The Devil's Partner (1961)

An okay way to spend an hour or so, 27 September 2005

A young man arrives in a small town (Pop. 1505 we are informed) after his Uncle, a local despised hermit, died. The young man moves into the Uncle's shack and immediately strange things begin happening. People are killed or maimed by a variety of animals and no one seems to be able to explain why. The only person who seems unaffected is the newcomer living in the old hermits shack.

What Works:

- Kill the Goat. I really wasn't expecting this much blood. Don't get me wrong, this isn't Braindead we're talking about, but for a movie from the very early 60s, I found it surprisingly graphic. The goat sacrifice (shown in shadows) is a nice touch.

- 60s Charm. This is a hard one to explain, but the movie has a certain charm to it that I can't help but enjoy. A lot of American made movies from this period (I Bury the Living, The Devil's Hand, 13 Ghosts, etc.) have a similar feel to them. Maybe it's the innocence of the characters and their reactions when faced with evil. Maybe it's the low-budget look. Maybe it's the willingness on the part of the filmmakers to experiment and take chances. Whatever, I'm a fan of this period of American horror.

- Storyline. Regardless of how successful the movie is or isn't, the whole idea of selling your soul to devil and writing a contract on an old goat skin with your blood is the stuff of nightmares.

What Doesn't Work:

- The Sheriff. I've always had a problem when supposed level-headed characters in positions of authority are so willing to accept wild explanations to strange events. In The Devil's Partner, not only does the Sheriff seem willing to accept the supernatural idea, he formulates the theory.

- Why Did He Do That? The movie presents very little in the way of character motivation to explain why the young man feels the need to summon animals to harm the citizens of the town. Is he seeking revenge? Is he out to get the only young, single woman in town? Is he simply evil? I suppose we, as viewers, are supposed to come up with our own ideas, but a little hint at the true nature of the young man's motivation would have been nice.

- Acting. This one is easy to complain about in these low-budget movies, but it's a fault nonetheless. With a couple of exceptions, the acting in The Devil's Partner is bad. Spencer Carlisle as the Sheriff tops of list of bad performances.

There are far worse ways to waste 73 minutes of your life than watching The Devil's Partner. It will never be confused with a great movie, but it's entertaining enough in its own low-budget, 60s sort of way.

5/10

Crypt of Horror (1964)

- La cripta e l'incubo
I'd like to see a restored Region 1 release of this one, 27 September 2005

Crypt of Horror appears to be one of those films from the early 60s that has been cut, re-cut, and released under almost a dozen titles. To me, it's a shame that this movie has been treated this way over the years because I found it to be a fairly effective Euro-Gothic treat. The plot deals with Count Karnstein and his fear that his daughter may be the reincarnation of a relative put to death decades earlier for being a witch. Regardless of whether the daughter is a witch or not, members of the Karnstein family are dying rather cruel deaths. The Count must discover the truth to the witch's curse and put a stop to the deaths before the Karnstein family looses another member.

If you are into Gothic horror, there's plenty here to enjoy. Crypt of Horror exudes that Gothic atmosphere and plays a bit like cross between Black Sunday and Castle of Blood. (No, I'm not saying it's as good as either of these films.) I described it to a friend as the best Barbara Steele movie that Barbara Steele never made. A wonderfully creepy castle with miles of secret passages, dreams of dead relatives that become reality, women in flowing white gowns wandering through the night, rituals designed to raise the dead, and a hint of lesbianism are the highlights of the movie. Add to that the presence of Christopher Lee (even if he has very little to do) and you've got the basics of a good movie.

But given my rating (6/10), it's obvious I had some problems with Crypt of Horror. Whether it's the result of editing, poor dubbing, or an incoherent script, there are problems with the plot. There are far too many things that happen that make little sense or seem to have no bearing on anything else going on. Take the housekeeper and her continued attempts to bring the spirit of the dead witch back to life. Sure, the witch is pivotal to the plot, but why is she trying to summon the witch? What is her motivation? At least in my copy of the movie, it's never explained. There are other examples of where the plot gets muddled, but you get the idea.

6/10

Alone in the Dark (1982)

Terrific cast and terrific set-pieces, 25 September 2005

Dr. Dan Potter has accepted a position at a mental facility known as the Haven. It's a unique place with no bars to keep the patients inside, only electric doors. During a blackout, four mental patients escape from the institution with the plan of getting their revenge on the new doctor who they believe killed their old doctor. The escapees wait for nightfall to lay siege to the doctor's house. Can Dr. Potter and his family survive this night of terror?

What Works:

- The Acting. Alone in the Dark features one of the better casts assembled for what is essentially a slasher movie. Jack Palance gives one of those stoic, menacing performances as the leader of the escaped patients. Donald Pleasence's eccentric doctor is a kook who may be more unbalanced than the patients he treats. But Martin Landau's demented Preacher may be the best. All Landau has to do is flash that twisted smile to effectively show how deranged his character really is.

- Trapped in the House. I've always claimed that if allow yourself to, in essence, "let go" almost any horror film can provide a few frights or scares. I try to do this whenever I watch a horror film. With that in mind, the final third of Alone in the Dark provides some wonderful frightening moments. You know the escaped patients are out there and you know they are capable of almost anything, but you don't know where they are or when they will strike. It's the stuff of real nightmares.

- Death of a Babysitter. This may be the most frightening set-piece in the film. Sure, it's clichéd, but Sholder does a terrific job of using misdirection to really make this scene effective. Very nice!

- Mom's Diner. The opening scene set in the diner is one of the most deliciously surreal things I've seen in a while. It's easily one of the most "fun" scenes in the movie.

What Doesn't Work:

- We Don't Need No Stinking Logic. As with a lot of horror movies, there are plot holes and lapses in logic that can interfere with the enjoyment of the movie if you let them. One example is the reaction of everyone in the movie (including Dr. Potter, his wife, and the police) to the discovery that a child molester has been in the house and spent the afternoon with the Potter's daughter. The reaction – no big deal. Go on with things as normal.

- That 80's Feeling. I hate the term "dated" when describing a movie, but it's the best I can come up with to describe Dr. Potter's sister. I know that people like that existed in the 80s, I'm just trying to forget it.

Back in 1982, I saw a lot of horror movies in the theater. I'm not sure how Alone in the Dark escaped under the radar, but it did. I'm glad to have finally discovered this gem. It's a well-acted, well-made slasher with some genuine scares. Alone in the Dark is a real nice addition to my DVD library.

7/10

Cyclone (1978)

Not as much fun as the other Cardona movies I've seen, 24 September 2005

Cyclone's plot features a group of people stranded at sea after a cyclone rolls through leaving them with little water or food. The movie examines the lengths these people will go through to survive. I have now seen three films directed by Rene Cardona, Jr. and Cyclone is easily my least favorite. While it has its moments of weirdness, overall it is neither as sleazy as Tintorera nor as bizarre as The Treasure of the Amazon. For the most part, it's just plain dull and nowhere near as fun as the other two Cardona movies I mentioned. Add to that some bad acting, bad special effects, bad gore, and a bad script and you've got the makings for a bad movie.

Animal lovers beware. Cyclone features one scene in particular that is as cruel a scene as I've ever seen. I realize that the animal probably wasn't hurt, but I found it repulsive nonetheless.

3/10

The Monster of Venice (1965)

- Il mostro di Venezia
One memorable moment cannot save a movie, 22 September 2005

A deranged frogman is kidnapping the most beautiful women of Venice and taking them to the sunken cathedral that serves as his lair. Once there, he dons a hooded robe and skull mask and embalms the young women in an attempt to preserve their beauty. The police are so ineffective that it's up to a local reporter to crack the case. And when his sweetheart goes missing, he steps up his efforts to discover the whereabouts of the missing women and the crazed killer.

What Works:

- The Chase Scene. The final chase scene through the cathedral does provide a few suspenseful moments. It also provides the only real memorable image from the movie. The scene where the hooded, masked killer hides himself among the decaying corpses of the monks is easily the highlight of The Monster of Venice.

What Doesn't Work:

- The Acting. In a word, it's abysmal. I don't think it's just a case of bad dubbing – these people couldn't be convincing if their life depended on it.

- The Travelogue. While Venice is undeniably a beautiful city, much of the movie appears to have been directed by the local tourism bureau. We are treated to scene after scene of the lovely buildings and waterways of Venice. While they are certainly some nice looking moments, they have nothing to do with the movie and bring an already dull script to a screeching halt.

- The Killer's Monologue. The hooded killer loves to go on and on about preserving the beauty of his captives. It quickly becomes pointless and repetitive. And why does he feel the need to deliver these soliloquies? There's no one around to hear his words. He has embalmed his only audience.

- The Beautiful Women. This may sound shallow, but if these are the most beautiful women Venice has to offer, I would hate to see the rest of the populace. I would have trouble going so far as to say that any of the women approach being mildly attractive, let alone beautiful.

I give up. I could probably continue to list more individual weaknesses, but what's the point. Everything you could name – plot, characters, action, atmosphere, dialogue, etc. – are bottom of the barrel. Other than the finale, this is one incredibly dull film. If you really feel the need to watch The Monster of Venice, do yourself a favor and fast-forward the movie to the final 10 minutes. You'll thank me for this piece of advice.

3/10

The Brides of Dracula (1960)

Might be the most original of the Hammer Dracula's, 20 September 2005

A young teacher on her way to an all-girls school in Transylvania becomes stranded and must accept the hospitality of the Baroness Meinster. Although the Baroness tells the girl that she lives alone, the young teacher discovers the Baroness' son chained to a wall in another part of the castle. The naive teacher is smitten by the Baron and helps him to escape. What the girl doesn't realize is that she has unleashed one of Dracula's disciples.

What Works:

- Peter Cushing. I'm beginning to sound like a broken record when talking about some of these Hammer films. I should just simply make a blanket statement that Cushing is marvelous in almost everything he ever did. The Brides of Dracula is certainly no exception. While watching Cushing's performance, I was reminded of an interview I heard with Christopher Lee where he discussed Cushing's acting idiosyncrasies and the fact that Cushing was never at rest in any scene. Just watch the movements Cushing goes through to remove a pair of gloves. Most people don't go through that kind of movement to get completely undressed. The man was like one of those perpetual motion machines.

- The Plot. Of all of Hammer's films with the word "Dracula" in the title, I've always felt that The Brides of Dracula might be the most original when it comes to plot. The whole notion of having to chain your son to the walls of a castle because you fear what he might do as a vampire if he were allowed to go free yet you bring him young women to feed upon is something you just don't see everyday in a horror movie.

- The Look. The Brides of Dracula is Hammer at it's finest when it comes to the look of the movie. The rich, vibrant colors were never better displayed than in this movie. In addition, the Meinster Castle is among the best sets I've yet to discover in a Hammer film. Instead of looking cheap and ready to fall apart if touched, this one has a substantial look to it that makes it all the more believable. It's amazing what the people at Hammer were able to accomplish given the size of the budgets with which they worked.

What Doesn't Work:

- Yvonne Monlaur and David Peel. I doubt Hammer ever made a movie with two leads that I found as unappealing as Monlaur and Peel. Neither actor works for me and both only serve to distract me from what is an otherwise incredibly enjoyable film.

- Chains? I realize this is a minor plot point, but it has always bothered me. The film makes it clear that Baron Meinster has the ability to assume the form of a bat at will. How then does his mother keep him chained with a leg bracelet meant for a human leg? Couldn't the Baron just turn into a bat and fly out of his shackle?

This is a film that all fans of Hammer should see. The film is absolutely beautiful and Cushing is as good as you would expect. If it weren't for what I consider some poor performances, I would easily rate The Brides of Dracula among my very favorite Hammer films.

7/10

Night Creatures (1962)

- Captain Clegg
Cushing is good, but the plot isn't, 19 September 2005

The Crown, suspecting smuggling and tax evasion, sends Captain Collier to investigate the inhabitants of a seaside village. What he finds is a small community where things just don't seem right. The locals, even the Reverend, seem to be hiding something. But the only thing the Captain's investigation turns up for sure is a roving band of horrific marsh creatures. Are these horse-riding, living-dead things for real or are they just a ploy on the part of the smugglers to keep prying eyes at bay?

What Works:

- Peter Cushing, of Course. I've said it before and I'll say it again – I don't care how bad, boring, or pointless the material, Peter Cushing always seems to rise above what he's presented with and gives a fantastic performance. If you ignore the haircut (just joking), Cushing's work in Night Creatures is among his best.

- The Rest of the Cast. And the good acting in Night Creatures goes well beyond Cushing. The rest of the cast is just as good. Oliver Reed, Michael Ripper, Patrick Allen, and the incredibly beautiful Yvonne Romain are all excellent.

- The Marsh Creatures. The first time the marsh creatures are shown, it's quite a sight. Although not as creepy as the dead horsemen from The Blind Dead series, they're very comparable. Add to that the scarecrow with the moving eyes and you've got a really nice horror moment.

What Doesn't Work:

- Not Enough of the Marsh Creatures. The marsh creatures are the real highlight of the movie for me. But, with only two brief appearances, there is not enough of them. More marsh creatures might have made this a real winner.

- Too Predictable. The big twist ending was, at least for me, telegraphed from a mile away. Without giving anything away, I'll just say that the relationships between the characters are far too easy to predict. There's no subtlety as to what is coming next. The supposed surprise at the end of Night Creatures (which wasn't much of a surprise) really hurt a lot of what came before.

While I may never look at Night Creatures as the best thing Hammer ever did, it's entertaining enough. Ultimately, had the movie provided more in the way of surprises, I'm sure I would have enjoyed it much more. As it is, it's a terrific opportunity to watch two of my favorite actors, Peter Cushing and Oliver Reed, at their best.

6/10

Klute (1971)

Bravo for Fonda, 17 September 2005

John Klute (Donald Sutherland) is a small town detective who has been sent to New York to find a missing man. Bree Daniels (Jane Fonda) is a New York prostitute who may hold the key to the man's whereabouts. If Bree is to help Klute unravel the mystery, he must first protect her from a deranged stalker who seems to always be one step ahead.

I've always found it difficult to watch Jane Fonda and not let my personal feelings towards her get in the way of enjoying her work. I had no such difficulties while watching Klute. Fonda brings such life to Bree Daniels that it's easy to forget your watching a movie. It's one of the more convincing pieces of acting I've ever seen. While I've probably not seen all of the great performances from 1971, it would be difficult for me to imagine anyone deserved the Best Actress Academy Award more than Fonda.

Klute is also one of the more smartly written thrillers I've seen. Pakula uses the well written script to create believable characters who face realistic danger around every corner. The atmosphere and tension are almost palpable. There are moments that are as frightening as any horror movie. But Pakula refuses to go too far or over-the-top. I can well imagine that in the hands of a lesser director, Klute might have easily become a cheesy, throw-away slasher. Well done!

8/10

Secrets of a Call Girl (1973)

- Anna, quel particolare piacere
Tragic, 17 September 2005

Anna (Edwige Fenech) is a small town girl working as a cashier in a local coffee shop. When gangster Guido (Corrado Pani) blows into town and into her coffee shop, she is immediately smitten. Even though she knows little about him, Anna follows him to Milan. She is slowly introduced to a world that completely foreign. And before she knows what's happening, she does what Guido demands and joins his criminal organization as a call girl. But the birth of her son and a chance meeting with a nice doctor changes everything. Anna desperately wants to escape her former life and Guido, but at what price to her, her son, and the new man she loves?

Regardless of the silly American title and the way Secrets of a Call Girl was marketed, it's not really either an exploitation movie or a gangster movie. Sure, there are elements of both, but deep down this is a tragic love story. This is not the kind of movie that I usually go for, but something about Secrets of a Call Girl worked for me. Maybe it was just the charismatic presence of Fenech or the brutal character played by Pani, but I couldn't take my eyes off the television. In the end, Secrets of a Call Girl is an incredibly sad, moving film. If the ending doesn't affect you and all but bring a tear to your eye, you might need to seek help.

The new DVD represents another bang-up job from NoShame Films. Although their catalog is still quite small, NoShame easily gets my vote for the best DVD production company of 2005.

7/10

Nightmare (1964)

Let's hear it for Hammer, 17 September 2005

I recently wrote a review of Hammer's Paranoiac and, for the most part, I feel like I could change the name and delete references to Oliver Reed and post it as an original review for Nightmare. Oh, sure, there are differences between the two when you start talking about specific plot points, but the general theme is the same. Like Paranoiac, Nightmare is the story of a young woman who is either going insane or being driven insane as part of a fiendish plot. The girl has visions of a woman roaming the halls of her house. When she follows the woman, she inevitably finds her lying on a bed with a knife stuck in her chest.

If Nightmare excels at anything it's acting and atmosphere. The cast of non-Hammer regulars is wonderful. I've read that Jennie Linden was a last minute replacement to fill the role of the insane young woman. She's wonderfully believable in one of her first roles. I doubt that someone with considerable experience could have pulled it off so convincingly. As for atmosphere, I've always been of the belief that solid atmosphere is essential for an effective horror/thriller. And director Freddie Francis creates some very effective atmosphere. Everything from the sets to the cinematography to character reactions appears to have been designed to wring every last drop of atmosphere out of the script.

I couldn't be happier with the recently released eight-movie Hammer Horror Series. While most fans will surely purchase the set for the better known Frankenstein, Dracula, and Werewolf movies, I hope that most are as pleasantly surprised by the lesser known B&W Hammer films as I am.

7/10

The Black Torment (1964)

A few excellent set-pieces, but little else to recommend, 14 September 2005

After a three-month absence, Sir Richard Fordyce and his new bride return to his estate under a black cloud. A young woman who lived on his lands was brutally raped and murdered just two days prior to his return. Her last words seemed to accuse Sir Richard of being the culprit. In addition, several of the locals report seeing Sir Richard's dead first wife chasing him through the village on horseback yelling "Murderer!" Sir Richard is at a loss to explain these strange events. He has been more than 100 miles away for months. Is it witchcraft or something equally sinister? As the dead bodies begin to pile-up, Sir Richard must discover the truth to keep his tenants from revolting and losing his new wife.

What Works:

- The Opening. The movie begins with a woman we know nothing about running through the forest frantically trying to escape an unseen assailant. Unfortunately, she doesn't make it. This scene provides a wonderful opening and a lot of promise for The Black Torment. There is some real tension and atmosphere in this scene. It's a shame the rest of the movie couldn't be as good as the first five minutes..

- Other Set-Pieces. Other than the opening, there are a couple of other set-pieces that work reasonably well. The ending features a twist and a showdown that are nice. Nothing spectacular, just nice. But the best set-pieces are the ones featuring the dead first wife. The sight of the shrouded woman either lurking through the garden or riding a horse through the forest was a treat to a fan of Gothic horror like me.

What Doesn't Work:

- The Cast. I can't think of one member of the cast that I enjoyed watching. The actors are unappealing and the characters they play are unlikable. The worst are the two leads - Heather Sears as the new wife and John Turner as Sir Richard. I didn't think it was possible for two people to annoy me as much as these two do. Every time either opened their mouth it was like fingernails on a chalkboard. I really wish the killer could have gotten hold of their necks.

- Talk, Talk, Talk. In between the bits of horror, The Black Torment turns into an incredibly inane melodrama. Now it's not that I mind melodrama as long as it's done well, but much of this is painful to watch.

- The Stupidity of Sir Richard. The character of Sir Richard has to be one of the dumber characters put on film. Had he stopped yelling at everyone long enough, solving the mystery would have been easy. Instead, every little thing seems to unrealistically upset him and send him off half-cocked. A little rational thinking on the part of Sir Richard could have cut the runtime of The Black Torment in half.

To say that I was disappointed in The Black Torment would be an understatement. The plot description I had read across the internet made the movie sound like an undiscovered Gothic gem. And while a few bits of the horror were fun to watch watch, these moments seem to be enjoyable almost by accident when compared with the bulk of the movie. The ideas for a good movie are here, but, unfortunately, neither the script nor the actors were able to turn The Black Torment into one.

5/10

Murders in the Rue Morgue (1932)

Bela may be good, but the rest of the cast isn't, 10 September 2005

While at first glance Dr. Mirakle (Bela Lugosi) appears to be like many of the other sideshow charlatans, there's something very sinister about the man. It seems that he has been experimenting with the relationship between human and ape blood to prove their mutual lineage. But his experiments require a healthy human body with which to inject gorilla blood. And Dr. Mirakle will stop at nothing to get "volunteers" to assist him with his work.

What Works:

- Bela. I don't care how bad or dull the material, Bela Lugosi always appears to be having the time of his life and is somehow able to transmit that feeling to the viewer. It's difficult to watch one of his performances and not be drawn to the man. His Dr. Mirakle is another in the long line of characters given life by Bela. He is just so devilishly demented that it's impossible not to enjoy the character or the actor playing the character. Good job, Bela.

- Cinematography. I've made no secret over the years of my fondness for Karl Freund. Many of the movies where he credited for the cinematography (or directed) are among my favorites. His work on Murders in the Rue Morgue does not disappoint. Many of the scenes are shot like works of art. One of my favorites (and not just in this movie, but when compared with other movies) is the scene where Bela's prostitute victim is tied to the cross in his laboratory. The lighting, staging, and use of shadows make it one of the most beautiful scenes I've ever seen.

What Doesn't Work:

- Stagey. While this is a common complaint with some of the older films, I think I have only used the term twice before - Dracula and The Cocoanuts. But the term "stagey" fits many scenes in Murders in the Rue Morgue quite nicely. The unnatural feel caused by this took away from the atmosphere the movie was going for in many of these scenes.

- The Rest of the Cast. As good as Bela is, many of the other members of the cast have trouble meeting the standard set by Bela. The actor who immediately comes to mind is Leon Ames. On more than one occasion I found myself groaning out loud at his ludicrous performance.

- That's No Gorilla. This may seem picky, but I was bothered almost the entire movie by the close-ups of the gorilla that obviously wasn't a gorilla. In long shots, it's easy to tell that it's a man in a gorilla suit. But in the tight shots, the gorilla suddenly transforms into a chimpanzee. It's very distracting.

If for no other reason than Bela Lugosi's performance and the incredible cinematography of Karl Freund, I will re-watch this movie. While Murders in the Rue Morgue may never become a favorite of mine, the work of these two men easily makes the movie better than average. If you're a fan of either, I'm sure you will agree.

6/10

Blast from the Past (1999)

Harmless Fun, 10 September 2005

Thirty some years ago, a couple entered their bomb shelter because they thought the Russians were bombing California. They have a son while underground and he grows up only knowing life inside the shelter. It is now 1999 and the family is running out of supplies. The son must venture into the world above to gather the necessities his family needs to survive.

Blast from the Past is definitely not the kind of movie I usually go for. But it has a certain charm that I found refreshing and enjoyable. It's harmless fun. While there's not much that is laugh-out-loud funny, several moments brought a smile to my face. Brendan Fraser plays the son to wide-eyed innocent perfection. He makes believable a totally ridiculous situation. The rest of the cast is quite good with memorable performances from Christopher Walken and Sissy Spacek as the couple from the 60s. Their demeanor, language, and actions were totally believable.

7/10

Paranoiac (1963)

Nice B&W Change-of-Pace from Hammer, 10 September 2005

Hammer may be best known for remakes of classic period horror, but I'm quickly realizing that some of their smaller black-and-white films are among the best they produced. Although my experience with these films is limited, I've enjoyed the few I've been able to see. The story in Paranoiac is not dissimilar to that of Scream of Fear (another B&W Hammer film I've reviewed) – A young girl is believed to be mad. She believes that she has seen her brother who is believed to have drowned some eight years previous. Is she really insane or is someone trying to push her over the edge? When her dead brother does make his return, it becomes increasingly obvious just who is insane.

There are a couple of things that make Paranoiac really stand out. The first is Oliver Reed. He has always been a favorite of mine and in Paranoiac he gives a first rate performance. Reed has a tendency to be an over-the-top scene-stealer whether the plot calls for it or not. Reed's understated performance throughout most of the movie is deftly handled and a joy to watch. It's only when the script calls for his character to chew the scenery that he actually does. Overall, it's a nice, restrained performance.

The second area where the movie excels is the cinematography. Replacing the garish colors Hammer was famous for are some very nice B&W compositions that are quite simply stunning. Regardless of whether you enjoy the plot or not, it would be difficult for anyone to argue how beautifully filmed Paranoiac is.

Finally, the plot twists are a lot of fun to watch as they unfold. While I may have seen part of what was coming, the final twist is expertly handled and really caught me off guard.

7/10

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003)

However unfair, I can't help but compare it with the original, 10 September 2005

I'm not sure that anyone (especially fans of horror) doesn't have any idea of what to expect from the plot of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. For those who live under a rock, here's a very brief synopsis of the plot - TCM revolves around a group of friends who become stranded while traveling the back-roads of Texas. Unfortunately, they look for help in the wrong place and are soon under attack from a chainsaw welding maniac and his loony family. Most of the lost group of friends will pay for their mistake with their lives.

What Works:

- Kill Scenes. This is one of the few areas where the remake actually surpasses the original. For all the hype, TCM 1974 is not a very explicitly violent movie. Sure, we know people are dying, but we see very little of the actual carnage. TCM 2003 presents a lot of the gory details very effectively.

- Tension. Surprise, surprise – a modern American horror movie with some atmosphere. While I never felt the sense of dread or foreboding I do when watching TCM 1974, I must applaud the efforts to create tension through some relatively effective atmosphere. A perfect example is the scene where Jessica Biel hides in the closet. Very nicely done.

- R. Lee Ermey. While I'm not a fan of most of the members of the "new" family, Ermey is the exception. He would have fit right in with the Sawyers from TCM 1974.

What Doesn't Work:

- TCM 1974. It was all but impossible for me to watch this movie and not compare it with the original. The original is superior in many ways. Here's a laundry list of things I preferred in the original: the demented, over-the-top family; Marilyn Burns' escape and constant screaming; the dinner scene; the house decorated with human and animal remains; character motivation; and authentic 70s feel. The last item on my list may be a bit unfair, but the remake might have been better had the decision not been made to set it in the 70s. Few of the characters look, act, or "feel" authentic.

- Leatherface has a Medical Condition. Please just stop it! Why do many modern movies feel the need to create these ridiculous explanations for every character's motivation? What's wrong with having characters whose motivation is either that they are cannibals, backwards, or just plain evil?

- Why Doesn't Jessica Biel Die? This is almost exactly the same problem I had with Wrong Turn. Obviously I know why Biel doesn't die – you can't kill off the lead actress in the tight white t-shirt. It's all too unrealistic given the other events in the movie. All of the other members of her group are either immediately killed or so severely maimed that there is no real hope of their escape. But not Biel. With only a few scratches, the members of the family seem to take care to keep her "intact" to facilitate her escape. I never got the feeling she was in any real danger.

It's probably easy to see that I'm a fan of TCM 1974. It's difficult to explain, but the original has a gritty, brutal, savage "feel" to it that I find missing from most of the remake. And while I enjoyed the remake on a certain level, it has too many problems for me to completely endorse or recommend it.

5/10

The Devil's Rain (1975)

Borgnine the Goat, 10 September 2005

The plot of The Devil's Rain is very simple. It concerns the Preston family and a book their ancestors stole decades ago from a devil worshiper named Jonathan Corbis (Ernest Borgnine). Corbis has spent centuries trying to locate the book and will stop at nothing to obtain it and use its power.

What Works:

- What a Cast! The Devil's Rain is the Airport (or at least The Love Boat) of horror movies. Just take a look at the cast – Ernest Borgnine, Tom Skerritt, Eddie Albert, Ida Lupino, William Shatner, Keenan Wynn, and, although very brief, John Travolta. I'm amazed that the producers could get all of these people to appear in what is essentially a low budget horror film.

- Borgnine the Goat. This is where a lot of people seem to have problems with The Devil's Rain. They seem to find the sight of Borgnine with goat horns too funny to take seriously. I look at it just the opposite. I've always found it a disturbing, well-done visage. The whole idea that someone could literally transform into a demon is frightening to me. And the make-up is very nicely done. I've seen a lot of big budget films that didn't have special effects half as convincing as what's found here.

- Melting Bodies. Another special effects moment that is a winner as far as I'm concerned. Sure, the bodies look like they are spewing forth melted orange and lime sherbet, but I still find it effective. I've seen any number of melting body scenes over the years, but the ones in The Devil's Rain are among my favorite.

What Doesn't Work:

- Did I Miss Something? The movie gives no introduction as to what is taking place at the beginning of the movie. The viewer is literally dropped into a scene with people and actions that are a mystery. It's almost like the first half of the movie is missing.

- Silly Story. If you try to think too hard about what's going on with the plot, it can make your head hurt. My suggestion is to just enjoy the cheese and forget about trying to make sense of it all. Don't over-analyze it, just go with the flow.

In the end, I realize that The Devil's Rain really isn't that good of a movie, but it's just so much cheesy fun that I can't help but rate it as high as I do. It's a movie that could have only been made in the 70s. It seems to me that anyone with a half-baked idea and enough money could see their vision on the big screen. Many of today's horror movies are so glossy and over-produced that all the fun has been sucked out of them. And, for me, much of the appeal of horror movies is having fun.

7/10

Mill of the Stone Women (1960)

- Il mulino delle donne di pietra
The definition of atmosphere, 5 September 2005

Mill of the Stone Women is the story of a researcher named Hans who is finishing a book on the famous sculptor Professor Wahl and his carousel. The carousel features wax representations of women being tortured and killed in a variety of sadistic and inventive ways. A meeting with the Professor's beautiful, seductive daughter, Elfi, ignites conflicting passions within Hans because of his one true love Liselotte. Things are even more complicated because breaking the news to Elfi will not be easy. She suffers from a rare disease that can cause death if she becomes too upset or disturbed. In addition, Hans is convinced that Professor Wahl is up to some twisted experiments that may involve several of the local women including his Liselotte. Hans must solve the mystery of the windmill and the carousel if he is to save himself and the one woman he cares about.

What Works:

- Atmosphere, Atmosphere, Atmosphere. If you're into atmosphere with your horror, look no further than Mill of the Stone Women. Most movies can't claim to have 1/10 of the atmosphere found here. The barren landscape, the isolated windmill, the constant overcast skies, the dark corridors with secret rooms in the windmill, the eerie music, the twisted carousel of death, and the Gothic trappings everywhere you look all add to a movie that just drips with atmosphere. The movie takes it's time and doesn't rush or try to force things. There's a real foreboding sense of unease that runs throughout the movie. There are moments when you might think the atmosphere is going to literally ooze from the screen into your living room.

- Scilla Gabel. Gabel is one of those women of the 60s that I don't think exist anymore. She's from that Sophia Loren - Claudia Cardinale – Daliah Lavi mold of women that were a product of that time. She may never be confused with a great actress, but she has a screen presence that's hard to beat.

- Prof. Gregorius Wahl. What a character! Robert Boehme does an excellent job of playing a mad, but goofy, genius. By the end of Mill of the Stone Women, though, it's easy to feel some sympathy for him as his dreams are shattered. It's an excellent piece of acting from a man whose acting credits only include this movie.

- Wooden Shoes. Any movie with people wearing wooden shoes has to get a bonus point from me.

What Doesn't Work:

- Slow Going. For me, this is a plus. But I put it here to warn those who prefer a movie with a killing or explosion every five minutes.

- Love Story. Because Hans represents a new, exciting life, it's easy to see why Elfi might quickly fall for him. And, because Elfi is such a looker, it's easy to see why Hans might be interested in Elfi. But the fact that both are declaring their undying love for each other after one five-minute meeting stretches the imagination quite a bit.

In the end, Mill of the Stone Women is one of the finest examples of a Gothic, atmospheric movie ever made. The film plays like a combination of The House of Wax meets Eyes Without a Face. It's a wonderful movie that I enjoy more each time I get the chance to watch.

8/10

The College Girl Murders (1967)

- Der Mönch mit der Peitsche
Funky 60s Killer, 4 September 2005

There's a lot going on in The College Girl Murders. A mad scientist creates an almost undetectable poisonous gas. Before he can reap the rewards of his discovery, the scientist is killed by a hooded, whip-welding monk. After a co-ed is killed in a church by the gas, Scotland Yard is called in to investigate, but the killing continues. Who can stop this mad killer who seems to be able to come and go as he pleases in and out of the college?

What Works:

- The Killer. What's not to like about a killer who sneaks around wearing a vivid red KKK looking outfit, complete with red gloves. The white whip he carries and uses very effectively stands out nicely against the bright red gown. Although the idea of a killer in a flaming red, pointy-head outfit sneaking around a girl's school is fairly far-fetched, it's one of the more sinister looking costumes I've seen.

- Groovy 60s Music. I really would like to track down the title music to The College Girl Murders. It's got a jazzy, hip, 60s feel to it that I just loved.

- Bizarre Touches. Beyond the killer's red gown and hood, the movie features a sliding fireplace, a pit of alligators with a cage handing overhead, poison spraying bibles, a strategically placed mannequin, mini-skirts, go-go boots, and mile high hair. I would describe it as a cross between the 60s Batman TV show and an Italian giallo. The College Girl Murders is a real treat for the eye.

- The End. Let's just say that there are more twists than a mountain road. Just when you think the killer has been uncovered, here comes a twist…..and another….and another…and another.

What Doesn't Work:

- Chief Inspector Sir John. I know the guy was meant to be comic relief, but his buffoonish character has way too much screen time.

- Why Have Alligators? Previously, I mentioned the alligators in the pit. And while they are a nice touch, they serve very little purpose. Why go through all the trouble and not use them?

- Plodding Plot. Some of The College Girl Murders has no flow or rhythm to it. There are far too many moments throughout the movie when things come inexplicably to a screeching halt. Better pacing would have made this a much more enjoyable movie.

I haven't seen many of these German krimis but of the few I have seen (Phantom of Soho, Strangler of Blackmoor Castle, Dead Eyes of London) this may be my favorite. This one has a real funky feel to it that I really go into. Had the plot flowed a little better, I could have easily given The College Girl Murders a 7/10.

7/10

Van Helsing (2004)

I can't believe some people actually like this stuff, 30 August 2005

Renowned monster hunter Van Helsing is sent to Transylvania to deal with Dracula and his vampire minions. The Catholic Church is worried about protecting its Eastern flank from the spread of evil. But Van Helsing has never faced a creature quite like Dracula. And Dracula proves to be only one of his worries. Van Helsing must also take care of Dracula's vampire brides, a werewolf, and Frankenstein's monster.

What Works:

- Kate Beckinsale. Is there any need to explain why?

What Doesn't Work:

- The Monsters. I'm sure that James Whale is spinning in his grave.

- Hugh Jackman. Can anyone be more dull and lifeless? I really wish the movie hadn't been called Van Helsing because then there might have been a chance his character would die.

- Everything Else. There are so many things wrong with the movie that I really don't know where to begin. I suppose I'll start with the incredible overuse of CGI. Nothing in this movie looks real. As a result, people, animals, and objects all behave in a manner that seems completely inconsistent with any known laws of physics (or at least my very rudimentary understanding of physics). For example, a person simply cannot fall from the heights that the people in Van Helsing do without either becoming severely injured or dying. It's not possible. Yet Van Helsing would have the viewer believe that a person can drop from the height of a two-story building over and over without so much as a scratch. I don't even remember anyone getting their hair messed up – unlike much of this movie.

I want to take this opportunity to apologize to the people who made Freddy vs. Jason. I recently criticized it for being without any redeeming value. Van Helsing is exponentially more ridiculous than Freddy vs. Jason. Why do I keep subjecting myself to this stuff?

2/10

Hell Night (1981)

You could do far worse than Hell Night, 28 August 2005

As part of their initiation, two fraternity pledges and two sorority pledges must spend the night in creepy old Garth Manor. Before entering the house, the pledges are told the story of the Garth family - twelve years ago, old man Garth murdered his whole deformed family before taking his own life. However, some say that at least one member of the Garth clan survived. During the night, some of the other fraternity and sorority members try to scare the four pledges locked in the spooky mansion. But when people start turning up dead, it's obvious that this is no college prank.

For the most part, Hell Night is a standard 80s slasher. A group of young people in an isolated location are picked-off one at a time until only the end girl is left alive. I don't think this is much of a spoiler because most anyone could guess who is going to be left alive at the end of the movie. In fact, it's easy to predict with a fair amount of accuracy the order these people are going to die. The murders aren't extremely violent and some are left to the viewer's imagination. This was probably the result of budget constraints more than anything. The killers' make-up is bargain basement and not nearly as effective as some of the other movies of the period. Some of the acting is terrible and Vincent Van Patten is extremely annoying.

So, if the movie is predictable with poor special effects and acting, why haven't I rated Hell Night any lower? Other than those areas I've mentioned, the movie is reasonably well made. The house is fantastic and almost outshines any of the humans in the cast. Secret passages and long, dark corridors always make for fun in this kind of movie. Hell Night would have actually benefited had more emphasis been placed on the house. The movie is at worst competently directed by DeSimone. He does an above average job of creating atmosphere and creepy moments. And, on a personal level, I always enjoy Linda Blair in just about anything she does.

While it will never be known as a great movie, you could do far worse with a teen slasher than watching Hell Night.

6/10

Friday the 13th Part 2 (1981)

My favorite of the series, 27 August 2005

It's been five quiet years since a group of councilors were murdered at Camp Crystal Lake. But when a new group of councilors arrives to open a nearby camp, the killing starts all over again. Who's behind the murders? The original Camp Crystal Lake Killer is dead. Could it be her son who was believed to have died in the lake years earlier? By the time someone figures out who the killer is, most everyone else is dead.

Friday the 13th Part 2 has always been my favorite installment in the series. I've always thought that Jason was more frightening before he found the hockey mask and became the unstoppable iconic killer zombie. This Jason is human and that makes him more real. And, to me, the horror factor is increased when the killer is based in reality. He's a primitive being (not dissimilar to the inbred mountain men I recently wrote about in Wrong Turn) capable of extreme brutality, out to avenge the death of his mother.

Most of the movie is about what you would expect - grisly murders, an absence of logic, woeful dialogue, and iffy acting. Friday the 13th Part 2 also features just about every horror cliché that fans have come to expect in a teen slasher. When I saw this movie in 1981, a lot of what we consider teen slasher clichés were still being developed. Back then, a lot of this was still fairly new and fresh. And whether I should or not, I still see the movie the way I did in 1981.


8/10

Wrong Turn (2003)

"We are never going into the woods again!", 26 August 2005

A group of six young people find themselves stranded in the mountains of West Virginia. When four members of the group leave to find either help or a phone they stumble upon a cabin that at first appears to be deserted. But what they find in the cabin proves that it is actually inhabited and not the place they want to be when the owners return home. Just as they are making their exit, a truck pulls to the front of the house and three inbred mountain men enter the house carrying the dead, butchered bodies of their friends with them.

What Works:

- Inbred Hillbillies. Movies with backwoods murderous inbred hillbillies have always fascinated me. Some of my favorite movies (The Hills Have Eyes, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Final Terror, etc.) feature this kind of character. These characters are frightening because you know they're based in reality. There really are people out there who look and, to a lesser extent, act like this. As a bonus, the make-up used on Three Finger, Saw-Tooth, and One-Eye is excellent. It's another argument in favor of traditional quality latex make-up.

- No Jokes. Other than a few bits of comedy that fit within the framework of the plot, Wrong Turn is played straight. Most movies made today with this many horror clichés would turn into one big self-referential jokefest. I'm glad Schmidt avoided going down this road. There is no attempt to go out of the way to create comedy or fill the movie with inappropriate one-liners that only serve to ruin mood and atmosphere.

- Scenes of Violence. I found many of the scenes of violence particularly well done. These inbred hillbillies are brutal and savage. They care not for human life. Their methods of killing are primitive but effective. One of my favorite scenes involves a bow, an arrow, and human eye. Nice!

What Doesn't Work:

- It's Not West Virginia. My wife is from West Virginia and I've been there any number of times. I could tell almost immediately that the film wasn't actually made in West Virginia. I wasn't surprised to discover that the actual location was Ontario, Canada. If you're going to film a movie that is set in West Virginia, why not film it in West Virginia? This just bugged me throughout the entire movie.

- Why doesn't Eliza die? With the exception of Eliza Dushku's character, every other victim the inbreeds run across is immediately slaughtered. So why did they (or better yet, why does the script) treat Eliza differently? Why is she spared long enough to be rescued? Obviously I know the answer, but it's an inconsistency in Wrong Turn that I didn't appreciate.

Wrong Turn is a nice throwback to the 70s movies I grew up with. It's vicious, raw, brutal, and a lot of fun. In short, it's my kind of horror movie. Just thinking about the movie should make my family's annual October camping trip to West Virginia a more interesting.

7/10

Fresh Meat: The Wounds of 'Wrong Turn' (2003) (V)

Okay, but needs more, 25 August 2005

While every attempt was made to pack this nine minute documentary on the movie Wrong Turn with a lot of different and varied information, it's just too short to be very effective. This type of "behind the scenes" documentary works best with at least a thirty minute run time. Otherwise, too many interesting and informative bits are cut too short. Don't watch this if your expecting an in-depth study of any area of Wrong Turn.

However, what is presented is generally well done. The stories of selecting the director, the inbred hillbilly make-up, and other parts do provide the viewer with a taste of how the movie came to be. The make-up portions were easily my favorite. It was very interesting to see the mountain men without their make-up.

5/10

The Card Player (2004)

- Il cartaio
And I had such high hopes for this one, 25 August 2005

A deranged serial killer wants to play a game of internet poker with the police. But the stakes are very high. If the police win, the woman he has kidnapped goes free. If the killer wins, the captive dies. It's up to an Italian policewoman and an Irish agent to stop this high-tech killer before anymore young women die.

What Works:

- Set pieces. I have seen even the most ardent Argento critics admit that the worst of his movies have some nice set pieces. Argento's problem has always been stringing these set pieces together into a coherent story. While I could cite several examples, one set piece in The Card Player that really stands out is the scene where the killer is hiding in the policewoman's house. It's suspenseful and very nicely done.

- Nasty deaths. Although most of the actual scenes of murder take place off screen, we are treated to the nasty aftermath. The scenes of the police poking the murdered bodies in the morgue are as gruesome as you'll see. Especially when one of the bodies "fights" back. Eeeewwww.

- Acting. The two leads (Stefania Rocca and Liam Cunningham) are excellent. Both came across as believable and sometimes that's all you need. Plus, the chemistry between the two was very good. I could actually see the two of them together as a couple. It wasn't forced as is so often the case.

What Doesn't Work:

- Contrived Plot. Too often, The Card Player relies on the most unrealistic coincidences to advance the plot. It's as if the planets line-up just right for the killer to do and get away with the things he does. For example, in one scene, the killer uses a woman to lure a poker expert into a trap. The problem is that the man must follow the woman over what seems like half of Italy until he arrives at just the right spot before the killer springs into action. How does the killer know the poker guy will follow the woman that far? What if he tires of the chase and calls it quits? What if he meets another woman and goes with her? It felt too contrived to me to be believable.

- Acting. As good as the two leads are, much of the rest of the cast is terrible. I don't know if it's more a function of poor dubbing than it is actual acting ability, but the supporting cast doesn't come across very well. Some of the police captain's top assistants are about as convincing as the Three Stooges (not to mention they come across like the Three Stooges).

- The Poker Expert. The police captain's daughter has been kidnapped and could very well be the next victim. The police desperately need a poker expert to increase their odds of winning the game of online poker. Do they turn to a well-known, renowned poker player? Do they turn to a mathematician to assist in determining probabilities in poker? Heck, do they even seek out an someone with half a brain? The answer: No! Instead, the police put the fate of the kidnapped women in the hands of a brainless punk who plays video poker for pocket change.

Argento's The Card Player is a real hit or miss proposal. While Argento again shows his skill with set pieces and is blessed with some good acting, there are too many plot points that don't make much sense or are too far-fetched for me to rate The Card Player any higher.

5/10

The Brood (1979)

Time has not been kind to this movie, 24 August 2005

There was a time when I thought that The Brood was one of the more intelligent horror movies I had seen. I recently re-watched the movie for the first time in a couple of decades and I now have trouble seeing it in the same light. I'm no expert in psychology, but all the psycho-mumbo-jumbo sounds like a big bunch of hooey. Pyshcoplasmics? Please! The word is thrown around as if everyone knows what it's all about - never mind that it's all made up. And the whole concept that emotions can create something powerful enough to kill just doesn't cut it for me in The Brood. Again, I say Please! It's all an excuse to build to the one disturbing scene in the third act. (I'll admit that this scene does present an image that is all but impossible to erase from your memory.)

The acting in The Brood doesn't do much for me either. I hate to pick on a little girl, but the one in this movie is awful. Oliver Reed gives one of his worst performances that I've seen. Part of the problem with Reed in The Brood is that he is terribly miscast. I never once bought his psychiatrist routine. And don't get me started on Samantha Eggar. She's totally unbelievable as far as I'm concerned.

The supposed scares are anything but. While there are some decent jump scares the first time we meet the midget killers, it soon becomes apparent that this is the only way to make them seem frightening at all. On their own, the little people simply are not threatening. Notice how many of these things it takes to effectively take down a full-grown man without the advantage of surprise. I got the impression that had Reed or another actor moved too quickly or forcefully, the tiny terrors would have been sent flying.

So why haven't I rated The Brood any lower? While there are a few moments throughout that held my interest, the one extremely disturbing I eluded to earlier is so well done and so effective that it's worth a point or two on its own.

4/10

What's the Matter with Helen? (1971)

Poor Mad Helen, 23 August 2005

After their sons are sentenced to life in prison, Adelle (Debbie Reynolds) and Helen (Shirley Winters) begin receiving threatening phone calls because someone fells their sons got off easy. The pair decides to move to California to escape the publicity of the trial and to start a new life. They start a dance school that is soon very successful. One of the students has a rich unmarried father with whom Adelle quickly falls in love. In the meantime, Helen is busy raising rabbits and becoming a little too infatuated with an evangelist on the radio. It's only a mater of time before everything falls apart and the women enter a world of madness and murder.

I can't help but compare What's the Matter with Helen? to Whoever Slew Auntie Roo?, also starring Shelly Winters. Where that movie seemed almost restrained in its presentation of Auntie Roo's madness, there's nothing holding Helen back in this movie. It may take a good deal of the movie's running time, but once she snaps, Helen is one Bad Mad Mutha. You don't want to mess with her. Winters is so delightfully demented that it was impossible for me not to enjoy her performance. I'm not going to spoil the movie, but the things Helen is capable of are totally over-the-top.

As good as Winters is, Reynolds is totally ridiculous in her role as the gold-digging tap dancer. I got the impression that she thought she was in a movie that would get her nominated for some award. This ain't Citizen Kane! Quit acting so serious. Hey, Debbie, don't you realize that you're main purpose is to be a victim of Winters' insanity.

I just love these former-female-stars-in-the-twilight-of-their-career horror movies. What's the Matter with Helen? is as fun as any.

7/10

Freddy vs. Jason (2003)

Insulting, 23 August 2005

I finally got around to watching Freddy vs. Jason last night. My immediate reaction: I don't understand how anyone who considers themselves fans of Freddy, Jason, or horror movies in general could enjoy this piece of garbage. The movie is an insult to the intelligence of any thinking fan of horror. I could almost feel my IQ dropping while the movie played. Freddy and Jason have become parodies of themselves and are no long in the slightest frightening. Their final epic battle is little more than a poorly done video game. The CGI is terrible and completely unrealistic. I can understand a large man such as Jason being able to sink a heavy ax into someone's head, but punching someone so hard they fly through the air? Come on! This is superhero comic book stuff, not horror.

And whatever happened to character development? Sure, the older movies in both series featured characters that weren't much more than stereotypes, but at least we were given a chance to get to know something about them before they died. Freddy vs. Jason doesn't even give the viewer the opportunity to determine who the jock, slut, dork, and good girl are before they are butchered.

Say what you will about the older movies in both series, but they come off like horror masterpieces compared with this thing. Unless you're a 13-year-old fanboy who has only seen one horror movie, I'll never fathom how anyone could place this movie at the top of a horror list or give it a rating of 10/10. And to top it off, there are actually people hoping for a sequel! Count me out.

2/10

¡Tintorera! (1977)

Can you say "sleaze"?, 21 August 2005

It will be difficult, but I'll try to keep the plot description as brief as possible. The movie opens with shots of a tiger shark. Next we see our main character, Steve, who meets and has sex with Patricia. Patricia leaves Steve for Miguel. Steve gets into a fight with Miguel that only serves to push Patricia and Miguel closer. After a night of sex with Miguel, a tiger shark kills Patricia. More scenes of a tiger shark. Miguel and Steve become friends and meet two girls, Kelly and Cynthia. They have sex with the girls. One night the girls decide to have a party on Steve's boat. Steve becomes furious and kicks them off the boat. Oh, I think I saw a tiger shark! Next, Steve and Miguel meet Gabriella. Soon, Steve, Miguel, and Gabriella are living together, playing together, and having sex together. Gabriella buys three wedding rings and the group becomes unofficially married. A tiger shark kills Miguel and Gabriella leaves because their threesome has come to an end. Cue the scenes of the tiger shark. Steve now meets Girl from the Bar #1 and #2. They go to a party where Steve trades them for his old lovers, Kelly and Cynthia. Everyone decides to get naked and swim to Steve's boat. Cynthia and Girl from the Bar #2 don't make it. Can you say "tiger shark"? Finally, Steve battles the tiger shark for 3 or 4 minutes. The End. (Okay, so that wasn't very brief.)

Tintorera is a nice example of trash cinema at its finest. It's one of the sleaziest movies I've seen. It's hard to watch Tintorera and not feel dirty. I don't care how it's listed on IMDb, Tintorera is really soft-core porn with a few scenes of a tiger shark thrown in so it could be marketed as horror movie and a Jaws rip-off. Throughout most of the movie we're treated to scene after scene of people in little or no clothing, both male and female, drinking, smoking, and having sex. When they aren't busy doing this, Miguel and Steve enjoy lounging around in their Speedos drinking, smoking, and discussing having sex. In fact, and I'm not exaggerating, Miguel's naked butt has more screen time than the tiger shark. These people are so busy porking one another that it takes them forever to realize that their friends are being killed. And, as the scenes of the tiger shark are so infrequent, I almost forgot about it too.

When we do see the tiger shark ripping people apart, it's surprisingly well done. I would go so far as to say that it surpasses even Jaws in the gory depiction of a shark attack. The sight of a tiger shark swimming with Miguel's head in it's mouth is as horrific as anything in most any other shark movie I've seen. And it's not just the sharks doing the killing. The animal killing in Tintorera is more plentiful than in a lot of the other, better known, exploitation movies of the 70s. In their spare time, Miguel and Steve enjoy shooting sharks in the head and spearing barracudas. The movie shows literally dozens of sharks, turtles, and assorted fish being killed. It's really nasty stuff.

Finally, a word about the rating I've given Tintorera. I'll admit that it's really not a very good movie. But, I couldn't bring myself to rate it any lower because it kept me interested and amused throughout. It's a lot like a car wreck – it's difficult to look away.

Okay, I'm going to go take a bath.

5/10

Shikoku (1999)

Not as advertised, 20 August 2005

I had been intrigued by Shikoku for a while. The plot sounded interesting and the movie featured Chiaki Kuriyama (Gogo Yubari in Kill Bill Vol. 1), so I finally decided to give it a chance. The summary on the back of the DVD case ("Hinako returns to her childhood home on the island of Shikoku after many years. She learns that her childhood friend Sayori has passed away and the Sayori's mother, a local priestess, has slowly gone insane with grief. When strange things begin to happen on the island, Hinako and old friend Funiya learn that Sayori's mother has spent ears conducting a pilgrimage around each of the island's 88 temples in reverse order, which, according to folklore, is supposed to release the spirits of the dead and turn the island into the 'land of the dead'"), however, is very misleading.

Had the movie actually followed this plot description, Shikoku might have been a much better movie. Instead, we are treated to one of the dullest, most inane love stories I've had the misfortune to see (I suppose a love-triangle story would be a more appropriate description). What little horror there is in Shikoku comes from the fact that one of the participants in the love-triangle is dead. But, any real scenes of horror are too few and far between. And the other characters' reactions to the moments of horror are totally unbelievable. Once the two non-dead characters see the ghost of their dead friend, do they seem alarmed, surprised, or frightened? - NO! Based on their reactions you would think that seeing ghosts was just another part of their incredibly boring existence.

I will admit, however, that there are parts of Shikoku that I enjoyed. Regardless of whether you're a fan of the new wave of Asian horror or not, it would be hard for anyone to disagree with how beautiful most of these movies are. Despite it's flaws, Shikoku is another beautiful Asian horror movie. And if you're a fan of Ju-on style horror, some of the movie might appeal to you. The few subtle moments of horror are beautifully filmed and genuinely creepy. Finally, although it's underdeveloped, the whole subplot of the mother trying to bring her dead daughter back to life is interesting. There's a good, entertaining movie here somewhere. It's too bad we didn't see it.

5/10

Suspiria 25th Anniversary (2001) (V)

Very Interesting, 18 August 2005

If you are a fan of the movie Suspiria, you absolutely owe it to yourself to get hold of AB's three disc limited edition. Not only does it include the movie (I believe it's the same transfer used on the single disc edition), the soundtrack and this documentary are part of the package. The documentary is wonderful. Many of those who had a significant role in the making of the movie provide interesting stories about their memories of Suspiria and how it was put together. My favorite parts were the interviews with Cinematographor Luciano Tovoli and star Jessica Harper. Tovoli provides some great background into how the movie was filmed, including the use of Technicolor to get those incredibly vibrant colors for which Suspiria is so famous. As Harper is the only American to appear in the documentary, I found it particularly insightful to hear her impressions of working with Argento and in Italy at such a young age.

If I have one complaint, it's that Suspiria 25th Anniversary is too short. Suspiria is the kind of movie that I could listen to stories about the making of for hours. Instead of 52 minutes, I wish it could have been 152 minutes.

9/10

The Thing (1982)

"And it's gonna get a hell of a lot worse before it gets any better!", 17 August 2005

A helicopter chases a husky across the frozen landscape of Antarctica. The two Norwegians chasing the dog seem intent on killing it. The dog makes a bee-line for the American science station in what appears to be an attempt to seek safety. But is that really the dog's purpose? The Americans discover the dog's true mission only after it's too late.

I'm almost embarrassed to admit that I hadn't seen The Thing since its initial theatrical run. Because so much of the movie had slowly slipped from my memory, I have never placed it on a "favorites" list (until now). In fact, I had forgotten more of the movie than I remembered. I can promise that I won't wait another 23 years for my third viewing. The Thing is a no-holds-barred journey though some of the best that sci-fi, horror, and action have to offer. The movie never lets up and rarely gives the viewer a chance to catch a breath.

If you haven't seen this movie in a while (as I hadn't), the special effects will surely have stuck with you. They're gross, disturbing, and an excellent argument against the overuse of CGI in horror movies. Rob Bottin should have won an Academy Award for his special effects work on The Thing.

But it takes more than effects and gore to make a "good" movie. It's the interaction between the characters and their real feelings of mistrust that elevates The Thing to the lofty status it has achieved. These are men who have worked together in extremely close quarters with little outside contact. Trust is important in this kind of atmosphere. But when it becomes clear that there may be a problem with various members of the group, they're quick to turn on one another to save their own necks. The paranoia is fascinating to watch.

As far as I'm concerned, The Thing's ending is perfect. Too many movies attempt to spoon-feed viewers the answer to every question raised in the movie. The Thing leaves you with as many questions as it does answers. Good call, Carpenter!

I only have one minor quibble with the movie and it's based as much on my recent viewing of The Thing from Another World as anything. Try as I might, I can't help compare the two movies. I would have really appreciated a better opportunity in The Thing to get to know who these men are. The characters can be described as paper thin. The 1951 movie was more character driven, and as a result, I cared more for the characters.

9/10

5 Card Stud (1968)

Where's the mystery?, 15 August 2005

During a game of cards, one of the players is found the be a cheat. The others decide that running him out of town isn't good enough and lynch the cheater. Soon afterward, however, the men in the lynching party begin dying violent deaths. In the Old West, a showdown between two armed men was one thing, but murder is murder.

Considering the cast assembled for Five Card Stud (Dean Martin, Robert Mitchum, Roddy McDowall, Yaphet Kotto, Denver Pyle, and Inger Stevens) I expected a solid and enjoyable Western. And while each of these actors does their best to prop-up the movie, they are let down at almost every opportunity by uninspired directing and a weak plot. The movie is billed as a Western/Mystery. But, there's no mystery. It is so painfully obvious who the killer is that I'm shocked it took Dean so long to figure it out. Hathaway does nothing to add any suspense or drama. I was expecting, and hoping, for a big twist ending to save Five Card Stud, but it never came.

But the worst part of the movie has to be the editing. Five Card Stud is over-long and needlessly bloated with scenes that go nowhere and do nothing to advance the storyline. Better editing to create a tighter, leaner movie could have done wonders and might have made it really enjoyable.

4/10

La maldición de Frankenstein (1972)

Focus, Franco! Focus!, 15 August 2005

The beginning of the movie doesn't stray far from what you might expect - Dr. Frankenstein and his assistant are transplanting a brain into their creature. The transplant works and the monster is not only capable of performing simple tasks, but can think and speak. But before the Doc has time to celebrate his victory, he is interrupted by Melissa, the Bird Woman. She kills the Doctor and assistant and takes the monster to her master, Cagliostro. He has other plans for the creature. Dr. Frankenstein's monster will be the father of a new race of supermen.

First, a word of warning. I bought Image's The Rites of Frankenstein that came out August 9, 2005. I didn't pay much attention and just assumed it would be the edition that is commonly known as The Erotic Rites of Frankenstein - a movie I've wanted to see for a while. But this version is actually the Spanish movie - La Maldición de Frankenstein. The big difference is that the Spanish movie is heavily cut (meaning all the naughty bits are cut out) and extra scenes with Lina Romay have been added (which do nothing for the movie). It seems that almost everything you normally look for in a Franco film has been left on the Spanish editing room floor. I'm positive my rating and opinion of this movie would improve when and if I ever get a chance to see the real thing.

For those unfamiliar with Franco, a first time viewing can be puzzling and jarring. To begin with, Franco has a tendency to put shots in his films that are totally unrelated to the story. The scenes I mentioned with Lina Romay are the perfect example. They're just there. Sometimes Franco will allow his camera to linger on an inanimate object for what seems like an eternity. In this movie we get a random, close-up shot of a tree for no purpose that I could see. Shooting things out of focus doesn't appear to bother Franco. There were a couple of scenes in The Rites of Frankenstein where I had to stop myself from yelling "Focus, Franco. Focus". There are other examples as I've just scratched the surface of what you're likely to see in an average Franco movie. Whether you like them or not, his movies provide an experience like no other.

Visually, Franco has filled The Rites of Frankenstein with all sorts of treats (at least what wasn't cut from my version). I've already mentioned Melissa, the Bird Woman. She's a blind half-bird/half-woman with steel looking talons, green feathers, and an appetite for human flesh. That's definitely something you don't see everyday. Franco could have made the whole movie about her and it might have been more interesting. Frankenstein's monster has a unique look - he's completely silver. Cagliostro has the ability to summon the undead. The site of these shrouded figures wandering through the forest is one of the highlights of the movie.

But mixed with these interesting scenes, Franco has seen fit to include some ridiculous moments. One of my "favorites" in The Rites of Frankenstein are continual close-ups of Cagliostro's eyes. Somehow Howard Vernon was able to go the entire movie without blinking and, for some reason known only to him, Franco felt compelled to show us Vernon's non-blinking eyes over and over and over and.... Don't ask why - it's Franco. I'm convinced they had a representative from Guinness and were going for some sort of world record.

In short, if you're a fan of Franco, you might find some enjoyment in the movie - but wait for the uncut version. If you don't like Franco, skip it all together.

3/10

The Octagon (1980)

Too bad the first hour is so dull, 14 August 2005

The plot in The Octagon hardly matters. Trying to follow the nuances of the story is enough to give you a headache. The plot deals with a lost brother, ninja training, a woman who has something to do with a group of terrorists, and some other hokum. It makes little sense. But that's not why people watch movies like The Octagon. The main purpose of the movie is to see Chuck Norris fight a bunch of ninjas.

I recently revisited Norris' A Force of One. Chuck's acting improved dramatically between the time he made that movie and the time he made The Octagon. He still had that unnatural style of delivery, but there was improvement there nonetheless.

The big problem with The Octagon, though, isn't the acting – it's the complete lack of anything interesting. The first hour or so is, in a word, boring. Nothing much happens. Chuck spends most of the time, like the audience, just trying to figure out what's going on. I don't think he was any more successful than I was.

4/10

Waterhole #3 (1967)

Nice cast, but flawed movie, 14 August 2005

The plot in Waterhole #3 seems lifted straight from one of Leone's Spaghetti Westerns - a group of people search for stolen Army gold. Finding the gold doesn't prove to be too difficult. But hanging onto it certainly does.

Other than one major flaw, Waterhole #3 is a reasonably entertaining comedy/Western that's sometimes very funny and sometimes...well...a Western. While the story may not be very originally, most of the cast does does an excellent job. James Coburn and Carroll O'Connor work well together. I've become quite the fan of Coburn and in Waterhole #3, he doesn't disappoint. Although he appears to basically be playing himself, he's entertaining enough to watch. In contrast, O'Connor has never been a favorite of mine, but his "bad" sheriff routine really works.

The one major flaw I mentioned, however, kept me from completely enjoying Waterhole #3 and giving it a better rating. The flaw concerns the treatment of the sheriff's daughter who is basically raped by Coburn. I'm no prude, but there's just no place for this in a light-hearted comedy. And the fact that the her father, the sheriff, does nothing about it and even makes jokes with Coburn over what happened is out of place and out of line. A little sexual innuendo, a peck on the cheek, or Coburn making a pass at the daughter might have worked much better, but rape takes it way too far.

6/10

Whoever Slew Auntie Roo? (1971)

Wasted Potential, 13 August 2005

Auntie Roo is crazy. The opening scenes leave little to the imagination as to her mental state. The movie begins with Auntie Roo singing a lullaby to a little girl. As she finishes her song, the camera goes to a close-up of the child sleeping in bed. But there is no child. Only the mummified remains of what was once Auntie Roo's daughter.

Before I saw the movie, I had thought and hoped that with Shelly Winters playing the crazy Auntie Roo the movie would be a fun watch. But it doesn't live up to its potential. My biggest problem with Whoever Slew Auntie Roo? is that it never goes far enough in showing how mad Auntie Roo is. It's as if Auntie Roo's madness is allowed to reach a certain point and the director pulls it back in. That's not to say there aren't some moments of fun to be had watching the crazy Auntie Roo racing around the house in her mourning clothes, complete with black veil. But there aren't enough of these moments. The only thing that might have saved Whoever Slew Auntie Roo? would have been to allow things to go over the top and into the realm of camp and absurdity. As it is, it's all too tame and rather dull.

Another thing that might have helped the movie would have been to reveal just how insane Auntie Roo is later in the movie. Unfortunately, we see Auntie Roo at her most batty right from the beginning. Once you've seen Auntie Roo put the mummified body of her child to bed, you aren't really shocked at some of the other things she's capable of. Saving the revelation to end would have created the opportunity for more surprises and tension throughout the movie.

4/10

The Legend of Boggy Creek (1972)

"Y'all wanna Coke?", 13 August 2005

The Legend of Boggy Creek is the story of a creature alleged to live in the area near Fouke, Arkansas. The creature supposedly stands 7 feet tall, is covered with hair, smells bad, and kills chickens, dogs, cats, and other small animals. Although the creature has never killed a human, as the movie points out, several people claim to have been terrorized by the "Bigfoot of the South" in the 1960s.

I don't remember how old I was the first time I saw The Legend of Boggy Creek, but it scared me. Part of the reason is that it's based on a supposed true story. The people in the movie are the real people who claim to have seen the monster. I've actually known people like this and their stories ring true with me (at least I believe that they believe what they're saying). As I've grown older, I realize that the story is probably a bunch of hooey, but the movie is still effective in raising the hairs on the back of my neck. Another plus for the movie is the low budget look it has. I realize that this is a bi-product of actually being made on a low budget, but the grainy look is often more effective in creating an atmosphere of horror than slick, well-financed productions can achieve.

And even if you don't find any of the legend spooky, there is enough to poke fun at to have a good time. Don't watch this movie if you're expecting Academy Award caliber acting. Most of the people in The Legend of Boggy Creek aren't actors. And those that actually are actors are about as believable as the Fouke Monster. A couple of songs in the movie are quite funny. For example, the main theme: "Here the Sulphur river flows / Rising when the storm cloud blows / This is where the creature goes / Lurking in the land he knows / Perhaps he dimly wonders why / Is there no other such as I / To love, to touch before I die / To listen to my lonely cry." You don't hear lyrics like that everyday. One scene that always makes me laugh is the death of one of Fouke's felines. When was the last time you saw a cat that was "scared to death" as the ever-present narrator of The Legend of Boggy Creek claims. Good stuff!

6/10