X-Cross (2007)

JUNE 25, 2008

GENRE: ASIAN, CULT, SURVIVAL
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (FESTIVAL SCREENING)

When I was putting together the “quote banner” for the site, I came across a guy who liked Horror Movie A Day, but that it lost points because I “dislike Asian horror”. This was written a year or so ago, when I had very few Asian films reviewed here, and yes, most of them negative. But I hope that guy is still reading, because I have given several high marks to Eastern fare since, and X-Cross (aka XX (Ekusu Kurosu): Makyô Densetsu) certainly continues that trend – it’s actually one of my favorite movies of the year.

The setup is what really makes the film. It’s like Saw III and IV combined, in that the first part of the film shows you one character’s journey through an event, and then the 2nd part shows the other girl’s adventures. And each part has its own horror sub-genre feel – the first is a suspenseful girl in the woods type thing, and the 2nd is a one on one battle between a girl and a romantic rival who has gone insane and taken to running around dressed up in a costume and wielding giant scissors. But then the 3rd part is where the movie truly takes off, as the girls reunited and face their enemies together, culminating in a huge bloodbath via a batshit insane 4 way fight.

And that’s what makes the film work so well. We start off with suspense (suspense that actually works for that matter), then go into some light survival/”torture” elements, and finally just the gonzo type of stuff that director Kenta Fukasaku is known for (he did Battle Royale 2, for example). It works much better than you might think, and the way the film keeps elevating is admirable to say the least.

Plus I always like those sort of ‘two sides to a story’ movie setups. You see a broken light swinging around in one story, and the second story explains how it got that way. It’s not an easy thing to pull off – you run the risk of making the first part of the story incomprehensible because there is too many pieces that won’t be filled in until the next part, but Fukasaku and screenwriter Tetsuya Oishi do a good job of providing a lot of these type of “ohhhh.... that’s how that happened” moments without sacrificing story coherence.

Sadly, no US release is planned for this one yet, though since it’s been released in Japan and other countries, perhaps those among you who know their way around a region free DVD player can figure out how to get their hands on a copy. And then tell me how, because I can’t make heads or tails of that stuff.

Note - you may notice my review is rather vague compared to usual. That's because I think the movie is best when you go in totally blind, as I did. But because I like to serve, here is the (too long) trailer for the movie nonetheless. Watch at your own risk (of not enjoying the movie as much as me)!

What say you?

Read more »

Asian, Based On Novel, Cult, Fix, Survival,

{[['']]}

Believers (2007)

MAY 10, 2008

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

What the fuck is wrong with Raw Feed? Why can’t they ever make a film that lives up to its concept? I’d rather see a generic story done right than a good story done wrong, but that’s precisely what RF has done with each of their first three films. First was Rest Stop, which managed to create the most unlikable heroine in cinematic history (while boring us to tears). Then came Sublime, which was OK but about 40 minutes too long, and featured needless (and underdeveloped at that) “white guilt” social commentary. Now we have Believers, which not only takes a genius concept (a doomsday cult is actually right) but also an always fun actor (Johnny Messner) and once again dulls the movie almost beyond repair.

The problem is that the cult stuff is hardly the focus. This may be the first film in history whose sequel would almost be guaranteed to be more interesting. I was more interested in the history of the cult, its members, and most importantly, the idea that they were right all along. Naturally, the whole ‘end of the world’ that the film presents would kind of make a sequel hard to pull off, but I dunno, anything’s gotta be more interesting than watching scene after scene of Messner saying “fuck you!” and rattling his cage door. It’s a waste of a ‘twist’ ending when the 90 minutes before it weren’t giving you much in the way of entertainment.

That said, it’s not a bad movie. As said, Messner’s a fun guy to watch, and the few bits of interesting thought that the movie offers are certainly compelling. And one of the cult guys is named Io (lol), and resembles Tony from the original Die Hard (the one that Willis kills first; “There are RULES for policemen.”). And the cult member is the bald guy from Murder One, so there’s something. But the reliance on typical plot developments (Messner’s coworker comes looking for him, Messner briefly escapes, etc) sort of outweigh the original aspects. You really gotta work to weed out the good and try to ignore the generic.

One thing that helps immensely is, strangely, the disc’s extra features. Most of them feature the lovably nutty Io, including his orientation video, an uncut interview that he does on some sort of daytime talk show (this includes a hilarious and subtle jab at Scientology), and his explaining how math ties into their theories about God and life and all that good stuff. There’s also a video of some folks investigating the cult compound, taking place shortly after the events of the film (but before the film’s epilogue, obviously). The 20 minutes of material here are all far more interesting and revealing than the film itself.

Then again, you can’t really be surprised by that, since the film is directed by none other than Blair Witch’s Daniel Myrick (faring far better here than Solstice, at any rate). BW had a bunch of stuff (books, video games, tv specials, and of course, the internet) that fleshed out the film, and the same thing applies here. The only difference is, BW is still fun to watch even without knowing any of that other stuff, whereas with Believers, it’s almost required viewing in order to give the film any merit at all. Without this stuff, it’s just an underdeveloped, only occasionally interesting overlong Twilight Zone episode.

The only sort of “typical” extra is a commentary, and like Solstice, it’s just not very interesting, even though Myrick has help here (co-writer Julia Fair). He rambles about technical things, and also sits in silence for long periods of time. Fair occasionally interjects some generic “this guy was great” type comments about the cast, but not much else. Myrick also points out a Blair Witch related “easter egg” that I had actually caught, so if you missed it, watch the commentary up until that point to see what it is!

And yes, I spoiled the ending of the movie but not a vague reference that occurs in the first 10 minutes.

What say you?

Read more »

Cult, Religious,

{[['']]}

Satan's Skin (1971)

APRIL 20, 2008

GENRE: BRITISH, CULT, KILLER KID, SUPERNATURAL
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (REVIVAL SCREENING)

Oh, bless you, Joe Dante. I had never even HEARD of Satan’s Skin (aka Blood on Satan’s Claw) until you added it into your festival, and honestly, if it wasn’t paired with Horror Express (yay!) I probably would have skipped it. Not a big fan of devil type horror movies, and I had never heard of anyone in the cast or crew, so I figured it would just be some dull oddity. Well it’s certainly an oddity, but it’s VERY far from dull.

The storytelling is very loose, something that was a bit strange but eventually won me over. For example, the film begins with a dude visiting his uncle to introduce him to his fiancée. The film follows the young couple for the first 15 minutes or so, and then once we have met a few other folks, they have seemingly served their purpose. The girl is never heard from again, and the guy just sort of gets phased out, to the point where the last time we see him he’s basically an extra in a scene. Later, five of the townsfolk are chasing one of the suspected cult members, a scene that comes out of nowhere. You might occasionally get a bit confused, but in the end it all more or less makes sense (at least in an interior logic sort of way – we ARE talking about a movie in which people begin growing parts of the devil on their person).

I should also point out that the film has a rather unpleasant “teen on teen” rape scene. By that point I was having a grand old time with the loony movie, but that sort of sucked the fun out of it for a while. It gets back on track, however, when the film’s actual hero suddenly realizes he has a goat leg.

The finale has some of the strangest editing I’ve ever seen. The town judge is swinging a sickle, and it suddenly freeze frames. Is it over? Nope, it cuts to the intended victims, who begin to run... and then it freeze frames. What the hell? It’s not like they are using a clever edit to hide the violence (none of them are killed), it’s just there for the hell of it. Very strange. It also contains Yvonne Paul, one of the hottest women I've ever seen, dancing nude and brandishing a knife.

Anchor Bay released this one (under the Blood on Satan’s Claw title) but only in Region 2, so it should be relatively easy to find if you're not in America. It's also been released on VHS, whatever that is. If you can watch it though, I highly recommend it – it’s like Children of the Corn meets Wicker Man, something I mean in the most positive way possible. Hopefully a stateside release will be coming along promptly. Like tomorrow.

Like I said earlier, it screened with Horror Express, a film that I really enjoyed when I watched it, despite being a god-awful transfer. Unfortunately, the print they showed wasn’t much better – it was scratched to hell, and each reel had a different color timing to it (one was too red, the next one looked right, then the next one was too yellow...). Still, a damn fine film that is also largely overlooked. Support strange 70s horror!

What say you?

Read more »

British, Cult, Killer Kid, Supernatural,

{[['']]}

The Seventh Victim (1943)

JANUARY 28, 2008

GENRE: CULT
SOURCE: CABLE (TCM)

I really gotta stop reading descriptions about movies before I watch them. Until there’s such a thing as a spoiler warning on a plot synopsis, I always run the risk of knowing more than I’d like about a film, due to differing opinions on the difference between “plot” and “revelation”. Such is the case with The Seventh Victim, which, as far as I am concerned, is about a girl looking for her missing sister. That’s it. But Time Warner or whoever wrote the damn synopsis felt compelled to reveal exactly who/what took her sister, something that isn’t revealed until about 40+ minutes into the 71 minute film.

Of course, I spoiled it in the “Genre” tag, but whatever. No one pays me.

Ironically, the first 20 minutes of the film moved rather quickly, as the girl goes on her search pretty much in the 2nd or 3rd scene, and by the 20 minute mark has met a private investigator, visited the police, gone on a spooky search, seen a murder, etc. So I wrote down “Moves quickly!” and then literally as soon as I put the pen back down the movie began to slow down (I contemplated writing “not enough hardcore nudity and violence” to see if THAT suddenly changed, but I decided against it).

Part of the problem is that at this point in the film we are introduced to some 400 or so male characters: a shrink, a poet, another investigator, a doctor, yet another investigator, etc. They all seem to want to find the sister as well, not to mention totally tap the main girl. This results in a lack of focus – it’s like an ensemble film in which only one character’s storyline matters. Hell, the “heroine” even disappears for a large part of the climax, which is a bit odd (she’s not even present when all of the explanation about her sister is revealed!). Who is this movie about, anyway?

According to the always accurate Wikipedia (quoting a documentary on Val Lewton that aired along with all of these films on TCM – which I also recorded and will watch once I finish seeing all the movies since these docs tend to spoil the films more than a Time Warner synopsis could ever aspire to), a lot of scenes were cut from this one, and it sort of shows. People become important without really being introduced, characters disappear for long stretches, etc. And, as mentioned, there is no hardcore violence or nudity (that might be a stylistic choice though).

Still, it’s a pretty good film, and apparently has some ties to Cat People. So there’s something. The ending is pretty depressing/creepy, and I must admit I was surprised by it. And I like seeing old New York in movies for some reason. All in all, the best 71 minute movie I’ve seen! Wait, how long was Rise Of The Dead? I think that was 71 too. Oh well, this is top 5 at any rate.

What say you?

Read more »

Cult,

{[['']]}

October Extras #27 - Halloween III: Season Of The Witch (1982)

OCTOBER 27, 2007

GENRE: CULT, TECHNOLOGY, WEIRD
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (!!!!)
LAST SEEN: OCTOBER 2006 (DVD)

I must credit the source of today’s October Extra to Ryan Rotten of ShockTillYouDrop.com, who informed me of a theatrical screening of my beloved Halloween III: Season Of The Witch right here in LA. I skipped multiple parties and had to listen to Game 3 of the World Series (which the Sox won, wooo) on the goddamn radio in order to attend this rare event, but I have no regrets at all.

More than probably any other entry in the series, III deserves to be seen with a big crowd and on a big screen. It’s such a delightfully odd and mean-spirited film, there’s no way one could TRULY experience it without the film being presented larger than life, in a room full of appreciative fans. As many times as I have seen the film, I never noticed the totally fake fireman hat in the early hospital scene until it was magnified and pointed out by an audience member. Go back and watch the scene (widescreen version only) after the guy blows up at the hospital, and keep your eye on the fireman on the left. It’s breathtaking in its cheapness.

Also, come on people, let’s be honest: Tom Atkins is Oscar-worthy here. From his rampant hitting on of every woman who crosses his path, to his utterly horrified reaction to a generic cartoon playing at the bar (the one he frequents so much that his co-workers “said he could be found here” – keep in mind he’s a doctor), to his ass scene, the crowd cheered almost every time he appeared on screen. The scene where he calls his wife and tells her he has to go to some medical conference before grabbing a six pack and heading off to visit a mask factory with some chick he just met a few hours before (and of course, nails a few hours later) is possibly the greatest scene in any Halloween film.

Which brings us to the most controversial aspect of the film: the total lack of Michael Myers (something that escaped Roger Ebert, who, in his review, claimed that “the film begins where II left off, with the killer being immolated in the hospital parking lot” – dumbass!). Since we see clips of the original in the film, we are to believe that III exists in the “real world” (if so, I need to buy more 6 packs and make up more medical conferences than I already do), despite retaining the Halloween name. Everyone by now knows that this was Carpenter’s intent all along, to make a different film about Halloween every year, but he was vetoed by the money men and thus left the franchise after this one, and the “franchise entry” Halloween 4 was made, apparently by the people who survived the likely apocalypse at the end of this film. The long running argument is “If they didn’t call it Halloween I would probably like it”, which just speaks volumes as to how ignorant people are. If The Godfather was called “Horse Head In A Guy’s Bed”, I’m pretty sure it would still be a great movie.

Back to the film itself and how amazing it is. Let’s see, we got a kid’s head turning into snakes and insects because a computer chip with a piece of Stonehenge inside it reacted to an epileptic TV commercial, and... well really, what the fuck else do you need out of a movie? Atkins’ ass has already been mentioned.

The film’s most memorable contribution to pop culture is of course, the Silver Shamrock theme. Set to the tune of London Bridge, it is simply impossible to watch the film and not sing along to the ad (which we hear about a dozen times) at least once. Carpenter and Howarth’s score is one of their best collaborations (love the main theme over the computerized pumpkin assembly/credits), and even a die hard Myers fan would be hard-pressed to claim otherwise.

One thing I don’t get about the movie is the timing of the “Big Giveaway”. So this tiny mask company somehow convinced all major networks to show Halloween at the same time across the country (starting at half past the hour no less), and everyone was watching it? At one point, Cochran is told “they” are getting a 41 share, so maybe he owns all the networks and just chose not to sink any of his money into a more impressive factory.

But who cares. I love this movie, and watching in theaters with a couple friends and 30 other like-minded folks was one of the best theater experiences I’ve had this year. Another friend didn’t understand why I would pay 10 bucks and miss out on a party to go see a film I have on DVD (twice in fact) – but people like that just don’t get how important the theatrical experience is in terms of enjoyment. I almost feel bad when I see a film (especially one that wasn’t direct to video) for the first time on DVD. And revival screenings such as this are even more fun, because you get to sort of see the film for the first time again.

I usually never censor my comments, but I will make an exception here – anyone who posts “This movie sucks because there’s no Michael Myers”, even to be sarcastic, that comment will be deleted. I want good feelings and love here! Myers or not, there’s nothing anyone can do to convince me that any of the last 4 films (though H20 I can go either way on) is somehow truer to the spirit of Halloween (the film or the holiday) than III. BUT, if you can explain in a way that has nothing to do with Myers, or the title, why this film is somehow bad, I am all ears. Or, eyes, I guess, in this context.

What say you?

Read more »

Cult, Halloween Series, Holiday, October Extras, Technology, Weird,

{[['']]}

The Snake People (aka La Muerte Viviente)

OCTOBER 10, 2007

GENRE: CRAP, CULT
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK!!!)

Most horror fans know the sad fate of Boris Karloff, who spent the last few months of his life filming quick roles for a total of four productions (that were filmed entirely elsewhere). One such film was The Snake People, and unless the other three are on the other budget packs, it will be the only one I ever bother with, if Snake is any indication of their worth.

Possibly the boringest film on the entire budget set (far surpassing even Werewolf In A Girl’s Dormitory levels of plodding monotony), Snake People manages to make cannibals, lesbian “incest” (a girl makes out with herself in a nightmare), zombies, voodoo, cults, snakes, midgets, whipping, and hula dancing all seem like the least exciting elements of any film ever, not just horror. Yes, all these things and more are on display here, but they don’t connect to one another in any sensible way (I admit I was totally baffled as to what the hell was going on more than once during this film, but it didn’t make it any less boring).

I kind of got a chuckle out of the narrator though, as he sounds more like he’s describing a car or a new luxury resort as he discusses “the living death” and things of that nature. There’s also a delightful scene where a little person, who looks like he’s dressed as the Penguin from the 1960’s Batman show, repeatedly whips a girl on the back (and it seems like she’s enjoying it more than he is). But that’s not enough to warrant a recommendation, or even to rescue it from crap.

Even the goddamn credits on this film are confusing. For starters, there is an inordinate amount of people with only one name in the cast (and crew!). Also, about an hour or so into the film, we are given a title card reading “Damballah” (the name of the voodoo cult leader/god/whatever). No other such card appears in the film that I can recall. And finally, they can’t even spell basic words right:

Well, whatever movie. I’m going to go do what the movie told me to do 4000 times, and offer my dreams to Damballah. I often dream that I am on Lost, Prison Break, or 24 (sometimes two at once) – thus making my dreams a hell of a lot more interesting than whatever the hell he’s up to in this movie. Maybe it’ll give him some ideas.

What say you?

Read more »

Chilling Classics, Crap, Cult,

{[['']]}

October Extras #7 - Halloween: The Curse Of Michael Myers (1995)

OCTOBER 7, 2007

GENRE: CULT, SLASHER
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)
LAST SEEN: 1998 OR SO (VHS!)

I don’t think I was ever as excited in my life for a movie as I was for Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers. I was 15, and it had been 4 years since I saw the last installment, which ended on an intriguing cliffhanger. At the end of that film, Michael was broken out of jail (where he was hilariously allowed to keep his mask on) by a mysterious man in black. Who was he? Why did he do it? Why hadn’t anyone noticed the Thorn tattoo on Michael’s hand before?

Arriving at the theater after being dropped off by my friend’s mom, I was thwarted by a rare enforcement of MPAA rating limitations. As the film was rated R (in case you forgot a time when that was a given for a horror movie), the guy refused to sell us a ticket without a parent’s OK. This being the day before cell phones, we couldn’t just call my friend’s mom who was probably only a minute’s drive away. So we had to call my mom, and have her drive all the way down to the theater just to say “They can go see this movie.” Idiotic.

Well it wasn’t even worth her trouble, let alone the 4 year wait (6 for those who saw Halloween 5 during its theatrical run). Not that the film was a total abomination like Resurrection was (who else is excited for my upcoming review of that? It might be the first movie review to be rated NC-17 for language), but it stank of re-editing and re-shooting (probably the first time I noticed such things as a kid). Donald Pleasence was barely in it despite being the only actor to be listed above the title; half the scenes from the trailer/tv spots weren’t even in the film (and one spot featured footage from Hellraiser: Bloodline. Fucking amazing); and worse, none of the promised answers were really in the film. The whole marketing campaign was built around explaining who the man in black was, and why Michael killed, but all that the movie really offered was Tommy Doyle (played by Paul Rudd in his first role, which is what everyone who has apparently forgotten that Clueless came out 3 months before will tell you) pointing out that there was a constellation in the sky that not only had the same design as the tattoo that magically appeared on Michael’s wrist, but also had the most lax rotation in constellation history (It first appeared in 1963, then fifteen years later in 1978, and then ten years later, then a year after that, and now it’s back 6 years later.” What???). Loomis offered some of his usual hilarious nonsense, but only in a single scene or two. And the man in black turned out to be.... a guy only people who memorized the credits of the original film would recognize (Dr. Wynn – a.k.a. the guy who says “For God’s sake Sam, he can’t drive a car!”). One would assume this one line was pretty much all the backstory writer Daniel Farrands would need to justify his decision to use this random character as the big bad villain (i.e. HE taught him to drive), but that isn’t even mentioned – the film more or less introduces him as an entirely new character.

Of course, everyone and their hamster knows that an alternate version of the film exists. This one has more character stuff (certainly more Loomis) and makes a bit more sense, but it also contains many painful scenes (“Stay away monsters, stay away ghouls...”) that were rightfully cut from the film for theatrical release, and also has an ending that isn’t even remotely exciting. The theatrical has Rudd smashing Myers to a pulp with a pipe, but in the other version, he just throws some rocks on the floor, which makes Michael the Druid stop in his tracks. Rudd yells “It worked! The power of the runes stopped him!”, and then Dr Wynn transfers the Curse of Thorn (?) to Dr Loomis, as Michael walks away wearing the man in black outfit. Well, whatever.

I call this mask Michael's "Captain Smirk" mask.

If you take the first hour or so of the producer’s cut (up until Kara goes out the window) and then watch the theatrical ending (which isn’t any better but at least features some amazingly awkward stuff from Rudd), you have a somewhat decent movie. Joe Chappelle directed some scenes (Tim and Beth’s murders, Kara’s subsequent search of the house) quite well, and unlike any of the sequels, there really is a strong Halloween atmosphere in the film. Also, Farrands’ script may have included some truly terrible ideas (Michael is not only a killer, but he rapes his niece! Making this the second “Uncle fucking” movie of the day for me), but there were a lot of good ones too, and you can see glimpses of a stronger film throughout either version (even the producer’s cut was the result of hasty rewrites and nonsensical editing). Rumors abound that Dimension will release both versions in a special edition, but I can’t really see that happening, as it would almost require them to admit that they interfered too much with what would sadly be Donald Pleasence’s final film. This also began Dimension’s long, almost unbroken streak of fucking with their movies in post production.

Pleasence’s death, and the fact that the movie didn’t really make any goddamn sense resulted in the series “reboot” with H20, which led to Resurrection, which led to the remake, which is the biggest tragedy of all. Still, it didn’t stop me from writing a fan script when I was 16 that picked up right where Curse left off. I can’t recall too much about it anymore (it was written on a “digital word processor” that is no longer functioning) as far as explanations, but it all took place on a farm outside of Haddonfield, owned by the father of the Tina character from Halloween 5. The doctor from part 4 that Michael Pataki played also showed up, as did Hunt from Halloween II. Laurie Strode showed up at the end and killed Michael once and for all (I was probably ripping off Jason Goes To Hell there). And someone died with an electric beater to the mouth.

...I liked it, at least.

What say you?

Read more »

Cult, Halloween Series, Holiday, October Extras, Slasher,

{[['']]}

Hallowed Ground (2007)

SEPTEMBER 28, 2007

GENRE: BREAKDOWN, CRAP, CULT
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

Last night I got home and found a release copy of Hallowed Ground in the mail. I didn’t request it to review, so I have no idea why they sent it to me, but they are going to wish they hadn’t.

Actually it’s not THAT bad. It’s in fact the 5th best horror movie I’ve watched this week!

Like just about every other killer scarecrow movie, it’s just fucking stupid. The chick from Rest Stop (a movie I hate as much as Dark Ride, yet never remember to bash it as much as I should) finds herself once again stranded, though at least here she is slightly likeable, whereas in Rest Stop I wanted her to be beaten to death with a brick before she even got to the damn rest stop. And as luck would have it, she’s stranded in one of those movie towns where everyone is suspicious of her because she’s not from around there. Before long, she’s being stalked by a scarecrow and then the rest of the town as well, who thinks she is the “Chosen One” who will birth a child that will revive the town’s founder, who was killed by their own ancestors. Makes sense to me.

Call it irony, or call it just stupid, but the fact remains: scarecrows aren’t scary. And the writer of the film gave up any chance of it being suspenseful by not giving it another character to care about (the only other one, a reporter with the biggest teeth I’ve ever seen, is killed like 15 minutes in). It’s not like there’s any chance in hell Liz is gonna die, so the endless scenes of her being chased around cornfields and such are devoid of any of the intended effect.

Nick Chinlund is also in the film. You might remember him from Riddick or Con Air. He’s a great tough guy actor (he’s my only choice to play Fenix in the Gears of War movie), so it’s a damnable shame to see him so totally wasted here, playing the town’s founder. He wisely checks out after two or three scenes, hopefully because he was busy making a film that didn’t waste him. The only other recognizable actor in the cast is Brian McNamara (that fonzanoon!), as the town Sheriff who is from the big city and thus doesn’t share the town’s beliefs (how did he get elected Sheriff then?). But no one else really sticks out. Hilariously, there’s a scene of an out of place extra giving Liz a ridiculously extended dirty look, and I said “Hey there, director’s daughter!” But I was wrong. It was the producer’s daughter.

The movie also betrays its one halfway decent chill – the sight of blood on a minivan that we knew contained a family. But not too surprisingly, only the parents died, the little kid managed to escape. Not enough movies have the balls to kill kids off onscreen, but if you can’t even bring yourself to kill one offscreen, you have no business making horror movies! However, this extends the idiotic plot thread of the kid’s doll. When Liz first sees it, she calls it a “tranny” (?), apparently because the doll’s sex is unclear. Then later she finds it in the cornfield, and puts it in her jacket pocket for no real reason other than to help the girls bond later. Then, the little girl tears its head off and uses the body as a sort of PlaySkool Molotov cocktail. And then 5 minutes later, the doll resurfaces, head intact, and decidedly NOT on fire. Jesus.

Whatever, movie. And thanks for nothing, whoever decided to send it to me. And for good measure, fuck you, Rest Stop.

What say you?

Read more »

Breakdown, Crap, Cult,

{[['']]}

The Witches' Mountain

SEPTEMBER 18, 2007

GENRE: CULT, SUPERNATURAL
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK!!!)

What is it about the movies that involve cults on the Chilling Classics set that make me like them even though they are technically awful? The Witches’ Mountain is no exception: it’s poorly photographed, seemingly on pause most of the time, and doesn’t make a lick of sense, yet I remain compelled by its non-narrative and heartily recommend it, same as I did for Crypt Of The Living Dead and Devil’s Hand.

A big part of the attraction here is the soundtrack. It’s.... wow. Let’s see, there’s one composition that sounds better suited for the music that would play over an opening credits sequence of someone driving along the California coast, yet it plays over a scene of a woman finding a cat stabbed to death in her bed. Then there’s a lot of chanting stuff, apropos of what is going on in the scene. And then near the end there’s something that could only be described as the Mexican Choir version of ELO’s "Eldorado".

What any of that has to do with horror, well your guess is as good as mine. It’s not so much a horror movie as it is a “Guy takes pictures on a mountain while his girlfriend drinks tea with an old woman” movie. But she’s a damn fine looking woman, as is ex-wife, who appears in one scene in the beginning that is so far removed from the rest of the film, one has no other option than to believe that she will be part of a “twist” at the end.

The end of the film is just as laid back as everything else. After developing his photos and seeing people in them that weren’t there when he took the shot (there’s even one picture he took in which he himself appears – yet this doesn’t really seem to startle him), he tells his girlfriend they have to leave, at which point some poorly photographed scenes of people carrying green flames begin, resulting in a bunch of woman literally throwing themselves on him and his girlfriend takes a cliff dive. The final shot of the film involves what looks like a colander attached to a medieval speak n spell, and damned if I have any idea what the fuck it’s supposed to mean.

But I liked it. Hell I almost wanted to watch it again. How can you not like a movie that includes a casting credit that reads “With the special collaboration of John Smith” (not the actual name – I didn’t write it down in my notes). That’s WAY better than “Special Appearance by” or “Guest starring”. Plus it has a chick who looks like Eva Longoria blowing up a snake or something.

I really don’t have a goddamn clue what is going on here. But maybe that’s how it ended up on the same disc as Bad Taste (!!!) and Deep Red (!!!!!!), two actual, legitimate, GOOD movies that the Creek somehow got their hands on. It deserves to be among giants.

What say you?

Read more »

Chilling Classics, Cult, Supernatural,

{[['']]}