Alien

1979 sci-fi horror classic

Rating: 18/20

Plot: The titular fiend is loose on a spaceship where it starts picking off the crew one by one. A woman with ill-fitting underpants has to stop it.

This is the movie that my "ill-fitting underpants" tag was made for. And this is a movie that I was fascinated by way before I saw it. It came out when I was six, far too young to see it since the poster alone is terrifying. My father, however, bought me a Xenomorph doll, a foot-tall plastic guy with a button in the back that, when pushed, pushed a second set of menacing teeth from his mouth. It was not an appropriate gift for a child of six, and I didn't know what to do with it. I probably had my Star Wars action figures kill it over and over again. Anyway, I saw the monster in this franchise long before I saw the first movie which seems odd because one of the reasons why I think this movie works so well is that they don't let you see the monster for a really long time. You see eggs, you see a Facehugger (coincidentally also the name of something you can purchase from certain prostitutes), and you see the Xenomorph in bits and pieces, but you don't see the monster as well as I saw it in plastic form on my birthday when I was six.

It's hard to find a flaw in this movie, and I should probably give it a 20/20 just because it's one of the best science fiction movies of all time, one of the best horror movies of all time, and probably the very best horror/sci-fi movies of all time. The story's derivative, and it's easy to find the same yarn spun in the 50's and 60s'. Here, here, and this here Mario Bava film are some examples I could think of. The story had never been told like this, and it's never been told this successfully since. The opening credits and the way the title appears--deliberately, like the rest of the movie--with the scraping and rumbling minimalistic music set the tone early. Then, Ridley Scott gives us a tour of the Nostromo, taking his time to get to any characters or a story. The characters are snoozing anyway. The set design for the spaceship is impressive except for the Christmas lights on the bottom of it. That tour of the Nostromo creates this sense of loneliness, makes it palpable. Space looks great in this movie, too, no better than what Kubrick did the previous decade though. Kubrick didn't have Harry Dean Stanton though, and this movie does. There's not a lot of character develop here as they're kind of just there to be killed by the Xenomorph. But they get to exist like you'd figure bored astronauts would exist. I like how the dialogue is handled during a less-famous dinner scene where the characters talk like they think they're in a Robert Altman movie. The biggest surprise about the characters? Just look at the last three survivors--a black guy and two girls. Who would have predicted that? The black guys are always the first to go in horror movies! And women? A lot of the fear in this is because of how effective Scott is at building up tension. It's relentless, even if you've seen the movie. It's almost relentless even if you're not seeing the movie. There are times in this when you could listen to the sound effects alone and be terrified. There are a ton of memorable scenes and shots. The more-famous dinner scene reminds me of a Thanksgiving dinner I was once at, only less gruesome. I still remember watching that scene for the first time and being shocked and mesmerized. And check out that cute little guy skitter across the room! There are scenes that would terrify claustrophobics even more than non-claustrophobics, but a lot of the fear, I think, has to do the amount of sexual imagery in this thing. The imagery hits you more psychologically--taking advantage of women's fears of being sexually assaulted and men's fears of being attacked by a homosexual. Next time you watch this thing, watch for sexual imagery just to see if I'm making it up.

House

1986 horror-comedy

Rating: 13/20

Plot: A writer struggling with the loss of his son and break-up of his marriage moves into his late aunt's haunted house and has to battle both literal and psychological demons.

Entertaining horror-comedy here, but I kept getting distracted. First, it was good to see 80's sitcom superstars George Wendt and Richard Moll. But with Wendt, I found myself wondering how much he weighs now and had trouble focusing on the plot of House. Speaking of Wendt, if I were the director of House, I would have been a little more over the top with the horror and violence and included a scene where William Katt's character enters a hole in the house, stumbles around a bit, encounters a few ghosts, and emerges from George Wendt's rectum. That that scene wasn't in this movie shows that we're dealing with amateurs here. The second distraction was William Katt's V-neck sweater worn with nothing underneath. I'm talking about a deep V here. I suppose there's nothing wrong with the style choice, especially for 1986, but I was distracted because I was wondering whether or not I could pull that off in 2013. The third source of distraction was the appearance of a Masters of the Universe action figure, Buzz Off. I started thinking about the height of popularity of these toys and wondering if I was too old to be playing with them back in the mid-80s when I was entering my teens or when I was in my 20s. Luckily, I didn't need to focus too hard to get this. It's your typical haunted house movie with decaying fiends and silly shocks, but there's the missing child thing and a few Vietnam flashbacks to give this a bit more story. Things are a little too commercial, but the special effects are grotesque enough. A monster in an upstairs closet drips with ridiculousness, a reanimated giant fish, a bunch of tools, and a purple-dressed ghoul all recall Evil Dead 2. I wish that purple-dressed thing wouldn't have spoken though. I also wish "You're No Good" wouldn't have been used during one of the movie's better moments--a dismemberment montage. The music for most of this could have been lifted from any horror movie, and the Vietnam scenes seem artificial. But this has some creepiness and a few laughs. Just not George Wendt's rectum.

Bay of Blood

1971 Italian horror movie

Rating: 16/20

Plot: A bunch of people murder each other in an effort to inherit an island. The island isn't very happy about it.

This was on my radar because of its bitchin' alternate title--Twitch of the Death Nerve. Apparently, this has more alternate titles than any other movie which I guess is something. Here they are:

Carnage
Bloodbath (or Blood Bath)
Bloodbath Bay of Death
The Odor of Flesh
Before the Fact
The Antecedent
The Last House on the Left, Part II (Note: It has nothing to do with The Last House on the Left.)
New House on the Left
Ecology of a Crime
Chain Reaction


Ok, most of them are in other languages, but trust me, there's a lot of them. And that's not counting a few working titles--The Stench of Flesh, Thus Do We Live to Be Evil, and That Will Teach Them to Be Bad. This movie's also notable as being a hugely influential slasher film, spawning films (for better or worse) like Halloween and the Friday the 13th franchise. The latter, which I've never really had much interest in, apparently borrows a few murderous acts from Bava shot-by-shot. What makes this movie a little more interesting than a lot of crappy slasher flicks that follow it is in one of those alternate titles--Ecology of a Crime. One could look at all the violence of this thing and wonder what's wrong with people, but the real villain might be a little sneakier than just something like human nature or greed. There are mysterious forces at play here, right up until the shocking conclusion which works as black comedy perfection and a final karmic exclamation point. This is very cheaply produced, but there are some great stylistic touches, like the slowing wheelchair wheel in the aftermath of the first murder. There's also some first-person stuff that predicts the opening sequence of Halloween. Oh, and there's German actress Brigitte Skay playing Brunhilda, a character you get to see every inch of if you're into that sort of thing. Lots of this is gruesome with its fair share of decapitation, impaling, slicing, and dicing. This could use better pacing, but Bava does a lot with a little and adds a little depth to the violent genre. And that ending!

The Legend of Hell House

1973 ghost story

Rating: 14/20

Plot: A husband-wife physicist team and a psychic agree to spend a few nights in the titular haunted house with the lone survivor of an earlier visit. There's some haunting.

I wanted to watch something penned by the great Richard Matheson after his passing last week, and this was available. The horrors are effective enough, at least psychologically, and I like that the movie doesn't depend on gimmicks. They're the kind of scares that get under your skin a little bit. The story and its little twist are as cool as you'd expect from something that came from the mind of Matheson. The dialogue's not always great, but I like the conflict between scientific thought and supernatural beliefs. And you have to appreciate when writers can throw in phrases like "ectoplasmic stalk." There's also one of the most arousing come-on lines in the history of horror cinema in this when the hornily-possessed spouse of the scientist says, "You...me...naked...that girl...together...clutching..scratching...biting," before dropping her nightgown. Hot! Oh, and there's ghost sex, something that makes my head hurt now as I try to think of some clever way to reference ectoplasm. This feels a little stuffy at times, but it's got some style. The soundtrack, with its rumbling unidentifiable wind instruments, works well, and there are all these weird close-ups of people's faces or times when their faces move into a shot that I liked. And there's a stuffed cat attack which is nothing short of amazing. I liked Roddy McDowall in this, and one moment where he freaks out--all shrieking and contorting--is probably one of the highlights of his career. Near the end, he engages in a little paranormal trash talk. "What size were you, Belasco?" "Funny little dried-up bastard!" Great stuff. Roland Culver is also really good in a very small role.

Shaye and Kiki: Fun Bubble

2004 compilation

Rating: 15/20

Plot: Shaye Saint John and her charred doll Kiki have a series of mundane and repetitive adventures.

This is a compilation of about thirty short films featuring the titular characters. Here's the character's background: Shaye was a model who was involved in a car accident that disfigured her, so she had to replace a lot of her parts with mannequin parts. Or something like that. Shaye is the creation of performance artist Eric Fournier, now sadly deceased. These shorts definitely fall in the not-for-everybody camp and are alternately hilarious and horrifying. It's a maddening hyperkinetic dada art assault on at least two of your senses. The repetition alone is enough to drive some people batty, but the cheap computer effects, daffy minutia, and often terrifying imagery are what would make things unbearable. In fact, if I ever get the opportunity to prop somebody's eyes open and forcefeed their brain things like Alex in A Clockwork Orange, this is now on the list. I'm not sure if this stuff was created to say anything about society or not. Shaye is shallow enough to match a lot of cultural phenomena in our reality-show culture though, so there might be some lunatic fringe satire going on here. I laughed and probably had a nightmare or two that I don't remember, so I'm considering this thing a success. I mean, there's a scene where Shaye is in a washroom and the creepy doll keeps banging on the window. It's the stuff of nightmares, a scene easily more horrifying than I've seen in any horror movie. And then you get a repetitive scene where Shaye is trying to get a present indoors in the hilarious "Bake, Shake, Explode" which makes me laugh just thinking about it. And Shirley Temple 2000! made me laugh out loud. If you like gams, ever wished that the movie Mannequin was created under the influence of LSD, and like to feel really really uncomfortable when watching movies, this might be for you. Hypnotizing weirdness! One gripe: Grammar problems! Missing apostrophes annoyed me.

Halloween

1978 horror movie

Rating: 15/20

Plot: A lunatic escapes from an asylum, returns to the childhood home where he murdered his sister, and starts killing off teenagers who are having sex. Donald Pleasence chases him around.

Carpenter is so skilled at doing a lot with not much at all, and that gift's on display here. This is cheap and doesn't even really have a story that is all that intriguing. It does deliver the scares, mostly the things-jumping-out-at-you kind of scares, but it's more effective at delivering a creepiness, creepiness with a barely-discernible sense of humor below the surface. This definitely has a little style. The long shot at the beginning with the first-person perspective works really well. I'm sure that sort of thing had been done prior to 1978, but I'm not enough of a cinephile to know when. This also has so many wonderfully choreographed sequences, like one where Jamie Lee Curtis and her friend are talking with the latter's cop father and then pulling away while Pleasence walks up and introduces himself before Michael Myers drives past in the background. It's all one shot and so perfectly timed, and it's got this gritty effortlessness. Myers is very creepy when lurking around, but should psychotic killers really drive around in station wagons? And at what point did they decide to make him freakishly strong? I really liked a shot where the camera lingers on Myers while he's standing and admiring his work killing Bob, the guy with giant glasses. Following that, Myers pretends to be a sheeted ghost, and I still can't decide if that's the stupidest thing I've seen recently or one of the coolest. Jamie Lee Curtis? I'm not seeing any acting potential here ("The keeeeeeeeyyyyys. The keeeeeeeeyyyyyyss!"), and she looks like she's about thirty years old. Her character is worse at killing psychotic killers than Curtis is at acting the part. Why does she keep throwing the knife away? The character is good at locking herself into places. Either that, or she doesn't fully understand how doors work. That's one of the many horror moves in this that either were already clichés or that would become cliches. Also, I wouldn't hire Jamie Lee Curtis to babysit any of my children. Donald Pleasence is his usually awesome self here and lends a certain elegance to the whole thing, best exemplified in his delivery of the line "He came home." Pleasence is taking this movie so seriously, even when his character is parking in a handicap space, and if I see the sequels (I never have, by the way), it'll be because of him. The music, as famous as those "Tubular Bells"-sounding piano tinkerings in the theme are, is occasionally grating. I didn't remember a clicking sound in the theme and thought something was wrong with my device. When I found out it was supposed to sound like that, I was annoyed. What I did like were the cheesy sound effects accompanying some of Michael Myers' moves. Loved that kung-fu electronic springy sound when Myers leaps onto a car, and although I can understand the argument that the sound effects were goofy, I was glad there was a sound effect every single time the killer appeared in the movie. Something else I liked was the complete lack of enthusiasm in whoever was the voice of a teacher during one scene. I haven't been able to put a name to that off-screen role unfortunately. This movie works as a cautionary tale, like a lot of slasher pics do, a warning to teenagers that premarital sex can be deadly. This movie predates AIDS by a few years, but when my peers and I first stumbled upon these horror movies where teenagers were having the sex, the disease, in its abstractness, was almost more terrifying than any Michael Myers could possibly be, no matter how many times he seemed to be dead but got back up. For us, it was almost like Michael Myers put a face on the disease. I think that's why nobody I grew up with had sex before marriage.

The Frighteners

1996 horror-comedy

Rating: 15/20

Plot: Frank Bannister uses his ability to communicate with ghosts to con people. One cloaked ghost is flying around making numbers on people's heads and killing them, however, and Frank has to find a way to stop him before he's put away for the crimes.

I was trying to describe this movie to somebody I work with. I couldn't really articulate what was good about it, and I couldn't really articulate what was bad about it. It's enormously entertaining though. It's that manic sort of entertainment, the kind that can only be created by a charged and creative and loopily unpredictable mind like Peter Jackson's. The Peter Jackson who directed this--as opposed to the one who created the boring King Kong remake or all those really long movies about little people walking around New Zealand--is the same Peter Jackson who directed Dead Alive, Bad Taste, and Meet the Feebles. Here, he gets a little star power in Michael J. Fox who is every bit as likable as he is in every single other thing he's done, even when he's not surfing on top of a van. It's a little hard to buy Fox as any kind of a bad guy. He's sort of an anti-hero here, a guy who is playfully conning but nevertheless conning a community out of money by taking advantage of a gift he received in an accident that took his wife's life. Right off the bat, Jackson's asking you to root for a rather unscrupulous guy. But that guy gets to run around on those little feet of his and make big eyes and say, "Whoa!" a lot, so you end up rooting for him. That, by the way, is what Michael J. Fox does best. He'll be remembered as the guy who could run around and say, "Whoa!" I wonder if Jackson would have made Fox a hobbit? I guess we'll never know. Also really fun to watch is an unhinged performance by Jeffrey Combs of Re-Animator fame. The character doesn't make a lick of sense, but he's hilariously portrayed and as eccentric as any character you're likely to see. I was really impressed with the special effects team behind this. The ghosts were cartoonishly goofy, almost like something you'd see sitting next to you at the end of the Haunted Mansion ride at Disney World, but it was fun watching them splash through walls, manipulate the settings, and suffer disfigurements. The Reaper-esque bad ghoul is effectively sinister and visually cool whether he's rubberizing the carpet or wallpaper (not sure how he makes the setting elastic like that) or floating around as a Cape Monster. There are a lot of fun periphery characters including John Astin's ghostly The Judge and a character played by the son of last year's Torgo Award winner, Jake Busey, a guy who almost won his own Torgo in 2011. A lot of the movie really shouldn't work. Or maybe I should say that a lot more of it shouldn't work because there is quite a bit that seems a little too messy. Peter Jackson spills his soup quite a bit with this thing. Still, it entertains from beginning to end with a strange energy and creative story and was really hard not to like.

Barry recommended this just about two years ago.

Shaun of the Dead

2004 zombie comedy

Rating: 15/20

Plot: Zombies! The titular slacker hero has to survive and save his girlfriend and best friend.

The whole zombies-in-a-world-where-everybody's-kind-of-already-a-zombie thing, with characters living life obliviously, has been done before in other zombie movies, and this loses its rhythm a little in the second half of the film. And with what seems to be a bottomless supply of zombie comedies out there these days, this might seem like just another in a superfluous pile. And the title of the movie is a pun which just doesn't seem like a good idea. Still, this one manages to stand out. First, it balances its slapstick and more sophisticated gags really well as well as its comedy and drama. There's a love story that both works and doesn't get in the way of what the audience really wants to see--people being chased around and sometimes eaten by zombies. And the characters act precisely how slackers would act during a zombie epidemic. For me, the visual humor works a lot better than the humor in the dialogue. I actually sided with the girlfriend about Nick Frost's character. I did like the line--repeated, like so many in this movie--about how it was the poor guy's "second album [he] ever bought." But the real genius in this is the visual humor. There are always things going on in the background of shots, a ton of dramatic irony, and some really fun foreshadowy moments, my favorite being the parallel episodes in a pair of tracking shots as Shaun takes a trip through his neighborhood on the way to a store. Some rhythmic zombie beating and remote control t.v. surfing are other bits of genius. The zombies looks great, and you've got to appreciate the little magic trick they pull off with impaled Mary in Shaun's backyard. You could say this is a little formulaic, but it still manages to feel so fresh, a real credit to the writing and brand of humor. And it's a rare zombie movie that might benefit from repeated viewings.

You could probably talk me into bumping this up to a 16/20 if you wanted.

John Dies at the End

2012 horror comedy

Rating: 12/20

Plot: A pair of slackers get involved with a drug called "soy sauce" which causes them to drift between two dimensions. They have to save their world from something named Korrok.

What a mess! It's almost a delightful mess, but it's unfortunately just a little too much. I applaud its creative spirit and unique vision. The story and director Don Coscarelli take chances, but the budget's neither tiny enough or large enough to make it work and this desire to be 21st Century and hip gets old after the first, mostly fresh, twenty minutes or so. A lot of me wants to just appreciate the craziness of all this--animated meat that seem straight from Jan Svankmajer, a dog driving a truck, insects that would make Cronenberg giggle, exploding Robert Marleys, a creepster who'd be right at home in a David Lynch movie putting some giant insect thing down a guy's shirt, a punk song about a "Camel Holocaust," bare-breasted people from another dimension, and Paul Giamatti. The movie seems to get more coherent as it goes, but when you really think about it, it's just a movie that is pretending to be coherent and not doing a very good job at it. It also gets more and more frustrating as it goes, building to something that is so poorly realized with computer effects that you end up caring about what happens less than you care about the characters. And you didn't really care about any of that unlikable lot anyway with the exception of a dog. There's enough here to probably make this a cult classic, but I can't think of any reason why I would watch it again. Cool poster though.

Shane Watches a Bad Movie on Facebook with Friends: Burial Ground: The Nights of Terror

1981 Italian zombie movie

Rating: 12/20 (Libby: 4/20; Fred: 6/20; Carrie: 12/20)

Plot: Couples look for a good time at a creepy mansion but encounter zombies.

Don't get me wrong. The zombies in this are as creepy as zombies get. They're in various stages of decay, and a lot of them have wiggling maggots on their faces. They move like zombies should, feast on human flesh, and shamble out of unexpected places beautifully. But they are nowhere close to the creepiest thing about this Italian schlocker. No, that would be Peter Bark, the "unnerving Italian midget thespian" (according to imdb.com) who plays a twelve-year-old boy in this movie. His countenance and dubbed voice are creepy enough, but when he begins to sexually assault his mother? It's the stuff of nightmares. The problem with this movie isn't a lack of horrifying or suspenseful moments because once it gets going, really early in the proceedings, it's filled with horrifying and suspenseful moments. The problem is more with the storytelling, mainly that it doesn't have very much of it. The zombies aren't explained until the end with a quoted "profecy" that has more than one typographical error. And it's not exactly an explanation either. The human characters are a lot dumber than the zombies which doesn't make any sense. These are zombies that can use power tools. The humans? I'm not sure they can. I know one doesn't seem able to use a pitchfork. This festers with a lot of really nice horror movie moments including one that involves monks, and anybody popping it in for the gore will probably be satisfied. For me, it's the "unnerving" Peter Bark that I won't be able to shake out of my head.

Directed by Andrea Bianchi. It's a movie I liked enough to check out something else by him, maybe Strip Nude for Your Killer which was released six years earlier. That title's got some serious potential.

Nightmare on Elm Street

1984 horror movie

Rating: 15/20 (Rating changed after I was told that my pretentiousness was making somebody sad.)

Plot: An undead janitor attacks teenagers in their dreams.

I suppose this has enough gross-out gore and jump scene thrills to lure your typical fan of the horror genre, but after a cool beginning showing the construction of Krueger's scissor hand and Tina's nightmare which for some reason features a goat or a sheep, things get and stay pretty goofy. And that--the unapologetic goofiness--is really what appeals to me. Consider the villain, for example. He scowls and has bad skin, and if he was just lurking or popping out of dark places, he would be pretty terrifying. Instead, there are all these goofy Freddy antics, mostly with 80's synthesizer accompaniment. His "Watch this!" followed by cutting his own fingers off for absolutely no reason? Tina's look during that scene is priceless, by the way. The goofy long-armed thing? Cutting himself open and exposing maggots? Some silly tongue wagging? An obscene phone call with more tongue wagging action? Nobody needs to make a Freddy Krueger parody movie because he's already sort of a parody. I also don't really understand his character and what he does or how he does it. Is that explained in sequels or something? I believe I've only seen a couple of these. But he's inside dreams and then he's outside dreams. What's going on? Is this whole thing thought out very well? Am I just not paying enough attention? Freddy also gets some pretty silly things to say--a blasphemous reference to his scissor hands [By the way--has Johnny Depp appeared in a third scissor hand movie? Is there a scissor hand trifecta that has been completed?], "I'm your boyfriend now," "I'm gonna split you in two." They really should have made him a silent killer, instead of a snarling trash talker. Of course, nothing Freddy says seems dopey compared to Jsu Garcia's Rod, a character who not only says "Up yours with a twirling lawnmower" but also throws out a line I used to woo Jennifer: "I woke up with a hard-on, and it had your name on it." Depp, in his first movie, also gets a lot of stupid things to say. Still, he still manages to be Johnny Depp in this. He's got an It, a charisma, even in a small, silly role. This isn't all silliness, however. Tina's death--a scene where she is dragged up to the ceiling--looks really cool, and Johnny Depp's demise is also creative and pulled off with just enough black comedy. And if you look fast, you'll see Bruce Campbell. And I really do like Freddy's look, at least when he's not moving. So there is quite a bit of coolness in this little horror movie. But then there's a character reading from a book called Booby Traps and Improvised Anti-Personnel Devices and the whole movie threatens to turn into Home Alone and the silliness is back. This is a movie that really needed to pick a tone. They certainly picked a tune, and those repeated nine notes really got tiresome quickly. It all ends with a waving skeleton, one of the goofiest things that I've ever seen, an image that makes me wonder if this entire movie is a joke.

Question: Who do you think would win in a battle between Freddy and Jason? 

Shane Watches a Bad Movie on Facebook with Friends: TerrorVision

1986 sci-fi horror-comedy

Rating: 12/20 (Rat's Ass: 3.14(2)/20; Fred: 9/20; Carrie: 5/20; Bryan: 8/20; Libby: 13/20)

Plot: An alien thing finds its way to earth via a satellite dish and begins devouring a family and a couple swingers who pop over for some swinging.

Well, I was going to post the Facebook conversation, but it would be pointless. You should just Facebook friend request me and watch the bad movie of the week with us--9:30 on Sundays.

This is a fun slab of 80's sci-fi comedy with some gross and cheap effects, cheaper laughs, and a tan guy. There's a shift that threw most of us off about midway through when it changes from a monster-on-the-rampage-eating-unlikable-people movie to something like a dopey E.T. Then, it sort of changes back and doesn't wimp out at the end which I liked. My pals were entertained by some perverse artwork in the swingers' home. Bryan seemed slightly annoyed by the whole thing but even said, "That one face down ass up pic in the bedroom was pretty good." Fred didn't like the green blood. Libby liked the flick the most, contrasting it with Waterworld, a movie that her husband Fred said was "good," a comment that probably led to a huge argument and an eventual divorce. The guy's enjoyed an Elvira-esque television hostess who showed clips from The Giant Claw, Earth vs. the Flying Saucers, and Robot Monster. We were all excited to see Uncle Rico, and I like that the guy that did the "voice" for the monster has 686 acting credits on imdb.com. Frank Welker. He's a good grumbler. This isn't exactly high art, but there are lots of laughs, appropriate since it's supposed to be funny.

 

 

Carrie

1976 horror movie

Rating: 17/20

Plot: The titular bullied high schooler goes nuts and kills everybody.

This was the first movie that I can remember seeing in a movie theater back in '76 when my parents took me as a 2 1/2 year old. It was hard to forget the artsy dirtiness of that locker room scene, the way John Travolta drinks his beer, that bucket of pig blood, those flying knives, and that filthy hand as I relived it all over and over again in my nightmares throughout my childhood. Though dated somewhat, this is a horror classic. De Palma's storytelling, though not far removed from King's novel, is unapologetically over the top, but he's got a style that I really like here. I really like how Carrie the character is filmed in a lot of of this. She's seen at askew angles and through things enough, and it adds to the mystery of her character. I also loved this long shot that leads the audience up the rope and to that ominous bucket. The whole king/queen announcement sequence is brilliant and leads to  the longest applause for anything in movie history. The aftermath--the music cutting out with the only sound being a stylish bucket creaking and dripping--is such a perfect calm before the shit storm. Sissy Spacek is perfect; her eyes manage to give off an innocence and creepiness simultaneously. Piper Laurie is also perfect, the performance nowhere near realistic but deliriously entertaining regardless. She's effectively creepy while saying some pretty absurd things. "I can see your dirty pillows. Everyone will!" Also, note that carrot chopping scene. Laurie apparently thought that this movie was a spoof which may explain how she played her character. This isn't a perfect movie. There's a dancing scene where the camera spins around Tommy and Carrie way too fast, almost like De Palma wanted to make his audience really dizzy before the climax of the story. There are a few awkward comedy attempts including one with sped-up chipmunk voices. John Travolta, probably because he became so famous, is a little distracting. This movie should also probably lose points for his "Get 'er done!" which I'm sure is what gave Larry the Cable Guy the only idea he's ever had as a comic. There's also so much music, a few notes plagiarized from Psycho, I think. Of course, with an overbearing mother and a notable shower scene, I guess this has a few things in common with Hitchcock's movie.

Worth mentioning: Michael Talbott acting his ass off during the scene where they get a pig. Incredible performance.

Love this "Goof" from imdb.com: "Chris is somehow able to give her boyfriend a blow job and talk to him at the same time, without her voice being distorted in the least."

ParaNorman

2012 cartoon

Rating: 13/20 (Jen: 14/20; Emma: /20; Abbey: 18/20)

Plot: A boy who sees dead people inherits the job of reading a magic book to a centuries-dead witch from John Goodman, and along with his friends and sister, he's got to save the town from zombies.

Rapid Fire--Where Shane desperately tries to catch up and refuses to put much thought into this, write like a grown-up, or proofread himself.

Either I'm going nuts or there was a Manos: The Hands of Fate reference in this one. I really wanted to like it, and there are plenty of things to like. The creators have loads of creativity, there's a lot of fun visual humor, there's a visual style that keeps it from being just another one of those animated things, and Jon Brion does a nice job with the music. Then again, there's some crudeness and frightening imagery that made me wonder who the audience is, the humor in the dialogue doesn't work nearly as well as the visual stuff, the characters are really flat, and things just start looking stupid during a crazy climax. The story's weak. There's just not a lot of depth here, but this skims along entertainingly enough. It's darkly humorous and really probably not for children at all. Tim Burton fans might like it. The movie reminded me of him for a lot of reasons, not necessarily in a good way. Or is there a good way anymore?

Simon Says

2006 crapfest

Rating: 4/20

Plot: Some college kids go camping in a remote location and are terrorized by two Crispin Glovers armed with pickaxes.

That's right, Crispin Glover fans. You get to double your pleasure with this one. And his dad, former Torgo award winner Bruce Glover, is in this, too. He stinks it up in a limited role, but not as much as his children, twins played by actual twins Chad and Chris Cunningham. It's got to be the worst acting by twins ever which isn't right because they're playing young versions of the greatest actor of all time. And speaking of Crispin, just imagine this for a moment: Crispin Glover playing a mentally-challenged character and his twin, both with accents that convince you they're both supposed to be mentally-challenged. Sometimes, especially when he's called a retard or crazy, he gets mad. His character stomps on a dog and then exclaims, "Puppy sleepy!" He delivers some of the worst puns you'll ever hear--"How about a hand sandwich?!"--and gets lines like "I like this game. Make you special present for my dream. Everybody want to play this game. Oh, I like this game" that make you wonder if it was all written that badly or if Glover was just butchering his lines and everybody went along with it because he was the only famous person in the movie. Oh, wait a second. On some covers of the dvd of this movie, it has Blake Lively's name right up there. This was before she was famous for whatever she's famous for, and she's really only in this movie for about 3 1/2 minutes. Still she's Blake Lively, somebody I've heard of! There are three other Livelys in this movie, too (possibly a Lively record) so one can only assume that somebody in the Lively family produced this.  But back to Crispin because he carries this kids-in-the-woods-with-a-killer cliche on his shoulders and turns it into a comic masterpiece. In fact, a conversation one of his characters has that ends with him yelling, "Sorry! I'm just a little tense here!" might be the most comical thing I've seen all year. Or maybe it's his prayer--"Oh, God. [Moaning] [More Moaning] Let's eat." Or his explanation of "the devil's cry." Or maybe the line "Now that's what I call a fatty!" which I can't believe hasn't become an Internet meme. Aside from Glover's decision to make this an uproarious comedy, this movie is a complete disaster. The dialogue's inane ("How a one-armed man counts his chain" might be the most pointless thing I've ever seen), the story and its characters have all the cliches that The Cabin in the Woods poked fun at, and the special effects are awful. There are flying pickaxes, an effect that not only looked completely stupid but didn't make any sense at all. That's almost topped a little later on by some fire effects. There's plenty of gruesome violence if that gets you off. And I was really confused with the twin thing. You ever watch a movie where there seems to be a twist, but you catch on so quickly that you wonder if there was even supposed to be a twist? That's kind of what happened there. I lost track of what was going on with the pair of twin Glovers, and at one point, I convinced myself there was a twist within a twist within another twist.

A well-timed Wilhelm scream makes me wonder if this whole thing is nothing but a joke. I wouldn't put it past William Dear, the director of Harry and the Hendersons.

The Cabin in the Woods

2011 horror movie deconstruction

Rating: 16/20

Plot: Five stereotypes go on a retreat to the titular cabin in the titular woods, mess around in the cellar with stuff that doesn't belong to them, and unleash a redneck zombie family. Although there's a little bit more to it than all that.

I managed to hear about this movie without knowing anything about it which is exactly how you need to go into the experience. Let me be completely honest--I'm having a difficult time determining whether this is a really intelligent pseudo-horror movie that deconstructs the genre; pokes fun at its cliches, excesses, and even its audience; and manages to be really funny, infectiously energetic, and wildly creative or if it's just really really silly. Or maybe it's a little of both of those and that's exactly why it's so invigorating. I really enjoyed some allusions to horror classics, including the Evil Deads, and there's a moment of sheer lunatic brilliance in this that was simultaneously the most ridiculous thing I've seen all year and one of those moments capable of forcing one to cream his jean shorts in a way that jean shorts have never been creamed before. What follows is nonstop horror action with questionable special effects and even more questionable logic that cools down with a little Sigourney Weaver and some gummy allegory. Intellectually fascinating and horrifically stupid-fresh, this would make horror movie fanboys giggle themselves blind while also appealing to people who like dissecting movies to discover their meanings.

The Uninvited

2009 horror remake

Rating: 9/20

Plot: A crazy girl returns home from the mental institution. She and her sister start to suspect that their step-mother is up to no good. Boo!

Random creeps, artificial insanity, characters who just don't feel like real people at all, plenty of creepy imagery, lots and lots of gimmicks, and a story that is fairly predictable make this an all-too-typical and kind of boring horror movie. I'd never heard of it and had no reason to watch it except Indianapolis television personality Sammy Terry wanted to show it to me. Well, his son anyway. And I have to assume that the rubber spider George isn't the original rubber spider either, more likely a great-great-grandson of George or something. Sammy Terry's name isn't the only bad pun you're likely to hear during a broadcast. I have good memories of watching the purple-cloaked and pale-faced ghoul with his Vincent Price laugh during sleepovers with friends, so when somebody told me that there was a Sammy Terry special on Halloween, I was all over it. Unfortunately, The Uninvited was the movie that I had to watch. It made me look forward to commercials.

Sammy Terry:

The Orphanage

2007 horror drama

Rating: 15/20

Plot: A woman moves back to the orphanage she grew up in order to re-open the place. Her son starts talking and playing games with invisible people and then goes missing. Oh, snap!

This reminded me of The Others, probably because of the children and the ghosts. This is a genuinely creepy movie. Even the opening credits with this neat torn wallpaper effect are creepy. So are some creepy dolls. Sound effects and a really good use of quiet succeeded in making me feel uneasy. Now, I'm not sure if I would have felt that uneasy if I popped this in without knowing it was a horror movie. I just expected a dead orphan to pop out and giggle at me or something, but it's not that type of movie. This one gets under your skin. There are a few memorable scenes including one where the mother plays a game, shot with a lone camera that pans across a room several times, that make this almost special. It's an interesting little story with a poignant but maybe sappy ending, and with the manufactured creepiness, it's worth watching for fans of the psychological horror genre. Or for people who like orphans maybe. This is the second kind-of horror movie from Spain where one of the most memorable images involves a character in a shoddily-created creepy mask. Timecrimes is the other.

The Evil Dead (+ bonus short)

1981 horror film

Rating: 15/20

Plot: Like The Social Network, this is based on Mark Zuckerberg's story. Five punks retreat to a cabin in the woods and unleash evil demons when they read from (here's the joke's explanation in case you didn't get it) a book with a face on it. They fight to survive!

This isn't the goofy cinematic masterpiece that its sequel is, but it's a quality low-budget horror film. The tone's a lot different in this one although there are hints of the inventive camera work, wild creativity, and sick humor that makes Evil Dead II so memorable and fun. There's lots of squelchy body parts sloshing around in the blood and guts and milk, and there's one scene where a woman is violated by foliage that will either arouse or horrify you. Or horrouse you, maybe give you a horrection. Bruce Campbell takes a lot of punishment here, and it would be hard for somebody seeing these for the first time to believe that he takes even more in the second installment. I believe he's attacked by shelving more in this one than he is the zombie demons. I love a shot in the cellar where the camera leaves Campbell and circles all the way around the setting before settling back on the character again, a shot that is reused in Evil Dead II. I also like how the demons here don't just try to kill Ash and his pals. No, they taunt him first, like demon zombie trash talk. Joe LoDuca's clacky junkyard score is the perfect companion for the foreboding tone of the early scenes and the frantic ack-there's-a-zombie nutsiness later that follow. Once those start rolling, this is so fast paced that it's impossible to get bored. It all ends in some lovely stop-motion demon decay following by a "Join us" or three and a terrific abrupt ending. That Raimi is able to create something so memorable and chilling with almost no budget is a small little miracle.

Speaking of fun gory movies, I was moved recently to watch this short German film, a parody of those goofy job safety videos. This one is called "Forklift Driver Klaus: First Day on the Job" and is really funnier if you go into it without any prior knowledge. It's terrific! Find it here at Youtube.

Bubba Ho-Tep

2002 horror comedy

Rating: 13/20

Plot: Elvis, after exchanging identities a long time ago with one of his many impersonators, is living out his final years in a rest home that just happens to have an Egyptian soul-sucking mummy attacking its inhabitants. John F. Kennedy, now a black man, arrives and the iconic duo team up to fight the titular mummy thing.

The novelty fades away after the first fifty minutes of this, but it's really difficult to not like a movie about an elderly Elvis and a black JFK, the former with a penis that doesn't work and the latter with "a bag of sand back there [in his head]." Ossie Davis is so good here in a role I bet he never thought he would play. "I'm thinking with saaaaand here." The "Shit, that ain't gonna stop him" response to Elvis's "President Johnson's dead" line. It's a performance that should be nothing but stupid, but Ossie brings this cool class to it and makes something that shouldn't work actually work. And I'm going to go ahead and call Bruce Campbell's Elvis brilliant because it's my blog and I'm allowed to type anything I want. He manages to balance all the Elvis cliches and some real humanity. Campbell's Elvis is human and broken with a penis that doesn't work, so you end up feeling for the character in a way that's surprising, even when he says lines like this one: "Do I look like an ickyologist to you? Big ol' bugs--bugs as big as a peanut butter and banana sandwich. What do I care? I got a growth on my pecker." Bruce also gets to show off his action superstar chops with an Elvis vs. "bitch cockroach" accompanied by rockin' guitars. Unfortunately, that aforementioned novelty does wear off eventually, and all those flittery sound effects and whooshy sounds with quick shots of random stuff got a little old. The final thirty minutes of this just isn't very good, and the biggest problem might be that that titular antagonist isn't memorable, iconic, or interesting. There is a cool scene where the mummy's moving through the strangely-lit hallway though. My favorite scene is a conversation between our two heroes where there's this big dramatic movie music that leads to Kennedy asking, "Would you like a Ding Dong?" When that's more thrilling than the climactic fight this builds to--a battle between a couple old guys and an uninteresting mummy--it's probably an issue. But seriously, Bruce Campbell is really good in this.