Reviews written by registered user
|42 reviews in total|
Michael Fredianelli's film THE RIVEN is a tense drama centered around
the all to common practice of rape on college campuses. In fact as of
this writing, a prestigious university has suspended fraternity
activities due to the issue and many are proclaiming that a "rape
culture" exists in the US. THE RIVEN tells a story about a campus rape
and deals with the affects such a crime can have on college students.
The trauma, the reluctance to report, the victim-blaming, the impact on
social life and relationships... THE RIVEN puts it all on film. And
while stories like the one depicted might be discussed and examined
through the news and other media, it's odd that there doesn't seem to
be (at least to my knowledge) a bigger, more mainstream film that
seriously examines the subject of campus rape as its main focus.
In many ways, THE RIVEN is a different film to see from director Fredianelli. The film is more grounded than some of the director's other work and the characters and situations feel very real. Sure there are some plot points that feel contrived (it's a movie, it needs to tell the story) and a performance or two that's maybe a bit over-the top, but the film depicts plenty of the regular moments of college living that many can relate to.
Overall, it's nice to see Fredianelli succeed with a serious drama instead of the genre-film route he's better known for going. Even if the director's exploitation style films often come peppered with social commentary themselves, it's nice to see that same real-world relevancy come in more of a straightforward manner. And then done so powerfully at that. It's a poignant film that needs to get noticed.
As a film, I AM THE EDGE doesn't bring forth anything that's particular
new to the thriller genre. The plot is relatively straightforward and
there's a lot that we've seen elsewhere. Mainly it's the idea of a
successful, but currently struggling author brought into a situation
that resembles the thrilling nature of their novels. Think of the times
Stephen King has explored a similar theme for instance. Aside from the
plot being more on the "safe" side (at least in terms of what director
Michael Fredianelli tends to deal with), I AM THE EDGE is such an
entertaining, suspenseful, and just generally well-made film
(especially for a lower-budgeted indie) that it's abundance of genre
conventions throughout don't detract. In fact, the film's more
straightforward nature is maybe one of the film's best assets as it's
expertly executed and paced. It's less about what the story is here
than how well it's told.
Serving as the film's director of photography again, Fredianelli makes a nice looking film with some really moody black and white cinematography. With the choice of color perhaps aiding in this, the film's special effects are virtually flawless and there are some real grizzly shots that played much more effectively than those used in a lot of massively budgeted Hollywood pics. The film is pretty consistently well acted with frequent Wild Dogs collaborator Jeremy Koerner getting his most screen time yet as the lead. Koerner's performance is a bit more understated than what we're used to seeing from him, but he carries the film well.
As a film, I AM THE EDGE is one of Fredianelli's best looking and best made movies. It's also the director's most successful go at telling a mystery type story in a suspenseful manor and delivering the plot-twists in a way that's satisfying to the viewer (MONEY FOR ANGELS and the hunter vignette in COIN come to mind as examples to the contrary). I AM THE EDGE will no doubt keep you entertained from beginning to end and ultimately leave you feeling satisfied.
In recent times there has been a surge of independently made horror
anthology films. A lot of the time these films employ multiple
directors (each for a different vignette) and make use of some kind of
gimmick or vaguely defined theme. Many of these films are just too
episodic in nature and really fail at making any impact with their
empty bits of shock value. EREBUS however is very different from this
mold as it has more in common with the likes of classic horror
anthology movies made by British studio Amicus Productions than a
contemporary film of the likes of V/H/S. With the entire film being
helmed by director Rick Laprade, EREBUS has a cohesion that's missing
from a lot of the modern takes on the horror anthology sub-genre.
Erebus' vignettes and wraparound story take place across a few
different decades, but there's enough of an overarching narrative to
make each vignette compliment one another and create something that
comes together quite nicely in the end.
As a movie, EREBUS is quite atmospheric and genuinely terrifying. Shot on location in Block Island, the film makes prime use of a historic hotel as its main setting. The hotel's signature facade along with some very dark and stormy New England weather does a lot for the film. Coupled with the subtext of Block Island's real-life haunted history, the movie is all the more eerie. EREBUS doesn't need cheap "jump out at you" thrills to be legitimately creepy and it employs clever editing and other tricks to play it's on screen paranormal encounters to maximum effect.
One thing that's impressive about EREBUS is just how well it captures the different time periods it depicts on a meager budget. This is particularly true of the second vignette called "Exposure" that is set in the 1970s. The cars, costumes, and props appear spot-on and vignette lead actor Marc Vos looks like he walked off of a time-machine onto the set. And then there's the hotel itself and all the creepy furnishings that come with it. Without spoiling too much, a stand out is a vintage portable television that is utilized in a more terrifying manner than whatever type of lame shot-on-video gimmick you'll see today.
It's hugely impressive in general how EREBUS is able to achieve so much with very little and it's straightforward and "old school" in the best possible way. If there are any real glaring flaws it's that some of the film's slicker aspects do detract a bit. An HBO style motion graphics title sequence headlines the film along with some use of snappy jump cuts during the first few minutes. A minor gripe related mostly to taste, but these stylistic choices don't really feel in tune with the rest of the film either. All in all, EREBUS is a stand-out entry in today's high volume of indie horror (and more specifically, horror anthology) releases.
In 2012, director Richard Griffin made one of the most entertaining
low-budget horror flicks in recent times with MURDER UNIVERSITY. It's a
film full of black humor, satire, and is a loving tribute to 80s
slashers. After that, the director followed with DR. FRANKENSTEIN'S WAX
MUSEUM which was a nice love letter to Hammer horror films (and
SCOOBY-DOO) that is highly entertaining (if a bit less polished and
smaller in scope than MURDER U). Then we have this year's SINS OF
Dracula which could almost belong to a loose, unofficial "triology"
with the other two movies given their common casts (predominately
focusing on young protagonists), subject matter and themes (horror,
dark humor), and setting (loosely, the 1980s). And while MURDER U and
WAX MUSEUM were tributes to certain sub-genres and cinematic movements,
SINS is perhaps most interesting for being a biting satire of Christian
scare films. Yes, the no-budget cautionary propaganda tales probably
produced by your local church in the 1970s and 80s (even if films of
the type have never really disappeared). Plenty is taken from the great
popular and cult cinema of the 70s and 80s too with the film feeling a
lot like 85's FRIGHT NIGHT at times. In addition, the film makes nods
to everything from one the most famous horror films of the 70s to
blaxploitation movies. Oh yeah, and if you couldn't tell by now, the
film just so happens to involve Dracula and a satanic thespian intent
on raising that Prince of Darkness from the dead. Some might be
disappointed by how little this movie actually has to do with 'ol
Fangface, but you should know what you're getting into if you've seen
the film's trailer (or watched the film's first act).
As a film, SINS is considerably well crafted. Easily one of Grifin and co.'s best looking films and perhaps the closest one aesthetically to the 70s/80s exploitation films it's trying to ape (without needing the added dust or scratches of THE DISCO EXORCIST). There's great camera-work (among it a crane shot, and lots of stylish zooms) and excellent practical effects by New England gore-wizard Jordan Pacheco. Sure there's clear use of plaster mannequins played for laughs, but there's plenty of stuff that feels like it belongs right smack in a Hammer made Dracula movie. Furthermore, the film is headlined by great music consisting of hilarious diegetic numbers and a fantastic Euro-cult flavored score by Timothy Fife. Fife's pounding synth score is (for lack of a better word) quite sexy and brings to mind the work of Italian maestro Riz Ortolani (with a pinch of Italian prog rock band Goblin).
Plenty of Scorpio Releasing regulars line the cast and many of the leads from MURDER U return to star. Jamie Dufault has lots of charisma in the lead role of Billy while NUN OF THAT'S Sarah Nicklin gives a memorable (and hugely adorable) turn as his girlfriend (probably ranking as my favorite of her roles). Also returning is Samantha Acampora who gives plenty of zest to her role of Traci-- a D&D nerd. Supporting actors are great as well with Carmine Capobianco being hilarious as Billy's pastor, and Steven O'Broin (FUTURE JUSTICE) once again making a superb villain. Michael Thurber (who already excelled at playing Dr. Frankenstein) is a great presence as Dracula and brings to mind the best of old school Dracs Christopher Lee, John Carradine, and Bela Lugosi in his (mostly silent) performance. Everyone seems to be having fun here and Michael Varrati's script is extremely witty and plays with cinema tropes and societal stereotypes to maximum comedic effect.
In sum, SINS is a hugely entertaining film that will no doubt make a killer triple feature with Griffin's earlier MURDER U and FRANKENSTEIN'S WAX MUSEUM. See it!
With zombies being so big in pop-culture these days it's not much of a
surprise that most people think of the creatures when it comes to media
focusing on the apocalypse and its aftermath. Coupled with the fact
that horror always seems to be the go-to thing for most indie genre
filmmakers, it's really nice to see director Richard Griffin make an
80s inspired (of the likes of action classics like the MAD MAX films
and ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK) post-apocalyptic sci-fi action film in 2014.
While FUTURE JUSTICE owes elements to the movie ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK,
it's actually closer in structure to John Carpenter's earlier film
ASSAULT ON PRECINCT 13. So in that sense, FUTURE JUSTICE plays very
much in the vein of classic siege and survival movies. The film even
has a NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD vibe to it too as it has the
subterranean shelter element with a group of protagonists that have to
deal with conflict amongst themselves along with a larger threat.
Aesthetically though, the movie owes less to some of the larger scale
US and Australian post-apoc movies than it does to the relatively
short-lived fad of Italian post-apoc movies that capitalized on those
other movie's success. And in that regard, FUTURE JUSTICE has the feel
of Enzo G. Castellari's BRONX films in terms of the abandoned city
block exteriors and dusty, concrete interiors. Also when it comes to
the movie's gangster antagonists, they have a very mishmash look to
their weaponry and costuming not unlike the scavenging gangsters of a
lot of the Italian films. Even looking at some of the military
characters in FUTURE JUSTICE, they wear the black riot helmets that
seemed mandatory for whatever evil Fascist troopers would be employed
to take on the heroes in the Italian films. Also of note is the film's
pounding, 1980s-esque, synthy music score by composer Daniel Hildreth.
Definitely brings to mind 70s/80s John Carpenter music predominately,
but is also reminiscent of some Italian composers of the likes of
Claudio Simonetti. The music definitely fits the film well and aids in
giving it the really cool retro vibe that it has.
As a film, FUTURE JUSTICE gets quite a bit of mileage out of its low-budget. The film doesn't utilize a whole bunch of different physical locations, but has much more scope than what the meager budget might lead many to believe it has. One of the best assets of the film are the visual effects. The filmmakers employ a good mix of practical and CGI effects, and the CGI never feels overbearing or excessive like a lot bigger budget Hollywood productions. While it's difficult to explain exactly why, an obviously CGI spaceship featured early on actually brought on more of a miniature (original STAR WARS trilogy, first two ALIEN films in particular) vibe. In any case, that type of tasteful and limited use of CGI is what sets the film's look apart from a lot of the manufactured looking Hollywood films that employ dozens of VFX artists. Along with the well utilized practical effects (Griffin and his crew clearly have this down after making so many horror films on the cheap), FUTURE JUSTICE has a rawness to it that makes it suspenseful and exciting. The only real nit-pick to make would be some of the CGI blood spatter that shows up (albeit briefly) as it has an empty feel to it.
As far as the performances go, there are definitely actors and characters that stand out the most. Steven O'Broin as the villain Gazeebo is probably the most memorable and well acted role. He comes off as tough and brutal throughout (even to the point of being armed with a crossbow that shoots exploding arrows) while the pairing of a villain named Gazeebo facing off against a hero bearing the ridiculous (but insanely badass) name of Python Diamond is a funny touch. Diamond (Nathaniel Sylva) isn't quite as imposing or memorable, but he makes for an interesting lead nonetheless (especially with the whole "terrorist or freedom fighter?" back story he's given). Another standout is Aaron Andrade as Uxbridge-- a character that's such an over-the-top asshole he's just incredibly fun to watch. There are some good supporting roles as well with Pat Hawkridge playing sort of a motherly character to Gazeebo and his two grizzled henchmen Rag and Tag (kind of like post-apocalyptic versions of Coffer and TC from THE WILD BUNCH). A lot of these supporting roles are very comedic and Michael Thurber is hilarious playing a tuxedo clad caricature of pretentious, full-of-themselves thespians. If I had to pick a character I didn't really enjoy it'd have to be Meg (Casey Wright) as her dialog just got a little too weird and on the annoying side of things after a while. It's mostly a minor detraction though in what is a pretty good ensemble cast/group of characters.
FUTURE JUSTICE is a highly entertaining flick with a good amount of action scenes. While it might be missing a real signature shootout of Peckinpah or Castellari quality, it's peppered with plenty of exciting skirmishes and fights throughout its running time. It's a well paced film and one that certainly seems like it would have a great deal of re-watch value. If you like old-school action flicks (particularly of the 80s sci-fi variety), you will no doubt enjoy FUTURE JUSTICE!
Zombies, vampires, ghosts, slashers... There's an over-saturation of
indie horror and too often we just see the same thing again and again.
So with that said, THE DEVIL IN WHITE is hugely refreshing in itself
for feeling like something we just don't see much of in large volumes.
Cronenbergian body (and mind) horror. And it's a horror movie about
drugs too. While that's not a new premise, THE DEVIL IN WHITE might be
the best of that lot.
THE DEVIL IN WHITE also stands as what is probably the best post-SCARLET WORM (Michael Fredianelli's masterpiece) Fredianelli directed film so far. While the others were (for the most part) much more ambitious and dealing in genre and subject matter I tend to prefer, there was just something off about them and it seemed hard not to notice their faults. THE DEVIL IN WHITE is different. It's not a perfect film sure, but it's a very technically sound movie and pretty believable in the effects, storytelling, and performances.
While the movie is a bit of a slow burn, it opens strong (great pre-title and title sequences) and remains constantly gripping until the end. The film seemingly toys with the audience a bit as it doesn't really have a standard protagonist the way most stories do. It's a bit like Hitchcock's PSYCHO in this regard. You can't really be sure who the protagonist is at first and it makes for a thrilling ride. Surprises are abound and it's a very gripping and suspense filled movie.
While not every performances is top-notch, one of THE DEVIL IN WHITE's best assets is how well acted it is. Jeremy Koerner is a powerhouse as the evil cult leader Archie. While acting under Fredianelli's direction in two films prior, this is the film where Koerner is really utilized and able to shine the most. Koerner is infinitely menacing as Archie and gives a very creepy and believable performance. Other stand-out cast members include Vanessa Leigh (in a somewhat smaller role but performing great as always), Wild Dogs regular Michael Nosé (in what is probably his finest acting turn), and Peter Stylianos (in a small part again, but still making an impression). Beth Bemis (while I didn't enjoy her performance as much as the others) is also very memorable in her role as middle-aged mother Piper-- a character and role uncommon for a Wild Dogs Production (or at least with this type of treatment and amount of screen-time given).
Another major strong-point are the film's visual effects by Michael A. Martinez. Martinez returns from somewhat of an absence from Wild Dogs and boy does it make a difference. All the VFX on display in the film are convincing and hardly even appear digital (or obviously faked) if at all. The film isn't really an action or effects heavy piece per say, but the seamless nature of the movie's VFX really sells it. On that note, it's important to say that this is a high-impact and affecting horror film, but it's not full of explicit violence and gore to the extent a lot of others are. While Director Fredianelli really has a talent for filming the shocking and explicit, he also knows how to be just as effective for what he doesn't show when it comes to horror. As in his earlier horror movie THE BLACKFACE KILLER, this balance is on full display here.
In sum, THE DEVIL IN WHITE is at the top of its game as far as indie horror goes. It works well within the confines of a low-budget and doesn't overreach its bounds. It also seems to bring something relatively fresh to the table and doesn't feel like more of the same. And hell, David Cronenberg would be proud.
Richard Griffin's latest film NORMAL had a lot of mystery surrounding
it. I had figured out early on before the release that it would likely
center around a serial-killer, but it almost seemed like few details
were purposefully given. Such is appropriate though as NORMAL is indeed
a very shadowy and mysterious film with a good amount of twists and
turns. Despite Griffin making clarification that the film is not horror
(the genre he is best known for working in), this distinction is a bit
blurred here. NORMAL is a dark film and while it plays more with
psychology and drama rather than standard thrills and chills, the movie
certainly has enough horrific, unsettling and grim content in it.
However, even if it doesn't play like a straight horror film, NORMAL is
probably Griffin's scariest and affecting movie to date.
This is a movie (unlike most of the director's other films) that is dark and dead serious. Probably closest to Griffin's EXHUMED in tone and feel and the fact that much of the cast and crew is repeated here. For instance, the movie is all kinds of bleak and has a similar claustrophobic feel to it. Ken Willinger (who collaborates again with Griffin as director of photography here for the second time) crafts a similar look (albeit in color) and makes use of some really contrasty, low-key film noir type lighting that makes the film's aesthetic about as dark as its subject matter. Willinger really shines in his work here and fully demonstrates his massive talent for cinematography. On display are some truly amazing shots that rival the best work of a Roger Deakins-- my favorite of which features actor Michael Thurber walking through the streets of downtown Boston at night illuminated by a plume of sewer steam. This shot brought to mind a similar shot in THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES BY THE COWARD ROBERT FORD and as with there, it gave me goosebumps.
Even if NORMAL is a rather unsettling film for much of its running time, it's also oddly beautiful in a lot of ways. Due to its music score at times and aforementioned Willinger cinematography, NORMAL almost has a Terrence Malick like quality to it in the visuals and storytelling. Just a poignant and powerful film and the performances help sell it. Michael Reed is excellent in the lead and comes off as quite creepy and terrifying in his portrayal of a twisted serial killer. Elyssa Baldassarri also shines in the role of Kate and her performance says so much just due to her demeanor and facial expressions alone. The rest of the cast is generally well utilized and Michael Thurber always steals whatever scene he's in no matter how short his screen time.
All in all, nothing is really 'normal' about the film NORMAL. It's a film you'll no doubt be impacted by and probably hard-pressed to forget.
THE ICEMAN was on my movie watch-list since I first heard of it. A true-crime film about an infamous hit-man spanning from the 1960s-1980s starring a contemporary actor I don't actually hate (Michael Shannon) in the titular role. Now I admittedly had low expectations for this film considering neigh every recent limited-release movie I've went to see has turned out to be a disappointment. Even contemporary films from great 70s/80s genre directors like Friedkin and Cronenberg (heck, even Don Coscarelli to a degree) turned out to be more on the artsy/fartsy side and just seemed to do anything but leave me cold by their weirdness, non-endings or pretentiousness. THE ICEMAN is a movie (while somewhat of a clichéd depiction of the eras it is set) feels closest to a legit 70s/80s crime movie than most new films I've seen recently that seemingly try to achieve so (except for maybe Walter Hill's BULLET TO THE HEAD, but that's more on the action side of things). Great performance by Michael Shannon (the guy has charisma even when playing a brutal killer who "doesn't give a sh!t") and some great familiar "crime" faces like Ray Liotta and Robert Davi. Appearances by David Schwimmer (at parts looking like poliziotteschi hench Riccardo Petrazzi and then Jesus from THE BIG LEWBOWSKI) and a sleazy James Franco are worth noting...I guess. The film has good cinematography (none of this shaky cam and MTV style crap), minimal (and when noticeable) appropriate uses of CGI, and plenty of good practical effects like the hard-hitting squibs and stunt driving. These elements (and Robert Davi's worthy of framing weathered face) were enough to gain my tough, gritty 70s crime film fan seal of approval. We really need more serious, medium sized (both in scope and budget) films about real-life like this out there these days.
One day (hopefully sooner than later) I'll be able to review a Wild
Dogs movie without having to compare it to THE SCARLET WORM. Until then
I'm going to have to say that at least Fredianelli's latest effort
BLACK CAT WHISKEY seems to out-do all of the company's stuff post WORM.
BLACK CAT WHISKEY is a 1930s Georgia set (yet filmed in Northern California surprisingly pretty convincingly) depression era gangster film. It's really quite impressive in that regard as the sets, props, vehicles and locations included in the production all look great. Even after doing several period films I'm inclined to think that Fredianelli did this time period/setting the most justice oddly enough (I think the only thing the anachronism-spotting history geek in me caught were the questionable ribbed glassware that looks like the stuff found in my kitchen today). It's definitely not an overstatement to say this film is easily among the two or three best looking in the Wild Dogs catalog by far.
The selection of the cast and performances of the film's actors also achieve good marks. This is definitely a notable film in the Wild Dogs filmography considering it features (next to maybe only APOCRYPHA) the only time a female protagonist has headlined one of their features. Vanessa Leigh (who previously had a small role in Fredianelli's MONEY FOR ANGELS) portrays the main character Katie and does a fine job. She portrays a strong woman, but not exploitative so on the level of say, Pam Grier's hard-ass blaxploitation roles. No punches are pulled on portraying how a woman (especially a lower class one in the south) would have likely been treated at that time, but she never turns into Superwoman when she goes to seek revenge on the villains of the picture who try to break her.
The supporting cast in the film is also quite memorable. Jeremy Koerner is given a much meatier role than what he had to work with in I DIE ALONE and does great in a turn as a twisted (almost Spaghetti Western like) gangster villain named Richard Hayden. Then there's James Allen Brewer (giving off a really Richard Crenna like vibe) seems right at home in Depression era crime mode. Gift Harris is memorable as is the ever reliable Ray Medved in some of the few sympathetic roles, while (newcomer?) George S. Gemette is downright frightening as a really unsavory character.
As far as the film goes, it's pretty entertaining and watchable if focusing on some not at all light subject matter. There's some really good set-pieces and some great shots throughout that will definitely stay with the viewer. Plenty of brutal violence is featured, but the final shootout is unfortunately kind of underwhelming on repeated viewings. There's also sadly really apparent lack of practical effects on display with CGI crimson spray used most often instead of squibs. There's also plenty of digitally added muzzle flash, bullet impacts, and a really shoddy looking computer-rendered fire that blazes.
Unfortunately, the film also has it's share of other problems and it proves to be another Wild Dogs film that still isn't quite there yet. I have a hard time pinpointing what it is specifically (though probably related to the scripts or the budgets), but there's just something off about them. A lot of the time, I just feel like Fredianelli's movies ask a lot of the audience when they don't have to. There should be more in the movie that gets shown instead of alluded to and done in a more exciting manner that really engages the audience. Even if this is sort of a vague criticism at best, I know it's there given the SCARLET WORM was one (if not the only) not to suffer from it. It just felt like well-- more of a real movie to me. With all that said, BLACK CAT WHISKEY still comes recommended and is (at least for this viewer) superior to Hollywood's period gangster offerings as of late (PUBLIC ENEMIES, LAWLESS, and of course the stinker that is GANGSTER SQUAD) even if this indie probably cost about as much as it did to feed the cast and crew on those films. Great southern folk music score.
Except for the absence of female nudity of course.
As a director, Richard Griffin has made a name for himself (primarily working in the horror genre) with 13 feature films to his credit. The majority of these films have been made under his production company Scorpio Film Releasing beginning circa 2004 (yes, before Tarantino & co. seemingly began (or at least popularized) the whole resurgence of modern-day exploitation cinema with movies like GRINDHOUSE, and contributed to the over-saturation of mostly shoddy, amateur, direct-to-video genre films). Over the years, Griffin has amassed a (almost seemingly close-knit family type) pool of talented New England actors and crew and shows no sign of decreasing his immense productivity (I don't think I can even count the number of films that he currently has in development). That said, (having seen most of the director's filmography), it looks as if Griffin has more than graduated from the (likely even cheaper than his current output) shoe-string budgeted (both in production and aesthetics) movies he began his film career with that overall, had more of a home-made feel to them. However, starting with 2011's EXHUMED, Griffin seems to have reached a new level by producing films that transcend their meager budgets and easily stand on their own as quality examples of contemporary genre cinema. With EXHUMED, MURDER UNIVERSITY, and now, DR. FRANKENSTEIN'S WAX MUSEUM OF THE HUNGRY DEAD, Griffin has achieved an early-Walter Hill like streak by making three solid, quality, and highly entertaining films in a row! When it comes to DR. FRANKENSTEIN'S WAX MUSEUM OF THE HUNGRY DEAD, Griffin clearly pays homage to the many vintage B-movie horror and monster films he most definitely loves and grew up with. Now I know what you're thinking, do we really need another Frankenstein movie or a horror flick set in a wax museum (given the three versions of HOUSE OF WAX, among others)? Well to say the least, this movie does not play out in the most typical manner. Heck, the Wax Museum is more of a McGuffin than something as clichéd as a place for the villain to showcase dead victims preserved as statues (though the film does make use of the Scooby-Doo like, character hiding by being mistaken for statue gag). Instead, the wax museum locale (shot on location at Count Orlok's Nightmare Gallery in Salem, MA) just provides for a really interesting and atmospheric location (if this movie doesn't get you to want to visit Count Orlok's, then I don't know what will!) that Dr.Frankenstein (Michael Thurber), can use as a front for his mad scientist, corpse re-animating activities. Sure, the movie is still somewhat formulaic and derivative (intentionally being a certain 'type' of horror flick and sort of a "movie about movies" in general), but the film has more in common with Griffin's previous MURDER UNIVERSITY than it does with say, 30s Universal Monster movies or British Hammer horror flicks.
Like MURDER UNIVERSITY, the movie centers around a group of young people (high-school teenagers this time around) who become caught-up in a labyrinth of murders and mayhem. Unlike MURDER UNIVERSITY, the majority of the protagonists are hugely unlikable (almost the horror equivalent of the spoiled rich kids in WILLY WONKA AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY) and (with the exception of the sympathetic characters of Jamie Lyn Bagley's nerd-girl character Katherine and her love interest (or heck, even Sean Carufel's character, the snarky talking-head on a petri dish named Fritz)) so (along with the added fact that the movie plays like a dark-comedy anyway), the depraved youngsters (yes, anyone who doesn't care to learn about the history of classic Hammer horror films or hasn't even seen Alfred Hitchcock's PSYCHO deserves some form of punishment, at least by this film-geek's standards :) ) makes the audience delight in (and anxiously anticipate in) witnessing the main characters inevitable and brutal demises.
On a technical level, the movie has good production values (especially for being micro-budget), is well shot, and features some good over-the-top and comedic performances from pretty much all involved in the cast. Naturally, Michael Thurber (complete with eye-patch, toupee, and over-the-top German accent) stands out in the titular role and provides somewhat of a new and fresh take on the Dr. Frankenstein persona. Hell, to be honest, the guy has so much charisma in all the many different film roles I've seen him play that I wouldn't mind (as seems to be the case anyway) if he appears in every subsequent Richard Griffin film. Furthermore, the film's Timothy Fife/Lang-Grannan music score is pitch-perfect and sets the tone and atmosphere perfectly in all its 1980s, synthy, John Carpenter and Goblin-esque glory (In fact, the opening theme is so memorable that it brings to mind the iconic theme songs from THE EXORCIST and HALLOWEEN, and I don't think that's an overstatement on my part). Moreover (like MURDER UNIVERSITY) the movie has very much a cool retro, 1980s vibe as a whole (and despite the faux back story that played immediately preceding the film at the premiere, the time-frame is much more loose so I won't get all anal-retentive history geek about all the anachronisms) and comes complete with everything from hideous wardrobes to Duran Duran posters and the use of cassette tapes. If I really had to point out flaws in the movie it would be (as a huge fan of practical special effects) the obvious (yet minimal) uses of CGI for some of the blood-splatter. However, given the fact that the film doesn't really take itself seriously (the blood and gore being of course cartoony on purpose), it doesn't really detract from the film or anything. All in all, DR. FRANKENSTEIN'S WAX MUSEUM OF THE HUNGRY DEAD is a fine achievement in low-budget horror film-making and is entertaining on so many levels. Recommended.
|Page 1 of 5:||    |