Movies and Metal Maketh the Man

Deicide 'To Hell With God'

2011-02-08T12:36:00.000-08:00

Ever since the release of 2004’s Earache Records debut Scars of the Crucifix and the subsequent replacing of the Hoffman brothers guitar duo, death metal stalwarts Deicide have been on something of an upward trajectory in terms of quality. 2006’s The Stench of Redemption was greeted positively by fans and critics alike due to its rawer production and edgier performances, and although 2008’s Till Death Do Us Part lacked slightly in the song writing department it still had enough fire in its belly to convince even the hardiest of death metal fans that mainman Glen Benton and his not-so-merry men are still a force to be reckoned with.

Now signed to Century Media, the first thing that strikes you about To Hell with God is how invigorated the band sound; a bit of a cliché when a long established band change record label, but the addition of Trivium/DevilDriver producer Mark Lewis has proved a masterstroke. Slicker than any previous Deicide album, die-hard fans needn’t worry as the band’s trademark ferocity is still there but instead of all the blastbeats and twisted riffs getting caught up in a whirlwind of distortion, every instrument is audible yet still packs a punch – think Slayer’s World Painted Blood but played with a bit more enthusiasm.

Production values aside, this is business as usual for the veteran extreme metallers but this isn’t a bad thing. Yes, Glen Benton’s anti-religious diatribes don’t seem as offensive as they once did but as raging against the Christian machine is their business then anything else just wouldn’t do. Founding drummer and main songwriter Steve Asheim plays like a man possessed but the real focus here seems to be on the crushing guitar duo of Jack Owen and Ralph Santolla, whose ultra-tight riffing and maniacal shredding fill every song without ever cluttering them up, as can so often be the case with such technical brutality.

Overall, To Hell with God is one hell (!) of a great album. At once familiar yet sounding fresh – in itself a thing to behold in a death metal band over two decades old – the album flies by, each song clipped to perfection and never getting bogged down, yet still throwing out enough hooks to get under your skin. Song-by-song breakdown is fairly pointless, but there are a couple of real highlights, namely Empowered by Blasphemy, which displays the same heavy death-groove that Soulfly have touched upon on their recent releases, and the crackling energy of Hang in Agony Until You’re Dead. Fast, furious, brutal yet streamlined and catchy (for Deicide anyway) this is definitely up there with the band’s best and, given time, could well be considered their definitive work.

Rating: 9/10

Standout Tracks: To Hell With God, Save Your, Empowered By Blasphemy, Hang in Agony Until You're Dead, Into the Darkness You Go.

For Fans of: Cannibal Corpse, Cavalera Conspiracy, Obituary, Morbid Angel, Soulfly, Carcass.

For more information on Deicide go to: www.centurymedia.com

To Hell With God is out on February 15th via Century Media.

Predators (2010)

2011-01-30T13:26:00.000-08:00

Much like the Robocop series that started around the same time, the Predator franchise never really hit the levels of quality that the first instalment promised. 1990’s Predator 2 was a fairly dull affair, with Arnold Schwarzenegger’s action movie profile and presence replaced by a gruff Danny Glover basically reprising his Lethal Weapon shtick and doing the best he can with a plodding and occasionally ridiculous plot. Since then we’ve had the team-up with the Alien franchise for two movies – one mediocre and one downright dreadful - that has seen the once-intimidating hunter become nothing more than a slightly chubby and quite cartoonish bit-player (we all know the Alien is the real star!).

But luckily Robert Rodriguez (Planet Terror, Sin City) was taking note and has now given us – or had a big hand in giving us – Predators. Ignoring the Alien vs. Predator movies and bypassing Predator 2 (although apparently that one still counts), this new movie tries to do to the 1997 original what James Cameron’s Aliens did for Ridley Scott’s original Xenomorph adventure by adding an ‘s’ to the title, upping the ante and giving us more of what made the first movie so great. Does it achieve its goal, or is the Predator franchise destined to stay as one awesome movie and a series of cack follow-ups?

Plot-wise this pretty much follows the same course as the original, and that isn’t a bad thing as the franchise’s history has taught us that straying from the basics too far makes for a crap film. The movie opens with Royce (Adrien Brody) waking up to discover that he is hurtling towards the ground at a serious rate. After landing in a strange jungle he is joined by several other characters – including Cuchillo (Danny Trejo), Edwin (Topher Grace) and Isabelle (Alice Braga) - who have all had a similar journey, none of them knowing how they got there or why they are there. It soon transpires that the group all have something in common; that in some form or another they are all killers, and that they are being hunted in a deadly game by an unseen and seemingly indestructible force on a strange planet.

Of course, we all know who the invisible hunters are, as this movie is relying on the fact that we have all seen the original Predator and is really playing to all the fanboys out there who have craved a decent sequel to Arnie’s actionfest. To add to the action, there is also something of a ‘blood war’ going on within the Predator ranks, as a stronger and more powerful breed is at loggerheads with what we may now call the ‘classic’ Predator.

The newer Predator design is fantastic and - at last - the beast is once again intimidating like it was the first time around. With minimal CGI and some decent camera shots – instead of the ultra-fast quick-edits we’re used to seeing in action movies these days – the battle scenes are pacey and adrenaline-filled but still with a sense of clarity, so the action is never muddled. There is less of a focus on the technical gadgetry of the last couple of movies, so the hunter is back to using more of his basic tools and this gives it more of that primal edge that has been sorely lacking. Combine this with some stunning visuals and a claustrophobic atmosphere and the fanboys should all be gushing about this movie.

But there are faults here, namely the casting. Somebody somewhere decided that Adrien Brody – fine actor that he is – was a suitable candidate to step into Arnie’s no-doubt huge shoes (or boots!) and carry a macho, testosterone-filled sci-fi /action movie such as this – and they were wrong! Putting on a silly and unnecessarily gravelly voice doesn’t make you any tougher or charismatic than you are; just ask Christian Bale. And looking like a gangly version of Alistair McGowan (English impressionist, for our overseas friends) doesn’t do much for the action hero stakes, either.

Also, the characters aren’t as rounded as those in the original, and there is a distinct lack of the quirky humour and quotable lines that peppered that movie. Not that the movie suffers too much for it but a bit of light relief would have been welcome, especially about two-thirds of the way through when the pacing dips and there’s still too many characters onscreen, ushering in a rather rushed final act.

Overall, though, Predators does its job and provides a decent action/sci-fi adventure in the spirit of its timeless source material. Casting and pacing issues aside, there’s plenty here for audiences get their teeth into and although the original is still the definitive Predator movie, for those fancying something different but with enough familiarity to keep you interested then you could do a lot worse than this.

Rating: 7/10

Summary: Casting and pacing issues lose it a mark but overall this is the first decent sequel to an 80's classic. It may not have the staying power of the original but for those after a fix of up-to-date Predator action, this is as good as it gets.

If you like this then try: Aliens, Rambo, Apocalypse Now, The Thing, Universal Soldier.

For more information on Predators go to: www.predators-movie.com

Frozen (2010)

2011-01-30T13:14:00.000-08:00

Following on from his homage to the slasher genre - namely 2006's Hatchet - writer/director Adam Green brings terror and chills in a different way with this survival horror tale set in a remote ski resort.

The movie revolves around the trio of Dan (Kevin Zegers), his girlfriend Parker (Emma Bell) and best friend Joe (Shawn Ashmore) who have gone to the ski slopes of Mount Holliston to have a weekend of fun and frolics. Having spent the day accommodating Parker on the beginner's slopes, as evening hits the group bribe the cable car worker to let them ride up to the bigger slopes before closing time. After the attendant leaves his post and has a communication mix-up with his replacement, the power is switched off and the resort is closed for the week, leaving the trio left stranded high up the slopes in their cable car. So do they jump, climb or swing their way down, or stay where they are and freeze to death whilst waiting to be rescued?

Of course, it wouldn't be much of a movie if they just sat there for 90 minutes and froze themselves solid, but to go into detail about what they do would reveal too much. Needless to say, Frozen plays out like all of the best disaster/peril movies, forcing the viewer to empathise with its characters in a 'what-would-I-do?' kind of way, and as the situation the characters find themselves in is simple and almost 'everyday' (if you spend everyday on ski slopes, that is) the tension and sense of drama is truly stunning.

Forcing home the point that 'less is more', Green has totally changed tactics from the overly immature (in a good way, of course) Hatchet, which was crammed full of obvious genre references and OTT gore, and has made a movie that will resonate in the memory a lot longer than possibly any recent movie in this field. Green uses his camera angles to great effect, making what is essentially a one-scene movie seem a lot bigger that it is and also making great use of the bleak backgrounds creating a very real sense of isolation.

That said, it is possible to nit-pick some of the actions that the characters decide to take but that is just nit-picking. The three main leads all play their parts convincingly as their characters have to face up to the harsh reality that they may not survive for much longer and the tension is cranked up to the maximum all the way to the end. Believable, harrowing, engaging and just purely terrifying, Frozen ticks all the boxes for what a suspense/thriller/horror movie should provide and proves that Adam Green is more than a one-trick pony as far as filmmaking goes. On this form, expect great things to come.

Rating: 9/10

Summary: Scary and terror-filled, Frozen delivers the goods in the same vein as classic thrillers like Jaws. Totally believable and unbearably tense, it blows any other recent 'realistic' horror movies away with plenty of WTF moments.

If you like this then try: Jaws, Open Water, Adrift, Alive, Cujo, The Blair Witch Project.

For more information on Frozen go to: www.frozen-film.com

I Spit On Your Grave (2010)

2011-01-29T00:15:00.000-08:00

The remake debacle is one that is going to rumble on and, despite the protests of the movie purists out there, the studios are going to keep churning them out (and despite what they tell you, most of the purists will watch the remakes and maybe even secretly enjoy some of them!), so to immediately start bitching about a remake just because it's a remake is a fairly redundant exercise.

Right, got that out of the way! The modern horror remake can fit into one of three camps - better than the original (The Hills Have Eyes, The Last House on the Left), complete drivel (Friday the 13th, The Wicker Man) and a sort of take-the-same-basic-plot-but-make-it-different style (Dawn of the Dead, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre). I Spit on Your Grave fits firmly into the latter, taking the basic plot of Meir Zarchi's notorious 1978 original and filling it out with a few staples of modern horror/exploitation that deliver on the reputation that the film's title has built over the years.

Jennifer Hills (Sarah Butler) is a writer who has rented a log cabin in the middle of nowhere so she can write her next book. After stopping for gas and directions, she accidently embarrasses the local hillbilly Johnny (Jeff Branson)that works at the station by spilling a bucket of water on him in front of his gang. Unfortunately for her they now know where she is heading, and after Matthew (Chad Lindberg), one of Johnny's gang and not the sharpest knife in the rack, comes to fix her broken toilet, the posse - rounded out by harmonica-playing Andy (Rodney Eastman) and video camera fanatic Stanley (Daniel Franzese) - break into her cabin and subject her to a series of humiliating and abusive attacks that culminate in her being raped multiple times before being left for dead.

In a burst of inner strength and unwilling to give her tormentors the satisfaction of finishing her off, Jennifer manages to get to her feet and throws herself into the nearby river. Believing her to be dead, the men return to their lives and forget about what they did, until one day a vengeful Jennifer returns to wreak her revenge in the most painful ways possible...

As was pointed out earlier, the basic plot is the same as the original but there are a few differences that, in some ways, make it a more shocking experience but in other ways don't add very much at all. The rape scene is less visually brutal than in the original - where everyone was naked and the shot was wide so we didn't miss a thing - but unsettling (as all rape scenes are, of course) enough that it just confirms what we as an audience thought of these vile characters in the first place. Of course, what would be the point of having a violent rape scene if we didn't get the retribution that comes with the startling and uncomfortable revenge that plays out the last act of the movie?

Where the original had a more graphic rape scene and less graphic, almost implied, violence for the pay-off, this version flips that dynamic around and gives us possibly some of the most disturbing visuals that have hit our screens in recent times, and considering that the high gore content of films like Saw and Hostel is now pretty mainstream, that's really saying something. Foregoing the 'less is more' philosophy that all the best horror films adhere to, this gives you everything and is all the better for it. In the original the rapists, although fairly unrepentant, do give the odd look or expression here and there to suggest guilt at what they're doing, but here nobody - apart from Matthew - shows any remorse whatsoever, so when the gang get their comeuppance there is very little room for any sympathy. Considering the punishments that Jennifer dishes out, feeling nothing for these characters is quite unnerving but the pay-off is that justice has been served.

Overall, I Spit on Your Grave makes for some interesting viewing; 'enjoyable' isn't a word that feels comfortable to use, but it is certainly one of the better remakes out there. Well acted and shot, there are enough new twists to make it different from the original (there are five memebers to this redneck gang, but you'll just have to watch it to see how that plays out) and the final act just has to be seen to be believed - fish hooks, hungry birds, shotgun rapes, a bath full of Lye and a re-enactment of the infamous castration scene from the original are just some of the delights that are shown in all their glory. Don't say you weren't warned...

Rating: 9/10

Summary: Shocking remake of an already shocking movie that stands alone from the original due to a few neat narrative twists. Just don't put it on in front of the family on Christmas afternoon!

If you like this then try: The Hills Have Eyes (2006), Dawn of the Dead (2004), The Last House on the Left (2009), Hostel 2, Wrong Turn, Saw 3, Frontier(s), The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning, The Devil's Rejects.

I Spit on Your Grave is released on Blu-Ray & dvd on February 7th via Anchor Bay Entertainment.

Havok - Time is Up

2011-01-27T12:27:00.000-08:00

Every so often an album appears that grabs you by the balls and squeezes until your veins bulge and your eyes water. This is good, as great metal albums should do that very thing, and when it seemingly comes out of nowhere from a band who are really still cutting their teeth it brings a tear to the eye to know that there are new(ish) bands making metal with such passion.

Upping the ante from 2009’s Burn debut, Time is Up kicks off with the pummelling Prepare For Attack and continues to batter you around the head for the length of its running time. Offering up old-school thrash in spades there’s nothing particularly original here, but when you take the best bits of bands such as Exodus, Anthrax, Nuclear Assault and Overkill, then you really can’t go wrong. Add in a few sped up Black Sabbath riffs, some Metallica-esque time changes – stand-out track The Cleric positively drips that mid-80’s Bay Area crunch – and you know you’re going to have a good time with this one.

Overall, this is a fantastic album from a band who are unafraid to wear their influences on their sleeve and make no apologies for their lack of originality. Crisply produced by James Murphy (Obituary/Death/Cancer), Time is Up encapsulates everything that is great about thrash metal in ten short, sharp shocks and, maybe more importantly, paves the way for greater things to come.

Rating: 8/10

Summary: Cracking thrash metal anthems played with passion and conviction. Nothing new but when it's this ferocious, who cares?

For Fans of: Anthrax, Exodus, Overkill, Municipal Waste, Gama Bomb, Megadeth, Metallica, Testament.

Time is Up is out on March 29th on Candlelight Records.

Wishmaster (1997)

2011-01-23T10:54:00.000-08:00

Somewhere between the franchise heavy days of the 1980’s and the more recent remake frenzy of said franchises there was a decade known as the 1990’s, where, in the world of horror movies, not a lot happened. Freddy and Jason said their (temporary) goodbyes, Michael Myers limped on to a climatic showdown with Buster Rhymes after a brief glimmer of hope with Halloween: H20, Leatherface became a limp-wristed cross-dresser and Pinhead became...well, not quite sure what he became, but he wasn’t as good as he used to be. That’s the big boys done, leaving a few second-tier film series floating around in straight-to-video (and then dvd) limbo with only Tony Todd’s Candyman reaching anywhere near iconic status (oh alright, Ghostface from Scream if you like!).

So in a rather contrived attempt to make a new horror icon, somebody gave us Wishmaster, or to give it it’s full title, Wes Craven’s Wishmaster. Note the use of the word ‘somebody’, as Craven’s involvement is pretty questionable; he is credited as a producer, which tells us very little, and his name was removed from the title after the sequels started to appear. Anyway, for this first instalment we have Craven’s name and a few other genre stalwarts to add a bit of gravitas – more of which later. As the movie opens we are introduced to the Djinn (Andrew Divoff), the Wishmaster of the title and a dark genie, who will grant three wishes to the person who awakens him. Upon the granting of the third wish the gateway to their world will open and the rest of the Djinn will be unleashed upon our world to wreak havoc.

After being trapped in a jewel stone by a sorcerer 12th century Persia, the Djinn is awoken in 20th century America by Alexandra (Tammy Lauren) and, after taking on human form by stealing a face from a corpse, proceeds to grant wishes to everyone he comes across in his attempts to reach his waker. Of course, the wishes he grants come with a twist and always end in the wisher’s death, thus providing the Djinn with souls to feed his nether worldly brethren. Having removed all the obstacles around her, the Djinn catches up with Alexandra to grant her the three wishes that he needs, but will she be able to come up with the perfect wish to banish the evil demon back to where he came from?

Overall, Wishmaster is a strange one. It tries to combine intelligent mythology, state-of-the-art (at the time) special effects and a nod towards its horror history that predates the modern trend of being ironic by a good ten years, and to a certain extent pulls it off. But, and there is a but, there is a slight feeling of contrivance about the whole thing – after all, the 1990’s didn’t really have an established Freddy or Jason franchise to call its own, but that doesn’t necessarily make it a bad movie.

Just like Adam Green’s 2006 slasher Hatchet, this movie is really made for genre fans and, like Hatchet, features appearances by modern horror’s big three; Robert Englund (Freddy Krueger), Kane Hodder (Jason Voorhees) and Tony Todd (Candyman) all show up, along with other genre favourites such as Ted (brother of Sam) Raimi, Phantasm’s Angus Scrimm and Reggie Bannister, and Joe (Day of the Dead) Pilato, all adding a sense of fun to proceedings. Andrew Divoff creates a suitably mischievous persona for the Djinn and ensures his human characteristics add enough of a sinister edge whenever he appears.

The special effects – courtesy of, amongst others, Greg Nicotero (Day of the Dead, Re-Animator 2, From Dusk ‘Till Dawn, etc.) – really are top notch, and mix practical with visual very well, especially considering that CGI was in its infancy and most visual effects at the time looked like bad video game graphics; check out the opening scene where a skeleton rips its way out of a body and continues to cause chaos.

As mentioned before, the whole thing does feel a bit contrived. The script is awkward as the Djinn tries to manipulate his victims into saying “I wish...” before the next carefully constructed death scene plays out in accordance to the demon’s games, and there are some pretty close comparisons to Hellraiser that maybe didn’t help. The acting in the most part is good, but – Divoff’s sly smile and monotone phrasing aside - there really isn’t anything outstanding here that sets it apart from any other horror movie of the era, or even the decade.

But is it entertaining? Yes. Does it tick the boxes when it comes to what you want from a decent horror movie? Yes. Does it warrant a thorough examination of its mythology and symbolism, and to be treated as part of the horror movie hierarchy, mentioned in the same breath as A Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday the 13th or even Candyman? Hmmm...

Rating: 7/10

Summary: Entertaining with great special effects, although it may be a bit too ambitious to be up there with the genre mainstays.

For Fans of: Hellraiser, Hatchet, Scream, Leprechaun, Candyman, Nightbreed, A Nightmare on Elm Street.

The Return of the Prodigal Plonker

2011-01-18T13:17:00.000-08:00

Hello to you, the wider world. How've you been? It's been a while since my last proper communication with your good selves - those of you in the know will know all the reasons why, but that's another story - and hopefully I shall start being able to vent my spleen, opiniate and generally waffle on with no remorse about the subjects close to my heart - namely the music form known as METAL (always in capitals) and the scapegoat for all nastiness known as horror movies (although not exclusively - I do like other types of films as well!) again.

Anyway, in my rather obnoxious quest to get noticed for saying what I think about these things (wonderful thing, this internet - everyone has a voice, yet very little seems to get said) I shall intermittently be posting any bits and bobs I feel like sharing with you on this blog site that I started many moons ago before disappearing up my own backside. I shall leave all my previous post up for you to cast your beady eyes over, and shall soon be giving my opinions on some of the wonderfully bizarre movies and skull-crushing tunes that have been drilled into my nervous system in recent times. Until I get round to it, here's a taster of what to expect...

Here's an Offer You Can't Refuse...

2009-11-22T04:17:00.000-08:00

Hey people. After having posted my review of Mac Eldridge's 'Chemical 12-d', I have been asked by several people where they can see it. If you are unable to get to the various film festivals across the US where the movie is being screened then I have some good news for you.

The DVD will be available from Mac Eldridge's website for one week only for the bargain price of $8 (including shipping and taxes). As well as 'Chemical 12-D' itself, the dvd contains two extra documentaries, four commentaries and some extra Water Cooler Productions features, so more than worth the money.

Just click or paste the following link:

http://awatercoolerproduction.com/8.html

A Review of Chemical 12-D

2009-11-19T15:57:00.000-08:00

Isn’t it a telling sign that a seven-minute short film can capture the overall essence of what makes zombie movies great more than any number of recent, bigger budget studio productions? Written and directed by Mac Eldridge, ‘Chemical 12-D’ is an obvious labour of love, managing to squeeze more tension into its short running time than George Romero has managed to put into his last two movies.

Michael Frank (Bill Stoneking), seemingly a lone survivor in a post-apocalyptic world, has noticed a mutation in the zombies that roam the streets and picks up the wondering corpse of a young boy (Wesley Klepac). Taking him back to his lab, Michael begins to experiment with a solution known only as Chemical 12-D, in the hopes that he may find the answer to halting the spread of the virus.

To reveal any more would mean spoilers, but the overall vibe of the movie is very close to Romero’s ‘Day of the Dead’. If you ignore ‘Land of the Dead’ (like some people do!), then ‘Chemical 12-D’ could be a scene straight out of a possible follow-up to ‘Day...’, such is its grittiness and sense of despair. Bill Stoneking gives a very intense performance as Michael even though he doesn’t actually say a great deal. His deep expressions and subtle looks give a greater sense of hopelessness than any script. The production is surprisingly polished, giving the movie the feel of a studio film, and the effects – particularly the sound – are suitably gruesome.

To summarise, this isn’t the goriest or scariest zombie movie you’ll ever see, but it could well be one of the most lovingly crafted and effective. Instead of concentrating on blood and guts and forgetting the substance (like most zombie movies do), Eldridge has made a short movie that’s big on impact, and hasn’t it been a while since a zombie movie has done that?

To view the trailer for ‘Chemical 12-D, click or paste the following link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=za6IV_2ri3A

MY TOP 5 ZOMBIE MOVIES

2009-11-17T07:13:00.000-08:00

I love a list, and in response to Sarah from Gorepress I shall present my top 5 zombie films (all subject to change, though!):

5. The Return of the Living Dead (1985) – Funny and gory in equal measure, ‘ROTLD’ took Romero’s established formula, and made a classic horror/comedy out of it. The first zombie movie to mention ‘Braaaaains!’, and considering when it came out and the budget, the effects are pretty good, too. Add to that Linnea Quigley in the buff, 80’s mainstay Miguel A. Nunez Jnr (if he’s in it, I’ll watch it!) and great comedy performances from Clu Gulager and James Karen, and you can’t fail. 80’s classic.

4. Braindead (1992) – There was a time when ‘Braindead’ was the goriest horror movie ever to get through the BBFC uncut, and maybe still is! Luckily the censors saw the joke in ‘Lord of the Rings’ director Peter Jackson’s gloriously OTT zombie caper and kept all the best moments in – zombie baby being thrown around the park, zombie priest and nurse getting it on, death by lawnmower, sticking on peeling skin with glue, squeezing blood and puss filled boils, and possibly the best delivered line ever – ‘I kick arse for the Lord!’. Plot is irrelevant, all-time classic, go see it now!

3. Night of the Creeps (1986) – One of the most amusing and most quotable zombie movies of all, ‘NOTC’ stars veteran actor Tom Atkins as grizzly cop Ray Cameron and ‘National Lampoon’s Vacation’ brat Jason Lively as geeky Chris Romero (Cameron? Romero? Do you see what they did there?), who team up to wipe out a plague of inter-galactic slugs that lay eggs on your brain and turn you into a zombie. Classy B-movie nonsense that still stands up to this day, ‘NOTC’ was nearly the perfect horror/comedy crossover, except one movie stood in its way...

2. Re-Animator (1985) – Loosely based on the Lovecraft book, ‘Re-Animator’ is pretty much the perfect horror/comedy movie ever, mainly down to the deadpan performances from its lead characters. Jeffrey Combs stars as the ever-so-stern Herbert West, a brilliant medical student who is trying to perfect a serum that re-animates corpses. With the help of his assistant Dan Cain, he sets about trying out his theories on the recently deceased cadavers in the University morgue, much to the derision of top medical teacher Dr. Hill (David Gale), who wants the serum for himself. Hilarious and vulgar in equal measure, ‘Re-Animator’ spawned two inferior, but still worth a look, sequels but this original is still the daddy of them all.

1. Day of the Dead (1985) – Yes, after hours of breaking it down and altering my list, it comes down to this – George Romero’s 1985 sequel to his 1978 classic ‘Dawn of the Dead’. ‘But if ‘Dawn...’ is such a classic, why isn’t that number one?’ you may cry, and indeed ‘Dawn...’ is quite possibly the ultimate zombie movie as it has every element thrown in – gore, shocks, drama, romance, comedy, tense atmosphere – but sometimes having it all there in one movie is a bit too much. As it is, time has been a lot kinder to ‘Day...’ which still holds up – nah, forget that, it’s actually better now than it was then. A small band of survivors are holed up in a military bunker, with the soldiers intent on wiping out the zombies, and the scientists trying to find out what makes them tick. In reality, the zombies are secondary to the human characters and their in-fighting, particularly whenever the vile Captain Rhodes (Joe Pilato) is on-screen. Containing perhaps the best death-by-zombie moment ever – and nobody deserved it more – as well as many other marvellous effects courtesy of make-up maestro Tom Savini, ‘Day...’ has atmosphere, black humour, shocks and gore, albeit more streamlined and subtle than its predecessor, and that’s why it is my favourite.

A Review of Night of the Creeps

2009-11-16T14:37:00.000-08:00

If you try and analyze the elements of all the great horror movies, there are certain things that continually crop up. Obviously gore and terror are key, but you could also add to that a streak of dark humour, quotable dialogue, straight-but-slightly-knowing performances, characters that you care about, lots of genre references and in-jokes, better than average special effects and a pretty good story; ‘Night of the Creeps’ has all of those.

The story begins in 1959 when an alien aboard a spaceship (stay with it!) ejects a capsule that his pursuers are trying to get back. The capsule heads towards Earth, and lands in the woods near a couple of courting students who go to investigate. The guy goes to find the meteor while his unlucky lady friend waits in the car, which is parked right on the main road in the path of an axe-wielding serial killer. In the woods, however, the meteor containing the capsule splits open and a slug-like creature leaps out and goes straight into the mouth of the male student.

Fast forward to 1986 and Chris Romero (Jason Lively) and J.C. Hooper (Steve Marshall) are a couple of college geeks looking to gain the attention of Cynthia Cronenberg (Jill Whitlow), so they decide to join a fraternity. Brad (Allan Kayser), the leader of the fraternity and Cynthia’s boyfriend, tells the hapless duo that they must perform an initiation. In this case, they have to steal a dead body from the college morgue and dump it on the steps of a rival frat house. Chris and J.C. sneak into the morgue and find a cryogenically frozen body that they try to steal. After being interrupted by a lab worker they flee, leaving the body defrosting on the lab floor. Unfortunately, the body is the frozen corpse of the 1959 student and it still contains the slug from the meteor – well, it does until it leaps out of the corpses mouth and into the mouth of the lab technician. It seems that the slugs enter the body through the mouth and lay eggs in the brain, turning its host into a zombie before the head explodes, giving birth to more slugs. Enter Detective Ray Cameron (Tom Atkins), who is called to the lab due to there being two dead bodies, although when he arrives there is only the body of the lab tech. Seems the student corpse is on its way back to the ladies frat house, where he picked up his date in 1959, only this time he meets Cynthia. After his head splits open and a load of slugs spill out, Cameron is called to the scene, where it turns out he has been before. Apparently, Cameron’s girlfriend was the young student killed by the axe-murderer in1959 and, after discovering her body, went hunting for the killer and killed him with his shotgun, burying the body in the exact spot where the House Mother’s cottage now stands. The slugs that spilled out of the corpse have also found their way to the cottage, and Detective Cameron and his old adversary are about to have another meeting. Meanwhile, Chris is making headway with Cynthia, who has gone to visit him and J.C. to try and explain what she saw at her window. After dumping Brad, she asks Chris to the prom but unfortunately Brad takes it badly and hangs around the girl’s frat house, bumping into the House Mother’s dog that has an unwelcome visitor – and it isn’t fleas!

With slugs everywhere and a college full of students to play with, it’s up to Chris and Detective Cameron to put a stop to it all, before the slugs reach the college basement where one of the student’s science experiment is stored – jars full of human brains!

Not your average zombie fare, ‘NOTC’ is B-movie madness at its finest. Tom Atkins is in his element here, playing the grizzled alcoholic cop with a great supply of quotable one-liners (including the unforgettable ‘Thrill Me’), and Jason Lively and Steve Marshall bounce off each other like an established double act. Obviously paying homage to the classic monster movies of the fifties, along with the obvious influence of ‘Night of the Living Dead’, this movie could quite easily have been made today, such is its lasting appeal. Indeed, if you’re a fan of recent monster/zombie movies like ‘Slither’, ‘Infestation’ or even ‘My Name is Bruce’ then this is definitely essential viewing, and could quite possibly be seen as a forerunner to those movies (‘Slither’ in particular). The references are also fun, mainly because it’s done with affection and not in an ‘ironic’ way – there’s the obvious Romero/Hooper/Cameron/Cronenberg names, but also Raimi and Landis are name checked as well.

If you’ve never seen this movie (and due to it not being available for years, you probably haven’t) , then the dvd is certainly worth getting hold of. There’s plenty of ‘making of’ featurettes, deleted scenes, trivia track, commentaries and a Tom Atkins interview, and it all looks fantastic. Overall, a real genre classic that has hardly aged a bit so get it now!

A Review of The House of the Devil

2009-11-10T12:50:00.000-08:00

‘The House of the Devil’ could quite possibly be the movie that really shows those pesky youngsters how to make an effective horror movie. Harking back to an era when these types of movies were dubbed ‘chillers’, this movie takes the slow build-up and tense atmospheres of movies such as ‘The Amityville Horror’, and then climaxes in a crescendo of Hammer-style violence that really reminds of when movies were designed to scare and shock without the excessive use of torture and over-complicated traps.

Jocelin Donahue plays Samantha, a student who is looking to move out of her University digs and get her own place. Hoping to come up with some rent money pretty quick, she takes on a babysitting job for a slightly strange couple called the Ulmans, who live in a very big spooky house. Samantha turns up at the house with her friend Megan (Greta Gerwig) for support, when Mr. Ulman (Tom Noonan) tells Samantha that she won’t be babysitting a child but rather looking after his elderly mother-in-law, whom he claims will be no problem and Samantha won’t know she’s there. Not being too happy about it, Samantha refuses but Mr. Ulman, who refers a lot to the lunar eclipse that is happening that night, is desperate, so he offers her more money. Samantha agrees, much to the annoyance of Megan, who leaves and says she’ll come back after midnight to pick Samantha up. After the Ulmans leave, Samantha spends her time investigating the massive house, listening to her walkman and ordering pizza, although after hearing strange bumps and noises she phones Mr. Ulman on the number he left, but apparently the number doesn’t exist...

Any further plot details will spoil the movie, but if you’re a fan of old-fashioned spills and chills then you won’t be disappointed. The movie is a slow-burner, and the middle section when Samantha is investigating the house does take up a lot of the running time, but it’s this build-up of tension that makes the final act of the movie so effective. With it’s hat tipped towards classic Hammer and a big dose of seventies horror – there are nods towards ‘The Exorcist’, the aforementioned ‘The Amityville Horror’ and even further back to ‘Rosemary’s Baby’ – this movie won’t suit everybody, especially given the violent extremes that movies seem to have to go to today, but director Ti West seems to have enough genre know-how to make it work and really show how terror can be effective when using a ‘less is more’ strategy. In fact, if you didn’t know this was a new movie, then you could be forgiven for thinking it came out in the early eighties – missed a marketing trick there!

Overall, this is a great movie, and one that genre fans will be raving about for a while. The acting is very good, especially ‘Manhunter’ star Noonan as Mr. Ulman, and the script is convincing. Tense, atmospheric, creepy and disturbing, this is certainly a breath of fresh air in the current ‘torture-porn’ climate. If you’re a ‘Saw’ fan looking for your next gore-filled fix, then you may have to look elsewhere.

A Review of Wrong Turn 3: Left For Dead

2009-11-06T12:15:00.000-08:00

Bucking the trend of DTV franchises, 2007’s ‘Wrong Turn 2: Dead End’ was an exciting thrill-ride that outstripped its not-sure-if-its-serious-or-a-comedy predecessor. More mutants, more gore, characters that you routed for and Henry Rollins in an inspired bit of casting. You would think, then, that now a style for these movies has been established and it works, then part three would be an even bigger, bolder and better gorefest. As if they’d dare cock it up now...

After the now traditional opening gambit, where an insignificant group of eye candy youngsters get wasted (which is, to be honest, the best scene in the movie), we shift to the local prison where a group of high-risk prisoners are about to get transferred, and try breaking for freedom on the way. Stopping en route at the local sheriff’s office, the group then move on but their bus gets spotted by Three Fingers, the mutant cannibal, who rams them off the road. And so begins a desperate race for survival, as the prisoners battle not only Three Fingers, but also each other in a desperate bid to escape capture.

Doesn’t that sound exciting? On paper maybe, but when it’s on the screen, it becomes apparent that quality control wasn’t high on the agenda. Lacking the obvious passion for the genre that part two had in bucket loads, this entry in the series has the production values of the made-for-TV bilge that normally gets shown in the middle of weekday afternoons. The script is shamefully poor, the lines delivered by actors who obviously don’t know or care about the genre, or indeed the movie, they’re starring in, and the CGI makes ‘Mega Shark VS. Giant Octopus’ look like a contender for the best special effects Oscar. And this is before we even go into the utter absurdity of the situations the ‘characters’ (the term is used very loosely) find themselves in – let’s just say that if you ever find yourself with a seemingly dead mutant cannibal laying at your feet for about the third time in one evening, and you have a shotgun in your hand, it may be best just to err on the side of caution and blow his head off.

It isn’t all bad, though, as there are one or two moments that raise a smile. There’s a rather impressively bosomed young lady who gets one of Three Finger’s arrows right where it hurts, and a rather unfortunate young man who gets cheese-wired into three pieces, but two impressive kills just isn’t enough. With no big-name actors or cult personalities to speak of, a tedious lack of ideas and a list of plot implausibilities that just make the movie more ridiculous as it goes on, it seems the standard set by part two has been put to one side in favour of just churning out crap that seems similar but lacks the substance. Avoid.

A Review of The Hills Run Red

2009-11-01T12:59:00.001-08:00

‘The Hills Run Red’ is a strange one. On the one hand you have an above average slasher, that nicely pays homage to the late seventies/early eighties exploitation movies it so obviously wants to emulate, and at the same time adds a few neat twists and modern touches to keep it up there with the current crop. On the other, one could say this movie has ideas above it’s station and is trying to be too clever in it’s self-knowing ‘Scream’-isms.

Tad Hildenbrinck stars as Tyler, a young filmmaker obsessed by an obscure early eighties slasher movie called The Hills Run Red, that contains a masked killer called Babyface. Apparently the movie was deemed too gruesome and was never released, and the only evidence it exists is a trailer doing the rounds, so Tyler decides to go looking for the movie’s director (William Sadler), who’s daughter Alexa (Sophie Monk) he tracks down working in a strip club.

After a bizarre sequence where Tyler makes Alexa go cold turkey from her drug habit, she agrees to go with Tyler, and his friends Serena (Janet Montgomery) and Lalo (Alex Wyndham) to the woods where the movie was shot. When they get there, though, they get more than they bargained for when the group come face to face with the local redneck gang and Babyface himself. It soon seems the original movie was never finished, and Tyler and friends must find a way out before they become the latest victims of the crazed director and his creation.

As an overall comment, this is an entertaining movie and most genre fans will no doubt enjoy it. The overall premise is good, Babyface makes for a pretty intimidating villain – somewhere between Leatherface and Jason circa ‘Friday the 13th Part 3’ – and William Sadler is marvellous as the lunatic film director obsessed with making his masterpiece. There are, however, a few faults here. Too much genre referencing – the bulk of this movie’s audience will already be familiar with its obvious influences, so we don’t need constant nods to the classics. Tad Hildenbrinck is fairly flat as the lead character, as is Janet Montgomery as his on/off love interest, although Sophie Monk and Alex Wyndham offer solid support. The gore is suitably nasty – with one particularly cool kill involving two trees and some long rope – and there is a genuine air of menace throughout. It won’t blow your mind, but it does kill (ahem!) 80 minutes.

A Review of Infestation

2009-11-01T08:58:00.000-08:00

‘Infestation’ is one of those gems that pops up every once in a while to show how great old-fashioned monster movies really are. Taking it’s cue from other mutant creature features like ‘Tremors’, ‘Eight Legged Freaks’ and ‘Slugs’, ‘Infestation’ stars Chris Marquette as Cooper, a wise-cracking slacker who has taken his employers loyalty to the limit and is about to get fired. But just as his boss is about to issue his cards, a strange sonic screech starts up and everybody in the building seems to pass out.

Waking up a few days later, Cooper discovers that everybody has been cocooned by giant bugs, and not just in his office, as there seems to be a giant nest that draws the creatures to it not too far away. Assembling a group of survivors, including deaf strongman Hugo (E. Quincy Sloan), his father Al (Wesley Thompson), his boss’s beautiful daughter Sara (Brooke Nevin) and the dizzy Cindy (Kinsey Packard), Cooper decides to head to his father’s house, as his father (Ray Wise) is a former soldier with an underground shelter. On the way, though, the group run into trouble when some of the victims of the mutant bugs return as zombie/spider hybrids, intent on destroying our heroes.

Overall, ‘Infestation’ is a cracking rollercoaster ride of a movie that hrows you straight into the action and barely lets up until it’s genius final shot. Chris Marquette is great as Cooper, following on in the great tradition of leading losers such as Jason Biggs and Seann William Scott, and Ray Wise positively shines as Cooper’s dad Ethan, who can’t bear to see weakness in anybody, especially his son. The special effects are surprisingly minimal considering the subject matter, but this all adds to the B-movie mayhem, and some lightening-quick editing manages to keep the pace up throughout. Highly recommended.

MY ESSENTIAL TEN HALLOWEEN MOVIES

2009-10-31T14:59:00.000-07:00

As everyone else has done it, I thought I’d add my tuppence worth and give you my essential Halloween viewing. This doesn’t represent my favourite movies, just the ones I like to watch during Samhain, so just for fun and in no particular order:

10. BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN (1935) – James Whale’s sequel to his own 1931 ‘Frankenstein’, ‘Bride...’ is an entirely different, ahem, monster. Bigger in scale and with a genuinely emotive performance from Boris Karloff as the monster, this iconic movie still stands as the finest Frankenstein adaption and, quite possibly, always will.

9. RE-ANIMATOR (1985) – Nearly a quarter of a century on and Stuart Gordon’s debut feature film is still the most effective horror/comedy out there. Jeffrey Combs leads the cast as po-faced Dr. Herbert West, who is trying to perfect a serum that re-animates the dead. Of course it all gets out of hand and goes completely OTT with the gore and laughs. Essential viewing.

8. A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET (1984) – Wes Craven’s eighties masterpiece may have aged and, thanks to the diluted shocks of the sequels, seems less scary than it did back then, but there is still a menace to this genial shocker that introduced the world to the razor-fingered maniac Freddy Krueger. As with ‘Dracula’ or ‘Frankenstein’, each new generation should be shown this movie as an introduction to horror movies.

7. NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD (1968) – The movie that, more than any other, marked the birth of modern horror, George A.Romero’s seminal shocker challenged the stereotypes of the time and gave a definitive outlook on what zombies should be. A group of strangers end up trapped in a remote farmhouse surrounded by walking corpses who just won’t seem to stop trying to break in. Simple plot, maverick filmmaking and an influence that surpasses what any of the original makers could have ever imagined.

6. THE EXORCIST (1973) – It may be approaching forty years old, but William Freidkin’s adaption of William Peter Blatty’s novel about a possessed teenage girl in modern day Washington DC is still pretty effective, especially if it’s the first time you’re watching it. Banned for many years because of its graphic masturbating-with-a-crucifix scene, the movie garnered a reputation as the scariest movie ever and was proof that big budget Hollywood productions could be just as shocking and inventive as any independant production.

5. SCREAM (1996) – Love it or hate it, Wes Craven’s post-modern and self-knowing slasher did resurrect a flagging genre and, more importantly, is tremendous fun. A group of college kids are picked of one by one by a masked madman, and have to try and survive using their wits and following the rules of scary movies. Not too popular with purists, who saw it as some kind of piss-take, this movie features some great cameos and undoubtedly influenced a whole sub-genre of teen-based horror romps.

4. THE EVIL DEAD (1981) – The most infamous of the early eighties ‘video nasties’, Sam Raimi’s debut feaure was, and still is, a great example of what can be achieved when a vision is adhered to and compromise isn’t an option. A group of young adults stay in a secluded cabin deep in the hills, and unwittingly evoke the demons of the Necronomicon (Book of the Dead), who spend the night possessing the souls of everyone in the group. Disgusting and hilarious in equal measure, and the movie world’s first introduction to the legend that is Bruce Campbell, ‘The Evil Dead’ may show signs of age, but still manages to hit the right spot.

3. FRIGHT NIGHT (1985) – Not as overly stylish or trendy as ‘The Lost Boys’, which meant it would still appeal after six months, ‘Fright Night’ is a vampire movie that plays with traditions, but still nods it head towards the old school. William Ragsdale play Charley Brewster, a teenage horror film fan who looks out of his window one night and sees his new neighbour Jerry Dandridge (Chris Sarandon) literally sinking his teeth into a victim. Unfortunately, when he tries to do the right thing, nobody believes him. Great comic turn by Roddy McDowall as tv host Peter Vincent and Sarandon is effectively suave as the dastardly Dandridge. Great fun and hardly dated at all.

2. TRICK ’R TREAT (2008) – This movie has been in the can for a couple of years and finally got released this year. It’s hard to see why, because this is a fantastic movie and a definite newcomer to most people’s top ten lists. It’s an anthology consisting of four (five including the intro/outro story) stories all taking place in the same neighbourhood on the same Halloween night, and some including the same people. Unlike other movies of this type, the stories all crossover into each other and give the movie some depth, and is quite possibly the best original horror film of the last decade.

1. HALLOWEEN (1978) – John Carpenter’s original stalk-and-slash masterpiece is still the definitive movie to watch on All Hallows Eve, and has yet to be bettered for sheer terror and suspense. Six year old Michael Myers murders his sister after watching her make love with her boyfriend and is incarcerated. Fifteen years later he escapes from the institution and heads back to his hometown where he continues his bloody rampage. Responsible for the explosion in slasher movies, ‘Halloween’ is notable for its lack of gore and for Carpenter’s use of widescreen shooting and the ingenious use of light and shade. Often imitated and never bettered, ‘Halloween’ still scares and shocks, no matter how many times you see it.

A Review of The Last House on the Left 2009

2009-10-21T14:07:00.000-07:00

When discussing movies, and remakes in particular, the word ‘classic’ is often bandied around, usually in a sentence that goes along the lines of ‘They shouldn’t remake the classics’ or ‘They shouldn’t touch that – it’s a classic’. This may have been true in the past, with ‘classics’ like ‘The Texas Chainsaw Massacre’, ‘The Wicker Man’ and ‘The Omen getting a makeover, with varying results. ‘The Last House on the Left’ sort of gets away with it, because Wes Craven’s 1972 original was a very crude piece of filmmaking, and was more groundbreaking than classic. Classic implies that it’s universally loved and appreciated, and ‘TLHOTL’ certainly wasn’t that. It was a movie that split audiences down the middle – those who saw it as a slightly arty commentary on how cruel society was, or those who saw it as cheap exploitation – but whatever side of the argument you went with, one couldn’t deny its power and the fact that it was probably the first movie that fell into the horror category without having aliens, monsters, vampires or zombies. Its power came from the fact that the ‘monster’ in the movie was a person, or group of people, and that the events really could take place.

The plot of the movie is essentially the same as the original, with a few minor cosmetic changes, but for those who haven’t had the pleasure, it goes something like this; John and Emma Collingwood (Tony Goldwyn and Monica Potter) go to their lakeside summer house with their teenage daughter Mari (Sara Paxton). After arriving, Mari takes the family car and visits her friend Paige (Martha Maclsaac), who works in the local convenience store. Overhearing the girls talking about smoking pot, a teenage boy called Justin (Spencer Treat Clark) invites the girls back to his motel room to indulge in a little narcotic usage, but just when the Justin, Paige and Mari are starting to enjoy themselves they’re interrupted by Justin’s escaped convict father Krug (Garret Dillahunt), his lover Sadie (Riki Lindhome) and his brother Frank (Aaron Paul), and they’re not happy! Not wanting to risk being caught, the gang kidnap the girls, steal their car and head out into the country. After a botched escape attempt, during which the car gets wrecked, the gang start torturing the girls – including stabbing Paige and raping Mari - and, believing them both to be dead they head back along the road to look for shelter from the incoming storm.

Unfortunately for Krug and his cronies, the first house they come across is Mari’s parents’ house, and still assuming their daughter to be out with her friends, the Collingwoods invite the group in to see to their injuries and offer them a room for the night. It isn’t long, however, before Justin, who was powerless to help Mari while she was being raped, figures out who his hosts are and leaves a necklace dropped by Mari in their kitchen. After their guests have gone to bed, John and Emma find a barely alive Mari on the porch, and after finding the necklace that Emma knows Mari was wearing, they put two and two together and realise who is staying in their house, and decide to take action...

As previously stated, the basic plot differs very little from the original, and as far as remakes go this one is pretty solid. The actors are all fine in their roles, with particular credit going to Goldwyn and Potter as the distraught parents forced to go against everything they believe in to exact revenge on their daughter’s torturers. The character of Krug was very interesting, as Dillahunt plays him with appropriate coldness and cruelty, although he does lack the wicked charm of the original’s David Hess.

The rape scene is as uncomfortable to watch as you would expect, but the other tortures dished out on the girls don’t seem quite as degrading, in as much as although you are still watching innocent young girls getting punched and stabbed, nobody is forced to piss themselves, as they were in the original. The violence that is dished out once the Collingwood’s find out who they are sheltering is suitably grisly, especially Krug’s ultimate demise – although is it really possible to do that to somebody? To say any more would mean spoilers, so you’ll just have to watch, but due to it’s unlikely plausibility it does detract slightly from the overall flow. Well done (!), but just a bit too absurd.

Overall, though, ‘The Last House on the Left’ is a well made, well acted and very watchable thriller. Due to it being a remake, and a remake of a movie nearly forty years old, it could never have the shocking impact of it’s source material, but that probably isn’t the point. Wes Craven has often stated that his original movie was made by a bunch of people not really knowing what they were doing, so this was his chance to do it properly – and he has. Doing the same thing as he did with the 2006 remake of ‘The Hills Have Eyes’, Craven has hired a younger director to add a different flavour to his vision, and Dennis Lliadis certainly brings a more colourful sense of style to proceedings. People will bemoan it being more polished and more professional – Lliadis uses some wonderful long shots and his eye for colours is fantastic – but surely that is the point of a remake; taking something that wasn’t that great to start with and making it better.

There are quite a few continuity and editing errors, and that ending is slightly dodgy, but this is one remake that updates it’s story nicely whilst retaining the edge and threat of the original. It isn’t groundbreaking like that movie was, but it is easier to watch and, unlike the original, will withstand repeated viewing.

A Review of Halloween II (2009)

2009-10-16T13:52:00.001-07:00

How is it that a high profile sequel to a high profile movie, made by a (fairly) high profile director, can generate so much hatred? Surely there’s enough love for Rob Zombie and the ‘Halloween’ franchise as a whole to give it a fair go and look for the positives, and after all, considering the varying quality levels of the 1978 movie’s numerous sequels, at least it was made by the same team as the previous instalment, meaning continuity and such like? Could it really be that bad? Read on...

The movie starts immediately after the events of the 2007 remake, where Laurie Strode (Scout Taylor-Compton) is left wondering the streets in what could be called ‘a bit of a state’, after shooting psychopathic killer Michael Myers (Tyler Mane) in the head. Found by Sheriff Brackett (Brad Dourif), Laurie and Brackett’s daughter Annie (Danielle Harris), who also survived Michael’s attack, are sent to hospital. While this is going on, the van containing Michael’s body crashes into a cow (yes, I know!) and a somewhat revived Michael begins the trek to the hospital to finish what he started. It sounds simple, but there is more to it than that; Michael is now having visions of his mother and his childhood self, who are instructing him to hunt down and kill Laurie – who, incidentally, is Michael’s younger sister – so that the family can be together again. There are other twists and turns (or plot holes, as they should be called) that try to add to the plot but to mention them all here would mean spoilers.

As a summing up statement, this movie is garbled mess and somebody of Rob Zombie’s calibre and knowledge of horror movies should know better. The heart of the matter is there’s no real depth to anything; the characters, with the exception of Sheriff Brackett, are all pretty loathsome, the story just seems to jump from kill scene to Laurie-getting-upset-and-having-a-bad-dream-scene and back to a kill scene with little else to hold your attention and the script is pretty monotonous, even by Zombie’s standards.

Malcolm McDowell returns as Dr. Samuel Loomis (no, he didn’t die in the first movie – durrr!), and to be honest, even though his character this time around is pretty vile – he is now a best-selling author exploiting his history with Myers – it was a vast improvement on the sheer wetness he displayed last time around (“Michael, it’s me. It’s Samuel” – the worst delivered line in movie history!). Also an improvement in terms of character depth is Sheriff Brackett’s involvement within the plot. As always Brad Dourif is excellent, and even though the character himself doesn’t have any great lines or a defining screen moment to speak of, his on-screen presence is enough to make audiences empathize with him and make him the only character you’re likely to care about.

But that’s only two characters – what about the rest? There’s the character of Laurie, the main protagonist – the one character we’re supposed to be rooting for - but she’s really quite annoying. Not annoying like, say, a typical teen in an ‘American Pie’ type movie is annoying, but annoying because she’s really just uncharismatic and bland – and she shouldn’t be! When Jamie Lee Curtis played the role, she exuded charm and had a warmth and depth about her; Scout Taylor-Compton is a capable actress, but a leading scream-queen she is not. Sheri Moon Zombie returns as Deborah Myers (who, incidentally, died in the first movie and now appears in Michael’s head), and is, oddly, encouraging Michael to kill Laurie. She was a loving mother who couldn’t cope with her son being a psychopath in the first movie, and now she’s a ghost who wants all her family to die? Just seems like a flimsy excuse for Rob Zombie to put his wife in the movie.

All the other characters are equally as non-descript as this, and that’s why Zombie should hang his head in shame. This is a guy who knows his horror movies, he knows what works and what doesn’t, what makes a good sequel and what doesn’t, and what audiences expect from this sort of movie – and he doesn’t give it to them! Yes, the murders are bloody, violent and gloriously grisly, but just having Myers killing random people who’ve literally just appeared on-screen and called him names is pretty pathetic. If the audience had time to get to know these characters, then it makes more of an impact when they get offed. If they walk into shot, shout a bit and then get stabbed – who cares?

The other major fault with this movie is the rather ambiguous ending. Taken at face value, it’s quite similar to the ending of ‘Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers’ from the original series, although a deeper analysis hints at something else altogether. Zombie himself has suggested that the ending is not what what everyone would expect, but if you interpret it that way and look back at the movie, it doesn’t add up. There’s too many plot holes to make that suggestion carry any weight.

Overall, this movie is a huge disappointment. Credit to Rob Zombie for realising that the studio was going to make the movie anyway, so he may as well sign up to direct it, but maybe next time he should actually have a decent idea for a plot first. Rob Zombie is a good director with a very unique style, and he can certainly pull off violent and gory scenes as well as any of the big-name horror directors, but some decent content between the violent scenes and pacing that allows for character development wouldn’t go amiss. Casual viewers may not care about these things and just want to get their fill of gore – and they’ll be well catered for here - but for those of us who care about our horror icons, this is one slasher that just doesn’t cut it (sorry, couldn’t help it!).

AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY RANDOM...

2009-10-05T10:26:00.000-07:00

When writing about anything, the golden rule has always been ‘write about what you know’, and up until now, that has always been the case. But I was recently handed a random cd by a band I had never heard of, playing music I don’t normally listen to, and told to see if I could write a review on it. Not being one to back away from a challenge, I thought I’d give it a go, so here it is:

THE DEAD 60’S – THE DEAD 60’S (2005)

Hailing from Liverpool and sounding ‘retro’ is hardly original, but The Dead 60’s are a band that aren’t as easy to pigeonhole as many of their peers. Whereas a lot of bands are happy to tread the path of style over content, The Dead 60’s back up their stylistic cool by actually having a handful of decent tunes, as this debut album shows.

Eschewing the usual psychedelic-era Beatles influences (the band’s name is a bit of a giveaway), the band play their ska-infused rock with an energy and savvy that Joe Strummer himself would have been proud of. In fact, opening track ‘Riot Radio’ could have been lifted straight from ‘London Calling’ – not that that’s a bad thing, but when you wear your influences on your sleeve as much as these guys do, then it’s very difficult not to listen to the album without going ‘that bit sounds like The Clash’, ‘that bit sounds like The Jam’, and ‘that part sounds just like The Specials’.

And were it not for the quality of the songs then this album could probably be disregarded as retro-sounding nonsense. As it is, there is an addictive quality to tracks like ‘Horizontal’, ‘Ghostfaced Killer’ and ‘Soul Survivor’ that makes the album flow and bounce along on an understated groove, each song crafted to raise a smile and make you move, and being careful never to outstay it’s welcome.

With feet planted firmly in the post-punk, ska-revival sounds of Madness and The Specials, ‘The Dead 60’s’ is an album of infectious, high-energy pop that will appeal to fans of modern guitar bands and old-school 2-Tone lovers. Not all the songs are brilliant, but on the whole there’s enough quality here to separate them from the other ‘retro-clones’, and with songs that make you want to sing and dance like a loon, who could ask for anything more?

A Review of The Devil's Rejects

2009-10-04T14:34:00.000-07:00

Ploughing a different furrow from his 2003 cult hit ‘House of 1000 Corpses’ – a movie that was basically ‘The Texas Chainsaw Massacre’ with added weirdness – Rob Zombie has revised his characters and held back on the spooky undertones for this more depraved sequel.

Set a few months after the events of ‘House...’, ‘TDR’ begins with the local police force surrounding the home of the very dysfunctional Firefly ‘family’. Baby (Sheri Moon Zombie) and Otis (Bill Moseley) escape, but eldest son Rufus is shot and Mother Firefly (Leslie Easterbrook) is arrested by Sheriff Wydell (William Forsythe), brother of the Lieutenant murdered by Otis in ‘House...’, who is desperate to bring the whole family to justice. Otis and Baby hook up with Captain Spaulding (Sid Haig), the clown-faced killer from the first movie, who also turns out to be Baby’s dad, and end up holing up in a hotel room with a country music band and their wives. After butchering their hostages, the fugitives head for a brothel owned by Spaulding’s brother Charlie Altamont (Ken Foree – don’t ask!), with a clearly insane Wydell in hot pursuit with a couple of bounty hunters for good measure.

Very different in tone and execution to ‘House...’, ‘The Devil’s Reject’s’ is less of a ‘horror’ (in the conventional sense) movie and more of an exploitation movie; still very much in the vein of ‘...Chainsaw’ and ‘The Hills Have Eyes’, but with the emphasis on realism rather than leaning towards the supernatural. The main characters are very different here, especially Otis, who was portrayed as a ghostly albino with a penchant for creating models out of the corpses in the first movie. Here he is seen a Charles Manson-type figure with a wickedly dry sense of humour, who just slaughters for the love of it. It is his character and the way he interacts with Spaulding (himself slightly different from his original incarnation) that forms the bulk of Zombie’s witty dialogue, and show Moseley and Haig to be a pretty good double act.

Elsewhere, Zombie’s indulgence for cameos comes to the fore, as there’s cult star after cult star appearing on-screen. Ken Foree and ‘The Hills Have Eyes’ actor Michael Berryman prove to be a great comedy duo as Charlie Altamont and his sidekick Clevon, and there are various appearances from Geoffrey Lewis, Brian Posehn, Danny Tejo, Priscilla Barnes and Tom Towels, to name but a few.

But the real issue as to whether you’ll enjoy this movie is the violence. Zombie has gone all out here and made a movie that can justifiably claim to be a genuine ‘nasty’. Otis and Baby inspire little sympathy; the scene in the motel room with their hostages is one of the most intense and uncomfortable in recent memory, and Spaulding, although given a little more humanity, isn’t much better. So when Wydell finally catches up with them, you would expect some relief, although what plays out may make you shift your allegiances.

Overall, ‘...Rejects’ is a fantastic movie, and the movie that mixes together all of Rob Zombie’s trademarks to great effect – cult actors, great soundtrack (never has ‘Free Bird’ been put to better use than here!), OTT violence and gore, and a genuine feel for the seventies road movies that obviously inspired him. It is uncomfortable in places, and it could be said the script is a bit self-indulgent in places, but, unlike it’s messy and incoherent predecessor, it nods towards it’s influences rather than emulates them. Not for everyone, but what is?

A Review of Razor Blade Smile

2009-10-04T12:38:00.000-07:00

Every so often, a movie appears that, although far from perfect, seemingly captures a mood, a scene or even just a vibe that makes it stand out from the rest of the pack. Although ‘Razor Blade Smile’ may appear to be just a low-budget British vampire flick that hardly breaks any new ground, there is a spirit – an enthusiasm – throughout it’s running time that makes it just so compelling and fun.

The story begins in the 19th century, where a duel is about to take place between Sethane Blake (Christopher Adamson) and an unnamed adversary. Lilith Silver (Eileen Daly) attempts to stop the duel, but is too late as Blake has already won. Picking up the dead man’s pistol she shoots Blake, but then gets shot herself by Blake’s assistant. It turns out Blake is a vampire and he offers a dying Lilith the chance for eternal life by biting her and making her feed on the blood of the man he shot.

Fast forward to the present day, where Lilith has become a leather-clad assassin, known as The Angel of Death, and is currently under the employment of her sometime lover, known only as Platinum (Kevin Howarth), who is also working for a mysterious employer. Her current mission is to eliminate the members of a mysterious group known as the Illuminati, and take their membership rings from their fingers as a trophy. But during her latest operation, Lilith is distracted and loses the ring after making the kill. While this is going on, the Illuminati have met to set about bringing The Angel of Death’s downfall. Unbeknown to Lilith, the group are spearheaded by Blake, who leaves it to the cretinous Detective Inspector Price (Jonathan Coote) to find out who is killing their members. Price has deducted that it is the work of a vampire, but trying to prove the existence of the undead in modern-day London is a bit of a task – especially when there are so many vampire fetish clubs around!

Soon after, Lilith receives a video showing Platinum being tortured and threatened with death unless she returns her £250,000 fee. Lilith knows it is a trap, but her feelings for platinum force her to go to the meeting place, where she comes face-to-face with her extortioner’s goons, and a rather pleased-with-himself Blake, who offers Lilith a choice and reveals the truth behind the cat-and-mouse games!

Overall, ‘RBS’ is a high-octane vampire romp in the spirit of the early Hammer movies, but with a modern setting and a healthy dose of humour, although there is a lot wrong with it. The acting is fairly diabolical, especially Adamson and Daly’s abilities to deliver convincing lines, but as the script isn’t brilliant and they both look the part, this can be forgiven. Jonathan Coote as Price is fairly amusing in his attempts to convince his superiors of his intuition about vampires, as is Grahame Wood as the photographer hired by Price to photograph the inhabitants of the Transilvania nightclub, but all the other characters seem to play it completely straight, which goes somewhat against the slightly kooky feel of some of the action.

But the action is plentiful. Although she may not be convincing with the dialogue, Daly certainly makes up for it with her physical performance as the high-kicking Lilith, and as such, her screen presence is fairly huge. The pacing of this movie is fantastic, thanks to some lightening-quick editing and some wonderful camera angles, evoking a semi-comic book style that brings to mind the 1960’s ‘Batman’ series. In an era when decent horror movies were few and far between, ‘RBS’ offers a not-wholly original, but still fresh take on the vampire legend.

If low-budget horror movies aren’t your thing, then this probably won’t convince you otherwise. But look beyond the bad acting and crude script and there really are some wonderful moments here – the action plays out like an early version of the fight sequences in ‘The Matrix’, the scenes shot in the Transilvania nightclub – with Lilith professing to know all about vampire folklore – are entertaining and, of course, there’s plenty of sex and bloodletting. Comparable to Ken Russell’s 1988 cult favourite ‘The Lair of the White Worm’, this is a great example of eccentric British filmmaking made with passion and heart, and definitely worth a look for fans of the current crop of genre movies.

A Review of Freddy vs. Jason

2009-10-01T13:11:00.001-07:00

Having got past the nineties trend of being ‘post-modern’, ‘ironic’, or any of those other words that mean ‘the same old thing but trying to look intelligent’, in 2003 the hardcore faithful were rewarded for their patience by getting the ultimate face-off. Forget about story twists involving reanimating corpses with malevolent demons, or 3-D gimmicks and OTT fantasy deaths; this was a back-to-basics (well, almost) tale of two of modern horror’s biggest icons going head-to-head to prove who was best in their undead glory.

Child killer Freddy Krueger’s spirit still resides in the dreamworld, but as the residents of Springwood no longer mention his name or acknowledge his existence, his powers are very limited and he cannot penetrate the dreams of Springwoods teens; what he needs is a way of getting his name back in the town’s collective conscience so their fear will regenerate his powers. Knowing that he would get the blame for any murders in the Elm Street area, Freddy – in the guise of Mrs. Voorhees – orders Jason out of his grave and back to Springwood, just to kill a couple of kids and get people talking about him again. Unfortunately for Freddy, Jason gets a taste for slaughtering the Elm Street kids, meaning Freddy won’t get his kicks until Jason is back in Hell. Caught up in the middle is a group of kids, including Mark (Brendan Fletcher) and Will (Jason Ritter) – who have been locked up at the Westin Hills pyschiatric hospital due to nightmares involving Krueger – and Will’s girlfriend Lori (Monica Keena), who lives at 1428 Elm Street with her father, who may or may not know a little bit more than he’s letting on. Along with their friends, they must try and come up with a way of stopping Krueger once and for all, and Jason may just be able to provide the answer.

Doesn’t it sound exciting? Well, it is – in a funny sort of way. Maybe not as good as it could have been, ‘FVJ’ ticks all the right boxes – good looking teens, gratuitous sex scenes, gore, action, witty one-liners, etc. – and there is an almost comic book feel to the whole thing, but, due to the slightly underwhelming plot, it does stop slightly short of the mark. Director Ronny Yu is a veteran of Hong Kong cinema, as well as directing ‘51st State’ and ‘Bride of Chucky’, and his influence is all over the action scenes; both Freddy and Jason get flung around at various speeds during the action-packed fight sequences. But in between the fight sequences, we have to put up with whiney teenagers, a pretty poor script and a story that doesn’t really flow as well as it should.

There’s some sort of subplot involving Lori’s father covering up for Freddy murdering his wife - out of place, seeing as though Freddy is a CHILD killer, and why was he in the house to start with? Was he after Lori? What did Will do to make Lori’s father hate him so much? – but it never goes into any detail, as with Mark’s backstory involving his brother. Then there’s Deputy Stubbs, who is new to Springwood Police and doesn’t know the town’s history with Freddy – not too sure what the point of having him is.

Another low point is the reliance on bad CGI effects – like when nosejob obsessed Kia (Kelly Rowland) gets her nose picked by Freddy. It just looks cartoonish when compared to similar effects in lower budget movies.

On the plus side, the action sequences are pretty spectacular, and all credit to Robert Englund as Freddy for hamming it up for all it’s worth. So much of what makes Freddy such a great character is the slapstick body movements and Englund’s comic timing, and this is probably his best Freddy performance since ‘A Nightmare on Elm Street 3’. His make-up is also the best it’s been for a while – still not as good as the first two ‘...Elm Street’ movies, but not as rubbery looking as the last few. Stuntman Ken Kirzinger as Jason also adds a new depth to the character, combining slow zombie-like walking with faster, hunter-like movements when he has a kill in sight (side note – why is Jason’s skin covered in black lacquer? He looks like a mutant chess-piece!).

The kids are pretty annoying and there’s little sympathy for them, but maybe that’s the point in this movie. This isn’t like the original source material for both characters, where the audience roots for the hero or heroine trying to escape the madman – this movie is designed to make the audience root for one madman or the other, to see how they’re going to kill and to give a cheer when they strike. As it is, Jason (wisely) gets most of the kills here, meaning the deaths are more realistic and less fantasy based (no death by Nintendo or wizard masters here!).

Overall, ‘FVJ’ is an entertaining way to kill (!) ninety minutes, and there are plenty of reference points to the originals to keep long-time fans interested – hypnocil (the dream suppressant from ‘Nightmare 3’), the t.v. station KRGR (do you see what they did there?) is also in the first ‘Nightmare’ movie, as is the goat that randomly appears in the street, plus many other little nods. The thin plot, naff script, dodgy CGI and dull acting do take away from what should have been a real tour-de-force representing thirty years of slasher movies; not that these movies are known for their award winning attributes, but there’s just an overall feeling of ‘could do better’. Take it at face value and it’s an enjoyable comic book romp that doesn’t do any harm to both series’ legacy. And keep a look out for the final shot – it says more about both series than any script ever could!

The Films of Freddy Krueger (Almost)

2009-09-28T10:27:00.000-07:00

Given the way that everything we hold dear is being given a 21st century makeover, it was only a matter of time before that wickedest of movie bogiemen - Freddy Krueger - was given an updating, although we won't get to see the results until next year. So, as I trawled through my vast collection of box-sets and various franchises, I decided to reinvestigate the original exploits of the red-and-green sweatered dream demon.

For the benefit of those not up on the backstory (there must be somebody!), 'A Nightmare on Elm Street' was written and directed by Wes Craven (Last House on the Left, The Hills Have Eyes) and centres around a group of middle-American teenagers - Nancy (Heather Langenkamp), Tina (Amanda Wyss) and their respective boyfriends Glen (Johnny Depp) and Rod (Nick Corri) - who are all having the same realisic dream about a horribly burnt man who wears a red-and-green striped sweater, a fedora hat and has a glove with knives instead of fingers, who tries to take them to a boiler room to kill them. Although they are all having the same dream, none of them realises until Tina confesses at school. Nancy realises she has been dreaming about the same man so when Tina's parents leave town for the night, Nancy and Glen decide to sleepover at Tina's. After Rod shows up unexpectedly, he and Tina disappear to the bedroom where, after making love, Tina falls asleep and begins to dream about her mystery man, who then appears in her bed - although only Tina can see him - and slashes her to pieces. Of course, Rod panics, escapes and, after meeting with Nancy to protest his innocence, is arrested by Lieutenant Thompson (John Saxon), Nancy's father. It is then things start to unravel, as each of the teens is stalked by the twisted stranger, until Nancy manages, in a dream, to grab the man's hat and bring it out into the real world, identifying him as Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund), who, she learns from her mother (Ronee Blakley) was a child killer in the local area some years before. After he was caught and let off due to a technicality, the parents of the neigbourhood kids tracked him down to the boiler room where he worked and set fire to the building, trapping Krueger inside. As an act of revenge, Krueger now haunts the dreams of the children of the people who killed him.

Released in 1984, by which time the slasher movie had had it's peak, 'ANOES' was a real shot in the arm for the flagging genre. It's production values may look a bit clunky by today's standards, but this movie still has the ability to scare better than pretty much any teen horror movie released since. Named after Craven's school bully (as was the character of Krug in 'Last House...'), Freddy Krueger was a genuinely terrifying character, and although he isn't on-screen much, and the iconic status and cheesy one-liners were a few movies away, he really is a massive presence throughout the movie, thanks mainly to Robert Englund's masterful performance and over-the-top use of body language. The acting of the other main players varies from average to good; John Saxon is always a welcome presence and plays the role of a man desperate, but unable, to protect his daughter with utter conviction, although Ronee Blackley is pretty flat and useless as Nancy's alcoholic mother Marge. And yes, that is THE Johnny Depp as Glen - not the biggest start to a successful career, but he does display some sort of charm as Nancy's gormless boyfriend. Heather Langenkamp gives a fairly stiff performance as Nancy, but it doesn't really detract from the movie. A good story and a strong villain lift this movie head and shoulders above the rest of the era, and even though the ending is a bit lame and it may not have aged quite as well as 'Halloween' or 'Friday the 13th', it still retains it's shock value and edginess, which more than compensate.

Never ones to miss an opportunity, New Line released the sequel 'A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 2: Freddy's Revenge' a year later, and although it is inferior to the original, it isn't as bad as many make out and does have some great moments. The story involves the Walsh family, who have moved into the house on Elm Street previously occupied by Nancy. Since moving in the eldest son, Jesse (Mark Patton), is having trouble sleeping and is plagued by nightmares about - you'll never guess! - a man in a red-and-green sweater, a fedora hat and a razor-sharp claw on his right hand. After a few odd incidents, mainly with the heating in the house (and an exploding budgie!), Jesse comes face to face with Freddy who, instead of killing him, wants to use him as a vessel to get back into the real world. So now, instead of the usual teenage angst and confusions (and there are plenty of confusions here!), Jesse also has to worry about being ripped open and, for want of a better description, giving birth to a fully grown psychopathic killer!

It may sound ridiculous, and parts of it are, but this movie does have a few merits in it's favour. Robert Englund gives probably his best performance as Freddy, being more twisted and evil than in any other 'Nightmare...' movie - check out the barbeque massacre for some great Freddy action. Englund’s over-the-top facial expressions and spastic body movements are at their most effective here and the moment when he declares ‘You are all my children now’ remains his most iconic. There is also good support from eighties teenage mainstay Robert Rusler (whatever happened to him?) as Jesse’s friend Grady and Clu Gulager as Jesse’s irrational but slightly amusing father, and it is the scenes in which they are involved that really carry the narrative.

But now to the not so favourable. The character of Jesse is probably the least interesting of all the characters here, and as he is supposed to be the main focus of Freddy’s attentions that could be seen as a major problem. As is his chemistry (or lack of it!) with girlfriend Lisa (Kim Myers), which sort of leads into another area. It has been suggested that there is a very homosexual subtext to this movie, mainly because Mark Patton spends most of his screen time in his underwear in the company of other males, plus the quite odd scene involving Jesse’s sadistic, fetishwear-loving p.e. teacher (quite why we needed to see Freddy smacking his arse with a towel is certainly up for question). Like most of these things, it’s there if you want to see it or you can just ignore it if you don’t, but it may offer some sort of explanation as to Jesse’s behaviour. I’ll leave that one there, but rewatching this movie on dvd after years of seeing it on an old vhs was quite a revelation, as there were things on-screen that had previously gone unnoticed; mainly the subtle use of reds and greens on background objects – an indicator that Freddy may not be too far away, similar to the way the music in ‘Jaws’ indicated the shark’s appearance – and a clearer view of Freddy’s expressions and character traits.

Overall, ‘...Freddy’s Revenge’ is a good movie and not really deserving of the backlash it has generated over the years. Indeed, the main gripe people have with it is that it doesn’t seem to have many connections to the whole Freddy mythology other than the fact that Jesse’s family live in the same house as Nancy from the first movie. The fact is that there was no major Freddy mythology at that point, apart from Marge Thompson recanting about Freddy’s arrest in the first movie, so it really is an empty arguement. As it stands, this is a lot better than people give it credit for, and compared to a lot of other franchise sequels it really does deliver the goods.

Which brings us nicely to 1987’s ‘A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors’, which is where we start to see where the franchise was heading. We are introduced to Kristen Parker (Patricia Arquette) who has been having some very real dreams involving our favourite boogieman, until one night when her mother discovers her in the bathroom with her wrists cut. Kristen gets admitted to Westin Hills, a psychiatric hospital with a unit for suicidal teeneagers – which is lucky considering the business coming their way! Whilst in hospital, Kristen is introduced to a group of teenagers all suffering the same nightmare about Freddy. Seemingly helpless against the kids symptoms, the hospital hire a new staff member who specialises in dream therapy. Nancy Thompson (Heather Langenkamp) joins the team of well-meaning Dr. Neil Gordon (Craig Wasson) and the strict Dr. Elizabeth Simms (Priscilla Pointer) to get to the bottom of the kids nightmares, learning along the way that all of the teenagers possess special skills in their dreams that may just help them defeat Krueger once and for all.

So lets start with the good stuff. Wes Craven was back on board (wahay!) as scriptwriter, and it shows as this movie is probably the most inventive of the sequels, given the ‘Dream Warriors’ element. Bringing back Nancy, and her father (again played by the ever brilliant John Saxon), was a masterstroke, especially after the complaints about part two’s lack of character connections, and her interplay with Krueger was comparable to any hero/villain battle you can think of. The pacing of the movie was fantastic, as Freddy makes his first appearance within the first ten minutes in what is probably his most effective opening shot, and barely lets up until the end, and Freddy himself is given a bigger backstory, where we learn who his mother is and where he was born.

But it isn’t all good – oh no! This was the movie that turned Freddy from maniacal slasher into a wise-cracking conjurer. Yes, the dream skills idea is good on paper, as we’ve all had dreams where we have had special powers, but Freddy using what amounts to magic to kill? Admittedly, it isn’t as bad here as in the later installments, but when Freddy commits his first kill in the guise of a puppet-master, some questions have to be raised – like ‘what the hell are you doing?’ You see, although the original premise of ‘ANOES’ is rooted in fiction – it isn’t likely to happen, right? – there was always a sense of realism to the proceedings, like when Freddy killed he killed with a real, man-made weapon. Although he couldn’t be real, his methods were. Here, the fantastical elements have taken over, and we’re left with characters like Will - ‘The Wizard Master’ (try not to giggle when he has a go at Freddy, in his wizard’s cape and magical fingers!) – and the unintentionally amusing scene when Freddy’s finger-knives turn into syringes, so he can easily attack an ex-junkie.

Robert Englund is obviously having a ball as Freddy here, as he’s given a chance to do more with the character, but when he’s onscreen – which is quite a lot – he just isn’t as frightening as he was in the previous movie. Whether it’s the make-up, which is good but slightly tweaked to be slightly easier on the eye, or the lighting, which makes sure you can see every burn and scar clearly, I don’t know, but it’s pretty clear that this movie was designed to make the whole Freddy concept more marketable. Which is fine if you’re dealing with a dark character like, for instance, Batman or James Bond, but Freddy is an undead child-killer. Something that seems have been forgotten along the way.

There are plot holes here too. Like, if the kids in the hospital are, as Nancy puts it, ‘the last of the Elm Street children’ then why have they only just started dreaming about Freddy? Why didn’t they have nightmares before? And if they all lived on Elm Street, then why didn’t they all know each other? And can Freddy be in all of their dreams at the same time, or does he only appear to one person at a time? And is Heather Langenkamp basing her hairstyle on David Coverdale of Whitesnake? We need to know!

Overall, though, this is a fairly decent attempt at giving the original movie a proper sequel. Many people cite it as the best of the sequels, and it probably is, given the basic story, the use of characters and the pacy narrative. There are some good performances – look out for a pre-‘The Matrix’ Laurence Fishburne as Max, the kindly staff nurse – and some of the characters were good; maybe Dr. Gordon could have been brough back in later sequels, as he got some intensive experience in dealing with dream demons. But at the end of it all, it’s sort of like watching your best friend get drunk in a nightclub and starting to dance on the bar – you love them and there’s nothing wrong with a bit of mischief, but you can see where it’s heading and it isn’t pleasant!

And not pleasant is a pretty good adjective to describe ‘A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master’, as now we were into full-on, money-making, Hollywood franchise mode. Following on from ‘...Dream Warriors’, part four picks up with Kristen Parker (this time played by the curiously named Tuesday Knight) starting to have weird dreams about boiler rooms again. Using her skill to pull others into her dreams, she brings in fellow warriors Kincaid (Ken Sagoes) and Joey (Rodney Eastman) who are pretty peeved at being dragged back into her nightmares. Convincing Kristen that Freddy is finally dead, she carries on her life with her new group of friends. Inevitably, though, it isn’t long before Kincaid and Joey start having weird dreams again, and, thanks to a terrible chain of events involving Kincaid’s dog, the man in the hat is back! Extracting his revenge on ‘the last of the Elm Street children’, Freddy soon gets a new group of teenagers to terrorize, as Kristen uses her abilities to pass on her ‘gift’ to her timid friend Alice (Lisa Wilcox), who seems to have dream abilities of her own. Of course, Freddy starts picking off Alice’s friends one by one, forcing Alice to utilise all her skills and strengths against the pizza-faced dream stalker.

I’ll get the overall comment out of the way first – this movie is pretty terrible. In that cruel way that fate so often works, this is still the most successful ‘...Elm Street’ in terms of bums-on-seats ticket sales. Let’s make it clear – this isn’t because of the story, the acting, the special effects or even the then-growing trend of having a heavy metal soundtrack. It’s because New Line were marketing Freddy Krueger as a sort of cartoon character, with his own line of merchandise, a pretty poor television series and his own stand-up slot at Jongleurs – alright, I made that last one up, but that’s the way it was heading. Freddy’s resurrection was baffling and stupid, the characters were just dull and/or horrible, the acting was pretty poor, the script painfully lame and the kills were dumb – a girl with a bug phobia turning into a bug and then being squashed by Freddy? Or how about Freddy turning into a karate master to tackle Alice’s martial arts fanatic brother? And what about the one where Freddy literally sucks the life out of an asthmatic? Not quite was Wes Craven had in mind back in 1984, methinks!

As far as good points go, it really does just come down to Robert Englund’s performance. Obviously by now he was doing it for laughs and a decent salary, but with Freddy being increasingly pushed to go down the path of pantomime villain, surely at some point Englund must have said ‘This isn’t what Freddy is all about’. Add to all this the fact that it was directed by Renny Harlin (‘Die Hard 2’, ‘Cliffhanger’) and it all adds up to a big disappointment. It may have been fun in 1988, but looking back now it’s just plain embarrassing.

With Freddy now as much a part of modern culture as Mickey Mouse and Bugs Bunny, in 1989 New Line brought us ‘A Nightmare on Elm Street: The Dream Child’, where the pre-release blurb was promising a more evil Freddy, and a story involving Freddy haunting the dreams of an unborn baby. Like a foetus is going to put up much of a fight!

Anyway, the story (HA!) goes something like this – Alice and her boyfriend Dan, having survived part four (something that I nearly didn’t!), are now expecting a baby. As Freddy isn’t really dead, because if could die then somebody would have called a halt after ‘...Dream Warriors’, he tries to come back into the real world by infiltrating the dreams of Alice’s baby and getting reborn. Apparently, the only person who can stop him is his mother, Amanda Krueger (haven’t we done this before?), who unfortunately is also dead, but not dead in the real sense of being dead, because her spirit needs to be freed from eternal purgatory – or something like that. After Dan gets whacked (trust me, it isn’t a spoiler) and Alice’s new friends all start to get killed in all sorts of whacky ways, Alice has to free the troubled spirit of Amanda so she can stop Freddy once and for all – or at least until the next movie!

First of all, why does this movie have Elm Street in the title? Freddy or any of the victims don’t go anywhere near Elm Street; incidentally, seeing as Elm Street is a run down area in all of the kids dreams, has anybody actually gone to the real Elm Street when they’re awake? It might be very nice! But I digress.

The law of sequels dictates that you have to throw more into the mix than the previous movie and do everything bigger – and that’s exactly what they’ve done here, as it’s an even bigger balls-up than part four. Admittedly, it is darker in tone, but as for Freddy being more evil; you may as well have had Jim Carrey playing his part. Englund was just doing the best he could with what he was given, and what he was given was pure comic book garbage. All the religious iconography that was being introduced was completely unnecessary, Dan’s death sounds good on paper – he’s racing along on his motorbike when the all the framework starts to fuse with his body – but it just looks silly; the character of Mark getting turned into paper and ripped up – silly; a stick-thin girl getting force-fed her own guts – actually, that’s pretty good, but save for that and Englund’s manic performance and comic timing (even his make-up looked silly, too!) what else is there to recommend it? Well, Bruce Dickinson on the soundtrack album and a pretty cool poster, but that really isn’t enough!

Marginally better than part four, mainly because of the darker tone, this is still a pretty dire entry in the series and for many it is the worst. Apparently there was a lot of material cut out – to make the final cut shorter and flow more smoothly – so maybe a full director’s cut may give it a bit more credit, but for Freddy, who was now a very long way from the maniac stalker of the first movie, it really did look like the end...

...until the next beginning! As the nineties beckoned and a newer breed of horror was making it’s mark in the shape of more extreme fare like ‘Hellraiser’, New Line sensibly decided to call a halt to the Freddy Krueger comedy show by making ‘Freddy’s Dead: The Final Nightmare’ in 1991.

Seemingly ignoring the past few movies – which isn’t a bad thing – this movie sees Freddy taking on Maggie Burroughs (Lisa Zane), a child psychologist who has been having recurring nightmares. Discovering that one her patients has been having similar dreams, Maggie sets about finding the source, which leads her to a town called Springwood and a place called Elm Street. Not only does she find out where the dreams are coming from, but she also finds out something about herself that she may wish she hadn’t...

Overall, this isn’t really a great movie, but what was the real likelihood of New Line churning out a series finale worthy of Wes Craven’s original vision? That said, lame plot aside, it isn’t as bad as it could have been, and it’s certainly an improvment on the previous two movies. The wisecracks are still there, but not as prominent, or as awful, as before (the parody of ‘The Wizard of Oz’ is silly, but amusing; the death by Nintendo is just plain daft) and Freddy himself is a bit less comedian and more villain than in recent movies. Not as wicked as in ‘...Freddy’s Revenge’, but you can’t have everything. There’s also some nice cameos, including Alice Cooper as Freddy’s father (seen during a flashback), Roseanne Barr and Tom Arnold, and best of all – for all the old fans – Johnny Depp, although he isn’t playing the same character as he did in the original. You’ll just have to keep an eye out for him!

Resuurecting the 3-D gimmick for certain scenes was also a good move to bring the crowds in, especially as Freddy’s final demise was shot in that style, although the transition to the small screen wasn’t so great. It does smack slightly of too-little-too-late, but at least the heart was in the right place, and with it being directed by longtime ‘...Elm Street’ collaborator Rachel Talalay, at least there was somebody at the helm who had a bit of knowledge and passion about the heritage.

You would have thought that would be it, though, but no! In 1994, New Line announced it was releasing ‘Wes Craven’s New Nightmare’ (cue fanfare!) to a fairly disinterested public. Only this time, it wasn’t a sequel like all the others, where a new bunch of gorgeous teens would face Freddy and his limitless ways of killing; this movie told a story that was based more in reality. Celebrating the ten year anniversary of ‘A Nightmare on Elm Street’, Heather Langenkamp (or a version of her) starts to experience some weird goings on in her life, culminating in the death of her husband (not her real husband – that would be silly). After speaking to her friend and colleague Robert Englund (again, playing a version of himself), who starts to act a bit weird himself, she goes to see Wes Craven himself, who it turns out has been having nightmares again and is planning a new Freddy movie. We then learn that the evil force that has kept Freddy coming back time and time again – and is the force behind Craven’s nightmares – is an ancient demon that is using the Freddy persona and trying to break through into our world by attacking Heather and her son. The only way to stop it is for Heather to become Nancy one more time and face ‘Freddy’ in the ultimate showdown.

All clear? Well, it is a pretty interesting, if slightly ostentatious, concept, and an obvious attempt to add a little intellect into what could have been a real dumbing down of an already dumbed down formula. Watching it now in 2009, in a climate where mainstream horror is visually more extreme and action-based, it does come across as, for use of a better word, dull. Maybe what would have been better viewing for hardcore fans (and that’s really who this movie was intended for, as newcomers probably wouldn’t have a clue about who was who) would have been a feature-length documentary with everybody involved in the series giving their various opinions on the Freddy legend.

Good points? Freddy’s first proper appearance is quite startling, as he’s had a slight makeover to eliminate some of his more human traits, and the first thirty minutes is quite tense, as you feel you’re building up to something great.

But ultimately, you’re not. It just seems to lose momentum after that, going from one scene of Heather not being believed to another, until you get to the final battle, which is all fairly predictable and, to be honest, painfully boring. Overall, the movie just comes across as half a good idea that wasn’t fleshed out properly before being shot, and that’s a shame as there really were the seeds of a good idea at the core. Points to Craven and New Line for trying to add a twist to a series that should have ended three movies ago, but ultimately it ends up as being more of a curiosity than essential viewing.

And that really is it for the original series. Of course, Englund returned to the Freddy character once more for ‘Freddy vs. Jason’ in 2003, but as that movie isn’t a fully-fledged ‘Nightmare’ movie, I shall give it a once-over at another time. As I write this, the trailer for the remake is online and first impressions are good, so check this space next April for a review. Until then, the original series is readily available on dvd so do yourselves a favour and check them out – just remember don’t fall asleep (for the first three movies, anyway!).

A Review of Wrong Turn

2009-09-23T09:19:00.001-07:00

It seems that the ‘redneck cannibal’ movie is fast becoming a genre all of its own this decade, in a similar way that the slasher dominated eighties horror. As with then, the market has become so saturated it’s now time to try and separate the wheat from the chaff, and recent efforts have ranged from the terrible – like 2006’s ‘...Chainsaw Massacre’ rip-off ‘The Butcher’ – to the excellent, such as Alexandre Aja’s remake of ‘The Hills Have Eyes’.

‘Wrong Turn’ follows a similar theme to both of those movies, and actually falls somewhere between the two. The plot (as if you hadn’t guessed already!) concerns a young medical student called Chris Flynn (Desmond Harrington) who is on his way to a job interview. After getting stuck in traffic that doesn’t seem to be moving anytime soon, he makes a u-turn and heads into the hills to look for an alternative route. After asking for directions – and getting no help – from a hillbilly garage owner, Chris comes to a fork in the road and – guess what? – takes the...wrong turn. Not paying attention to the road, he crashes into another car that has hit some barbed wire and had it’s tyres punctured. Leaving two of the other car’s occupants to stand guard, Chris and the three remainding people head off along the track to try and find help. Unbeknown to them, though, they are all now in the territory of a family of inbred cannibals who begin to pick them all off one by one, starting with the two guarding the cars. After stumbling upon the family’s shack in the woods, Chris and his new friends now find themselves locked in a struggle for survival, as all hope of finding a way out of the forest gets slimmer.

All sound familiar? Of course it does, as this is a movie that wears it’s influences on it’s sleeve and isn’t ashamed to do so. In fact, make the kids in this movie into a family and this could very nearly be a remake of ‘The Hills Have Eyes’, but, and this is the movie’s main strength, due to the breakneck pacing of the action and flowing narrative, it isn’t until the movie is over that all the faults become obvious. Harrington is a pretty uncharismatic lead, and the other kids aren’t particularly likeable – except for Jeremy Sisto, who gives an amusing turn as the awkward Scott – and that is a pretty big flaw in these types of movie. The cannibals themselves are also pretty non-descript, as far as villains go. Yes, they may look horrible, with their unconvincing make-up and prosthetics, but none of them show any individual characteristics, meaning that they really could be anybody. That may be the effect that the makers were after – that there really are people like this and you really could bump into them anywhere – but, unlike the mutants in ‘The Hills Have Eyes’, there were no defining character traits, no real standout baddie.

But there are some good moments to be had here. There is genuine tension in some of the scenes, like when the group discover the cannibal’s cabin. Mainly due to some lightening quick editing, because nothing is actually happening on-screen, but there is a feeling of creeping dread that a lot of these movies try, and normally fail, at achieving. There are also other flashes of inventiveness with the camerawork – like the shot when the reflection of somebody being cut up is shown in a hidden witnesses eyeball – but these moments are few and far between. And of course, the real reason anybody watches these movies is for the kills themselves, and they are suitably gruesome. Maybe not quite as graphic as they could have been (which isn’t always a bad thing), there is blood and body parts aplenty, including a pretty cool death scene up a tree – no more info, you’ll just have to watch!

The main problem with this movie, though, is that isn’t quite sure where to fit in. It isn’t a totally serious piece – the almost slapstick movements of the mutants and the inclusion of Scott take any real edge off some of the scenes – but nor does it easily slot in the ‘teen horror/comedy’ niche, unlike the 2007 sequel that suffered a lot of the same flaws as this movie, but seemed to be almost self-knowing in it’s more comedic moments.

Overall, ‘Wrong Turn’ is a good movie. Not great, like the sequel, but certainly better than a lot of what passes for ‘video nasties’ these days. If you’ve never seen ‘The Hills Have Eyes’, ‘The Texas Chainsaw Massacre’ or any of the other usual culprits then you’ll probably think this is the mutts nuts, but for those of us who have seen more of these types of movie than is probably good for us, then there are better examples around. The real test of quality for these movies is whether you’ll watch it more than once, and judging it by that theory then ‘Wrong Turn’ just about passes.

A Review of Wrong Turn 2: Dead End

2009-09-14T08:39:00.001-07:00

2003's 'Wrong Turn' was a pretty unremarkable little thriller. It had some good moments, but just being good doesn't really cut it when you're amongst modern horror giants like 'Saw', 'Switchblade Romance' and 'The Texas Chainsaw Massacre', all also released around the same time. Popular amongst a teen audience, it was really a 'The Hills Have Eyes'-inspired romp that managed to be enjoyable but ultimately forgettable, so guess what? They only went and made a sequel!

'Wrong Turn 2: Dead End' (do you see what they did there?) follows a reality game show, hosted by ex-Marine Dale Murphy (Henry Rollins), where a group of young people have to survive five days in the woods in a supposed post-apocalyptic fallout. The usual group of misfits turn up - the wise-cracking joker, a jock, a lesbian, a prick-tease, a self-harmer and an actress - and proceed to get picked off by the redneck cannibals that dwell in the woods.

And that is it - simple really. There's no point delving too far into the plot and detailing what happens to who, as that would spoil the enjoyment that there is to be had in this gem of a movie. It's not to say that it's a perfect movie - because it isn't - but it's the sort of movie that knows exactly what it is, and has been made by somebody with an obvious passion for these sorts of things. The cast are all pretty good in their respective roles, especially Rollins, who may not be the best actor in the world but he does have a massive screen prescence, and nearly every scene that he's in is enjoyable because of him. Erica Leerhsen also appears as Nina, the self-harmer, and is rapidly showing promise as a Scream Queen for a new generation, following on from her role in '...Chainsaw Massacre'.

There are faults here, namely the plot itself which is hardly original, but when it's delivered in such a relentless and fun style, it really doesn't matter. The other major weakpoint is the cannibals themselves, whose prosthetic make-up is pretty fake looking, but as there isn't many lingering shots on them, it's a minor quibble. There's also a few other glitches in the special effects, but, as with the other negative points, it's all forgivable due to speedy narrative and lashings of gore.

Overall, 'Wrong Turn 2' ticks all the right boxes - nudity? Check! Inventive kills? Check! Charismatic and sympathetic characters? Check! Fast-paced action and loads of blood? Check! Black humour? Check! It's big, dumb fun and it knows it, and as far as capturing the aura of the video nasties that it is an obvious homage to, then it can be called a success. It isn't likely to win any Oscars, though!

A Review of Tokyo Gore Police

2009-09-05T07:11:00.000-07:00

When reviewing a movie, it's always helpful to have a breakdown of how the movie is put together - the acting, the script, the narrative, character development and so forth. When it comes to 'Tokyo Gore Police', all of those things go out of the window. Much like 'The Texas Chainsaw Massacre' and 'Night of the Living Dead' the title says it all, but there's gore and then there's GORE!

There is a vague sort of plot that centres around Ruka, a young female police officer who is part of a special unit that hunt out a gang of mutants called 'engineers', who are killers that when injured, a bio-mechanical weapon grows from the wound (!). There are flashbacks to Ruka's childhood where we learn she witnessed her father's death by an assassin. Apparently he was a police officer who was rallying against the privatisation of the police force and got shot for his troubles, but, quite honestly, who cares? He gets his head blown into pieces that fly into the camera before the opening credits, and that pretty much sets the tone for the whole movie. The first major fight with an engineer ends up with several police officers getting a mangled chainsaw/extendable arm hybrid being shoved in their mouths and several jets of blood pouring like fountains over the screen and from there on in all the fight scenes get worse and worse.

For instance, one poor chap ends up getting his, ahem, poor chap bitten off by some kind of mutant freak with alligator jaws for legs. As if that wasn't unfortunate enough, instead of doing the decent thing and dying, he turns into an engineer and gets his missing body part back - only this one is about three-feet long and shoots things. Most inventive, though, is when a broken bottle gets shoved in some unlucky victim's face, twisted round and then the circular piece of face is blown out of the broken end, sort of like a cookie cutter!

It was once remarked by that great philosopher David Lee Roth that the first ten minutes of a porn film are the best, because after that it gets boring, and the same thing could be applied here as scene after scene of blood spraying all over the place does wear you down after a while, but you don't watch a movie with a title like 'Tokyo Gore Police' without an inkling of what's involved. No, the real problem with this movie is the exact opposite of that - the scenes between the fights are just plain boring. There's flashbacks, introspection, dreamy music and the like, but why would you want that in such an extreme movie? Extreme gore and violence goes to extreme tedium just like that.

The violence is over the top, totally gratuitous, and for a while quite compelling, but the drawn out slower scenes totally kill the momentum so that by the time the end battle comes round you'll find yourself not caring about how people are getting wasted and just preying for the end credits. At nearly two hours long it's quite an endurance test, and due to the uneven flow, it makes you wonder why the makers didn't cut most of the slow stuff out and just make it one big over-the-top gorefest. As it is you have an over-the-top gorefest interspersed with pointless scenes that add nothing, except a reason to use the scene select button on your dvd player.

Overall, 'Tokyo Gore Police' is a jumbled mess of extremism. The gore scenes are fun and totally over-the-top, in a pumped- up 'Evil Dead' kind of way, but eventually become less exciting by the end of the movie, and the rest is just plain baffling and dull. Watch it once just to see how sickening and overly disgusting a movie can be, but repeated viewing may be too painful. For hardcore fans of Asian cinema only.

A Review of Demons

2009-08-28T03:44:00.001-07:00

'Demons' is one of those cracking movies that crops up once in a while. A movie that throws in (or should that be up?) everything that's great about the genre, and a few things that aren't so great, and is completely unashamed in it's gory glory.

The plot goes something like this - a mysterious man in a metal mask is giving out free tickets to a cinema screening of a movie called Demons. As the patrons all gather in the lobby of the cinema, one of the lucky participents - a prostitute who has gone to the showing with a collegue and her pimp - puts on a metal demon mask hanging in the foyer. As she removes it, she cuts her cheek. Thinking no more about it, all the audience settle down to watch the movie, which, ironically is about a group of youngsters searching for evidence of demons, who come across a metal mask (like the one in the foyer) that turns whoever wears it into a demon, a bloodthirsty zombie-like creature who infects everyone it touches. As the events of the movie unfold, the prostitute goes to the bathroom, where the cut on her cheek explodes in a shower of blood and pus. Now a demon, she runs riot in the cinema, which somebody has inexplicably locked, infecting everybody with the demonic poison, until just George and Cheryl are left to battle a whole cinema full of rampaging monsters.

Oh, and did I mention that the movie was directed by Lamberto Bava (son of legendary horror filmmaker Mario Bava) and produced and co-written by Dario Argento? Having such a pedigree does lend 'Demons' an edge that a lot of similarly styled movies lacked, although anybody expecting full-on Argento-style flair are in for a disappointment. Clearly aimed at the American teen market, 'Demons' is both brilliantly throwaway and essential viewing at the same time. Any movie that has the hero racing through a cinema full of drooling demons on a motorbike, whilst wielding a ninja sword and hacking at anything that moves, all played out over German power metallers Accept's 'Fast as a Shark', will instantly appeal to anybody looking for no-holds-barred gory action. If, however, you question why the motorbike was there, why were the keys in it and the petrol tank full, how were the exits blocked so quickly and wasn't the heroes escape route convenient (unbelievably so!), then this may not be quite the movie for you.

As you can probably tell, this is no Oscar winner. It is, however, exceptionally gory, overly violent and breathtakingly pacey, with some scary visuals and an overwhelmingly creepy tone throughout. The soundtrack is suitably thumping (Saxon, Accept, Billy Idol), the effects pretty gruesome and the action non-stop. If modern zombie/infected movies such as '28 Days Later' and the 'Dawn of the Dead' remake are your sort of thing, you could do a lot worse than check out this underrated eighties gem.

A Review of Embodiment of Evil

2009-08-27T08:35:00.000-07:00

For those who have been a follower of Josefel Zanatas, otherwise known as Coffin Joe, for the past forty-five years, the arrival of this movie - the third in a trilogy that began in 1964 with 'At Midnight I'll Take Your Soul' and continued with 1967's 'This Night I'll Possess Your Corpse' - will be nothing short of the second coming. To those who aren't up to speed on their Brazilian horror movies and have never heard of him, it may take a bit of selling.

In short, Coffin Joe (played by writer/director José Mojica Marins) is an undertaker whose wife was unable to bear him a son to carry on his bloodline. After killing her, he set about finding the perfect woman to have his child, which usually involved forcing himself upon women and doing very horrific things to them. In 'Embodiment...' we catch up with Coffin Joe as he is released from prison after forty years for his murderous crimes, where he meets up with his faithful assistant Bruno (Rui Resende) and a small gang of worshippers, and begins his quest for the perfect womb once again. On his trail, though, are the Military Police, and a vengeful priest, who will stop at nothing to put an end to Coffin Joe once and for all.

It all sounds straightforward when put on paper, but there really are a lot of subtexts going on in this movie, the most prominent being Coffin Joe's overly-Atheist insistence on being free from any sort of belief, a theme that pops up over and over again. There is also a lot of surrealist imagery - like the scene where Coffin Joe is inside the woman he has just had sex with and meets a character called The Mystifier, who shows him purgatory and death...sort of like 'A Christmas Carol' but a bit more twisted!

But in all the subliminal goings on, there is the gore - and plenty of it! We get to see a woman getting fed one of her own buttocks (!), one poor chap getting hung up by the flesh on his back, a woman getting hot cheese poured over her and a hungry rat let loose between her legs and various other stabbings and impalings. And surprisingly, in spite of the trashy feel to the movie, it's all done rather well and never looks false. There's also some cool flashback sequences to earlier events, starring a younger Coffin Joe lookalike, that add to the mayhem going on and never seem tacked on. Mix that with Coffin Joe's ability to fill the screen and totally command every scene he's in (and he's in most of them!) and the sheer scale of Marins' deranged inventiveness really comes through, already marking this movie out as a cult classic.

Overall, this is as trashy as movies get, but trashy in the good sense. It's one of those movies that would be great to watch in a packed cinema where ninety percent of the audience have no clue who Coffin Joe is or any sense of what's going on. Coffin Joe is a cultural icon in his native Brazil, and although his movies don't always make sense, they're always fun and based on that, 'Embodiment of Evil' is a winner.

An Overview of the Friday the 13th Series

2009-08-25T09:04:00.001-07:00

Being the age that I am (early thirties, if you must know), it's quite hard to remember a time before there were any 'Friday the 13th' movies, as they have been such an integral part of my movie viewing life. Back in the good ol' early eighties there was always a 'Friday...' video leering at me from the shelf of my local movie nirvana (in this case, Videographic in East Grinstead - no longer there but I managed to buy most of their stock when they closed down!), but as I was only a wee pup, I was only allowed to watch Hammer movies and the odd Freddy Krueger film (?); I think my mother went on the theory that as long as there were no weapons or graphic pictures on the box then it was okay - I could watch '...Elm Street 2' as it only had a drawing of Freddy and a school bus on the cover, but anything with a bloody machete on it was out.

Anyway, it was always the title that intrigued me and one day I managed to (with a bit of convincing the guy behind the counter that my mum would be okay with it as she'd let me watch '...Elm Street 2'!) get my hands on 'Friday the 13th Part 3' and that was it, I was hooked. From then on, it was my mission to seek out all the 'Friday...' films (bear in mind they were still making them regularly then), which I did, and I have been a massive fan of Jason and his Camp Crystal Lake world ever since, so here's one fan's critical eye giving an opinion over what is arguably the best slasher series.

Directed by Sean S.Cunningham (Last House on the Left), 1980's 'Friday the 13th' ushered in the new decade continuing the theme of holiday-based slashers set by 'Black Xmas' and 'Halloween' during the previous decade. The story involves a summer camp called Camp Crystal Lake, that has been closed for many years, reopening it's doors. A group of young camp counsellors looking for the camp are warned by the local village weirdo to keep away, but, of course, they choose to ignore his warnings about the 'death curse' and other townsfolks stories about a young boy who drowned there back in the fifties, and the murders that took place soon after. After arriving at the camp, though, they soon find something is up as one by one, the counsellors start disappearing. All hope seems lost as only one survivor remains, but help soon arrives in the shape of Mrs. Voorhees, a friend of the camp's owners, who may not be quite as helpful as she first makes out...

This original 'Friday...' still ranks as the best of the lot. Taking it's cue from Carpenter's 'Halloween', but with added gore, this really is a suspenseful little shocker that, although suffering from a slightly weak script, still holds up today. Starring Betsy Palmer as Mrs. Voorhees, plus an appearance from a young Kevin Bacon, special make-up effects by the genial Tom Savini, and featuring an ending borrowed straight from Brian DePalma's 'Carrie', this may not be the most original movie of all time, but it is one of the most effective.

The inevitable sequel, imaginatively titled 'Friday the 13th Part 2', followed a year later and carried on the story quite smoothly. Cunningham was no longer involved but the film follows the style of the original nicely, due to a lot of the original crew being used. This time, the camp next door to Crystal Lake is opening up and a new group of counsellors are gathering to get ready for the new season. Again, they are warned about previous events that have happened but they ignore it all - will they ever learn? Although the killer was apprehended at the end of the first movie (oh alright, it was Mrs. Voorhees killing the councellors in revenge for letting her son Jason drown in 1957) we are now introduced to Jason properly for the first time, as apparently he saw his mother being slaughtered and wasn't too happy about it, so he now lives in the woods and kills anybody who dares enter. Whoooooa!

All in all, this isn't a bad movie at all. There's a nice pacing to it so it never gets boring, and the councellors are all fairly likeable characters, although maybe a bit more one-dimensional than the ones in the first movie. Jason isn't in it a great deal, but when he does finally fully appear he fills the screen (literally), and the legendary hockey mask is still nowhere to be seen! A decent stab (!) at a sequel that doesn't quite hit the mark of the first movie, but still has enough style and suspense to carry it along.

And pretty much the same could be said for 1982's 'Friday the 13th Part 3', as again a lot of the same crew were involved. Supposedly carrying on where part two left off, Jason moves from Crystal Lake to the nearby Higgins Haven, where he terrorises a new bunch of youngsters who are staying at the property. One of the group, Chris, was attacked in the nearby woods a couple of years earlier by Jason and has returned to try and confront her fears - which, of course, she does. Big time!

By now, plot was giving way to formula as far as these sorts of movies go, so to add an extra bit of excitement this movie was originally done in 3-D. And it must have worked because '...Part 3' was the most successful of all the 'Friday...' movies (apart from 'Freddy Vs. Jason' but that isn't a fully-fledged 'Friday...' movie). This is the one where Jason first puts on the hockey mask, and he was yet to have been butchered beyond belief so his movements were quite fast, instead of the lumbering zombie he was to become. There's no standout performances and the ending was a little contrived, but it's still a lot better than the other imitation movies that were starting to appear and it's by no means the worst of this series. But all in all, it seemed that the makers were out of ideas on the originality front, so...

'Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter' appeared in 1984, proving that maybe the best thing to do was end it before it became a joke - ha! Different director, different writers and a returning Tom Savini (who came back as he thought it would be 'the final chapter') but still the same old Jason, whose body has been taken to the local morgue. Unfortunately, he isn't dead, so up he gets and carries on slaughtering. He returns to his old stomping ground of Camp Crystal Lake, where he finds the two properties on the site, one occupied by a group of sex-mad, partying teens (shocker!) and the other by horror movie mad Tommy Jarvis (Corey Feldman), his mother and sister. Naturally Jason gets pretty mad and starts hacking them all up - until young Tommy finds a way to stop him in his tracks.

Even though the plot was wearing a bit thin, and a whole flurry of similarly themed movies were appearing left, right and centre, this fourth installment is actually pretty good. It may lack the feel of the earlier movies in terms of it's look, but the pacing is frenetic, the acting not too bad for this sort of movie and, naturally, Savini's effects are superb and easily the best so far. Still not too sure what the final shot is supposed to be suggesting, but all in all a great slasher film. So that's it then...

Oh no, I nearly forgot - we then get to 'Friday the 13th: A New Beginning'; looks like Mr. Savini got it wrong! As did the makers of this movie. We begin with a now grown up Tommy Jarvis (John Shepherd) having a dream that Jason has risen from the grave and is out for revenge. We then learn that Tommy has been sent to live at a foster home for other disturbed young people in the middle of nowhere. Of course, it isn't long before bodies start piling up, but if Jason is dead, who is doing all the killing? Well, spoiler alert, it's...a paramedic, dressing up as Jason, whose son was murdered at the foster home by another patient who didn't want a candy bar! Durrh!

In an attempt to add a new twist to the bog-standard slasher formula, the makers decided that a 'whodunnit' was the way to go. Either this movie was ahead of it's time or it was just dumb - I'd opt for the latter. In all fairness, apart from the lame 'twist' and an awful performance from Shepherd as Tommy, there are some plus points to be had. The murders are still pretty good (love the guy getting his head strapped to a tree!), 'Tour of Duty' star Miguel A.Nunez puts in an amusing turn as a poor mans Michael Jackson called Demon, and there's more nudity than any other 'Friday...', so the key elements are there, but when the killer isn't Jason, and the connection to who it is is about as desperate as it gets, then it's time to look elsewhere for your slasher thrills. And again, the very last scene is a bit odd!

And it seems even odder when you see 'Friday the 13th Part 6: Jason Lives' as Tommy (Thom 'Return of the Living Dead' Mathews) returns to Jason's grave to make sure he's dead. He is, so he should have just left it, but, in a sort of homage to 'Frankenstein', Jason is brought back to life by a bolt of lightening, and it's up to Tommy to convince the local sheriff that the young kiddies at Camp Crystal Lake need protecting. Sounds easy, but you know it never is in these movies.

There are two ways to look at part six- it's either writing off part five and attempting to bring the series back to some sort of basic level, carrying on from part four and bringing Tommy's story full circle, or...you can shut your brain off, put the ending of part five down to the writers not having a clue and carry on watching regardless. Either way, this is probably the dullest of them all. There's nothing inventive, the plot is boring, Thom Mathews does what he does in '...Living Dead' but without the charisma and Jason gets killed (!) in a very dull way. All in all, and I'll use the word again, very dull. Well, tell a lie, there is a slight bit of amusement to be had in the James Bond-style opening credits, and C.J. Graham is probably the most intimidating Jason yet (now that he is officially a zombie!), but in the year that gave us the excellent 'A Nightmare on Elm Street 2' and 'The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2', Jason's latest offering was looking very pedestrian.

So maybe another twist was needed - or not! Now seemingly desperate for ideas to make 'Friday...' stick out from the pack, we were given 'Friday the 13th Part 7: The New Blood', where this time Jason was brought back from his watery grave by a girl with telekinetic powers (yes, I know!), who has come back to Crystal Lake as that was where she used her powers to accidentally kill her abusive father many years before. Under pressure from her sinister doctor to try and harness her powers, she gets in a rage and - you''ll never guess - manages to unwrap Jason from his chains, and with the other house on the lake occupied by those 'sex-mad, partying teens' (TM) so begins another killing spree.

Of course, it's complete drivel but, strangely, time does seem to have been kind to it (this used to be my worst one, but after revisiting it again recently it wasn't too bad). The pacing is reminiscent of part four, and the murders are pretty cool to watch, particularly the infamous 'sleeping bag smacked against a tree' death (side note: has anybody else noticed that when Jason swings the sleeping bag, it is the feet end that hits the tree but when he opens the bag it's the head that's split open? Still cool, though!). This movie was also the first of the series to feature Kane Hodder as Jason, who went on to play him in next three movies and has since become synonymous with the role. Ignore the crass 'Carrie' rip-off plot and just enjoy Jason killing people in inventive ways again.

Which brings us up to 1989 and the excellently titled 'Friday the 13th Part 8: Jason Takes Manhattan'. By now, horror movies had moved on slightly, with the surrealist 'Hellraiser' and the just utterly bizarre Frank Henenlotter moving to the forefront of the genre, so I guess the makers of the 'Friday...' series decided to go all-out hokey and see what happens - and what happened was still a pretty decent slasher. Receiving another electric shock, Jason reanimates once again but this time he manages to steal his victim's boat (stay with me...) and travels upstream where he finds his way aboard a ship full of graduation students on their way to New York. One of the students, Rennie (Jensen Daggett), was pushed into Crystal Lake when she was a child by her strict uncle Charles (Peter Mark Richman), who was trying in his own way to teach her to swim. She was held under the water by a young Jason, who was still living in the lake (!), so obviously the big J is after her now. Rennie, Charles and a few stragglers escape the doomed voyage and manage to get to New York, unaware that Jason has followed. So the Big Apple had better beware, as there's a new psychopath in town...

Any sense of realism or even just sensible ideas had long gone by now, but based on it's basic merits, '...Manhattan is a pretty good slasher. Again, Kane Hodder is a very menacing screen presence and the deaths are still great - I still love it when Jason punches off the head of one of the kids who has just tried to take him on in a boxing match - and there really is very little credibility to this movie, but it's still fun. In a moronic way. Which doesn't say much about me, really...

And that was it - until 1993! Although many regard '...Manhattan' as the last proper 'Friday the 13th' movie, somebody thought a proper ending was still needed so, moving from Paramount to New Line (home of the 'A Nightmare on Elm Street' franchise), 'Jason Goes to Hell: The Final Friday' came forth to give us the definitive Jason movie. And did it work? Well, not really. The origins of Jason's longevity are revealed to be down to a supernatural demon that can travel from body to body, creating killer zombies as it goes - which begs the question, why did it stay in Jason's rotten, thirty-five year old corpse rather than seek out fresh new bodies? Is it a throwback to the ideas presented in part five? Anyway, the movie begins with Jason being blown up by a SWAT team (even though he was left as a child at the end of part eight - oh dear, I've spoilt it again!) and his body is taken to the morgue; he must have his own parking space by now! During the autopsy, the coroner, for some unexplained reason, gets the urge to bite Jason's heart and - lo and behold - he is now possessed by Jason's supernatural conscience, and off he goes on a killing spree. Meanwhile, bounty hunter Creighton Duke (Steven Williams), who has been tracking Jason for years (allegedly, 'cos I don't remember seeing him in any of the other movies!), has discovered Jason's secret and knows the only way to destroy him - 'Through a Voorhees he was born, and through a Voorhees he can be destroyed' - and, as luck would have it, Jason's last remaining relatives live nearby. Bet you didn't know there were any left! So cue lots of macho fight scenes and special He-Man swords to kill Jason with.

As you can probably tell, I'm not really taking this one too seriously. Much like part eight, this is a movie you put on for shits and giggles when you get the lads round for a few beers. Unlike the other movies, though, there is a really nasty tone throughout and overall it's a bit of a mess. Steven Williams (a poor man's Carl Weathers) is a fairly lame 'hero' and there's very little sympathy for any of the characters. The scene with the coroner (played by 'Rocky V' actor Richard Gant) is just odd, and the 'Frankenstein'-style walking that all the Jason-possessed zombies do is just plain laughable. It's actually a bit of a relief when Jason (again played by Kane Hodder) appears at the end for the final showdown, and you'll probably give a little cheer - even though he's the baddie! And any urges to shout 'BY THE POWER OF GRAYSKULL' when the magic sword appears should be kept in check! The very final shot of Jason's mask being dragged into the earth by Freddy Krueger's gloved hand (do you see what they did there?) is a nice touch, and gives an indication of what's to come, but a solid entry in the long-running series this is not, despite original 'Friday...' director Sean S.Cunningham coming in as producer.

But fear not, because it wasn't over just yet. In 2001, as the new millennium dawned and horror movies were garnering mainstream acceptance again, thanks to Wes Craven's self-knowing 'Scream' series and the influence of Japanese cinema, New Line gave us 'Jason X'. Now normally, when a series of movies gets to the 'set in space' stage, it means that all credibility will be thrown out of the window...but luckily the 'Friday...' series threw it's credibility out of the window sometime in the mid-eighties, so hardcore fans were quite prepared for this sort of nonsense. The movie begins in 2008 where Jason has been kept prisoner in a military research facility, so that scientists can try to find out why Jason won't die (they obviously didn't watch 'Jason Goes to Hell'!). Rowan (Lexa Doig) is preparing Jason to be cryogenically frozen so he'll pose no further threat, but Dr. Wimmer (a great cameo by David Cronenberg) attempts to override her, thus causing the main man to escape confinement. After a scuffle, Jason and Rowan end up getting frozen until they get discovered by a team of science students - five hundred years in the future! By now Earth has become inhabitable, so aboard their spacecraft the young scientists thaw out their discoveries, unaware of the danger that Jason will do aboard the confines of a spaceship.

No doubt you'll know by now whether you're going to watch this or not. Is it any good? No, but if you switch your brain off it is quite enjoyable in a 'drink lots and see what's on' kind of way. Being set in space gives the makers a chance to invent some new ways to die - look out for the virtual reality Camp Crystal Lake scene where there's a nice nod to part seven - and this is purely the only reason to enjoy this movie. Jason even gets a futuristic makeover when his corpse gets reanimated by the ship's computers, although he still prefers his trusty twentieth century machete when it comes to the job in hand. The acting throughout is fairly terrible - only Cronenberg's brief appearance and the reliable Kane Hodder being engaging in any sense - and the effects are good but not mind-blowing, as they could have been given the setting, but at least it's a bit more fun than the previous entry and it nevers takes itself seriously. At all.

Is that the end of it all? Of course not, because in 2003 there was the inevitable 'Freddy vs. Jason' that was hinted at back in 1993, but as that isn't a proper 'Friday...' movie it shall be scutinised elsewhere. There has also been the obvious remake/reboot/reimagining (delete as appropriate) released this year, but, again, that shall be looked at on another occasion, as there's not enough room to put down everything that's wrong with it here.

And there it is. All the original stories of Mrs. Voorhees little boy looked at under a microscope and given to you to investigate and make up your own minds. All are readily available on dvd and, if you're feeling naughty, I can recommend closing the curtains, locking the doors and giving yourselves a weekend to enjoy them all. Happy camping!

A Review of Friday the 13th (2009)

2009-08-18T14:09:00.000-07:00

Not so much a remake of the 1980 slasher but more an update of the whole Jason Voorhees legend, director Marcus Nispel and producer Michael Bay have once again teamed up to bring a horror icon from the video nasty-era to a new generation, following on from their success with 2003's 'The Texas Chainsaw Massacre'.

Starting where the original 'Friday...' left off, in 1980 and the death of Jason's mother (Nana Visitor), this new version combines elements of the first four original movies, with Jason coming back for revenge wearing a sack on his head, to him picking up the iconic hockey mask and terrorising a houseful of 'teens' (or young adults, as they clearly aren't teenagers). The scene then shifts to the present day, where a group of five young people set up camp in the woods just ouside Camp Crystal Lake. After one of the group tells the story of Jason and his mother, the group separate, with two of them going for a walk in the abandoned camp, two having sex in a tent and the one remaining gooseberry wandering around looking for cannabis plants. Of course, all of the group fall foul to Jason, who still lives in the camp after witnessing the death of his mother. Fast forward six weeks and the brother of one of the group, Clay (Jared Padalecki), is searching the nearby town for his missing sister. He bumps into another group of kids, led by the spolit Trent (Travis Van Winkle), who are going out to Crystal Lake to stay at Trent's parents holiday home. After warnings from some of the locals, Clay heads out to the camp, where he finds Trent and his friends having a party with an uninvited guest.

Those familiar with the plots of 'Friday...' movies will need no more explanations as to what happens, and ironically, those who are not familiar with them will also need no explanation as it really is a no-brainer. The biggest difference between the original no-brainer movies and this one is that this really is a dull slasher movie. The original series was really just an excuse to show gratuitous, but inventive, death scenes, but there really is nothing here to get excited about, as the camera seems to pull away from most of the violence, making it all seem rather restrained. Those familiar will Nispel's work on '...Chainsaw' will recognise the director's style; in fact, it could almost be a shot-for-shot copy of that movie, just replace Leatherface with Jason. The lighting, the camera angles (from the floor pointing up), the way the camera pans the background into shot, the grainy lack of colour, etc. is near enough the same, only in 2003 it seemed fresh and inventive. And considering the atmosphere, pacing and gore content of '...Chainsaw', why is this movie so boring? There's no sense of a build-up to anything, as Jason just sort of appears, hits somebody with his machete and then the scene skips to the next victim. Where's the inventive deaths we were promised? Where's the lingering shots of Jason's victims with their heads split in two? All the deaths are over with just too damn quick and then it's on to the next boring set-up.

And the cast are just as bland as the so-called 'action'. Travis Van Winkle gives a fairly convincing performance as the detestable Trent, but is that a compliment? And the scene with Mrs. Voorhees - one of the main set-pieces of the original - is gotten over with within two minutes (although one could say thankfully, as Nana Visitor could qualify as giving the worst performance of an iconic character since Malcolm McDowell appeared as Sam Loomis in Rob Zombie's 'Halloween'). The script is also fairly generic, so is it any wonder the delivery is useless? And is the sex scene supposed to be funny? Can tits be described as 'stupendous'? And will anybody be surprised by the final scene?

But let's not get carried away, as there are a few good points. The new leaner, meaner and faster Jason was a welcome change (credit to Derek Mears making Jason more threatening), as was the decision to make him more human and less supernatural, i.e. he doesn't miraculously appear in front of people running away from him. And it's always a joy to see Jason putting on the hockey mask, even if it was a lame way that he found it. Trent's death (oh come on, that isn't a spoiler!) is also pretty cool to watch, but one cool death in a 'Friday...' movie just isn't enough.

If you've never seen a 'Friday the 13th' movie, or the 2003 '...Chainsaw' remake, then you may get something out of this, but for those of us expecting the last word on modern slashers will have to keep on waiting until next years 'A Nightmare on Elm Street' remake for any hope (although I think we may already know the outcome there!). Do yourselves a favour and seek out the original 'Friday...' instead.

A Review of Deadgirl

2009-08-06T04:58:00.000-07:00

There is a trend among horror movie makers at the moment to tackle some really harsh and troubling subject matter, but in an intelligent and thought-provoking way. 'Martyrs' is one such example where what is happening on-screen is excruciating but at the same time very compelling, and never once does it feel exploitative or gratuitous in the same way that so many movies tackling similarly disturbing subject matter can, and 'Deadgirl' follows a similar path.

'Deadgirl' is the story of two teenage outcasts, Rickie (Shiloh Fenandez) and J.T. (Noah Segan), who decide to bunk off school and hang out in a derelict hospital. Whilst doing the normal teenage boy thing of drinking beer, smoking and general vandalism, the two friends get chased by a wild dog and end up getting lost amongst the endless maze of corridors. Stumbling across a patially hidden iron door, the boys manage to open it and venture inside, where they discover a naked female chained to a gurney and covered in a plastic sheet. Seeing she is still breathing, and ignoring Rickie's pleas to leave well alone, the seemingly troubled J.T. hits on the idea of keeping her as the boy's sex slave. After a heated arguement J.T. lashes out and punches Rickie, who decides to leave. Rickie picks up a gun and later returns to the hospital where J.T. reveals that the female started to attack him so he continually hit her and broke her neck, but she was still breathing and moving. As Rickie begins to protest, J.T. grabs the guns and shoots her three times, but she still keeps breathing and moving. The next day, Rickie returns to the hospital where he discovers his and J.T.'s friend Wheeler (Eric Podnar) having sex with the female (now known as Deadgirl) and he discovers that J.T. has been staying there overnight and seems to be becoming obsessed with Deadgirl. As things spiral out of control, and the friendship between Rickie and J.T. gets tested to great lengths, more people get to hear about Deadgirl, until J.T. discovers (in a very eye-watering scene) that if you get bitten by Deadgirl, you become just like her. Deciding to kidnap unsuspecting females and make more 'Deadgirls', J.T. and Wheeler attempt such actions at a late night service station. Failing spectacularly, fate intervenes and they end up kidnapping JoAnn, (Candice Accola) who is the uninterested object of Rickie's affections. Rickie then returns to the hospital and discovers J.T. and Wheeler have tied up JoAnn with the intention of making her their new undead love interest, leaving Rickie as the lone voice of reason in a very twisted situation that's about to get even worse.

Overall, despite how the story looks on paper, 'Deadgirl' is handled very intelligently and several issues to do with growing up and 'coming of age' are dealt with, especially the fraught and destructive friendship between Rickie and J.T. There are other subtexts going on as well; the obvious one being the 'men will shag anything' angle, which although untrue (trust me, I know) is definitely there. The nudity in the movie is never gratuitous or titillating in the slightest, and this adds to the mature handling of the subject matter, and whilst the acting is far from Oscar-winning, the performances from the main leads are fairly convincing.

But there are flaws. The movie never seems to be quite sure whether it wants to be taken seriously or viewed as slightly comedic. Of course, a streak of subtle dark humour throughout these sorts of movies is usually welcome, but essentially what we are dealing with here is rape, and although the power of suggestion is used more than anything too explicit, it still seems wrong to derive laughs from it. Had the movie been a little more consistent with it's direction then maybe it wouldn't seem quite so discomforting to smirk at some of the scenes, i.e. when J.T. and Wheeler bodge their kidnap attempt. That said, it could have been a lot worse.

If you're looking for a movie that's a little different from the norm, then 'Deadgirl' certainly fits the bill. Never overly graphic or explicit, 'Deadgirl' wisely stops short of being the all-out sleaze-fest it could have been. As long as your moral compass allows you to view such subject matter with an open mind, then you'll find it to be an enjoyable (in the right way) movie.

90'S METAL: TEN REASONS WHY IT ROCKED FROM SOMEBODY WHO WAS THERE

2009-07-17T06:06:00.000-07:00

In a homage to recent lists that have made their way online regarding what was great about 90's metal, possibly a cue for a nineties revival seeing as the eighties one is slowing down, I though I'd shove my two pennies worth down your throats.

In no particular order (apart from number one, which is meant to be there) here are the best things I can remember from what I feel I can term 'my time':

1) Sepultura - Doing what Metallica did in the eighties - taking an extreme form of music and bringing it to the mainstream - but with less commercial aspirations, Sepultura came from underground metal obscurity and managed to get three singles from 'Roots' into the charts, released four classic albums in a row, appeared on The Big Breakfast, The Word and Hotel Babylon, and appealed to old-school metal fans and nu-metal fans alike, as well as introducing a lot of metalheads to hardcore. Not bad for a death metal band from Brazil. Just a shame we'll never know what could have been...

2) Black Sabbath reunion - The 'Nativity in Black' tribute album lit the fuse, and then everybody from Pantera to Cathedral was putting out Sabbath covers, so it was inevitable - and on a cold December night in 1997, the original line-up of the original metal band were reunited for a full set of classic anthems. Grown men were seen weeping into their beer as Osbourne, Iommi, Butler and Ward proved why they are the most imitated band in rock, and gave everybody in attendance a night to remember. Expectation was high for a new album, but Ozzy let his family take over his career and decided that mainstream celebrity acceptance was the way forward...so we got some more mediocre solo Ozzy albums instead. At least we got Heaven & Hell to make up for it. It was good while it lasted...

3) Fear Factory 'Demanufacture' - Combining death metal and industrial was always going to be a noisy affair, but following on from their relatively primitive debut 'Soul of a New Machine', Fear Factory streamlined their sound and produced a classic. When everyone else was looking back in time for inspiration (Cradle of Filth, Sepultura) or commenting on the mundane goings on of everyday life (Godflesh), Fear Factory looked to the future and gave what was described at the time as 'Terminator metal'. Producer Colin Richardson wiped out Raymond Herrera's tom-tom's from the mix, so the drums were cold and machine-like, while Dino Cazares' simple-yet-brutal riffing dominated the whole sound, with the kick drums following his rhythms rather than the bass. Vocalist Burton C.Bell did aggressive and melodic in equal measure, inspiring the likes of Robb Flynn to try expanding their range, but it was the songs...oh the songs! Replica, Self Bias Resistor, Pisschrist, New Breed, A Therapy For Pain, the seizmic title track...all brilliant and still howling. Shame everything else they did sounded so generic by comparison.

4) Nu-Metal - Every decade has it's scene and it's sound, and after grunge had disappeared (yay!) the cutting edge sounds of Korn, Deftones, Coal Chamber and Limp Bizkit broke through and layed down the template for the new millennium. Yes, we look back and laugh now at what it became, but those first few vital releases by the aforementioned bands really were groundbreaking. 'Korn', 'Around the Fur', 'Life is Peachy', 'Three Dollar Bill, Y'all', 'Coal Chamber' and 'Slipknot' were all great examples of the burgeoning new sound, but it couldn't last. Korn got fat and had a makeover, Coal Chamber called their music 'spookycore' and lost the plot, Fred Durst became a figure of ridicule and somebody came up with the idea of Linkin Park. It all went commercial and the once youthful sound of adolescent angst became bloated and middle-aged, but for about five years in the nineties it all seemed like a good idea.

5) White Zombie - Unclassifiable and very bizarre, White Zombie first emerged on the New York art-noise scene in the mid-eighties. Refining their b-movie inspired noise into a well-balanced blend of metal riffing, punk attitude, techno beats and a polished industrial edge, White Zombie became a touring freak show across America in the mid-nineties and released what could probably be described as the ultimate nineties metal album in 'Astro Creep 2000'. Songs like the grinding 'More Human Than Human' and the psycho rock n'roll of 'Super-Charger Heaven' became MTV staples and White Zombie were on the verge of greatness without compromise - until Rob Zombie quit to go solo and direct horror movies. Rumour is there is to be a reunion - without Rob - but would there be any point? It was a moment, a special moment that could never be repeated. Just put on 'Astro Creep...' and listen to how genius should sound.

6) John Bush Joins Anthrax - Anthrax were always a great band, with a tight thrash metal sound and a back catalogue of cracking tunes, but there was always one piece of the puzzle that didn't quite fit - the singer. Although Joey Belladonna had a powerful set of pipes, his voice just never seemed to suit the music - imagine Ronnie James Dio singing for Megadeth; it just wouldn't go. So come 1993, Anthrax released 'The Sound of White Noise' with new singer John Bush and the address was balanced. Bush could replicate Belladonna's warbling, but with a gritty edge to his voice, meaning that the band could expand their sound further. Bush could also write songs as well, and was a commanding presence on the stage, whereas Belladonna just sung and wore a Red Indian headdress. Shame nobody bought their records, though.

7) Machine Head 'Burn My Eyes' - Contrary to what a lot of people say, Machine Head did not revitalise a flagging metal scene when they released their debut album in 1994. Korn and Deftones were about to break barriers with their debuts, Pantera, Sepultura and Biohazard had all released what would be their defining masterpieces around that time, while Slayer and Megadeth were about to release follow-ups to their biggest commercial successes. Except for a lack of new releases from Maiden, Metallica, Priest and Ozzy, there was a decent set of albums doing the rounds, so why is 'Burn My Eyes' held up in such high regard? Simply because it kicks major ass. Opening with the anthemic 'Davidian' and not letting up until the closing bars of 'Block', 'BME' was a masterclass in sophisticated aggression. Mixing the hardcore stomp of Biohazard with the dynamics of Bay Area thrash and a hint of death metal's downtuned riffing, all wrapped up with Colin Richardson's crystal-clear production, Machine Head did the typical crime of the nineties and made a brilliant debut that they have spent the rest of their careers trying to live up to. Just play the main riff to 'Old' at full volume and try to stop yourself bouncing along.

8) Roadrunner Records - As the eighties turned into the nineties, it was arguably Earache records who were regarded as the home of the cutting edge metal bands - until about three years into the new decade, when all of a sudden a lot of their popular bands were starting to leave the label for one reason or another, and Roadrunner seemed to have all the good stuff - Sepultura, Type O Negative, Fear Factory, Machine Head, Life Of Agony, Obituary, Dog Eat Dog, Biohazard, The Misfits, Soulfly, Slipknot, Coal Chamber...Just check out the bill for Donington 1996 for proof that the label knew how to promote their bands.

9) Pantera - As with Sepultura, Pantera took an extreme style of music and took it to the mainstream with impressive success. Unlike Sepultura, or Metallica before them, Pantera didn't start out making extreme music and streamlining it for mass-consumption. Instead they started out playing a more glam style of heavy metal and got heavier with each release, so by the time of 'Vulgar Display of Power' in 1992, when they could have followed it up with something more accessible to capitalise on their success, they went the other way and made an even heavier album with 'Far Beyond Driven', which went to number one in both the UK and the US. Although the scene changed with the advent of nu-metal and Pantera seemed to go out of vogue, their influence is undeniable and even to this day their name is still a benchmark by which other bands are judged. Just ask DevilDriver or Lamb of God.

10) Crossover Appeal - It was fairly straightforward before. There was hard rock (Led Zeppelin, Thunder, etc.), heavy metal (Priest, Maiden, Sabbath, etc.), thrash metal (Megadeth, Anthrax, Slayer, etc.) and death metal (Morbid Angel, Cannibal Corpse, etc.), and anything else had to slot into those pigeonholes. In the nineties, though, it all changed. Due to the public's need to categorise everything, there were all sorts of labels bandied around - goth metal, gothic metal (not the same thing!), doom, hardcore, grindcore, industrial, ambient, noise, electronica, stoner, sludge, southern, nu-metal, alternative, grunge, punk, pop-punk, straight-edge, emo, screamo; and those are just the immediate ones I can think of! Of course, it did have it's plus points - bands who wouldn't normally have anything in common would tour together (I once saw a bill of Type O Negative, Entombed and Stuck Mojo - something for everyone!) and bands also started to incorporate other styles into their sound. Death metal bands would experiment with hardcore (Obituary), while hardcore bands would rap (Biohazard) or even appeal to Goths (Life of Agony, Type O Negative). Sepultura and Machine Head would cover obscure punk bands, while traditional metal bands started upping the ante with thrashier riffs and double bass drumming (Saxon, Priest) and some bands even started toying with techo and drum n'bass (Fear Factory, Pitchshifter). It was a mish-mash of styles and it didn't matter if you were into rap, metal, rock or techno because there would be something for everyone to grasp onto. Kind of miss that, really...

A Review of Day of the Dead (2007)

2009-07-11T09:54:00.000-07:00

It seems that the horror movie remake is now fully integrated into the Hollywood money-making psyche, and although the debate is going to run and run about the merits of such movies - the snobbery of the fans of the originals versus a newer generation who can't see what all the fuss over the so-called 'classics' is about - it doesn't really matter what anybody thinks as they're going to make them anyway. Although 2003's remake (reimagining, reboot, whatever...) of 'The Texas Chainsaw Massacre' arguably kickstarted the trend, to some degree of critical and commercial success, it was the 2004 version of what some see to be the Holy Grail of horror movies - 'Dawn of the Dead' - that really signalled the arrival of this new wave of remakes. Taking George A.Romero's original idea of having a group of survivors holed up in a shopping mall during the zombie outbreak and marrying it to the '28 Days Later' idea of zombies that can actually move faster than a tortoise. Some hated it, some loved it, but overall it was a decent movie that had it's foot planted in both the horror and action genres, with a few respectful nods towards it's source material and adding enough original touches to make it stand on its own.

Inevitably, though, the sequel to the original 'Dawn...' - unsurprisingly called 'Day of the Dead' - was also going to be a candidate for a 21st century makeover, but unlike 'Dawn...', this movie was more low-key, going straight to dvd without all the hoorah that greeted 'Dawn...'. Was this a sign that the remake trend was waning, and that nobody cared? Or was it simply because 'Day...' was simply a rubbish movie? Probably a bit of both.
The core of 'Day...' is essentially similar to the 1985 original - the idea of military tactics versus a more scientific approach of trying to train the zombies rather than annihilate them. And that's pretty much the only major similarity, apart from a few character traits, but more on that later. In the original, a group consisting of gung-ho soldiers, slightly eccentric scientists and drunken helicopter pilots were trapped in an underground bunker while the marauding undead were lurking on the surface. The movie explored the character development within the group and what happens when desperate people with no hope are grouped together, the end result being that the zombies end up being less threatening than the characters who are slowly losing their minds. In this movie we have a group of (fairly unconvincing) soldiers, led by Captain Rhodes (Ving Rhames, who bizarrely appeared in the 'Dawn...' remake playing a different character), who are setting up a roadblock to stop the occupants of a Colorado town leaving to stop the spread of a virus. Corporal Sarah Bowman (Mena Suvari), a town local, and Private Bud Crain (Stark Sands) go to Bowman's home to take her sick mother to hospital. When at the hospital, most of the town's inhabitants seem to be there, and before long all of the sick and injured (including Ma Bowman) start to transform into bloodthirsty zombies and start attacking the living. Bowman, Crain, another soldier called Salazar (Nick Cannon) and Doctor Logan (Matt Rippy), who may know more than he is letting on, manage to escape the hospital, but Bowman hears the voice of her brother Trevor (Michael Welch), who is hiding at the local radio station, on the radio and turns back towards town to rescue him. During all of this excitement, Bud gets bitten by a zombie and the slimy Dr. Logan does a runner, but Bowman rescues her brother and his girlfriend, and the group make a move towards a disused factory that houses a secret underground research facility that may hold the key to the outbreak.

Overall, 'Day of the Dead' isn't actually that bad. There is a lot wrong with it - more than there is right with it - but take away the connections to Romero's classic and you have a fairly pacey zombie romp that could probably sit alongside modern fare like '28 Days Later', 'Resident Evil' and 'Dead Set' fairly comfortably and appeal to a lot of the newer fans of the genre. The main problem with it is the title, because it really has none of the depth or quality of it's source material. You can give the characters the same names as the originals (Sarah, Logan, Rhodes and Salazar are all in the original, but Bub is renamed Bud) but that doesn't mean that the characters are the same. Rhodes in the original was a detestable bully who would stop at nothing to maintain control over the group, but as the zombies break into the facility and he loses control - of the group and his mind - there is a sense of empathy with him as he tries to escape his fate. In this one, Rhodes is a fairly generic army Captain who barks a few orders and then gets his legs bitten off after about twenty minutes. Original Logan is an eccentric doctor trying to achieve results in the taming of the undead. Ignoring the bullying of Rhodes in favour of trying to see what makes the zombies tick, Logan is a fascinating character who seems completely unaware of his surroundings and genuinely feels an empathy with Bub, the zombie he has managed to control. Logan in this movie comes across as a nasty piece of work who doesn't seem to have any reason to be nasty apart from saving his own skin. Do you see a pattern emerging? And who thought that making Bud a vegetarian zombie would be a good idea?

The casting is quite baffling, too. Ving Rhames appearance is just plain odd, the only reason seeming to be that because 'Dawn...' was so successful, the audience may see Rhames name on the cover and assume this movie to be a direct sequel. It isn't, and Rhames is only in the movie for about ten minutes of screen time, so ...go figure! Mena Suvari is fairly solid but unremarkable as Sarah, although to be fair she doesn't have a lot to work with considering the workmanlike script, and the other supporting cast being pretty forgettable, only the ever reliable Ian McNeice providing any sort of likeable or memorable character as Paul, the obnoxious local radio disc jockey.

The cgi special effects aren't the best ever seen, especially when you consider the groundbreaking effects that Tom Savini created in the original, and it sometimes feels like you're watching an Xbox game rather than a movie. The zombies are of the fast-moving variety, as in most recent zombie movies, but the ones in this movie also have the ability to crawl up walls and along the ceiling. Believing the dead are coming back to life is one thing, but then giving them Spiderman-like abilities is stretching it a little.

But, as previously stated, it isn't that bad when you watch it. Most of the negatives, apart from the ceiling crawlers, appear when the movie is over, when you have time to reflect on it. On screen it moves along at a cracking pace, with plenty of well coreographed action sequences and a few tense moments, namely the scene in the radio station featuring Trevor, his girlfriend, Paul and a couple of survivors. Another thing (and it may be just me) is that there seems to be an underlying sense of self-knowing, that what's being shown is nowhere near as good as the title suggests but they're going to have fun with it anyway. Because that's probably the best comment one could make about this movie - it's fun. Big dumb fun that fills 90 minutes without outstaying it's welcome and has none of the pretensions of greatness that plagued '28 Days Later'. It's certainly better than other recent zombie movies such as 'Flight of the Living Dead' and 'Zombie Strippers', just as long as you can get the Romero comparisons out of your head. Don't expect greatness, make up your own title, and it's a watchable, if ultimately pointless, zombie movie.

LET'S NOT GO BACK TO THE BAD OLD DAYS

2009-07-07T14:05:00.000-07:00

I think I've gone to sleep and woken up in the early eighties. Except this isn't the good early eighties I remember - New Romantics on TOTP, The A-Team and The Fall Guy on television on a Saturday night and other such fond memories. No, I seem to have awoken in the bad early eighties, when the moral majority (hah!) decided to force their (often unfounded) opinions on the good people of this country. Copies of such movie classics as The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Evil Dead and The Exorcist were not allowed to be stocked at your local video shop, and anybody caught distributing or even just watching this mind-bending filth will be flogged within an inch of their lives and not allowed to enjoy themselves any more.
But that was twenty five years ago. Attitudes have changed towards what is acceptable for a viewing audience; The Texas Chainsaw Massacre has been shown on terrestrial television - indeed, most of the plastic surgery-based documentaries that are broadcast have more blood and gore than Tobe Hooper's infamous movie - and movies in general have more blood, gore, sex and violence than ever before. Since the end of the nineties, the BBFC have relaxed their attitude as to what is or isn't allowed to be seen and, especially with the advent of DVD and the internet, literally hundreds of titles that you never have seen during the eighties and early nineties were at last available to watch in the privacy of your own home. That's not to say that all these movies were great, because they certainly weren't, but should I have the desire to watch Driller Killer, Zombie Flesh Eaters, I Spit On Your Grave or even the comparatively mainstream The Exorcist, then I could do so. And guess what? I have watched all of those (plus many, many more) and have never once had the urge to go on a rampage with my power tools, push somebody's eye into a splinter, go raping and pillaging or join the Catholic Church (!). You see, I would like to think that somewhere along the line, somebody had the good sense to realise that nobody has ever committed an atrocity by being directly influenced by a movie or a song, unless they were likely to do so in the first place. Which means that if Fred Bloggs one day decides to go and chop up some innocent victims with a chainsaw, is Tobe Hooper or any of the other makers of the Chainsaw Massacre movies to blame? Of course not. Fred Bloggs might never have seen a Chainsaw movie. If he had, then I'm sure the press will home in on that and blame that as the cause for his wrongdoing. But what if he hadn't seen it? That would mean that something else would have triggered that rage, but as to what that trigger is, we'll probably never know. Maybe he's just wrong in the head. Bless him.
But we wouldn't be saying bless him if he was a rampaging monster who committed his crimes due to his love of horror movies and that other cause of moral uproar - heavy metal. Does anyone remember the Columbine massacre in the late nineties, when two students embarked on a killing spree at their school? Of course it was Marilyn Manson's fault, according to the media. It was nothing to do with the two students, who may have had psychological problems, depression and inferiority complexes. No, it was the fault of a singer who wears a corset and stilts, a singer who, it could be argued, encourages positivity through his lyrics about individuality and fighting against what you don't agree with. I believe it later emerged that the two gunmen didn't even listen to Marilyn Manson. But that doesn't matter - he was the public hate-figure at the time, they dressed a bit like him, so therefore...
But I'm digressing. The point of this rant? The point is that the moral yardstick by which we should all live by - i.e. The Sun newspaper - has opened up the old can of worms by publishing a 'genius' piece of 'journalism' regarding the new Lars Von Trier movie Antichrist. According to The Sneak, who I assume to be some sort of gossip monger, the movie comes under the banner of 'torture porn', a title designed for convenience rather than being a title that accurately describes the content. The Sneak then brackets Antichrist with those other infamous 'torture porn' movies Hostel and Saw. Well, first things first - could anybody show me the porn in either of these movies? Hostel, while having gratuitous nudity, could hardly be described as pornographic. There's some tits in it, and some women shown straddling some guys, but then again, so do a lot of BBC dramas. Saw, as I am aware because, unlike some, I have actually seen it, does not contain any nudity or sex. As for the torture - granted, there are some very uncomfortable scenes in both movies, but as I generally look at the blurb on the front of the box, I know I'm not going to be getting a Disney movie.
　
The Sneak then claims that the BBFC has become more liberal over the past few years. Yes it has, but didn't it need to? Then he (I assume it's a he) says that films that would have been rated 18 in the past are now 15 or 12A before giving us his best line - 'In 1985 The Terminator was rated 18. Terminator Salvation, released this year, was a 12A.' Excuse me, but I don't think that has anything to do with falling standards. I think it has to do with the fact that they are TWO SEPARATE MOVIES! Plus, The Terminator now has a 15 rating on DVD, so is that falling standards or just the BBFC being a bit sensible? We then get 'Bloody violence is increasingly acceptable'. No it isn't. Well, not in real life anyway. In a movie, though, it's thoroughly acceptable. If you took the bloody violence out of most of these movies, then what would the audience be left with? Apparently, The Sneak would like the BBFC to find better ways to let people know what the content of a movie is. The rating and a brief description on the box or the poster isn't enough. How about a full page review in a national newspaper? I'm sure that Mr.Von Trier would appreciate the full page advert you've given his movie, because if people weren't aware of the 'Actual Sex', 'Genital Mutilation', 'Torture' and 'Sexual Violence', then I'm sure they would be now.
If people don't know what a movie is about before they go to see it, and they end up in deep distress by it, whose fault is it? The filmmaker for making it? The cinema for showing it? Or is it down to the individual to check what they're going to watch? We all used to laugh at Simon Bates and his little message about 'making an informed choice', but he was right. I make a choice to watch horror movies. If I don't like it, and I haven't yet come across anything that has made me switch off, then I simply won't watch it. I'm not going to stop anybody else watching it. Sensationalist journalism like The Sneak's not-so accurate scribblings doesn't help matters, as now people who wouldn't normally watch anything more horrific than Dr.Who will now pay their money to go and see Antichrist just so they can complain about it. According to the BBFC, they only cut scenes that involve illegal activity - i.e. scenes like the killing of a live animal in Cannibal Holocaust, which is fair enough - or scenes that are there purely for arousal or titillation. Don't think anybody's likely to whip their todger out at the sight of Willem Defoe going at it (apologies to Mr.Defoe), just as nobody did to Hostel (not in the cinema I was in, anyway). From what I understand of Antichrist, it's all done in the name of art and none of it is as shocking as such recent French movies as Martyrs, Frontier(s) or Inside, which, incidentally has apparently not yet been submitted to the BBFC for classification. If and when that happens, it would be interesting to see what The Sneak thinks about that, as that movie involves abortions, stabbings and all sorts of violence. Things that happen in the real world. If the BBFC let it through uncut, as they have with the equally unsettling but very intelligent Martyrs, then - and I never thought I'd say this - the BBFC will be a shining beacon of common sense amongst the sea of absurdness that is the nanny state of Britain.
This is the 21st Century. I am a grown man. I can make decisions for myself what is suitable for me to watch. If The Sneak doesn't like it, then just leave it alone - don't watch it. Don't write idiotic statements that will just spur on the do-gooders to campaign against something that some people might actually want to see. I know I want to.

A Review of Inside (À l'intérieur)

2009-07-02T14:38:00.000-07:00

Who'd have thought that nearly a decade into the new millennium France would be the main producer of quality gore movies? While Hollywood blindly stumbles on, churning out dull remakes and pointless sequels, our French brethren have been releasing some outstanding examples of how 'horror' should be done. 2002' 'Irreversible' and 2003's 'Haute Tension' arguably upped the stakes for what was acceptable to be shown on-screen, whilst 2007's 'Frontièr(s)' and last years 'Martyrs' overwhelmed audiences with relenting brutality in the case of the former, and an almost progressive style of filmmaking in the case of the latter. How does 'Inside' compare to these modern masterpieces? It actually falls somewhere between the last two, showcasing bludgeoning violence nailed to an intense ride of a story, all nicely wrapped up in some of the most atmospheric filmmaking since John Carpenter had an idea about killing babysitters.

It's difficult to say too much about the plot without giving too much away, but the basic premise is pretty simple. An expectant mother named Sarah (Alysson Paradis, sister of Vanessa) and her husband are involved in a car crash that kills the husband. On Christmas Eve, Sarah has a last scan before she is due to give birth the following day and returns home, where she will be collected the next morning by her boss, Jean-Pierre (François-Régis Marchasson), and taken to the hospital. That evening there is a knock at the door and a woman's voice asks to use the phone. When Sarah refuses to open the door and tries to call the visitor's bluff, the woman (Béatrice Dalle) reveals that she knows Sarah is alone in the house and tries to get in. Sarah manages to get a blurry photo of the woman and calls the police, as well as Jean-Pierre. After being unable to find anything untoward, the police promise Sarah that a night patrol will come and check on her in the night, unaware that the woman has managed to creep into the house already. Sarah goes to sleep but is awoken when the woman appears in her bedroom and tries to cut open Sarah's stomach with a pair of scissors. What plays out now is a cat and mouse game, with Sarah fighting for her and her baby's lifes against a seemingly unstoppable lunatic who is desperate to get her hands on Sarah's baby at all costs.

With more than a passing nod to the slasher movies of the late seventies/early eighties (especially 'Halloween'), 'Inside' is certainly an atmospheric movie; the use of shadows and lighting is pure John Carpenter, whilst the terror-filled performances of the two main leads is startlingly realistic. Newcomer directors Alexandre Bustillo and Julien Maury obviously know their stuff as, although there is nothing new in the style of filming and it all looks fairly familiar, this sort of 'creeping dread'-style movie is rarely done to this level of excellence. It is the subtle touches that are as important to the overall feel of the movie as well as the violence - the scene after the police have left and Sarah wakes up on the sofa is one of the creepiest cinematic moments of recent times. There are other subtleties that are thrown in - the baby being due on Christmas Day, Sarah giving Jean-Pierre a set of house keys, the police not being readily available due to riots, etc. - that, although in retrospect seem obvious, give the movie a sort of psychological edge; similar to, say, 'The Silence of the Lambs' or even 'The Sixth Sense', where there's lots of little visual and aural touches that may not give much to the plot at the time, but when the movie is reaching it's climax, they all add up to give the audience as much of a thrill as any scenes of action or brutality. Of course, though, most people are going to want to see this because of the gore, and there is plenty of it, especially as the movie reaches it's disturbing end. Although not as intelligent a film as 'Martyrs', it certainly is above the gratuitous gore and violence of 'Frontièr(s)', and what the audience gets to witness are some of the most realistic and sickening acts of savagery to have ever been seen in the movies. Unlike 'Martyrs', though, the ending isn't completely downbeat. Not what you may expect, but certainly better than the alternative - the last shot, although not what one could call satisfactory, is certainly one that will get etched on the brain.

As far as negatives go, the main point that resonates is the fact that Sarah is a fairly unlikeable character at the beginning of the movie. Maybe a deliberate move by Bustillo, who wrote the story, to make more of a contrast between a grieving mother-to-be who may not care about her baby as much as she should and the vulnerable victim who will go all out to protect her unborn child, as she is later on, but whatever the reason, she doesn't come across as a character you can relate to. And although this is a movie that will test the mettle of the most hardened gore freaks, it won't linger in your thoughts in the same way that 'Martyrs' stark imagery did.

Overall, 'Inside' is dark, creepy, gory, disturbing and shocking. It's well made and well acted, the story and effects kept within the barriers of realism and it's very uneasy to watch. Recently, as a trawl through some of the movie websites will reveal, there have been a lot of 'The Most Disturbing Horror Movies Ever'-type lists being put up on the forums, and 'Inside' is frequently featured. The most disturbing thing about it, however, are not the scenes of gore - if these were taken out the movie would still be effective, although maybe not as much - but rather the idea of what is happening. Young, sex-mad teens getting stalked by faceless zombie killers with axes and machetes makes audiences laugh, as do chainsaw-wielding rednecks and gipsy curses, but when the victim is a pregnant woman and the monster somebody who from the outside appears normal, but harbours a dark desire that they will stop at nothing to satisfy, then disturbing is certainly the right word; the events in this movie could happen, and probably have, and that's the really scary thing.

The Hellraiser Sequels Parts 4-8

2009-06-26T14:53:00.001-07:00

1987's 'Hellraiser' was a breath of fresh air for the horror genre. Confounding genre traditions and trappings, Clive Barker's vision of Hell as a domain where tortures are dished out by the Cenobites - 'demons to some, angels to others' and led by Pinhead (Doug Bradley) - and pleasure and pain blur into one was a stark contrast to the endless teenage stalk-and-slash movies that were dominating the market. 'Hellbound: Hellraiser II' followed shortly after and bucked the trend of sequels by actually being pretty good. Less consistent than it's predecessor, it was nevertheless a decent stab at continuing the story and expanding on what had been established without compromising the original. After some delays 'Hellraiser III: Hell On Earth' appeared in 1992, and this is where things started to change. Written by Peter Atkins and directed by Anthony Hickox, Barker's involvement was minimal, although he was consulted by Hickox behind the studio's back. When they saw what Barker had added they okayed it, but Pinhead was now a wisecracking, mass murderer in the same vein as Freddy Krueger. Exactly the opposite of what the appeal was in the first place.
Now a watered-down villain for the MTV generation, Pinhead next appeared in 1996's 'Hellraiser: Bloodline'. An attempt to explain the origins of the puzzle box that summons Pinhead from his domain, '...Bloodline' is actually a bit of a mess. Initially directed by Kevin Yagher, the movie's producers wanted Pinhead to feature more. When Yagher refused to agree to the changes he disowned the movie. Joe Chapelle was then brought in to finish off and re-shoot some scenes, and then the movie had to be credited to Alan Smithee, a pseudonym used by filmmakers when a director has disowned his or her movie. To be honest, considering the troubled genesis of the movie, it isn't that bad. It starts in the 22nd century (stay with me!) on board a space craft where a descendant of the original box maker is trying to close the gateway to Hell by the use of a new puzzle box. Telling his story to a soldier who has arrested him, we learn how the box was first made in the 18th century by a French toymaker called Lemarchand, who was commissioned by a noble aristocrat with an interest in the dark arts. The aristocrat creates a beautiful being called Angelique by sacrificing a peasant girl to the demon's in the box, who begins to wreak havoc by killing everyone she comes across. We then cut to the modern day, where the next unfortunate ancestor, John Merchant, doesn't just come face to face with Angelique but also Pinhead, who decides that more people should be killed. Then it's back to the 22nd century where Dr. Merchant must now close the gateway to Hell and banish Pinhead forever.
Due to the amount of edits and cuts, the movie is quite difficult to follow, and the acting is pretty poor. That said, the effects are good and it was certainly an improvement on part three, and it gave the story some sort of origin and closure. Usually when a franchise resorts to being set in space it means the ideas have run out, and had the series stopped there, any negatives could have been forgiven. But no; some bright spark at Dimension thought it would be a good idea to give the go ahead for a fifth installment.
Released in 2000, 'Hellraiser: Inferno' changed direction again and this time offered up a psychological thriller in the vein of a 1940's detective film noir. In fact, Pinhead doesn't come into it until the end, and when he does he serves no purpose other than to explain to the main characyer what has been happening. Briefly, the plot (or what their is of one) revolves around Joseph Thorne (Craig Sheffer), a corrupt detective who is investigating a series of murders apparently committed by somebody called The Engineer. Thorne discovers the Lament Configuration box and solves it, after which he starts seeing Cenobites. He captures The Engineer, who is a Cenobite, committing a murder on tape, but unfortunately nobody else can see it. During all this, Pinhead pops up and tells Thorne that he can still change his corrupt ways - a bit like Marley's ghost in 'A Christmas Carol'
Obviously this movie didn't start out as a 'Hellraiser' movie, and had it been left as a detective-learning-the-error-of-his-ways story it could have been okay. But shoving in Pinhead, some comedy lesbian cenobites (who seem strangely attractive?!!!) and the puzzle box doesn't make this credible in any way, shape or form. Clive Barker's influence is all but gone, Doug Bradley battles against rubbish make-up and a hammy script and comes across as desperate and, ironically, interest is lost when all the weird stuff starts happening. Overall, a half-decent detective thriller turns into a rubbish 'Hellraiser' movie and is best avoided.
But - and there is a but - even this movie seemed interesting next to the abomination that came next. 'Hellraiser: Hellseeker' came out in 2002 and wowed audiences with it's clever, twisting plot, state-of-the-art special effects and top-notch acting, earning the movie a place in many top ten charts around the world...okay, it didn't really. Directed by cinematographer Rick Bota, the obvious selling point of the movie was that Kirsty Cotton (Ashley Laurence), the heroine from parts one and two, was returning to do battle with Pinhead once again. Sounds good on paper, doesn't it? What really happens is Kirsty and her husband Trevor crash their car into a river. Trevor gets out but Kirsty is nowhere to be found. Seemingly indifferent to his wife's fate, Trevor starts to have visions and everyone around him starts dying. Eventually, he runs into Pinhead and told he's a naughty boy. Kirsty then appears and has a chat with Pinhead. They agree that Trevor's a naughty boy and then we flash back to the beginning where the two are in the car, and a different scenario unfolds.
There is one redeeming feature; due to Bota's previous experience, there is some nice photography and his use of lighting is good, but that's about it. Like the previous movie, you have to question why somebody thought inserting Pinhead in just so you can market it as a 'Hellraiser' picture was a good idea. And what's the obsession with dream sequences and flashbacks? By now, there's a familiar structure in place. We have a villainous main character who has visions of Cenobites and people dying, and several flashbacks later comes face to face with Pinhead and is told 'This is what you could have won!'. Complete drivel and the worst of the series.
'Hellraiser: Deader' appeared three years later, and although still awful, was a bit of an improvement due to it's story being an interesting concept. Reporter Amy Klein (Kari Wuhrer) is dispatched to Romania to investigate a cult who call themselves Deaders. Their leader, Winter (Paul Rhys) makes the wannabe disciples kill themselves and then brings them back to life through mouth to mouth contact. Amy gets her hands on the Lament Configuration box by taking it from the hands of the corpse of Marla and seems to get pulled into it, where she first sees Pinhead. After a series of events, Amy finds herself being influenced by Winter and in the position of being very close to death. The Cenobites then appear and kill Winter, but before they can claim Amy she kills herself.
It's an interesting concept, and in the hands of a more experienced genre director it could have been great. As it is, Rick Bota has once again given us a good-looking but ultimately bland movie that probably would have worked better as a short film. Again, it doesn't seem to have been a 'Hellraiser' movie from the very beginning and there are some ideas that could have been explored more - Winter alludes to the fact that he is part of Lemarchand's bloodline, but this is never followed up. Overall, a wasted opportunity to garner a bit more credibility to an ailing franchise.
Although, again, this didn't stop the decision makers at Dimension releasing another. Filmed back-to-back with '...Deader', 'Hellraiser: Hellworld' is a fairly contrived attempt to cash-in on the 'Scream'-style self-awareness of recent horror movies. A group of teenagers have been playing a 'Hellraiser' based game called Hellworld on the internet and have managed to solve an online version of the Lament Configuration box. In doing so they have won invites to a 'Hellraiser' themed party at a creepy mansion. The host of the party, played by cult favourite Lance Henriksen, informs them that the house they are in was a convent built by Lemarchand, and then proceeds to give them mobile phones to communicate with each other. As the party goes on, the group find themselves separated in different parts of the house and falling prey to Pinhead or the host. I shan't spoil the ever-so-clever twist (!) but needless to say, there are scene shifts, visions, etc. Oh stuff it, I will spoil it. It all turns out it was all a drug-induced hallucination, provided by the host, as he is the father of one of the group's friends who died after getting addicted to Hellworld. For some reason, he thought that giving his son's friends drug, burying them in coffins and feeding them suggestions would be some sort of revenge. Anyway, Pinhead does his usual five minute appearance, there's some gratuitous nudity and the final scene when the host eventually meets Pinhead is classic 'Hellraiser'. Very much a teen horror movie, the original flair and intelligence of the first two movies was long gone, and although Lance Henriksen gives his usual intense performance, it's not enough to save this once-great franchise from disappearing up its own self-inflicted asshole.
With a remake of the original in the pipeline, with Clive Barker back on board (cue applause), 'Hellraiser' may rise once again to terrify audiences. Going back to Barker's original book - 'The Hellbound Heart' - there is plenty of scope to retell the original story in a different way, and there's the possibility to take it off in all sorts of directions. Unfortunately, vision often gets pushed aside in favour of dollars, and to do so in this case would be the ultimate betrayal of probably the most original idea in horror movies for the last twenty five years. So this goes out to whoever is in charge - for the sake of the fans, please don't muck it up this time.

A Review of Heaven & Hell 'The Devil You Know'

2009-06-26T10:17:00.000-07:00

Of course, in 1997, when the original Black Sabbath line-up of Tony Iommi, Geezer Butler, Bill Ward and Ozzy Osbourne reunited to rapturous applause and a bout of touring, it was expected that another studio album would be on the cards, especially as the resultant live album contained two new recordings. Alas, it was not to be, and after nearly a decade of playing basically the same set of thirty year old songs on festival circuits across the globe, Black Sabbath seemed to be put to rest. That is until Rhino Records approached Tony Iommi to ask if there was anything unreleased that they could put on a compilation album covering the years that Osbourne's replacement Ronnie James Dio was in the band. With nothing usuable in the vault, Iommi got together with Dio with the intent of writing some new material. After reuniting with Butler and drummer Vinnie Appice (who replaced Ward in 1980), the band recorded three new tracks to add to the album, released as 'Black Sabbath: The Dio Years'. A name change to Heaven & Hell, named after the 1980 Black Sabbath album, allowed the band to tour the material from the three studio albums featuring Dio without having to play the Ozzy-era material, and in essence gave this line-up the chance to be a new band, away from the Sabbath shadow.
That's the history lesson over with. Long-time fans will be pleased to know that Heaven & Hell's debut studio album, 'The Devil You Know' - a reference to the band's name change - does not disappoint. All the trademarks that you would expect are there and in bucketloads, although by contrast, some of the less popular traits are there too, but more of that later. With a few exceptions (1980's 'Heaven & Hell' and 1983's 'Born Again' spring to mind) Sabbath have never really had blistering opening tracks, seemingly preferring to start off with a mid-paced slab of heaviness to crush you with before the tempo changes kick in, and 'TDYK' is no different, with 'Atom & Evil' providing a heavy, if relatively unremarkable, opener. It has been said many times before, and no doubt will again, but Dio's voice is probably one of the most commanding and majestic out there, able to turn even the most plodding rocker into something epic, and although 'Atom & Evil' is pretty standard fare, it's Dio's voice that carries it. 'Fear' follows, and although the pace isn't much quicker, the haunting vocal harmonies and Iommi's choppy riffing give the song that extra edge. Could be one to listen out for in the live arena. In fact, probably all of the songs will sound great when played live, as the album's production is suitably thumping, updating the band's classic sound without losing any of the low end clout that they're known for.
A great example of this is during first single 'Bible Black' when, after a gently strummed acoustic intro and a beautifully sung verse, Iommi's guitar crashes in and gives us the first proper example of what makes this line-up so great. A contender for possibly the best song this band has ever done, 'Bible Black' also has Iommi soloing as if his life depended on it, which is also another factor on this album. Known more for his riffs than his solos, Tony Iommi is all over this album with solos ranging from bluesey to all-out shredding. Think what Kirk Hammett did on 'Death Magnetic' and you'll get the idea.
The more straight-forward 'Double the Pain' is another example of Iommi's seemingly new-found excitement at playing solos, although the song itself is less doomy and probably would have sounded better placed on Iommi's debut solo album with Dio as a guest vocalist. 'Rock and Roll Angel' has a main riff that's evocative of 'I' from Sabbath's 1992 'Dehumanizer' album and Dio's vocal is less aggressive, giving the melody a bit of swagger, but the song is a grower and gives the album a slightly different vibe at the halfway point.
Oddly, although 'TDYK' is a direct continuation of 'Dehumanizer' (as it would be, considering it's the same four people involved!), in places it is reminiscent of the 'Paranoid' album from 1970, and not just in it's sound. A lot of the songs have the doomy feel of tracks like 'Electric Funeral' and 'Iron Man', but as with 'Paranoid', this is the sound of a band who know what their core sound is. There's very little room for experimentation here, with only a few subtle background keyboard effects, and each member of the band totally on top of their game. As mentioned, Iommi and Dio both give outstanding performances but mention must also go to Geezer Butler, whose ever-present bass rumbles like the very bowels of the earth throughout, but who also gets a few short flurries of his own to show off. His rhythmic interplay with Iommi is outstanding, both seeming to feed off each other's riffs, and with Appice instead of Ward providing the backbone, the rhythm section is more straighforward and driving the song along, rather than underscoring Iommi's riffs. Appice's simple yet easily identifiable drumming style also gives the band another dimension to their sound, his fills being more inventive than before. Just like Sabbath's 1970 breakthrough album, this is pretty much a defining statement.
Tracks like 'Follow the Tears' and album closer 'Breaking into Heaven' really throw everything this band is about into the mix - huge doomy riffs, Dio's rich melodies and piledriving rhythms all working together to envelope the listener in all the crushing goodness that this line-up can offer, with only the fairly nondescript 'Neverwhere' sounding slightly rushed. Not a bad song, but maybe a little incongruous considering what sits either side of it.
Overall, 'TDYK' stands as testament that when this group of musicians (Black Sabbath, Heaven & Hell or whatever) get together and lock into a mindset, the music they create can be astounding. The album is not without its faults - one or two tracks could be accused of treading water, and sometimes the lyrics touch on the slightly ridiculous ('Eating the Cannibals') - but when it comes to a band who have seen every trend come and go, and this far into their career can still make giant sounding albums without resorting to parody and veering from the sound that made them successful, then what's not to applaud? As long as they continue on this form, the continual cries from the purists for a reunion with Ozzy will sound pretty redundant.

20 Greatest Horror Movies of the Eighties

2009-06-26T10:12:00.000-07:00

This is undoubtedly the age of being 'retro', the process of remembering what things used to be like without sounding like your parents, and with the slew of horror movie remakes now moving on from the gritty seventies trailblazers to the more polished, bigger budget productions of the eighties, now seems like a good time to reflect on some of the great genre pieces of that decade. Bearing in mind that most of these movies were made for home viewing, as opposed to the big screen outings that the previous decade hosted, may make it easier to see what was trying to be achieved by some of these gems, and remember - this is just one person's opinion. If you have any other suggestions, go watch them (preferably on VHS) and reminisce about a time before CGI effects...
20) Scanners (1981) - Generally speaking 'Scanners' is actually a pretty dull movie. So what's it doing in this list? Well, it's here because it contains probably one of the best exploding head effects ever put on screen. To summarise, Michael Ironside does what he does best and plays a tough and moody renegade 'scanner', somebody with psychic powers, who is intent on world domination. Patrick McGoohan plays a doctor who uses a good scanner to try and weed out Ironside and destroy the underground movement he has created. Great effects, a dark atmosphere and David Cronenberg's fluid direction make it watchable, but it does seem to drag in places and the acting, apart from the two leads, is average at best.
19) Poltergeist 2: The Other Side (1986) - Although the original is often applauded, it's really this sequel that contains most of the shocks and scares. Little Carol Anne Freeling is once again terrorised by the spectral entity that haunted the family home in the first movie. Not knowing where to turn, the family seek help from a Native American spiritualist who may hold the key to ridding the family of their curse. JoBeth Williams and Craig T.Nelson play the distraught parents pefectly - the chemistry between them is more electrifying than before - and the children don't annoy like a lot of child characters can. More impressive, though, is the really unnerving performance by Julian Beck as the creepy preacher Kane, who will stop at nothing to possess the soul of Carol Anne.
18) Children of the Corn (1984) - There's something to be said for using children as the instigators of wrongdoing, and although 'Children of the Corn' (based on a Stephen King story) may not seem as terrifying now as it did in 1984, it still sends a shiver down the spine. Burt and Vicky are a young couple travelling across Nebraska when they stumble upon the small town of Gatlin, where, upon the orders of a child preacher named Isaac, the kids have murdered all of the adults. Apparently, Isaac gets his orders from 'He Who Walks Behind the Rows', an evil force that lives in the cornfields, but why the devil wants a town with no adults is anyones guess. The special effects are pretty bad - check out the animated effects when the devil comes calling at the end - and the acting pretty ropey, but the film does prove that when left to their own devices, children can be more creepy than any movie monster.
17) Creepshow (1982) - Written by Stephen King, directed by George A.Romero and starring a cast of genre favourites, how could 'Creepshow' fail? Based on the E.C. comics of the 1950's, 'Creepshow' is an anthology of short stories that are told within the context of a comic book that has been thrown into the garbage by a strict father who discovers his son reading it. The first story tells of a demanding father, who was murdered by his put-upon daughter, coming back from the grave to claim his father's day cake. Look out for a young Ed Harris, who shows off his disco dancing skills. Story two stars Stephen King himself as a backwoods farmer who finds an asteroid in his yard. After touching it, he soon discovers that some things are best left alone. Leslie Nielsen and Ted Danson star in the third tale as part of a love triangle (there's a sentence you never thought you'd hear!). Danson is having an affair with Nielsen's wife, unaware that Nielsen knows all about it and is plotting his nasty, and very wet, revenge. The fourth, and probably the best, is a monster story concerning Hal Holbrook and his nagging wife, played by Adrienne Barbeau. After discovering an old crate at the college where he works, Holbrook's under-the-thumb character finds a way to be rid of his missus forever. Which leaves the final story, starring E.G. Marshall as a secluded millionaire with a cleanliness fetish. Living in a supposedly clinically clean apartment, cockroaches keep appearing and no matter what traps and sprays are put down, they just keep appearing - in their thousands! Although it may look a bit dated now, 'Creepshow' is still an enjoyable watch, if only to see some of today's bigger movie stars in their younger days. Nielsen, especially, seems to be having the most fun, playing against type and coming across as a real menacing villain. If possible, try and get the Region 2 double-disc set that contains an entertaining behind-the-scenes documentary.
16) Brain Damage (1988) - Written and directed by the genial Frank Henenlotter, the twisted mind behind 'Basket Case' and 'Frankenhooker', 'Brain Damage' follows the fortunes of Brian, who has adopted a pet by the name of Aylmer. Alymer is no ordinary pet, though; in fact, we're not really told what exactly Aylmer is. He looks like a slightly deformed, burnt phallous but with a voice like a well-versed game show host. Anyway, Aylmer likes to feed on brains but, as his owners don't tend to kill voluntarily, he injects a blue liquid into the backs of their heads that sends them into a reckless state so Aylmer can feed on anybody who gets close. Sound good? Well it is, and that's something that can be said of all of Henenlotter's movies. They sound nonsense, but are executed with such style and passion, that they cannot fail to entertain. Ignore the gormless acting and the low-budget production values, and rejoice in the fact that 'Brain Damage' still manages to raise a smile all these years later. And it may make you think twice about what you put in your mouth...
15) The Fly (1986) - The second, and last, entry for David Cronenberg in this list is a remake (yes, they did them then, too) of the 1958 Vincent Price classic, and, to be honest, if they had tried to make a movie like this in 1958, Cronenberg would probably have been executed for crimes against decency. In this version, Jeff Goldblum plays scientist Seth Brundle, a bumbling geek who has invented a teleportation pod that can transport somebody from one pod to another in seconds by breaking down their DNA structure and rebuilding it in seconds. After showing his creation to a journalist (Geena Davis), and bedding her, he gets drunk and teleports himself, unaware that a fly has gotten into the pod with him. Splicing together the fly's genetic make-up with Brundle's, Seth starts to get a taste for all things sweet and begins to grow funny hair in unusual places! State-of-the-art special effects, career-defining performances from the two leads, a great script and Cronenberg's slick direction all combine to make this movie one of the most compelling of the decade, and a movie that sticks in the mind long after the credits have finished rolling.
14) Basket Case (1982) - Another entry for Frank Henenlotter, this borderline video nasty pretty much typifies the sort of movies that the busybody brigade were rallying against in the early eighties. Henenlotter's debut is as grizzly and nasty as anything else that was around at the time, but there is also a real black sense of humour on display that, as with the 'The Evil Dead' at around the same time, ensured the movie garnered a real cult following. The story concerns Duane Bradley, a young man who was born with a siamese twin, named Belial, attatched to his side. Being no more than a fleshy lump with a face and arms, Duane's father arranged for the two to be separated and Belial to be disposed of. After rescuing Belial from the bin, Duane and his 'brother', who are psychically linked, go on a mission to seek revenge on those who have wronged them, although Belial doesn't count on Duane falling in love along the way. Probably the most straightforward plot out of all of Henenlotter's movies, 'Basket Case' displays all of the gritty, low-budget charm that became the director's trademark, along with the bad acting that usually accompanies such movies. Why would you want to watch a movie with such qualities? Because, as with 'Brain Damage', there is obviously such a passion and talent at work, that to decry it as trashy nonsense is to ignore the sheer entertainment value of it. There are two bigger (but not much) budget sequels to 'Basket Case', but none of which stand up to the visceral power of the original, and quite honestly, the sight of a blob of plasticine trashing a hotel room in stop-motion animation does stay in the memory longer than most of the Oscar nominated special effects that bigger studios pay millions to use.
13) The Thing (1982) - Another remake, this chiller from 'Halloween' director John Carpenter is still one of the scariest monster movies of all time, even though there is no one 'monster' to speak of. Kurt Russell plays MacCready, a helicopter pilot who is part of a scientific team working in the Antarctic. After witnessing a team of Norwegians chasing a dog through the snow and then crashing their helicopter, the team take the dog back to their base. After investigating the nearby Norwegian base, and finding a disfigured human corpse, MacReady begins to suspect something untoward is happening. Back at the American base the dog mutates into an alien organism that seemingly clones the person or animal that it kills. After the team's doctor starts to go mad, MacReady starts to suspect that the alien has moved amongst the crew, and so begins to question who is infected. Much like Carpenter's previous hit 'Halloween', 'The Thing' is a very dark and sombre movie that positively drips with atmosphere. Kurt Russell is every inch the grizzly hero with an attitude problem, and the supporting actors (including Keith David and Richard Masur) are all suitably cast. The special effects also deserve a mention, proving that proper live-action effects are more unsettling than anything that has been created by a computer - keep an eye out for the human head that sprouts spider-like legs. Very creepy!
12) Demons (1985) - Sometimes it can get tiring watching a movie and having to think throughout, to follow the plot in case of any twists and analyzing every word spoken to make sense of the whole thing. Sometimes it's good to watch something so silly and pointless that, quite often, it can be the greatest movie you've ever seen - and that's what 'Demons' is. Alright, it's not the greatest movie ever, but it could be one of the most pointless yet enjoyable gorefests you ever have the pleasure to see. Basically, patrons in an Italian cinema watch a horror movie about 'demons' - slimy, zombie-esque creatures with a penchant for gauging out eyes and ripping people open. But while the monsters are appearing on the screen at the cinema, one of the audience has fallen foul of the curse by trying on a mask that has cut her skin and infected her. Tons of blood, green slime and entrail are on offer here, and quite frankly, who wouldn't want to watch a movie that involves hacking off demon's heads whilst riding a motorbike through a cinema to a soundtrack that includes Accept, Billy Idol, Saxon and Mötley Crüe? Produced by horror legend Dario Argento, this is a great piece of nonsense that still holds up nearly a quarter of a century later.
11) An American Werewolf in London (1981) - Supposedly the inspiration for Michael Jackson's 'Thriller', 'AAWIL' was written and directed by John Landis ('Animal House' and 'The Blues Brothers') and was one of the early examples of combining comedy and horror to great effect. Two American students are attacked as they hike across the Yorkshire moors. One of the lads, Jack (Griffin Dunne), is killed, but David (David Naughton) survives with horrific injuries. Taken to a hospital in London, where he meets and falls in love with nurse Alex (Jenny Agutter), David begins to be visited by Jack, who tells him that he is a werewolf and must kill himself. Dismissing Jack's visits as delusional, David and Alex begin a life together, but come the first full moon, David soon wishes he'd heeded his friend's warnings. This movie is a genuine eighties classic, with Naughton's paranoid performance staying the right side side of slapstick and a script that's as witty as you would expect from someone with Landis' career credits - check out the scene in the porno cinema when David meets with the dead versions of the people he's killed. With a solid supporting cast featuring Brian Glover, John Woodvine and David Schofield, this movie hasn't lost any of it's appeal and still makes you chuckle and squirm in equal measure nearly thirty years later. And look out for a young Rik Mayall in the pub scene.
10) The Lost Boys (1987) - So hip and trendy it was out of date as soon as it was released, this could well be the ultimate teen horror movie of all time. Jason Patric and Corey Haim play brothers Michael and Sam who, along with their mother Lucy, move to the sleepy seaside town of Santa Carla to live with their grandpa. Unbeknown to them, Santa Carla is tagged as 'The Murder Capital of the World', and fairly soon Michael begins to fall in with the motorbike gang that hang around the town's pier. After being initiated by the gang's leader David (Kiefer Sutherland), Michael's behaviour begins to change - sleeping all day, staying out all night and wearing dark glasses around the house, and that's just the start of it. Meanwhile, Sam begins to suspect something is up and, with the help of his friends Edgar and Alan Frog, he sets about proving that not everybody is what they seem - including his mother's new boyfriend. Although not very scary, 'The Lost Boys' is terrific entertainment, with Sutherland in particularly fine form as the intense David, and the comedy element provided by the Frog brothers and Grandpa is well used. Ironically, ten years ago this movie looked like a throwback to a distant time, but with the eighties now back in vogue it looks surprisingly fashionable again. Certainly a lot edgier - make that better all round - than the sappy 'Twilight' tosh that's currently getting teenagers all emotional.
9) Night of the Creeps (1986) - This is one of those rare gems of a movie, the sort that didn't appear at the cinema and went straight-to-video, doesn't star any A-listers, but is actually a really good movie. It begins in the 1950's, when a meteorite crashes to Earth. A couple of college students go to investigate and end up playing host to slug-like creatures who leap into their victims mouth and lay eggs on their brain, turning the victim into a zombie. Leap forward thirty years and Chris and J.C. are two college nerds who are desperate to get into one of the fraternity houses. Being told they have to pass a test, in the form of a dare, they go to the mortuary with the intention of stealing a corpse and dumping it on the doorstep of the girl's dorm. Unfortunately, the corpse they defrost opens it's eyes and our two hapless heroes make a run for it. Unbeknown to them they have defrosted the corpse of the nosy student from the 1950's, who still has the slug in his brain. 'NOTC' is very much a cult movie and, although the movie is far from perfect, there's not actually much you can fault it with. Anyone who has seen 2006's 'Slither' will be in familiar territory here, with that movie borrowing a lot of ideas from 'NOTC'. The cast are all fine in their roles, with only genre veteran Tom Atkins and 'National Lampoon's' Jason Lively providing any real familiarity, and the special effects are suitably nasty. As a side note, this movie will get a long-awaited dvd release this year, so hopefully there will be some juicy extras to add to this already cult favourite.
8) Fright Night (1985) - One of the more popular debates over the years has been which is the better vampire movie - 'The Lost Boys' or 'Fright Night'? Both have their merits, but in this list 'Fright Night' comes out on top, purely because it's less fashionable and doesn't take itself quite so seriously. William Ragsdale play Charley Brewster, a normal teenager who, one night, notices his new neighbour Jerry Dandridge (Chris Sarandon) has very long fingernails and pointy front teeth. Realising that Dandridge is a vampire, Charley tries to convince everybody around him - his mother, girlfriend Amy (Amanda Bearse) and his best friend 'Evil' Ed (Stephen Geoffreys) - but they don't believe him, so he turns to late-night horror movie host Peter Vincent (Roddy McDowall) in a desperate bid to expose his neighbour. Although it is a fun movie, 'Fright Night' also has a very dark streak running through it. Mostly shot at dusk or at night, there is a great use of shadows that give the movie terriific atmosphere. There are nods to the more classic horror movies (Peter Vincent is named after Peter Cushing and Vincent Price) whilst adding a few new twists to the vampire mythology (crosses don't work unless the person brandishing it has complete faith in it), and although it's a very eighties movie there is a definite feel of the older Hammer-style films about it. Sarandon is a natural successor to Christopher Lee in playing a suave but deadly bloodsucker, and Roddy McDowall is perfect as the bumbling, reluctant t.v. show host, having to do for real what he has acted out on-screen for years. Still great and still very watchable, 'Fright Night' is essential viewing for anybody wanting a great example of eighties culture.
7) Friday the 13th (1980) - Made in 1979 but not released until 1980, we'll let this one in, mainly because it set the precedent for pretty much all the slasher movies of the next two decades. You know the story - an unsupervised young boy called Jason drowned in Camp Crystal Lake in the late fifties and the camp got closed down. Twenty years later the camp is reopening, but instead of the usual opening day teething troubles, the staff are all being bumped off by a mysterious figure. Has Jason come back for revenge? Well, considering there's now at least ten sequels, plus one remake, you'll probably know the answer, but putting all those aside, this first installment is probably one of the most effective chillers of the last thirty years. First and foremost, you care about the characters (including a young Kevin Bacon) that are being butchered, and secondly, the special effects (courtesy of horror legend Tom Savini) are pretty gruesome. Not as atmospheric, or as universally popular, as John Carpenter's 'Halloween', and often overlooked because of some of the later installments, 'Friday the 13th' is definitely worth another look, if only to see how this kind of movie is done properly. It must have been good to spawn all of those sequels...right?
6) Day of the Dead (1985) - And speaking of Tom Savini, this movie probably contains one of the best special effects he has ever created. It happens right near the end, when a soldier gets torn in two by a horde of zombies. Yes, it's 'Day of the Dead', George A.Romero's second sequel to his classic 1968 hit 'Night of the Living Dead'. After the zombie outbreak in 'Night...' and the shopping mall encounters of 'Dawn of the Dead', we now join a group of survivors living in an underground bunker. Made up of scientists and soldiers the group is fraught with tension - the military want to destroy the zombies, while the scientists want to study and train them. Getting outside to capture specimens is getting more and more dangerous, and the soldiers, led by the detestable Captain Rhodes (Joe Pilato), want some answers quick, before they start shooting. Coming off the back of 'Dawn...' was never going to be easy - where do you go when you've pretty much included everything a zombie movie could in one film? Last minute budget cuts forced Romero to make several script changes, so what we get here is not the full extent of the director's vision, but a very intelligent, progressive and gritty zombie movie with lots of dialogue, that doesn't really get going until the last thirty minutes, when Romero really unleashes hell. As previously stated, the special effects are amazing and still look great to this day, considering what terrible CGI gets used in these types of movies now (and that includes Romero's latest), and if you get the 2-disc special edition, there's a neat little interview with Savini himself explaining how the torn-in-two effect was done. On first viewing 'DOTD' may seem a little sluggish compared to the non-stop action of 'Dawn...', but time has been kind to this movie and with repeated viewings it does get better, to the point that, nearly twenty five years later, this could arguably lay claim to be Romero's greatest work. Even the man himself agrees.
5) The Return of the Living Dead (1985) - Not an official sequel to Romero's 'Night of the Living Dead', although it does have links with one, but rather a more comical effort from director Dan O'Bannon. Two medical supply warehouse employees unwittingly unleash a poisonous gas into the atmosphere that turns anybody who breathes it in into a brain-eating zombie. Meanwhile, a group of punks fooling around in the local cemetary become the main meal of the newly risen dead after the toxic gas causes poisonous rain to fall onto the graves. It's never an easy task to combine horror and comedy and do it well, but the eighties is undoubtedly the decade of the horror comedy and this is one of the best. The main actors, including veterans Clu Gulager and James Karen, eighties fixtures Miguel A.Nunez Jr. and Thom Mathews plus scream queen Linnea Quigley, all ham it up in style - almost as if it was 'Carry On Zombie' - but the gore is what counts here, and there's plenty of it. Best of all, though, is the scene that involves a conversation with the top half of a zombie corpse. Funny and gory in equal measure, and in keeping with tradition, a pretty downbeat ending as well, 'TROTLD' is a bona fide eighties classic that still manages to amuse and disgust.
4) Hellraiser (1987) - In a decade that was drowning in a pool of mask-wearing serial killers offing sex-mad teenagers in various ways, Clive Barker's directorial debut, based on his novella 'The Hellbound Heart', was a breath of fresh air...so to speak! The story centred around an ancient puzzle box that, when solved, opened the gateway to Hell, where the Cenobites - a group of demons with a perverse taste in S&M - would come to claim the soul of whoever opened the box. Frank Cotton opens the box and gets taken to the depths of the netherworld by the sadistic Cenobites, but his soul manages to escape and returns to the place of his bodily death - his brother Larry's house. Larry manages to cut his hand and spills his blood on the floor in the room where Frank died, enabling Frank's soul to absorb the blood and start rebuilding his body. Needing more blood, Frank convinces Larry's wife Julia - with whom he had an affair - to supply more bodies and make him whole again. Unfortunately, Larry's daughter Kirsty finds out what is going on and takes the puzzle box for herself, unleashing the Cenobites back into our world to find their missing soul. It may sound complicated on paper, but 'Hellraiser' is an aborbing movie, snaring the viewer from the outset and not letting up for the whole of it's running time. Produced on a budget of under a million dollars, it is also proof of what can be achieved by sticking to a vision without compromise and it captures Barker's fantastical storytelling perfectly. We are also introduced to Pinhead (credited as Lead Cenobite'), whose presence in the horror world has now become as familiar as Freddy or Jason, but back then he was a different sort of villain, whose scarce presence on the screen meant he was more threatening when he did appear. Tons of blood and gratuitous sex, along with a tight script and intelligent philosophical leanings, gave 'Hellraiser' an edge over it's bigger budget, more mainstream rivals, and although the 1988 sequel 'Hellbound: Hellraiser II' (also written by Barker) was a decent follow-up, subsequent sequels have lessened the impact of the 'Hellraiser' universe, reducing Pinhead to nothing more than a serial killer with some bad one-liners.
3) A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) - Alongside 'Hellraiser', 'ANOES' can justifiably claim to be one of those rare things - an original idea. The story centres around a group of teenagers in the suburban town of Springfield, who are all dreaming of a horribly burned man, who wears a glove with razors on the fingers and who tries to take them to a boiler room where he can kill them. As if the fact that they are all dreaming about the same man isn't weird enough, if he happens to kill you in your dream, you die for real. The last surviving member of the group, Nancy, manages to steal his hat in the dream, and emerges from her sleep still clutching it. Identifying him as Freddy Krueger, Nancy finds out that he was a child murderer who was responsible for a series of killings many years before, and that her parents, and the parents of her friends, tracked him down and burned him alive. Unfortunately for their children, Freddy now haunts their dreams, seeking revenge for his death by killing his murderers children. Although it may seem a bit clunky by modern standards, this original '...Elm Street' movie is still the best of the series. Freddy is seldom seen, and when he is, he is normally a shadow or a silhouette. Unlike the sequels, there are no lame one-liners or attempts at comedy and, despite the subject matter, the movie has a feeling of realism, that Freddy really could get you. Not the comic-book fantasy of the later sequels, where religious iconography and magic became a part of the equation. Wes Craven's fluid narration and penchant for developing an original idea made 'ANOES' a major success and one of the benchmark movies of the decade, making Freddy an iconic villain, a star out of Robert Englund, whose portayal of the dream demon is the perfect definition of evil and introducing a young Johnny Depp to the world. The fact that Craven has never made anything as groundbreaking since is testament to it's potency
　
2) The Evil Dead (1982) - Probably the one movie most credited with the 'video nasty' boom of the early eighties, Sam Raimi's debut feature is still the stuff of wet dreams for fans of cult horror cinema. Filmed on a shoestring budget over the course of four years, 'The Evil Dead' sees a group of young people holidaying in a remote cabin in the woods. They discover an old reel-to-reel tape player in the basement and, of course, play it, unwittingly evoking the evil forces that live in the woods. One by one they fall foul of the ancient spirits until a sole survivor (the legendary Bruce Campbell) is left to do battle with the possessed bodies of his friends. The gore is plentiful, the effects cheap and the acting not brilliant, but there is so much inventiveness in this movie that none of the bad stuff matters. There are so many creative touches, as is nearly always the case with low-budget movies made by young directors, that you can't fail to get on board and go along for the ride; for example the 'demon's eye view' was created by Raimi and Campbell mounting a camera to a piece of wood and runing through the woods with it - simple but effective, as is the stop-motion animation in the final battle. As with 'Basket Case', the crew were working with what they had, and as they were obviously passionate about what they were doing, the results never comes across as rubbish. The inevitable sequels upped the comedic side of things, making the series more accessible, but none come close to capturing the sheer madness and originality of the first, making 'The Evil Dead' a genuinely frightening, and ultimately satisfying, experience.
1) Re-Animator (1985) - And here we have it - the best, in my humble opinion, horror movie of the eighties. Stuart Gordon's debut feature film is still a delight to watch nearly a quarter of a century later, and although there are many things to enjoy here, it's the performances of the leads that make this movie stand out above all others. Jeffrey Combs plays Herbert West, a young doctor who has been working on a serum that, when injected, revives dead bodies. The trouble is that the bodies, once revived, start to attack the living. After moving to the Miskatonic Medical University to continue his research, he rents a house with another junior doctor called Dan Cain (Bruce Abbott), who is dating the daughter of the University Dean, and together they start testing the serum on some of the fresh cadavers at the University. The Dean discovers what they are up to and throws West out of the University and bans Cain from seeing his daughter, although that doesn't stop them from breaking into the University morgue to continue their experiments. Unfortunately, the Dean discovers the pair mid-experiment and gets killed, giving West and Cain a nice fresh corpse to work on. While all this is going on, the pair are being watched by the University's head doctor Carl Hill (David Gale), who has his eye on the serum - and the Dean's daughter. Although the movie is based on an H.P. Lovecraft short story, the obvious comparison is to 'Frankenstein' and taking other influences from all manner of sources from Hitchcock (note the movie's theme tune) to Raimi, although it does feel very fresh in its execution. Despite all the madness of reanimated corpses coming to life and attacking the living, the cast all play their roles dead straight, with very little humour coming from any of the leads, and this is what gives the movie it's charm. Gordon's theatre background adds great pace to a movie that is pretty much the definitive eighties movie - OTT gore, gratuitous sex, manic comedy situations, tight script, likeable characters and perfect casting all in one movie. And it hasn't dated one jolt.

A Review of Priest Feast 20/2/2009

2009-06-26T10:09:00.000-07:00

It's just like 1988 all over again. Over the last few years, a lot of metal gigs have been 'old-school-versus-new-school' affairs, with line-ups like Iron Maiden with Trivium, but this is the sort of stuff dreams are made of. Old-school thrash titans Testament are first up, hitting the stage at just gone six o'clock and going at it like they have a point to prove. Current album 'The Formation of Damnation' has proved that there's life in the old dog yet, and songs like 'More Than Meets the Eye' and the savage title track sit seamlessly alongside established thrashers like 'Souls of Black' and 'Practice What You Preach'. Chuck Billy's formidable stage presence and gutteral vocals (along with his microphone air guitaring!) show he's still one of the best frontmen out there, and combined with the none-more-metal guitar attack of Alex Scholnick and Eric Peterson, Testament really are having a rebirth. Long may it continue!

And much the same could be said about fellow thrashers Megadeth, who follow shortly after. Last album 'United Abominations' was released two years ago, and with nothing new in the pipeline until later in the year, Dave Mustaine and his band of merry men can concentrate on delivering a set of classics for the baying crowds. Although the band open with a surefire triple whammy of 'Sleepwalker', 'Wake Up Dead' and 'Take No Prisoners', the lack of guitars in the mix means the effect is dampened somewhat. After a grumble from Mr.Mustaine (unlike him!) all seems okay and Megadeth hit their stride, peeling off classic after classic - who could argue with the full force of 'Hangar 18', 'Symphony of Destruction', 'In My Darkest Hour', 'Peace Sells' and 'Holy Wars', all spat out by a seemingly very pissed-off Dave Mustaine?

Which just leaves the headliners, the mighty Judas Priest, the task of hammering home old-school metal values - a task for which they are more than up for. First track proper 'Prophecy', from latest album 'Nostradamus', may not have the fist-in-the-air urgency of usual opener 'Electric Eye', but it's chunky riffing and catchy chorus send the masses into singalong mode anyway. 'Metal Gods' follows as several thousand old-schoolers bang their heads in unison, before the band unleash a tirade of forgotten classics - 'Eat Me Alive', 'Between the Hammer & the Anvil' and 'Devil's Child'. Almost sensing the crowd's need for singalong anthems, Rob Halford's cry of "Breaking the what?" is met with near hysteria and sets the energy levels for the rest of the show. And that's what this is - a show, as opposed to a gig. Rob Halford has more costume changes than Bette Midler, whilst flamboyant guitarists K.K. Downing and Glenn Tipton provide adequate support, stalking the whole of the stage whilst firing off those classic duelling solos. Drummer Scott Travis also joins in the theatrics , throwing drumsticks in the air whilst never missing a beat or cymbal crash, although not all of them were caught. During 'Death', the second and last song aired from 'Nostradamus', Halford emerges from the drum riser sat on a throne, but yet this doesn't seem corny or cheesy. With the exception of maybe Iron Maiden, Priest are probably the only band who could get away with it, and it's this sense of the theatre - the costumes, the props, the stage-moves - that make this band just so damn entertaining. Halford has the crowd in the palm of his hand from the very beginning and doesn't let them go until the very last note has been played, and even though he may not have quite the same intensity on stage as he had twenty five years ago (a fact born out by the way he can barely stand at the end of the show), every note is sung (and screamed) with a passion that many frontmen half his age could barely muster.

After a storming 'Sinner', including an amazing solo by Downing, and 'Painkiller', the band leave the stage - only to return moments later to the sound of revving motorbike engines, and Halford astride a Harley Davidson as the band launch into 'Hell Bent for Leather'. The end is nigh, and the band give everthing they've got as they finish with their staple cover of Peter Green's 'Green Manalishi' and the singalong goodness of 'You've Got Another Thing Coming', and the band relish the manic reactions from the crowd. Although they may not have the mainstream acceptance of Iron Maiden or Metallica, on tonight's evidence there is no doubt that Judas Priest are still the defining heavy metal band, and in the live arena, about as entertaining as it's possible to get.

A Review of Metallica in Nottingham 25/2/2009

2009-06-26T10:07:00.000-07:00

Holding approximately 10,000 people, the Trent FM Arena is full of anticipation tonight as metal legends Metallica embark on their first full UK tour since 1996. But before the headliners hit the stage, openers The Sword get the chance to test their mettle(!). Hand-picked by Metallica drummer Lars Ulrich, The Sword hit the stage with their mix of Sabbath riffs and rhythms and almost Slayer-esque aggression, all flailing hair, tight jeans and feet-on-monitors. Despite some complaints about the sound mix, the band play an enthusiastic half hour set showcasing tracks from both of their albums and show that old-style heavy metal headbanging is still the most fun you can have with your clothes on.

A fact that next band Machine Head have been hammering home for the last fifteen years. Kicking off with 'Clenching the Fists of Dissent' from their 2007 masterpiece 'The Blackening' it's obvious that our heads aren't gonna get kicked in by the band tonight. Not that it's the band's fault because their energy and playing is never in any doubt. It's just that somebody forgot to tell the soundman to turn up Robb Flynn's mic. Dave McClain's drums dominate everything as guitars and vocals are lost, and even a move around the floor to the other side side of the stage doesn't improve things much. 'Imperium' looks impressive, as does their cover of Maiden's 'Hallowed Be Thy Name', but it's only during closer 'Davidian', when the crowd seem to take the hint and start a frenzied circle pit, that there's any connection with what's going on on stage. Which is a shame, as Machine Head don't do bad gigs. Put this one down to bad sound engineers and hope someone's arse gets kicked.

Which is what Metallica do best! Opening with the first two tracks from latest album 'Death Magnetic', Metallica have it all to prove tonight. Last album 'St.Anger' was universally despised due to it's lop-sided production and over-long songs, and although 'Death Magnetic' has been enjoying better than average reviews from fans and critics alike, there's still a sense that the band need to reclaim their title as THE metal band, especially with renewed interest in veteran bands such as Megadeth, Iron Maiden and Judas Priest. A few niggly sound issues are taken care of and Hetfield addresses the crowd to rapturous applause. Classic thrasher 'The Four Horsemen' is next, followed by the rarely played 'Leper Messiah', from 1986's masterpiece 'Master of Puppets', and to be honest, they could leave the stage now, safe in the knowledge that it's 'job done'. 'One' is aired, with enough pyro to sink a battleship, along with newie 'Broken, Beat and Scarred', a future staple of the set for sure, before the crowd is treated to the world-exclusive first play of 'The Judas Kiss', probably the stand-out track from 'Death Magnetic'. A stomping 'Sad But True' gives way to the gentler 'No Leaf Clover' before the double-whammy of 'All Nightmare Long' and 'The Day That Never Comes' shows how fresh the new material sounds, albeit with a gentle nod to the band's glorious past. A furious 'Master of Puppets' signifies we're on the home straight, before the band throw another curveball and give us the full-throttle aggression of 'Fight Fire With Fire'. The amazing sight of a circle pit full of die-hard Metallica fans suddenly going from high-kicking through a thrash classic to gently swaying from side to side with lighters in the air for 'Nothing Else Matters' must rank as a highlight, before we're treated to the inevitable set closer 'Enter Sandman'. An encore of covers 'Breadfan' and 'Helpless' gives way to Hetfield teasing the crowd about not having any more - and then the band oblige and give a rousing rendition of 'Seek and Destroy', as 10,000 raised fists confirm that this has been an evening to cherish. So there was no 'Creeping Death', 'Fade to Black' or 'Wherever I May Roam'. Oh well. When Metallica are as on fire as they are tonight, it wouldn't matter if they played the theme tune to 'Eastenders', because the love genererated from the crowd to the band is immense. And playing a set with their foot firmly in the heavier side of their back catalogue, for the first time in well over a decade, Metallica belong to 'us' again.

A Review of Drag Me To Hell

2009-06-26T10:05:00.000-07:00

It's always a joy when iconic filmmakers rediscover their mojo and make the kind of movies that fans want to see. George A.Romero went back to basics with 'Diary of the Dead', admittedly with mixed results but at least there was an honesty to its execution, whilst Wes Craven and David Cronenberg have both contributed to movies that bear the trademarks of their talents. Sam Raimi has been a favourite with genre fans since 'The Evil Dead' first terrified and amused audiences at the dawn of the video nasty boom of the early eighties, and even though he has gone on to bigger blockbuster action with the 'Spiderman' franchise, he has frequently returned to more spooky fare with production credits on 'The Grudge', 'The Grudge 2', '30 Days of Night' and 'The Messengers'. With 'Drag Me to Hell', though, the inventive director has come full circle and made a movie that easily stands up against his original 'Evil Dead' trilogy.
The story centres around Christine Brown (Alison Lohman), a loan officer in a bank who is a potential candidate for a promotion, if only she could convince her boss (David Paymer) that she can make tough decisions. She is visited at work by an elderly Hungarian gypsy, Mrs. Ganush (Lorna Raver), who is requesting a third extension on her mortgage. After trying to convince her boss to grant the extension, he leaves the decision in Christine's hands, as a way of testing her credentials. After telling Mrs. Ganush that the bank cannot extend her mortgage, the upset pensioner then gets on her knees and begs. Christine calls security to remove her from the building, but Mrs.Ganush takes this as an insult and tries to attack Christine, insisting that Christine has shamed her. When Christine leaves work that evening, she is attacked by Mrs. Ganush (in one of the best scenes of the movie), who takes a button from Christine's coat, places a curse on it and gives it back. Still traumatised, Christine and her boyfriend Clay (Justin Long) pay a visit to Rham Jas (Dileep Rao), a local spiritualist, who tells Christine she has been cursed by a demon called The Lamia, who will torment her for three days before coming to claim her soul and take her to Hell.
So there's your plot. The first thing to say about this movie is how refreshing it is to see this sort of shocker made by somebody who really knows their stuff. The gore is kept to a minimum, but that's because there's no need for it. Raimi has always been able to shock audiences without resorting to gratuitous tactics - 'The Evil Dead' may have had bucketloads of goo, but as those movies went on there was less and less of it, forcing the viewer to invest more in the story. Although the comparisons to the 'Evil Dead' movies are obvious, as well as the shocks and the 'Three Stooges'-esque slapstick, it is the overall style that Raimi has developed over the years that shines through here, and other earlier works such as 'Darkman' and 'The Quick and the Dead' would prove to be useful reference points - the quick editing, the camera angles, narrative flow and cinematic scope that are present in both of those movies is here, as is Raimi's 'shaky-cam' style of filming. It's also a very loud movie with loads of bangs crashes and subliminal noises that add to the overall atmosphere.
As with almost all of Raimi's movies, the characters are strong and likeable - even Mrs. Ganush to start with - and this familiarity with type adds to the action. Lorna Raver's depiction of the scorned gypsy is the very definition of creepy and if there was ever a category for Best Villain at the Oscars then Mrs. Ganush should win hands down. Without trying to give anything away, even in the later scenes when her physical being isn't doing much, she still exudes an air of ghoulish menace. Alison Lohman is a pretty strong lead, and seems to have a good chemistry with Justin Long, even if he comes across as a bit wet. Christine's rival for the promotion at the bank, Stu (ReggieLee), is also a great character who was used well and came across as pretty detestable.
As a whole, 'DMTH' is an absolute triumph of a movie. There are a few slight issues - some dodgy CGI effects, one or two lapses in the script - but no movie is perfect, and as far as this movie is concerned, it's about as close as you're going to get from one of the genres most consistently inventive talents. The only thing that was missing was an appearance from a certain Mr. Campbell, maybe in the role of Milos, the medium's assistant. Considering how the scene involving him plays out, it would have been a great cameo. Overall, though, this is an excercise from a master in how to shock and have fun in equal measure, and although Raimi made the fatal error of making his first movie a classic against which everything he does is measured, this is certainly the best movie he has made since 1982.

A Review of Midnight Meat Train

2009-06-26T10:04:00.000-07:00

Of all the people not to meet on a train late at night, Vinnie Jones in a bad mood must come close to the top of the list. Hopefully, though, his mood would lighten somewhat with the knowledge that 'TMNMT' is a gem of a movie that may just have given the ex-footballer a proper vehicle for his menacing screen persona.
Based on the short story by Clive (Hellraiser) Barker, the movie centres around photographer Leon (Bradley Cooper), who is desperate to break into the big time by photographing what he calls 'the real city' - pictures of everyday people doing everyday things. Told that his photos need to have a bit more edge, Leon follows a gang of thugs into the subway station, where they start to harrass a young lady. Leon calls for them to stop and immediately starts to snap pictures as the gang head in his direction. Pointing out that they've been captured on film, Leon escapes a beating but snaps a couple of pictures of the grateful lady before she steps on the train. Unfortunately for her, she is sharing the train with Mahogany (Jones), a dapper looking butcher who stalks the late night train and kills whoever is left on there in the early hours, using the tools of his day job. The next day, the young lady's picture is in the paper and this gets Leon intrigued. Leon's potential employer loves the pictures of the gang he has taken and asks for more to put in an exhibition, so he goes back to the subway and waits. He doesn't have to wait long, as the next person to emerge from the station is Mahogany. Noticing that Mahogany is wearing the same ring as a mystery hand who held a door open for the previous night's victim, Leon follows him back to his hotel. Becoming obsessed with Mahogany, Leon then follows him to his workplace, where Mahogany catches Leon spying on him. Leon manages to escape, but his obsession, that is starting to cost him his relationship with his girlfriend Maya (Leslie Bibb), leads him back to the subway that night. Witnessing Mahogany's latest massacre, where he not only kills but removes the eyes, shaves the hair and hangs the bodies on meathooks, Leon passes out, only to awaken hanging from a hook in Mahogany's workplace with a strange emblem carved into his chest and his camera missing.
Concerned with what's happening Maya and her friend Jurgis (Roger Bart) go to Mahogany's hotel to try and find Leon's camera, only for Mahogany to return and catch them. Maya escapes, without Jurgis or the camera, and goes to the police to try and convince them what is happening, but does Detective Hadley (Barbara Eve Harris) know more than she is letting on? While this is going on, Leon gets tooled up and heads back to the subway to take on Mahogany one last time, unaware that there may be more to the butcher's crimes than just random killing.
Stylishly directed by Japanese director Ryûhei Kitamura, this movie is a real treat for gore fans. With nods to Sam Raimi (brother Ted even appears in one of the scenes) but with less slapstick, Kitamura has stamped his own mark with some truly remarkable camera work, and although the cgi effects aren't the best, they don't distract from proceedings. If anything, they add to the director's sleek style; keep a watch out for the scene when three city types come up against Mahogany and his meat tenderizer, and prepare to let out a fanboy cheer. The real gore effects are brilliantly done, so much so that those with weak stomachs may consider turning veggie.
The pacing of the movie is also excellent, throwing you straight in to the action and not letting up - even the quieter, stalking scenes are as tense as anything seen since Hitchcock. Part of that would be down to Jones' performance as the psychotic Mahogany. Comparable to Arnie in 'The Terminator', it isn't his acting ability that impresses - he only says one word in the whole movie - but it's his overall presence and his ability to fill the screen, indicating that danger isn't far away. Also, the way his body language is so very controlled - again, like Arnie's cyborg killer - is quite remarkable. His cold stare, robot-like turn-of-the-head and understated body movements make for a great performance of one of the more interesting villains of modern horror movies.
That isn't to say that there aren't a few bad points. Bradley Cooper is fairly uncharismatic as the equally lame Leon, so it was quite hard to empathise with him, and, with the exception of the always entertaining Roger Bart, the rest of the cast are fairly forgettable. There are also a few loopholes in the plot that don't really explain the bigger picture, so there are a few questions left at the end.
Overall, though, 'TMNMT' is one of the most enjoyable horror movies of recent times - gory, funny and, in keeping with Clive Barker tradition, never quite going in one direction, and would probably make a great double feature with Sam Raimi's 'Drag Me To Hell'. It may also make you think twice about who you sit next to on the train!

A Review of Martyrs

2009-06-26T10:03:00.000-07:00

There is a tagline in the trailers for the original 'The Texas Chainsaw Massacre' that says 'This movie is relentless in it's attempt to drive you out of your mind', and although that movie did scare audiences, it was a good scare; a throw-your-popcorn-in-the-air scare, with a tongue placed firmly in cheek with regards to the terrors it presented. Instead, that tagline should be applied to 'Martyrs', as it's fairly doubtful as to whether there has been a movie that makes it's audience feel so uneasy yet, at the same time, is so very compelling.
'Martyrs' begins with a news flashback to 1971, where a young girl called Lucie has escaped from captivity and notified police. Lucie has been deprived of proper food and severely beaten, but there are no signs of any sexual traumas, and she is in such an emotional state that she is unable to tell the authorities about who was holding her or what really happened. Lucie is put into a care home where she meets and befriends a young girl called Anna, who also gets quizzed by the authorities as to whether Lucie has revealed anything. What Anna doesn't tell them, because Lucie has made her promise not to, is that Lucie gets visited by a snarling, female figure who attacks and mutilates her.
Fast forward fifteen years, and the Belfond family are having the usual early morning family squabbles. Brother and sister are fighting while dad is making breakfast, and mum is in the garden fixing the water supply. After answering a knock at the door, dad is killed by a shotgun-wielding Lucie, who then proceeds to blast away at the rest of the family, only stalling at the son to ask if he knows what his parents have done. Having murdered the whole family, who Lucie believes were the ones who tortured her, Lucie then sees the creature who has been haunting her since childhood. Although trying to placate the creature by murdering the family, the creature attacks Lucie with her own cut-throat razor, in one of the most violent and unsettling scenes in the movie. Lucie is then joined by Anna, who begins to clear up the mess and dispose of the bodies in the garden, discovering along the way that the mother isn't quite dead. Anna tries to sneak the mother out of the house, but is discovered by Lucie who proceeds to smash the mother's skull with a hammer. The creature appears again and Lucie shows the creature that the mother is dead. It is now that we learn the creature is in fact a woman who was being tortured in the same building as Lucie, and that Lucie could have helped the woman escape when she managed to break free, but didn't. The creature starts to cut Lucie's arms, but a revealing shot from Anna's perspective shows that Lucie is in fact cutting herself and that the creature is imaginary. Lucie believes that murdering the torturers would somehow stop the creature from appearing, but unfortunately Lucie still sees it and, seemingly unable to take any more, kills herself.
But it doesn't end there, as Anna is about to find out. Discovering a secret lair of chambers under the house, she comes across another female victim, who is blindfolded with a metal visor that has been riveted into her head. Anna takes the woman upstairs and tries to clean her up and remove the visor, but, due to the traumatic events that have obviously happened to her, the woman freaks out and tries to cut off her own arm, after which she is shot in the head by a team of soldier-type people who have entered the house. Immediately seizing Anna, they drag her down to the underground chamber where she is visited by a mysterious middle-aged woman who informs Anna that Lucie and the other victim were in the process of being made martyrs - people who, when tortured to the point where the body gives up resisting, achieve a level of transcendence and are able to see into the afterlife. As women make better martyrs, it is they who are experimented on. Of course, Anna is then the next person subjected to the vile tortures that the new occupants of the house inflict.
To find out what happens, you'll have to watch the movie, but needless to say if what has happened so far hasn't put you off your dinner, then the final thirty minutes of 'Martyrs' will certainly will. And if the final thirty minutes doesn't at least make you cringe, then you are officially dead, as this is probably the most reactive movie you'll ever be able to rent from your local Blockbuster. If your idea of hardcore violence begins and ends with 'Hostel' then think again, as 'Martyrs' pushes the envelope even further, and that isn't to say that the gore is ever excessive or out of context. 'Hostel' is indeed much gorier, but that movie was made by a couple of filmmakers who are known to be excessive and exploitative, and in the end 'Hostel', for all it's pretentions to Grindhouse, is a Hollywood movie, albeit filmed to look cheap and tacky. This movie pushes the boundaries by suggesting that human nature is so depraved, so desperate to achieve knowledge about that which is beyond our existence, that so-called 'normal' people would stoop to any level to achieve it. Fortunately, there is salvation at the end - not for Anna, but for the viewer, who gets to see the results of what happens when Anna achieves martyrdom, and what it does to the person there to witness it.
French cinema has been very busy of late, producing such graphic nasties as 'Frontier(s)' and 'Switchblade Romance', but where these movies are new twists on old themes, 'Martyrs' is strikingly original. The story moves along at a steady pace, and the lightning quick edits and unusual camera angles add to the feeling of frenzied madness that is coming from the screen. In contrast to that, some of the scenes near the end, when Anna is taking the full force of the brutality being dished out, are very beautifully shot, despite what is happening. The lingering shots of a desperate Anna, having been tortured, mutilated and taken the worst that humanity can offer, are almost poetic in their execution (!), and give the viewer that extra emotional punch, as if any were need.
'Martyrs' is uncomfortable, disturbing, humourless and mean-spirited. It is also competently acted and inventively shot, with a tight script and has probably some of the most realistic displays of violence and it's effects ever seen on film. It isn't an enjoyable movie but, at the same time, it is a movie not to be missed, and for once, it is a movie that is deserving of the title 'video nasty'.

A Review of Stuck

2009-06-26T09:53:00.000-07:00

In recent years, director Stuart Gordon has branched out from the H.P. Lovecraft adaptions he was famous for and started to creep towards more realistic scenarios, and although 'Stuck' is pretty far removed from the OTT gorefest that is 'Re-Animator', it still has its fair share of gruesome moments and black humour. Based on real events, Gordon and writer John Strysik have injected the basic story with a venomous satirical slant that echoes classic George A.Romero and makes what could have been an already bizarre story into a rather more interesting tale.
The story centres around the rather tragic figure of Thomas Bardo (Stephen Rea), an unemployed man who gets thrown out of his lodgings for not paying his rent. After an unsuccessful visit to the employment office, where he is made to feel even more insignificant by his advisor by being told he isn't on their system, even though he's filled out all the correct forms already. Now jobless, homeless and with no cash at all, Thomas is forced to find a park bench to sleep on, where he befriends another homeless man who gives him a shopping trolley. Meanwhile, care assistant Brandi (Mena Suvari) is up for a promotion, and to celebrate she has gone out on the town with her friend and colleague Tanya, and her drug-dealing boyfriend Rashid (Russell Hornsby), who gives the girls ecstasy tablets. Brandi and Rashid leave the club and decide to meet up at Brandi's house later on. Unwisely choosing to drive, Brandi makes her way home, but driving whilst on drugs and using a mobile phone isn't sensible as Brandi loses concentration for a second and hits Bardo, who had been moved on by the police and was on his way to a homeless shelter. Rather than bounce off the bonnet, though, Bardo goes headfirst into the windshield and manages to get stuck (do you see what they did there?) half in and half out of the car. Brandi panics and drives home, where she realises that Bardo is still alive. She parks in her garage and goes in the house where Rashid turns up a few minutes later. Brandi tells him what happened but misses out the part about Bardo still being stuck in the windshield. Believing that Brandi hit a street bum and drove off, Rashid convinces her that no-one will come looking for a homeless guy and that she's in the clear.
The next day, Brandi goes to work, and after a tense scene involving a taxi driver almost discovering Bardo in the garage, Brandi realises that she has left her mobile phone in her car. Meanwhile, Bardo has also discovered it and tries to phone the police, although not knowing where he is could prove to be a problem. Also, the illegal immigrant family who live next door have discovered Bardo but, due to their own predicament, don't tell the authorities. Brandi also goes to see Rashid, who she finds in bed with another woman, and tells him the full story and asks for his help, as he has boasted about getting rid of bodies before. As Brandi soon discovers, though, his boasts turn out to be just that, as when Rashid goes to finish Bardo off, he gets more than he bargained for.
Overall, 'Stuck' is a gem of a movie. The cast are all pretty top notch in their roles, especially Stephen Rea as the tortured Bardo and Russell Hornsby as the cowardly Rashid, and given the incredible circumstances of the story, it's all done pretty convincingly. Gordon's direction is, as usual, fairly tight and shows that he can handle more serious, dramatic subject matter with the same inventiveness he has displayed previously without resorting to dumbing down his style. There are moments of humour amongst the never gratuitous gore, and when combined with Gordon's intelligent story telling, it all comes together to make a wonderfully entertaining movie. It isn't perfect, but what movie is? The few editorial gaffes (like a windscreen shattering into shards in one shot, and being laminated in the next) are so minor that it doesn't distract from the compelling story unfolding on the screen. As mentioned previously, there is also a satirical slant to the story, especially the scenes with Bardo at the employment office, and it has also been said that the movie is a metaphor for the Bush administration. As with all things, it's there if you want to see it but it never overshadows the narrative.
There are those that say the events of this movie aren't what really happened, but in the context of a movie, is that so important? The point is to entertain and maybe make you think a little, and on both of those points 'Stuck' can be called a success.