Reviews written by registered user
|445 reviews in total|
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
"Just Before Dawn" focuses on five young hikers who make their way into
the backwoods of Oregon to a piece of property whom one of them owns;
unfortunately, they get more than they bargained for when an ogreish
killer ends up on their trail. Rope bridges, waterfalls, an abandoned
church, and the dense Oregon forest set the stage here for a whole lot
of fun and some surprisingly sophisticated thrills.
It had taken me a long time to get around to seeing this film, but boy, oh, boy, what a surprise we have here! Taking pointers from "Deliverance" (and also heavily reminiscent of "The Hills Have Eyes", despite the fact that the filmmakers refute having even seen that film before writing the script), "Just Before Dawn" is one of the slickest and most dazzling backwoods slasher pictures to come out of the 1980s.
While the general premise clearly has little to offer in terms of originality, the production values here really elevate the film incredible cinematography of the landscapes and forests are gorgeous while conversely terrifying, and the individual cast members and their on screen chemistry is incredibly believable. Sophisticated and well-placed curves in the plot also make for some understated moments of awe and terror; in another's hands, the script here could have taken the "Friday the 13th" route, but there is plenty of clever writing and a serious attempt at tension and suspense. The haunting whistling score adds another layer of ominousness to the film, blurring the lines around the film's diegesis and composition is it the soundtrack, or is someone whistling at us from the woods? Is there a difference? Jeff Lieberman's direction here is amazing, and Deborah Benson is perfect in the film's central role.
At the end of the day (or rather, beginning), "Just Before Dawn" is one of the most under-viewed slasher thrillers of its time; while it is cherished by a great few, it is not a film that has fully received the audience it deserves. Pitted against 98% of the slasher fodder that was the 1980s, it is the cream of the crop moodily shot, well-acted, well-written, and indelibly atmospheric. The film's peers of the time that attempted similar things (the atrocious "Don't Go in the Woods" comes to mind) did so with about 1/10th of the grace, and its influence has bled on into contemporary films (see "Wrong Turn"). Really, the bottom line is that "Just Before Dawn" is a class act all around. Imagine how shocked and giddy I was when I found out after watching it that it was basically filmed in my backyard! I think I've officially got summer hiking plans now, sans backwoods maniacs with machetes (or at least I would hope). 9/10.
The infamy of "Nightmare" no doubt largely centers on the fact that the
film's distributor faced prison time for refusing to cut down one scene
from the film for its release in the United Kingdom. I mean, after all,
how many horror films have that under their belt? The plot follows a
disturbed schizophrenic who escapes from his experimental psychiatric
hospital in New York City and heads down the coast to Florida, where
his wife and children reside, killing along the way before making an
attempt at his final hometown hurrah.
With "Halloween" and "Maniac" being obvious influences here, "Nightmare" feels much more like a '70s picture than it does a product of the '80s, and its confluence of influences might be precisely why. The film's formula is fairly straightforward, although its subject matter is remarkably dark, insofar as it has to do with a man who can't help but want to slaughter his own children it's a macabre affair all around, and the grindhouse aesthetic only bolsters the film's sinister tone. It's part slasher film and part psychosexual thriller, with leading man Baird Stafford playing the villain who's entire distorted existence seems to hinge on his childhood experience of witnessing his father's affair (and subsequently slaughtering both parties in their bed). The film does meander a bit between the realms of dramatic thriller and splatter epic, but it's an engaging watch none the less.
I'd be lying if I said that the real attraction here for most people is the remarkable gore effects, which were controversially credited as being the work of Tom Savini turns out Savini was apparently just a friend of the effects director and didn't actually work on the film, but regardless, the film showcases a plethora of elaborate murders with some remarkably nasty special effects; throats are slashed, people are stabbed, and heads roll, and Romano Scavolini makes sure his audience has front row closeups to all the nitty gritty details. The special effects work, though dated in some regards, is still surprisingly effective.
Overall, "Nightmare" is a deserved cult classic that would appear to have come from the drive-in era of the late '70s; despite the fact that the film was made in the following decade, it retains a gritty exploitation feel in which violence is the central spectacle. Like I said, it's a dark movie and a gratuitously violent one. It's the kind of thing you watch and then want to shower after. Like after a humid Florida evening, the film leaves you feeling slightly grimy, but that's what it sets out to do from the first reel. 7/10.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Angela Baker is back in "Sleepaway Camp II," but this time with a sex
change, and a hunger for killing immoral teens at the summer camp in
which she works. Among her arsenal of hunting tools are knives, fire, a
chainsaw, guitar strings, and battery acid!
While the original "Sleepaway Camp" was a B-movie through and through, it maintained a level of seriousness and a sophisticated tension throughout; it's a remarkably dark slasher film, thematically and visually. "Sleepaway Camp II," on the other hand, trades in Robert Hiltzik's macabre chops for cult director Michael Simpson's self-referential slasher schlock. "Sleepaway Camp II" is a completely uninhibited and shameless sequel that derails the seriousness in the first film, opting for straightforward gags and black comedy.
The film does not really have a plot so to speak; there is no twist either, which, for being the offspring of a film that made its name because of these things, is kind of surprising. It is really just a platform for Angela to butcher teenagers in a ridiculous number of different ways. There are gore effects o'plenty, and many of them are quite good; some of them quite silly. It's not a film that can be taken seriously by any stretch of the imagination, but because of that, it is a rare piece of entertainment that is aware of its utter implausibility and yet completely engaged with it. Pamela Springsteen goofs along through her role and is often hilarious but never frightening, and the supporting cast is well above the cut.
As a sequel, "Sleepaway Camp II" is out there, but as a self-aware spoof of films like "Friday the 13th," it's really quite amusing. There is no intellectually stimulating material here, but it's a good way to goof off for an hour and a half. That said, it pales in comparison to the substance of the original film, with its twisted plot and ruthless conclusion. The biggest highlight here? Stabbed in the back and drowned in a leech infested porta-potty. How low can you go? 6/10.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
If you're a student at Lanier College, the only thing worse than being
one of the few whose finals fall on the last day of the semester is
being confronted with the madman who has arrived on campus just in time
for the end of finals and the end of lives, too. Needless to say, the
unlucky coeds who are still at school won't be getting any studying
Free of the obligatory gore and gratuitous sex that dominated the '80s slasher as we know it, "Final Exam" takes its cues from "Halloween" and "Prom Night," emphasizing quiet terrors over confrontational scares. I was shocked by the fact that the film seems to have gotten a lot of flack from people who have deemed it far too "boring" and complained about its lack of "back story," so just let me say this: you're wrong.
Is "Final Exam" a masterpiece? No. But its detractors are overlooking the fact that one of its most unique tenets is in that it fails to ascribe to the conventional stalk-and-slash formula by a madman with mommy issues. There are no masks, no motives, and no over-psychologizing of a mythical lunatic. It's a random account of a random killing spree, and while some feel that's a cop out, the flip side is that this approach is the film's greatest contribution toward anything original. When you strip the film down beyond that, it's fairly routine, though of a higher caliber than most films of its era. There is some classy cinematography and some deliciously creepy, subtle shots of the killer looming around. The film also makes ample use of its abandoned college campus setting, much like films such as "Girls Nite Out" and "The House on Sorority Row" did in the following years but let's not forget, "Final Exam" was something of a pioneer for the college campus slasher as we know it, whether you want to admit it or not. Solid yet quirky performances from a cast of unknowns also help keep the film afloat.
Overall, "Final Exam" truly does not get enough credit. As a slasher picture, it's a slow burner, but it's got enough eerie cinematography and ominous atmosphere to engage before the body count starts to rise. As I said before, it unabashedly takes its cues from "Halloween" and other slasher trend-setters from the late '70s, but its denial of a tedious back story or any real denouement forces it outside of the box, even if just a little. Either way, I found the film a splendid exercise in subtle spookiness, and I've never found an empty college campus so eerie although maybe that's just because I graduated from a very urban university. 8/10.
"Night of the Demons" has a group of ten teenagers throwing a Halloween
party in an abandoned funeral parlor; led by prankster Angela (Amelia
Kinlade), the party starts out in good spirits, but it's not long
before spirits of the dead start possessing each of the kids, turning
them into ravenous monsters with an appetite.
I remember seeing the VHS cover for this film at the video store as a child, and it haunted my dreams for years. Every time I went into the video store, I'd avoid the horror section at all costs just so I wouldn't have to see that awful monstrosity on the VHS slip. Now, as an adult who has seen the film, it seems rather silly given the minutely comical tone of the movie, but no less, it is a testimony to the effective makeup work and special effects employed in this film.
Plot-wise, what we really have here is essentially a hybrid of "The Evil Dead" and "Hell Night," but the film is still wildly enjoyable despite the derivations. Kids running amok in a dusty funeral parlor where each of their friends are transforming into monsters, while meanwhile, Angela, the "queen bee" of the party is perhaps the most horrific of all. The film has a slightly humorous edge to it at times, yet still has plenty of scares and splatters up its sleeve to keep the most jaded horror fans amused and entertained. Amelia Kinkade and Linnea Quigley are the highlights of the cast despite ostensibly being supporting characters, but the whole cast is much better than the material demands.
"Night of the Demons" is, at the end of the day, a solid flick that doesn't demand serious viewing in fact, I'd say it works against that but it's still a remarkably well made film with impressive special effects and a hearty mix of gruesome violence and edgy humor. The Bauhaus dance sequence is just one of many party favors offered. 7/10.
"Lucy Harbin took an axe, gave her husband forty whacks, when she saw
what she had done, she gave his girlfriend forty one." So is the life
of Lucy Harbin, played by dynamite Joan Crawford. After spending twenty
years in an insane asylum for her crime, she is released and goes to
live with her daughter on their farm property, but it is not long
before goings on around the farm seem to point to Lucy's questionable
sanity (and innocence).
While William Castle earned his reputation for schlock-ridden gimmicky horror films, his pictures with Crawford are true gems; this film and "I Saw What You Did," to be specific. While Crawford's meditated approaches to performance are part of what made these films so effective, it is inarguable that these films were well written and well directed. Penned by Robert Bloch, the author of "Psycho," "Strait-Jacket" plays on Harbin's potential madness like piano keys it's routine, sure, but for 1964, it's still a fresh approach to insanity on film. What's most surprising though is, as in "Psycho," the way in which the film's conclusion turns on its audience, and the plot twist is just as unexpected to a 21st century audience as it was in 1964.
Crawford's dedication to her role in the film is astounding, and in "Strait-Jacket" she is able to take a stab at the madwoman villainess whom she played opposite to in "Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?" two years earlier. Crawford's determination and gall really pay off for her, because the role, no matter how dramatic or emotive it is, is convincing. Diane Baker plays opposite as Crawford's tormented daughter and is able to hold her ground against the grand dame of madness.
Overall, "Strait-Jacket" is a solid thriller with Castle's schlocky touch, but its writing is sophisticated and its performances impressive enough to elevate it far beyond any sort of gimmick. The plot twists and Crawford's anti-demure playing of her character make this worth a watch. Along with "I Saw What You Did," "Strait-Jacket" is among Castle's classiest and most calculated thrillers. 7/10.
"The Honeymoon Killers" is one of those films that you want to shut off
because it's so damned tenebrous, but at the same time you don't really
want to look away. The thin plot follows an overweight, depressed nurse
who meets her prince charming after her mother places an ad in the
lonely hearts section of the local newspaper. The problem? Her
smooth-talking Latin boyfriend wants to take her along for the ride on
a killing spree of innocent women.
Among all of the drive-in grindhouse fare to come from the late 1960s-early 1970s, "The Honeymoon Killers" may be the cream of the crop; it's not sleazy enough to be shelved among its counterparts, but it's also not sophisticated enough by most standards to be thought of as anything else. It's a remarkably ugly film in just about every sense of the word its characters are vile, its story is downright macabre, and it has one of the most downtrodden but effective endings of any of its peers of the time period.
Shirley Stoler and Tony Lo Bianco turn in ingenious performances here and have a surprising chemistry with one another. Also featured is a young Doris Roberts (beloved mother on television's "Seinfeld") as Stoler's friend. Directed by Leonard Kastle (and his only feature film), it is well-shot and takes advantage of its stark black-and-white photography to create effective mood and make even daylight scenes potential threats. Other horror films of the era that feature similar use of photography (Herk Harvey's "Carnival of Souls" comes to mind) may have done so more effectively, but what the photography really bolsters in this film are its bleak depictions of violence. The murder scenes in the film are tonally flat, and that may be why they are so shocking. There is no dramatic cue music, no thunderstorms outside, no killer with a knife just silence, screaming, and the thwack of a hammer against the skull.
Released in the wake of Charles Manson, it's not surprising that "The Honeymoon Killers" was relegated to the drive-in circuit, and in some regard it deserved to be there; at the same time, it had the chops to be playing at art house theaters as well. Its straight-talking documentary style strips the film of any and all potential variation in tone, but its flatness is part of what makes it so appalling and so realistic. It's gritty and expressionless, but still masterfully done and fraught with emotion. It's a remarkably well-made film, but it's so direct that it at times feels dangerous to watch; the fact that it's based on an actual killing spree only amplifies the sentiment. 9/10.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Andrzej Zulawski's infamous cult film has Isabelle Adjani and Sam Neill
as a troubled couple living in Berlin. After returning from a business
trip, Mark (Neill) finds his wife, Anna (Adjani) wanting to divorce him
for inexplicable reasons. The film chronicles the deterioration of
their relationship as Anna exhibits increasingly psychotic behavior,
going back and forth between the apartment they share with their son,
and an abandoned flat where Mark believes her to be holding secret
rendezvous with someone... or something.
It's been said that Zulawski wrote this film during his divorce from his wife, which is pretty damned clear. It's difficult to explain the film in terms of plot beyond what I've already said, so I won't even bother, but I will say that it is magnificently crafted in just about every way possible. As a meditation on divorce and how people deal with remnants of what was once a relationship, the film is astounding. Beyond that, however, is the fact that it's operating on levels far different it's also a horror film, a creature feature, and perhaps even a sci-fi thriller, all rolled under the blanket of a twisted domestic drama.
Isabelle Adjani and Sam Neill turn in jaw-dropping performances here. I've heard accusations of overacting in this film, and I simply don't see it. Adjani's wicked, otherworldly presence in the film is haunting; she turns from frustrated mother to murderess to madwoman writhing on the floor of a subway tunnel having a miscarriage, and you never once question her or her motives, no matter the level of madness her character reaches. She is both touching and horrifying, and the catalyst around which the entire film hinges. Neill plays her counterpart with extreme precision as well, communicating the emotions of a husband driven mad by his wife's infidelity, and an abusive control freak who will stop at nothing to possess her.
Zulawski tells the story among the gloomy cityscapes of Cold War Berlin, and the photography in the film is stunning in all its greyness. It's a disturbing film in both content and imagery; the scenes of domestic violence are just as disturbing as the gruesome murder scenes and Adjani's infamous copulation sequence with the tentacled monster whom she's been nesting away. The last act is particularly compelling, mainly because of how out-there it really gets, and the ending follows in line. I still don't know what to make of it; what I do know, is that is was brilliant, and that it demands repeat viewings.
Overall, "Possession" is a gobsmacker. Ajdani and Neill's performances are reason enough to check the film out, but there are some utterly bizarre plot twists and shocking special effects here that will satiate fans of thrillers and creature features alike. The film's duplicitous nature makes it a difficult one to really pin down, but conversely is also one of the most fascinating things about it; it's a domestic drama, and a horror film, and a creature feature, and perhaps even a love story. Regardless, the end effect is that we are ultimately as uncertain of what the film is as we are of Anna's schoolteacher doppelgänger, or her grotesque paramour locked away in the abandoned flat. In any measure, "Possession" is a ruthless tale of betrayal and desperation, and I think that's one of the few things Zulawski and his audience would agree upon. 10/10.
"Bad Dreams" has Cynthia (Jennifer Rubin) awaking from a thirteen
year-long coma that she was put into when the leader of a cult which
her mother was a part of led a mass suicide by fire in a remote
farmhouse. As Cynthia tries to assimilate into life again, those around
her in the hospital begin dying in mysterious suicides and the fact
that Cynthia is beginning to see the ghost of the cult leader lurking
around doesn't make things look all that great.
This was one film that has been on my "to watch" list for a long time, but I have to say it was a pleasant surprise and far exceeded my expectations. Surprisingly high-gloss, the film, directed by Andrew Fleming (who later found success as a mainstream Hollywood director) was released in 1988 by 20th Century Fox with the expectation that it would become a blockbuster and ignite a franchise of sorts neither of these things happened, and for understandable reasons, but that doesn't detract from the fact that this is a really well-made horror film, especially by '80s standards.
The comparisons to "A Nightmare on Elm Street" are fair enough, although the truth is that this film really doesn't have all that much to do with dreams at all it's really about the traumatic effects dealt onto a young woman who spent her childhood in a sinister cult, which makes for grim subject matter as is. It is a slasher film in an unconventional sense that being that the deaths are suicides but the setups for each of them are based on the maneuvering hand of Harris, the malevolent cult leader's ghost. Lots of great special effects here that should be taken note of, and really nice photography. The film has a polished studio look that isn't particularly common for slasher films of this era. Jennifer Rubin plays the doe- eyed, flighty Cynthia convincingly, and "Re-Animantor's" Bruce Abbott plays her psychiatrist/eventual love interest; Richard Lynch is in stark opposition as the wild-eyed cult leader, who spends half of the film covered in gruesome fourth degree burns.
Overall, "Bad Dreams" is an effective thriller and is a surprisingly classy oddball of the late 1980s slasher crop. While the film's victim count feels by-the-numbers, it is still an entertaining watch bolstering some solid performances and a visibly adept craftsmanship behind it. It's no surprise that Fleming found success with his later more mainstream pictures given what he was able to pull off here. Worth some attention from any fans of eighties horror. 7/10.
"I Saw What You Did" has teenagers Libby and Kit spending a night home
alone along with Libby's younger sister, Tess. What do three young
girls do for fun on a Friday night in 1965? Make prank phone calls, of
course! But Libby and Kit's idea of innocent fun turns dangerous when
they ring a psychopath who has just murdered his wife.
I admittedly am not a fan of William Castle's earliest work (as much as I don't want to say it, I find his earlier ghost films "House on Haunted Hill" and "13 Ghosts" remarkably dull), but here Castle seems to have struck my fancy. "I Saw What You Did" is a straightforward suspense film that relies on crafty writing in order to really hold our attention, but the script pulls it off. The causal reactions that put Libby and Kit into such grave danger are extremely clever, and that is perhaps the film's greatest strength the writing is inventive and smart. In terms of action, there is not a lot that happens over the course of the film, but it still manages to engage all the same, and running at 82 minutes, it packs its punch well.
The film's black-and-white photography is gorgeous and drenches everything atmosphere, and its famous "uxoricide" scene cribs Hitchcock's "Psycho" but is arguably more brutal; it marks a pivotal point in the film as well that will have the audience shifting in their seat even the film's hokey score is discredited by that scene alone. As lightweight as the film feels for much of its duration, the first murder is there to remind us that it's really not.
The two leading young girls are remarkably likable in their roles, and Joan Crawford infamously pulls off the role of the psychopath's sultry mistress next-door. While Crawford is often credited for hamming things up in her later career, I found her performance here to be actually quite incredible and terrifying; her interrogation of Libby when the girls arrive at the madman's house was absolutely hair-raising in fact, I'd go so far as to say she's scarier in that moment than John Ireland is throughout the entire film.
Overall, "I Saw What You Did" is noteworthy as a thriller, but also as a cultural relic of a bygone era of rotary dials, and a world where prank calls could lead to murderous madmen peeking in your windows. It's a clever and suspenseful film that is tame by today's standards, but the maliciousness of its first murder scene does keep it floating above total kitsch. It's fun, short, and sweet, and Joan Crawford somehow manages to be at her scariest in a role that could have easily been very boring in the hands of another actress. It's a shame that it hasn't been re-released on DVD or Blu-ray for new generations to have availability to; the original Anchor Bay disc went out of print years ago and is inexplicably among the rarest horror DVDs out there. 9/10.
|Page 1 of 45:||          |