It's October baby....Horror flick time!

[Secret Executioner]

Indestructible Man (USA, 1956)

The body of executed criminal Charles "Butcher" Benton (Lon Chaney Jr.) is sold to a scientist who eventually manages to bring the corpse back to life. Now invincible and gifted with superstrength, Benton goes to seek revenge on his former partners who betrayed him and sent him to death row for a heist.

 

Technically more of a crime with kind of a Frankenstein twist for the horror/sci-fi element, this little (70 minutes) film is a decent watch.

The central characters - beside the titular character - are two cops - a detective and a chief of police -, Benton's former associates (two criminals and a lawyer that pulled the heist and got Benton the death penalty) and Benton's girlfriend Eva. Detective Chasen - who also narrates the story via flashback - is very enjoyable, he's smart, has a way with words and manages to get what he wants in very intelligent ways. His chief makes for a good supporting character, they have a good relation and it seems closer to genuine friendship than a strictly professionnal relation. He supports him when he unofficially investigates the mysterious deaths and the bizarre idea there's a link to  Benton, and he has some comments you'd expect more from a friend than a superior. He does listen to the detective, which allows them to progress. Another cop that gets a lot of moments is a sergeant who regularly has a good line.

Benton's two accomplices who are essentially shown as heavy drinkers, scarety cowards and troublemakers (notable when it seems a bartender - played by Bonanza's Robert Foulk - kicked one out of his establishment and tells the other he doesn't want trouble so he is to finish his drink and leave). One of them is shown walking with crutches, making him a tad bit more sympathetic (at least to me). The third character in this group - the "attorney at law" as his office's door reads, played by Ross Elliott (who appeard in a lot of TV series and a few movies between the early 1950s and the mid-1980s) - is more heavily explored. We see him have an exchange with Benton early in the film where he comes across as cocky, but he slowly gets down as he fears more and more for his life. He gets a macguffin from the main girl, and is revealed to have been the mastermind behind the heist, though he doesn't know where the loot is hidden - only Benton knows and it's why there's the aforementionned macguffin. Eva (Marian Carr, an actress who mostly made TV shows and films in the 1950s - she also had an uncredited role in Frank Capra's It's a wonderful Life) is a very likeable, and also quite a smart and managed female character. Far from a damsell in distress, she is very proactive and feels like a very preeminent figure. She eventually also becomes a love interest, though this is vastly unexplored and the proposal at the end comes quite out of nowhere.

As for our titular character, he is played by silent film star Lon Chaney's son Lon Chaney Jr. IMDb mentions he wass often overshadowed by his father, but even though Lon Sr. is indeed an incredible actor and a genius when it comes to disguising himself, Lon Jr. has had quite a carreer with appearances in a lot of classic westerns such as Cecil B. DeMille's North West Mounted Police, Jesse James (alongside Henry Fonda) and High Noon - and he would play four Universal monsters (the Wolfman, Frankenstein's monster, the Mummy and Dracula) within a couple of years. He also made a lot of TV material, much like the rest of the movie's cast at the time. In this film, Chaney's performance is mostly silent as the character only speaks early in the film when confronting the lawyer guy, the experiment bringing him back to life destroying his vocal chords. This, along with Lon's bulky appearance and mean face - there is a close-up shot of him having maniacal eyes that is repeatedly played through the film that's pretty intense, though it becomes funny the more it's used -, helps make the character more threatening and intimidating, though his body language is limited and his face doesn't emote that much. He is shown to be remorseless, not hesitating to kill random people who cross his path. The superstrength is well shown, mainly early on when he can lift two men or a car without much of an effort. It isn't much showcased afterwards though, as he doesn't do much that comes across as incredible feats - though he does lift people above his head and tosses them at least twice, and he seems to make little effore of the safe that was said to be impossible to open by a single man. He gets injured in the climactic battle when big efforts are pulled off, but I felt his ultimate fate was a bit of a letdown. I guess he had carried out his vendetta and being cornered by the police forces he had no other solution, but still... There's a bit of irony too, as the narrator points out.

 

Otherwise, the movie has limited settings, seems to reuse a lot of shots (the eyes thing I mentionned and a shot of a police car passing some civilian cars in traffic) and implies more than it shows (probably due to the restrictions on violence, but some of the implied violence could be hard to pull on screen).

 

My call ? Decent enough movie, lots of likeable characters and some suspense. However, the horror seems restricted to implied stuff and the titular character being kind of a Frankenstein's monster. 

[Drunken Monk]

Pumpkinhead - Decided to tackle this cult classic for the first time. I don’t get it. A pretty run of the mill monster flick that lacks any scares or the traditional gore of the 80’s. Sure, it’s “different” but it certainly isn’t good.

Solid creature special effects does not save this alleged gem. I found it to be boring and lacking any redeeming element to hook me in. Not a fan.

[DragonClaws]

 

Got some rea die hard Horror fans on the forum, @Graeme Of Death. @Drunken Monk, @Secret Executioner all on a strict October Halloween horror movie diet. Hat's of to those of you trying to watch one everyday, I just wouldnt have the stamina.

 

 

Here's a classic I'd recommend to fans of vintage Horror.

 

 

[Rodolphe Dux]

Gags the clown by Adam Crause, nicely done if you’re into the found footage stuff. The ending is a bit of a letdown though.

Munchie, pretty nice Gremlins rip-off.

Maniac Cop trilogy, a classic but very entertaining trilogy.

And the guilty pleasure, jason X for the 2000s cheesy style!

 

 

Edited October 16, 2019 by Rodolphe Dux

[Drunken Monk]

I was going to watch Jason X this month too! I just didn't know if it was streaming or not.

[Rodolphe Dux]

Creepshow 1 & 2, superb anthologies with an awesome casting !

 

Evilspeak, a gigantic 80s possessed computer summoned by Clint Howard is enough for a good time !

 

Another Clint Howard goodness, Ice cream man, fun and twisted madman movie with ice cream truck.

 

 

[Rodolphe Dux]

8 minutes ago, Drunken Monk said:

I was going to watch Jason X this month too! I just didn't know if it was streaming or not.

You should! The sleeping bag kill is a hoot! But it’s on streaming with Shudder if I remember correctly.

[Drunken Monk]

19 minutes ago, Rodolphe Dux said:

You should! The sleeping bag kill is a hoot! But it’s on streaming with Shudder if I remember correctly.

Sweet, I actually just got Shudder two weeks ago. Time to explorer it properly!

[Rodolphe Dux]

4 minutes ago, Drunken Monk said:

Sweet, I actually just got Shudder two weeks ago. Time to explorer it properly!

Good choice! there are tons of old school goodness on shudder, starting with chopping mall and slumber party massacre ☠️👍 Have fun! that’s the perfect streaming platform for halloween!

Edited October 16, 2019 by Rodolphe Dux

[Secret Executioner]

@Rodolphe Dux  Jason X is a decent slasher with an interesting sci-fi layer added to it. Makes for a good and enjoyable movie, and a much better film than some of the previous entries in the Friday the 13th franchise.

 

@DragonClaws I actually missed a couple of days, but I could post 31 reviews overall since I got a couple of reviews written in advance (Wasp Woman for instance, and a couple more I still have yet to post).

Horror is actually probably the genre I've been the deepest into, having a very wide variety of movies of the genre - even though looking back, I realize my reviews seem heavily focused on movies with monsters or ghosts/spirits. I'll try and add some diversity for the second half of the month.

 

 

Speaking of monsters (and in complete oppostion with my previous statement), here's one case I hadn't covered yet - though one of these creatures is featured towards the end of The Monster Club.

Werewolf AKA Arizona Werewolf (USA, 1995).

A group of archeologists find a strange skeleton in the desert, and a scientist working with the team claims it's a werewolf's. A crew member who got injured cutting himself with a piece of bone eventually becomes a werewolf, and this leads the crew's leader Yuri (George Rivero) to try and see if contact with the bones turn other people into werewolves. It does, and he notably turns a reporter named Paul (Fred Cavalli) into one as he gets a bit too nosy and starts flirting with his assistant Natalie (Adrienna Miles).

 

Continuing on with cheap little movies, there is a DTV one that could fit in the so bad it's great category. The acting is rather poor, lacking in emotions and convinction - though George Rivero's Yuri is an hilariously transparent villain -, the effects are not so great (the werewolves look kinda silly at times) and the movie has a rather bizarre and stupid ending. The premise is interesting though, I like the fact they went with the remains of a werewolf rather than having a werewolf already around who either bites the main character and turns him into a werewolf or rapes a woman and the child conceived during this rape becomes our lead (and is a werewolf of course). This results in people being bugged because they thought werewolves were stuff of legends and didn't believe in their existence. The execution is quite clumsier though, as the movie is rather slow, the villain randomly turns people into werewolves for no particular reason (except becoming famous for "creating" them and proving lycanthrops do exist ?) and the movie often goes at odds with itself as while its title(s) contain(s) the word "werewolf" and a lot of characters do utter the word, the scientist talks of Native American legends regarding men disguising themselves as ferocious creatures like wolves, coyotes and bears, and slowly picking up their habits and becoming more animal-like. He often mentions coyotes in his little speech and as a result, it feels a bit confusing as to whether what we have is a werewolf or some legendary Native American creature that's part human/part coyote - I'm not even sure what the name of this thing is, couldn't really make it out.

The creatures themselves look a bit silly at times, though the make-up and effects can be pretty good at other points. Paul got the best IMO with a very convincing look, but others aren't so well off. A previous guy who became a werewolf looked more like he had some bad make-up applied and his pointy teeth aren't very convincing, and the twist ending has very silly looking one, feeling more like a stylized part human/part animal creature than a real werewolf. Sequences of transformation are rather bad, the characters grimace and act up in manners that feel more ridiculous than like they're in pain. Lon Chaney's maniacal eyes and Fredric March's Dr. Jekyll transforming were less goofy than that.

That said, the movie has funny moments, notably the female lead's deadpan reactions to being told about werewolves and that the people she's working with have dug up one's remains. The villain is so villainous he feels cartoony at times, scenes involving werewolves have some whacky stuff in them like one driving his car and crashing it or Paul getting beaten up by a random guy. I'm saddened by the French dub of the copy I have though, the female lead lost her bizarre accent and ir's not made up for. They also replaced a bizarre sound effect - Yuri opens a bottle champagne and it normally goes "honk" for some reason, but the French dub has a more normal "pop" sound.

Speaking of sound, the soundtrack is pretty good. There's mainly a sinister cello and some Native American sounding chants with drums used through the film and while it may seem overkill at times, it's a decent soundtrack that had to the creep factor. Lots of wolf howling too, which feels bizarre in a movie mostly set in a big city. There's also some stock sound of animals, and those are better used as you mostly hear them when a werewolf is on screen and it's supposed to be their "dialogue".

 

My call ? Enjoyable.

 

Fun fact: just like She-Creature (and a few other like Laserblast), I first saw this film as an MST3K episode. And this one is really a classic, whether it's the movie parts or the host segments (which I find weren't usually that great in seasons 8, 9 and 10).

 

Edited October 16, 2019 by Secret Executioner

[Rodolphe Dux]

15 hours ago, Secret Executioner said:

@Rodolphe Dux  Jason X is a decent slasher with an interesting sci-fi layer added to it. Makes for a good and enjoyable movie, and a much better film than some of the previous entries in the Friday the 13th franchise.

For sure, Jason X is a damn good film, my fav of the franchise with the first and the fourth. Good script, decent characterization, splendid kills and cool scenery. And the mask’s design is damn badass... But I have to admit some love for Jason in Manhattan!

Edited October 17, 2019 by Rodolphe Dux

[Secret Executioner]

@Rodolphe Dux The first and third are my personal favorites. I plan to watch and review (at least) a couple of the sequels in the last couple of weeks of the months.

Edited October 17, 2019 by Secret Executioner
Hadn't finished writing before posting...

[Drunken Monk]

Boar - A film about a giant pig. Needless to say, I had low expectations. I’m happy to say this was far better than I expected! It’s an uneven film with a few scenes going too long, but the creature effects are glorious and the small pockets of gore pleased a gore hound like myself.

Sadly, the ending is a bit lackluster and it doesn’t quite have enough monster action as I wanted but, all in all? A fun little flick.

This one’s a Shudder exclusive.

Edited October 17, 2019 by Drunken Monk

[Secret Executioner]

Today's review takes us back to Italy and to a director whose work I really enjoy, the great Mario Bava.

 

Kill, Baby... Kill ! AKA Operation Fear (original title: Operazione Paura) (Italy, 1966)

After a woman's gruesome death, a doctor arrives to a small village to help with the investigation. However, the villagers remain mute and seem terrorized. Soon, it turns out the woman was the last of a long series of gruesome deaths and the village seems cursed, each death occuring after the victim sees a little girl in white and the abandonned church's bell rings. A witch tries to help prevent deaths using spells and rituals, but can it be enough against what appears as the works of the local noble Graps family whose house it is said nobody returns ?

 

There's some really awesome horror movie. Very atmospheric with nice period sets, a lot of fog and a brilliant soundtrack mixing sinister themes to more lullaby-like songs (especially in early scenes with the little girl), the movie also has a very tight plot that keeps you wondering what's going on - not in the bad "I don't get it !!" sense, but in the sense it slowly reveals things and remains vague enough about it not to kill any tension - and even though some stuff can be predicted, the movie manages to surprise you by throwing in a scare (that closet scene had me jump from my seat) or by making the stuff happen in a very tense and suspensful manner (an expected death being made very slow and tense as the victim is crying and saying "no" in a desperate voice). The charaters are also very interesting, the doctor played as the lead is competent and likeable, the witch is a very mysterious character who leaves you questionning whether she's actually trying to help or in on the mysterious deaths, the mayor is also rather ambiguous for a while, there's a police detective who's a no nonsense kind of guy and doesn't buy the whole supernatural thing (he is also pissed off through most of his time in the film) and Baroness Graps is a mysterious figure who has a big reveal towards the end that brings everything together and while she has little screen time, she's most certainly memorable. The villagers are rather forgettable and come across as a**holes overall, being rude, mean or plain hostile to the main character and his newfound assistant, a woman whose lifestory turns out to have quite a link to the Graps family. The behavior of the villagers doesn't make them less sympathetic as their fear and them relying to superstition and magic to fight the curse is a very strong trait - them carrying protective artefacts, resorting to extreme measures to protect themselves and the abandonned church are mentionned and shown enough to remind you. It leads to a couple of rather gruesome scenes involving the innkeepers' daughter.

The horror here relies more on the atmosphere, with some hallucination sequences that are very well-rendered and give out a great sense of paranoia thanks to vibrant colors and image distortion. The rendering actually (if IMDb's trivia section is to be believed) influenced the likes of Martin Scorcese who took a lot after Bava's films and notably this one for some of his movies such as Taxi Driver. In terms of influence, I feel like the little girl in white and some sequences repeating themselves also influenced the Nightmare on Elm Street movies, a sequence of events repeating on a loop in the fourth movie in a way similar to how the doctor keeps running through the same room in the Graps home towards the end of the film while the little girl in white appears to future victims and keeps giggling in ways similar - I found - to how the victims of Freddy come across little girls in white that sing "one two, Freddy's coming for you". That girl though was alluded to in an even more obvious manner in the 2002 Internet-based horror film FearDotCom in which we see a similar little girl in white with a ball and IIRC the ball also bounces around on its own in that one. 

 

My call ? Definitely a must-watch. 

 

Fun fact: the assistant director in this film is a guy named Lamberto Bava who is none other than Mario's son. He is also known for directing the animal horror feature Monster Shark AKA Red Ocean AKA Devil Fish (original title: Shark: Rosso nell'oceano), the actioneer Blastfighter, the Gialli A Blade in the Dark AKA House of the dark Stairway (original title: La casa con la scala nel buio) and You'll die at midnight (original title: Morirai a Mezzanotte), and the two Demons movies (original titles: Dèmoni and Dèmoni 2... L'incubo ritorna) between 1983 and 1986.

[Secret Executioner]

Friday the 13th  Part VI: Jason lives (USA, 1986)

Tommy Jarvis is now an adult, but is still haunted by Jason. To get rid of him he decides to dig him up and destroy the body, but things naturally go awry and Jason ends up alive and stronger than ever. As Jason goes on another murder spree Tommy tries to convince the authorities Jason is alive, while Camp Crystal Lake reopens (and finally has kids spending the weekend there as opposed to just a group of counselors preparing their arrival).

 

Dear me, I mentionned there being worse entries than Jason X in the franchise and while Jason takes Manhattan got mentionned, this was the film I had in mind. Obnoxious characters who try to be funny, horrible dialogues... I feel like this movie was intended to be one of those terrible comedies where the humor consists in having loud and obnoxious characters spoutting cringy dialogue in a poor attempt at making the audience laugh. Then they remembered it was a slasher and thankfully Jason shows up to make some of these morons shut the f**k up - the kills are okay on their own with some bare-handed kills and others done with a machete for the most part. Concerning the gore though, I felt the movie was rather tame for a Friday the 13th title as I find it has a fairly small amount of gore. A handful of kills are brutal though.

On the positives I found Jason was quite imposing in several aspects - he has quite a build, is shown to have superstrength from the first kill and several scenes have him look pretty badass, the one where he is standing on the crashed RV is pretty cool for instance. And I love the title sequence - IMO the only funny moment in the film. 

I also enjoyed the soundtrack, Manfredini's themes seem darker and more sinister,which is kinda ironic when the movie's tone is the exact opposite. And of course, there are those Alice Cooper songs. The end credits song is a special mix of "He's back (the mand behind the mask)", the song heard during the RV kill is "Teenage Frankenstein" and a third song called "Hard Rock Summer" is playing during a car chase scene where a girl tries to get Tommy away from the cops. While the original lversion of "He's back" and "Teenage Frankenstein" could easily be found on the album Constrictor, the movie mix of "He's back" and "Hard Rock Summer" would remain more difficult to get until 1999 and the release of the Life and Crimes of Alice Cooper box-set. The liner notes also suggest the song "He's back" was intended as a much more basic rocker, but it had to be made more synth-based and not as much of a had rocker for its use in the film.

 

My call ? I consider this the worst movie in the series (not counting Freddy vs Jason nor the remake), yet I find it has a special place since it's the film that sparked my interest in slashers (though my interest mostly came from the inclusion of Alice Cooper songs in it).

Edited October 19, 2019 by Secret Executioner
Formating issues.

[Drunken Monk]

Freddy vs Jason - This film perplexes me. Are the crew in on the joke? Is it supposed to be tongue-in-cheek? It’s a very silly and, in parts, awful addition to the franchise. But, good god, it’s watchable. It’s cinematic slip and the slop tastes mildly good.

The fist fights between Freddy and Jason are one of the worst ideas in cinematic history. They are comically over the top. As is the acting and plot.

Again...confusing. If it’s a semi-spoof, the film is better than it is if it isn’t. Or is it?

Haunt - I wasn’t expecting a lot from this 2019 film and wow, I was actually impressed! It’s a combination of escape room thriller and slasher film and it works really well. There’s some strong pieces of gore and the killers are truly original. 

The whole “Why?” of the film isn’t really answered but I kind of like that in a way. All in all an underrated modern horror. Well worth the rental.

Hell House LLC 3 - Pure dreck. I thought the first film was a nice low-budget attempt at some solid spooks but the sequels are horrendous. They should have kept it simple and, instead, went with a preposterous plot, masking their lack of special effects with shitty camera gimmicks.

[Secret Executioner]

Cry_Wolf (USA, 2005)

A group of highschoolers use the murder of a fellow student to spread the news a serial killer's on the loose. Things then go awry when their plot materializes and students get murdered.

 

An ok slasher with an interesting premise, some relatively likeable characters (including a teacher played by Jon Bon Jovi and a student played by Supernatural's Jared Padalecki) but a flawed execution, some obnoxious lines (innuendos...) and a head-scratching finale that contradicts stuff seen before as well as itself within a short amount of time. An interesting aspect is the goriest shots involving kills are filmed in a different manner, looking grittier than the rest of the movie but also more amateur-ish. They also have more light, which I won't complain about as the movie is quite dark-looking, making some night scenes hard to follow. The other main visual flaw is that the action-packed sequences have very shaky camera work, which may make them look more lively but is annoying.

The execution feels flawed because logic seems thrown out of the window as a lot of stuff gets contradictory, especially when gory and violent kills happening right in front of witnesses turn out false later on. As I said the finale is head-scratching though kinda predictable in retrospect, especially when some previous lines from a character dealing with manipulation and strategy or said while playing a game of chess are repeated during another character's epiphany - one could say "symbolism", but I found it a bit overkill as I'm sure the audience wouldn't be so dumb they'd forget a character is constantly talking about manipulation in a movie that draws its title from a popular phrase regarding hoaxes and false alarms and not believing people who keep alarming everyone for nothing. 

 

My call ? A decent slasher with ok characters (a bit annoying but overall engaging), some good gore, a premise that holds up in spite of the flawed execution (and a relatively predictable resolution) and some tension here and there, though it's honestly far from the most suspensful or frightening slasher you could get.

 

Fun fact: it's taking place around Halloween time so possibly an appropriate watch at this time of the year ? Also, the rental DVD version I have contains various trailers such as Resident Evil: Extinction and Rush Hour 3 (the trailer made me curious, though I feel the movie could quickly become obnoxious to me) and its backcover alludes to other "horrific thrillers" like Scream, I know what you did last summer and Urban Legend. Looking up the movie on IMDb they had Urban Legend, Urban Legends: Final Cut and I still know what you did last summer in the "More like this" section, so kudos for the relevant comparisons there.

[Tex Killer]

On 10/18/2019 at 11:53 PM, Drunken Monk said:

Freddy vs Jason - This film perplexes me. Are the crew in on the joke? Is it supposed to be tongue-in-cheek? It’s a very silly....

The fist fights between Freddy and Jason are one of the worst ideas in cinematic history. They are comically over the top. As is the acting and plot.

 

Sure it has to be tongue on cheek..those fights are hilarious...

The ward. Girls burns house and is taken into mental institute. There she claims remembers about nothing from past, and in hospital is vengeful spirit around...

It was my first view of this Carpenter movie and for a moment I was thinking..

Spoiler

those institute things are not a hoax.if you have seen f e shutter island and specially recently easy to figure out what is name of game

 

. Alas was disappointed but sort of happy that guessed right what ultimately was going on as in last 5-6 mins plot is revealed fully...Last seconds were disappointing because scary moment far too predictable, would have been big surprise if it would have ended other way...

Certainly no revisit material, more like recycle bin but have seen lot worse mainsteam horror...Worth a view but keep expectations moderate.

 

[Secret Executioner]

Didn't watch anything today (wasn't in the mood to watch movies) and since I was one review behind, here's a double review dealing with some contemporary horror films I wrote about a month ago after seeing them back-to-back on a great evening at the theater.

 

It (USA, 2017)
Derry, Maine. 1988/1989. A group of kids dubbed "the losers" find themselves gathered in a fight against a mysterious entity dubbed "It" they suspect is responsible for the disappearance of many kids - including one of the losers' younger brother - in the town over its gruesome history.

 

Based on the Stephen King classic, the movie at first didn't really grab me. Bullying in school is really one of the elements I can't stand in a movie. Thankfully, our heroes eventually gather together and the bullies are soon removed - they actually serve as an help to the formation of the "team", abusing all of them in at least one instance and the characters eventually crossing each others' paths. But our main group all have their own issues beside It and the bullies, making for interesting personalities and scares that make sense as they're based on those fears/issues. It also feeds on its victims' fear, and the more you fear the monster, the stronger it gets. I couldn't help but find this M.O. kinda similar to that of Freddy from the Nightmare on Elm Street movies (getting stronger as it's feared, children chanting as a sign of its presence, the ability to twist reality to create the victim's fears, shapeshifting abilities resulting in sometimes gross visuals), and the Stephen King book came out two years after the Wes Craven film... I felt the makers knew that and added a little nod to the franchise by having the local movie theater marquee anouncing A Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child in the last third or so of the film. BTW that theater also has a spot with arcade games in it, which makes for a great 1980s postcard. Even some jokes and cultural referrences feel straight out of the eighties, like one of the boys calling the girl "Molly Ringwald".

But this film also has its own elements that make it stand out. The monster is quite unsettling in his clown form, having a deformed face, sounding twisted and giggling maniacly. The town seems cursed with its attacks and has a history of gruesome children's deaths, and the fact this history plays into the mystery and that we get a look into it alongside the characters makes us want them to understand what's going on here - the characters also come across as smart as they go on to figure out a lot in their little investigation. The whole mythos is interesting, I prefer some horror with background like in Friday the 13th or Nightmare on Elm Street than some random "well, there's murders/ghosts and nobody cares why, it just is". Makes it more atmospheric as you feel like the place as a whole could be dangerous. The way It makes the heroes' fears come to life provide some great visuals and creepy imagery, and even though there are jumpscares here and there, they don't come across as annoying. They're well set up and it makes sense you get startled as opposed to jumpscares where some shit flies to the camera with a big noise that feel cheap and are really annoying.

 

For a movie about a thing causing mass murder though, the bodycount seems fairly low in terms of on-screen deaths (I counted 4). And even then, half of these deaths aren't caused by It but by humans - one is accidental, the other is an indirect It kill since the murderer is manipulated into doing so. The kills directly resulting from It's actions involve one of the main character (the famous scene with the kid in yellow - one of our leads' brother - seeing the clown in the sewers) and the other involves a bully who actually doesn't seem to be too bad of a guy. That kill eventually plays into the second film in what was IMO a pretty ridiculous way. The kills actually tend to make you feel sorry for the victims, which is something I feel got lost in horror movies from the 1990s and 2000s. Although at least one of them you kinda wished dead (or at least removed) due to the way he acted with one of our leads. 

 

It: Chapter 2 (USA, 2019)
2016. 27 years after they defeated "It", the "losers" must reunite as a new wave of gruesome murders and mysterious disappearances is striking Derry, ME. But most of them can't seem to remember what happened during the fateful summer of 1989 that saw them defeat (or so they thought) the monster.

Reviewing (or even merely watching) the two at once makes a lot of sense IMO because these films have a very strong connection in that most of the second one is impacted by the events from the first - or rather events that happened offscreen and some background elements we didn't know about, so even though it technically happens in 2016 with our heroes being adults you still get a big part of the movie in 1989 with the middleschool versions of the heroes. There's notably a quest for "tokens" that depends heavily on the memories of the characters from a certain point of that summer, one that was kind of glanced over in the first film. This results in the movie becoming much more psychological as we get to explore each character's fear(s), with some pretty bad memories resurfacing. This leads to efficient scares, a lot of atmosphere as well as creative and gruesome imagery. The scares actually are more intense than in the first movie, mainly thanks to said gruesome imagery (the ones involving a statue and a dog are the two that I found the most intense).
This second movie is also more interesting in terms of character development as the personalities seem more explored, even though the characters stay very close to their 13 years old selves - in spite of most of them having moved on and gone through some change that's more or less radical depending on who we're looking at, but it seems returning to the town kind of reverses them back, something notable with one whose speech impediment somehow returns. 

 

The movie mixes the intense moments and scares with some lighter stuff (some pretty funny lines) and some tearjerking moments (the dead brother stuff, a main character's demise) in an emotional blend that flows quite well, which some movies fail to accomplish resulting in confusing tonal shifts. The main confusion in this movie for me came from two things. First, the town has barely changed in 27 years. Save for the movie theater/arcade place being closed and decrepit, it remains exactly identical without any real explanation - seeing no deterioration or alteration to the roads or houses in 27 years broke my suspension of disbelief quite a bit. The second element is the fact the main bully breaks out of a mental asylum and chases the heroes with the help of the one of his goons that got killed in the first movie. So you have a guy being driven around by a zombie (a pretty decayed one, his appearance is pretty neat so there's that) and the zombie issue is never addressed. Like having a zombie walking around in this town is normal - I get it may be an illusion created by It, but it's still pretty weird.

Through the movie - and even more so in the final battle - you get some twists and turns, something that escalates the tension and makes you wonder what the characters are going to do and if their efforts to try and destroy It once and for all will ultimately pay off. However, I must say I was a bit disappointed that the stuff happening to one of them towards the end of the first film doesn't pay off that much - I thought they teased it as an important plot point for part 2 when it seems underplayed - and the way It is defeated is a bit weak if not ludicrous, with the resolution feeling a bit too much like a "love and friendship conquer all" mixed in with a case of "the abused become the abusers" if you read a bit deeper into it. Ironically, a running joke through the film is that one of them (played by James McAvoy, notable for playing Charles Xavier/Professor X in the 2010s X-Men movie series) became an author and writes great stories with terrible endings. 

My call for these two films: I prefer the story from the first while the character development is more interesting in part 2, but the conclusion leaves a bit to be desired. Nevertheless, they're definitely worth checking, the characters are multidimensional and likeable, the scares are intense and you get a lot of very well pulled-off (very good effects, especially for It's true form in the final battle), gruesome (and some pretty gore) imagery.

[Drunken Monk]

What Lies Beneath - More a supernatural thriller than a horror but a very good film. A slow burner that’s pretty tension filled and then the last thirty minutes hit and it becomes a masterclass in thrills.

[Rodolphe Dux]

Don Dohler marathon:

 

- Alien factor

- Night Beast

- Alien rampage

 

There’s a strange but unique atmosphere in Dohler’s movies, some Jack Arnold vibes bit weirder. But I have to admit it’s kind of facinating. Maybe One of the most underrated horror director.

 

 

Edited October 21, 2019 by Rodolphe Dux

[Rodolphe Dux]

il boia scarlatto AKA Bloody pit of horror

 

A really awesome gothic gem by Massimo Pupillo (Lady Morgan’s vengeance). The gothic atmosphere is really mesmerizing, thanks to Mickey Hargitay.

A must watch for gothic enthusiasts!

 

 

Edited October 21, 2019 by Rodolphe Dux

[Secret Executioner]

Our friend @AlbertV mentionned it earlier in this thread, my watch for tonight was Dick Maas' The Lift (original title: De Lift) (The Netherlands, 1983)

A state of the art elevator begins acting up and while nothing is wrong according to the technician from the lift company, the machine keeps malfunctionning and causing deaths. The technician decides to investigate the matter, receiving help from a plucky reporter.

 

Changing from the US and Italy, we're getting a Dutch movie today. A very good one I might add. The characters are well-rounded and interesting, the tech must not only deal with this issue that makes him go over the edge on a professional level, but also with issues in his private life - I find this family drama is a nice addition, as although it barely plays into the story, it adds a layer to the character and makes you feel for him. The reporter is a very Lois Lane-ish kind of character, outspoken, resourceful and witty, making for a character you grow to like as she turns out very helpful and not just an annoying reporter as you see dime a dozen in movies. The people working in the building have their moments, the concierge is most heavily featured and he has some funny lines, other people seen are essentially maintenance staff (like a cleaning crew that has one scene), employees at the restaurant or people having their office there, including the tower's owner. They have brief moments, but these moments allow some buildup before elevator-related problems occur.

There is a lot of tension as the elevator acts very unpredictably and looks unsettling on its own with its red doors, red lights inside and looking at the inside gives off a very claustrophobic feeling. The building itself actually looks intimidating, it's a big tower with 15 stories and the footage of its outside often depicting it at night or in the storm add to the threatening aspect. The soundtrack is also very appropriate for tense moments, the music is quite sinister, and the sound effects for a sequence towards the end make said sequence even more suspensful - as if the enclosed space and overall lack of light weren't enough - and the scare in there is even more startling. That's pretty much the only proper scare BTW, the movie relying more on tension and suspense than scares.

 

My call ? A movie that's definitely worth watching. Highly recommended.

[AlbertV]

While I was recovering from a very nasty head cold, I decided to finally watch the two sequels to Sleepaway Camp that starred Pamela "I'm Bruce's little sister" Springsteen as Angela Baker.

This was made at a time where dark humor was beginning to become a trope in late 80's horror films (ask "Chop-Top" Sawyer or Freddy Krueger from Nightmare on Elm Street 3 on) and writer Fritz Gordon (aka Michael Hitchcock) and director/producer Michael A. Simpson decided to inject the dark humor in the first of the two sequels, Sleepaway Camp 2: Unhappy Campers. Recently watching a documentary on the making of the original film, creator Robert Hiltzik revealed that he only licensed the name for the sequels as he pitched some ideas to Double Helix Films, but they opted to dgo a different direction.

Back to Sleepaway Camp II: Unhappy Campers, we learn that after the events of the original film, Angela Baker had checked in to a mental institution and during her time there, she underwent an operation where she is now fully female. Felissa Rose said in the documentary that she did audition to reprise the role and didn't find the humor in the role so she was happy to not return with Springsteen taking over. The kill scenes here are quite fun, taking elements of Blood Feast, A Nightmare on Elm Street, and even a dose of Texas Chainsaw Massacre in a homage scene where two male campers decide to prank Angela by disguising themselves as two iconic slashers only to get the tables turned when Angela, disguised as a third iconic slasher, puts both of them out of their misery. With the dark humor injected, Springsteen does IMO give it her all and even proves she doesn't need the name recognition (which apparently the cast didn't even know who her famous brother was until years later). She isn't the only one with a famous last name and family as the innocent camper Molly, who Angela bonds with, is played by Renee Estevez (who is the sister of Charlie Sheen and Emilio Estevez). So this sequel I enjoyed....on the other hand...

Sleepaway Camp 3: Teenage Wasteland is a (pun totally intended) waste of a third installment. The film was shot back-to-back with Unhappy Campers, but it felt like it was more rushed and bland compared to either the original film and this second part. I can't blame Springsteen for her performance here. The issue lies in the rushed script and production. It does revolve a good idea in that the camp in the second film has been replaced with another camp. That's the good piece of things, as well as a connection to the second film as one of the counselors in a rehab program is the cop father of a victim of the 2nd film. However, the kill scenes are more average (with the exception of one IMO) and there aren't really any characters that seem to be completely sympathetic, even Tracy Griffith's Marcia's crush on a bad boy just seems "meh".

So my final ratings:

Sleepaway Camp 2: C+
Sleepaway Camp 3: D

[AlbertV]

On 10/18/2019 at 4:53 PM, Drunken Monk said:

Freddy vs Jason - The fist fights between Freddy and Jason are one of the worst ideas in cinematic history. They are comically over the top. As is the acting and plot.

I was stunned to learn the "fist fights" were choreographed by Chuck Jeffreys, at one time the "Eddie Murphy" of martial arts films and would go on to be Wesley Snipes' frequent choreographer in the mid-2000s. The 1st time I saw the film (when it was in theaters) I was like Holy crap! Freddy knows kung fu! LOL Now I see it and I laugh my butt off when they have the fist fights.

I heard a rumor that originally the central characters were going to face off against their arch nemeses Tommy Jarvis and Alice Johnson, even hearing that Jason Bateman was tapped to have played Tommy and Lisa Wilcox returning as Alice. That would have made it more cool.