Dead Rotten's Extreme Unction

Machete (2010)

2010-05-05T16:03:00.001-07:00

WANT.

WEREWOLVES CURED YOUR MALE PATTERN BALDNESS

2010-02-25T22:36:00.000-08:00

Just as Obama Is Your New Bicycle, Werewolves Are The New Vampires.

Peter Stupp, the Werewolf of Bedburg

2010-02-25T21:53:00.000-08:00

Peter Stupp was a German farmer who was executed in 1589 for killing and eating fourteen children, along with two pregnant women and their fetuses. He claimed to be a practitioner of black magic and a werewolf. He stated at trial that the devil had given him a belt of wolf-hide that allowed him to transform. The woodcuts of his execution are among the first portrayals of the werewolf in art.

Check it out!

Gingersnaps (2000)

2010-02-23T12:19:00.000-08:00

Gingersnaps was directed by John Fawcett and stars Emily Perkins and Katherine Isabelle.

I really like this movie. It's witty, and really smart in how it uses lycanthrophy as a metaphor for the Other and for Change. The onset of Ginger's werewolf-ism is presented as a parallel for the onset of puberty. I really wish I had seen this one first, rather than the terrible prequel Ginger Snaps Back (reviewed earlier).

The movie centers mostly on the visceral horror of lycanthrophy/puberty, of watching one's self change and being unable to halt the process. Ginger finds her transformation into a wolf bewildering, and the upheaval causes believable tension between Ginger and her sister Brigitte.

What I found most interesting, however, is the fact that, in the end, Ginger does not return to human form. She is a werewolf, irredeemably, and the connotation is that Brigitte is next. The change is unavoidable for Brigitte, and is something she must now face alone.

A

Next up: Cursed (2005)

WEREWOLF WEEKEND!

2010-02-21T18:28:00.000-08:00

I return triumphant this weekend with a plethora of reviews! In honor of the new Wolfman (in theatres), I decided to devote this past weekend to Werewolf movies.

Wolfman (2010) Excellent. If you like Gothic fiction, this is most decidedly a movie for you. It has every element: the abandoned castle, the damsel in distress, the underground labyrinth, a curse. It was really fun to see something so modern deal with these classic tropes.

However, I think it would have done better had they stuck even closer to the rules of the Gothic. All the gore felt out of place and forced against the moodiness of the rest of the movie.

Also, Emily Blunt's character is shown wearing a blue bodice just months after her fiance died. If they were sticking true to true Victorian funerary dress, she would have still been in deep mourning, and blue would have been forbidden.

B+

Big Bad Wolf (2006) Terrible, and not in a so-bad-it's-good way. First of all, I feel werewolves in wolf form shouldn't be able to talk. Besides that, the whole movie was just bizarre and deeply misogynistic. Who thought this movie was a good idea? It's just one huge rape joke. Seriously.

F

The Wolves of Kromer (2000) Not Horror, though Netflix bills this as a Horror movie. It's basically a British comedy, which uses Werewolf-ism as a hamfisted and transparent metaphor for homosexuality. The plot swings wildly around, and most of the time I had no idea what was going on.

The only redeeming quality was William Lee, (left) who made quite a cute and endearing wolf-boy.

D+

Stay tuned for even more werewolf movies! I'm making a week of it.

Coming soon: Gingersnaps (2000)

Ils (2006)

2010-01-11T20:32:00.000-08:00

Ils, which translates to "Them" is a French film directed by David Moreau and Xavier Palud, staring Olivia Bonamy and Michaël Cohen.

In Ils, the two main characters are pursued through their home and the surrounding area by a group of what turn out to be ten to fifteen year old children. These kids track down and kill Clementine and Lucas, seemingly as a diversion. The post-script atates that when the youngest child is asked why, he responded "They wouldn't play with us." The movie is billed as "based on a true story."

What struck me about the ending of Them is how the film depicts the children after the murders. They emerge from the woods to hop directly on the school bus. The monsterous creaking sound that has occumpanied their presence swells as they exit the woods, until one realizes it is a toy noisemaker. The children seem normal.

This movie embodies a fear that runs through a good percentage of horror, which is terror of the degenerating future. Any apoclaypse film posits a similar indightment: that if we do not change, do not work against what is seen as the moral decline of the present, these children will be our future.

Though it is not obvious, this movie asserts a very clear, conservative moral. It presents an example, as many horror films have, of the amoral future. This movie is tight, suspenseful, and definitely worth watching.

B+

Deadgirl (2008)

2010-01-10T17:57:00.000-08:00

Deadgirl was directed by Marcel Sarmiento and Gadi Harel, and stars Shiloh Fendandez, Noah Segan and Jenny Spain.

I was warned this movie was disturbing, and they weren't kidding. This film left me in a deep malaise for hours after I saw it. It's a great movie, but I certainly wouldn't recommend it to anyone without reservations. I felt dirty after watching it. I don't know what to say about it.

The film: A

How it made me feel: D for Disgusting

The House of the Devil (2009)

2010-01-09T17:23:00.000-08:00

The House of the Devil was directed by Ti West, and stars Jocelin Donahue, Tom Noonan and Mary Woronov.

Honestly, I did not like this movie very much. I've been hearing so much about it, about how perfectly it captures the feel of classic seventies and eighties horror, but I honestly think that if this film were made in the eighties, very few people would consider it anything more than a middling example of Killer Satanists sub-genre.

However, this movie does have many visual homage moments that are successful. When Samantha is heading up the stairs with the knife to investigate the noise, the light shines through the spindles of the stair railing, reveling her silhouette. It's a perfect Giallo moment. Similarly, when she wakes up tied over a pentagram, the image is a carbon copy of Hammer Satanism.

Despite this, I can't help feeling it should have been better. The director went through so much trouble to re-create the feel of the classic early eighties film, but the plot is weak in comparison. The movie had so much potential source material to draw from, including the real-life Satanic Ritual scares. This movie should have been the classic that never was, but it never rose above mediocre.

I know that eighties films are not nearly as fast paced as movies today, but literally nothing happens during the rising action of this movie. Samantha dances around the house and orders pizza, then is suddenly frightened by footsteps upstairs. However, she has been told she is watching an able-bodied elderly woman. She shouldn't be surprised when she hears someone moving about the house. I felt like she did a lot of things that didn't make sense.

However, I think the last twenty minutes of the movie were spectacular, but I was so frustrated by Sam's character that I had a hard time appreciating them. I'd recommend this movie, but not without reservations.

Horror Homage Aspects: A+

Ending: A+

Film Overall: C

A cool tidbit about this film: They marketed it by releasing special copies on VHS. Awesome!

Daybreakers (2010)

2010-01-09T10:21:00.000-08:00

Daybreakers is currently in theatres. Directed by the Spierig Brothers, this movie stars Ethan Hawk, Willem Defoe and Harriet Minto-Day.

Daybreakers was a good movie. Not great, but mildly entertaining. However, it had a few intriguing points that make it worth seeing.

In this movie, an epidemic has swept the world, turning most of the population into vampires. The movie calls it an epidemic, but the specifics of the disease are never clarified. It seems to me to be not a sickness at all, but more like a social trend. The main character Edward's brother admits to changing Edward not because of overwhelming thirst, but because he wanted his brother to be immortal as well. This seems to be the reasoning in most cases, with each vampire turning their family and friends until vampires overwhelmingly outnumber humans. The demand for blood quickly outstrips supply. Famine and riots quickly ensue.

It seems to me that the epidemic is selfishness. People disregarded balance, thinking only of preserving the ones they love. They scrambled to change everyone, regardless of the consequences. When the blood began to run out, they rioted, or executed the crazed Nosferatu-esqe starving vamps to delay the problem. Basically, Daybreaker vampires are more human than most people would most likely be willing to admit. The transformation has not changed people's essential nature.

However, this is not to say that the film does not have problems. The director used a blue filter over much of the movie that I found uncomfortable to watch. Additionally, the last ten minutes needed to be cut off, or ten more minutes needed to be added. The end completely invalidated everything the heroes had been working toward for the majority of the movie, and made the whole experience seem pointless.

Without the ending: B +

As it stands: C

Flatliners (1990)

2010-01-09T09:43:00.000-08:00

Flatliners was directed by Joel Shumacher, and stars Kiefer Sutherland, Julia Roberts, and Kevin Bacon.

The concept of this movie had potential. The idea of being haunted by one's sins is an old one, but definitely an archetype that carries emotional weight. Every viewer can identify with regretting one's actions, but I feel this movie is too redemptive. Everyone atones and weeps and gets on with their lives, relatively unscathed.

This may have been more a problem of expectation. I wanted Flatliners to be Drag Me to Hell (2009), but instead it was Steel Magnolias (1989) with ghosts and without the Southern charm.

Lame.

D

Trick 'r Treat (2008)

2010-01-07T15:43:00.000-08:00

Trick 'r Treat was directed by Michael Dougherty, and stars Dylan Baker, Quinn Lord, and Anna Paquin, AKA Sookie Stackhouse or Rogue.

I'd heard so much about this movie, and was absolutely thrilled when I found out we'd be watching it in the Horror class I'm attending over intercession. Let me say, it did not disappoint.

This movie functions as an anthology. The stories overlap, as the characters of each segment interact and make appearances in other segments. The stories are not presented chronologically, so these interactions are nonsensical until the end of the film. It is certainly not a film to watch while preoccupied with other activities.

We talked in class about how this could be one of the reasons this film sat in post-production hell for years, despite how well-done it is. With the success of other non-linear films such as Memento (2000) or Pulp Fiction (1994), one would think the studios would be more open to more complex movies like Trick 'r Treat.

I feel this lack of faith stems from a lack of trust in the fans, which really saddens me. The studios seem to think that horror fans won't appreciate anything complex or difficult. Conversely, when a smart Horror film does really well, such as Let the Right One In (2009), it gets labeled as not truly horror, but an art film with Horror elements.

However, Trick 'r Treat is unavoidably a Horror movie. Its important themes deal unavoidably
with the conventions of the genre, and I think this is the major strength of the film. The movie has a little of everything.

However, what is most telling is the film's emphasis on tradition. Each character chooses to act according to or in disregard for tradition, leading to their salvation or their doom. Rhonda, who carves pumpkins and seems to know and acknowledge Sam, the pumpkin boy, survives and is empowered by the experience. She seems to know it is not simply another trick when she leaves the other children to their fate. She chooses not to save them. She stares confidently ahead during her escape, ignoring the screams of her deceitful friends. The werewolf pack also follows tradition and emerge unscathed. They are watched over by Sam, seemingly because they are creatures of the same ilk. The bus driver is saved by his unintentional offering of candy to Sam.

This emphasis on the rules seems to espouse a conservative ideology. Sins, such as the bus driver's treatment of the disabled children, are inevitably punished, as is disobedience of the rules. However, the fate of the werewolf girls invalidates this. Under a true conservative ideology, they would not be allowed to remain unpunished, regardless of the rules. Besides Rhonda, there is no clear-cut "good guy."

This movie masquerades as a traditional slasher, as different characters are picked off by an otherworldly "villain." However, there are in fact no such boundaries, making this movie much more liberal and internal than it seems.

A+

Dead Rotten Fights Back From Beyond the Grave

2010-01-07T15:32:00.000-08:00

Time for my New Year's Resolution.

For real this time, I will try to post once a week at least. Exams and Graduate School applications lured me away from Extreme Unction, but I have returned! Onward to reviews!!!

-DR

New Moon (2009)

2009-11-21T10:06:00.000-08:00

New Moon was directed by Chris Weitz, and stars Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, and Taylor Lautner.

What a cheesy mess.

My friend Sarah and I went to the midnight showing. Girls were there with "Team Edward!" signs, and someone even had a "Team Charlie" sign. People screamed and cheered through the whole movie. It was a spectacle to say the least.

On thing made it absolutely worth it that we went at midnight. There was this seemingly normal, middle-aged woman sitting behind us. Every time Taylor Lautner came on screen, she would make some disturbingly over-appreciative noise. Most memorably, when he first took off his shirt, she said, "Hot damn! That is a juicy man!" Sarah and I almost died.

Surprisingly, I thoroughly enjoyed myself. The director took out a lot of what made the book annoying to read, such as Bella's sheer mountain of ANGST, but didn't try to legitimize what was left into serious drama. They realized what crap they had as source material and just went with it.

As a result, much of the angst became laughable. Even Twi-hards, who made up most of the crowd, were laughing when Edward left. This is also partially because of Kristen Stewart's horrendous acting during the forest scene. Edward tells her he's leaving forever, and her face doesn't even twitch. Bad acting mixed with knowing winks from the directors makes it much more enjoyable than the first movie.

However, I do feel part of this was going on opening night. Watching this movie on your television at home would be funny, but not nearly so funny as when one is surrounded by screaming fangirls.

Movie Experience: A

Movie: B

Stewart's Acting: F

dinner_guest on Twitter

2009-11-17T11:12:00.000-08:00

This is totally fake, but a new member of Twitter has been getting some buzz.

dinner_guest has been posting creepy, bloody tweets that chronicle his grisly deeds, such as:

"So difficult to know how much blood is too much, I know the body holds pints..but it's hard to tell how much when it spreads."

Still relatively new, but interesting. I'm thinking it's a potential viral campaign for a book? I don't know, but it's something to keep an eye on.

-DR

Underwood and Flinch Podcast

2009-11-11T23:35:00.000-08:00

I started listening to "Underwood and Flinch" today, a free novel on podcast, and I'm already on section eight. The author, who also reads for the podcast, does a great job preforming as he reads, and I feel like I'm listening to an old thirties radio program.

It's a pulpy vampire story about Underwood and the family that serves him, the Flinches. There's secret Satanist plots, vampire resurrections, mobsters, and basically a lot of frothy good entertainment. Overall fun listening!

-DR

It was an accident....

2009-11-09T23:34:00.001-08:00

Live Evil (2009)

2009-11-09T22:25:00.000-08:00

A New Must-See!!

Interesting concept. We think of vampires as the ultimate predator, but we never think of them as subject to the laws of evolution, where a lack of resources or a change in ecosystem could lead to extinction. Nifty!

-DR

Sugar (2005)

2009-11-09T12:22:00.000-08:00

Sugar was directed by Patrick Jolley and Reynold Reynolds, and features Samara Reynolds.

Such a promising start to a garbled and ultimately fruitless art-film. The look of the film is grainy and gothic, and leads to some very creepy moments, but as it lacks a script, an ending, and any sort of comprehensible plot, this basically comes to nothing.

How did this ever get to Sundance? "Post-narrative" is just an excuse for laziness.

A waste of an hour and a half.

D-

The Toxic Avenger (1984)

2009-11-05T12:03:00.000-08:00

The Toxic Avenger is a Troma film directed by Michael Herz and Lloyde Kaufman, starring Mitch Cohen.

This movie is awesome. It's like every creature feature you've ever seen, injected with PCP and nihilism. It is truly indescribable except to say that if you like video nasties, this is for you.

Video Fan also has The Toxic Avenger, Part II (1989), Part III: the Last Temptation of Toxie (1989), Citizen Toxie (2000) AND Tromeo and Juliet (1996). Reviews WILL be forthcoming.

Also, Toxic Twins: The Toxic Avenger V will be released in 2011. See you in the theatre!

A

Martin (1977)

2009-11-05T10:54:00.000-08:00

Martin was directed by George A. Romero and stars John Amplas, with cameos from Romero himself and Tom Savini, horror make-up and effects guru.

What a perfect, quiet little movie!

This film really cuts to the core of what it means to be a vampire. Vampirism is not about lace or sparkles or sex appeal. All those things have been later additions to the myth, covering up the raw truth: that a vampire is a human who preys on other humans, cutting them down and feeding upon them for sustenance.

In what I feel is the most important scene, Martin attacks his grandfather in the park. His grandfather has tried to exorcise him, believing him under the influence of the vampiric family curse. Martin leaps upon him, dress in full Dracula garb, complete with children's pop-in vampire teeth.

At first, one is take aback, thinking not only that the film has sold out, but done so using the absolute worst effects imaginable. However, as his grandfather cowers on the ground, Martin spits out the teeth, laughing, and shouts, "It's only a costume!" I think this is the main focus of the movie: that all the romantic trappings surrounding vampires are essentially a costume, masking their true, monstrous nature.

After all, besides claiming to be over eighty years old, Martin displays no real supernatural powers. It is quite possible he is only a human monster, abet one we have sympathy for.

In all, this movie reminded me a lot of Brian del Palma's Carrie (1976). I don't want to say too much, but both play on that essential happy moment before the tragic downfall. Wonderful.

A+

To The Devil... A Daughter (1976)

2009-11-02T22:33:00.000-08:00

Directed by Peter Sykes for Hammer Films, To The Devil... A Daughter stars Christopher Lee (which makes this film worth watching in itself.)

I've been YEARNING to see this movie since I read about it in Clive Barker's A-Z of Horror a few years back. Now, thanks to my beloved Video Fan, I can proudly say I have borne witness to this gem of a film.

I really enjoyed this movie. Really, it has everything one expects from a Hammer film: lush scenery, beautiful women and atmosphere that overwhelms anything else, rendering it unimportant. Aspects of this movie were confusing, and the ending, which consisted of hitting Christopher Lee over the head with a rock, was a bit anti-climactic, but the baroque tone cancels out these shortcomings. The scenes of Christopher Lee as a fallen priest leading rites to Astaroth are compelling enough to tide one through the saggy bits.

Also, Natassaja Kinski makes a beautiful old-school nun. The scenes of her running through the streets in full habit are a must-see for genuine Sixties European scenery.

B+

True Blood, Anyone?

2009-11-01T18:32:00.000-08:00

Scientists are now able to convert blood types.

Seems like it won't be long until artificial blood? Maybe vampires really will decide to come out of the coffin. :)

-DR

I Drink Your Blood (1970)

2009-11-01T10:47:00.000-08:00

I Drink Your Blood was directed by Davis E. Durston and starred Bhaskar Roy Chowdhury, who had a tragic, but fascinating life.

This movie, inspired by the Manson Family, is abut a group of Satanic hippies who get on the wrong side of a little boy. As a result, he doses them with rabies by injecting the blood of a rabid dog into meat pies and selling them to the hippie clan. The rabies spreads as the hippies go on a crazy killing spree until the town is razed to the ground. The only thing saving the few survivors is that rabies causes an extreme fear of water, which allows for an anticlimactic escape through a river.

I think the description says it all, really. A wonderful example of why Grindhouse movies are great. :) I mean, this is two hours of hippies wielding axes as they foam at the mouth. Beautiful.

Also, Bhaskar Roy Chowdhury really gives a stand-out performance. His dance background is readily apparent in the theatricality of his acting. The movie is worth seeing just to see him as a Satantic cult leader. He comes across as much more of a protagonist than the sociopathic little boy.

A+

Rosemary's Baby (1968)

2009-11-01T10:08:00.000-08:00

Since I have so many to write, each of these is going to be quick and dirty, just the facts, ma'am. :)

Rosemary's Baby was directed by Roman Polanski and starred Mia Farrow and Ruth Gordon, who won a Best Supporting Actress Oscar for her role.

I have seen this movie MANY times, but it never fails to spook me. I read the book when I was eighteen, and it is the only book I have ever read that has given me nightmares.

However, I think people misplace the horrific aspects of this movie. While Levin is obviously drawing from the idea of the invasion of the body and ancient ideas of demonic possession, I think the true terror in this movie lies in the idea that sometimes the people you love betray you. It really speaks to the inherent evil in human nature and how trust can be so easily broken.

I mean, Guy sells Rosemary to the Devil for his own success in acting. Everyone around her, including her neighbors and her doctor, are in on the plot, and there is no one she can turn to. If you ask me, that's much scarier than her demon baby.

A+

Happy Halloween, Y'all!

2009-11-01T09:12:00.001-08:00

Halloween is the time for horror, after all, so I have embarked on a two-day horror fest, reviews to come shortly. :)

So far:

Rosemary's Baby

I Drink Your Blood

Island of Death

Nightmare on Elm's Street

Hellbound: Hellraiser II

The Hunger

Practical Magic (Not Horror, but whatevs.)

Happy All-Saints!

Paranormal Activity (2009)

2009-10-22T14:57:00.000-07:00

Just in time for Halloween, a RETURN TO EXTREME UNCTION!!!

Just a general note, I've decided I'm going to make my posts much shorter in general, so I will be more likely to get them up, rather than let them pile up.

Now to the good stuff:

Paranormal Activity was directed by Oren Peli, and stars Katie Featherston and Micah Sloat as themselves.

This movie's been kicking around film festivals since 2007, and it seemed to get good reviews, though not much hype until recently. I really wasn't too enthused to be seeing it until I actually got into the theatre. I mean, it's a found footage movie about a haunting, meaning it could have gotten real hokey, real fast. I was expecting the same old Amityville Horror House nonsense, with flies and dripping blood, but the actual movie was much more subtle.

Basically, the director did something really smart and avoided the obvious. No cats jumped out of trashcans; no hideous visages appeared in reflections from behind the camera. Each effect was well placed and timed, so that each new occurrence built on the previous with almost no lag in between. This allowed the director to get the most out of each paranormal event, winding the audience up in a way that one really doesn't see in horror anymore.

I mean, the audience never sees anything truly tangible beyond shadows or footprints. The first scare is a door moving slightly one way, stopping, then swinging back in place. The end scene, out of context, could be considered on par with an opening scare in other movies, but when I saw it, the entire audience screeched. I was genuinely scared even after I left the theatre.

The only problem I had was in the advertising. Like Quarantine, (2008) the end shot is shown in the trailer. It just seems counter-productive, and trivializes the suspense the movie works so hard to build.

Movie: A

Trailer: C

Throat Sprockets by Tim Lucas

2009-08-23T11:19:00.000-07:00

Throat Sprockets was written by Tim Lucas and published in 1994 by Delta Books.

I picked this book up on a whim, not knowing that it had been listed by Rue Morgue as one of their "50 essential alternative horror novels," among other accolades.

I can see why it garnered such attention. Lucas chronicles his protagonist's (unnamed, an affectation that works here) growing obsession with the film Throat Sprockets and how that fixation draws him, and eventually the world, into oblivion.

Throat Sprockets is absolutely dominated by the influences of Lynch and Burroughs, which is both good and bad for the novel. Lucas juxtaposes the film and the protagonist's life as they intertwine, until the whole world is drawn into "sprocketing," the vampiric throat fetish featured in the film, and characters in the film begin to make appearances in the protagonist's life.

This use of overlapping symbols works for most of the novel, until the last section. I just don't know what to think of the last chapter. It almost ruined the entire book for me, honestly. Did Lucas really need to push the film's influence all the way to destroying the world? In the chapter before, we see how pervasive the film has become, how society has contorted itself into a mimic of the film.

Really, I think this vision of declining society is more evocative than a ruined landscape. The last chapter comes across as muddy and confused, with the Christian anti-vampire group STOKER roaming the land like Burroughs' Wild Boys, killing off sprocketers. It just came across as too contrived, and left me in a funk all night after I finished reading.

The Novel, Minus the Last Chapter: A

The Last Chapter: I don't even know.

Oh no....

2009-08-20T19:18:00.000-07:00

I like musicals...

Squeaky Fromme!!

2009-08-14T08:16:00.000-07:00

Lynette Alice "Squeaky" Fromme was released from prison Friday. She served thirty-four years due to her ill-fated attempt to assassinate President Ford, though she is most well-known as a member of the Manson family. She is the only member of the family still devoted to Charles Manson, even escape prison in 1987 to visit him when she heard a rumour he was ill and dying.

A few years ago, I read her biography, Squeaky: The Life and Times of Lynette Alice Fromme, by Jess Bravin. If anyone needs a bit of not-so-light reading, I would highly recommend it. Her life, especially her life with and devotion to Charles Manson himself, is absolutely fascinating. I don't want to tell too much, but from reading about her childhood, it is really no wonder she got caught up in such a mess.

Who knows, maybe now I could have her over for dinner. :) I would love for her and I to sit down and talk.

-DR

Much more chic than a musty old coffin...

2009-08-06T22:15:00.000-07:00

I want this over my bed. For realz.

Also, TruBlood is going to be released as a real drink!

Coming Soon:

2009-08-06T13:00:00.000-07:00

Recently, I have been absolutely awash in horror, so much so that I have quite a few reviews coming. These include:

Gingersnaps (2000)

The Ruins by Scott Smith

AND

The Ruins (2008)

Leprechan: Back 2 Tha Hood (2002)
(This is not, incidentally, number two, but instead the sixth in the series. Weird.)

I Know Who Killed Me (2007)

And FINALLY:

Skeleton Key (2005).

Orphan (2009)

2009-07-29T23:45:00.000-07:00

Orphan was directed by Jaume Collet-Serra, and stars Isabelle Fuhrman, Vera Farmiga, and Peter Sarsgaard. It is currently in theatres.

As a preface: SPOILERS! WATCH OUT!

What truly impressed me in this movie was Isabelle Fuhrman's acting. The girl is only twelve or thirteen, yet she pulls off nine and thirty three with equal aplomb. You see, the twist is that Ester is in fact a grown woman, a proportional dwarf masquerading as a nine year old girl. Now, this sounds patently ridiculous, as quite a few Internet sources have noted, but I feel Fuhrman gave a strong enough performance to make her secret believable.

Through almost the entire first act, Ester comes across as almost too sweet, and one finds one's self almost rooting for her, despite knowing that she MUST be evil. After a girl at school is particularly cruel to her, pushing her off a jungle-gym seems not only excusable but justified. However, Ester's rage intensifies as the movie progresses, and her transgressions get more and more serious, and correspondingly less well-thought-out, until she can disguise her true intentions no longer. Fuhrman gives Ester a snarl that slowly emerges through her East European accent as she begins her siege on the family, using their spotted history to turn them against each other until it is almost too late.

Additionally, I felt Vera Farmiga was excellent. She plays Ester's adopted mother, who lost her third child while it was still in the womb. She descends into suffering as Ester escalates into manic insanity, matching her in violence until they battle in the final act. In fact, one of the most shocking scenes in the movie is not due to Ester, but when Kate slaps her. She must be physically restrained from beating Ester, and this rage from a "good" character is quite jarring.

However, a few things did bother me about the movies. The reason Ester wears ribbons on her throat and wrists is to cover scars she recieved from her straight jacket when she was in the mental instituation, but these scars look more like cutting scars, rather than the abrassion marks one would get from rubbing fabric. I think they had these scars mostly for the sake of misdirection, really, and for visual effect.

In fact, I felt quite a few things in the movie were done mainly for mood, sacrificing logic. For instance, Ester likes to paint, but her seemingly innocent pictures are, when shown under blacklight, to contain twisted hidden images, such as burning children or heaqds on pikes. Now, these day-glow ciphers were certanly interesting and spooky, the whole thing seemed a bit too hoodoo-magic to fit with the logic of the rest of the film. I mean, did she own a blacklight in the orphanage? However, it did make for a great closing credits sequence.

B+

Drag Me To Hell (2009)

2009-07-08T12:52:00.000-07:00

Drag Me To Hell (2009) was directed by Sam Raimi and stars Alison Lohman.

Now, I saw this movie well over a month ago. I really enjoyed it, yet I haven't been able to write anything coherent about it. It seems to just evade my grasp.

Raimi's gruesome glee is there in full force. There are scenes of absolute horror-comedy disgustingness you can't help but be swept along, such as the first fight between the gypsy woman and Christine. The gypsy woman loses her teeth at one point, and basically ends up gumming Christine's face. My immediate reaction was "Awesome!" and there were many moments that captured the joy of Evil Dead (1981).

But then... You could SEE the end coming from a hundred miles away. As soon as she puts the cursed button in an envelope identical to the one she gave her boyfriend, you KNEW what was coming. I just... this doesn't ruin the movie, it just... I can't decide. The fumbling bits would not have bothered me in ANY OTHER MOVIE, but from Sam Raimi...

Just...
B

Geraldo Rivera Is Silly

2009-06-30T13:41:00.000-07:00

Really, how could anyone take this as anything BUT sensationalism?

Speaking of exorcism...

2009-06-29T10:43:00.000-07:00

This has been out for awhile, but I thought I'd post it.

Now, what to think of this? I think even an extremely conservative believer in exorcism would find this offensive. Hypothetically, even if one believed it was a sin to be gay, exorcising someone for that sin could be seen as forgiving culpability. If one can be exorcised for homosexuality, it's not a far stretch to see other sins as similarly external. It forgives responsibility, which seems like an abuse of the rite of exorcism itself.

Add to this how offensive it is to equate homosexuality with evil, and I don't see how anyone could NOT find this disturbing.
-DR

The Rite: The Making of a Modern Exorcist by Matt Baglio

2009-06-26T13:39:00.000-07:00

I've been reading The Rite: The Making of a Modern Exorcist by Matt Baglio, and so far it's been really fascinating, especially concerning the reality of demonic possession compared to possession in cinema. For instance, most exorcisms take only about twenty minutes to subdue the demon, and reactions to the exorcism can vary from screaming, speaking in tongues or unknown languages, or threatening violence to coughing and yawning, depending on the intensity of the infestation. However, I found this passage particularly interesting, so I thought I'd include it:

"In the lore of exorcism, perhaps nothing is more infamous (because it it so spectacular) as the victim vomiting strange objects or copious amounts of fluid, sometimes even blood. Most of us remember Linda Blair's projectile vomit in the film The Exorcist, and Father Carmine [a priest profiled in the book] had a case wherein a woman vomited buckets of sperm. Such action typically signifies a curse; the person has eaten cursed food that he or she needs to eject. Vomiting objects such as finely woven hair or beads, or even blood clots, is a common indication of a curse as well. Or, in the case of a voodoo doll, the victim may vomit up a nail.

Note that exorcists believe these objects don't necessarily come from the person's stomach, but instead materialize in the mouth. In this way, such people are not harmed physically even though they appear to vomit sharp objects such as pieces of glass or needles...

Other exorcists have seen things that defy explanations, such as pools of mysterious black liquid appearing on the floor, or live animals- including crabs and scorpions- vomited up. Father Carmine once saw a woman vomit a small black toad that was alive. When he went to catch it, it fizzled away into saliva" (Baglio, 151).

However, Baglio goes on to assure that, as "psychotic patients swallow strange objects and them routinely," this can not be held as sole proof of possession. I don't know about this. Could a person really swallow a live animal and bring it back up still kickin'? I would think such a thing would be definitive proof.

Anyway, whether or not one believes, this is a fascinating book to pick up for some summer beach reading. :) Once I'm done, I'll post a full review.

-DR

True Blood

2009-06-23T17:57:00.000-07:00

True Blood is getting good, y'all. Seriously. The series has definitely expounded upon the books in an enjoyable and consistent way, making the series even truer to the themes in the book.

Also, Mary Anne is SO a maenad. That's why she could rile up everyone at Merlotte's so easily. :)

-DR

The HORROR!

2009-06-16T13:50:00.001-07:00

The only horror in this post is that I am not PARTAKING IN THIS CUTENESS!!! AUGH!!

This is a Fennec Fox, the only species of fox you can have AS A PET. Seriously, why was I not informed of this before?

BRB you guys, I'm going to the pet store.
-DR

Can YOU tell the difference?

2009-06-16T12:28:00.000-07:00

Can you tell the difference between a serial killer and a computer programmer? Take the quiz!

I got four out of ten. I guess that means if someone offers to show me their new code, I should politely decline, to say the least.

-DR

Christopher Lee is Knighted

2009-06-15T21:19:00.000-07:00

Congratulations, Christopher Lee!

Lee was knighted last Friday through the Queen's Birthday Honours List. Lee got his start playing Dracula and other dastardly characters in a variety of Hammer films. Hammer movies have come to be known as classics of the horror genre, especially those starring Lee.

"New Moon" Trailer

2009-06-01T22:31:00.000-07:00

Somehow, a scene that came across as melodramatic in the book managed to be even more over the top on film. I mean, I know I'm generalizing, but it was just a paper cut. Seriously. Anyway, doesn't it seem a bit backwards to leave Bella's luscious, vampire-bating self unsupervised in order to protect her? Nothing bad could happen with that...

Additionally, that's not even close to being the most ridiculous aspect of " New Moon." I mean, the whole suicide segment is too convoluted to even explain. I just hope there are some good car chase scenes in Italy, otherwise this whole movie will amount to watching Bella cry and write in her diary about how empty her soul is.

On the bright side, maybe all the the fans will get to see inside Bella's catatonic breakdown after Edward's departure. In the book are just four blank pages labeled with the month, but maybe we'll get to witness what actually happened in that time! Excellent! Like I don't do enough sitting around in my house that I'd want to watch Kristen Stewart do it as well.

Maybe they can throw in a subplot where Bella gets turned into a robot. That would definitely be something I'd watch, as long as they didn't build the robots using the same program they used for the werewolves. Horrible CGI.

However, I do like this poster. That's something, right?

Wow! Excellent!

2009-05-25T19:47:00.001-07:00

Summer has officially commenced! The end of classes and Leaky Con (best weekend ever!) took up most of my spare time, but now that I'm back at school, I will most decidedly be back posting at least once a week.

I just checked through some old posts, and my Twilight/True Blood post actually has fifteen comments! I mean, some are not too pleased with my opinions, but some of you guys, who I hope are still reading, had some really interesting stuff to say. I'm just really glad people were interested, or offended, enough to write back. :)

It makes me feel warm and fuzzy, which may be detrimental to the horror level in my posts.

Yay!
DR

Kick-Ass!

2009-04-29T00:09:00.000-07:00

School has taken over my soul for the last few weeks, but I'll be back soon with a review of Obsessed (2009) and maybe Skeleton Key(2004), finally?

But for now, I bring you: Kick-Ass.

All you need to know is that it involves an eleven year old assassin named Hit Girl. You know where I'll be Opening Night.

-DR

The Last House on the Left (2009)

2009-04-07T12:20:00.000-07:00

\
The Last House on the Left is a remake now in theaters, featuring Garrett Dillahunt and Sara Paxton. The original was filmed in 1972. Both were produced by Wes Craven.

There was never any way this remake could ever exceed or even accurately reproduce the original. The 1972 version is a classic, but also a relic of its era, much like many other exploitation flicks, such as I Spit on Your Grave (1978) or Cannibal Holocaust (1980). These movies typify a certain gritty "reality" aesthetic that can't be sincerely reproduced.

The closest we come is Grindhouse (2007), which is intended as a homage and does an excellent job, but is irreconcilably different from its source material in that it is deeply ironic. It seems now, post Scream (1996), everything MUST be presented with a smirk in order to be taken seriously, as contradictory as that may seem. This can work quite well, such as in Behind the Mask: The Rise Of Leslie Vernon (2006), but often this ironic winsomeness can choke the true terror out of a movie, leaving just a shell of self-satisfied hipness behind.

With the kitchy over-the-topness of exploitation movies pretty much ruled out, all that is left to work within is the Eli Roth School of Torture Porn. While both categories use about the same amount of gore, Saw (2004) and Hostel (2005) have somehow gotten a reputation for depicting much worse acts onscreen, I think mostly as a result of self-promotion.

This version of Last House has fallen onto the Saw bandwagon, like most modern horror movies. The unpredictable, almost dangerous edge of the original has been replaced by startlingly real effects that are nonetheless a bit lifeless.

One thing I have to address is the microwave scene. When I went to see this movie, people cheered and walked out saying how AWESOME and HARDCORE and GNARLY that had been, that the father paralyzed the main killer, then exploded his head in a microwave. As I listened, I wanted to tell them to see the original or Dead Alive (1992) or basically any classic gore fest, then come back and tell me what they thought of that scene.

It felt tacked on to me, like someone decided the last day of shooting that there wasn't enough gore, so they shot another few minutes for the end, so they wouldn't have to change the continuity. Not to be a party pooper, but a microwave wouldn't WORK if the door was still open, and anyway, why would he go through all the trouble of paralyzing the killer if he was just going to kill him immediately? It just felt poorly thought-out, and seemed too much like pandering for my taste.

Despite all my grumblings, however, there were some improvements over the original. For one, the levels of gore throughout were more even. In the original, as in many Revenge movies, especially I Spit on your Grave, the rape and torture scenes are often much, much worse than the revenge, so much so that one often feels cheated for the main character. If someone was brutalized for the first half of a movie, one would expect much more by way of revenge than just shooting their torturer a few times. The new version is much better about this, up until the very end.

In fact, the gore was quite good, especially in the second half. The garbage disposal scene, in which someone's hand is ground to pieces, actually made me feel a bit queasy. All of the actors, except for Sara Paxton as Mary, were excellent as well. Everyone gave it their all, screaming and flailing with the best of them, but at times Paxton looked lobotomized. She is literally expressionless as her friend Paige (Martha MacIsaac) is tormented and ultimately stabbed. I know she was supposed to planning her escape, but it got a bit ridiculous.

Also, I found it unusual that Craven changed the ending, allowing both Mary and the son of one of the killers, Justin (Spencer Treat Clark), to live. It even felt at times as if they were trying to imply the potential for a relationship between them! Would a girl who was raped and almost killed really go for the demented, sullen offspring of her attacker? Most likely not, I would think.

Besides this, their survival puts a completely different spin on the plot overall. Rather than the revenge of desperate parents, it becomes just another aspect of escape, a necessary evil more than the result of rage, and therefore much less effecting.

Overall: C

Drag Me To Hell (2009)

2009-03-29T10:16:00.000-07:00

Does this seem just a little... racist to anyone else? I mean, Evil Gypsy Woman harasses Poor Innocent Blonde Girl! At least Stephen King's Thinner (the book, not the movie) was original, and gave its gypsies some humanity.

They say she's a Lamia, which could prove to be interesting, maybe. There's a rich history there, but I have a feeling the producers have done what seems so popular now, which is pick an interesting name from mythology, then proceed to write out all the interesting folklore aspects, turning the creature into something generically evil.

However, it IS called "Drag Me To Hell," so I HAVE to see it. I'm a sucker for a good title. :)

-DR

Blogging will re-commence in... Five... Four...

2009-03-27T08:19:00.000-07:00

Hey folks!
I've been out of commission for some time, but I'm back, and ready to review! Expect Last House on the Left (2009) and Skeleton Key (2005) shortly.

-DR

Friday The 13th (2009)

2009-02-20T13:07:00.000-08:00

Friday The 13th was directed by Marcus Nispel and stars Derek Mears as Jason.

This movie is NOT a remake of the original Friday (1980). I went into the movie assuming it was just another retread in the spirit of Rob Zombie's Halloween (2008), and was quite grateful it wasn't.

(By the way, watch the first fifteen minutes of Halloween, then throw it out and watch the original. There's a bit of interesting characterization for Michael Myers in the intro, then absolutely nothing else worth watching. I can't believe H2: Halloween 2 (2009) comes out this year. Rob Zombie's only good movie was The Devil's Rejects (2005).)

Anyway, I wasn't expecting much of the new Friday as a result. However, it picks up where the first left off, working as a sequel. I was glad they didn't attempt a remake, however, this creates problems for me, as does H2. If one makes sequels of the original, don't they then overlap with the existing sequels, cancelling them out? (And how could one ever cancel out Jason X (2001) aka "Jason in Space"?)

Besides the elimination of some good entertainment, it creates a problem. I'm not saying that Jason X is art, necessarily, but one can't simply eradicate so much material without creating weak spots in the canon, for the newer movies will unavoidably be informed by the older sequels. They're building on the foundation they are denying.

It strikes me as being a bit too close to fanfiction, or just fandom wish fulfilment, that if one can just ignore the pesky sequels, one can deny the basic cheesiness of the genre. This just doesn't work. Look at Prom Night (2008). By ignoring the source material, they alienated the built-in base of series fans. Conversely, the result was still too of the genre to be enjoyed by casual viewers. They got the worst of both worlds, and created a bomb the horror world views with shame.

However, the movie itself was entertaining, if uneven. It opens with the ending of the original, then shifts into modern day. A group of teens are camping near Chrystal Lake, they are stalked and killed, ect. The thing is, the killings are going too fast. No one will be left to finish out the movie. After twenty minutes, everyone is dead. However, this is really just the first act. ANOTHER group of teens (you'd think they'd start running out) go camping, joined by the brother of one of the girls, who's been kept alive by Jason because she looks like his mother.

The first movie could have been cut out, really, because it really functions mostly as clutter. The whole first twenty minutes could have been reduced into a flashback montage. I felt like the first act was mostly time filler, when I really wished they had used that time to elaborate upon the later killings.

Accordingly, gorehounds will be vastly disappointed. This movie does not try to top itself in any manner. I really think that, in this respect, it was written by someone who knew the conventions of the genre, but didn't really understand the purpose. Yes, people are supposed to be picked off one by one, but the draw is how this occurs. If everyone is chased all around for a few minutes, then stabbed, there is no reason to watch. One girl is burned alive, but when the camera focuses in on her face, she just has a few scrapes on her cheeks. It just doesn't make sense.

The lighting is so dark, as well, that one wouldn't be able to see any great effects anyway. I felt like they just didn't want to spend the money, so they just threw some Caro syrup on everybody, turned down the lights and asked them to scream. Darkness alone does not make something scary. Just look at The Burning (1981). The raft scene was done in broad daylight, yet it's really gorey and well done, especially for the Eighties.

Movie Itself: C+

Overall: D+

Cor Cordium: Percy Shelley on the Shore

2009-02-05T23:15:00.000-08:00

I wrote this poem, and I thought I'd post it. It has what I would consider horrific themes, and is about Percy Shelley, the poet, and his wife Mary, who wrote Frankenstien.

Cor Cordium: Percy Shelley on the Shore

“Nothing besides remains:”

And Byron, that
Bastard Byron with his satyr’s hoof,
Lights the driftwood with a flint.

Too early for Lucifer matches.
Not yet the workers with phossy jaw necrosis,
With bones that glow green white bright in the darkness.
Eaten to the bone as Percy was eaten.

Sparks sizzle, go out against the wetness.

Heart meat is
Tough,
Springy to the teeth that
Gnaw its rubber gaskets, a
Fleshy phoenix egg boiled beyond rebirth,
Last to burn.

And Byron plucks the
Heart out of ashes and sand
To take home in his waistcoat pocket.

And Mary keeps it on her desk.

Twenty nine years sealed in a jar:
Her Modern Prometheus, her
Homunculus husband.

Note:

The quote is line 12 of Percy Bysshe Shelley’s “Ozymandias.”

My Bloody Valentine 3D (2009)

2009-01-30T10:41:00.000-08:00

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)

2009-01-25T15:00:00.000-08:00

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)

2009-01-21T16:06:00.000-08:00

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)

2009-01-20T08:02:00.000-08:00

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)

2009-01-18T21:58:00.000-08:00

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

Baby Blues (2008)

2009-01-18T11:05:00.000-08:00

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)

2009-01-15T18:56:00.000-08:00

I can't wait!

The Devil's Rejects (2005)

2009-01-13T10:13:00.000-08:00

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)

2009-01-12T09:45:00.000-08:00

Who would NOT want to see this movie?

Amityville 3D (1983)

2009-01-11T14:09:00.000-08:00

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)

2009-01-01T20:08:00.000-08:00

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)

2009-01-01T00:16:00.000-08:00

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-

Let The Right One In (2008)

2008-12-19T18:56:00.000-08:00

Let The Right One In, or Låt den rätte komma in, was directed by Thomas Alfredson, and stars Kåre Hedebrant and Lina Leandersson. It was filmed in Sweden, and can now be seen in theatres with English subtitles. It is based on a book by the same name, by John Ajvide Lindqvist. There is currently an American remake in production.

Let The Right One In is an excellent film. I attended with both my parents, neither of whom particularly enjoy Horror, and we all left with similar feelings of satisfaction. Let The Right One In combines just the right amount of gore and grisliness with what is, at heart, a love story. Oskar and Eli are, despite Eli's status as a vampire, just two isolated children who find solace in one another.

The treatment of Eli's character is really what makes the movie unique. She is not Anne Rice's Claudia, a spoiled and cunning woman in miniature, but a child. Her every movement is imbued with vulnerability, and the need to be accepted. When Oskar buys her some chocolates from a shop, she eats one, though she throws up moments later, because she so wants to be his friend. Eli is innocent, a word almost never used to describe a vampire. Her stomach rumbles with hunger before she goes out to feed, and she kills not out of blood lust but out of necessity.

This is not to say, however, that she is "good" or "tame." She does not feed on animals or from willing donors, but on any person she can. When Oskar is attacked by bullies, she responds with all the violence that comes with uncontrolled power. She is the perfect mix of monster and angel, making her awkwardly budding relationship with Oskar darkly endearing.

Overall: A+

The Dead Travel Fast: Stalking Vampires from Nosferatu to Count Chocula

2008-12-14T16:10:00.000-08:00

The Dead Travel Fast: Stalking Vampires from Nosferatu to Count Chocula by Eric Nuzum, published in 2008 by St. Martin's Griffin. Available in paperback.

I really enjoyed this book.

It's really more of an anecdotal retelling of Nuzum's encounters interspersed with facts than a scholarly text, but this what, in the end, keeps this account appealing. Rather than composing a thorough and, in the end, lifeless account of the psychological motivations of the vampire-obsessed, or theories concerning how the vampire archetype originated, Nuzum focuses on what most audiences would most be interested in: stories about hanging out with crazy weirdos who think they're vampires.

However, this is also the weakness of the text. Though Nuzum sets out to discover the appeal of the vampire image and lifestyle, he has seemingly already made his appraisal: that these people are simply outcasts looking for empowerment, which they find through self-delusion. Nuzum fails to truly bond with any of his subjects, and keeps a cynical distance which is then imposed upon the reader. There is no growth over the course of the work. Nuzum gains no understanding, and many of his subjects are simply minor characters, passing in and out of the background.

However, this is not to say there is nothing to learn from the book. If one is interested in the history of Bram Stoker, this book provides quite a bit of information on his life and the conception of his most famous novel, along with the facts about his inspiration Vlad Tepes. However, I felt there were a few topics that were grievously overlooked. Anne Rice was barely mentioned, and though I harbor no particular love for her work, one must admit that she revitalized and forever altered the vampire mythology. Nuzum says he watched every episode of Buffy, in order, yet he never sets down his conclusions about the series. All in all, there were quite a few loose ends.

Research: A

Book Overall: B-

True Blood and Twilight

2008-12-07T18:22:00.001-08:00

True Blood is currently airing on HBO on Sundays at nine.

Twilight is the first in a book series by Stephanie Meyers, and is now a movie starring Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson.

True Blood is what Twilight should have been. As I type this, I can hear the rattle of sabers as an army of thirteen year olds gathers at my door, but it is the truth. Really, the show is just a sexier interpretation of the books, with a dash of "Heroes" for good measure, set somewhere that isn't so horrendously rainy. This doesn't mean True Blood doesn't have its flaws, or Twilight its strengths, but True Blood is better if one is looking for horror.

I've read all of Twilight, New Moon and Eclipse, but only about a third of Breaking Dawn, as it was simply too ridiculous to allow me to continue. I can really see why all the Twi-Hards (this, or sometimes Twi-Nerd, is the proper term for Twilight fans) were so upset after its release. Though I only spent a few days on the series as a whole, I felt cheated. I can only imagine how everyone else felt.

There is simply too much to expound upon here in regards to the series. Beyond bad writing, or obsessive description devoted to Edward's beauty, intelligence and gentle disposition, Bella's character is obnoxiously weak. I wanted to scream at her. When Edward leaves for what he sees as Bella's own good, she basically goes catatonic for four months, as she can not function without him. Though she is a good student, she gives up on college for she no longer sees a reason for it now that she has found her "true love."

She is unable to defend herself, is manipulative and so emotionally immature one wonders how Edward, in his advanced age, can manage to hold a conversation with her. In what I think was a bid to make her character "lovably flawed," she is clumsy to the point of handicap, and basically must be rescued from herself every few pages. She does not even have a good nature to redeem herself, but is shrill and overly-opinionated in what I think was Meyer's failed attempt to make her a "strong female character." She is, unequivocally, a bad example for all those thirteen year old girls who love her, especially in concerns to romance. Everything is simply presented to her, and Bella and Edward's problems mostly stem from loving each other too much. It sets up unrealistic expectations.

On a more horrific note, Meyer's vampires are anything but. They possess every power, but every weakness of their kind has been eradicated. They can not walk in the direct sunlight not because they will burn, but because they will sparkle and thereby attract undue attention. They do not feed on humans, and seem more like good faries than creatures of the dark.

However, there are moments of danger and appeal. In Eclipse, which I think was actually acceptable as a novel, Edward rips a fellow vampire's head clean off her shoulders and it rolls to Bella's feet. These kind of moments, though few and far between, highlight the true essence of a vampire. That is exactly what NEEDS to be seen in the series, but are most often censored out.

This brings me back to True Blood. I have only watched the first four episodes, as I do not own a television, but I feel the basics of the series are already apparent. Violence pervades every scene of this show, and not only from the vampires.

Sookie, the main character, saves Bill the vampire from a couple attempting to steal his blood in order to sell it as a drug. Though she looks just like Hayden Panettiere from Heroes, she defies her tiny, blonde appearance and attacks the man with a chain. She sucessfully rescues Bill, but is later ambused by the couple, who throw her to the ground and kick her in the ribs until blood pours from her mouth.

As one can see, the makers of True Blood do not shy from violence, but I also enjoy that this violence is not soley the domain of the vampires. It certainly makes for a much more complex set of morals than the normal "humans good/vampires bad" party line.

I could go on about this, but I'm running out of room. Basically, True Blood simply has what Twilight lacks: violence, sex and above all, heart.

Twilight, the book: C-
New Moon: D
Eclipse: B
Breaking Dawn: F

Twilight Movie: B

True Blood: A

Almost Christmas

2008-12-07T18:16:00.000-08:00

Such a long break between posts! I've been meaning to do many more movies, but the time between Halloween and Christmas Break was gobbled up by the Demon Exams. I am hoping from now on to do at least one post a week, every Sunday, though hopefully more often.

Another entry coming right up!
DR

Midnight Meat Train (2008)

2008-11-10T11:45:00.000-08:00

Directed by Ryuhei Kitamura and starring Bradley Cooper, Midnight Meat Train is based on a short story by Clive Barker.

I know I've said this before, but what's with all the blurry blue/green posters? Bug (2006), Pulse (2006), Quarantine (2008)... Come on guys. You would think an original concept would better sell a movie than attempting to package it as another rip-off. However, the title still rocks.

That said, this movie was good. Not great, just good, as much as my Clive Barker-loving heart pains to say. However, it got me thinking about the nature of the conspiracy.

The Midnight Meat Train basically exists as a food supply for a race of demons that live beneath the city. The police and the conductors are in on the whole thing, and protect the one person whose job it is to dispatch the unlucky late-night passengers. This job is passed along as each executioner becomes less efficient and is found out by someone else. As one would expect after this information is revealed, the narrator, Leon Kauffman, becomes the next butcher after his ride on the Midnight Meat Train. He is actually presented with his equipment by the Chief of Police in the ending scene.

To me, this ties into a basic human fear, which is the fear of isolation. What is frightening about conspiracy is not what is actually being done, regardless of how malevolent the intentions, but one's own exclusion, that things are going on without one's knowledge.

It points to the powerlessness of the individual, and to the fact that one is NOT special. This, I think, is at the heart of all horror, and what makes it diametrically opposed to other genres such as fantasy: the protagonist, and thereby the reader/viewer, is not of any real importance. Underneath this, I think, is the message that most people try to avoid in their day-to-day lives, that someday they will die and there is nothing anyone can do about it.

Midnight Meat Train: B-

HAPPY HALLOWEEN!

2008-10-31T12:07:00.000-07:00

THE day for Horror. I hope to see Midnight Meat Train tomorrow and hopefully post about it soon. :)

Watch out for monsters!
-DR

Richmond Zombie Walk!

2008-10-28T15:54:00.000-07:00

The Zombie Walk was amazing. Over two hundred people showed up, and we shambled and growled through the streets of Carytown and made quite a ruckus. Photos from here and here. Sadly, all of my own photos are trapped on my cell-phone.

Sarah Palin Zombie!

Me and my friend Dominik, who is mostly obscured.

Really good gore effects.

Snarlin' for the camera. I did both Dominik's and my own makeup. I really wish I could get a close up of Dominik's, I think I did a good job on his. He had little flecks of green, like his body had been left in the woods.

So cute! A whole team of ice-skater zombies!

Jesus has got my back, yo.

Bird Flu Vaccine Study

2008-10-24T11:12:00.000-07:00

A Bird Flu vaccine study?

This is totally code for injecting people with unproven cures, then rubbing sick birds on them and recording the results. If fast, infected-style zombie break out in Seattle, you'll know why.

Masters of Horror: Imprint (2006)

2008-10-24T10:54:00.000-07:00

Imprint was made for the series "Masters of Horror," and aired as episode thirteen of the first season. It was directed by Takashi Miike of Audition(1999), and features Youki Kudoh, Michie Itô, and Billy Drago.

The Masters of Horror opening reminded me of a Gothed-out Nip/Tuck trailer with all the Photoshopped moving gargoyles and bleeding doll eyes and such. I felt like it was trying too hard to impress.

Really, if the director wants a movie to be truly lifelike, he or she should really dispense with most CGI work. I feel that most CGI effects end up falling into the Uncanny Valley. The effects are just real enough that the viewer's mind that the unrealistic bits seem more jarring by comparison, and ruin the effect overall. This idea is more closely associated with robotics, but I think it applies here just as well.

After the Masters of Horror opening, and up until about half-way in, I wasn't enthused. The first thirty minutes play like a high budget SciFi channel movie. This is especially bad because it it essentially the low budget that makes SciFi movies entertaining.

I almost turned it off, despite the cinematography, which was absolutely stunning. Everything is saturated in rich rainbow color, even during scenes of torture. The costumes were amazing.

However, beauty doesn't make up for bad scripts. Seriously. This movie is set in Nineteenth Century Japan, and everyone talks like characters in a teenage Lifetime movie. Even aside from a certain lack of originality in dialog, people in Japan a hundred years ago would not be using English proverbs like "Keep your chin up." I am sure there's a Japanese equivalent that would have meant the same thing but not sounded so out of place.

In addition, the script really didn't do the idea behind the movie justice. Miike really plays with the idea of narration, of what makes a story "true" or believable. He leads the viewer deeper and deeper into the story of Komomo's death, showing each scene in the scarred woman's story change as the facts behind it shift.

The story begins basically as a set of cliches, with a man returning to rescue the beautiful hooker-with-a-heart-of-gold and take her home with him to America. Though Kokomo is not at that geisha house, he is forced to stay the night and hires a geisha who keeps to the back of what looks like a jail cell the girls are kept in. Her face is scarred on the right side, the skin stretched oddly, giving her a permanent lopsided smile. She informs Christopher that Kokomo killed herself a few months before, as she believed Christopher to have abandoned her.

Christopher refuses to believe her, prying for more details. As he questions, her story expands and changes. The scarred woman herself transforms along with the shifts, going from noble hero to betrayer to monster. I don't want to give too much away, but in the end, the viewer is left in suspense as to what truly occurred, and left questioning who, exactly, is the monster.

Theory: A
Execution: C+

Dead Alive (1992)

2008-10-21T18:59:00.000-07:00

Dead Alive, also known as Braindead, was released by Peter Jackson and stars Timothy Balme and Diana Peñalver.

First of all, this movie blew The Lord of the Rings (2001) right out of my head. This is what Peter Jackson should be known for, not hobbits tromping around New Zealand, no offense to the LoTR fans. There were literally buckets of blood sloshing over everything. It was like the hallway scene in The Shining (1980), but with chunks. Simply awe-inspiring amounts of gore.

The only problem I had was at the end. When Lionel and Paquita, the heroes of this fine piece of cinema, kiss in the end scene, they are absolutely covered in what must be at least a dozen zombies' worth of goo, but they don't even wipe their lips. Things like that bother me in movies.

However, that scene is the least of the disgusting things contained within this film. I have a pretty strong stomach, and I still had some trouble at times eating my cheese and crackers. I threw all my limbs in the air with disgust many times throughout the movie, but I tell you, I never took my eyes off the screen.

However, there was never a scene that felt smug. Watching, say, Hostel, (2005) one feels as if the film-maker is sitting back, smirking to him or her self and thinking, "Those smucks won't be able to handle this." In contrast, Dead Alive seemed gleeful in its treatment of the disgusting.

Every way that a person could possibly be killed is shown in amazing, over-the-top detail. It's intended to be gross, but any torture it intends to bring upon the viewer seems entirely good-natured. The message of the movie is basically, "Gross! Dude, come look at this!" and that is exactly what makes it enjoyable.

Dead Alive is high camp of the first order! A+

Zombie Walk!

2008-10-21T18:46:00.000-07:00

Just thought I'd post some of these amazing pictures from Toronto's Zombie Walk. People went all out, and it really shows. Here's a few of my favorites:

Pictures from this site.

If you'd like to participate in a Zombie Walk, here's the site to see if there's one in your area. There'll be one in Richmond on Saturday and you can bet your brains I'll be there.

Quarantine (2008)

2008-10-18T22:41:00.000-07:00

Quarantine was directed by John Erick Dowdle, and stars Jennifer Carpenter and Steve Harris. It is now in theaters.

Okay, I know a lot of people were angry that the trailer showed the end scene of the movie, which I agree was a stupid move on the part of Andale Pictures, but to me, the fact that the trailer AND the poster state "The residents were never seen again" gives more away. The inclusion of that sentence contextualizes the movie as just another "found footage" film, putting it up against Cannibal Holocaust,(1980) the horrible little movie that invented the genre, The Blair Witch Project (1999) and Cloverfield (2007), all of which could be said to have more going for them.

Without the trailer and poster, Quarantine stands up much better against the competition. The point-blank explanation of the cover-up given in the trailer dehumanizes the terror of the people trapped in the building. I finished the movie feeling spooked, but then I looked up the poster and it made me say "Meh" and basically forget everything I had just enjoyed about the film. The image, which is taken from the last minutes of the movie as well, makes the movie seem generic and derivative. It is practically interchangeable with the poster from Pulse(2006).

This is not to say that the plot isn't derivative. It absolutely is. Quarantine is a remake, specifically one that was put into production before the original, [REC] (2007) was even released. As a result, there's no way this movie wouldn't suffer somewhat. The thing that saved it, however, was the acting, which is something that can rarely be said about a horror movie.

This is evident in one of the last scenes, in which Angela, the reporter, and Scott, her camera man, are the last two people left uninfected. They enter a dark room for a reason I'm not too clear on. Angela is wailing and crying, and she keeps repeating "Keep the light on me!" to Scott, whose camera has a lamp attached to the front. To me, this captures perfectly the irrationality of terror. The light won't save her. In fact, it will probably attract more infected to her, but her human need for illumination, for vision and for the clarity she instinctively feels vision will bring her, is too strong. She descends into gibbering fear in a realistic way, without going over the top, and it really is the strength of the movie.

Scott has a similar moment after he beats an infected person to death with the camera. This not only makes for a really cool scene, but the few seconds shot with the lens spattered with blood are harrowing. Scott has a Lady Macbeth moment, with the camera trained on his face as he obsessively wipes off the blood long after it is gone. This is his only real screen time, but he certainly makes the most of it.

The movie also got me thinking about the new "fast" breed of zombie that has been so popular since the release of 28 Days Later (2002). I think their rise in popularity is not only due to the fast zombies' increased virulence as villains versus traditional shambling zombies, but to changes in what we fear as a culture. This fast zombie is never a dead person risen from the grave, but someone infected with a rage virus (28 Days Later), a mutation of rabies (Quarantine), or something similar. Even I Am Legend, (2007) which was based on a book about vampires, was transmuted into a movie about zombies caused by a faulty cure for cancer.

I've heard theories that zombies are a personification of people's fear of meaninglessness, but I think a greater, less existential fear has taken over: the fear of science. This is similar to the proliferation of nuclear mutation films in the 1950s. With all the current talk of pandemics and biological warfare, disease is in the front of everyone's mind, and corruption of the body is one of the most personal and intense fears a person can have. What is the fear of death if not a fear of betrayal by one's body, of pain? Combine this with a distrust of government and you get Quarantine.

Acting: A
Movie: B
Marketing: C-

Hatchet (2006)

2008-10-18T17:43:00.000-07:00

Hatchet came out in 2006, was written and directed by Adam Green and stars Joel Moore, Tamara Feldman,and Deon Richmond, along with a supporting role from Mercedes McNab, or Harmony from Buffy!

First of all, holy cheese on a cracker. I just had to get that out there. If you want some fantastic, no-cut-aways gore, watch this movie. Seriously. There was no cutting away to the shadows on the wall, and the effects were creative and well done. I really wish I could have seen it in theaters, or in HD or something. Whoa.

Now that I'm finished gore-geeking out, on to the review. This movie is billed as a Horror Comedy, and it manages to fulfill the requirements of both genres in a way that is quite satisfying. It is what I think so many Horror Comedies fail to be, which is funny but still frightening.

Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon (2006) manages both, but even Shawn of the Dead, (2004) which is often cited as people's favorite Horror Comedy, fails in this respect. A zombie friend one keeps chained up to play video games with is funny, but all the bite, so to speak, of the zombie threat is neutralized. Needless to say, Hatchet does not end on such a light-hearted note.

The scene I found the most interesting on an intellectual level involves two older, Midwestern tourists who are dispatched early on. Everyone is stranded in the bayou near the house of Victor Crowley, and the only way out of the swamp is to pass this haunted, murderous house. The husband, Jim, has been injured by a crocodile, and Ben and Marcus, the College guys in New Orleans for Mardi Gras, are helping him to walk. Once they find out the house is haunted, they immediately abandon the older man. His wife, Shannon, takes him on her own shoulder, leading him towards the road and the house. As she walks with him, she says "Everything's going to be just fine... We have the Good Lord with us, baby. The Good Lord will protect us." Of course they are both immediately and gruesomely killed.

The fact that Shannon utters those lines moments before her death is quite significant. In horror, no matter the medium, the true terror lies in the fact that no one, not even God, can save you. There is no escape. Belief is, in fact, often the way deeper into trouble. Take Bug, (2006) with Ashley Judd, or Kate Hudson in Skeleton Key (2005). These examples don't necessarily deal with religion, exactly, but they show the downsides of belief in a way not usually seen in the media, that faith in the wrong thing can hurt just as much as positive faith can heal. I think this illustrates what the true purpose of Horror movies is: not only as a catharsis, a release of all the negativity inherent in the human psyche, but as a outlet for ideas that, though valid, are considered unacceptable in society.

One last thing: The tag line to this movie is ridiculous:
"It's not a remake. It's not a sequel. And it's not based on a Japanese one. HATCHET: Old School American Horror." A Japanese what? I mean, I know the meaning is inferred, but that just sounds bad syntactically. Come on, people. Also, a movie based on an earlier Japanese film would be a remake as well, so that's redundant.

Movie: A
Syntax: D-

Sleepaway Camp (1983)

2008-10-17T10:10:00.000-07:00

I thought I'd start off with something considered a classic, but not something too well known. (Spoiler Alert, btw).

Sleepaway Camp was written and directed by Robert Hiltzik, starring Felissa Rose and Jonathan Tiersten. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086320/)

First of all, I like slasher movies. They just rock, despite the many problems inherent in the genre, and this one is a perfect example. The politics behind this movie made it hard for me to enjoy in retrospect, though I was riveted while it was on-screen.

I can't deny that some of the kills were effective, even if they seem a bit old-school now. I mean, getting scalded while trying to boil corn is a bit less impressive than the gore of the torture-porn genre. However, what made these kills frightening was that they left something to the imagination. There was a lot of shadow work and shots of grasping hands, with a few well-done shots of the dead body thrown in as well. Much of the kill is not actually shown on-screen.

This means that, rather than squirming away from something that is graphically depicted, the viewer's mind has to fill in the gaps, which is always so much worse, or better if one prefers. The viewer didn't have to physically see Judy, the camp mean girl, get violated with a curling iron, the shadow on the wall was enough.

Judy's death, to me, sums up her status in the movie. It is a symbol of femininity, a curling iron, that kills her. Overall, she exists only to be the Whore in contrast to Angela, the almost-mute new camper's, initial status as Virgin. When she first really attacks Angela in the cabin they share, she focuses on her body. She asks why Angela showers alone, and speculates as to if she's reached puberty yet. To Judy, this is the most insulting thing she can say to Angela. Judy's status at the camp focuses directly around her body, as do all the girls'. Angela's failure to fit into their concept of girlhood enrages them. Most of Judy's interactions with Angela consist mainly of Judy screaming into Angela's passive face, though this may just be a result of bad acting.

The "twist" ending held just as much gender bias. Angela is reveled as being male, and the killer to boot. The end scene, especially Angela's bug-eyed expression, is creepy, but the underlying morals are creepier. Angela's true crime is not conforming to society's gender roles.

Her motivation for killing is apparently not the horrible accident that killed her father and brother, which was caused by careless campers, but instead being raised as a girl by her aunt, who it seems was transgendered and preferred to have a girl child. This experience, though it would be confusing to a child in real life, is positioned as so inherently traumatic as to turn someone into a psycho killer.

It also seems that the end shot provided the genesis of all the J-Horror screaming ghost children, as Angela could easily be transported into The Grudge during this shot. If this is good or bad, that's personal preference.

Overall:
The Film Itself: B
The Film's Politics: D-

Cruel Intentions

2008-10-17T09:46:00.000-07:00

As a first post, I'd thought I'd lay out my intentions.

I've watched an egregiously large number of horror movies in the past year. More than I should admit, really, and I know this compulsion isn't going anywhere. As a dorky English major who wants to be a horror writer, I find myself analyzing everything I watch, and I thought I'd write some of it down. It'll be a mix of classic, not-so-classic and new movies, with some books and other media thrown in.

Also, HERE BE SPOILERS! Watch out!