My Bloody Valentine 3D (2009)

My Bloody Valentine 3D was directed by Patrick Lussier and stars Jensen Akers and Jamie King.

Augh! This movie was great!

Seriously. It delt out exactly what it promised: An 80's-style slasher romp that was fun to watch. It wasn't deep or nuanced in any way, but it didn't pretend to be. This lack of pretension allowed the film to foreground itself as derivational and thereby revel in its lack of originality.

My only problem was that our local theatre was only showing it in 2D. (Boo! Hiss!) However, the 3D effects were pretty well done, because quite often images seemed to pop out anyway, despite our appaling lack of 3D glasses.

A+

The Hills Have Eyes (1977)

The Hills Have Eyes was released in 1977 by Wes Craven, and stars Susan Lanier and Robert Houston.

I decided that since I've been doing so many new movies lately, I should go old school and do something classic.

My mistake. The original Hills Have Eyes is boring! Seriously, y'all. I know I should tear my blaspheming fingers off for even typing this, but it just looked like a bunch of cave people running around to me.

I never thought I'd say this, but the new one is better.

D

Inside (2008) or À l'intérieur (2007)

Inside was directed by Alexandre Bustillo and Julien Maury and stars Béatrice Dalle and Alysson Paradis. It was released in 2007 in France, and has just recently been released on DVD in the United States.

First of all, if you do not appreciate stabbings, this is not the movie for you. At all. Just sayin'. It features quite a few puncture wounds caused by a wide variety of pointy objects, most notably by a shiny pair of sewing scissors. This especially freaked me out because I was working on a sewing project as I watched this movie, and just happened to have an identical pair sitting right in front of me on my desk. They were shining quite menacingly in the glow of my computer throughout the movie.

Also, according to Bloody Disgusting, this movie has been censored by Blockbuster in the states. They've removed a total of seven minutes, which I've heard really destroys the movie's integrity. Luckily, I managed to get a copy from a local independent rental place, (Video Fan, which, by the way, has an entire horror ROOM,) so my review will be of the complete film.

I think true suspense is not actually about the unknown, but more about knowing exactly what is about to happen and being powerless to stop it. Inside has a perfect understanding of this principle. I'm not one for yelling at the screen, but this movie had me cringing and shouting throughout. There were many moments where one could see exactly what was about to occur, which made that event so much more brutal to watch.

Accordingly, I think there is a legitimate place for predictability in horror. Twist endings are all well and good, but I feel they often result in "puzzle" movies. Figuring out the twist is entertaining, but as soon as the end is revealed, there is nothing left to ponder. Bruce Willis is dead and that's all one needs to know. I mean, there are notable exceptions, Fight Club (1999) being a prominent example, but most often all that results is a movie unworthy of a repeat viewing. There's nothing to care about once one knows the ending.

Consequently, it is when Inside attempts to be original that it fails. Towards the end of the film, the lights are shut off by La Femme, the killer who desires Sarah's baby. The police are of course killed when they go to the basement to turn them back on, along with a young Muslim man they had taken into custody earlier in the night for rioting. Later, Sarah enters the basement to confront La Femme in the dark when suddenly, the young man stands up and turns back on the lights. His eyes are blacked out, and I had a sudden "Huh? Is he a zombie?" moment before he was killed again. In a movie that seemed to pride itself in the authenticity of its brutality, this moment just didn't fit. It felt like a cop-out.

Similarly, La Femme's explanations for wanting Sarah's baby seemed a bit weak. It was just a bit too coincidental that La Femme and Sarah were both be pregnant when they crashed their cars into each other, killing La Femme's child and Sarah's husband. To me, it would have been more frightening to provide no motivation for La Femme's rampage beyond her desire for a child. Providing a reason breaks her character's actions down into a simple cause and effect reaction, rather than the result of a twisted human mind.

Overall, this movie is intensely feminine. A majority of the weapons, from sewing scissors and knitting needles to hair sticks and kitchen knives, have especially domestic connotations, especially in view of the motherhood-centric plot. In general, it was refreshing to see, in light of the constant barrage of plots concerning hulking men chasing after nubile college girls.

Suspense: A+
Movie Overall: B+

Repo! The Genetic Opera (2008)

Repo! The Genetic Opera was written, directed by and features Terrance Zdunich. This movie stars Paris Hilton, Anthony Stewart Head (who played Giles in the Buffy the Vampire Slayer television series) and Sarah Brightman.

First of all, Sarah Brightman?!? I though she'd be much too... classy for this movie. However, she did a great job as Blind Mag, and her voice really shines against the more modern styles of the other actors.

Overall, this is an amazing movie. Seriously. The lyrics and plot may be a bit weak at times, but the sheer over-the-top lunacy of the movie makes it a wonder to watch. It's like Brian DePalma's Phantom of the Paradise (1974) in that it exists more as a spectacle than a story.

Also, it's worth watching to see Paris Hilton as a plastic surgery junkie whose face falls right off.

A+

Lesbian Vampire Killers (2009)

What a year 2009 will be for exploitation! This, Bitch Slap AND Repo: The Genetic Opera!

Baby Blues (2008)

Baby Blues was released in 2008 by Lars E. Jacobson and Amardeep Kaleka and stars Colleen Porch and Ridge Canipe.

I don't know what to think of the movie, exactly. It certainly took a rare kind of guts to make a slasher movie about Postpartum Depression, but that may not have payed off.

Baby Blues is, in fact, too heavily influenced by slasher films. This film could have been much more successful had it concentrated more on the mother's descent into her insanity and how her rage begins to manifest itself, like how Bug (2006) was set up, rather than parceling out a few faux-creepy/crazy scenes in the first few minutes before immediately segueing straight into the traditional stalk-and-kill second act.

Conversely, the slasher aspect could have worked had the movie not taken itself so seriously. I mean, the concept seems, to me, to be classic exploitation movie fodder, but by trying to be so SERIOUS and GRITTY, the movie lost what could have been a great example of bad taste. I mean, it IS a film about a mother murdering each of her children while spouting catchphrases such as "Come to Mama!" That's not exactly Highbrow Art Film material.

What makes exploitation movies great is their unapologetic and somewhat gleeful use of horrible situations, converting our deepest fears into something ridiculous we can goggle at. Without that sheen of hyperbole, the movie simply becomes uncomfortable to watch, and not in a thought-provoking kind of way. This is exactly the trap Baby Blues fell in to.

Also, without a mood of exploitation, the end of this movie seems jarring against the tone of the first two-thirds. The mother's survival, and the revelation that she is, in fact, pregnant again, seem a bit too "And the seemingly dead body sits up!" for my taste. Especially since the beginning of the movie worked so hard to retain realism, it feels cheap that she could have escaped, un-scarred, from a house fire to be taken back in by her husband, who then expects this relevation to sit well with his one surviving son. It's just too contrived.

Also, I understand the concept of Southern Gothic, but can't crazy people be from somewhere else every so often?

C

My Bloody Valentine 3D (2009)

I can't wait!

The Devil's Rejects (2005)

The Devil's Rejects was released in 2005 by Rob Zombie, and stars Sid Haig, Billy Moseley, and Sheri Moon Zombie.

This is one of the best, most complex horror movies I have seen in a long time, and it far exceeds its predecessor, House of a 1,000 Corpses (2003).

Honestly, I didn't really care for HoaTC. I had high hopes for the movie, especially because one of my friends flat out refused to watch it, saying she had heard it was "corpse porn." Of course, after that, I had to see it.

When I sat down to watch it, however, I was disappointed. It seemed just like every other "stranded-in-the-South" killer movie you've ever seen, operating as a freak show display case for the Firefly family, who were simply not freaky enough to carry the movie. A car breaks down, tourists end up trapped with a Texas Chainsaw Massacre-style (1974) family, blah blah blah.

The Devil's Rejects is much more intricate than HoaTC, especially in its development of the Firefly family. A few months after the events of HoaTC, the police raid the Firefly Ranch, killing Rufus and taking Mother Firefly into custody. Baby and Otis escape, and later meet up with Captain Spalding, Baby's father. Basically, Baby, Otis and Capt. Spalding go on the run, until they are captured by Sheriff Wydell. Wydell has a particular vendetta against the Firefly clan, as they killed his brother in HoaTC.

What is truly interesting in this film is its moral ambiguity. Though Otis, Baby, and Capt. Spalding are serial killers, they become the victims in the face of Wydell's quest for vengeance. Baby is even shown at one point in the traditional slasher movie victim role, fleeing across a field, pursued by a gun-toting Wydell.

In this movie, good and evil are not mutually exclusive, permanent terms, but mutable concepts independent of one's status or actions. Wydell's status as a cop does not place him on the side of good, just as the Firefly's past homicidal actions do not make them evil in the eyes of the film. One's status really just depends on what side of the fence one is on.

What the film truly values, however, is freedom: from guilt, from fear, and from society's rules. The Fireflys are committed to their actions, and their willingness to go out fighting rather than surrender is portrayed as blatantly heroic, especially the strategic use of Lynyrd Skynyrd's "Freebird." Conversely, what makes Wydell the villain are not his actions, but his unwillingness to let go of his hatred.

A+

Also, the mask scene was gnarly. I was seriously horrified, which means the movie did its job perfectly. A++!

Bitch Slap (2009)

Who would NOT want to see this movie?

Amityville 3D (1983)

Amityville 3D, or Amityville 3: The Demon, was released in 1983. Directed by Richard Fleischer, this fine film stars Tony Roberts, Tess Harper, Candy Clark from The Man Who Fell To Earth(1976), and Meg Ryan.

I’m watching Amityville 3D as I write this. This is not out of sudden, joyous inspiration caused by brilliant movie magic, but because it is really boring. Really. Boring. You’d think, what with it being in 3D, there’d at least be a few things flying at your face to keep it interesting, but no such luck.

Lame. Whatever, I’m still SUPER EXCITED about My Bloody Valentine 3D.

F

Ginger Snaps Back: The Beginning (2004)

Ginger Snaps Back: The Beginning was directed by Grant Harvey, and stars Katharine Isabelle and Emily Perkins. It was released in 2004.

This movie was a mess.

I felt like I was watching The Simple Life: The Wilderness 1815. Ginger and Brigitte, two sisters who vow to be “together, forever,” despite getting caught up in a murky prophecy involving werewolves, have valley girl accents and Paris Hilton vocabularies, replete with an array of thoroughly modern curse words. I felt like the director forgot to tell the writer this was supposed to be a time travel movie.

Basically, nothing in this movie makes sense. There’s no reliability in the mechanics of the world, and things occur mainly for appearances. It’s disorienting, and most of your time is spent trying to dismiss the glaring inconsistencies in order to make the movie watch-able. Maybe I needed to see the original Ginger Snaps to understand, but one would think a movie called “The Beginning” would be able to stand alone.

Ideally, this movie should be enjoyed with the sound off. The pretty cinematography is the only thing that makes it worthwhile.

Overall: D

Cinematography: B

Watcher in the Woods (1980)

Watcher In The Woods was released in 1980 by Walt Disney Pictures. It was directed by John Hough, and stars Bette Davis and Kyle Richards (Paris Hilton's aunt.)

Bette Davis rocks my world. Though she plays a victim in this film, Davis is the most frightening part of the entire movie. Seemingly reprising her role, at least appearance-wise, in “Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?” she stalks silently around, grieving for her lost daughter.

What makes Davis so fright-inducing is that, unless something terrible occurs, most people will be in her position. Invariably, we will lose someone. We will get old. We will be alone, and that’s what makes Davis’ performance so riveting.

Bette Davis : A+

Overall: B-