Showing posts with label 80s Horror. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 80s Horror. Show all posts

The Deaths of Elm Street: Blow by Blow

Let’s take a grim trip down memory lane and examine some of the standout death scenes from one of the best horror/slasher franchises ever, A Nightmare on Elm Street, may they rest in peace...

Best Death - Tina Gray (A Nightmare on Elm Street)

Most Elm Street fans agree the death of Tina Gray is Freddy’s finest kill.  Tina is not only Freddy’s first kill, but we as a collective audience are introduced to one of the greatest characters in horror cinema, through Tina Gray.  It’s her nightmare that opens the series and her thoughts that invite us into the nightmare world of Freddy Krueger, a violent force to be reckoned with.  Unfortunately for Tina, she is the vessel for which we see firsthand just how violent a force Freddy is.  No one really knew where this movie was headed, who this Freddy guy was, or how he was going to end this innocent girl’s life.  In my opinion, this is one of the most violent and disturbing deaths in film history, not just for a horror film, but for any film.  

By 1984, slasher films had already become a caricature of themselves, with dumb, uninspired death scenes that made more people laugh than scream.  Why would this be any different, it is just a slasher film, right?  Initially thrown off by the fact we can’t actually see Freddy in the room killing her, four single slash marks appear down Tina’s chest, an obvious infliction of the weapon Krueger wears on his hand, and immediately bleeds profusely.  Before we even have a chance to cover our mouths and bid this girl farewell, she is ripped from the mattress and violently thrown around the room like a ragdoll, blood splattering the surrounding walls and ceiling.  To make matters worse, Tina isn’t quite dead yet, and if the sights are too much to bear and you planned on covering your eyes, plan on bringing some earplugs too because the sounds may be even worse.  Tina does nothing but beg for her life, a life she’s already lost, based on the amount of blood on the floor, and we can only imagine what’s going through her mind as her body is dragged up and down the walls.  Moments before finally plummeting to the mattress below, she reaches for her semi-conscience boyfriend who's witnessed the whole thing, unable to defend her from this unseeable force.  Tina dies, and this is a scene I can’t imagine made anyone laugh.  End act one, and don’t even get me started on how the deleted footage on the Infinifilm DVD managed to make this scene even more frightening.

Tina’s Death also wins the award for “Scariest Death” and “Most Violent Death.


Worst Death - “John Doe” (Freddy’s Dead: The Final Nightmare)

Freddy’s Dead sucked, and so did the “John Doe” character and the way in which his character is killed.  Basically, John thinks since he is the last surviving child (now a grown man) of Springwood, he must be a spared offspring of Freddy.  He’s wrong, and Freddy wastes no time disposing of him.  Freddy seems as bored with this guy as the audience is, thus, what is probably the weakest, most unfulfilling death of the series.  As John dangles from a parachute way up in the clouds, Freddy cuts the straps, sending him falling to his death.  We then see Freddy on ground level positioning what can only be described as a bed of spikes, for John to land on.  He does, and that’s that.  It’s a real Wile E. Coyote moment for Freddy, except in this case, he successfully catches his roadrunner.


Most Climactic Death - Glen Lantz (A Nightmare on Elm Street)

By “most climactic” death, I am referring to a death that everyone saw coming, knew would be glorious, and despite this, still shocked the hell outta us and lived up to our own built-in hype.  Johnny Depp’s onscreen debut is that moment.  Glen is a surprisingly likable boyfriend to lead heroine Nancy Thompson, and because of this, you know he’s doomed.  Foreshadowed quite heavily, Glen is urged by his girlfriend not to fall asleep, or else Freddy will get him.  Fully aware that his closest friends are mysteriously dying around him, he still isn’t completely convinced by Nancy’s claims of a dream stalking dead killer, so he doesn’t heed her warnings as best he should and ends up dead because of it.  In a very well edited sequence, as we go back and forth between what’s happening in Nancy and Glen’s bedrooms, Freddy informs Nancy he is about to kill her boyfriend, as Glen passes out with his headphones on.  As she scrambles to save him, we cut to Glen’s bed literally chewing him up then spitting him right back out in a geyser of dark blood.  It’s an amazing moment in horror cinema and has become quite the iconic Elm Street moment.  Only one question really remains: what did Freddy do to him down there?


Most Anticlimactic Death - Donald Thompson (Part 3: Dream Warriors)

Estranged for years, Nancy reunites with her policeman father when the kids of Elm Street begin dying again.  He’s now quite disgraced, drowning the sorrows of his past, a past that involves vigilante justice and the death of many children.  He unkindly aids Dr. Neil Gordon on his quest to defeat Freddy once and for all, at the site of his original junkyard burial.  In the end, Freddy’s bones emerge into a fully functional Freddy skeleton (reminiscent of Ray Harryhausen’s work) and impales Thompson with the rear of a pink Cadillac.  Aside from the ridiculous use of weaponry, it’s just a pointless extra piece of gore.  There is no glory whatsoever in the death of what is essentially a pivotal character in the series.  I personally thought he should have died in a more honorable way.  Sure, he was a sourpuss, but who wouldn’t be in his position.


Best Personal Death - Debbie Stevens (Part 4: Dream Master)

When Freddy’s feeling extra cruel, he likes to get personal.  He likes to deliver that last fatal blow in a manner that hits way too close to home.  He’s used many personal feelings, ideas, and objects against his victims; everything from hard drugs to naked swimsuit models.  In the case of Debbie Stevens, a girl terrified of cockroaches, Freddy has her turned into a cockroach, literally.  But Freddy takes things even further by not just turning Debbie into a cockroach but making it, so Debbie is torn apart from the inside out by a cockroach.  He actually doesn’t even lay a hand on her, except the initial barbell he pins Debbie’s arms down with, tearing them wide open at the elbows, unleashing the horrific monstrous insect within.  The arms, legs, and eventual face of the cockroach emerge, tearing off Debbie’s face with it.  As though all of this isn’t bad enough already, this particular cockroach isn’t free and happy to be alive, but trapped inside a roach motel, fighting for its new life.  So not only has Freddy murdered Debbie, but he’s also even torturing the cockroach he killed her with.  Freddy then squashes it.


Best Quick Death - Roland Kincaid (Part 4: Dream Master)

Sometimes Freddy just means business and doesn’t have time to screw around with flashy set pieces.  Sometimes he needs to get in, get out, and move on to the next victim.  On occasion, Freddy has been known to simply stab his razor blades somewhere into someone’s torso and be done with them, and I’d say the best occurrence of this has to be fan favorite, Kincaid.  Always a force of entertaining energy, Kincaid was a character most fans enjoyed and did not want to see killed.  The fact that he’s Freddy’s first order of business in Dream Master, tying up loose ends from Dream Warriors, makes you really feel for Kincaid.  It still comes as a bit of a shock; assuming the writers let Kristen, Joey, and Kincaid survive the previous film, they wouldn’t just kill them in the first reel of the following film, would they?  Well, yes, they do.  Overall, it’s a pretty tense scene, and one of the series’ best.  Freddy is resurrected through burning dog piss, climbs from his grave, and after some hide and seek, finds Kincaid, sticks his razor glove into his stomach and bids farewell.  Honestly, if Freddy’s gonna kill you, I think this may be the best option, one quick swipe and hope it’s over.  For Kincaid fans it’s a sad moment, even Freddy seems kinda touched as he cradles Kincaid’s lifeless head on his shoulder.  They also exchange some final parting words which help break the tension and make this the most entertaining “quick death” of the series.

Most Creative/Unique Death - Phillip Anderson (Part 3: Dream Warriors)

Phillip is the first to die in one of the greatest sequels of all time, A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors.  He’s a nice, laid-back kid, talks like Corey Feldman and has a collection of marionettes he makes himself.  None of this foreshadows Phillip’s death, but we do wonder why we’re even made aware that the kid collects puppets, until one night a puppet morphs into Freddy and murders him.  In one of the series’ most memorable moments, Freddy literally turns Phillip into a human marionette, complete with strings and everything.  The only thing is those strings are Phillip’s own veins and tendons.  In what can only be described as torture, Freddy uses Phillip’s insides and “walks” him to the roof of the hospital he’s admitted to, brings him to the edge, cuts his strings and laughs as he falls.


Most Undeserving Death - Sheila Kopecky (Part 4: Dream Master)

Sheila, the meek, nerdy girl with huge glasses and serious case of asthma, really didn’t deserve the “kiss of death” Mr. Krueger indulged her in.  That isn’t to say anyone in the Elm Street universe deserves to die, but Sheila, for one thing, was not an Elm Street child.  Kristen Parker was the last of the original (the real) Elm Street children, so anyone killed thereafter is simply a greedy extra point for ‘ol Freddy.  Maybe this is exactly why as soon as Freddy eliminates Kristen in a fiery inferno, his kills get zanier and more comedic for the duration of the series.  Perhaps with Freddy, knowing he’s achieved his goal of killing every offspring of his vigilante killers, he’s now able to enjoy himself more and have fun with his kills.  Enter Sheila, the first “bonus kill” of Freddy’s career.  Semi-long story short:  Kristen’s ability to pull people into her dreams is transferred to new series heroine, Alice, and Sheila is the unfortunate guinea pig in this unplanned experiment.  While taking a test at school, Sheila is confronted by Freddy, who slowly slithers to her desk and literally sucks the life out of her.  It’s a perfect cover for Freddy, not that he really needs one; but with Sheila’s medical problem, and since Freddy made it appear as though she died by loss of breath, her death is still not enough to convince many that she was murdered by an invisible force.


Saddest Death - Ron Grady (Part 2: Freddy’s Revenge)

Grady’s death is a perfect example of wrong place at the wrong time.  Had Jesse simply not shown up at Grady’s house that night, Grady would most likely still be alive.  He already avoided being a victim of the pool party massacre earlier that evening, content to spend a grounded night in his room watching tv and hitting the sack early.  However, awkward friend Jesse shows up with claims of possession, and just like a good friend does, Grady lets the kid crash at his place for the night.  Obviously, Grady doesn’t take Jesse’s warnings seriously, otherwise he’d have told him to get the fuck out.  But Grady was a good dude, despite his moronic bully nature in the film’s first act and remained loyal to his friend.  A loyalty which unfortunately gets him killed moments later.  As soon as Jesse dozes off, a relieved Grady bids goodnight, only to be confronted by Freddy himself, literally tearing through Jesse’s body from the inside out.  Grady also wins the award for most realistic reaction to a charred killer emerging from your friend’s stomach.  He, like most other level-headed human beings, immediately heads for the door, then upon realizing he’s locked in, screams at the top of his lungs and pounds on the door as loud as he can for help.  Perhaps we only get this reaction from Grady because his death, unlike most Elm Street deaths, actually occurs in reality, thus making screaming for help a viable option.  Regardless, the realistic, non-comedic nature of this scene (like Tina’s death) leaves you in a stunned state of silence once Grady is dead.  It’s almost too realistic for its own good, leaving many with a bad taste in their mouths, and think what you will about lead character Jesse, or the now infamous reputation this film has on alleged/confirmed homosexual themes, but Jesse’s guilt-soaked reaction to his friend’s death is heartbreaking and one of the most surprisingly poignant moments of the series.


Best Freddy “Death” A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: Dream Master

Last but not least, the many deaths of Fred Krueger.  Being that he’s already dead, Freddy is never “killed," just defeated, which probably deserves to be in quotations just the same.  But the best instance of this has to be the finale of Dream Master, as Alice helps the souls of Freddy’s victims fight back and take their killer down once and for all, or at least until next time.  Accompanied by some pretty gnarly effects, Freddy’s chest of souls (first introduced in Dream Warriors) comes alive as the heads, hands, and bare breasts attempt to escape the confines of Freddy’s twisted cauldron, busting through his burned skin with everything they’ve got.  In a somewhat bland maneuver, they basically tear his jaw apart, which then instantly releases their souls to continue peacefully into the afterlife, as Freddy’s carcass drops to the floor.  Alice then caps the scene nicely by kicking Freddy’s glove like it’s nothing.  No surprise he’s reflected in the fountain a minute or so later, but that’s their problem to figure out in the sequel.



- Peter DiGiovanni

Review: The Hunger (1983)

The Hunger (1983)
Director:  Tony Scott
Writers:  Whitley Strieber (novel), Ivan Davis (screenplay)
Stars:  Catherine Deneuve, David Bowie, Susan Sarandon



This movie had me at Catherine Deneuve and David Bowie play a pair of vampires.  It's also directed by the late, often great Tony Scott, who always knew how to make a good popcorn flick.  The Hunger is a surprisingly entertaining vampire movie, given it's probably the most un-vampire like vampire movie in existence.  It's as though it's in a state of genre denial, and for some may come off more an erotic thriller than horror film, but the final product delivers enough blood and gothic imagery to whet the appetite of any horror fan.

Deneuve plays Miriam Blaylock, a gorgeous ancient vampire who every 300 years or so must acquire a new immortal lover of her choosing.  At times it's gory and disturbing, especially the turning point in the film when Miriam’s current lover John, played by Bowie, takes the life of a young child, the child Miriam plans on having as her next partner in crime. It's an unsettling moment with significant repercussions, and this is when the plot really thickens, as Martian must scramble for a replacement.  The big finale, when the mummified corpses of Miriam’s past lovers rise from their caverns, is a genuinely frightening sequence, if not a bit too reminiscent of the Poltergeist finale a year earlier.  But this climactic moment is the most visually stunning of the film and really shows off the amazing special effects work, which look better in '83 than most stuff nowadays.  

The Hunger was not initially well received but has since found its audience and over the years developed somewhat of a cult following.  It's easy to see why, based on the credits alone: Deneuve and Bowie are icons in their own right, Sarandon offers an early and quite edgy (and rather nude) performance, and it’s Tony Scott’s first major work and one of his only horror films.  There is a classiness to The Hunger you don’t find in many other horror films and its unique atmosphere is unlike any vampire story I’ve ever seen.

Peter DiGiovanni

Trailer:



Review: Blue Velvet (1986)

Blue Velvet (1986)
Director: David Lynch
Writer: David Lynch (screenplay)
Stars: Isabella Rossellini, Kyle MacLachlan, Dennis Hopper


I remember when I first saw David Lynch’s 1986 surreal classic, Blue Velvet. I got home after hanging out with friends and noticed I recorded it in my DVR. Without knowing much about it, I hit the play button and found myself equally wowed and disturbed by Lynch’s haunting masterpiece.

What makes Blue Velvet a horror film? Good question! It’s the idea that a candy-colored, peaceful, little town has hidden secrets. The film tells the tale of Jeffrey Beaumont (Kyle Maclachlan), a college student called home to care for his comatose father. While strolling through a field, Jeffrey finds a severed ear covered in ants and takes it to the police.

It’s at the police station where Jeffrey overhears a detective (George Dickerson) discuss the case and takes it upon himself to investigate. Jeffrey finds himself in one hell of a nightmarish ride involving a femme fatale lounge singer (Isabella Rossellini) and a deranged gangster named Frank Booth. Boy, you’ll think Jeffrey regrets picking up that ear in the field.


Blue Velvet is a masterful Neo-Noir film that has a lot to say. In the opening scene, we get beautiful and semi-satirical shots of Lumberton (the film’s setting). Everything is nice and peaceful, but then we see a glimpse underneath the soil, of large insects crawling creepily, implying this isn’t an ordinary town. Perhaps it’s also saying that no town is ordinary. The first half of Blue Velvet is entirely buildup. Through hallway shots and POV shots through closets, we know we’re about to see something that will shock us. 

- Austin Maggs

Trailer:


Review: Monkey Shines (1988)

Monkey Shines (1988)
Director: George A. Romero
Writers: Michael Stewart (novel), George A. Romero (screenplay)
Stars: Jason Beghe, John Pankow, Kate McNeil



George A. Romero will always and forever be, to many, the master and originator of zombie horror. Monkey Shines, however, does not fall under this category. The “odd guy out," if you will.  I had not seen it until last Monday and it was not at all what I was expecting, out of Romero or in general. This was not necessarily a bad thing. I will keep this review short and sweet this time around.

Monkey Shines is about a quadriplegic man named Allan, who becomes paired up with a trained monkey named Ella. What he does not know, is that Ella was also part of an experiment which allowed her to tap into his deepest feelings of rage, which she carried out for him.

This film was an interesting one because it reminded me a bit of Re-Animator and how the bulk of the movie was slow paced and then just wallops your sensory organs with the last half hour or so. For the most part, it seemed to me to be a basically-sci-fi, not-really-horror movie. It was mainly about this cute little monkey who progressed in intelligence through an experiment. She then started to become slightly naughtier with the storyline, which all in all was pretty tame. There was not a whole lot of gore or horror really, which was actually a nice break, although unexpected and in this case, a little disappointing. My mind wasn’t totally blown by this film, and it didn’t exactly feel like a Romero film ought to. Yes, it was not meant to be just like one of his zombie flicks, but it felt a little too disconnected from his directing style. It is possible though that I’m a bit tainted after familiarizing myself with a gorier video library. If you are looking for and expecting something more in the vein of a psychological, science fiction flick, I would say give it a shot. It’s definitely nothing I will back-shelve, and it was worth taking a look at what else a familiar film director could do.

- Jasmine Casimir

Follow Jasmine on Tumblr

Review: Pet Sematary (1989)

Pet Sematary (1989)
Director: Mary Lambert
Writer: Stephen King (based on his book)
Stars: Fred Gwynne, Dale Midkiff, Denise Crosby



Pet Sematary isn’t that good of a movie.  It is, however, a really good horror movie and a great adaptation of a book Stephen King hated writing.  Perhaps this is why King opted to write the screenplay himself, figuring if such a heinous tale was to be put on screen, he might as well do it right.  He even appears in the movie as a priest.  

The opening credits and soundtrack set the tone beautifully for what is a highly depressing and frightening endeavor.  We then meet the main players, including Jud Crandall, played wonderfully by Fred Gwynne, easily one of the best screen versions of a Stephen King character.  There’s also Louis Creed: doctor and family man, his wife Rachel, kids, cat, station wagon, etc.  Originally from Chicago, they relocate to Maine and settle into a house with a very odd path out back, a path to a cemetery for pets, misspelled “Pet Sematary” by local heartbroken youngsters.  The “sematary” naturally leaves a bad taste in everyone’s mouth, especially when the Creed’s own cat, Church, is run over by an eighteen-wheeler on Thanksgiving.  After hearing some local legends from Jud, Louis chooses not to bury Church in the harmless children's pet sematary, but an ancient Micmac burial ground instead.  This burial ground is known to bring back the dead, only what it brings back usually isn’t for the better.  In a desperate attempt to salvage his daughter’s pet, Louis buries Church exactly where he shouldn’t and keeps it to himself.  Amazingly enough, Church does return from the dead, smelling like shit and with a really bad attitude.  Let’s just say no one in the Creed household will be taking a relaxing bath any time soon.

The story then takes a dark detour about halfway through, when Louis’ son Gage, practically a baby, is run over and killed by the same kind of truck that killed Church.  The way I recall seeing this scene for the first time, my inner monologue went something like this: “He’s not really gonna get run over by...yep, he just got run over by the truck.”

No surprise to those who’ve read the book first, but I had not at the time, and it’s just something you don’t see very often in any movie.  Hell, I thought this movie was about a killer cat!  Gage’s funeral is yet another disaster and it’s clear where Louis plans on burying his son’s body.

Did I mention Louis does all this despite a strict warning not to by the ghost of a dead jogger?  His name is Pascow, and even though his brain literally dangles from his bleeding skull, he’s a pretty nice guy.  In the first act, Pascow pretty much flatlines on Louis’ nurses' office table, after being hit by none other than a giant truck.  He wakes up dead and swears his allegiance to Louis.  All he wants to do is help, and perhaps had he made any attempt to be less creepy, Louis would have heeded his warnings properly.  Instead, Louis does nothing but piss on Pascow’s advice, which ultimately gets him, and the entire family killed.  

The plot of Pet Sematary, a cemetery that brings back the (evil) dead, is undeniably scary.  What’s interesting is that the scariest scenes don’t necessarily directly relate to said plotline.  For many, the most memorable scene of the movie is Rachel’s flashback about her dead, reptilian sister, Zelda.  Just thinking her name makes me shudder, and she’s put a dark cloud over the classic Nintendo game, that’s for sure.  But this scene, along with the unsettling suicidal hanging of housekeeper Missy Dandridge, could’ve easily been cut from the movie and not taken away a single thing...except for two of the scariest scenes.  They work more as subtext, providing some insight into Rachel’s past and feelings about death.  Other scenes involving stories relayed to Louis via Jud, are scarier than the entire third act, which features slasher Gage going to town with a scalpel.

There are some movies I distinctly recall seeing for the first time.  Pet Sematary was on a Saturday evening, I’m guessing around 7pm (although my instincts are 5pm), and on television.  It’s actually not a bad movie to suffer through a TV edit, as it’s not too gruesome, nor does it have much profanity, so for the most part it’s all there.  Already a big horror fan by age 8 or 9, and knowing what Pet Sematary was, I didn’t have particular interest in it; I just sat there and started watching as it came on because I didn’t feel like getting up.  Needless to say, I never did get up, nor do I remember at what point the power came back on.  Imagine sitting there, a little kid, getting a real big kick outta a horror flick you’re not supposed to be watching, TV edit or not, loving every minute of it, fully aware getting sleep will be difficult tonight but making the gamble anyway.  Successfully making it through the entire thing, almost turning it off several times, I finally get up and due to some summer or fall wind (this is why I can’t pinpoint a 5pm or 7pm start time) the power goes black just as the sun has officially vanquished.  It was like something out of a horror movie!

That’s how I remember Pet Sematary and probably always will (and nothing beats that peaceful Paramount jingle at the beginning).

- Peter DiGiovanni

Trailer:



Review: The Stuff (1985)

The Stuff (1985) Director: Larry Cohen



I am a cartoonist. I love everything about cartoons and, MOST of the time, I love it when films bend the realms of physics. When I saw that a movie like The Stuff existed, I legitimately got excited. The Stuff had so much potential to be witty AND horrifying if it was executed with a really clever script. It may not have been a 'Horror Classic' but definitely could have been a cult classic. If you can sense where I'm going, you already know that The Stuff did not meet any of my expectations.

THE PLOT

Weird yummy goo erupts from the earth and is discovered by a couple of miners. They taste it and decide to market it because it tastes so good. The American public literally eats up the new dessert sensation now known as the Stuff, but, unfortunately, it takes over the brains of those who eat it.

Industrial spy and former FBI agent David 'Mo' Rutherford is hired by executives of the ice-cream industry to disclose the recipe of the phenomenally successful marshmallow Stuff. With the support of Nicole, the designer of the Stuff's advertising campaign, and a boy named Jason. When Mo discovers the horrible truth about 'The Stuff' he enlists the help of a terrorist group led by whack-job col. Malcolm Spears (played by Paul Sorvino of all people)

The problem with this film is two things: it isn't funny and it isn't scary. If it was unbalanced on either side of the funny/scary spectrum, it may have had some lasting power. Unfortunately, The Stuff is only two words: Boring and Disappointing.

The film REALLY gets dull when Sorvino's character shows up, but we really get off the rails when Garret Morris' character Chocolate Chip Charlie (worst name for a character ever?) shows up. I think he's the comedic relief but because he's not funny, he's really just useless. Besides useless characters, the film is super anti-climatic as it decides to go the Soylent Green route (Tell the world! The stuff is bad!) instead of a good old fashioned man vs Stuff showdown. While a "tell the world!" ending works for films like Soylent Green, a cheesy 80s flick needs a good monster showdown.

What does work? The advertisements for The Stuff on the TVs in the film are really good and clever and is obviously where all the care and attention went. The film is so busy making fun of
food product advertisement that it forgets to be anything but a heavy-handed mess.

Scariest Moment: (spoilers) Garret "Chocolate chip Charlie" Morris succumbs to The Stuff and his body suffers the consequences.

Rating: 1 1/2 pints of Stuff out of 5

- Andrew Megow  @Almegow

Review: Demons 2 (1986)


Demons 2 (1986)
Director: Lamberto Bava

Demons is probably one of the best pieces of gory grindhouse ever, and mostly because it ended with a bang.  The hero Samurai-Sword fought demon zombies to the sound of 80s rock, before having to kill his new girlfriend, on the back of a jeep, while escaping an overrun city.  What better sequel setup could you ask for?  Demons 2 could feature a whole world overrun by demons and a few select survivors trying to live through the last hours of an apocalypse.  That’s not what Demons 2 does though. 

Demons 2 follows the “give’em more of the same!” tradition of sequels. While the first movie was a bunch of people stuck in a movie theater, being threatened by a demon zombie plague, the second one features a group of people stuck in a large apartment building.  The events of the first Demons are slightly referenced in yet another ‘movie-within-a movie’ narrative device.   This time they push the angle, that these monsters come from the film you're watching, in a much bigger way.  Even as far as to show the first major demon coming out of the TV to attack an unsuspecting viewer.

Wait so… what?  Oh, screw it… whatever I didn’t come here for this to make sense.

If you’ve read my review of the first movie, you know I’m in love with it.  Everything from the goofy acting, the crazy pimps, and demon puss pimples, fills me with glee like a 9-year-old boy.   That love floods over to this sequel as well, but only a little bit.   Demons 2 takes the building blocks of the first and tries to do the same thing, but with just a little extra. It sadly misses its mark.  We spent just too much time making back-story for characters we know are going to die.  We have subplot after subplot in different locations in the building.  They all have their so-bad-its-funny sort of charm, there’s just too many though.    We have body builders fighting demons, a house party turned into ground zero, a pregnant couple, an old lady with a dog, and a child left home alone. 

Luckily Tony the Pimp is back too… but with a different name and an obsession for fitness.

Sure, we get the more of the great creature effects, like the demon baby, but we also have the horrible demon dog, which starts with promise and eventually just turns into a dog with a mask on.  It’s all still gory fun, but it's not as much gory fun.  If you liked the first one, you’ll stand to get a kick out of this, but it doesn’t have nearly the same amount of heart.  I will give it credit for killing both the dog and the kid; two characters you always just assume will live.
           
Then there’s the whole meta-plot ‘movie within a movie’ stuff.  It’s ultimately pointless and hard to follow. So, was the first movie just a movie IN this movie, and they are watching the sequel while we’re watching them in a sequel?  Is the movie from the first Demons in any way related to the movie in the second Demons?  Are the events in the movies within the movies, real life? Is this like The Ring where if you watch the movies, you die like in the movies? Why the hell would you show this movie on TV? What about the mask in the first one? Why is demon blood acidic now? Those questions alone made my brain explode a little bit.  We’re not supposed to worry about that stuff in a cheese-ball gore fest like this. My best advice is to just turn off all of your brain, every brain cell, you just need to destroy it. 

Still, it’s a decent movie to watch at 3 in the morning, when you come home intoxicated, but it’s not good for much else.  Basically, if you like Demons, you’ll at least get a kick out of Demons 2.  If you didn’t like Demons, you should just step back and leave it be. 

Now, just don’t get me started on the rest of this franchise's supposed sequels.


Jesus… I can’t… I just won’t. 


- Will Woolery

Review - Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer (1986)


Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer (1986)
Released September 1990
Director: John McNaughton

We live in a society where culturally our entertainment has a lot of violence in it; (this coming from a horror film reviewer...) but often times the violence in film and television is toned down to a quick punch in the face or it is completely absurd and the blood pours down the screen. We watch horror films to feel a sense of danger, shock, or just to get our adrenaline pumping, but rarely has there ever been a film filled with such hopelessness as Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer.

Whenever someone tells me that they are desensitized to violence, I tell them to watch Henry, because even the most desensitized film goer will shut up and respect the sheer realism that Henry provides. Simply put: Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer is a brilliant film, but it is NOT a fun film. Nothing is sugar-coated, cartoonish or absurd. The character of Henry shares many biographical concurrences with real-life serial killer Henry Lee Lucas. Director John McNaughton makes clear in the beginning of his film that it is based more on Lucas' violent fantasies and confessions, rather than the crimes for which he was convicted; however, this fantastical portrait of Lucas’ life takes nothing away from this truly bleak film.

We are immediately introduced to Henry as a killer and follow him throughout his daily routine. No mention is given to any police inquiries and Henry is oblivious to any notion of avoiding capture or covering his tracks. Much of the film's power comes from this nonchalant approach, whereby, if a person doesn't register that something he is doing is wrong, then it quickly becomes almost acceptable. We then meet Henry’s roommate Otis (who later joins Henry on his murderous rampage) and Otis’ sister Becky, who’s coming from out of town for a visit. We watch as the movie slowly suffocates the viewer with countless murders, interwoven with a story of three tortured individuals trying to find some way of coping with one another. The film ends with no justice and no peace. Henry continues to drive around town and kill with no signs that he will eventually be captured.

Rooker, in the title role, is totally convincing and gives a performance free from the mannerism clichés which detract from more famous serial killer characters like Hannibal Lector (the film actually made me stop watching Dexter, simply because it changed the way I view serial killers) Almost equally disturbing is Tom Towles performance as the half-witted roommate Otis, who is used as some form of comic relief until you realize just how many people you’ve met in your life that share some of Otis’ tendencies.

Everything about Henry: Portrait of A Serial Killer feels genuine. Its low budget makes it feel homemade (shot on 16mm and only had a $110,000 budget) and the relationship between the characters is so downplayed by (then) unknown actors that everything feels real, which of course makes it scarier. Some films will scare you with monsters or graphically showing a kill, but I don’t think the murders are what makes Henry such a horrifying film. I think it’s simply the atmosphere painted across its entire landscape that brings viewers to the brink of terror.

SPOILERS:
Scariest Scene: Henry gets a bottle to the face from Otis and right as he’s about to kill Henry, Becky stabs Otis in the eye. In any other horror film, this may have just been another stabbing, but the sheer tension this film provides makes this scene truly unforgettable. (With help from the soundtrack, which is arguably the best in any horror film)

- Andrew Megow

Review: Dark Night Of The Scarecrow (1981)

Dark Night of the Scarecrow 
(1981 TV Movie)
Director: Frank De Felitta




I first saw Dark Night of the Scarecrow on TV, when I was a little kid, at a sleep-over in the early 80s.  With the lights turned out and snacks on hand, the next 2 hours of supernatural and suspense became the talk at recess for months to come.  And like any childhood fad, the movie was quickly forgotten.  Recently, when I finally scored myself a low-quality copy off the internet, I hoped I was going to be treated with sweet nostalgia, and not be faced with destroying another childhood memory.  I mean come on, what good has ever come out of a made-for-TV movie?

Dark Night of the Scarecrow is directed by novelist Frank De Felitta (author of Audrey Rose and The Entity) and is credited as the first killer scarecrow movie that started the quasi-popular sub-genre. Until this title, a horror movie that featured a scarecrow as its centerpiece simply did not exist.  You could say it led way to other scarecrow movies like Scarecrows (1988), Jeepers Creepers (2001), and Hallowed Ground (2007).

Set in a small farming community, it centers on Otis Hazlerigg (Charles Durning) the town’s postmaster.  He deems Bubba (Larry Drake, Darkman and Dr. Giggles), a large, gentle, mentally challenged man, a danger and a menace. Bubba’s innocent childlike friendship with 10-year-old Marylee (Tonya Crowe) is something he especially deplores. 

When word goes around that Marylee was attacked by a dog and is presumably dead, Otis takes immediate action with his three friends to hunt down Bubba.  Bubba runs home and his mother hides him in a scarecrow costume in the middle of a field.  When the hounds track him down, Otis and his pals mercilessly gun him down.  Before the gun smoke even settles, they learn that Marylee is still alive, and that Bubba actually rescued her.  Great big oops.  Otis places a pitchfork in Bubba’s dead hand and fabricates a story that he tried to attack them with it.  Using this lie in court, Otis and the three are released due to lack of evidence against them.

Following the trial, members of the vigilante group start getting killed one by one by what appears to be accidents.  Before each death, the men claim sightings of the same scarecrow mysteriously appearing on their property.  For Otis, the pressure is on to find out who is responsible before he’s ultimately targeted.  Is it the district attorney looking for justice because they were let off the trial so easily?  Is Bubba’s mother avenging her dead son?  What of Marylee who says Bubba is not dead, but is hiding?  Or could it be Bubba himself from beyond the grave?

Because this title was made for TV in the 80s, it didn’t (or couldn’t) rely on violence, gore, or big special effects.  The strength of the movie is in its simple storytelling, simple filmmaking and fantastic performances from the cast.  Although most deaths are off-screen with minimal blood, the movie still offers a great air of suspense and even includes a spooky midnight grave digging scene (who doesn’t love those!) and a climactic chase in a pumpkin field.


With expectations set on nil, when I rewatched this childhood favorite 30+ years later, I was pleasantly surprised to take a break from the oversaturated bombardment of annoying teen celebrities, blaring pop music, and mediocre CG gore effects. 

- Frank Fu

Review: Videodrome (1983)


Videodrome (1983)
Director: David Cronenberg

“Long live the new flesh.” James Woods (Vampires) plays a sleazy television executive – as if there’s any other kind – looking for the next big thing when he stumbles upon a pirated broadcast, the eponymous Videodrome. Featuring torture and murder, Videodrome instantly begins to fascinate him and his new masochistic girlfriend, played by Deborah Harry of Blondie (Super 8). As Woods begins to investigate the source of the signal, he stumbles onto a man who lives only on video tape, a church that treats the homeless with endless hours of television, and the fact that Videodrome produces a brain tumor that causes violent hallucinations.

Finding that the signal originates in Pittsburgh (is that really such a surprise?) Woods begins to investigate the reality of these broadcasts and disappearance of Harry. Eventually, he becomes a pawn in an ongoing war for control of the future, with much delightfully disgusting Cronenberg body-horror along the way. Highlights include a vagina in Woods’ stomach, a literal hand grenade, and death by cancer-causing flesh bullet (I think it was Freud who said a flesh bullet is never just a flesh bullet). Warning: personal enjoyment of this kind of thing may vary.

It’s not hard to see the way Cronenberg predicted our modern media landscape, from reality television to YouTube. What else is the “new flesh” but our modern lives lived anonymously over the computer? As people give more and more of their lives over to technology, so much so, that even in the poorest towns in third world countries you can find people with cell phones, it’s reasonable to wonder what this all means for the future and to feel a certain fear for our humanity. It’s this part of the movie that feels the most relevant and engaging. Not to mention the always enjoyable Woods and those special effects provided by master Rick Baker (The Howling) mentioned before.

However, there’s always something about stories emphasizing the dangers of technology that comes across as a little silly and retrograde. Were there plays about the dangers of radio when it was first introduced? Did people tap out stories where telegraphs merge with humans, one dot and dash at a time? Anytime new technology is invented, someone is going to write a story showing the dark side of said technology, and it will always wind up looking a little dated and goofy (I’m looking at youThe Net.) It’s kinda hard here not to laugh when several scenes involve evil, pulsating Betamax tapes.

The story also gets a little too bogged down in its philosophies. There doesn’t need to be clear delineations of good and evil but the differences between various factions in this movie is hard to parse. One wants to use the Videodrome signal as a weapon (I think), the other wants to welcome members into a new reality of life-everlasting on video (or something like that). No movie needs to spoon feed morals and lessons, or even clarity, but it’s hard to see a point other than “too much television is bad.” Sex and violence aren’t the future of entertainment, they’re as old as humanity itself.

Still, the power and seduction of Videodrome is undeniable. All you have to do is walk down the street and watch people unable to put down their smartphones to wonder if the future predicted in this movie is already here. Cronenberg has style and talent to spare and it’s easy to get sucked in, kinda like Woods pushing his face into an undulating television screen. If a brain tumor is the result, then long live the new flesh.

- David Kempski

Review: Zombie Lake (1981)


Zombie Lake (1981)
Director: J.A. Laser / Eurociné

Description from Netflix:
During World War II, a group of villagers ambushed and defeated a band of German soldiers and threw their bodies in the nearby lake.  Now, the Nazis have returned as angry zombies, preying on unsuspecting teen swimmers and skinny-dippers.

My thoughts:
The above description should tell you just about all you need to know.  Especially the part about skinny-dippers.  Oh man...for a lake as filthy as this one, it's amazing how many skinny-dippers there are.  Young women find their way to the lake and immediately think, "I need to take off all my clothes and get in there as soon as possible."  And they do.

While all this gratuitous nudity was going on (I'll estimate that 30% of this movie was naked ladies), there was a backstory about one of the Nazis and his daughter.  While he was stationed in this town, he knocked up a resident.  He was then killed, because he was a Nazi, and that's what you do to Nazis.  So, on top of killing nude co-eds, he also wanted to reunite with his daughter.  Because even though he was a zombie, he still held his memories he had while living (like Colin or Bub).

Needless to say, it was a terrible story.  They writers decided it really wasn't worth their time to flesh out any of the characters or their motivations or anything.  Am I asking too much of a softcore-zombie-porn?  Probably.

There were a lot of laughable parts of this movie (on top of the obvious nudity, which I feel has been covered pretty well).  The make-up was atrocious.  Like, visibly-rubbing-off-during-scenes bad.

Most of the zombies walked around like regular people, if a little slower.  But this joker thought he was Karloff or something.  Seriously.  No other zombie moved like this.

To say this was a terrible movie would be about the best review I could give it.  At times, it was borderline unwatchable.  Honestly, I felt a little uncomfortable watching it at times (that had less to do with the nudity and more to do with the fact that it felt like it was made by a Nazi sympathizer).  The handful of laughs didn't make up for the rest of it.

If you're looking for a good Nazi zombie movie (and who isn't?), I highly recommend you go with Dead Snow.

Zombies: they seemed to be pretty standard zombies.  No super-strength or anything like that.  Regular gunshots didn't seem to stop them (although I can't vouch for headshots, because I'm not sure any of them were actually shot in the head).  However, the thing that separated these zombies from your Romero zombies was the fact that fire killed them.  Anyone who knows zombies knows you should never set one on fire: it won't kill them, and now you have a flaming zombie to contend with.  But it seemed to work for these guys.

- Dusty 'D' Evely