Non Canon Review: Friday The 13th: The Final Chapter (1984)

MARCH 14, 2008

GENRE: SLASHER
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (REVIVAL SCREENING)

For some reason I started with part 4 for my two favorite horror franchises. Halloween 4 and Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter were my introductions to Michael Myers and Jason Voorhees, respectively, and both remain my 2nd favorite entries in the series (with Jason Lives being my favorite Friday). I saw it when I was like 6 or 7, and over the next couple weeks my mom rented V (New Beginning) and VI (Jason Lives), before announcing that she was sick of them. It would be a couple years before I saw the others (I think 3 was the last I got around to seeing, when I was like 14), thanks to friends and cable TV.

Final Chapter was also the first (and 2nd last) horror movie that ever scared me to the point where I had to turn it off. I was like 10 or so, up in Maine, where we “camp” in the summer (by “camp” I mean we have a fully functioning RV in a well lit and highly populated summer campground), and my parents had gone out to dinner or something, leaving me alone in the RV (NO they weren’t being negligent, our honorary relatives “camped” right next door and were home, plus I think my older sister was around), which had a TV/VCR. I put on the film, and by the time poor Teddy got stabbed through the projector screen, I was too freaked and had to shut the movie off until they got back (the fact that I slept outside of the RV, in a tent very much like the one the ill-fated Rob has in the film, didn’t help much).

(For the record, the other one was Halloween 5 – which I tried to watch when I was home alone at the age of 12, ON HALLOWEEN. I got up to the barn scene.)

Part of why 4 has endeared is that it was the last of the series to have any real ties to the others (other than the Tommy Jarvis character, introduced here via Corey Feldman). Parts 1-4 tell a sort of complete story of Jason’s origin, and the endings to all 3 sequels have thematic ties to the original. Also, 2-4 take place over the course of a few days; after this film, the timeline is pretty much the most convoluted in any franchise, including James Bond (if you go by this film’s claim that the first movie took place in 1979, and factor in the “it’s been 5 (or 10, or whatever) years” statements that occur in many of the sequels (which were all filmed no more than a year after the previous one), then part VIII would take place in the early 2000s). There is a minor plot hole with this set up (Rob has all of these clippings and research about Jason, due to the fact he killed his sister – but she would have only died about 2 days ago. Can’t he wait until she’s buried before hitting up the library and going on a revenge mission?), but otherwise it works OK enough. It’s nice to know that at one point they were at least trying (anyone who can figure out how Jason went from a tiny boy in New York to Hell, then to Space, and finally back to Springwood is certainly welcome to explain here).

This is also one of the few films in the series to feature actors you may have actually seen in something else. Other than Feldman, the big name here is Crispin Glover, who stars in the series’ most famous non-kill scene (his ridiculous dance). But Bruce Mahler from the Police Academy movies also shows up as Axl, the horny morgue attendant, and Lawrence Monoson appeared in the “not as bad as it could have been” Starship Troopers sequel (and according to the commentary, his casting was actually a demand from the studio). And the guy who plays Rob showed up in an episode of House. Plus, the no-names are better actors than average.

In addition to the casting, the film even has some actual production value. The morgue scenes are a nice change of pace from the “how many goddamn cabins ARE there on Crystal Lake” feeling you get from the other movies, and the opening scene has helicopters, ambulances, police cars... it’s great.

And Tommy plays Zaxxon. Badly.

Like all movies I re-watch at the New Beverly, there’s a lot of stuff I never realized how silly it was. Like the newspaper claiming “MASS MURDERER’S BODY MISSING” as a headline (and ignored by the reader), or the idea of a young kid taking a very odd stranger up to his room with little suspicion from his mother. I also lost count of how many times the one girl says “Paul?” as she goes for a skinny dip (and how does her inflatable raft remain inflated when Jason spears the goddamn thing?), because the entire theater began laughing every time she asked again. Look, if it’s him, he’ll answer! Also, possibly the dumbest “chase” moment in the entire series occurs here – Trish goes to one door, but there’s a body on the ground. Then she goes to another door, and again, a body. So what does she do? Smashes a window and climbs out. Is there some religion that prevents followers from stepping over or around a corpse?

This movie also began implementing Jason’s teleportation abilities. Most obvious is when he kills Jimmy, the twin, and then Teddy in rapid succession. Jimmy is killed in the kitchen, some 10 feet away from Teddy. Teddy doesn’t hear his screams or anything, but that’s sort of par for these movies. But then it gets weird. The twin is then killed by Jason on the 2nd floor (from outside no less), and then Jason somehow gets back downstairs and behind Teddy to turn off the projector, then behind him AGAIN (Teddy spins around) to stab him through the throat. What?

Still, it’s one of the best sequels, easily. Savini’s gore effects are amazing, the kills come along at a nice clip without becoming a parody (like in part 5), and you’ll even like a few of the characters. Also, the fact that it started to “open up” the series (with an adult for once, plus a kid) was a good thing, because it made the movie feel “bigger”. And damned if that one dude getting stabbed through the groin (after sort of cheating on his girlfriend) doesn’t make me wince. Well played, Joe Zito!

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Final Exam (1981)

MARCH 14, 2008

GENRE: SLASHER
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (REVIVAL SCREENING)

One of my favorite things on the internet has to be the “mash up” of two Nickelback songs. If you play “How You Remind Me” and “Photograph” (or whatever the hell their other big hit was) at the same time, you’ll see they have the exact same structure, with the chorus kicking in at precisely the same time (accompanied by a “duh duh duh DUH DUH DUH!” buildup) and clock in at just about the exact same length (one is like a second longer I think). I thought about that while watching Final Exam, because I am pretty sure one could superimpose the film over Halloween and come away with a similar result.

Ignoring quality, the films are curiously similar. Both have one kill at the very beginning, and then about an hour of no kills. Both have a scene of the (very bookish) girl seeing the killer outside her window, mixed with scenes of her talking to her very slutty friends. The score is similar. The finale finds the killer falling over a railing. Etc, etc. Of course, the difference is, Final Exam isn’t QUITE the masterpiece the ‘Ween is, but it’s still a fun enough little forgotten slasher that doesn’t deserve its current status (i.e. unreleased on DVD). If fucking Prom Night got like 3 DVD releases, there’s no reason why Exam can’t get one.

The most hilarious thing about the movie is that the killer makes Michael Myers look like the most complex killer in slasher history. While his motives were unclear, he at least had a name and a mask. This guy doesn’t even have that. He’s just some guy with an Anton Chigurh haircut. No mask, no name, and certainly no motive. Even He Knows You're Alone gave its vague killer a backstory with the film’s final line. In a way it’s kind of admirable that at the time the film came out (1981), when everyone was trying to make its own memorable slasher, the Final Exam team couldn’t even be bothered to give the guy a paper bag.

The movie also hates chemistry. During the “character development” phase of the film, we are treated to at least 12 slams on chemistry’s purpose in real life, to the point where it’s almost mean-spirited. My guess? Screenwriter/director Jimmy Huston failed chemistry in college or high school, and wrote a slasher film around it, and was so focused on chemistry bashing that he forgot to provide his killer with any sort of... well, anything.

Our heroes are ripe for loving mockery. The girl (Cecile Bagdadi) never stops smiling (it’s the creepiest thing in the movie), and our hero (Joel S. Rice) is named Radish. He’s sort of like Ian Sera in Pieces, and I kept hoping a kung fu professor would kick his ass. There is a hilarious scene where he’s at the girl’s door, telling her to be careful and all that. She CLEARLY wants him to come in and fuck her to sleep, but he’s oblivious. So he walks away, and then..... he knocks at her OTHER door! Yes, her dorm room has two doors for some goddamn reason. And he again reiterates his desire for her to be careful while ignoring her desire for some Radish love. It’s the first time I’ve felt sexual frustration for another (not to mention fictional) person.

Well he gets his fucking head smashed thru a door and neck cut by the glass, so it evens out.

It’s moments like this that make this movie a must for “big crowd” viewing. On a surface level, it’s a boring fucking movie (in Halloween, they constantly had Michael watching from the shadows; but here it’s like the killer is an after-thought), but there are so many “what the FUCK?” moments of absurdity that it seems a lot better than it actually is (or would be if you were watching it alone). Por ejemplo, one of the girls is fucking her professor. That’s fine, but she has a FRAMED PHOTO of the guy on her desk! Discretion? Why bother? There’s also a fraternity initiation scene (lifted verbatim in Scream 2), except with the added “bonus” of a cop pouring whiskey into the kid’s underwear.

But that doesn’t even come CLOSE to the levels of homoeroticism that are displayed by the film’s resident bully character: Wild Man. At one point he literally spoons a dude (the aforementioned frat pledge) and begins kissing his ear as the other guys strip him down to his underwear. It’s amazing. There’s also a subplot about pills that never quite makes sense (we’re led to believe that they are steroids, but there are like 50 different sizes and colors).

In my notes I have written down “Two lousy people!”, but I have no idea what this means.

In the annals of early 80s slashers, it’s both one of the worst (worst killer ever, for certain) and one of the best (due to its unparalleled levels of unintentional comedy). If you still have a functioning VHS, check it out, but only with friends. I think watching this movie alone might be detrimental to the health of both you and radishes.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Let's Scare Jessica To Death (1971)

MARCH 13, 2008

GENRE: PSYCHOLOGICAL, VAMPIRE (?)
SOURCE: DVD (STORE RENTAL)

My biggest regret as a human being is that I wasn’t born in 1959 or so. I would have loved to have been a kid in the 70s, getting to experience pretty much all of my favorite horror films when they were first released, instead of 10-20 years later, after many of them had their impact blunted by ripoffs (and now remakes). Such is the case with Let’s Scare Jessica To Death, a film I probably would have loved had I hadn’t seen too many other “A woman is seeing things... or IS SHE?” movies (that were probably inspired by Jessica to boot).

It’s still a good flick though, definitely one to watch late at night with the lights off, instead of during the bright daylight like I did (this is due to the fact that at night I wanted to play Condemned 2, a game so dark I literally can’t see it when there’s the slightest bit of glare in the room). After April Fool’s Day, the title had me expecting that the movie was all just a prank (as in “Hey Guys, Let’s Scare...”), so the fact that it was indeed a legit supernatural horror film (albeit yet another slow burn of one – I REALLY need to watch a nonstop gorefest before this week is through) was a nice surprise, and not without some well-appreciated creepiness. There’s a scene late in the film where the heroine’s husband walks into a general store, and then 4 or 5 of the creepy townsfolk slowly follow him in and close the door – foreboding and creepy as hell!

Unfortunately I really couldn’t stand the lead actress, Zohra Lampert. She was supposed to be a former mental patient (which they never quite explain), so some of her awkwardness could be chalked up to that, but Lampert went above and beyond what is required for such a character, to the point where I wished she would stop speaking. Also, her character (and to be fair, her husband and his buddy) are slow as molasses – they see a century old picture with a woman who is CLEARLY the strange girl they allow to stay with them, and yet it takes almost the entire movie before anyone makes the connection.

However, the aforementioned strange girl (Gretchen Corbett) looks a lot like Ginny from the Harry Potter movies, so there’s something.

The film flies by as well. It’s only 88 minutes long, but it felt even shorter. And since there is very little “action” until the final 5 minutes or so, this is even more impressive. In fact, the film definitely could have used a few more minutes in the narrative to explain some of the under-developed plot threads (in addition to never explaining Lampert’s past mental problems, her husband seems to fall in love with Corbett without ever spending as much as a single scene alone with her).

As for the “Vampire” tag – I’m not sure. Corbett is alluded to being a vampire, and neck-biting seems to be the modus operandi for any of the film’s killings, but the finale, in which Lampert escapes the town, finds all of the pursuing townsfolk acting more like your standard zombies. In fact, the movie very much reminds me of the “sort of zombie” Messiah Of Evil (which came after Jessica), so any fan of that film will probably enjoy this one.

Strangely, the film has a PG-13 rating, despite being released some 13 years before that rating was invented. I am guessing it got a PG back in the day and has been re-rated due to some creepiness (and some all-too-brief lesbian undertones), but since Paramount couldn’t be bothered to include even a trailer for the damn thing on the DVD, answers to such questions won’t be found here (and the film’s Wiki/IMDb pages are no help either, though the Wiki does reveal that the film was originally written as a comedy!). They DID however change the box art, and thus now the movie’s title is in the Trajan font. Add it to the list, Kirby!

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Underbelly (2008)

MARCH 12, 2008

GENRE: INDEPENDENT, THRILLER, WEIRD
SOURCE: DVD (SCREENER)

Sometimes a movie I watch for the day is sort of contrarian to the original idea of Horror Movie A Day, which is to basically “talk” about a horror movie, albeit in internet form (as opposed to a typical review). But a movie like Underbelly doesn’t quite fit the bill, because it’s not out yet. It’s just now gearing up for a festival run, and as far as I know, has no distribution as of yet. Hopefully that’ll change soon so some of you folks can check it out with relative ease.

On the flipside, the movie is actually ideal for this site’s intentions, because the film doesn’t explain or spell out a lot of its horror elements. It is open to interpretation, so everyone will probably come away with a different idea of what happened at the end and want to post their thoughts.

As this is an independent film, the actors are hardly well-known. However, they are all surprisingly good. More surprising, none of them share the same last name as the director. Likewise, the production value is good across the board – then again I’ve said before that it would actually take effort to make Texas look bad on film; it’s the most photogenic state there is! While it’s a small film, there are a lot of different locations, allowing the film to seem bigger than it is in actuality.

I say that because this is a rather slow film, with very little action. Like The Lost, it’s bookended by some top notch thriller stuff, but the middle can get a bit slow (not nearly as crippling as The Lost though). Writer/director Matt Cade made the interesting choice to follow not the “hero” of the film, but the villains instead (the film centers on 2 disappearances, the hero’s wife and the villain’s sister). They are a largely unpleasant lot, but they also have a dark sense of humor that permeates their actions. This presents some tonal problems (it’s kind of hard to laugh at a guy’s ironic joke after he’s just raped someone) but the unique point of view is enough to keep these matters from permanently damaging the film.

Aside from that, I really dug the movie’s strange tone. There are occasional musical numbers, and a full minute of the film is given to a guy beating the shit out of a cell phone (which he’s not very good at, after like 12 stomps the damn thing still looks intact). There’s also a gonzo scene where the villains visit the site of David Koresh’s cult compound and the leader waxes philosophic about his admiration for the group, while an acoustic ballad with reversed lyrics plays over the soundtrack (I plan to utilize the PS3’s handy “play sound while in reverse” function and see what the guy is saying). Fans of David Lynch will appreciate these moments.

Speaking of the music, it’s great. There are songs and score, all seemingly done by the same group of folks, and I enjoyed them all. There are a few songs that remind me of The Refreshments/Peacemakers, which is always a good thing as far as I’m concerned. If you’ve never heard the Freshies’ "The Bottle And Fresh Horses", you’re missing out on some grade A southern flavored pop rock.

Also the composer/star of the movie is a guy named Fritz Beer. That’s the best name ever.

Like I said before, the horror elements are left largely to interpretation. Discussing them would be spoiler-ish (I don’t do spoilers when it’s likely not a single reader has seen the film yet), but suffice to say that those who like everything spelled out (or even generally explained) will be frustrated by the film’s lack of answers. I didn’t mind not understanding them all, but I DO wish there was a little more tension to the plot, which would make these scenes more effective. The disappearance of the two women seems largely forgotten for a while, to the point where I was wondering if that plotline was merely a macguffin – but the fact that the climax revolves around the conclusion to this story thread nullified that as an option. Hell, one character disappeared for so long I forgot what he looked like. But, it’s rare I see a movie (especially now, when I’m watching so goddamn many) that I am still thinking about a few hours later, replaying scenes in my head to try to see if information I got later in the film gave them new meaning. Hell, I may even watch it again!

Like Return In Red, this is the type of movie where you gotta be patient and accept that it’s not going to have a big Bruckheimer-ian climax. And like that film, Underbelly more or less overcomes the limitations of a REAL independent production (I love when I look at Boxofficemojo and they point out the record breaking figures for “independent” films like Rob Zombie’s Halloween) and turns out pretty good. It’s not for everyone (what movie is?), but I enjoyed it overall, and for once it’s nice to see an indie where none of the problems are technical and/or acting related. If it’s playing at a festival near you, check it out (movie's website is HERE).

And thank CHRIST, it’s actually an anamorphic DVD! So for those keeping score – DVD that was possibly burnt on the director’s home computer – anamorphic; Multi-million dollar movie from a major studio starring Shannyn Sossamon – non anamorphic. Fuck you, Lionsgate!

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

April Fool's Day (2008)

MARCH 11, 2008

GENRE: CRAP, HOLIDAY, SLASHER
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION) (for now)

Oh, April Fool’s Day, you fucking worthless excuse for a movie... why oh why do you exist?

Excluding cynicism, there are two reasons to remake a film: 1. To improve on a concept that was botched for whatever reason (studio interference, poor acting, whatever) in the original version, or 2. To introduce a once popular film to a new generation. Well, April Fool’s Day was NOT a popular film, and it’s only 20 years old, so the children of the teens that saw it in theaters when it was released are probably like 7 or so for the most part, and thus won’t really care. So does the film improve on the concept of the original?

(Note - spoilers ahead, but you'd almost have to TRY to not figure out the ending 12 seconds into the film).

No. Not even close. The original is actually a lot of fun, but it’s sort of spoiled by the ending, which reveals everything was a joke and no one’s really dead. So a remake would correct that, and have everyone REALLY die this time (or at least use AFD’s original ending and have the prank be revealed, and then suddenly a real killer shows up), right? Sadly, no one involved with this movie was that intelligent, apparently. In fact, they take their stupidity a step further – this movie actually has NOTHING in common with the original (different story, different characters, even a different setting entirely) EXCEPT for the idiotic ending!

Yes, once again, it’s all a prank. They try to sell one or two of the kills as real (one of them is an actress and thus has access to an entire Savini-style workshop, I guess), but for the most part they don’t even try. The main girl (Taylor Cole) is the only one who ever “sees” the murders, and even then she is always just stumbling on their bodies moments after they are “killed”. Maybe if you’ve never seen a horror movie in your life you will be fooled, but it’s so blatantly obvious that the killings are staged that I honestly thought for a long time that the twist would be that the killings WERE real this time around, and that the Butcher Brothers (squandering all of their promise from The Hamiltons, which wasn't much to begin with) were pulling a meta-joke on the audience – making real killings seem fake so the jaded audience familiar with the original would be surprised. Even the equally abysmal Catacombs did a better job at presenting a fake killer.

Unlike the original, this one isn’t very fun either. The characters are all completely unlikable (only Scout Taylor-Compton, queen of the unnecessary remakes, plays someone who isn’t a snooty prick) and they aren’t amusing. The original’s group had a nice repartee; I believed they were friends. These assholes don’t even seem to like each other, and while some of the girls are ridiculously hot (Cole looks like the scientifically amazing offspring of Chrarisma Carpenter and Evangeline Lilly, thus making her one of the hottest women in the world) the fact that we don’t even get to see any of them actually die just makes the movie WORSE.

Actually, there is one small exception – the character of David, played by Hamiltons’ Samuel Child. He’s an idiot running for Senate, so this results in a few Republican jokes. He also delivers one of the film’s two memorable lines when he drunkenly tells a guy “I’ll have you raped by a wizard!” for some goddamn reason.

The other good line comes from Blaine, our would-be hero, who’s also the most insufferable of them all. Most of the time he’s just being a jerk, but he takes a quick break from that winning character trait in order to deliver what HAS to be a meta line about the film itself. Scout’s character (the actress) is appearing in a bad slasher movie, and he comments “who cares about that movie - it doesn't even have any big stars!” Brilliant.

Let’s see, what else sucked? Well there’s the 25 minute prologue* that should have been 5 (it’s a year earlier and some of the characters are planning a prank. We know someone’s going to die – get the fuck to it!), nonsensical plot (the whole town seems to be in on the prank), a lengthy “Inside Edition” type news show with the fakest screen graphics I’ve ever seen in a film (note the hilarious “sports scores”) that does absolutely nothing but hint at the film’s obvious plot holes that result from some rewriting/post production editing, etc.

Yes, in this news scene one of the characters (another guy from Hamiltons) has written a book about the prank gone wrong, and the reporter cryptically notes that it’s not the first time he’s been involved with a high profile murder. It’s never mentioned again. Later, the heroine is explaining why everyone is guilty of something, and mentions that David couldn’t keep his dick in his pants, which caused a problem of some sort. No idea what the fuck she was talking about there. It’s later alleged that he had an affair with the dead girl (presumably BEFORE she died), but again – it seemingly has no bearing on anything. One only needs to read the confusing screenplay credits to know that this was a script that went through a lot of hands (it’s “based on a screenplay by” both the original film’s writer AND the Butcher Brothers, and yet written by someone else entirely), and boy does it show.

Look how hot this girl is, and I’m STILL calling the movie “Crap”!

All in all, there is absolutely no reason anyone should watch this movie. The “unrated” label means absolutely nothing – this film is BARELY worthy of a PG-13 (hell, they probably got a PG from the MPAA and were embarrassed by it), there is no actual gore or nudity, the twist is obvious (though to be fair they add a little extra bit of business to it, however it’s of no real consequence), the characters suck, and they don’t even bother to give the killer a mask. Everyone was surprised that it didn’t go into theaters – having seen it, it’s more amazing that the studio ever even considered it. Even Lionsgate would probably pass on this shit. This is easily the worst remake of the current crop (and no, I haven’t forgotten Scout’s other one) – I have to go back to Psycho 98 to think of one so utterly worthless.

What say you?

*I should note that this may be the first movie tagline (“She has a killer party planned”) that only references the film’s prologue – because there is no party at any other point in the movie. Also, saying “she” would pretty much spoil the ending if they were referring to the actual movie, since there are only 3 girls – one dies early on and the other is the one seeing all the murders. Nice work.

PLEASE, GO ON...

The Stuff (1985)

MARCH 10, 2008

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

“Everybody has to eat shaving cream once in a while...”

Every now and then I come across a movie that features a performance that really makes me wonder why it hasn’t been ripped off in scores of other films. Such is the case with Michael Moriarty in Larry Cohen’s The Stuff. He’s sort of like a cross between Fletch and a southern businessman, and almost everything he says is hilarious. He’s completely laid back and dry, and it’s definitely a highlight of his career (sadly, the next year he was in Troll, and didn’t get anywhere near as many moments to shine as he does here). It’s seriously worth your time to watch the film just for his scenes.

Luckily, the rest of the movie ain’t too shabby either, however I should note that it’s a bit oddly paced – the stuff is discovered in the film’s very first shot, and our requisite young hero discovers that the stuff is “bad” less than 3 minutes later, but then it’s sort of drawn out for a while. Granted, there isn’t a hell of a lot of story here, and Cohen luckily doesn’t try to explain where it came from or any possibly crippling thing like that, but it still could have used maybe a tiny bit of restructuring.

Otherwise it’s a blast. Moriarty is hilarious, Garrett Morris shows up as a chocolate chip cookie magnate, and Danny Aiello and Paul Sorvino (between this and Repo, this guy needs to make more genre films!) turn in rare non-mobster roles. The whole movie (particularly the radio station scenes) has an improvisational feel which isn’t exactly what you expect in what is essentially a monster movie. There is a wealth of great moments throughout the film; my favorite has to be the stock boy at the grocery store who dives over a pile of The Stuff in order to save it from the hero, who is destroying it all. I also like the rather odd notion that the kid hero just teams up with this total stranger (Moriarty) without any question.

And young Johnny Depp shows up!*

Also the music during the scene where they see The Stuff “swamp” sounds exactly like the Super Mario Bros “dungeon” music (Dun dun dunnnnnnnnnnn, dundundundun dun DUN DUN). And the effects are pretty good for the time – it’s mostly stop motion stuff (by the late, great Dave Allen) matted with live action footage. For a low budget, it’s impressive, though naysayers will probably balk at the poor compositing (which Cohen acknowledges on the commentary).

Speaking of the commentary, Cohen’s an interesting guy, but the track has a lot of gaps; it’s almost like he’s afraid to talk over the dialogue at times. I wish Moriarty or someone had joined him, as the film is ripe for some good natured ribbing that would likely occur with a couple participants. It also seems to have been recorded over a few sessions, that or Cohen is senile; he constantly refers to “a picture I did called Q: The Winged Serpent” as if he hadn’t mentioned it a dozen times already. Sadly, it’s the only extra of note.

Your enjoyment of the film will likely depend on how much you like Moriarty, since he carries the film, and if you don’t enjoy his style of humor he will probably just annoy the shit out of you. Your loss.

What say you?

*No, that’s not him – but the film does have a Depp connection: the room where the Stuff attacks our heroes is the same room where Tina was killed in Nightmare on Elm St.

PLEASE, GO ON...

The Lost (2006)

MARCH 9, 2008

GENRE: HORROR?, PSYCHOLOGICAL
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

A while back I watched The Girl Next Door, which was a pretty good movie based on a book by Jack Ketchum, whom I was not familiar with. It wasn’t a masterpiece or anything, but it got me more interested in seeing The Lost, which was also based on one of his novels, but directed by Chris Sivertson, who impressed me with his work in the ludicrous and yet totally endearing I Know Who Killed Me (which was actually shot long after The Lost, which is just now hitting DVD). And he repeats continuously that the books have been faithfully adapted into films, so I think it’s safe to say that after watching both films: the guy needs to branch out a bit.

Both are based on true stories (though Lost seems to stray further from reality than Girl did with its respective true event), and both involve mostly unlikable people doing horrible things. Here it’s a guy named Ray Pye, who looks like any hipster douchebag you might encounter at Amoeba Records in Hollywood. There was scarcely a moment in the film where I didn’t want to just punch him in the fucking neck and wipe his stupid self-painted “beauty mark” off his face. And that’s kind of a problem, because there isn’t really anyone else to identify/sympathize with, other than few supporting characters who are only given 2 or 3 scenes each and thus stink of “They were more important in the book”. No, the entire two hour film is basically Ray being a douchebag, drinking, doing drugs, and fucking women.

On that note, I should point out that this film has more nudity than any non-pornographic film I can recall, including a montage of Ray bedding at least two girls (the footage is all sped up and Avid farted to death so it’s hard to tell, there might be a third in there). And since there was nothing really “horror” going on (that’s 3 of my last 4 films! I need to narrow my standards), I began wondering if maybe there was a guy doing Porno Movie A Day, and if he was maybe watching what he thought was a porno but was really a horror movie. I also wondered how chafed he was. “I’ve been doing PMAD for 6 months now, and I haven’t missed a day... it really stings down there.”

(Note – this is what happens when a movie is more or less treading water for over an hour – the viewer begins wondering about the movie watching/masturbating habits of non-existent people.)

Anyway, the last 15 minutes finally include some truly gripping psychological horror, as Ray kidnaps a few girls and tortures them. But until that point, the only scary thing about the movie was the sight of Ed Lauter in bed with a girl at LEAST 40 years younger than him. Gah! And it’s a shame, because if they had the good sense to shave at LEAST 20 minutes or so out of the middle of the film, they could have had a really great movie here.

Luckily, Sivertson assembled a great cast. In addition to the always welcome (just not in bed with a girl who could play his granddaughter) Lauter, we get the great Michael Bowen (from, ironically, Lost), Richard Riehle, Dee Wallace, and the blond from Black Xmas. Also, the film “introduces” Robin Sydney, which shows how long it’s been sitting on the shelf, since she’s been in at least a couple movies I reviewed months ago.

There’s also some nice black humor. Late in the film, someone we thought was dead suddenly begins trying to escape. “The fuck is she still alive for?” Pye yells. “I already fucking shot her!” The guy playing Pye is actually a good actor (at least I hope he’s acting, if he’s really like that then... Christ), and there’s a few instances like this in the film that help keep the film afloat. Then again, for every line like that, there’s one like “It can’t be a wrong number, not at this hour,” in regards to a late night phone call. I’m sorry – it’s late, lots of folks are either drunk or their contacts are starting to dry out, plus it’s dark. Wouldn’t it be MORE likely to have a wrong number than during the day?

The disc’s extras are largely worthless. There are some outtakes, many of which are just more of the same type of stuff that there is too much of in the movie to begin with, though there’s a pretty funny beer “buying” scene that’s worth a look. The scenes are presented entirely out of order in relation to the film, but it’s not too hard to figure out where most of them would go. There’s also some audition footage (an extra I never quite understood the appeal of – I’d rather see the actors who DIDN’T make the cut) and a storyboard thing.

The worst is the commentary track though. It’s Ketchum and another novelist named Monica O’Rourke. Over 119 minutes, they discuss things that pertain to this actual book/movie for maybe 10. The rest of the time, O’Rourke is simply asking Ketchum about his other books, what he’s working on, what he was like as a kid, where he was on 9/11, etc. I swear to Christ I thought she was eventually just going to ask him what he was having for dinner or if he saw the game last night. And while he drones on (the guy is certainly not against talking about himself), she says “Right” over and over and then he punctuates every anecdote with “Yeah.... yeah...” I’m sorry, but when I watch an audio commentary for a film, I want to learn more about the film (or if it’s a Kevin Smith film, lots of jokes at the expense of Ben Affleck). And certainly there was a wealth of material he could have drawn from – the real life case, changes from the book, how he felt about casting decisions vs how he pictured the characters in his mind, etc. but he sadly barely touches on any of that, resulting in a track that should have been presented as a highly edited interview with Ketchum. But hey, if you ever wondered what kind of car Monica O’Rourke drove when she was 19, this is the commentary for you!

All in all, a decent film that could have used another edit or two, coupled with extras that only die hard fans of the film (or would-be Ketchum biographers) would enjoy. Girl Next Door was much more enjoyable and much more gut wrenching – even though the violence here is actually more disturbing out of context, the film’s endless middle section coupled with the fact that none of these people are likable (at least the kids in Girl had some moments of innocence) sort of counteracts the ending’s intention – it’s supposed to shock, but by that time I was actually just “excited” something different was happening.

(I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that I am in the minority here – this film has cleaned up at festivals and won acclaim from several critics/sites, including Bloody Disgusting. And again, it’s not a BAD film, just a missed opportunity to be a great one).

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Nightmare Detective (2006)

MARCH 8, 2008

GENRE: ASIAN, SERIAL KILLER
SOURCE: DVD (STORE RENTAL)

If there’s one thing I hate about movies with dream sequences, it’s that the dreams are always designed to try to be passed off as real, so that it’s a surprise when they wake up. But if you think about it, this means that the people are having the most mundane fucking dreams in human history. When I dream, absolutely nothing about it makes any logical sense, which is kind of the appeal of dreams. So it’s nice to see a movie like Nightmare Detective (aka Akumu Tantei), because they are not crippled by this filmmaking cliché, and thus the dream sequences actually resemble real dreams.

For example, one guy is killed in a room that is jampacked with bicycles. There’s at least a thousand of the damn things all around him, piled together. THAT’S a dream image! And then he’s killed by a lightning quick monster straight out of Clive Barker’s Tortured Souls toy line.

That kill is one of the many gore/makeup highlights in the film, all of which are highly impressive and more than make up for the fact that the movie doesn’t make a lick of sense, even by J-horror standards. Couldn’t tell you what was going on at any point during the last half hour, but I was still highly entertained and impressed by the technical side of things.

My only complaint is that director Shinya Tsukamoto films everything tight. This is fine for the most part, but some scenes it makes it impossible to tell what is going on. There’s a scene in the climax where the title character saves the heroine, and I haven’t the slightest clue where he even came from! I also can’t tell what exactly he is doing to help. Zoom out, brother Tsukamoto!

Speaking of the “title character”, I’m surprised how little he is in the film during the first half. Most of the time we are with Keiko (the beautiful Hitomi). She’s kind of interesting, but not as much as a guy who can enter nightmares (he doesn’t really do any detective work either, but that’s OK). Hopefully in the sequel (which is already complete) he takes more of a central role throughout the film, not just the climax (incidentally, earlier today I watched Dr. No, aka the first Bond film, in which the character of Dr. No only shows up in the final 20 minutes).

I also got a few laughs during the film. The opening seems to be making fun of other J-horror movies (a guy has a nightmare about long black/wet hair, and it is dismissed), and there’s a scene where the Detective attempts to enter a dream by doing this sort of hypnotic suggestion thing. “There’s a polar bear on a bridge, eating a bowl of grasshoppers,” he says to the sleeping guy. He then adds: “It’s annoying.” Hahahaha. I dunno, I think if I saw a polar bear eating a bowl of ANYTHING on a bridge, annoyance wouldn’t be my first feeling. I’d probably just make Lost references (and thus annoy everyone around me).

Like just about all Asian horror films, it’s about 10 minutes too long (seriously guys, do you have some sort of phobia for 95-ish minute running times?), but it’s quite visually stunning and pretty original. Definitely recommended.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Premonition (2007)

MARCH 7, 2008

GENRE: PSYCHOLOGICAL, SUPERNATURAL
SOURCE: BLU RAY (STORE RENTAL)

Anyone who’s ever moved cross country (east to west) has probably noticed that they will receive text messages from east coast friends 3 hrs “before” they were sent, due to the time zone difference and small technical... technicalities. Anyway, the first time this happened to me, I thought I had just received a text message from the future. I then got an idea for a movie where a guy gets a “I’m about to die!” message from his girlfriend and has 3 hrs to save her. My twist? She dies because he distracts her during his ‘rescue’ attempt, and had he just left her alone, she’d be fine. I thought of this while watching Premonition, because not only does it have a similar premise, but the ending is also straight out of my vague plot outline.

(NOTE – This review will spoil the ending of the film.)

While the trailers made the film look like a linear sort of Groundhog Day retread, where Sandra Bullock (starting to age, sadly. Why can’t she use whatever Madeline Stowe or Courtney Cox use to look HOTTER as they age??) is told of her husband’s death and then has a week to figure out how to prevent it, it’s really more like Memento. The film takes place over the course of a week (Sunday to Saturday), but the death is on Wednesday, so half the time she is dealing with the loss and the other half she is trying to stop it from occurring at all. And while everyone else seems to be living the week in order, Bullock experiences it on shuffle – Thursday, Monday, Saturday, Sunday, Friday, Tuesday, Wednesday (or something like that). The theme is that as you get older you start losing track of time (yes, this is essentially a filmed version of “All day Wednesday I kept thinking it was Thursday”), and it’s actually pretty solid. Rewatching the film with the commentary, I saw how well it was constructed, and with only minor quibbles with the “time traveling” aspect that would be too difficult to explain here (the short of it – on say, Saturday, her family and friends should have remembered her crazy behavior from Thursday).

Unfortunately, there are two problems. One, despite it’s attempts to make it look like one, it’s not really a horror movie, but a romantic drama with light thriller and psychological elements. Of course, by adding in horror elements, the film would become more ludicrous (a la The Forgotten) so I guess it’s a good thing. And per my rule, IMDb classifies it as horror, and there are a few “only in horror movie” shots, such as when her daughter runs through a glass door and mangles herself badly. There’s also an unintentionally hilarious bit where the husband’s casket falls out of the hearse, and then his disembodied head falls out of the casket. Have you ever seen a head roll around the street in a PG-13 movie (one without Leslie Nielsen anyway)? A+!

The other problem is that Bullock actually causes his death in the first place! In the end, she doesn’t save him, but their renewed love resulted in her getting preggers. That’s nice and all, but it doesn’t change the fact that if she didn’t make him turn his car around on the road, he’d be alive. The themes and point of the film would have been much more meaningful and “awww”-worthy if they had come up with a way to kill the poor sod in a manner that would have occurred even if Bullock wasn’t there at all. Hell, even if she simply called him and his distraction made him forget to look where he was going, it would be fine. But he’s on the side of the road, completely out of danger, and she tells him to do a U turn on a major road. He does, the car stalls, and then he’s hit by a truck that would have simply driven by him had he never moved. Nice work, Sandy!

Still, I actually liked the film. I’m a sucker for sentimentality, and damned if the scenes of the two of them all lovey dovey while Klaus Badelt’s incredibly good (read: perfectly manipulative for folks like me) score plays didn’t make me a bit sad. And I really liked how well the chronology was implemented; once you buy into the sort of fantasy idea that Bullock isn’t REALLY living her days out of order, but that they are simply glorifying the “I don’t know what day it is” feeling people get once their lives become routine, it really works well. The cast is also quite good; Julian McMahon plays a non asshole for once, and he’s actually bearable (I hate Nip/Tuck, and his performance as Doctor Doom is pretty much the bane of all comic book movies). Amber Valletta (who also appeared in the underrated Dead Silence, which was released the same day as this movie) manages to get some sympathy for her ‘other woman’ character, and the great Peter Stormare shows up as a psychiatrist. This is actually a bit manipulative from a casting standpoint – you see Stormare and you automatically begin thinking he’s the “bad guy”; that Bullock’s confusion is a result of him trying out some new drug on her or something. Nope, he’s just a regular shrink. Awesome. I wish he was in it more though, his entire role occurs over a 10 min segment in the middle of the film.

The DVD has a nice collection of extras, and because this was Blu-Ray, I had to watch them all at home (I usually watch my extras at work), making it the first time I have watched a commentary track from my couch in about 3 years or so. The track isn’t particularly exciting, though there’s some nice trivia to learn. The best extra is director Mennan Yapo summarizing the film in sequence (from Sunday to Saturday). Here you can really see how well the supporting cast develops over the course of the week, not to mention how hard it must have been for Bullock to keep track of her character. The deleted scenes are mostly useless, though there’s another one of Bullock’s character smoking, which is significant because how often do you see a non-villain character smoke in a film anymore? Never. Also included is an alternate ending, which was thankfully not used as it makes the film MORE horror-ish, and thus kind of stupid (they don’t show him, but you get the impression that 6 months later he’s suddenly alive again). There’s also a 45 minute doc on real people with premonitions, which I didn’t watch, because, well, come on. I got games to play.

All in all, it’s not going to be a favorite among horror fans, but those who like a nice little character drama with thriller elements should check it out. It’s the type of movie you might be a bit bored/baffled by while watching it, but will stick with you.

And again, you get to see Dr. Doom’s fucking head roll around in the street while his entire family looks on. Amazing.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Last Woman On Earth

MARCH 6, 2008

GENRE: POST-APOCALYPTIC
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 2!!!)

If there’s one thing Roger Corman doesn’t usually skip on, it’s the horror. Plot, acting, sets, all that stuff is usually an after-thought, but there will ALWAYS be a monster, some gore, a few kills... except for Last Woman On Earth. The horror stems from there being only two men and one woman left in the world (note – the other way around could be the plot of a very different and vastly more exciting type of movie), but that’s it. I was expecting maybe an insane monkey man or maybe a fish monster would also survive the apocalypse, but nope.

So what happens in the movie? Uh... nothing. Our survivors have lived because they were underwater at the time the whole world lost oxygen (must have been a pretty slow day for the scuba diving industry). As the title reminds you, there’s only one woman left, but also two guys, so naturally they both fuck her, and then whale on each other (which results in the film’s only bloodshed – a cut on the loser’s face). Granted, this IS Corman, so I wasn’t expecting scenes like the one in The Stand when they go through the tunnel (the after effects of the end of the world are shown via one guy on the ground next to his car, and another car with a dead driver crashing gently into a curb some 5-6 hours after he should have died).

And again, even for Corman, this feels entirely too cheap. Other than those two guys I mentioned, and another random corpse later on, there is literally zero evidence that anything has occurred. The editing is also choppy as hell, and the three survivors barely ever seem really concerned that they are the only ones left. If the recent I Am Legend got anything right, it was this type of stuff – the isolation and just general creepiness associated with an empty world (and based on the vampire effects, I can only assume that film had as big a budget as Corman’s). This movie is more about the “let’s sit around and yell at each other” situations of an apocalypse.

That said, it’s not without its occasional charm. Robert Towne (from the other Corman quickie that this film was filmed back to back with, the similarly 'The'-less Creature From The Haunted Sea) demonstrates an utterly bizarre way of rinsing his eyes – dipping his fingers into a freshly poured glass of Scotch and rubbing his pupils with them. He also fights the other guy over, of all things, oxygen. “Leaves need oxygen!” he shouts, as he grabs the other guy’s shirt and shakes him violently back and forth. Man loves 3rd grade science. Towne’s script also contains a precious few moments of wit – love the bit about “1/3 of the human race.”

Also the broad’s pretty hot, so it’s perfectly understandable that both guys want to nail her, what with all the other women not only dead but totally vanished from the world.

At 71 minutes, it’s a harmless enough timekiller, but the utter lack of, well, HORROR, makes it pretty disappointing. Luckily, per my own made up rule #4 (“Any film classified as horror by the IMDb is eligible”), it’s enough to get me through another day. And since it’s been out for 48 years, I imagine Mill Creek won’t make me take down the review to exert their authority.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

The Monster Maker (1944)

MARCH 5, 2008

GENRE: MAD SCIENTIST
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 2!!!)

Well after the insanity of Repo, anything would probably seem boring today (I should watch my beloved Armageddon and see if I find it “too slow” now). But The Mad Monster is especially slow, with less action than normal for a film of the era and not a lot going on otherwise.

Here’s another one for “someone remake THIS!” list. The plot is actually kind of awesome: a mad scientist turns a guy into an Elephant man, holding the cure ransom. The desired reward? The guy’s daughter, who the scientist thinks is a spitting image of his late wife (who he accidentally killed when he tried to make her ugly so that no one else would want her). Someone like Cronenberg could make an AMAZING movie out of this. But director Sam Newfield (who did the much better Dead Men Walk) and writers Pierre Gendron and Martin Mooney don’t really do much with the concept, or a giant ape that the scientist keeps in a cage. When your movie has a giant ape, he damn well better kill lots of people OR play hero at the end. In this movie, the damn thing disappears with another 20 minutes to go.

And what’s with all the horror movies that use the pituitary gland as a means for crazy scientific nonsense? In this movie it has something to do with turning folks into Elephant men. In Leech Woman, she used it to keep young. And other movies have come up with different uses for this largely un-cared about part of the human body. My theory is, since no one other than doctors and scientists really know what it does (as opposed to say, the uvula, which you gotta be fucking stupid not to know about!), screenwriters have the creative license to use it for whatever nonsense they come up with for their silly horror movies.

My favorite part of the movie came at the very beginning. A guy walks into the room and tells our eventual victim, “A man is here to see you, he says his name is Doctor Igor Markoff.” He then hands over the guy’s card, and we are treated to a closeup:

LOL. Well at least he wasn’t lying. There’s also an odd credit at the end for the dog in the film: “Ace.... By Himself”. I am not familiar with mid century lingo – is saying BY himself instead of AS himself something folks just did? Or was the creditor just a bit confused on his adverb prepositions? Well, whatever. Other than the wonderfully evil J. Carroll Naish as Markoff, there’s not much here to recommend unless you are a fellow budget pack obsessive.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Repo: The Genetic Opera (2008)

MARCH 4, 2008

GENRE: MUSICAL, WEIRD
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (TEST SCREENING)

NOTE – As this is a test screening, the following review may not 100% reflect the final product. Furthermore, as a lazy man who is often broke, I can’t guarantee that I’ll see the film during its theatrical release and/or update the review to include any changes. - UPDATE! - there were a few minor changes, all for the better.)

I first became intrigued by Darren Bousman’s Repo: The Genetic Opera a year or so ago, when he mentioned Shock Treatment as a sort of influence. While I’m not a die hard fan of the Rocky Horror “series”, I do quite enjoy both films, and particularly liked how utterly batshit Shock was (I still don’t have a goddamn clue what is going on during large chunks of the film), and how it managed to “outweird” the original film. Well, Repo makes both of them look sane. And I mean that in the goodliest way possible.

The movie is based on a play (which Bousman directed a version of a few years ago, before he entered the world of Jigsaw), but since I haven’t seen it I don’t know how close the film follows it. There is no real “main plot”, but instead a series of interconnecting stories about a group of folks with ties to a futuristic organ donor/replacement company called Geneco. The film’s central character is Shiloh, played by Alexa Vega, aka the chick from Spy Kids (she’s like 20 now, so it’s OK to think she’s hot, right? Hope so.). She is suffering from some blood disorder and kept largely confined to her bedroom by her dad, played by Anthony Head (Giles!). Unknown to her, he works as a Repo Man for Geneco; killing and “taking back” organs from patients who failed to keep up with their payments. Geneco is run by Paul Sorvino, who is dying, and his kids (Paris Hilton, Bill Moseley, and Ogre from the band Skinny Puppy) are fighting one another over who gets to run the company once he passes. Sorvino also holds a grudge against Head, and there’s also an opera singer (who is also Shiloh’s godmother) and a grave robber who is over-medicating the surgery obsessed Hilton. While some plots are justifiably given more screen-time than others, it’s to Bousman’s credit (as well as the screenwriters, Terrance Zdunich and Darren Smith, who also appear in the film) that the film weaves so many different story threads while never once really pausing to let the audience take a breath, yet maintains coherency and a pace that builds and builds at a steady rate.

Also, this isn’t Rocky Horror or Nightmare Before Christmas, where the best musical numbers come in the first half and then the film sort of treads water for a while – here the best numbers come near the end. In fact, the one concern I had with the film was that it took 15 minutes to get to the first song that would make for enjoyable “stand-alone” listening (many of the “songs” are just a verse explaining story details). The opening of the film is a graphic novel style prologue explaining what has happened to the world in the future and how Geneco came to be – I’d rather they had a big number with these plot elements explained in the lyric. But the way the film just builds and builds up more energy as it unfolds is pretty astonishing, so in a way the “slow” feel of the first few scenes makes total sense – think of it as a roller coaster with a 10 foot climb rewarded by a 100 foot drop.

The cast is about as random as one could get (Paris Hilton and Bill Moseley as brother and sister? Giles playing a murderous boogeyman?), but there isn’t a single weak link in the cast. In fact, I must admit that Hilton is QUITE good in her role, both acting and singing (all of the primary characters sing their own songs). I usually can’t stand her in anything, but she won me over here. Moseley also has some great moments as the most violent character in the film, and it’s nice to see Head finally play the “Ripper” he never got a chance to be on Buffy. However, the godmother character, played by Sarah Brightman, doesn’t get to work with the other characters as much, so her scenes have a slight disconnect, and she is sort of MIA (other than TV screens) for the first half of the film – I would have liked to have her given something earlier on that would make her importance to the second half of the film have a bit more resonance.

The movie’s also just damn hilarious. Moseley singing “I’ll shoot you in the face!” to a guy offering him decaf is possibly the best moment in movie musical history. There’s also a rocking number called (I think) “I’m 17!” by Vega, who rocks around her room while two of her stuffed animals headbang along and Joan Jett shows up out of nowhere to provide the guitar riffs – I was laughing my ass off the entire time.

As for the violence/gore, it’s pretty over the top, but also sparsely displayed throughout the film. I would say it’s about as violent as Sweeney Todd (but also about 20 min shorter), and it doesn’t stick out as much as it did in Todd, since the over the top slashing and “repossessing” is just as nutty as everything else in the film.

I’m sure that Lionsgate will market the film as “Saw meets Rocky Horror” or something to that effect, but that would be selling it short. While it’s certainly an easy way to describe it, the real hook for me was just the sheer originality and insanity of it all. You know how Sweeney Todd was almost all songs, but would occasionally “stop” and just have dialogue? No such thing here. There were a few songs that I really dug and wanted to applaud after, as is sort of customary for musical films, but the problem was: I couldn’t. My applause would be interrupting the next musical segment. I just hope people give the movie a chance and appreciate, if nothing else, the sheer originality on display. Anyone reading this site knows how many horror movies I endure, so when I see one that never ONCE reminds me of other movies (even the obvious comparisons – Todd, Rocky Horror, etc, only came to mind in generalized thoughts), and is able to totally suck me in and keep me entertained almost nonstop for 90 minutes, I get pretty thankful and happy. Sure, I love my formulaic slashers and action movies about guys taking over some sort of vehicle only to be thwarted by a rogue cop, but I secretly crave for more movies like Repo; where I am almost at a loss as to how I can review it or recommend it to others. It truly does need to be seen to be believed, and I hope you fine folks not only do just that, but enjoy it as well.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Frankenstein Meets The Wolf Man (1943)

MARCH 3, 2008

GENRE: CLASSIC, MONSTER, WEREWOLF
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

Man, I sure do take a long time to get through my own DVDs, huh? It was the first Monday in March of LAST YEAR (and I swear I didn't do it on purpose - I had to look up the date) that I last took in a movie from my Wolf Man collection, despite my “I should blow through all three of these Universal sets in a month or so” thinking at the time. I’m not even halfway through the three sets (the others being Dracula and Frankenstein), and adding insult to injury - I bought the damn things in in 2004!

Anyway, Frankenstein Meets The Wolf Man is pretty damn good, despite the wrongest title ever. It’s more like “The Guy Inside Of The Wolf Man Meets Frankenstein’s Monster And Then His Daughter”, but oh well. When it comes to Frankenstein movies, the title is always of debatable merit (see Bride Of Frankenstein, which contains less than 2 min of actual Bride).

After what I think may have been the first animated credits in movie history (I expect to be called out for being wrong here), the film begins with two guys trying to rob the Wolf Man’s grave and unintentionally resurrecting him, an obvious allusion to Friday the 13th Part 6: Jason Lives. Which is the nice thing about sequels, because a lot of these old movies take a while before there’s any monster action, for obvious reasons (they weren’t created yet), so it’s nice to have a little bit of action right at the start before all the yakkity yak.

Most of what the characters are talking about for the next 40 minutes or so is the Wolf, and whether poor Larry Talbot (still billed as just “The Wolf Man”) is crazy or not. Though the writer occasionally takes time out of this to take a few cheap shots at Gypsies, with exchanges such as this:

Guy: Do you know Maleva, she’s a Gypsy.”
Guy 2: “Ah, a vagrant!”

Now come on! A Gypsy could very well have had his or own home. There’s also another line where a guy scoffs at the idea that a Gypsy would be telling the truth. Why all the hatred?

Although there’s not a lot of monster action (Frank’s monster doesn’t show up until halfway through or so), the only time the movie feels slow is around the 45 minute mark, when we are ‘treated’ to a lengthy musical number. It ends with a typical “Lon Chaney needs anger management” scene, and then Frankie comes barreling through on a rampage before hitching a ride on a runaway wagon, which livens things up considerably and more or less makes up for the lengthy song, but still: cut out a verse or two next time!

The finale is pretty rousing. In a hilarious bit, Frankie begins carrying the damsel off into the night, which pisses off Wolf Man. Wolf Man attacks Frankie while he’s still holding the woman, and as a result he drops her hard onto the stone floor a few feet below. Nice work, Larry, you probably fractured her spine in your “rescue” attempt. But then they begin whaling on each other, and despite the fact that the fight is incredibly short, it’s pretty sweet to see them go at it, since they are a more even match than many of the other movie monster fights we’ve seen since. Wolf Man could use a bit more originality in his fighting style though – his entire strategy seems to be climbing onto tables and the like, then jumping onto Frankie while howling. Then a surge of water from a dam explosion knocks over a model of a castle, which somehow results in their assumed drowning. And unlike the first Frankenstein film, the filmmakers had the good sense to end it right there, rather than have a wholly useless epilogue with some doctor talking about drinking while a few dames fawn over him.

Looking at the collection, I now see that Wolf Man never really got a legit sequel (the other monster sets have more movies too). This was half a Frankenstein movie, and the other two films on the set seem entirely unrelated (one of them actually came out 6 years before the original Wolf Man did). Bride of Wolf Man is an untapped treasure! Think of all the Gypsy jokes the film could have!!!

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Henry: Portrait Of A Serial Killer (1986)

MARCH 2, 2008

GENRE: SERIAL KILLER
SOURCE: DVD (ONLINE RENTAL)

“Otis... plug it in.”

And that was all that I remembered about Henry: Portrait Of A Serial Killer, a film I had watched a few times when I was 14 and obsessed with “ultra-violent” films like Natural Born Killers and whatever other Tarantino movies I was able to rent. But I sort of grew out of that phase and never revisited the film until now.

I had forgotten how somewhat fragmented and matter-of-fact the film was presented. There is also almost zero buildup to any of the kill scenes - they come (and go) out of nowhere. It's a great idea - why draw suspense when the movie is ABOUT a serial killer? No one is going to survive.The passage of time is entirely unclear (Henry says he doesn’t like to stay in one place for too long, but since he kills like a dozen people in the film, all in Chicago and suburbs, I would guess it would HAVE to take place over a year, or else the police would be suspicious, even if he was using different implements), and the first five minutes are just a series of shots showing the aftermath of Henry’s crimes edited with scenes of him driving around Chicago.

It is in this opening sequence that John McNaughton displays his fondness for cutting to a close-up of something, and then slowly pulling out for a look at the bigger picture. There’s some 568569 of these shots in the film, and it gets kind of annoying, to be honest. It’s effective at first, but there are only so many times you can use the trick. But it’s his first movie, so I guess it’s forgivable. In my first movie I didn’t even have a cameraman to pull off such shots.

For a low budget movie, the acting is surprisingly good. Michael Rooker is, of course, top notch in the role of Henry, and Tom Towles has what remains his largest role to date as Otis (now he’s just sort of relegated to brief appearances in Rob Zombie movies, though he also did a damn good job as Cooper in the underrated Night of the Living Dead remake). The girl playing Becky is also good as the film’s only non-despicable character, though the fact that she looks like Ed Harris is a bit upsetting.

Here’s an embarrassing story – when I first saw the film, I was so unfamiliar with the cinematic “language” of sex scenes that I didn’t even realize Otis was actually raping Becky at the end of the film. Since all of my exposure to sex scenes in movies at that point had been either in slashers or Basic Instinct (where taking ones' clothes off was pretty much the first priority), I thought he was just an aggressive kisser. Oh well. I also didn’t understand what Becky meant when she talked about her father coming into her room and “doing whatever he wanted”. This is the result of putting a movie nerd like myself in Catholic school – I missed out on key discussions of such matters in study hall, which is something we didn’t even have.

Despite being billed as a 20th anniversary special edition, the DVD is a bit of a letdown. The only extra of note is a badly recorded commentary with McNaughton and some British dude. Whenever the Naught raises his voice above a certain level, the sound on the recording cuts out, sometimes completely muffling what he was saying for the next few seconds. He does offer a lot of good info, however, so overall it’s worth a listen. Just don’t be fooled by the claim that the film runs 130 minutes on the back of the DVD – it’s the same 85 minute uncut version (cut versions run about 78 minutes). I am guessing that whoever designed the art didn’t know the difference between an hour and thirty minutes and a hundred and thirty minutes. What a jerk, huh?

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

The Sickhouse (2007)

MARCH 1, 2008

GENRE: GHOST
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

I am pleased to report that The Sickhouse is the first screener sent to Horror Movie A Day from a major studio! The irony, of course, is that that studio is in fact New Line, who more or less folded the day before I watched the film. Oh well, close enough.

Given the fact that it was direct to DVD and starring Gina Phillips, who is 0-2 in the non-existent HMAD sweepstakes (thanks to Dead & Breakfast and the truly awful Ring Around The Rosie), I wasn’t expecting much from the film. But I was pleased to find that it wasn’t all that bad – a fast paced ghost movie that resembles House On Haunted Hill in a number of ways but at the same time feels a bit original.

The HoHH comparisons stem from a few sources. One, this is the bluest fucking movie I have seen since, well, HoHH. In the rare moments that you see red (the blood looks more like black) it’s almost an eyesore. Lay off the filters, (director Curtis) Radclyffe! Strangely, the pics on the back of the DVD are shown in a brownish/yellow tint that resembles the Chain Saw remake. Well, whatever. Blue, orange, it’s all OK in Michael Bay’s world, and thus perfectly OK in mine.

Another similarity is that the backstory involves a rather confusing account of a doctor doing experiments, and now the ghosts of his victims are killing people. Or something. It’s all a bit baffling (and the ending suggests that the characters are stuck in a time loop?), but it’s still entertaining, which is really all I ask for anymore. Plus, the backstory is actually about the plague (“As in THE Plague?” a character asks), which is a topic I am quite interested in, and is also rather rarely used in horror films. Which is why the film feels more original than it probably actually is – there are bits and pieces taken from a variety of horror movies, but overall the concept is kind of unique.

Kudos to writer Romla Walker for doing something truly rare – making me care a bit about a criminal in a horror movie. For whatever reason, many horror movies have criminals (usually robbers) as our “heroes”, and I’m always cold to the concept. Fuck them, they are thieves! Kill em all! But in this I actually kind of liked the main guy, Nick (Alex Hassell), who is introduced by stealing a car and going joyriding with his friends. Of course, when someone in the car finds a video camera he almost immediately does a Blair Witch parody, so that helped immensely.

However, one thing about her script (I assume) that wasn’t so great was the rampant profanity. Now, obviously I have ZERO problem with the F-word and all its variations (I’ve even been known to make a few up), but sometimes a movie just has so many that it just sounds forced, and even worse, tiresome. Take for example, this exchange:

Nick: “Shut the fuck up you crazy fucking fuck!”
Gina: “Fuck you!”

Come on now. We can all do a lot fucking better. Had the film been a bit lighter, this could be construed as a joke, but the film is entirely dark and humorless other than the Blair Witch joke.

Another thing I was reminded of was the underrated Xbox game Condemned: Criminal Origins. In that game, there’s a sort of nonsensical sidequest that involves you finding the remains of dead birds around the city. This film also has dead birds, though it makes a bit more sense here, since... actually I have no idea what sense it makes. The ghost killer dresses like a bird. That’s about it. Hey, it works. That game also had an abandoned hospital as a level, if memory serves.

Like yesterday’s movie, this one has a rather disgusting birth scene, and damned if I didn’t applaud it. A girl suddenly squirts out not a child, but thousands of leeches. She then begins walking around, as more leeches and black fluid (which could be blood, though it seems thicker) pours out down her leg and all over the floor. Fuck yeah! Nasty bits like that are increasingly uncommon, so when you get a bit of it in a new movie, it’s a good sign that all hope is not lost for modern horror.

The surround mix is also quite good. Creepy kids' laughter and things of that nature will occasionally pop out of the rear speakers, and one time it even freaked me out a bit. I hope a lot of you have decent home theaters for these movies, I can’t imagine how different my opinion for some of these movies would be if I wasn’t being engulfed by the damn thing while I watched it (this may be why I tend to like stuff no one else does – maybe they’re just watching it on a stereo TV?).

You may wonder why I am a bit vague on story specifics. Well, that’s because I honestly can’t make heads or tails of the final 20 minutes of the movie, and need to watch it again (or have it explained to me via wiki entry). But I haven’t had time to do that yet, and no one else has seen it, best I can tell, so I guess I’ll have to wait. If this review is not updated by the time the DVD hits stores (March 18th I think?), feel free to explain the ending to me. Please include an explanation for the fox under the clock, why a guy who is flat out told he is going to die via hanging decides to wear a scarf anyway, and what the hell is going on with the cop at the end. Thanks!

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...