House on Haunted Hill (1959)
Runtime: 75 minutes
Directed by: William Castle
Starring: The Great Vincent Price, Elisha Cook, Jr., Carol Ohmart, Richard Long
From: William Castle Productions
To end this month of talking about horror movies, it is appropriate to talk about a classic haunted house film that I just finished watching on Turner Classic Movies. I had seen it once before but that was many years ago. My plans are that I’ll talk about something in another genre and then after that I’ll talk about another horror movie, but one that was on the big screen. No, not a Saw movie. I’ve never seen any of them, believe it or not.
This was from master showman William Castle, who was great at coming up with gimmicks to promote his movies, such as with this, theatres could have a skeleton come flying out and about during a certain point in the movie. He was quite the interesting guy and I wish there were more wacky characters like him in the film business now. At least it would make things more fun. His Wikipedia page has some info about him.
The movie is simple yet effective. Floating heads (literally) start off the movie right away and explain what the plot it. I mean, the pace is pretty quick and like with the last movie I reviewed, for its short runtime a lot is packed in. Five random people are chosen by a wacky couple (Price and Ohmart; Price is a huge reason why this movie is as fun as it is) to spend the night in a haunted house. They end up getting locked in there and each have a gun. If they can survive until sun up, each person gets 10 thousand dollars. It’s so simple and yet it manages to work. It sure as hell didn’t work with the 1999 remake of this, though. Just take my word for it: that movie is just awful and unpleasant, while the original is fun and entertaining. It’s not blood-curdling horror by any means but if you enjoy something that’s a little goofy (I mean, a house has a random pit of acid?) then this is not a bad way to spend 75 minutes. It’s always nice to watch Vincent Price in action and as usual he delivered a memorable performance. Also, the performance of the skeleton (billed as "himself") was memorable.
The plot is actually not as straightforward as it may first sound; Price’s old lady is his fourth wife and he apparently wants her killed. So, that adds some drama to things. Then, there are various twists and turns so things aren’t as they first appear to be. Things pop out suddenly and while it’s light in tone it doesn’t mean it’s not suspenseful or dread-filled, as it is if you go with it. That is why the movie is pretty famous in some circles.
I hope that everyone had a nice Halloween. I’ll be back Wednesday night with a new review.
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Horror of Dracula
Horror of Dracula (1958)
Runtime: 82 minutes
Directed by: Terence Fisher
Starring: Peter Cushing, Christopher Lee, Michael Gough, Melissa Stribling
From: Hammer
Here’s the classic horror movie I mentioned at the end of my last post. It’s from the great British film studio Hammer, which became famous starting in the 50’s for their horror movies, doing stuff in color, being sexually charged and not being afraid of showing blood, which was quite different from the usual horror flick back in the time period. Wikipedia has a nice article about the history of the film studio, which had laid dormant for many years but recently returned, basically in name only but still…
I managed to pick this movie basically at random and thankfully, a random Chinese streaming video website (of all things) had it up in 2 parts so I watched it that way. I know, not the most ethical thing to do, but it’s not like I’m the only one who does things like this!
I’ve never read the Bram Stoker novel so I can’t really compare the book to the movie, but I know that a lot of things were changed… not that it means a whole lot to me. The story-set in Germany-revolves around vampire hunters trying to track down the famed Dracula (Lee, who was totally awesome in this role). One guy, a Mr. Harker, tries to do so but only stakes the “bride”; it is up to Dr. Van Helsing (Cushing, also awesome in his role) to do so, while having to deal with the bloodsucker now getting his revenge against the Harker family.
This movie is a great yarn and it moves very quickly. It’s not that long but a lot of stuff is packed into it. Besides the great performances by the two leads, the movie is moody and atmospheric (another Hammer trademark) and the sets all look very well-done. The German setting-yes, not Transylvania-provides some nice scenery. They aren’t afraid to show blood or the effects of someone getting staked in the heart (hint, a lot of blood will come out). Van Helsing can be nice to someone like a little kid but he otherwise is very serious and can be rather blunt and direct when it comes to eradicating the famed vampire. Meanwhile, Dracula is of course menacing and yet can be suave and charming too. What is important to note is that he is NOT a Edward Cullen wussy sparkling vampire sort of crap; when he gets his revenge on the Harker family, he does so ruthlessly, not messing around at all. He’s a real bastard, in other words. I much prefer this sort of vampire to the type that come in nonsense like Twilight or The Vampire Diaries!
By the way, here is a page from another Blogpost site which shows some random stills from the movie; you can see how nice the sets are, for example.
It all comes together to create a fun package and if you enjoy horror movies and want to see something different from the usual stuff in the genre that is dominant in recent years, this is something worth seeing. Like I said, it’s not difficult to find online. If you search for “Dracula 1958” (its original title; the new title was for the U.S. so that people wouldn’t confuse it with the Bela Lugosi classic) on Google Video, you’ll find it in 2 parts.
I’ll be back Halloween night, and I have no idea what film in the genre I’ll review, but I’ll try to make it a good one.
Runtime: 82 minutes
Directed by: Terence Fisher
Starring: Peter Cushing, Christopher Lee, Michael Gough, Melissa Stribling
From: Hammer
Here’s the classic horror movie I mentioned at the end of my last post. It’s from the great British film studio Hammer, which became famous starting in the 50’s for their horror movies, doing stuff in color, being sexually charged and not being afraid of showing blood, which was quite different from the usual horror flick back in the time period. Wikipedia has a nice article about the history of the film studio, which had laid dormant for many years but recently returned, basically in name only but still…
I managed to pick this movie basically at random and thankfully, a random Chinese streaming video website (of all things) had it up in 2 parts so I watched it that way. I know, not the most ethical thing to do, but it’s not like I’m the only one who does things like this!
I’ve never read the Bram Stoker novel so I can’t really compare the book to the movie, but I know that a lot of things were changed… not that it means a whole lot to me. The story-set in Germany-revolves around vampire hunters trying to track down the famed Dracula (Lee, who was totally awesome in this role). One guy, a Mr. Harker, tries to do so but only stakes the “bride”; it is up to Dr. Van Helsing (Cushing, also awesome in his role) to do so, while having to deal with the bloodsucker now getting his revenge against the Harker family.
This movie is a great yarn and it moves very quickly. It’s not that long but a lot of stuff is packed into it. Besides the great performances by the two leads, the movie is moody and atmospheric (another Hammer trademark) and the sets all look very well-done. The German setting-yes, not Transylvania-provides some nice scenery. They aren’t afraid to show blood or the effects of someone getting staked in the heart (hint, a lot of blood will come out). Van Helsing can be nice to someone like a little kid but he otherwise is very serious and can be rather blunt and direct when it comes to eradicating the famed vampire. Meanwhile, Dracula is of course menacing and yet can be suave and charming too. What is important to note is that he is NOT a Edward Cullen wussy sparkling vampire sort of crap; when he gets his revenge on the Harker family, he does so ruthlessly, not messing around at all. He’s a real bastard, in other words. I much prefer this sort of vampire to the type that come in nonsense like Twilight or The Vampire Diaries!
By the way, here is a page from another Blogpost site which shows some random stills from the movie; you can see how nice the sets are, for example.
It all comes together to create a fun package and if you enjoy horror movies and want to see something different from the usual stuff in the genre that is dominant in recent years, this is something worth seeing. Like I said, it’s not difficult to find online. If you search for “Dracula 1958” (its original title; the new title was for the U.S. so that people wouldn’t confuse it with the Bela Lugosi classic) on Google Video, you’ll find it in 2 parts.
I’ll be back Halloween night, and I have no idea what film in the genre I’ll review, but I’ll try to make it a good one.
Monday, October 25, 2010
Case 39
Case 39 (2009)
23% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 62 reviews)
Directed by: Christian Alvart
Runtime: 109 minutes
Starring: Renee Zellweger, Jodelle Ferland, Bradley Cooper, Ian McShane
From: Paramount Vantage
Here is a movie I didn’t think I was ever going to see. But, last night I had free time and wanted to get out of the house, so I returned to the drive-in in Lakeland and I saw the double feature of this, preceded by Paranormal Activity 2; of course, that movie in that format isn’t quite the same, but I was still entertained by it. This movie, though…
In case you don’t remember, it was released the first week of October as one of the many horror flicks coming out at that time. They all beat upon each other and none of them did that particularly well; not a surprise to me, dividing the horror fans that way. This is noteworthy for some of its major names… along with the fact that they started filming this in late 2006. No kidding. There were many re-shoots (I even noticed it once, but if you looked closely enough, Renee looked noticeably different due to plastic surgery, hair styles, or what have you) and the United States was like the last place in the world to get the movie. More often than not, a film being on the shelf for that long is a giant red flag. After I actually watched the damn thing, that theory was proven to be correct.
I don’t know how much about the movie is known by people (heck, I’m not sure if I’ve seen the official trailer or not; the one I’ve seen online is rather misleading, to say the least), but as I doubt that many people care about this movie… I’ll make the comparison to the movie Orphan, i.e. my very first review. That movie-which ends up being similar to this in a few ways-stomps all over this one. I don’t blame the little girl starring in this movie (Ferland); with what she had to work with, she was fine, being both cute and creepy. It’s just that the story and the other people acting around her… for many of them it was just another paycheck, in other words. Interestingly enough, both little Esther (Isabelle Furhman) and popular little girl Chloe Moritz could have been in that role; not that it would have really changed this movie at all.
To be brief, Zellweger delivers her usual Zellwegerian performance as Emily Jenkins, a social worker who has to deal with 38 cases as once (is this how it really works?) but then is giving a 39th one; there, it looks as if some wacko parents are abusing an adorable little girl. She tugs Emily’s heartstrings and eventually the parents are caught trying to cook her in an oven! She’s saved and somehow, Emily is allowed to briefly adopt her. That proves to be a mistake, though, as various things suddenly start happening… and I’ll leave it at that.
This movie overall just isn’t that scary or terrifying at all. Despite some laughably dumb stuff you get to see, it’s also pretty boring overall. The first half mainly isn’t the problem; it derails totally in the second half once you get to see just what exactly is going on. It’s rather laughable, the killings are. And Emily acts REALLY stupid before and after she finds out what it is. Think and act logically, that does not happen. She could have even tried to attack the villain (as an attempt would have made the audience happy, at least), but nope, does not happen. Things get stupider and stupider until the very end and the film is just a waste of time. Aside from the goofy premise of what’s causing all the mayhem, the movie is otherwise not fresh at all, is not even interesting to look at, and flicks like Orphan are more worth your time than even spending a few bucks to rent this once it comes to DVD/Blu-Ray. I mean, other people noticed it more times than I did, but there's at least one *really noticeable* instance where Renee looks very different, due to wearing a bad wig to look like she did before massive reshoots happened. But it's kind of hard to hide plastic surgery on your face...
However, I will mention one thing that did make me chuckle. Near the end of the movie, through ways that I won’t get into as it’s spoilers, someone calls Renee a pumpkinhead; pumpkinhead! For some reason, that seems totally appropriate and for the rest of my life, I may think of Renee Zellweger as a pumpkinhead. At least I could garner SOME kind of enjoyment from this otherwise pointless motion picture.
I’ll be back Thursday night and for that I think I’ll go back (way back) to review a classic bit of horror.
23% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 62 reviews)
Directed by: Christian Alvart
Runtime: 109 minutes
Starring: Renee Zellweger, Jodelle Ferland, Bradley Cooper, Ian McShane
From: Paramount Vantage
Here is a movie I didn’t think I was ever going to see. But, last night I had free time and wanted to get out of the house, so I returned to the drive-in in Lakeland and I saw the double feature of this, preceded by Paranormal Activity 2; of course, that movie in that format isn’t quite the same, but I was still entertained by it. This movie, though…
In case you don’t remember, it was released the first week of October as one of the many horror flicks coming out at that time. They all beat upon each other and none of them did that particularly well; not a surprise to me, dividing the horror fans that way. This is noteworthy for some of its major names… along with the fact that they started filming this in late 2006. No kidding. There were many re-shoots (I even noticed it once, but if you looked closely enough, Renee looked noticeably different due to plastic surgery, hair styles, or what have you) and the United States was like the last place in the world to get the movie. More often than not, a film being on the shelf for that long is a giant red flag. After I actually watched the damn thing, that theory was proven to be correct.
I don’t know how much about the movie is known by people (heck, I’m not sure if I’ve seen the official trailer or not; the one I’ve seen online is rather misleading, to say the least), but as I doubt that many people care about this movie… I’ll make the comparison to the movie Orphan, i.e. my very first review. That movie-which ends up being similar to this in a few ways-stomps all over this one. I don’t blame the little girl starring in this movie (Ferland); with what she had to work with, she was fine, being both cute and creepy. It’s just that the story and the other people acting around her… for many of them it was just another paycheck, in other words. Interestingly enough, both little Esther (Isabelle Furhman) and popular little girl Chloe Moritz could have been in that role; not that it would have really changed this movie at all.
To be brief, Zellweger delivers her usual Zellwegerian performance as Emily Jenkins, a social worker who has to deal with 38 cases as once (is this how it really works?) but then is giving a 39th one; there, it looks as if some wacko parents are abusing an adorable little girl. She tugs Emily’s heartstrings and eventually the parents are caught trying to cook her in an oven! She’s saved and somehow, Emily is allowed to briefly adopt her. That proves to be a mistake, though, as various things suddenly start happening… and I’ll leave it at that.
This movie overall just isn’t that scary or terrifying at all. Despite some laughably dumb stuff you get to see, it’s also pretty boring overall. The first half mainly isn’t the problem; it derails totally in the second half once you get to see just what exactly is going on. It’s rather laughable, the killings are. And Emily acts REALLY stupid before and after she finds out what it is. Think and act logically, that does not happen. She could have even tried to attack the villain (as an attempt would have made the audience happy, at least), but nope, does not happen. Things get stupider and stupider until the very end and the film is just a waste of time. Aside from the goofy premise of what’s causing all the mayhem, the movie is otherwise not fresh at all, is not even interesting to look at, and flicks like Orphan are more worth your time than even spending a few bucks to rent this once it comes to DVD/Blu-Ray. I mean, other people noticed it more times than I did, but there's at least one *really noticeable* instance where Renee looks very different, due to wearing a bad wig to look like she did before massive reshoots happened. But it's kind of hard to hide plastic surgery on your face...
However, I will mention one thing that did make me chuckle. Near the end of the movie, through ways that I won’t get into as it’s spoilers, someone calls Renee a pumpkinhead; pumpkinhead! For some reason, that seems totally appropriate and for the rest of my life, I may think of Renee Zellweger as a pumpkinhead. At least I could garner SOME kind of enjoyment from this otherwise pointless motion picture.
I’ll be back Thursday night and for that I think I’ll go back (way back) to review a classic bit of horror.
Friday, October 22, 2010
Paranormal Activity 2
Paranormal Activity 2 (2010)
69% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 42 reviews)
Runtime: 91 minutes
Directed by: Tod Williams
Starring: Brian Boland, Sprague Grayden, Katie Featherston, Micah Sloat
From: Paramount
Yep, I wasn’t planning on seeing this movie already; in fact I had pretty much left myself in the dark on what the sequel was going to be about. I enjoyed the first movie a lot when I saw it last fall. My view on it is assuredly different from many other people as I first heard about it from the website Dread Central on their podcast back in the fall of ’07 and since then it’d be periodically mentioned but many of the listeners there grew frustrated with the process of hearing about a movie heavily hyped by the site and yet hardly anyone could go and see it as it only had a few random screenings around Los Angeles and that was it… until a miracle happened last year and via viral marketing it became a shockingly huge hit and even was number one at the box office for a weekend, something I could have never predicted when I first heard about the almost no budget film back in ’07. Anyhow, I had fears about the sequel; it was being made very quickly so that it’d be out at this time, there is a different writer/director (although the guy who came up with it all, Oren Peli, would still be on as a producer) and just by history most horror sequels are crap compared to the originals. Just look at the Blair Witch Project sequel; I’d never seen it but the more traditional film to the found footage original is HATED by most horror fans.
But, it was the opportunity to see the first PA and the sequel back to back last night (which was done at various locations across the country) made me go out and see it… and this was a very wise choice on my part. The first movie had a real small crowd show up at the huge auditorium at Winter Park. The sequel drew a larger crowd but it still looked small in such a large room. Also, I sat far away from everyone else; I don’t know why but it made me feel like I had leprosy or something! Anyway, the crowd seemed to enjoy PA2 quite a bit, yelling and shrieking at all the jump scares and freaking out during the night scenes and all the tension those scenes had. When the end credits hit-after a long moment of just a black screen-there were many relieved sighs. The film also worked on me and at least at the moment I’d say it’s a little better than the first. It’s very similar to the first but a fresh spin it put on things with the focus being on a family rather than a two person couple and you get some security camera footage in the house along with a handheld camera.
I’m not sure how much I should reveal here, but the family in question is actually the sister of Katie (Featherston) and it takes place at the same time as the first Paranormal Activity. The two movies go together very well and some things in the first are elaborated upon here (such as learning more about the demon in question) and a viewing of the original movie before you see this one may not be the worst idea. Revealing much more than that about the story would probably ruin things so I’ll shut up about that.
On another topic, though, if you were a fan of the busty Katie, then you should enjoy the one scene she has where you see her in a bikini top. I didn’t complain about that scene myself!
So, if you loved the original, you should see this with a crowd and enjoy the scares and frights with an audience; if you hated the first (and I know some personally who did; that disappoints me but to each their own) then your opinion on this won’t change as the two are very similar. As I'm a fan of the first... that's why I dug this and I think it's pretty incredible to think that many IMAX screens are showing this for the rest of the month. Again, no way could I have predicted back in '07 that there would be a sequel to this, and I could see it on an IMAX screen, whether a legit one or a much smaller one.
I’ll be back Monday night with a new review.
69% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 42 reviews)
Runtime: 91 minutes
Directed by: Tod Williams
Starring: Brian Boland, Sprague Grayden, Katie Featherston, Micah Sloat
From: Paramount
Yep, I wasn’t planning on seeing this movie already; in fact I had pretty much left myself in the dark on what the sequel was going to be about. I enjoyed the first movie a lot when I saw it last fall. My view on it is assuredly different from many other people as I first heard about it from the website Dread Central on their podcast back in the fall of ’07 and since then it’d be periodically mentioned but many of the listeners there grew frustrated with the process of hearing about a movie heavily hyped by the site and yet hardly anyone could go and see it as it only had a few random screenings around Los Angeles and that was it… until a miracle happened last year and via viral marketing it became a shockingly huge hit and even was number one at the box office for a weekend, something I could have never predicted when I first heard about the almost no budget film back in ’07. Anyhow, I had fears about the sequel; it was being made very quickly so that it’d be out at this time, there is a different writer/director (although the guy who came up with it all, Oren Peli, would still be on as a producer) and just by history most horror sequels are crap compared to the originals. Just look at the Blair Witch Project sequel; I’d never seen it but the more traditional film to the found footage original is HATED by most horror fans.
But, it was the opportunity to see the first PA and the sequel back to back last night (which was done at various locations across the country) made me go out and see it… and this was a very wise choice on my part. The first movie had a real small crowd show up at the huge auditorium at Winter Park. The sequel drew a larger crowd but it still looked small in such a large room. Also, I sat far away from everyone else; I don’t know why but it made me feel like I had leprosy or something! Anyway, the crowd seemed to enjoy PA2 quite a bit, yelling and shrieking at all the jump scares and freaking out during the night scenes and all the tension those scenes had. When the end credits hit-after a long moment of just a black screen-there were many relieved sighs. The film also worked on me and at least at the moment I’d say it’s a little better than the first. It’s very similar to the first but a fresh spin it put on things with the focus being on a family rather than a two person couple and you get some security camera footage in the house along with a handheld camera.
I’m not sure how much I should reveal here, but the family in question is actually the sister of Katie (Featherston) and it takes place at the same time as the first Paranormal Activity. The two movies go together very well and some things in the first are elaborated upon here (such as learning more about the demon in question) and a viewing of the original movie before you see this one may not be the worst idea. Revealing much more than that about the story would probably ruin things so I’ll shut up about that.
On another topic, though, if you were a fan of the busty Katie, then you should enjoy the one scene she has where you see her in a bikini top. I didn’t complain about that scene myself!
So, if you loved the original, you should see this with a crowd and enjoy the scares and frights with an audience; if you hated the first (and I know some personally who did; that disappoints me but to each their own) then your opinion on this won’t change as the two are very similar. As I'm a fan of the first... that's why I dug this and I think it's pretty incredible to think that many IMAX screens are showing this for the rest of the month. Again, no way could I have predicted back in '07 that there would be a sequel to this, and I could see it on an IMAX screen, whether a legit one or a much smaller one.
I’ll be back Monday night with a new review.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Halloween II
Halloweeen II (1981)
Runtime: 93 minutes
Directed by: Rick Rosenthal
Starring: Jamie Lee Curtis, Donald Pleasence, Charles Cyphers, Lance Guest
From: Universal
No, I’m not writing about the apparently awful Rob Zombie Halloween II that came out last year. Rather, this is the first sequel to the legendary original Halloween, a movie I haven’t seen recently but remember pretty well as I’ve seen it on a few occasions. Back in 2007 there was a special one night only 20th anniversary screening so I got to watch it on the big screen. However, I’ve only seen this particular film once, at least ten years ago on a VHS tape! I really didn’t remember too much about it. I more remember “The Halloween that has nothing to do with Michael Myers (III) and the fourth and fifth in the series (with Danielle Harris; believe it or not, on another night there was a nationwide deal where amazingly those two movies in the series were shown back to back on the big screen) rather than this one. I haven’t seen the others in the series and believe me, Rob Zombie’s contributions to the series don’t count at all.
The plot to this is rather simple; it starts right after the first one ends… which if you don’t remember, Laurie Strode (Curtis) is able to escape Myers after Dr. Loomis (Pleasence) shoots him six times and falls off a balcony, but then vanishes. This movie has Laurie going to the hospital-which is staffed by a totally incompetent crew-but Michael discovers where she’s at. Meanwhile, Dr. Loomis and Sheriff Brackett (Cyphers) are on the hunt for him.
This movie was produced and written by John Carpenter and Deborah Hill so you’d hope that two of the main forces behind the original could work their magic again. Well… there were some creepy and chilling moments (e.g., there’s a scene where in the background a character gets strangled by Michael and in the foreground there’s another character, totally oblivious to what’s going on behind them) but far too often the film ends up being disjointed, confused, and just plain dumb. You’re happy to see Michael kill some of those doofuses, and I don’t know if that was supposed to be the plan. And then there’s a rather ridiculous finale, especially when you consider the subsequent sequels. Alas, tis a shame…
There is one interesting thing I do have to mention, and it revolves around the back of the DVD case for this motion picture; I rented this from Blockbuster recently and as with most of their rentals the DVD’s come in their original case. On it I suddenly noticed quite the blatant spoiler, and yes I’ll be revealing it but I’m sure that most of you already know it by now.
I have no idea how this got out and Universal didn't notice it, but if you read the blurb on the back of the DVD, it says the following:
"It seems the inhuman Michael Myers is still very much alive and out for more revenge as he stalks the deserted halls of the hospital where his sister lays waiting. As he gets closer and close to his terrified target, Dr. Loomis discovers the chilling mystery behind the crazy psychopath's savage actions."
Um, idiots at Universal... not only did you spoil the "chilling mystery" but then right after you did so, you bragged that the movie HAD a "chilling mystery"! I couldn't believe it when I realized they made such an obvious mistake and it wasn't caught by anyone before it was released. Yes, it is true that the mystery is the relationship between Michael and Laurie (something that was later admitted to be a mistake), but to spoil it like that was not something I was expecting.
I'll be back Friday night with a new review.
Runtime: 93 minutes
Directed by: Rick Rosenthal
Starring: Jamie Lee Curtis, Donald Pleasence, Charles Cyphers, Lance Guest
From: Universal
No, I’m not writing about the apparently awful Rob Zombie Halloween II that came out last year. Rather, this is the first sequel to the legendary original Halloween, a movie I haven’t seen recently but remember pretty well as I’ve seen it on a few occasions. Back in 2007 there was a special one night only 20th anniversary screening so I got to watch it on the big screen. However, I’ve only seen this particular film once, at least ten years ago on a VHS tape! I really didn’t remember too much about it. I more remember “The Halloween that has nothing to do with Michael Myers (III) and the fourth and fifth in the series (with Danielle Harris; believe it or not, on another night there was a nationwide deal where amazingly those two movies in the series were shown back to back on the big screen) rather than this one. I haven’t seen the others in the series and believe me, Rob Zombie’s contributions to the series don’t count at all.
The plot to this is rather simple; it starts right after the first one ends… which if you don’t remember, Laurie Strode (Curtis) is able to escape Myers after Dr. Loomis (Pleasence) shoots him six times and falls off a balcony, but then vanishes. This movie has Laurie going to the hospital-which is staffed by a totally incompetent crew-but Michael discovers where she’s at. Meanwhile, Dr. Loomis and Sheriff Brackett (Cyphers) are on the hunt for him.
This movie was produced and written by John Carpenter and Deborah Hill so you’d hope that two of the main forces behind the original could work their magic again. Well… there were some creepy and chilling moments (e.g., there’s a scene where in the background a character gets strangled by Michael and in the foreground there’s another character, totally oblivious to what’s going on behind them) but far too often the film ends up being disjointed, confused, and just plain dumb. You’re happy to see Michael kill some of those doofuses, and I don’t know if that was supposed to be the plan. And then there’s a rather ridiculous finale, especially when you consider the subsequent sequels. Alas, tis a shame…
There is one interesting thing I do have to mention, and it revolves around the back of the DVD case for this motion picture; I rented this from Blockbuster recently and as with most of their rentals the DVD’s come in their original case. On it I suddenly noticed quite the blatant spoiler, and yes I’ll be revealing it but I’m sure that most of you already know it by now.
I have no idea how this got out and Universal didn't notice it, but if you read the blurb on the back of the DVD, it says the following:
"It seems the inhuman Michael Myers is still very much alive and out for more revenge as he stalks the deserted halls of the hospital where his sister lays waiting. As he gets closer and close to his terrified target, Dr. Loomis discovers the chilling mystery behind the crazy psychopath's savage actions."
Um, idiots at Universal... not only did you spoil the "chilling mystery" but then right after you did so, you bragged that the movie HAD a "chilling mystery"! I couldn't believe it when I realized they made such an obvious mistake and it wasn't caught by anyone before it was released. Yes, it is true that the mystery is the relationship between Michael and Laurie (something that was later admitted to be a mistake), but to spoil it like that was not something I was expecting.
I'll be back Friday night with a new review.
Friday, October 15, 2010
Ax 'Em
Ax Em (1992)
Runtime: 71 minutes
“Directed” by: Michael Mfume
“Starring”: Michael Mfume, Sandra Pulley, Joe Clair, Racquel Price
From: Nubian Prince Pictures
Here’s a rather unique review for today. Not only is it more story-telling than talking about the actual movie, but the movie itself has to be the worst I’ve ever seen!
It all begins in the late 90’s, when a relative of mine gave my family and I a stack of old videotapes; many of them were taped off of the pay cable channels in the 80’s, which is pretty awesome. However-and I’ll never know how he got it-the stack also had an all-black horror movie called The Weekend It Lives. It was awful! It looked to be a student film and it was as awful as can be. The dialogue could hardly be heard, the “special” effects weren’t all that special, things dragged on forever, and it was often howlingly bad when it wasn’t painfully bad.
A few years later on a messageboard I see a thread where people are talking about a movie called Ax ‘Em. I look it over and then came to a horrifying conclusion; The Weekend It Lives was retitled Ax ‘Em and released on DVD! THAT movie getting a DVD release left me flabbergasted. But I never tracked that down.
Until, early this year when the Blockbuster located a few miles from me closed down (there’s still another one open, it’s just farther away) and one of the movies still on sale for a few bucks was Ax ‘Em. So, I finally got it and watched it. Aside from some minor things and it being shortened (not that it helped at all), it’s about the same as the original VHS tape.
By the way, in some strange trivia, the director/star’s father is Kweisi Mfume, a former President/CEO of the NAACP and a former Congressman! No kidding.
The movie is all about a group of African-American college students who go to a cabin for the weekend, but are attacked by a giant hulking killer who I presume is undead (I mean, his skin IS blue! Although, maybe he just uses colloidal silver…); that’s all you really need to know about the plot. The killer’s backstory is not important at all, trust me.
Besides the major problems I addressed already, there’s also such great moments as some of the awful stereotypes that are presented (shocking to me given who his dad is), the look of the film stock changing often-and all of it looking so awful it appears as if the film camera was a JVC camcorder from about 1985 or so. At least once you HEAR the director yell “Cut!” before the next scene starts. Characters often talk over each other, making the sound issues even worse.
If you’re extremely brave, you can actually watch the movie on YouTube! It takes a lot of nerve. Lest you don’t believe me, check out other reviews from the likes of Something Awful and Black Horror Movies. It is as bad as I’m saying it is! Why this movie (allegedly with a budget of SIX HUNDRED AND FIFTY DOLLARS) ever made it past the student film stage is beyond my comprehension, except that it’s a part of the small “black horror movie” subgenre and there aren’t enough of those around. Well, I say it’s more a giant insult to that subgenre than anything else.
I'll be back Wednesday night, and I promise I'll review a movie far better than this one.
Runtime: 71 minutes
“Directed” by: Michael Mfume
“Starring”: Michael Mfume, Sandra Pulley, Joe Clair, Racquel Price
From: Nubian Prince Pictures
Here’s a rather unique review for today. Not only is it more story-telling than talking about the actual movie, but the movie itself has to be the worst I’ve ever seen!
It all begins in the late 90’s, when a relative of mine gave my family and I a stack of old videotapes; many of them were taped off of the pay cable channels in the 80’s, which is pretty awesome. However-and I’ll never know how he got it-the stack also had an all-black horror movie called The Weekend It Lives. It was awful! It looked to be a student film and it was as awful as can be. The dialogue could hardly be heard, the “special” effects weren’t all that special, things dragged on forever, and it was often howlingly bad when it wasn’t painfully bad.
A few years later on a messageboard I see a thread where people are talking about a movie called Ax ‘Em. I look it over and then came to a horrifying conclusion; The Weekend It Lives was retitled Ax ‘Em and released on DVD! THAT movie getting a DVD release left me flabbergasted. But I never tracked that down.
Until, early this year when the Blockbuster located a few miles from me closed down (there’s still another one open, it’s just farther away) and one of the movies still on sale for a few bucks was Ax ‘Em. So, I finally got it and watched it. Aside from some minor things and it being shortened (not that it helped at all), it’s about the same as the original VHS tape.
By the way, in some strange trivia, the director/star’s father is Kweisi Mfume, a former President/CEO of the NAACP and a former Congressman! No kidding.
The movie is all about a group of African-American college students who go to a cabin for the weekend, but are attacked by a giant hulking killer who I presume is undead (I mean, his skin IS blue! Although, maybe he just uses colloidal silver…); that’s all you really need to know about the plot. The killer’s backstory is not important at all, trust me.
Besides the major problems I addressed already, there’s also such great moments as some of the awful stereotypes that are presented (shocking to me given who his dad is), the look of the film stock changing often-and all of it looking so awful it appears as if the film camera was a JVC camcorder from about 1985 or so. At least once you HEAR the director yell “Cut!” before the next scene starts. Characters often talk over each other, making the sound issues even worse.
If you’re extremely brave, you can actually watch the movie on YouTube! It takes a lot of nerve. Lest you don’t believe me, check out other reviews from the likes of Something Awful and Black Horror Movies. It is as bad as I’m saying it is! Why this movie (allegedly with a budget of SIX HUNDRED AND FIFTY DOLLARS) ever made it past the student film stage is beyond my comprehension, except that it’s a part of the small “black horror movie” subgenre and there aren’t enough of those around. Well, I say it’s more a giant insult to that subgenre than anything else.
I'll be back Wednesday night, and I promise I'll review a movie far better than this one.
Thursday, October 14, 2010
The Hills Have Eyes
The Hills Have Eyes (1977)
Runtime: 89 minutes
Directed by: Wes Craven
Starring: Russ Grieve, Virginia Vincent, Robert Houston, James Whitworth, Michael Berryman
From: Blood Relations Co.
Here’s a movie that is probably well-known now amongst the general public for the remake and its sequel that were made back in the ’00, but I haven’t seen those before, nor did I see this movie… until earlier today. I picked it up at the local Blockbuster and finally viewed it. I knew the basic details and saw brief clips of the movie, but that was it.
This is about a family from Ohio who goes on vacation in California but take a detour into the middle of nowhere Nevada; a relative apparently granted a silver mine to them long ago and they want to claim it. It being a Chrysler Station Wagon towing a camper, there’s a mishap in the middle of the desert and they get stranded. From there they meet up with a crazed family of cannibals living in the desert, and mayhem ensues.
Yeah, I realized that the idea of cannibals being able to live out in the middle of nowhere and once in a blue moon catch some humans (or dogs) and otherwise sustaining on… well, something… is not something to spend a lot of time thinking about logically. However, the movie is pretty tense and it works very well. The film print (even in its 2003 DVD release) looks rather poor upconverted on my Blu-Ray player, but that actually helps to add to the 70’s-ness of it. There are some pretty terrifying moments and the villains are memorable, especially the distinctive Pluto (Berryman). Michael Berryman was born with some genetic conditions which result in him looking the way he does and thus makes him perfect for being the scary bad guy or the henchman in this genre.
Anyhow, the movie has raw intensity in spades and you can tell that this family is up s***’s creek and Jesus Christ in a crunch they have to resort to becoming animalistic themselves to try and survive. It’s something I recommend seeing if you haven’t already. Sure, there’s some goofiness but that was mainly its 70’s charm, from the guy who looks like Sonny Bono to the fashion to the phrase “Goddamn” being used often by one character and the phrase “Jesus Christ in a crunch” being uttered.
I have no clue how good the remake and its sequel are; I’ve heard mixed reviews to that. I can tell you that the sequel to THIS movie, though, is by all accounts God-awful and filled with flashbacks to the original to pad time. It was a total cash grab by Craven and that’s unfortunate.
One interesting thing about the movie is that the character of Bobby (Houston) is clearly a homosexual and yet it’s just that and it’s not addressed. Before I looked online I thought it was rather curious. He sounds like he’s gay, wore short yellow shorts in the beginning, and randomly did gymnastics. It turns out that Robert Houston is in real life a homosexual so it’s not like it was unintended homoeroticism or whatever. So you have to assume that the character of Bobby was a homosexual and it was totally random and didn’t mean anything to the movie. At least there was no stereotyping and he had to swish around or whatever. He managed to deliver a fine performance; I was just surprised when I first heard him speak, that’s all…
Plus, he gets cool points in my book for being a big part in putting together the movie Shogun Assassin, which Americanizes and combines the first two movies in the Lone Wolf & Cub series, which is a Japanese magna that was adapted into a set of six movies in the 70’s. I’ve only seen Shogun and the first movie in the Lone Wolf series, but it’s awesome sword-wielding bloody greatness. Plus, the theme to Shogun Assassin is tremendous.
I’ll be back Friday night with a new review.
Runtime: 89 minutes
Directed by: Wes Craven
Starring: Russ Grieve, Virginia Vincent, Robert Houston, James Whitworth, Michael Berryman
From: Blood Relations Co.
Here’s a movie that is probably well-known now amongst the general public for the remake and its sequel that were made back in the ’00, but I haven’t seen those before, nor did I see this movie… until earlier today. I picked it up at the local Blockbuster and finally viewed it. I knew the basic details and saw brief clips of the movie, but that was it.
This is about a family from Ohio who goes on vacation in California but take a detour into the middle of nowhere Nevada; a relative apparently granted a silver mine to them long ago and they want to claim it. It being a Chrysler Station Wagon towing a camper, there’s a mishap in the middle of the desert and they get stranded. From there they meet up with a crazed family of cannibals living in the desert, and mayhem ensues.
Yeah, I realized that the idea of cannibals being able to live out in the middle of nowhere and once in a blue moon catch some humans (or dogs) and otherwise sustaining on… well, something… is not something to spend a lot of time thinking about logically. However, the movie is pretty tense and it works very well. The film print (even in its 2003 DVD release) looks rather poor upconverted on my Blu-Ray player, but that actually helps to add to the 70’s-ness of it. There are some pretty terrifying moments and the villains are memorable, especially the distinctive Pluto (Berryman). Michael Berryman was born with some genetic conditions which result in him looking the way he does and thus makes him perfect for being the scary bad guy or the henchman in this genre.
Anyhow, the movie has raw intensity in spades and you can tell that this family is up s***’s creek and Jesus Christ in a crunch they have to resort to becoming animalistic themselves to try and survive. It’s something I recommend seeing if you haven’t already. Sure, there’s some goofiness but that was mainly its 70’s charm, from the guy who looks like Sonny Bono to the fashion to the phrase “Goddamn” being used often by one character and the phrase “Jesus Christ in a crunch” being uttered.
I have no clue how good the remake and its sequel are; I’ve heard mixed reviews to that. I can tell you that the sequel to THIS movie, though, is by all accounts God-awful and filled with flashbacks to the original to pad time. It was a total cash grab by Craven and that’s unfortunate.
One interesting thing about the movie is that the character of Bobby (Houston) is clearly a homosexual and yet it’s just that and it’s not addressed. Before I looked online I thought it was rather curious. He sounds like he’s gay, wore short yellow shorts in the beginning, and randomly did gymnastics. It turns out that Robert Houston is in real life a homosexual so it’s not like it was unintended homoeroticism or whatever. So you have to assume that the character of Bobby was a homosexual and it was totally random and didn’t mean anything to the movie. At least there was no stereotyping and he had to swish around or whatever. He managed to deliver a fine performance; I was just surprised when I first heard him speak, that’s all…
Plus, he gets cool points in my book for being a big part in putting together the movie Shogun Assassin, which Americanizes and combines the first two movies in the Lone Wolf & Cub series, which is a Japanese magna that was adapted into a set of six movies in the 70’s. I’ve only seen Shogun and the first movie in the Lone Wolf series, but it’s awesome sword-wielding bloody greatness. Plus, the theme to Shogun Assassin is tremendous.
I’ll be back Friday night with a new review.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)