Category Archives: Horror

Hostel-2006

Hostel-2006

Director Eli Roth

Starring Jay Hernandez, Derek Richardson

Scott’s Review #951

Reviewed October 24, 2019

Grade: A-

During the early 2000’s the traditional horror genre catapulted into a sub-genre commonly referred to as “torture porn” led by the Saw franchise, debuting in 2004.

Hostel (2006) takes note and creates a terrifying production that holds up arguably the best in the bunch.

With Quentin Tarantino serving as producer and Eli Roth (Cabin Fever-2002) as the writer and director chair, one knows something memorable is in store.

The film is hardly everyone’s cup of tea but a delight for horror fanatics.

American college students Paxton (Jay Hernandez) and Josh (Derek Richardson) travel across Europe seeking adventure and dalliances. They are advised to visit Slovakia, where they are told the women are beautiful, picking up a new Icelandic acquaintance, Oli, along the way.

They encounter a strange Dutch businessman, a pack of rebellious street kids, two Asian girls, and two gorgeous European women, Natalya and Svetlana, as they travel.

When Oli disappears, and Paxton and Josh are drugged by the girls, events turn gruesome as the young men find themselves in a horrific remote dungeon facility where tourists are accosted and sold to willing buyers who brutalize and experiment on the victims.

Paxton must figure out a way to escape his peril and try to save any of the others before it is too late.

Hostel portrays the loneliness and insecurity of traveling abroad successfully as confusion and disorientation are commonalities that anyone who has traveled to a foreign country can relate to. The country of Slovakia (as an aside the film was shot in the Czech Republic) looks eerie and desolate with a quiet and cold tone.

As the group is preyed upon by a mysterious organization that tortures and kills kidnapped tourists, the thought and realism this conjures up adds to the fright.

In a unique measure, Roth turns the traditional gender stereotypes upside down. Based on an unbalanced scale females are killed much more often in horror films than males are. A refreshing point is the three principles are males, not females and we wonder which ones will “get theirs” and how.

Similarities thereby abound with Halloween (1978) when the trio were females and audiences watched their daytime adventures while salivating at the thought of the antics that would transpire when darkness finally falls.

Hostel kicks into high gear during the final thirty minutes once the blood-letting begins to take place. The dark and dingy dungeon is laden with corpses, severed limbs, and blood.

A melancholy scene occurs when one character, alive yet pretending to be dead, is affixed in a position where he must stare into the dead eyes of his friend. In another scene, one character must cut off the dangling eyeball of another so that they can escape the dungeon.

The scenes have equal power in different ways.

A slight irritant to Hostel is the prevalence of homophobia throughout the film. When the guys get into a scuffle with a long-haired bar patron and use a homophobic slur or a scene in which Paxton states “that’s so gay” as a negative seems unnecessary.

Is this to make the main characters less sympathetic or for the viewer to hope that they suffer a horrible fate? Or is Roth just known for homophobia?

In 2006 the LGBT community was becoming prominent in the film, so the inclusion is off-putting and out of line.

Hostel (2006) remains a superlative horror film that is a shock-fest and is still one of the best of its decade. The gruesome scenes still resonate well and watching the film more than a decade later it feels as fresh as when released with only the homophobic slurs needing to be removed.

Influence by Tarantino is always a fine element and his stamp is all over the film.

Followed by two sub-par sequels that tread the same blueprint of European travels gone deadly.

Ma-2019

Ma-2019

Director-Tate Taylor

Starring-Octavia Spencer, Diana Silvers

Scott’s Review #949

Reviewed October 22, 2019

Grade: B+

Marketed as a slasher film based on the trailers, Ma (2019) impressed me immensely as my expectations of a standard horror film were superseded by a more complex, perfectly-paced psychological thriller.

A fantastic performance by Octavia Spencer and dare I mention an Oscar-worthy one if this were a different type of film, the actress effortlessly brings a vulnerability to a not-so-easy role to play.

The finale is disappointing, and the film throws in a few too many stereotypes but is a very good effort.

Set somewhere in remote Ohio, but looking more like the southern United States, teenager Maggie Thomson (Diana Silvers) and her mom Erica (Juliette Lewis) return to Erica’s hometown after her marriage fails.

Reduced to a job as a cocktail waitress at a local casino, she encourages Maggie to make friends. Maggie falls into the popular crowd as Erica reconnects with high-school friends who are mostly the parents of Maggie’s new friends.

Sue Ann (Spencer) bonds with the cool kids by purchasing them booze and holding parties in her basement much to the displeasure of the parents.

The audience soon knows that something is not right with Sue Ann. She forbids the kids from ever venturing to her upstairs and slowly develops a needy attachment to the teens. Flashbacks begin to emerge as clues to her connection to the other parents and her plot for revenge.

The incorporation of a place in the house to avoid is a common horror gimmick that always works well. Inevitably, someone will venture to that area of the house and a secret is revealed. Ma is no different in this regard.

How wonderful to see more diversity, and specifically among the African-American population, represented in the horror genre. Typically, other than at best being cast as a best friend or in small supporting roles, the horror genre has been an all-white affair.

Thanks to Get Out (2017) and Us (2019) horror films have recently included all-black casts and have been tremendous hits. Let’s hold out hope that the Asian, Latino, and LGBTQ communities will receive more inclusion and bring freshness to a key cinematic genre.

The film belongs to Spencer.

The Oscar-winning actress must have had a fun time with this role and gets to let loose during many scenes. She goes from coquettish to maniacal, sometimes within the same scene, with flawless precision and gutsy acting decisions.

My favorite Sue Ann is the unhinged one as she slyly threatens to cut one male character’s genitalia off. She smirks and uses her large, expression-filled eyes to her advantage. Psycho has never looked so good!

The climax, so important in horror or thrillers, to follow through and capitalize on the build-up, ultimately fails in Ma. Once the big reveal surfaces and a childhood prank is exposed, the trick hardly seems worthy of a killing bonanza.

A mousy Sue Ann performed fellatio on a nerd instead of her crush. Even those involved on the outskirts are blamed and waiting twenty years to exact revenge on her tormentors (most of whom have repented) doesn’t seem plausible.

Ma (2019) contains a hefty cast of stalwarts but it’s Spencer who brings the sometimes-generic material and trivial conclusion to crackling life with her brilliant portrayal of a damaged woman.

Allison Janney, Lewis, and others add respectability when the film teeters too close to mediocrity with its teen character cliches, but the film excels when it focuses on a character-rich story and unexpected plot points.

Child’s Play-2019

Child’s Play-2019

Director-Lars Klevberg

Starring-Aubrey Plaza, Mark Hamill

Scott’s Review #948

Reviewed October 17, 2019

Grade: B

In the cinematic genre of horror, when a successful franchise has been dormant for a period it is an inevitability that sooner or later a reboot will be in the offerings.

Child’s Play (2019) resurrects the series of films popular in the late 1980s and early 1990s with a modern stamp.

The film is formulaic but adds a bit of macabre dark humor that lifts it above mediocrity, but the freshness turns too silly in the final act and neither the film nor the killer is scary.

Kaslan Corporation has launched a successful new global product called Buddi, a revolutionary line of high-tech dolls designed to be human-like companions to their owners, learning from their surroundings and acting accordingly.

Buddi dolls can also connect to and operate other Kaslan products, quickly becoming a phenomenon for kids worldwide. A disgruntled employee tweaks one of the dolls to turn sinister and then commits suicide.

Single mom Karen Barclay (Aubrey Plaza) works as a retail clerk in Chicago raising a thirteen-year-old son named Andy (Gabriel Bateman), who wears a hearing aid. New to the area he struggles to make friends, so Karen takes the defective doll from her store as a substitute friend and picks me up for her son.

As Andy makes acquaintances within the building and takes a disliking to Karen’s new beau Shane (David Lewis), Buddi names himself Chucky and seeks vengeance against those surrounding Andy, eventually turning on the boy.

Child’s Play takes a modernized approach by making the new Chucky a more high-tech doll, much advanced to the original Chucky from the 1988 debut.

2019 Chucky is creepier and more life-like than the original Chucky which provides the film with a fresh look rather than merely a retread of the 1980s.

Set in present times the film feels relevant and glossy. New Chucky is more human than old Chucky with more capabilities and room for thought and deduction making him more devious.

A treat for Star Wars (1977) fans and any fan of cinema history is the inclusion of Mark Hamill as the voice of Chucky. While Hamill’s voice is not sinister nor particularly distinguishable to the naked ear, the star power adds fun and familiarity, a throwback and ode to film lore.

Hamill’s voice is pleasant and kind which adds a foreboding and sinister quality.

The film has some clever moments and bits of chilling dark humor that make it a fun experience. When Shane becomes the first victim of Chucky’s wrath and meets a dire fate at the hands of a tiller while hanging Christmas lights, he is beheaded and Chucky leaves the head in a disgusted Andy’s room.

In hilarious and laugh-out-loud form, the head ends up is a wrapped Christmas present for Andy’s elderly neighbor Doreen who props it on her mantle until she can open it.

Bryan Tyree Henry, known for his prominent turns in Widows (2018) and the wonderful If Beale Street Could Talk (2018) adds comedy and a nice guy edge as Andy’s neighbor, Detective Mike Norris.

Plaza, like Karen, is given limited material and unable to shine in her role, not seeming old enough nor motherly enough to add much realism. A big fan of the actress, she is more talented than this part allows her to be.

The film misfires with the cliched misunderstandings and incorrect assumptions that Andy is responsible for the deaths Chucky caused.  Andy’s two apartment buddies are caricatures, and the big finale set inside the retail store is disappointing.

Chucky brilliantly hacks the Buddi toys on the shelves and chaos ensues as parents and children are massacred as a stampede tries to escape the store. The scene does not work as well as a climax should.

Sticking closely to script and offering a predictable formula film the 1988 film Child’s Play is remade in 2019 with added star power. Familiar faces (and voices) Plaza, Henry, and Hamill rise the film slightly above B-movie status, though the dumb finale made me tune out a bit after the main kills were over.

I doubt the film performed well enough at the box office to secure the known actor’s returns and hopefully, this will be a one-and-done project.

IT: Chapter Two-2019

IT: Chapter Two- 2019

Director-Andres Muschietti

Starring-James McAvoy, Jessica Chastain, Bill Hader

Scott’s Review #939

Reviewed September 11, 2019

Grade: B+

A companion piece to the first chapter, simply named It (2017), and an adaptation of the famous and chilling 1986 novel by horror novelist, Stephen King, It: Chapter Two (2019) is a successful culmination of the vast story and will please many fans.

A box-office hit mixing straight-ahead horror with the supernatural, and a tad of adventure mixed in, the film is to be appreciated in many ways, though I slightly prefer the first chapter by measure.

Set in present times (2016), twenty-seven years after the first film took place, the Losers’ Club kids are now nearing middle-age, in their forties.

The most prominent characters in the group, Beverly Marsh (Jessica Chastain), Bill Denbrough (James McAvoy), and Richie Tozier (Bill Hader) are summoned by childhood chum Mike Hanlon, to return to the sleepy town of Derry, Maine after a series of murders begin at the summer carnival. Each of them except for Mike has fled the small town and found success in bustling cities, living prosperous lives.

Because of a promise made as kids, the entire group reunites except for Stanley Uris, who chooses to fatally slit his wrists in a bathtub rather than return and face evil Pennywise the Clown (Bill Skarsgard).

The six members wrestle with their demons and past mistakes while Pennywise takes the form of human beings and objects to terrorize the group, providing imagined and frenzied scares while they scramble to perform a Native American ritual to destroy the beast.

It is difficult to write a successful review of It: Chapter Two as merely a stand-alone film since the two chapters are meant to be one cohesive long film.

Filmed at the same time the pacing and the continuity are what make the experience an enjoyable one. Key is the interspersing of many scenes as a hybrid of childhood and adult sequences which gives the film a cohesive package.

This style is a treat for viewers having seen the first chapter two years ago. After the hoopla dies down, patient fans would do well to watch both chapters in sequence in back-to-back sittings for an undoubtedly pleasant experience.

Director Andres Muschietti wisely places focus on the characters so that the film is character-driven rather than plot-driven, a risk with anything in the horror genre.

Each of the six adults resembles the six kids in physical appearance which makes the story believable. A major score is a focus on each character individually, both in present times and in the past. Each faces insecurity, guilt, or mistakes making them complex.

At a running time of two hours and forty-nine minutes the film can take its time with character exploration and depth.

A nice add-on and deviating slightly from the King novel are a modern LGBTQ presence. It is implied (though I admittedly missed this when I saw the film) that Richie (Hader) is either gay or wrestling with his sexuality.

The pivotal final scenes depict Richie’s undying love for his lifelong friend Eddie as one saves the other’s life only to sacrifice his own. The fact that the love is unrequited or unrealized is both sad and heartbreaking.

The gay-bashing opening sequence of Adrian Mellon and his boyfriend is quite the difficult watch as is the lack of any comeuppance for their perpetrators, but the scene is true to King’s novel.

It is also a jarring reminder that in 2019, small towns are not always the safest place for the LGBTQ community as far too often small towns breed small minds.

The film could contain more jumps and scares than it does and teeters a bit too long in the overall running time. While the focus on the character is great, the final climax and the battle with Pennywise is a slight letdown and feels predictable.

The film is not scary in terms of horror but does have nice special effects and visual razzle-dazzle, especially concerning Pennywise. The creepy clown is less scary than in the first chapter but perhaps this is due to becoming more familiar with him.

A treat for eagle-eyed fans is the cameo appearance by legendary author Stephen King. As a cantankerous pawn shop owner, he sells Bill the relic bicycle he had enjoyed in his youth.

For bonus points, Muschietti treats fans to a scene including filmmaker Peter Bogdanovich, who cameos as the director of the film based on Bill’s novel.

It: Chapter Two (2019) provides good entertainment and will please fans of the horror genre and the famous author since the film is very true to the novel.

As a modern horror experience, the film is a solid win though not without slight missteps. Superior in depth and character development to most films in the same vein, it is to be enjoyed and appreciated.

The Curse of La Llorona-2019

The Curse of La Llorona-2019

Director-Michael Chaves

Starring-Linda Cardellini

Scott’s Review #937

Reviewed August 29, 2019

Grade: C+

The Curse of La Llorona (2019) is a modern-day horror flick that possesses all the standard and expected trimmings that a genre film of this ilk usually has.

The story is left undeveloped with many possibilities unexplored in favor of a by-the-numbers experience. Linda Cardellini, a wonderful actress, above the material she is given, does her best to spin straw into gold but comes up empty-handed.

It is the sixth installment in The Conjuring Universe franchise.

The film does have jumps and frights galore and a creepy ghost/spirit character that is scary, but more was expected from this film which left me ultimately disappointed.

First-time director Michael Chaves is a novice, so a bit of leniency should be given as he develops a limited product, but he could have a strong future ahead of him if he works on story elements rather than focus on merely scare tactics.

In 1673 Mexico, a family happily plays in a field when one of the boys suddenly witnesses his mother drowning his brother, soon suffering the same fate.

This incident becomes part of Mexican folklore and is subsequently feared by many. In present times (1973), caseworker Anna (Cardellini) is sent to investigate a woman who has locked her two sons in a room. Despite the woman’s claims that she is trying to save their lives, Anna brings them into police custody.

When the boys are later found drowned, the woman curses Anna, whose two young children are now in danger.

The positives are that Chaves makes a competent film. It is not bad and provides a level of familiarity, creaking doors, cracking mirrors, an evil spirit named “The Weeping Woman”, are good and provide a scare or two at just the right moments.

Characters frequently see the spirit through a reflection and since the film is set almost completely at night, this tactic is successful.

Cardellini, garnering recent fame for her role in the Oscar-winning film Green Book (2018), undoubtedly signed on for The Curse of La Llorona before all the Oscar wins.

The actress gives it to her all but can hardly save the film, though she does provide the professionalism that raises the film above a terrible experience. Not nearly enough praise will be given to the young child actors playing Anna’s kids.

Largely one-note and lacking any evident experience, ironically, they mirror Chaves’s own inexperience. They react to the scenes as they are directed but never add any depth or authenticity to their performances.

Besides Cardellini and the horror elements, The Curse of La Llorona lacks much shine or substance. The plot and characters are forgettable, and the viewer is left shrugging his or her shoulders once the film concludes, largely forgetting the production thirty minutes later.

The story, based on folklore, is weak.

The audience is expected to believe the spirit killed her own children and now roams the earth looking for other sacrificial pairs of children so that she may bring hers back from the dead?

In one perplexing sequence, the Weeping Woman softens when looking at Anna’s kids, her demonic face reveals how she once was a beautiful woman. She suddenly changes course and reverts to the evil spirit she had been.

Granted the special effects are impressive, but this is one example of a missed opportunity. Why couldn’t we be given a meatier backstory of the motivations of the woman?

Other misses are the 1970’s Los Angeles time-period- a feathered hairstyle and tight sweater worn by Anna, a clip of an old television show, and a car or two overlooking the City of Angels hardly appreciates the decade or the metropolis.

Especially laughable are the modern hairstyles and looks of the children, including the kid from the seventeenth century.

Any connection to The Conjuring (2013) or Annabelle (2014) is limited as one character (Father Perez) appearing briefly holding the Annabelle doll barely warrants mention.

The Curse of La Llorona (2019) may only be a blueprint of what director Michael Chaves can build on in his career, and a bright future for him is not out of the question.

Building on The Conjuring franchise is a good place to start with a certain audience sure to see this film. He ought to take his basics and create films with more depth, character development, and twists and turns.

Pet Sematary-2019

Pet Sematary-2019

Director-Kevin Kolsch, Dennis Widmyer

Starring-Jason Clarke, John Lithgow

Scott’s Review #923

Reviewed July 26, 2019

Grade: B

In the age of the movie remake, especially within the horror genre, it was only a matter of time before Pet Sematary, first made in 1989, would resurface with its fangs bared.

Paramount Pictures offers up Pet Sematary (2019), a by-the-numbers affair perfect for viewing on a late Saturday night. It is an improvement over the disappointing ’89 version but hardly recreates the genre, feeling more like a remake than offering much in the way of new story-telling or frightening effects.

The conclusion is rather disappointing offering a hybrid of slasher meets zombie.

To compare either film to the chilling and suspenseful page-turner written by esteemed novelist Stephen King would be ridiculous. The book is a quick read that will leave its reader breathless and scared, perhaps even fearing their pets, so the bar is set way too high for a cinematic offering to match up with.

The book delves much more into the feelings and emotions of all the principal characters, something that is severely limited with the film.

The Creed family, Louis (Jason Clarke), Rachel (Amy Seimetz), and children Ellie and Gage move from bustling Boston, Massachusetts, to rural Maine to allow Louis the opportunity to practice medicine at a university hospital.

Their friendly neighbor Jud Crandall (John Lithgow) befriends Ellie after she stumbles across a funeral procession of children taking a deceased dog to a cemetery called Pet Sematary. He warns her and Rachel that the woods are dangerous. When tragedy strikes the family, the cemetery unleashes a supernatural force contained in an ancient burial ground that sits beside it.

The first half of the film is superior to the second as the build-up offers more perilous moments than when all hell breaks loose. Mysterious is when an accident victim in Louis’s care dies and begins to show up in his visions warning him of something sinister.

The victim is mangled and bloody and quite frightening are these foreboding scenes. When a curious Ellie traipses throughout the woods with curious wonderment the audience is nervous about what (or who) she might stumble upon.

The film also gets props for the suspenseful birthday party scene that ends in a grisly death. The scene begins cheerily with lively party music and festive balloons amid a warm afternoon in summery Maine.

In a clear example of foreshadowing, earlier in the film, Louis curses the truck drivers that drive at reckless speed past his house. Excitedly running after their cat named Church, Ellie and Gage pay no attention to the looming truck with the texting driver until it is too late.

The scene drips with good terror.

After one family member is struck down by the speeding tractor-trailer the predictability surfaces. Jud has already warned Louis that “sometimes dead is better”, but we know Louis will surrender to temptation out of desperation and tempt the bad spirits.

When the once dead character returns with a droopy eye and calm deviousness, the film becomes a standard slasher film and is not as compelling.

The final thirty minutes feel very rushed as if the careful pacing of the buildup is all for naught. As in most horror films, now deemed a cliche, the last sequence allows for a sequel if box-office profits are hefty enough. I do not recall a similar ending in the chilling novel or any reference to the family living out their days as a family of the undead.

The obvious attempt at a zombie reference was unsatisfying and much different from what I expected.

From a casting point of view, Jason Clarke (usually cast in supporting roles) gives a strong performance as the main character. He is a good father figure and provides charisma to the film. Well-mannered but also somewhat outdoorsy and a “regular joe” he is intelligent and humorous with the kids.

The child actors are fine but hardly the main attraction and Seimetz as the mother, Rachel, is not the best casting choice. She plays the challenging role much too brooding and angry for my taste, especially given she is written as the most sympathetic of all the characters.

Pet Sematary (2019) is a satisfactory horror offering with a solid first half that teeters into difficult to believe territory rather quickly. A stalwart veteran like Lithgow helps immensely, giving the film some respectability, and a child actor cast in a pivotal role is enough and doesn’t ruin the experience.

There is little reason to see the film a second time but recommended is to snuggle with the King novel for some good scares.

Eyes Without a Face-1960

Eyes Without a Face-1960

Director Georges Franju

Starring Pierre Brasseur, Alida Valli

Scott’s Review #922

Reviewed July 23, 2019

Grade: A

Eyes Without a Face (1960) is a macabre and twisted French-Italian horror film co-written and directed by Georges Franju based on a novel of the same name by Jean Redon.

The film cover art (see above) is flawless and terrifying, inducing the creeps by only giving it a glimpse causing the recipient curiosity, attempting to analyze what the meaning behind it could be.

The film is nestled into a short one-hour and thirty-minute package but that is more than enough time to scare the audience to death with many fantastic and gruesome elements, severely limiting the gore, which only adds to the horrific nature.

The film was highly controversial when released in 1960 because of the subject matter at hand and was subsequently either loved or reviled among its audiences.

What makes Eyes Without a Face, so riveting is the empathy for the characters and the measures gone to right wrongs, despite the main character being undeniably crazy.

The complex emotions of guilt and obsession are commonalities making it a layered and complex horror film appearing on many Top Ten genre lists.

The film is not for the faint of heart.

Doctor Genessier (Pierre Brassier) is a brilliant and successful physician who specializes in plastic surgery. After a vicious car accident that he is to blame for, he attempts to repair the ruined face of his daughter, Christiane (Edith Scob), a victim of the wreck.

But his plan to give his daughter her looks back involves kidnapping young girls and removing their faces. He is aided in his machinations by his assistant, Louise (Alida Valli), who kidnaps the young woman and helps him in the laboratory acting as a surrogate mother to Christiane.

Louise aids Génessier partly because of his help in restoring her damaged face in events that happened before the film begins.

Scob is the stand-out character, containing an innocent and quietly melancholy existence as she is the clear victim of the story. Her defeated posture while resiliently hopeful and demure is complex for an actress to carry and she defines grace and poise.

Brasseur and Valli, the villains of the film, each deliver the goods in different ways. Valli, haunting in her best horror effort, Suspiria (1977), is mesmerized by her doctor and savior so that the relationship is almost cult-like. Brasseur, while devious, is strangely heroic too, as he steals lives to save other lives, so his character is extraordinarily complex.

The surgery scenes are chilling featuring white, starchy uniforms worn by a doctor, assistant, and victim. The scenes could almost be mechanical tutorials offered to first-rate medical students with scholarly intentions if this were not a horror film, the look is so documentary style.

Genessier calmly cuts an entire circular length of his victim as a hint of blood slowly oozes down the sides of her face in an almost tender fashion.

The film is not the 1980s slasher film image that encompasses non-horror film-goers’ preconceptions and, made in 1960, contains a somber yet gorgeous texture.

The best scene occurs when one of Genessier’s victims, lying on a gurney, comes to and gazes at a figure leaning close to her. The camera turns to the figure revealing a blurry but recognizable image of Christiane, sans the face-like mask she usually wears throughout the film.

As the victim shrieks in horror, Christiane slowly backs away from her amid a sunken feeling of pain and heartbreak, remembering how much of a freak she must appear to others. The scene is sad and grotesque at the same time.

Horror films often get bad raps, but poetic and stylized horror films are a diamond in the rough.

Eyes Without a Face (1960) achieves its place in the cinematic archives with brilliant black and white cinematography entrenched in a Gothic, chilling story with characters whose motivations can be dissected and studied long after the film ends.

This is a type of film that keeps the viewer thinking and deserves repeated viewings to fully capture all the plentiful gems that it offers.

Witchfinder General-1968

Witchfinder General-1968

Director Michael Reeves

Starring Vincent Price, Ian Ogilvy, Hilary Dwyer

Scott’s Review #904

Reviewed May 31, 2019

Grade: B+

Witchfinder General (1968) is a macabre horror film that provides an enormous atmosphere amid a gruesome story centering around the theme of witch-hunting.

By the late 1960’s violence and bloodletting in cinema had become more lenient and acceptable so the film takes full advantage of the timing with an unusual amount of torture, cruelty, and brutality.

The mid-seventeenth-century English period is highly effective as is the ghastly religious angle, making for effective film making.

Vincent Price is delicious in any film he appears in, having amassed over one-hundred cinematic credits alone, to say nothing of his television appearances.

Practically trademarking his over-the-top comic wittiness and campy performances, his role in Witchfinder General may be his best yet as he plays the character straight and deadly serious.

This succeeds in making his character chilling and maybe the best role of his career despite numerous disputes with the director, Michael Reeves, over motivation.

During the English Civil War, Mathew Hopkins (Price) took advantage of the unrest in the land, profiting from witch-hunting. He travels from town to town accusing the unfortunate of witchcraft until they are mercilessly executed after which he is paid handsomely.

Matthew is assisted in the accusations and torments by John Stearne (Robert Russell) a man his equal in brutality. The knowledge that these two men were real-life historical figures makes the action even more difficult to watch.

When he arrests and tortures Father Lowes (Rupert Davies), Lowes’s niece’s fiancé (Ian Ogilvy) decides to put an end to Hopkins’s sleazy practices and goes on a quest to seek vengeance.

The mixture of a romantic love story as Richard Marshall (Ogilvy) and Sara (Hilary Dwyer) marry and a revenge tale as Marshall vows to destroy Hopkins is a nice combination as are the numerous outdoor scenes.

Witchfinder General has much going on and the pieces all come together.

The most horrific moments of the film come during the death scenes as the victims, who logical viewers can ascertain are innocent. The characters are merely perceived as peculiar, therefore deemed to be up to witchcraft, and do not stand much of a chance despite their endless pleas and cries.

Before they are murdered they are typically tortured until they ultimately confess to crimes out of desperation and perceived relief. The common mode of death is either hanging or burning to death.

In one sickening scene, victims are assumed to be witches if they can swim and then are subsequently burned at the stake; if they drown they are innocent, but of course die anyway.

One unfortunate victim has her hands and legs bound and drowns, followed by one of the witch hunters professing how her death was unfortunate because she was innocent all along.

In horror films, the most frightening situations are the ones that can conceivably occur in real-life whether it be a home-invasion, a psycho with a knife, or burning at the stake in the 1600s.

The fact that witch-hunting did happen is shocking and resoundingly makes Witchfinder General creepier especially given that most scenes take place in the daytime. Anyone can create a studio monster, but the realism of the events is the key to the film’s power.

As an aside, while watching the film I was keen to keep in mind how many countries still treat certain classes and groups of people differently, or even oppress them in the name of God.

Food for thought and an additional component that makes Witchfinder General relevant.

The story and the screenplay are not brilliant, nor do they necessarily need to be given the treasures existing among the elements. The writing is your basic villains getting their comeuppance with a love story thrown in- standard fare and adequate.

While pointing out some negatives is “Witchfinder General” the best title that Reeves could come up with, or anyone else for that matter? The title does not exactly roll off the tongue nor does the renamed United States release, The Conqueror Worm sound much better.

Witchfinder General (1968) is not an easy watch and the faint of heart may want to avoid this one, but the realism and the rich atmosphere make it a success.

The lit candles, an old castle, potent red and blue costumes, and one of the greatest horror legends of all time make this a must-watch among horror fans.

Taste of Fear-1961

Taste of Fear-1961

Director Seth Holt

Starring Susan Strasberg, Ronald Lewis

Scott’s Review #901

Reviewed May 21, 2019

Grade: A-

Though Taste of Fear (1961) is a Hammer Production, a British film company known for hefty offerings in the horror genre, the film plays more like an intense and chilling thriller with a Gothic, ghostly feel rather than a full-throttled horror display.

The title was changed for US marketing purposes to Scream of Fear and neither the US nor the UK title quite works, both lacking the appropriate pizzazz that the film warrants. The result is a razor edge spellbinder with marvelous cinematography and more than a few surprise twists.

The action gets off to an exciting start as a female body is suddenly discovered in the waters of coastal Italy; a young woman has taken her own life by drowning.

Soon after a wheelchair-bound heiress, Penny Appleby (Susan Strasberg) arrives at her father’s estate in the lavish French Riviera to bond with her new stepmother, Jane (Ann Todd), and await her father’s return from vacation.

It is explained that the deceased woman was a close friend of Penny’s.

Penny distrusts her stepmother immensely but is not sure why since the woman is more than accommodating during her stay.

Immediately, strange events begin to occur at a rapid rate, most notably seeing her father’s corpse in odd places around the house and the grounds. The body disappears when Penny calls for help leaving the members of the household questioning her sanity and Penny starting to agree.

She befriends the handsome family chauffeur, Robert (Ronald Lewis), and the pair become determined to figure out what is going on.

Cleverly, the audience knows that something is amiss but not what the entire puzzle will add up to, which is a great part of the viewing pleasure. Director Seth Holt enjoys toying with his viewers, keeping them guessing at every dark turn.

The biggest questions are these: If Penny’s father is dead where is the body being hidden? Who is responsible and why? Why does Jane leave the house for drives every night? What does the family doctor (Christopher Lee) have to do with the story?

The best visual aspect of Taste of Fear is the black-and-white cinematography.  This quality adds foreboding and brooding elements during the entire short running time of eighty minutes.

The grand estate with its creepy nooks and crannies provides plenty of prop potential. A grand piano that seems to play by itself is pivotal to the story as is a murky pool, shockingly deep and unkempt for such a residence. Finally, the mansion boathouse that may or may not contain lit candles takes center stage during the film.

The storytelling is quick-paced and robust, never dragging. Layers unfold as the story progresses, but instead of overkill, the developments are necessary as the conclusion comes into view.

Assumptions as to which character’s motivations are devious begin to unravel. The illustrious dialogue crackles with spunk so that by the time we figure out what is going on we scratch our heads in disbelief finally surrendering to the film’s manipulations.

Where Taste of Fear falters slightly is only when an attempt to make the story completely add up is pondered. Liberties must be taken, happily so, as what could be deemed silly or superfluous instead results in thrilling fun.

Only once or twice I thought the setup was too contrived, but just as quickly tabled the inquisition instead of choosing to revel in the story.

The more than adequate cast performs their roles with professionalism and energy, always careful to make the unbelievable believable. Any film starring the legendary Christopher Lee is worthy of praise despite the actor only has a supporting role.

Justice is eventually served though as his character becomes central to the plot.

A fun fact is that Lee was quoted as saying: “Taste of Fear was the best film that I was in that Hammer ever made. It had the best director, the best cast, and the best story.” This is not to be easily dismissed given the actor’s catalog of treasures.

A forgotten delight, Taste of Fear (1961) is a prime example of a film that does everything correctly.

An excellent story, Gothic gloominess, and a foray for Hammer Production company into the then-new genre of the psychological thriller. The piece is never over-the-top and is a production sure to make Hitchcock himself quite impressed.

Never Take Sweets from a Stranger-1960

Never Take Sweets from a Stranger-1960

Director Cyril Frankel

Starring Patrick Allen, Gwen Watford

Scott’s Review #900

Reviewed May 17, 2019

Grade: A

Never Take Sweets from a Stranger (modified to Never Take Candy from a Stranger in the US for marketing purposes) is a 1960 British film, directed by Cyril Frankel and released by Hammer Film Productions.

The film contains brilliant cinematography, and a cerebral quality, and is quite daring for the time made. It combines a story of pedophilia with manipulations of the legal system allowing those to get away with this most heinous crime because of their status.

Despite the production company name and marketed as horror, the film is more left of center than the traditional genre film.

The locale is a small, sleepy lakefront Canadian town, seemingly like an everyday US town. The Carter family (Peter, Sally, and 9-year-old daughter Jean) have just moved to allow Peter a fantastic job opportunity as the school principal.

Jean confides to her parents that while playing in the woods, she and her friend, Lucille, went into the house of an elderly man who asked them to remove their clothes and dance naked for him in return for some candy, which they did.

Peter and Sally are appalled and decide to file a complaint. The elderly man is one of the wealthiest and most influential in the town, the respected Clarence Olderberry, Sr.

Surprisingly, Jean’s experience is downplayed, and the Carter family is largely shunned by the town. As a trial against Olderberry commences, Jean is ridiculed on the stand and her story ripped to shreds by attorneys.

After Olderberry is acquitted he pursues Jean and Lucille in the woods eventually catching the girls during a harrowing lakefront chase and murdering Lucille. Jean escapes and the truth is revealed to the shocked and devastated town.

The cast of Never Take Sweets from a Stranger are not household names, but each gives a fine performance.

Patrick Allen and Gwen Watford as the parents are well-cast and believable. They are upstanding people but strangers in the town, wanting to protect their daughter without smothering.

Felix Aylmer as old-man Olderberry plays the role not as dastardly or menacing but by providing glimpses of pain and sympathy. The audience is unclear whether the man suffers from dementia or Alzheimer’s disease, perhaps not even knowing what he has done.

The black-and-white cinematography is gorgeous, surreal, and tremendously effective.

With ghostly tones, the film gets off to a mysterious and prominent start as we see Jean and Lucille casually playing in the woods, startled to glance up at a menacing mansion (perfect for a Hammer production) to see elderly Olderberry leering at them with binoculars.

The lakefront sequences and the chase through the woods are among the best at providing superior camera angles.

As it’s Lucille who talks Jean into entering Oldberry’s house we presume she has done this type of thing before. She knows Oldberry will provide the girls with candy, but does she understand this comes at a price?

Immediately there is a shred of doubt placed on the children’s innocence- ever so quickly. This decision by the film along with the representation of Oldberry is pivotal to casting even the slightest doubt on the motivations or decisions of the main characters.

Comparisons to the brilliant The Night of the Hunter (1955) must be made. Themes of child abuse, young children in front and center roles, a creepy lake with a prominent boat, and macabre adults are prevalent, at least to some degree, in both films.

Additionally, both films were shunned at the time of release, misunderstood, and later rediscovered, subsequently seen as treasures of brilliant film making.  Measuring both films as tragedies is also obvious; each results in pain and sadness for the children involved.

Never Take Sweets from a Stranger (1960) is a film released decades ahead of its time that has taken years for its brilliance to be recognized and appreciated, adding nuances that are admirable and thought-provoking to the viewer.

The subtle qualities make this film a world of its own. Sadly, the very best of films are often overlooked, marinating the flavorful juices rather than a sudden bombastic reaction.

In 1960 the world was not ready for this film but is now poised to be remembered as a brave, disturbing, and relevant film offering.

Scream and Scream Again-1969

Scream and Scream Again-1969

Director Gordon Hessler

Starring Vincent Price, Christopher Lee, Peter Cushing

Scott’s Review #899

Reviewed May 16, 2019

Grade: B+

Any film that features horror heavyweights and great actors like Vincent Price, Christopher Lee, and Peter Cushing is well worth the price of admission for the name status alone. Each is a mainstay attraction in his own right and combined, results in an orgy of riches.

Scream and Scream Again (1969) sputters by limiting the on-screen interaction between the actors but after a reflective pause, I realize the picture is to be revered for its creativity and use of intersecting plotlines into a thrashing crescendo of a surprise ending.

The audience is offered three segments of the story, each periodically revisited as stand-alone segments that culminate into overlapping components.

An athletic runner trots along the streets of London suddenly suffering from an attack only to awaken in the hospital with no legs.

Elsewhere, a deadly intelligence operative reports back to his repressed Eastern European country only to murder his commanding officer with a deadly paralyzing hold.

Finally, a London detective investigates the brutal deaths of several young women in metropolitan nightclubs.

Cushing, reduced to merely a cameo-sized role as the ill-fated officer, is barely worth mentioning and adds little to the film besides appearing in it.

Lee, like Fremont, the head of Britain’s intelligence agency, plays a straight role with not much zest.

Price, with the meatiest role as a mysterious doctor specializing in limb replacement, can give anyone the creeps with his scowling and eerie mannerisms, but the film strikes out by wasting the talents of the other legendary actors.

The film is not at all what a fan of Hammer horror would expect especially based on the horror familiar cast and the gory-sounding title.

Heaping buckets of blood or ghoulish vampires are what was on the anticipated menu but that does not mean the film fails to deliver. It may not please a fan of traditional horror films since the genres of political espionage and science-fiction come heavily into play.

However, the fantastic and peculiar nightclub serial killer storyline will satisfy fans eager for a good kill or two.

My initial reaction to Scream and Scream Again was that of over-complicated writing and too much going on simultaneously, especially for a film of the said horror genre.

After the film concludes and the surprise ending is revealed I realized that the numerous tidbits are necessary to achieve the desired result and events will make the viewer ponder when the film ends.

Not to ruin the big reveal but the filmmakers borrow a healthy dose of Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956) in a more macabre way, naturally.

Fans of the 1960s British television series The Avengers will be pleased with Scream and Scream Again as a similar tone exists with both.

The distinctive musical soundtrack, trendy for the 1960s period works well, and the nightclub sequences and some of the detectives feel reminiscent of the show.

The feel of the film is not limited to an episodic television story but contains a similar style.

High British 1960s fashion is also prevalent and pleasing to the eye.

A couple of supporting characters strike a fascination in small and almost entirely non-verbal performances.

A sexy red-headed hospital nurse with superhuman powers and a penchant for removing limbs, combined with a brooding and mysterious serial killer provides dubious intrigue as to who the true characters are.

What is their motivation? Do they work for someone or something sinister? Questions like these will keep the viewer occupied and thirsty for an explanation.

Bizarrely, British film and television director Gordon Hessler crafts an implausible yet fascinating story that keeps the viewer guessing.

Featuring horror superstars Price, Cushing, and Lee would seem like an assured horror masterpiece but the star’s limited time on-screen brings the overall project down a notch.

Scream and Scream Again (1969) still achieves a good measure of worthy entertainment.

Invasion of the Body Snatchers-1956

Invasion of the Body Snatchers-1956

Director Don Siegel

Starring Kevin McCarthy, Dana Wynter

Scott’s Review #895

Reviewed May 8, 2019

Grade: B+

Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956), released during the mid-1950s, a time of post-War World II unity and prosperity in America where neighborhoods snuggled cheerily by the fireplaces with nary a care in the world, sought to make the public paranoid and it worked.

Thanks to a foreboding premise audiences got to ponder the possibilities of pod people cloning human beings and invading the planet, scaring the daylights out of the masses, and resonating with critics.

Playing like an extended episode of the Twilight Zone, and to the film’s credit, it preceded the television series, at a brief one hour and twenty-minute running time the film is successful at achieving thought-provoking post-film dialogue and has been crowned with the cult-classic status along with similar creepy themed genre films that blossomed during the 1950s.

Set in the fictional sunny California town of Santa Mira, the film gets off to an exciting start as we witness a screaming man in an emergency room attempting to be calmed by staff. The harried man claims to be a doctor and recounts, via flashbacks, the events leading up to the present day.

Our main character, Dr. Miles Bennell (Kevin McCarthy), and his ex-girlfriend Becky (Dana Wynter) team up after several of his patients report relatives acting robotic and downright strange.

When half-created bodies in pods are soon discovered, Miles and Becky know there is something amiss in their town and race to figure out the mystery of the “pod people” while most of the town turns into emotionless human-like beings.

The big revelation is that the epidemic is caused by an extraterrestrial life form. Their intention they explain is for humanity to lose all emotions and a sense of individuality, creating a simplistic, stress-free world.

An interesting facet of Invasion of the Body Snatchers is how time has changed the reaction to the film. In 1956 the thought of aliens taking over the world seemed plausible and frightening since the man had not yet walked on the moon and astronomy was a just new venture.

The peaceful tranquility of the United States of America was in danger of being overtaken, the film exclaimed, and viewers fell for the scare tactics.

The film was created to be a political allegory and boy did this sure work.

Decades later, the vibe of the United States is more integrated and flourished with more diversity and acceptance of other cultures and beings. The country is also more chaotic, so the invasion of the “pod people” is less scary and perhaps even more embraced by those living in Malcontent.

Invasion of the Body Snatchers, therefore, suffers from some poor aging and a message rethink and teeters on feeling dated.

The acting is marginally good if not spectacular, but it does not need to be Oscar-worthy to have the desired effect. The actors deliver their lines with a dramatic gusto successful in providing the troubled paranoia of the suburban American to audiences sure to be on the edge of their seats as the drama unfolds.

The characters never think outside the box; only in straightforward terms so the motivations are earnest.

The black and white cinematography is palpable yet subdued, the lack of colors providing mystique that was ample for the times. The 1950’s while a wonderful time for film was also a less edgy time for cinema.

The 1960s brought fewer restrictions and therefore more shocking elements but Invasion of the Body Snatchers is compartmentalized, feeling more like a long episodic television thriller.

Double-billed with the equally frightening The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951) would make for delicious 1950s science-fiction viewing.

I remain partial to the stunning vibrantly colored 1978 remake, superior film-making, and more layered production values, but the original Invasion of the Body Snatchers holds its own and is a recommended watch.

Us-2019

Us-2019

Director-Jordan Peele

Starring-Lupita Nyong’o, Winston Duke

Scott’s Review #882

Reviewed April 1, 2019

Grade: A

Hot on the heels of his critically acclaimed and shockingly Oscar-nominated horror film Get Out (2017) Jordan Peele does it again with an even more thought-provoking creation.

Us (2019) combines classic horror elements with macabre and insightful qualities, crafting an ambitious project that can be dissected and discussed at length following the climactic and psychologically perplexing ending.

One thing is for sure; Peele has earned his spot among the most influential and elite directors circling Hollywood.

The film begins in 1986 as an event entitled Hands Across America- a publicity campaign encouraging people to hold hands to create a human chain to fight hunger and poverty- gripped the United States. Nine-year-old Adelaide Thomas goes on vacation to Santa Cruz, California with her parents only to wander off into a deserted house of mirrors.

When she meets her doppelganger, she is terrified beyond comprehension and requires therapy to resume a normal life.

Events return to the present day as Adelaide (now played by Lupita Nyong’o) is married to Gabe Wilson (Winston Duke) with two young children, Zora and Jason. Coaxed into a weekend getaway to none other than Santa Cruz to visit their wealthy friends Josh and Kitty Tyler (Tim Heidecker and Elisabeth Moss), Adelaide is apprehensive about the trip with a dreading sensation that her doppelganger is returning to get her.

When a strange family dressed in red jumpsuits appear on Wilson’s driveway the plot transforms into a bizarre direction especially since the family looks exactly like the Wilsons.

Us is extremely layered and reminiscent of the expression “peeling back the onion” in analysis and discussion possibilities. For starters, a character thought to be one person is another causing the audience to spin into confusion and not know who they were rooting for or not rooting for all along.

The astounding questions are endless and in Peele’s brilliant fashion can be asked at different times during the film. Why do the doppelgangers exist? What do they want? What do Hands Across America have to do with anything? What do the rabbits symbolize?

One gruesome scene and a favorite is the barbaric scene when the Tyler’s are suddenly attacked by their doppelgangers- home invasion style.

Reminiscent of the infamous Charles Manson murders, the family is slain quickly and mercilessly as the audience is left agape at the brutal slaughter. So much happens in this scene, first and foremost is the realization that there are more doppelgangers than we originally thought.

To lighten the mood a bit, Peele adds morbid comic relief as the family’s voice-controlled Siri system misunderstands the dying victim’s plea to call for police and mistakenly plays “F#@$ the Police” by N.W.A. instead.

Nyong’o has the most opportunities to showcase her acting ability by tackling two very different types of roles. As Adelaide, she is kind, capable, and your typical suburban Mom but as her doppelganger Red she is grizzled and desperate with a dry, throaty voice filled with pain and defeat.

At first thought a villain the audience eventually learns the complexities of Red’s story clearer and the Oscar winner delivers both parts with exceptional grace.

The supporting actors fill their characters with gusto with a mention going to Duke and Moss. Duke’s character of Gabe contains inept humor coming across as slightly incompetent and the typical goofball dad-type character.

Moss takes her one-note character of Kitty, a spoiled never made it as an actress whiner with a rich husband, and infuses naughty passion into her doppelganger. As she playfully applies lipstick while coquettishly watching herself in the mirror she soon gives the term “plastic surgery” a new definition as she curiously carves her face.

Peele delivers a treasure with Us (2019) and I salivate at the thought of the film is only the novice director’s second attempt. Not suffering from the dreaded sophomore slump, he is becoming a modern director whose works are more like events than simply released films.

Quentin Tarantino is a director who has also achieved this status through the director’s styles are vastly different. I cannot wait to feast on Peele’s next attempt.

Diabolique-1955

Diabolique-1955

Director Henri-Georges Clouzot

Starring Simone Signoret, Vera Clouzot, Paul Meuisse

Scott’s Review #878

Reviewed March 16, 2019

Grade: A

Diabolique (1955) is a masterful French thriller that is as compelling as it is frightening and offers insurmountable influence in years to come.

Shamefully remade and Americanized in 1996 starring Sharon Stone, a waste of time if you ask me, the original is the one to discover and salivate over.

With a perfect blend of psychological intrigue, never-ending suspense, and even a good mix of horror that Hitchcock would find impressive (more about him later), the film is brilliant in its pacing and frequent twists and turns.

Directed by Henri-Georges Clouzot, Les Diaboliques is set in a crumbling boarding school in the metropolis of Paris. Sadistic headmaster Michel Delassalle (Paul Meuisse) runs a tight ship but works for his Venezuelan wife, Christina (Vera Clouzot), who owns the school.

Michel is immersed in a torrid affair with schoolteacher, Nicole Horner (Simone Signoret) and regularly abuses both women as well as his students. The two women embark on a plot to kill Michel, but when they succeed in their plan, Michel’s body goes missing.

The women panic.

In a few fun trivia tidbits, director Clouzot, right after finishing making Wages of Fear (1953), optioned the screenplay rights, preventing Hitchcock from making the film. This movie helped inspire Hitchcock’s Psycho (1960).

Robert Bloch himself, the author of the novel version of Psycho, has stated in an interview that his all-time favorite horror film is Diabolique. If the film displays nuances incorporated in Psycho, this is undoubtedly the reason.

Clouzot also directs his wife Vera in the prominent role of Christina.

The brilliance of the film is that it could have been made by Hitchcock as the entire experience has his stamp and influence written all over even though his best works lay ahead of him in 1955.

Still, from the Gothic mood to the “can’t believe your eyes” twisted, blood-curdling ending, the director immediately comes to mind every time I watch the film. The “shock” ending only exceeds expectations with a fantastic delivery.

The film takes an unusual stance on the dynamic between the two women, Christina and Nicole. Rather than take a traditional route and make the women rivals for the man’s affections, Clouzot chooses to make the pair co-conspirators. This only deepens their relationship as events unfold and takes a darker and more dire turn.

They rely on each other as teammates rather than despise each other over their love for another man. Intelligently, they spend their energy on making sure the insipid man gets his just comeuppance for his dirty deeds. Nicole leads Christina in the direction she needs to go.

The black and white cinematography is highly influential to the mood of the film. With each unexpected twist or scene of peril, the lighting is perfect in radiating the suspense. The camera juxtapositions the frequent glowing of the white against the dark black that exudes a frightening, ghost-like presentation.

The entire setting of the school is laden with dark corners that provide good elements of foreboding and sinister moments to come.

As the women become more and more unnerved by the limitless possibilities that the missing body presents, many questions are asked but are impossible to answer. “Where is the body?”, “Could Michel be alive?”, “If he is alive is he hell-bent on revenge?” The viewer will also be asking these questions throughout most of the final half of the film.

When an unknown person begins to call the women and other clues take form the questions begin to multiply.

Clouzet uses frequent shots of objects to enhance the tension even further. Closeups of a dripping bathtub, a typewriter with a man’s hat and gloves, a woman’s feet as she removes her shoes, and a woman running in terror through the corridors of the school.

These facets only enhance the overall experience as the suspense and the terror begins to mount.

Diabolique (1955) is considered one of the greatest thrillers of all time and I concur mightily with this assessment. A French version of Psycho (1960), that combines an acclaimed director’s ingenious subtle ideas into a giant web of delicious filmmaking.

The viewer will never see the surprise ending coming even if they think they have the plot figured out. This point alone is reason enough to see the film and salivate in its greatness of it.

Suspiria-2018

Suspiria-2018

Director- Luca Guadagnino

Starring-Dakota Johnson, Tilda Swinton

Scott’s Review #864

Reviewed February 7, 2019

Grade: B-

Dario Argento’s 1977 creative masterpiece is the original Suspiria, an orgy of style and visual spectacles carefully immersed within a standard slasher film appropriate for the times.

To attempt at a remake might be deemed foolhardy by some.

Argento’s film contains comprehensive and defined story elements whilst the new Suspiria (2018) changes course with a brazen attempt at achieving the same mystique as the original but falling short instead offering a plodding and mundane story that is almost nonsense and does not work.

Thankfully, a bloody and macabre finale brings the film above mediocrity.

Director Luca Guadagnino fresh off the Italian and LGBT-themed Call Me by Your Name (2017), a bright film peppered with melancholy romance and lifestyle conflict could not be more of a departure from Suspiria.

The respected director parlays into the horror genre with two of Hollywood’s top talents in tow, Tilda Swinton and Dakota Johnson, and a nice nod to the original film with a small appearance by leading lady Jessica Harper.

The premise of Suspiria remains intact as the period once again is 1977 and the location stays as Berlin, Germany. Susie Bannion (Johnson) is a gifted American dancer who joins the prestigious Tanz dance academy run by a coven of witches where she unearths demonic tendencies.

Coinciding with her arrival is the disappearance of another student, Patricia Hingle, and the revelation that her psychotherapist Josef Klemperer (Swinton) has Patricia’s journals chronicling details of the dastardly coven.

From an acting perspective, Swinton impresses the most as she tackles three distinctive roles: an elderly and troubled psychotherapist, artistic director Madame Blanc, and Mother Marko, an aging witch.

Each character is vastly different from the rest and allows the talented actress to immerse herself into the different characters. So convincing is she that I did not realize while watching the film that she played the psychotherapist or that the character was played by a female.

Admittedly not a fan of Dakota Johnson for perceptively using her Hollywood royalty to rise the ranks to film stardom or her lackluster film roles thus far- think Fifty Shades of Grey or the innumerable sequels- she does not do much for me in the central role of Susie. The miscast is more palpable in comparison to Harper’s rendition of the role decades earlier.

Johnson is predictably wooden and quite painful to watch especially matched against a stalwart like Swinton in many scenes. Lithe and statuesque the young actress does contain the physical qualities of a dancer, so there is that.

As a stand-alone film, my evaluation of Suspiria might be less harsh, but the original Suspiria is held at such lofty heights that this is impossible.

The problem is with the screenplay as compelling writing is sparse. Much of the plot makes little sense and does nothing to engage the viewer at the moment. Slow-moving and meandering and lacking a spark or an abrupt plot breakthrough, I quickly lost interest in what was going on.

The interminable running time of over two and a half hours is unnecessary and unsuccessful.

Before I completely rake Suspiria across the coals my cumulative rating increases with the astounding and garish final sequence which features a plethora of blood and dismemberment in a sickening witches’ sabbath.

As Klemperer lies incapacitated after being ambushed by the witches one girl is disemboweled followed by decapitation as the bold use of red is blended into the lengthy sequence. As the withered and bloated Mother Markos relinquishes her title an incarnation of Death is summoned, and heads explode.

The finale plays out like a horrible dance sequence.

To add to the above point the visuals and the cinematography are its highlights. By using mirrors and possessing a dream-like quality the film looks great and harbors an eerie and stylistic deathly crimson hue. The resulting project is one of spectacle and intrigue rather than a sum of its parts.

Rather than approaching the film with an introspective or cerebral motif simply going with the flow and letting it fester is recommended.

Guadagnino deserves credit for bravely attempting to undertake the creation of such a masterpiece and bringing it to audiences in 2018.

Suspiria (2018) suffers from a lack of plot or pacing and is the second runner-up to the original.  The story is not worth attempting to make heads or tails of since it is not interesting enough to warrant the effort.

Ultimately skip this version and stick to the brilliance of the Argento effort or better yet do not compare the two films at all.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Cinematography (won), Robert Altman Award (won)

The Transfiguration-2017

The Transfiguration-2017

Director-Michael O’Shea

Starring-Eric Ruffin, Chloe Levine

Scott’s Review #853

Reviewed January 7, 2019

Grade: B+

The Transfiguration (2017) is a quiet horror film and resoundingly peculiar vampire tale borrowing elements of similar genre pieces but adding fresh nuances to its story.

Some may feel the film is too slow-paced, but with patience there comes a terrific payoff and tremendous conclusion. Of the independent horror field and with a limited budget, the underlying message of teen loneliness and alienation comes through loud and clear.

The film wisely adds tidbits of classic film history which is a special treat for horror buffs.

Fourteen-year-old Milo (Eric Ruffin) has been through much trauma in his young life. His father has died, and his mother has recently committed suicide. Milo resides in a crummy Brooklyn high-rise with his older brother Lewis (Aaron Clifton Moten), a depressed military veteran.

Milo has a horrific secret- he is convinced he is a vampire and habitually kills strangers drinking their blood. When he meets troubled teen Sophie (Chloe Levine), the pair are inseparable, but Milo’s secret is threatened to be uncovered.

The bevy of neighborhood Brooklyn exterior shots are pleasing for those familiar with New York City locales. Similar in style to Beach Rats (2017) another recent coming-of-age story shot in Brooklyn springs to mind.

Many scenes of Milo and Chloe wandering around their neighborhood or riding the subway are featured making the overall package feel authentic and not overly produced. The Brooklyn beaches and skylines make frequent appearances.

The most compelling, and frightening, aspect of The Transfiguration is how convinced Milo is of his being a vampire leading me to think the writer is providing mental health learning. The audience immediately knows he is delusional, but he truly believes.

Terrifying is this reality as via flashback we see Milo discovering his mother’s body, her wrists slit. As he gruesomely tastes her blood a sense of wonderment we wonder if this is his vampire discovery moment. Surely a defense mechanism, it is nonetheless extreme behavior.

The character of Sophie is also worthy of discussion. With both of her parents deceased she is sent to live with her abusive grandfather who lives in the same building as Milo. We never see the character but know that he is vile.

In one scene Sophie appears to be raped by a group of boys and she yearns for a friend in Milo. As she slowly realizes his secret but incorrectly assumes he is writing a book not killing people, she can look past this to belong. Milo and Sophie desperately need each other.

Despite the macabre characterizations outlined above the film is not quite a downer. In the middle of the vampire story is a sweet and likable young romance between the two leads.

There is a charisma and charm between the two that is genuine and heartfelt and even the simplest conversations sparkle with the appeal. The final sacrifice that one makes for the other is riddled with kindness.

Fans of classic horror will be delighted with clips of the 1922 film Nosferatu as well as other gory cult classic films that Milo is obsessed with.

Innocently, he attempts to broaden Sophie’s exposure to vampire films- she thinks the Twilight films are masterpieces much to Milo’s chagrin. This fun banter balances the dreadful main story plot.

Does Milo have rooting power? Despite a history of animal torture and human killings, he is a remarkably nice kid. He is tempted to kill both Sophie and a young boy in the park but resists this urge.

In the end, he also saves Sophie ensuring she will have a better fate than he. The character is complex and a large part of the success of The Transfiguration.

Writer and director Michael O’Shea cleverly use a side story of a gang of bullies to incorporate a dramatic and shocking conclusion with a wonderful twist. Milo, though tragic and flawed, proves himself a hero as he uses an opportunity to punish and exact revenge on enemies while saving the life of another character.

In this way, he will undoubtedly gain sympathy from the audience.

The Transfiguration (2017) is a unique film that infuses character development and a romance with a blend of horrific blood-curdling moments, especially during “kill” scenes.

I hope that this very small film with no advertising budget receives enough word of mouth to gather a following or at the very least garner recognition for the up-and-coming director (O’Shea).

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: John Cassavetes Award

Hereditary-2018

Hereditary-2018

Director-Ari Aster

Starring-Toni Colette, Alex Wolff

Scott’s Review #837

Reviewed December 6, 2018

Grade: B+

Hereditary (2018) is a horror film that provides quite an unsettling feeling long after the credits have rolled, which is always a positive in my book. Moreover, the film contains more than a handful of effectively chilling moments and a breathtakingly good performance by its star Toni Colette, who delivers the goods in spades.

The film is the debut project by writer and director Ari Aster, who certainly has a bright future ahead of him.

We meet the Graham family- artist Annie (Colette) and husband Steve, along with sixteen-year-old Peter (Alex Wolff) and thirteen-year-old Charlie as they mourn the death of Annie’s mother.

As Annie sees an apparition of her mother in her workshop, the mother’s grave is desecrated prompting her to attend a support group to deal with her problems. When Charlie then tragically dies in a gruesome accident, Annie begins to teeter over the edge putting her remaining loved ones at risk.

The story that Aster writes is tremendously hard to follow leaving many perplexities and assured questions about the plot. Was fellow support group attendee Joan (Ann Dowd) a sinister cultist along with Annie’s mother or merely a kindly friend trying to help? Did Annie kill her family or were their deaths fated, a result of an unstoppable force hence the “hereditary” title?

A post-film synopsis will need to be read by many viewers (myself included) for clarity.

Frightful sequences resonated with me for days following my viewing of Hereditary, so much so that a second viewing may very well be required.

The decapitation of Charlie is one of the creepiest scenes I have ever witnessed as well as tidbits such as Annie furiously pounding her head on the attic door, clearly not herself. Not to be outdone, Steve bursting into flames, and Annie slowly beheading herself with piano wire while coven members look on may lead to nightmares for days.

Shot in a style that makes the film feel claustrophobic and contained, props must be given to the camera crew for creating a dollhouse aesthetic. Enhancing this point is artist Annie’s clay dollhouse, mirroring the families.

The viewer sees a mock version of the real family and when Annie decides to create a mimic of Charlie’s headless body to express herself the results are dire.

The best part of Hereditary, though, is Colette’s performance.

Flawless as the haggard mother in The Sixth Sense (1999), her role as Annie takes the actress to even greater heights. The woman slowly teeters to the brink of insanity as she awakens one morning to find the headless corpse of her daughter lying in the back seat of her car.

Aster wisely has her discovery and reactions appear off camera giving the sequence a high element of anticipatory horror. From this point, we know that Annie will steamroll further into insanity as she realizes the death of her daughter was caused by her son.

Horror films involving witchcraft or other demonic supernatural elements do not always work for me as I find realistic situations more effective, but Hereditary is atmospheric and effective.

The film possesses this element throughout the entire run so that we know bad things will happen, we just do not know when.

To further explain, many scenes involve closeups of characters seemingly deep in thought or shrouded in mystery. Evidence of this is when Peter sits in a classroom hearing the clicking of teeth, a habit of Charlie’s. When a trance-like Peter returns to reality, he is confused and slams his head against his desk breaking his nose.

Aster might have been wise to write a more concrete screenplay instead of leaving the audience unable to add up the parts.

Interpretation is a fine thing, but in the case of Hereditary, the sum may have been greater than the parts. Meaning, a more satisfying, though not less frightening, ending would be encouraged for his next picture.

Hereditary (2018) is a demonic horror film that offers a perplexing plot of a family’s hereditary curse and ultimate doom.

Thanks to brilliant acting and some of the most disturbing scenes ever witnessed, the film is a breath of fresh air in the over-saturated horror genre and a welcome debut from an upstart director.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Female Lead-Toni Collette, Best First Feature

Goodnight Mommy-2015

Goodnight Mommy-2015

Director-Severin Fiala, Veronika Franz

Starring-Susanne Wuest, Lukas Schwarz, Elias Schwarz

Scott’s Review #833

Reviewed November 21, 2018

Grade: B

Goodnight Mommy (2015) is an Austrian film that is not for the faint of heart nor the squeamish. Being a seasoned viewer in diverse, bizarre, and otherwise unpleasant cinematic experiences, the film was nonetheless a tough watch for me.

Universally lauded and even submitted as Austria’s Foreign Language entry for the Academy Awards, I found the film at times pointless and gratuitous in its torture scenes. Still, the film stayed with me days later and that is always a positive.

In a peculiar and unclear story opening, we witness a mother (Severin Fiala) and nine-year-old twin sons (Lukas and Elias Schwarz), residing in a remote lakeside location surrounded by cornfields and nature.

The mother (character unnamed) is disfigured and wrapped in bandages with only her eyes and mouth revealed, a haunting and grotesque image. The twins, Elias and Lukas, are very disturbed by her appearance and concerned when she begins acting strangely, ignoring Lukas entirely and chastising Elias repeatedly.

Through a game that the mother and twins play, the audience learns that the woman is a television personality- has she had a facelift by her choosing, or has she been in an accident? As she acts cruelly and selfishly towards the twins they begin to question whether the woman is their mother or a fake.

They become determined to find out at all costs, turning the tables on the mother, resorting to torturous methods to get the truth out of her.

A few positives for me in Goodnight Mommy are as follows. The Austrian setting and language are huge strengths in adding to the mystique of the overall film.

The unfamiliar (to me) speech and the remote modern home that the mother uses as a sanctuary work very well.  In this way, loneliness and isolation are infused into the film giving a measure of dread. The way the plot continues to unfold and the circumstances are slowly revealed is a good thing.

The how’s and the why’s of the mother’s surgery come to fruition and allegiances switch from the boys to the mothers throughout the film, which I found interesting.

The major negatives are the motivations of the twins and the big reveal at the end of the film- a reveal easily figured out within the first portion of the running time.

Though not shocking, the revelation only complicates said motivations, and questions abound. Is one of the twins just plain crazy? Who is the woman in the photo with the mother dressed exactly like her?

If this is a red herring, no wonder the twins think this woman is impersonating their mother. The mother not being able to escape the twin’s clutches is a bit hard to swallow- remember they are old nine years old!

The torture scenes are brutal for the audience to endure. As Elias and Lukas tie their mother to her bedpost and demand she reveals she is not their mother the methods they resort to are devious and cringe-worthy.

Prolonged in nature so that the viewer feels they are also being tortured when the twins burn her face with a magnifying glass, the process is slow and excruciating.

Later, they decide to superglue her mouth shut and when they realize she cannot eat, they sever the glue with scissors leading to a bloody mess. These scenes are tough to take.

The point of Goodnight Mommy (2018) seems rather, well, pointless. Torture for the sake of torture and many plot holes or story dictated plot devices- who did not think that the Red Cross would fail in rescuing the mother?

Nonetheless, the film does contain a mystique and an unnerving, haunting quality.  The viewer will undoubtedly be kept thinking about the subject matter and the ending, specifically the final still-frame.

Bride of Frankenstein-1935

Bride of Frankenstein-1935

Director James Whale

Starring Boris Karloff, Elsa Lanchester

Scott’s Review #825

Reviewed October 31, 2018

Grade: A-

After four long years director, James Whale finally agreed to follow up, and resurrect, his character of The Monster. Fortunately, Boris Karloff also returned to the role he made famous. In this installment, he meets a mate played by the gorgeous Elsa Manchester.

Critics argue that the sequel is superior to the original, but I am not so sure of that, slightly preferring Frankenstein. Still, the aptly titled Bride of Frankenstein (1935) is a fantastic effort and a memorable classic in and of itself.

The plot picks up where the original Frankenstein ended and includes a sub-plot from the 1818 Mary Shelley novel. Having learned his lesson about the drawbacks of creating life, Dr. Frankenstein (Colin Clive) is coerced into creating a female mate for the Monster.

Much of the action follows the Monster, who is on the run from hunters as he encounters both devious and kindly individuals. In clever form, Manchester plays both the “Bride” and Mary Shelley, who is heralded for her masterful writing.

The main difference between Frankenstein and Bride of Frankenstein is that the Monster is more developed from a character perspective. Even more empathetic and now uttering some dialogue, the pained character contains deeper moments and a damaged quality.

Karloff reportedly despised this aspect preferring that his character be more ambivalent, using grunts and facial expressions more than words, but to me, the development works well.

As the Monster traverses the forest looking for shelter while being pursued witch hunt style, a lovely sequence occurs between the Monster and a lonely blind man. Attracted by the gorgeous sounds of a violin playing “Ave Maria”, the blind hermit befriends the Monster and teaches him a few words like “friend”.

Harboring no ill will towards the creature, the old hermit instead feels blessed and thanks God for sending him a friend. The tender moment is then shattered when a fire burns down the cottage.

Continuing what Frankenstein did and more in line with Shelley’s novel is the constant theme of loneliness and despair. The Creature is a tortured soul, yearning for love and affection, yet suffering from a temper. He is childlike and struggles to know the difference between right and wrong.

Like Frankenstein, the sequel contains high-quality special effects and ambiance. With a storm raging (naturally), the thunder and lightning qualities add so much to a horror film such as this, filling it with suspense and a certain science fiction element.

When the Bride is hoisted to the sky and struck by lightning, the scene is both campy and terrifying.

How delicious a character is Manchester as The Monster’s Bride? With her statuesque seven-foot height (the actress used stilts), white-streaked hairdo, macabre white gown, and jerky, animal-like head movements, the character is forever recognizable in pop culture.

Timeless in characterization, the beautiful woman possesses a macabre yet humorous quality. When she becomes alert, sees the Monster, and shrieks, it is a memorable moment in film history.

Throughout cinematic history, few sequels ever live up to their predecessors, but Bride comes close.

Easily able to be watched in tandem with Frankenstein, and perfect for a bit of Saturday afternoon nostalgia, Bride of Frankenstein (1935) is a wonderful trip down memory lane to a time when horror was as thrilling in simple black and white as it is with all the frills added.

Thanks to Whale’s brilliant direction, both films are legendary in their inspiration and achievements.

Oscar Nominations: Best Sound Recording

Halloween-2018

Halloween-2018

Director-David Gordon Green

Starring-Jamie Lee Curtis, Judy Greer

Scott’s Review #823

Reviewed October 23, 2018

Grade: B+

Let’s be honest- nobody will ever be able to either top or recreate the iconic 1978 masterpiece Halloween- so any real attempt is a moot point.

Throughout the subsequent decades, many sequels or remakes have emerged and have largely disappointed or turned the franchise into a joke.

With the latest incarnation of Halloween (2018), director David Gordon Green gets it right by creating a follow-up to the original, skipping all the other films. Scoring Jamie Lee Curtis as Laurie is a major win along with seemingly dozens of neat references to the original gem.

Set forty years to the day (Halloween Eve and Halloween, naturally!), the audience is first given a summary of killer Michael Meyer’s (Nick Castle) time spent in Smith Grove Sanitarium once captured following the 1978 Haddonfield killing spree.

Two journalists visit Meyers in captivity and attempt to make him speak after forty years of silence by mentioning the name Laurie Strode and showing him his notorious Halloween mask.

Conveniently, he is scheduled to be transferred to a maximum-security prison the following day. We just know that Meyers will escape.

Meanwhile, Laurie has been living with post-traumatic stress disorder since her attack and lives in a constant state of paranoia.

With two failed marriages and a daughter, Karen (Judy Greer), who is traumatized by her mother’s anxiety, Laurie’s life has not been easy. As an aside, I just love how Laurie dons the same hairstyle she had at age seventeen.

While she awaits the inevitable return of Michael, her secluded house is peppered with traps and guns allowing her to be at the ready at any moment. Despite her problems, Laurie is very close with her granddaughter, Allyson (Andi Matichak).

When the inevitable happens and Michael escapes by presumably causing a bus accident off-screen, the action truly begins. The coincidence of this happening on Halloween night is to be expected and embraced.

Audiences who see the film certainly are not new to the genre. The target audience is the crowd who either grew up with the original or generations who followed and were introduced to the original.

Therefore, the film is wise to not try and reinvent the wheel- giving fans what they expect. To this point, the opening graphics (the eerie orange writing and the glowing jack-o-lantern) are intact as well as the “introducing” credit for its heroin star- in this case, Matichak.

There are several certainties with a horror film like Halloween. We know there will be “kills”, we know there will be an inevitable showdown between Laurie and Michael Myers to conclude the film. The fun is in the trip we take to get there. Who will be offed and how? A butcher-knife? other Halloween delights?

Since there are arguably three female leads and three generations of Strode’s, will the film make one of them feel Michael’s deadly wrath?

Halloween works, and a large reason for this is countless nods to its past. Many scenes pay homage to attention-paying fans resulting in riches and nostalgic memories.

Allyson’s boyfriend’s father’s name is Lonnie- undoubtedly the kid who Dr. Loomis scared away from the Meyers house forty years ago.  Then there is a neighbor woman wearing curlers and slicing a sandwich with a butcher knife, who Michael steals the knife from.

Finally, as Allyson sits in the back of her class and glances out the window she sees not Michael, but Laurie standing across the street staring at her. These gems are in large part thanks to clever writing and study.

There are a couple of negatives to mention. I am not crazy about the casting of Judy Greer as Jamie Lee Curtis’s daughter. The actresses look nothing alike nor does Curtis seem old enough to be Greer’s mother.

Furthermore, attempts to add some comic relief moments, two bumbling police officer’s talking about brownies, Allyson’s goofy father, and the salty tongue of the kid one of the baby-sitters sits for does not work.

How great would it have been to include P.J. Soles, Nancy Loomis, or even Kyle Richards in cameos? Since Curtis and Castle returned I wanted more familiar faces.

In wise form Gordon Green leaves the window wide open for a potential sequel, so be sure to stay for the end credits. My wish would be for this to parlay to the aftereffects of the killings on the same night, which Halloween II (1981) did so successfully.

If the box office returns are strong enough and with Curtis on board for another installment, the possibilities are endless.

Frankenstein-1931

Frankenstein-1931

Director James Whale

Starring Colin Clive, Boris Karloff

Scott’s Review #822

Reviewed October 22, 2018

Grade: A

Those of us who treasure cinematic brilliance in films of the past need to look no further than Frankenstein (1931), a masterpiece in the horror genre.

Considered by some to be the greatest horror film ever made, the still frightening work is based on the legendary 1818 Mary Shelley novel.

Highly influential to later groupings of horror film sub-genres, the importance of this film must never be forgotten.

In a small European village, a scientist named Henry Frankenstein (Colin Clive) is determined to create human life by way of stealing fresh body parts from cemeteries and using electrical shock as part of his creation.

He convinces his assistant, Fritz (Dwight Frye), to steal a human brain from a former professor’s laboratory. Due to a clumsy mistake, Fritz must steal the brain of a criminal rather than a “normal” human being, the result being dire when Frankenstein’s monster is created.

The creation of the monster (and no, the monster’s name is not Frankenstein as some might assume) is astounding, especially given the period of the early 1930s.

With a flattop, heavy eyelids, protruding neck terminals, and his hulking physique, he is a frightening figure, but with a yearning, childlike nature. The monster’s innocence makes him so tragic.

A compelling scene occurs when the audience first sees the monster turn around and face the camera.

What separates Frankenstein from many other horror films is the underlying sadness and empathy that we feel toward the monster. Generally, the “villain” in most horror films is clearly defined, but who is the villain in Frankenstein?

How can it be the monster when he, unaware of his strength, drowns a young child? We root for the monster when he hangs the dastardly dwarf and we hate the town of peasants who seek revenge on the monster.

The complexities in this film are endless.

The main character is an interesting study. Title billed; the character is a genius while also teetering on the brink of madness- he is not the hero of the film nor is he entirely sympathetic.

He is the ruin of a monster who has feelings and sadness in him. Frankenstein’s fiancée, Elizabeth (Mae Clark) is concerned for him, which adds a nurturing element to the dynamic. The intent is for the audience not to despise Frankenstein, but to be enthralled with his complexities.

The term “monster film” can conjure up feelings of silliness or over-the-top acting, but Frankenstein is more artistic than goofy.

The famous line “It’s alive!” was paid tribute to in later years, but an equally spectacular horror film, Rosemary’s Baby (1968) when Rosemary feels her haunted baby kick. To say nothing of the tribute Mel Brook’s classic Young Frankenstein (1974) paid to the original.

Given the film was made in 1931 the effects and lighting techniques are beyond impressive. The overall tone of the film is stylistic with a prevalent fairy-tale beauty unlike any films made at the time, save for perhaps Dracula, the 1931 horror-vampire masterpiece.

Both Frankenstein and Dracula would make a delicious double feature on a Saturday evening. Director James Whale creates a magical environment that astounds, holding up well generation after generation, never seeming dated.

Frankenstein (1931) was followed by numerous sequels, the best of which is Bride of Frankenstein (1935). Undoubtedly, the film influenced campy yet important monster films to follow- most notably the “Hammer Horror films” of the same tone.

Despite teetering on the one-hundred-year-old mark, the brilliant film is timeless and must be introduced to young filmmakers everywhere (especially in the horror genre).

The Nun-2018

The Nun-2018

Director-Corin Hardy

Starring-Taissa Farmiga, Demian Bichir 

Scott’s Review #812

Reviewed September 19, 2018

Grade: B-

A film such as The Nun (2018) is best described as a genre horror film strong on atmosphere, scares, and effect, but weak when it comes to story, dialogue, or weaving much of the other films together that it supposedly relates to in a satisfying way.

To stress, the set pieces and foreboding convent where most events take place are tremendously thought out adding to the stylistic filming, but the story stinks, making the overall result barely above mediocre.

Said to be connected to The Conjuring (2013) and Annabelle (2014), this story point is all but laughable.

In theory, a prequel since the film is set in 1952, the only connection is a super quick sequence of a scene in later years. Ed and Lorraine Warren use a character in The Nun as a case study for their audiences.

Admittedly, I have not seen The Conjuring 2 (2016), but from what I can surmise, what remains of The Nun is a stand-alone film. Was the demonic nun in The Conjuring 2? This may make more sense.

The creepy setting in Romania- is a superb choice given the association with Transylvania and Dracula. The film begins with the suicide of a Roman Catholic nun in a gloomy and largely abandoned Monastery.

Having been visited by an unseen force who kills another nun, a vicious demon appearing in the form of a nun looks on menacingly. Father Burke (Demian Bichir) from the Vatican arrives with Sister Irene (Taissa Farmiga) to investigate, where they meet flirtatious local, Frenchy.

The atmosphere used throughout almost the entirety of the film is spot on and highly effective.

Most of the scenes are set at nighttime (naturally!) and in or around the vicinity of the spooky, gothic monastery. To double, a gorgeous castle in Romania was used. From the dark and narrow hallways to the crucifixes and obvious religious decor, the props and set design shine through.

The best scenes occur within the grounds of the statuesque building as dozens of graves can be seen- when bells from the graves begin to ring on their own and spirits can be seen lurking, the audience is in for a good scare.

Even the scenes in daylight hours are fraught with creepy tension. When Frenchy comes upon the nun, dead for days, she dangles from the monastery, eyes gouged and covered with feasting crows, as her blood drips onto the front porch.

The camera closeup of the shot is highly effective as are others involving the typical jolts and creaky floors that have become a cliche in horror films somehow feel fresh and invigorating in The Nun.

And the demonic nun, a grimacing Marilyn Manson type ghoulish figure, is downright scary.

Unfortunately, along with praise must come to some criticisms. The story and the logic do not make too much sense and I stopped trying to figure out the plot points halfway through.

Why the Father and Sister are chosen to go alone to investigate is implausible as is a silly, brief mention of a Duke in the old days evoking a curse in the monastery that was “conjured” up during World War II and must be contained again is a hardly compelling story.

The plot-driven device (and frankly done to death at this point) attempt to forge a romantic connection between Irene and Frenchy never works. How many times in film have we seen a handsome, young man trying to woo a pretty nun away from her calling?

Filmmakers may have added this for humor and (hopefully) the intentional or not religious exclamations by the characters of “Oh My God!” or “Mother of God!” are laugh-out-loud silly.

At the end of the day, with a film such as The Nun (2018), riveting writing is not top of the wish list- great atmosphere and effects are.

In this way, the film delivers some excellent content and makes for an enjoyable experience with some good thrills and scares. Thankfully, for the horror genre, the film is rated a solid “R” and not watered down for PG-13 audiences. Just be prepared for some hokey writing.

The Blair Witch Project-1999

The Blair Witch Project-1999

Director Daniel Myrick, Eduardo Sanchez

Starring Heather Donahue, Joshua Leonard, Michael Williams

Scott’s Review #761

Reviewed May 22, 2018

Grade: A

When a horror film “scares the viewer to death” then that film has superseded what it has intended to do since horror films are a dime a dozen these days.

Fondly remembering sitting in a crowded and very dark movie theater to see The Blair Witch Project (1999), I was left both mesmerized and clutching my seat for dear life. This film had an enormous impact on me.

The film wisely uses hand-held cameras (black and white 16mm film) and Hi-8 video, manipulating the audience into using their imaginations leading to terrifying results making the film one of the scariest horror films of the 1990s.

Sometimes what you don’t see is much more frightening than what is seen on screen.

In 1994 three college-aged amateur filmmakers (Heather, Michael, and Joshua) decided to hike to Burkittsville, Maryland to film a documentary about a legend known as the “Blair Witch”.

The witch is reportedly responsible for mysterious deaths and disappearances over the past two hundred years. They interview, wander, and joke around with each other as a sense of dread begins to develop.

According to the film, the trio themselves disappear, but a year later their equipment is uncovered fully intact with the film footage able to be viewed.

The 1999 film is professed to be the footage left behind by the group.

Throughout the film we watch the individuals conduct interviews with the townspeople and eventually get lost in the woods at nightfall, forced to stay the night as a mysterious entity terrorizes them.

Numerous creepy noises and rustlings scare the group.

In retrospect, with more insight and knowledge about the film, it may be easy for critics to dismiss The Blair Witch Project as either a hoax or a complete manipulation, but in 1999 audiences flocked to the theaters in droves as word of mouth spread.

I saw the film twice on the big screen and was frightened equally with each viewing. More importantly, with the onset of the reality television craze, the film was clever in capitalizing on this trend, so it is to be championed.

Timing is everything!

In the film genre, The Blair Witch Project used buzz and word of mouth to elicit interest before the film was even released- and then the craze began.

The film was highly influential to subsequent releases that also chose to utilize camcorders as their method of storytelling- think 2007’s Paranormal Activity and 2008’s Cloverfield.

The Blair Witch Project is similar in tone to older masterpieces such as 1974’s The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and 1968’s Night of the Living Dead- independent releases made on a shoestring budget that became enormously successful.

As with these films, the camerawork was tremendously important in eliciting necessary realism.

What makes The Blair Witch Project enormously authentic is the tricks used not only on the audience but also on the cast. Reportedly the film was almost entirely improvised including dialogue and situations that the characters faced.

The actors began to feel as if the events they were supposed to act were happening- their map disappeared and noises were created to frighten them.

This clever approach to Method acting elicited the perfect responses from all involved- especially as they got colder, hungrier, and more desperate.

My concern is how well 1999’s The Blair Witch Project will hold up as the years pass. Phenomenally effective and tremendously profitable at the time, dozens of imitations have arisen since the idea of the film was novel. So much so that it makes the original idea seem dated.

One thing remains true- the film gave the horror genre a much-needed breath of fresh air and influenced many films to come.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-Best First Feature (Under $500,000) (won)

A Quiet Place-2018

A Quiet Place-2018

Director-John Krasinski

Starring-Emily Blunt, John Krasinski

Scott’s Review #751

Reviewed May 1, 2018

Grade: B+

A clever modern horror film, A Quiet Place (2018) offers a unique premise and novel use of sound to elicit a compelling, edge of your seat story.

With a science fiction slant and a “quiet” sensibility, the film is a good offering with ample jumps and frights that fit with the story rather than being added unnecessarily.

Actor turned director, John Krasinski shines in this film to say nothing of the raw talents of Emily Blunt and the two child actors involved. Only the four principles exist in the story which is a benefit.

In the year 2020, most of the human population has been decimated by vicious creatures called “Death Angels”, who have a hypersensitive hearing- they cannot see but pounce on their prey at every sound made. Thus the survivors must either whisper or communicate non-verbally.

An intelligent couple, Lee (Krasinski) and Evelyn Abbott (Blunt), an engineer and a doctor have managed to survive with their two children, Regan and Marcus, their youngest son Beau having been killed after his toy rocket accidentally goes off. The family exists on a farm in upstate New York having created intricate ways to ward off the creatures but live in constant fear of impending doom.

As Evelyn is now pregnant and due to give birth any day, in addition to Regan’s deafness, Lee attempt to create a mock ear to enable her to hear. One evening he decides to take Marcus out to hunt while Regan visits Beau’s grave.  When Evelyn goes into labor she steps on a sharp nail, dropping a picture that alerts a nearby creature.

The remainder of the film (only ninety minutes in length) is spent with Evelyn alone in peril as the rest of the family makes efforts to save her with some eventual dire results, both before and after the baby is born.

A Quiet Place immediately stands out as a unique film- especially for horror- by using sign language and sub-titles to show not only the characters communicating with each other but also to the audience. This tactic is successful at immediately getting the viewer absorbed in Abbott’s world and the hurdles they face.

This unconventional approach gives the film more depth than a standard horror film would normally have and is tremendously effective.

Such marvels are Blunt and Krasinski as the protective and clever parents that I fell in love with both characters almost immediately and bought them as a palpable couple. This is no stretch considering the two stars are dating in real life, but alas their chemistry works well in the film and they make a believable team.

Both Lee and Evelyn will do whatever it takes to protect their brood, and after a lovely day of foraging for supplies in an abandoned grocery store, we feel heartbreak when their youngest is annihilated by the savage creature.

Lee, and Krasinski looking perfectly hunky in his beard and muscles, falls into the hero/Dad role nicely while Blunt gives an emotional bravado performance worthy almost of an Oscar nomination if this were a different genre.

Not to be usurped by more seasoned actors, both child actors are wonderfully cast and hold their own. Millicent Simmonds, an unknown, flawlessly portrays Regan as the young actress who is herself deaf which translated well onto the large screen. And Noah Jupe plays sensitive yet brave to the hilt. Both assuredly have bright acting futures ahead of them.

The “creature” is a strong element of the film but suffers some misses as well.  Careful not to be too amateurish looking or too obviously heavy on the CGI effects, the fastness and ferocious nature are effective.

However, no apparent motivation is ever given nor an explanation of how they came to exist is mentioned. Perhaps a sequel will give more depth? Regardless, I wanted to know more about the backstory of the creature. And how did Abbott’s hold out so long when no others did?

A Quiet Place succeeds as a frightful film with depth and intelligence. Perhaps working better as an independent film  (it could have been edgier) with more grit and less polish from the creature, the film was released by Paramount Pictures.

Nonetheless, Krasinski is off to a great start as a director and leading man with an impressive horror effort containing nice scares and little gore.

Oscar Nominations: Best Film Editing

Friday the 13th: Part III: 1982

Friday the 13th: Part III: 1982

Director Steve Miner

Starring Dana Kimmell, Paul Kratka

Scott’s Review #743

Reviewed April 17, 2018

Grade: A-

By 1982 the Friday the 13th installments were becoming an almost annual event, which would continue until the late 1980s.

Still popular and fresh at the time (the novelty would soon wear thin), Part III has the distinction of being released in 3-D, a highly novel concept and just perfect for a slasher film, including sharp weapons to shove at the camera at every turn.

Directed once again by Steve Miner, who also directed Part II,  the film charters familiar territory that will certainly please fans of the genre.

The horror gem still feels fresh to me decades after its original release.

The plot originally was intended to copy 1981’s successful Halloween II and capitalize on the return of one central character, Ginny (Amy Steel), and continue her night of terror as she is whisked away to a local hospital following her ordeal at Camp Crystal Lake.

While this plot seems laden with good, gruesome “kill” possibilities (think syringes, scalpels, and other neat medical objects), unfortunately, this was not to be after Steel balked at a return appearance.

Directly following the bloody events the night before, a new batch of teenagers- oblivious to the recent killings- except for tortured Chris (Dana Kimmell), who once was attacked by the crazed killer, travel to Camp Crystal Lake for a weekend of fun and partying.

As Chris teeters between imagining sounds and shadows, traumatized by her past, Jason lurks nearby waiting to pounce on unsuspecting victims. In this installment, Chris is most certainly the “final girl”, a fact that is obvious with the immediate backstory.

The other characters fall in line with traditional slasher stereotypes- the lovelorn couple, the prankster, and a stoner couple. Also, a rival biker gang is thrown in for added drama as they vow revenge on the group following an incident at a convenience store.

A few main differences between Part III and Parts I and II follow:  Part III incorporates fewer “point of view” camera shots from Jason’s perspective, and more from the viewpoint of the victims.

The result is neither better nor worse- just different.

This is the first installment in which Jason dons his trademark hockey mask giving the film a slicker feel, and more identity, than Part II did, where Jason mostly wore a burlap sack.

Cleverly, Jason steals the hockey mask from one of his victims.

Finally, as evidenced by the soundtrack, Part III adds a disco/techno beat to the famous “chi chi chi” sounds, giving the music a distinct 1980s feel that the two preceding installments do not have- those feel more like 1970s films.

Memorable slayings include a knife shoved through a victim’s chest while resting on a hammock, electrocution via a basement fuse box,  and death via a shooting spear gun.

The main draw to the kills and thus the film itself is the clever use of 3-D technology, which makes the audience feel like the center of the action.

What a treat to see the implements used in the killings coming right at me!

Credit must be given to the added diversity Friday the 13th: Part III incorporates. For the first time (a glorified black extra in Part II does not count) minority characters are featured.

Bikers Fox (Hispanic) and Ali (Black) as well as pretty Vera Sanchez are included giving the film more of an inclusive feel- though each of these characters is killed off.

Enjoyable also is the inclusion of a quick recap of Part II, similar to what Part II did with the original so that the climax of the preceding film gives the viewer a good glimpse of how the action left off.

The screenwriters add a few comical characters, admittedly offed rather quickly into the mix.

I would have loved to have seen a bit more junk food-eating Harold and his nagging wife Edna, for example, before they meet their maker.

Hardly high art, Friday the 13th: Part III (1982) is mostly remembered for some cool, innovative technology, a tiny bit of camp that does not overwhelm the straight-forward horror flavor, and for still seeming fresh before the franchise got old, stale, and tired.

Part III, along with I and II, make for a wonderful trio in one of horror’s finest franchises.