Remembering Murder

I would watch another movie to review, but I have already watch three today, and I'm ready to move onto something else for the rest of the night. In order to make it to ten posts, I guess I could have cheated and thrown in a trailer, but I watched Memories Of Murder (2003). This turned out to be more of a crime drama, but it is about efforts to catch a serial killer, so there is at least a touch of horror there. I didn't know, until it started to play, that this film runs slightly over the two hour mark. It was made longer for me though. This was the other film that will be taken off Netflix's instant play sometime tomorrow. It was running fine for almost half an hour, when it decided that my internet connection had slowed, not once but three times. It actually did this four times in all, which was very annoying. I had to wait for it to buffer more of the film, so it wouldn't be interrupted. Because of this, it actually "ran" for two and a half hours.

Memories Of Murder is a South Korean film, that is based on true events of their first classified serial killer. Hopefully I am getting the names right for this. The film starts with Detective Park Doo-Man (Kang-ho Song) on the scene of a murder. We are told that this first murder takes place in 1986. Park does his best to preserve the crime scene, but it doesn't work out too well for him. We soon meet his side kick, Detective Cho Yong-koo (Roe-ha Kim), who literally does kick people when he doesn't get the answers he wants. Soon there is a second murder, and they get a new partner to work with. Detective Seo Tae-Yoon (Sang-kyung Kim) is a detective from Seoul, who has agreed to help with the investigation. Seo quickly starts to put things together that everyone else seems to have missed. The two women were killed on nights that it rained, and they were both wearing red. He also believes that a third woman, who was reported missing, might also be dead. She went missing on a night that it rained, and she was wearing red. As more women start to turn up dead, will they be able to find the person doing it?

Memories Of Murder is an interesting film if you like to follow clues. I don't know how close to the actual murders this film ended up being, but it is an interesting film. According to those that actually live in South Korea, the film is also about the times that the film takes place in. The names of the detectives are close to the leaders of that time period, so it is a take on them, as well as the murders. Since I don't know how close to the murders it actually is, I can only go by the film itself. I did do a quick search for the actual murders, but found very little about them. I mostly got hits talking about the film, and not the real murders. Park and Cho seem to think that if they beat a suspect long enough, they will get the person to confess to the murders. Maybe they honestly believe they have the right guy, but it seemed somewhat obvious to me that they didn't. Not that I am a great detective, but it was just too early in the film! They have a CSI type team, but it seemed like that team was in its early stages. So I'm not sure they were really much help to the police. It was also interesting to see how Park and Seo seem to change places as the film goes on. Seo is the thinker of the group. But he does stand by as suspects get beat up, as does their chief for that matter. It is interesting how the roles seem to switch.

We do see some dead bodies along the way, but nothing that is all that graphic. The acting was very well done. The film is subtitled, and I was a little disappointed with them at times. One of the things that was nice about it was the fact the subtitles didn't go by quickly. Even if there was a lot to read, it just fell a little behind is all. I really liked this, since in some films the subtitle will disappear before I get a chance to read it all. The downside of it was that every now and then, there was a word I did not recognize. I don't know if it ended up being a Korean word, or just a word I didn't know, which is completely possible.

I wasn't really sure what to expect out of this film when I started to watch it. I knew what it was about, and that is why I ended up adding it to the instant watch queue. I just didn't know if it would be a really gory film or not. Since it follows the police that are trying to stop this killer, it isn't a gory film. That is alright though. The killings themselves aren't gory, so it is nice that they stuck to that. Memories Of Murder not only tells us about the first serial killer, but it also shows a glimpse of life for people who live in South Korea. They show drills that people had to go through in case there are attacks by the north. A siren goes off, and everyone has to turn off all lights. This is being watched and timed. At a school, they practice what to do if there is a gas attack. These drills include where to go, how to use emergency chutes, and even how to carry the wounded to safe areas. It was a very interesting glimpse into life in general there. That being said, I didn't like how long the film ended up being. Two hours is a long time to sit through a film. Anything past that just makes it all the worse to me. It wasn't that Memories Of Murder was a boring film, far from it. But it does drag just a little in places. I'm not sure what they could have cut from it though. The ending leaves much to be desired, but in truth, they couldn't have ended it another way if they wanted to stay true to the actual murders. It is an interesting film, and one I do suggest checking out. If it had been a tad shorter, I may have given it a little higher rating.
3 out of 5 Putting my detective hat away for the night

Beware The Flesh Eaters

I don't know what I was thinking to be honest. I had it in my head that there was another day in the month after today. Good thing I looked at the calendar! Since I only had eight posts done, after my post about Time Of The Wolf, I realized one more film isn't going to cut it. While ten posts for the month isn't anything to brag about, I'm trying to get there so I don't have two months in a row with single digit reviews. Since I just got The Flesh Eaters (1964) from Netflix today, I decided to go ahead and watch it next. I was going to watch the last Invisible Man movie after this. But since I want to get that other movie in on Netflix streaming, before it is taken off, I guess I will save Invisible Man for tomorrow.

The Flesh Eaters starts off with a guy and a woman out on the ocean. They are enjoying the sun, being on their boat, and each others company. After joking around with each other, the woman's top manages to come off, so she jumps into the water. The guy goes in after her, but never comes up to the surface. As the water around her darkens, she lifts her hand up and notices there is something wrong. She soon disappears under the water, as the water appears to be boiling on the surface. From there we meet Grant Murdoch (Byron Sanders), a pilot who is down on his luck. Jan Letterman (Barbara Wilkin) approaches him in order to rent his plane. Actress, and often times drunk, Laura Winters (Rita Morley) needs to get to Provincetown (they are somewhere in New York state), so she can get to her next job. With a bad storm rolling in, Murdoch isn't so sure, until he is offered a lot of money. With the storm almost on top of them, Murdoch discovers that fuel isn't getting to the engines, so he finds an island to land next to. He plans to make the repair after the storm has passed over. But before they can find shelter, they run into Professor Peter Bartell (Martin Kosleck). Bartell is acting rather creepy. At times he acts like his uninvited guests are no trouble, and then there are times he wants them gone. After finding a mostly intact human skeleton, along with a bunch of fish skeletons, they realize there is something in the water that eats the flesh off of things. Does Bartell know anything about this? Or is he the mastermind behind it all?

Much like Fiend Without A Face, I was surprised at some of the things they filmed in The Flesh Eaters. It seems a little ahead of its time, as far as the effects go, which I will get into a little bit later. The plot for this film was actually kind of interesting. A scientist creates a string of flesh eating bacteria that he discovered, thanks to a failed Nazi experiment. There is actually a flash back scene to this, but it isn't included in this version of the film. You can find it as an extra though. I liked the different characters, even though there isn't a whole lot of character development to be found. I was a little confused by Bartell, since he simply wants them gone one minute, wants their help the next, and then simply wants them dead. He can't seem to make up his mind on what to do with his guests. Then we get the fifth person of our cast, Omar (Ray Tudor), who represents the '60s as most people probably think of it. With talk of love will save us all, and saying groovy every now and then. The only scene that really bugged me to death, was when Laura goes chasing after her suitcase with all her special drinks in it. She has to go out on a stretch of rocks that extends out into the ocean in order to get it. When it is discovered that the flesh eating stuff is in the waters around the rocks, and nearby ocean, she suddenly can't make it back across the rocks. Even though she managed to cross them with no problems to reach the suitcase, now she can't at all. She needs the big strong man's help. Okay, whatever.

The effects could look very silly at times, but I have to give them credit for at least trying. There is a scene where it looks like Bartell is cutting into Murdoch's leg, in order to get the bacteria off of it. Even though I think it would still be on the pants leg, I guess I could be wrong though. Another scene either used a green screen, or maybe it was the same effect they used for the Invisible Man films. One scene offers up a fake head, before such things were widely used in films. While the effects are a mixed bag, some are really good and some aren't, I was mostly impressed with them. The acting was also pretty good as well. Some of the lines said are a tad on the cheesy side of things, as well as some of the things they end up having to do. It is a B movie after all, so these things can be expected. If all of the effects and acting were bad, I might rip into it more that I have. I guess for mid '60s though, it wasn't as bad as it could have been.

I didn't feel that The Flesh Eaters was a great film, but it ended up to be a lot better than I was expecting it to be. It does have its silly moments, and the ending of the film gets pretty wild, but I didn't mind that so much. Dark Sky put together a nice little DVD here. The transfer is nice and crisp, which is a lot more than I can say for The Ape Man. It is a little light on extras, but at the same time, it would be hard to put a bunch of extras together for a film over forty years old. The cut footage, which I believe was added by someone else after the film was completed, was a nice extra in itself. There is nothing major in it, but it was nice to see it all the same. If you have never watched this one, give it a go. I think it is worth watching at least once. With plenty of time left on the clock, I think I will find something to eat, and then watch my third movie for the day.
3 out of 5 Stay far away from glowing water!

Non-Horror: Time Of The Wolf

I'm going to do something a little different for this review. I have often thought about it, just never done it until now. I'm going to take a page from The Horror Section, and write up a review for a movie that isn't a horror flick. Jay will write one up every once in a while. I have thought about doing this a few times, but never have. Last night I was looking through what I could watch through Netflix, and noticed that two movies will no longer be available on their stream after July 1st. One of the films, Time Of The Wolf (2003), is a drama. After watching it, I was debating doing a review for it, mostly because I wanted to talk about it. Since I don't have a blog for other reviews, and don't feel like messing with one, I thought I would just write one up here. I don't know how often I will do this. Probably just when I find one I feel like talking about I guess. This will also serve to show that I do watch other types of films!

In Time Of The Wolf, we meet the Laurent family. There are Georges (Daniel Duval), his wife Anne (Isabelle Huppert), his son Ben (Lucas Demoustier), and his daughter Eva (Anaïs Demoustier). They are traveling to their country home, to get away from the city life. When they get to the cabin, they discover that some other family is already there, and the guy has a shotgun. Georges manages to talk the guy into letting his kids leave the cabin while they talk things out. As Georges begins to try and sort things out, he gets shot. As Eva begins to open the door to see what happened, the film cuts to the rest of the family walking down a road. All they are left with are the clothes they had on, some minor supplies, and a bike. Once back in the city, we get the first signs that not all is right in the world. Animals are being burned in the city streets, and everyone is staying indoors. Something has happened to change the world. We follow Anne and her children, as they struggle to survive in this new world.

Time Of The Wolf is a little confusing right from the start. I never figured out if the Laurent family left the city because things in the world were changing, or because it changed in the time it took them to get to their cabin. They don't seem to realize what is happening once they reach the cabin. But later on Anne states that all they knew when they left, was that supplies were having a hard time getting through. So the best I can figure is, they knew something was going on, and that something got worse by the time it took to get to the cabin. We are never told what that something is, which does add to the confusion, more than once actually. It is easy to figure out that water has been contaminated, which I think is why animals were being destroyed. What caused this is never explained, but might have been hinted at with a couple of drawings of mushroom clouds. I would think that it would be talked about among the people that Anne eventually meets up with. In fact, the lack of talk about what is happening in the world is very obvious. I would think that everyone would be asking questions once they meet up with someone new. The only real news that we are ever given is about supplies.

I'm not sure why I ended up putting Time Of The Wolf into my Netflix queue. This is a film by Michael Haneke, which you may remember from my Funny Games reviews. It might have been suggested to me at that time, or I may have just come across it and thought it sounded like a good movie. I really think that Haneke should have explained what was going in the world, or at least France, since it would have made it easier to understand what all the characters were going through. Something else that Haneke managed to do was give zero character development outside of the main characters. There really isn't all that much even with the main characters. Eva starts out as a quiet person, but as the film goes on, we can see her mature, and become more of her own person. Ben is a quiet boy, and basically remains that way for the entire film. He does get something of a spotlight at the end of the film though. We get to know Anne from her struggles with life in general, but also trying to take care of her kids as well. Since the film was subtitled, it was a little hard to judge the acting, but it seemed very well done by all involved. I really liked Anaïs Demoustier, who played Eva. Not only is she a good actress, but is very cute as well. I believe she is 15 or 16 in this film, so I looked for more recent pictures of her, and discovered she is even more beautiful now.

Another problem I had with the film, is the fact that it is so dark. I didn't mind that the subject matter is dark. I watch horror movies all the time, so that didn't bother me. It was that the film itself is so dark, that it is hard to see what the hell is going on at times. In one scene there is supposed to be a rape happening, but I didn't know this until I started to read the message board on IMDb. I knew someone was having sex, and I thought that was all that was going on. The scene was so dark that it was hard to see what was supposed to be happening. Someone on IMDb explained that on the big screen, you could see more clearly that the woman was being forced, since she had a knife to her throat. It wasn't that I wanted to see the rape, I don't believe it actually shows anything anyway. But it would have gone a long way in explaining a scene that comes later if I had known. As if to make things worse, the way the film was edited would sometimes leave me with the following thought: wait...huh? Sometimes the scene was change so suddenly that I was often wondering what I had just missed. In one scene, Eva is keeping a fire going near a barn, so her mom will be able to find her way back to her. Something catches Eva's attention, but I have no idea what, since it was too dark to see anything. After about twenty seconds or so of looking at darkness, suddenly the entire barn is burning.

Time Of The Wolf is a pretty good drama. But there were just so many things wrong with it from the film makers that make it feel dragged out. I understand that we are seeing things from the point of view of Anne, and her kids. When they come across someone that isn't speaking French, we are not given any subtitles to explain what they are saying. Since Anne, or one of the others, doesn't know what is being said, we aren't going to know either. I understand that, but at the same time I found it annoying. Especially since there is a good chunk of film where we are not given any subtitles at all. Another questionable thing is the killing of some horses on screen. I'm not sure if they actually did or not. But according to some, it is allowed to show this on screen in France, and in other countries, as long as the animal was going to be put down anyway. I did enjoy the performances in Time Of The Wolf, but the film itself had a lot of problems that kept me from really liking it. I should have time to get another film in today, so hopefully there will be another review later tonight!
2 out of 5 You go up like a torch if you throw yourself into a fire

Ape Men Rejoice

As I figured, I had to babysit today. So I wasn't able to get a movie in as soon as I wanted. That's okay, since I still have two more days to work in three movies. On the plus side of things, this is the first time in a long time that I have managed to watch all of the Netflix movies I have at home. I'm sure if anyone has been wanting the movies I've had here, they have had a very long wait for them. Today I watched The Ape Man (1943), another mad doctor film. This makes the sixth mad doctor film now, so I'm almost there! I put it in after I got finished babysitting. I guess it wasn't as bad as it could have been. I was watching a two year old, and a ten month old. At least it wasn't Adventures In Babysitting bad.

The Ape Man starts out with Dr. Randall (Henry Hall) meeting Agatha Brewster (Minerva Urecal). Agatha was overseas investigating some ghosts, she is a ghost hunter after all, but has returned to where her brother lives, because he has gone missing. Randall takes her to Dr. Brewster's house, where she discovers that her brother (Bela Lugosi) isn't missing after all. He is actually in hiding because his experiment has gone wrong. He has been injecting spinal fluid of an ape into himself, with Randall's help. This has had a side effect that wasn't all that expected though. Brewster is now all hairy, but not to the point you can't tell it's Lugosi, and has given him some posture problems. When we first see Brewster, he is sleeping with his pal, the ape (Emil Van Horn). Well at least sometimes he is. They don't seem to get along too well unless they are out killing people. Brewster has decided that if he injects human spinal fluid, it will change him back. So he takes the ape with him to collect it. Unknown to him, there are a couple of reporters (Louise Currie and Wallace Ford) who have been nosing around.

Even though The Ape Man barely cracks the hour mark, 64 minutes, it felt like it was a much longer film. The plot is full of holes really. The reason Brewster kills people isn't because he has gone insane by slowly being turned into an ape. Instead, they claim that by drawing out spinal fluid, it means instant death to that person. While that isn't completely true, since I believe it depends on how much is taken, it certainly doesn't explain why the ape is still alive. One has to assume that the ape in Brewster's lab is the same one he has been using to get ape spinal fluid from. It is also never explained why ejecting spinal fluid from an ape is a good thing. Randall says they were on the verge of a break through, when Brewster decided to be the test subject. That is all that is ever said about it though. Did they believe they would be as strong as an ape or something? I guess it isn't all that important to know, but it would have added to the story a lot. Most of the story is about Brewster complaining about being part ape, while not really doing a lot about it. The other side plot is about the two reporters trying to score an interview with Agatha. They then stumble onto Brewster being part ape. I had a hard time watching this one, because it just dragged on despite the short running time.

The effects are nothing more than Lugosi being in makeup, and a guy in an ape suit. There is nothing special outside of that. Lugosi must have gotten over not wanting to be in makeup, since he turned down Frankenstein for that very reason. Too bad he didn't let the makeup artist do more with it though. You can see where they were going with it. But I have the feeling Lugosi didn't want anything on his face, so people would still know who he was. This is hardly his best film as far as his acting goes. It almost seemed like he was embarrassed by the whole thing, which would have been easy to understand. I sure would be, if I had to act like an ape at times. It was actually Minerva Urecal that I though stole some scenes at times. She doesn't have a big role, but I really liked her. I loved the scenes where she was being interviewed because of her ghost hunting skills. The rest of the cast seemed to be around more for comedy than anything else.

The few reviews I looked at before writing this, did point some at the comedy. I didn't find any of it all that funny though, except for Agatha's ghost hunting looks. So it passed right over me. There is a character that is seemingly always around. I was wondering if this guy ever slept, ate, or went to the bathroom. He offers a small twist at the end of the film, if you can stay awake that long. I didn't find The Ape Man to be a bottom of the barrel type film, but it was getting close to that. If you are really into Lugosi's films, I guess you might want to check it out at some point. If you aren't into him though, I would suggest just skipping this one.
2 out of 5 Eating peanut butter and crackers makes for some slow typing

Attack Of The Brains

If I have time tonight, I want to work in another review. If not tonight, then maybe tomorrow. Although I have a feeling I will end up being a babysitter tomorrow. Just my luck. Anyway, I watched Fiend Without A Face (1958), which is a somewhat short film. The next film I have in line is also a short film, so I thought I would try to work them both in on the same day. I'm trying to break into at least ten posts this month, and I have to double up one day in order to do that. With two short films, I figure this is the best time. Fiend Without A Face is another film for my 999 Challenge. It does have a scientist in it, but he isn't really a mad one. I'm going to go ahead and include it anyway, as I'm sure some people will think he is mad all the same.

The film is set in Canada, where the U.S Air Force has set up a base. They are working with a new radar system, that will help them track any missiles coming from the U.S.S.R. At the start of the movie, we watch a soldier on guard duty, when he hears a strange noise. He leaves his post to check it out, when he hears a scream. He finds a guy that has been killed. The locals think it is either atomic energy, or a G.I. that has gone mad. It is up to Major Cummings (Marshall Thompson) to find out the truth behind the murders. The turning point for him is when he finds out the people being killed are missing part of their brain, and a professor (Kynaston Reeves) is living in the area. The professor believes in the mind being able to do things that are only dreamed about. Could he be behind the murders?

Fiend Without A Face is just short of a feature film, by today's feature films anyway. It worked out well for this film, since it didn't leave much room for filler. That doesn't mean there isn't any though. There is a small subplot that involves a love triangle between Major Cummings, a local, and Barbara (Kim Parker). She works for the professor, which is how Cummings knew about him. It was a minor point, that really had nothing to do with the overall plot, but I guess it did add to the characters a little bit. The pace of the film can be a little slow in places, but still manages to keep ones interest in it going. The fiends in question are largely invisible, until the end of the film. Maybe this was a good thing, since we have no idea what the fiend is supposed to look like. We just know that they attack around the neck area, which is obvious by the way the actors are told to react. Once we do find out what the fiends look like though, it does add a lot to the film. In a way I wish they had made their appearance earlier, but at the same time I'm glad they waited. The only problem I really had with the film was some odd editing choices. In the middle of an important conversation, the film cuts to a group of people walking through the woods looking for that mad G.I., without much success of course. I suppose it was nice to know what this group was up to, but it seemed like an odd place to show us.

Fiend Without A Face is known because it is one of the first films to show gory special effects. Since the film is in black and white, I was wondering just how gory it could be. I was actually surprised by the effects. There are times the effects look kind of silly, but for 1958, I was very surprised at what was shown. The fiends themselves looked neat, but also a little on the silly side. Watching them move around was almost laughable to be honest. When a fiend is shot, a lot of blood comes spilling out of the wound. The blood looks really thick, and I believe someone said the blood is actually grape jelly. Even though it all looks silly to me, it does have a certain charm about it. Even though I had to chuckle at it, I still had to admire it all the same. The acting was just okay to me. I wasn't all that impressed by anyone actually. I guess the acting as it is, adds to the film in its own way. I can't call it bad really, you should watch Return To Sleepaway Camp for that. It just wasn't all that great to me.

Another thing that surprised me was the DVD itself. The extras are not what I would call great, but they are interesting. There is a commentary, which I didn't listen to. What I did watch though, was a small interview/documentary about how the film was promoted at theaters. From ideas that didn't go over, to one that was a smashing success, it was all very interesting. They took one of the models of the fiend and placed it outside of the theater. The police eventually had to tell them to remove, because it was causing such a big crowd, that it started to block traffic. It makes me wish that they still did things like that today. I wasn't completely impressed with Fiend Without A Face, but I did like it. Whoever said that my generation can't appreciate the classics was full of shit.
3 out of 5 Making sure my brains stay in my head

Blood Has No Coffin

With the news stuck on Michael Jackson passing away, there wasn't much on TV last night to watch. Because of this, I went ahead and put in a movie. While I hate to hear about anyone passing away, does it really deserve this much news coverage? I'm still on my mad doctor kick for my 999 Challenge. Last night I put in Doctor Blood's Coffin (1961), since there wasn't much else to do. I had never heard of this movie before, so I had no idea what to expect from it. The only reason I got this movie is because of it having a mad doctor in it. To help find films that matched what I needed, I ran a web search. I was pleasantly surprised that I could find lists of films that matched what I was looking for. Not only with mad doctors, but with some of the other categories I was looking for as well. Of course, the lists don't say if the movie is good or bad, so I knew I was taking a chance. Don't we do that with all films though?

Doctor Blood's Coffin opens with a doctor walking into an operating room, and finding another doctor performing an experimental procedure. This doctor has been warned many times to stop doing this, but he keeps doing it anyway. He is then kicked out of the hospital. This was supposed to be taking place in Vienna, so after that, the scene switches to somewhere in England. A couple of people have disappeared from their homes in this small town. Robert Blood (Ian Hunter), the local doctor, is worried that his supplies have something to do with it. Someone has been stealing drugs, and other things, from the good doctor. Sergeant Cook (Kenneth J. Warren) is thinking that whoever is doing this might be hiding out in the old mine shafts. One of the town folks says he will gladly help the police search the mines, since he knows them so well. The next day though, this guy has also disappeared. Peter Blood (Kieron Moore), Robert's son, shows up that very day. Peter has been away learning the same trade as his father. He offers to help the police search the mines, since he used to play in them as a kid. Unknown to them, Peter is the one that has been kidnapping people out of their homes. What is he doing with these people though?

Even though we never actually see the mad doctor's face at the start of the film, he has one of those surgical masks on, it was easy to figure out who he is. We see Peter drugging people, and then carrying them off. But again, we don't ever see his face. However, we do see his hair, and general build. Since Peter is the only person they ever show that matches the slim description, it wasn't very hard to put two and two together. It is hard not to give anything away about this film, because so little actually happens in it. We learn what he is trying to do, bring the dead back, but I will let you see how if you are interested. There are a few nice scenes to be found, some that even surprised me given the year it came out. But the rest is just talk, and more talk. There is a little bit of a romance thrown in, with Peter and Linda (Hazel Court), his father's nurse. Things don't get real interesting until the last few minutes of the film, but I can't really suggest watching the whole film just for the ending. The location of the film looks beautiful, being a nice place for a vacation I'm sure.

It was the effects for this film that managed to surprise me. While they are nothing that will shock fans of horror films today, I'm sure it did back in 1961. There are a couple of scenes were we see the human heart. Like I said, nothing major these days, but it did surprise me to see that in such an early film. The dead guy at the end looked kind of bad, but I have seen much worse in films more recently. The acting was really good at least. Kieron Moore does get a lot of praise for this film, and I can understand why. He is creepy when he needs to be, romantic at times as well, and can even have that mad look in his eyes. A lot of people seem to know who Hazel Court is, but I believe this is the first time I have come across her. Some think her talent was wasted in this film, since she wasn't given a lot to do. I rather felt that way about everyone however.

I can't say that I ended up hating this film, but it just got so boring at times. That isn't a good thing when you are watching a film late at night, and on the verge of being tired. The way the doctor was going about bringing people back to life, was very flawed I thought. Add the two together, and you end up with a film that could have been a whole lot better than it turned out. Sorry for the short review, but Doctor Blood's Coffin didn't give me a lot to talk about. I'm not even sure why they called it that. There is only one coffin in the film, and it doesn't really have anything to do with Blood. Oh well, maybe the next film will be a better one.
2 out of 5 Taking my heart to the grave

The Giggling Doctor

I think I will try for three in a row again, and this time I will get it. Hopefully I will get more than just three actually. When I got up today, I was in the mood to watch a movie, and then write up the review. This is a good thing, since I haven't really felt that in a while. Maybe I am getting back into doing reviews again, which is never a bad thing. I'm still trying to work through my Netflix films, since I have yet to have one sent to me this month. I was getting five films, but recently I decided to knock it down to three films, in order to save a little money. Since I haven't been watching any movies lately, I need to watch three films before being sent a new one. Dr. Giggles (1992) is the second film of the five I had, that will now be sent back. Two down, one to go. Dr. Giggles is a film I remember watching with my dad. I thought I remembered him taking me to the theater to watch it, but seeing how I was only five when it came out, I don't think he did that. Anyway, watching it with my dad again, was a nice fun time.

Dr. Giggles opens with Doctor Evan Rendell (Larry Drake) performing an operation, and explaining to those above him what he is doing. As the camera pulls back though, we soon realize he isn't a real doctor. The person he is cutting on is fully dressed, with his tie getting in the way. We soon learn that Rendell is in a mental hospital, and Rendell isn't one of the doctors there. As Rendell makes his escape, we learn he is heading back to his home town, to take revenge on the town that killed his father. Meanwhile, we meet Jennifer (Holly Marie Combs), who is going through her last day of high school before the summer break. Not all is well with Jennifer though. She has a heart problem, a valve is not working right, which may need to be operated on. Jennifer fears this, despite being told it is an operation that is no longer a big deal. Her mother passed away from an operation that wasn't supposed to be a big deal either. Once Rendell finds this out, he makes up his mind that he is going to help Jennifer. Rendell's own mother died because of a bad heart. His father, a real doctor, ended up killing people in the town to find a new heart for his wife. Will history repeat itself?

Since Rendell is looking for revenge on the town, the film leans towards being a slasher film. Rendell uses doctor tools in order to kill people every time. This makes the film slightly different from other slasher films at least. Rendell's constant giggling does get rather annoying after awhile, but that is the title of the film. So I guess it would be silly if he didn't giggle. I noticed some things this time, that I didn't really notice before. Like the kill scenes weren't as gory as I remembered them being. I was also laughing at Rendell's doctor bag. I made the comment at one point that it is his endless doctor bag. No matter what he needed, it was in that bag. It is a good sized bag, but at one point he pulls out a stomach pump from it. This pump was bigger than the bag! I guess it is one of those magical bags, that is bigger on the inside than it appears on the outside. I would have liked to have seen some of the other characters used more. We only really get to know Rendell and Jennifer. Jennifer's boyfriend, Max (Glenn Quinn) has a somewhat big role, but we don't get to know him all that well. We do learn that he is a typical teenage boy, who thinks with the wrong head.

As I have touched on a little already, the kill scenes aren't as gory as I remembered. I was rather disappointed by this actually. Some of the kills are off screen, even though we know what has happened. Others aren't really off screen, but we don't actually see it because it is being blocked somehow. That doesn't mean there isn't any gore to be found though. There are a few scenes that were more on the gory side of things. Even though I was a little disappointed by the effects, what we are given turns out to be pretty good. The only effect I didn't like at all, was when they tried to show the camera angle from inside a persons mouth. It didn't look very good to me. The acting was good however. Larry Drake was very good in his role. His dead pan delivery of his one liners made them all the funnier. I didn't laugh at all of them, but there are some good ones to be had. Holly Marie Combs is probably best known for her time on the TV show Charmed. If you are interested in seeing her before the show, this is a good way to do it. I never really watched the show she has been on, but have looked at pictures from it at times. I have always thought she was pretty. In Dr. Giggles, it is easy to see that she is much younger. I didn't feel she is as beautiful as she is now, but she is very cute all the same. You can also find Cliff De Young, Keith Diamond, Richard Bradford, Michelle Johnson, and Nancy Fish.

I can't say that Dr. Giggles has ever been a favorite film of mine, but I have never felt it was as bad as a lot of people seem to think it is. IMDb has it rated slightly below an average film for example. Dr. Giggles ends up being a film where you have to turn off the brain, and just go with what is being shown. It is a fun film to watch, but there are things that keep it from being better than it is. Like Rendell being able to pull just about anything out of his bag. The ending feels a little forced as well. Although I do love it when Rendell looks into the camera, and asks if there is a doctor in the house. I have said before that how you feel going into a film can often affect how you react while watching it. With Dr. Giggles, I was excited about watching it because I got my dad to watch it with me. He hasn't watched a horror movie with me in a long time, so I was looking forward to it. We both were making fun of the film at times, but we were also enjoying it as far as the horror parts went. Dr. Giggles was actually the first film I thought of when I came up with the nine mad doctors category for this challenge. So it's about time I actually got around to it.
3 out of 5 Giggling my way through this rating

Mad Doctors And Their Pits

Since I have made it through two reviews, in two days, I decided to make it three in a row (which didn't happen, yay me). I know my reviews over at Top Horror Movies Club have been all over the place, which I'm trying to get back on the weekends, but I did manage to post a new review there a couple of days ago. Check out my review for Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus, if you haven't already. For today, I took the top movie in my pile of Netflix stuff to watch. I picked out The Dead Pit (1989) because it has a mad doctor in it, which meets one of my categories for my 999 Challenge. I figure I had better get to work on it more, since half the year is quickly approaching. I'm not even close to the halfway point in my movies for this thing, so I will have to step it up.

The Dead Pit starts off with Dr. Swan (Jeremy Slate) learning that fellow doctor, Dr. Ramzi (Danny Gochnauer) is using patients, in the mental hospital they both work for, as lab rats for his own experiments. When asked why he is doing it, Dr. Ramzi says that he is tired of the living, and has moved on to the dead. He might want to tell the people that he is experimenting on that though, since they are still alive. When each person dies on him, he throws them into a pit. When Swan discovers what it is Ramzi is actually doing, he confronts Ramzi, and kills him. He then seals off the door that leads to the basement, and the pit with all the dead bodies in it. Twenty years later, Dr. Swan is still working at the mental hospital. A woman (Cheryl Lawson) is brought in by the state, after being picked up the street. She doesn't remember anything about herself, and claims that a surgeon stole her memories from her. As she is being interviewed by the head nurse, an earthquake happens that breaks the seal to the basement. Soon after, our Jane Doe begins seeing Dr. Ramzi, even though she has no idea who he is, and people begin to disappear from the hospital. Is Ramzi back? Or is someone else doing the killings?

The Dead Pit was filmed at the Agnew State Hospital in California, which had been closed down for many years by then. The main building that they filmed in was once the high security wing. Since they knew their film was going to be shot at this site in advance, they were able to write a script around it. The main idea for the film was to include zombies. You will find them, if that is what you are looking for in a movie, but they come late to the party. I have never been to a mental hospital, and hopefully I never have to go to one. So I don't know if how they depict the common room is accurate. It seemed to me they had no real order there though. The majority of the film deals with our main character dealing with her memory loss. Dr. Swan is trying to help her using hypnosis, which doesn't work as well as he had hoped it would. Our main character also spends most of the movie in a skimpy t-shirt and panties, with no bra. While this is all interesting, to a point, I couldn't help but wonder when the zombie action was going to start. Ramzi was more like a ghost at first, with only our main character being able to see him most of the time. Once the zombies do show up, it turns into a little more interesting film. The ending does start to feel dragged out though. While no one ever goes for a head shot, bullets seen to have no affect on the zombies. But something else sure does.

Zombie films usually go hand in hand with gory effects. With The Dead Pit, we do get some gory effects, but not all of them look all that great. Some of the effects really did impress me at times. There's plenty of blood, and brains, being shown at times. The zombies themselves looked pretty good, with a lot of blood on them as well, which was hard to wash off I guess. The brains of us normal folks were exposed a lot, sometimes being shown with needles in them. These scenes didn't look all that bad either. There were times though when the zombies would hold up someone's brain, I have no idea why, but they did. I didn't like the brains then, they looked very fake at those times. The acting was just okay to me. Cheryl Lawson was actually filming another movie when she tried to get the part of Jane Doe. The Dead Pit is usually considered her first film though, since it was released before the other film. It wasn't that I didn't like her performance, I just felt she was screaming too much. Running around in her underwear was rather distracting at times as well. In one scene, the voice of Ramzi is supposed to be coming out of her, while she is under hypnosis. Cheryl used her own voice for that, which sounds a lot different from her real voice. One has to give a lot of credit to the extras of this film. They were not paid, but went all out for the film. A lot of extras were used for the hospital scenes, as well as for zombies.

The DVD for this film was nice. It includes commentary, as well as four interviews. The interviews included are for Brett Leonard (director/co-writer), Gimel Everett (producer/co-writer), Cheryl Lawson, and Jeremy Slate. They were pretty good interviews, that mostly stuck to the topic of The Dead Pit. The film itself wasn't the best around, but I enjoyed it. At the time of its release it was sent straight to video, with something of a 3-D type box, with glowing zombie eyes when a button was pushed. It got better once the zombies did show up, it just took a long time for that to happen. The way to kill a zombie is one I haven't come across in another film. To give you a hint, they borrowed a little from the vampire genre. The effects for a dying zombie were also a little cheesy looking, but I forgave it for that. I was a little confused about how Ramzi was taken out, if he truly was anyway. I can't really explain why without giving too much away, sorry about that. Not one of the greats, but not one of the bad ones either. Worth a watch at least once I would say.
3 out of 5 Wearing less than Jane Doe at the moment

Koko Beware

During my time just after exams, I started to read another book. This time I picked a book that I have had for a long time now, but have never read. The title is Koko, written by Peter Straub in 1988. I don't remember when I bought this book, but I know it has been sitting on my book shelf for years. I thought about reading it at times, but being a thick book, almost 600 pages long with small print that takes up the majority of the page, I would usually pick something else to read in its place. While this book turned out to be more of a thriller, instead of a horror novel, I decided to go ahead and post a review of it anyhow.

In Koko, we meet a cast of four characters to start with. The story opens with the Vietnam vets heading to Washington D.C., because of the Vietnam Memorial being open to the public for the first time. We first meet Michael Poole, who is waiting for his friends that still remain from the squad he was in, back in Vietnam. Michael is now a baby doctor, and also married to his wife Judy. He is waiting for three of his Vietnam buddies. One is Harry Beavers, who is a lawyer now. The others friends are Tina Pumo, who owns a Vietnamese restaurant, and Conor Linklater, a somewhat down on his luck carpenter. They are meeting at a hotel for three reasons. First is to see each other again. Second is to pay their respects to those that didn't make it out of Vietnam. Third, and perhaps most important, they are there to talk about the recent Koko murders, that have happened overseas. This is important to them because they believe it has something to do with what they did while in Vietnam. They believe it is another guy they served with, Tim Underhill, who is responsible for the murders. Ever the lieutenant, Beevers has come up with a plan to find Underhill, and stop him from killing more people. His plan also includes writing a book, and selling the story for a movie, so they can all get rich from their adventure. Will they find who they are looking for? Will they survive if they do?

Even though Koko was a thick book with very small print, I was surprised at how quickly I managed to work my way through it. It took me around two weeks to read it, with some days not being able to get any reading in, or very little. I found the story to be very interesting actually, and wanted to see what was going to happen to the different characters. One of the nice things about the book happens to also be one of the things that makes the book drag in places. Each of the main characters is given an everyday problem. Poole lost a son a few years back to cancer, which has caused a lot of problems in his marriage. Judy wants to forget all about their son, while Michael still feels a lot of pain over the loss. Beevers has already been through a divorce, and now has been fired from his job. Since he still sees himself as the lieutenant he once was, he can also be a very big asshole at times. Linklater is having a hard time finding his niche in life. Pumo is having trouble with his much younger girlfriend, partly because he has trouble getting close. He is also struggling because the Board of Health is after him, because of all the bugs in his restaurant. We also learn about some of the other people they served with in Vietnam, as well as some of the things that happened while they were there. There is a pivotal event that affected them all while they were there. In a small village, some kids may, or may not, have been killed. While all this information adds a lot to each of the different characters we end up following through the book, it can also slow things down at times too, as Straub deals with each of these issues.

I did notice a mistake in the book at times. While everyone else heads overseas to try and find Tim Underhill, Pumo stays behind to deal with the issues at his restaurant. The book flips back and forth between the other three, and Pumo, for a while. At one point Straub is dealing with Pumo, and refers to Pumo by a different character name. At first I thought maybe I was just reading it wrong. So I went back to read it again, and I am pretty sure it was just a mistake. The character being referred to was overseas, and not part of the story at this point. I noticed it once more much later in the book, with different characters this time. There were some also minor points that didn't bother me as much. Another thing that did bother me, is the big event that happened in Vietnam. It is talked about all through the book. All of the characters that were involved in it, are still haunted by it on different levels. The story of what happened there is slowly told, which I was glad for really. But the thing that bothered me the most is it is never completely told. We learn that there may have been some kids in hiding, and it is hinted at what happened to them. In truth we are never told one way or the other. I don't mind making up my own mind, but with an event that plays such a large part of the plot, and the characters lives, it would have been nice to have a straight answer.

Straub never really tries to hide the identity of the killer in Koko. Still, it wasn't until it was getting towards the end of the book, that I actually figured out who it was. I understand why he was doing it, yet I still don't get it at the same time. From what I have learned, Straub uses some of the characters in this book in some of his other stories, so I will have to check those out someday. As for Koko though, it turned out to be a very good thriller type book. It might be hard for anyone that was in Vietnam to read though, as some of those stories can be rather graphic at times. If this sounds like an interesting story to you, I highly suggest giving it a read.
4 out of 5 Hoping I get to travel overseas someday

Dracula The British Way

In my last review, for Frankenstein Created Woman, I talked about it being the first Hammer film I had ever watched. While I was swimming the other day, I realized that wasn't true. It was actually the second film from the Hammer studio, that I have now watched. Back in 2006, my first year as a blogger, I reviewed Night Creatures. Being that far back, I guess it is no wonder that I forgot about that film. Since I didn't think very highly of it, I let it slip from my memory. Swimming has the affect on me though. That is why I wasn't posting all that much last month. With the added stress of graduating, if I wasn't in class, or had my nose in a book, I was in the pool. Nothing relaxes me quicker, and gets my mind more focused, than swimming. What all that had to do with today's review is anyone's guess. In case you missed it, you can check out my review of Drag Me To Hell, which I reviewed last week.

In Dracula, better known as Horror Of Dracula here in the States, we meet Jonathan (John Van Eyssen) just as he arrives at Dracula's castle. Jonathan is there to work in Count Dracula's (Christopher Lee) library, to catalog and put the books in order. What the Count doesn't know is, Jonathan knows that he is a vampire. Jonathan plans on finding where Dracula is sleeping, so he can stake him. Jonathan meets a woman there, who says she is being held captive by the Count. To his surprise, this woman turns out to be a vampire as well. Jonathan finds out a little too late though, since she manages to bite him first, much to Dracula's displeasure. Jonathan passes out and awakens locked in the room Dracula put him in. He does manage to escape, and to discover where the two vampires are sleeping. He stakes the woman, but Dracula gets to Jonathan before he can finish the job. We soon find out that Jonathan was working with Doctor Van Helsing (Peter Cushing). Van Helsing learns what has happened to Jonathan, who is now himself a vampire. Van Helsing is forced to kill Jonathan, with a stake to his heart. Back home, Van Helsing wants to tell Jonathan's girlfriend the bad news, but is told she has been ill the last couple of days. Thinking nothing of it, Van Helsing leaves. He eventually finds out that Dracula has come to town just before him. The battle is now set.

This film is one of the first Dracula films to be made in color. I didn't know that going into the film, but I guess I assumed it would be in color. One thing that is noticeable about this Dracula, is how little the guy talks. He talks a little bit at the start of the film, and then loses his voice from that point on. Not that Dracula needs to talk to be noticed. But it seemed odd to me that he would be so silent at times. Even though Dracula is based on the same material as the American film of the same name, it is interesting how different the two films ended up being. One of the things that did bug me about Horror Of Dracula, would be the character of Jonathan. Even though we learn that Jonathan is a vampire hunter, he seems pretty ignorant about vampires. He doesn't seem to suspect that the woman living under Dracula's roof might also be a vampire. This might explain why he killed the woman, instead of killing the bigger threat in Dracula, first. Of course, there wouldn't be a movie if Dracula was killed off so quickly. One of the things I learned about the American version of Dracula, is that the studio didn't want Dracula biting any males, as they feared this would be seen as homosexual. I had to wonder if the same thoughts were there for this film as well. Unless a guy is trying to kill Dracula, he ignores them completely. Dracula only seems to go after women, not that I really blame him.

While the effects in Horror Of Dracula struck me as a little silly at times, I have to admit, they also had a certain charm around them as well. If one good thing came about in this version, Horror Of Dracula, wasn't afraid to show makeup effects of the bloody kind. These effects ranged from blood on wounds, and around the mouth/teeth, as well as bite marks and staking vampires. We also get to see what happens to a vampire, that simply doesn't fade away when in contact with direct sun light. Given the range and frequency of effects, it was a little easier to forgive them. I wouldn't be so kind to a movie that had these same effects if it were made today, but given the time period, they were not too bad. Like the American version, it is the acting that really shines through in both films. Even though he barely speaks, Christopher Lee does make a great Dracula. He doesn't really come across as the charmer that his American counter part was, but he is more menacing. Always snarling to show off his pretty fangs, which is something that was never in the American version. According to the trivia for the film, Lee did have a lot of problems with the contacts used in the film, that gave his eyes the bloodshot look. I can see why a lot of people like Peter Cushing as Van Helsing. I guess it is how you like your characters though, since Cushing plays the roll in a very matter of fact way. I liked that if you didn't believe the guy, he didn't much care. He would still do what he had to do all the same.

One of the things that surprised me, in a good way, is that a child was being tapped for food by a vampire. The child was never bitten, as far as I could tell. But it was still interesting that they would think of a child in this way for the film. Overall, I was very surprised with Horror Of Dracula. It was a sort of a "what could have been" for the American version, if they had decided to try to make it more bloody. The big battle between Dracula and Van Helsing is really the icing on the cake. It was great to see the two actually fight it out, even though I had to wonder why Dracula didn't try to stop Van Helsing when he went for the...well, that would be giving it away so I won't say. If you have watched the film though, you may know what I mean. If you like vampire films, or even just Dracula films, this is one to check out for sure. On a more personal level, I'm very sorry it has taken me so long to get this review up. I started it right at the end of May, but didn't get very far into it, before other things got in the way. I decided to take a break from everything for a while, which may have been a mistake on my part. I was having trouble getting back into doing reviews, but I think I have gotten over that now. My next review here I think will be a book review, while my next film review will be over at Top Horror Films Club, which I hope to find a movie for today sometime. Hopefully I will get things turned around now, and start getting more reviews up.
4 out of 5 Melting away into a pool for the summer