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!

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.
 

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...

Reflections from The Cutting Room Floor (Part IV: Haunted)

Haunted

So, two movies down, two to go.  At this point, we finished Tagged, and it was about mid-November. I remember, because it was freezing when we shot the alley scene in Tagged and I was still sick from parading around Halloween night dressed as a ballerina. (in hindsight, not the best idea.)

We took a little break over the winter, and then reconvened in January to film... Murder Party.  -But wait- isn't this blog about Haunted?  Why yes, yes it is.  But at that point, Haunted was a very different story.  

Haunted was the last thing we filmed, primarily because up until about a month before we shot it, it was a completely different script and story.  The original story was about a young girl that grew up in a haunted house.  The hauntings weren't malevolent or anything, and the girl almost saw them as a reassurance, or security blanket that had followed her over her entire life.  As a young adult, she now lives in the house, alone, but the occasional flickering of lights or creak of the door reminds her that she's always got this "presence" with her.  Eventually, she meets a guy, and upon bringing him back to her house, the ghostly activity gets more severe.  The guy gets injured in an incident involving breaking glass, and he storms off.  For the first time, she fears the supernatural presence that she had always came to rely on growing up, and under the insistence of her new boyfriend, they ask a pastor to bless the house.  The pastor shows up, and we have this increasingly, out of nowhere-intense sequence where the house freaks out at we go into some wild poltergeist activity.  Eventually, the house is cleansed, and the pastor leaves, shaken.  The girl and boy continue their romance, but she can't help but feel like she betrayed whatever presence has been with her her entire life.  Things get out of hand when the boyfriend increases his sexual advances and she has to fight him off, sobbing as he walks out of her life.  She then lies in bed, watching the door, waiting for the reassuring creak shut that it used to do, but it never happens.

So, that was the original idea in a nutshell. I like it, and I feel like it might make a better short story than a movie, so I'm filing it away for later.  The problem is, this story isn't very cinematic.  Not in a negative way, but this was supposed to be very low-key, without much spectacle.  It was a haunted house story but I didn't want to ever show any ghosts, or spell out what exactly was causing the haunting.  It was supposed to be a more emotional haunted house flick, and I feel like we couldn't have pulled it off at the time, so we switched gears completely, and went with a vampire flick.

However, I didn't want to just do a straight forward vampire flick either. I had the idea that a girl would meet this strange gentleman on the town and he'd essentially turn her into a vampire like himself, then use her to lure other unsuspecting guys as prey. On the flip side, the guys she lures, are onto her, believing her to be responsible for their friend's death, and are setting their own trap.  And to make it even more twisty-turny, we have the timeline broken up so it doesn't play in chronological order.  As I wrote this, I was really excited, because the story structure was so different, taking a page out of  the Christopher Nolan or Tarantino playbook.  The viewer never gets the whole story until the end, and it's not clear who the protagonists are, or what the plan was until the last few minutes. 

I think this movie definitely holds up more on the second viewing.  The strange story structure might've turned some people off, but it's intended to make the viewer work a little and question where it is going.  Haunted isn't as straightforward as Tagged, and isn't as entertaining as Murder Party, but I feel like it is the perfect "middle movie" of the anthology.  It's a little slower, more experimental, and focuses a little more on emotion.  

There are a couple flaws with this one though, and if I could go back and change anything, the first would be to fix the damn audio in the cafe.  It kills me that the ice-maker was running intermittently as we filmed, so it drowns out a lot of the audio.  Paul did a terrific job with the cinematography during their coffee date, but the botched audio kill the mood.  We even went back there the night before we were set to premiere the movie and attempted to redub the lines.  After about five minutes we decided that was absolutely not feasible, and had to settle with what we had.  It's not terrible, but it hurts the opening.  And the ghost story Sarah tells about her family home was a bit of a nod to the original story idea.  It also brings up the title, "Haunted."  Why keep the same title?  It's funny; when we switched to the vampire story, I was going to call it "Hunted," which wasn't a huge change, and made sense in the context, but I really liked the title "Haunted," and I felt it still fit the movie, and also gave it a more ambiguous title, much like the tone of the entire short.

The cast expanded a little from Tagged.  Sarah and Neil were the leads, and both did great. It gets a little "meta" here, because essentially, Neil is the same character from the zombie film, but playing an actor, playing a vampire.  Does that make sense?  No?  Let me spin it another way.  Neil's character in the zombie film, is an actor who plays a vampire in this.  So his character in the zombie film watches his own movie that he starred in as part of a local film festival.  Does that make sense?  No?  Then I'm sorry, I don't know how else to describe it.  It's also fitting that in Haunted, he takes Sarah to be his mate (or whatever), and in the zombie movie, it appears he has had a secret affinity for her, which he admits to her before finding out she has become a zombie and he has to lock her in the stairwell.  Layers upon layers, huh?

Also in the short: Myself, another part that I wasn't originally going to play, but ended up doing because of convenience. We're also joined by the two Scotts (Goedert and Reuber).  Goedert played the ticket booth zombie earlier and did a fantastic job, so we brought him back, and Reuber gave the most intense performance of the movie, as the friend distraught over the death of his buddy.  It was a conscious decision not to give any characters in this movie an official name, but man, it makes it tough to write about it afterwards.

This movie also featured some cool locals, beginning with Paul's family owned cafe and the ice machine of doom, and ending at Potter farm, home and breeding ground of the Potter family.  Haunted has some really nicely composed shots; it's just a shame it wasn't more consistent.  No one's fault really, we just had various things working against us on this one (time, daylight, and that damn ice machine.)  Overall, a good time to shoot, and we were able to expand on some of our film making techniques.

Join us tomorrow, because you've just been invited to... The MURDER PARTY!