Sleepaway Camp II: Unhappy Campers (1988)

sleepaway2

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 3 out of 10

4-Word Review: Angela returns to camp.

Angela (Pamela Springsteen), the teen killer in the first film, has now been ‘reformed’ after going through years of shock therapy and sexual reassignment surgery. She gets a job as a counselor at a camp named Rolling Hills, which is 60 miles away from Camp Arawak, the site where she had previously killed all those people. The campers and other counselors have no idea about her past and have a hard time getting along with her and she’s quite strict with no tolerance for anyone who breaks the rules. If someone does draw her ire she quickly dispenses with them by reverting to her old habits and after they’re offed she goes and tells the camp leader, Uncle John (Walter Gotell), that she ‘sent them home’, but when she starts doing this to too many kids everyone’s suspicions begin to rise.

While on the technical end the production is decent the storyline is ridiculous even when taken into context of a black comedy, which is what the filmmakers were hoping for, it doesn’t work. The idea that Angela would be let out of a mental hospital in such a short period of time, just 5 years, after killing so many people is absolutely absurd and would create a national, media uproar. Since the murders were all deliberate and plotted out she most likely would be considered sane and stood trial and sent to a regular prison anyways. Why would any campsite hire her? Don’t these people do background checks? A way to have resolved this would’ve been to shown her at the beginning escaping from the mental hospital, and possibly killing a few orderlies along the way, which would’ve helped the story make more sense and also been an excuse to show blood and guts, which is what audiences for these types of films pretty just want anyways.

While Pamela Springsteen, who’s the younger sister of Bruce Springsteen, may be a quality actress in her other films she does not play the role here in a convincing way. What made Angela so memorable in the first was her penetrating stare, which we don’t see any of. Angela’s inner angst came from her gender issue and not that she was some old-fashioned prude, like in this one, that kills people who don’t live up to her high moral standard. It’s like a completely different person who’s connection to the other one is in name only. Apparently Felissa Rose, who played the role in the original, auditioned for the part, but because she couldn’t convey the one-liners in a humorous way that they wanted they decided to go with Pamela. Personally I feel they shouldn’t have even bothered to make it if Felissa couldn’t have recreated the role, which I felt she had earned the right to.

The killings are not as creative either and in fact look downright pathetic. I’ll give some credit to the death in the outhouse where a victim is shoved into the hole were people relieve themselves and then she struggles several times to come up, with more and more waste appearing on her as she does, but otherwise it’s tacky fare especially the end where they come into an abandoned home featuring all the dead victims that looks too obvious as being mannequins with red paint.  I also didn’t care for the nightmare segment, apparently done to help pad the runtime, that rehashes the killing scenes we’ve already seen and is highly redundant.

Fans of the film say it’s the humor that sells it. Yes, some of it is kind of funny like when the male counselor (Brian Patrick Clarke) smells underneath his arm pits after Angela walks away thinking that the reason she was so cold to him wasn’t because she’s a psycho, but more because of his possibly bad body odor. My favorite though is when Ally (Valerie Hartman) has sex with a man and then only after it’s over does she bother to ask him if he has ‘AIDS’. Yet outside of this it’s a letdown. As sequels go it’s not the worst of its kind, but I would’ve preferred more of a straight horror approach that tried to stay faithful to the first one, both in tone and with the cast.

My Rating: 3 out of 10

Released: February 28, 1988

Runtime: 1 Hour 20 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Michael A. Simpson

Studio: Double Helix Films

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Video, Pluto, Tubi, YouTube

Sleepaway Camp (1983)

sleepaway

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 6 out of 10

4-Word Review: Somebody’s killing the campers.

In 1975 two children are out on a lake with their father when the boat they’re in capsizes. As they are swimming in the water another boat that is being recklessly driven rams into them killing both the father and one of the children. Fast forward to 1982 one of the surviving children, Angela (Felissa Rose), is now living with her eccentric Aunt Martha (Desiree Gold) and Martha’s son Ricky (Jonathan Tiersten). Because Angela is very shy Martha has decided to send her off with Ricky to summer camp so that she can learn to socialize better. Once there Angela’s quiet nature causes her to be bullied by the other kids, which soon leads to all sorts of violent deaths amongst both the campers and counselors. The camp owner, Mel (Mike Kellin), wants to keep the deaths out of the press and insists they’re all just been accidents, but while he does this he becomes convinced that it’s Ricky who’s behind it and resolves to teach the kid a very brutal and violent lesson.

Initially this was a low budget film made near the end of the golden age of slasher flicks that was not intended to do all that well as most studios had considered this type of horror film to have gone out of style. The critics at the time savaged it, but since then it has gained a strong cult following and considered even ground breaking for its gay subtext and gender identity roles. Writer/director Robert Hiltzik shot it at a camp in upstate New York that he used to attend when he was growing up. The camp atmosphere is very authentic and I was impressed with how many kids they were able to bring on to make it seem like a genuine camp day with tons of kids running around everywhere and all of them age appropriate to the role versus having older kids over the age of 18 trying to look younger than they are, which is what you get in most other teen flicks. The only caveat is that it was filmed in September/October of ’82 and seeing some of the trees in the background changing colors does not help give off much of a summer time feel.

The film is noted amongst slasher aficionados for its grisly deaths. When I first saw this movie back in the 90’s I hadn’t seen as many slasher movie so I wasn’t aware of how the killings here are much different  than what you usually see. In most other films of this nature the victim dies usually by a quick slash of a knife, or strangulation, which isn’t either creative or memorable, but here you get all sorts of novel deaths. Two of the best is when an overweight man (Owen Hughes) has his entire body doused with scalding water and the throbbing blisters on his skin look realistic. He also doesn’t die, which is unusual because usually the victim passes away without that much of a struggle. The death by bee hive in which the victim has his face covered by hundreds of stinging bees is equally vivid and well played-out.

The acting is impressive too as not only do you get to see Christopher Collet in his film debut, and witness his bare behind in a brief bit, but also Felissa Rose, whose quiet stare is quite penetrating and becomes the film’s most lasting impression. She apparently got the part because during the audition they were asked not to convey any lines, but to simply stare off in space while pretending to eat some candy. Prolific character actor Mike Kellin, this was his last film and he was already dying of lung cancer when he did this, is fun particularly his incredibly unfashionable choice of clothes that bring out the worst styles of the 70’s and are reminiscent of a what a middle aged suburban dad of that era might wear when attending a neighborhood backyard BBQ.

Spoiler Alert!

On the negative end I didn’t find Angela, who we learn at the very end is really a boy, to be able to realistically pull-off the murders that she does. I don’t believe she (he) would’ve had the strength to pull out the chair from underneath a heavy-set man, nor dunk the head of a bigger boy under the water, or be able to force a knife through a metal wall of a shower stall. The argument that she’s really a boy doesn’t work as her (his) body type is quite small no matter the sex and the arms are scrawny. The film does well in coming up with novel deaths, but they should’ve worked harder at thinking up killings that a small fame teen could accomplish and still be in the realm of reality, which I don’t feel these are.

With that said it’s still a cool ending. I enjoyed the weird facial expression that Angela gives off once she’s caught and the camera freezes on it while morphing into a green backdrop. The final song that gets played is creepy too, so all in all the film succeeds though it will require some suspension of belief in order to be fully enjoyable.

My Rating: 6 out of 10

Released: November 18, 1983

Runtime: 1 Hour 24 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Robert Hiltzik

Studio: United Film Distributors

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Freeve, Pluto, Tubi, Amazon Video, 

Hellbound: Hellraiser II (1988)

hellbound

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 7 out of 10

4-Word Review: The cenobites come back.

The story begins immediately where the first installment ended with Kristy (Ashley Laurence) in the hospital recovering from her injuries while she pleads with Dr. Channard (Kenneth Cranham) and his assistant Kyle (William Hope) to destroy the bloody mattress that her stepmother Julia (Clare Higgins) died on for fear that it might bring the woman back to life. Dr. Channard finds this possibility intriguing, so he brings the mattress back to his home and then has one of his mentally ill patients bleed on it, which brings Julia, minus her skin, back from the other dimension. She feeds on the patient, which gives her strength and Dr. Channard supplies her with more of them until she is able to take human form. Kristy finds out about it and travels to Channard’s home along with Tiffany (Imogen Boorman), a mental patient at the hospital whom she meets that cannot speak, but has a gift for solving puzzles. When they confront Julia and Channard all four get taken to the other dimension known as the labyrinth that houses the cenobites.

While Clive Barker wrote the script and produced he did not direct and instead handed over the reins to his friend Tony Randel. Randel wanted to turn into more of a dark fantasy and the transitions works making it visually arresting. The mazes that make up the other dimension, which are captured from a bird’s-eye view as we see tiny dots, which represent the characters running, are amazing and I enjoyed Tiffany’s brief foray into a circus like freak show that had a giant fetus with its lips sewn shut, that was creepy and I wished extended further. The scene where Julia bursts out of the mattress to attack the patient I found genuinely horrifying and a dare say one of the scarier moments in horror film history. I also liked the backstory revealing how pinhead (Doug Bradley) came into being. Supposedly this backstory was supposed to take up a major part of the runtime, but due to budget limitations it had to be scrapped and we only see a brief snippet of it through quickly edited segments, which to me was probably best.

The script though does seem a little weak in the way it sets up the premise as it’s way too convenient that the patient in the neighboring room to Kristy’s would have this fixation to solving puzzle boxes, which just makes it highly predictable where its going to go. Have her Dr. show an equal fascination with the puzzles and the cenobite world is again betting long odds and having someone with this dark obsession from outside the hospital track Kristy down would’ve been more believable. The way the mental patients are housed looks dated like we’re seeing an asylum from the 16th century though it still works, if you suspend your belief a bit, with the film’s over the top style.

I was glad that at least Andrew Robinson’s character from the first one doesn’t appear here. He was asked to reprise his role, but refused, which was good because if he had returned the script would’ve had a scene where he and Frank where together in the same body like Siamese twins, which sounded ridiculous. I also don’t like movies that have a character die-off, like Robinson’s did in the first one, and then magically come back to life later, which seems to defeat the purpose. If someone dies then they should stay dead otherwise it’s really not that horrifying seeing anyone get killed if we know that somehow they can still find a way to exist.

Spoiler Alert!

The Julia character, which was already poorly defined in the first installment, gets worse here. Supposedly, she was so madly in-love with Frank that she was willing to kill for him, which meant they must have some sort of special and perverse bond, but in this one she gleefully rips his heart out, literally. In the first one she showed signs of being conflicted over what she was doing, but here she becomes one-dimensionally evil and very boring.

The only cool thing about her is the way she sheds her skin off, but this proves problematic when Kristy puts on the skin in order to disguise herself. The women had different body types and heights, so the skin should not be able to fit her. Also, the inside of the skin was lined with blood from Julia, so putting it on should make Kristy suffocate and quite frankly gag at the grossness of having someone else’s blood seep all over her and thus not be able to wear it for more than a few seconds, or at least that’s how I would respond if I were in that situation, which makes the ending here a bit problematic.

My Rating: 7 out of 10

Release: December 23, 1988

Runtime: 1 Hour 37 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Tony Randel

Studio: New World Pictures

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Video, Plex, Pluto, Tubi, YouTube

Hellraiser (1987)

hellraiser

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 6 out of 10

4-Word Review: Former lover needs blood.

Frank Cotton (Sean Chapman) purchases a puzzle box and brings it home to solve it. When he does he finds that it brings out demons known as Cenobites who enjoy inflicting pain on others for their own pleasure. After tearing Frank apart they reset the box and return to their own dimension. Larry (Andrew Robinson), Frank’s brother, moves into the house along with his wife Julia (Clare Higgins), who at one time, unbeknownst to Larry, had a brief affair with Frank. While moving in some boxes Larry cuts his finger and bleeds onto the attic floor where Frank was killed. Pieces of Frank still exist under the floor boards and the blood allows him to regain life though his body still needs more blood to regain its full form. He convinces Julia to bring in strangers from the bar home, so that she can kill them and allow Frank to drink their blood and regain more strength. Julia agrees to do this, but then Kristy (Ashley Laurence) becomes aware of what Julia is doing and is determined to put a stop to it by confronting Frank and taking away his puzzle box.

This was the first movie directed by Clive Barker and is based on his 1986 novel ‘The Hellbound Heart’. After being dissatisfied with how Rawhead Rex, based on another novel Barker had written, he became determined to direct the next feature in order to give it, in his words, some ‘directorial oomph’, which he had felt was missing in the previous film. Special effects wise the film hits all marks and is a precursor to what’s called Horror Porn today with a lot focus put on the effects that are both realistic and cruel. Watching Frank’s body slowly take form by growing out of the floorboards is quite impressive, but my only complaint are the close-ups of the skin particularly when a hook slices it open, which to me resembled more silly putty.

While the effects are great the characters aren’t. All of them come-off as dark and mean and there’s really no one to cheer for, or side with. Supposedly it’s Kristy the viewer is intended to get behind, but she came-off looking older than college aged and more like she was in her late 20’s. She’s also worldy-wise and seems able to handle herself, as is seen when she comes into contact with a couple of lecherous movers, quite effortlessly, so there’s no real character arch. Having her start-off as shy and sheltered and then grow stronger and confident as she learns to take on the cenobites would’ve been much more interesting and would’ve allowed for tension as you would initially question whether she had to guts to confront the evil like she eventually does.

The Julia character is weak too. I didn’t understand what drew her to Frank. Maybe in the novel this gets better explained, but in the movie it’s nebulous. Her brief fling with Frank, in the few backstory scenes that get shown, makes it seem like it was rather cold and distant and Frank doesn’t necessarily treat her all that well, so why would she bother helping to bring him back to life? Maybe she had a sadomaschistic bent, but if that was the case why would she marry Larry who treats her differently almost like he’s the passive and she’s more in control. If the woman prefers the man to be in control then that’s what she looks for in her next relationship not the opposite.

Spoiler Alert!

The twist near the end where Frank kills Larry and then begins to wear his skin gets botched too. It’s intended to be a surprise reveal for the viewer who, like with Kristy, initially think it’s the real Larry though it’s pretty obvious something isn’t right as blood is seeping out on the edges of his face, which Kristy should notice, but apparently because she’s so upset she doesn’t. It would’ve been better though to have the killing played-out and shown the final shocked expression on Larry’s face when he realizes he’s been betrayed by not only his brother, but wife too, which would’ve been priceless.

What’s even more perplexing though is why is Frank speaking in Larry’s voice? He may have his skin, but not the voice box. Even if he had tried to disguise it, in an effort to trick Kristy, I don’t think it would’ve come-off so convincingly. Then, once the gig is up and Kristy realizes it’s Frank, he still continues speak with Larry’s voice by why bother at that point since he no longer needed to fool her?

My Rating: 6 out of 10

Released: September 11, 1987

Runtime: 1 Hour 34 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Clive Barker

Studio: New World Pictures

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Video, Pluto TV, Tubi, YouTube

Slugs (1988)

slugs

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 5 out of 10

4-Word Review: Town overrun by mollusca.

Mike Brady (Michael Garfield) is a health inspector of a small town who’s finding its residents being killed and skinned by some sort of mysterious entity and the only clue are trails of slime that it leaves behind. Later, Mike and his friend Don (Philip MacHale), who works for the sanitation department, along with high school science teacher John Foley (Santiago Alvarez) determine that the culprit are slugs whose unusual aggressiveness may be tied to leakage from an abandoned chemical waste dump.

Based on the 1980 novel of the same name by Shaun Hutson the script follows the book version closely. Director Juan Piquer Simon is best known for the gory cult hit Piecesbut this movie fares a bit better on the technical end. I liked that it was shot on-location in the US, Lyons, New York, where the fall setting helps accentuate a spooky Halloween feel as Simon’s other horror film was done in Spain, but pretended to be Boston though it was easy to see the difference. The tone is a bit more playful, particularly the bouncy score, and seems to be trying for a light tongue-and-cheek approach though it could’ve used more humor and worked better had it went full into a comedy-horror versus trying to play it completely straight, which doesn’t work.

A lot of the problem is buying into these slugs being that dangerous. They’re small, slow, and squishy and can be easily smooshed with any type of hard object. Having people getting overrun and attacked by them just doesn’t seem believable. The film tries to compensate for this by showing the victims after they’ve been devoured, but a person would have to be awfully slow and inept not to be able to get away as all they’d have to do is just step on the things to eradicate them, which makes the whole concept of them being this threatening aggressor rather lame. I did though like the segment where a couple is busy making love and thus don’t notice the slugs coming into their room and ultimately have their nude bodies covered by them when they fall onto the floor, which has a provocavtive quality and I might give some credit to the final scene where Don gets attacked by them while underwater, but the rest of the slug killings come-off as exaggerated and more unintentionally comical than scary.

The fact that the town’s mayor (Manuel de Blas) refuses to listen to Mike and won’t cut-off the town’s water supply in an attempt to keep the slug infestation (they travel through the pipes) under control is too reminiscent of JawsIn Jaws seeing an elected official refusing to heed the warnings was interesting as it showed how greedy politicians can be just as much a threat to the people as a monstrous shark and maybe even more so, but here the confrontation comes-off as derivative and the actor playing the mayor isn’t as talented as Murray Hamilton who was able to make his character, as slimy as he was, fun and engaging.

The two actors who play the leads are especially bland and it’s no surprise that neither of them had much of a career in front of the camera. Both look like they’d be better suited on a soap opera, and MacHale was a cast member on both ‘Somerset’ and ‘One Life to Live’ as they have chiseled good looks, but a benign presence. In some ways it was refreshing not having teens cast in the lead as so many other horror movies do that, but there still needed to be adult characters that were interesting and multi-dimensional and these guys certainly are not. The lead guy needed some sort of fatal flaw, or some inner weakness he had to overcome that would make him unique, but instead it’s just John Suburbia going through the motions, which for me wasn’t captivating at all. A viewer needs to actually care about these people to get into it and since that doesn’t happen I found the whole thing to get pretty boring the more it went on though the movie poster is cool.

My Rating: 5 out of 10

Released: February 5, 1988

Runtime: 1 Hour 29 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Juan Piquer Simon

Studio: New World Pictures

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Video, Tubi, YouTube

Terror at Red Wolf Inn (1972)

terror1

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 4 out of 10

4-Word Review: An appetite for humans.

Regina (Linda Gillen) is a shy college student living in a dorm by herself who doesn’t have enough money to go to Spring break with the rest of her friends, so she’s forced to stay on the campus all alone while the others go. Then she receives a letter telling her that she’s won a free trip to a bed and breakfast resort called the Red Wolf Inn. She’s offered a private plane ride to get there and once she arrives she’s greeted by a kindly elderly couple (Arthur Space, Mary Jackson) who own the place and two other women, Pamela (Janet Wood) and Edwina (Margaret Avery), who are also staying there, as well as the couple’s adult grandson Baby John (John Neilson). While things start out well Regina soon grows uncomfortable and convinced that the couple has ulterior motives. When both Pamela and Edwina disappear Regina fears she’ll be next, but her efforts to escape are thwarted trapping her in the home to become the next meal item unless she can convince Baby John, who has fallen for her, to help her find a way out.

This very odd piece of 70’s horror that seems to want to combine a grisly theme with offbeat humor definitely has a few keen moments. My favorite was the way Regina finds out that she’s ‘won something’ and excitedly shouts it out to her otherwise empty dorm building. Some may consider this exaggerated as most people today would be highly cynical of such a letter, but back in the 70’s, (and I was around then), the teens were more trusting and had a propensity to be experimental and act as if life was just one big adventure, so in that respect the movie gets it right and this became for me one of the funnier moments The only caveat is how did the couple find out about Regina to send her the letter? Why was she chosen and how often and how many of these letters did they mail and how many of them got answered, which never gets addressed, but should’ve.

On the horror end its not very scarry and only borderline creepy. There is a dream sequence that had the potential of being cool, but doesn’t go on long enough. Regina’s attempt at escape I did like, but it does leave open plenty of loopholes like why was a motorboat, that wasn’t tied to any dock, conveniently left out in the bay for her to swim to? Initially I though it was an intended trap and she’d get into it and see dead bodies lying there, but that’s not the case as she uses it to get over to a neighbor’s house, but no ones inside and all the other buildings in the area are eerily empty, but why? The dinner scene in which everyone chomps at their food like pigs could’ve been considered revolting and upsetting had it been confirmed that it was people they were eating, but this wasn’t yet established, so the shock effect is lost.

Some have labeled this as a comedy-horror and one of the first films to use this sub-genre, but outside of the opening bit there really isn’t anything all that amusing. There are some moments of extreme awkwardness like when Baby John smashes the head of a baby shark repeatedly against a rock while a shocked Regina looks on in horror before he turns to her and confesses how much he loves her, which is darkly humorous in a distorted type of way, but outside of that the chuckles are as infrequent as the scares.

Spoiler Alert!

I did enjoy Mary Jackson’s performance who goes from nice old lady to threatening matron effectively, but the wrap-up leaves much to be desired. Initially it’s sort-of exciting as Regina and Baby John make a daring run for it only to be chased down by the older couple’s dog and then viciously attacked by both the pet and the old man. The film then cuts to show Regina and Baby John back inside the kitchen of the grandparent’s home having supposedly gotten the upper hand, but this is a struggle that needed to be played-out, the film lacks action anyways and this would’ve offered much needed excitement and tension. Showing the old couple’s decapitated heads inside the freezer had a gory appeal, but then having the old guy look up and wink ruins it and turns the whole movie into one big stupid joke.

Some viewers insist that the 77 minute version, which is what’s available on DVD despite the cover saying it’s 90 minutes, is the edited version with certain scenes of ‘horror’, or other ‘dark’ moments left out and this is based mainly on the fact that IMDb lists the original runtime as 90 minutes and Leonard Maltin’s review book says it’s 98 minutes, but I’m not so sure. As short as the 77 minute runtime is it still came off as draggy. This was also made in an era where implying the violence and gore was considered shocking enough making me believe that the DVD cut is pretty much the whole thing. Even if a longer version may exist it’s doubtful that it would be filled with more carnage as it’s clear that the filmmakers were going for a soft tongue-and-cheek approach making me believe the supposed lost scenes would’ve amounted to being talky bits that wouldn’t have added much.

terror2

Alternate Title: Terror House

My Rating: 4 out of 10

Released: September 27, 1972

Runtime: 1 Hour 17 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Bud Townsend

Studio: Red Wolf Productions

Available: DVD

Ghost Story (1981)

ghost1

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 7 out of 10

4-Word Review: Four men carry secret.

Four elderly men, Ricky (Fred Astaire), John (Melvyn Douglas), Edward (Douglas Fairbanks Jr.), and Sears (John Houseman), who all live in the same small Vermont town and are lifelong friends who call themselves the Chowder Society, get together each week to tell each other ghosts stories. Then Edward’s son Don (Craig Wasson) dies after falling out his apartment window. The men begin having reoccurring nightmares focusing on Eva Galli (Alice Krige) a woman they once knew 50 years earlier. Has she come back from the dead to haunt them and their family members? And just exactly what happened to her as she seemed to have left town without a trace? Only the four men seem to know the answer to this and all of them guard this secret quite closely, but once David (Craig Wasson) comes to town, who is Edward’s other son, he becomes determined to break their silence.

The film is based on Peter Straub’s epic novel, which was released in 1978 and was 483 pages long. Many fans of the book complained that the movie overly simplified the plot, but there is just no way you can condense a long book into a two hour screenplay and for what it’s worth I think both director John Irvin and screenwriter Lawrence D. Cohen did the best they could and if anything this might’ve worked better as a TV-miniseries where many of the story’s dramatic angles could’ve been played out more. My main complaint is that in the novel Eve Galli character was portrayed as being a manitou who could change shape being a small child at one point and a wasp at another and the film would’ve been scarier had it taken that approach.

I also didn’t like Wasson, who’s great for giving a deer-in-headlights-look, but not much else, playing both the brothers. I can’t remember if they were twins in the book, or not, but having them be twins here wasn’t integral to the plot and makes it a bit confusing. For instance when the brother falls out the window, where he is naked and full frontal nudity showing, which was bit daring at the time for males, the next shot shows Wasson, as the twin, waking out of deep sleep making it seem incorrectly that it had all just been a dream.

The film’s main selling point is seeing four legendary actors, who were all either in their 80’s, or nearing it, still able to carry a film, which they do quite well and if anything it would’ve been nice seeing them in more of it. Astaire’s presence is especially interesting, he apparently threaten to quit the movie several times during the shooting, as he had mostly done musicals and light fare before this one. The females are strong here too particularly Krige in her film debut, who gets shown nude from both the back and the front, who has a very creepy presence. Jacqueline Brookes as Melvyn Douglas’ wife has a few key moments, but Patricia Neal, as Astaire’s wife, gets barely any speaking parts at all and is entirely wasted.

The recreation of the 1930’s was my favorite part and quite well done with the characters behaving in believable ways and making it seem like they weren’t just caricatures of their era, but real people that could exist today. Finding actors to play the roles of the older men in their younger years and come off closely resembling them is amazing and much credit should go to the casting director Mike Fenton for hiring young men with just the right characteristics of their older counterparts. The only caveat is that it has the incident occurring 50 years earlier, just like in the book, but with all the actors clearly looking like they’re in their 80’s a more accurate time period would’ve been 60 years when these guys would’ve realistically been college aged.

Spoiler Alert!

The effects are good though much of the scares hinges off of sporadic close-ups of ghostly Eva’s decomposed face, which gets a bit redundant. The story leaves open a lot of questions like why does Eva’s ghost wait 50 years to haunt the men; why not begin terrorizing them 10  years later or even 20? Also, why does Eva go after the son’s of one of the culprits who wasn’t even born yet when the incident happened instead of going directly after the old guys who were responsible? Also, how does a ghost take humor form enough so that the Wasson character is able to make love to her, he complains that she’s ‘cold to the touch’, but a spirit should be trapped into being just that, or at best possessing someone else’s body, but here we have Eva literally recreated to modern day and am not sure in ghostly logic terms how that gets done though despite these issues it’s still a fun ride.

My Rating: 7 out of 10

Released: December 15, 1981

Runtime: 1 Hour 51 Minutes

Rated R

Director: John Irvin

Studio: Universal

Available: DVD, Amazon Video, YouTube

Tales that Witness Madness (1973)

tales

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 3 out of 10

4-Word Review: Four tales of terror.

Directed by legendary cinematographer Freddie Francis, the film revolves around four stories where the protagonist is perceived as having gone mad, but in actuality it’s evil from another dimension that gets them to see or do odd things and in reality they’re the sane ones. The connecting element is Donald Pleasance who acts as their psychiatrist who keeps them at his clinic in an effort to improve their mental state. In the first story we have a boy named Paul (Russell Lewis) who boasts about having a live tiger in his room even though his parents (Donald Houston, Georgia Brown) don’t believe him. The second story deals with Timothy (Peter McEnery) an antique collector who’s able to ride an old Penny Farthing bicycle that allows him to go back into time and inhabit another man’s body. The third tale deals with a man (Michael Jayston) who brings home a dead tree and mounts it in his living room much to the annoyance of his wife (Joan Collins). The final story is about a rich socialite (Kim Novak) who courts a younger man only for him to have show more interest in her beautiful daughter (Mary Tamm).

This Review Contains Spoilers!

The first story is pretty weak mainly because you presume going in that there’s probably, despite the long odds, some sort of tiger present because after all this is a horror movie dealing with the supernatural, so seeing the parents getting attacked at the end isn’t surprising, or even shocking and you’re pretty much just waiting for it to happen from the get-go. Director Francis makes the mistake of attempting to film the attack as it happens by editing in stock footage of a tiger and mannequin parts with red paint standing in for the parent’s bodies, but it all looks quite fake. Since the tiger figures in again at the very end of the movie a better idea would’ve been to keep it a mystery whether he existed, or it was just a homicidal child that had killed his mom and dad. When the parents walked into the son’s room the camera should’ve remained outside in the hall and the viewer hearing their screams, which would’ve been scarier than anemic special effects that we ultimately do see.

The second story is limp as well as it features a picture of ‘Uncle Albert’ whose facial expressions and eyes are constantly moving and changing, which has been parodied in many other films making this one seem more campy than scarry. The third tale is dumb too as anyone who brings a dead tree into their living room and wants to keep it there is mentally ill and the wife would’ve been smart to have left him versus fight for his affections. The twist here is no surprise either as I saw it coming right from the start though Collins does give a good performance and the viewer gets treated to a shot of her breasts although I suspect it was done by a body double.

The fourth segment is the only one that merits any type of mention as it features the bad guys not only killing the daughter, but slicing her up and then serving her to the mother as a piece of ham during a Hawaiian-style luau. The audacious idea deserves some points and Novak’s performance is fun as is Tamm’s in her film debut, who you also get to see nude from the backside, but it fails to make up for the rest of it, which isn’t up to par with the other British Anthology horror films from that period.

My Rating: 3 out of 10

Released: October 31, 1973

Runtime: 1 Hour 30 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Freddie Francis

Studio: Paramount

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Video, YouTube

Blood Lake (1987)

blood1

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 1 out of 10

4-Word Review: Killer stalks 6 teens.

Filmed on-location in Cedar Lake, Oklahoma by a bunch of young amateurs convinced they could make a horror movie just as good as the studios. Mike Berry, who stars as Mike, wrote the screenplay and then shopped around his script, but could find no takers until he bumped into Tim Boggs at a local retail store who agreed to take on the task of directing and even quit both of his jobs to do it. The shooting took place over a course of 10 days with the storyline revolving around 6 teens who go to the house of Becky (Angela Darter) whose parents are away, which will allow them to party for the whole weekend only to have it interrupted by a deranged killer (Tiny Frazier) upset because the house they’re in used to be owned by him.

When I hear about films like this I harken back to Harold P. Warren, who wrote, directed, produced, and starred in Manos: The Hands of Fatewhich has become quite infamous as one of the worst movies ever made, but also started as a bet where Warren, being a local salesmen, bet famous screenwriter Stirling Stilliphant, who was in the El Paso, Texas area scouting for locations for an upcoming film, that he could direct a horror movie that could be just as good as anything Hollywood could churn out. Of course the results where abysmal, but you can’t help but feel that the cast and crew here were equally in over their heads.

On the positive side it starts out a heck of a lot better than the Warren film, which had extended shots focusing on the passing Texas countryside for no apparent reason and got visually boring quite fast. The excuse for this was that Warren had expected to shoot the opening credits over this, but for whatever reason it got botched leaving a lot extraneous and pointless footage. Here though they get it right with a nicely edited bit showing the kids driving in a car while the credits and music play over it. In fact the editing is quite good and helps equalize the cheap video look that was done via a VCR camera. The dialogue is also well done as director Boggs was smart enough to allow the teens to paraphrase their own lines to make it sound natural and thus the characters come-off as more believable than in most other bigger budgeted horror flicks, so we’ll score one for the Okies on that.

Unfortunately everything else is pretty bad. The big problem is that not enough happens. For a film with Blood in its title you end up seeing very little of it. There’s a quick killing at the beginning, which doesn’t show much gore, and then another 48 minutes before you see another one. There’s a teaser death where you see a body floating in a lake, but it turns out to being just a prank. I realize other 80’s slasher flicks would sometimes employ this, but when you’re a cheap production you can’t play with the audiences expectations like that and you got to get to the gore and violence pretty quick to hold their interest. Spending almost 20-minutes watching the kids go water skiing turns the whole thing into a snooze feast and it’s very unlikely anyone is going to want to stick with it after that.

Spoiler Alert!

The killings, once they finally get going, aren’t impressive and all done by a guy who doesn’t look frightening at all and has no distinguishing features to make him interesting. The knife he uses is quite small and having him use a sword, or ax, or something big and sharp would’ve elicited more terror. The reason for why he goes on a killing spree is that apparently he sold the house to the new owners, but they ended up ‘not paying for it’, but how does someone take possession of the home if no money transaction takes place? You can’t really ‘sell a home’ if no actual sale happens.

The ending is confusing too as the killer’s body disappears and then it gets intimated that he reappears inside the ambulance that’s taking the injured teens to the hospital though we don’t really see this as all that gets shown is the ambulance driving away with laughter in the background. The final sequence becomes almost surreal as the killer magically reappears at the home site only for him to see all the water in the lake drained out. Apparently this was, as the closing credits intimate, an ‘act of God’, but what does it have to do with the story?

My Rating: 1 out of 10

Runtime: 1 Hour 22 Minutes

Not Rated

Director: Tim Boggs

Distributor: United Home Video

Available: DVD, Fandor, Plex, Tubi, Amazon Video, YouTube

Poltergeist III (1988)

poltergeistIII

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 3 out of 10

4-Word Review: Ghosts haunt a skyscraper.

Carol Anne (Heather O’Rourke) has been sent away by her parents to Chicago so that she can live with her Aunt Diane (Nancy Allen) and her husband Bruce (Tom Skerritt) along with Donna (Lara Flynn Boyle) Bruce’s teen daughter from a previous marriage. Carol Ann is told that this is just a temporary set-up while she attends a school for gifted children. The school though is more of a therapy center for kids with emotional issues and run by Dr. Seaton (Richard Fire), who doesn’t believe Carol Ann’s stories about seeing ghosts and thinks she’s making it up to get attention and has some sort of ability to create mass hypnosis to get others to believe it too.  Soon after moving there the evil Reverend Kane (Nathan Davis) returns and begins terrorizing Carol Anne by appearing in mirrors as he continues his attempts to bring her back to the other side.

In another example of a sequel nobody asked for writer/director Gary Sherman, who had some success helming horror flicks early in his career that gained a cult following like Dead & Buried manages to inject an interesting vision. Moving the setting away from a suburban home and into a city skyscraper was a good idea as the story needed to progress somewhere and not just be a rehashing of things again and again in the same place, or one that looks just like it, would’ve give the whole thing a very redundant quality. Visually it looks sharp, I especially liked the scenes with frozen ice, with the special effects done live and not matted onto the film print later on like in the first two. The use of the mirrors, which are used as sort of window to the other dimension where the evil spirits reside, does offer a few jolts.

I liked that O’Rourke reprised her role and she gives an excellent performance, though she’s not seen all that much as she gets kidnapped and taken to the other side, which forces others to go after her just like in the first two installments, but it’s fun seeing her grow into a more accomplished actress who can handle broader speaking lines and able to hold her own in a wider variety of dramatic situations. The only negative is her visible swollen cheeks, the result of cortisone treatment shots that she was getting due to a misdiagnosis of Crohn’s disease, which gives her a chipmunk type look.

Zelda Rubinstein also reprises her role as Tangina, but like in the second installment, isn’t seen enough and it’s disappointing when she goes away. Davis takes on the role of the Reverend when Julian Beck, who played the role in Part II, died, but the character is only seen sporadically and doesn’t have all that much of a presence and an effective horror film needs a villain, whether it’s in human, spirit, or monster form, with adequate screen time to build tension and here that’s just not the case.

The storyline starts to become derivative of other better known horror flicks especially the use of the possession theme where we have an evil Carol Anne running around tricking everyone that she’s the real one, but isn’t. Her transformation into a devilish ghoul resembles a cheap imitation of Linda Blair from The Exorcist. I admit the first time it’s done it caught me off guard and was good enough to elicit a minor jolt, but then they go back to it too often where it becomes boring and predictable. The shots showing Carol Anne being spotted running away around corners and through doorways while wearing a red pajama suit is too reminiscent of Don’t Look Now, a Nicholas Roeg directed classic that dealt with parents searching for their missing young daughter and would occasionally spot her, or what they thought was her, running around street corners and through doorways in Venice while also wearing a bright red piece of clothing.

The biggest mistake though was that the reins weren’t fully handed over to O’Rourke as she was the only real carryover from the first two. Rubenstein too should’ve been given more of a part, but in any case the action should’ve followed Carol Anne all the way through and having it instead cut over to Skerrit and Allen’s characters and making them the main stars isn’t interesting at all. They come-off as quite bland and benign and just thrown in because Craig T. Nelson and Jobeth Williams didn’t want to recreate their roles. O’Rourke by this stage had enough acting ability that she could’ve carried it and the audiences would’ve excitedly been there with her the whole way, but unfortunately during the second and third act she gets relegated to cameo status while Skerrit and Allen take over, which are people we care nothing about and makes it seem like a completely different type of movie entirely.

My Rating: 3 out of 10

Released: June 10, 1988

Runtime: 1 Hour 38 Minutes

Rated PG-13

Director: Gary Sherman

Studio: MGM/UA

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Video, YouTube