Revelations... the Music Video!

Death metal with incomprehensible lyrics... Catholic Demon Hunters... Zombies... ... and an appearance by the always-fabulous Cheyenne King! What more can one ask for in a horror-themed music video?

Revelations (2010)
Starring: Sarah French, Cheyenne King, and Daigoro
Director: Eli Funaro
Rating: Six of Ten Stars

By the way, the people who worked on this low-budget video did a better job with the cheap digital gore effects than what I've seen in some recent big-budget, full-blown movies who have turned to the same technology. It's a sad commentary on how some effects artists are paid entirely too much for their incompetence; these guys should have been hired for "Machete", "Expendbles", and several other pathetic examples of crappy digital effects I could mention. On the downside... just what the hell is the song about? I think maybe I understood a total of five words out of four-five minutes of screeching.

'Unrest' needed to pick up the pace

Unrest (2006)
Starring: Corri English, Scot Davis, Jay Jablonski, Joshua Alba, Derrick O'Connor, and Marisa Petoro
Director: Jason Todd Ipson
Rating: Six of Ten Stars

A medical student (English) tries to unravel the mystery behind why everyone who handles a cadaver in the pathology lab turns up missing or dead... before she becomes the next victim.

"Unrest" is mostly an effective horror film that is one of the better iterations of the Japanese Inscrutable Angry Ghost That Can't Be Placated Or Stopped No Matter What You Do school. It benefits from an inherently creepy locale--a gross anatomy class and the cadavers that go along with it--and a more-interesting-than-usual Pretty-But-Suffering-With-Some-Sort-of-Mental-Truama first-year student, played here by Corri English. The notion of a psychic atheist who has to deal with a curse brought down by angry spirits and/or an ancient god is pretty a pretty neat element. The escalating supernatural events in the hospital as the are also very well handled, with some supremely creepy death scenes, and a chilling finale involving a cadaver storage tank. The filmmakers also effectively deploy every tool at their disposal from lighting to color scheme in the scenes, to camera angles and cuts, to sound design, in order to heighten the terror as the film goes on.

And even more praiseworthy, this is a film that ends when it's over. While it's got the nicety of a denouement, it is blissfully free of that non-shocking shock ending that plagues so many horror films. Sadly, as this movie was made in 2006, too many horror filmmakers still haven't realized that tacking a nonsensical "final scare" onto your story is ineffective and lame. But at least writer/director Jason Todd Ipson got it right here.

Unfortunately, for all its strengths, the film also has its weaknesses. The biggest is the question as to why our lovely med student continues to live in the hospital, with the growing number of supernatural events and outright murders taking place. The filmmakers try to address this question, both by raising it and attempting to provide rationales, but in the end, the answer boils down to "because if she doesn't, the story will grind to a halt, so just don't worry about it, 'kay?!"

Also, while the film has some great peaks of terror, its quiet moments are REALLY quiet. Too quiet. And not in a good way. They run a little too long, and they become a little too boring. The creepy mood never lets up, but more than once I found myself wishing that they'd get on with the angry ghost stuff, especially after the mystery of who the haunted cadaver was, and what the nature of the haunting, had been revealed. It's not so much that the film is padded, but more that some scenes just go on for too long.

If you like "The Grudge" films, or movies like "The Ring" and "One Missed Call", I think you'll like "Unrest". If Japanese horror flicks and their Americanized counterparts leave you an urge to do the dishes, you should skip it.

Like an episode of a TV anthology series with padding

Fell (2012)
Starring: Jeff Dylan Graham, Kristian Day, Katie Walters, and Barron Christian
Director: Marcus Koch
Rating: Five of Ten Stars

Bill (Graham) has problems. His psychiatrist has put him on medication that is distorting his reality, his relationship with his girlfriend has fallen apart... and there's a dead girl in his bath tub, but he doesn't know how she ended up there.

If you're like me, you enjoy movies that present mysteries that you can try to solve as the film unfolds, opportunities to get ahead of the filmmakers and then be proven right or wrong in your assumptions.

"Fell" is one of those movies. And being that it's a film that takes place almost entirely within the apartment and/or the mind of a madman, it presents numerous puzzles for the viewer to try to piece together ahead of time. While most of the answers to what is happening in the film aren't surprising, the build-up to them is effectively staged. Transformations in the apartment gives viewers hints as to what is really happening, as do the behavior of the characters. And while I correctly guessed almost every fact of what was going on in the film, there was a final twist at the end that made me change my overall evaluation from "that was predictable" to "that was predictable but cool!"

Unfortunately, as I mention in the headline, "Fell" suffers from too much padding, especially in the first half hour. It's got the story of an intense episode of "The Hitchhiker", "Tales From the Darkside" or "Hammer House of Horror", but the director makes the all-too-common mistake of either thinking his audience dim or not trusting his own ability to get his point across and thus ends up repeating himself to the point of tediousness in his effort to make sure we get that Bill is crazy and can't distinguish reality from hallucinations. Some trimming would have made this film even more intense than it already is.

Despite being a little flabby, I still think this film is well-worth a look by anyone who enjoys psychological horror... and for anyone who wants to see a perfect example of how to make a fine movie for very little money.

(This review was based on a preview screening copy provided by Distributor Chemical Burn. "Fell" will be in stores on June 6, 2012... but, strangely, not at Amazon.com.)

Jess Franco does good!

Count Dracula (1970) (aka "The Nights of Dracula" and "Night: When Dracula Awakens")
Starring: Christopher Lee, Fred Williams, Herbert Lom, Soledad Miranda, Maria Rohm, and Klaus Kinski
Director: Jess Franco
Rating: Six of Ten Stars

The immortal vampire Count Dracula (Lee) leaves his Transylvanian home for the fresh hunting grounds of London, preying upon women connected to his attorney, Jonathan Harker (Williams).

There is little question that Jess Franco is a hack of small talent. Even at his best, he ends up showing off how inept he is as a director, producer, what have you. So, to say that "Count Dracula" ranks among the very best of Jess Franco pictures sounds like I'm damning it with faint praise.

I am not, however. "Count Dracula" not only ranks among Jess Franco's best pictures, but it should be counted among the most faithful adaptations of Stoker's "Dracula" that has ever been committed to film. (In fact, the only one I've seen that's more faithful is John Johnson's oddly titled "Alucard"... which I just discovered I never posted a review of. I'll have to fix that ASAP.) Although it appears to be based on the stage play rather than novel, as was the famous Bela Lugosi flick for Universal 40 years earlier, this film captures the tone and intent of Bram Stoker's "Dracula" with far greater accuracy than the Lugosi vehicle or the film from Francis Ford Coppala that falsely passed itself off as "Bram Stoker's Dracula."

Christopher Lee is especially excellent in this film, portraying Dracula as the coldhearted, barely human maniac that he should be portrayed as--a being where humanity is a badly maintained mask that is barely skin deep. There is no romance surrounding this Dracula... only evil. Franco promised Lee that he would get to play Dracula as Stoker wrote him, and Franco was true to his word... Lee even gets to deliver the "children of the night" lines word-for-word, and with greater power than any other film actor before or since. The only complaint I can level against Lee's grand performance is that he comes out of the starting box a little too strong. The film maintains the creepy bits from the novel where Dracula gets younger as he feeds on the life-force and blood of innocent young English women, but the viewer doesn't get the full impact of Dracula's rejuvenation, because the transformation from old to young is little more than a make-up job, because Lee plays Dracula the same way.

Another shining performance in the film is delivered by Soledad Miranda. She literally commands every scene that she's in, being not only beautiful but also possessed with immense charisma. And when she goes from victim to vampire, she shows that she can be cute as easily as she can be creepy. It is one of film history's great tragedies that she was killed in a car accident on literally the very day when she was going to sign the contract that would have been her big breakthrough. If she had lived, perhaps even Jess Franco would have left a less foul legacy, as Miranda seems to be the common element between some of Franco's best pictures; the five-picture deal Miranda was about to sign would have seen Franco come along as the director on the films.

As for the rest of the cast, there isn't much to say other than that they showed up, they did their lines, and no one embarrassed themselves. Herbert Lom is an okay Van Helsing, and Klaus Kinski is a decent Renfield, but everyone else is perfectly forgettable... including Fred Williams' bland Jonathan Harker. (In fairness to Williams, though, anyone would look bland in comparison to Lee's Dracula in this flick.)

With the actors being excellent to okay, and the film being as faithful-as-can-be-excepted adaptation of "Dracula" within an 100-minute running time, why am I only giving it an Average rating, you might ask? Well, that's because despite everything that's good about the film, it is STILL a Jess Franco production.

Like most Franco films, he is working with a budget that is very small. And like most Franco films, Franco doesn't appear capable of judging where the money is best spent, or he is incapable of devising ways to hide the lack of budget. For example, when Terrence Fisher did his "Dracula" in 1958, the final battle between Dracula and the vampire hunters was completely revised to reflect the limitations of budget and production realities. Franco, doing a more faithful rendering of the source material couldn't be as radical as Fisher and writer Jimmy Sangster, but a more skilled director and manager could have devised a better solution than fake boulders being dropped on horsemen in a badly staged stunt sequence... and he certainly could have done better than the tragically anti-climactic demise of Dracula at the very end. (It's not only lame, it's barely within the "faithful" zone.)

The bonus features on the disc contain an interview with Franco that sheds a little light on why the ending to the film is so weak, but it really boils down to bad management on his part. That said, the interview also shows how committed he was to making this film, and, despite my describing him as a hack, gives me respect for him and this film.

The Franco interview is one of those rare DVD extras that is actually more than just filler... it's worth the time it takes to sit through. The same can be said about the dramatic reading of a condensed version of "Dracula" by Christopher Lee that's also included, as well as the essay about Soledad Miranda. All in all, the bonus features on the "Special Edition" disc that formed the basis of this review add real value to the package.

'Suspect Zero' is strangely lifeless

Suspect Zero (2004)
Starring: Aaron Eckhart, Ben Kingsley, and Carrie-Anne Moss
Director:
Rating: Five of Ten Stars

A disgraced FBI agent (Eckhart) becomes the target of taunts from an apparent serial killer (Kingsley), but as the case unfolds it becomes clear that the taunts are more like case-notes and the killer is actually hunting other serial killers. Including perhaps the worst serial killer in history.

It's a little hard to tell what went wrong with "Suspect Zero". Given top-drawer cast and the creepy idea of a serial killer-killing serial killer profiler who uses psychic remote viewing to identify and track his targets this should have been quite the thriller.

But I found myself so bored with the first half hour that I almost gave up on the film, and when it finally became entertaining, it held my attention only very loosely.

Part of what makes the movie dull is that the characters feel lifeless, partly because the central characters never rise above the level of chiches (the tortured zealot agent, the inscrutable murderer, the loyal and supportive female agent), but also because the performers seem like they're giving their bare minimum. I expect Carrie-Anne Moss's performance to be perfunctory, but Aaron Eckhart and Ben Kingsley have both been far better with far less to work with than what I can envision that this film COULD have been.

Also, the film's is a little too predictable. When the pieces fall into place and the biggest mysteries are solved at roughly the one-hour mark, the rest of the picture unfolds on a straight line with no further twists. The ending, while stylish and thoroughly set up by everything that preceded it, feels abrupt and unsatisfying. It's clear that the movie ends when it's over--and I appreciate the fact that the filmmakers didn't feel obligated to tack on one of those obnoxious "shock endings" or "final twists" that ruin so many horror flicks and thrillers these days--but I was still left wanting something more. Perhaps more of a point, beyond "when you stare into the abyss, it stares back at you", "sometimes sacrifices have to be made to defeat great evil" or "free will isn't free" (or whatever point the ending was supposed to convey).

Overall, this film left me a sentiment that I more frequently reserve for low-budget pictures by inexperienced filmmakers with green casts: There was lots of potential here, and it would have been fantastic if it had been spent on a better movie.

Wolf Man vs. Vampire Woman: The Rematch!

Night of the Werewolf (aka "The Craving" and "The Return of the Wolf Man") (1981)
Starring: Paul Naschy, Azucena Hernandez, Silvia Aguilar, Julia Saly
Director: Paul Naschy
Rating: Seven of Ten Stars

An psychopathic witch (Aguilar) resurrects the evil vampire Countess Bathory (Saly) in a quest for ultimate power and eternal life. But she didn't count on the intervention of Waldemar Daninsky (Naschy), the tragically heroic reluctant werewolf and his sexy sidekick Karen (Hernandez).

By the time he wrote and directed "Night of the Werewolf", Spanish actor Paul Naschy had played the continuity-challenged werewolf character Waldemar Daninsky nine or ten times (depending on whether one counts a movie that may or may not ever have been released), and this film assured him his place in history as the actor to play a werewolf in movies more than any other actor. And he went on to play a werewolf six more times--including three more appearances as Daninsky.

It is therefore not surprising that "Night of the Werewolf" has a very familiar feel to it. Naschy follows the formula of previous outings--Daninsky is a recluse, trying to deal with his monstrous side, who is forced back into the world, first to save the film's love interest from bandits/rapists/her own stupidity... and then to save the world from an evil greater than he. And, in the end, Daninsky wins by performing the ultimate sacrifice and/or must himself be slain because the werebeast within him is too strong to overcome--hitting most of the same plot and emotional notes that worked in previous films.

The plus in this approach is that if you liked previous Naschy outings, you're bound to like this one, as there are just enough variations to the formula to add a little freshness to the going-ons. The negative side, however, is that if you didn't like the previous films, you want to avoid this one like it was a plague carrier. The twists on the formula won't be enough to make this film worth your time.

Decently acted and featuring a script that tries to address some of the common Stupid Character Syndrome mainstays of the vampire and werewolf movie--like why do vampire killers never seem to go looking for the monster's hide-out during the daytime, and why doesn't the werewolf always just lock himself away when the moon is full--it's further augmented by beautiful women who take their shirts off every now and then. While there are some awkward scene transitions and disappointing werewolf transformation effects, the good ultimately outweighs that bad.

Fans of Hammer Films' gothic horrors from the 1950s and 1960s may also wish to seek this film out. Naschy captures the mood of those films perfectly in several sequences... even if his film looks a bit shabbier, because he didn't have Terence Fisher's gift for making $1.95 look like 1.95 million. Still, there aren't many good gothic horror flicks outside the Hammer Films canon, so one has to take them where one finds them.

Reportedly, this was Paul Naschy's personal favorite of all the 12 or 13 Daninsky films, which is no great surprise as this was his first outing as both star, writer, and director. Personally, I think "Werewolf vs. Vampire Woman" (of which this film is, essentially, a remake) is better, but I enjoyed this one, too.

'Poker Run' follows predictable trail

Poker Run (2009)
Starring: J.D. Rudometkin, Bertie Higgins, Robert Thorne, Jasmine Waltz, Debra Hopkins, Jay Wisell, and Skip Pipo
Director: Julian Higgins
Rating: Five of Ten Stars

A pair of successful lawyers (Higgins and Rudometkin) buy a pair of motorcycles and drag their wives (Hopkins and Waltz) on a mid-life crisis inspired Poker Run in the California desert. However, they fall prey to a pair of psychopathic bikers (Wisell and Thorne), who abduct the women and force the men to perform a series of murders that they frame them for.

"Poker Run" merges the "killer hicks" genre with motorcycles and throws in a dash of torture porn and "The Hitcher". It's mostly well-acted, technically competent, and very suspenseful at times. Unfortunately, it's also very, very predictable. If you've seem two "city folks in the back-country" horror movies prior to this one, you've seem most of what this film has to offer--not necessarily done better as there are a lot of crappy movies with that theme, but you will have seen it.

The strongest aspect of the film is the performance given by Robert Thorne, as the murderous master-manipulator who seems to have every resident of the California desert obeying his every psychotic whim in order to preserve their own lives. It also ultimately becomes one of the film's downfalls, because his control is so absolute and so far-reaching that viewers find themselves at a couple of occasions reacting more with a "Seriously?" rather than a "Oh, my God!"

Another performance worth mentioning is that given by Debra Hopkins. She gives such a perfect performance as a shrewish wife that I've not found myself wanting a character to be killed so badly since Barbara Shelley in "Dracula: Prince of Darkness".

"Poker Flats" is available in at least one DVD multi-pack where it is joined by two decent flicks and one weak one. It's worth the asking price when joined with other films--if you enjoy Killer Hicks movies--but I wouldn't waste my money on it as a stand-alone.

'Gacy House' might be worth visiting

8213: Gacy House (2010)
Starring: Jim Lewis, Matthew Temple, Diana Terranova, Michael Gaglio, Brett A. Newton, Rachel Riley, and Sylvia Panacione
Director: Anthony Fankhauser
Rating: Five of Ten Stars

A group of paranormal investigators (Gaglio, Lewis, Newton, Panacione, Riley, Temple, and Terranova) conduct a ghost hunt in the house built on the site where pedophile and serial killer John Wayne Gacy's home once stood. They find more then they could have imagined in their worst nightmares.

"Gacy House" is a film that will appeal to you if you are a big fan of TV shows like "Ghost Hunters" and found footage hoax movies like "Blair Witch Project". You're also going to be willing to overlook the fact that the film is plagued by numerous instances of characters behaving in ways so mind-blowing idiotic that Stupid Character Syndrome doesn't even come close to describing the degree to which badly considered plot dictates override common sense and logic. (The worst of these: A character who decides to bail on the ghost hunt, yet can't seem to figure out to how to use a cell phone to call a cab or to simply walk away from the haunted house.)

The film is mostly well acted and there aren't many instances where you find yourself groaning at the clumsy attempts at maintaining the illusion of reality... although, personally, the film lost credibility when it tried to present itself as actual police evidence, so I never did manage to suspend my disbelief in regards to the events of the film being real. That said, I did find a couple of moments very well done, such as the one where a character is working both with an infra-red camera and a regular camera, so we get to see a ghost invisible to the naked eye attack him in a clever sort of split-screen effect thanks to monitors.

While not as good as "The Last Exorcism" or "The Blair Witch Project", "Gacy House" is still a far sight better than many other attempts at this sub-genre. Still, it's flawed enough that I am giving it the lowest possible of a Five Star rating, and I think it's probably only of interest to the biggest fans of "found footage" efforts.

'Attack of the Vegan Zombies' is an uneven but entertaining effort

Attack of the Vegan Zombies! (2012)
Starring: Christine Egan, Jim Townsend, Natalia Jablokov, Kerry Kearns, Watt Smith, John D. Kelly, H. Lynne Smith, and Wyatt Gunter
Director: Jim Townsend
Rating: Five of Ten Stars

A string of bad growing seasons might cause Dionne and Joe (Egan and Townsend) to lose the vineyard and winery she inherited from her father, so Dionne turns to her mother (Smith), a practicing witch, for help. Together, they cast a spell that causes the grapes to grow like never before... but there is one big problem: The plants are sentient and thirsty for the blood of anyone who drinks wine made from the vineyard's grapes.

"Attack of the Vegan Zombies!" is one of those films I wish I liked more than I do. It has a lot going for it... a cast that's generally more talented than what I often see in films at this budgetary level, and a writer/director who seems to actually haven taken his script through more than a single draft, because the dialogue actually seems polished (although I got the sense that maybe a little more research into wine-making might have been needed). Also, as an idea for a low-key "Shaun of the Dead"-type horror spoof, this is a great one.

Townsend also clearly has a firm command of the technical aspects of filmmaking. The scenes are well-framed and well-lit, the edits and establishing shots always dead-on, the sound always clear and well-balanced, be it dialogue or sound effects. On a technical level, this film stands heads-and-shoulders above the vast majority of is low-budget, direct-to-DVD kin.

But as much as I want to like it, the weaknesses present here are so strong that they really get in the way of my overall enjoyment of the film.

The most glaring and persistent of these weaknesses are the characters portrayed by Watt Smith and John D. Kelly. These are a pair of uber-nerds that are played with such over-the-top gusto and caricature that they are out of step with the more realistic performances around them, making their characters irritating on the level of the comic relief characters that were shoehorned into the majority of horror films from the 1930s and 1940s. However, the aren't quite as bad as the majority of those characters, because Kelly and Smith have enough charisma to be likable through the annoying character acting. It's a shame that director Townsend chose to go in that direction, because the geeky banter back and forth between these characters would have been even funnier if they'd been played in a more straight fashion.

Another aspect that weakens the film is that Townsend may have taken on more than he was ready to handle in his first outing as a director; he may have made a mistake when he chose to play the male lead in the film he also directed, because every scene he appears in as an actor seems flat and lifeless when compared to those he isn't in. The clearest example of this is the scene where Dionne and her mother reveal that they are witches with a very real ability to weave spells. It's a great little scene that brings back fond memories of the "Bewitched" TV show, but actresses Christine Egan and H. Lynne Smith showed far greater energy in the scenes where they were interacting with each other or with other actors while Townsend was off-screen watching the scene unfold instead of trying to watch it from within. With more time and money to "get it right", Townsend might have been able to both star in and direct this picture, but given that he only had $30,000 as his budget and presumably the severe time limitations that arise when you have to coordinate your cast-with-dayjobs with when your locations are available, I don't think he had the opportunity for the multiple takes probably needed.

Finally, the film, strangely, seems to come apart at the seams during the final half-hour. For most of its running-time, it builds steadily toward what promises to be a chaotic climax full of killer grapevines and blood-sucking zombies. But as we get to that climax point, promises made early in the film don't pay off--like the exchange the mother has with a local restaurant owner to whom she sells a case of wine that seems to have been made from the magical grapes and its promise of a whole hoard of zombies attacking the winery in search of more "nectar". There are also strange continuity gaffes, and a repeated shying away from anything resembling physical altercations or violent action: We get the set-up, but in nearly every case, the action is either truncated or completely absent. All-in-all, what seemed very promising just sputters out at the end... even to the point where Townsend makes the huge error of tacking on one last joke in the form of a "shock surprise ending" which is predictable, not very funny, and nowhere near the closing moments that this film deserved.

There is enough good about this film that I hope it does well enough for Townsend to either motivate him to self-produce another movie, or for someone to hire him to make one for them. I would like to see what he could come up with, given lessons learned from this film. I also wouldn't mind seeing Christine Egan take another turn in front of a camera, as I think she did a fine job here, in what seems to be her only film role so far. This really is a an okay little movie that got torpedoed by a few bad choices on the part of a first-time director.

"Attack of Vegan Zombies" was completed in 2010, and Townsend has been selling copies of the film directly through his website and on Amazon.com. However, it was recently picked up for distribution by Midnight Releasing, and it will be available everywhere come January 3, 2012.

(My thanks to the good people at Maxim Media for providing me with a copy of the film for review.)

It's English Settlers vs. Viking Ghosts!

Lost Colony (aka "Wraiths of Roanoke) (2007)
Starring: Adrian Paul, Frida Farrell, Rhett Giles, and Michael Teh
Director: Matt Codd
Rating: Six of Ten Stars

Ananias Dare (Paul) leads a desperate struggle for the survival of his fellow settles in 16th century Roanoke when the colony is set upon by undead Vikings.

"Lost Colony" is a made-for-television spookfest that is loosely based on the mysterious demise of the English Roanoke colony. By the standards I've come to expect from a film from the Sci-Fi Channel (now known by the nonsensical name SyFy Channel), it's a masterpiece. By the standards I apply to horror films in general, it's not bad. It's not great, but it's entertaining.

The acting is serviceable, with Adrian Paul offering his usual Sensitive Hero character and Frida Farrell, as the distressed damsel haunted by evil pagan dreams, leading the cast. None of the characters are particularly deep or all that well-developed, but what we do get is just enough. (Although, having said that, I would have liked to know more about Ananias Dare's connection with Nordic paganism, as it seems like an bit of knowledge to assign to a person whose real-world historical counterpart seems to have been a brick-layer by profession.)

Special effects-wise, the film is also a little better than what I've come to expect from a "Sci-Fi Original", but I did at a couple of points find myself wishing that either more time had been spent rehearsing actors when it came to them sword-fighting with opponents who literally weren't there (as the phantom Vikings they were battling were computer animations added later) or more money and time had been spent on post-production, as there are several points where the fights are less than convincing.

As a period horror film, you can do a lot worse than "Lost Colony". The price is also right, if you pick up in the "Horror 4 Pack Volume 2" which can be found at some retail outlets for as little as $5.

'Goregoyles: First Cut' is a nice package

Goregoyles: First Cut (2003)
Starring: Robert Harvick, Sebastian Croteau, and Matt Busch
Directors: Augustine Arredondo, Kevin J. Lindenmuth, and Alexandre Michaud
Rating: Six of Ten Stars (for the film)/Seven of Ten Stars (for the overall DVD package)

This was a hard one for me to rate, not only because it's an anthology film of wildly varying quality, but also because the entirety of the DVD package is something I feel needs to be taken into account in the review. This is rare for me, as Most of the time, the "bonus features" on DVDs are fairly dull or just recycled/archived marketing materials. With the "Goregoyles: First Cut" DVD, however, most of the extras are interesting and well-worth being considered "bonuses.")

First, the movie. I'll rate each part of it seperately, and then give an overall rating for the film alone. "Goregoyles: First Cut" is the first in a series of films that will feature several short horror shorts, framed by introductory comments from Uncle Dodo (Croteau).

The Uncle Dodo sequences are both amusing and informative--the long-haired host is a combination of Joe Bob Briggs and the Cryptkeeper--something which isn't true of other low-budget anthology films I've come across. I suppose I should admit with some degree of shame that the Uncle Dodo set bears a disturbing resemblence to my office. (Okay, there's no blow-up doll in the corner, but the rest is strangely similar....) By themselves, I rate the Dodo sequences at Six of Ten Stars.

Then there's the first of the two short films, "The Holy Terror." This is the story of a man (Harvick) who gets possessed by a demon and then finds himself pursued by occultists and assassins for the Catholic Church.

"The Holy Terror" should be required viewing for anyone who makes or is contemplating making a horror film on a limited budget. Reportedly made for around $800, this short film is better crafted than some horror flicks with ten times its budget. It features good acting, nice camera work, a well-done and well-used music soundtrack, and is nicely structured and paced. The producer/director, Augustine Arredondo, also seems to have had a realistic sense of what he was able to accomplish--he limited his special effects to movie gore and didn't make any attempts putting monsters, physical transformations, or anything else that required lots of money to pull off on the screen--and he didn't attempt to pad his film to the 70 minutes minimum for a feature. Most low-budget horror movies are ruined not so much by crappy acting, but by padding and filmmakers attempting things their budget and resources simply don't allow for, and Arrendondo avoided both those pitfalls. Even better, he clearly understands that if your effects are cheaply made, you don't want to feature them in long, loving shots so the audience has a chance to roll their eyes and snicker at you. It seems like something that should be easy to understand, but given the number of filmmakers who don't do this, it must be a hard concept to grasp.

"Holy Terror" was Arredondo's first outing as a director, and so far his only one. This is a shame, because while it's not a perfect film--it could have done with a few more minutes of running time and story to fill in a couple of niggling plot issues, and a stronger ending would have been nice--it is still good enough to earn a rating of Eight of Ten Stars. It's a shame he didn't stick with directing.

The second film that Uncle Dodo presents is titled "Bezerker". Almost everything that "The Holy Terror" got right, this one got wrong... despite the fact that this one is supposedly the product of a "legend" of low-budget filmmaking, Kevin J. Lindenmuth, while the first film was the product of a newcomer.

"Bezerker" is a short zombie movie with a storyline so muddled it trips over itself, despite being thinner than a supermodel on a hunger strike. Basically, it's Viking zombies show up and kill people. To make matters worse, it has a cast of actors who range from bad to awful, and some of the worst zombie costumes put on the screen.

(Free tip to filmmakers: If you have a zombie who is rotted and decayed from wandering the woods for a decade, don't put it in a clean, bright white, freshly washed night gown. Similarly, rotting walking corpses shouldn't all be wearing black sweatshirts that look brand new, particularly not when some of them supposedly are 1,000 year-old zombie Vikings. Thank you. You're welcome to acknowledge me in the credits of your next film.)

Given that Uncle Dodo's description of "Bezerker" both in the intro and the lead-out make it sound interesting than it it, and seem more like a description of what SHOULD have been on the screen instead of what is, it sounds like the producers of the "First Cut" anthology were as bored with this worthless piece of trash as I was. There are two good scenes in it, one of which is almost ruined by terrible child actors, and the other undermined by an ineptly done gore effect--although the zombie eating himself while walking around still made me squirm and will stick with me for some time. This one gets Two of Ten Stars.

Overall, I give "Goregoyles: First Cut" a rating of Six of Tomatoes of Ten, skewing the rating a bit high, because as awful as "Bezerker" is, it's thankfully short.

The final thing I touch on here are the extras that are included on the DVD. Like I mentioned above, I don't usually take those into account when reviewing a film, but I make an exception here.

First off, the interview with "Goregoyles" producer Alexandre Michaud is interesting, insightful, and far more honest than the self-congratulatory marketing crap we usually get in these sorts of offerings. He talks about the origins and intent of the "Goregoyles" series, and even touches upon some shortcomings. Similarly, the "making of" documentary about "The Holy Terror" also features some very candid interviews with its star and director that provide an interesting look into "no-budget" filmmaking, and it's a real look at the production process, not just an extended ad that originally appeared on HBO.

Among the extras is also a "bloopers" section that doesn't actually contain bloopers but instead feature longer versions of Uncle Dodo's commentary. I liked these longer riffs better than what appeared in the film, although I also agree with the choice of shortening them; the films shouldn't be secondary to the host.

Finally, the disk contains previews for numerous movies in the Brain Damage Films catalogue. I'm impressed with the way they can make movies I know to be completely and utter turds (because I've had the misfortune of seeing them) look like they may actually be interesting. It's a nice look at what this distribution company offers--even if some of the previews are better than the films they are made to advertise!

When I add the high-quality extras on the "Goregoyles: First Cut" DVD into my considerations, the overall package gets an extra Star, bringing the rating up to Seven of Ten Tomatoes. I applaud Brain Damage Films for producing a DVD package where the "bonus" material is worth watching, and I encourage lovers of horror films to track this one down for "The Holy Terror" at the very least.

Note: "The Holy Terror" is also included in the Catacombs of Creepshow 50 movie pack. That might be a better way to get your hands on it, as you'll be getting a slew of other indie horror flicks... some good, some pretty awful. But the price is good.

'Mayhem Motel': Home of sex, violence, mimes, and puke baths

Mayhem Motel (2001)
Starring: Matthew Biancaniello, Sarah Berkowitz, Lorene Scafaria, David Langley, and Ray Jarrell
Director: Karl Kempter
Rating: Six of Ten Stars

"Mayhem Motel" defies summary. It is a collection of vignettes that are scrambled together to tell the story of a night of sex, murder, mayhem, and just plain weirdness. If one were to attempt to make sense of the film in order to take away a point to it, one would have to conclude the film was made to convey the messages that one should always keep one's motel room door bolted, and that sex with strangers kills--not because of venereal disease, but because of knives and guns. Oh, and there's also the moral that one shouldn't ever piss off a dwarf.

This is a film that is 100% unique viewing experience--and for that the world should be grateful.

First of all, "Mayhem Motel" contains the single most disgusting scene I've ever witnessed on film. It was so gross that I almost stopped the DVD when it occurred. The second scene of the movie has a character named Pukey in the credits (played by David Langley) settling into a tub and puking into the bathwater. He then proceeds to stir the water and vomit around him as he sits there. Whether that was actual vomit or some REALLY convincing special effects (and my money is on actual vomit... it simply too convincing not to be), the scene is so disgusting that it put me off my dinner. It almost put me off the rest of movie, but since it was so early on, I felt obligated to stick with it just a little longer. (As it turned out, I watched the whole thing.)

Second, "Mayhem Motel" is almost entirely plot-free. Each vignette has something of a story to it, but for each plot that is brought to an almost-conclusion, there are two that are left hanging, giving the overall movie a feel of a short story collection rather than a complete film. And I don't mean a collection of short films... I mean a collection of scenes like the ones you might have students write if you were teaching a writing workshop. They're interesting, they're pretty raw, but they're also for the most part utterly pointless except for invoking a momentary reaction in the viewer. While this approach did keep me watching, it's not one that I would want to see become commonplace.

That said, this film does feature some good acting, decent dialogue, and it moves along at a fast pace (with only the mime scene dragging a bit). The filmmakers obviously know their craft, and they know that they should put exactly what a scene needs onto the screen, and not a second more. Add that the fact that there are several hilarious moments (like both instances of a character choking to death during sex--in the "I know I shouldn't be laughing at this but I can't help" kind of way), and the end result is a movie that I find myself liking far more than is probably healthy.

Maybe my brain has finally rotted away due to all the Z-grade movies I watch? If "Mayhem Motel" had just a little more structure to it--the priest who we're introduced to at the beginning of the film should have been seen leaving the motel at daybreak the next day--I may even have given it a Seven-Star rating.

Although I still don't feel comfortable recommending anyone see it--although if you get it as part of the "Mental Maniacs" multi-DVD set as I did, you might as well give it a try--I still think but that "Mayhem Motel" has some impressive qualities to it. It MIGHT also be a suitable screener for a Bad Movie Night, if you have the right crowd. (I know that I'd never show this film to anyone *I* socialize with, but then I don't know everyone.)

A stylish film too disjointed for its own good

A Bell From Hell (1973)
Starring: Renaud Verley, Veveca Lindfors, Maribel Martin, Nuria Gemino, Christina Betzner, and Alfredo Mayo
Directors: Claudio Guerín and Juan Antonio Bardem.
Rating: Five of Ten Stars

John (Verley), a young special effects artist, is released from an insane asylum into the care of his crippled aunt and her three attractive daughters. He becomes convinced they were behind his being committed in the first place, and they intend to have him sent back, so he plots his revenge.

"A Bell From Hell" is too disjointed for its own good. It's well enough acted, and it moves along as a decent clip while offering many unexpected twists and turns, but there are a couple too many tangents and too many badly defined characters who are doing things for no discernible reason other than the script says so.

This is a very moody, creepy, and stylish film, and the last half hour ranks up there with some of the great horror movies--with John's fate the most chilling part of the film--but the story is just a little too chaotic for this movie to truly be considered worth the time to watch.





(Trivia: Director Claudio Guerín fell to his death from the tower housing the title bell on the last day of principle photography.)

One of Argento's best still prompts the question, "That's it?"

Suspiria (1977)
Starring: Jessica Harper, Stefania Casini, and Joan Bennett
Director: Dario Argento
Rating: Six of Ten Stars

Suzy Banyon (Harper) comes to study at a prestigious German dance academy, but instead becomes drawn into the murderous and deadly web of secrets exists within its walls. Is there a killer on the loose in the school, or is it the spirit of its founder--a reported witch--who has returned from the depths of Hell?

When "Suspiria" was over, I mused out loud, "Was that it?"

The film is praised by critics and viewers as being Argento's best, but I think "Deep Red" is a far superior film. The only things "Suspiria" has going for it are some fantastic sets, some interesting lighting, a neat theme by Goblin, and the attractive Jessica Harper's deer-in-the-headlights performance.

Everything else is "Suspira" is sorely lacking. The structure of the dance classes shown are odd and unrealistic, the acting is mostly wooden, and the script is so weak so as to feel like an excuse to simply display the three set-piece murder scenes. To make matters worse, what story their is only succeeds due to Stupid Character Syndrome, except here it's the villains that engage in such mindless stupidity that one wonders how they managed to the school's secrets for as long as they did.

There are countless really cool cinematic moments in the film (prime among them are Suzy's trip through the rainstorm at the beginning of the film, the climactic moments of the first murder, the sequence in the open plaza, the entire sequence of Sara's flight through the school, and Suzy's exploration during the film's climax), but the story that should be motivating all these scenes is so ill defined and poorly explained that it makes an already weak climax feel rushed and as if the movie ends before we're even given one-quarter of the story.

Impressive visually, but severely lacking in the story department, "Suspiria" isn't as good as its repuation might lead you to believe. I think it's worth seeing if your interested in seeing a technically well-done film, but you can spend your time better if you're just interested in watching a creep-fest.

2-fer-1: 'The Crawlspace' and 'The Red Cell'

Up today, are reviews of two horror films from the very talented Chris Schwartz. Unfortunately, he seems to have stopped making movies after finishing these two efforts.


The Crawlspace (2006)
Starring: Chris Schwartz, Jason Hastings, and Julian Peck
Director: Chris Schwartz
Steve's Rating: Six of Ten Stars

Mike (Schwartz) wakes up in a filthy, cramped space. A phone rings, he answers... and he discovers that he's been kidnapped and imprisoned by a psycho (who calls himself "The Director") intent on playing mind- and torture-games with him.

"The Crawlspace" is a surprisingly effective low-budget (well, probably no-budget) entry into the mysteriously popular "torture" horror subgenre that's emerged in recent years. Think "Blair Witch Project" meets "Saw", and I believe you'll have a sense of the general look and feel of this picture.

Chris Schwartz, who, according to the credits, did everything on this film but grind and install the lenses on the cameras, not only manages to convey the claustrophobic environment of the film's setting, but he gives a performance that's amazingly good, given what is typically found in small-budget indie pictures. Further, Schwartz seems to be a filmmaker who understands how to work within the limits of his means. The film he's set up here is almost perfect for a film shot on a partial shoestring budget, and Schwartz concentrates his resources and efforts on creeping the audience out with what he has on hand. Based on this film, I think he could probably do wonders with a four-figure budget, and I hope to find more films by him in the future.

That's not to say this is a perfect movie. Part of the film only works because of Stupid Character Syndrome, some of the sound effects needed a little more work, and the film could have used a stronger ending. But, these flaws are far from fatal, and the good outweighs the bad here, making this a picture that's worth seeing.

"The Crawlspace" is another movie that earns a spot on my "Free Advice for Low-Budget Filmmakers" list. If you're dreaming about making a movie with the change you just scooped out of the fountain at the mall, this is an example of how it's done, and it's a movie you have to see.


The Red Cell (2007)
Starring: Donovan Schwartz
Director: Chris Schwartz
Steve's Rating: Six of Ten Stars

Ayden (Donovan Schwartz) wakes up in a shabby basement where the walls are lined with cardboard and the only window has a strong electrical current running through it. He soon discovers that he has been abducted by a gasmask-clad maniac who is committed to curing him of his lethal cancer through a variety of hideous tortures.

"The Red Cell" does what most of the "capture and torture" movies fail to do. It generates genuine mystery and even some confusion (of the good kind, not the kind arising from a poorly executed flick) for the viewer to resolve as they watch. Has Ayden truly been kidnapped by some crazy man who fancies himself in possession of a miracle cure, or are all the horrible things that gasmask-clad figure--who sneaks in and out of a sealed room with ease--something that's simply a product of Ayden's sick body and brain? The film also has a dimension of psychological horror that so far I haven't seen any other of the sub-genre even come close to featuring.

I thought I knew exactly where the film was going, but then Schwartz throws in a twist-ending that made gave me a "Wow!" feeling that someone who watches entirely too many movies (like, oh, me) only rarely has. Schwartz, in one stroke, showed that not only can a talented and creative filmmaker do something VERY worthwhile artistically with the "capture and torture" genre, but he actually managed to make a film that deserves to be considered along side not only the "greats" of this sub-genre, but should be included when considering good horror films in general.

What's even more remarkable, Schwartz made his film on a tiny fraction of what the other wide release examples of the "tortured captive" genre are made on, and probably even less than the majority of the low-budget direct-to-DVD examples of it.

"The Red Cell" is currently seeking distribution, and it's a film that deserves to be seen by as wide an audience as possible. It's not a perfect film--it's a little too slow at times, driving home Ayden anguish and suffering well past the point where the audience has gotten it and the scene starts getting tedious--but it's one that horror movie fans will appreciate. Particularly those fans who are looking for something a little different.

'Vampire Conspiracy' is a good merging of two sub-genres

Vampire Conspiracy (2005)
Starring: Sarah Boes, Adrian Pryce, Ron Mazor, Christiane Garcia, John Lopes, John-Marc Fontaine, and Jaret Sacrey
Director: Marc Morgenstern
Rating: Six of Ten Stars

“Vampire Conspiracy” tells the story of six apparent strangers (Boes, Pryce, Mazor, Garcia, Lopes, and Sacrey) who wake up in a dingy room. They have no recollection of how they got there, and there is no apparent way out. Soon, a strangely clad man who introduces himself as Von Rhylos (Fontaine) appears and explains that they are trapped in a maze, that they have until dawn to escape, and that those who do will inherit the vast fortune of a world-weary vampire while those who do not will be consumed by his blood-sucking minions.

As they search for an exit—moving down identical hallways between rooms that can only be distinguished from one another due to ashes arranged on the floors to spell out seemingly random words—while occasionally fending off attacks from bestial vampires, it becomes clear not only have some of them been chosen for this “contest” because of their skills (like the cop with combat abilities, the criminal with the abilities to pick locks, or the occult expert), but that each of them harbors a secret that connects them to at least one other person in the group. As those secrets come to light, the group becomes less and les likely to want to work together, and they eventually hold as much danger for each other as the vampires stalking them do.

For the most part, “Vampire Conspiracy” plays like a cross between “The Cube” and “Saw”, with vampires taking the place of the captors and traps. That could have made this an okay movie right there, as it’s a fine amalgam of the good concepts of those two other very successful horror films. However, the movie takes on a dimension that will appeal to fans of more classic horror films—the vampire movies from the 1930s through the 1960s—when master-vampire Thelonius Von Rhylos makes his appearance.

John-Marc Fontaine’s portrayal of Van Rhylos has an air about it that is at the same time noble and bestial, like Bela Lugosi in “Dracula”, Christopher Lee in “Horror of Dracula”, and David Peel in “Brides of Dracula”. This classical touch adds a sense of class that is all-too-rarely found in horror movies anymore.

But Von Rhylos isn’t just a bit of retro that’s in the film for traditionalists like me. Although he brings a bit of the classics to the film, he is a character with better-developed motivations than the vampires from the movies he brings to mind.

Von Rhylos has been around for 250 years, and he feels that humanity gets more and more corrupt with each generation that passes him by. He has therefore taken to creating elaborate webs of temptations designed to draw out the cowardice, greed, lust, and bigotry of seemingly decent people… webs that culminate with their confinement to his maze.

In the case of the six people in his current “contest”, as we come to learn their personal secrets and the event that connects them all (and how that event came to be), it seems the vampire may have a point… although this latest game of his doesn’t quite turn out the way he had intended because it is also being rigged by one of the “contestants.”

The motivations of the vampire, the secrets and hidden connections of the people he’s captured add up to a surprisingly effective third act and an ending that reminded me to never make up my mind about a movie until the end credits start to roll.

Although the various components that make up “Vampire Conspiracy” are not particularly unique by themselves--“catch ‘em and toss ‘em in a maze” seems to be the main starting point of every third indie and studio horror film, vampire movie have been around almost as long as there have been movies, and the featured characters are mostly stock figures that are expected to be in movies of both the vampire genre and the “capture” genre--writer/director Marc Morgenstern uses them in unexpected ways that ultimately adds up to a movie that keeps you wondering about how it will all end, right up until the final moment. (At about the halfway mark, I had decided this was an okay film, but nothing to get terribly excited about, but then Morgenstern stirred things up, and he kept crossing my expectations and assumptions about where the movie was going and left me with a feeling of “wow!” at the end that I rarely experience over movies anymore.)

I also tip my hat at Morgenstern for being a filmmaker who understands how to work within the limitations of his budget. The way he works his limited sets were great, and he doesn’t attempt any special effects or stunts that are beyond his means. He also knows that every second of screen-time has to count for something, or the movie’s impact is squandered.

Too many low-budget filmmakers have visions that are grander than their budgets and available talent pools, but lack the sense to scale their vision to match the budget and talent at their disposal, and even more have some sort of pathological need to pad their movies with nature shots and pointless scenes with characters wandering about doing nothing. Not so with Morgenstern. This is a sparse movie where everything is on the screen for reasons important to the film rather than its running time... and because things are so tight, the tension keeps building through the movie, and the various attacks the characters suffer at the hands of the bestial vampires in the maze with them seem increasingly frightening.

However, despite my loving it, “Vampire Conspiracy” is not a perfect movie.

Although blessed with a cast that are all better actors than many low-budget horror films, those actors bring a very theatre-like air to their performances. While it’s not the weekend community theatre they remind me of--they are all far better than that--I found myself repeatedly thinking of this as taped stage play than a movie. Part of this help underscore the classic feel that the Von Rhylos character brought to the film, but for the most part it was mildly distracting.

The fights between Sarah Boes and Adrian Pryce also had a clear stage-performance sense about them. I don’t know if the problem was not enough rehearsing, or if the problem was the wrong kind of choreography, but they felt more like they belonged on the stage at the Seattle Rep Theatre rather than on my TV screen. I also think the foley work on the fights was a bit too subtle. It’s a fine line between too much and too little when it comes to sound effects, but I feel like Morgenstern was just on the too little side of the line.

Another weak spot is the dialogue, and it’s the only weak spot in an otherwise well-written script.

With a movie that is driven first and foremost by the characters, like “The Vampire Conspiracy”, it’s important that those characters each have a different personality, particularly if they are stock figures like the ones we have here. One very good way to make each character different is to craft their language-usage. Here, though, each character basically sounds the same, particularly during the first few minutes where every character is yelling and swearing and uttering “fuck” with every third word. In fact, that seems to be the only curse word that any of these characters know. A little more time should have spent on polishing the script and giving each character its own unique voice.

In the end, though, these weaknesses don't drag the movie down too much... it still teeters on the higher end of average when everything else that's out there is taken into account.

Monsturd' is da shiznitz (or sumthin)

Monsturd (2003)
Starring: Paul Weiner, Beth West, Dan Burr, Dan West, Rick Popko, Hannah Stangel, and Brad Dosland
Director: Rick Popko and Dan West
Steve's Rating: Six of Ten Stars

Serial killer Jack Schmitt (Dosland) is shot to death by police in the sewers beneath a small town, but is reanimated as a living turd by bioengineered bacteria that had been dumped there by mad scientist Dr. Stern (Burr). Now, he's killing the residents as they Do Their Business in the bathroom, literally eating shit and growing bigger. If Agent Hannigan of the FBI (Beth West), Sheriff Duncan (Weiner) and his two dimwitted deputies (Dan West and Ppko) don't find a way to stop the monstrosity before the town's Annual Chili Cook-off, Butte County will end up as a very crappy place to live.

"Monsturd" is an amusing horror-comedy that spoofs monster movies ranging from the "science gone bad" films of the '50s and '60s (like "Island of Terror") to the "greed over public good" horror flicks from the '70s and '80s (of which "Jaws" is the most famous example).

Script-wise, this film does more with "Number Two" than I think any other tale in any medium has ever done before, which earns it some sort of place in history. It also manages its psuedo-science better than any number of monster movies that expect to be taken seriously, and it pulls off the costuming and effects involved in bringing a monster that's a walking, mansized turd to the screen with an effectiveness that is rarely seen in movies produced at this level.

I fully expected the "monsturd" of the title to stink like so many elaborate monsters do in low-budget horror flicks. But directors West and Popko clearly understand how to mount a production within their means, and they very effectively used lighting and camera angles to make their monster look even better. If science-gone-bad ever caused a dead serial killer to be reborn as a giant turd, I think he might actually look like the creature that West and Popko came up with. The terms "believable" and "realistic" can't quite be applied here, but the monster is very convincing (and appropriately gross).

"Monsturd" also benefits from a cast that's better than what I often see in films at this funding level. While there are no award-winning performances, everyone is competent and none of the gags are killed by bad delivery. Again, I have to congratulate the directors for matching their material to a cast capable of bringing it properly to life. (I particularly enjoyed Dan Burr as Dr. Stern. He made a great mad scientist, and his "turd-calls" while searching for the monsturd in the sewers were hilarious.)

The soundtrack is the final element that makes "Monsturd" the effective spoof that it is. It's composed in the style of a 1950s monster movie, very bombastic and dramatic... even when it's just someone walking down a hall. Fans of classic horror films will enjoy this movie for the music alone.

The film isn't perfect, however. If suffers from jumpy and erratic editing, and, despite the filmmakers' best efforts, the tight budget of the picture does still cripple it at times, despite the very clever efforts to hide the defects. (This is most evident in the scene where Schmitt is shot, and in the various office and interior sets.)

Still, "Monsturd" is a film that's hard not to like if you have a sense of humor and a tolerance for splatter of a different sort. Also, aspiring filmmakers should definitely check it out, and they should listen to the commentary track, as well as watch the being-the-scenes footage. It's very interesting and informative stuff, and it'll give insights into how this very effective low-budget comedy came to be, and it will give you some hints and tricks that you might want to model.





(One interesting surprising bit of trivia that's mentioned in passing on the commentary track is that few reviewers ever comment on the film's music. That's surprsing to me, because that was the very first thing I noticed about it.)

One of the funkiest werewolf movies ever

The DVD version of this film I watched had no opening credits, title card, or other such niceties. It simply launched into the action, with a rich man telling friends he was taking his trophy wife on vacation to Transylvania to visit his childhood home. Bad Things happen (as they do on every trip anyone in a movie ever takes to Transylvania), but what didn't happen was the appearance of anyone that appeared to be Dr. Jekyll. By the time Naschy appeared on screen and declared himself to be Waldemar Daninsky, I assume the editors of the Pure Terror DVD multi-pack had made a mistake and that I was watching some other Naschy werewolf movie co-starring that I would have to spend some time identifying when it was over. It seemed a minor concern to me, as the film was unfolding rapidly with lots of nasty, superstitious peasants and good performances by everyone involved.

Then, at the half-hour mark or so, Dr. Henry Jekyll was name-checked and he made an appearance soon thereafter. It took a while to get to him, but he's there. Mad science and monumentally bad ideas in the arena of werewolf curing ensue.

Dr. Jekyll and the Werewolf (aka "Dr. Jekyll and Werewolf Hyde") (1972)
Starring: Paul Naschy, Shirley Corrigan, Jack Taylor, Mirta Miller, and Jose Marco
Director: Leon Klimovsky
Rating: Six of Ten Stars

After saving a beautiful young tourist (Corrigan) from Transylvanian bandits, Count Waldemar Daninky (Naschy) is presented with an opportunity to rid himself of the werewolf curse that plagues him. The young woman is friends with the grandson of the famous Dr. Henry Jekyll, and he has continued the research and medical experiments of his ancestor. She is convinced that he will be able to help Daninsky, but once they return to London, the younger Dr. Jekyll (Taylor) and his work is endangered by a jealous assistant (Miller). Will Mr. Hyde walk the streets of London again, this time augmented by the savage might of a werewolf?

Of course, if you've seen at least one "werewolf/vampire/two-headed circus freak goes looking for a cure to his ailment," you know the answer to the rhetorical question above. Of course Hyde ends up running loose on the streets of London augmented by the might of a werewolf!

This film marked the sixth time Spanish actor Paul Naschy donned the werewolf make-up and hopped around while making snarly faces. It's the third I've reviewed, and so far it's the most accomplished of them all. Naschy is also better as his signature character Daninsky than I've seen him previously.

After a bit of a false start--one that is far removed from werewolves and Dr. Jekyll both--the film gets down to some really fun business of merging werewolf lore with Robert Louis Stevenson's classic novella. Unperturbed by the fact that every circumstance points to his grandfather's idea of unleashing a person's dark side being a really, really bad one, the new Henry Jekyll has continued along that line of study with a large helping of modern psychology thrown in. And now, by using the Jekyll Method to draw out Hyde just before the full moon rises, he then causes Hyde to turn into Daninsky instead of the werewolf.

I'm sure it makes a whole lot of sense, but it doesn't matter because it all gets messed up when his assistant stabs Jekyll in the back (metaphorically and literally), unleashes Hyde once and for all and becomes his partner.

(Although on the face of it, Hyde makes even less sense in this film than in any other I've seen. It makes perfect sense he'd be a Victorian-era scoundrel and sex pervert in films set during that period, but why would he manifest himself that way from Daninsky's dark side in the 1970s?

And things go from bad to worse when Jekyll's werewolf-supressing formula wears off and Hyde transforms into a werewolf in a crowded disco and starts maiming the crowd. It's one of the film's best moments... exceeded only by the earlier one where Daninsky gets stuck in an elevator shortly before the full moon is about to rise.

In the end, the film resolves itself in a fairly predictable way that tie loosely back to the extraneous half or so that opened the film and which tries to interject a little romantic tragedy into the film. It feels a little forced, but it does provide some additional texture to what was otherwise unfolding like a "oh crap, the run-times almost over... better wrap this puppy up!" final few minutes.

While not quite as crazy as "Fury of the Wolf Man" or "Werewolf Shadow" (both reviewed here), it is more coherent and as good as some of the Universal Larry Talbot monster-mashup from the 1940s. (And those films are clearly what the creators of the Naschy films are drawing for inspiration; are there any of the Naschy werewolf flicks that don't mix in villains or elements from other horror subgenres?)

If you liked the classics with Lon Chaney Jr., I think you'll like "Dr. Jekyll and the Werewolf".

Double Feature: Paul Naschy as the Wolf Man

Other than Lon Chaney Jr., no actor is more closely associated with playing a werewolf/wolf man than Spanish actor/writer/director Paul Naschy. He portrayed a werewolf in at least 12 different movies, a record I doubt anyone will ever surpass. More often then not, his werewolf was named "Waldemar Daninsky," even if many of the films had nothing to do with any of the other ones featuring the Daninsky character. Despite always exerting a great deal of creative control of the films he appeared in--often being the star, writer and director--he apparently didn't have much regard for the notion of continuity.



At least two of Naschy's Daninsky movies do feature some continuity between them, however. While Naschy is not at his best as the werewolf in either one, they are fun monster-mashes in the way the majority of the Lon Chaney Jr.-starring werewolf movies from Universal Pictures were.

Together, they can make for a semi-epic Bad Movie Night.

(By the way, I'm aware that it might just me my desire for continuity that's imposing a connection on these two films. Some of the release dates I've seen for "Werewolf Shadow" has it predating "The Fury of the Wolfman," but then I've seen release dates assigned to "The Fury of the Wolfman" that range from 1970 to 1972.)


The Fury of the Wolfman (aka "The Wolfman Never Sleeps") (1970)
Starring: Paul Naschy, Perla Cristal, Veronica Lujan, and Mark Stevens
Director: Jose Maria Zabalza
Rating: Five of Ten Stars

When a globe-trotting scientist (Naschy) contracts lycanthropy, he becomes the latest subject of the twisted experiments of a mad scientist (Cristal) and her all-woman team of graduate student assistants.

"The Fury of the Wolfman" is a mess of a movie. It's over-long, partially due to the fact that the creators seemed to want to cram every legend and scientific-sounding theory they'd heard about werewolves into the picture and tie them into the efforts of their multi-discipline mad scientist... who is working on several mind control projects and creating human/plant hybrids in the basement of her creepy castle. And then there's the completely superflous plotline involving a reporter and a police inspector who are both trying to track down the wolfman.

Another issue with the film is the title. It would have been more aptly named "Moonlight Strolls of the Wolfman" or "The Wolfman, Starring WB's Tazmanian Devil"... because the wolfman spends much of his time just wandering about, and when he's snarling, he sounds exactly like the Tazmanian Devil from the old Bugs Bunny cartoons. While this does give rise to much unintended hilarity, it doesn't make for much of a horror film.

The movie is at its best as the poor victim of lycanthropy and a newfound ally try to escape the mad scientist's castle. But this is about ten minutes of the running time, and even here the film lapses into unintended comedy.

"The Fury of the Wolfman" is fast enough paced, has enough characters behaving stupidlyl, and enough instances of fullblown, unintended comedic disaster that it would make for a fine addition to a "Bad Movie Nite" party... but that's all it's good for.



Werewolf Shadow (aka "The Werewolf vs. the Vampire Woman", "Blood Moon" and "Shadow of the Werewolf") (1971)
Starring: Paul Naschy, Gaby Fuchs, Barbara Capell, Patty Shepard, and Yelina Samarina
Director: Leon Klimovsky
Rating: Six of Ten Stars

Two college students (Fuchs and Capell) conducting research into a supposed vampire and witch from the Middle Ages (Shepard) trace the existence of her tomb the isolated castle of Count Waldemar Daninisky (Naschy). While the hospitible, yet secretive, count is showing them the tomb, the ancient (and very hungry and lusty) vampire is awakened. Will the count be able to save the girls and the nearby villagers? Will he decide that there are days where it's actually good to be cursed with lycanthropy?


"Werewolf Shadow" is a direct sequel to "Fury of the Wolfman", and, although a bit slow at times and showing signs of a director struggling to pad the film to meet a certain running time, it's a pretty good little flick--and it's far, far better than the film it follows. It stands up nicely when compared to some of the movies released by Hammer around the same time. Of course, if you're familiar with the output of Hammer in the early 1970s, you might think I'm damning this film with faint praise... and you might not be entirely wrong.

(And if you've seen "Fury of the Wolfman", you're probably wondering why the Good Count is even around. That's explained quite nicely in the first minutes of the film, where a coroner makes the worst blunder of his career. It's a sequence that is one of the more effective in the film.)

This is an okay horror flick, but it's not great. Its a solidly average 1970s monster film, teetering on the brink of low-average (between the ratings of 5 and 6 on my scale). It's got decent acting, some nice, moody camerawork, and there's some great use of lighting and fog machines to enhance the creepiness of many scenes. The slow-motion, gliding movements of the vampires is an excellently executed way of adding creepiness to them, and there are moments when the film is almost lifting itself up to a higher level of quality... but those moments pass quickly and then the movie sinks back to its low-average comfort zone.

A big problem is the above-mentioned padding of scenes. Another problem is the film's star, Paul Naschy. Just like in "The Fury of the Werewolf", he seems to more stroll through the night than run. He does a slightly better job when he's not a werewolf, but he still seems to dragging himself through the film... and as a result he drags it down.

On the upside, though, the film is helped by three gorgeous leading ladies (Shepard is particularly good and sexy as the resurrected vampiress), plenty of bare breasts, a good heaping of blood, and a well-done climactic fight.

It's worth seeking out if you enjoy early 1970s horror flicks, but just be aware that Naschy portrays one of the most lethargic wolfman in cinematic history.

'Night of the Demons' has Halloween gore

Night of the Demons (2010)
Starring: Diora Baird, Shannon Elizabeth, Edward Furlong, Monica Keena, Bobbi Sue Luther, John F. Beach, Michael Copon, and Tiffany Shepis
Director: Adam Gierash
Stars: Five of Ten Stars

After an illicit rave in a mansion that was the sight of mysterious disappearances and murder on Halloween night some 90 years ago, the party organizer (Elizabeth) and six friends accidentally discover what happened. In doing so, they awaken demons that have until dawn to possess and destroy seven humans in order escape their prison inside the house.

"Night of the Demons" is a remake of the 1988 horror fan-favorite of the same title. It sat on a shelf at the studio for a year before being released directly to DVD, has a more satisfying ending than the 1988 original (and, in an amusing way, manages to present one of those "final moment twists" I so often rail about that actually works), but other than that it doesn't measure up.

There is only one scene that's as scary and strange as anything in the 1988 film--involving lipstick and about a gallon of blood--but everything else is what we've come to expect from a movie about beautiful young people trapped in a house with demons that possess them and pick them off, one by one. The film has the further flaw that the characters aren't actually trapped, but appear merely to be too dumb to scale the wall around the mansion's grounds; the gate is mysteriously locked, but what's to stop them from giving one of their number a boost over the wall so that person can get a locksmith?

"Night of the Demons" is a fast paced, competently made but unspectacular horror flick. The stars all deliver good performances, it's got just enough story and character development to keep me happy, and its spiced up with plenty of gore and jiggling naked boobs to make me even happier. Perhaps if such a clear line hadn't been drawn to the 1988 title (if it had been called "House of Demons" or "Seven Until Dawn" or some-such), I would have considered it to be among the better paint-by-number horror flicks out there. As it is, however, it suffers by the comparisons it invites and therefore calls attention to the fact that it really does fall at the bottom end of average.