HORROR MOVIE catch-up: What the hell have you been doing, Dave?

Okay- I know what you're thinking. This is pretty late.  "We're 3 days from Halloween and Dave, you lazy asshole, you've only reviewed 9 movies.  What's your deal?"

Well first off, I underestimated how much of a dedication it would be to not only watch a 90-120 minute movie ever night, but then go and write a full review on it immediately afterwards.  And jeeze, if you miss one day, it just keeps piling on, making it pretty damn difficult to catch up.

And second, I don't have to answer to you, you're not my father.  So back off internet.  Give me a second to catch my breath (I ran all the way here to tell you this).


All kidding aside.  I've always wanted to do the horror movie a day thing for October, and unfortunately, it didn't quite pan out this year.  Work, family, etc.  If I was still a lonely bachelor, I probably could've written three years worth of these things, but alas, that time has passed.  So, maybe when Roman has graduated high school and moved away to college, I'll be able to delve into this and give it the commitment it needs.  Until then however, I didn't want to force this on myself because, hey, I love October, and if I'm making myself watch horror movies, then I'm not really enjoying it. 

So, there have been a couple days where I skipped a movie, but instead filled the time with fun things you can only do in the fall.  We took Roman to the Pumpkin Patch outside of Rockford, IL; a place that my parents used to take me every year.  This was his first time there, and it was a lot of fun.  He's still at the age where he doesn't quite know what to make of anything, but he seemed to enjoy most of it. Especially that damn bounce house. 

We also had a couple nights of making cut-out Halloween cookies, which I think I can say with 100% certainty, are the best cookies known to man.  Bats, Pumpkins, Ghosts, cats, and the standard penis-shaped cookie, created with the last remaining bits of dough.  Good times.  Then we carved some badass pumpkins (which unfortunately, almost immediately caved in on themselves once we put them outside.) 

One of my other favorite aspects of October, is the Halloween marathons and TV specials on TV.  AMC has been doing their usual, awesome marathons.  This year's line up has been particularly impressive, and it looks like they've got the rights to a ton of famous franchises.  Definitely some good TV-watching if you don't already own them.  I already had most of the good ones, so I found myself flipping through the line-up and DVRing the shitty movies that I never bought, and probably will never intend to watch.  Oh well. 

The Travel Channel has actually had some cool programs this year as well. (I know, the Travel Channel...) Lots of cool haunted locations, behind the scenes of haunted houses, scariest places in the world, etc.  Great stuff to get you in the Halloween mood.  And then Food Network never fails to amaze me, when they do their specials on the epic Pumpkin carving competitions, and sugar/cake sculpting.  Plus, Mythbusters did a Walking Dead episodes, that shitty Ultimate Spider-Man did a Dracula episode (guest starring Blade, Werewolf by Night, Man-Thing, and a couple other C-Level horror characters from the Marvel universe), and ABC even did a Toy Story Halloween special that was pretty damn good, especially since it had all the returning cast members do voices.

So, this is why I didn't get 27 movies watched by now.  But, I didn't stop at 9, as my blog would have you believe.  I've still been watching stuff, I just haven't had the time to go into too much detail on it.  And rather than backtrack and write up 10 painfully long, in-depth reviews, I figured I'd just give a quick run-down on what I've been watching, to get you up-to-speed.

So, here we go, picking up where I left off:

SUSPIRIA
-Classic Italian witch movie, directed by horror maestro, Dario Argento.  He had worked primarily in giallo horror films before this one (Giallo-being an Italian genre which usually involves an unseen killer stalking his victims before revealing the killer's identity at the end; they also usually have a lot of shots from the killer's POV- the more you know...) but this was his first foray into supernatural horror. 

Bright red blood, awesome electronic soundtrack, and the most vividly lit horror flick you'll ever see.  Suspiria is the first of many Argento movies where logic goes out the window, and you just sit back and take it in for the pure visual brilliance that you see before you.  This is the first of Argento's Three Mothers Trilogy (which, unfortunately, only goes downhill from here), and it follows an American girl, arriving at a famous Italian ballet school, which may or may not be housing a coven of witches.  Okay, it is.  Spoiler.  Gruesome deaths. Maggots raining from the ceiling. Service dogs turning on their owners. Falling into a pit of razor wire. And terrible Italian dubbing.  What's not to like? 

Also- on a odd note, it's been said that Argento himself does all the stabbings in his movies.  Meaning, it's his hand stabbing or strangling the victims in ever scene.  That's a little weird, huh?  But I guess no weirder than Mel Gibson doing the same during the crucifixion scene in Passion of the Christ.  Different strokes I guess.


PEOPLE UNDER THE STAIRS
-Wes Craven's take on the have and the have-nots.  The story follows a young, inner-city black boy nick-named "Fool," as he gets roped into robbing a wealthy house in hopes of helping pay his family's rent and medical bills.  A young Ving Rhames plays the guy who brings him along, but they soon find themselves tapped in a booby-trapped home of two psychotic Reagan-esq. lunatics. 

Not a great movie, but kind of a fun one, with lots of moments that stick out in your memory.  Courtney always remembers this movie, and I think she remembers it being better than it actually is.  It's a cool concept, and Craven seems to have a thing with setting traps in his movies.  It's almost like a companion piece to Home Alone, only with less shocking brutality.  (Poor Marv...)

Another off note- the two psycho home owners, referred to as "Mommy" and "Daddy" are actually played by the actors that play a husband and wife on the show Twin Peaks, which must've been airing right around this time.  I finished Twin Peaks for the first time earlier this year, so it was a shock to see them together again, playing a slightly more deranged pair. 

Some of the best moments involve the creepy images of the kids within the walls of the house, and the tongue-less kid (who would later go on to play Rickity Cricket in Always Sunny).  It's a fun movie, but it gets a little old around the 50-minute mark, because so much of the run-time involves them just running around this house.  It's worth a watch though.  And if you saw it when you were younger, chances are, you'll remember it being better than it actually is. 

 

 

TOY STORY OF TERROR
-Not a horror movie, and not much longer than 20 minutes, but still a fun Halloween flick, and I'd never turn down a chance to revisit the amazing Toy Story Universe.  I'll do this one quick.  The toys, now living with the little girl that Andy gifted them to at the end of the trilogy, are unexpectedly stuck at a hotel after the family encounters car trouble.  They check in, and explore the creepy hotel room, while acknowledging all the classic horror movie tropes that they manage to find themselves in.  Suddenly, they begin to get picked off one by one.  I won't spoil anything, in case you run across it, but the highlight of the short film is definitely the character Combat Carl, as voiced by Carl Weathers.  He definitely channels some of his Dylan-persona from Predator.  Good stuff, and quite funny.


WALKING DEAD
-Another one that's not a movie, but how can you talk about Halloween viewing and not touch on Walking Dead?  Since it premiered on Halloween night 4 years ago, this has been about the biggest show on cable since, I don't know... since Breaking Bad's finale last month?  (the timestream seems to be out of wack-  I'll check on it later).  Whether you're in the camp that loves it or hates it, there's no denying it's affect on pop culture. 

And even though last season's lack-luster finale left everyone with a bad taste in their mouth, how can you turn your back on a show that has fully embraced, gruesome, big-budget zombie horror?  They don't pull any punches on this.  You've seen the show- you know that no one is safe.  I feel bad that right now, among certain geek circles, it's become cool to hate on The Walking Dead.  Sure, it's not perfect, and yes, I wish they wouldn't have veered so far from the comic in some aspects too, but come on, is there something better that you're watching instead of this?  Get real.  It's a fucking well made zombie show.  Who would've thought this would become the most popular show on TV?

As for season 4, we're only two episodes in, but I already feel like it's a large step above the end of season 3.  A lot better characterization, and the fact that some time has passed, the threat of the Governor has subsided, and the characters are able to relax and try to start enjoying themselves, is really setting this up as a nice calm before the storm.  Still, even with a bit of a lull in the action, we've gotten two amazing zombie attacks, and a new mysterious virus that's killing off people without incorporating the zombie bite.  I'm intrigued, and I look forward to seeing where they are going with this one.

-Also- American Horror Story is on again as well.  I LOVED the first season, but missed the second one on TV. I picked it up on blu ray, but I'm waiting till after October to dig into it.  I'm also DRVing the 3rd season, so I can jump into that right away too.  I really like how each season is essentially, it's own, 12-hour stand alone horror movie.  Brilliant idea.  I can't wait to watch this. 


MONSTER HOUSE
-A fantastic kids movie about a haunted house.  I had forgotten that Spielberg and Zemeckis were producers on this, and after watching it for a couple minutes, it really shows.  It's got that great, retro feel of a Spielberg movie, following around a group of likable (not annoying) kids as they have a seriously dangerous and horrifying adventure.  Plus, it's got some great cinematography, that feels like this could have easily been a live-action film, if Zemeckis wasn't so infatuated with his CGI-motion-capture playground that he's been spending the last couple decades in. 

Overall, a really good, well-made kids movie, that feels a little like Poltergeist or The Gate; you know, those movies that are PG, but they could seriously freak you out if you saw them at the right age.  This isn't quite at that level, but it definitely doesn't pull punches for a kids movie.  And it's got Steve Buescemi, which is always a good thing, for any movie.


MANIAC
-Gruesome, artsy remake of a sleezy 80s horror flick.  This one, starring Frodo himself, Elijah Wood, as the titular "Maniac," a guy who owns a mannequin restoration shop, and apparently suffers from social anxiety syndrome.  Oh, and he likes to go out and scalp women in the night, and set their bloody hairpieces on his girlfriends (mannequins) that he has scattered around his bedroom.
Despite that one little tick, he's a fairly likable guy, and you can't help but feel sorry for him, both because he's just so socially awkward, and because the majority of the movie is shot through his Point of View, so we're seeing the film through his eyes.  That's right, so when he's having dinner with this hot chick, you're feeling pretty cool, excited to get her back to her apartment. Then it dawns on you, "Oh shit," he's going to kill this girl, and you're going to have to watch.  Hell, it's more like you're going to have to participate, since the movie plays out like a killer/rapist version of Goldeneye.  Too bad that didn't exist, maybe all those Halo-nerd frat guys wouldn't have rufied so many girls at college parties.

Worth a watch, for the creative camera work, the gruesome effects, and the fact the Elijah Wood gives it his all.  His face is really only in the film for about 10 minutes, but you feel like you're watching him for the whole movie.  I read that they were going to just get someone to be his hand double, but he was dedicated to the movie, and did all the hand work himself too.  So, even though you can't see his face, it's pretty much all him throughout the movie.  He also fondles a girl's boobs for a while, so that may have played a role in his decision as well. 





THE CONJURING

-Somehow, this movie recently became like the third highest grossing horror film of all time.  When did that happen?  I mean, I know it was pretty popular in theaters, but I had no idea it was that successful.  Should it have been?  Eh, I don't know.  It didn't re-invent the wheel, or do anything completely unique (like Blair Witch or something) (thank God), but what it did do, it did very well. 
Classic Haunted House 101.  I guess the interesting thing they did was focus the movie not only on the family experiencing the haunting, but also on the two real-life paranormal investigators, Ed and Lorraine Warren. 

The movie takes itself very seriously, and they hold back on the in-your face shocks for most of the film, before going pretty all-out in the climax.  Not a lot of surprise fake out, or jump scares.  Most of the shocks feel genuine and earned, and the house itself is a nice, creepy old farm house that you can believe exists out there somewhere.

The reason this movie is as good as it is is director James Wan.  So far, he's given us Saw, Dead Silence, Death Sentence, Insidious, this, and Insidious 2.  That is a pretty damn good track record.  He definitely knows how to craft an effective horror film, and if that's what you're in the mood for, this will definitely fit the bill.  Like I said, there isn't a whole lot of new ground covered, but it takes the classic formula and does it so well, you don't even care.


*****

So, there you have it.  I wouldn't call it caught up, but that's what I've been up to.  I also watched the badass revenge movie: Only God Forgives, but I can't really include it in this column, as it's not a horror movie.  Gruesome, yes. Horror, no.  Nicolas Winding Refn, the director of Drive and Bronson did it, and if you like those, check it out.  If you thought Drive was too slow, you'll hate this even more.  I loved it though.

AND I watched Pacific Rim, which was my favorite movie of the Summer.  Again, not really a horror film (although I guess you could make a case for it- giant monsters and all).  I'm not including it, but it was amazing.  I can't recommend it enough.  It was like a trip back to my childhood when I first saw Jurassic Park. 

 If you've read it this far, I thank you.  It's easy to get discouraged if you don't think anyone is reading this, but it sounds like a couple people have, so that's enough reason to keep up on it. 

I'm also in the midst of writing a couple original fiction things, which I hope to be able to share soon too.  I can assure you, they're better written then this, random train-of-thought thing that I do on this blog. 
Oh, and also- it's almost Halloween!  So go out and enjoy it!

IN THE MOUTH OF MADNESS: Day 9 of 31

John Carpenter is one of those directors that really grew on me the more I watched his work.  Upon first viewing of the majority of his stuff, it can come off a little cheesy.  The dialogue is always a little hokey, the effects consists of practical rubber monster suits, and the soundtrack is usually comprised of 80's synth that he composed himself.  I remember the first time I watched a number of his movies, I wasn't a huge fan.  But somehow, I just felt the need to rewatch them.  Again and again... all those little things that used to take me out of the movie became things I looked forward to, and awaited their occurrence in other movies he's worked on.

Once you know what to expect out of Carpenter's films, there is something strangely comforting about his entire body of work.  Sure, most of them deal with the end of the world, or serial killers, or a dystopian future on the edge of ruin, but they all have them quirky charm to them.  And man, how that electronic keyboard has grown on me! 

One of my favorite John Carpenter films is In The Mouth Of Madness.  It's just such a great horror film, made for horror fans, by a horror fan.  It's dark. I mean, it's about the end of the world and the loss of sanity and rationality, but again, there's something "fun" about this flick.  It's not near as bleak as his previous two installments of his unofficial "End of the World Trilogy" (The Thing and Prince of Darkness (also amazing)).  Maybe it's because by the time the film comes to a close, the main character (Sam Neill) realizes it's just better to accept insanity, rather than be the last same man in a world full of crazy people (oh- spoiler).  Either way, the whole movie feels pretty upbeat, despite the dark subject matter.  But again, that's just kind of how Carpenter rolls, baby.

The storyline is about an insurance claims investigator (Neill), who is hired by a publishing company to locate their missing author, Sutter Kane.  Kane is an obvious facsimile for Stephen King, and even more obviously, H.P. Lovecraft.  In fact, the entire story is basically one big tribute to the horror master, and the film basically paraphrases his entire body of work.  Unimaginable creatures lurking outside the realm of man's domain.  Forces at work with greater power than one can understand.  Sights and tentacled monsters so awful they'll drive you mad (title).  This was Lovecraft's bread and butter.  His contribution to the horror genre can't be matched.  Except maybe by Poe. Maybe. Stephen King is definitely the only current genre author that has come close to being comparable, so it's kind of nice that this movie makes obvious references to both of them.  Even the titles of the books, and the locations the characters make their way to are direct references to Lovecraft.  So, to put it simply, if you like the shit in this movie, go buy a Lovecraft collection... go straight to the source.

Anyway, Sam Neill's character tracks the missing author to a fictional New England town straight out of his writing.  There he finds bizarre, possessed townspeople, an epic black church (as in, the church has black spires, not a black congregation) and enough slithering, slimy creatures to bring this into respectable creature feature-territory.  Neill's guide through the town, a woman the publisher sent with him, is convinced that Kane's writing has become real.  After all, his work has been known to have an effect on people (memory loss, dizziness, urge to grab an axe and chop people up in the middle of the street, headaches, etc.).  Neill spends the whole film denying that theory because it is impossible.  He's quick to note (many, many times) that we live in a rational world, and these things can't possibly exist.  However, the movie frequently poses the question that, our world is only rational because that's the point of view of the majority.  If the ratio suddenly shifted, and the insane people took the majority, would the rational be considered insane?  Something tells me, no, not really.  At least not in a literal stand point, but it's still an interesting thought experiment.  And as you would imagine, outside in the world, Kane's writing is driving everyone mad, thus preparing for an insanity-driven coup of the rational viewpoint. 

This is one of those movies with a lot of hallucinatory images, lots of false jumps, creepy people saying mysterious things and then walking away, etc.  It all fits in with the overall off-kilterness of the story though.  It helps you get into the frustrating mindset of a man losing his grip on reality, but still clinging to the idea that reality is reality; it can't be altered.  (spoiler- it can).


 Overall, this is a fun, fast-paced horror flick.  If you're a fan of horror novels, this should be a definite must-watch, and if you're a Lovecraft fanatic (either you've never heard of him or you love him), there's no way you shouldn't know about this.  Sam Neill brings an excellent performance as always, and the effects are great, in a dripping-rubber-monster-in-the-shadows kind of way.  You know, the things that all the recent CGI-laden films are missing.  But if you're a horror fan, you already know that too.

Carpenter is definitely one of those directors where I'll just go through a spurt where I'll crave all of his movies.  They've all got the same tone and feeling.  You could flip on any of them and instantly know you're watching a John Carpenter film.  There's only a couple other directors with as much to their body of work that I could say that about.  David Cronenberg would be another front-funner.  Both of them have a sort of comforting quality to their films (for me anyway) despite being about dark, gruesome things.  I guess it's just nice knowing what to expect.  If you want a cool protagonist, facing off against unimaginable evil, with an unflinching eye for great effects and gore, then look no further.  Oh, and the synth keyboard.  You're gonna get the synth too.

THE CHANGELING: Day 8 of 31

 Okay, so I know I said yesterday's column was going to be a short one, but then I went on for like fifteen paragraphs.  This one, I will be shorter, I promise...

The Changeling (not the Angelina Jolie child abduction movie) is a really well-crafted ghost story from the early '80s, starring General Patton himself, George C. Scott.  Now, his acting period was a little before my time, but I've seen him in things here or there, and the guy is just such a badass.  I mean, in Patton, he was the most famous war general that ever lived.  In The Exorcist III (surprisingly, really good) he was a hard-boiled detective.  In this, he's a kind-hearted composer and pianist... ?  And even though he acts like the sweetest old guy in the world, he's still just got this undercurrent, this aura of take-no-shit badassery.  According to lore, the night he won the Oscar for Patton, he was absent from the award show because he was sitting at home watching a hockey game.  So, that's how this old-timer was.  He'd go in, get the job done, then go home and relax without a second thought.  No time for theatrics or show-boating.  They don't make them like this anymore.

So, what does all this have to do with The Changeling?  Not a whole not actually; I just don't have a ton to say about the movie itself.  It's a slow-burn ghost-story, centered more around the mystery of why this giant old house is haunted in the first place.  Scott plays a composer that recently lost his wife and daughter in an auto accident, so he moves out of his apartment and starts renting a house closer to where he is working at a prestigious music school.  It starts off slow- wait- scratch that.  I don't want to give it a negative connotation.  It's deliberately-paced, giving the movie time to build suspense and establish the creepy atmosphere of the old house.  Scott is obviously torn up over the loss of his family too, but he doesn't spend his days moping around.  He gets up, goes to work, has drinks with colleagues, and only occasionally slips into uncontrollable sobbing while he's alone in his bed.  But with good reason.  Luckily, he doesn't get a chance to wallow in sadness for too long, because he starts hearing strange noises around the house. 

It doesn't take too long before he's discovered that, yes, there is in fact a ghost haunting this building.  This is kind of a nice refreshing plot development.  Other movies might've had him constantly second-guess the weird occurrences, trying to make him think he's going crazy, or that he's imagining it altogether.  Nope. It's a ghost story.  Let's get to the ghosts.  Plus, he's a squared-away guy.  John Patton doesn't go crazy.  So, he goes through the motions of investigating the house's history, invites a medium over for a seance, the usual Saturday night routine.  Once they discover what the ghost wants, he goes on a mission to help put the spirit's, uh, spirit at ease.  I'm sure he started the quest to bring closure to this restless soul, but I'm guessing some of it was just so the ghost would stop banging around on the pipes so Scott could get a good cry going.

On his journey, the spirit takes him to an old, buried well, which hides the ghosts remains.  It's actually pretty similar to The Ring, although this ghost isn't such a vengeful bitch.  Rather than spreading it's suffering across the world, The Changeling's ghost is pretty reasonable.  It seems like it just wants justice for the wrong done to it almost a hundred years ago.  Also, the ghostly activity is pretty subtle.  Not a whole lot of jump scares.  Just lots of little things.  Whispers on a tape recorder.  Piano keys moving by themselves.  The occasional chase scene by an haunted wheelchair.  No big.

It's interesting that the ghost picked Scott out because it sensed his own loss, the recent death of his wife and child.  Makes sense.  And there's a little moment; powerful, but almost a blink and you'll miss it scene where Scott is having dinner with some friends when their children run in.  He looks at the young daughter, kind of longingly, forcing a smile, but inside, obviously wrecked with sadness at the reminder of his own child.  He doesn't oversell it, and the acting is so subtle, but great.  They guy is a master of his craft.  I really want to seek out more George C. Scott movies after this.

Overall, a decent little scary movie.  I don't think it ever became one of the true genre "greats," but I often hear it brought up in small circles, citing it as one of the scariest ghost stories of all time.  Truthfully, it's not horrifying, and the ghost never seems to be evil, or want to harm anyone.  It just has some well-done chills, and creepy moments that keep you invested and a little unnerved. Worth a watch if you're in the mood for something a little less fast-paced and in your face.
 

LORDS OF SALEM: Day 7 of 31

 

 

Rob Zombie has never been a film maker I would describe as subtle.  Or restrained.  Or mature.  But wouldn't you know, that's exactly what his latest film is.  It also has a scene where a priest forces a woman to give him felletio.   So maybe that early praise was a little bit pre-emptive.

I want to make this review kinda short since I'm a little behind, and I've still got today's movie to watch... (what did I get myself into?).  Luckily, this is a good movie to go a little briefer, because there really isn't a ton I would have to say about it.  And not really in a bad way.  Hmmm... let me start over...

I grew up worshiping Rob Zombie in high school.  I mean, I just thought that shit was the coolest.  When I heard he was directing a movie, I could hardly contain myself, and then four years later when it finally came out, I thought House of 1000 Corpses was just the bomb.  It was over-the-top, ridiculously crude, in-your-face, unapologetic horror.  It was also pretty poorly written, sloppily edited, and stole a ton of material from other movies.  Somehow, it just worked though.  For the people that could appreciate it anyway.  Mr. Zombie is obviously a huge horror fan, and he made his first horror movie about the kind of horror movies he loves.  It's definitely a labor of love, and you can see just what he wanted to do during his first time behind the camera.  Far from a cinematic masterpiece, but you know what, for horror films, it's not a bad candidate at all.  (and a great flick to watch on Halloween).

Next up, he blew everyone away with Devil's Rejects.  Now that he blew his horror-load on House of 1000 Corpses, he was able to dial back the craziness, focus on developing characters, and just make a lot tighter, more mature movie.  Shit, even Ebert and Roper gave this thing two thumbs up. It's a pretty great, gritty horror flick.  More of a serial killer film than a horror movie (if you've seen enough of these movies to be able to make a distinction).  Has some really unnerving scenes, and some great, great characters.  I saw this twice in the theaters, and it really put Rob on the map as someone to watch.

Then he remade Halloween and he lost me.  I'm not going to get into this too much.  That's another review entirely, but I was less than thrilled with his take of a bullied-Michael Myers, replacing the unexplainable evil that encompassed the killer in the original series. Still, I've watched his two Halloween movies multiple times, and I'd call them interesting failures.  There's definitely a lot more creativity and talent in Rob's remakes than in anything from the original franchise after part 3.  And Michael Myers is definitely an imposing, scary figure in these.  I just wish he didn't crud it all up by throwing his white trash, scum-bag characters into the whole thing.  In House of 1000 Corpses, it worked.  In Devil's Rejects, it worked.  In Halloween, it just doesn't.  The characters just don't fit in this series.  And every time another character is introduces, sporting the same ironic 70's rockband T-shirts and swearing like a sailor, it just becomes abundantly clear that, "Oh, okay Rob, so this is all you can do, huh?"  

It really put me off him for a while.  Like, I thought his monster-mash type of music was cool, because it was it's own thing.  Then his first two movies were cool, because they lent themselves to a bunch of sleazy trailer trash characters.  But then he did the same thing in Halloween.  And come on man, it's Halloween! It's like the most high end, prestigious horror film series after Psycho.  Show a little class. 

Oh well, I got over it, and when I heard his new film was a different approach, a more restrained, low-budget supernatural film, in the vein of The Shining, I had to say I was intrigued.  He's really 50/50 at this point, so I wanted to see which way this film broke the tie.

Well, I'm happy to say, I'm impressed.  The storyline itself is just kind of there.  Not really any driving force progressing the movie forward.  It just kind of floats along following the main character (his wife, Sheri Moon Zombie) as she starts losing her mind, haunted by the curse of a couple witches that were burned at the stake back in the Salem Witch Trial era.  Still, the movie is really well done.  it's intentionally a little slow, taking it's time to just drop hints of weird little shit here and there. 

Sheri Moon does a really good job as the main character; definitely a step up from her psychotic "Baby" in the House and Devil's.  And as usual, Rob casts a couple of genre favorites, like Ken Foree (always awesome) and Dee Wallace, who all bring their A-game. 

What sets this apart from his other work, is it never goes off the rails into the crazy shit department.  At least not like his previous work.  And yes, this movie does have a scene of Sheri orgasmically grabbing a burnt midget's intestines and flailing her arms around, which (I think?) causes her to become pregnant with the antichrist?  Maybe?  I'll have to listen to the director's commentary for clarification.  So apart from some weird hallucinations and dream sequences, Bob Zombie keeps it pretty restrained and dialed back.  He lets atmosphere carry the film, and allows the shots to linger on the moody hallways and bleak Salem scenery.  It's really an impressive looking film, which up until this point, I never would've guessed would have come from Rob.

My only complaint is, the movie feels like it loses focus a little in the middle, and into the final act.  The whole, character being haunted by weird happenings and hallucinations leads into a kind of anticlimactic ending that kind of feels like they just ran out of money.  Still, it feels like this is the movie Rob really wanted to make, and I respect the fact that he didn't sway from his vision.  It's not a very commercial or studio-type of film, which I'm all for.  I'd rather see mildly disappointing originality than bland cookie cutter garbage, so thanks for flying your freak flag high Bob. 

He had described it in an article I read as "Rosemary's Baby" as if imagined by Ken Russell (who directed the really bizarre "Altered States" film).  If you understand what I'm talking about, I think that is the absolute best description I could give this movie. 

It's elegant, while sleazy.  Slow-burning, with moments of graphic weirdness.  Interesting story while being pretty close to other witch-craft movies that came before it.  And it's got a really groovy soundtrack.  Great early rock tracks, along with a cool, spooky tune that resurrects the witch's curse when played over the radio (not as lame as it sounds).  It gets under your skin and gets kind of catchy in a maddening way. 

Lastly, my favorite thing I took away from the movie:  While Rob has his usual cast of trashy looking characters, they didn't behave like a bunch of filthy assholes like every other movie.  They were actually funny, (kind of intelligent), and all around, a lot more likeable.  And there are even characters that we are introduced to, which in any other horror movie, you know they're just there to up the body count, but they make it out unscathed.  Which is kind of interesting.  Like she has a dog.  And through the whole movie, I was just waiting for this poor bastard to die and her to find it's mutilated body.  But she never does.  Hats off to you, Mr. Zombie.  I didn't think you had it in you.

It's too bad I've heard him report that this is his last movie... just when he showed he could do something different.

Also- as you might expect, there are a ton of Sheri Moon ass shots.  Rob has made no effort in hiding the fact that he's definitely an ass guy.  Which is fine, I guess, because she definitely has a nice one and everything, but it really comes off... I don't know... needy?  Maybe that's not the right word, but that's the feeling I get from it.  And it's his wife.  And he constantly wants us to look at her ass.  I don't know, I've always been more of a boob man myself, so I guess I'm just a little exhausted from it by now.  We get it Rob, you like your wife's ass.  And you want us to as well.  But come on, you know... no matter how much you show it, it's just an ass.  Poop comes out of there. 

ROOM 237: Day 6 of 31

Okay; this is going to be a short one.  Why?  Because the movie sucks. 

Room 237 is a documentary focusing on multiple theories about hidden messages within Stanley Kubrick's The Shining.  The Shining, as everyone knows, is regarded as one of the greatest horror films of all time.  And director Stanley Kubrick is well known for being a meticulous and calculating director, placing all kinds of hidden meanings within is work.  So, this seems like it would be an interesting watch, right?  Wrong.

Without as much as an introduction, we're blasted right into a handful of people's ridiculous interpretations of what Kubrick is "really trying to say" with The Shining.  Which would be fine, if the theories weren't the most random, off-the-wall collection of insanity I've ever heard.  Conjecture of the movie representing the slaughter of Native Americans, to the Holocaust, to hypothesizing that Kubrick helped NASA fake the moon landing footage, and this movie was nothing more than a vessel for him to reveal it to the audience through subtle clues, like it was just something he had to get off his chest. 

It wouldn't be such a bad watch if there was some validity to what these people are saying.  But most of it comes off as someone looking for meaning in every little tiny detail, that they miss the big picture.  You know, the whole "see the forest through the trees," saying.  I think. I've never really used the expression before.  It just sounded right.  Maybe I'll research everything there is to know about trees, forests, forest fires, Smokey the Bear, lions, tigers, bears, wizard of oz, witches, Halloween, paganism, mass religion in general, God, Gods, the universe, the big bang, the universe before the big bang, nothingness, and everything.  Then I'll make a documentary about it.  That's pretty much the thought process behind how these people came to their theories. 

It's no secret that Kubrick was a brilliant filmmaker.  And it's no secret that his films, The Shining especially, have more to them than meet the eye.  But for these conspiracy theorists to think that an out of focus poster of a skier seen for a couple seconds is supposed to represent the image of a minotaur (I'm not joking),  it unfortunately forces the viewer to just check themselves out of this documentary. 

With that said, there are a couple kind of interesting tidbits that are unearthed and brought to the surface for examination.  Like the idea that the movie can be watched backwards, overlayed onto the normal viewing of the film, creating some weird synchronicity and patterns.  There are a few cool, kind of creepy moments that line up, but I'm guessing there's about another two hours of moments that nothing notable happens at all.  There are also some cool little goofs (?) such as rug patterns not matching from scene to scene, or objects in the background mysteriously disappearing.  The first instinct would be to blame them on continuity errors, and if the director was anyone other than Kubrick, that would be it; case closed.  However, knowing what we know about him, there's no way he would've let these goofs make it through to the finished film.  So did he put them in on purpose?  Any why?  Is the whole movie supposed to just be full of weird, nonsensical things that exist solely to drive the viewer mad when they try to search for meaning?  Maybe. Makes more sense than a goddamn Minotaur.

Overall, The Shining is a masterpiece of filmmaking, and I'm sure there are tons of hidden meanings.  I'm also sure that there are several things Kubrick hints at, and likens to, without having to say that "This is really what the movie is about.  The Genocide of the American Indians."  Can't movies just have themes and allegories?  Does everything have to be so literal?  The people in this documentary have wasted there lives looking for meaning in this movie, when it's quite possible that it has been purposefully created to have no meaning; to just be a decent into madness with no way out. That would actually be kind of fitting for these folks.  Enjoy your craziness, you obsessive bastards; can't say they didn't warn you.

There's another quote that comes to mind; I think it has to do with Freud, looking for sexual meaning behind everything.  Like bananas.  Things like that.  But sometimes, a banana is just a banana.  Quit hoping for a penis!  With a movie like this, the fun is in making your own interpretation.  The more you study it, the more you can pick up, but to say that this is definitely what Kubrick was trying to say with the picture just makes you look like a crazy, penis-obsessed loon.  Now go eat a banana and shut up.

*Okay- elephant in the room time-  this is like the third movie I watched this month that wasn't technically a "horror movie."  They all have ties or elements to the horror genre, but I'll agree, this wasn't really a horror flick.  So, to make up for it, I wanted to call out to some great horror flicks currently on Netflix this month.  If you're looking for some good, movies to check out on instant streaming for your Halloween enjoyment, here's a good place to start.  If you're not, then I don't know why I'm even talking to you.  Get lost. Go on, GIT!

Evil Dead and Evil Dead 2: Dead by Dawn:  Essential viewing in order to become a member of the Dave Tucker Friendship Alliance.  The first movie is low-budget, but so ingenious in the camera work and cinematography.  The second is the greatest slapstick-horror experience ever put to film.  Bruce Campbell earns his title as the greatest horror actor of all time with this one, the the over-the-top nature just makes it such an entertaining, one-of-a-kind experience. 

Cabin in the Woods:  A clever deconstruction of the horror genre, making fun of all the genre tropes and doing so in an original manner.  Crafted by Joss Whedon (I guess he's kind of a big deal on the internet), the movie shares his knack for clever dialogue without coming off "too-clever" as a lot of his work tends to be.  Plus the end of the movie is a horror fanatics wet dream.

Troll 2: Proudly carrying the title of the Best Worst Movie ever made.  Endlessly entertaining for all the wrong reasons, this terrible, terrible movie is one of the most enjoyable experiences you can have with a bunch of friends and a couple of beers.  When I first saw it with some buddies, we turned around it and immediately watched it again the same day.

Fire in the Sky: One of the most terrifying horror movies from my childhood.  "Based on actual events," this film follows the alien abduction of Travis Walton, and examines the legal drama that his friends were left in after his mysterious disappearance.  The last fifteen minutes of this has the freakiest, most disturbing alien sequence I've ever seen.  Seriously, this film scarred me for life when I saw it as a kid. 

Killer Klowns From Outer Space:  Come on, you know about this one.  I'm not getting into it too much here, because I plan on reviewing it later this month.  But you know what you're getting into with a title like this.

Human Centipede 1 and 2:  Gross-out film-lovers need only apply.  Although, I would argue the first film is a very well-crafted, disturbing suspense story, with ass loads of originality, and a truly original premise that is as horrifying as it is disgusting. It's also relatively tame (compared to the sequel), and most of the disgustingness is implied rather than shown.  If you really want to ruin a nice evening, follow it up with the sequel, which delivers on all the grisly promises of the original, without a shred of shame or humility.

Re-Animator: A close contender for the same category that Evil Dead 2 holds the title.  A brilliant, hilarious, horror film that acts as a modern (well, 80's) retelling of the Frankenstein formula.  Jeffery Combs is brilliant as Dr. Herbert West, the titular Re-Animator, and if anyone could compete with Bruce Campbell for the King of slapstick horror, it's him.  Extra points for being adapted from the legendary works of H.P. Lovecraft.  I actually proposed to my wife while we watched this movie.  So, take that as either a recommendation of the film, or an example of how weird I am.

The Host: Awesome Korean monster movie that isn't afraid to show the creature.  Some of the best computer-generated effects, which is a rare feat, since most movie monsters work best in the shadows with a degree of practical effects to them.  Tonally, kind of weird and all over the place, but it really is a cool, well-made movie.  Give it a shot, it's got a great opening sequence where the monster first attacks.  If you aren't sold by that, then I guess maybe monster movies aren't your cup of tea.

Hellraiser: Another classic.  Author Clive Barker's first turn in the director's chair, adapting one of his earliest novels, The Hellbound Heart.  And also cinema's first introduction to horror-icon Pinhead, or as he is credited in this film: Lead Cenobite.  Great, grisly gory fun. 

Creepshow 2: Another great anthology, adapted from a couple short stories by Stephen King, and helmed by George A. Romero.  The first and last story are a little lame (so why am I recommending this?), but the middle segment is so amazingly badass, it could be it's own film.  The Raft is about a couple of kids that swim out to a raft in the lake, only to be sequestered by a monstrous creature resembling a pool of black tar.  Such a great segment.  Worth watching just for this.  (which is strange because most horror anthologies usually drag in the middle segment.  A rare exception.)

Aftershock: Written and produced by Eli Roth (of the Hostel fame), this survival horror film follows a group of friends (also starring Roth) as they try to make their way out of an Earthquake ravaged city in Chile.  The effects are a little Sci-Fi channel, but the film is dark and unforgiving. The direction isn't on par with Roth's own movies, like Hostel, but the spirit and premise is pretty similar.  Worth watching because you have no idea what will happen next.  And man, are the characters expendable.

Slither: A campy throw-back to old creature-feature films.  This is a gross-out big budget shlock-fest brought to us by the folks that started their careers working on Troma films (the lowest-of the low budget (and brow) horror films in the industry).  It's enjoyable and well made, with a pretty impressive cast, great gore and make up, and a lot of hilarious moments. 

And lastly, if you have a lot of time on your hands this month, why not check out two amazing horror TV shows currently streaming on Netflix?  The Walking Dead (anyone heard of this?) and American Horror Story.  I really dug American Horror Story, because essentially, ever season is a stand-alone story, like having an original horror movie stretched out for 12 episodes.  They have time to craft some really cool stuff, and there is so much cool, creepy style to it. 


Well, that's all I've got for now.  I'm sure there's a couple that I'm missing (and I'll probably kick myself for it when I stumble on them) but I feel like this is a pretty good smattering to get you started...

GRAVITY: Day 5 of 31

So, I saw Gravity yesterday.  Maybe you've heard of it.  It's this little sci-fi film that's getting some interesting buzz around the web lately.  At least that's how it was referred to when I first heard about it earlier this year.  Now, you've probably heard it described as "The best film of 2013!" or "The greatest science fiction movie since Stanley Kubrick squeezed out 2001: A Space Odyssey!" or "The single greatest technical achievement by man in the history of ever. And always."

That last one may have been a stretch, but it's a pretty decent movie I guess.  I'm just joking; it's a very decent movie.  Best movie of 2013?  Eh, maybe.  It probably is one of the greatest special effect achievements ever put to film.  In terms of cinematography and story telling, it's light years ahead of anything else to date.  Definitely a game changer (oh God, how I hate that term) in that sense.

I also love the fact that the story takes such a simple premise (if you can call 'having two astronauts have to use their survival skills and technical expertise to try to return back to Earth after barely escaping certain death due to an onslaught of charging satellite shrapnel that destroyed their ship and left them stranded in space' simple), and focuses the entire movie on it.  I really dig minimalistic movies.  This storyline brings to mind a couple other favorites of mine that involve similar circumstances, where a character or characters are stranded or confined to one place and they're trying to escape certain death.  Open Water (which involved two scuba divers being stranded by their boat and everyone hated it) and Buried (which involved Ryan Reynolds trapped in a coffin for 90 minutes, and no one saw it).  Gravity kind of completes the environmental trilogy, proving that deep space is just as bad a place to get stranded as the middle of the ocean, or six feet under ground in a box.  Although I don't know if anyone was going to make an argument against that.

The really cool thing about this movie, that sets it apart from the other two is the production value. 
While Open Water was filmed with a couple digital cameras on the cheap, and Buried was done very well, but never once left the coffin, Gravity uses every single camera trick and special effect in its repertoire. And it does it seamlessly.  This is, without a doubt, one of the most amazing looking films I've ever seen in my life.  I've read that the director (who also did the amazing "Children of Men") spent the last four years working on this project.  Even spending a considerable time working on the 3D process, meaning the studio didn't just decide to post convert it later to make a couple extra bucks.  Knowing that going in, I opted to see it in 3D, and it was definitely the best 3D experience I had in a theater as well.  Much, much better than Avatar (ugh... but you know my thoughts on Avatar).


The reason the 3D works so well in this movie (and if you know the director's work, it's no surprise) is because of the extremely long takes that make up each scene.  While most movies cut to about 50 different camera angles to cover one action sequence, Alfonso Cuaron painstakingly films it all in one take without any cuts.  The long takes give your eyes and brain a chance to really register what's happening in front of you, and appreciate the robustness that the third dimension adds to the picture.

Now, that's not to say there aren't any cuts.  And since this entire thing was filmed on a green screen, I'm sure there's virtually hundreds of cuts in each of these 15 minute long takes.  However, the important thing is, we don't notice them.  It's all crafted together so beautifully with such a natural flow, it all just appears to be happening in front of you. Seriously, don't misconstrue what I said to mean there are cuts, but we don't notice them; for all intents and purposes, there are no cuts.  It's like you're right there, floating in space with them, not missing a beat.  Yesterday I said there was a short film in VHS2 that put the viewer in the eyes of the protagonist while he's haunted by ghosts. Well, Gravity puts you in the space suit of the astronauts, and you are directly in the middle of the action.  Or lack of action, as you drift silently through space.  It's a pretty miraculous achievement.

What makes this all the more note worthy, is that the storyline itself doesn't really need to be so technologically amazing. It could've just as easily been shot like a normal movie.  It could've even been shot for super cheap, and just edited together like a hundred other space movies we've seen.  The story of two characters on a quest to get home is nothing new.  But the way they present it, in a way we've never seen; experiencing their struggles first hand, that is what makes this movie amazing.  The viewer is watching anxiously as the characters bounce off the shuttle, trying desperately to grab hold of something in order to stop their descent into space. You hold your breath and grip your armrest as they miss ledge after ledge, drifting into total blackness.  This movie forces you to connect with them, and experience their panic first hand.  A rare feat these days.  And again, even rarer because it really didn't have to.  It's like someone came up with the movie idea, and pitched it to some executives.  The executives yawn and say, "Okay, go ahead; are you going to do anything different, that we haven't seen before?" and the production crew says, "Yeah, we're going to make it really, really good."  That's two reallys.  And they meant it.

So, premise of the movie: good.  Technical wizardry on screen: amazing.  Acting: Eh... two out of three aint bad, right?  Wait, what?  Dave, you didn't like the acting?  It's got George Clooney, everyone loves Clooney!  Yeah, I know. Clooney was the man. Clooney rocked this movie.  Well, that only leaves one other person... are you telling me you didn't like Bullock? Come on; she's an Oscar winner too!  Yeah, for the Blindside.  Listen.  Clooney was great.  Sandra wasn't bad.  She just wasn't all that good.  Her character wasn't very relatable, or likeable, or even someone that I cared a great deal for.  I never really found myself connecting with her, or really hoping she made it out other than just because she was the main character.  She gave a couple good moments, one especially good one when she is saying a quick prayer to her daughter who died years before (which now that I'm a parent, came off much more heart wrenching than I would've thought before), but overall, I just found her kind of flat.  Not someone I was actively rooting for.  Of course, I wasn't hoping she'd die out in space either; I just found her kind of "meh."  If I were to compare her to Sam Rockwell's character in "Moon," another terrific space movie from a couple years ago, I'd say they're not even in the same league.  Sam was warm, sympathetic, and you spent the whole movie feeling for him, and rooting  that he'd make it out. There were also a couple moments where I thought the writing was almost embarrassingly contrived.  The stand out is when she makes her way to a Chinese space shuttle and picks up a radio conversation between some random Chinese guy back on Earth.  This was one of the few weak parts for me; but not enough to do any real damage to the film, just kind of a low point.

Overall, with all minor criticisms aside, Gravity is one hell of a movie.  An absolutely amazing technical achievement that will undoubtedly be talked about in film circles for decades to come.  Plus, the storyline of overcoming adversity, and not giving up, no matter how dire things look is always a crowd pleaser too.  The movie has some twists, which I won't even hint at because the marketing people actually avoided giving anything away in the previews.  Seriously, everything I saw in the trailers took place in the first 15 minutes.  I had no idea what was going to happen after that, so I went into this pretty damn eager.  That doesn't happen a whole lot in this day and age.  Most movie trailers show you every single action beat, along with the jokes, money shots, and punchlines of just about every beat of the movie.  Horror movies like Quarantine even show the last scene in the movie in every advertising campaign they run. Hell, it was even the cover of the movie for Christ sakes!  Studios will release exclusive sneak peaks online, months before the film hits theaters, showing unbroken, 3 minute long scenes from the movie.  The Evil Dead red-banned trailer showed every single kill and action sequence in the movie, so when I finally got around to seeing it, opening night, it felt like I was just watching a longer version of something I already saw.  No mystery.  No anticipation.  No enjoyment.

And shit, what do I know, maybe Gravity does have some longer trailers they've released that show a whole lot more of the movie; I don't know.  I haven't been seeking them out because I wanted to go into it fresh.  And it paid off.  I suggest everyone else does the same.  Don't read anymore about it.  Quit listening to everyone say it's the best movie they've ever seen.  Just go into it and make up your own decision.  But at least keep in mind how astronomically amazing the effects are.  You may think you've seen something like this before, but trust me; you haven't.

PS- I know this isn't technically a "horror" horror movie.  But shit, it had my pulse pounding faster than anything I've seen in the horror genre lately.  And really, who's to say what qualifies as horror?  I would say being alone, endlessly adrift in space is far more terrifying than running from a slasher in a hockey mask.  But maybe that's just because they never seem to put any pep in their step when they chase their victims.  If he at least put forth the effort to speed walk, maybe I'd get some chills.

V/H/S/2: Day 4 of 31

Last year a really cheap horror movie made some waves across the internet upon its release.  V/H/S is a found-footage horror anthology, which means it combines a genre everyone despises with a type of film that isn't really made anymore.  And lo and behold, it actually did... pretty well.

Despite some very really misogynistic qualities that strangely peppered their way through every one of the short films, and the fact that basically every character was a douchebag bro that you couldn't wait to watch get slaughtered, V/H/S was not a bad little horror film.  It was helmed by about 5 different directors, each crafting a compilation of stand alone shorts that a couple of criminals have stumbled on after receiving a job to break into an old house and steal a particular video tape.

Like all found footage movies, the gimmick wears thin after the first hour or so, but one of the things that worked in V/H/S's favor was that it was made up of separate stories, so when one of them got a little old, it wouldn't be too long before we moved onto the next one.  And each story (being shot from a first-person-point-of-view) lent itself to unique and original opportunities to tell the story.

I wasn't quite sure what I thought of it after my first viewing, but it did stick with me over the next couple of days.  Any movie that manages to do that, I figure did something right.  Upon second viewing a couple months later, I decided it was pretty damn good.  Despite a couple overly-shakey moments, and a couple other faults; the good definitely outweighs the bad.  And like any anthology, there are always a couple stories that are better than others.  I remember liking the first short (with the Succubus girl) and the last short (with the haunted house) the most.  Especially the haunted house one.  I'd recommend that one multiple times over.  A really unique, truly creepy short film.

So, what are you doing Dave; I thought you were reviewing V/H/S/2, why are you rattling on about the first movie?  Well, because I want to set it up in case you're not familiar with the series.  On first glance you might lump it in as a cash-grab riding on the success of the Paranormal Activity franchise.  After watching it though, it's abundantly clear that this series has more originality in any one of the short films than any of the Paranormal Activity movies (and I LIKE the Paranormal Activity franchise!).

Just get to the goddamn point already Dave!

Okay, sorry.  I felt like I needed a build up.  And while we're getting everything out there, I'm going to do without the "forward slash" marks in the title: V/H/S/2 from now on.  They're just too much of a pain to type each time.  From now on, I'm just calling it VHS2. Okay?  Good.  Break.

Jesus Christ. Just talk about the damn movie already.

Right.

Anyway, the sequel kicks off in the tradition of the first, by showcasing a chick's boobs before going into any plot whatsoever.  Then we meet two private investigator's hired by a college kid's mother.  Apparently her son has disappeared, and when they arrive at his house, they find a collection of old VHS tapes.  It looks like her son was into some weird snuff-film type hobbies, and these particular tapes have some kind of curse-type-deal associated with it if watched in the right order.  (it almost brings to mind The Ring, or the short film "Rings" which bridged the gap between the first, excellent The Ring and the second god awful sequel, The Ring Two).

The investigators begin checking out the tapes and we the viewer are treated to their viewing party.  One thing this film clears up right away is why everything is on a shitty old VHS tape when we're clearly living in a digital age.  I don't exactly remember what the reason was, but rest assured, it was addressed and noted.  Nice job sequel.  You're fixing problems created by your predecessor and you're barely out of the starting gates... lets keep it up.

The first film is a very effective ghost story, all told from the perspective of a robotic eye.  The main character lost his eye in a car accident and had it replaced with a prototype artificial eye that is recording everything he sees for later examination.  This puts us quite literally, in the protagonist's shoes. Or, in his head, as the case may be.  He returns to his Malibu beach front property (what the hell-? how did this asshole afford this place?  Thank God it's haunted...) and finds out it's haunted.  Kind of.  Apparently, ghosts are around us at all times, and some people can become more susceptible to noticing them. (bet you wish you would've just went with the patch now, huh guy?)  I won't give much more away, but this one actually got to me a little.  The acting was poor, the ghosts were a little generic looking, but it had a great way of keeping the tension up.  The fact that we saw the ghosts as he saw the ghosts really puts you in the middle of the scares.  It's not like there is a moment where you can distance yourself from the horror by being a casual observer.  You're never watching something lurking behind the main character when he has his back turned- you are experiencing it right there with him.  When he reacts, you react.  It's a pretty brilliant concept actually.  There's a couple moments when he runs to the bathroom to escape the ghosts, and then peeks out the door to see if it's safe.  I can't describe it any other way other than, it's like you're right there, peeking out the door too.  You want the story to keep going, but you also don't want him to see anything, because, shit, if you were in his place (which we are), you would prefer not to suddenly have a ghost lunge at you. But you're watching a horror movie, so at the same time, you're here to see the fucking ghosts.  It's a really weird dichotomy.  You want to be scared but you don't want to be.  Overall, this was a good one.  Not terribly original (The Eye, comes to mind, which is actually a remake of a Japanese movie to begin with), but I think it does it well.  The final scene could've been a little more graphic to really push the envelope and take the vicarious viewer all the way to the brink, but it felt like they held back a little, which is too bad.  Okay, I want to talk about it, so I'LL SPOIL IT.  DON'T READ THIS IF YOU'RE GOING TO WATCH IT...

Still here?  Okay- eventually, the main dude can't take it anymore and cuts the artificial eye out with a straight razor.  He's looking the mirror about to do it, then says, "I can't watch this," and looks at the sink and quickly pops the eye out with the razor.  Now, this is a horror movie.  An Unrated Horror movie at that.  What a chance to do some really intense gore that frankly has never been done before. The protagonist cuts out his own eye, and the viewer has to watch from his own point of view.  Talk about a missed opportunity.  Then the ghosts break in, grab him and stuff the eye down his throat.  It goes to static then cuts to black.  Again.  Missed opportunity.  With all the cool camera equipment medical technicians have, this would've been a great chance to cut to a shot from a scope camera going down his throat and into his intestines or something, all still from the first person point of view of the artificial eye.  Oh well.  Not a bad short, but I feel like they fumbled it at the end.  They went for a field goal when they could've pulled off the touchdown.  (and that will be the only sport reference you'll ever hear me make).

The next short was decent.  A unique take on the zombie genre.  We are watching from the Go-Pro cam of a mountain biker as he journeys down a trail in the woods.  He stumbles upon a nice slice of zombie madness, gets bit, becomes a zombie himself, and then starts going after other people.  It was an original idea to show everything from the zombie point of view, or more accurately, from the point of view of the dude becoming a zombie.  Overall, there's nothing wrong with this one.  It's got some nice gore, but zombies themselves aren't terribly engaging.  Maybe that's why no one has ever done this before.  It works as an interesting experiment, perfect for a short film, but that's about all you need.  It ends nice as the zombies crash a kid's birthday party and wreak havoc on a bunch of mini-van sporting families.  Also- an interesting note: this was directed by the Blair Witch crew... so, uh, there's that.


The third short, which is quite a bit longer and a lot more fleshed out than the rest, was definitely the standout of the bunch.  It follows a documentary crew who happen to be filming a mysterious cult.  The cult leader is a shady guy, who after some convincing, allows them to film behind the walls of their colony located out in the middle of nowhere.  Inside, they witness a brainwashed collection of men, women, and children, all obeying the words of "The Father," and planning for the impending rapture.  To say this short goes balls out would be an understatement.  I don't want to go into any more detail because the less you know going in the better.  All I'll say is, just when you think it's reached it's limit, it goes in a whole different direction, and just keeps getting more extreme.  And who directed this one, you ask?  Why, the genius behind last year's most badass action flick, "The Raid."  Enjoy.

The last story brings to mind the older Steven Spielberg and Joe Dante flicks, focusing on a group of kids (although they're a lot more foul mouthed than Steven would've allowed) intent on terrorizing their old sister and boyfriend during a slumber party.  And then a bunch of aliens show up.  This is a lot of fun, but the camera is attached to a dog for about half the run-time, if not more, so the shakey-cam used to represent the moving dog makes it a little hard to grasp what's going on.  Still, it's a solid entry, with some of the better acting (and from young kids to boot), and some really creepy shots of the aliens stalking the youngins.



All in all- the VHS franchise is two for two.  And the sequel achieved the rare feat of being a lot more enjoyable than the first.  It feels like the creators listened to all the complains from the first film, and made them the top priority to fix when prepping the follow up.  Less douchey characters.  Less shakey camera.  Fewer short films, allowing for a little more fleshed out plot development this time around.  And it feels like they upped the blood and body count as well.  Considerably. As any great horror film should.
I'm not saying these are the future of horror, or any all time greats; just simply a couple good little experiments that are worth a watch for the change of pace and the originality.  I couple times I was so impressed with the plot and some of the ingenious scares, I found myself wishing that I was watching an actual "MOVIE," with more production value and without the found footage gimmick.  But that would kind of defeat the purpose, and then it might not feel so unique as a result, so I guess, just keep doing what you're doing VHS... keep up the good work, and see you next year?

CEMETERY MAN: Day 3 of 31

God I love this movie.

Cemetery Man is such a bizarre mash-up of weirdness, humor and horror, it brings to mind some of the greatest slapstick horror films in the genre like Evil Dead 2 and Re-Animator.  The sad thing is, I don't think too many people know about this one.  Or if they do, chances are they caught it randomly and dismissed it, not prepared to embrace the full extent of its awesomeness.

Originally titled "Dellamorte Dellamore," (which I think is a badass title in itself, and translates from Italian to something along the lines of "Of Death of Love") this is a film that was made in '94, but somehow feels like it was done much, much earlier.  It's definitely low-budget (as the best horror films generally are), but that doesn't refrain the movie from having some amazing make-up and set pieces.  It's also shot in Italy, but most of the actors speak English, and has a couple of that good-old-terrible dubbing for some of the supporting cast.  This is really something I've come to expect with most Italian horror flicks, and watching anything by Fulci or Argento just wouldn't be the same without it.

The plot is pretty simple, but never boring, and it always strikes me as a movie that is made up of several parts.  I would almost compare it to American Psycho, where it's kind of a character study.  We follow the protagonist through his life and the different things he encounters.  The story focuses on a Cemetery watchmen named Francesco Dellamorte (played by Rupert Everett- weird I know) and his mute man-child assistant as they do their best to keep up with a wave of resurrection that seems to be plaguing the graveyard.  For some reason, the dead begin to arise 7 days after they've been buried, and Francesco takes it upon himself to return them to the earth.  Usually by way of bullet, shovel, or spade.  The charm of this movie lies in it's just matter-of-fact weirdness.  For example, no one else seems to notice or care about the zombies.  Francesco attempts to report it to his supervisor's at the city, but he doesn't have the time or ambition to file all the necessary paper work and decides it's "easier just to shoot them."  He goes about his disposal of the undead just as if it were any other part of his job.  Just a cog in he wheel that doesn't have the ambition to find any deeper meaning in what he does.  And that's pretty much how his character views his life.

After a couple minutes into the movie, he meets a beautiful young widow mourning over the loss of her (strangely ancient) looking husband.  She's turned off by Francesco's advances until he shows her to the cemetery's ossuary (which apparently is a dank, mold crypt for scattered bones and remains).  That apparently is all it takes, because now she's all over him and ready to get it on.  (again, it's the charm of these weird foreign flicks like this)  

So, they're banging on the grave of her recently deceased husband, and sure enough, what happens?  Boom zombie.  I think we all saw that one coming.  Let that be a lesson to everyone.  Don't be a whore.  And if you do, don't be one on the grave of your freshly dead spouse. It can only lead to trouble.  

So, zombie husband bites her, she dies, and Francesco is down in the dumps again.  He has some more, strange little adventures over the next couple of days, but then, wouldn't you know it- his love returns from the dead... only to, um... get killed again.  It gets really strange when Francesco starts seeing her again, around town as different characters, each one becoming attracted to him, but each one ending in heartbreak.  And to make matters even more bizarre, Francesco starts seeing Death, as in, Mr. Death, around the graveyard.  And he's not just stopping by to chat, he's calling him out, saying, "Why are you killing my undead?  Wouldn't it just be easier to kill the living?"  Strange philosophy, but Francesco decides to dip his toe into the murder pool and take him up on his offer.  So, he goes around town and has a little shooting spree.  And murders a ton of hospital staff. And maybe indirectly burns some college co-eds.  Alive.  

So, you'd think he's a pretty despicable guy. But strangely, you never really dislike him, and you're rooting for him through the whole film.  Partly because of the bizarre surreal nature of the world this movie takes place in, where you're not quite sure what is real or not.  The story is following Francesco, and we all took English classes where they drill us on the idea of the "unreliable narrator."  Does he fit the bill?  Maybe.  Probably, actually.  But the movie doesn't beat us over the head with notions like this.  Rather than throw a big twist and say, "Oops- he's imagining it the whole time," it just exists in its weird little universe where you're not quite sure what the hell to think.  He runs the cemetery, and most of the movie takes place in the cemetery, so essentially, we're in his world.  His element.  And he's really good at his job.  He blasts zombies away without giving them a second glance.  Mows down approaching hoards while talking on the phone.  You never once get the impression that he feels like he's in any danger.  And that's another reason you kind of root for him.  He has this philosophy that "life, death, it's all the same. You live, you die, you wind up here, you live again, then you die again..."  It's just a part of the daily grind for him.  He's definitely a bit of a sad-sack, but not the whiney, annoying emo bitch Tobey McGuire plays in Spider-Man 3.  He's more of a blue-collar James Bond who just doesn't give a shit, bangs hot chicks, kills zombies, and then has a smoke.  He sometimes wonders what exists outside the town limits, outside of the graveyard he feels at home at, but it's much easier for him to continue cleaning up this never ending slew of zombie returners, than it is to go explore a different career path.

His assistant, Ghnagi is almost his polar opposite.  While Francesco is tall, skinny, good looking and well spoken.  Ghnagi is short, fat, ugly and mute.  He only responds with a child-like "Gna!" to every conversation.  He's essentially the ying to Francesco's yang, because he balances him out.  He's generally happy, optimistic, and while Francesco spends the majority of his free time crossing the names of the newly deceased out of the phone book, Ghnagi allows himself the simple pleasures of life, like watching TV, gorging on spaghetti, playing in leaves and, um... kissing a resurrected pre-teens' severed head.  Yeah, that happens.  

There's a strange twist at the ending AND I'M GOING TO SPOIL IT NOW, SO QUIT READING IF YOU PLAN ON WATCHING THIS where Francesco has enough and he drives off with Ghnagi to start anew.  They leave the town, travel under a bridge, but then crash their car just inches from a steep cliff that looks like the end of the world.  Ghnagi is injurred and almost appears to be dead, but he suddenly gets up and then starts speaking in perfect English.  Francesco's response is only, "Gna."  Then it's over.  So what the hell happened?  Throughout the movie, everyone outside of the Cemetery kind of looks down on Francesco and they don't really give him a whole lot of credit to follow through with anything.  In fact, when the police are looking for the mass murderer of the killings he is responsible for him, they pass by him without a second glance, even though he's leaving the site of the slaughter, holding the murder weapon.  The cop even says something hilarious like, "Oh good! You've got a gun; that means you can defend yourself!"  It really brings to mind the ending of American Psycho, which I likened it to earlier.  But what is up with the sudden role reversal?  Has Francesco really been the mute handicapped dude the whole time, and once he left his kingdom of the cemetery, he didn't know how to function in the outside world?  Was Ghnagi the leader of the duo the whole time, but since the story focuses on Francesco, we're just seeing the world through his eyes, where he's King Shit Zombie Exterminator?  Who knows?  It's a good twist, but it doesn't really give you a clear answer, and you could argue a couple different theories, but I don't think there's one definitive way to interpret the ending.  I like it though.  It fits the strange, surreal tone of the rest of the movie.
 
OKAY- YOU CAN RESUME READING AGAIN. SPOILERS OVER.

Overall, this is one of my favorite horror movies.  The main character is just a cool motherfucker.  It has some really great lines.  Awesome zombie effects, and also some of the coolest photography I've ever seen.  They are definitely restricted by the budget in some areas, but man, they come up with some beautifully ingenious cinematography.  The movie opens with a shot pulling back from inside a skull, through the eye socket, then between a phone cord and finally into the establishing shot of Francesco's living room.  There's plenty more as well, really making full use of the meticulously designed cemetery set.  And as much as I'm against remaking classic movies like this, I feel this is a rare case where a more financially stable remake could be even cooler.  As long as they get the right creative team and didn't mess with all of the goofy, original elements that makes this a standout.  Before Tim Burton went all Hot Topic, this would've been the perfect project for him and Depp.  Now a days, that concept is about as exciting sounding as driving to Wal Mart, but when Burton was in his prime, this would've been right up his alley.  He could definitely do the material justice if he took the Ed Wood or Big Fish approach and just went all out weird, with little regard for box office revenue.  But with the most recent en devours he's produced lately, there's not a lot of hope there.  And trust me, if you're going to remake something like this, you have to keep the offbeat tone, and the dark, dark humor. The R rating is a necessity.  So, maybe it's good to just leave it as is.  

Anyway, one last bit of background: this movie is based on an Italian comic book called Dylan Dog.  They made a really shitty adaptation of it starring Brandon Routh a couple years ago, (so maybe it's best to just leave this alone; or use it as an example of what NOT to do... this is what happens when you go for that general audience PG-13 rating).  Francesco apparently pops up in a couple of issues of the comic, but the character of Francesco in Cemetery Man is pretty much based and modeled on the Dylan Dog character in the comic.  Does that make sense?  Probably not.  Either way, I have an omnibus collection of the comic and it's a good read.  This might also explain why the movie has so many good "parts."  It definitely feels like an adaptation of multiple story lines from a comic book, but it doesn't feel jumbled; it actually flows perfectly, and the strange shifts to different story arcs make for a really great viewing experience.  You never know where the hell this movie is going, or how it could end (unless you just read my spoiler filled breakdown of the end.)

Final verdict: Cemetery Man is a standout gem.  It has so many great moments I can't even begin to cover them all in this column, and frankly I shouldn't, you should just check it out for yourself.  See how creative and weird the Italians can be when they are free to make a movie virtually no one will watch.  

One weird note about the trailer: It's all in Italian. But the movie is in English. So don't let that turn you off, you uncultured swine.