Here's your sign(s)...

The Omen (1976)

Damien:  Omen II

Omen III:  The Final Conflict

Omen IV:  The Awakening

The Omen (2006)

Damien.  The name alone has come to signify something satanic, or just evil.  Beginning in 1976 with The Omen, three sequels and a remake 30 years later followed, plus there was a TV series simply called Damien (I started watching that when it first aired but didn’t keep up with it, so I will not be reviewing that here).  The original Omen may be considered a classic to some, and while I do like it, kind of, I don’t fall into the group that agrees with that subjective label.  It may be known as an evil kid movie, and I wouldn’t necessarily disagree with that, but it really just involves those that come into contact with the child befalling tragedies soon after, making it more of a stylized body count film (not that there’s anything particularly wrong with that either).  One of my favorite scenes is still the part where the baboons go crazy in the safari park.  Damien:  Omen II takes place seven years later (but released just two years later) in Chicago instead of Europe and features Damien as a cadet.  It’s really just another body count film, but, in typical sequel fashion, worse; much worse, in this case.  The deaths are generally poorly executed, save for maybe an elevator death.  At first, you might think you’re watching a sequel to The Birds instead of The Omen since a bird is around for the deaths and the cause of at least one.  Also, Damien is given too much of a personality this time, a bit cheerful at that, whereas he was quiet in the first, making him a bit more creepy.  I’m not the hugest fan of The Omen to begin with, but it’s infinitely better than its sequel.  Omen III:  The Final Conflict is even worse than Damien:  Omen II.  In it, Damien is a 32-year-old ambassador played by Sam Neill.  Now, if The Omen actually took place in 1976 when it was released, Damien:  Omen II would take place in 1983 (but was released in 1978), and Omen III, released in 1981, would take place around 2003.  I got no indication of dates and I’d be willing to disregard that kind of logic if the movie was actually good; this one wasn’t.  It is so lame with barely any suspense and feels much longer than its 108-minutes; there is a rather bloody suicide in the beginning though.  All I got out of this threequel was that adult Damien evades a group of God-worshippers intent on killing him while having his own disciples take out male babies that might be a threat to him.  To top it all off, in typical franchise fashion, the title indicates this was supposed to be the FINAL entry!  Omen IV:  The Awakening could’ve stood on its own aside from a connection to the previous entries revealed towards the end that should be 100% obvious from the get-go to anyone that watches movies, or anyone with a functioning brain for that matter!  Part four was released 10 years after part three as a TV movie and it certainly feels like one (not that there’s a single thing wrong with that; TV movies can be fun; hell, I used to look forward to watching them during school nights back in the day!).  A girl named Delia is the evil child this time, and this felt like an evil kid flick more than the other entries in the beginning, but then it becomes somewhat of an investigative thriller.  I enjoyed The Awakening more than parts II and III, but I still wouldn’t go so far as saying it’s a particularly good movie; it’s fine for a TV movie fourquel.  Now, about that 2006 remake.  Was it unnecessary?  Yes, but the majority of remakes are, if not all of them (even if they are actually good).  If you’ve seen the original 1976 version, you’ll know everything that’s going to happen in the remake, just with different performers.  Some scenes may be in better focus (i.e. the unearthed graves), but I would hope so given the 30-year difference in technology.  The beheading may be a bit gorier too and done a bit differently, but, again, it was gorier because it was made 30 years later.  The “monkeys go crazy” scene, in a zoo this time instead of a safari park, just wasn’t as effective either (maybe if the gorilla busted out of the glass it would’ve been).  This version may have been okay if the original didn’t exist, but it obviously does, so this remake will be a waste of time if you’ve seen it first, and if you see this before the original, chances are you’ll like this version better unfortunately, unless you like the look of Seventies films (like yours truly).  In conclusion, this isn’t one of my favorite franchises; the original film isn’t even one of my favorite films period, but, like anything, it definitely has its fans.  I personally don’t think Satan has been given his proper due in visual entertainment.  Sure, I liked films like Rosemary’s Baby, The Exorcist, and others, but of all the films I’ve ever seen (it’s a lot but there’s also a lot I haven’t seen), the best cinematic representation of Hell that comes to mind is in Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey (laugh it up, but it’s how I feel).  These films featuring Damien are more satanic than evil kid ones, but if you’re looking for a better evil kid franchise to have a marathon for, go for the Children of the Corn movies.  Sure, most of them aren’t exactly of the highest quality, but they’re fun (all but Genesis, part 8), much more than any of these films are.  I’d really only tell you to check out the original film, if anything, and don’t bother with any of the sequels or remake, unless, of course, you have OCD like me and need to watch every movie in a franchise, and I would completely understand, but, I’m telling you, you could save a lot of time.  6/14/2021

Evil Cars

The Car

An evil car film from 1977 released six years before Stephen King’s evil piece of machinery was thrust upon the world (both the book and film).  It is a driverless car which does have a POV and is suggested to be some kind of demonic force during the final sequence; suggested, meaning there is no direct answer as to why or how the car can operate on its own.  You are watching a film about a driverless car that kills people after all, so I would assume your disbelief is entirely suspended (although, yes, an explanation would be nice).  It is considered a cult film, but I wouldn’t personally call it a classic; it does go on longer than it should and, even for a film made in 1977, the “car attack” scenes aren’t executed in the best way, even laughable at times, but you could do worse in regards to mindless entertainment from yesteryear; some of the characters make it occasionally worthwhile at least.  8/22/2020

The Car:  Road to Revenge

I never saw this “sequel” released over 40 years later until now, so I really could’ve included it in my main blog (I Like Moobies), but, whatever, I’ll keep them together for this particular blog entry.  It’s really not a sequel despite bearing the same name, possibly more of a reimagining with no direct connection to its alleged predecessor other than a cameo from an obviously aged actor whose face you’ll recognize.  I mean, yeah, it does contain a killer car like the first, this time actually showing how the car came to be possessed and why it’s going after people (the last part of the title should hint at that).  It is basically a slasher film, body count film more appropriately, with a car as the killer, making that part of the film a bit formulaic.  It’s also somewhat of a big, loud action movie akin to a Mad Max film.  Like its predecessor, it goes on longer than it should, it is bloodier this time though, that’s for sure, and you’re probably going to want to watch both movies in succession if you’re anything like me (even though they really aren’t entirely similar), but don’t expect either of them to be the greatest movies you’ve ever seen.  You’ll likely even forget about them afterwards.  8/22/2020

Christine

I read the book of the same name by Mr. Stephen King in between 7^th and 8^th grade for a summer reading assignment and immediately saw this movie right after.  I do remember liking the book at the time and didn’t remember being too crazy about the movie, but I have grown to like it a bit more over the years.  John Carpenter, the man behind the legendary Halloween, the decent Village of the Damned remake, They Live, and the overrated but nonetheless lauded The Thing and The Fog, directed, so it wasn’t like it was in unworthy hands.  It is a premise as simple and preposterous as they come, but it somehow works in a simplistic way, despite being close to 2 hours!  This is more than just an evil car movie; it’s technically a teen movie dealing with bullying, teen angst, love complications, overprotective love, blah, blah, blah, it is ultimately about the titular evil car since the majority of events in the film wouldn’t have happened without her (yes, she does kill people).  It’s assumed this piece of machinery is just inherently evil since we do never find out how she became that way (I forget if the book explained it; it has been over 20 years; one day I’ll re-read it), but, again, if you’re watching a movie about an evil car, I doubt a rational explanation is necessary (although, again, it would be nice).  8/22/2020

Conclusion:  Christine wins out of this trio of preposterous yet mildly diverting evil car flicks.

---Sean O.

8/26/2020

Cheat Death Five Times

I decided to revisit this series in which death itself (portrayed as a black mist) kills a bunch of people.  Although they’re set up as slasher films, I guess they would be more of the body count variety since people die but there is no specific killer (yes, there is a difference---Jaws is a body count film, Halloween is a slasher film).  Now, us horror fans don’t watch these movies for plot, as is the case with most slasher/body count films; there never is a plot---a group of people are temporarily saved from dying in a specific situation (due to a premonition) before they all die one by one (in the order they should have) due to “cheating” death’s plan; we just watch them for the deaths, usually elaborate, and maybe for the characters, but ultimately the deaths.  These films are simply meant to be mindless fun and they are for the most part…

-------------------------------------------------------------

Final Destination

The one that started it all.  I loved it when I first saw it in the theater, it being a bit different from the average slasher film.  Like I said, it’s merely only set-up as a slasher film being it contains mostly teen characters being offed one by one.  It’s still good today, but may have lost a bit of impact over the years and after being followed by four sequels (well, at least three sequels, but more on that below).  A plane crash is what the cast of characters were meant to perish in here, something which many people fear, and, according to Google (the statistics probably differ on every site), the odds of it occurring are 1 in 9,821.  John Denver, who himself died in a plane crash, is featured on the soundtrack.  How’s that for morbid transparency?

Favorite death:  The teacher at her home.

Final Destination 2

Well, this one was certainly gorier than its predecessor.  This time, our intended victims were supposed to bite it in a highway accident.  Only one character returns from the first (well, two if you count Candyman himself, Mr. Tony Todd) and the same thing happens wherein all those that should’ve perished on that highway die one by one.  It’s still fun for those indiscriminate viewers, horror fans or not, and there’s a bit of general suspense, more so the first time or a repeat viewing after a while with little to no recollection.

Favorite death:  Boy squished by glass.

Final Destination 3

Third time’s a charm?  Well, the first one was a somewhat original concept for a well-worn subgenre and the second one upped the gore quotient.  This one was definitely not original and the gore probably rivaled the first sequel instead of topping it.  However, if you made it this far, you should know exactly what to expect; it is fun like the others, if you enjoy these sorts of films, that is, the deaths are well thought out like the others, and the film is well-shot (I particularly liked the ominous shots of the amusement park and the segue from the tanning beds to the coffins).  A rollercoaster (aptly named Devil’s Flight) is the spot where all the characters were to expire this time; a site on Google states the odds of dying on a roller coaster are 1 in 300 million (again, different sites will give you different statistics; one character in this film states it’s a 1 in 250 million chance).  James Wong is back in the director’s chair, he also directed the first one (as well as co-wrote both), while David R. Ellis (Cellular, Snakes on a Plane, Shark Night) helmed the second one.

Favorite death:  Tie between the tanning deaths (most disturbing one too) and the nail gun through the gothic chick’s head.

The Final Destination

David R. Ellis returned to direct this fourth entry (I guess they assumed this would be the last one by putting The in front of the first title) wherein our cast of characters are supposed to kick the bucket at an auto racetrack after an accident causes cars and car parts to fly into the audience.  (I guess audience members would never expect to go at a place like that since I came up with nothing after Googling statistics for the odds of dying there).  Yup, the same thing happens this time---those that left their seats after someone spouts about having a premonition in regards to an upcoming disaster die one by one due to cheating death’s plan.  It’s still undeniably a bit of fun if you enjoyed the others and there are far worse ways you can spend roughly 82 minutes.  Luckily they got rid of the deplorable redneck right away in one of the more inane death sequences.  This was originally presented in 3-D which I think is an ineffective gimmick for feature films.  You can view it in either, but just watch it in 2-D; you can still tell what parts were meant to be in 3-D.

Favorite death:  Real---Decapitation by tire.  Imagined---Escalator death.

Final Destination 5

Steven Quale (who also directed the underrated tornado flick, Into the Storm), not James Wong or David R. Ellis, helmed this fifth entry that’s really a prequel to one of the other films (I won’t reveal which in case you haven’t seen this).  Here, a bridge collapse is the initial disaster, not during an earthquake either (it looks and seems like it would be a very frightening scenario, but a Google search told me it’s a one in several million chance of being your demise).  Then, of course, those that were supposed to die, die in the order they would have.  You know the deal, especially after four other films (there was a new theory proposed here though in regards to cheating death a different way).  Somehow they always somewhat seem to work though, or at least hold your attention.  I probably liked this entry the least, but that doesn’t mean I disliked it either.  This was also shot in 3-D and 2-D, but I only ever watched it in 2-D because 3-D sucks, if I haven’t made that clear!

Favorite death:  Skewered in the kitchen.

-------------------------------------------------------------

In conclusion:  I like this series, as formulaic as it may seem.  Arguably, it’s not necessarily formulaic since we don’t know specifically how the characters are going to die.  Instead of simply being stabbed, sliced, or beheaded with a sharp object, a Rube Goldberg-ish sequence usually occurs before the characters are stabbed, sliced, or beheaded (examples of a Rube Goldberg design, for those unaware, would be the Mouse Trap board game, the breakfast sequence in Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure, and some of the traps in the Home Alone films).  There also might be, I think, a bit of a Stephen King influence in that mundane situations/locations (tanning salon, car wash, hair salon, dentist, etc.) become deadly.  I’ve seen them all more than a couple times and they still manage to be entertaining whenever I revisit them.  A sixth entry has been proposed for a while now with no confirmed release date as of yet.  Well, as has been proven, I’m going to keep watching them as long as they’re made.  Watching people die is only fun when in movies.  F.Y.I., if you want to look for Easter eggs while having your marathon, the number 180 appears in all of them…7/14/2020

---Sean O.

7/15/2020

Burn, Baby, Burn!

Firestarter

Firestarter 2:  Rekindled

I read the novel, Firestarter, at the end of 8^th grade and watched the adapted film of the same name immediately after.  I don’t remember much about the book (I’m almost 38 now) and the only part of the movie I recall (at the time) being faithful was the very beginning when the father and daughter were running from government agents.  Drew Barrymore plays that daughter (the titular character) that has pyrokinesis as a result of government experimentation just 2 years after being in E.T. (1984 for those unaware of movie releases).  Stephen King is one of the few that could take a premise so simple and make it compelling---a little girl can cause fires with her mind (sounds like something a third grader would concoct).  And I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again and again---Mr. King excels at characterizations and his characters often make the stories as much as the stories themselves.  I don’t think I would label this film horror, it being more of a chase movie and a thriller with elements of sci-fi (the All Movie site agrees with my description).  Now, this was never my favorite work of his, as it is very simple without much depth.  I don’t dislike it at all either; its simplicity itself is what makes it watchable.  Given the time of release, the realistic fires (as they all likely were real) give it a praiseworthy quality that noticeable CGI would never be able to accomplish, particularly when her powers really let loose at the end, enough to simultaneously be a pyromaniac’s wet dream and a firefighter’s worst nightmare.  The sequel, Firestarter 2:  Rekindled, a TV movie released 18 years later in 2002, was more of a remake and a sequel to the remake in one film (it was almost 3 hours, so it was certainly long enough to be 2 films!).  I say it felt more like a remake because the flashback scenes were shot with different performers at different locations instead of using footage from the first film, yet the character names were all the same (I know not what the reasoning was behind that).  It often felt more like an X-Men-type film too, there being other “mutant” kids created by a government agency and kept together in a facility.  Back to my mention of realistic fires in the first film, some here may have looked passable (particularly a flashback scene where the little girl lets loose), but many were noticeably digital.  Some of us do prefer films that were made before digital effects were completely at our disposal.  Aside from that, it isn’t the worst movie I’ve seen, but I still say it’s an unnecessary sequel to a movie that wasn’t exactly a masterpiece itself.

In conclusion:  If you have time, read the Stephen King novel and then watch the movie (again or for the first time) like my 8^th grade self did.  If you don’t have time or don’t want to make time, just watch the first movie.  I, personally, wouldn’t tell you to waste your time with the sequel, but I understand how it is in wanting to complete a series; just know that you’ll lose almost 3 hours of your life you won’t get back.  At least it was only 2 films that were made (so far) and it managed to avoid being bitten by the remake bug for a long time; I heard Blumhouse Productions plans on remaking it.  Since it was inevitable and I’m willing to give remakes, however unnecessary, a chance (I didn’t expect to like the Child’s Play remake as much as I did), all I can say for this one is that I hope the fires look realistic!  6/15/2020

---Sean O.
6/16/2020

Psycho Analyses

Psycho (1960)

Psycho II

Psycho III

Psycho IV: The Beginning

I decided to revisit this series after seeing a post about Psycho II (damn social media) and that I haven’t seen them in a while.  I didn’t watch the 1998 remake (at least my OCD doesn’t always get the better of me) because I remember it being a shot-for-shot remake in color with different performers, and that just makes it the very definition of an unnecessary remake; I watched it one time and that’s it for me!  As for the original black-and-white film, it is labeled a horror classic.  Classic, as I’ve said either in person or in one of my reviews, is a very subjective term, often coined by historians and society at large.  Just because something is labeled a “classic” doesn’t mean I’m going to like it, nor should I feel like I have to (I’m not a fan of Citizen Kane and I’ve watched it twice).  I do like the original Psycho, yes, and it’s still a good film to watch despite feeling dated (what do you expect from a movie made 60 years ago?).  I am a fan of Alfred Hitchcock, even some of his work made before Psycho; I don’t believe I’ve seen all of his movies, but I’ve seen many and am a fan of enough to call myself a fan (I’m always interested in seeing films labeled as “Hitchcockian”).  Even if you haven’t seen Psycho (or the remake, and I hope the remake isn’t the only version you’ve seen), I’m sure the twist has been revealed in much of pop culture or by word-of-mouth, but I won’t disclose it in case there’s a chance you don’t know.  Do see the original, if so, and skip the remake (OCD be damned; coming from someone with OCD); luckily I grew up in a time when most original films were the only version and I grew to love them before remakes came along.  Sequels, especially for horror and action films, are largely inevitable, and while many may not be as good as the first (often more than not) and/or unnecessary, I don’t hate them as much as remakes.  Psycho II, while not as good as its predecessor, isn’t that bad for a sequel made 23 years later (22 years have passed in the film world).  Psycho III, directed by Norman Bates himself (Anthony Perkins), isn’t bad as well despite not being spectacular; the blood surely spills more than the previous entries.  Psycho IV: The Beginning is a TV movie sequel that’s mostly a prequel via flashbacks.  While I’m not always the biggest fan of prequels, especially when they ruin a film’s overall mystery or are an obvious cash-in, this fourquel wasn’t the worst movie I’ve seen (as a standalone film).  Director Mick Garris, he who was behind other horror films like Critters 2: The Main Course, Sleepwalkers, The Stand, The Shining remake, and Riding the Bullet, adds a bit of credibility to it.  I’d still say it would’ve ended well after Psycho III, if anything, but at least they stopped at IV (for now).  I never got around to watching the Bates Motel series because I never really had a desire to and there were five seasons!  Five ten-episode seasons with a minimal 40-minutes each is an awful long prequel!  According to Wikipedia, there was a TV movie in 1987, also titled Bates Motel, that was a spinoff of the franchise.  Maybe I’ll check that out since it’s only one 95-minute movie.

In conclusion:  Watch Psycho if you haven’t already, even though you might think it’s dated and may not have patience compared to most modern films, and you could waste your time with worse if you decide to have a marathon (I like these movies in the order they were released).  Do skip the remake though, whether you have OCD or not, because it is as unnecessary as they come.  Also, if you are a fan of the original Psycho, or filmmaking in general, check out 78/52, a documentary involving a detailed analysis of the infamous shower scene.  6/7/2020

---Sean O.
6/8/2020

Nights to Dismember

Prom Night (1980)

Hello Mary Lou: Prom Night II

Prom Night III: The Last Kiss

Prom Night IV: Deliver Us from Evil

Prom Night (2008)

Prom is so overrated.  I didn’t even want to go to mine.  I only went my senior year (with someone I didn’t even care to go with) because my mom wanted a picture.  I hated high school in general (I wasn’t exactly the most popular person either).  Anyway, I decided to revisit the Prom Night franchise, even the 2008 remake I know I hated, enough to only give it 1 ½ stars out of 4 (when I used to give star ratings) and to include it on my ten worst films of that year.  But, since I have OCD, usually whenever I watch a film that’s part of a franchise, I like to watch all of them, and sometimes my opinion on a movie may change over time (yes, even if I remember hating it).  The original Prom Night starring Jamie Lee Curtis and Leslie Nielsen definitely isn’t my favorite slasher movie.  I don’t hate it, but it’s kind of boring even as a teen movie and the kills are too few, not starting until after the hour mark (not counting the accidental death in the beginning).  Hello Mary Lou: Prom Night II introduces the titular Mary Lou character in a story that’s totally different than the first.  This takes a more supernatural approach although there are deaths in a body count fashion and it’s ultimately an example of standard (yet watchable) Eighties cheese.  It also tries to emulate, not nearly as successfully, that best prom-themed film known as Carrie, the original one directed by Brian De Palma.  I do love that possessed rocking horse; it always seems to stand out the most whenever I think of this sequel.  I always thought of Prom Night III: The Last Kiss as my favorite entry in the series, but it’s still not the greatest film out there.  Sure, it may be flawed like the rest of the films, but it’s a slightly stylish teen body count movie and I’m particularly a fan of the ‘Prom Night in Hell’ scene at the end.  Whereas my buddy and fellow queer, Ron Oliver, he who directed several Are You Afraid of the Dark? and Goosebumps episodes among other things, wrote Prom Night II, here he wrote and directed.  Prom Night IV: Deliver Us from Evil takes place in the same universe as the preceding two entries and concerns a seemingly possessed priest that escapes a certain kind of confinement and ends up targeting a group of four teens that ditched their prom.  There are an equal amount of bland kills as there are passable ones in this entry, making it a typical slasher film that isn’t anything special (much like the first film).  Lastly, I hated the remake probably as much as I did in 2008.  While the original film was largely boring, this one was as by-the-numbers as they come.  It was bland, uninteresting, dull, unimaginative, uninspired, insipid, lackluster, flat, stale, lame, you get the idea (I used as many synonyms for bland as I could).  And at least the original had a bit of mystery with the whodunit aspect; here you knew who the killer was right away and the kills were all predictable while lacking flair.  Prom Night (2008) is one of many examples belonging in the definition of ‘unnecessary remake.’

In conclusion:  While it’s definitely not the best franchise out there (it seems like I say that about a lot of franchises), it certainly has its place in the history of horror cinema.  I don’t think any of them are spectacular and the only one I completely detest is the 2008 remake.  One thing that is for sure, I have more fun with these films than I did at my own prom that I don’t even remember too much about; I don’t remember having any fun either.  Fuck prom!  And high school!  I would never go back.  6/3/2020

---Sean O.
6/5/2020

Chomp! Chomp!

I was recently on a Natural Horror binge featuring the “modern dinosaur” cousins, the alligator and crocodile.  While one you’ll “see later” and the other “in a while,” the differences have been claimed to be size and snout shape, but I really don’t think you’re going to care about differentiating them if either are coming after you on land or especially in the water.  Both of them will eat you!  I stuck to the more simpler-titled films and not necessarily of the highest quality (save for maybe Alligator) instead of better films like Rogue and Black Water, and Lake Placid doesn’t have the creature in the title (like those aforementioned two).  Yes, I could’ve done Croc (a 2007 film) but whatever.  Here are the five films I recently re-watched:

Crocodile (1979)

This Thai film clearly inspired by Jaws claims to have come out in 1979 but wasn’t released until 1980 and not until 1981 in the U.S.  They definitely tried their best but obviously didn’t have the means.  It’s dubbed, not as bad as it could’ve been, but it’s apparent.  Given the time, the creature was practical and looks better than the majority of CGI ones today.  It is bloody but the action often looks repetitive and the last section practically mirrors that of the aforementioned shark movie’s last section.  Not the worst movie I’ve seen, of its type or in general, but it still drags and only Natural Horror completists need apply, pretty much just to say they saw it.

Crocodile (2000)

No, this wasn’t a remake of that Thai film reviewed above, at least not that I’m aware.  It’s pretty much what you’d expect from one of these films---a group of people are pursued by the titular creature for being in its territory, and for taking one of its eggs.  I would’ve expected better coming from Tobe Hooper though, the man behind The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 1 and 2, Poltergeist, Salem’s Lot, and even Eaten Alive (which was basically The Texas Chainsaw Massacre with a crocodile).  The creature looked practical in the water and up close, but obviously CGI on land at times and painfully so that I’m surprised Tobe was fine with it!  Not bad overall if you’re not picky, but can you really be with these films regardless of who’s behind them?

Crocodile 2:  Death Swamp

Has no connection whatsoever to the first, at least not that I recall, and the crocodiles sort of play secondary characters here as the plot revolves around a group of people, including bank robbers on the run, making their way through a swamp after a plane crash.  At times, I forgot the movie was even about crocodiles!  Like the previous film, the creatures are both practical and CGI, obviously so for both, but I’ll always settle for the practical regardless of how fake they look (take note filmmakers!).  Wasn’t too much a fan of this one, but why not watch it if you watched the first one, regardless of connectivity (and at least there were still crocodiles unlike Halloween III not containing Michael Myers)?

Alligator

I’ve always been a fan of this film since seeing it on TV during my younger years (I’m not sure if I was in high school yet).  The part in the pool where the young boy is pushed in always stands out.  Being directed by Lewis Teague (Cujo, Cat’s Eye) and written by John Sayles (Piranha, The Brother from Another Planet) certainly gives it some credibility too.  I like the characters too.  One of the better Natural Horror flicks.  It made my ‘Ten (times two) Best Natural Horror Films’ list on my other blog, Ten Best Lists (www.tenbestlists82.blogspot.com).

Alligator II:  The Mutation 

Sequel, like most, obviously not as good as its predecessor, but still not bad for what it’s worth (better than many “modern dinosaur” flicks).  I don’t think you’ll be too, too disappointed if you liked Alligator.  The preposterous-ness of it all (the gator is strong enough to bust through walls and completely destroy a boat) actually works given the circumstances, and at least it was made during a time when the creatures were still practical.  Yes, it may be more work, but wouldn’t modern filmmakers take the hint as to how much better they looked before CGI became the unfortunate norm?  Content is key after all.

---Sean O.

6/15/2019

Feast your eyes...

Feast

Feast II: Sloppy Seconds

Feast III: The Happy Finish

Average creature feature trilogy with gnarly monsters and enough bloodshed to satisfy gorehounds while possibly disgusting sensitive viewers.  Mostly everyone is fair game too so don’t warm up to every character introduced.  Don’t expect an origin tale for the creatures either.  I don’t know what they were waiting for if Feast IV was planned since part three was released in 2009 and the first two were released in 2006 and 2008, respectively.  All three films are linear so you should probably watch them in order even though each successive one reiterates parts of their predecessor.  Feast takes place in a bar in the desert and features too many characters, some we don’t meet much at all, but passable violence.  We don’t get much of a good look at the creatures as scenes happen too rapidly and the camera often shifts focus.  It also drags quite a bit in the middle.  Feast II: Sloppy Seconds picks up right after Feast in a nearby town ravaged by the creatures where previous survivors and others seek refuge in buildings.  There’s better characterization this time, a better look at the creatures, and there’s still violence aplenty.  A creature autopsy will likely repel viewers but it never particularly made me nauseous since it was rather cartoony considering the type of film---this coming from a horror nut though.  A slightly longer run-time than the first makes this suffer from occasional tedium as well.  Both films might’ve benefited from chopping some time off their 92 and 100-minute run-times.  Feast III: The Happy Finish gets it right by being a scant 80-minutes and wasn’t bad at all as far as threequels go.  There’s plenty of notable violence, some surprises up its sleeve and, despite what the title implies, isn’t a very happy finish at all for whoever survives.  Plus, the shorter length as mentioned doesn’t make it overstay its welcome.  Oh, but you do get to see a creature consume a head, watch it traverse its digestive system, and see it pooped out.  It’s actually not as nasty as it sounds, but I never preferred potty humor myself regardless of the genre.  A Spanish-singing guitar player refreshes your memory for all three films at the end to top it all off. 

In conclusion:  It’s not the greatest trilogy (for horror or any genre for that matter), but indiscriminate horror fans should enjoy all three.  None aren’t worth watching if you make a marathon out of it.  It’s a bloody, over-the-top, campy creature feature franchise that wouldn’t have felt out of place in the ‘80’s.  Dig in!  1/23/2018

---Sean O.

I Spit on My Blog!

Been almost 5 months since I posted on this blog...

I Spit on Your Grave (1978)

Calling this rape/revenge film a classic is tough.  I’d be reluctant to even call it a cult classic which is what it became.  Despite being wince-inducing momentarily, it also has that exploitative “can’t look away” aspect.  Rape is no joke and unfortunately happens to many people in reality.  This film contains a gang rape lasting a minimal half-hour in multiple locations in a serene countryside.  It’s the only movie I recall ever causing me to cover my eyes during some of the brutally convincing rape scenes.  This film would certainly make you hate men and allow feminists to believe they’re all like this.  The men in this film are vile scumbags that received their due justice though.  Speaking of feminists, this film would more likely constitute as feminist over misogynist.  The victim does get revenge on her four attackers after all, the standout being the bathtub castration, something real rape victims would only dream of being able to pull off.  I know, I know.  This is only a movie and Camille Keaton was solely in it for the paycheck and moved on to her next project afterwards, but films sometimes should be a cathartic creative outlet.  No, I don’t think it would make real rape victims feel better, but a film like this depicts how truly awful the act is.  No one should ever be raped.  I simply “like” this film for being a gritty, depraved ‘70’s exploitation pic that surprisingly doesn’t make me feel dirty after watching.  Obviously if I saw it more than once!  Proceed with caution if you haven’t already but be prepared for what you’re getting into.  9/7/2017

I Spit on Your Grave (2010)

I’m always leery of remakes, especially if the original doesn’t need improvement.  Just show younger audiences the original I always say!  I actually didn’t mind this remake though.  This movie replaced the gritty quality for a more pristine look (I would hope so if this was made in 2010) which is nice for modern films but the “poorer cinematography” of the original is what made films from that era so distinctive and appealing.  Again, it’s always tough to say you like these movies since the subject matter is rather barbaric despite knowing it’s only a movie with performers.  The rape this time is more psychological than physical but doesn’t lessen its intended impact.  Of course the original had a much more disturbing sexual assault though.  Where this film tops the original is in the creative and very elaborate revenge deaths.  Both films are worth watching if, like me, you don’t mind harrowing yet entertaining movies.  I know that I’m watching a movie with performers and (I’m paraphrasing something I heard before) people watch these films knowing they’re in the safety of their own home (or movie theater) and grateful the atrocities aren’t happening to them.  Statistically, even though I think statistics is a shady analysis, just as many women watch these kinds of movies as men, so I don’t want to hear that only perverted men are who these films are made for.  I’m gay too, so there!  9/7/2017

I Spit on Your Grave 2

Essentially a remake of the remake since it’s a similar scenario, with no connection to the first, happening to a different girl (character and actress).  Said girl is kidnapped, transported from New York to Bulgaria, tied to a bed in a basement, and tortured by a family before being left for dead below the house.  Why can’t villains ever make sure the victim is definitely dead?  There wouldn’t be formulaic movies like this, that’s why!  This is just another lame torture porn/revenge flick.  The torture scenes aren’t disturbing since the premise wore thin and the revenge scenes lack flair minus the “ball squeezing” which has the same cringe-inducing effect as the original bathtub castration.  Predominantly bland and unworthy sequel.  9/7/2017

I Spit on Your Grave III:  Vengeance is Mine

This is actually the sequel to the 2010 remake.  Forget part 2 even happened.  The returning victim played by Sarah Butler (my gay ass is actually attracted to her) reluctantly joins group therapy for other rape victims following her therapist’s advising.  The rapists are slaughtered by Jennifer Hills (Butler) after her friend is sexually assaulted and murdered while the cops “don’t have enough evidence” to do anything about it.  This is essentially a slasher film with the “victims” deserving their comeuppance and, again, could be cathartic for sexual assault victims.  Two brutal instances involve an explicit penis-slicing and an anal pipe penetration.  This is better than the second one but still suffers from sequel-itis.  The open-ended conclusion might negate the entire film too, but I’m not entirely dismissing this entry.  If you’re going to have a marathon, watch all but I Spit on Your Grave 2.  9/7/2017

---Sean O.

Let's go joyriding...three times!

Joy Ride                                                                     

It’s been years but I remember liking it then too.  It’s a fun suspenseful road movie with a Hitcher vibe in that both deal with villains on desert highways.  Instead of a hitchhiker, this film contains a trucker named Rusty Nail doing the terrorizing.  I can’t say I’m a fan of the late pretty boy, Paul Walker, but I don’t dislike him either.  Mr. Walker and Steve Zahn decide to have some fun with a CB radio unknowingly kick-starting Mr. Nail’s wrath.  It could’ve been a tedious movie with Rusty taunting them on the open road the entire time leading to the inevitable showdown, but the confrontation occurs halfway and I liked how it was structured to appear finished.  It’s almost like a sequel was already included and its welcome is never overstayed.  This movie’s entertaining.  I wanted more when it ended if that’s any indication.

Joy Ride 2:  Dead Ahead

Fairly worthy sequel with Rusty Nail (played by a different actor) doling out more “vengeance” on a group of young adults heading to Vegas.  It’s still a road thriller with added bits of Texas Chainsaw Massacre and “torture porn” thrown in.  It’s probably not a good idea to borrow someone’s car when they’re not home, even if you leave your number stating you’ll return it.  At least not if that house and car belong to Mr. Nail.  Again, it could’ve been super lame if they were followed on the highway the entire time, but the crazy trucker makes demands for the victims to accomplish off the road.  Horror sequels are expected to increase the bloodshed.  This sequel slightly follows those rules.  Just make sure you watch the unrated version though; I don’t remember violence (other than implied) in the rated one.  I don’t recall much of any from Joy Ride come to think of it, but it wasn’t needed because the suspense kept me occupied. 

Joy Ride 3:  Road Kill

Rusty Nail, played by another different actor, is back and this time his victims are six young adults heading to a NASCAR-like race.  The red stuff tops the first two combined this time.  Just make sure it’s the unrated version again; I don’t remember the rated version being as bloody.  Some of the violence is superb and the chase sequences are extremely well-shot but, like most threequels, the thrill wears off.  It’s still worth watching though.  This is the first movie I saw with Ben Hollingsworth and I’ve been a fan since.  This was surprisingly my favorite movie of his.  I think celebrity crushes are lame but eye candy is always nice especially if the content is somewhat compelling.  Go figure, I like him but not Paul Walker.  Whatever, different strokes folks.

In conclusion:  All three movies are worthwhile.  All three have a different actor (face mostly obscured anyway) playing Rusty, but their voices all sound similar.  The films successively get worse, but not in the sense you should bypass any.  At one time (and possibly still), the entire series was only $7.50 at Walmart.  Totally worth having a Joy Ride marathon every few years, or weeks/months depending on admiration.  The franchise began to lose steam the third time like most trilogies, so I don’t think Rusty Nail needs to return a 4^th time (different actor or not).  I can’t control these things though.  Much like the iconic boogeymen (Jason, Michael Myers, Chucky, etc.), Rusty inexplicably seems immortal.  So if Joy Ride 4 happens, you know I’ll have to watch it (damn OCD).  For now though, enjoy these three.  4/27/2017

---Sean O.

An Alaskan Tale...times three

Balto

Ah, the good old days of hand-drawn animation.  I still cherish those pre-Millennial days before computers handled animation completely.  This movie begins and ends as live-action with the flashback animated.  Set in Nome, Alaska (an isolated northwestern town) during the 1920’s, it involves the titular half-Husky/half-wolf coming to the rescue during a diphtheria outbreak.  Balto is initially shunned for being half-wolf but once he retrieves the medicine needed for the ailing children, he’s lauded for being a hero.  Therefore, differences don’t prevent heroism.  Balto is adventurous, suspenseful and wondrous to behold.  I’m always amazed at what animators can accomplish.  Not my favorite animated feature but definitely worthy.

Balto II:  Wolf Quest

Not the worst direct-to-video sequel let alone sequel period.  Contains unnecessary singing prevalent in direct-to-video animated sequels but almost as much adventure as its predecessor.  This time one of Balto’s daughters (the only one that looks more wolf) endures the same insecurities he once did of being a mixed breed upon learning of her ancestry.  The ultimate message is that there’s a place in this world for everyone no matter who or what you are.

Balto III:  Wings of Change

Still not terrible considering it’s a second direct-to-video sequel.  Taking place in the late 1920’s during airmail’s infancy, the sled dogs (including Balto’s son) feel like they might be useless once mail is entirely delivered by plane.  A race is set between the pilot and dogs to deliver mail to a nearby town and back to see which delivery method is quicker.  Something happens on the return route and Balto once again saves the day.  The message here would be to retain the old ways as modern advancements are apt to fail as proven here.

In conclusion:  While it may not be the best trilogy, it certainly makes for a decent family marathon.  Luckily it ended at three, unlike The Land Before Time (I never saw a single sequel) or those live-action Air Bud movies and its rip-offs.  I’m not sure whether to tell you to watch these now while it’s cold out and you’re in the comfort of your warm home, or during the summer to “cool” you off.  I personally always thought it was cozier to watch movies set during winter during winter in the comfort of my warm home.  Plus, I was born in Alaska so these movies should resonate with me.  Whatever, I only lived there until I was 2.  1/8/2017

---Sean O.

Let's take a trip to Salem's Lot...

Here's my review of Salem's Lot, its sequel and remake:

Salem’s Lot (1979)

The TV movie based on Stephen King’s vampire opus directed by the legendary Tobe Hooper (The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Poltergeist, Eaten Alive).  Not the best adaptation (or story for that matter) but certainly far from the worst.  The vampires are generally creepy.  Old school make-up consisting of fangs and contacts were just enough to work.  Twilight pussies these vamps are not!  This definitely aged and shows in the editing when the screen pauses and goes black during several vampire attacks.  All in all, it’s a rather faithful adaptation with a few minor details omitted.  Worth watching.

A Return to Salem’s Lot

Technically only a sequel in name.  It’s actually not that bad though.  It’s gorier and (prematurely) dispels some of the myths that modern movies try to do.  The vampires aren’t as cool or creepy; one looks like a mask bought from a clearance bin.  Similar to the first, it’s far from being the worst vampire movie.  Diverting in the least.

Salem’s Lot (2004)

I remember watching this when it premiered.  I was actually alive unlike when the original aired.  This 3-hour miniseries is fairly faithful to the literary material as well with more included and some parts rearranged.  Average adaptation with faster vampires looking modern compared to the old-school bloodsuckers of Hooper’s version.  Personal faves this time are the undead school bus and the death by table saw after falling through the stairs.

In conclusion:  I finished reading Salem’s Lot not that long ago, so naturally I had to watch the movie again.  My OCD made me seek out the sequel plus re-watch the remake.  If you’re looking for quality, this might not be the best series to view, but if you’re an open-minded horror fiend like me, this franchise should satisfy your cinematic bloodlust just fine.  12/18/2016

---Sean O.

I'm..dreaming of a black...christmas!

Burn up any evidence with a nice cozy fire and relax with this double dose of yuletide jeer!  Season's Screamings!

Black Christmas (1974)

Just in time for the holidays!  This slasher film from the Great White North predated all the American classics like Halloween, Friday the 13^th and all their imitators.  This seminal flick is underrated, overlooked and one of the best!  It might even be one of my favorite horror movies period.  I’m a huge fan of merging beauty with tragedy and what better way to take a festive time like Christmas and involve murders in a sorority house?  A title like Black Christmas is awesome in that it simplistically signifies the juxtaposition of the macabre and majestic.  One of the first serious film analyses I wrote in college in the early 2000s was for this movie.  (Sorry, I don’t have a copy of that.  You’ll have to contact my Film History teacher, if he even still has it).  I was initially turned onto this movie years ago when I read Phil Anselmo (Pantera, Down, Superjoint Ritual and many other side projects) mention this was one of his favorite horror movies.  I rented it on VHS (well that should tell you how long ago that was), fell in love at first sight and loved it since.  Amazing how hard it was to trace a phone call just 40 years ago!  The ambiguity of the killer’s identity and his various POV shots add to the overall effectiveness.  Additional applause for never having any sequels like so many other iconic slasher films.  Be sure to kick back this holiday season with this stylish, chilling (like a Canadian winter) and completely meritorious (should-be) holiday classic.

Black Christmas (2006)

Well, I hated the idea of this remake upon hearing of it, hated it when I first saw it and lumped it in with other pointless remakes like coal in a stocking.  Well, I watched it again a few years after that and didn’t hate it as much.  Perhaps my initial contempt stemmed from my love for the original?  Comparisons are instinctual but I’ve definitely become more lenient with different adaptations, especially book-to-film.  I’ve seen this maybe four or five times now and it definitely gets better each time.  It’s so well shot and provides plenty of the red stuff.  It’s quite disturbing at times too.  Plus, I’ve always been a fan of horror movies set around Christmastime (as long as they’re actually good, well-made and involve mayhem of some kind).  I still dislike how Billy the faceless killer is given a backstory here.  That’s the primary problem with remakes.  The ambiguity of yesteryear’s originals are what made them so great.  We don’t need to know what Michael Myers’ childhood was like before going psycho.  We don’t need to see Jason Voorhees before going psycho.  No need to even mention the Nightmare on Elm Street remake.  I believe if I never saw nor heard of the original Black Christmas, I would’ve liked this much better.  I would add it to my list of Christmas horror favorites.  Still doesn’t come close to the original and I have some reservations overall, but I’d say include it in a holiday horror marathon.  Just watch the original first if you haven’t already.  11/22/2016

---Sean O.

Goddamn those Japanese houses!

Hausu (House)                                                            OK/G

The first time I saw this Japanese horror/comedy/fantasy I thought it was too silly and uber-bizarre.  Especially since I watched it based on horror writers (Rue Morgue in particular) praising it.  Well, it still is goofy and very outlandish but undeniably like no other haunted house film I’ve ever seen nor (most likely) will ever see.  I did appreciate it more with a liberal mindset and can’t deny it’s entertaining in the least.  The soundtrack adds to the idiosyncratic tone which sounds like it belongs in a 70’s comedy sitcom.  Funny how certain characters aren’t thrown off by some of the supernatural occurrences at first, like when one of the girls uses kung-fu against flying logs as if that’s the normal thing to do.  I have a feeling this would continually grow on me upon each viewing.  After all, I was initially turned off by the slapstick of Evil Dead 2 but now it’s one of my favorite horror movies.  While this doesn’t have the overall horror and excessive gore of Evil Dead 2, it’s still imaginative and trippy.  (This was released a decade before Sam Raimi’s worthy sequel).  I could never conceive the manic fantastical elements on display.  Of particular note are a piano eating a girl and the house becoming a blood river spewing from a cat painting.  Very eccentric and far from my first choice of viewing but, damn it, there’s nothing else quite like it!  11/19/2016

---Sean O.

Let's all go to Halloweentown!

Halloweentown                                                           OK

Cheeseball award goes to….this initial film for a corny Disney movie franchise?  Nah, there’s probably other candidates for that.  Yes, this is as cheesy as cheese can get, even for a kiddy flick.  The monsters in the titular town are goofy and the special effects are lame, but it’s mildly amusing and 100% harmless.  I liked the big town pumpkin.  11/1/2016

Halloweentown II:  Kalabar’s Revenge                      OK

This one was a little better than the first one.  I liked that they didn’t make the same movie twice.  It might be that is was also directed by Mary Lambert who made Pet Sematary and Pet Sematary Two (classics in my mind).  Still far from classic status but there’s more going on this round to slightly elevate interest.  I liked the shrunken head walkie-talkies.  11/1/2016

Halloweentown High                                                  EH/OK

It’s tough enough being a human freak in high school.  Imagine being a literal freak (disguised as humans initially).  Age-old tale about basing people on their personality over outward appearance.  Blah, blah, blah.  I liked the giant animatronic (at first, then CGI) skeleton from the haunted house.  Slightly.  11/3/2016

Return to Halloweentown                                           EH

A different actress plays the oldest witch sister this time.  The girl from the previous three couldn’t do one more?  She probably foresaw the series losing steam and didn’t want to waste her time.  No, the franchise isn’t spectacular to begin with but this fourth entry was simply too many.  Its corny factor reached an all-time high (higher than the two characters flying the broom over Witch University---in which the brother and sister attend in…well, the title should explain where).  Otherwise it’s more of a lame teen movie with monsters being additional cast members.  Thank badness they stopped here.  11/3/2016

In conclusion:  I saw the first two Halloweentown movies about a decade ago and didn’t remember much other than being cheesy family-friendly movies.  My current opinion hasn’t necessarily changed.  Sure, I’ve seen worse.  Plus, they were all free on demand.  Overall, Halloweentown may be a nice place to visit briefly.  Every decade or so.

---Sean O.

The hills are aliiiiiiiiiive.....and they have eyes.....

The Hills Have Eyes (1977)                                        G

Pretty good “survival” horror flick from the late 70’s directed by the late Wes Craven.  Not the best of the decade or by the filmmaker but still has that gritty, harrowing aspect that made most of those post-“flower power” years so great.  I met the bald mutant that plays Pluto…nice guy.  I also met Wes Craven and Dee Wallace.  R.I.P. Wes.

The Hills Have Eyes, Part 2 (1985)                            EH

Subpar sequel picking up where the first left off, also directed by Mr. Craven.  Infamous amongst horror fans for having a recollection by a dog, this is ultimately pretty bad.  It almost fits the so-bad-its-good category.  It’s pretty much a typical slasher indicative of the decade without a mystery to the killer(s) identity.  Ironic coming from the same guy that would call out common tropes of the subgenre a decade later with the Scream franchise.

The Hills Have Eyes (2006)                                        OK

Just watch the original and add this to the unnecessary remake pile.  Made for modern audiences (ten years ago) but slower (?!) than the 1977 film.  The only thing I can say I liked better this time was the bloody violence.  The gore is just right, not too grotesque and not too discreet.  It doesn’t happen often but when it does, this horror freak was very happy.  The villains looked too much like cast members of the Wrong Turn series. Only instead of inhabiting the West Virginia woods, they’re desert-dwellers and not necessarily inbred but victims of radiation. 

The Hills Have Eyes 2 (2007)                                     B

Considering the original sequel to the original film wasn’t spectacular, did you really think this sequel to the not-so-great remake would be any good?  It doesn’t make the original sequel any better than it is, but I would absolutely tell people to waste their time with that over this garbage.  I can’t believe Wes Craven actually involved himself with this!  I have a feeling if this was made posthumously, he’d be rolling over and over in his grave!  9/14/2016

---Sean O.

Pre-Rings

Bad Taste                                                                    G

Peter Jackson.  The man behind the Lord of the Rings trilogy and the Hobbit movies.  Does anyone even know of his filmography before those fantasy epics?  Sure, you might remember The Frighteners, but do you remember before that?  This is his debut about an alien invasion in a small New Zealand town.  The aliens (which are actually pretty gnarly looking despite a few goofy aspects) initially disguise as humans to harvest Earthlings for their flesh to take back to their planet for food.  The aliens eating a bowl of green puke is definitely in bad taste (!) but this gory first-feature from the Academy Award-winning director is lots of fun.  His third feature, Dead Alive, is even gorier than this (in the unrated version) but do (also) check out that wild zombie flick that should be seen at least once.  One word:  Lawnmower.  7/28/2016

---Sean O.

Here There Be Tiger

Burning Bright                                                            VG/E

One of the best natural horror movies that came out less than ten years ago!  Here there be (real) tiger(s), no CGI (according to a featurette, the only CGI regrettably added was saliva coming from the feline’s mouth).  Briana Evigan (whom I love and would definitely fuck if I was straight, I like all of her movies even if they aren’t that great---Sorority Row, S. Darko---solely on her presence) is stuck inside her boarded-up home during a hurricane with her autistic little brother.  A tiger is let loose into the house, for reasons gradually explained, before the front door is nailed shut in time for the storm.  Keeping the majority of the film in one location with two actors works really well.  This film is proof that sometimes simplicity pays off.  Tiger POV shots are creepy and most of the film is suspenseful and realistically frightening.  I felt as if I were in the house the whole time.  This really could happen, most likely with deadlier results.  I’ve seen this about ten times and its never gotten old or less suspenseful.  7/28/2016

---Sean O.

What do you expect with a title like that?

Ticked-Off Trannies with Knives                                 OK/G

The title says it all.  Well, the Ticked-Off Trannies part applies to the whole thing; the with Knives part comes into play during the last 20 minutes (give or take).  Generally a fun movie with some slow and unnecessary parts.  Three trans women are attacked by three straight (transphobic and possibly homophobic) men at a warehouse putting one in a coma.  They eventually have their revenge with the titular weapons and the movie certainly delivers in that regard.  I don’t get turned on by trans peeps but after watching movies like this, I don’t think I ever want to tick one off either.  7/17/2016

---Sean O.

Careful who you pick on!

Elephant                                                                      VG

Loosely based on the Columbine massacre made four years after it happened.  Is it right to like a movie based on such a tragedy?  Probably not, but the media is supposed to be a (slightly skewed) reflection of reality.  Contains several of Gus Van Sant’s signature long takes but fits the scant 80-minutes.  I would’ve liked more stories but I somehow think it was properly approached with unknown actors to depict how ordinary lives can become shattered within seconds.  Powerful.  Deep.  Good stuff.  7/9/2016

---Sean O.