Otis (2008)

JUNE 22, 2008

GENRE: COMEDIC, REVENGE, SERIAL KILLER
SOURCE: DVD (STORE RENTAL)

I was particularly harsh to Captivity, a film without any sort of plot, character to care about, decent photography, etc. And yet, I’d rather watch it a 2nd time than do the same for Otis, even though Otis is technically better. The difference is, Captivity was just awful all the way through, and thus would make for a good drunken movie night with pals, whereas Otis is actually decent for the first hour, only to fall completely apart.

Like Captivity, Otis focuses on a fat guy with glasses who kidnaps a blond girl he calls Kim (and hey, in Captivity, WE call her Kim, because she’s better known as Kim Bauer!) and chains her in a dungeon with some torture devices. He’s got a brother who may be even more of a wretched human being, and the cops looking for her are pretty inept. But this movie offers another angle to the proceedings – the girl’s family, who go from grief to vigilante over the course of, I dunno, two scenes.

And therein lies the main problem with the film – it’s tonally all over the place. The “torture” scenes are presented as creepy and fairly understated, and the family stuff goes from broad to satirical and back seemingly at random. It’s actually like the Halloween remake in that regard – there are great scenes here and there, but overall it’s like watching three films combined into one mess. I hate to admit, most of the best stuff is just the dungeon/kidnapping scenes, due to the aforementioned creepiness. He’s not a particularly violent guy; she takes a slug or two and that’s about it. But he dresses her in a cheerleader outfit and has her cheer, rear projects a highway and pretends he’s taking her for a drive, etc. These scenes are pretty unnerving at times, and accompanied by a truly great soundtrack and score. There’s also a nice bit of underplayed foreshadowing involving her bra that I appreciated – nothing worse than a completely obvious hint about something that will be important later (see Untraceable for the absolute worst offense of this sort of screenwriting, EVER). But once she escapes, the rest of the movie is just pretty awful, as her suddenly vengeful family tries to get him back for what he did, only to mistakenly torture Otis’ brother Elmo (Kevin Pollak).

The humor does not work at all in these scenes. It’s supposed to be over the top and ridiculous, yet making a point, and yet its all so clichéd and generic. For example, the mild mannered dad (Daniel Stern) is about to plug in a torture device, only to discover the cord isn’t long enough to reach the outlet – a gag that has been used in full on comedic films as well as a moment of levity in full blown horror ones (Hostel II comes to mind). “Ha. Ha.” This gag goes on for a full minute. The worst offender is Jared Kusnitz, as the girl’s brother. His character is yet another disassociated youth who does reprehensible things that pass for character development. Ignoring the fact that some of the stuff he allegedly does should put him in jail, it’s just completely idiotic that we are expected to believe he does ALL of it – sells porn of his sister, deals drugs, MAKES drugs, nails frogs to the principal’s office door, plus apparently plays video games all day (and more). The actor is annoying as well (think an emo version of that Chris Marquette kid), which doesn’t help at all. Plus, the family switches so instantly, it’s hard to believe that they are so bloodthirsty – it comes off as impulsive behavior, but they are fully prepared for their act. Worse – they look nothing like a family at all; there’s no way in hell I buy Illeana Douglas and Ashley Johnson as 2nd cousins, let alone mother and daughter (the brother doesn’t look like anyone either).

The only actor who pulls it off is Jere Burns as the lead cop. He’s an idiot, but thinks he’s clever, and while it’s not exactly an original character, he at least got a few laughs out of me due to his completely inappropriate bluntness (one of his best lines is in the trailer). Also worth a chuckle is Tracy Scoggins (still hot!) as a newscaster who tells a missing girl’s parents that their daughter is probably dismembered. According to the commentary, this is supposed to be a satire on the media as well, but since Scoggins only has about 2 minutes of screentime, it’s kind of hard to really sell the idea – it comes off as just a quick gag rather than as any sort of commentary.

The same writer and director are also responsible for Sublime, a film that also suffered from half-assed attempts at social commentary and an uneven tone. Their commentary is full of pretentious babble and occasional obnoxious bickering (they argue over whether an actor had gum in his mouth at one point – riveting!), instead of explaining why their film looks like a soap opera. Oh, because they shot on video. Maybe instead of hiring well known actors to play a family, you can get unknowns that actually look alike, which would not only perhaps help sell the “family bond” idea in the film if the viewer can actually believe they are related, but also allow you to shoot on fucking film so your movie doesn’t look like ass on top of it. There is also an alternate ending that, true to form, doesn’t fit the tone of the film very well, and is also apparently missing a scene or two leading up to it, as it doesn’t make any sense in the context of what is in the final cut.

I hate to say that the best parts of a film feature a girl being psychologically tortured, but that is sadly the case. A film like The Cottage managed to blend the gore (and even a kidnapped blond!) with the slapstick-ish comedy rather well, so I know a. it can be done and b. I can enjoy it, but this one just didn’t work for me.

Incidentally, I should note that right before I watched Otis, I finally watched Juno, a film I took a personal vengeance against last Christmas when the Arclight took the 21+ screening of Gremlins away and put Juno in its place, forcing me to watch Gizmo and co. completely sober. I wasn't much interested in the film anyway; I loved Jason Reitman’s first film (Thank You For Smoking), and most of the cast are aces in my book (Jason Bateman, JK Simmons, Allison Janney), but Ellen Page looked like she would annoy me, and since she was the star, I figured that would be kind of a dealbreaker. But when my colleague Spooky Dan got a quote on Otis by saying its “Juno for the horror set” I figured I would get myself in the right frame of mind to enjoy it as much as he did. And to be honest, I didn’t hate Juno, I just hated Juno herself. While she bugged me (the girl can't say 4 words without one of them being an obscure reference. JUST TALK!!!), the rest of the characters were genuine and spoke like human beings for the most part (though I am growing tired of Michael Cera’s one mode of performance – can the kid do anything BUT play soft spoken introverts who inexplicably draw the attraction of girls nothing like him?), and I laughed out loud several times. Plus at its heart it was a simple, sweet little character comedy/drama, and there's nothing wrong with that. Bateman's character in particular was one I could definitely relate to (I too have a room in which to keep my personality!). So if I can more or less enjoy a movie I wanted to hate (I DID hate the soundtrack though - but keep in mind I consider the Shocker soundtrack to be the finest of its kind), I should have been able to enjoy Otis, a movie I wanted to like, right? Oh well.

What say you?

Read more »

Comedic, Revenge, Serial Killer,

{[['']]}

Non Canon Review: The Fog (1980)

JUNE 13, 2008

GENRE: GHOST, REVENGE
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (REVIVAL SCREENING)

OK, I have to apologize to the makers of the remake of The Fog. In my review for that film, I mocked the idea of having an unveiling ceremony at 9 o clock at night. Well, that’s the way it is staged in the original, something I had forgotten. Granted, there are still plenty of other things to mock about the remake, but that is not one of them.

I say forgotten, but I’m still going to consider this a non canon review, because I remembered the jist of the film, as well as certain particular scenes (like when our two groups finally meet together in the church), even though I hadn’t seen it in over 10 years (and on a TV broadcast at that). I also remembered that I thought it was pretty damn good and didn’t understand why lots of folks (Carpenter included) considered it a letdown. I mean, yeah, it’s no Halloween, but it’s a solid ghost movie, with a fast pace, great cast, a few scares, and a super hot looking Nancy Loomis. What’s not to love?

One thing I really dig about the movie is how it’s like 3 different short movies combined. You got Tom Atkins and Jamie Lee Curtis investigating an abandoned ship, Adrienne Barbeau at a lighthouse/radio station with only Charles Cyphers to talk to (not a bad gig really, Cyphers rules), and finally Hal Holbrook, Janet Leigh, and Ms. Loomis discovering horrible secrets about the town that they are about to honor (at 9 pm!). Eventually, the stories blend (though Barbeau never shares a scene with any of the above), and the excitement is ramped up in kind. In a way, it’s even more “fun” than Halloween – it’s not as well made, certainly, but it’s almost nonstop in terms of different locations, story development, etc. I’ve read that Halloween was intended to be a thrill ride; if so, it’s like the first 30 seconds of a roller coaster, where you are slowly going around, coming up, and then hurtling to the bottom, whereas The Fog is the rest of the ride, with lots of ups and downs, twists and turns, etc.

If there’s one real issue, it’s the lack of ghost action. They only need 6 folks to kill, and they get 3 right off the bat. With this sort of “limit” in place, they don’t have a lot to do, and I’d like to see them more. It’s not a slasher film, so seeing them stand around watching our characters wouldn’t do, but why not just up that limit to an even 10 and get another 4 kills out of the deal? Rob Bottin’s ghost designs are pretty damn good, but we barely get to see any of them.

The score is fantastic as well. Not that that’s a surprise with Carpenter, but it’s easily one of his best scores. There’s some similarities to the Halloween themes, but you get some repetition with every composer. Look at James Horner, ALL of his scores sound alike, and he’s just composing! Carpenter is also writing, directing, and even acting, in his most visible role ever (until Body Bags anyway) as Holbrook’s assistant.

I also like how ridiculously long the opening credits last. We’re like 10 minutes into the film and they are still rolling out at a glacial pace. It’s awesome.

The DVD (which I finally opened when I got home, some three years after purchasing it) has some nice extras. For starters: a better than usual commentary with Carpenter and Debra Hill. He still drones on about lighting and frequently narrates the action, but he discusses a lot about shooting locations, effects, and the troubled production (without really going into details – he mentions Charles Cyphers’ role was reduced due to the reshoots, but doesn’t really explain how). It would have been nice to have some of the cut material presented in the extras, but alas. We also get an old making of from the time the film was release (produced by Mick Garris!), as well as a new one with lots of folks giving new interviews (no Jamie Lee though – her interview portions are recycled from the 1980 one). There are also a handful of trailers and a standard blooper reel, plus some notes from Carpenter on the interior sleeve.

Speaking of sleeves – what’s with so many new DVDs not even having the damn things? They used to be as standard as the outer sleeve – if nothing else it would have the chapter menu printed for easy reference. But they are so rare nowadays it was actually odd to not only see the thing inside, but to see that it had content (MGM was always pretty good with that though). Goddamn lazy home video departments...

It may not be one of Carpenter’s best films (I’d put it at around #7), but it’s certainly one of his best “crowd” movies. Halloween and The Thing are so highly revered it’s almost blasphemous to chuckle during their occasional “weak” moments (I use the term very loosely), but with The Fog it’s OK, and thus it makes for a grand experience. Even Carpenter has come around to it, now regarding it as one of his better pictures as well. It couldn’t have been easy for anyone involved to follow up Halloween (half the cast, and pretty much the entire crew from that film is present here), and considering the production problems, its something of a minor classic in retrospect.

What say you?

Read more »

Carpenter, Ghost, Non Canon, Revenge,

{[['']]}

Psycho II (1983)

JUNE 7, 2008

GENRE: HERO KILLER (?), PSYCHOLOGICAL, REVENGE
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

I recently picked up the collection of Psycho sequels, and when I opened it I discovered that while III and IV had to share one disc (one side in fact), Psycho II got one all to itself. Having never seen any of them in their entirety (only edited TV broadcasts when I was 15 – and I don’t think I watched III all the way through either), I can’t vouch for this being a sign of their quality, but I do know that II is a damn fine followup, and nowhere near the disaster that it could have been.

For starters, Tom Holland’s screenplay (which is entirely unrelated to the sequel novel written by original author Robert Bloch) is great in that it managed to find a way to present another mystery angle without betraying or rewriting the original film (unlike say, Scream 3, which apart from being fucking terrible, changed the reasoning for the actions of the first film’s killers). Sure, the final scene may be a bit on that side, but it’s not like they came out and said that the woman who Norman killed wasn’t the one who had raised him, or that he killed someone else entirely.

The only flaw in the mystery is that it is spoiled relatively early in the movie for those who know the first film well. Norman’s new friend introduces herself as Mary Samuels, which is the same name that Marion used when she checked into the motel. It’s OK to assume that Norman has forgotten the “coincidence”, since he has been locked up for 20 years and probably has other stuff on his mind (his penchant for sandwiches, for example), but to an audience it’s pretty much a dead giveaway.

However, I must point out what my buddy Rob (a true Psycho expert if there ever was one) pointed out to me – in 1983 the home video market hadn’t really taken off, so apart from TV broadcasts of the film (at least one of which was canceled at the last minute due to a real life tragedy), Psycho hadn’t been seen for years, and thus the majority of the audience probably had forgotten as well. I keep having the idea for Bloody Disgusting where we’d have a page with movie news that would have been posted if the internet was around in the early 80s, this would be something worth posting: “I just read the script for Psycho II and it turns out that the girl Meg Tilly plays in the movie is the niece of Marion Crane! Also, the guy who was a deputy in the first film is now the town sheriff. If you use this, call me BatesFan23.”

Minor nerdy issues aside, it’s simply a well done, respectable sequel. It would have been easy to simply have Norman escape and kill some folks, but Holland and director Richard Franklin went the classier route, with Lila Crane (now Loomis –she married her sister’s boyfriend! Nice.) trying to drive Norman crazy so she can get him locked up again, and Norman struggling to keep his sanity. Sure, the body count is a bit higher, and there is actual on screen violence (including a particularly nasty death in the famous basement), but compared to the other horror films of the period, it’s practically G rated in that regard.

It’s also got more Perkins, which is fine. Of course, he doesn’t show up until about a half hour into the first film, and Lila and Sam’s investigation eats up some screen time as well. But here he’s pretty much in every scene, and is terrific both as “sane” Norman (his incredibly awkward conversations with Tilly are a particular highlight) and “nutty” Norman, who becomes convinced his mother really is alive. And if you thought he was pretty nice in the first, he’s downright sympathetic here. Even when he starts to crack, you still root for the guy to pull through and be OK.

Tilly is also a delight. Mainly because she is ridiculously cute, but she also has a bit more personality than Marion got to display (again, she also has more screen time, for obvious reasons), and it’s nice to see her actually develop a bit of a kinship with Norman. The rest of the cast is good as well; it’s funny to see Dennis Franz in one of his earliest roles as a total scumbag (as opposed to the more lovable plain ol' jerks he plays in stuff like Die Hard 2).

I also love how isolated Fairview is. We know the motel is off the main road or whatever, but the diner Norman works at for about 8 minutes also appears to be in the middle of nowhere (who the hell would go there?). “Downtown” is mentioned though not really seen, but you got to imagine that there’s a perfectly good diner in the middle of the alleged civilized part of town.

Franklin also stages some terrific scenes. There’s a bit where “Mary” is arguing with Lila, and a maid with a vacuum drowns out what they are saying, to the dismay of a nosy hotel clerk who is trying to listen to what they are saying. And Franklin also makes good use of shadow and silhouette; there’s a spooky scene where Norman confronts Mary, who is seen only in silhouette, and thus keeping us on edge. The numerous scenes of people looking through the hole in the bathroom wall are also unnerving, especially since it’s never really made clear who is looking in when (there are like 4 killers in the film, ultimately).

Compared to the first sequels of other great horror films (Halloween II, Nightmare on Elm St 2, Cube 2: Hypercube), it’s in a class of its own. You can’t really top Hitchcock, but to keep the spirit of his film intact while making it your own is something I doubt many could accomplish. Kudos to those involved for pulling it off.

What say you?

Read more »

Hero Killer, Psychological, Revenge,

{[['']]}

Black Dragons (1942)

MAY 28, 2008

GENRE: REVENGE, THRILLER
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 2!!!)

Honestly, I can’t take another one of these movies. I can’t even tell them apart anymore. Even though Black Dragons has a spy plot (with lots of racist overtones – I wasn’t aware major newspapers referred to our enemies simply as “Japs”), it’s essentially yet another movie that takes place in a large house, features a butler, a horror icon (Lugosi here), a wise talking cop, and a dame who is there to see someone with ties to her uncle (or her uncle himself in some of them). Murders are largely off-screen, bodies disappear, people run in and out of a lot of rooms with swinging doors, etc. It’s the same crap I’ve watched a dozen times on this set.

The odd thing about the movie is that the synopsis gives away the film’s twist ending. It says it’s about a guy who is imprisoned after performing plastic surgery on six Japanese men who plan to impersonate six different US leaders. But none of that is really even mentioned in the film’s first 55 minutes or so, it’s only revealed in the final 10 minutes what exactly Lugosi was up to and why he was killing some dudes. It’d be like saying that The Usual Suspects is about a guy named Keyser Soze who fabricates a story to a detective while he awaits bail for his assumed alias of Verbal Kint.

Then again, the synopsis also mistakes Lugosi for Karloff, so I should have known better than to put any stock into it.

It’s also one of the lesser transfers on the set. An entire chunk of the film has white noise over it (it actually sounds like popcorn being popped at an alarmingly delicious rate), and certain reels have sections with what could only be described as electronic mud on the right side of the frame. Somewhere in the world there exists a man who considers this to be his favorite film, and it’s sad to think that he can’t get a decent copy.

That aside, the rest is the same as the others, so if you haven’t seen any of them (and judging from the lack of comments for these movies, you haven’t), there is some mild entertainment to be had from the story, particularly the scenes where Lugosi holds an imprisoned dude down and forces him to ward off visitors by telling them that he is fine and doesn’t need their assistance (Lugosi’s operation on his face left him monstrous). And the dame (Joan Barclay) is pretty cute, which makes it all the more puzzling why not only does she never kiss our hero, but she is also revealed to be an undercover cop in the film’s final act, an issue that is never brought up again or resolved. Why not have her onscreen more? You get eye candy AND resolution of your own generic subplots!

I only have about a dozen movies left on the Horror Classics set; I hope like hell none of them follow this story template. If so I may be forced to take drastic action (like, watch something else that day).

What say you?

Read more »

Horror Classics, Revenge, Thriller,

{[['']]}

Black House (2007)

APRIL 16, 2008

GENRE: ASIAN, REVENGE
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

One of the, I dunno, four good things about doing Horror Movie A Day is since I occasionally get movies to review without asking for them, I have a completely blank slate with which to watch it. Such is the case with Black House (aka Geomeun Jip), which I had never heard of, didn’t know the plot, not even what kind of horror movie it was. The cover suggested some sort of Saw/Texas Chainsaw type film, and the tagline just suggests complete crap ("The Address Where DEATH Lives"), but that was (thankfully) not the case.

Since it’s new, I won’t spoil anything, other than to say that it’s about an insurance investigator unknowingly getting into some disturbing shit. If I had I known the twist that occurs halfway through, the film probably wouldn’t have been as enjoyable. Not that it’s terrible surprising, but the film is carefully constructed, constantly building on what you know (or think you know). It’s also well paced, and for a change, fairly short for an Asian film (100 minutes, as opposed to the usual “thisclose to two hours” ones I usually watch). In fact, it could even be a bit longer; the deleted scenes are almost all worthwhile and could only be cut from the film for length (there is no commentary or any sort of marker that explains where the scenes would be in the film, though it’s not too difficult to figure out for the most part). There’s a subplot about a crowded elevator that perfectly encapsulates the lead’s attitude at the beginning of the film vs. what he is like at the end.

And it makes total sense! At no point during the entire film did I go “What the FUCK is going on!?”, or have to consult the IMDb synopsis to understand what I was seeing; truly a unique experience for an Asian horror film. On that note, I do suggest paying close attention to the names of supporting characters when they are introduced, as they are mentioned more often than they are shown, especially in the film’s final act.

It’s also nice to see a more rural area in one of these movies. A lot of them take place in urban locales, but the titular house seems to be in Korea’s version of northern Maine. And the hero isn’t a woman, also fairly rare. He’s a guy named Juno (though he's not pregnant, and there's a good reason for him not speaking simple English), and he’s sort of like the guy in 13 Games Of Death, a mild-mannered office drone who gets in way over his head just trying to do the right thing. The actor, Hwang Jung-Min, is quite good, as is the beautiful Yu Sun as the woman he attempts to help.

Music, also good. Direction, quite good (I loved the long shots in the final rooftop battle – as opposed to American horror movies in which the camera is seemingly just thrown onto the actors as they fight, resulting in a completely confusing scene). So do I have anything bad to say? Not really. There seems to be a translation error when it comes to discussing how much the insurance policies are worth – the child who dies at the beginning of the film is supposedly worth 30 million??? Normally it wouldn’t be a problem, but it is here (to explain why would be spoiler-ish – let’s just say that the person receiving the money almost instantly needs more, which is ridiculous. Even I couldn’t blow 30 mil in 2 days).

Also, there’s a scene where the hero needs to be told what a psychopath is. “Ever heard of psychopaths?” a cop asks him, and he’s like “nope.” Now, maybe Koreans are just less nuts than we batshit Americans, but it still seems a bit odd that a grown man would be completely baffled as to what a psycho was. It’s just an excuse to lay the groundwork for something that will be important later, so I wish they could have come up with something a bit less silly.

All in all, a solid thriller that proves that the Asian horror world is not all ghosts inside your electronics (the irony being that movies like this are far better than the Ju-Ons and Ringus that are primarily associated with the Eastern genre output. Sigh). It’s based on a book, I plan to get it if it has been translated into English. If not, I will get the audiobook. Those have subtitles, right?

What say you?

Read more »

Asian, Based On Novel, Revenge,

{[['']]}

The Monster Walks (1932)

FEBRUARY 8, 2008

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

Another Friday, another racist budget pack movie. While not nearly as offensive as King Of The Zombies, the character of Exodus (billed as Sleep n' Eat, for some reason) in The Monster Walks will most likely give a modern audience pause, especially in his final scene when Darwin’s theory of evolution is briefly explained to him (he believes it because his grandfather looked like an ape, only he was lazy). He also points a gun at himself while he talks. Nice.

Sadly that’s probably the only interesting thing about this dull movie. At only 59 minutes (the IMDb lists 63, so there are 4 possibly racist minutes left to the imagination) it still moves at a snail’s pace, and I don’t think I need to remind anyone how sick I am of movies in which folks in an old house kill each other for an inheritance. Granted, instead of a fake ghost or whatever, the villain sets up a poor ape as the murderer, which is a bit different, but not nearly enough to retain my interest.

Not helping matters is the odd audio problem over most of the film. Namely, it sounds like everyone is underwater. Now, none of the budget pack transfers are going to win any awards, but this an issue that is (so far) unique to this film. It wouldn’t be as much of a problem if there was a lot of action, but since 95% of the film is just people talking (the first 15 minutes are comprised of nothing but discussions over where everyone should sleep for the night), it’s a bit annoying.

Question for those of you who own and/or use whips – are there often handstraps on the handle that you use to secure the whip to your hand? The killer is done in because he couldn’t free his hand from the strap in time (the ape pulls him against its cage), but it seemed a bit silly that he’d even have such a thing. A good whipper should be able to hold onto his weapon!

What say you?

Read more »

Horror Classics, Predator, Revenge,

{[['']]}

The Killing Floor

JANUARY 19, 2008

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

I'm not sure what the point is of hiring a fairly well-known actor or actress and giving them nothing to do for the majority of a film, but it makes even LESS sense when you are trying to give your film a twist ending. Such is the case with The Killing Floor, a film which I will have to spoil in the rest of the review. So if you haven't seen it yet, be warned: I am giving away a twist that isn't really all that surprising to anyone who recognizes the cast.

The actress in question here is Shiri Appleby. Maybe not a household name, but certainly recognizable from a variety of roles on both TV and film. She plays Marc Blucas' assistant, and has literally nothing to do in the film's first hour or so except say things like "There's a call for you" and bringing Blucas his mail. So anyone with a rudimentary understanding of movies, casting, etc. will immediately suspect that she is somehow more important than she seems, if not the MOST important figure in the plot against Blucas (which involves old murders, a betrayed friend, and, sigh, real estate shenanigans). And guess what? She is! The whole movie is a setup she (over)planned to get back at Blucas for not reading her short story. The fact that if he DID read the fucking thing would render the entire movie moot is another matter entirely (seriously, she even gives him the damn thing. Had the guy taken the wrong manuscript into the bathroom after taco night, he never would have had any problems down the line). So in order to make this a "twist", they leave her in the background through most of the movie, so I am just sitting there wondering how long it will be until she is revealed to be the killer.

The other problem is that the viewer has to believe that a man wouldn't be interested in Shiri Appleby:

Come on now.

Otherwise it's actually not too bad of a movie. For what it's worth, the plot twist works well in the context of the rest of the film (ironically, maybe this would make a better book), and the acting is good. Even Blucas, who wasn't exactly Olivier on Buffy, manages to make his asshole character fairly sympathetic. The quality was good for what I am pretty sure is some form of digital media (there are no extras of any sort on the disc to help solve this non-mystery). It barely qualifies as horror (though there's a pretty gruesome scene where a character feeds another's remains to a bunch of pigs), but as a thriller it functions on the level it should, and I guess if you have no idea who Shiri Appleby is you might be surprised that her meek character turns out to be the Big Bad.

What say you?

Read more »

Revenge, Serial Killer,

{[['']]}

Pit And The Pendulum (1961)

JANUARY 14, 2008

GENRE: REVENGE
SOURCE: CABLE (TURNER CLASSIC MOVIES)

Man, good thing I caught Pit And The Pendulum on Turner Classic Movies (best non-premium movie channel ever!), where it was presented in letterbox format, and not on a Mill Creek budget pack, like many other Roger Corman movies I watch. Corman filled the frame in almost every shot, and I would hate to see it cropped. He might be known as a cheapskate, hack, etc, but damned if this movie doesn’t look great throughout.

Like a lot of Poe movies, the part that actually follows the short story is pretty much the finale, so the writers have come up with an hour or so of “prequel” in order to make a film (though I am guessing someone like Ti West, the master of padding, could take a 2-3 page Poe story and make an 80 minute film out of it without adding a goddamn thing). And the one they came up with is... strangely similar to the plot of the same team's House Of Usher, which came out the year before. Like that film, a guy arrives at a castle to question Vincent Price about the status of a shared loved one (this time it’s HIS sister/Price’s wife, whereas in Usher it was the other way around), leading to a lot of heated arguments and finally, an ending in which someone gets punched in a dungeon.

But it’s a lot of fun. Price gets to go all over the place in this one, from his usual smarmy creep, to a scared and disturbed grieving widow, and finally a madman who tries to kill everyone and manages to fail on all accounts (of his 3 intended victims, one falls to his own death, one escapes and the other is left forgotten inside a cage). The other lead, the guy who plays his brother-in-law, looks constipated throughout the film, and he’s pretty much a bore, but really, when you have Price around, why bother casting someone with any screen presence? It will all be vacuumed up by Price anyway. And Barbara Steele is also on hand, though not as much as I hoped given her billing prominence. She’s seen mainly in oddly colored, mute flashbacks throughout the film. In the finale she comes back and plays her usual whorish bitch of a woman, but it’s not enough. More Steele!

Speaking of the credits, Pendulum is a rare film that has the cast listed at the top of the film but none of the crew. I can see why you might not want to let an audience know right off the bat that they are about to watch a Roger Corman movie, but it’s still pretty odd, especially for the time period (in which, most of the time, they would list EVERYONE in the cast and crew at the beginning, and then just have THE END at the end, with maybe a single card for the cast). Corman probably just forgot to pay the credit titles guy.

What say you?

Read more »

Based On Novel, Revenge,

{[['']]}

The Terror

JANUARY 7, 2008

GENRE: GHOST, SUPERNATURAL
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 2!!!)

I used to refer to The Terror as my "Bedtime Movie". I bought it on VHS for like 39 cents when I was 16, thinking it was some lost gem. “How can it be bad, with Karloff AND Nicholson?” I said to myself. “Stop talking to yourself!” replied the clerk at Suncoast. Anyway, a few attempts to watch the film over the next week all resulted in me falling asleep within minutes. From then on, whenever I had trouble falling asleep, I would put it in and let nature take its course (this is back when I used to be allowed to have a TV in the bedroom. Never get married, kids!). Until today, I had never seen the whole thing (I even re-bought the film on its own DVD and still never made it through, making this budget copy version the 3rd copy I have owned!).

I don’t know how the hell I used to fall asleep during the first 10 minutes though. In the first SIX SECONDS we are given a spooky castle, waves crashing violently on the shore, and Karloff walking down some stairs. OK that’s not very exciting, but the way the 3 shots are edited together is so rough and violent, it seems like it is. Over the next few minutes we’re also treated to Jack Nicholson throwing his compass away because it’s not working in the spot he’s in (which is like when a guy in an action movie throws away a gun when it runs out of ammo. They’re not disposable!!!); a near drowning or two, Nicholson yelling at a woman, a bird attack, Nicholson trying to punch said bird, and what I am pretty sure is Dustin Hoffman in drag:

There’s also a nifty opening credit sequence that features some animation, giving the film a bit of extra production value (this is a Roger Corman movie, so PV is welcome wherever it can be found). This credit sequence also features several future names, including Monte Hellman and Francis Ford Coppola (both of whom were among the many uncredited directors of this movie), and the odd listing of RICHARD Miller instead of the usual Dick. Miller is at his most serious in this movie (never cracks a smile or does anything amusing.... hell, his character isn’t even named Walter Paisley), which is perhaps why he used his full name. Also an animated dove, for some reason.

I hope I still have that old DVD, because the compression on this is the worst I have ever seen on these budget packs. There’s a lot of water in the film (always a tough thing for compression, even on otherwise respectable DVDs), which doesn’t help, but even in non-water scenes, it’s very pixely. The whole climax of the film (it’s actually considered trivia that this Corman film has a water finale instead of a fire) looks less like a film and more like a very unattractive mosaic:

As for the movie itself, I haven’t a clue. There’s a woman who may be a ghost, a Baron who may not be the Baron, Nicholson supposedly being in the French army, a witch with a bird she can control, a mute... it shouldn’t surprise anyone that the film was made up as they went along, with several directors shooting stuff more or less at random. At one point, Miller explains that Karloff’s character killed the real Baron and took his place, and now believes he really is the Baron. Didn’t anyone notice? Is his Baron title just sort of honorary?

Corman apparently spent some time just shooting all of the actors walking up and down stairs, figuring he could work it all into the film somehow (and he does! That first shot of Karloff makes sense now!). As was often the case with Corman, the film was shot over a few days, using sets that were about to be torn down. The result is as slipshod as you might expect from such a shooting design, but yet it’s still strangely appealing, with the nonsensical story always moving along, plus some occasional gore. The end of the film, featuring a melting woman (no idea) was on my Doorways to Horror game that I mentioned in another review. So you know it’s good.

There are lots of errors in the movie (including “stones” that float), but my favorite was the giant metal door. Karloff raises the thing using a chain. He ducks under it, and it immediately falls back down (since no one is holding the chain). Then Miller and Nicholson open it, but this time it stays open, for no reason other than the fact Nicholson has to run back outside a few moments later. As he does, the door dutifully drops back down as soon as he gets through. It’s like the world’s first automatic door (the movie it set in 1806). Amazing.

What say you?

Read more »

Ghost, Horror Classics, Revenge, Supernatural,

{[['']]}

Sweeney Todd (2007)

DECEMBER 8, 2007

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What say you?

Read more »

Hero Killer, Musical, Revenge,

{[['']]}

Nightmare Castle

NOVEMBER 30, 2007

GENRE: GHOST
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 2!!!)

When I was like 4 or 5 I saw a movie on Cinemax that involved a haunted castle. I am pretty sure it was near the ocean, and the ending, which occurred (I think) at sunrise, involved a woman turning into sand/dust. I don’t think she was a vampire though, more of a mummy. Numerous submissions to “Help with this movie title?” threads on horror movie forums have been fruitless, probably due to my terribly vague recollection. So every time I see a movie about a castle, I hope that it might be it.

Nightmare Castle is not it.

But it’s actually pretty good, much better than the 90 or so movies it reminded me of while I was watching it (such as The Ghost, which also starred Barbara Steele, and Dementia 13, which didn't). And a big part of that is, for once, it’s an actual fucking ghost! While the usual inheritance/drive someone mad type plot elements are in play, there is a legitimate resurrection, thus making this an actual horror movie, unlike some of those others.

Hell there’s even some makeup/gore!

Not that it’s a masterpiece. The dubbing is atrocious, and is seemingly not limited to the dialogue (a guy pats a horse and the sound is not only not completely out of sync, but it sounds like some wood is involved). Also, the villain guy has a strange sense of urgency. At one point he hears his wife screaming, and acts panicked, but then barely speed-walks through the house to go find her. Later, his mistress cuts herself, and he spends 30 seconds explaining why she needs to be bandaged immediately (and again, just walks out of the scene. Use your feet buddy!

But the fact that, for once in these movies, the ghosts are actually fucking GHOSTS means that stuff actually happens. There’s a couple of kills along the way, including a poor butler who is electrocuted in the most convoluted way possible. And the climax is awesome. Hell, there’s even a light ‘torture porn’ scene, as the crazed husband whips his wife and the guy she’s nailing on the side. Speaking of her affair, I am pretty sure at some point in the film that every male character is seen at least making out with every female character. By the end I couldn’t tell which ones were the actual couples and which were just fucking around. But hey, all part of the fun.

Steele plays two roles, which makes the film a bit confusing at times (especially when they are said to be “Step-sisters”) but that’s OK. And one character is named Lady Aerosmith. “Amazing”, indeed.

What say you?

Read more »

Ghost, Horror Classics, Revenge,

{[['']]}

Dementia 13

OCTOBER 23, 2007

GENRE: PSYCHOLOGICAL
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 2!!!)

I was going to start my Dementia 13 review by quoting MST3k: “Smokey says, only YOU can prevent Roger Corman!”, but then I got déjà vu, so I checked and sure enough, I already began a review with that (for Bucket of Blood). I guess I am running out of ideas. Or MST3k quotes.

This movie is memorable for two things. One: it’s Francis Ford Coppola’s first movie, and possibly his only genuine horror movie with the exception of Jack (Dracula is more a costume design/art direction showcase with occasional blood splatter). Two: It has a prologue with a psychiatrist testing you to see if your mental health is strong enough to see the film. Well that part isn’t on this DVD, of course (this IS Mill Creek after all). But I assume I would have passed the test; it wasn’t very frightening and I’m a good guesser. However, perhaps AFTER watching the film I would be found insane, unless there’s a better clinical term for “Sick of watching movies about people pretending that loved ones are coming back to life in order to scam them out of an inheritance”.

Christ, how many goddamn movies in the 1960s had this scenario? It seems like I’ve watched like 5 of them already this year (The Ghost, Paranoiac, to name a two). It wasn’t very interesting the first time, and it’s not interesting now. This one also rips from Psycho, particularly in killing the assumed lead halfway through. In fact, the movie is pretty gory for its time (1963), so I will give it that, but it doesn’t really make the film any more interesting.

As you may have noticed, this one comes from Budget Pack 2 (aka 50 Horror Classics), as I am just about done with my beloved Chilling Classics set. Looking at the descriptions, I notice that they put a lot more effort into these little plot summaries than they did on the Chilling set. But on the flipside, the running times are not included, which is a bummer as I often choose my movie based on how much time I have to watch it at work. Since they are all old (some of them date back to the 20s), I can assume there wont be many of more than 90 minutes (this one was like 75), but if any of my fellow budget pack enthusiasts know of any really short ones off hand, please provide the titles. Those are key for busy days when I am finding it difficult to make time for my daily horror movie.

Also, the audio balance on this movie was skewed way to the right. When I watch a Corman film, I want the absolute best possible presentation!!!

What say you?

Read more »

Horror Classics, Psychological, Revenge,

{[['']]}

The Ghost (aka Lo Spettro)

AUGUST 30, 2007

GENRE: GHOST (?)

SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK!!!)

Well The Ghost started off promisingly enough. The instant the film begins, someone says “That’s enough for tonight.” Who he is, what they are doing, and how long they have been doing it is none of our goddamn business. It’s enough, and that is all we need to know.

But then it goes downhill, as it’s a slow and fairly standard “Horrid shrew of a woman plots with her lover to kill her rich husband” movie. And there’s no ghost. When the title of a film only has one actual word, you’d think it would describe something in the movie. But not here. There’s a guy PRETENDING to be a ghost, but that doesn’t count. The end of the film is also too needlessly loaded with double-crosses. All of these people are despicable, so I don’t even know if the good guy ‘won’ or not.

Still, there’s enough here to warrant a view. The scene where Barbara Steele goes nuts and slashes one of the other characters to death is pretty gory for its day (1963 by my watch and warrant), and, well, it stars Barbara Steele. Mmm. There’s also an exchange that may or may not have given Jim Steinman the idea for one of his most famous songs:

“If you loved me you’d do anything.”

“Anything, yes. Not that.”

Hahahaha whoa! So maybe that’s what “that” is! Meat Loaf would do anything except plot to kill his lover’s husband in an attempt to get his gold! Oh Meat, you old softy.

There’s also a guy who sounds like Vincent Price, and another named Canon Owens. It’s a fairly stupid name (won't just Canon, or just Owens, suffice?), but it’s made even more nonsensical in the scene where he talks to the husband, who is named Dr. Hitchcock. For whatever reason, the two of them continually repeat each other’s name as they talk. So it’s like:

“Hi Dr Hitchcock.”

“Hi Canon Owens.”

“How are you, Dr Hitchcock?”

“I am fine, Canon Owens, and you?”

“I am very good, Dr Hitchcock. Thank you for asking.”

But this got me thinking – I realize when I write a lot of my reviews that I have to go back to the IMDb or something to find out the characters’ names, and that’s because no one writes like that anymore. You get a character’s name spoken maybe once in the movie (if that), and that’s it. You have to pay attention these days!

Well I don’t want to! I have ADD, and I want my viewing experience to be perfectly...

What say you?

Read more »

Chilling Classics, Ghost, Revenge,

{[['']]}

Sisters Of Death

JUNE 19, 2007

GENRE: SLASHER
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK!!!)

None of the transfers on my budget pack look better than a duped VHS tape, and by now I am pretty used to it. But Sisters Of Death was seemingly transferred with a special sort of blur filter that allows the film to look OK enough but to render the credits entirely unreadable:

That’s not even the worst one. Another one, swear to Jebus, just looks like a red line made with Microsoft Paint.

The movie itself is a decent enough piece of 70’s cheese. We have a lame cult (the full on blue robed girls are initiated by ‘surviving’ a round of Russian Roulette, yet when one actually dies, they seemingly disband and become sorority girls?) reuniting under mysterious circumstances, as they are all invited Ten Little Indians style to some mansion in the middle of nowhere. But the movie blows it’s wad by not only revealing who is behind the invites, but also WHY, like 20 minutes in. It’s the dad of the girl who got killed. He thinks one of them killed her on purpose. Also along for the ride are two typically 70s guys, one of whom is played by Nat from the Peach Pit. Instead of his usual credited name of Joe E. Tata, he is simply Joe Tata, playing a character titled Joe, who everyone calls Joey. Has your head exploded? Mine has.

Because of the blurry credits, I cannot discern who composed this masterpiece (nor is it listed on the IMDb), so perhaps it IS Harry Manfredini composing the film, but if not, he ripped him off blind when he composed the Friday the 13^th score a few years later. It’s almost identical. Like, Bloody Birthday identical.

While you’re on the subject, I’d like to point out that this film would probably work better as a solely audible experience. The music is great, and the sound editing is something of a national treasure. Scenes of our 5 heroines talking at an equal level, overlapping one another, result in what may be considered virtual schizophrenia. There’s also a hefty dose of inane dialogue. At one point, the grieving father delivers this haunting bit: “And then you calmly watched while her head, her beautiful head, was broken into a hundred fragments!” There’s also a yoga-y type guru who offers what sounds more like a riddle than any sort of meaningful advice: “There is no true anywhere; the true is nowhere to be seen. If you think that you have seen seen the true, then your seeing is not a true one.” Deep, man... DEEP.

The audio track more than makes up for the inept picture. Clearly the cameraman, DP, etc were more interesting in being 70s than paying the fuck attention. Because, much like the credits, the picture leaves much to be desired. Some examples:

Hey there Mike!

Where the fuck are our heads?

But nothing compares to this unintentionally hilarious bit of editing. There’s an electric fence around the mansion, keeping them from escaping. Joey is being chased and he runs into it, electrocuting himself to death. We then immediately cut to another character, who yells “Joey found a power source!” Hahahahaha, oh man, it’s fucking beautiful.

What say you?

Read more »

Chilling Classics, Revenge, Slasher,

{[['']]}