IMDb says Swamp Women is horror, and it is included on the 50 Horror Classics box set. Which begs the question: who the fuck watched this movie and said “Yes, this is most definitely a horror movie”??? Some jerk I bet. Roger Corman may be involved, but that doesn’t make it horror. If I was being generous, I would call it a light thriller, which is one of my categories. Also, there IS a scene where our protagonists are menaced by an alligator, so that’ll just have to do.
Swamp Women (which I assumed would be about females with the powers of Swamp Thing; no dice) is a pretty straightforward movie. Some broads break out of prison, bicker, take a male hostage, flirt with him, argue some more, and then the cops show up to arrest them for whatever it is they did (breaking out of prison, and something about stolen jewels). About halfway through, an alligator is seen swimming near one of them and there is some minor suspense over whether or not the girl will get out of the water OK, and the final 5 minutes is pretty much just two of the women punching and tossing each other around (which is pretty awesome), but otherwise nothing really happens in this movie. The body count is... one, if I am counting right. Two if you count a rather unthreatening snake that serves as a “monster” for the finale.
The most entertainment I got out of this flick was how laidback the girls were in their hostage-taking. They untie the guy like 3 or 4 times during the film, let him walk around their camp, etc. Plus at one point or another I think they all hit on him, and when their boat gets stuck at one point, he is never made to help them get it out. And apparently Stockholm Syndrome took fast hold of him; less than 5 minutes after being captured he seems pretty content with the whole thing. It’s the most pleasant kidnapping I’ve ever seen in a film.
I also like how quickly they escape from jail. Really, the whole “imprisonment” section of the film runs under 4 minutes, which kind of kills any real sense of desperation the characters might be feeling. More screentime is devoted to shots of the parade that the first scene takes place at than the prison which is ostensibly the main crux of the film.
Then again, maybe Mill Creek just really botched this one. The IMDb claims there is a version that runs 84 minutes (this one was about 68); maybe that 16 minutes included some legit horror elements. Since about 2-3 minutes of the film is presented in what appears to be footage that was taped off of someone’ TV screen, it’s pretty obvious that the Creek wasn’t too concerned with providing its customers with the most respectful transfer/version of this junk.
I had a pretty heavy internal debate over whether or not to watch Madhouse. On one hand, the last time I watched a horror movie with Josh Leonard and Patrika Darbo, it was Hatchet. On the other hand, the last time I watched a movie directed by William Butler, it was Furnace.
Then I saw that the borderline illegally cute Jordan Ladd was in it too, so off to the rental counter I went.
Popping in the DVD, I was flooded with pleasant memories of when Lions Gate was a more trustworthy studio. It had the old Lion logo, Lions Gate was two words, and I could hit the menu button when the DVD started and actually go to the menu, not be forced into 3 FBI warnings, a lengthy animated studio logo, and 40568906 trailers for bullshit I already saw. Ah, the good ol’ days... three years ago.
Plus the movie itself was pretty decent. It didn’t amaze me or anything, but it was a solid little thriller with a sort of decent twist and some fantastic gore gags. I’ve seen a lot of horror movies (2,613) and I don’t think I’ve ever seen an electrocution kill that resulted in the victim graphically biting their own tongue off (you see the thing sort of dangling between the teeth before finally becoming completely severed). And while it’s not exactly nonstop action, it moves along nicely, offering up a kill or some creepy stuff every 5-10 minutes or so.
You also get a nice cast of genre folk. In addition to Leonard and Darbo, the great Lance Henriksen plays the head of the hospital, and he’s in top form here (faring far better than some of his other recent DTV stuff), though he’s not in it as much as I’d like. Leprechaun’s Mark Holton also shows up as one of the stable of crazy people, and Leslie Jordan (“Jesus, Pookie!”) plays one of the other doctors. Plus, the aforementioned hotness of Jordan Ladd, who despite a fully clothed love scene (once again, thank you, Club Dread!) looks as good as ever, and makes the most of some occasionally terrible dialogue.
One thing really irked me though: the umpteenth usage of the “Patient pretends to be a doctor” gag seen in just about every fucking movie ever made that is set in a hospital. I would rant longer, but I already ranted about it in the review for Bad Dreams. Seriously, filmmakers: knock it the fuck off. Why not have a doctor pretend to be a patient to see if he can catch the new guy/hero off guard? Or just stop setting horror movies in mental hospitals? Either or. Also, the DVD box makes a big deal out of the appearance of Natasha Lyonne, an annoying actress to begin with, and she is only in the movie for about 3-4 minutes, in a largely inconsequential role. Maybe she was too busy shitting on the floor or molesting dogs to film all her scenes, I dunno.
Butler and Leonard provide a commentary track, and it’s pretty decent, despite some occasional lengthy gaps. Leonard seems a bit drunk (or high) and they have some choice words for some of the crew and the producers who made them change the ending (Leonard’s comment is particularly hilarious, especially since I thought the same thing when I watched it), so it’s pretty entertaining. The only other extra is a brief collection of deleted scenes (3) and outtakes (3) that combined are under 10 minutes, nothing essential.
According to my Blockbuster receipt, which they actually gave me for once (lately they’ve been being more “Green” and not printing them unless asked), I can keep the movie for 3.99. I won’t, but if you see it for that cost, it’s a pretty safe purchase (especially since most rental places charge 4.49 or so). However, since Ladd keeps her clothes on, that would mean the proportional value of Club Dread is some 800 million dollars, which is a bit much.
Rock Band 2 was all I cared about today, so I needed a short movie that wouldn’t benefit from my full attention. Enter Hellraiser: Deader, aka Hellraiser 7, which I knew was actually written as another movie and molded into a Hellraiserfilm. Also it was from the same people who did the last one (and the next one, where Pinhead goes “online”... sigh) . Also it starred Kari Wuhrer, an actress who has never starred in a good movie. Needless to say, I wasn’t going to be surprised if the movie stunk.
And actually, it’s not all that bad at first. I like the investigative reporter plot, and Wuhrer is hotter than ever. And yeah, Pinhead isn’t in it much, but that’s not only a given nowadays, but also sort of a good idea in theory – he’s barely in the first one either. The one he’s in the most were pretty much loathed by fans (III and Bloodline) so why not try to emulate the original?
The problem is, the story here just ain’t as good. Like I said, it starts off OK, but it eventually just becomes needlessly confusing (why is Jacob’s Ladder the seeming influence for all of the DTV Hellraiser’s?). Worse, there isn’t anyone in any real danger for the bulk of the film, since Wuhrer is pretty much our only character. The folks she is investigating are dead (or “deader”); her editor is pretty much the only other human character of note, and he’s in it less than Pinhead. And while killing off the lead is sort of par for the course for these movies, we know it won’t occur until the film’s final 5 minutes, leaving 80 that are almost entirely without suspense or even violence (this is possibly the least violent film in the series). 90% of the film is merely Wuhrer walking around looking at shit.
It’s also got some pretty idiotic filmmaking. The thing that sets the whole movie off is a video where a girl is seemingly killed and then resurrected, and that’s fine. But the video is obviously shot and edited! There are conversations with both angles, reaction shots, etc. Kind of hard to buy into the “reality” of the video when it looks as manufactured as the film in which it is contained. And I had to laugh when Wuhrer sees her article in the paper, seemingly unhumorously titled “How To Be A Crack Whore” (given Wuhrer’s penchant for nudity, I’m surprised this minor subplot wasn’t more promiment). Also, there are only two other cenobites this time around, and director Rick Bota can’t even be bothered to really show them off. One of them is never even really seen in full, which is a shame, as Gary Tunnicliffe’s makeup is great (as it always is) and I would have liked to have seen it in more detail.
That all said... it’s got its moments. There’s a bit where Wuhrer finds herself with a knife in her back (no idea) and spends a good 3-4 minutes splashing blood around her bathroom and finally getting the damn thing out. I also like that the movie is actually set in Romania; Dimension films pretty much every one of their movies there, so it’s nice to see them actually admit it rather than try to pass it off as America like they usually do. The concept of a subway car that is permanently filled with lowlifes (it looks like a traveling opium den/S&M club) is also pretty fantastic; it’s the only thing in the film that seems like Clive Barker himself may have come up with. And, in pretty much the one constant of the franchise (other than the complete lack of any continuity from film to film), the score is fantastic.
Speaking of all the movies, how the fuck does everyone know how to open the box almost instantly? They pick it up, all confused, and then within 10 seconds they randomly decide to rub their thumb around the circle. If I found the damn thing, first thing I would do (besides check its Ebay value) is attack the thing with a nice screwdriver and vigorous shaking.
Bless Dimension for going all out with the extra features though. If you dig this one, you’re in for a treat, as there’s about 4 hours’ worth of stuff here including the two feature length commentaries. I only listened to one, with Bota and Pinhead himself, Doug Bradley. It’s a pretty informative track, and Bradley points out the same thing I (and others have), anyone who complains about the lack of Pinhead in these films clearly doesn’t remember the original very well. Then there are also a few making of featurettes (two about the effects, one in general), some location scout videos, and about 20 minutes or so of deleted or extended (mostly the latter) scenes. Most of it is worthless (one is just Wuhrer endlessly walking to a subway station, riveting stuff), but there are a few character bits one might enjoy. Strangely enough, there is actually a couple minutes’ worth of deleted Pinhead material here. I would think they would use as much as possible.
There is also an Easter egg worth noting. If you go into the 2nd page of the extras, go to down to “Play Movie”, and then hit left and then up (or right and down, I forget. Look, just fuck with it until you light up the Lament Configuration on the right side), you get this wonderfully odd little film with Pinhead (not Bradley) as an old man, lamenting about the state of the world and things of that nature. He then opens the box himself and two cenobites kill him. I haven’t the slightest clue what the point of it is, and the quality of the video is beyond terrible (it looks like Youtube), but it’s definitely worth a look. It reminded me of one of those Marvel Comics called “The End” which tells the ‘final’ story of certain Marvel heroes.
I still have one more to go, but I think it’s safe to say that of all the horror franchises, none fell harder than Hellraiser. All of the series got pretty bad, but they were still in the same spirit as the original films, to some extent. And it’s the only major horror franchise that got sent direct to video, which is a bit of a shame. Had Barker or even Pete Atkins stuck around, I am sure it would be a wonderfully original franchise, and it’s a shame Dimension just couldn’t let it die after Bloodline (which pretty much served as a series finale anyway). It’s ironic; the past three movies were done in more by the expectations one would have for a Hellraiser film more than anything else. If they were just unrelated genre films, they’d probably fare better with audiences.
I’m sure the online one sucks no matter how you slice it though. Christ.
Even though I’m not a big fan of anthology movies, I figured I would enjoy Trapped Ashes, due to the filmmakers involved. Joe Dante and Sean Cunningham are pretty reliable, and even if I disliked it, Ken Russell would probably do something at least interesting. But had I noticed the positive blurb from ShockTillYouDrop’s Ryan Rotten, an otherwise good man who hated Wrestlemaniacand The Return, I probably would have (rightfully) assumed it was actually quite bad.
Like all anthology films, the quality varies from story to story, but unfortunately that spectrum never gets to the “good” end. At best (Monte Hellman’s Stanley’s Girlfriend) it’s merely underwhelming, but at its worst (pretty much everything else) it’s damn near unwatchable, and the wrapup is not only obvious, but completely lacking any sort of bite.
Dante is the one who directed the wrap-arounds, and they are the best part. We get some genre faves like John Saxon and Henry Gibson, not to mention Dick Miller, in a far too brief (and wordless) role as a security guard who seems apprehensive about letting our primary characters into the house that will lead to their doom. As these mostly unlikable folks stumble around a haunted house movie set (they are on a studio tour) there is some sense of fun, something that is more or less tossed out the window once the stories begin.
Russell’s story is the most outlandish (shock!), and probably would have been a bit more enjoyable had the ending not come out of nowhere and had some actual development. It seems like they simply ran out of time so cut an important chunk out. Indeed, there is a longer cut on the DVD, but I had no desire to watch it, since the parts that did flow well weren’t really that great anyway. Killer tits is a funny concept, but nothing is done with it beyond biting a guy’s back. And that’s a problem throughout the damn thing – there’s not a single onscreen death. Violence does not equal quality, but if you’re going to show me 105 minutes of bad anthology, at least offer some interesting effects to admire.
Cunningham’s story is like a bad Heavy Metal reject that was reshot in live action (with some of the animation left over), and John Gaeta’s, the worst of the bunch, has not a single interesting character or moment in the entire thing. I guess it takes some sort of talent to make a movie about a girl who has a twin that’s also a worm and make it so dreadfully boring, but not a talent worth having.
Which leaves Hellman’s tale. I liked this one the most, even if it’s the least “horror” in the bunch (if anything, the horror element ruins it). They never say his last name, but its essentially a fictionalized account of why Stanley Kubrick never returned to America after leaving to shoot Paths of Glory (or “a World War I movie” – nothing in the story is explicitly named). It’s got a super hot girl, a love triangle involving two filmmakers, and lots of people playing chess. I dunno, for me it was interesting, but that’s probably because I love Kubrick and thus enjoy seeing this strange little story about him, however outlandish. Of the four, it’s the only one I would actually want to sit through again (yet, I didn’t – this one also has an extended version on the DVD, which makes me wonder why they didn’t just make an extended cut of the film).
And that’s the other thing – for a movie about 6 people telling scary stories, we sort of get gypped with only four. Then again, I don’t know if I could sit through 2 more stories on the level of these others, especially since they are all written by the same guy. Still though, they don’t even explain why one guy doesn’t have to tell a story (one story is about two of them, so it’s OK).
In addition to the two extended stories, we also get a full length commentary that’s pretty interesting. It’s led by the writer and some of the cast (some of the directors sit in on their stories as well), and they cover pretty much everything from casting to production to editing. Can’t say much about the film they are discussing, but it’s a lively chat and if you enjoyed the movie for some reason, you should definitely check it out. There are also brief making of pieces for each tale, and a few deleted scenes as well (nothing that helps).
Given the talent involved, this one is a major disappointment. I may have seen worse movies this year, but they were all no-budget, no-talent productions, so their lack of quality is kind of expected. Christ, when this one went DTV I was almost surprised; I figured a few of the names alone would get it at least a limited release. Now that I’ve seen it, I think it was one of the best decisions a studio could make.
The score by Kenji Kawai is amazing though. Besides Miller’s cameo, it’s the only thing that saved this one from the Crap marker, really.
At last year’s Screamfest, I went to a screening of Hell’s Ground (aka Zibahkhana) and slept through about 65% of it. This is not a sign of the film’s quality – I fall asleep at everything, and also it was at like 11 PM, AND it was the 4th movie of the day I think. What I saw wasn’t really bad or incredibly exciting, but I vowed to watch it again properly once it hit DVD.
Well my initial reaction was pretty accurate. In fact, I pretty much saw all the best parts before (I was amazed to discover that I actually slept through the entire first 20 minutes – apparently I started dozing before the movie even began!), so I didn’t even really need to see it “again”. The problem with the film is that it just doesn’t know what to be – it starts off as a slasher, then goes into zombie territory, some light survival, and finally slasher again. I’m all for cross-genre horror movies, but the zombies completely disappear after the first half hour, never to be mentioned again until the goofy epilogue. I would have liked it more had the zombies been after the kids AND the slasher (zombies aren’t choosy!), a lot of fun could be had with such a concept.
The survival aspects are also a bit mishandled. The driver notices that the van is on empty, but it takes another half hour and a LOT of driving for it to finally run out of gas. If the car can go that long on E, why not turn around and hit up the gas station on the main road (as it is a horror movie, they are taking a shortcut)? They also introduce the idea that the drinking water is unsafe, but again, don’t really do much with it.
Another issue is that it’s just plain generic. I accepted Doomsdaybecause I know Neil Marshall is capable of doing something great and was clearly just looking to have a little fun. But I don’t know director Omar Khan (this is his first film), so I can’t lend him the same sort of allowance. Throughout the film, scenes and scenarios are stolen from Texas Chain Saw, Halloween, Mother’s Day, etc. On the commentary he acknowledges this and says it’s part of the point, but he went a bit too far into the “homage” direction for my taste. The social/political issues that are barely addressed would have provided the backdrop for a terrific (and original) horror film – it’s a shame he opted to keep it more “fun”.
However, it’s undeniably entertaining. At 75 minutes it hardly wears out its welcome, and while the pace is a bit slow at first, once it gets going it’s pretty fun. The slasher has a great and unique look, and I can’t recall the last slasher to use a mace as his weapon of choice. Also, one of our main characters is like the Pakistan version of me. He wakes up and has like 10 DVDs around him. He looks at one as if he had no idea that it was in his possession, then watches about 30 seconds of it before laughing to himself and going outside. I myself have been surprised to discover films in my own collection, so this little bit made me smile. The actors are all pretty good too (and Rooshanie Ejaz is super cute, luckily she’s also the Final Girl), despite the fact that none of them seemingly have any film experience (this film is the only credit on the IMDb for just about everyone in the cast). And last but not least, the gore/makeup is pretty impressive as well.
Less impressive is the film stock. Not sure what the problem was, but it looks like there are like 5 or 6 different film/video stocks being used throughout the film; sometimes switching in the middle of a scene. It’s distracting, but thankfully the images themselves all look good. I just wish they were consistent with one another.
One thing that I found distracting was the mix of Urdu and English, sometimes within a single sentence (at Screamfest, listening as I was “resting my eyes”, I was convinced my brain was translating parts of the dialogue for me). However, I have since been told that this is actually how they talk over there. In a way it’s nice, but I wish I could understand the rhyme or reason behind it. Like, when do you use English and when not?
The DVD has some minor extras. The commentary is pretty interesting, as Khan points out production troubles, addresses criticism of the film, etc. He is also very proud of the film, and should be - had I not seen all the movies he acknowledges, I would probably have nothing but praise for it. And admitting his influences is a surefire way to win me over - I fucking loathe when a filmmaker claims he's never even seen the films his movie blatantly steals from, but Khan cheerfully points out even some homages I had missed. There is also a brief look at the film’s premiere in Pakistan at a film festival, and a music video (pretty rocking tune, even if I have no idea what it’s about), plus the trailer. Finally, there is something called “Ice Cream Zombieland Documentary”. This is essentially Khan discussing how his film has been released everywhere EXCEPT for Pakistan (sadly ironic, since Pakistan audiences will probably find it much more original than in the horror drenched West), and also just sort of hanging out in his apartment - at one point we watch him watching the extra feature about the premiere! How gloriously self-reflexive! We also see his ice cream shop, which seems like the most awesome ice cream shop ever; there are horror posters and toys everywhere, and his jukebox has the Phantasm soundtrack! I wish this piece was longer; he talks a lot on the commentary about censors, but barely touches upon it here.
It doesn’t win any points for originality, but it’s still a pretty fun movie. I just hope Khan makes another film that is a bit more unique. I enjoy watching foreign horror because I get to learn a little bit about their culture, but for the most part all I learned from this movie is how much he likes American horror movies.
The last thing I expect from a movie called The Wig (Korean: Gabal), which is about a haunted wig, is that it would be kind of sad. And not sad in a “Someone put money up for a movie about a haunted wig” way; sad in a “Wow I actually kind of feel bad for just about everyone in this movie” way. I also wasn’t really expecting it to be any good.
Wisely avoiding having a goddamn hairpiece running amok and killing folks, it’s actually a borderline metaphor for a woman losing her identity. I mean, yeah, it IS haunted and thus there are a few scare scenes that more or less revolve around strands of hair moving around, but its still nowhere near as schlocky or even “fun” as I thought it would be. The body count is one of the lowest in ages too, I think the total number of deaths in the film is like, three. However, those rare kill scenes are pretty damn great, particularly a car crash about halfway through that would fit right at home in one of the Final Destination movies.
So what IS in the movie’s 103 minutes? Well, that’s where it gets a bit cloudy. I THINK I get it all now, but there are times in the film where I am just completely baffled as to who is who and when we are in the narrative. Flashbacks don’t seem to have the usual “blur-o-vision” or desaturated color normally associated with such scenes, and there is also a peculiar directorial choice that makes characters actually walking around in flashbacks of their younger selves. And since the whole movie kind of revolves around a girl whose possessed hair makes her turn into a former lover of the film’s only male character, it just gets a bit too hard to follow at times. There is also a mute character who mouths stuff, so we get subtitles for her “dialogue” even when she’s not even on screen, another head-scratching plot device (not often implemented, thankfully).
But when it’s easy to follow, it’s pretty damn good. I liked both of the main characters, and seeing their downfall was heartbreaking. The music is a big part of that; it’s one of the best scores I’ve heard in ages. I even let the main menu loop for a while so I could listen to 20 seconds of the main theme over and over. The acting is also quite good, particularly Seon Yu as the mute sister who starts the film as the secondary character and you eventually realize that the movie is just as much about her as the “heroine”.
I also really like how they finally decided to LITERALLY make a horror movie about long dark hair, since that’s sort of a big part of the iconic image behind a good half dozen of the bigger horror titles from the East.
The DVD has a few extras, one of which is pretty good as it includes the thoughts of the film’s soft-spoken director, Shin-yeon Won. There is also a piece on the special effects that is pretty entertaining. Not so much is the “Behind the Scenes”, which is just a bunch of random, well, behind the scenes footage. No commentary or interviews accompany the footage, so it’s pretty much skippable. The movie itself is the real draw, and I thank the cast and crew for making something that’s more Eye 2 (a damn good film) than Grudge(not so much). We need more of these! Leave our goddamn electronics alone and start haunting our donated body parts!
I’m kind of glad I am now done with the three big Universal monster sets, now that I have watched House Of Frankenstein (the other sets being Dracula and Wolf Man). I don’t dislike them by any means, but as they went on, you can really see how no one involved really gave a shit anymore. Continuity is tossed out, whole plot elements are recycled, actors are replaced (and in this one’s case, said actors come back as other characters), etc. It’s just kind of a bummer.
This one’s not too bad though, really. Glenn Strange is no Karloff (and seeing Karloff stand next to him as a different character doesn’t help), but the Monster scenes are kept to a minimum anyway. Dracula’s role is so brief it’s a wonder why they even bothered at all, leaving poor ol’ Larry Talbot to carry the bulk of the screentime as far as any of the monsters go (ironically, no one in the film is actually a Frankenstein, but Karloff’s character knew of him).
Is there any horror movie character MORE depressing than Larry Talbot? He’s been in like four or five of these, and every single one it’s the same deal: the guy just wants to die. His revival (as usual, barely explained, and he’s somehow fully clothed) leads immediately to his usual pleas to either be killed or cured, and, as usual, he gets fucked over by those who promise to help him. Christ, the poor sod just breaks your heart. It seems the next film (House of Dracula) finished him off once and for all, but I am sure that if anyone had the thinnest idea, there would be a House of Creature From The Black Lagoon or something that inexplicably focused more on Larry than anyone else.
Karloff and Chaney aren’t the only ones around though; pretty much the entire 30s/40s Universal horror crew is here. Lionel Atwill plays what has to be the 7th character he’s played in this universe, and George Zucco pops up as well as a circus owner. And I think this is Carradine’s first appearance as Dracula (Lugosi being the only one not around, as he was probably too doped up at the time), though like I said, he’s barely in it (he also barely appeared in House of Dracula – I guess the titles were just as half-assed as everything else at this point). I didn’t see Dwight Frye either, though J. Carrol Naish is pretty great as the resident freak/assistant.
It’s also one of the more violent of the films. Of course, it’s pretty much all offscreen, but the body count is pretty high. Ignoring that Dracula, Larry, and the Monster were all revived in HoD, I count 11 deaths, which I think is a record. They even kill off the heroine, something incredibly rare for the period. In fact, the only people alive at the end of the film are the ones in the traditional mob.
This being the last disc on the set, there are also a whole bunch of extras pertaining to the cinematic history of Frankenstein. You can ignore the brief look at Van fucking Helsing, and skip right to the 40 minute retrospective on Bride of Frankenstein, which is narrated by Joe Dante and has commentary by Rick Baker, Clive Barker, Karloff’s daughter Sara, and many others. A great piece. There’s also another 40+ min piece about Frankenstein’s overall legacy that isn’t as necessary, but fun nonetheless. Finally, there’s a short film called Boo, which I guess got thrown on there to fill space.
An entertaining, if inconsequential finale to the overall best series in the lot, House’s biggest faults are simply the result of the law of diminishing returns. After 6 films (the most in any of the series), you can’t expect much, and it’s the only series with two truly great films (the original, and Bride). If you haven’t picked up this set yet, you’re missing out on what can singlehandedly provide an overview of the era of the Universal Monster. Dracula and Wolf Man’s sets can be skipped (especially since they released Dracula by itself on its own lavish 2 disc set, and will probably do the same for Wolf Man when the big budget remake hits next year), but Frankenstein’s is worth every penny.
Scanning the shelves at Blockbuster, I chuckled as I saw the cover of Baby Blues, since it looked like a killer baby (or doll) movie. The clerk nearby laughed at my laughing, and said “Man, whatever you got, I want, because it’s making you laugh.” I told him the title, to which he replied “Baby Blues, oh no!”, despite the fact that he probably didn’t know the film from Baby Mama*. The guy at the counter also made lame jokes, so I dunno, maybe something was in the air tonight (hold on!) at Blockbuster. Usually they are silent; lately they don’t even bother telling me the due date.
Anyway, the movie was NOT about a killer baby (or doll), but in fact a killer mom. Essentially a slasher version of the Andrea Yates story, I was pretty pleasantly surprised to see how disturbing and fast paced it was, with no punches pulled. It’s not every day you see a woman stabbing her 5 year old son over and over, then chasing the two other kids around with a tractor and such.
On the IMDb, some folks are complaining that the movie should be banned and what not because it’s so disturbing and tries to make entertainment out of a real life problem (post natal depression, which is what sets the mom off). Of course, that means we should also ban Candyman(inner city people being ignored), Stir Of Echoes 2 (the Iraq War), Texas Chain Saw(the economy), etc. And the idea of banning a horror movie for being disturbing is both hilarious and sad; it’s so rare anymore that a horror film even TRIES to disturb the audience anymore, when one does its considered a “crime”.
Now, granted, many (all?) of these complaints are from women who are mothers or expecting to be (good luck, with your shrill attitude), so some slack can be cut. I am not a parent, or a farm owner, or a complete idiot, so I cannot identify with either the characters in the film or its critics, but I can safely say that the mere act of making a horror movie out of a real problem is sort of a good thing – you can be entertained (to a degree, it’s hardly a “fun” slasher like your Friday the 13ths or whatever) and maybe open your eyes a bit at the same time. Maybe if I become a dad I will look for warning signs that the mother of my child is suffering from post natal depression that I am now aware of, such as excessive crying, unmotivated feelings of inadequacy, or seeing stigmata in the bedsheets.
Speaking of the dad, one thing I definitely liked was that the dad in this movie wasn’t a complete asshole, like most horror movies present fathers as. He seems like a pretty chill dude, actually. He’s just trying to provide for his family, and if that means he has to spend the entire movie driving in a truck so that the filmmakers can cut to something besides filicide every now and then to pad their film out a bit (it’s not even 80 minutes long, with two full credit sequences plus usual end credits), so be it. His only flaw is not really thinking things through; early on he expresses his desire to have another child (which would make 5) despite the fact that the newest one doesn’t even seem to be a year old yet. Granted, actress Colleen Porch is hot as fucking hell (she looks like a cross between Evangeline Lilly and Angelina Jolie) and you can’t blame him for wanting to hit it, but Christ dude, look to my initials (BC!) for the best of both worlds.
Then again maybe they didn’t have the pill back then, with then being whenever the hell this movie is supposed to take place. The main kid’s friend has an Atari, which would put it at 1981 or so (that or it’s the present day and he’s just the youngest hipster ever), but they have a modern baby monitor. However, the farm hand listens to old records and everything else sort of looks like early 60s. I guess it’s sort of the point, to be “timeless”, but it’s a bit awkwardly done if so.
I must give credit to the directors (Lars Jacobson and Amardeep Kaleka) for their damn good direction though. It’s a beautifully shot movie, and other than some obvious day for night colored shots, technically flawless. They are big on cutaways to random objects, all of which serves to make the film feel a bit off kilter, not to mention supply heavy doses of atmosphere. It’s rare any of this DTV indie nonsense impresses in the technical department, so well done.
There is one part that’s a bit ridiculous though. The kid begins to freak out (due to the fact that his mom just killed his siblings and stabbed him with an ax) and thus begins smashing plates and overturning furniture. But in the middle of all that, he... turns the faucet on? What the hell kind of rebellious act of anger is that? Why not leave the fridge door open or maybe turn the light on in a room you’re not staying in while you’re at it?
So if you don’t like horror movies that are based in reality and are actually disturbing (and suspenseful), I would probably steer clear of this one. But if you can put aside the somewhat odd idea of presenting those ideas in a slasher format (she even has a couple of minor “one-liners”) and your soapbox has been put away, you should enjoy it.
What say you?
*A film that I had also picked up for a moment, because, well, Tina Fey is funny and cute, dammit. If that movie had Kristen Wiig instead of the uber-annoying Amy Poehler, it would be like porn to me.
Last week I pointed out that The Long Hair of Death was the first Mill Creek movie to be shown in its correct aspect ratio. But that was only like 1.85:1 (if that). The Vampire’s Night Orgy (Spanish: La OrgÃa Nocturna De Los Vampiros) does it one better though – a full on 2.35:1 transfer!!!* The annoying little Mill Creek bug in the corner of the screen didn’t even obscure any film information!
Oh, and the movie was pretty damn good to boot.
I think Orgy (which doesn’t have any orgies, sadly, though there is SOME nudity) is the first film to combine the typical “breakdown” scenario with a vampire film. Our group is in a big bus and it breaks down, so they stop in vampire town. The bus actually breaks down a 2nd time and they have to return, which is something I really liked. Dual breakdownage! I also love how the group immediately begins to drink once they arrive in the town and discover it empty.
It also sort of unfolds like a slasher movie, with our good guys constantly going off by themselves and getting killed every 10 minutes or so. Also, the vampires behave sort of like zombies; rather than just one euro-trash head vampire and a couple of lackeys, like usual, it’s just a bunch of vague, hungry zombies, a la 30 Days of Night (except for the Danny Huston character), which was also a nice change of pace. It’s only 79 minutes long, but it’s a well paced 79 minutes, and I could have easily enjoyed another 10-20.
In fact, that may be possible. One thing the film didn’t really deliver on was the gore. It never really felt edited (music cues were not abruptly cut) but for a 70s Italian horror movie, it was relatively dry in this area. I did some light research, and only found someone claiming their version was 82 minutes, but otherwise it seems that the film is complete (it has the nudity; apparently the nude scenes all have alternate “clothed” takes, so I don’t see why they would be OK with nudity but not gore). Still, some of the kills were pretty cool anyway; my favorite was when a guy is seduced by a vampire girl, who then tosses him out the window to be eaten by a bunch of vamps waiting below. Awesome.
The end is stolen from 2000 Maniacs, of all movies. Our two survivors go see a cop, and tell them about their ordeal. He doesn’t believe them, so they lead him to the town, only to discover nothing there. However, a final shot reveals that the town WAS there and they are hiding. At first I thought it was going to be like Nothing But Trouble, where the cop turns out to be in on it, but oh well, can’t have everything.
Another thing worth noting – even though the film is obviously Spanish (even the credits are in Spanish – “Producida por”!), the dubbing is way above average. Some of it sounds a bit forced (as if they were pausing unnaturally to better match the original lip movement) but as a result, there isn’t any of the usual sort of “the guy is still talking but his mouth is already closed” action.
It’s rare I see a film on these MC sets that I would actually recommend for non ironic reasons; I’d even go out and buy the film on its own DVD if the image was better (widescreen or not, it’s still a bit washed out, as always) and had some good extras. I may tell everyone to watch Cathy’s Curse (the reigning champ of budget pack “finds”) but it’s a wretched movie. This one’s actually pretty damn good for real. Check it out.
Also, this is my 3rd movie in a row in which the monster type (Devil, Zombie, and now Vampire) was in the title. Cool. If possible, I’ll keep the streak going.
What say you?
*Someone on IMDB claimed that the transfer was in fact a full frame transfer that was then masked (black placed over the image) to only appear widescreen. This is completely stupid, as it would mean you were only watching the very center of the image (as it would be missing the left and right sides from the initial cropping, and then the top and the bottom from the masking). I think something like that would be noticeable, and thus an example is below:
As Zombie Town’s opening credits flashed by, I caught a name that sounded familiar: David Giancola. Then a bit into the film, someone pointed out that they were in Vermont, and my memory was instantly jogged: Giancola was the guy behind Time Chasers, one of my all time favorite MST3k episodes, and butt of my favorite MST3k related anecdote. Apparently, he and the cast and crew of that film got together when the MST episode premiered, figuring it would be a good time, only to realize how much it hurt (one guy in particular, whose role was cut from the episode for time constraint reasons, was apparently borderline depressed about the whole experience). Hahahahah, awesome.
Anyway, the guys probably would have been more kind to this film (which Giancola only exec produced), as it’s far more entertaining than that film, with better production value to boot. With the exception of the blood (which never looks like anything but Kool-Aid), the effects are pretty good, and relatively plentiful. It’s a bit slow at first (slowest zombie outbreak ever – they are around from the first scene but they only become a real problem in the final half hour) but there is still plenty of action overall, especially for a low budget indie. Some of the gags are stolen outright from Shaun of the Dead though, something I’m not really thrilled about. But really, the biggest blunder in the film is during a Bingo scene where the guy calls out “O-2”. What sort of generic bullshit Bingo card has a 2 in the O column?
They also really sell the whole “town” angle. Unlike most zombie films, the walking corpses seem to have been actual people that the living characters know, and the film’s best laughs stem from their silly reactions to the fact that their friends are trying to kill them. “Fuck you, Mitch Smith!” one of the good guys yells after he is attacked by the Mitch-zombie. The film’s resident laid-back zombie hunter guy (more than just “shades” of Ed from Shaun) also nonchalantly kills his aunt at one point. And in the film’s one nude scene, a guy’s grandmother bites his partner in the middle of a backseat romp (one occurring in the middle of a party – I guess he’s not worried about his friends watching).
In addition to Shaun, some other horror-comedies are obvious influences. Our heroes meet the heroine in a scene straight out of Tremors, and some of the bigger gore scenes owe at least some of their existence to Dead Alive (Brain Dead). And slug nature of the zombies is a bit Night of the Creeps-y (plus they are killed by salt – a device from Horror Of Party Beach!). Unlike Shaun, however, they don’t directly steal exact gags from those films, so it’s much more acceptable. And since the movie is reasonably entertaining, I don’t mind being reminded of great films (as opposed to when a complete piece of shit suddenly references Jawsor Halloweenor whatever).
The movie also has a surprising and ultimately excessive amount of profanity. The F word appears more often than zombies do; even old men toss the finger with relative nonchalance. Normally I don’t care (obviously – this review probably has an R rating) but sometimes it just seems excessive, and this is one of those times. Less is more, fuckers.
And I don’t care, the generic alt-rock song over the end credits rocked.
The disc has some extras that you can just skip for the most part. The best is a look at how some of the effects were pulled off, which goes into more depth than usual (and since they aren’t exactly KNB, they had to get a bit more inventive than the crews you usually see in these things). There’s also a “making of” that is pretty annoying, it’s just the cast trying to be funny for the most part. There is also a commentary, but they did a shitty job recording it – the dialogue of the film is pretty much at the same level as their audio, so it’s kind of hard to concentrate on who is talking and what is being said when the people on screen are talking (which is often for the first hour). Most of it is just sort of pointing out who the cast members are or whatever, so it’s not really essential. It’s also a full frame transfer; not sure if it was filmed that way (I honestly can’t tell if its film or DV – it looks pretty good either way) but if you have a widescreen TV, prepare to make the “stretch or windowbox?” choice.
For some reason I completely forgot about the 2nd volume of the Bava set. I know some of the movies aren’t horror, but neither is the first one, and I went through that pretty quickly (compared to other sets; I still haven’t finished the Masters of Horror set and I’ve had that well over a year now). Sorry about that.
Anyway, Lisa And The Devil is definitely a good choice for Horror Movie A Day, because it’s actually two movies. Apparently, after the film was released (and tanked), the producer decided to rip off The Exorcist and re-edit the film to accommodate that decision. The result was titled The House Of Exorcism, and contains about a half hour’s worth of new footage (with about as much removed from Bava’s original version). So I decided to review both, because I couldn’t in good conscience consider House its own movie.
Both have their merits. Lisa is atmospheric and a bit slow, like many of Bava’s films, and House is ridiculous and incoherent. If I had to watch one at the New Bev, it would be House, but Lisa is the one I actually prefer. I should note that the best scene in either version appears in both: when a woman begins running over her husband over and over and we just see the dummy corpse rolling around, battered and broken. It’s awesome.
The movie also features Telly Savalas, so you know you’re in for some silly scene chewing and lollipops. Some of his stuff is lost in the re-edited version, and that is a shame, but there is still enough to savor, particularly the scenes where he works on his mannequins. Also enjoyable is Alessio Orano as Max, the batshit insane man who keeps his wife’s corpse in bed with him. I wish I could tell you what the hell his deal was, but after more or less watching the movie four times (each version has a commentary) I still can’t really tell what the hell is going on in certain parts. The original version is merely weird, but the re-edit is just baffling at times, particularly the end, in which the two stories sort of combine in a manner that simply makes no sense and doesn’t really conclude anything.
Most of the new stuff involves Elke Sommer’s character becoming possessed and going through the usual Exorcist rip off motions: body contorting, foul mouthed male voices, pea soup... it’s all here. Within these scenes is my 2nd favorite devil expletive of all time: When the priest asks where she came from (meaning the demon), it replies “From a cunt, you jerk!” (my favorite remains “Do you know what she did? Your cunting daughter?”). These scenes are entertaining, despite the unoriginality, but I wish they made it a bit more clear how the two stories were entwined. I think we are supposed to believe that the old footage (which Bava shot) is merely a dream or something? A flashback? The adventures of her soul? I have no idea. Maybe they just actually split into two people, who knows. All I know is, the re-edited version is missing the original’s hilarious conclusion, in which Telly flies a plane (lollipop still in hand!) populated with corpses.
I was amused by how they cut from old footage to new and tried to make it look “seamless”. Basically, whenever they needed to cut from Bava’s footage to Leone’s, they would go from a random object. Like, there would be a shot of a watch in Bava’s footage, so Leone would begin a scene on a clock or whatever. He gives up after awhile though; by the halfway mark, every “possessed” scene just begins with Sommer making some face and then turning her head toward whoever was in the scene with her. I like to imagine that he began watching Bava’s version with an editor and the two of them pointed out possible “entry” points. “Hey, there’s a shot of a melted candle... we can go from that to pea soup splattered on the floor.”
Tim Lucas (who else?) provides the commentary for Lisa, and as usual, he’s over-informative. In addition to stuff about the actual movie, you’ll learn odd bits that have nothing to do with the movie, such as the name of the actress who dubbed one of Lisa’s actresses in a completely unrelated film. Like his other tracks, he still sounds like he is reading cereal ingredients, but I don’t doubt that he is the premiere expert on Bava, and that guy's sort of dead, there’s probably no one better to have on the track. House has the meddling producer (Alfredo Leone) and Ms. Sommers, but she barely speaks throughout the track. Instead Leone mostly just sort of explains why he recut the movie (money) and points out the “new” stuff. I wish Lucas had joined in, since he doesn’t talk too much about it on his track and I find this area of the film’s lifeline to be the most interesting, but oh well. Now I know the names of other movies that were filmed in the same city and the name of the author who came up with the line “Where there’s smoke there’s fire.”
Actually I forget both of those things. Plus I dozed off for a while listening to it, and then I had the terrifying experience of dreaming with Tim Lucas’ narration. My dreams didn’t make a hell of a lot of sense, but I could hear Lucas throughout, talking about impotence (Max's junk isn’t functioning right – I think it’s an important plot point) and what not as dream-BC tried to find his new room at a college dorm made to look like something from ancient Greece.
I’ve never been a huge fan of any of Bava’s films (except Shock, which Lamberto sort of took over I guess); I tend to enjoy them but forget about them within a few days. But this one was a lot of fun... it’s well made, strange, and occasionally gory, all of which is fine by me. If you’ve never seen any of his films, I think this would be a good place to start.
Sometimes, you just need to watch a bad monster movie from the 60s. There’s nothing particularly good about Night Fright; it’s slow, badly photographed, padded beyond any reasonable measure... yet that’s all part of the charm of the damn thing. Had it actually been good, it would probably bore me, because I would have seen all of the movies that had ripped it off in the 40 years or so following its release. Instead, it works as a relic of a time long since past: when all you needed for a monster movie was any sort of suit, a down on his luck actor (in this case, John Agar), and a few bland kids.
The bland kids spend roughly half the movie dancing around in the dark (it seems shooting day for night wasn’t an option for director James A. Sullivan). One girl’s ass in particular appears in the film more than the monster ever does. Of course, there is some inner-group turmoil (two guys fighting over the same girl), leading to some great dialogue like “This is our private blast! If you don’t dig it, split!” and more badly photographed action, plus some cops wandering around, people making phone calls... just about anything Sullivan and writer Russ Marker could think of to avoid having the damn monster appear. Again though, this is what made it fun to watch. It also kind of reminded me of Giant Gila Monster at times, except Sullivan and Marker failed to devote any significant amount of screen time to the finer details of car repair.
As for the monster, I’m not sure. If there’s ever a shot in the movie where he could be seen clearly, I missed it. Here is one of the better shots:
But most just look like this:
Yeah, I don’t know where he is in there either. I could hear him growling so I assume he is in the scene, but it might have just been Agar muttering to himself.
One thing I loved is the end credits. Not because it was finally over, but because they are picture credits, accompanied by some rousing Bonanza style score. I always liked those, and it’s a shame so few films use them anymore (I think the Scream films are the most prominent “recent” example). They also follow one of the silliest closing lines in movie history – “I’ll buy you all of the uniforms you want!”
This one never showed up on MST3k to the best of my knowledge, which is kind of strange. It’s the perfect type of movie for them, and a good length too (75 minutes). Plus they always had fun with Agar’s films, even some pretty decent ones like Revenge of the Creature. A missed opportunity, to be sure.
Ever since Seven, it's like no one can make a serial killer movie anymore unless it takes place in a big city, has a brooding cop as the hero, a killer with "good" intentions, etc... I plan to make a serial killer thriller that takes place in the woods, the hero is just some kid, and his motives are pretty flimsy. Oh wait, I guess that's just a slasher movie.
Anyway, movies like The Killing Gene (aka W Delta Z) are pretty much a dime a dozen, and when you add that to my already over-saturated intake of horror movies, it shouldn't be much of a surprise that I was pretty damn bored by most of the film. However, it finally comes to life once the actual killer shows up (sort of a spoiler ahead, though the back of the DVD more or less does that anyway).
Selma Blair is the killer, something they pretty much tell us less than halfway through the film, but she doesn't really appear until the final 20 minutes or so. And it's a shame, because her scenes are the best in the film, and the filmmaker's decision to keep her out of the story is a big part of why it doesn't quite work as well as it should for most of the running time. Since we aren't seeing killings, and the killer isn't being chased, the entire movie consists of our two uninteresting heroes walking around and talking to people about things that already happened. It's like a grimy version of a Law & Order episode, and not one of the good ones about crazy daughters who kill their dads because he found out she got knocked up by her brother or whatever. Stellan Skarsgard, an actor I usually like, pretty much spends the entire movie muttering and glowering at people, and Melissa George* just plays the "I'm not cut out for this OK I guess I am now" role that we've also seen a million times. It doesn't help that director Tom Shankland banished tripods from the set and will often do things like shoot a cigarette rolling around on the ground for 10 seconds straight for no reason.
The nice thing about the end though, is that it gives a lot of the stuff we've seen a slightly new meaning, and if the movie wasn't so leaden-paced, I would actually be happy to give it another look. And I really appreciate the lack of a Saw-style rapid fire flashback montage that shows those double-meaning clips in succession, for the idiots in the audience who can't really remember things that happened five minutes ago.
The movie also contains one of the silliest mistakes in recent memory. A killer's accomplice is driving away, and George is shooting at him from behind. Somehow, his windshield is shot out, despite no bullet hole in the back shield that would allow such a thing to occur. Also, the movie makes a more unintentional error by copying a plot element from Fletch (cops dealing drugs by making fake arrests). If you're boring me, the last thing you want to do is make me start thinking about one of the most entertaining films of all time.
Not sure if there is an unrated cut anywhere, but the R one is pretty choppy - for a Dimension EXTREME! title it feels pretty content with not showing throat slashings, vomit, etc. It's also shot on HD, so there's not much to enjoy on a technical level either, since the entire movie is set at night, something HD isn't exactly the best choice for in the first place. That said, it's a damn fine DVD transfer (black levels are perfect - a rarity for a film this dark as DVD places will try to compensate by "lightening" the image a bit, resulting in washed out blacks), and the making of is brief but pretty informative.
So I dunno, I really dug the ending, and I liked the basic idea behind the killer's executions, but I was bored to tears by the first hour or so, which had no suspense, no action, and no interesting characters. Your call.
What say you?
*In my very first junket for Bloody Disgusting, George told us she didn't consider herself a horror actress. Funny, because four of her last five movies have been horror films, with another two on the way. Damnable liar!
Some of my movie choices come from the strangest sources. For example, I was originally going to watch whatever Blockbuster had sent me in the mail today. But when I checked my email, I saw that an email chain concerning the screening of Die Hard and Robocop at my beloved New Bev had somehow turned into a debate over the merits of The Fly II. As people posted examples of why it was good, I realized that I couldn't remember a goddamn useful thing about the movie anymore (I thought I watched it when I was like 16, but it must have been even earlier, or I would have recognized Frank Darabont's name in the credits, since I saw Shawshank when I was 14 and it instantly became one of my favorite movies), so I opened the DVD I had won when it came out a few years ago and decided to see on which side of the argument I would fall.
Well, I liked it! Sure, it's maybe not as "smart" as the original, but come on – it's a movie about a guy who is becoming a fly, and I like that Chris Walas and his crew embraced the fact that they were making a monster movie. Eric Stoltz disappears entirely at around 1:10 in the 1:45 film, so you get over a half hour of pure giant fly action. Why go the whole metaphorical/psychological route again? That's what the first film is for. I don't think it hurt the Alien franchise very much by going balls to the wall for its sequel, so I'm not sure why there was any dissidence here.
Now obviously it does have its shortcomings. Eric Stoltz is hardly as interesting as Jeff Goldblum (either as an actor or a character), making the "all fly" aspect of the film's final third all the more appreciated. And it's also a bit too slight; even at 1:45, it feels a bit rushed at times, and there isn't much complication to the plot. I would have liked to have seen the story have another layer to it somehow, instead of the rather simplistic "he starts to turn and he gets revenge" angle.
A couple other minor things annoyed me too. One is the goddamn holographic badges that everyone wears. They are so distracting, I almost wanted to take the color out of the film (it would be sort of fitting, the 50s Fly was color but ITS sequel was filmed B&W to save some dough). The fake computers annoy me too; there's a part where Martin hacks into the database to change his security clearance and when he succeeds, it suddenly plays some "victory!" music, as if he had just beaten Super Mario or something. And I had to laugh when Martin gets his own place and it's decorated like a retirement home for a 80 year old woman. He's like a five year old in a 20 year old's body, at least get the kid a car poster or something.
Otherwise it's a damn solid sequel. It's gory as hell, which is not only good but incredibly surprising; in 1988 and 89, the MPAA was being completely unreasonable in regards to gore, resulting in damn near bloodless horror films like Friday the 13th 7 and TCMIII (which was almost incomprehensible at times due to the MPAA edits). The guy who tears off his own (fly-juice-covered) face as he screams is simply amazing, as is the head crush that occurs a few minutes later. The monsters are also incredible, in addition to the fly itself, there are also a pair of "bad transport" freaks that are not only great looking, but are more "alive" than the thing at the end of the first film. The movie even offers us a mutant cactus.
Fly II also contains what is now my favorite break up line of all time: "Stay out of my sector! You no longer have clearance!" Next time I have to dump someone, I hope I remember to use that line (the less contextual sense it makes, the better). And I guess I should mention the scene where the kid does a maze, because it was the only part of the movie that felt familiar to me as I watched it (I also recalled that Martin lived at the end, something I don't really agree with – the dude killed like 7 people!).
Of course, no one can forget the dog stuff (well, I did; it was someone's claim that it upset them so much that they had to leave the theater that made me decide to revisit it). Like The Gate, it seems as if the filmmakers were hellbent on making the audience cry. Young Martin sees his dog suffer a bad transport, and that's bad enough, but then he comes across it a few years later. The poor thing has been kept alive in a pit, and then the movie ramps up the tear-making antics: the little mutant dog wags its tail, and then sticks its mutant tongue out to try to show affection for his old pal. THEN, Stoltz weeps as he puts the thing out of its misery, which it clearly protests. Christ!
Like the original, it has an inordinate amount of people with incredibly goofy names. Our primary bad guy's name is Bartok, a name better used for cartoon rats in Anastasia movies. And the resident asshole henchman character is named Scorby. Plus the original's Stathis Borans returns (the only cast member to do so, though some deleted Goldblum footage is resurrected).
The DVD is jampacked; I didn't even have time to go through it all. There are a pair of documentaries that are close to an hour each; one about Fly II, one about the entire franchise. Then there are some storyboard comparisons and brief featurettes (one from 1989, it's hilariously cheesy). There is also an "alternate ending" which is really an "alternate prologue", as it doesn't change anything about the actual ending of the film. Plus another deleted scene, some random trailers (The Omen?) and a commentary by Walas which I will hopefully get to soon. As a bonus, a lot of the extras are anamorphic, which was appreciated. It's a bit of a bummer that so few people from the film came back for the retrospective documentary (Walas is there, obviously, but not a single cast member and hardly any crew join him), especially when I watched this stuff right after going through the extras on the new Child's Play DVD, in which just about every major cast member and the entire creative team came back for new interviews.
Anyway, I hope folks give this one another look; it's much better than you might expect, and even if you dislike it, the monster action/makeup/gore is definitely worth your time.
HMAD-ing is actually somewhat expensive! If you can, help BC pay for his various movie-getting services (Netflix, Amazon, buying used DVDs, etc.)! Thank you!!!
Horror Fans