Interview: Susan Adriensen

It took longer than I thought it would but, in the end, it was worth the wait. At long last the interview with Susan Adriensen is done. I started the interview not long after I watched Under The Raven's Wing. A film that Susan directed. Since she contacted me to do a review of the film, I had to ask if she would be willing to do an interview with me. She was happy to do so since we both thought it would give her film a little more exposure. The plan was to do the review and then post the interview shortly after. Life has a funny way of getting in the way at times though. We would both get busy or one of us had a little free time while the other didn't so much. In the end though, we got it done. Not to honk my own horn, so to speak, but I think it turned out to be a good interview. Enough talk from me. I give you Susan Adriensen.

Heather Santrous: Susan, I wanted to thank you for allowing me to watch and review Under The Raven's Wing. I must say that you surprised me when you asked me to review it. I never thought anyone would contact me and ask me to review their movie, so this was a very nice surprise. As I write this, you have no idea what I thought of it, since I haven't done the review itself yet. Does this....I don't know, make you nervous at all?

Susan Adriensen: [[[GULP!]]]

HS: Okay, I will take that as a "yes." Before we start talking about the movie, would you mind telling me about yourself?

SA: I’m a filmmaker, actress, wife, and mother of two parrots ("Puppy" and "Einstein"). I graduated with a BA in Broadcasting from Montclair State University, but only discovered filmmaking in an elective class during my last semester, senior year! Years passed and I always dreamed about making a movie. It wasn’t until several years later, after a bit of depression from the loss of a second brother, that I picked up my husband’s small single chip camera and just decided to do it! My husband searched e-bay for lights and we did pretty good, considering the quality of the camera. The movie is called Mavi Göz, a paranormal drama … or sometimes I call it my "artsy" film. I cast myself as lead actress, because I knew I’d be available for the many weekends of shooting over several months. I never quite perfected the audio on the project. I took a break from filmmaking for a while, basically because I wanted a better camera and I got too busy with my networking group, Mingle Mangle: Horror Filmmakers and Fans. After not being able to get a special event off the ground, I thought it just might be better to … make another movie! We finally purchased a new camera and that’s where Under the Raven’s Wing comes along.

HS: I will admit to you that I was a little worried when I was reading that you were the director/writer/producer, among other things, for Under The Raven's Wing. Most of the time, but not always, I have found movies like that fall short. I think it is because one person is trying to take on too many tasks. I know when I try to, things don't always turn out the best that I know they can be. You seemed to have pulled it off though. Was it as hard as I think it is to do so many things?

SA: Yes. It was hard. I had help from some wonderful production people. Most of them had full time jobs, so the brunt of pre-production was on me. As for the other roles, writing was done separately and fairly quickly since I already had an outline of the characters for many years. So once the writing was done, the pre-production began. That’s A LOT OF WORK! It consisted of lots of juggling and planning. This included more than just scheduling (which Brian Jude, my other producer, helped greatly). I also had to shop for wardrobe, props, makeup, and the craft service goods (and I HATE food shopping).

Then there were the shooting days. I had to wear the hat of Producer and Director and sometimes Actor. Once again, I had the help of others to get me through it all. But I will confess, there were times my head was spinning in so many directions.

And as for the post-production, … well … editing was a different beast for me - a reclusive and tedious beast, but it got done with my sanity intact … I think. Our trailer was created by one of my Co-Producers, Sophia Eptamenitis and friend, Derek Blakeman (the trailer can be seen here ). As for promoting and being there for me, I have to thank Kimberly Amato ("Raven"). I didn’t know her for beans and she had to audition like everyone else. I had no idea of her organizational skills and savvy until she offered to help. Her title is, of course, "Raven," but she soon became "Co-producer" as well. Without her, I wouldn’t have been able to get around to doing this interview. I’d still only be sending out to our first film festival. Oh! By the way, Under the Raven’s Wing got accepted into the Full Moon Film Festival and Convention and was screened for Halloween!

HS: Now that you have been able to read my review of Under The Raven’s Wing, you know how much I enjoyed it. Did the folks at the Full Moon Film Festival and Convention understand your intent too?

SA: Honestly, it's hard to say. At the festival theater none of the theaters had signage of what film was showing. Also, non-fest movies were playing. Some people were in the wrong theater! When I saw a couple with their two pre-teen daughters, I thought, "They have no idea." Sure enough, to my relief, they left during the detailed stories of the slumber party scene.

Regardless of these issues, we were pleased to meet a young local gentleman who came to see Under the Raven’s Wing just by seeing the trailer posted on the Full Moon Film Festival site. He told us that the trailer looked "different" from the other movies and it intrigued him. This local guy, Brian Mills, not only understood the movie, but enjoyed it as well. He even saw the movie twice! Later, he asked me deep intuitive questions. I like that. My movie sparked questions and thoughts! Brian is now considered our first real fan!

HS: Now wait a minute. I got to watch it first so I want that title! I am glad you are starting to see people that appreciate the movie. Where did the idea for Under The Raven's Wing come from?

SA: Remember that rinky-dink one-chip camera I mentioned? Well, a friend from college and I wanted to do a short film about Goth chicks who commit a murder (although the Goths I know wouldn’t hurt a fly!). Anyway, things fell through as my friend got busy and I put my shot list and character background on the shelf. I created Mavi Göz instead. Years later, I took my notes off the shelf, blew off the dust, and wrote a script. I added much more detail to the characters and put in a little of my own childhood experience with Christian fundamentalists.

HS: How much of the history for each character came from you and how much came from each actress?

SA: Well, basically, everything you hear in the movie, the dialogue and "Raven’s" rambling monologues, are from the script I wrote (yes, it’s scary). I put a little bit of myself into each character – including the male character. I feel a little psychotic like "Raven" sometimes. I feel shy at times and sweet, like "Jessie." I feel sexy and flirty like "Angel." As for "The Director," he represents my inner battles.

But I can’t take the credit for what each and every actor brought to these characters. They all brought a little something that I, of course, could not have provided. I was especially amazed at Kimberly Amato’s take on "Raven." She came into the audition with only the sides that we had provided. They didn’t say much about the history of "Raven," but Kimberly KNEW "Raven" was abused as a child. (That WASN’T in the sides!) With her education and background in Forensic Psychology, she created a psychological profile for "Raven" and concluded she was suffering from "antisocial personality disorder." I, of course, knew "Raven" was delusional, but to have someone with education and experience in these things come to an audition and confirm it was great!

When we all saw her audition our mouths dropped. We had our "Raven!" The other actors were perfect for their characters too. I giggled when Coy DeLuca auditioned for "The Director" because his voice was so perfect. Jessica Palette and Kamilla Sadekova also brought a little something to their characters that was special and unique.

HS: You talked about how each character is a part of yourself. You have also talked about how The Director is a voyeur. Did that come from a part of your personality too? Sorry, but I simply could not let that one pass by without asking you.

SA: Hah! Hah! Boy, you caught that, didn’t you, Heather?! I am being totally honest here - I have a telescope collecting dust in my living room. I don’t use it because I wonder, as I peer through it, … who’s watching me? Think Rear Window.

HS: Could you tell us what your favorite memory or moment from Under The Raven's Wing is?

SA: There were so many good memories. Most of the time the working process was fun, but the downtimes were exceptionally enjoyable. I’ll never forget our last day of principal shooting when we stopped for lunch. I went outside and suddenly blasting from Brian Jude’s car was one of my favorite songs I had as a ring back on my phone: Morrissey’s "The More You Ignore Me, the Closer I Get." Suddenly, I found myself dancing on the sidewalk with Kimberly Amato ("Raven") and Jessica Palette ("Jessie") like fairies in a circle! We had so much fun. I can’t wait to work with all of them again!

HS: It sounds like you had some fun moments. I'm sure that helped balance out all the hard work. Since you have held various positions in horror movies, which task have you found to be the hardest?

SA: Well, when you’re working on your own low-budget/indie movie, EVERYTHING becomes hard. I found myself running around buying things from wardrobe to craft service. One day, our additional makeup person decided to drop out two days before the shoot. That left me to do the makeup for "Raven" … on top of directing! I actually enjoy doing these things, but in the rush and with all my other tasks … I can easily say, those tasks were difficult and hard.

But if I had to pick one position that is a stand-alone difficult task, I would say … casting. Being an actress myself, I must learn to distance myself from the disappointment the actors must feel when coming all the way to an audition and not getting the part. I just hate being the one to make the final decision, but it is the nature of the beast.

HS: What about directing? What was hard about that for you?

SA: I think most new female filmmakers can relate to not being taken seriously. You have to work harder, but it pays off. You’ll be taken seriously more sooner than later … just finish a great film….

HS: Since we just talked about your work behind the camera, let’s talk about your work in front of it. Does acting come naturally to you, or do you have to work at it?

SA: It all depends on the character and the situation that character is in. To be honest, the crazier the character, the more natural it feels. Playing straight is difficult, but if that straight person turns nuts, it’s like smooth sailing for me. I wonder why that is….

HS: I have only watched two of the films you have acted in. Could you tell me about the films I haven't watched yet that you are in?

SA: Have you seen The Blood Shed? You gotta see The Blood Shed! It gives homage to The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Pink Flamingos. I also see a little bit of Carrie in there too. It’s a horror comedy … done right! I can say that because the reviews have been phenomenal!

I play a member of the Bullion family clan, Sno Cakes. Don’t mess with them. Don’t go around sneakin’ in their back yard either! They’re inbred crazies … with some special family powers…. That’s all I’m gonna say. The movie is available NOW!

HS: No I haven't watched that one yet but I will be sure to do so! One of the movies I have watched is Prison Of The Psychotic Damned. Can you tell us how you got involved with that movie?

SA: If I recall correctly, a friend at EI Cinema (now Pop Cinema) recommended me to David Williams of Red Scream Films. I then corresponded back and forth with Williams. I sent him my resume and headshot. I believe I also sent him a DVD copy of Mavi Göz. Before I knew it, I was on board to play "Professor Rayna Bloom!"

HS: I think each of us that watch POTPD will have our own "take" on what happens to your character at the end. Would you share your thoughts with us on what you felt happens to her?

SA: We talked about the actual fate of "Rayna Bloom" on set. Between the cast and David Williams, there are many different stories. I’d really rather leave it up to the viewer, but to make your brain-gears turn – if the "Psychotic Damned" still linger in the Terminal, wouldn’t all those killed be still lingering as well? However, "Rayna Bloom" is seen running off screen…. What really happens to her? I’ll let you decide.

I’m not sure if the outtakes of that scene are on the current released DVD, but … that’s a must-see!

HS: The other movie I have watched that you acted in is of course, Under The Raven's Wing. It was a small part and I probably wouldn't have known it was you, if I didn't already know what you looked like. Why did you decide to step in front of the camera?

SA: It's actually quite simple - I was available. Many people think actors and actresses grow on trees. They do not! It’s especially difficult to find good actors for small, one-line roles or for extra roles. I didn't want to go through the auditioning process for such a small part - which was the role of "Young Jessie's Mother." Heck! Even the role of "Young Raven's Foster Dad" was played by our very own Brian Jude.

Also, I will be very honest, the scenes that I played as "Young Jessie's Mother," are very sensitive to me. They deal with some actual events in my life, and I had very specific ideas for that role. It was just best that I got in front of the camera for that part. It was a bit therapeutic.

HS: I appreciate that you are being honest and open with me for this interview. I'm sure the fans appreciate it as well. The 1980's found a rather large movement of people protesting horror movies because of violence against women, among other things. While there is certainly violence against women in these types of films, I have never felt that people will watch these films and then commit an act of violence. Since you have been in horror movies, I'm curious as to what you think about this claim.

SA: Wow. That’s a difficult question. I can’t say whether violence against women in movies actually causes violence against women. I’m sure there are psychologists and researches that have done extensive work. We hear all the time that violence on TV is bad for our children. I’m sure it is. But what about the adults? I cannot say.

I can tell you from my own perspective that because television and movies have become so saturated with violence that I’m not sure that those of us who grew up watching those movies realize how accustomed we are to the violence. The 80’s hacker movies / chase-after-the-pretty-girl-to-kill-her movies never bothered me on a gender/sexist level. I just thought they were scary … or sometimes dumb and funny.

If a movie is blatantly out to make a point of being violent against women in general, I would have a problem with it. That being said, I NEVER promote censorship. So, it’s a catch 22 situation in my book. I, myself, have truly, but unconsciously, created a thin and fine line of what I feel is acceptable and what’s not. I sometimes feel hypocritical because I "ride the fence." My scripts include violence or dark subjects and I’m sure there are people who would find it offensive. I also find certain movies offensive myself. Some filmmakers go too far and although I don’t promote censorship, I can choose what I watch … and don’t watch. Just recently, I deleted a myspace "friend" because they posted a bulletin of a video … as they said: "a preggo getting it with a bat." Out of angry curiosity seeing the word "preggo" and knowing full well that it was about a pregnant woman, I watched it. First, I fast-forwarded it. I’m just too busy to watch unknown film shorts during my working hours. Sure enough, there’s a man violating a pregnant woman with a bat as she cries for her unborn child. I immediately deleted that person as a "friend."

Then I thought, "I didn’t even watch the whole entire movie." What if the woman wins in the end? Or "super baby" popped out and clobbered the man? Who knows? I made a choice. Delete! Buh bye! But we all have a choice!

But what about me? My most recent script has a scene that is not too far from that, but it’s a daydream sequence and the attacker … is a woman. Does that make it right? It’s all what we perceive.

And in many ways, we can’t point at any one decade as being more violent than another. The 70’s came out with some very raw movies. Today, movies are made so realistically that it’s hard not to cringe. There are two recent movies that come to mind that made me wince. One is Devils Rejects - when Otis and Baby Firefly force the character of Gloria to strip. That scene was hard to watch. But, women weren’t the only victims in the movie. (And I will confess - that movie was done oh so well that it is one of my favorites horror movies. I don’t think I’m a bad person for it.) Another movie is Jack Ketchum’s The Girl Next Door. Not really a horror movie, but it was a horrific story – based on a true story. And it was an upsetting movie. Was it a good movie? Yes and done well, but I am a little uncomfortable that it’s getting accepted into horror film festivals. Is the torture entertaining for some?

So when it comes to violence to females in film, we have to look at the big picture. Are females the only victims in the film? What’s the story telling? And what about other mediums … like music? Aren’t the hip-hop songs doing the same? But, I wouldn’t dare censor the artists. I just wouldn’t listen to it…. People have a choice.

As for myself and other filmmakers, we certainly can’t be responsible for the actions of others. Hell, with all the horror movies I’ve seen, how come I never went out and really hit someone with a brick? But honestly, for me there’s always a concern with my movie Under the Raven’s Wing. How will people perceive it? Will they believe in Raven’s philosophy? Will they do something stupid like try to transcend someone in the name of love? Oh shit. People, it’s just a movie! I wrote the script and I’m just making commentary on the parallel between religious fundamentalists and Raven and the girls. You don’t want to be like either one, do you?

I cannot compromise my artistic ideas and writing. I don’t expect others to do so either. Like I said, it’s a very fine thin line….

HS: Personally I do not think you should have to compromise your ideas, and I hope you never have to do that. I also agree with your thoughts on violence related to females in horror movies. Susan, you mentioned your web site, Mingle Mangle earlier. Will you tell us more about it?

SA: Mingle Mangle: Horror Filmmakers and Fans is a networking group I put together back in August of 2004. The members, or as I call them, "Manglers," are people in the film or music industry who come to our mixers or who have supported Mingle Mangle in some way. Basically, we meet in a bar or lounge in NYC for "Mingle Mangle Mixers," which are free. We talk shop and promote our stuff to one another. We used to meet monthly, but since I’ve started "Under the Raven’s Wing," we only meet bi-yearly. We keep in touch though via e-mail and myspace.

HS: Can you tell us what you see in your future?

SA: If all goes well, I see myself making another movie and another and another. It’s what I want to do. It’s all I can think about!

HS: I sure hope that you can do that. Susan, I wanted to thank you again for doing this interview with me. I enjoyed getting to know you over the last few months while doing this interview and I sure hope we can keep in touch. Please keep me informed about your projects so I can pass the information on. I am looking forward to doing more reviews of your movies and hopefully more interviews as well!

SA: Thanks so much, Heather. You’re questions were fun and thought provoking. I will be in touch for sure!

Winged Gods

Last night it was getting late and I wasn't all that tired but I was bored as all get out. Since I'm trying to break double digits as far as posts this month (I have yet to do that you see), I eventually decided to watch a movie. I remember reading about Q: The Winged Serpent (1982) over on And Now The Screaming Starts. It wasn't a movie I had heard of before. I went to check it out on Netflix and noticed I had already added it to my queue at some point in time. So I decided to just wait for it. Now it was here and has been watched. At long last, I can add something under Q for my reviews. Now I just need to find a horror movie that starts with an X.

Q: The Winged Serpent is an odd film in a way. The main plot has to do with a flying serpent that is brought to New York City by some Aztec ritual killings. There are two sub plots going on at the same time. One is that the police are trying to figure out what these rituals killings are about, and of course who is doing it. The second sub plot is about Jimmy Quinn (Michael Moriarty) who is a very small time criminal. His girl, Joan (Candy Clark), is trying to help him go straight by helping him look for jobs. He is trying to be a piano player but he tends to get turned down whenever he tries to get a job. His "pals" talk him into doing a jewel heist which he agrees to, but as long as he doesn't have to carry a gun and only drives. Once they get there, they hand him a gun and make him go in with them. Something goes wrong and Jimmy is the only one that comes out. He has a bag with him but gets spooked when he hears sirens and takes off on foot. He gets hit by one of those crazy New York taxi cab drivers we are always hearing about and losses his bag. Eventually he ends up at the top of the Chrysler Building and discovers Q's nest. He soon realizes he is the only person that knows where to find Q.

The effects are not too bad for being a low budget film. There are a few different effects to be found. Heads go missing. Body parts fall from the sky. There's skinless corpse, and a few different corpses actually in different phases. These effects didn't look half bad at all. Q itself didn't look bad as far as the design goes. They used stop motion in order to make it look like it was flying and I have never been a big fan of that kind of effect. Lucky for me it isn't used a lot and mostly towards the end of the film.

I rather enjoyed the acting thanks to some known names scattered about. I just watched Michael Moriarty not all that long ago in Troll and here he is again. Some thought he was over acting a lot but I rather liked his performance. It seems he gets the most screen time, even over Q. David Carradine I know. I have watched him a few times. But the person I didn't know, who is a star in his own right, is Richard Roundtree. I think I have seen Richard in something before since he looked somewhat familiar to me. As for Q, not bad acting...for a serpent.

I wrote about the one sub plot the most because in truth, it comes close to becoming the main plot of the movie. I'm not sure how much screen time each plot gets, but it had to be close between Q and Jimmy. I don't know if it is a flaw or not but I was a little disappointed that more time wasn't given to Q. Sure we see some great shots from high above the city to show that Q is flying around, and we see its foot here and there and the damage it is doing. All that was great but it just wasn't enough of it. Eventually there is a big stand off between the police and Q. This was probably the most interesting part of the film for me but I couldn't help wonder where all those bullets that were missing Q ended up. I sure hope they cleared the streets before hand but I have a feeling they didn't bother.

I know people don't spend parts of the day looking up in the sky. But I had to wonder why no one seemed to notice this giant serpent flying around. The film throws in a quick line that basically says that Q is always flying near the sun. So we are blinded by the sun and don't see it until it is too late. Not sure I buy into that but whatever. Q: The Winged Serpent isn't too bad of a movie, but it wasn't really what I was looking for when it comes to giant creatures. It was fun to watch it the one time, but I don't think I will be going back to it ever again. Well, unless I just happen to catch it on cable and nothing else happens to be on. Worth a watch at least once.
2 out of 5 Mimes with guns are scary enough!

Troll People Part Two

I got up early today so I had time to work in a movie. I have been wanting to go see Cloverfield but I haven't had the time yet. Since they don't show movies this early in the day, I had to settle on a DVD. I just watched Troll anyway so the next movie should be Troll 2 (1990) right? I don't always watch movies in order, even though you think I would. Troll 2 was voted, at one point in time, the worst film ever on IMDb. Currently it is hanging on at number 36 in the bottom 100. German Fried Movie is at the number one spot as of this writing. Having known the history of Troll 2 before watching it, I still went forward and pressed play.

Troll 2 is mostly about Joshua Waits (Michael Stephenson). When the movie starts, Grandpa Seth (Robert Ormsby) is reading to Joshua a story about goblins. Just before Diana (Margo Prey) busts up the party, Grandpa Seth tells Joshua that goblins are real! When Diana, Joshua's mom, asks what is going on, Grandpa Seth has disappeared. It turns out that Grandpa Seth passed away 6 months ago but keeps returning to talk to Joshua. Of course the rest of his family doesn't believe a word of it and chalk it up to his over active imagination. A little later, Joshua hears a noise from his window and yells when he sees someone outside. It turns out it is his sister's, Holly (Connie Young), boyfriend Elliot (Jason Wright). Holly isn't too happy with Elliot since he can't seem to go anywhere without his three friends. It turns out that the family is heading out for a vacation the next day so Holly tells Elliot that if he shows up alone to go on vacation with them, he just might get lucky with her. The next day we see the family driving along without Elliot and Holly is mad at dad (George Hardy) for leaving without waiting another fifteen minutes. They eventually reach Nilbog and the house they will be staying at. There is a family there waiting to exchange keys. Even though I have never heard of it nor would I ever do it, the two family's are swapping their homes! Not all is right in Nilbog though. As Grandpa Seth would say, "This place even gives me the creeps."

The effects are pretty bad. The goblins look real bad since they are just masks with no moving parts to them. Not that the goblins talk all that much anyway. You will find a lot of green stuff. I never thought I would get tired of a colour but I did here. I have never seen so much green stuff in my life. Sometimes the effects looked kind of cool like when Arnold (Darren Ewing), one of Elliot's friends, gets turned partly into a tree. Yes Elliot does find his way to where Holly will be and brings his friends with him and is surprised when Holly then rejects him. We eat stuff the goblins give us, almost always green stuff which people in the movie never think twice about, which in turn makes us into part plant which happens to be their favorite food. The goblins can't stand that fact that we turn other animals into food but I guess it is alright for them to turn us into food.

The acting came away flat. Not everyone came across this way though. Flat is the best way I can describe it since a lot of lines are spoken with no real emotion behind them. This is probably due to the fact that most of the crew spoke only Italian and that the director (Claudio Fragasso) insisted lines be spoken verbatim from the script. The one character I liked a lot, in a very weird sort of way, was Creedence who is played by Daborah Reed. I had to track her down in other reviews because for some reason she isn't listed on the cast for this movie. Sure she over acts, badly at that at times, but it was still fun to watch. She tends to get her whole body into the over acting mode.

I will get this out of the way right now. Everyone says it so I might as well too. Troll 2 has nothing to do with the first movie and doesn't have a troll in sight. It is all about the goblins. You can blame it on the fact that the movie was titled Troll 2 sometime after filming wrapped though. The plot is a little confusing when it comes to Grandpa Seth. He can't seem to help Joshua all that much it seems. Like at one point Joshua needs to stop his family from eating the goblin food but Grandpa Seth can't do anything other than stop time for Joshua. He gives Joshua three seconds but he takes much longer than that. So he can stop time but only does it once. He can also appear with an axe and chop off a goblin's hand, which made me wonder why he couldn't stop time and just chop up the food as well.

Arnold tries to help a woman he sees running through the woods at one point. When he sees the goblins he never once acts at all surprised by them. In fact, he walks right up to them and gives them a stern talking to like they are just a bunch of kids or something. Ok so the plot is a little silly as well as some of the characters. The effects are only likable if you happen to love the colour green. Some of the things said made me laugh and it wasn't always because of what was said. Just the way the lines are delivered could make them funny. Is this a bad film? You bet it is. Is it the worst ever? Not hardly. If you honestly think this is the worst film ever then you need to watch some of the other movies I managed to get through just so I could give them an honest review.
2 out of 5 What was all that milk about?

Troll People Part One

I had a busy weekend for once so I'm just a little sorry that no reviews got posted during that time. One thing I have noticed is that most of you seem to disappear when the weekend gets here. Like you all have lives! You are not fooling me any. I guess since I am so busy through the week that I don't mind plopping my butt into a chair and just surfing the net for a while. I do this during the week as well but not for as long. One thing I did late Sunday night was watch another movie. Troll (1986) was sitting high up on my Netflix queue when The Film School Dropout did her review of this film. I will let you go read her review of Troll if you want to but lets just say she wasn't all that impressed with it. Did I delete this movie from my queue? Obviously not since I watched it. The thought didn't cross my mind actually since everyone sees a movie differently. That is what I like about movies, well one thing anyway, everyone thinks of the same movie in different ways. Not a lot of people like this film but there are a few out there that do.

Troll introduces us to the Potter family. We have Harry Potter Sr. (Michael Moriarty), his wife Anne (Shelley Hack) and their two kids Wendy (Jenny Beck) and Harry Jr. (Noah Hathaway). By the way, they are of no relation to the wizard Harry Potter. The Potters are moving into a new apartment building. We are never told why really but I guess it isn't all that important to the plot anyway. We find them unloading the car then dad decides to go get some "rat" burgers. Mom wants Jr. to play with his sister but that would be uncool so Wendy decides to take her ball and go play elsewhere. She finds her way to the laundry room when her ball gets away from her and goes in there. She braves the room and goes in to get her ball but she meets up with Torok the Troll (Phil Fondacaro). Wendy quickly disappears but when her brother comes looking for her, Torok somehow transforms into a spitting image of Wendy and basically takes her place.

Eventually we meet the rest of the people that live in the building. There is the lady's man Peter (Sonny Bono). Jeanette (Julia Louis-Dreyfus) who is a waitress. Barry (Gary Sandy) who is an ex military guy. Malcolm (Phil Fondacaro) who is an English professor. And the eccentric older woman Eunice (June Lockhart, played by her daughter Anne Lockhart as the younger version). It makes for an interesting cast to say the least. No one seems to notice that Wendy is not acting herself except for her brother. Eunice helps Jr. figure out what Torok is up to but I will let you see the movie for yourself to figure it out.

The effects aren't great but then again this is a pretty low budget movie we are talking about. You will find lots of little troll puppets that looked kind of stupid, but I guess they got the point across. There are also some transformations that look kind of cool. Sonny Bono's was probably the best of the bunch. I was fun to see him turn into a forest, goblins and trolls, oh my! There can also be found some stop motion effects. These always look a little silly to me so thankfully they were not used a whole lot. Torok the Troll doesn't look too bad.

The acting was a bit over the top really, but I got used to it after a while. Michael Moriarty does this very bad dance that you just have to see to believe. Jenny Beck wasn't too bad even if she was getting annoying at times. But I can't really blame her for that. It was just how her character was supposed to be. To my surprise, this was the first acting job for Julia Louis-Dreyfus. At least IMDb lists it as her first movie. Her boyfriend in the movie is played by her real life boyfriend Brad Hall. They married the year after this movie was released. I last talked about June Lockhard for my review of She-Wolf Of London so it was good to see her in another horror movie. Phil Fondacaro probably has the best character, and no I don't mean as Torok.

While this is listed as a horror movie, I wasn't so sure that is where I would place it. Troll is more of a fantasy movie to me. I guess it would be scary to someone much younger...maybe. Wendy's parents write off her personality change as her just being a kid. This really bugged me. Of course we don't know how Wendy normally acts since we barely get to see her before Torok assumes her identity. I would be very surprised if she acted the way Torok does as her though. While the parents think it is a little odd they don't do a whole lot about it. Her brother is the only that becomes worried and the parents find that more troubling, big brother worried about little sister, than anything else.

Troll didn't sit right for me at first but the longer I watched it, something strange started to happen. The more I watched, the more I started to actually like this film. I wouldn't say it is a great movie. In fact, I think I wouldn't even call it a good movie. But it does have....I don't know, I guess I would say it has a certain charm about it. Between the story, the back story and the song/chant that the fairy creatures do, I ended up kind of liking it. I think I am one of the few that actually ended up liking it to a degree. So if you do end up watching it, please don't blame me if you end up not liking it.
3 out of 5 Good witches rule!

Watching Some TV

I decided to do something a little different today. Before I get to that, I would like to point out that I added a new blog to my list, Wine And Werewolves. While it isn't a blog dedicated to horror, I will forgive CG for that since he writes up some good reviews. And lets face it, even I watch movies that have nothing to do with horror. Scary thought isn't it? Alright, back to the matter at hand for this review. A few months back, a TV show called Ghost Hunters did a live version of their show. While I was watching it, I was thinking about doing a write up about it and other shows like it. Since I have never reviewed TV shows before, I wasn't sure if I wanted to do that. After giving it a lot of thought though, I decided since I have done reviews for a couple of books, TV shows should be fair game as well. So lets get started! (All times listed are EST)

The Scariest Places On Earth Family Channel

I could be wrong but I think the only new episodes for this show appear around Halloween. There seem to be two types of episodes for this show. The first, and less shown, are those where they go to a location and they interview the people at the location. The show will often bring along someone that can sense spirits and more times than not, they do find the place haunted. The other type of episode is more reality based. The show picks a family, straps cameras on them and sends them off to a location that is supposed to be one of the scariest places on earth. Linda Blair hosts the show and Zelda Rubinstien narrates. Both types of episodes start off with a history lesson about the location and this is what I have always found the most interesting about the show. To give the show credit, the people that can sense spirits are not told (as far as I know) about what is going on at the location. They don't always get everything right though. Since they aren't going in trying to find other reasons for the things going on, I don't end up caring what they have to say really. The second type of episode is more interesting to me but I do have to admit it can be boring. They do have cameras set up in the place but those cameras are often a bit fuzzy so it is a little hard to see what is going on. The cameras on the folks themselves only show their faces. Sometimes they have a hand held camera but since they are scared, the camera tends to move around a lot. I have often wondered if the show doesn't set things up to scare the people in the location just to give these people a scare and thus the viewers. This is a show that I watch if I happen to catch that is on. I don't go out of my way to try and watch it.

Ghost Hunters Sci-Fi Channel, New episodes 9pm Wednesday (New season starts in March)

This is a reality show that follows the group TAPS, Trans Atlantic Paranormal Society. Grant Wilson and Jason Hawes are the heads of the group while the rest of the group changes out depending on who is available for each case. This is probably my favorite show out of all the ones I will review here. They go to each location, listen to the owner(s) claims of paranormal activity and set up cameras in the hot spots. Once they are done setting up, they "go dark." They go around and turn off all the lights and just use flashlights when needed. What I like so much about the show is that even though they believe in the paranormal, they don't go to a location and call it haunted right away. They are looking for other things that could be a more reasonable explanation. Weird tapping noises being heard? Could be this loose pipe moving when water goes through it. The hanging lamp sways for no reason? Could be someone walking in the room above it. While they don't always question everything, they do a good job of it. Much better job than most shows of this type anyway. Recently they had a live episode where they went to Waverly Hills Sanatorium in Kentucky. I only got to watch part of it and I will admit I was doing other things at times while watching it. I think the Sci-Fi network pushes guests on them for these shows because they will often have at least one person from another Sci-Fi show join them for these live investigations. One thing that annoys the hell out of me is that there is music being played in the background at all times. When someone will suddenly say something like "Did you hear that?", all I end up hearing is the stupid music that is always there. I guess someone feels us viewers will get too bored if there isn't music being played. Each show is usually, but not always, about two investigations. It is an hour long show with each investigation taking up roughly a half hour each. Sometimes they walk out finding nothing at all to show the owner(s) which is odd since you would think a show like this would want to find things in order to keep us interested. That being said, there have been times when they have caught some really interesting things. My favorite episode so far was a lighthouse they were investigating. I don't recall which lighthouse it was now but they were following something up the lighthouse. You could hear voices and once in a while could see something above them moving. There was only one way up and down the lighthouse and the door that lead outside at the top of the lighthouse was pad locked on the inside but they couldn't find anyone. If you have yet to see this show, give it a try. I don't think you will be disappointed by it.

Ghost Hunters International Sci-fi channel, 10pm Wednesday, New episodes on now

I guess when you have a show that is a hit, you need a carbon copy of it to bring in more viewers. This is a very new show. As of this writing, only two episodes have been aired so far. While the parent show is always somewhere in the United States (usually on the east coast but they are starting to travel more), they did spread their wings and went over seas for two episodes last year. I think they did this to test the waters so to speak. This show takes three people that have appeared often on the parent show, Andy Andrews, Donna LaCroix and Brian Harnois. Added to the team are Robb Demarest, Shannon Slyvia and Mike Dion. So far it has been these six on each investigation. Since there have only been two episodes aired, I'm not sure what to think of this show yet. Donna helped out from time to time on the parent show but I have never thought of her as an investigator. I don't care for Brian at all since he seems to jump to conclusions quickly and often thinks that anything and everything is paranormal. Maybe I am being to hard on him but that is my take on him. So far the team has been in England, Scotland, Italy and Wales. The jury is still out on this one.

Paranormal State A&E channel, new episodes 10pm and 10:30pm Monday

This is a reality show that is actually listed as a drama. A lot of people feel that the show is scripted. I don't know if it is or not but I do know that the half hour episodes don't work very well. This show is about the Penn State Paranormal Research Society. The head of the group is Ryan Buell. It is mostly about the "most extreme" cases they have investigated so it raises the question that since they seem to go into each investigation not knowing a lot about them, how do they know these are going to be the most extreme? I just can't see them going to a location and filming a bunch of stuff then the producers, or whoever makes the choice to air it or not, decide that they wasted all that time and film so scrap it. Once in a while we catch a glimpse into their lives as students and faculty at Penn State. Add that and the investigation and the interviews and/or history of the case, it makes for too short of an episode. Even though Ryan (who also narrates) claims they go into each investigation with an open mind, I have found it is always open to the paranormal only. If they do look into other explanations, it is rarely shown on film. In the show's defense, they do some investigating before what we see but I'm not clear how much. The show just started this fall and is still going through its first season. I am still catching up with the ones I have missed but have managed to watch most of them now I think. There seems to be an on going story of some demon (whatever you do don't say the name Belial, it was beeped out on the show but they did scramble the letters and showed it to everyone) that has a personal hatred of Ryan, at least that is what they suggest. Some people have heard that they are planning on adding a romance in order to appeal more to my gender. If they want a reality show then please make it one. If they want a drama then please make it one. Don't give me a reality show that is partly scripted because I will sit around and wonder what is scripted and what isn't thus taking away what they find on the show which isn't clearly shown anyway. Jury is still out but it isn't off to a good start.

Most Haunted Travel Channel, New episodes 10pm Friday

To me this is the worst of the bunch that I have watched so far. Yvette Fielding is the host and also leads her team of "investigators" into different locations. The start of the show is fairly interesting since it delves into the history of each location. While I am hardly a history buff, the history of a place can often be more entertaining than what actually happens there now. Yvette always brings a medium in with her. Until recently it was Derek Acorah. I think what we are seeing as new, according to Travel Channel, are actually repeats because in one live show that was aired at the same time on the Travel Channel (it is a British television series), they talked about Derek leaving the show after the live one. On the Travel Channel, Derek was on the show for a long time after that before being replaced and there was no talk of his leaving the show until around that time. So we are a bit behind on the curve I think. Derek left to go on his own show, Derek Acorah's Ghost Towns, which started in 2005 (according to IMDb) but just recently started airing on Travel Channel. I have yet to watch one of these completely since I don't care for Derek at all so I won't waste your time with a review. Getting back to Most Haunted. Every place they go to is haunted. No ifs, ands or buts about it. Some dust reflects some light, that has to be an orb. They love to slow-mo the orbs by the way. They never look to see if there is another explanation for anything they supposedly heard or seen. Derek was often possessed by some spirit and it was some of the worst acting I have ever seen. So why am I so down on this show? During its most recent live event, I took the time to get online and check out their live web cams that they set up for Internet use and asked people to text message what they were seeing on the cams. Some of the text messages were pretty wild so I decided to see what there was to see. I didn't see anything strange as far as the paranormal goes. I did see people who, I'm guessing, were part of the production team. They were moving things around and setting up tables and such for the investigation team. At no point in time were these extra people every explained. The team hears some knocking. There is always camera people following them around. Yvette tells someone from her team to check the hall and other rooms to make sure no one is there making these noises. Instead of a camera man following him to show us this is the case, all stay there and the guy comes back in a short time to tell everyone no one else is around. It made me wonder if it was one of these extras making that noise. The whole show just feels put on. Worst of all is the fact they are always yelling and swearing at any little thing. It makes it impossible to hear anything because of the constant fucking beeping they use to edit out the swear words. After the last live show, I have yet to watch this one again. I got very tired of it at last.

So why do I like Ghost Hunters the best so far. I know I knocked Paranormal State for only being a half hour long when most of the Ghost Hunters episodes can be broken down to half hour episodes but the format seems to work so much better. I like the fact that the Ghost Hunters show at least will try to eliminate other explanations before calling something paranormal. Once all else has been eliminated, you are left with the unexplained. If I am to truly believe in ghosts then this is how an investigation should be run. I'm not saying people can't speak to ghosts or be possessed by them. I think history has shown that a ghost isn't constant. it shows itself when it wants to or when it can. Just because someone is there looking for it doesn't mean it will show itself. It is always strange to me when a medium on one of these shows goes into a place and right away is talking to some spirit. Of course these are just my views on the subject and I would love to hear from all of you about these shows or any others I may have missed.

Little Demons Part Four

This one is for you Cattleworks. Instead of watching Suspiria for the film club Sunday night, I decided to go ahead and finish off this series. I didn't know Cattleworks wanted to read the review for this one until Monday but I am going to blame him anyway for not watching the film club choice. Sorry to put that on you Cattleworks but since you are married, I'm sure you are used to it by now. Actually, I decided against it because Suspiria happens to be one of my favorite movies and I was afraid of writing about it and sounding bias towards it. Most of the movies you will find reviews for here are ones I have only watched maybe a couple of times but, more than likely, I am watching them for the first time. The only time I break away from that is when I hit a milestone post which I then talk about a favorite movie. Anyway, I watched Ghoulies 4 (1994) with little hope. I wasn't sure what direction this one would take but I knew by reading other reviews that at least some people liked it better than Ghoulies 3 but even that isn't saying much since I have yet to come across a Ghoulies movie that I have liked.

Ghoulies 4 surprised me in a way since it tries to tie in with first movie. This is the only sequel that has tried to do that. While the ghoulies have been the same, you don't need to see the other movies in order to understand what is going on. Ghoulies 4 isn't much different but it might help a little if you have watched the first one at least. Jonathan Graves (Peter Liapis) is back. You may remember him if you have watched the first movie or you may remember me complaining he knew to much about rituals in my review. In the ten years in between (give or take a couple of years) films, Jonathan has become a police detective. A bad ass police detective at that. At least he thinks so. The movie actually opens with a break in. Alexandra (Stacie Randall) breaks into a warehouse in order to steal a jewel for her master. She does this in such a loud way that all the guards come running. She takes care of them in different ways and then draws a pentagram on the floor, places the bodies inside it and summons her master. When she goes to hand over the jewel to him, she makes the stupid mistake of stepping inside the pentagram and of course master freaks out as does Alexandra and the jewel is lost. Thankfully, for them both, there is another jewel that will work just as well. The jewel will help bridge the gap between earth and hell you see so this guy needs it. The other jewel just happens to be the one that Jonathan wears around his neck.

When Alexandra managed to mess things up royally, she managed to bring two goulies out of hell. I have no idea why this happened in truth but it did. These ghoulies look nothing like the ghoulies of old though. Still, they seem to know who Jonathan is and feel he can help them get back to hell. Only problem is, whenever Jonathan gets anywhere near where he could possibly see them, they run and hide. So they end up trying to catch up with Jonathan and once in a while make a funny joke for the rest of the film. They do stop and help a woman that is being held up at knife point. They knock the guy out for her (umm, you guys do remember you are from hell....right?) and she rewards them. Lets just say she isn't too picky about what her men look like and leave it at that. Anyway, the bad guys are after the jewel, the good guys don't realize it yet and the ghoulies are trying to get back to hell...in a round about way.

The effects are not much different than the other films. At least there were some effects this time around. Some blood here, a little there but nothing adding up to a whole lot. One scene was with a guy all cut up and I perked up some because the effect looked interesting. I was fooled for a short time only though. Upon getting a second wind, thanks to Alexandra, he starts to fight Jonathan and it is easy to see the "cuts" have disappeared completely. There was some neat magic effects but it isn't what I am really looking for in a horror movie. The acting was just ok. I think I liked Peter Liapis better this time around. There was some good chemistry between him and Barbara Alyn Woods that is pretty much wasted in a film like this. The ghoulies are played by Tony Cox (Bad Santa) and Arturo Gil (Spaceballs). You will also find Raquel Krelle and Billy Di Cocco.

Ghoulies 4 was really stretching things at times. Jonathan's magic must work on guns because he never seemed to have to reload them. Of course, neither did the bad guys. The only time I watched anyone reload a gun is when a bad guy went to reload his shotgun. He took the empty shells out but only acted like he was putting more in and then went back to blasting things. I guess Alexandra's master doesn't much care if the bodies she gives to him in order to appear are dead or alive since either seems to work. Some scenes appear to come out of no where. The mugging scene for one and another is with a woman who starts to hear a voice out of thin air and then dies in a fiery explosion. She only appears in one other scene before this so I didn't really see the point of having to watch her get blown up. At least it was a movie effect I suppose. I would never go anywhere with her driving anyway. She gets a phone call and never once looks at the road the whole time she is on the phone.

Ghoulies 4 is said to have gotten back to the roots of the original film and I believe that. Not only do we get the same lead actor but it also leaves the ghoulies as mere background characters that wouldn't change the story at all if they were never there. In fact, I would have to say that they are more of an after thought this time around. I can just see the writers sitting around typing up the story and one suddenly looks at the other and says, "Wait, this is a Ghoulies movie so shouldn't we have a ghoulie or two in it?" Maybe this film isn't as bad as I am making it out to be. There were times I was a little entertained by it. I think those moments had to do with the fact that scenes were eye rollers like the unlimited ammo. Fans of the first movie might like it since it links up with it by the lead actor and a couple of flashbacks. If not then I would say it would be easier just to skip it.
2 out of 5 "Look for us in Ghoulies 4 Part 2!"

Little Demons Part Three

Before you go rushing out to buy the Ghoulies movies, there is one thing you should know. Ghoulies 3: Ghoulies Go To College (1991) has yet to make it on DVD. At least here in the states. So how did I manage to watch you ask? I didn't buy a DVD from another region because my DVD player isn't a region free player. Since I knew this series was making its way up my queue, I set out finding a cheap VHS copy of it. That's how dedicated I am to bring you reviews! That's how much I care! Just think of it, me, a child of DVDs resorting to watching a VHS tape! I probably should have watched some of it before it was time to watch it for a review just to make sure it was in working order though. It is but the tape had some issues. The video would slow down and sometimes disappear for a second at times. It wasn't so bad that it made it unwatchable but it made it annoying to say the least. Of course, it waited until the end of the movie to really start messing up but by then I no longer much cared.

Ghoulies 3 starts off 21 years ago with a guy trying to read from a comic book in order to send the ghoulies away. He manages to do so but they pull him along for the ride, leaving the comic book behind. Back in present time we find out this place is actually a college. As it happens, it is prank week. This is a new one on me, I have never heard of a prank week before. Pretty obvious what it is, a war between the frats trying to pull off the best prank. The winner even has a prank crown. The war seems to be between two frats with the women getting caught in the middle. Professor Ragnar (Kevin McCarthy) despises prank week since some of the students like to prank him and the rest of staff as well. He comes across the comic book and does a little research on it. He discovers that what is written in the comic book can really summon demons. Once he realizes this, he summons the ghoulies to him and decides to use them to stop prank week once and for all.

The effects were different. It was obvious that more money went into the ghoulies this time around. They moved around a lot more and actually talked this time around. The blood went from a little in the other movies to not having any at all in this movie. The only other effects to be found are some gag jokes like a rubber tongue being stretched out and a rubber face being stretched out from a plunger. I guess that isn't completely true, there is also some green goo and the professor turns into something like a ghoulie. I guess you will just have to see it for yourself to understand. If you want to that is.

The acting wasn't too bad I guess. It was a little hard to judge since everyone was pretty much trying to be funny all the time. Ghoulies 3 actually has a lot of known people in it. Kevin McCarthy is one of them of course. Matthew Lillard was not known at the time, it was his first movie actually. I remember him mainly from the Scooby-Doo movies. Patrick Labyorteaux may not be known to very many people but I remember him from Summer School. Stephen Lee has been in a ton of stuff before and after this movie. Marcia Wallace has had a lot of small parts over the years which include this movie. Eva La Rue wasn't a name or really a face that I knew but when I checked her out it turns out she has had a long career as well. You will also find Jason Scott Lee, Evan MacKenzie, Thom Adcox-Hernandez, Andrew Barach and Hope Marie Carlton.

Goulies 3: Goulies Go To College took a turn out in left field compared to the other two films. While funny things happen in the previous movies, they were still horror movies. At least they tried to be horror movies. Ghoulies 3 throws out the horror aspect and gives us a straight comedy that just happens to have three demons in it. Even the ghoulies get in on the comedy act with something of a Three Stooges set up. There seem to be a few people that think this is the best in the series. I'm not even sure this makes a good comedy movie and it sure doesn't make a good horror movie. During my review for the second movie I said that I had hoped that this would at least get an R rating and it did but for different reasons than I had hoped. I was actually hoping for some good gore effects and instead I got nudity. I didn't mind the mindless nudity because you can't go to college and not see some nudity at some point in your years there. Trust me! Ghoulies 3 ended up being a bad college comedy. If this is right up your alley then go for it but as a horror movie, it just wasn't there at all. Not that it is the fault of the actors or anything. They played their parts according to what type of movie was being made. I can't blame them for the direction this one took. If you are looking for scares, an easy one to stay away from.
1 out of 5 Drunk ghoulies

Little Demons Part Two

Now that I got the "birthday" post out of the way, I can go back to doing reviews. Since this is a series review, you can guess which movie I watched next. If you happen to like this series, you can buy the first two movies on a single DVD. The only bad thing is that we only get the bare bones. The only extra to be found is the trailer for each movie. I like looking at those after watching the movie so I'm not complaining about that. Sometimes I might see something that was cut from the movie in the trailer, not always though. It would have been nice to have seen a few more extras. A movie that lasted through three sequels isn't bad even if they are all bad. I don't know if that statement is true since I have only watched half of them so far. Then again, series like Friday The 13th see very little love when it comes to extras on their DVDs so maybe it isn't so far fetched after all.

Ghoulies 2 (1987) is said to be taking place soon after the first movie. We see a guy running with a big bag and being chased by a few other guys in red robes and red pointy hats. The first guy turns out to be a priest and he manages to find a gas station. He hides inside and locks the door he came in so when the guys in their pointy hats try the door, they discover it is locked and run on. Inside the repair shop is a barrel marked with warning labels saying the stuff inside is toxic. The priest says a quick prayer and drops the bag into the barrel. Soon after he does this, a flying ghoulie breaks the glass and enters the building where it attacks the priest who manages to fall into the barrel. A few seconds go by and then we see a few more ghoulies that were in the bag apparently and then we see the remains of the priest.

During this time we are introduced to Larry (Damon Martin) and his uncle, Ned (Royal Dano). Ned is drunk which seems to be a pretty common thing for him. They are hauling a carnival attraction called Satan's Den. They have been having trouble with their truck breaking down so have fallen behind the rest of the carnival. They pull into the gas station looking for some help about the time that the ghoulies have made their escape from the toxic barrel. While Larry goes about fixing the truck, apparently taking whatever he needs, the ghouiles see the art on the side of the truck and since it sort of looks like a ghoulie, they decide to hitch a ride. Neither Larry nor Ned manage to see them doing this even though there were a couple of times I thought for sure they would.

Once they make it to the carnival, they meet up with Nigel (Phil Fondacaro) who helps them run the attraction. They also meet P. Hardin (J. Downing). Hardin's father owns the carnival and he informs everyone that the carnival will be run like a business and if any attraction doesn't turn a profit, it will be replaced. No one likes this idea since everyone feels that are a part of a family and it doesn't matter to them if an attraction makes money or not. This spells trouble for Satan's Den since it has been losing money for months now. It is a scary fun house but people don't seem to think it is all that scary anymore. Once everything is open, two kids and a few teenagers go into Satan's Den where they come across the ghoulies. One of the ghoulies seems to like to spit this green goo at people which is very sticky. Two of the teens get stuck together while kissing because of this. The kids are bored with the attraction but love the ghoulies and start to tell anyone who will listen about them and suddenly Satan's Den becomes popular again.

The effects were pretty lame once again. We get some goo and a little blood here and there. I have to say that I'm pretty disappointed with the effects. Even this one got a PG13 rating which I can live with but I'm sure I have seen good effects in this kind of rated horror movies before. The effects fall squarely on the ghoulies themselves. I think I forgot to bring them up in the last review. It was obvious that they were just a type of hand puppet in both movies since the majority of the time we just see the ghoulies from their arms up. In Ghoulies 2 they add in what looked like stop motion so that we could see the ghoulies walk once in a great while. I thought they looked a little better this time around. There is also a very large ghoulie that looked like one of the small ones later on.

The acting was better this time around I thought. It could have been a little better in spots but over all I enjoyed it more. Kerry Remsen gets the lead female role. She is a dancer and has romantic links between Larry and Hardin. A little side plot there but not much of one. I remembered seeing Phil Fondacaro before. When I looked him up on IMDb, I was very surprised at just how many horror movies he has acted in.

I don't really see why some people seem to think Ghoulies 2 takes place soon after the first. I understand the reasoning behind it since this is a sequel but it could just as easily be a prequel for all I know. Since the ghoulies are summoned, the story itself can really take place at any point in time. I liked Ghoulies 2 a little better over the first movie. I liked the acting much better this time around. The story wasn't much better in truth but could have been. A carnival can be a very creepy place when done right. I don't want to say it is a bad movie. It was entertaining but the total lack of gore effects really kills it. If some gore effects had been added, then I think I would have enjoyed this one more. One review talked about seeing this movie on TV and remembers seeing at least one effect that wasn't on the DVD. Now tell me that makes sense? Too gory for the theaters but it's fine for TV.

One thing they did right was make this movie more about the ghoulies. We don't really learn anything about them, outside of the fact that one of them likes to spit green goo. But at least they are in the movie a whole lot more. Ghoulies 2 made me feel like it earned the right to be named ghoulies this time around. Ghoulies 2 was an improvement but it still isn't there yet. I don't know what the rating is on the third movie but hopefully they went for the R rating this next time around.
2 out of 5 Giving new meaning to the big bang

Let The Party Begin Part Two

I was going to start today off with another review but the movie I was going to review for this post wasn't going to get here on time. So I had to come up with something different. If you are wondering why this isn't a review for Ghoulies 2, it is because today is a special day. Today is the day, two years ago, that I made my first post to Mermaid Heather. I had a birthday movie lined up to review for today but I had it in my mind that the blogs birthday was later in the month. When I figured out I was wrong, it was too late. Since I was throwing around the idea of a end of the year review, I thought that would be a good replacement for the movie I was going to watch.

Last year, I kicked off the new year for Mermaid Heather with a review of Happy Birthday To Me. I was pretty excited that I had gone a whole year reviewing movies. I had managed 163 posts the year before. This year wasn't as good with only 139 posts making it on the blog but I think that is still pretty good. Since Mermaid Heather is primarily a review site, I have to watch the movie or read the book in order to do a review of it so not only do I have to find time to watch the movie, I need to find the time to write up the review. Not always an easy thing to do when busy with college. Soon after my first review of the year, I started my first series review. I had picked up the Child's Play movies the year before and decided to watch those next. The series reviews kept going with Mimic, Critters, Wishmaster and Ripper. I plan on doing more series reviews this year. It is fun and it is also nice to be able to watch all the movies at once instead of waiting a year or more for the next movie to come out and forgetting what happened in the last movie because I watched a ton of movies since then.

One thing I was really excited about was doing reviews for the 8 Films To Die For. The first set came out the year before but I wasn't able to go see any of them on the big screen so I had to wait for the DVDs. They hit stores in April so I bought the set and went about reviewing them right away. I managed to find a 5 star review in Reincarnation! Later in the year, in November, this year's set hit the big screen and this year I was able to see all 8 films there. While this year's set wasn't as good as the previous set, it was still worth seeing and I highly suggest either set to all of you.

I also started to do tribute posts this last year. My first one was to Jamie Lee Curtis and my last one for the year was to A.J. Cook. You can find all of my tributes on the side bar. Another thing I started this last year would be interviews. I only managed to get two done but hopefully I will have some more to post here sometime. I tried out my interviewing skills on Terry Kimmel, or Cattleworks as he is better known around the blog world. I felt the interview went very well considering it was my first one. Since then I also interviewed David Williams. I thought that interview went real well also. I have interviews going with D.W. Kann and Susan Adriensen. These are going slow however. They are busy people and when it seems they have time to work on the interviews with me, I'm the busy one. Maybe sometime I will get those done and find some more people to interview as well.

Speaking of David Williams and Susan Adriensen, they both gave me a movie to review! It was a nice surprise when they asked if I would be willing to watch and review their movies. I was more than happy to get a sneak peak at a movie so I could tell all of you about it. Hopefully they will keep in touch with me and let me know when Under The Ravens Wing and FrightWorld will be out on DVD for the rest of you.

I managed to get to my 200th movie review this last year with the very crappy Creepies. As with this post, not all of my posts have to do with reviewing movies but I would say a good 90% of them do. Just before the actual year ended, I managed to get to my 300th post. I'm hoping I can keep them coming for all of you since I do enjoy watching all these movies and letting you know what I thought of them. I can't let this post go by without saying something about the only other 5 star review of this last year. To my surprise it was a movie no one had heard of before. Well, at least not everyone had heard of it I should say. Of course I am talking about the movie Dead Birds. You can find all reviews I have talked about in this post either on the side bar or by finding them in my review list which can also be found on the side bar.

Two years down, hopefully many more to go. I will be seeing you all again very soon!

Little Demons Part One

Happy New Year everyone! I'm sorry that my year end bang didn't happen. It wasn't much of a bang. In fact, there wasn't even a fizzle. With my being home for college, old friends that are still around or were back themselves, were fighting for my attention so I ended up not being home very much at all. That is why I try not to make plans in advance because it just has a way of never going the way I had planned or not at all. I actually did watch a movie the night before last but since I promised this was going to be a series review, I will get to that other movie some other time. I got the series called Ghoulies through Netflix and it was a good thing I had more than one movie to send back to them because they sent me the last movie in the series before sending me the first one. Even though they are in order in my queue, this isn't the first time that has happened. Sometimes I wonder if they do it on purpose. Yes Netflix gods, I hear you laughing at me.

The first Ghoulies (1985) starts off in an odd way really. Right off the bat we catch glimpses of ghoulies and then we are introduced to some type of black magic ritual. Malcolm (Michael Des Barres) is the leader of this cult that is doing the ritual. He calls up a bundle and when he opens it, we discover there is a baby inside. Malcolm is going to kill the baby for more power. A woman in the cult stops him though and puts a necklace around the baby. When Malcolm tries to kill the baby, the necklace somehow stops him. Malcolm sends the baby away from him forever. He tells the woman that saved the baby, who I assumed was the mother, that she will take the place of the baby. Her chest begins to bulge out and just as it is about to burst, it cuts to the starting credits.

Twenty five years later, Jonathan Graves (Peter Liapis) finds out he has inherited an estate from the parents he never knew. He arrives with his girlfriend, Rebecca (Lisa Pelikan). Thanks to a voice over, we find out that Jonathan was the baby that was taken away all those years ago. He was taken to a family that took him in and it was hoped that he would never discover who his real family was. Jonathan and Rebecca explore the house and grounds and discover some books about magic and a grave site that Jonathan seems strangely attracted to. Rebecca comes up with the idea to throw a party since the place is already a little run down, no one can really do any more harm to the place. They invite some friends and are having a good time. After a while though they run out of things to do and try and think up of what to do next. Jonathan comes up with idea of holding a ritual. He takes them down the the basement and starts to draw on the floor. When asked how he knows how to do all that, he comes up with, "I don't know. It just comes to me." He then starts to chant but nothing happens. After they all leave, a fog begins to roll in and a ghoulie appears. Over the next few days, Jonathan decides to drop out of college so he can fix up the place. He does do this but he is drawn to the magic more and more. Soon enough he gets glowing eyes and has control over the ghoulies. But do the ghoulies have their own plans?

Ghoulies is a PG13 movie. Because of this, there is very little when it comes to gore. There is a little here and there but nothing that is all that impressive. I don't know how true it is but one review said that 12 minutes of the film was left on the cutting room floor. This makes sense to me which I will explain more as to why later. For now I will just say that maybe some gore was cut in order to get the PG13 rating. One scene that I did like was death by tongue! A woman starts to kiss one of the guys and before you know it, her tongue is wrapped around his neck. Sure it looked a little cheesy but it was a fun death to see.

The acting was ok. I honestly didn't really care for Peter Liapis all that much. I just felt he was over acting a lot of the time. But I guess when you are trying to do dark rituals you need to over act some. Scott Thomson was in this movie. Does that name ring a bell? Most might remember him as Chad Copeland in the Police Academy movies. He is the doper of the group this time around. Mariska Hargitay makes her debut in Ghoulies. I don't know the name since I don't watch a lot of TV shows but she is well known on the Law & Order shows. Peter Risch and Tamara De Treaux appear as a couple of servants that are summoned by Jonathan. They are probably the most interesting characters in the film. You will also find Jack Nance, Ralph Seymore, Keith Joe Dick, David Dayan, Victoria Catlin, Charene Cathleen and Bobbie Bresee.

For a movie that spawned three sequels, I was pretty disappointed with Ghoulies. I hinted above that I had an idea why some of this movie ended up on the cutting floor. The movie Gremlins had become a big hit and I think Ghoulies was trying to ride that wave for all it was worth. To make the movie more appealing to families, they managed to get it down to a PG13 rating. I say this because one of the movie posters for Gremlins looks an awful lot like the movie poster for Ghoulies. Since Ghoulies came out after, I have to guess that they were trying to copy Gremlins just a bit. It must have worked some since Ghoulies went on to make $35 million. That sounds like a pretty good chunk of change for this movie. What is sad is that the ghoulies really aren't that important to the plot. When the movie was being made, I don't think they were thinking about calling it Ghoulies. I think that came after the success of Gremlins. I could be wrong since I don't know the time lines for either movie. Yes they go around killing people, most of the deaths anyway. But you can easily take them out, change the deaths a little, and still have the same movie.

One thing that bothered me some was how quickly Jonathan became so good at rituals. I can wrap my brain around someone saying they are evil because their father was evil or something like that. Rituals take practice. Not that I have done it but I can't see someone just automatically knowing what to do when it comes to rituals. I know enough that things have to be pretty much perfect when it comes to demons so that they don't do harm to you. I just can't see someone just knowing how to avoid that without ever having done it before or having been taught that. Ghoulies was an ok movie but since they really pushed the idea of the ghoulies and instead made a movie about magic and rituals, it was pretty disappointing. Hopefully the other movies will get better.
2 out of 5 Death by tongue may not be so bad

On a side note. I started this review on Jan. 1st and I'm just now getting it finished. Two reasons for this. One is I wasn't able to get the review finished in one sitting and when I tried to finish it on the second sitting, it didn't save anything so I ended up losing everything that I added. That managed to piss me off pretty good so I didn't write anything after that. Since then I managed to catch the flu so I sure haven't felt like writing until today. I'm sorry for being gone for so long and not getting any reviews done. I hope you all will forgive me.