Author: fenrisfil

Stoker (2013)

Posted on by fenrisfil

“Stoker” (2013) is a movie that’s been on my watch list for a long time. This is director Park Chan-wook’s English language debut. This is the director of “Old Boy” (2003), a deeply disturbing, yet compelling revenge thriller that takes taboo to the extreme. This movie has a number of unique elements to it’s production. While Clint Mansel provides most of the music, Philip Glass was originally on board as composer and created a key piece of diagetic music for the film. The writer here is none other than “Captain Cold” himself, actor Wentworth Miller in his screenplay debut. The core cast is Nicole Kidman, Mia Wasikowska and David Alford. All very good actors, but none were the first choice. Chung Chung-hoon, a long time collaborator of the director, provides cinematography.He has also worked with Edgar Wright on his last two movies.

On the day of her eighteenth birthday “India Stoker” (Wasikowska) and her mother “Evelyn” (Kidman) are shocked to learn of the death of India’s father “Richard” in a car accident. India is a very distant and cold young lady who rarely forms attachments and has no friends. The family are however very well off. At the wake, the pair are surprised at the arrival of Richards brother “Charles”, a man neither were aware of. Supposedly he has been traveling the world. After discussion with Evelyn, it is revealed he is staying with the family for a while. Richard is a charming man, but it becomes clear to India something isn’t quite right with him. But then the same is true of India.

The Elephant in the Room

So this is the second Park Chan-wook movie I have seen, the previous one being Oldboy. If you don’t want a major Oldboy spoilers, skip the rest of this paragraph. I find it a little odd both these movies involve incest. In Oldboy the incest was unintentional and part of a convoluted revenge scheme. Here it is entirely intentional and there is no illusion of innocence on either party. It is at least between an uncle and niece instead of a father and daughter, but it’s still incest. This is a psychological thriller of course and the pair in question are both psychopaths. So it’s not like these are characters of high morality. This is a very dark story.

So now we’ve acknowledged the elephant in the room. It’s time to talk about the rest of it. Park Chan-Wook is a very good director with an eye for detail. He can tell a dark story like this and fill it with subtle symbolism. Perhaps the problem here is that it’s a very obvious and somewhat blunt story. Unlike Oldboy there isn’t really a mystery here, at least not one you can’t guess fairly easily. It’s pretty clear India and Charles are psychopaths. The way it plays out leaves a lot of questions as to if certain things are real or not, specifically the duet piano piece the pair play, which may just be in India’s imagination. The trouble is, it doesn’t really mater.

Duet

So this is a film with a bit of a disconnect between the story and the presentation. But this isn’t really a plot based story. As I said, you can largely tell where it will all go. This is a character based horror, where the symbolism is all reflective of the mental state of it’s primary psychopath, India. Regardless of whether the piano duet scene is real or in her head, it is an incredibly scene. The piano piece was written by Philip Glass specifically for the movie. It was designed as a duet that requires one of the players to effectively embrace the other by requiring them to reach around to their other side to complete it. It’s actually an incredible piece of music in itself and easily the best scene.

That said, I didn’t find India particularly compelling as a character. She’s creepy, but also intentionally somewhat blank. Instead Charlie, who is presented as the classic charismatic, manipulative psychopath is far more interesting. But since we never really know how much of his appearance is genuine or India’s imagination, his impact is also diminished. Evelyn is also an interesting character, a woman determined to handle her burden with elegance. It’s a subtle performance from Nicole Kidman that really works. Yet she is not really given a lot of screen time. There is so much good in this film, yet the movie seems far more concerned with the incestuous romance angle.

Conclusion

The screenplay is a problem in my view. Wentworth Miller is not a script writer by trade, but obviously had an idea he thought was good. The screenplay remained unproduced for a long time but found it’s way on to the famous “Black list” of best unproduced screenplays. I can see why, it has compelling elements but also feels like something very difficult to make work. For Park Chan-wook, this is his first English language movie. Yet he is not fluent and required a translator. Between these two factors I believe this is why the film feels such a mixed bag. On one hand it is visually and socially compelling and the director got solid performances from all the actors. Hard to say if this is the director or just that all three of the leads are very good actors anyway.

Ultimately this is going to be a difficult one to rate. I did not like the story. I did not really buy India’s character or really enjoy her presentation. Her voice over also felt unnecessary. But the movie is well made from a technical standpoint. I suspect I may not have a true score for this until I’ve had more time to think on it and maybe give it a second viewing. I could end up adjusting it anywhere from a 5.5-7.5. It’s that kind of movie. As it stands, despite this review probably sounding more negative than positive, I think the movie is worth watching. This is a more likely to win awards than fill theaters. It’s sort of unpleasant to watch, yet compelling too. I’m giving it a 6.5/10.

Rating: 6.5 out of 10.

The Man From Planet X (1951)

Posted on by fenrisfil

Tonight we’re hitting the 50’s. The era that popularized science fiction horror. It paved the way for films like Alien, Terminator, Pitch Black, Event Horizon and even Terrorvision. In most cases these early sci-fi horrors were more firmly science fiction with horror elements where as now it’s more the other way around. This is “The Man From Planet X” and independent movie from 1951. Directed by Edgar G Ulmer and written by Aubrey Isberg and Jack Pollexton. John L Russell provides cinematography and Charles Koff the music. The movie stars Robert Clarke, Marget Fielding and William Schallert.

A rogue planet enters our solar system on a trajectory that will take it close to Earth. “Professor Elliot” (Raymond Bond) sets about observing it, but the encounter becomes far closer than expected. When his daughter Enid (Fielding) stumbles upon an alien craft in the Scottish highland, the professor and American journalist “John Lawrence” (Clarke) go to investigate. Finding the alien apparently non hostile they return to their lab with the being and try to communicate. Unfortunately the professors colleague Dr. Mears (Schallert) has his own plans for the alien. With his betrayal, the alien becomes hostile and with the threat of invasion it is down to Lawrence to stop the being.

Close Encounter

This is a very simple movie, but where it stands out among a flood of sci-fi horrors of the period is the ambiguity. The audience never gets to find out the truth of their visitors attention. The heroes speculate that the alien was peaceful but that the assault from the ambitious Dr. Mears forced him to change plans. The implication is that these beings wanted to co-exist with humanity on Earth but were willing to take the world by force if necessary. Since we don’t hear this from the alien it is entirely human speculation. However, usually you’d expect either evil aliens trying to conquer Earth or benevolent ones aghast at the behavior of humanity. The ambiguity is probably more realistic.

The alien itself is pretty interesting, especially for the period. It looks humanoid, but not at all human like. The blank expression of course was partially down to what they could do with FX at the time, but it works. That the alien tries to communicate with music tones is a great concept and I suspect one that heavily influenced Stephen Speilberg many years later for “Close Encounters of the Third Kind”. They don’t actually make much of it here because the person that figures it out is a villain and so wants to keep it secret. The characters here are all somewhat one dimensional and merely service the plot, but the acting is good enough throughout.

Conclusion

Overall this is a mildly entertaining movie that doesn’t overstay it’s welcome. The concept is interesting and the acting is solid. But there’s not a lot more to it than that. There’s no particularly memorable scenes, none of the characters are particularly interesting and none of the performances stand out. It’s all just very average, at least though a modern lens. I can only give this a 5.5/10. Only recommended for those that like 50’s sci-fi.

Rating: 5.5 out of 10.

The Invisible Man Returns (1940)

Posted on by fenrisfil

For tonight’s movie I’m hitting two classic Halloween elements at once. One is a Universal Monsters movie and the second is Vincent Price. This was Price’s fourth movie role and his first horror. Yes, this is Vincent Price’s first horror. Of course since he plays the titular character, you don’t actually see him for the vast majority of the movie. He does get off a laugh though! The movie is directed by Joe May, with a screenplay by Lester K. Cole and Curt Siodmak. Milton Krasner provides cinematography and Hans J. Salter and Frank Skinner provide the score.

Geoffrey Radcliffe (Price) has been sentenced to death for the murder of his brother Michael, a crime he did not commit. On the night before his execution his friend Dr. Frank Griffin (John Sutton), the brother of the original invisible man, visits him, giving him the invisibility drug. Deterective Sampson (Cecil Kellaway) from Scotland yard is not fooled however, remembering the case of the original Invisible Man and is on his trail. Geoffrey meets up with his fiancé Helen (Nan Grey) at a remote farmhouse and is already struggling with the side effects of the drug that lead to madness. The race is on for Dr. Griffin to find a cure, while Geoffry attempts to find who really killed his brother.

The Price of Invisibility

Often when you watch an early movie from a great actor, their performance is a little underwhelming. This isn’t the case here. The voice isn’t quite what you would remember from price, but the performance was classic Price. What always made the actor stand out to me, especially in horror was that while he would deliver an authorative and powerful performance he would do it with a great vulnerability behind it. In many ways he makes the perfect tragic horror character. This is one of the reasons why my favorite version of “I am Legend” is his “The Last Man In The Earth”.

It’s a shame Price never got to play a werewolf. But this isn’t far from it, a tragic hero on the verge of madness. His performance is subtle compared to his later horrors were he would ramp everything up to eleven, but covers a range of emotions. We get sadness, self loathing, despair, anger, and megalomania. We even get some maniacal laughter. It’s a shame we don’t get to see him until the very end. So it’s like half a performance. Price aside, the effects are actually incredibly good for 1940. So full credit to Universal’s FX wizard John Fulton. Some of these effects even hold up today.

Conclusion

The plot is more complicated than the previous Invisible Man movie. The film is also ten minutes longer, though still falling under the hour and a half mark. Indeed it’s probably a little short for the content, leaving it feeling a little rushed. Not drastically so, but film doesn’t waste time. The supporting actors are reasonable, but don’t stand out. The music is somewhat uninspired, mostly reusing music from previous Universal horror movies. There’s nothing remotely scary on display here and the mystery has no real depth to it. None of this is overly bad, just very average for the period.

There are two elements that raise this movie from being merely average. Vincent Price and the quality of the effects. Without that, this movie would be a five out of ten. However price is the perfect choice for the invisible man and the effects have aged remarkably well. As a result this is a strong 6/10 and a recommendation. If you like Price or Universal horror, then put this one on your list.

Rating: 6 out of 10.

The Popes Exorcist (2023)

Posted on by fenrisfil

For tonight’s movie I’m checking out the Russel Crowe lead exorcism horror “The Popes Exorcist”. This is a fictional story, based on a real life exorcists experiences. Specifically that of Father Gabriele Amorth. Perhaps the most famous real life exorcist, who has written multiple books on his experiences. The film stars Russel Crowe as Amorth, with Daniel Zovatto, Alex Essoe, and Franco Nero supporting. It was directed by Julius Avery (Who made the pretty good horror “Overlord” in 2018). Michael Petroni and Evan Spiliotopoulos provide the screenplay. Cinematography is by Laurie Rose and Fabian Wagner and the Jed Kurzel provides the soundtrack.

Father Gabriele Amorth (Crowe), returns to Rome from his latest assignment and is tasked by the Pope (Nero) to take on a potential exorcism in Spain. The Pope has deep concerns about this one and fears a powerful demon my be involved. He is sent to an old Abbey that has recently been inherited by a woman called “Julia” and her children “Henry” and “Amy”. The Abbey was the sole possession of Julia’s husband, who passed away recently. They intend to renovate and sell the property to deal with their financial issues. However the work on the Abbey seems to have freed a demonic spirit that has taken possession of young Henry. It is up to Father Amorth and a young local priest “Father Tomas Esquibe” to exorcise the demon and free the child.

The Devil in The Detail

This is actually surprisingly good. But it does suffer from the big problem of exorcism movies. They all tend to follow the formula of the original Exorcist and as a result they tend to lack much in the way of originality. It’s like if 90% of slashers were set at lakeside camps. You basically know to expect a couple of priests, a child in a bed saying all kinds of nasty stuff and some special effects designed to make the possessed extra disturbing. Because of all this, it’s one of my least favorite genres. When I do like possession movies it’s usually ones that approach it differently such as “Nefarious“, “Fallen” or “Exorcist III”.

Given we know what to expect, what makes this movie stand out? Well, some very good special effects for those disturbing moments, it uses a real life exorcist as the lead character and Russel Crowe puts in a top notch performance. The finale also moves past the usual exorcist tropes to provide something a bit more visually satisfying. It’s interesting to note, Crowe was in another exorcism film recently “The Exorcism”, which did do something different… and wasn’t very good. So it’s not always about having the original idea, sometimes it’s all in the execution. The movie is well paced too and does a good job of working in callbacks and the two priests respective weaknesses.

Conclusion

This is a pretty fast paced exorcism movie, wasting almost none of it’s 103 minute running time. It also makes the most of it’s $18m production budget. A fairly normal budget for a horror. The style of the effects seems heavily influenced vengeful spirit movies, including the whole upside down walking on fours thing and limbs moving in inhuman ways. It works well here and the small main cast keeps it tight and efficient. We probably need need the scenes with the other priests and the pope, but then when you call a film “The Pope’s Exorcist” you probably do want the pope in it.

Overall this is one of the better exorcism movies. Not that it’s a highest of bars. In many ways these are similar to Werewolf movies. That is to say, it’s easy to make them, but very hard to make a good one. They succeeded. This is a strong 6.5/10. I can’t really give it higher, because it’s still basically just following the exorcism movie formula. I wasn’t blown away, but I had a good time and it was better than I expected.

Rating: 6.5 out of 10.

The Prowler (1981)

Posted on by fenrisfil

1981 was the year the slasher film firmly established itself as a horror genre. Friday the 13th part II introduced us to an adult Jason Voorheese. We also had “The Burning” and “My Bloody Valentine” and tonight’s horror movie “The Prowler”. While The Burning aimed for the Friday the 13th style holiday camp bloodbath, The Prowler followed in the wake of “Prom Night” (1980) by targeting a small town graduation dance. The movie is directed by Joseph Zito, who would go on to direct Friday the 13th Part IV (The one where Jason actually gets killed). Neal Barbera and Glenn Leopold write, João Fernandes provides cinematography, Richard Einhorn provides the music and Tom Savini does the effects.

In 1945 the town of Avalon is shaken by the brutal murder of a pair of lovers at a graduation dance. The victims are impaled with a pitch fork and decorated with a single rose. In the aftermath it is decided to no longer hold graduation dances. This lasts for 35 years until the community is finally convinced to let the dance happen. Unfortunately for the celebrating school leavers, someone is not happy about this turn of events. While embarking on a killing spree following the original killers M.O. one of his potential victims manages to escape and sound the alarm bell. The police deputy, who is left in command after the Sheriff goes on a fishing trip must track down and stop this Prowler before he takes another victim.

Some People Take Rejection Badly

This is a fairly early slasher film (At least if you ignore proto-slashers like “Bay of Blood“). Because of this, it’s hard to appreciate the impact this film would have had on release. A lot of the slasher tropes in this film were still relatively fresh. The effects for the kills would have been especially impressive. Thanks to the great work of Tom Savini, those effects actually hold up pretty well by modern standards too. The movie has a moderately low kill count. Six stalked kills by the psycho (All coming in pairs), with the first pair being decades earlier. This is followed by two more during the struggle at the end, both shot. These are fairly evenly spaced out maintaining the pace and tension.

The plot though is a little weak and somewhat muddled. There’s never any explanation given for why the killer is the killer. It’s implied his first kills are because he was jilted while fighting in WW2. This new spree though seems to be simply from a hatred of proms. This is a remarkable level of hatred towards the idea of young lovers. Even 35 years after his heart was broken and despite having apparently had a fairly normal life, he is still so enraged by the graduation ball that he wants to slaughter a load of random kids. It’s a hard one to buy. He deliberately avoids killing his work colleague though, so he’s not purely psychotic. It’s definitely odd.

What The Fork?

There’s a lot of unanswered questions that come with his movie. The most obvious one is why a pitchfork? The only answer I can think of is simple because they thought it was a cool. That and it would help the killer stand out. He uses a bayonette just as often and that one makes more sense given the WW2 soldier gimmick. On top of this there is a lot of oddness that seems to me to be attempts to throw red herrings our way about the identity of the killer. But these are all very ineffective and just end up throwing random things into the story. For example the whole Major Chatham red herring.

Had he turned near the end in place of the random character that does, it would have tied this up nicely. Instead we get a whole scene with a Major Chatham watching two of the lovers from the prom get it on in a basement. I can’t help but the film’s makers were really certain the viewers would think Chatham was the killer. Even despite being very old and frail and obviously not his own daughters jilted lover. His entire role in the film ends up just being that of a peeping tom. Apparently that’s more important to him than finding out who killed his daughter. It’s even stranger when you remember that it was meant to be Chatham that stopped the school having a prom for so many years. Seems like he enjoys it plenty.

Conclusion

One final bit of weirdness with the film is at the end. After a rescue moment with the final girl (Trying to avoid spoilers here). The girl and her somewhat random rescuer spend a lot of time staring at each other while dramatic music plays. The scene is awkward to watch. Perhaps this is the effect of having seen so many slasher movies. Obviously I knew the killer wasn’t finished off yet. The pair silently stare at each other for what feels like forever, while the girl makes a variety of facial expressions and then… well, you can probably guess. It’s a slasher film after all. This was just a bad scene and a shame because the final act had been pretty solid until then.

So overall, I did quite like this slasher. Tom Savini needs a star on the Hollywood walk of fame. He’s raises the level of any horror film he does the effects for and this is no exception. The plot though is all over the place, but the pacing is at least good. The film only started to drag once (When the Deputy is trying to get a lazy motel worker to contact the vacationing Sheriff). The killer is still pretty original, even 44 years later even we still don’t know why he used a pitch fork. Overall, this is a solid 6/10. Not a universal recommendation though. Instead it’s a strong recommendation for slasher fans and a “Don’t go out of your way for it” for everyone else.

Rating: 6 out of 10.

The Bird With The Crystal Plumage (1970)

Posted on by fenrisfil

For tonight’s movies I’m heading back to the world of giallo and an early film from horror legend Dario Argento. This is “The Bird With The Crystal Plumage” from 1970. The film usually credited with both launching Argento’s career and popularizing the giallo sub-genre internationally. Really, I should have watched this years ago, but I’m making amends now. The movie is written and directed by Argento with Vittorio Storaro providing cinematography. The legendary Enzio Morricone provides the soundtrack. American method actor Tony Musante stars.

“Sam Dalmas” (Muscante), is an American writer, vacationing in Rome while trying to get over a case of writers block. While walking home one evening Sam witnesses a violent attack at an art gallery. The victim survives thanks to his interference and Sam is questioned by the police where he learns that this may be a serial killer. Sam is haunted by what he saw that night and is sure he has missed something important about the would be killer. He begins to investigate the killings himself, something that draws the attention and wrath of the killer. Now he and his girlfriend “Julia” (Suzy Kendall) are in mortal danger. Sam can’t help but think this is a sign he is getting close to an answer.

Yellow With Spots of Red

This is very much a giallo film. It’s more murder mystery than horror, but when violence is required it doesn’t hold back. It’s a very compelling murder mystery too. I have to say, I didn’t guess the killer either. The red herrings were well placed and while I didn’t fall for all of them, they did enough to throw me off the scent. But it’s also not the kind of film ruined by knowing, so it hasn’t lost re-watch value either. There are perhaps a few holes in the story, but they don’t ruin anything. I would say some characters are a little too easy about friends of theirs dying and the police a bit too quick to let an American writer do their investigating for them, but other than that it is solid.

Despite being an early Argento film, his flair for visuals is evident here. It is perhaps a little less polished than it would become, but if anything that makes it more effective here. There’s a lot of closeups of limbs, eyes through holes and some great set ups for having the killer charge towards their victim. The killer’s style of black raincoat, gloves, hat and mask, mirror Mario Bava’s “Blood and Black Lace”. Argento would re-use this in several of his later giallo movies too, cementing the look as the “Giallo killer”.

The Art of Horror

Later Dario Argento films tended to feature great soundtracks from “Goblin”, which gave them a unique feel. This movie is before he began collaborating with that Italian progressive rock band. Instead, in his early career Argento regularly collaborated with one of the masters of the movie soundtrack, Enzio Morricone himself. Unsurprisingly, this is a top tier soundtrack and it really adds to what you see on screen. In some ways it’s superior to Goblin’s work since sometimes with that band, the music would feel more important than what was on screen. Similar to when Tangerine Dream did soundtracks in the US. Morricone’s soundtrack fits perfectly.

The presentation of the film is stylish but energetic and visceral. It doesn’t really build slow tension or rely on jump scares. Instead, it is somewhere in between the two. When the action kicks off you get very little warning, but you do see it coming. It’s just enough to brace yourself and get you to the edge of your seat. The kills aren’t dwelled on either. You see just enough for it to have shock value and no more. Everything in this movie is quite measured, which is no surprise coming from a very technical director as Argento.

Conclusion

The movie isn’t without flaws, but they are few and far between. My biggest issue, I can’t list without giving a major spoiler for the ending. Suffice to say it’s down to the logistics of the final twist. But that’s really my only issue. The film looks good and sounds good. It’s not quite the visual spectacle of “Blood and Black Lace” or some of Argento’s later films (For example, “Opera” which I reviewed a few years ago). It does however have an interesting and well put together plot (Better than Opera in that regard). Plus of course a Morricone soundtrack. Overall this is a clear 7/10. Definitely a recommendation and if you want to understand what “Giallo” is as a genre, this is the movie to watch.

Rating: 7 out of 10.

The Curse of the Werewolf (1961)

Posted on by fenrisfil

For tonight’s movie, I’m hitting the Werewolf sub-genre again and finally checking out Hammer Horror’s take on the beast from 1961. This is from legendary director Terence Fisher and stars legendary actor Oliver Reed (In his first lead role). It also features a 12 tone serials score from Benjamin Frankel. That is, the score avoids being in any key by ensuring that every note in the chromatic scale is played the same amount. Arthur Grant provides cinematography and Anthony Hinds (Credited as John Elder) wrote the screenplay.

In 18th-century Spain a beggar is imprisoned by a cruel marques and left for years forgotten in his dungeon. For years he is seen only by a mute serving girl that sends him his food. Over time he becomes a feral beast in that dungeon. After the serving girl is put into the same cell for refusing the marques advances, she is raped by the feral beggar. Begging for a freedom she is taken to the marques, but kills him and flees. Later she is found by a kindly gentleman-scholar, who lives alone with his housekeeper. They tend to her but she dies giving birth to the child of the feral beggar. The scholar raises the boy as his own, but it becomes apparent he is cursed.

Origin of the Curse

This really is a film of two halves. Specifically, Oliver Reed is only in the second half. The first half tells of his origin story, explaining why he was born with the curse. This section of the movie drags somewhat and involves a number of characters that are long gone by the time you get to Reed’s section. It’s not that this section is actually bad, it just feels like part of a different story. A lot of the story is setting up the “Marqués Siniestro” as an over the top evil villain. However, he’s dead before Oliver Reed turns up, so feels wasted. He is there to explain how a beggar ended up abandoned in the prison until driven into a feral form. Really, wasn’t neccisary.

The beggar in the dungeon is given it’s prologue, showing why the Beggar is in the dungeon. It’s not much of a reason either and amounts to the Marqués being a dick. But this too is given a prologue explaining why the beggar has turned up to this feast to end up in the dungeon. Then this entire section exists as a prologue to showing the child version of Reed’s character and revealing that he has the curse. It’s a very long winded origin story. Which would be fine if there was a lot to the main story, but by this point we’ve only got 45 minutes left. So the second half ends up feeling rushed.

Classic Werewolf Tragedy

Despite having three very distinct and isolated acts, these are individually very well put together. The acting is all good and the individual stories are relatively compelling. The downside is they are all too short. It’s the screenplay that is the problem here, this was Hinds first full screenplay and he simply put too much in it. It’s actually the middle act where this drags, because at this stage I realized the entire first act was not going to impact the rest of the film and I just wanted them to hurry up and get to an adult Leon. What I will say though is the child they had play Leon as a child really does look like Oliver Reed. He wasn’t a great actor, so I’m guessing they cast him on looks.

When we finally get to Reed’s section, it’s actually very good. Rushed, but good. Leon is quickly thrown into a relationship with the unobtainable daughter of his new employer. But as fast as it happens, it’s not fast enough to avoid the curse. Having killed an innocent girl, Leon wants to die and goes as far as to ask to be burned to death. Eventually when he changes, escapes and is hunted down it becomes a classic werewolf tragedy. We’ve seen it in the original “Wolf Man” movie, and we’ve seen it done best in “American Werewolf in London”. This is werewolf movie bread and butter. Reed plays a great tragic character. He is doomed from the start and ultimately only wanting to protect others from the beast within.

Conclusion

This is a well directed movie, with great sets, great and original music and quality acting. Unfortunately the plot is hampered by spending so much time in the set up and doing no more than the standard Wolfman thing for it’s final act. It features a great villain and a tragic hero that never actually have anything to do with each other. It’s actually the kind of movie that could work better these days, where they’d just extend it by another 40 minutes, allowing for a lot more meat to the main section. But Hammer Horror movies tended to be around the 90 minute mark and so that wasn’t to be. This is still a solid 6/10 however. Not a must see, but recommended as a solid werewolf movie.

Rating: 6 out of 10.

Bride of Chucky (1998)

Posted on by fenrisfil

Bride of Chucky is the sequel to “Child’s Play 3” and fourth installment of the Child’s Play franchise. It also the last Chucky movie not to be directed by it’s creator Don Mancini. As much credit as he deserves for the series, it’s notable it went downhill after he took the directing chair. While Mancini writes this installment it is directed by Ronny Yu (Who would go on to direct Jason Vs Freddy). Graeme Revell provides the music and Peter Pau provides cinematography. Brad Dourif naturally returns as the voice of “Chucky”. He is joined by Jennifer Tilly, Katherine Heigl and Nick Stabile.

Years after the events of the previous movie, Chucky’s remains are stored in a high security evidence lock up. Chucky’s girlfriend “Tiffany” (Tilly) from his human life orchestrates breaking the lifeless doll out and re-animating him. She is psychotic but also a romantic and dreams of getting married to Chucky. When the doll rejects her, the two fall out leading to Tiffany’s death and resurrection in another doll. The pair then trick an eloping couple to take the dolls to the cemetery where Chucky’s human body is buried so that he can retrieve his amulet and use it to posses a human form.

Tonal Shift

This a notable shift for the franchise, moving into far more comedic territory and switching away from focusing on Andy Barclay (Protagonist of the first three movies) This was just in time too as the third film was starting to wear the basic concept a bit thin. The film needed a fresh approach and they found that with Bride of Chucky. The first thing I noted with the film is the meta references, which stands out more in retrospect than it would have done in the late 90’s. Thanks to the impact of “Scream” (1996) most late 90’s horror took a very meta, self aware approach. Mostly I wasn’t a fan, but here in a horror comedy it works well.

Right at the start of the film as we’re shown the high security evidence lock up where Chucky’s remains are stored, we get to see a number of other items. Specifically a hock mask, a white mask of a face, a chainsaw and a strange glove with knives on the fingers. If you don’t get those references you are probably not a horror fan. We also get a reference to Pinhead from Hellraiser a bit further in and jokes indirectly about the Child’s Play series itself. This probably wouldn’t work without the comedic shift, but I enjoyed each one. The story didn’t have to go out of it’s way for the references and they were just a bit of fun.

And Then There Were Two

More importantly though is the dynamic between Chucky and Tiffany. Chucky is as abusive as you would expect, while Tiffany is a romantic… To be fair, a romantic serial killer, but still romantic. They only really bond over their love of murder and death, but they bond hard over it. Apparently the good guy dolls are anatomically correct… Yeah, that’s sort of disturbing in it’s own way. The second couple in the story, the eloping Jade and Jesse have their own tension. Mostly stemming from suspecting each other as serial killers. The whole thing is sort of a macabre double date/road movie. It works surprisingly well.

Visually the movie is pretty cool. I think that’s the best way to describe it. It’s not gory or scary, but the visuals are pretty original and unique to what you can do with killer dolls. The look of the rebuilt Chucky Doll is great and there are some creative kills and a variety of looks to Tiffany. It all works rather well. The soundtrack mixes in some great rock/metal of the period (Including a great version of “Crazy” courtesy of the band “Kidneytheives”), with a number of throwbacks to past Child’s play movies. Sadly this is the end of Chucky’s classic run, with creator Mancini taking full control and injecting a bit too much identity politics into it.

Conclusion

This is a different kind of film to past Child’s Play movies and as such it may not be what a lot of people expected from the franchise. That said, it’s not like they tried to make Chucky a hero or anything. He’s as irredeemably evil as ever. Many long running franchises have moments like this, where they recognize their own ridiculousness and lighten the tone a little. Nightmare on Elm Street part 3 and Friday the 13th part 6 come to mind. For me, the added humor was exactly what the franchises needed to stay fresh and this is easily the best Chucky movie since the original. This narrowly hits a 6.5/10 purely for how much fun it is. If you like horror comedy, you’ll like this.

Rating: 6.5 out of 10.

Street Trash (1987)

Posted on by fenrisfil

Tonight’s movie is the independent horror comedy “Street Trash” from 1987. Made on a budget of $100,000 ($274k in today’s money), making it at the cheaper end of the horror scale. Horror comedies are pretty easy to do at this price range since you can get away with goofy effects and bad acting providing the film is actually fun to watch. This one has been on my radar for a long time. The movie is directed by J. Michael Muro, a professional that mostly works as a camera operated. In that capacity he’s actually a James Cameron regular and has worked on films like “Terminator 2” and “Titanic”. This is the only movie he ever directed. The film is written and produced by Roy Frumkes. David Sperling provides cinematography and Rick Ulfik the soundtrack.

A liquor store own frequented by street bums finds a box of “Tenafly Viper” in his basement. Seeing it as trash, he decides to sell it at $1 a bottle to the local tramps. Unfortuantely for them, it kills anyone instantly that drinks it. Meanwhile, the bums have their own problems. They are unwelcome residents of the junkyard they inhabit. They are lorded over by a crazed Vietnam vet with a tendency towards psychotic outbursts. After a passing commuter is murdered and a few of the Viper killed corpses turn up, the cops also get involved and last but not least a local gangster has a grudge against the group after they gang rape and murder his girlfriend.

Brothers, Bums and Booze

One of the first things I noticed about the movie is how almost none of the plot actually revolves around the “Viper” booze, which from the trailer you’d think is the main story. This isn’t the story of the deadly booze, it’s just sort of there and not much of the story relates to it. But then that’s the kind of story this is. This is really just a story about a bunch of crazy hobos, being crazy hobos. The conclusion to the story is basically two hobo brothers dealing with the psycho boss hobo. The brothers are the closest thing to protagonists this film has, but it’s an ensemble cast really

Because of the chaotic plot and the ensemble cast none of the characters really have any kind of charm or appeal to them. But then they are all hobo’s so they probably aren’t meant to. To be fair, I wasn’t expecting character depth here. Another thing I wasn’t expecting was James Lorinz to turn up in a random small role and steal the show. You’d be forgiven for going “Who?” to that, and I would too had I not recently watched “Frankenhooker“, where he stars. This was his first movie role and it likely got him that job. Another cameo highlight is Tony Darrow also in a minor role, as a mobster (Naturally).

Conclusion

While these cameos are good, there’s also some pretty poor acting from other characters. Nothing that wrecked my enjoyment. Even though this isn’t a Troma Studios film, it is at that level. The humor, the gore, the sex, the acting are all what you’d expect from that studio. Basically it’s trash, but trash you can have fun with. Speaking of the gore, style of gore here is apparently known as a “Melt movie” and that is certainly an apt description. But it’s not just hobo’s melting, there’s also a severed penis being thrown around at one point too, because why not I guess.

This is a chaotic and ridiculous film. The plot feels like it was written by a hand grenade. The acting quality is all over the place and the special effects are deliberately silly. The music is actually quite good, in a cheesy 80’s sense. The cinematography is actually pretty solid but then Muro is primarily a cameraman and cinematographer so that makes sense. Basically, the title is accurate, this is tras. But it’s the kind of trash you can have fun with. Especially if you are drinking, though I’d avoid the Tenafly Viper. 5/10

Rating: 5 out of 10.

Oddity (2024)

Posted on by fenrisfil

Oddity is an independent Irish horror written and directed by Damian McCarthy. Not quite sure how this one came to my attention but the last independent Irish horror I reviewed was the excellent “A Dark Song”, so that probably got me looking at other Irish horrors and this one came up. The film stars Carolyn Bracken (In two roles, though one is brief). She is supported by Gwilym Lee, Caroline Menton and Steve Wall. Colm Hogan provides cinematography and Richard G. Mitchell provides the soundtrack.

“Dani” (Bracken) is murdered at her house late one night while her psychiatrist husband “Ted” (Lee) is at work. A year later and the psychiatric patient that is suspected of the murder is himself brutally slain Tom gives the man’s glass eye to “Darcy”, Dani’s blind sister (Also Bracken), a clairvoyant that is able to learn about that person from their items. She then travels to her sisters house to uncover the truth, bringing with her a large box containing a mysterious wooden statue of a man. Tom has to go to work, but his new girlfriend “Yana” is left at the house. But she is uncomfortable, not just by the company but also the house itself. She keeps seeing visions of Dani. As events unfold, the truth will be revealed.

Two Player Mafia

This is a film with few sets and few actors, but this leads to a major issue as it’s pretty obvious there is no real mystery over what happened to Dani. It’s a bit like trying to play the card game “Mafia” with two players. You know the guilty party at the start. The explanation for motivation feels a little weak at first. The reveal of just the kind of person Ted is helps with that, but also opens a number of potential plot holes. The main issue is the big divide between Ted’s life and his wife’s. They have been married for a number of years. Despite his sister-in-law being a clairvoyant and despite this being something that runs in their family, Ted casually dismisses all the occult. Even when faced with things that have no realistic explanation.

Meanwhile, Ted is a sociopath that has been abusing patients (And occasionally hiring psychotic ones as orderlies) for years. Yet neither his wife nor her clairvoyant sister ever suspected a thing. So while most of the reveals were predictable from the start, the few surprises just damage the films verisimilitude. Now to be fair, I’m sure the film makers knew it would be predictable. I mean, after the initial set up there are only four characters left in the film. One of which is only introduced late on and only after we are told of his involvement. The only question I had was if the girlfriend was involved or not. Whichever way that landed, wouldn’t really add to the mystery.

Conclusion

Fortunately though, Oddity has a solid atmosphere to it. Really, very little happens, but the movie makes the most of the dark foreboding ambiance. A lot of this is probably down to budget restraints, but horror has always worked well in those situations. There’s not much else to it however. Despite being the protagonist Darcy doesn’t really do much. Most of the actual acting here is from Caroline Menton in her role as Ted’s girlfriend Yana. Sadly, she gets a barely passing grade in that regard. Not terrible, but unconvincing. After Yana departs, everyone is basically taking the role of antagonist, including Darcy. It becomes a “Who can be more menacing” competition.

One last positive thing I can say about the movie is the Golem did look creepy. I can tell they spent some time on the design. Which in some ways is a waste because it too doesn’t do much in this film. This is a bit of a theme really. There is no much to this movie outside of atmosphere. The plot doesn’t drag you in or make you think and none of the characters are really compelling or relatable. On Atmosphere alone it could score well, but overall I think the best I can give the film is a 5.5/10. If you like slow burn, atmospheric horror you may enjoy it. On the other hand if you do like that and haven’t seen “A Dark Song” (2016), watch that instead.

Rating: 5.5 out of 10.