much everything else) it’s damn near unwatchable, and the wrapup is not only obvious, but completely lacking any sort of bite.

Dante is the one who directed the wrap-arounds, and they are the best part. We get some genre faves like John Saxon and Henry Gibson, not to mention Dick Miller, in a far too brief (and wordless) role as a security guard who seems apprehensive about letting our primary characters into the house that will lead to their doom. As these mostly unlikable folks stumble around a haunted house movie set (they are on a studio tour) there is some sense of fun, something that is more or less tossed out the window once the stories begin.

Russell’s story is the most outlandish (shock!), and probably would have been a bit more enjoyable had the ending not come out of nowhere and had some actual development. It seems like they simply ran out of time so cut an important chunk out. Indeed, there is a longer cut on the DVD, but I had no desire to watch it, since the parts that did flow well weren’t really that great anyway. Killer tits is a funny concept, but nothing is done with it beyond biting a guy’s back. And that’s a problem throughout the damn thing – there’s not a single onscreen death. Violence does not equal quality, but if you’re going to show me 105 minutes of bad anthology, at least offer some interesting effects to admire.

Cunningham’s story is like a bad Heavy Metal reject that was reshot in live action (with some of the animation left over), and John Gaeta’s, the worst of the bunch, has not a single interesting character or moment in the entire thing. I guess it takes some sort of talent to make a movie about a girl who has a twin that’s also a worm and make it so dreadfully boring, but not a talent worth having.

Which leaves Hellman’s tale. I liked this one the most, even if it’s the least “horror” in the bunch (if anything, the horror element ruins it). They never say his last name, but its essentially a fictionalized account of why Stanley Kubrick never returned to America after leaving to shoot Paths of Glory (or “a World War I movie” – nothing in the story is explicitly named). It’s got a super hot girl, a love triangle involving two filmmakers, and lots of people playing chess. I dunno, for me it was interesting, but that’s probably because I love Kubrick and thus enjoy seeing this strange little story about him, however outlandish. Of the four, it’s the only one I would actually want to sit through again (yet, I didn’t – this one also has an extended version on the DVD, which makes me wonder why they didn’t just make an extended cut of the film).

And that’s the other thing – for a movie about 6 people telling scary stories, we sort of get gypped with only four. Then again, I don’t know if I could sit through 2 more stories on the level of these others, especially since they are all written by the same guy. Still though, they don’t even explain why one guy doesn’t have to tell a story (one story is about two of them, so it’s OK).

In addition to the two extended stories, we also get a full length commentary that’s pretty interesting. It’s led by the writer and some of the cast (some of the directors sit in on their stories as well), and they cover pretty much everything from casting to production to editing. Can’t say much about the film they are discussing, but it’s a lively chat and if you enjoyed the movie for some reason, you should definitely check it out. There are also brief making of pieces for each tale, and a few deleted scenes as well (nothing that helps).

Given the talent involved, this one is a major disappointment. I may have seen worse movies this year, but they were all no-budget, no-talent productions, so their lack of quality is kind of expected. Christ, when this one went DTV I was almost surprised; I figured a few of the names alone would get it at least a limited release. Now that I’ve seen it, I think it was one of the best decisions a studio could make.

The score by Kenji Kawai is amazing though. Besides Miller’s cameo, it’s the only thing that saved this one from the Crap marker, really.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Hell's Ground (2007)

SEPTEMBER 12, 2008

GENRE: BREAKDOWN, SLASHER, ZOMBIE
SOURCE: DVD (ONLINE RENTAL)

At last year’s Screamfest, I went to a screening of Hell’s Ground (aka Zibahkhana) and slept through about 65% of it. This is not a sign of the film’s quality – I fall asleep at everything, and also it was at like 11 PM, AND it was the 4th movie of the day I think. What I saw wasn’t really bad or incredibly exciting, but I vowed to watch it again properly once it hit DVD.

Well my initial reaction was pretty accurate. In fact, I pretty much saw all the best parts before (I was amazed to discover that I actually slept through the entire first 20 minutes – apparently I started dozing before the movie even began!), so I didn’t even really need to see it “again”. The problem with the film is that it just doesn’t know what to be – it starts off as a slasher, then goes into zombie territory, some light survival, and finally slasher again. I’m all for cross-genre horror movies, but the zombies completely disappear after the first half hour, never to be mentioned again until the goofy epilogue. I would have liked it more had the zombies been after the kids AND the slasher (zombies aren’t choosy!), a lot of fun could be had with such a concept.

The survival aspects are also a bit mishandled. The driver notices that the van is on empty, but it takes another half hour and a LOT of driving for it to finally run out of gas. If the car can go that long on E, why not turn around and hit up the gas station on the main road (as it is a horror movie, they are taking a shortcut)? They also introduce the idea that the drinking water is unsafe, but again, don’t really do much with it.

Another issue is that it’s just plain generic. I accepted Doomsday because I know Neil Marshall is capable of doing something great and was clearly just looking to have a little fun. But I don’t know director Omar Khan (this is his first film), so I can’t lend him the same sort of allowance. Throughout the film, scenes and scenarios are stolen from Texas Chain Saw, Halloween, Mother’s Day, etc. On the commentary he acknowledges this and says it’s part of the point, but he went a bit too far into the “homage” direction for my taste. The social/political issues that are barely addressed would have provided the backdrop for a terrific (and original) horror film – it’s a shame he opted to keep it more “fun”.

However, it’s undeniably entertaining. At 75 minutes it hardly wears out its welcome, and while the pace is a bit slow at first, once it gets going it’s pretty fun. The slasher has a great and unique look, and I can’t recall the last slasher to use a mace as his weapon of choice. Also, one of our main characters is like the Pakistan version of me. He wakes up and has like 10 DVDs around him. He looks at one as if he had no idea that it was in his possession, then watches about 30 seconds of it before laughing to himself and going outside. I myself have been surprised to discover films in my own collection, so this little bit made me smile. The actors are all pretty good too (and Rooshanie Ejaz is super cute, luckily she’s also the Final Girl), despite the fact that none of them seemingly have any film experience (this film is the only credit on the IMDb for just about everyone in the cast). And last but not least, the gore/makeup is pretty impressive as well.

Less impressive is the film stock. Not sure what the problem was, but it looks like there are like 5 or 6 different film/video stocks being used throughout the film; sometimes switching in the middle of a scene. It’s distracting, but thankfully the images themselves all look good. I just wish they were consistent with one another.

One thing that I found distracting was the mix of Urdu and English, sometimes within a single sentence (at Screamfest, listening as I was “resting my eyes”, I was convinced my brain was translating parts of the dialogue for me). However, I have since been told that this is actually how they talk over there. In a way it’s nice, but I wish I could understand the rhyme or reason behind it. Like, when do you use English and when not?

The DVD has some minor extras. The commentary is pretty interesting, as Khan points out production troubles, addresses criticism of the film, etc. He is also very proud of the film, and should be - had I not seen all the movies he acknowledges, I would probably have nothing but praise for it. And admitting his influences is a surefire way to win me over - I fucking loathe when a filmmaker claims he's never even seen the films his movie blatantly steals from, but Khan cheerfully points out even some homages I had missed. There is also a brief look at the film’s premiere in Pakistan at a film festival, and a music video (pretty rocking tune, even if I have no idea what it’s about), plus the trailer. Finally, there is something called “Ice Cream Zombieland Documentary”. This is essentially Khan discussing how his film has been released everywhere EXCEPT for Pakistan (sadly ironic, since Pakistan audiences will probably find it much more original than in the horror drenched West), and also just sort of hanging out in his apartment - at one point we watch him watching the extra feature about the premiere! How gloriously self-reflexive! We also see his ice cream shop, which seems like the most awesome ice cream shop ever; there are horror posters and toys everywhere, and his jukebox has the Phantasm soundtrack! I wish this piece was longer; he talks a lot on the commentary about censors, but barely touches upon it here.

It doesn’t win any points for originality, but it’s still a pretty fun movie. I just hope Khan makes another film that is a bit more unique. I enjoy watching foreign horror because I get to learn a little bit about their culture, but for the most part all I learned from this movie is how much he likes American horror movies.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

The Wig (2005)

SEPTEMBER 11, 2008

GENRE: ASIAN, SUPERNATURAL
SOURCE: DVD (ONLINE RENTAL)

The last thing I expect from a movie called The Wig (Korean: Gabal), which is about a haunted wig, is that it would be kind of sad. And not sad in a “Someone put money up for a movie about a haunted wig” way; sad in a “Wow I actually kind of feel bad for just about everyone in this movie” way. I also wasn’t really expecting it to be any good.

Wisely avoiding having a goddamn hairpiece running amok and killing folks, it’s actually a borderline metaphor for a woman losing her identity. I mean, yeah, it IS haunted and thus there are a few scare scenes that more or less revolve around strands of hair moving around, but its still nowhere near as schlocky or even “fun” as I thought it would be. The body count is one of the lowest in ages too, I think the total number of deaths in the film is like, three. However, those rare kill scenes are pretty damn great, particularly a car crash about halfway through that would fit right at home in one of the Final Destination movies.

So what IS in the movie’s 103 minutes? Well, that’s where it gets a bit cloudy. I THINK I get it all now, but there are times in the film where I am just completely baffled as to who is who and when we are in the narrative. Flashbacks don’t seem to have the usual “blur-o-vision” or desaturated color normally associated with such scenes, and there is also a peculiar directorial choice that makes characters actually walking around in flashbacks of their younger selves. And since the whole movie kind of revolves around a girl whose possessed hair makes her turn into a former lover of the film’s only male character, it just gets a bit too hard to follow at times. There is also a mute character who mouths stuff, so we get subtitles for her “dialogue” even when she’s not even on screen, another head-scratching plot device (not often implemented, thankfully).

But when it’s easy to follow, it’s pretty damn good. I liked both of the main characters, and seeing their downfall was heartbreaking. The music is a big part of that; it’s one of the best scores I’ve heard in ages. I even let the main menu loop for a while so I could listen to 20 seconds of the main theme over and over. The acting is also quite good, particularly Seon Yu as the mute sister who starts the film as the secondary character and you eventually realize that the movie is just as much about her as the “heroine”.

I also really like how they finally decided to LITERALLY make a horror movie about long dark hair, since that’s sort of a big part of the iconic image behind a good half dozen of the bigger horror titles from the East.

The DVD has a few extras, one of which is pretty good as it includes the thoughts of the film’s soft-spoken director, Shin-yeon Won. There is also a piece on the special effects that is pretty entertaining. Not so much is the “Behind the Scenes”, which is just a bunch of random, well, behind the scenes footage. No commentary or interviews accompany the footage, so it’s pretty much skippable. The movie itself is the real draw, and I thank the cast and crew for making something that’s more Eye 2 (a damn good film) than Grudge (not so much). We need more of these! Leave our goddamn electronics alone and start haunting our donated body parts!

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

House Of Frankenstein (1944)

SEPTEMBER 10, 2008

GENRE: MAD SCIENTIST, VAMPIRE, WEREWOLF
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

I’m kind of glad I am now done with the three big Universal monster sets, now that I have watched House Of Frankenstein (the other sets being Dracula and Wolf Man). I don’t dislike them by any means, but as they went on, you can really see how no one involved really gave a shit anymore. Continuity is tossed out, whole plot elements are recycled, actors are replaced (and in this one’s case, said actors come back as other characters), etc. It’s just kind of a bummer.

This one’s not too bad though, really. Glenn Strange is no Karloff (and seeing Karloff stand next to him as a different character doesn’t help), but the Monster scenes are kept to a minimum anyway. Dracula’s role is so brief it’s a wonder why they even bothered at all, leaving poor ol’ Larry Talbot to carry the bulk of the screentime as far as any of the monsters go (ironically, no one in the film is actually a Frankenstein, but Karloff’s character knew of him).

Is there any horror movie character MORE depressing than Larry Talbot? He’s been in like four or five of these, and every single one it’s the same deal: the guy just wants to die. His revival (as usual, barely explained, and he’s somehow fully clothed) leads immediately to his usual pleas to either be killed or cured, and, as usual, he gets fucked over by those who promise to help him. Christ, the poor sod just breaks your heart. It seems the next film (House of Dracula) finished him off once and for all, but I am sure that if anyone had the thinnest idea, there would be a House of Creature From The Black Lagoon or something that inexplicably focused more on Larry than anyone else.

Karloff and Chaney aren’t the only ones around though; pretty much the entire 30s/40s Universal horror crew is here. Lionel Atwill plays what has to be the 7th character he’s played in this universe, and George Zucco pops up as well as a circus owner. And I think this is Carradine’s first appearance as Dracula (Lugosi being the only one not around, as he was probably too doped up at the time), though like I said, he’s barely in it (he also barely appeared in House of Dracula – I guess the titles were just as half-assed as everything else at this point). I didn’t see Dwight Frye either, though J. Carrol Naish is pretty great as the resident freak/assistant.

It’s also one of the more violent of the films. Of course, it’s pretty much all offscreen, but the body count is pretty high. Ignoring that Dracula, Larry, and the Monster were all revived in HoD, I count 11 deaths, which I think is a record. They even kill off the heroine, something incredibly rare for the period. In fact, the only people alive at the end of the film are the ones in the traditional mob.

This being the last disc on the set, there are also a whole bunch of extras pertaining to the cinematic history of Frankenstein. You can ignore the brief look at Van fucking Helsing, and skip right to the 40 minute retrospective on Bride of Frankenstein, which is narrated by Joe Dante and has commentary by Rick Baker, Clive Barker, Karloff’s daughter Sara, and many others. A great piece. There’s also another 40+ min piece about Frankenstein’s overall legacy that isn’t as necessary, but fun nonetheless. Finally, there’s a short film called Boo, which I guess got thrown on there to fill space.

An entertaining, if inconsequential finale to the overall best series in the lot, House’s biggest faults are simply the result of the law of diminishing returns. After 6 films (the most in any of the series), you can’t expect much, and it’s the only series with two truly great films (the original, and Bride). If you haven’t picked up this set yet, you’re missing out on what can singlehandedly provide an overview of the era of the Universal Monster. Dracula and Wolf Man’s sets can be skipped (especially since they released Dracula by itself on its own lavish 2 disc set, and will probably do the same for Wolf Man when the big budget remake hits next year), but Frankenstein’s is worth every penny.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Baby Blues (2008)

SEPTEMBER 9, 2008

GENRE: SLASHER (?)
SOURCE: DVD (STORE RENTAL)

Scanning the shelves at Blockbuster, I chuckled as I saw the cover of Baby Blues, since it looked like a killer baby (or doll) movie. The clerk nearby laughed at my laughing, and said “Man, whatever you got, I want, because it’s making you laugh.” I told him the title, to which he replied “Baby Blues, oh no!”, despite the fact that he probably didn’t know the film from Baby Mama*. The guy at the counter also made lame jokes, so I dunno, maybe something was in the air tonight (hold on!) at Blockbuster. Usually they are silent; lately they don’t even bother telling me the due date.

Anyway, the movie was NOT about a killer baby (or doll), but in fact a killer mom. Essentially a slasher version of the Andrea Yates story, I was pretty pleasantly surprised to see how disturbing and fast paced it was, with no punches pulled. It’s not every day you see a woman stabbing her 5 year old son over and over, then chasing the two other kids around with a tractor and such.

On the IMDb, some folks are complaining that the movie should be banned and what not because it’s so disturbing and tries to make entertainment out of a real life problem (post natal depression, which is what sets the mom off). Of course, that means we should also ban Candyman (inner city people being ignored), Stir Of Echoes 2 (the Iraq War), Texas Chain Saw (the economy), etc. And the idea of banning a horror movie for being disturbing is both hilarious and sad; it’s so rare anymore that a horror film even TRIES to disturb the audience anymore, when one does its considered a “crime”.

Now, granted, many (all?) of these complaints are from women who are mothers or expecting to be (good luck, with your shrill attitude), so some slack can be cut. I am not a parent, or a farm owner, or a complete idiot, so I cannot identify with either the characters in the film or its critics, but I can safely say that the mere act of making a horror movie out of a real problem is sort of a good thing – you can be entertained (to a degree, it’s hardly a “fun” slasher like your Friday the 13ths or whatever) and maybe open your eyes a bit at the same time. Maybe if I become a dad I will look for warning signs that the mother of my child is suffering from post natal depression that I am now aware of, such as excessive crying, unmotivated feelings of inadequacy, or seeing stigmata in the bedsheets.

Speaking of the dad, one thing I definitely liked was that the dad in this movie wasn’t a complete asshole, like most horror movies present fathers as. He seems like a pretty chill dude, actually. He’s just trying to provide for his family, and if that means he has to spend the entire movie driving in a truck so that the filmmakers can cut to something besides filicide every now and then to pad their film out a bit (it’s not even 80 minutes long, with two full credit sequences plus usual end credits), so be it. His only flaw is not really thinking things through; early on he expresses his desire to have another child (which would make 5) despite the fact that the newest one doesn’t even seem to be a year old yet. Granted, actress Colleen Porch is hot as fucking hell (she looks like a cross between Evangeline Lilly and Angelina Jolie) and you can’t blame him for wanting to hit it, but Christ dude, look to my initials (BC!) for the best of both worlds.

Then again maybe they didn’t have the pill back then, with then being whenever the hell this movie is supposed to take place. The main kid’s friend has an Atari, which would put it at 1981 or so (that or it’s the present day and he’s just the youngest hipster ever), but they have a modern baby monitor. However, the farm hand listens to old records and everything else sort of looks like early 60s. I guess it’s sort of the point, to be “timeless”, but it’s a bit awkwardly done if so.

I must give credit to the directors (Lars Jacobson and Amardeep Kaleka) for their damn good direction though. It’s a beautifully shot movie, and other than some obvious day for night colored shots, technically flawless. They are big on cutaways to random objects, all of which serves to make the film feel a bit off kilter, not to mention supply heavy doses of atmosphere. It’s rare any of this DTV indie nonsense impresses in the technical department, so well done.

There is one part that’s a bit ridiculous though. The kid begins to freak out (due to the fact that his mom just killed his siblings and stabbed him with an ax) and thus begins smashing plates and overturning furniture. But in the middle of all that, he... turns the faucet on? What the hell kind of rebellious act of anger is that? Why not leave the fridge door open or maybe turn the light on in a room you’re not staying in while you’re at it?

So if you don’t like horror movies that are based in reality and are actually disturbing (and suspenseful), I would probably steer clear of this one. But if you can put aside the somewhat odd idea of presenting those ideas in a slasher format (she even has a couple of minor “one-liners”) and your soapbox has been put away, you should enjoy it.

What say you?

*A film that I had also picked up for a moment, because, well, Tina Fey is funny and cute, dammit. If that movie had Kristen Wiig instead of the uber-annoying Amy Poehler, it would be like porn to me.

PLEASE, GO ON...

The Vampires' Night Orgy (1973)

SEPTEMBER 8, 2008

GENRE: BREAKDOWN, VAMPIRE
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 4!!!)

Last week I pointed out that The Long Hair of Death was the first Mill Creek movie to be shown in its correct aspect ratio. But that was only like 1.85:1 (if that). The Vampire’s Night Orgy (Spanish: La Orgía Nocturna De Los Vampiros) does it one better though – a full on 2.35:1 transfer!!!* The annoying little Mill Creek bug in the corner of the screen didn’t even obscure any film information!

Oh, and the movie was pretty damn good to boot.

I think Orgy (which doesn’t have any orgies, sadly, though there is SOME nudity) is the first film to combine the typical “breakdown” scenario with a vampire film. Our group is in a big bus and it breaks down, so they stop in vampire town. The bus actually breaks down a 2nd time and they have to return, which is something I really liked. Dual breakdownage! I also love how the group immediately begins to drink once they arrive in the town and discover it empty.

It also sort of unfolds like a slasher movie, with our good guys constantly going off by themselves and getting killed every 10 minutes or so. Also, the vampires behave sort of like zombies; rather than just one euro-trash head vampire and a couple of lackeys, like usual, it’s just a bunch of vague, hungry zombies, a la 30 Days of Night (except for the Danny Huston character), which was also a nice change of pace. It’s only 79 minutes long, but it’s a well paced 79 minutes, and I could have easily enjoyed another 10-20.

In fact, that may be possible. One thing the film didn’t really deliver on was the gore. It never really felt edited (music cues were not abruptly cut) but for a 70s Italian horror movie, it was relatively dry in this area. I did some light research, and only found someone claiming their version was 82 minutes, but otherwise it seems that the film is complete (it has the nudity; apparently the nude scenes all have alternate “clothed” takes, so I don’t see why they would be OK with nudity but not gore). Still, some of the kills were pretty cool anyway; my favorite was when a guy is seduced by a vampire girl, who then tosses him out the window to be eaten by a bunch of vamps waiting below. Awesome.

The end is stolen from 2000 Maniacs, of all movies. Our two survivors go see a cop, and tell them about their ordeal. He doesn’t believe them, so they lead him to the town, only to discover nothing there. However, a final shot reveals that the town WAS there and they are hiding. At first I thought it was going to be like Nothing But Trouble, where the cop turns out to be in on it, but oh well, can’t have everything.

Another thing worth noting – even though the film is obviously Spanish (even the credits are in Spanish – “Producida por”!), the dubbing is way above average. Some of it sounds a bit forced (as if they were pausing unnaturally to better match the original lip movement) but as a result, there isn’t any of the usual sort of “the guy is still talking but his mouth is already closed” action.

It’s rare I see a film on these MC sets that I would actually recommend for non ironic reasons; I’d even go out and buy the film on its own DVD if the image was better (widescreen or not, it’s still a bit washed out, as always) and had some good extras. I may tell everyone to watch Cathy’s Curse (the reigning champ of budget pack “finds”) but it’s a wretched movie. This one’s actually pretty damn good for real. Check it out.

Also, this is my 3rd movie in a row in which the monster type (Devil, Zombie, and now Vampire) was in the title. Cool. If possible, I’ll keep the streak going.

What say you?

*Someone on IMDB claimed that the transfer was in fact a full frame transfer that was then masked (black placed over the image) to only appear widescreen. This is completely stupid, as it would mean you were only watching the very center of the image (as it would be missing the left and right sides from the initial cropping, and then the top and the bottom from the masking). I think something like that would be noticeable, and thus an example is below:

ORIGINAL WIDESCREEN IMAGE...

...THEN CROPPED...

...AND FINALLY MASKED AGAIN?

No. Idiot.

PLEASE, GO ON...

Zombie Town (2007)

SEPTEMBER 7, 2008

GENRE: COMEDIC, ZOMBIE
SOURCE: DVD (ONLINE RENTAL)

As Zombie Town’s opening credits flashed by, I caught a name that sounded familiar: David Giancola. Then a bit into the film, someone pointed out that they were in Vermont, and my memory was instantly jogged: Giancola was the guy behind Time Chasers, one of my all time favorite MST3k episodes, and butt of my favorite MST3k related anecdote. Apparently, he and the cast and crew of that film got together when the MST episode premiered, figuring it would be a good time, only to realize how much it hurt (one guy in particular, whose role was cut from the episode for time constraint reasons, was apparently borderline depressed about the whole experience). Hahahahah, awesome.

Anyway, the guys probably would have been more kind to this film (which Giancola only exec produced), as it’s far more entertaining than that film, with better production value to boot. With the exception of the blood (which never looks like anything but Kool-Aid), the effects are pretty good, and relatively plentiful. It’s a bit slow at first (slowest zombie outbreak ever – they are around from the first scene but they only become a real problem in the final half hour) but there is still plenty of action overall, especially for a low budget indie. Some of the gags are stolen outright from Shaun of the Dead though, something I’m not really thrilled about. But really, the biggest blunder in the film is during a Bingo scene where the guy calls out “O-2”. What sort of generic bullshit Bingo card has a 2 in the O column?

They also really sell the whole “town” angle. Unlike most zombie films, the walking corpses seem to have been actual people that the living characters know, and the film’s best laughs stem from their silly reactions to the fact that their friends are trying to kill them. “Fuck you, Mitch Smith!” one of the good guys yells after he is attacked by the Mitch-zombie. The film’s resident laid-back zombie hunter guy (more than just “shades” of Ed from Shaun) also nonchalantly kills his aunt at one point. And in the film’s one nude scene, a guy’s grandmother bites his partner in the middle of a backseat romp (one occurring in the middle of a party – I guess he’s not worried about his friends watching).

In addition to Shaun, some other horror-comedies are obvious influences. Our heroes meet the heroine in a scene straight out of Tremors, and some of the bigger gore scenes owe at least some of their existence to Dead Alive (Brain Dead). And slug nature of the zombies is a bit Night of the Creeps-y (plus they are killed by salt – a device from Horror Of Party Beach!). Unlike Shaun, however, they don’t directly steal exact gags from those films, so it’s much more acceptable. And since the movie is reasonably entertaining, I don’t mind being reminded of great films (as opposed to when a complete piece of shit suddenly references Jaws or Halloween or whatever).

The movie also has a surprising and ultimately excessive amount of profanity. The F word appears more often than zombies do; even old men toss the finger with relative nonchalance. Normally I don’t care (obviously – this review probably has an R rating) but sometimes it just seems excessive, and this is one of those times. Less is more, fuckers.

And I don’t care, the generic alt-rock song over the end credits rocked.

The disc has some extras that you can just skip for the most part. The best is a look at how some of the effects were pulled off, which goes into more depth than usual (and since they aren’t exactly KNB, they had to get a bit more inventive than the crews you usually see in these things). There’s also a “making of” that is pretty annoying, it’s just the cast trying to be funny for the most part. There is also a commentary, but they did a shitty job recording it – the dialogue of the film is pretty much at the same level as their audio, so it’s kind of hard to concentrate on who is talking and what is being said when the people on screen are talking (which is often for the first hour). Most of it is just sort of pointing out who the cast members are or whatever, so it’s not really essential. It’s also a full frame transfer; not sure if it was filmed that way (I honestly can’t tell if its film or DV – it looks pretty good either way) but if you have a widescreen TV, prepare to make the “stretch or windowbox?” choice.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Lisa And The Devil/The House Of Exorcism (1972/75)

SEPTEMBER 6, 2008

GENRE: ITALIAN, SUPERNATURAL
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

For some reason I completely forgot about the 2nd volume of the Bava set. I know some of the movies aren’t horror, but neither is the first one, and I went through that pretty quickly (compared to other sets; I still haven’t finished the Masters of Horror set and I’ve had that well over a year now). Sorry about that.

Anyway, Lisa And The Devil is definitely a good choice for Horror Movie A Day, because it’s actually two movies. Apparently, after the film was released (and tanked), the producer decided to rip off The Exorcist and re-edit the film to accommodate that decision. The result was titled The House Of Exorcism, and contains about a half hour’s worth of new footage (with about as much removed from Bava’s original version). So I decided to review both, because I couldn’t in good conscience consider House its own movie.

Both have their merits. Lisa is atmospheric and a bit slow, like many of Bava’s films, and House is ridiculous and incoherent. If I had to watch one at the New Bev, it would be House, but Lisa is the one I actually prefer. I should note that the best scene in either version appears in both: when a woman begins running over her husband over and over and we just see the dummy corpse rolling around, battered and broken. It’s awesome.

The movie also features Telly Savalas, so you know you’re in for some silly scene chewing and lollipops. Some of his stuff is lost in the re-edited version, and that is a shame, but there is still enough to savor, particularly the scenes where he works on his mannequins. Also enjoyable is Alessio Orano as Max, the batshit insane man who keeps his wife’s corpse in bed with him. I wish I could tell you what the hell his deal was, but after more or less watching the movie four times (each version has a commentary) I still can’t really tell what the hell is going on in certain parts. The original version is merely weird, but the re-edit is just baffling at times, particularly the end, in which the two stories sort of combine in a manner that simply makes no sense and doesn’t really conclude anything.

Most of the new stuff involves Elke Sommer’s character becoming possessed and going through the usual Exorcist rip off motions: body contorting, foul mouthed male voices, pea soup... it’s all here. Within these scenes is my 2nd favorite devil expletive of all time: When the priest asks where she came from (meaning the demon), it replies “From a cunt, you jerk!” (my favorite remains “Do you know what she did? Your cunting daughter?”). These scenes are entertaining, despite the unoriginality, but I wish they made it a bit more clear how the two stories were entwined. I think we are supposed to believe that the old footage (which Bava shot) is merely a dream or something? A flashback? The adventures of her soul? I have no idea. Maybe they just actually split into two people, who knows. All I know is, the re-edited version is missing the original’s hilarious conclusion, in which Telly flies a plane (lollipop still in hand!) populated with corpses.

I was amused by how they cut from old footage to new and tried to make it look “seamless”. Basically, whenever they needed to cut from Bava’s footage to Leone’s, they would go from a random object. Like, there would be a shot of a watch in Bava’s footage, so Leone would begin a scene on a clock or whatever. He gives up after awhile though; by the halfway mark, every “possessed” scene just begins with Sommer making some face and then turning her head toward whoever was in the scene with her. I like to imagine that he began watching Bava’s version with an editor and the two of them pointed out possible “entry” points. “Hey, there’s a shot of a melted candle... we can go from that to pea soup splattered on the floor.”

Tim Lucas (who else?) provides the commentary for Lisa, and as usual, he’s over-informative. In addition to stuff about the actual movie, you’ll learn odd bits that have nothing to do with the movie, such as the name of the actress who dubbed one of Lisa’s actresses in a completely unrelated film. Like his other tracks, he still sounds like he is reading cereal ingredients, but I don’t doubt that he is the premiere expert on Bava, and that guy's sort of dead, there’s probably no one better to have on the track. House has the meddling producer (Alfredo Leone) and Ms. Sommers, but she barely speaks throughout the track. Instead Leone mostly just sort of explains why he recut the movie (money) and points out the “new” stuff. I wish Lucas had joined in, since he doesn’t talk too much about it on his track and I find this area of the film’s lifeline to be the most interesting, but oh well. Now I know the names of other movies that were filmed in the same city and the name of the author who came up with the line “Where there’s smoke there’s fire.”

Actually I forget both of those things. Plus I dozed off for a while listening to it, and then I had the terrifying experience of dreaming with Tim Lucas’ narration. My dreams didn’t make a hell of a lot of sense, but I could hear Lucas throughout, talking about impotence (Max's junk isn’t functioning right – I think it’s an important plot point) and what not as dream-BC tried to find his new room at a college dorm made to look like something from ancient Greece.

I’ve never been a huge fan of any of Bava’s films (except Shock, which Lamberto sort of took over I guess); I tend to enjoy them but forget about them within a few days. But this one was a lot of fun... it’s well made, strange, and occasionally gory, all of which is fine by me. If you’ve never seen any of his films, I think this would be a good place to start.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Night Fright (1967)

SEPTEMBER 5, 2008

GENRE: MONSTER
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 4!!!)

Sometimes, you just need to watch a bad monster movie from the 60s. There’s nothing particularly good about Night Fright; it’s slow, badly photographed, padded beyond any reasonable measure... yet that’s all part of the charm of the damn thing. Had it actually been good, it would probably bore me, because I would have seen all of the movies that had ripped it off in the 40 years or so following its release. Instead, it works as a relic of a time long since past: when all you needed for a monster movie was any sort of suit, a down on his luck actor (in this case, John Agar), and a few bland kids.

The bland kids spend roughly half the movie dancing around in the dark (it seems shooting day for night wasn’t an option for director James A. Sullivan). One girl’s ass in particular appears in the film more than the monster ever does. Of course, there is some inner-group turmoil (two guys fighting over the same girl), leading to some great dialogue like “This is our private blast! If you don’t dig it, split!” and more badly photographed action, plus some cops wandering around, people making phone calls... just about anything Sullivan and writer Russ Marker could think of to avoid having the damn monster appear. Again though, this is what made it fun to watch. It also kind of reminded me of Giant Gila Monster at times, except Sullivan and Marker failed to devote any significant amount of screen time to the finer details of car repair.

There’s also some strange editing going on, like the fact that the opening credits don’t appear until the movie is about 10 or 11 minutes into the narrative. There’s also a great bit when a guy is talking about himself (providing “characterization”) and he says “Sometimes when I’m alone I-“ and then the film cuts to something else. But it’s not the usual Mill Creek “Oh we used a film print we found in the garbage” type of bad splice edit, it seems completely intentional. The editor simply realized no one gave a shit about what the guy did when he was alone and tried to get the film to move along. Of course, had it cut to the monster or something, it would work, but it just cuts to other people doing not much of anything. Sullivan must have been a protégé of the Night Fright’s editor (Arthur Sullivan – relation to James unknown but pretty goddamn likely), since he went on to edit the incomprehensible Manos.

As for the monster, I’m not sure. If there’s ever a shot in the movie where he could be seen clearly, I missed it. Here is one of the better shots:

But most just look like this:

Yeah, I don’t know where he is in there either. I could hear him growling so I assume he is in the scene, but it might have just been Agar muttering to himself.

One thing I loved is the end credits. Not because it was finally over, but because they are picture credits, accompanied by some rousing Bonanza style score. I always liked those, and it’s a shame so few films use them anymore (I think the Scream films are the most prominent “recent” example). They also follow one of the silliest closing lines in movie history – “I’ll buy you all of the uniforms you want!”

This one never showed up on MST3k to the best of my knowledge, which is kind of strange. It’s the perfect type of movie for them, and a good length too (75 minutes). Plus they always had fun with Agar’s films, even some pretty decent ones like Revenge of the Creature. A missed opportunity, to be sure.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

The Killing Gene (2007)

SEPTEMBER 4, 2008

GENRE: SERIAL KILLER
SOURCE: DVD (STORE RENTAL)

Ever since Seven, it's like no one can make a serial killer movie anymore unless it takes place in a big city, has a brooding cop as the hero, a killer with "good" intentions, etc... I plan to make a serial killer thriller that takes place in the woods, the hero is just some kid, and his motives are pretty flimsy. Oh wait, I guess that's just a slasher movie.

Anyway, movies like The Killing Gene (aka W Delta Z) are pretty much a dime a dozen, and when you add that to my already over-saturated intake of horror movies, it shouldn't be much of a surprise that I was pretty damn bored by most of the film. However, it finally comes to life once the actual killer shows up (sort of a spoiler ahead, though the back of the DVD more or less does that anyway).

Selma Blair is the killer, something they pretty much tell us less than halfway through the film, but she doesn't really appear until the final 20 minutes or so. And it's a shame, because her scenes are the best in the film, and the filmmaker's decision to keep her out of the story is a big part of why it doesn't quite work as well as it should for most of the running time. Since we aren't seeing killings, and the killer isn't being chased, the entire movie consists of our two uninteresting heroes walking around and talking to people about things that already happened. It's like a grimy version of a Law & Order episode, and not one of the good ones about crazy daughters who kill their dads because he found out she got knocked up by her brother or whatever. Stellan Skarsgard, an actor I usually like, pretty much spends the entire movie muttering and glowering at people, and Melissa George* just plays the "I'm not cut out for this OK I guess I am now" role that we've also seen a million times. It doesn't help that director Tom Shankland banished tripods from the set and will often do things like shoot a cigarette rolling around on the ground for 10 seconds straight for no reason.

The nice thing about the end though, is that it gives a lot of the stuff we've seen a slightly new meaning, and if the movie wasn't so leaden-paced, I would actually be happy to give it another look. And I really appreciate the lack of a Saw-style rapid fire flashback montage that shows those double-meaning clips in succession, for the idiots in the audience who can't really remember things that happened five minutes ago.

The movie also contains one of the silliest mistakes in recent memory. A killer's accomplice is driving away, and George is shooting at him from behind. Somehow, his windshield is shot out, despite no bullet hole in the back shield that would allow such a thing to occur. Also, the movie makes a more unintentional error by copying a plot element from Fletch (cops dealing drugs by making fake arrests). If you're boring me, the last thing you want to do is make me start thinking about one of the most entertaining films of all time.

Not sure if there is an unrated cut anywhere, but the R one is pretty choppy - for a Dimension EXTREME! title it feels pretty content with not showing throat slashings, vomit, etc. It's also shot on HD, so there's not much to enjoy on a technical level either, since the entire movie is set at night, something HD isn't exactly the best choice for in the first place. That said, it's a damn fine DVD transfer (black levels are perfect - a rarity for a film this dark as DVD places will try to compensate by "lightening" the image a bit, resulting in washed out blacks), and the making of is brief but pretty informative.

So I dunno, I really dug the ending, and I liked the basic idea behind the killer's executions, but I was bored to tears by the first hour or so, which had no suspense, no action, and no interesting characters. Your call.

What say you?

*In my very first junket for Bloody Disgusting, George told us she didn't consider herself a horror actress. Funny, because four of her last five movies have been horror films, with another two on the way. Damnable liar!

PLEASE, GO ON...

The Fly II (1989)

SEPTEMBER 3, 2008

GENRE: MUTANT
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

Some of my movie choices come from the strangest sources. For example, I was originally going to watch whatever Blockbuster had sent me in the mail today. But when I checked my email, I saw that an email chain concerning the screening of Die Hard and Robocop at my beloved New Bev had somehow turned into a debate over the merits of The Fly II. As people posted examples of why it was good, I realized that I couldn't remember a goddamn useful thing about the movie anymore (I thought I watched it when I was like 16, but it must have been even earlier, or I would have recognized Frank Darabont's name in the credits, since I saw Shawshank when I was 14 and it instantly became one of my favorite movies), so I opened the DVD I had won when it came out a few years ago and decided to see on which side of the argument I would fall.

Well, I liked it! Sure, it's maybe not as "smart" as the original, but come on – it's a movie about a guy who is becoming a fly, and I like that Chris Walas and his crew embraced the fact that they were making a monster movie. Eric Stoltz disappears entirely at around 1:10 in the 1:45 film, so you get over a half hour of pure giant fly action. Why go the whole metaphorical/psychological route again? That's what the first film is for. I don't think it hurt the Alien franchise very much by going balls to the wall for its sequel, so I'm not sure why there was any dissidence here.

Now obviously it does have its shortcomings. Eric Stoltz is hardly as interesting as Jeff Goldblum (either as an actor or a character), making the "all fly" aspect of the film's final third all the more appreciated. And it's also a bit too slight; even at 1:45, it feels a bit rushed at times, and there isn't much complication to the plot. I would have liked to have seen the story have another layer to it somehow, instead of the rather simplistic "he starts to turn and he gets revenge" angle.

A couple other minor things annoyed me too. One is the goddamn holographic badges that everyone wears. They are so distracting, I almost wanted to take the color out of the film (it would be sort of fitting, the 50s Fly was color but ITS sequel was filmed B&W to save some dough). The fake computers annoy me too; there's a part where Martin hacks into the database to change his security clearance and when he succeeds, it suddenly plays some "victory!" music, as if he had just beaten Super Mario or something. And I had to laugh when Martin gets his own place and it's decorated like a retirement home for a 80 year old woman. He's like a five year old in a 20 year old's body, at least get the kid a car poster or something.

Otherwise it's a damn solid sequel. It's gory as hell, which is not only good but incredibly surprising; in 1988 and 89, the MPAA was being completely unreasonable in regards to gore, resulting in damn near bloodless horror films like Friday the 13th 7 and TCMIII (which was almost incomprehensible at times due to the MPAA edits). The guy who tears off his own (fly-juice-covered) face as he screams is simply amazing, as is the head crush that occurs a few minutes later. The monsters are also incredible, in addition to the fly itself, there are also a pair of "bad transport" freaks that are not only great looking, but are more "alive" than the thing at the end of the first film. The movie even offers us a mutant cactus.

Fly II also contains what is now my favorite break up line of all time: "Stay out of my sector! You no longer have clearance!" Next time I have to dump someone, I hope I remember to use that line (the less contextual sense it makes, the better). And I guess I should mention the scene where the kid does a maze, because it was the only part of the movie that felt familiar to me as I watched it (I also recalled that Martin lived at the end, something I don't really agree with – the dude killed like 7 people!).

Of course, no one can forget the dog stuff (well, I did; it was someone's claim that it upset them so much that they had to leave the theater that made me decide to revisit it). Like The Gate, it seems as if the filmmakers were hellbent on making the audience cry. Young Martin sees his dog suffer a bad transport, and that's bad enough, but then he comes across it a few years later. The poor thing has been kept alive in a pit, and then the movie ramps up the tear-making antics: the little mutant dog wags its tail, and then sticks its mutant tongue out to try to show affection for his old pal. THEN, Stoltz weeps as he puts the thing out of its misery, which it clearly protests. Christ!

Like the original, it has an inordinate amount of people with incredibly goofy names. Our primary bad guy's name is Bartok, a name better used for cartoon rats in Anastasia movies. And the resident asshole henchman character is named Scorby. Plus the original's Stathis Borans returns (the only cast member to do so, though some deleted Goldblum footage is resurrected).

The DVD is jampacked; I didn't even have time to go through it all. There are a pair of documentaries that are close to an hour each; one about Fly II, one about the entire franchise. Then there are some storyboard comparisons and brief featurettes (one from 1989, it's hilariously cheesy). There is also an "alternate ending" which is really an "alternate prologue", as it doesn't change anything about the actual ending of the film. Plus another deleted scene, some random trailers (The Omen?) and a commentary by Walas which I will hopefully get to soon. As a bonus, a lot of the extras are anamorphic, which was appreciated. It's a bit of a bummer that so few people from the film came back for the retrospective documentary (Walas is there, obviously, but not a single cast member and hardly any crew join him), especially when I watched this stuff right after going through the extras on the new Child's Play DVD, in which just about every major cast member and the entire creative team came back for new interviews.

Anyway, I hope folks give this one another look; it's much better than you might expect, and even if you dislike it, the monster action/makeup/gore is definitely worth your time.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

The Antichrist (1974)

SEPTEMBER 2, 2008

GENRE: POSSESSION, RELIGIOUS
SOURCE: DVD (ONLINE RENTAL)

OK, I promise, tomorrow's movie won't have a goddamn thing to do with Christianity, the Bible, etc. With The Antichrist (Italian: L'Anticristo) being now the FOURTH movie in a row to have at least some plot elements revolving around the Bible, I am feeling a bit Jesus-ed out. If there was such a thing as an occult expert that only applied to horror movies, I feel as if though I may be qualified.

An acknowledged Exorcist knockoff, The Antichrist is actually pretty damn awesome. While some elements are stolen wholesale (like the exorcism sequence, which involves a priest who arrives covered in shadow, a door that's about to be pounded off its hinges, and pea soup), it's different enough to warrant a look. Instead of a young girl, the Devil takes over a 20ish woman, and since this is an Italian movie, you know what that means – gratuitous (and blasphemous!) nudity. Sure, Linda Blair got herself off with a crucifix, but she was still clothed (I hope that doesn't read as disappointment – I'm not that much of a perv). Alberto de Martino goes for erotic displays of demonic possession here; not only does the Amanda Plummer-ish Carla Gravina bare all, she also sticks her tongue out in ecstasy for a good 30 seconds as the Devil has his way with her (her resistance is quickly abandoned). Hot.

She also, over the course of the film, alludes to fucking her uncle, her father, and her brother (and even before she is possessed, she displays unreasonably high amounts of jealousy toward her stepmother). Her possessed dialogue is also full blown R rated; it makes Regan's occasional "Do you know what she did? Your cunting daughter!" type stuff look downright PG rated in comparison. Plus, the possessed voice sounds a lot like the killer's in Tourist Trap (which came 5 years later), so that was a big plus for me. Of course, all this just makes the movie all the more entertaining, and gives it enough of its own identity to forgive the plot theft from Friedkin's film.

There are also some fantastically silly moments that don't have much to do with the possessed woman talking about incest. For example, late in the film, a man tumbles down a giant flight of stairs, and you can actually see the guy making himself elongating his fall by pushing and flipping himself over when he gets "stuck" on a few steps along the way. The flashbacks (Gravina is the reincarnation of a devil worshipping woman) are also pretty deliriously fun, as you get guys with goat heads chanting, lots of "Priest! Bastard!!!" type yelling, etc. And even though it's not laugh out loud funny, I was tickled by the fact that the title appears twice in the opening credits, just in case you forgot I guess.

One odd thing about this DVD release (from Anchor Bay); while the bulk of the film is dubbed (at least the Italian actors are; standard procedure for these films is for everyone to just speak their native tongue so English and Italian audiences only need part of the film translated for them), the first 10 minutes are not, nor are there any subtitles. Granted it's pretty easy to figure out what's going on (I was about ready to just try to watch the whole thing in Italian and see if I could more or less get the gist), but it's still a bit odd.

The only real extra is a ten minute retrospective by De Martino and Ennio Morricone, composed the score with Bruno Nicolai. A "TV spot" is also included, but it's just what appears to be an actual still from Exorcist (doesn't look like our gal's bedroom at any rate) while a guy rambles about "The Tempter", which is what I guess it was originally called over here. The one below is much more informative.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Vampire: Los Muertos (2002)

SEPTEMBER 1, 2008

GENRE: VAMPIRE
SOURCE: CABLE (HDNET)

When it comes to John Carpenter, most folks are pretty much on the same page when it comes to his successes (Halloween, The Thing), and his failures (Village of the Damned, Ghosts of Mars). But with Vampires, the fanbase seems pretty divided; some consider it to be a return to form, others find it wholly disappointing. Hell, a buddy and I agree on every one of his movies except that one (I’m in the “disappointing” camp). Weird.

Anyway, since I didn’t care for the original, I had little interest in the direct to video followup: Vampires: Los Muertos, but when it popped up on HD cable, I figured I would take a look. And surprisingly enough, it’s not bad at all. I’d even put a notch higher than the original, if only for lowered expectations.

My biggest problem with the original was that it presented this team of badass vampire hunters... and then killed them all in the first 10 minutes. In theory, that’s fine, because you know that the bad guy is REALLY bad. But it also deflates suspense, because you know James Woods won’t die, so your only options are his partner (who got bit, so you know he’ll be around until the end to provide half-assed “emotional” plot elements), and the priest who comes for the ride. But that’s not the case here, Bon Jovi has a fellow hunter, a kid, a woman, a priest (and later another priest)... they’re all fair game.

Another problem I had was Carpenter’s laziness (or cheapness) when it came to vampire action. A lot of the setpieces, even the goddman finale, were seemingly never filmed; you see the beginning of an attack, and then it fades to later once the vampire is dead. What the fuck kind of bullshit is that? When their work was actually on screen, KNB had provided some of the best gags in their career, yet we barely ever got to see them. Again, this is improved in the sequel. The effects might not be AS good, but at least they are onscreen. There is only one ‘fade out’ bit in the entire movie, and it’s just when they are killing some sleeping vampires anyway.

Now, obviously Bon Jovi isn’t as badass as James Woods (to be fair, Woods’ “Living on a Prayer” probably fucking sucks too), but he’s OK enough as an actor to keep the movie watchable, and his “team” play nicely off one another. The only exception is Natasha Wagner as the woman who joins up with them. She’s usually OK as an actress, and she’s cute as hell, but her delivery here is awful. Everything comes off as a whiny complaint, even exposition (luckily, the dialogue in this movie isn’t 95% exposition like it was in the original). It got on my nerves after 10 minutes; by the end of the movie I wanted to smack her. They also tease a lesbian tryst with the head female vampire, but do not deliver. Weak.

One actor who DOESN’T appear is Tim Guinee, who played “Padre” in the first film (and delivered the best bad line in all of movie history: “He’ll be unstoppable... unless we stop him.”). The cable TV info thingie said he was in it, so I was pretty pissed to discover that it wasn’t the case. He is mentioned (his grave is shown but unless I missed it they don’t explain how he died or where Jack Crow went), but that’s not even remotely worth a cast listing on a TV guide onscreen prompt. I like Guinee, I wish he was in more stuff. And by more I mean any (last thing I remember him in was that canceled TV show called Strange World, though IMDb has him in Iron Man. Damned if I recognized him).

Sadly, no line of dialogue in this film comes close to the awesomeness of the “unstoppable” one, but there is a scene that comes pretty close. Bon Jovi spies a vamp getting off a bus, and he approaches him. In front of like 20 people, he and another vampire hunter shoot the guy and then cut his head off, then toss the corpse into the dumpster. The most vocal crowd response is “What’s going on?” I know whenever I see a rock star behead a guy and then toss the body into the nearest receptacle, I’m much more alarmed. I guess this kind of thing happens a lot in New Mexico. I should move there.

Anyway, there’s a third one, but Carpenter had no involvement (he exec produced this one), nor did Tommy Lee Wallace return. Speaking of Wallace – this guy is like the king of the underrated sequel (he also did Halloween III, which I love, and Fright Night 2, which I haven’t seen yet but I understand is actually quite good). I wish he had a bigger directorial career, but if nothing else, I know now not to under-estimate the guy. He managed to more or less upstage Carpenter, and that’s pretty impressive in my book.

I really should write that book. The amount of things I promise that are in it is getting pretty out of hand.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...