Not much story to get in the way of the gore

Recycled Parts (2010)
Starring: Girstin Bergquist, David Dartt, Joe Duffy, Brandon Brendel, Lisa Gail, Michael Dias, and Larry Sands
Directors: Larry Sands, Erick Vega, and Bradley Young
Rating: One of Ten Stars

Three unlikeable college friends (Brendel, Gail, and Dias) and two stupid ones (Bergquist and Sands) become victims of a madman (Dartt) who is abducting people and harvesting their limbs and organs for sale on the black market (or something like that).

First of all, this turned out not to be my kind of movie, so maybe I'm unable to appreciate its strengths, but sitting through this movie was a miserable experience. Regular readers know that I can't stand "torture porn" movies... and there's really not much else to this movie that gory deaths and screaming victims.

The best thing about "Recycled Parts" was that it was that it was so to the point that it lasted just one hour.

But during that hour, you get to see just about every variety of incompetent filmmaking you can imagine--from bad dialogue to bad characterization; from amateurish Foley work to uneven sound levels and inaudible dialogue; from badly lit scenes to badly framed shots, this film has it all! Hell, it even has a textbook example of the moronic "shock twist ending" that is so bad it actually ends up being one of the worst parts of the movie.

The only reason I'm not rating it Zero, is that the filmmakers did manage to creep me out with te Christmas-themed lair of the psychotic doctor's assistant Einstein (played by Joe Duffy). Then again, with three directors and five cinematographers, one would expect them to get SOMETHING right. Unless, of course, each director and cinematographer was brought in to work on a part of the film that didn't play to their strengths....

Perhaps if you're really, REALLY into films with less substance and class and creativity than the "Hostel" series, you might like this film. Everyone else should probably stay away.





(Full disclosure: Distributor Midnight Releasing provided me with a screener of this film.)

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.

Its got nothing to get in the way of the violence

Kill the Scream Queen (2004)
Starring: Bill Zebub, Deborah Dutch, Debbie D, and Isabelle Stephen
Director: Bill Zebub
Rating: One of Ten Stars

A sexual psychopath and serial killer turned movie-maker (or movie-maker turned sexual psychopath and serial killer) (Zebub) lures wanna-be actresses to an abandoned bar with the promise of being in his horror movie/snuff-film. He then tortures and rapes them.


That is not only a summary of "Kill the Scream Queen", it is the entire content of the film. There is virtually nothing worthwhile here, unless you want your "torture porn" almost completely free of plot and character development, and with a little more actual porn that you find in the "Hostel" and "Saw" movies.

The very low One Star-rating I'm giving this pointless piece of "filmmaking" is based on the one victim that fights back in a big way. Otherwise, most of the girls here are just so much meat--only two show even the slightest glimmer of acting talent--and the filmmaking and effects are pedestrian in the extreme.

Worse, the film is such an amateur effort that the director can't even keep his continuity straight. In one scene, he rips a girl's panties off so he can rape her, yet when he dumps the body, they're back on and they're intact.

(The only positive things I can say is that the "writer and director" of the film didn't attempt to overreach his $1.25 budget. There's also the "message" that gets delivered via film-maker's monologues directed at his victims... that an emphasis on sex and gore over acting and story is ruining the horror genre.)

I like the high concept of the movie... but I just wish a movie had actually been made with it, instead of a collection of clips with girls taking their clothes off and being menaced and killed with nothing else going on.

'Trailer Park of Terror' is trashy, gory fun

Trailer Park of Terror (2008)
Starring: Nichole Hiltz, Jeanette Brox, Brock Chuchna, Stefanie Black, Matthew Del Negro, and Trace Adkins
Director: Steven Goldman
Rating: Six of Ten Stars

When a bus-load of troubled teens on a church retreat crash during a rain-storm, the passengers and their chaparone (Del Negro) take refuge at a nearby trailer park. Unfortunately for them, the trailer park is merely the ghostly reflection of a murderous den of hillbilly criminals that died in a gory, revenge-fueled massacre decades earlier. They now re-inact their brutal ways on hapless travelers, under the command of Norma (Hiltz), one of their victims who has turned victimizer thanks to a deal with the devil (Adkins).

"Trailer Park of Terror" has something for just about every horror fan. It takes nearly every disgusting thing you've seen in a Killer Hicks movie from the 1970s forward and combines them with a sadistic sense of humor that will put you in mind films like "Spider Baby" and "Re-Animator", as well as slightly more modern off-kilter horror features like "From Dusk 'Til Dawn". Further, the ghosts mostly manifest themselves as disgusting walking corpses, so lovers of zombie films will have something to sink their metaphorical teeth into, while admirers of Torture Porn flicks will get to watch one victim get her arm sawed off while tripping so high she doesn't notice until after the fact, and another victim is turned into jerky meat while still alive. And then there's the horny teens that are forced to be the stars of a snuff flick.

I'm not a big fan of mean-spirited and sadistic horror films, so there was quite a bit about "Trailer Park of Terror" I didn't care for. I also like my gory ghost movies and slasher flicks to have a "morality tale" aspect to them, and when they don't--or it's a weak part of the film, as it is here--the film invariably loses me, so that was another reason for me not to like this flick.

However, this thing is so well-written and so finely acted by everyone involved that I couldn't help but like it. Virtually all the characters are so purely one-note and cliched with the hillbilly ghosts  that combining them all in one place manages to breath a form of demented freshness into the film--the writers didn't even try to expand the victims beyond horny teen, asshole teen, druggie teen, and so on; nor to give the ghosts more definition than rapist redneck, robber redneck, cannibal redneck, and so on.

The only character with even the slightest depth to her is Norma, who in life was the only non-psychotic inhabitant of the trailer park... at least until she decided she had enough of them and gunned them all down and killed herself. But the facets to the Norma character never manifests itself quite in the way one expects as the film unfolds, something which becomes which is highlighted and becomes even more interesting due to the plethora of one-note stereotypes that otherwise inhabit the film. It also helps, of course, that Hiltz is a better actress than her repeated casting as a white-trash bimbo (here, and in the television series "The Riches" and "In Plain Sight") warrants. I'd like to see in more horror movies, and in different roles than what she seems to be playing over and over.

The only real down-side that I saw to this film is its somewhat disorganized structure. It starts with an extended sequence in the past and then interrupts the present with a couple of extended flashbacks that both fill in back story but also stand alone to some extent, giving the film the fell of a half-baked anthology. Given the film is based on the anthology comic book series "Trailer Park of Terror", I understand why the filmmakers wanted to make a nod in the direction of their source, but I just wish they had done it in a less choppy fashion.

In the final analysis, though, "Trailer Park of Terror" is well worth watching.

'House of 9' is fairly unremarkable

House of 9 (2006)
Starring: Dennis Hopper and Kelly Brook
Director: Steven R. Monroe
Rating: Five of Ten Stars

Nine strangers wake up in a house with no exits and an automatic feeding system. A voice announces over a speaker that only one of them may leave the house alive, but that person will "win" 5 million dollars. Will these prisoners work together to escape, or will they turn on each other?


"House of 9" is a little bit of "Cube", a little bit of "Saw", and a whole lot of "Big Brother." It goes light on the "torture porn" aspect of the film, and it's spends a little more time developing the captured characters as believable human beings--both of which help it score a few extra points with me--but while it held my attention, but it didn't do much more than that.

There was nothing in particular that makes me want to condemn the film (although the annoying jump cuts that got used to show a character's mind snapping, and the slipping accent of Hopper almost rose to the level of bothersome) but there's also nothing that makes me want to stand up and cheer. The film moves along at a decent pace, the tension stays high, and the ending ellicits sadistic chuckles. There weren't any real surprises, though.

I think "House of 9" is an average, fairly unoriginal film. It's not bad, but it's not good. If you're a fan of this particular horror subgenre--or huge a fan of Kelly Brook or Dennis Hopper--you might put it somewhere low on your priority list, but otherwise, skip it for the day it shows up on TV and there's nothing else to watch.

The most feared Nazi of them all: Ilsa

Ilsa, She Wolf of the SS (1975)
Starring: Dyanne Thorne, Sandi Richman, Jo Jo Deville, Gregory Knoph, Tony Mumolo, Uschi Digard, Maria Marx, Nicolle Riddell, and Georoge "Buck" Flowers
Director: Don Edmonds
Rating: Six of Ten Stars

Ilsa, the big-breasted Nazi commandant of a concentration camp (Thorne), supervises a series of "medical experiments" that involve torturing women in the most gruesome and unusual fashions. Her hope is to prove that women are more psyscially tough than men, so that Hitler and his generals were allow them to serve on the frontlines of war. She is also on a quest for the ultimate orgasm... and when the freakishly well-endowed prisoner-of-war Wolfe (Knoph) is placed in her camp, she may well achieve it.

I don't often use posters with all the logos and taglines in place to illustrate articles, but the original one for this movie captures everything it's about with such accuracy that I simply had to use it.


One of the truest statements on the poster is that it's a "Different Kind of X." This is a movie that puts the "porn" in "torture porn." The various female torture victims are completely naked while they are cut, stabbed, frozen, cooked, beaten, raped and everything else in between. Ilsa is a sadistic maniac who would give Jigsaw and his girlfriend from the "Saw" series nightmares.

This isn't the sort of film I watch because I'm looking for entertainment; if I hadn't declared the "Nazis Quit!" mini-blogathon, I probably never would have watched a Nazi torture porn film. The too realistic violence in films like this make me ache in the various parts of my body where I've had broken bones or deep cuts, and all the screaming sets my nerves on edge. I had an idea of what I was in for when I slated this film for review--it was legendary when I was a kid and I dissuaded my friends from trying to rent it back when we were young teens and my family was the first with a VCR in the neighborhood--but I had no idea how bad it was.

Not "bad" in the sense of incompetent filmmaking and lousy acting [for the most part... a couple of cast-members must have been sleeping with the director or producer in real life, or I can't see how they ever made it past an audition, and some of the put-on German accents are hilariously awful). No, I'm referring to the fact that five minutes doesn't pass in the film where there isn't a scene of violent sex or brutal torture. It is amazing how much they managed to cram into one movie.

There is so much crammed in here, so much that had me cringing and squirming and making me wonder if I'd ever have an appetite again that the film virtually flew by. I think this is quite possibly one of the most effectively paced films I've ever seen. In fact, I think the only other movie that's had that effect on me--causing me to lose track of how much is left of the movie--once I started watching films with an eye toward writing reviews was "JFK." As much as it made me uncomfortable, I have to give the director credit for keeping me engrossed even as I was repulsed by what I was watching.


While this is without question a sleazy B-movie, it's a testament to its effectiveness that it's very watchable (assuming you want to watch scenes of rape and torture). When a film works as hard to be as offensive as this one is, it is usually boring or unintentionally hilarious. Neither is the case with this film. Heck, I wish there were scenes that were unintentionally funny, because I might be able to have some dinner right about now if there had been. (The closest we get is when Gregory Knoph tries to act, or even deliver lines. It's little wonder that this was his first and only screen credit.)

There are few films I've seen that make Nazis more disgusting that how they are portrayed in "Ilsa, She Wolf of the SS." The sad part is that many of the horrible acts shown in this film probably were perpetrated on human beings in real life.

If you're looking for a sleazy Nazi movie, you won't go wrong if you can lay your hands on a copy of this movie; it seems to be out of print in the United States--I borrowed the copy I viewed from a friend who gave me a long warning about the film, because he knows my tastes do not run in this direction. (He also lent me some other, lesser Nazi "torture porn" films which I will watch for the blogathon once my stomach settles.)

However, if you're a pain-numbed gorehound who thinks "Saw" is for pussies and "Urban Flesh" is too tame, maybe you will find yourself disappointed with what this, unarguably, superior early example of the "torture porn" horror subgenre.

Evil Clown knocks them dead in 'Torment'

Torment (2008)
Starring: Suzi Lorraine, Tom Steadman, Ted Alderman and Lucien Eisenach
Director: Steve Sessions
Rating: Five of Ten Stars

A young woman (Lorraine) is released from a mental hospital into the care of her alcoholic husband. The two go to an isolated house so she can continue her recovery and they can renew their relationship in a quiet environment. Unfortunately for them, a psycho in a clown costume (Eisenach) is capturing and torturing people in the area.


This movie was hard for me to assign a rating to. While there is much about it that I like, there is much I don't like. It's one of the better psycho clown movies I've seen, but it's got some serious flaws.

Suzi Lorraine gives an interesting performance as Lauren, a former mental patient who spots a psychotic killer as he picks out his next victim, but who is disbelieved due to her history of mental illness. The way the script sets up the chain of events that leads Lauren into the worst possible danger is well executed and her confrontation with the Killer Clown (called Dissecto in the credits but unnamed in the film istself) is very suspenseful. Unfortunately, these strong parts of the movie are undermined and outweighed by the weak parts.

"Torment" feels like its two halfbaked scripts that have been combined into one film. They weren't necessarily BAD scripts... they're just unpolished and they work against each other and ultimately end up undermining what suspense and tension they could have produced if they had been two different movies.

The clunky dialogue at times made up for by some well done lines, and the few overlong and even redundant scenes in the film are likewise counterbalanced by some truly creepy, scary and startling moments. (For example, the repeatative expository scenes and dialogue of the fact that Lauren is fresh out of mental hospital are annoying, but they are more than made up for the scene where Dissecto invades her home, or when she is hiding in his.) As far as this goes, the good counterbalances the bad.

However, the way the film makes it crystal clear from the outset that Lauren isn't hallucinating the spooky clown lurking in the bushes-- the extended scenes of him torturing a pair of missing Mormon missionaries is most definately not something she's imagining--and so there is no real tension produced by the "is she crazy or isn't she" question... although it does make her husband come across like a grade-A asshole. If you're into "torture porn", I suppose you might enjoy those aforementioned scenese of Dissecto performing for and upon his victimes, but I'm too squeamish for that sort of thing--having recently experienced my own encounter with excruciating pain has made that sort of material hard for me to watch--but the sloppy costuming of the "Mormons" can't be anything but a strike against the movie. (It's bad enough one of the "Mormons" had a shaved head, but none of their missionaries would EVER sport a soul patch/jazz dot!)

Bad costuming (and the sloppy direction that allows it to happen aside) it's the absolute certainty the audience has of Dissecto's existence that undermines Lauren's story. It makes us dislike her husband to a disproportionate degree and it makes everything leading up to her encounter with Dissecto feel like it goes on and on, because we know the real action won't start until he dispatches the husband and starts stalking her.


And that's too bad. Suzi Lorraine gives an good performance, but my impatience with wanting the movie to get to where the real action was made it hard to notice. Tom Steadman likewise gave a decent accounting of himself as Lauren's moronic husband... and I think that if he had been given better dialogue to deliver, he might have been even better. (To a large extent, he's The Amazing Redundant Exposition Man, and this reduces his role to something less that what it could have been.)

"Torment" is a movie that has a lot to recommend to fans of thrillers, slasher movies, and "torture porn". Unfortuantely, the thriller elements and "torture porn" elements are at odds with each other and between them they almost manage to make the slasher element moot and make the ending seem false and forced because it doesn't feel like a natural outgrowth of anything. These, plus the stilted and clumsy nature of some of the dialogue and the excessive exposition in certain scenes drag this down to a low end of average, despite its strong points. (Speaking of excessive exposition... one thing the film never even hints at is the Who and the Why of Dissecto. Part of me would like to know more about him, but another part of me likes the "senseless evil" aspect this presents. I think the fact I'm torn is another sign that the script needed more work.)

Despite its flaws, though, "Torment" is worth checking out if you're into killer clowns, or if you enjoy small-scale horror films.

'The Traveler' is a good movie I'll never watch again

The Traveler (2006)
Starring: Jonathan R. Skocik, Shawn Burke, Melanie D'Alessandro, and Megan Hartley
Director: Jonathan R. Skocik
Rating: Nine of Ten Stars

Seven people are trapped in an abanonded house by a supernatural force, and an immortal man with monstrous strength (Burke) soon appears and forces them to torture each other to death. But he is keeping his most special, most terrble plans in reserve for young married couple Alan and Suzan (Skocik and D'Allesandro (with Hartely providing the voice of Suzan).

Once in a blue moon, I come upon a film that I can say is fairly decent, but that I will still never watch again and that I am hesitant to recomment to anyone else.

"The Traveler" is one such movie.

I have never seen violence this graphic and terrible in a movie before. I'm the first one to admit that I'm a bit squemish when it comes to slasher-flicks and torture scenes--I know the reality of severe pain, so I can't stand watching it staged on-screen, and you'd probably laugh if you saw me squirm and look away while viewing many movies--but it's rare where I am shuttling past extended sequences because they are making my skin crawl and because they are just too horrible to watch.

"The Traveler" features six such terrible, extended, extremely graphic scenes. And the violence mostly looks horribally realistic--only once did I think "that looks fake"... but that could just have been because I was zooming past the guts spilling out from one of the characters at x4 speed.

I did watch snippits of each of the death sequences (yeah... most everyone in the house dies most terrible, anquishing deaths, and I don't consider that a spoiler in the day and age of "Saw" and the various imitators, of which this is one). The violence looks horribly realistic and the well done sound effects make it even more stomach-turningly believable. The best (or most horrible) torture sequences were the one where the "host" takes a spike and a hammer and shatters a victim's teeth one by one--and we get a top view so we can see it happen-- the one where another victim gets hoisted into the air on a meathook that penetrates the roof of the mouth and exits through an eye-socket, and the one where a victim's face is literally shaved off.

Despite my revulsion at the graphic violence, despite the fact that I will never consider watching this movie again, I admire the technical know-how that went into creating it.

This is a well-made film over-all. There are a few clunkly moments here and there--tinny dialogue, flat acting, a special effect here and there that don't come off quite right--but overall it features decent camerawork and staging, it's free of all the padding and time-filling garbage that ruins so many horror movies, and it even offering a story that's interesting and engaging,

What's more, the director has the ability to honestly assess what worked and what didn't work in the movie; the camera lingered on the gore and special effects that worked with terrible convincingness, while those that clearly didn't work as I'm sure was hoped are passed by with fairly quick cuts. (There's a "regenerating head" sequence that I think fits this bill.) Too often, low-budget filmmakers allow the audience to see their film's shortcomings too clearly by dwelling on them. Not so with Skocik... he's clearly a filmmaker with a good eye, and I'd be interested in seeing what he might come up with in the future (even if I have to shuttle past portions of the movie).