Poster Art - IN THE MOUTH OF MADNESS (1994)

This film features my favorite Sam Neill horror performance.

 

The Bloody Pit #228 - Bits and Pieces

The best laid plans of mice and me are often undermined by circumstance. In this case I was unable to arrange events to record a new episode of the show for February so I had to come up with a backup plan. I have stitched together a few of my Patreon audio pieces from the past two years for a brief bit of movie discussion to tide you over. I start with an obscure British monster film with one of the most ridiculous explanations for the murderous creature in the history of horror. I move on to ramble about the TV version of NEEDFUL THINGS (1993) and how I cannot be satisfied! Then I wrap up things with an extended evisceration of the Children of the Corn film series that poses the question ‘Are any of these any good at all’?

 

I hope you enjoy these bits from my Patreon and if you want access to more than a hundred more such babble fests you can hand over $3 and check it out HERE. Thank you for listening and we’ll be back with fresh movie talk in March. 

Patreon - The Children of the Corn Series

Because steaming service Shudder just added the first five Children of the Corn sequels I could not stop myself from finally watching them. This was partially an attempt to answer a recent question about which long-term horror franchise is the worst. I have many thoughts. Save me from working my way through the entire Hellraiser run!

I opened this post up to all members of my Patreon so if you are curious just head over there and join up.

 

Review - THE DARK HALF (1993)

THE DARK HALF is a beautifully shot, expertly directed & edited, well-paced and brilliantly acted terror tale that taps into a host of adult fears. The horror of having the darker side of your creative nature manifest itself and demand to be paid heed is an amazing idea and although King is far from the first writer to play with it, his take (filtered through Romero’s script) is fascinating. By making the two half’s fight for the single life they are afforded a physical confrontation of dark and light played out over the creative act of writing itself. The movie literalizes the battle everyone feels when faced with a deadline and a blank page. But beyond that idea, the film is just a joy to watch as the story unfolds. This was made when Romero was at the height of his power as a director and his surefooted choices in every single scene are amazing to see. There were several times I backed the movie up to watch a particular sequence again just to marvel at how perfectly he chose his camera placement to best communicate what needs to be known. His framing is fantastic throughout and I think he must have loved working with such a strong cast capable of taking advantage of the uniformly great dialog.

Timothy Hutton has always been a good actor so it’s no surprise that he brings great depth and nuance to the central dual role. Romero is able to use tight close-ups of Hutton to get across a host of emotions that a lesser actor would have had to brush past to get the job done. He’s always believably real as Thad Beaumont (nice nod to one of my favorite writers Charles Beaumont) and also believably scary and threatening as his vicious, razor wielding alter ego George Stark. Amy Madigan as Thad’s wife is very good as well even though I found it strange that she sports a hairstyle and seems to have been dressed in a way that makes her look a bit like Romero’s wife Christine who shows up in a brief role. Interesting choice George- identify with your central character much?

Michael Rooker as the local sheriff and friend of the family tasked with protecting the Beaumonts and their twin sons (another nice touch) is very good in a role that could have been one note. Smartly, Romero gives Rooker’s character a few scenes of his home life as well to provide context for what he sees as the best way to do his job.

And have I mentioned the fact that the movie was filmed in the Autumn? Oh my goodness is this the perfect time of year to watch this movie! Colorful leaves being blown along the ground, bare tree limbs stretching to the sky like skeletal hands grasping at the darkened clouds overhead, jackets and sweaters worn to ward off the visible chill in the air. Perfect! This is a great movie and one ripe for rediscovery. If it has passed you by before maybe this Fall give it a chance. 

Trailers From Hell - DELLAMORTE DELLAMORE (1994) (Cemetery Man)

Director Ernest Dickerson presents the trailer for one of his (and my) favorite Italian horror films. It is a brilliant combination of arthouse intelligence and grindhouse sex and violence that seems to get better with each passing year. I once saw this with a horror marathon crowd in the 1990s that did not appreciate its surrealistic touches or bizarre black humor. Their loss, I thought at the time but you can now see this incredible movie on Blu-Ray and judge for yourself.  There is nothing else quite like it. 

The Bloody Pit #151 - THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA (1998)

During a recent rewatch of Dario Argento’s THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA (1998) I typed out my real time reactions to the film on FaceBook. Several friends played along, seeming to share my dislike of the film and enjoying my detailing of the bits that struck me as nonsensical or bizarre. But one person stood up for this strange version of the Gaston Leroux tale and now he and I discuss our disparate takes on this odd effort.

Troy Howarth returns to the show to defend the film that was many people’s breaking point with Argento. We forgo an in-depth synopsis and simply dive straight into picking apart the various points of disagreement about the film’s quality. Strangely enough, we find several details and scenes that we both admire but mostly our discussion involves me bringing up the elements I dislike and Troy providing a defense. I’m impressed with his resistance to my repeated appeals to sanity and logic but since neither of those things usually factor into an Argento film, he has cinema history on his side. Luckily, I think our conversation is pretty lively and might even make fans that hate this odd film give it a second look.

 

If you want to put in your two cents about this film or any other that we’ve covered on the show thebloodypit@gmail.com is the place to send messages. Thank you for listening and we’ll be back soon!  

Episode LINK

The Bloody Pit #136 - FRANKENSTEIN AND ME (1996)

In this episode I welcome filmmaker Robert Tinnell and film historian Anthony Taylor to the podcast for a discussion of the 1996 movie FRANKENSTEIN AND ME, which was conceived and directed by Mr. Tinnell. The film is a funny, touching tale of a young monster obsessed kid with an active imagination and what happens when he accidentally gets his hands on the real Frankenstein Monster! Having the movie’s writer/director along makes for a different kind of show!

 

We dig into Bob’s inspiration for the film’s story including his childhood monster fandom and his dreams as a young director. The production of FRANKENSTEIN AND ME is examined as well as the original version of the story and the freewheeling times in which an independent Canadian film like this could come together. We talk about the great cast that includes Burt Reynolds, Louise Fletcher and the first film role for a teenaged Ryan Gosling. The conversation turns into what you might find after hours in the bar at a monster movie convention with topics such as Robert McCammon’s novel ‘Boy’s Life’, the writing skill of Peter Straub and the joys of comic books as a medium. We dart off onto several barely related tangents with one of the most satisfying being our mutual love of the DVD of Monster Kid Home Movies put together by the great Joe Busam.  That collection of Super 8 homemade films of Monster Kids showcasing the mad energy of the childhood creative impulse shows the clear beginnings of Bob Tinnell’s path to this film. And finally, we discuss the fact that the film has never been released on DVD or Blu-Ray and the possibilities of that happening one day soon. 

If you have any questions or comments thebloodypit@gmail.com is the place to send them. We’ll be thrilled to hear from you. Thanks for listening to the show! 

Apple Podcast LINK 

MP3 Download LINK 

What I Watched in August

I guess it’s accurate to call CANDYMAN (2021) a slasher film but it is more than just an excellent example of that sub-genre. Less a reboot than a sequel, this new movie brilliantly advances the mythology of the central boogeyman in the same way that Bill Condon’s CANDYMAN: FAREWELL TO THE FLESH (1995) did. It takes the bones of the original film and builds ever more impressive details into the broad strokes already set in place. The idea of focusing on another black artist in modern day who finds himself looking for inspiration among the urban history of the legend of Candyman is quite smart. It allows the film to show a parallel between the creator and his subject even as the poor modern painter seems only slightly aware of the dangers of such interplay until the bodies start piling up. This takes the story into wonderful territory, blurring of the lines between monster and artist asking questions that slowly become more deadly. What is a creator’s responsibility to those around him? What are the lines that exist to warn of real dangers in the world that a bold artist crosses at great peril – not just to himself but to those his life touches? How can a questing soul recognize the deadly areas when the warnings all sound like simply criticism? Is it only bravado that causes someone to tempt death by doing the one thing that can bring death to stalk you? (Say his name to your own reflection five times.) How does vanity play into the ‘call’ of death? The film even has a brief scene that mentions the unintentional horrors inflicted on children by their parents? So many ideas!

 

If you ignore the subpar third film and just view the first two and this new movie, we can see the creation a marvelous horror series. The expansion of the Clive Barker story of an urban legend into a much more universal story of the horrors of creative curiosity is incredible. This is how films used to build larger, more intricate worlds in their sequels. The way George Romero broadened his small-scale zombie story to larger and larger locales and bigger, scarier societal fears. The way George Miller’s original Mad Max trilogy took the character on a life changing post-apocalyptic journey that brought him full circle to a new family. This new Candyman film shows how it would be possible to use this character and concept to explore racial themes and, in fact, almost any subject related to it through the use of horror’s often ignored symbolic potential. Smart writers can push past the simplistic ‘zombie’ and hook-handed killer metaphors and dig into darker examinations of hidden motivations and sublimated desires. Damn! This film makes me excited to see more!

 

As you can tell, I liked it. 

The List 

SHANGHAI CHEST (1948) – 6 (Winters is not bad as Charlie Chan) 

THE BLACK HOLE (1979) – 4 (rewatch on Blu) (what a terrible script) 

THE HUMANITY BUREAU (2017) – 5 (Nic Cage in a mediocre dystopian tale) 

MISCHIEF NIGHT (2014) – 4 (pretty bad horror effort) 

THE HUMANOID (1979) – 6 (rewatch) 

THE DROWNSMAN (2014) – 4 (beautiful but uninvolving horror) 

THE SUICIDE SQUAD (2021) – 9 

FANATIC (1965) -7 (rewatch on Blu) (a.k.a. Die! Die! My Darling) 

THE RED QUEEN KILLS SEVEN TIMES (1972) – 7 (rewatch on Blu) 

THE NIGHT COMES FOR US (2018) – 8 (amazing Indonesian action/crime film) 

BLACKHAT (2015) – 5 (weak Michael Mann thriller) 

DISTORTED (2018) – 5 (OK mystery/thriller with about six minutes of John Cusack) 

SCHOOLGIRLS IN CHAINS (1973) – 6 

THE PHANTOM SPEAKS (1945) – 6 (criminal returns from the dead to exact vengeance)

UNKNOWN TERROR (1957) – 6 (goo monster in a cave!)

SHE DEVIL (1957) – 6 (medical experiment creates evil woman)

QUEEN OF THE SEAS (1961) – 7 (fun swashbuckler with Lisa Gastoni) 

VALLEY OF THE ZOMBIES (1946) – 6 (interesting medical ‘undead’ tale) 

RETURN OF THE APE MAN (1944) – 4 (rewatch on Blu) (gloriously daft Poverty Row horror with Lugosi)

THE LADY AND THE MONSTER (1944) – 6 (Donovan’s Brain) 

REFUGE OF FEAR (1974) – 6 (low budget Spanish made post-nuclear war story)

SHOW BOAT (1936) – 8 (wonderful musical) 

REMINISCENCE (2021) – 4 (gorgeous but a muddled script sinks it) 

GRAVE OF THE VAMPIRE (1972) – 6 (rewatch on Blu) 

THE SUICIDE SQUAD (2021) – 9 (rewatch) 

THE BYE BYE MAN (2017) – 4 (empty attempt at a horror film) 

NAKED OBSESSION (1992) – 5 (Martino’s too obvious erotic thriller) 

HIT THE ICE (1943) – 6 (Abbot & Costello romp) 

CANDYMAN (2021) – 8 (excellent new sequel) 

OLD (2021) – 7 (well-made supernatural thriller) 

MONSTER HUNTER (2020) – 4 (videogame-based slog) 

TAZA, SON OF COCHISE (1954) – 5 (3-D western w/Rock Hudson)

Argento's THE STENDHAL SYNDROME (1996)

THE STENDHAL SYNDROME was Dario Argento’s final great film. Not that I knew it the first time I watched it. That first time through I enjoyed it but was disappointed in the rather downbeat and slightly unsatisfying ending. But I liked it enough to watch it again and on that second viewing it opened up like a flower stretching toward the sun. My god! What a beautiful but deadly thing. Much like a gorgeous plant far too poisonous to touch THE STENDHAL SYNDROME is easy to admire but nasty in its effects. Bleak to the point of teeth gritting nausea it boasts a rape and murder scene that is rough even for a horror movie veteran. And the thing the killer does with a razor blade still makes me flinch just to think of the specifics. But alongside these terrible things are some beautiful moments of cinematic excellence. This was the last time I felt that Argento really had a handle on what makes a thriller work. Not that he hasn’t made some interesting stuff since then but THE STENDHAL SYNDROME was the last time I felt he made an entire film that stood up and rewarded repeated viewings. It also has one of the most surrealistic scenes I have ever witnessed in a horror film involving Asia Argento kissing a fish. This has to be seen to be believed, if not understood.

Of course, the film has its share of problems- all Argento movies do. There is some dodgy CGI that doesn’t quite work, some of the dubbing is bad and at least one character is too poorly defined for the ending to be completely effective. But still…..this is a good movie. It’s got a great twist, some amazing set pieces, a truly scary villain and what is probably Argento’s last great use of color. Not to mention the sense of dread and horror that breaks at the half way point only to slowly build again in the last half. There are few things scarier than the fear that you are going mad and this film gets that across almost without you noticing.

Dario Argento's THE STENDHAL SYNDROME (1996)

I think THE STENDHAL SYNDROME (1996) was Dario Argento’s final great film. Not that I knew it the first time I watched it. That first time through I enjoyed it but was disappointed in the rather downbeat and slightly unsatisfying ending. But I did like it enough to watch it again and on that second viewing it opened up like a flower stretching toward the sun. My god! What a beautiful but deadly thing. Much like a gorgeous plant far too poisonous to touch, THE STENDHAL SYNDROME is easy to admire but nasty in its effects. Bleak to the point of teeth gritting nausea it boasts a rape and murder scene that is rough even for a horror movie veteran to take. And the thing the killer does with a razor blade still makes me flinch just to think of it. But alongside these terrible things are some wonderful moments of cinematic beauty.

This was the last time I could feel that Argento really had a handle on what made a thriller work. Not that he hasn’t made some interesting stuff since then but THE STENDHAL SYNDROME was the last time I felt he made an entire film that stood up and rewarded repeated viewings. It also has one of the most surrealistic scenes I have ever witnessed in a horror film involving Asia Argento kissing a fish. This has to be seen to be believed if not understood.

Of course, the film has its share of problems, as all Argento movies do. There is some dodgy CGI that doesn’t quite work, some of the dubbing is bad and at least one character is too poorly defined for the ending to really be effective. But still…..this is a good movie. It’s got a great twist, some amazing set pieces, a truly scary villain and probably Argento’s last great use of color. Not to mention the sense of dread and horror that breaks at the half way point only to slowly build again in the last half. There are few things scarier than the fear that you are going mad and this film gets that across almost without you noticing.

Wrestling with TALOS, THE MUMMY (1998)

TALOS, THE MUMMY (1998) a.k.a. TALE OF THE MUMMY might be one of the least discussed horror films of the 1990's. Most of the few people who have seen it might think there's a good reason for that - they probably think it sucks! And that would be a completely valid view except that, unfortunately, the version of the film they have seen is missing about thirty minutes! That is a whole lot of story to be chopped out of any narrative but especially one this over plotted. Plus it is pretty confusing with Egyptian mythology and psychic mumbo-jumbo being crossed with a police procedural and apocalyptic babblings. But, in the first ten minutes Christopher Lee gets chopped in half! That's worth seeing.

I can remember watching this on VHS around 2000 and wondering just what the Hell was going on. There were a dozen actors of note running around trying to deal with an ancient Egyptian Mummy curse, which I found intriguing. But it was impossible to follow the plot or understand the relationships between the characters. One of the many improvements the longer cut of the film makes is in clarifying who these people are and what they are doing. You know - like a proper story should!

Possibly the biggest problem the film has (at least in the two hour cut) is that in certain scenes the CGI seems unfinished. This is true most especially in the opening in which Christopher Lee is reduced to half his normal height - or length, really. This is unfortunate because the practical effects work by KNB is spectacular. They're called on to visualize some very interesting mummy effects although their actual mummy doesn't appear until the last third of the story. For most of the running time they bring the mummy's supernaturally mobile wrappings to life and their work is excellent. But the matching CGI work is often pretty dodgy making some shots a bit jarring and less impressive overall. This is a shame as the film is very well shot with some beautiful, moody cinematography and very nice sets in which all the creepy things happen.

Earlier I mentioned the cast and this group is well worth talking about. The film is populated with a combination of (at the time) established character actors and younger folks who would soon be big stars. Besides Sir Christopher Lee we have Honor Blackman as a police official; Shelley Duval as a psychic; Michael Learner as one of the doomed archaeologists and the great Jon Polito as a British (!) scientist. Among the up and coming actors who would soon make their marks in Hollywood we have Jack (Pirates of the Carribean) Devenport; Sean (Gotham) Pertwee; Louise (CSI) Lombard and Gerard (every bad action movie for the past decade) Butler as a jerk boyfriend that doesn't make it past the thirty minute mark.

The oddest casting choice, though, was Jason Scott Lee playing police detective Riley. Mr. Lee is very American but there he is anyway playing a Scotland Yard cop leading the investigation into the various deaths surrounding the mummy shenanigans. The script makes a half-hearted attempt to justify this bizarre choice with a quick line about Riley being a former LAPD police officer now working in London. WTF? Was the star of DRAGON: THE BRUCE LEE STORY (1993) and THE JUNGLE BOOK (1994) really seen as someone with so much drawing power that he should lead this film? No disrespect to Mr. Lee, because he is quite good in the role, but wouldn't an English actor have fit the part just a little bit better? Or, given his name, an Irish one? Why further complicate this very busy tale with an obvious American in a very British role?

I know I'm probably alone in my interest in this mostly forgotten film. When I call for a Blu-Ray special edition with all versions of the movie and a pyramid full of extra features I'm sure I'm shouting into the abyss. But I'm also sure that - at it's longer length - this film could become a favorite with horror fans. It's far from perfect but there is a lot that is very good in this overlooked effort. Should I start a writing campaign to get Scream Factory interested? Or am I wasting my time? Does anyone else out there share my fascination with this one?

FRANKENHOOKER (1990)

The films of Frank Henenlotter are not for everyone. I wouldn't call them an acquired taste because I think most people have a visceral reaction to them that defines how they feel about movies like BASKET CASE without any deep thought getting in the way. I think this reaction is mainly because, as much as they appear on the surface to be horror films, Henenlotter's movies are actually comedies. Anyone who has ever tried to recommend a funny film to someone can tell you that the hardest genre to get two people to agree about is comedy. If you don't find something or someone funny there is nothing anyone else can do to get you to appreciate the humor of, say- The Three Stooges. You either laugh at the eye-poke or you don't. In the same way, if the sight of a talking parasite that feeds its host a narcotic for carrying out its homicidal requests doesn't strike you as amusing then Henenlotter's second film BRAIN DAMAGE is not for you. And, by extention, I can say that this means your reaction to any one of his movies will tell you if you'll like all of them.  None of them are going to ever be called the best filmmaking the world has to offer but his energy, inventiveness, humor and warped sense of the way the world works marks Henelotter as one of the best kinds of American auteur - the truly independent kind! 

FRANKENHOOKER was the writer/director's fourth film and appears to have had a higher budget than the first three combined. This extra cash is clearly onscreen from the beginning with a very professional look to the production that, to 21st century eyes, seems to simultaneously improve and date the movie a bit more than earlier efforts. This movie is an unashamed product of the late 1980s and only a story as over-the-top as this could make that a good thing. The fashions alone make FRANKENHOOKER  an embarrassing time capsule of hideousness - and then the sewed together hooker beast shows up and the madness goes into the stratosphere!

Obviously based loosely on the classic Mark Shelly novel the film tells the sad story of misunderstood inventor and part-time medical student Jeffery Franken. After his modified lawn mower accidentally reduces his fiancée to a pile of veal cutlets Jeffery's grief is so great that he vows to bring his beloved back to life. As he has only been able to salvage her head he will need to find her a fresh or semi-fresh body for attachment. Now, where would you look for a female that wouldn't be missed by too many people? That's right- Time's Square in the 80s was packed to the gutters with prostitutes of every description so its there our mad doctor goes with a stethoscope, a tape measure and a plan. That his plan involves his rather dangerous new invention Super-Crack might not seem too bad an idea- what Time's Square prostitute is going to turn down free drugs . But the fact that this drug has the terrible side effect of making the user literally explode doesn't factor into Jeffery's thinking until he's standing in a room filled with random hooker parts wondering which pieces he should salvage. Needless to say, our hero eventually fashions a serviceable woman out of the bits but things don't go quite the way he would have wished.

If you can get on this movie's wavelength it is an extremely funny tale. As already mentioned Henelotter's movies are cock-eyed horror comedies and that makes them harder to appreciate than the average low budget horror film or low budget comedy. I suspect that only horror fans with a taste for low brow humor will be able to get past the first 20 minutes and discover the real cleverness at the heart of this mad scientist love story. The story is filled with real wit, amusing observations and a cast of colorful characters that make predicting what will happen next almost impossible. The film is over the top and completely insane in a ways that defy easy categorization. What other movie features a stitched together woman turning tricks in an hysterically robotic manner like some fantasy blow-up doll in the middle of a story punctuated by touching scenes of its main character reciting love poetry to his dead girlfriend? The film is strange- maybe stranger than it needs to be- but I really enjoyed it and if the idea of a man filing a bunion off a foot he's about to attach to his beloved's new body causes a grin for you, so be it. I'm tempted to chant 'One of Us' repeatedly.

Synapse Films has issued FRANKENHOOKER on Blu-Ray with all the love you could hope for. The film print was taken from original vault materials and is presented in gorgeous widescreen with both 5.1 and 2.0 audio options. I had never seen the movie before this disc arrived but I can't imagine it looked this good in earlier incarnations. The picture is bright with colors that really pop, especially in the neon lit scenes shot on location in New York. The Blu comes with lots of great extras as well starting with a commentary track featuring Henenlotter and his Make-Up Effects Designer Gabe Bartalos. The writer/director does most of the talking, as he should, and proves to be just as entertaining in this venue as he is as a filmmaker. His tales of the madness involved in shooting around crack houses and only semi-legally are a hoot. I would hope he is given the chance to do similar tracks for all of his work. The other extras include a short interview with the mighty Frankenhooker herself, Patty Mullen called A SALAD THAT WAS ONCE NAMED ELIZABETH; the featurette A STITCH IN TIME: THE MAKE-UP EFFECTS OF FRANKENHOOKER and TURNING TRICKS, an interview with actress Jennifer Delora and her time spent as a cinema 'hooker'. Miss Delora is very funny relating he attitude toward doing onscreen nudity at the time and I was glad that she was given another short piece to show off her photo scrapbook from the production. This unexpected peek behind the scenes is a blast. The film's theatrical trailer rounds thing out and the case comes with a reversible cover sporting alternate promotional art. What more could a horror hound wish for?

IT (1990)

The recent release of this mini-series/TV event film from 1990 was celebrated by it's fans. I have never considered myself much of a fan of it or, indeed, many of the various television adaptations of Stephen King stories. They have always struck me a neutered versions of tales that really need a blast of subversive ultra-violence or darker-than-allowed characterizations to become the full blooded horror efforts that they were on the page. The only one that seemed to find a way to craft visceral thrills that actually crept under my skin was SALEM'S LOT (1979) but it appears to be the only one with any real dark power and the ability to hold up over the years.

So, I picked up the cheap Blu-Ray of IT (1990) to see if my memory of it as 'not bad' held up twenty-seven years later. The good news is that I think it is actually better than my dim memories led me to believe. The bad news is that it's flaws are still IT's downfall and they come in the expected spots.

I expected some of the acting to be less than great - this is, after all, a TV production with a huge cast of mostly television stars and a large number of child performers. But I was surprised to note that the young actors are mostly very good. There are some flubs and it's easy to spot some careful editing to get around particular actors not being able to successfully bring off certain emotional notes as well as might be wished for, but overall they are solid. The adult versions of these characters are played by an assortment of familiar 1980's TV faces and other than Harry Anderson, who is way out of his depth, they are quite good. In fact. Dennis Christopher, John Ritter and Richard Thomas turn in strong work and Ritter plays well off of Annette O'Toole in an emotional scene in the final hour that is very affecting. It speaks to the talent of the cast that they managed to accomplish what they do in a story with so many characters.

As might be expected, it is the finale of the story where the production falls down the most. The visualization of the ancient evil that terrorizes Derry, Maine every thirty years has been excellent up to the final act with Tim Curry embodying the creepy horror as Pennywise the clown. But once we have to get a look at the real physical nature of the creature the film can't help but disappoint. I've never read the book but I understand the monster takes many different forms including the giant spider we get here. The effects are passable to a degree but the stop-motion employed is not up to the best of such work and, although the live action props are well matched, it never feels like a real threat. The actors do their best to bring some real seriousness to the monster battle and manage some good moments amide the TV-safe gore but it doesn't completely work.

I'm looking forward to the feature film version of this story due out later this year but at the same time I fear the loss of character detail the shorter running time will require. It'll be interesting to see what they manage on second try. If nothing else I'm sure the ending will be impressive.

HALLOWEEN 6: THE CURSE OF MICHAEL MYERS (1995)

A few years ago I decided it was time to stop avoiding the various Halloween sequels and finally check them out. Maybe there was some gold in those movies- who knew? Well, after I finished slogging through HALLOWEEN 4, HALLOWEEN 5 and the sad-ass HALLOWEEN 6 I realized that I had wasted my time in a futile hunt. For all the talk about how many bizarre avenues the producers of the Friday the 13th and Nightmare on Elm Street franchises walked their boogeyman characters down clearly the most potholed road was travelled by Michael Myers. My god! There should have never been a Michael Myers film made after HALLOWEEN II (1982) and these three movies only made me wish harder that the direction of HALLOWEEN III (1983) had been realized. The stories for 4 and 5 are pretty damned bad but by the time they got to 6 - subtitled The Curse of Michael Myers - they had written themselves into a corner from which there was no escape. Celtic priests, runic tattoos, constellations in alignment, shadowy conspiracies, evil cults and druids -fucking DRUIDS, people - were woven together into a threadbare mess that only partially resembled a coherent story. Watching Paul Rudd try his best (in his screen debut) to make the expository dialog sound sane is almost worth your time, but not quite. I'm not surprised the producers decided to scrap this storyline, ignore it completely and pretend it never happened with the next film in the series HALLOWEEN H2O (1998). That was a pretty strong and well made sequel to the original two films even if they had to go and screw it up with the next one. Damned Halloween sequels. 

Anyway- this past week I couldn't stop myself from rewatching HALLOWEEN 6 (1995) mainly because I wanted to watch both versions back to back - again. You see, HALLOWEEN 6 exists in two sort-of official cuts. There is the hideous and stupid theatrical cut that everyone saw in 1995 which plays like a typical sequel except that Donald Pleasance's Dr. Loomis character disappears for the final thirty minutes. That's because the entire ending was reshot to change the mad druid priest curse clusterfuck ending that confused and pissed off the test screened audiences. Pleasance isn't in this ending because he had died before it was shot! The original version of the film - now known as the Producer's Cut - is better than the theatrical but only by virtue of being so totally nuts that it becomes goofily entertaining for the wrong reasons. Guys in black robes stealing babies while trying to create another Michael Myers to bring about the end of the world - or something like that - is much more fun than watching Paul Rudd run around a basement and beat Myers to death with a pipe. But maybe I'm stating the obvious there. 

HALLOWEEN: THE CURSE OF MICHAEL MYERS (1995) is a terrible movie and quite possible the perfect example of what happens when you don't think a franchise through or extend its life past its 'sell by' date. But I suspect I will watch it again. And when I do I will question my own sanity again while I shake my head and laugh at the idiocy of the plot hole riddled script. Is it so bad it's good? Maybe. I don't know. I just know it's stupid as hell and I'm drawn to watch it every few years. 

THE ISLAND OF DR. MOREAU (1996) - posters & images

Tonight I watched this film for the third or fourth time since catching it in its original release and I'm going to have to come out and state that I like it. The recent documentary about the making of this very troubled production rekindled my interest and the new Blu-Ray proved the perfect viewing experience. I'm never going to claim it's a perfect film, but it is far from the terrible movie that it has been painted as for nearly twenty years. In fact, I think it holds together very well until Brando's exit and then it flies a bit out of control. Part of this chaotic feel is obviously intentional as it mirrors the breakdown of order on the island but there always seems to be pieces missing that would have made things work smoother. And while the CGI beasties are awful beyond words the Stan Winston creature effects are stupendous and the actors inside the suits do a magnificent job. I was disheartened to hear so many of the cast & crew referring to it as one of the worst movies of all time! No, no! As far as I'm concerned this is much better than other 1996 releases including Independance Day, The Rock or Twister. 

Brief Thoughts -SCANNERS II: THE NEW ORDER (1991)

I watched SCANNERS II: THE NEW ORDER (1991) last night on the new streaming Shout! Factory channel on my Roku. First, let me recommend this option for viewing some obscure films from the Shout Factory collection as well as quite a number of Mystery Science Theater 3000 episodes. The channel allows free viewing with occasional commercial interruptions or you can pay 99 cents and watch the show with no breaks. I choose the free way because I am cheap!

Any way, I had never seen SCANNERS II before but have been curious about it for years. The original film is a longtime favorite of mine which may be why I had shied away from the sequels. Cronenberg had nothing to do with them so I feared the worst. Much to my shock I am pleased to say I enjoyed it. I'm kind of surprised that it was as well done as it turned out as I had pictured a massive mess masquerading as a film. Instead I got a petty well thought out story that - while it does copy the plot of the first film a little too closely - is well crafted and well acted. It even has that strange otherworldly/different dimension feel that I have always associated with Canadian productions that makes them seem to be taking place in a slightly cleaner, calmer and more ordered place. Could that just be Canada?   I'll have to watch the third one soon.

PHANTASM 3: LORD OF THE DEAD (1994)

The first time I saw PHANTASM 3: LORD OF THE DEAD I did not like it. Indeed, I felt so incredibly let down that I have refused to see the fourth film made a few years afterwards. The reason I was so upset by this film was that the second one had been so absolutely excellent. I felt (and still do) that PHANTASM 2 was one of the best sequels the horror genre had ever produced and in some ways might have surpassed the original. So 3’s limping story and the introduction of an irritating kid character just pissed me off. I wondered if the fact that I was watching this one on video instead of in the theater might have hindered my enjoyment but in the end I hated the sucker and was just angry.

Now- a confession. When I rented and watched PHANTASM 3 all those years ago I was on drugs. Serious drugs. And by that I mean painkillers given to me by a doctor. A real doctor. I had been struck down by my first (and so far only) kidney stone for three days. I spent those hazy days doped up on a wonderful prescription whose name is lost to the mists of my ever failing memory waiting to pass that damned chunk of calcium. Unable to go to work or do much more than lay around and hope it would soon be over I mostly distracted myself with morbid self pity and horror movies. Luckily the stone passed before I ran out of the happy pills or my idea about self surgery went from occasional thought to structured plan. Eventually everything was good again. Until, of course, the remaining pills were stolen from my car- but that’s another story entirely (to be filed under 'Christmastime Car Theft Tales'). Because of the wonderful drugs (Just say no, kids!) I have said for years that PHANTASM 3 was so bad that even drugs couldn’t make it good.

But……..as my memory of the film faded over the last decade or so I’ve wondered if maybe I was being too harsh at the time. After all- I love the first two movies. Maybe I should give it another try.

Boy, am I glad I did! I really liked it this time. It is clearly weaker than the previous two movies but it’s actually good. Yes, it has its flaws with the foremost being the irritating, gun toting kid character played by an actor with less talent than was needed for the role. And I could have done without the trio of zombiefied looters Reggie runs afoul of more than once. But overall this movie moves very well and entertains in the classic PHANTASM style. Nice location shooting, fun action scenes, an unexpected returning character and some more hints about the Tall Man’s origin make it a fun trip indeed. And credit must be given to writer/director Don Coscarelli for both handling the low budget very well and fashioning another great ending.

So now it is time to finally see the fourth and probably final film of the series which even die-hard fans say isn’t very good. But who knows? I’ve said for years 3 stank to high heaven and I’m doing a public 180 right here. Maybe PHANTASM 4 will prove better than I’ve heard.

THE STENDHAL SYNDROME (1996)

THE STENDHAL SYNDROME was Dario Argento’s final great film. Not that I knew it the first time I watched it. That first time through I enjoyed it but was disappointed in the rather downbeat and slightly unsatisfying ending. But I liked it enough to watch it again and on that viewing it opened up like a flower stretching toward the sun. My god! What a beautiful but deadly thing. Much like a gorgeous plant far too poisonous to touch THE STENDHAL SYNDROME is easy to admire but nasty in its effects. Bleak to the point of teeth gritting nausea it boasts a rape and murder scene that is rough even for a horror movie veteran like me. And the thing the killer does with a razor blade still makes me flinch just to think of it. But alongside these terrible things are some wonderful moments of cinematic excellence. This was the last time I could feel that Argento really had a handle on what made a thriller work. Not that he hasn’t made some interesting stuff since then but THE STENDHAL SYNDROME was the last time I felt he made an entire film that stood up and rewarded repeated viewings. It also has one of the most surrealistic scenes I have ever witnessed in a horror film involving Asia Argento kissing a fish. This has to be seen to be believed if not understood.

Of course, the film has its share of problems- all Argento movies do. There is some dodgy CGI that doesn’t quite work, some of the dubbing is bad and at least one character is too poorly defined for the ending to really be effective. But still…..this is a good movie. It’s got a great twist, some amazing set pieces, a truly scary villain and Argento’s last great use of color. Not to mention the sense of dread and horror that breaks at the half way point only to slowly build again in the last half. There are few things scarier than the fear that you are going mad and this film gets that across almost without you noticing.