cam26 Reviews

Black Christmas (2019)

Even Worse than Expected

[1/10 · 18 December 2019]

Oh my GOD this was bad. I was expecting a mediocre semi-remake of the original Black Christmas. But what I got was worse. SO much worse. First of all, absolutely NO relation to the original. Zero. Zilch. Why even bother calling it Black Christmas? What it was, was . . . a poorly done version of a Buffy the Vampire Slayer episode? You know the one I'm talking about. The one about the frat house. It was that. Only without the talent of Joss Whedon involved. Truly, utterly without merit. They say no one sets out to make a bad movie, but whoever greenlit this should be ashamed of themselves. I would almost say OFFENSIVELY bad. Felt bad for Cary Elwes having to appear in this piece of crap. Bob Clark is rolling over in his grave. This makes the (pretty mediocre) 2006 remake look like Citizen Kane by comparison. WHAT on EARTH were these people thinking? Who the hell is the audience for this thing. Bad. Bad. BAD!

Slasher: 3am to 6am (2019) Season 3, Episode 8

Surprising amount of depth

[9/10 · 4 October 2019]

Personally, I thought this was utterly brilliant. As a fan of all things slasher-genre related, I was expecting something fairly decent, after the first 2 seasons, but this one totally blew me away. Not your typical blood-and-guts slasher fare (although there was plenty of that). But a thoughtful, thought-provoking meditation on race relations, internet shaming, multiculturalism, and the social contract. This is horror at its best. And, in spite of the killings being TOTALLY brutal, the killer's (or killers', no spoilers) motivation was not only understandable but extremely sympathetic. I think they hit this one out of the park. (Also, in addition to being Tori Spelling's husband, Dean McDermott is actually a pretty damn fine actor.)

The Omen (2006)

what a remake is supposed to be

[8/10 · 21 June 2006]

First let me say that I'm a fan of the original, and, apparently, so are the folks behind this remake, because, for once, Hollywood didn't manage to screw it up. (See my review of "The Fog" remake for an example of "screwing it up") I think what I liked most was that they treated the original with respect and they took the story seriously. I'm so sick of these tongue-in-cheek, nudge-nudge wink-wink, self-referential horror movies. ("Scream" is a great film, but it's got a lot to answer for). The cast played it straight, and I appreciated that.

The script follows the original story pretty closely, with a few minor changes and some nicely done "jump" scares. (I'll admit, they got me a couple of times) True, the score isn't exactly Jerry Goldsmith's classic "Ave Satana", but I thought Marco Beltrami did a decent, if slightly conventional, job.

As for the cast : Liev Shrieber is perfect. I thought he brought a much more human, much more emotional Robert Thorne to the screen. Nothing against Gregory Peck, mind you. I actually preferred Julia Stiles' Katherine Thorne to Lee Remick's. She seemed a little more innocent and less of a, well, a bitch, frankly.

Awesome supporting cast. Mia Farrow obviously took a completely different take on the Nanny role than Billie Whitelaw. Not better necessarily, just different. David Thewlis was terrific in the Photographer role. Neat accent, too.Do I detect North country? Yorkshire, perhaps? Michael Gambon is pretty much wasted as "Bugenhagen", but then, so was Leo McKern in the original. Pete Postlethwaite's "Father Brennan" is pretty much a carbon copy of Patrick Troughton in the original, and all the better for it. Finally, it's nice to see Italian genre fave Giovanni Lombardo Radice (aka John Morghen)back on screen as "Father Spiletto". (Fantastic burn make-up on him as well. Totally creepy.) Anyways, all in all I thought this was a very well-done remake that should please fans of the original as well as newcomers. Nice job, guys.

The Fog (2005)

Bland, disappointing, why bother?

[14 October 2005]

John Carpenter's original "The Fog" is a classic. A minor classic, but a classic nonetheless. Now, I'd read some pretty good press about this re-make, and the fact that Carpenter himself was on board as a producer seemed like a good omen. Let's just say I went in with an open mind. I was prepared for, if not a better film than the original, at least an intriguing update. Boy, was I disappointed. This film lacks everything that made the first one special : heart, good performances, and above all, atmosphere. This remake goes through the motions, but has none of the genuinely chilling moments from the original. The acting is atrocious, particularly by the leads. The supporting cast is actually pretty good, they just aren't given anything interesting to do. Case in point. In the original, Hal Holbrook's Father Malone was an integral part of the plot. His entire character encapsulated the theme of the sins of the past haunting the present. Whereas, in this version, Malone comes of as a modern incarnation of "Friday the 13th's" Crazy Ralph (You're doomed!). The character is given no motivation, no identity, no reason to even be there. And can we please PLEASE keep these WB actors where they're meant to be . . .ON THE WB!! Tom Welling is obviously completely out of his depth, and he's trying way too hard to "act". Check out Tom Atkins in the original : subtle, nuanced, completely believable, and he never seems to be trying too hard. Maggie Grace, who I actually quite like on "Lost" looks, well, lost. The one pleasant surprise was Selma Blair as "Stevie Wayne". Granted, no one could really compete with Adrienne Barbeau from the original, but Selma at least gave it the good old college try. Finally, the ghosts. I'm all for make-up effects, but, as proved in the original, this is the kind of story where less is definitely more. In fact, the fact that, in the original, we only got fleeting glimpses of the drowned lepers, made them all the more frightening, particularly when there WAS a decent close up of Rob Bottin's excellent effects. The spirits in this thing are just too over-the-top, too, dare I say it, "Pirates of the Caribbean". Oh, and the music. Carpenter's music was one of the key ingredients in the first film's atmosphere. Whereas here, we get your typical cheesy-horror-movie jump-shock soundtrack. Not bad in its place, but complete anathema to a story that supposedly depends on subtlety. Finally, there's the fog itself. Remember the "glowing" fog from the original? Otherworldly? Mysterious? And genuinely frightening. So, 26 years later, after all of these amazing special effects advances, what do we get? We get fog that looks a hell of a lot like, hmm, what's the word I'm looking for? Oh yeah . . .fog. OK. I'm done ranting. The verdict? Save yourself $10.00. Rent the original. Turn the lights down low. And try to remember back to a time when they actually made decent horror movies, as opposed to pointless watered-down, pg-13 pieces of . . .

The Changeling (1980)

Best Haunted House Movie Ever. Period

[10/10 · 25 August 2004]

My all-time favourite haunted house pic. First, let's start with the house itself. Huge, ominous, creepier in broad daylight than Hill House at night. Forget boarded up rooms. How about a boarded up staircase, leading to a dark room, at the top of the house, with a wheelchair, and a music box that plays by itself. Good Lord I'm getting chills just thinking about it.

Scenes. There's so many good ones it's hard to choose a favorite. Best seance scene of all time. That droning voice saying "Did you die in this house?" Who needs special effects when you've got that kind of atmosphere? The ball bouncing down the stairs, AFTER he's thrown it in the river. Absolute perfection. Trish Van Devere running from the wheelchair. Creepy as hell.

The score. Music really makes this film. Juxtaposition of the warm classical piece John is working on with the intrusion of spooky "Omen-esque" choral work and the occasional soaring string section.

Acting. George C. Scott. Probably one of our greatest actors giving a totally believable, passionate performance. Melvyn Douglas is no slouch either.

Heck, even the poster is creepy.

I've seen this movie over 20 times and it never fails to totally creep me out. Watch it with the lights on.

Rituals (1977)

low-budget gem

[8/10 · 25 August 2004]

Just caught this one on T.V. I was surprised how much I enjoyed it. The low budget works in its favor. It really gives this movie a realistic feel. Excellent, naturalistic performances by Holbrook, Robin Gammell and (actor-producer) Lawrence Dane, as a bunch of rather ordinary guys caught in extraordinary circumstances. I particularly liked the fact that the killer's motivations are suggested, but never fully explained. The setting and cinematography, particularly during the night scenes, are pretty creepy. All in all, if you're a fan of subtle, realistic, quality horror, check this one out. Kind of surprised Ebert gave this a thumbs down. Seems like his kind of flick.

Note: First make-up credit for FX wiz Carl Fullerton (Friday the 13th parts 2 and 3)

Silent Rage (1982)

underrated b-flick

[10/10 · 21 May 2004]

Surprisingly effective action-thriller-suspense-horror hybrid. Worth seeing mainly for the supporting cast. In particular the 3 docs (Steven Keats, Ron Silver, and the much under appreciated William Finley) give very effective nuanced performances. Libby is also very good as unstoppable killer John Kirby. Frankly, the only let-down is Chuck himself. He gives a whole new meaning to the term wooden. Direction is tightly paced with several nicely timed scares. Probably Chuck's best film. Good for a rainy night with a few candles. Bring popcorn. This really is one of my all-time closet favorites. (But that cheesy song "It's a time for love" has soooo got to go.)