Non Canon Review: Silent Night, Deadly Night (1984)

DECEMBER 18, 2007

GENRE: HOLIDAY, SLASHER
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (REVIVAL SCREENING)

At long last... I have seen Silent Night, Deadly Night in its proper context: in a theater, with 300 other people in various levels of sobriety (I was sadly completely sober, having flew over to the New Beverly from work and parking so quickly that I didn’t notice the no parking sign; my devotion to the film has now cost me an additional 45 dollars). Of all the times I have seen the film, it has never been with more than one or two others, and seeing it with a big group of like-minded folks is of course is part, if not most of the fun.

The film was actually picketed against when it was released in 1984, mostly by mothers (or, more likely, embittered women who never managed to put their shrill and sad attitudes aside for long enough to get knocked up) who objected to the ads depicting Santa Claus with an axe. Clearly, this could damage a young child, one who would be much better left at home alone while his mother picketed a movie she hadn’t seen so she could avoid basic parenting. This resulted in the film being pulled from theaters after a week or so, so thanks a lot, whores. Hell, according the liner notes in the DVD, the film never even played in LA, making this screening all the more exciting.

For the rest of the people in the world who aren’t complete idiots and at least WATCHED it before making an opinion, this movie is a delightfully wretched piece of mean-spirited cinema. Bad Santa could only WISH it was as gleefully cruel as this movie. “I’m on my lunch break”??? That’s got nothing on a group of kids seeing not one but TWO Santas (one a kindly deaf priest!) get shot to death in front of their eyes on Christmas day.

Of course, the most terrifying scene in the film is the one early on with the kid’s grandfather, a man who momentarily springs out of his comatose state to warn his grandson that Santa is coming to kill him later on. The look on this guy’s face and his delivery is nothing short of astounding, and sets the tone nicely for the classless joy that follows. Over the course of the next 80 minutes, we get plenty of gratuitous nudity, 30 year old bullies stealing sleds from 20 year old children, a truly bizarre montage of our eventual killer learning how to work in a toy store, sadistic nuns, a beheaded snowman… GOD I LOVE THIS FUCKING MOVIE.

I also noticed for the first time how many ties it has to the Halloween sequels. The Lily Tomlin-ish chick from part 4 who transfers Michael in the opening scene shows up as the toy store owner’s girlfriend, Leo Jeter (aka Curse’s Barry Simms) plays the boyfriend in the infamous antler scene, and Don Shanks (Part 5’s Michael) did some of the stunts. Weird. Speaking of the antler scene, the other day I pointed out how Jeter’s terrible peripheral vision was topped in Toe Tags, but looking at it again, I think it might be a tie:

How the FUCK does he not see her???

When I first saw this film as a 6 year old (I’ll say it again – my mom rules), I seriously believed that the filmmakers had to wait years to finish the film in order to give time for the kid playing Billy to age from 7 to 12 to 18. Of course, looking at it now, even if such nonsensical filmmaking tactics were true, they certainly wouldn’t be the case here, as the 3 actors couldn’t look LESS alike. I also like how my 6 year old self was smart enough to understand that it was only a movie (I still believed in Santa for another 3 years) but yet was stupid enough to think a film would be filmed in chunks over the course of a decade to accommodate the actor’s aging.

Maybe it's the habit... but I think Sister Margaret is hot.

This classic was just re-released on DVD, with some excised footage restored (though from a different video source, so it looks kind of stupid), but the original release had the sequel on the other side. Since I’ve only seen the sequel once (when I was like 8) I think I’ll make it tomorrow’s regular movie. Sadly, none of the other sequels (including part 5, which starred Mickey Rooney, who was one of the biggest protesters against the first film, going so far as to call the filmmakers “scum”) have ever hit DVD, and I think the pressing with 1 and 2 is now out of print. But really, in the end all you need is the original. The upcoming remake is wholly unnecessary, because unless they get someone with the appropriately sick sense of humor (like Joe Lynch and the Wrong Turn 2 team, or maybe even someone without any horror 'cred', like Louie CK), they will likely opt to make it more accessible to mainstream audiences and thus less awesome. As far as I am concerned, we already got a remake of sorts with Black Xmas (which thematically had more in common with this than the original Black Christmas, in my opinion). And if any of the people reading this review knew (or in fact, IS) someone who protested the film back in the day, I have a message for them/you: Get a sense of humor.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Toe Tags (2003)

DECEMBER 17, 2007

GENRE: SERIAL KILLER
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 3!!!)

Man... there should be some sort of warning on these movies. “This was filmed with the same camera your uncle films family gatherings with and the acting within isn’t quite as good as that of porn.” Once again being marginally better than the previous film from the Decrepit Crypt set, Toe Tags is still a miserable excuse for a film that doesn’t deserve to be commercially available. If it was free on Youtube (which the video quality often resembles) it would be one thing, but come on guys.

Like Before I Die, these guys didn’t even bother using sound recording equipment for their film. Thus, when people are close to the camera, you can hear them, and when they are not, you can’t. If you for some reason decide to watch this film, be prepared to keep your finger on the volume button.

And these guys are supposed to be cops.

Also, this one is quite short. It lists a running time of 68 minutes, but the film itself is only 60. The other 8 are bloopers and behind the scenes footage of the (bad) makeup effects. The only interesting thing about any of them is hearing someone genuinely laugh at a guy’s terrible (and confusing) Tony Montana/Travis Bickle impression. Note to the world – saying either “Say hello to my little friend!” or “You talking to me?” in any situation or capacity is not funny, ever, and you really should just fucking stop doing them (and witnesses to them should not under any circumstances encourage them by laughing).

The movie also manages to top Silent Night Deadly Night’s antler scene in regards to how bad the character’s peripheral vision is. In SNDN, a guy doesn’t notice his girlfriend hanging by a pair of antlers, because she’s at his, let’s say, 4 o’ clock. Well this one is even stupider:

The blond chick doesn't see the woman walking up to her. Un-fucking-believable. Seriously, I’m about to throw this entire fucking set into the trash.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Scarecrows

DECEMBER 16, 2007

GENRE: ZOMBIE
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

“Hey Curry: how are we gonna live in Mexico, if we’re dead?”

That line is hilarious, but unfortunately, like about 80% of the (less funny) dialogue in Scarecrows, it is spoken by an off-screen actor. It’s really jarring to hear a bunch of disembodied voices over shots of houses, cornfields, and airplanes throughout the film, and you never really get used to it.

This is a shame, because otherwise, this movie’s pretty good. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that Quentin Tarantino and/or Simon Barrett are fans of the film, since both From Dusk Till Dawn and Barrett's Dead Birds (a great flick, if you haven’t seen it yet you should) are very similar (Birds moreso than Dawn), and in certain aspects, superior. Scarecrows has a father and daughter taken hostage by the robbers (like Dawn) and is a very atmospheric, low-key effort set entirely in a farmhouse (like Birds). And both are about robbers being killed by monsters (note - I am dubbing this a zombie film because the guys that get killed by the scarecrows come back as murderous, mindless drone things).

I was surprised to see Peter Deming’s name in the credits, as he is one of the few directors of photography whose name means a damn thing to me (he also shot the Scream sequels, Evil Dead 2, From Hell, and a few David Lynch films). His career is uneven at best (he also shot Son In Law and Joe’s Apartment), but he does great work here. The shots of the scarecrows creep me out throughout the film. Take a note, Lionsgate – killer scarecrows CAN be scary!!!

And this guy is awesome.

It’s sort of a shame that writer/director William Wesley has only one other film to his name (Route 666, which was a complete disappointment, to put it mildly). He knows how to stage scenes and keep a film moving despite an obvious low budget (I suspect many of the voiceovers are the result of needing to deliver exposition without filming a whole scene), and it would be good to see what he could pull off with the necessary resources. None of the actors are particularly memorable, but they aren’t bad either (one guy kind of looks like Nathan Fillion, which is always a plus).

Also the dog in the film is “awwww” worthy.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Graveyard Shift (1990)

DECEMBER 15, 2007

GENRE: BASED ON NOVEL, PREDATOR, MONSTER
SOURCE: CABLE (FEARNET)

I blame Fearnet for the one time I ever missed a movie. I was on vacation last February, and planned to use their online site, which offers crappy movies for free, for my daily film. But the horrible presentation and terrible buffering errors caused me to give up trying. Since their actual channel is not available on Time Warner, which is my cable provider, that was my only real experience with Fearnet until today, when I went to a friend’s house in Massachusetts. She had the channel, which offers about 40 movies “On Demand” per month, including Graveyard Shift, which is the one I opted for out of all the choices.

As I said in my 1408 review, a Stephen King short story usually translates into an awful film. Not that all of his full length novels have been successfully adapted, but the problems with the ones that don't usually stem from leaving out “favorite parts” more than anything else. With the short stories, the filmmakers have to pad the idea out in order to make a 90 minute narrative, which is no easy task. Sometimes, like 1408, this works. Usually, like Children of the Corn, The Mangler, The Lawnmower Man, etc. it doesn’t. So I was happy to see that Graveyard Shift came out pretty decent, if far from perfect.

The odd thing about the movie is that it’s about Brad Dourif and some other guys killing rats, only to discover that the REAL monster is a giant bat fucking thing living in the rat nest, and yet no one seems to be having any fun. The whole concept is pretty ridiculous, why not laugh it up? Even in the finale, when a Diet Pepsi can is used to save the day (best product placement ever?), director Ralph Singleton and writer John Esposito play the whole thing maddeningly straight. Even Dourif gets little scene-chewing to do outside of a long Vietnam speech early on (which has a line about Bruce Dern that sounds EXACTLY like something King would write, though I do not think that the line, or even Dourif’s character for that matter, are in the book), but that's about it. The rest of the film is kind of dour, if (heh) not entirely serious.

But it’s still enjoyable once it gets going, and the gore is sufficient. The acting is pretty decent for the most part as well. Brad Andrews, of “I guess they couldn’t afford Tom Berenger” fame, plays the lead, and Andrew “The Djinn” Divoff plays one of the other mill workers. The girl looks like Marisa Tomei, and her character’s final scene is pretty surprising. There’s also a howler of a final line by the requisite “evil human” character, who yells “We’re going to hell.... TOGETHER!!!” (“together” sounds like the chorus to a song, he shouts it for so long).

Also, they give some nice King nods – the mill is named after Richard Bachman (who wrong “The Long Walk”, my all time favorite book, and I am pretty sure that the mill is supposed to be the same one that the Pete McVries character in “Walk” worked at prior to joining the Walk), and there’s a Plymouth Fury glimpsed here and there. Of course, it’s not very likely that King is a fan of the film, though I think he should be impressed that they got as good of a movie as they did from his source story, which is hardly one of his better tales to begin with and also is only about 8 pages long if memory serves.

So, if you have Fearnet, and have never seen the film, give it a watch or two and tell us what you think. Otherwise... I dunno. Make a sandwich or something.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

I Am Legend (2007)

DECEMBER 14, 2007

GENRE: BASED ON NOVEL, POST-APOCALYPTIC, REMAKE, VAMPIRE
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (IMAX)

It’s sort of a lie to say I saw I Am Legend in IMAX, as it was pretty much a fake IMAX. The screen was about the right size, but the theater setup and sound system were identical to any stadium seated theater. The whole point of IMAX is to be engulfed in the film with a curved screen that you are close to and sound that comes at you from all sides. This was not the case. So if you are in the Hooksett, NH area, and are considering going to their IMAX screen for the experience, don’t. Make the extra drive down to Reading, MA.

It was sort of fitting for the film though. It had the right intent, but it was missing key ingredients. Like the book itself and Last Man On Earth, the first half hour or so is the best part. Watching Neville go about his regular routine in a sort of half survival, half fantasy scenario is always the highlight of this particular story. In this version, Neville is in New York, and the scenes of him navigating the empty city are truly effective (though the effect is a bit dulled after Devil’s Advocate and Vanilla Sky did the same thing to a degree). There are some great “future” sight gags in these scenes as well, and the idea of a guy literally watching every movie ever made (in alphabetical order no less) has obvious appeal to me.

But, like always, the 2nd half flounders. Why can’t anyone, even Richard Matheson himself, ever come up with a good way to wrap up this story? Deviating from the book (even moreso than Last Man) is fine, but only if they improve on things, which isn’t the case here. Surprisingly, the film contains far less action than you’d expect from the trailers and pedigree (Michael Bay himself was once attached to this film, and the first scene with Smith is probably leftover from his involvement), though that isn’t really the problem. And considering how awful the CG vampires look, the less of them we see, the better. No, the problem here is that the movie fails to give Neville a real antagonist like his neighbor Cortman in the book. Here, the “big bad” is simply a slightly better rendered CG zombie-vampire thing (“played” by Dash Mihok, who is a recognizable character actor I usually enjoy), and he is given very little to do. There is very little sense that the vampires fear him (making this film’s use of the book’s title, the first adaptation to do so, all the more puzzling), rendering (no pun intended!) them largely inconsequential. Neville’s own crumbling sanity seems a bigger threat than the vampires ever do, with the exception of one (terrific) sequence set in a pitch black building.

They also include some truly idiotic “spiritual” nonsense (spoiler alert!). Early on in the film, during one of the flashbacks (the movie scores a few points by splitting these flashbacks up, Lost-style, but loses a few of those points for focusing pretty much on one night/scene), Neville’s kid randomly says “Look at the butterfly!”. Later, Neville sees a butterfly tattoo on a fellow survivor, and realizes what he has to do to save humanity. So, yes, this film essentially rips off “Swing away, Merrill!” and manages to make it even dumber. Who knows which writer is to blame on this though, since the film has had so many false starts and different creative teams over the past 10 years. This results in what has to be a cinematic first (at least for a film based on a book), as we are given a “Based on a screenplay by” credit in addition to the story/screenplay credits (and, of course, Matheson for his novel). And that’s just the credited writers!!!

So while it was far from a bad film, it was really disheartening to watch as the film went from great to merely OK. Like 30 Days of Night, this has the potential to be one of the years’ best genre films (luckily, the PG-13 rating is of no real consequence in relation to the film’s flaws), but the lazy script prevented such a thing from happening. Still, I was entertained for the most part, thanks in part to the antics of my fellow moviegoers. Going to get a snack, I witnessed a man screaming and yelling about his pretzel, which resulted in a refund, and then the guy went back to his movie... which was Alvin and the Chipmunks. I didn’t think anything would top that, but then I saw a girl buy a soda and Sour Patch Kids, and then throw the soda into the trash without even as much as putting a straw into the lid. What the hell kind of person pays 4 dollars for a cup of colored water and then immediately throws it away?

My enjoyment was also aided by a 6 minute preview of The Dark Knight (aka Batman 2). We watch pretty much a whole scene, detailing a bank robbery orchestrated by the Joker, who is believed to be pulling the strings from an unknown location, and not the 5th robbery member whose face we never see. The scene also includes William Fichtner brandishing a shotgun and generally being awesome. Someone get this guy a starring role!!!

UPDATE – the movie made 80 million over the weekend, beating even Return of the King for a December opening. So who cares what I think?

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Prom Night (1980)

DECEMBER 13, 2007

GENRE: SLASHER
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

I saw Prom Night once, back in 1995 or so, when I was old enough to rent my own movies and thus was going back and trying to see all the slashers from the early 80s. And I remember being disappointed with it, considering that unlike many of my favorites (such as My Bloody Valentine), it actually spawned some sequels, earned some mild critical appeal, and featured Jamie Lee Curtis herself.

So now, 12 years later, with a remake looming and my memory of the film entirely vanquished (I couldn’t even remember who the killer was) I gave it another pass, and I was surprised to discover that... Prom Night really isn’t all that good.

For starters, it takes far too long to get going. The first killing occurs around the one hour mark (and they kill the hottest girl first, never a good idea with me!), but without anything really happening before it. A mirror breaks for some reason, and that’s about it. No POV shots of the killer watching, no Halloween style “Someone’s watching me but I turned to get my friend and now he’s gone” type stuff, nothing. Hell, one could easily forget it’s a slasher movie at all. Usually I appreciate these deviations from the slasher blueprint (especially one from this time period) but here it just doesn’t work, because nothing else in the film makes up for it. The characters aren’t terribly interesting, the setting is bland, and the red herrings are so badly implemented that it’s a wonder they even tried (like the “escaped killer” guy would really be the killer when we’ve never even SEEN him?). Plus the killer’s outfit is pretty much the least memorable in slasher movie history.

Girls, do you often leave the locker room like this? I hope so.

It’s also a painfully dated film. Every guy in the movie has a perm, and the dancing numbers take more than a little patience. And while I got some perverse amusement from seeing a kid in a ski mask walk casually around his high school (he’d be tasered on sight nowadays), it wasn't enough to get that nostalgic feeling that other dated movies have. Hell, I almost started getting the impression that the remake might even be an improvement, before remembering that A. it’s PG-13 and B. the killer in it is the guy who was an asshole in That Thing You Do!

The adult characters aren’t much better. Leslie Nielsen, in a rare straight role, is top-billed for his three, largely inconsequential scenes (he’s in the film for MAYBE 7 total minutes, and that’s being gracious. I don’t think he even appears in the film’s final half hour at all). There’s a cop who keeps narrating things, and another guy who looks like an old Michael McKean, and that’s about it. Most of the time we are with our core group, 4 girls and 3 guys (2 of which look a lot alike, and since one is the brother and the other is the boyfriend of Jamie Lee’s character, this leads to some momentary Taboo-style hilarity).

Still, there are enough occasional sparks of greatness that save this one. The shock beheading kill at the prom is a fantastic sequence (the only kill in the film worth a damn, really), and I laughed endlessly at one guy (who looks like Jonah Hill) being surprised that the girl he just fucked was a virgin. And Jamie’s Final Girl is a lot more fun than her Terror Train character.

How this spawned three sequels (which I haven’t seen but apparently have zero relation to one another) is beyond me, and I have little hope that the remake will improve on it, but it has its moments (and certainly its fans), so it’s not a total loss. Still, I fail to see why Randy had so much love for it.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Terror Toons

DECEMBER 12, 2007

GENRE: COMEDIC, CRAP, WEIRD
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 3!!!)

The best, and pretty much only, good thing I can say about Terror Toons is that it’s the best movie I have seen so far on the Decrepit Crypt set. Out of two.

Otherwise it’s just a mess. I THINK it’s supposed to be funny, but it’s not, which makes about 90% of the movie fail from the start. We have guy in drag playing the mother of two girls who are supposed to be like 16 and 18, played by 20 and 34 year olds, respectively. OK. The plot about cartoon villains invading the real world is even stupider than it sounds, and the effects, cartoonish or not, look like shit.

Granted, there is a certain charm at times to the film, particularly in the opening sequence, which combines intentionally (I think) childish 2D cel animation with a “torture” scene, but it’s nowhere near enough to make the film even remotely worth watching. After that scene, it’s just one painfully unfunny scene after another, without a single thing such as inventive gore, wit, or even competent filmmaking to make up for it.

Also, cinema’s worst Devil. Ever.

The sad thing about this is that this movie was pretty much the only one on the set I had ever heard about before (not counting Matthew aka Scream Bloody Murder), and even looked forward to seeing it. Anyone who knows me or has read my reviews that allude to my cartoon knows how much I love the idea of combining humor and horror via animation. And yet the movie botches so much, I barely even THOUGHT about my own creation while watching this goddamn thing. I’m a pretty self-deprecating guy, but even I can safely say I could do a lot better than this.

Some folks I talked to (OK, one) got this mixed up with Evil Toons; which is pretty much the same movie from what I can gather. But it can’t possibly be worse, right? Anyone care to elaborate?

And I know someone else has the Decrepit set... tell me these are among the worst on the set, because if not I don’t think I will be able to get through the whole thing. I’ve already put the box back on my shelf at home rather than in my desk at work (which is where I would watch them, if ever).

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Before I Die (2003)

DECEMBER 11, 2007

GENRE: ANTHOLOGY, CRAP
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 3!!!)

Wow, a bad anthology movie? No! They’re always so great! Especially no-budget horror ones like Fright Club and House Of The Dead!

That enough sarcasm? Good. Let’s get to tearing apart Before I Die, a god awful piece of worthless shit that has set the bar insanely low for the Decrepit Crypt of Nightmares set (it was the first movie I watched out of the 50).

Filmed with what looks like a VHS camcorder from 1988, this movie is so mind numbingly dull and amateurish, it is borderline inconceivable that anyone involved in the film’s production had the drive to finish it at all once they began editing it together, and even more shocking that anyone, even Mill Creek, would put their name on it and distribute it.

The best thing you can say about it is that it’s somewhat short, clocking in around 80 minutes. They will FEEL like much more, but that’s neither here nor there. There are three stories here, each one marginally better than the one before it, simply because it’s shorter. Thus, the worst/longest comes first, a succubus tale with “comic” elements, mostly from a really horny guy that looks like the love child of Harold Ramis and someone who you might see on a local car dealership on Sunday morning TV.

Some 4000 hrs, or 40 minutes, later, the 2nd story begins. This one is also highly sexually charged, as a couple goes to a remote vacation spot and proceed to fuck each other several times, in between bouts of oral sex (the guy's dick must resemble red gravel by the end of the 2nd day). After a while, they start hallucinating and then a giant head yells at them and they leave. The end. I couldn’t even begin to tell you the point of this one.

The third story is the best, and not only because it’s the shortest. This one features some actual action (a couple of slashings in the first few minutes!) and the cast’s only attractive female, who also spends a good deal of her running time in the buff. Thank Mill Creek for small favors. Unfortunately, this one also has the worst technical gaffes, such as a 3 shot stabbing sequence in which the knife is shown being held 3 different ways. Like some other anthology films, this one also ties in a bit to the wrap-around story, but it’s so dumb (not to mention a bit repulsive) it’s not even worth mentioning.

This guy must have gone to Castleton...

The wrap-around, I will mention, is a writer trying to write a followup to his book (movie? magazine? blog?) "Horrortales" or some shit like that. He spends the first 5 minutes of the film unnaturally talking to himself (read: the audience) as he explains what he’s doing, why he needs to do it, etc. Damn, if only film were a visual medium, these things could be conveyed without having a guy say things like “I have writer’s block. I need to get around it. What did I do last time I wrote?” to no one in particular!

The sound is all recorded through the camera, the actors are all terrible at best, the makeup effects are as inept as they come, and the myriad attempts at humor all fall flat. The same could be said about two films I made in high school, so maybe I should give Mill Creek a call and see if they’ll distribute them on their next budget pack. I think I’d be pretty psyched if, 20 years from now, some dude who was carrying on my e-legacy and literally watching any piece of shit horror movie he came across tore my own amateur movie apart.

50 movies for 20 bucks means you pay about 40 cents per movie. In this movie’s case, I am pretty certain that effectively put them back in the black.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Creature From The Haunted Sea

DECEMBER 10, 2007

GENRE: COMEDIC, MONSTER,
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 2!!!)

You gotta love a movie that somehow manages to combine a sea monster, Cuban immigrants, spies, gold, animation, scuba fighting, and a musical number, all in under 75 minutes. But Roger Corman (who else?) did just that with Creature From The Haunted Sea, coming up with a concept that is far better than the execution.

And name-mentioner police, yes, the guy who stars in the movie is Robert Towne, who went on to write cinematic classics like Chinatown and Days Of Thunder. But you knew that, and I have nothing interesting to say about it.

While I’m sure it was a hoot back in the day, the Cuban “social commentary” and all silly spy stuff doesn’t quite work anymore. And the main reason why is, the film’s de facto “main” plot is so great, all that stuff sort of distracts. Basically, you have a guy lying about a sea monster killing his crew (he’s the real killer), only to discover that the sea creature is in fact quite real. That’s brilliant! Who cares about Cubans and gold??? Someone needs to take this basic concept, hell, even make a legit remake, and streamline it so that the non-ruse is front and center. An Owen Wilson (or better, a BC) would be ideal for the film. It reminds me of something they do so brilliantly on South Park: taking an absurd concept and turning it into reality (such as Moses telling the Jewish kids that he needs macaroni art). Love it!

Also, a fake Tom Green.

Otherwise, it’s so all over the place that it’s sort of difficult to discuss. It makes the convoluted plot of Red Zone Cuba look straightforward. Still, everyone seems to be having fun, and you can’t dislike a movie that features a note that is written so that a camera can shoot the whole thing in closeup:

I’d like to mention that I am 99% positive that clips from this film appeared in the VHS tape for the “VCR Board Game” Doorways to Horror which came out in the mid 80s. You’d watch clips and fight witches and vampires... it was also pretty convoluted. I used to just watch the tape by itself as a young man. I’d love to find it (ebay would probably help in that area) and see how many of the films I have actually seen now. I know Night of the Living Dead, Nosferatu, and The Terror were all on there.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Non Canon Review: Tremors (1990)

DECEMBER 9, 2007

GENRE: COMEDIC, MONSTER
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (REVIVAL SCREENING)

Screening along with American Werewolf was Tremors, one of my favorite movies (hence the "Non Canon" mark). I had never seen it theatrically, like 99.999% of the rest of the world (I was only 10. What the fuck was your excuse?!?!?), so even though I was tired and needed to pack (I'll be visiting family for a week), I stuck around.

What makes the film work, besides the engaging comic banter, is the sheer number of survivors. If this was a serious monster movie, you can pretty much bet that everyone except Kevin Bacon, the hot seismology chick, the little girl, and her mom (maybe) would be dead by the end of the film. But since it has a light touch, it leaves several folks alive. BUT, since there are a number of deaths as well, this actually makes the film more suspenseful. Anyone can die! That said, I always felt the film ended rather abruptly, and perhaps could have used another death/setpiece. But that’s OK.

I also like how quickly it starts up, despite not seeing the monster for a while. Bacon and Fred Ward find a corpse, a mangled farm, and a car, and figure something is wrong, all in the first maybe 20 minutes. The pace in this film is near perfect. It doesn’t hurt that you will like most of the characters and enjoy “hanging out” with them (I also wish that Victor Wong’s hilarious Mr. Chang character made it a little longer, he’s way more fun than the Mexican guy or the film’s one annoying character, Melvin, both of whom survive).

I really need to get this DVD. Like Werewolf, the presentation was marred by some technical issues on the soundtrack (every other reel was muffled), and if memory serves there’s some decent extras. I’ve only seen the first sequel, and I understand you can get all 4 films pretty cheap, so maybe I’ll pick that up. I remember Tremors 2 being OK enough for a DTV sequel.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

American Werewolf In London

DECEMBER 9, 2007

GENRE: COMEDIC, WEREWOLF
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (REVIVAL SCREENING)

There are two films that I think will shock my readers to realize I had never seen them. American Werewolf In London is one (sort of). The other is far more “Are you SERIOUS? NEVER?!?!?”-y, and I expect to be flogged when that day comes (the title will be the subject of an upcoming poll!). In London’s case, I had seen bits and pieces of it throughout the years, and thus knew the general gist of it all, but had never seen the entire thing in one sitting, and for every scene I knew, there were one or two others I didn’t.

As I’ve said several times, there are very few good werewolf movies. And now that I have seen this near perfect masterpiece in its entirety, that claim is even more true, for the ones I actually liked (such as Big Bad Wolf) are borderline shit when compared to this. It’s a shame Landis has more or less stepped away from horror (MoH episodes don’t count!), as this film proves he is one of the few filmmakers who successfully blend horror with comedy.

Rick Baker’s effects are terrific (the transformation scene comes out of nowhere!), and while a surprising number of kills occur offscreen, the “stalk” scenes before the kills are uniformly great, in particular the one in the subway where the wolf appears at the bottom of the escalator. And the initial attack scene is pretty suspenseful too. So the movie certainly succeeds as a straight horror film. BUT, it’s fucking hilarious too! I have a new entry in my “10 funniest lines in movie history” list. There’s a scene early on where the doctor gets a phone call, and his response is nothing short of brilliant. “I don’t want to talk to him. Tell him I died.” HAHAHAHAH oh man, if anyone ever called me I would totally use that in response.

I also liked the continuing friendship of the two guys. I wish they made it a little more ambiguous as to whether or not Jack was actually back from the dead, but oh well. There scenes together (with Jack becoming more and more decrepit with each scene) are the heart of the film, in my opinion, and the lack of this type of camaraderie was one of the many, many, MANY things that the sequel got wrong. And the Hammer style, epilogue-less ending was perfect, if a bit abrupt (I really thought there was another 10 minutes or so, but nope).

Sadly, the print (this was part of Edgar Wright’s festival in Los Angeles) was marred with some technical issues. The picture dropped out entirely twice (it otherwise looked fucking beautiful for a 26 year old film), and the 4th reel was all but totally drowned out by a mechanical noise. Bummer. And since it wasn’t the “real” night for the event (every double feature screens twice, but Edgar and special guests only appear on one of the nights), it wasn’t very crowded, which is always a big part of the fun. But then again, since I was technically seeing the film for the first time, I guess the quieter audience was a plus, as I didn’t have to “ssh” anyone so I could hear the dialogue everyone else knew by heart.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

It Is Fine. Everything Is Fine!

DECEMBER 8, 2007

GENRE: HERO KILLER, INDEPENDENT, PSYCHOLOGICAL, WEIRD
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (EVENT SCREENING)

Uh... um... the uh... yeah.

How can one review a film like It Is Fine. Everything Is Fine!? Any film directed by Crispin Glover is bound to be a bit strange, but this makes an average David Lynch film look like the epitome of mass appeal.

The film was written by its star, Steven Stewart, a man who suffered from cerebral palsy (and died from it a month after filming was complete). The fact that he wrote it should dispel any notion that Glover is exploiting him, but I’m sure some folks will still see it that way. Still, it doesn’t make the film any less uncomfortable to watch, especially when, about an hour into the film, we are shown Stewart being given oral pleasure (for real, not fake “head bobbing” style), shortly before he kills the girl by running her neck over with his wheelchair.

Oddly enough, a few years ago I suggested a film in which the villain was an actor who had downs syndrome or some sort of handicap. My feeling was (and still is) that they had just as much potential to be bad as anyone else in the world. The person I was talking to was quite offended by this notion. But she was (and still is) female, so it’s probably OK when Crispin Glover does it.

Glover finances the films (this is the 2nd part of a thematic trilogy, the first of which, What Is It, was finished a year or so ago after nearly a decade of production) with the money he makes from appearing in what he calls “corporate” films such as Charlie’s Angels. Which is pretty awesome, if you ask me (at least he’s honest), but on the flipside, it means that the film is shot in small chunks over a long period of time, without a lot of the resources one would usually have for a film. Unsurprisingly, this results in some technical issues (overly grainy footage, out of focus shots, etc), not to mention some fragmented storytelling (one character, played by Lauren German from Hostel II, disappears about 20 minutes before the end).

And, while it’s not exactly an issue, it should be noted that Stewart is often very difficult to understand and his dialogue is presented without subtitles (everyone in the film understands him perfectly, and usually it’s obvious what the gist of what he’s saying is). Glover, during his endurance test, er, Q&A (which lasted longer than the film itself), explained that putting subtitles would send the wrong message, and I agree. Still, a guy who watches a horror movie every day and eats pasta without sauce isn’t exactly the average person whose opinion you would want on such matters.

Glover has no plans to release these films on DVD; he likes to be in the audience and talk about them with everyone. So if you’re curious, check out his official website and see if he is coming around. The evening also comes with a signing and an hour or so of Glover reading some “books” he wrote, which are slide shows that don’t make any goddamn sense but are still more or less entertaining. If you like something different, you can’t do much better (or worse, depending on your POV) than this.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Sweeney Todd (2007)

DECEMBER 8, 2007

GENRE: HERO KILLER, MUSICAL
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (PRESS SCREENING)

It’s kind of weird when you think about it: Tim Burton is probably the most high profile director associated with the macabre, and yet only 3 of his films are rated R (and one of them is Ed Wood, which is only R for language). Sweeney Todd is the 3rd (after Wood and Sleepy Hollow), based on the musical that I never saw or probably ever will (sorry, Broadway, but lower your fucking prices! Or at least make the seats more comfortable).

As a film it certainly works better than other filmed versions of stage musicals (in particular Schumacher’s Phantom of the Opera, a film without almost anything that even approaches quality entertainment). The cast, with one exception, feels right at home both in the acting and the singing (Alan Rickman in particular – I listened to the stage version of “Pretty Women” and found the film version to be far superior). Also, the film doesn’t seem to stop cold for a song, which is a problem that plagues other musicals. Not every song is here (“The Ballad of Sweeney Todd” is one lamentable omission; at least, according to the people I have talked to who HAVE seen the musical. Maybe you should read their review instead of mine), and that’s a good thing: they seem like they are more focused on making a good film than making sure everything from the stage version is included.

The one cast member who seems a bit out of place is Sacha Baron Cohen as Pirelli. He’s not BAD, but his character is so cartoonish and loud that he sticks out like a sore thumb next to the rather dry and subdued black humor of the rest of the film. It doesn’t help that the audience I was with laughed every time he was in the shot, regardless of what he was doing. Granted, his presence cements the idea that the film isn’t supposed to be taken too seriously, but it still distracts. I’d rather they came up with a different way to get the purpose of his scenes across (Sweeney making his presence known on Fleet Street) that retained the tone of the rest of the film.

There’s also a very curious cameo by Anthony Stewart Head. Nothing I can find suggests he was ever in the stage version, and he’s not exactly the type of household name actor one would include for a cameo, so it’s very strange. He says one line and is never heard from again, nor is he credited. Whatever.

Like all musicals, some songs are better than others. "Pretty Women" was my favorite, though I also enjoyed "A Little Priest" and "Epiphany". Surprisingly, Burton did not employ frequent collaborator Danny Elfman to conduct the score (in fact this is only the 2nd film of Burton’s in which Elfman did not contribute). Again, having not seen the stage version I don’t know if the instrumental portions are the same in the film or if they are new, but either way I enjoyed them.

Finally, I should note the gore. It’s insane! There’s almost a dozen quite bloody throat slashings in the film, with the red stuff spraying all over the walls, other characters, and camera lens. Of course, the hypocrisy on display is lamentable (why can Tim Burton get away with it in an R rated film but not Adam Green?), but what can you do? Needless to say, any fear I had that the film couldn’t be considered a horror movie were quickly erased.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Last Man On Earth

DECEMBER 7, 2007

GENRE: BASED ON NOVEL, POST-APOCALYPTIC, VAMPIRE
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 2!!!)

What with I Am Legend hitting theaters next week, I thought I’d give a look at Last Man On Earth, the first adaptation of Richard Matheson’s novel. Also, like 90 readers suggested I watch it. I had always heard bad things about it, so I wasn’t exactly dying to see it, but as it turns out, it’s not all that bad.

However, it’s hard for me to buy Price as a hero. He just sounds too damn sinister. Later in the film, when he finds a fellow survivor, who can blame the poor broad for not wanting to trust him? He makes “I’m not going to hurt you!” sounds like the most threatening thing ever said. I wouldn’t trust him either. Maybe his grandson Jody, but not him.

The movie also offers a fake Peter Cushing.

Also, and it’s been a while since I’ve read the book so I can’t remember if it was the same, but I think it would work better if the flashbacks were separated and delivered in smaller chunks, Lost-style, rather than stopping the movie cold for a half an hour to explain away everything at once. This prevents any vampire action from occurring for far too long a time. Still, the flashback sequence does offer Price saying, quite matter of factly “Maybe it was because I was bitten by a bat...” (in response to his seeming immunity). Apparently, he was the only one ever bitten? But the way he says it is so hilarious (he might as well be saying “Maybe I should have roast for dinner.”), it buys the film another 10 minutes of momentum.

Also, the transfer is pretty ridic. Apparently it was taken from a TV airing. So the film’s 2.35:1 image is cropped, but the film is also windowboxed! And making things worse, the opening credits are either cropped out:

Or the image is stretched vertically so that they wouldn’t be cropped:

Christ. I might have to buy the regular DVD (there’s a new edition with a cover that ape the remake) just so I can watch the movie respectfully. They might as well have shot it with a camera during a screening.

I still haven’t seen Omega Man, though I understand it’s the least faithful of the three. Not that I really care. If you want the book, read the book.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

The Evil Of Frankenstein

DECEMBER 6, 2007

GENRE: BRITISH, MAD SCIENTIST, MONSTER
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

You just can’t go wrong with Peter Cushing, as far as I’m concerned. Here we have what has to be the 90th Frankenstein movie I’ve watched this year, The Evil Of Frankenstein, and yet I was entertained throughout, never once bored even though nothing in the plot occurred that I hadn’t seen before.

I also now see where The Bride got the idea to combine shady circus folk with the Frankenstein story. The synopsis on the Hammer collection DVD sort of gives away the fact that a circus magician named Zoltan is the villain of the story (he only appears once in the first two acts of the film), so don’t read it, or this review, if you want to be surprised by the development. Oh, wait. Never mind. I should also point out that the title is misleading, Frankenstein is pretty much neutral in the film.

And the actor playing the monster is named Kiwi.

One thing that kind of bummed me out is that they recycled the Universal/Karloff makeup rather than come up with their own. It’s modified, obviously, but in wide shots, it’s kind of hard to tell the difference. Still, the early science lab scene is fantastic, with Cushing pumping a heart by hand while the usual sparks and electricity shower down around him (like a lot of Hammer films, the film is damn pretty to look at).

And, I know I mentioned it before, but I’ll say it again: I LOVE how Hammer films end. They end almost immediately once the bad guy has been dispatched. No need for a silly epilogue or set up for a sequel. This one in particular – with 1:10 left to go in the film; the monster is killed, leaving just enough time for the end credits. Yeah! Plague of the Zombies remains the best example, as the credits begin rolling literally one second after the explosion that kills all the zombies goes off. Love it.

This makes the 2nd Hammer sequel I have watched (after The Brides Of Dracula) to a film I had never seen, but it’s not exactly hard to follow. I assume that since Cushing is in both films, he didn’t die at the end of the first Hammer Frankenstein (called The Curse Of Frankenstein), so I guess it’s not entirely faithful to the book, but that’s fine. If it keeps Cushing around, all the better! I wish Hammer would release a box set of all their originals, instead of sequels and lesser known efforts. I think there’s a Region 2 one, maybe I’ll pick that up.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Ice Spiders

DECEMBER 5, 2007

GENRE: CRAP, MAD SCIENTIST, MONSTER
SOURCE: DVD (STORE RENTAL)

Had I known that Ice Spiders was a goddamned Sci-Fi original movie, I wouldn’t have rented it. Granted, at some point I will run out of horror movies to watch if I keep this up, so I can’t exactly be choosy, but for the love of God, 99% of all Sci-Fi movies are the exact same goddamn thing anyway. And all the clues were there: rated R for “Creature violence” and nothing else (even a few damns and hells will get you a language note), a team of military guys figuring into the plot, and a running time that is just shy of 90 minutes. So I have only myself to blame, as it's only when they break out of this mold that they occasionally make something that is worth my while (like Headless Horseman, a film that I actually thought WASN'T a Sci-Fi original, since it was actually a lot of fun, but then I was (pretty rudely) corrected by my old pal Anonymous).

Still, I can’t help but be a little curious about a film that has not one, not two, but THREE Melrose Place alums in it. Patrick Muldoon (some guy that fucked Jane, if memory serves), Vanessa Williams (Rhonda: the first cast member to leave, if memory serves), and Thomas Calabro (Michael: the only cast member to remain with the show from pilot to finale, if memory serves) are all here, though Calabro and Muldoon don’t share any scenes together. Any one episode of Melrose was vastly more entertaining than this (except for maybe the ones when it first started, when everyone liked each other. Show got way more awesome once they all started fucking and/or killing one another), so it’s a shame they couldn’t bring some of its charm along. Nor can Muldoon, who was probably cast for the Starship Troopers connection more than anything else (his attempts at playing a burnout ski bum are atrocious and distracting), can’t be bothered to do anything as awesome as he did in that film (namely, getting his fucking brain sucked out).

The CG is occasionally decent; which leads me to believe that perhaps a few different FX houses worked on it, some clearly more concerned with the quality of their work than others. Here’s a few examples:

Not too bad at all.

Meh.

Are you fucking kidding me?

And once again, we have a shitty horror movie set at a ski resort. It is simply amazing how no one can manage to wring one iota of suspense when combining something as usually upsetting as a monster or a killer, in this case giant spiders (especially giant spiders that are still sort of tiny – it’s not like they are big enough to knock over skyscrapers), with skiing (one of the most dangerous sports ever when you think about it), but Ice Spiders joins Shredder and Iced in the bottom of the barrel. There’s an occasional moment of fun, such as when one moron skier plows directly into a spider that’s just finished eating a guy, but it’s nowhere near enough to save it from the tedium, horrible acting, laughable CG, annoying characters, etc.

Plus, they don’t even take advantage of something that I would think would be an obvious set piece. Skiers, shockingly enough, wear ski boots. Anyone who has ever skied knows what walking is like with these goddamn things on. So do they have a scene where a guy tries to run but is forced to do that weird stilted thing you call walking when you have the damn boots on? Nope. In fact, everyone seems to be wearing regular footwear, as they run constantly without any sort of problem. Dumbasses.

In all fairness, I would like to point out that this scene almost elevated the movie out of “Crap”. I must admit, I have never before seen someone wield a trophy in order to attack a badly composited spider. They don’t call them Sci-Fi “originals” for nothing I guess!

Also, the DVD is in 5.1 but all the sound is compressed into the front left and right. The surrounds don’t do shit. There’s a scene with a lot of machine gun fire and it sounds like it’s coming out of headphones. Fuck you movie, if you can’t even deliver that much.

For no reason I’d like to point out that yesterday’s movie (Ring Around The Rosie) had a trailer for Hostel and today’s movie has a trailer for Hostel 2. Everything is connected!!!

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Ring Around The Rosie

DECEMBER 4, 2007

GENRE: CRAP, GHOST (?)
SOURCE: DVD (STORE RENTAL)

Scorsese. Spielberg. Scott (both Tony and Ridley). Stone. And hell, why not: Sonnenfeld. Not only do many of our most revered modern directors apparently have names that begin with the letter "S", but they also all, at one point, put Tom Sizemore in their high profile films. How does a guy go from working with some of the greats to starring in a total piece of shit like Ring Around The Rosie (directed by the non-S Rubi Zack)? Oh, right. Drugs and hookers. Fuck the “this is your brain on drugs” ads, I think the youth of today should just watch Saving Private Ryan and this goddamn thing (or worst, Bottom Feeder) back to back so they can see how truly fucked up their life can become.

At least Bottom Feeder had the good sense to attempt to be fun, and actually include something, you know, HAPPENING every now and then. Rosie does not follow suit. Instead, we have the Jeepers Creepers girl walk around a house getting scared at just about everything, falling down a lot, getting leered at by Sizemore, engaging in uncomfortably close behavior with her sister (there were at least three instances where I thought for sure they were about to start making out), and getting scared at other things. Ironically, I thought the film was going turn out to be a gem, as she begins seeing things and getting spooked almost immediately after arriving at the requisite “inherited old house”, but as anyone else unfortunate enough to have seen this thing already knows, the movie basically peaks at that point, roughly 15 minutes into the film.

I guess when you can’t afford Oliver Hudson you just get this guy?

For the next hour, nothing else happens of note. Literally. Sizemore teaches her how to ride a horse in the film’s biggest action sequence. Then, finally, with about 10 minutes to go, Sizemore suddenly tries to rape the two girls, one of them dies, and then Jeepers girl’s douchebag-y boyfriend shows up and provides a twist ending that is not only stupid but also fails to resolve the film’s central storyline. Some kind souls on the IMDb posted some theories, I just read the first and accepted it as canon just so I wouldn’t have to think about the movie anymore. Let’s just say the movie is a ripoff of A Tale of Two Sisters (the review is linked, but don’t bother reading it, all it says is “I have no idea what I just saw, but I liked it.” I was really lazy that day).

Shockingly, there are FIVE credited writers on this goddamn thing. I think that’s a record for a non Bruckheimer production. I wonder which of them came up with the scene where the douchebag drags a dead deer off the road, or the scene where a bunch of postcards and photos fly around a room for no reason. Was it in the script that two sisters who look a lot alike as children would grow up to look as un-alike as any two women in the entire world possibly can? And who among the five decided that it would be easier to tape a "D" over the "C" in "Candyland" rather than get permission to show it in their shitty movie?

Oh, Sizemore. *shakes head sadly*

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...