Coma Boy

In order to get a movie in today, I got up and took a shower first thing. Trust me, I needed one. Instead of drying my hair though, I put Patrick Still Lives (1980) in, and watched it while I waited for my hair to dry on its own. I got this post started yesterday, with very little of it done. I wanted the time stamp on it more than anything. I guess I could have picked a different film to end the year with, but I really didn't see the point in it. Some up coming things for everyone, my third year of doing this blog is quickly coming to a close. Instead of doing a year end thing, like I did last year, I have found a film with a birthday theme to it that I will review instead. Hopefully I will have the last trailer for the After Dark films soon. Last time I checked, it still wasn't up on their web site, and I can't find it anywhere else either. Last but not least, there will be another review later on today, posted for today. At the party last night, my friend asked if I had watched a certain movie. It was late, or early in the morning, so I was started to feel pretty tired. But the mention of this film woke me up a little. He gave me the film to watch, so I'm excited. Excited I say!

Patrick Still Lives starts off with Patrick (Gianni Dei) standing by his car that has broken down. We can hear someone else pointing out that someone is coming, so Patrick tries to wave down the approaching car. Instead of stopping, the person throws out a bottle, that hits Patrick in the face. We see him laying on the ground screaming. Next thing we know, he is laying in a bed, now in a coma. I don't know how it went from screaming to coma, but I will go with this. Patrick is now at some sort of vacation resort, off season of course. Other people start to show up, who were invited by a strange letter that talked about their pasts. We have Lyndon (Franco Silva) and Cheryl (Carmen Russo) Kraft, Stella (Mariangela Giordano), David (Paolo Giusti), Peter (John Benedy), Meg (Anna Veneziano), and Patrick's father Professor Herschell (Sacha Pitoëff). Professor Herschell has invited them all there, so to speak, but why? We soon find out that even though Patrick is in a coma, or at least they want us to believe he is, he isn't all that helpless after all. Bodies start to pile up, but how are they being killed?

Patrick Still Lives is sort of a sequel to Patrick. Sort of you ask? Patrick is a film out of Australia, while Patrick Still Lives is a film out of Italy. In an interview with the producer of the film, Gabriele Crisantie, he explains that Patrick did very well in Italy, so they decided to jump into the genre and make their own film. This isn't the first time I have come across a horror film out of Italy that is an unofficial sequel to a film made somewhere else. I don't think you need to watch Patrick in order to pick up on what is going on in this film though. The plot is a little confusing at first, mostly because they don't bother to explain why all these people are showing up at the resort. Eventually they do though, but it is a pretty lame excuse if you ask me. One of these people might have been the person that threw the bottle. They are invited to the resort, so Patrick can have his revenge. Since they don't know which one it was for sure though, best to be safe and just kill them all off. Just one problem with that, Patrick has taken a liking to Meg.

The effects end up being something of a mixed bag. There are some that look pretty cool, and some that look really bad. The deaths are all over the place. Boiled up in a swimming pool, hanged by a hook, rolled up in a car window, and (my personal favorite) death my a fireplace poker, that goes from one end of the body to the next. While the effects weren't always good, they were at least gory. Being a film out of Italy, and being 1980, I guess I can forgive the effects just a little bit. New ways of making effects were just being discovered around this time, and it would take a little while before it was perfected. The acting seemed to be alright. I guess some of the people listed above were known on the international market, while the rest were somewhat known to those in Italy only. There is also an interview with Gianni Dei on the DVD. They try and make it sound like he had a hard part in this film. I had to ask myself though, were they being serious? How hard is it to lay in a bed, and stare off into space? A thing I found interesting in the interviews was the death scene with the poker. From the interview, it was thought up right on the set, and was brought about because the producer had a major fight with the actress. So he wanted an on screen death that he thought might offend her in the worst possible way.

Patrick Still Lives isn't one of the better films to come out of Italy, but it is entertaining to a point. I liked it just enough, truth be told. I was having a hard time figuring out which way I would score it. After a little thinking though, I realized it wasn't so bad after all. It is the only film I can think of, outside of porn movies (not that I would know), where every actress gets naked at some point in the film. I did find the plot to be rather silly, but outside of that, I would say this one is worth a watch. At least once that is.
3 out of 5 I guess there are worse deaths than death by a fire poker

The Dead Get Thirsty?

I just have one more movie to watch in The Living Dead value pack. Once I get it watched, I move on to a different one. I just haven't decided which one yet. Probably a small one like this one, that way I can move on to the bigger ones later on. With that in mind, I watched The Thirsty Dead (1974). This is a movie I had never heard of before. After watching it, I can understand why. Only 113 people have rated the film so far on IMDb. That told me something right there as well. Off topic, if you like hot things, you should check out Dentyne Fire Mints. Not hot in the sense that I am used to, spicy foods, it does manage to make my tongue feel rather warm at times.

The Thirsty Dead starts off in a club. I guess it is like a strip club, except no one is stripping off their clothes. Just dancing in an oversized bird cage. This is where we meet Claire (Judith McConnell) though. Claire is one of the dancers. We watch her dance for a while, then go back to the dressing room. Once there, she changes back into her clothes and puts on some makeup. Someone keeps knocking on her door, so at last she gets up to see what the problem is. Right away she finds a rag put over her nose and mouth. From there we meet Laura (Jennifer Billingsley), who is walking home with a guy that is trying to talk her into getting married to him. She isn't ready to get married yet, but makes the promise when she is ready, he will be the first person she calls. She enters the gate to the building she lives in, but fails to notice the guys waiting for her in robes. She quickly finds a rag over her mouth and nose as well. Laura is led to the sewers, and then to an awaiting boat, where she finds Ann (Fredricka Meyers) tied up in the boat. Eventually they meet up with Claire and Bonnie (Chiqui da Rosa) somewhere in the forest. They are all taken to a cave where they learn that a group of immortals need their blood to stop aging. Laura is offered a spot among them, thanks to some prophecy. Will she accept, or will she become one of the victims?

The Thirsty Dead is a film out of the Philippines. We don't get to see much of their country in this film, since most of it takes place in a very fake looking cave. The title is misleading, since there are no dead people. I guess there are some here and there, but none of them are thirsty, let alone alive. The immortals are far from dead, or even undead. They are very much alive, but just have found a way not to age. I didn't really understand why the immortals have hidden themselves away from everyone else. The women are being kidnapped from a city, and then transported out into the forest somewhere. I would think it would be easier to live in the city somewhere, so that they could easily lure the women to them. Less chance of getting caught transporting women that they have taken. That being said, I never once saw the women trying to fight their way out, or at least scream for help when they were able to. I was also surprised at how lightly everything was being taken. The guys that kidnap the women, act like it is no big deal, along with the women being taken. While we do find Ann tied up, Laura is never tied up, and is even allowed to untie Ann.

Not much to report about effects. There are a few to be find, but they aren't all that great. We get to see one of the women get a cut in her through, in order to draw blood into a bowl. You can clearly see the application that was applied to her neck, so that her neck isn't cut. Then there are a bunch of women that have had their face either deformed, or have some cuts on them. These looked ok, but they aren't shown for very long. I was never sure if these women were those that rejected becoming immortal, or if they were just past their prime. Only the blood of women who are in their prime seems to work. So I guess the immortals keep them around until they die off on their own? I'm not sure at all since it wasn't explained very well. I don't want to call the acting bad really. It was often rather wooden. I didn't really care for any of the characters. I did like Fredricka Meyers, who was my favorite here, but she doesn't get very much screen time. The Thirsty Dead appears to be her last acting job on top of that. You can also find John Considine and Tani Guthrie.

I don't know, not only did I find The Thirsty Dead rather boring, but I would also be hard pressed to call it a horror film. I guess it sort of is one, as I'm sure I would be scared if I was in their shoes. A lot more scared than they appeared to be! Claire kept going on about how they should just accept their situation, which felt just a little out of place to me. With one more film to go, I'm hoping this last one isn't as bad as The Thirsty Dead. This film is, so far, the clear loser of this set. I hope to get a review in tomorrow before I head off to a New Years party. In case I don't though, Happy New Year to everyone!
1 out of 5 At least it was fun watching one of the guys get really, really old

Are You Ready? Part Seven

Almost done with these now. This is a trailer for The Butterfly Effect 3: Revelation. I have watched the first film, but not the sequel. I don't think it really matters though, since I believe each film is its own story. I have a feeling I will have to wait on the DVDs of these films to come out. I'm disappointed in a way. I want to go in order to keep this going, but since After Dark doesn't seem to be updating its web site all that much, I'm not sure if the films will be near me or not. They listed a city that I could get to easy enough, but they no longer have it listed now that they are updating which theaters the movies will be in. They said it would be updated everyday, but I haven't noticed any changes so far. With just over a week left, I'm about to throw in the towel and not worry about. Anyway, here is the trailer.

Lost In The Ordeal

I'm supposed to be helping around the house today. Cleaning up, moving things around, and other fun stuff like that. But I slept late, and no one else was home when I got up. So I thought I would work on this review, until I am put to work that is. Even though I was tired last night, I wanted to get a movie in. I have some Netflix stuff here to go through, but I had already watched a non horror earlier in the day. I do manage to watch other films now and then. I thought I would give my DVD player a rest, and watch something on the net through Netflix. Not long ago, I went through the horror stuff and added a few movies to the Watch Now section. It sucks that the extras aren't included, but it is nice to pick a movie and watch it right then. Kind of like pay for view, without the paying part. I had read about Calvaire (2004) on another blog. While the person gave it a mixed review, it struck my interest all the same.

Calvaire (or The Ordeal in English) is about Marc Stevens (Laurent Lucas). Marc is a performance singer. He is popular, but in a way that a small time singer is. When we first meet Marc, he is giving a performance at an old folks home. After the performance, one of the women that live there knocks on his door. He has performed at this home before, so he knows the woman in a way. She asks if Marc will be back next year, and he tells her that he will. She tells Marc that she might not be around by the time he comes back next year. Marc waves this off, and tells her not to talk like that. She takes his hand, and places it in her lap area. This shocks Marc a bit, to a point where he doesn't know what to say. The woman runs off, calling herself a dirty old whore, among other names. As Marc is about to leave, one of the nurses is talking to him, and gives him his payment. She is also very friendly with Marc as well. What can a guy say? Love is in the air I guess.

Marc gets on the road, to travel to his next performance. Sometime during the night, Marc gets lost. He has a map, but maps are only useful if you know where you are. It is raining as well. To make matters worse, his van breaks down. Boris (Jean-Luc Couchard) shows up, but is more interesting in looking for his dog, Bella, than helping Marc. Marc does get Boris to lead him to an inn that is near by though. There Marc meets Bartel (Jackie Berroyer), the owner of the inn. Bartel comes across as a nice guy, a little too nice maybe. He seems to bend over backwards in order to help Marc. When Marc goes on a walk though, we see Bartel break into Marc's van and rummage through Marc's things. Bartel eventually starts to talk about his wife, Gloria, who left Bartel at some point. Bartel has been very sad every since. Bartel tells Marc that his wife was also a singer. The next morning Marc keeps talking about leaving, and discovers that Bartel has taken some of his things. Bartel slips over the edge and starts to smash up Marc's van, then goes after Marc himself.

In my review for Satan's Blood, I talked about how I enjoyed watching odd movies. Odd films are often a love it, or hate it, type film for everyone that watches it. More times than not, I will often like these odd films. Now and then I find one that I really love, but most of the time I just like them. Calvaire sounded like one of those odd films to me, and I wasn't disappointed. As I pointed out above, the English title is called The Ordeal, which is true to the film. Marc certainly goes through an ordeal. But many people have pointed out that this isn't a very good translation. From what these people have said, Calvaire has a more religious meaning. Religion isn't the main topic of the film though. It is never really brought up, but you can see some things that point to religion, like a crucifixion of sorts.

Calvaire is a crazy film, to say the least. We get a cast of characters that don't see things the same way as everyone else. Marc is really the only sane person, or is he? Calvaire may leave a person with more questions than answers, but that is what makes this film fun to me. Not everything in this film is open and shut, so to speak. Some films like this can make me mad. I think the reason they can make me mad, is more because of the way the film presents it. Some films don't intend to leave the person watching it wondering, but they end up doing that. Either from bad story telling, or whatever, these are the ones that can make me mad. Calvaire wants to leave you wondering, to keep you guessing. Since our cast of characters aren't completely sane, you never know what is going to happen next. I kept watching just to see how things were going to end. I'm not sure how I feel about the ending, since it is an open ending. Marc's fate is, in the end, left for us to decide.

IMDb lists Calvaire as a film out of Belgium, but also lists France as well. Considering some of the other films I have watched from this region, I was half expecting a very gory film. I was a little disappointed in the fact that it isn't a gory film at all. I don't need a film to be gory in order to enjoy it, but since Netflix, and other people, like to refer to Calvaire as "in the likes of such films as The Texas Chainsaw Massacre," I was expecting a gory film. To be honest, I don't really see why so many people are pointing to TCM when talking about this film. They really don't have much in common with each other. Anyway, you will find some blood, but not a whole lot. Calvaire is a film that messes with your mind, more than with your senses. The acting was great. I enjoyed all of the performances, even those from the supporting cast. The only real problem I had was with Laurent Lucas. While I enjoyed his over all performance, when it came time for him to be emotional, I wasn't buying it too much. I couldn't tell if he was crying or laughing in some scenes. Maybe it was meant to be a mix, but it was annoying to me some. One other thing confused me more than anything. That was the casting of Jackie Berroyer and Philippe Nahon. The reason I found this confusing is because they look a little too much alike in some scenes. When it is dark, it was a little hard to tell the difference between them. When they were both not in the same scene, it took me a little while to figure out which guy I was looking at.

Calvaire is, more or less, about a guy that meets up with a crazy guy. The images found in the film support that idea. Not only is Bartel a bit off his rocker, so are some of the people in the nearby village. What this film lacks in gore, it makes up for in odd images and events. How often do you see a scene where a guy is having sex with a cow, while his father encourages him? There is also a dance scene in a bar that is just so strange, that you have to see it in order to believe it. Whether you love it, or hate it, Calvaire is a film that will leave you thinking. It will also stay in your mind for a while after as well. For that reason alone, how can I not love Calvaire?
4 out of 5 Cows are tender, according to the father anyway

You Call Yourself A King?

Have you ever had a problem that seemed like it was impossible to figure out? And then the fix turned out to be very simple? I had that happen today. My computer has been very dusty, the inside of it that is. So I took it out in the garage, where my dad has an air compressor, and blew it all out. I knew it was dusty, but not as bad as I thought it was until I started blowing it all out. I brought it back in and connected everything back up, hoping I would remember where it all went, and turned it on. Only problem was, it didn't turn on. I asked my dad about it, and he suggested I check all the power connections. I didn't really think blowing it out would disconnect something, but I did it anyway. Still no power. So I called a friend and asked him. He asked if the power switch on the power supply was on. I was like, there is a power switch there? I checked, and sure enough it was off. I guess I hit the switch at some point while lugging it around. After I got all that fixed, I ended up watching King Of The Zombies (1941). I know, silly of me to get the computer working again when I was just going to turn it off and watch a movie. How else would I be able to do a review though?

King Of The Zombies starts off with a plane ride. Inside the plane we have the pilot, Mac McCarthy (Dick Purcell), Bill Summers (John Archer), and Jeff Jackson (Mantan Moreland). Even though they are looking for a certain island in the Bahamas, they feel they have been blown off course by a storm. They manage to pick up a radio signal, but Mac can't understand who it is that is speaking. He does believe that it is coming from an island below them though, so they decide to try and land. The landing doesn't go so well though. They crash the plane, but everyone comes out alright from it. They now find themselves in a graveyard. Nice place to crash land isn't it? They decide to try and find out where the radio is, so they can get some help. They come across this big house, that ends up being owned by Dr. Sangre (Henry Victor), who claims there are no radios on the island. He is nice enough to give the others a place to stay, until a boat shows up to take them off the island. Jeff is a black man, so Dr. Sangre gives him a place to stay in the servant's area. While there, Jeff meets Samantha (Marguerite Whitten), who tells him about the zombies that can be found on the island. When he tells Mac and Bill about this, they of course don't believe him. Something is going on though, but what?

There are some interesting things about King Of The Zombies. The role of Dr. Sangre was scripted for Bela Lugosi, but he wasn't available at the time. They decided to go with Peter Lorre from there, but couldn't reach a deal with him. So the part went to Henry Victor. This was filmed just prior to the United States entering the second world war. Even though there were hints, some spying going on and the doctor speaks in German at times, Germany was never mentioned by name. Even though these things have no bearing on the film itself, I found them interesting.

The first thing that I noticed about King Of The Zombies, was the short run time. In comes in just over a hour long. This surprised me a little bit, but was kind of glad it was going to a somewhat quick movie. Sometimes those are nice, you know? After watching this one though, I don't see how anyone could be scared by it. I don't even think that those who can be scared easily would be scared by this film. It's funny how some films will throw in something that is thought of as scary, like zombies, and expect people to be scared by that alone. The slow lumbering zombies barely get much screen time. They are being controlled by voodoo, or are they? A hint is dropped at the end, where that may not be the case. Since most of the screen time went to Mantan Moreland, who covered the comedy, I guess they were trying to go with a horror/comedy mix. While the comedy part of it was easy to see, and even a little funny at times, I would think they failed at their attempt at the hybrid.

Being a film from 1941, and being in black and white, there are no effects. The zombies looked fairly normal. Their cheeks looked sunken in some, but outside of that they looked normal enough. Probably could have passed as anyone else, expect for the way they would just stare off into space all the time. The acting wasn't bad though. While Mantan Moreland covered the comedy, everyone else played their parts straight. While I liked some of the comedy, I didn't like all of it. I thought they were playing up the comedy a little too much in this one. At one point Jeff gets hypnotized, but the way he plays it out made me wonder if he really was hypnotized, or if he was just pretending to be that way. Some people seem to have a problem with some of the things that Moreland says in the film. Even going as far as calling it painful. I guess it has to do with the time, since blacks didn't normally get a lot of screen time in movies. This isn't the case here though. If anything, Moreland gets more screen time than anyone else in the film.

One thing I couldn't figure out in this film is the fact that a woman, who has been hypnotized, leaves an earring to be found. I didn't understand why she did this if she was truly hypnotized. Anyway, I'm having a hard time finding things to say about King Of The Zombies, so I guess I will wrap this up. Unless you are a fan of Moreland, or one of the other actors, I wouldn't go out of my way to watch this one. If it wasn't for the fact that it shows up on a budget pack, there is probably a good chance I wouldn't have watched it myself.
2 out of 5 At least the voodoo scenes were kind of cool looking

Don't Answer The Phone

When I reviewed the films Funny Games, I watched the original film, then watched the remake. I could have done the same with today's review, When A Stranger Calls (2006), but I didn't really think it through. In truth, it might be better this way. By not having watched the original film, even though I have always wanted to, I can't compare the two films together at all. My judgement of the original film will have no bearing on the remake now. I remember this film being on the movie channels at one point, but I never got around to watching it. I guess I wasn't all that excited by this remake, mostly since I never watched the original, or its sequel. I went with the movie poster for my pic here, instead of the DVD front. I like the movie poster much better.

The plot is very simple. When A Stranger Calls opens in some town, somewhere in the United States. While we are actually never shown much of anything during the opening scene, we get the idea that a babysitter, and the kids, were killed. Now we switch to a town many miles away, where Jill (Camilla Belle) is at her high school, doing teenager type things. Mainly she is fighting with her boyfriend, because she busted him kissing her so called best friend. Jill is in deep shit with her parents though. She has been talking none stop with her boyfriend, prior to the fight, on her cell phone. Which has caused her to go over her free minutes, by a ton. So her dad is going to make her babysit in order to make some money to pay them back. He drives her to the Mandrakis's house, which turns out to be a big, and very fancy, house. Everything starts out well enough, the kids are already asleep, until the phone calls start. Nothing much is said by the person calling, but it is enough to scare Jill. Once the calls get more threatening though, what is a babysitter with a couple of kids supposed to do?

From what I understand, the original When A Stranger Calls is split into two sections. The area described above is the first section of the film, while the second section takes place years later. The most famous part of the original film though is from the first section. So it sounds like the people behind this film decided to take that and expand on it. Not a bad idea in theory, but who really wants to watch someone babysit some kids? The slow pace of this film didn't bother me all that much, but it did a lot of other people. I think the biggest mistake they made, the people behind the film that is, is having the kids be asleep before Jill got there. That leaves Jill with very little to do. Jill explores the house, trying on some of the jewelry of the owner, and things like that. Eventually she settles down and goes over her studies while answering the phone. Her former best friend shows up, and Jill can't figure out how she got around the alarm. They talk for a little while before Jill makes her leave. So there isn't a whole lot going on for a good while.

The main problem I had with this film was with the plot holes. The Mandrakis are obviously rich people. I'm sure they can do better than finding a babysitter to watch their kids for them. Even if they don't have a nanny, they do have a maid. I guess it isn't in her contract to watch the kids, but I would think that she probably has before. She lives there, on the third floor, so I'm sure she knows the kids well enough. The house itself appears to be by itself. No close neighbors near by, so how did the killer just happen to pick this house, on this night, when Jill gets stuck babysitting? How does the killer manage to get around the alarm so much? The writers are really stretching things here, almost too much. Despite these things, and the slow pace, I felt that the last half hour of the film made up for things, and then some. Once the action gets going, it doesn't stop.

When A Stranger Calls is a PG13 outing, so there is really only one effect to be found. A poker through the hand is the only effect to report here. Not a big deal really. The acting is something I thought could have been better. I didn't see it as bad really, just kind of bland. Camilla Belle does an alright job with the role. I was actually more impressed with her, and her character, once the action got going. David Denman has a small roll as one of the police officers. He talks to Jill, and also shows up at the end. Why do I bring him up? When I finally saw his face at the end of the film, I knew I had seen him somewhere before. When I started this review, I looked him up on IMDb to see where it was I knew him from. If you have ever watched the film Out Cold, then you may remember the guy that ends up admitting he is gay. That would be David Denman. It would bug me way too much if I didn't go look. You can also find Tiffany Madison, Tommy Flanagan, and Clark Gregg.

When we first met Jill, I had to wonder about her. I can understand exploring the house, and maybe getting a little nosy when it comes to the jewelry. Breaking away from that train of thought for a second, I can understand why this was targeted at teens this time around. What teen aged girl hasn't babysat at least once in her life? I know I have done my share of it, so it was easy to identify with Jill. While I would never put the jewelry on, in fear of losing it, I might take a look at what was there. I was worried about Jill when she started putting on all kinds of jewelry, and then started to raid the closet. What worried me the most is when the alarm went off. Jill punches the code in to turn it off, but doesn't bother to check anything to see what made the alarm go off. Then she reassures everyone that ends up calling that everything is fine. One other thing that really bothered me, even though the kids were asleep, she never once went to go check on them. That is until the caller asked if maybe she should go check on them. Call me over protective, but I would go peek in on the kids I would babysit for, even if they were sleeping. I wouldn't do it a lot, but I would now and then, just to make sure one didn't get up and make a run for it I guess. What did impress me about Jill though, is when push came to shove, she kept her head about her the best she could. She would even put herself in danger in order to give the kids a chance to get away.

When A Stranger Calls isn't a great film. As far as remakes go though, I can't place it in the worst list. They did try and take a situation and stretch it a little too far. I think it would have been best if they had introduced the kids when Jill got there. Give Jill some time to get to know the kids, along with us, and then put them to bed. From there she could explore the house and so on. It would have killed some time, and maybe not come across as so boring to most people. I can understand why the first hour, or close to it anyway, will come across as boring. If you think babysitting is boring, try watching someone babysitting. All in all though, I ended up liking When A Stranger Calls, mostly because of the last half hour. If you can handle the slow pace, give this one a watch.
3 out of 5 At least she didn't try on the clothes in the closet

Are You Ready? Part Six

Another trailer has been released for the up coming After Dark Horror Fest. This one is for Perkins 14. I found two trailers for it, which I have posted both here. You might want to watch them both, since they are slightly different. I also updated my Part Five post for Voices. A new trailer, with English subtitles, was released for that film. Give it a look while you are here. It should still be on the main page, so just scroll down a little ways.

Tis The Season...For Killing

Merry Christmas everyone! I hope all of you horror fans get plenty of presents that have horror films in them. As for me, I didn't get much. My best friend gave me a $25 gift card for Olive Garden, she remembered that is my favorite place to eat. My dad, who has given up on trying to buy clothes for me, gave me a lot of money to go buy my own presents with. It isn't the same as getting actual presents, but I don't mind going shopping, and picking out what I want. What girl doesn't like to shop? Anyway, it struck me that in the three years I have been doing the horror movie review thing, I have never reviewed a horror movie based around Christmas on Christmas. I have always found a picture of a Christmas tree and posted it along with a little message. Well not this year! Since the only film I have that I haven't reviewed yet is Silent Night, Deadly Night (1984), that will just have to do. I didn't actually plan this out you see, more of a spur of the moment type thing.

Silent Night, Deadly Night starts off with a young Billy traveling with his parents to go visit Billy's grandpa (Will Hare). Grandpa is in a mental hospital, and doesn't talk to anyone. That is until Billy is left alone with grandpa. Then grandpa starts to talk to Billy about Santa Clause. Saying that Santa like to punish those that have been naughty, and things like that. He then asks if Billy has been naughty this year, which Billy nods that he has been. Grandpa warns Billy that he had better run then if he happens to see Santa. On the way home, Billy's parents discover what grandpa told Billy, but don't really say all that much about it. They happen across a guy dressed as Santa, who it appears is having some car trouble. They don't know it, but this guy killed a store clerk and robbed the place earlier in the night. When Santa pulls a gun, the dad takes off but doesn't get very far before being shot. Billy takes off across the road and hides, where he watches his mother being murdered. Nothing is ever said about his baby brother who was in the car.

From there we jump ahead a few years. We see that Billy is still thinking about what happened to his parents a lot. His drawings of Santa are not what the nuns at the orphanage want to see. Instead of trying to help Billy, Mother Superior (Lilyan Chauvin) believes that punishment is the only way to solve problems. This only adds to Billy's troubled mind. Once Billy turns 18, Sister Margaret (Gilmer McCormick) helps Billy (Robert Brian Wilson) get a job stocking things at a toy store. Things go very well for Billy there, he appears to be very normal with no troubles...until Christmas rolls around. Billy becomes more on edge once images of old Saint Nick start to show up around the store. Then one day, the guy dressing up as Santa for the store breaks his arm. So the owner turns to Billy, and gets Billy to be Santa. This, along with a couple of other things, pushes Billy over the edge, and he becomes the punishing Santa that he believes in.

Silent Night, Deadly Night came out before I was even around. Because of this, I didn't know a thing about the controversy around the film after it was released to theaters. I had heard about it here and there over the years, but it wasn't until I watched Going To Pieces: The Rise And Fall Of Slasher Movies, that the full scope of it was shown to me. It starts off with the trailer being shown on TV. Parents were upset that their children, who still believed in Santa, would now be scared of Santa because of this movie. Never mind that fact that it was an R rated film, therefore it was unlikely they would actually see the film itself. I think it would have been a smart thing to sit down with said child, and talk to them about films not being real. But that didn't happen. Instead, parents started calling and demanding that the trailer be pulled, and then started to demand that the film itself be pulled as well. Tri-Star decided to do just that. Some feel that the protests, there were actual protests outside of theaters, had nothing to do with Tri-Star pulling the film, I feel differently. Does protesting actually work? When it comes to entertainment (i.e. books, films, or music), then I would have to say you are defeating the purpose. Entertainment mostly depends on word of mouth to become successful. I go watch a movie, I come back and tell all of you about how much I, hopefully, enjoyed it. All of you go "Oh cool," and then go watch the film yourselves, when you may not have gone otherwise. When a bunch of people decide that a form of entertainment isn't for anyone, and then decide to protest it, they are only adding to the word of mouth. It may keep some people from seeing, or hearing (or whatever the case may be), said entertainment. But I think it actually gets a lot more people curious as to why so many people hate it. So something that may have never been popular, is now. More so to all those teens that love to get under their parents skins.

Now that I have bored you all to sleep, I will talk about the film itself. The DVD that I bought, I don't recall if I got this year or last, is an extended version. Some scenes that had been cut are now back in the film. It has gone from a 79 minute film, according to IMDb, to an 85 minute film. Silent Night, Deadly Night has a nice transfer to DVD. There are scenes that are darker than the rest of the film, which I assumed were the scenes that were edited back in. This is a film that I have watched before, but it has been many years since I watched it. I'm pretty sure that I have only watched it that one time, up until now. There was a lot that I didn't remember, but I do recall that I thought it was a pretty good slasher film, the first time I watched it. The added scenes make the film all the much better I think. Not everything is added gore, but that is there as well.

Silent Night, Deadly Night has something that I have come to expect out of slasher films, lots of gore. The effects aren't what I would call outstanding, but they are nicely done. We get a lot of different things here, people being shot, beheading, people being cut up, and being hung on some deer antlers. The antlers is perhaps the most extended scene with the added stuff. I could be wrong, but I don't recall seeing the antlers actually pushing through the skin, until now. The acting was also not all that bad. I thought that Robert Brian Wilson did a good job expressing what he was feeling. Linnea Quigley shows up here. I didn't recall her the first time I watched it, but that could be because I just didn't know who she was at the time. I do recall an interview with her though, where she complained about opening the front door topless. What I found funny about that scene was the fact that she was down to her panties before that, but put on her shorts before going to the door. Like she didn't want anyone to see her panties, but it didn't bother her if anyone saw her topless.

Speaking of being topless, there seems to be a lot more nudity than what I recalled as well. If you are a fan of this film, I would suggest looking for this DVD. If you have yet to watch it, but like slasher films, then it is a must have. I don't want to call it one of the greats, but I do love to watch it. The added scenes helped Silent Night, Deadly Night all the more. Again, Merry Christmas to all of you, more so my friends here (you know who you are). Stay safe!
4 out of 5 Killer Santa's are easier to believe than in a Santa that can visit everyone in one night!

Last Man Standing

So it begins. The next fifty posts anyway. After taking a couple of days off to travel back home for a while, I went from really cold, to not so cold, but still cold. Usually Texas is a warm state, but in the winter it can get cold. Not as cold as some areas, but still cold. Enough about the weather, I know you don't come here for weather reports. Last night, since there was nothing on TV to watch, I put in the next film in The Living Dead box set, The Last Man On Earth (1964). A while back I watched I Am Legend. I debated with myself on whetheror not to write a review. I eventually decided against it, but I will tell you this, I didn't care for it. Knowing that The Last Man On Earth is based on the same novel, I was a little leery when going into this film.

Dr. Robert Morgan (Vincent Price) is, as far as he knows anyway, the last human on Earth. As the film opens, we get an idea as to what Robert's day to day life is like. During the day Robert goes around the city, collecting the things he needs, and also gets rid of any bodies he comes across. The reason he does these things are explained in a long flash back sequence, roughly mid way through the film. I won't spoil it all, but will say that Robert is now up against vampires. As it turns out, a plague has spread through all of the human race, except Robert. Robert is immune to the virus that is causing those that die from it to rise from the dead and feed off the blood of the living. Robert hunts the vampires by day, while being tormented by them at night. Robert is all alone in the world, or is he?

I admit that I have never read the novel I Am Legend by Richard Matheson, so I can't compare the book to the film. I do know though, from reading other novels before they became movies, that the book always outshines the movie. Lets face it, a book can go into as much detail as the author wants, he isn't limited by time like a movie is. Matheson helped with the screen adaption for The Last Man On Earth, and didn't like it. He went by a different name in the film's credits. This film was also going to be produced by Hammer studios, but they decided to pass on it. If you are keeping count, that is two strikes.

The Last Man On Earth was eventually picked up by Robert L. Lippert, who produced the film in Italy. If you pay attention to the film, you can kind of tell it was filmed in Italy, even though they try and pass it off as somewhere in the United States. What they did right though was getting Vincent Price to be in this film. It is hard for a single actor to carry a film. Very few films are brave enough to try this. Since there isn't a whole lot going on plot wise, things fall onto Vincent Price all the more. Price does a wonderful job conveying the sadness, and slipping into feeling crazy as well, of being the last normal person left. Giacomo Rossi-Stuart plays Ben, Robert's best friend, who now returns every night to torment Robert. There is also Emma Danieli, who plays Robert's wife in the flash back, and Franca Bettoia. Some of the names also give things away as being filmed in Italy.

No special effects in this film. The vampires look like they do have some makeup on them, but not a lot. Of course it is in black and white, so it is hard to tell. The vampires seem to act a bit more like zombies instead of vampires. They are slow moving, and appear to be very weak. Since it has been three years since Morgan became the last human left, I guess we can argue this is why the vampires are so weak, no fresh blood to fight the virus. It is interesting to note though that many people compare Night Of The Living Dead with The Last Man On Earth. While I haven't gone searching for the interviews, some say that Romero used I Am Legend as a sounding board for his own film. It makes sense if you think it out. With a few changes, a group of people instead of one, and zombies instead of vampires, you have a different film.

The start of The Last Man On Earth is a little hard to get through, at least it was for me. It was interesting to see his day to day life, but it was quickly getting boring. One thing I didn't understand is the fact that he maps out where he has hunted for vampires already. I assume he feels that once he has cleared a building of vampires, that is it, others won't show up there. If I were a vampire, and someone was hunting me down (which the vampires seem to know is happening), I wouldn't be staying at the same spot all the time. Many people seem confused over Ben's death. I don't know that he did "die" though. We see what happens to him, but how do we know he actually was killed by that? I'm not sure I liked the ending all that well either.

Of the three films that credit themselves as film adaptions of the book, with only one taking the book's name, The Last Man On Earth seems to be the one that fans pick as being the most faithful to the actual novel. I didn't fall in love with this film, but I did enjoy it all the same. It was released on DVD by itself, but you can find it on many collection DVD sets. The quality of the film isn't always the greatest on these sets though. Since the film is considered public domain, which is why it appears on so many sets, it can also be found on the web for free. It is one to check out, at least once.
3 out of 5 Need to give those vampires some vitamins

Visiting In The 'Burbs

As promised, I watched The 'Burbs today for my 450th post. You may be asking why The 'Burbs? It isn't a horror movie. I know that this is mostly a comedy, but it does draw from the horror genre a little bit. It isn't a scary film at all, but it can be a little creepy at times. Since it is one of my all time favorite films, I figured why the hell not? After the first set of football games was played, I sat down with this movie, and watched it yet again. I have watched this film more times than I care to admit, but it has been a couple of years since I last watched it. If nothing else, doing a review of this film gave me an excuse to watch it again. I have it on VHS somewhere at home, but I decided to get the DVD from Netflix so I could check out any possible extras on the disk.

The plot for The 'Burbs is pretty simple really. Ray Peterson (Tom Hanks) is taking week long vacation from work. He has decided that he will sit around the house, take in a ball game, and drink a couple hundred beers. He enjoys watching the neighbors do their things as well, like Walter's (Gale Gordon) dog taking a poop on Rumsfield's (Bruce Dern) lawn. About a month ago, Ray got new neighbors, the Klopeks. No one on the block has met any of the Klopeks though. No one has seen them coming or going. No one shows up at their house either. All they know is that strange noises come from the Klopek's house. Pretty soon Ray, and the rest of the neighbors, begin to get some crazy thoughts in their heads about the Klopeks. Like maybe they are killing people over there. When Walter disappears, Ray and the others start to look into this theory.

If I remember correctly, I first discovered The 'Burbs on some movie channel. From there I went out and bought the VHS of it, so I could watch it more often. My obsession with this film firmly started once I had the VHS. This is a movie that I would put in when it was time for me to go to bed. I would get ready for bed, put the movie in, turn the lights off, and watch this movie. Sometimes I would fall asleep before it finished, and I didn't feel too bad about this, since I knew it would stop and rewind itself once it reached its end. Once in a while I would fall asleep before it really got going, but most of the time I would watch it completely. I have no idea how long I did this for. So to say that I know this film forward and backwards, even today, is an understatement. I'm not really sure how I broke away from watching The 'Burbs. I know that for a while, Dumb And Dumber took over as my obsession movie, but not for as long a period as The 'Burbs did.

The 'Burbs came along just as I was starting to like watching horror movies, but was still kind of leery about them. The 'Burbs wasn't scary to me then, but it was just creepy enough for me to feel that, while still laughing at the jokes. There are no real special effects, outside of what Tom Hanks looks like after being blown up. Well not literally, but I'm sure you understand what I mean if you have watched the movie. What really sold me on this movie though is the cast. Tom Hanks is great. Carrie Fisher, to my delightful surprise, played his wife. Bruce Dern is one of the neighbors, the military guy. Wendy Schaal plays his wife. Rick Ducommun was an unknown to me, but I understand he is very good at stand up comedy. Rick plays Art, who happens to work for the phone company, and is always getting Ray in trouble with Carol (Fisher). Art is married, but we never really get to meet his wife. Corey Feldman rounds out the neighbors. The Klopeks are played by Henry Gibson, Brother Theodore, and Courtney Gains. Dick Miller and Robert Picardo make cameo appearances as garbage men. To round out the main cast, we have Cory Danziger, who plays the Peterson's son.

What helps the cast, in a big way, is the script. The 'Burbs isn't what I would call a rolling around laughing movie. But it does have its moments where you will find yourself laughing out loud. I still laugh at some of the scenes, or some of the things that are said. For the most part though, I just grin wide and chuckle a little at all kinds of things. The attention to detail is another thing that I like about this movie. For example, in a dream sequence, Ray sees Walter with an ax in his head. Walter is holding his dog, which has a much smaller ax in its own head. Little things like that are what makes me love this film so much. A lot of the things that are said in this movie, are things that I can still remember. Sometimes I still throw a quote out, mostly just to see if people know what I am talking about. Very few actually do.

If you have yet to watch The 'Burbs, you need to do so. I know this is a horror blog, and this isn't a horror movie. But it does use horror as a back drop. A few horror movies are shown on TV that Ray is watching at one point. I can now name all of the films that are shown in that scene. It was nice to be able to watch this film on DVD. There aren't a lot of extras to be found, but there is an alternate ending. I didn't like it as well as the ending we always see in the film, but it was great to see something new from the film. The trailer is also included, and I noticed a couple of scenes that were new, or slightly different than what is found in the film itself. Trust me, I have watched the film enough to spot something new in the trailer. It has been great to watch The 'Burbs once again, and talk about it here. I have stopped watching films in an obsessive way a few years ago, before I started this blog actually. Don't worry, I won't start watching it every night again, but I think I will spend a little more time with it than I have been over the last couple of years.

Argento Style Phantom

It is always nice when finals are over with. Now all I have to worry about are the grades, which I don't see as much of a problem. Hopefully anyway. Since I'm closing in on my 450th post, I decided I will get it done by this weekend. Of course I will have to get some football time in tomorrow. The good news is, my favorite team has already played this week, so that will give me more time to work in the movie. I have watched it a lot actually, the movie I have planned for tomorrow that is, but I like to refresh my memory before writing about a film. As for today, I sat down to watch yet another Dario Argento film, Phantom Of The Opera (1998). I have heard this isn't one of his better films, but I ended up adding it to my Netflix queue at some point.

I would think that most people would know the story behind Phantom Of The Opera, since the film has been made and remade many times over. Maybe that is why Argento decided to put his own little spin on the story. His film starts with a baby in a basket floating down an underground river. A rat swims its way to the basket, then somehow manages to pull the basket back to safety. From there we are basically told that the baby and the rats form a bond. Many years later, we discover that The Phantom (Julian Sands), is now a man. The Phantom ends up watching understudy Christine (Asia Argento) singing one night, when she thinks she is alone in the opera house. To my surprise, they quickly form something of a relationship. The Phantom isn't the only person that is interested in starting a relationship with Christine though. Raoul (Andrea Di Stefano) is also wanting Christine for himself. With The Phantom doing everything in his power to make Christine the star of the opera house, who will she fall in love with?

With any director that I like, I want to like all of their films as well. That isn't always possible though. Phantom Of The Opera is a good example of why you can't always like every movie by a certain director. The main problem I have with this film, which is a problem in a lot of Argento's films actually, is the lack of character development. Before the twenty minute mark Christine has already met The Phantom, and is more than willing to meet up with him some more. The difference between this Phantom and others that came before him, is that he isn't disfigured. Instead of a physical deformity, he is able to use telepathy. He uses this to talk with the rats, and also talk with Christine at times as well. I suppose he has used his telepathy in order to learn to speak with other humans, since I'm sure the rats can't speak. I suppose none of that is really all that important, but it would have been nice if it had been touched on just a little bit. I don't mind movies that get right into the plot from the get go, but at the same time, give me some information about the characters!

If you can say one thing about this version of Phantom Of The Opera, it is the fact that it is a pretty gory film. One of the first things we see, after the baby bonding with his new rat parents, is some guy getting cut in half somehow. We don't actually see this, just what is left of his lower half. Despite the whole scene not making a lot of sense, I can say the special effects looked good at least. From a beheading, showing the bone in the thumb (and flexing it), and also showing people being crushed, you can say that this is a fairly gory film. This helps save the movie a little but, in my mind anyway, not completely. The acting was on the other end of things. While I didn't think that Asia Argento and Julian Sands were bad, I didn't buy into their characters all that much. Some of the actors though were very bad. I was a little disappointed by how bad some of the acting came across.

Another thing I was disappointed in was Argento himself. The fact that he changed the story, just enough, didn't bother me a whole lot. Still, I would think that he could come up with something better than The Phantom being raised by rats and being able to use telepathy. Some scenes felt out of place, like a rat trap full of humans coming down out of the sky. Obviously it was something that The Phantom was thinking about, but the way it was done made it look very stupid. This, and the other things I brought up, made Phantom Of The Opera a pretty boring film to me. It doesn't bother me that Argento tried to make it more of a horror story. I just thought he could have done a much better job with it. There are people that liked this film, but there are many Argento fans that even say that this was one of his worst. I can plainly see why, now that I have also watched it.
2 out of 5 No mask makes for a less interesting Phantom

No Skin Eating Here

It has been a long time since I have done an actual review here, so I say it is time I get back to basics. For those of you that might be interested, I have done a review, which you can find over at Top Horror Movies Club. Just follow the link over on the side bar. With finals going on this week, which I think I'm doing well on, I haven't had a lot of time to watch movies. I do try and sneak some in, if for no other reason than giving my mind a little break. I watched a film earlier in the week, which I kept thinking I had watched before. Turns out that I had, about two years ago. I didn't hate it as much the second time around, but it did make me kind of mad that I watched it again. I guess I should start checking my review list before hand. Last night, before crashing hard, I watched I Eat Your Skin (1964). I'm trying to make a push to post 450, which is just two short posts away after this one.

I Eat Your Skin starts off with a voodoo dance. A woman is dancing around, along with many others, but the camera stays on this woman most of the time. Eventually they bring out a goat. The woman gets down on all fours, while some guys hold the goat in front of her. The leader takes a machete and has a choice to make, the woman or the goat. He swings down, but we don't get to see which head he takes off. From there, we go to a hotel where Tom Harris (William Joyce) is sitting around the pool. Tom is a best selling author. When he isn't writing, he is telling his stories from memory to all the ladies that are interesting in hearing them. Duncan Fairchild (Dan Stapleton), Tom's publisher, shows up wondering why Tom isn't working on his next book. Tom is too busy making out with one of the women there at the pool, but Duncan has a job for Tom. Of course Tom isn't interesting in working, that is until the woman's husband shows up. Duncan wants to take Tom to Voodoo Island, where a doctor is working on a cure for cancer. Duncan thinks that the island is ripe for a story. With a doctor trying to cure cancer, natives that are into voodoo, and stories leaking out of the dead walking again, doesn't that sound like a good book to you?

I Eat Your Skin has a small story behind it. It was filmed in 1964 under the title Zombies. After it was filmed, no one would pick it up for release, so it sat on the shelf for six years. Then Jerry Ross was looking for a film to add to a double bill, to go along with I Drink Your Blood. He picked up Zombies, but decided to rename it I Eat Your Skin. Even though IMDb has the film listed under its original name, I'm going to refer to it as I Eat Your Skin, since it was never actually released under the original name. The film itself is kind of interesting in itself as a period piece. Tom is very much the ladies man, and is shirtless more times than not. Many credit this to the James Bond films that were coming out around this same period. Tom fits into the action hero type character, instead of the horror character that he is. Of course, I can make the argument that many zombie films have a touch of action movies included in them. Tom is always the leader, always the one that offers to be the explorer. In other words, he puts himself in danger first, and is always ready to fight first, and ask questions later. I guess he never heard the saying that the pen is mightier than the sword.

As soon as they see the island, the plane runs out of gas. They manage to land the plane on the beach, thanks to Tom. I would think that the pilot would have been able to handle it, but for some reason Tom has to take over. Right away Tom tells everyone to stay at the plane, while he goes and looks for some help. He finds a guy that is willing to help him, and also tells him that the drums that they hear means there will be a sacrifice later that night. A zombie attacks them before they get too far though. The nice guy gets his head cut off for his trouble. That is what happens when you try and be nice to someone. This leads me to the effects for I Eat Your Skin. The above scene did look cool, but there was no blood to be found. I know this is a low budget film from the early 60s, but it would have been nice to have a quick shot of some blood squirting up, or something like that. This was the only effect, outside of the zombie makeup. I couldn't decide if I liked how the zombies looked or not. Some of them looked fairly decent, except for the eyes. The eyes always bugged me with every zombie. We do get to see one person being transformed into a zombie, which was done in the same way the Wolf Man transform. I have included a picture below, so tell me what you think!

The acting was kind of cheesy, but I think that had more to do with the script than anything else. I Eat Your Skin is full of cheesy lines. The actors seem to be doing their best, even if it doesn't come across as all that great. One thing I didn't really care for was the fact that Duncan, once on the island, seems more interested in where his next drink is coming from, instead of making sure Tom is doing his job. Maybe Duncan is like that all the time though. William Joyce does a nice job with his role. I don't know what his other roles were like, but I thought he could have made a good action star. Heather Hewitt plays the lead role for the women. The women in this film aren't represented all the well though. It is mainly William Joyce that gets the screen time here. Betty Hyatt Linton plays the part of Duncan's wife, and is pretty much just the silly blond. You can also find Walter Coy and Robert Stanton.

I Eat Your Skin was filmed before zombies became synonymous with eating the living. While the new title suggests that is the case, it's not. These zombies are being controlled by the leader of the voodoo cult, and it is never really clear if the zombies are the walking dead or not. The island looks nice, but the location is not used to full effect. We only see a limited number of places on the island. This could be due to the fact that I Eat Your Skin was filmed in Florida, and not on some island. With the cheesy lines, somewhat bad acting, and jazz music almost always playing in the back ground, this movie seems to appeal more to the "it's so bad it's good" crowd. As for me, while I was entertained by it to some degree, I ended up not caring for this movie all that much. I can't recommend it, unless you just love the bad movies.

2 out of 5 Maybe some munching on skin wouldn't have been a bad idea after all

Are You Ready? Part Five

To top things off, the last trailer I could find for the 8 Films To Die For. I did watch this one a week or so ago, but I wasn't sure it was the correct film until I compared the cast in it. Not sure which country this film is from, but the trailer offers no subtitles. If I find a better trailer I will add it to this post and let everyone know. Oh, the film is called Voices. Enjoy!

Are You Ready? Part Four

At least the trailers are starting to find their way to the net. This one is for From Within. This is the first trailer I have watched that has the After Dark logo in it. At least it is an offical one from them. Four found, four more to go! Again, found some clips from the movie. Enjoy!

Are You Ready? Part Three

I found the trailer for another one of the 8 Films To Die For. I admit that I am a little worried about this next offering. After Dark is being very slow when it comes to updates. They still have listed which theaters will be showing their films. With less than a month to go, they had better get moving on this. Not everyone can wait until the last minute in order to travel if needed. Anyway, this is the trailer for the film The Broken. I also came across three short clips from the movie. I don't know if those will be eventually or not, so watch them while you can. Warning: Some do have a little bit of nudity in them.

MIWTS: My Bloody Valentine 3D

I'm sorry nothing has been posted in a while. Next week is finals, and I guess the stress is catching up to me some. Ever had a 24 hour headache? It's not fun at all. I started my review for Rachel's blog, but I didn't get far since the computer screen was only making things worse for me. Anyway, My Bloody Valentine 3D will be coming out next month, which I am excited about. The original is getting a new DVD release around the same time as the new film. This is supposed to have deleted scenes at long last. I will be sure to pick up that DVD. Here is the trailer for the new film, let me know what you all think!

Playing Games

There are times when I am way behind everyone else when it comes to horror films. Sometimes I feel like I am the last person that has heard of, or watched, a horror movie that everyone else already seems to know about. Case in point: Funny Games (1997). This was a film I had never heard of, or the director Michael Haneke, until I happened across a review of the remake on Final Girl's blog. Someone made a comment that they were surprised that someone like Final Girl, someone who has their finger on the pulse of the horror genre (so to speak), could not have hear of either until many years after the fact. My own reply to that was that just because we see ourselves as big fans of the genre, it doesn't mean we know about every film and/or director. One of two things has to happen, either we happen across the film ourselves, or we find out about the film through magazines, or someone suggests it to us. If those things don't happen, how are we supposed to know about them? Before I get into the review itself, I just want to note that I will be watching the remake next. You won't find that review here though. I decided to do that review as my exchange with Top Horror Movies Club. Be sure to check there over the next couple of days for it. Be sure to check out the rest of the blog, if you haven't already done so, while you are there.

Funny Games starts with a game. Anna (Susanne Lothar) and her husband, Georg (Ulrich Mühe, who passed away last year), are playing a game as they drive to their summer home. They put in CD's and try and guess which track they are listening to. They are traveling with their son, Schorschi (Stefan Clapczynski). Once there, they spot their neighbor, and invite Fred (Christoph Bantzer) over. As they leave, they comment that their neighbor was acting rather strangely, but basically write it off without much thought. As they start to settle in, Fred comes over with another guy, to help unload the boat that Georg was hauling to the house. After they get it into the water, Fred and the other man leave, while Georg and Schorschi finish setting up the boat. Anna is in the house talking on the phone and getting some dinner going. A man, who introduces himself as Peter (Frank Giering), shows up eventually asking for some eggs. Peter tells Anna that Fred has sent him over to get them. She kindly gives him some, but Peter ends up dropping them. After some talking, Peter gets Anna to give him some more eggs. We hear Peter make another blunder as he accidentally pushes Anna's phone into the sink, that happens to be full of water. Then Paul (Arno Frisch) shows up as well. Paul is the guy that came over with Fred. While Anna is starting to get very frustrated with these two, little does she know that the real games are about to start.

Funny Games is one of those films that often has two sides of opinion to it. Either you love it, or you hate it basically. I think very few people fall somewhere in the middle. While reading what a lot of people had to say about the film, I can side with both side to some degree, so I guess that puts me in the middle. That is actually how I felt after watching the film itself. I didn't love it, but I can't say I didn't like it either. I understood what Haneke wanted to convey. The parts I didn't really get were explained in the interview with Haneke as an extra. Haneke is, in a sense, playing a game with the viewer. He assumes that people watch horror movies, or violent movies at the very least, watch them because we want to see violent acts against people. Maybe some people watch these films for the purpose, but to me, Haneke assumes wrong. I'm not the only one that feels this way, some people are a bit more angry that Haneke assumes that. There are times I feel cheated if I don't see a death on screen, but at the same time, I don't have to see it. Even so, it was this game, that Haneke plays, that made the film interesting to me.

Haneke doesn't want us to side with the family, or the guys that are holding the family. I think he wants us to stay in the middle somewhere. He does a couple of things that separate this film from many others. One is the breaking of the fourth wall. Paul will sometimes talk to us directly. This isn't something that you will often find in a horror movie. The other thing was a rewinding of a scene in order to change the outcome of it. I was surprised by this more than the breaking of the fourth wall. I didn't really like that this happened, until I heard the reason behind it. I won't give you what the director had to say, unless you really want to know, but will instead tell you what I thought the reason was. I figured it was mostly just to be different, and to pull the rug out from what we think should happen.

Some people hated the above, mostly because it took them out of the reality they were putting themselves into for the film. That was kind of the point though. It meant to take you out in order to make you think about what you were watching. The thing that annoyed me more than anything was the fact this is a film out of Austria (Austria? Well then, good day mate!), which means I was reading subtitles. Normally this doesn't bother me all that much. This time around it bothered me at least twice. Since I was busy reading subtitles that would sometimes quickly disappear before I was finished, I missed some of the things being shown elsewhere. I didn't notice who else was with Fred when Anna and Georg stop to talk to him. I figured it out later, but it still annoyed me that I missed that. Another thing I missed was a telling wink. I only noticed that later, because it was shown again during the interview while they talked about it.

One thing people can agree on is the acting. Ulrich Mühe and Susanne Lothar are just terrific in Funny Games. They each give great performances, even though I felt Ulrich was a bit underused. Part of this is the actor themselves, and the other part is the director making sure he got the performance he wants for a scene. A few people felt that the characters themselves weren't very good at times. The guys that played the bad guys did a great job I thought. Some thought that their looks, one was on the skinny side, was enough not to feel threatened from. I think those people miss the point there, it isn't how a person looks that you need to be afraid of, but how they act. Georg also took a lot of heat for not trying to do more to protect his family, despite the fact that he gets his knee broken. Even Anna and her son get complained about for not fighting back enough. I don't know what these people want of the characters, but in this case I felt they were asking too much.

Most of the violence takes place off screen. We do see some of what happens, but only when it happens to the bad guys. Because of this, there aren't a lot of effects to be found. The best effect is probably what we see after something bad happens to one of the characters. I think this was done to test us. It made some people mad that they didn't show anything happening to the family. One person was mad that he didn't get to see what happened leading up to an event. With this I have to agree some, it would have been nice to see what happened in order for one of the characters to have been killed. We hear some of it, be see none of it. In fact, the whole movie is a test of patience. Funny Games is a slow moving, but steady at least, with one scene lasting around ten minutes. This scene has next to nothing happening in it. No one is moving, or at least there is very little movement. Many thought maybe their DVD had something wrong with it. I almost thought this, but then I figured out that there was nothing wrong. A TV in the background can be heard, so that is what proved to me it was just a long shot.

Funny Games has been described as a hard film to watch. It wasn't for me, but it was interesting at least. I don't know if I would ever watch it again though. I guess I will have to at least once more, since the remake is up next for me. I have heard it is a frame for frame remake of this film, by the same director no less. If you are interesting in hearing my thoughts about it, head over to Top Horror Movies Club to read them. As for this version, I think it is worth a watch at least once for everyone.
3 out of 5 I can't believe I forgot the rating!!

Nothing Like Real Fur

It has been a while since I have visited the Masters Of Horror series. Since I was in the mood to watch something tonight, but didn't have time for a long movie, I decided to watch Pelts (2006). This comes from the second season, and was the sixth episode. I haven't watched enough of these yet, since I am using them as a sort of back drop to my tribute posts. Since I have already done one for Dario Argento though, I figured this would be a good one to watch. I don't have to do research in order to do a tribute post this way. I should get around to updating my links in Dario's tribute though, since I have reviewed more of his movies since that time.

If you haven't watched any of the Masters Of Horror episodes, then you should know that this is a series that ran on Showtime. I don't know that it is still on, I didn't hear anything about it last year or this year. Each episode is roughly an hour long. Since this was being aired on a movie subscription channel, they actually mean an hour. Sometimes this is just the right amount of time for the episode, sometimes it isn't. With Pelts, we are introduced to Jake Feldman (Meat Loaf). Jake is in the fur business, making coats and other items out of fur. Business isn't doing so good though. We when first meet him, he is going through his factory checking things out. Each time he stops to look at the different pelts that are there, his temper seems to get worse. Eventually he decides to leave, and heads for the strip club. Once there he gets a private room with his favorite stripper. Shanna (Ellen Ewusie), formal model turned stripper, isn't all that happy to see Jake, since Jake won't leave her alone. Shanna seems to more interested in other women, and certainly not Jake. Jake promises her that someday his business will make him a very rich man, and then he bets that Shanna will come around.

Cut to Jeb (John Saxon), and his son Larry (Michal Suchánek). They are trappers also on hard times. Jeb is taking Larry to a place that is on private land, which is making Larry very nervous. Jeb tells him that he was there the night before and nothing happened to him, so they head in. They make their way into some old looking ruins, where they find a lot of raccoons have been trapped. After killing all the raccoons, they head back to their house to start skinning them. Larry is obviously taken in by the new pelts, he can't seem to stop looking at them, and touching them. Jeb heads upstairs in order to call Jake, who agrees to come out to see the new pelts. Not all is as it seems with these pelts though, as people start to die whenever someone is around them.

I assumed that Pelts would have something to do with people getting killed over pelts, or people would be killed because the pelts were killing them. In that sense I was correct in my thinking. But all through the film, I kept thinking to myself, this isn't how I thought it was going to be. I have no idea why. I think that in part, I just wasn't getting into the story itself very well. Thanks to CRwM, I know that the pelts are supposed to be from an animal that was never seen before. In the film version though, we get raccoons? I guess I just never though of a raccoon as something that people were after as far as fur went. To give the film credit though, they added an effect to the fur, its hairs appeared to be always swaying, that did make it stand out. Many people didn't like that there was a very short explanation as to why the pelts were cursed. Since the film is only an hour long, the explanation wasn't really needed at all. The important thing to remember is that they are. Sure it would have been nice to have explored it more than they did, but given the time, they went with what they could.

The biggest surprise to me was Meat Loaf. I don't recall seeing him in a film, or TV show before, so it was a surprise to me how well he nailed his role. I was very impressed with his acting here. It was also fun watching the making of feature where he talks about telling his daughter that he was offered a role in Pelts. She was very excited by her dad being offered a role in a Masters Of Horror episode, and even more excited when she found out Dario Argento was going to direct. Many claimed that the rest of the cast was sub par, but I didn't have a problem with them. It was good to see John Saxon, even if it was a minor role. Since I have not watched many of the second season episodes yet, I don't know if this is the goriest of the bunch, but many people seem to think that it is. It does pack a lot of gore into the hour it shows. From cutting up a person, to a hand being torn off, the gore is represented well here. I think my favorite effect though would have been the woman that sews herself up. Since it didn't hold back in showing this, it was a little hard not to look away from that. Some of the effects weren't all that great to me though. There weren't many that I felt could have been better, but there were some.

I know that at least two of my regular readers really enjoyed Pelts. While I don't disagree that it is one of the better episodes, it didn't strike me the same way as it did for them. I just couldn't get into the story that much. Plus there were times I wished the person that bad things were happening to would show a little more pain than they were. I do recommend this episode though. If you haven't watched any of these yet, what are you waiting for?
3 out of 5 Skinned alive has to be harder than shown here