Horror Book Review: Who Killed The Homecoming Queen? by R.L. Stine


This 1997 YA novel from R.L. Stine tells the story Tania, Eva, and all of their friends at Shadyside High!

Tania, as we learn in the book’s opening pages, is having the best year of her life! She’s got a hunky stepbrother. She’s got a football player boyfriend. Her movie career is about to be launched because she’s been cast in a high school student film. (Yeah, that didn’t make sense to me either but just go with it.) And, at the big pep rally that starts the book, it’s announced that she’s going to be the homecoming queen! Meanwhile, Eva apparently has psychic abilities that allow her to know if something bad is going to happen. That may sound impressive but the book doesn’t really do much with it.

Of course, life is never as perfect as it seems. Tania may be the most popular girl in school but that doesn’t mean that everyone likes her. In fact, Leslie, one of the defeated homecoming queen finalists, even attempts to push Tania down some stairs! OH MY GOD! Leslie says it was an accident but was it? Later on, when Tania mysteriously disappears, Eva and her friends wonder …. who killed the homecoming queen!? (Of course, that’s assuming Tania is dead. She’s actually just missing so it could be that Eva is getting ahead of herself.) Leslie seems like the obvious suspect but …. OH MY GOD AGAIN, is that Cherise Colby making out with Tania’s boyfriend!? And seriously, why would anyone trust their boyfriend with someone named Cherise Colby?

I love the old R.L. Stine and Christopher Pike books and I’m planning on reading and reviewing a lot of them for October. The main reason I read this particular book was because of the title. I mean, Who Killed The Homecoming Queen is the type of title that you would come up with if you were challenged to come up with the perfect R.L. Stine title. That said, the book itself is pretty anti-climatic. There’s only one death in the book and — surprise! (and spoiler alert, I suppose) — it’s not the homecoming queen! So, as perfect as the title is, it’s kind of a lie. Stine used the title but he didn’t actually use it as the plot of the book, which is strange.

To be honest, though, this book feels like R.L. Stine on autopilot. This is one of the last of the original Fear Street books (though Fear Street itself is not really mentioned in the book) so one gets the feeling that Stine was a bit bored when he wrote it. I was a bit bored when I read it, though I did have to laugh at the obnoxious student filmmakers who insisted on making Eva’s life awkward. Never have a group of supporting characters felt more true to life.

Anyway, fear not! This particular R.L. Stine book may be disappointing but he wrote a lot of books and I’m planning on reading and reviewing a few of the better ones this October!

I mean, who can resist a trip to Fear Street, right?

Horror Book Review: Fright Favorites by David J. Skal


Happy October!

Now, if you’re like those of us here at the Shattered Lens, you’ve already got your list of movies set up to go. You know exactly which horror movies you’re going to watch this year and you’re ready for a great Halloween! Good for you! However, for everyone else, David J. Skal’s Fright Favorites is a good place to start when it comes to making out your list.

The book is subtitled 31 Movies To Haunt Your Halloween and Beyond and that’s pretty much the perfect description. Skal writes about 31 classic horror films, analyzing both their content and discussing their historical importance and making a pretty good case why these should be the films that you watch this Halloween. (Actually, since there’s 31 films, you could easily watch a film a day.) Going in chronological order, Skal starts with silent classics like Nosferatu and The Phantom of the Opera and then goes all the way to modern classics like Get Out. Along the way, Skal discusses Universal classics like Dracula and Frankenstein, the Hammer films, the Corman Poe films, and, of course, films like The Exorcist, The Shining, Halloween, Beetlejucie, Scream, A Nightmare on Elm Street, and many more. He also recommends Hocus Pocus but we won’t hold that against him. He also devotes a chapter to Black Sunday (with a little mini-section about Surpiria) so Italian horror does not go unmentioned!

It’s a fun read, for both horror and non-horror fans. It’s a good starter for those who might not know much about the genre but, at the same time, there’s a lot here for those of us who already love the films. Skal’s appreciation of the genre comes through and, even if you’ve already seen the films that he recommends, it’s still interesting to consider his thoughts on them. This is one of those books that will remind you of why you fell in love with the horror genre in the first place.

WNUF Halloween Special, Review By Case Wright


Hey my readers!!!! It is time for another horror review. I probably should be studying Differential Equations or determining the velocity of CO2 molecules on Venus…Really, I did that today- They move at .649 m/s. If you’re ever on Venus and wonder, Man this CO2 is really a mindbender…I wonder how fast the molecules are movin’? SPOILER ALERT- It’s .649 m/s. If I had a dollar for everytime that I needed to know how fast the air on Venus is blowin’ around- I’d have…I’d have exactly one dollar.

The WNUF Halloween Special is the best home movie ever made. The entire budget was $1500.00. Yep, that was it. I’m not going to judge this film too harshly. Did it have flaws? Sure, but 1500 bucks?! It was clear to me that the people who put their hearts and souls into making this treated it like a million dollar budget.

WNUF Halloween Special has 1980s ads that are so on point; it’s all but impossible to tell them from the real thing. Honestly, I would bet dollars to donuts that the Duffer Brothers saw this film and were more than inspired by it.

The movie is presented as a live broadcast of a local news station on Halloween. The commercials were absolutely accurate. I remember being a little kid and seeing these ads and remember dressing up for Halloween and my Gen X babysitters with their big hair and crazy makeup.

The newscast focuses on a Haunted House and the B-story of a group of right-wing religious fanatics. The movie came out just a bit before the Conjuring. This nostalgia drips a bit every 20 years or so. The movie does a good job of delivering a couple of scares. More importantly, it has a heart of determination to put out a movie. This movie was loved. If you have a Shudder subscription, it’s a must watch!

International Horror: The Cars That Ate Paris (dir by Peter Weir)


Taking place in a vaguely futuristic world, the 1974 Australian film, The Cars That Ate Paris, opens with an attractive and impossibly happy couple going for a drive in the countryside and getting killed in a truly horrific car accident, one that apparently was deliberately set up.

Meanwhile, two brothers — Arthur (Terry Camilleri) and George (Rick Scully) — are traveling across Australia, in search of work.  Everywhere they go, they see long lines of desperate people looking for a way to make money, suggesting that the economy has basically collapsed.  George does the driving, largely because Arthur’s license was taken away after he accidentally killed a pedestrian.  Arthur is struggling with both the guilt and a phobia of cars in general.

That phobia only gets worse after Arthur and George are involved in a automotive accident of their own.  George is killed but Arthur survives.  Taken to the small, rural town of Paris, Arthur is adopted as a bit of a mascot by the town’s seemingly friendly mayor, Len Kelly (John Mellion).  At first, Arthur is relieved to have survived but he soon comes to realize that the residents of Paris have no intention of ever letting him leave.

Paris, it turns out, is a bit of a strange place.  The entire economy is based on collecting scrap metal from the many cars that crash within the city limits.  The local hospital is full of car crash victims, the majority of whom end up getting lobotomized and used as test subjects for the local doctor.  Indeed, the only thing that kept Arthur from a similar fate was that the mayor assured everyone that Arthur’s phobia of driving has rendered him “harmless.”  (And just to make sure that Arthur doesn’t lose that phobia, he’s sent to a psychologist who spends nearly the entire session showing him grotesque pictures of car accident victims.)  Though the mayor continually talks about how Paris represents the “pioneer spirit” that made Australia great, the town’s teenagers don’t seem to be too impressed with the place.  They spend all of their time driving around in cars that they’ve modified into small tanks.  (Their leader drives a compact car that has been covered in metal spikes, transforming it into a motorized porcupine.)  Arthur wants to escape the town but can he conquer not only his own fears but also avoid being killed by the citizens who have adopted him?

The Cars That Ate Paris is a rather uneven film.  It gets off to a good start and the town is memorably creepy but, once Arthur had been adopted by the mayor, it starts to drag and not much happens until the teens finally get around to turning on their elders during the final fifteen minutes of the film.  Arthur is a frustratingly passive character and his car phobia never really feels credible.  The film attempts to mix horror, science fiction, and satire but it comes across as being rather disjointed.  Thematically, it’s probably most interesting as a precursor to the Mad Max films, having been inspired by the same Australian car culture that inspired George Miller.  In fact, The Cars That Ate Paris almost feels like a prequel to the Mad Max films.  One half expects a young Mel Gibson to pop up at the end, wearing Max’s patrolman uniform and shaking his head at the madness of it all.

That said, the film features a few striking images and Paris is a memorably desolate town.  This really isn’t that surprising, given that The Cars That Ate Paris was directed by Peter Weir.  This was Weir’s first feature film, though he had previously directed several shorts, and the film very much comes across as being the work of a talented artist who was still learning how to use those talents to tell a compelling story.  In the end, Peter Weir’s involvement is the main reason to watch The Cars That Ate Paris.  The film doesn’t really work but it does provide a chance to see an early effort from someone who would eventually become one of the most interesting directors of his time.

Beware The Tentacles Of October!


by John Newton Howitt

Are you scared of tentacles?

Whether they’re reaching down from the sky or coming out of the water, the idea of being grabbed and, even worse, squeezed by several slimy tentacles is a scary one!  Perhaps that’s why it was such a popular image during the pulp age.  Below is just a sampling of some of the era’s tentacle horror, courtesy of some of the best artists to work in the pulps!

by Earle Bergey

by Alexander Leydenfrost

by Edmund Emshwiller

by Hugh Joseph Ward

by L.B. Cole

by Lou Fine

by Rafael DeSoto

by Robert Bonfils

by Ron Embleton

by Rudolph Belarski

6 Shots From 6 Ken Russell Films


4 (or more) Shots From 4 (or more) Films is just what it says it is, 4 (or more) shots from 4 (or more) of our favorite films. As opposed to the reviews and recaps that we usually post, 4 (or more) Shots From 4 (or more) Films lets the visuals do the talking.

This October, we’re using this feature to highlight some of our favorite actors and directors, all of whom have made invaluable contributions to the horror genre!  Today, we pay tribute to the iconoclastic British director Ken Russell with….

6 Shots From 6 Ken Russell Films

The Devils (1971, directed by Ken Russell, DP: David Watkin)

Altered States (1980, dir by Ken Russell, DP: Jordan S. Croneweth)

Crimes of Passion (1984, dir by Ken Russell, DP: Dick Bush)

Gothic (1986, dir by Ken Russell, DP: Mike Southon)

Salome’s Last Dance (1988, dir by Ken Russell, DP: Harvey Harrison)

The Lair of the White Worm (1988, dir by Ken Russell, DP: Dick Bush)

Horror Film Review: The Devils (dir by Ken Russell)


In 17th Century France, Louis XIII (Graham Armitage) may be king but it’s the devious Cardinal Richelieu (Christopher Logue) who holds the power. Richelieu has convinced that king that every walled city in France should have its walls blown up, the better to keep track of what’s actually happening within the city. Unfortunately, for Richelieu, Louis XIII promised the Governor of Louden that he would never harm any structure in the city, leaving its walls untouchable. While Louis XIII concentrates on throwing outdoor parties where murdering protestant is the main source of entertainment, Richelieu searches for an excuse to destroy the walls of Loudon.

Along with being frustrated by the fact that Loudon retains its walls, Richelieu is also upset that the unofficial leader of the city is Ubrain Grandier (Oliver Reed), a decadent priest who has not only criticized the discipline of clerical celibacy but who has also publicly opposed the Cardinal’s efforts to increase his own political power. Grandier has made it clear that, as long as he’s in control, the walls of Loudon will never came down and the people of Loudon, fearful of the plague that is ravaging the world outside of the walls, support him.

Among Grandier’s many admirers is Sister Jeanne des Agnes (Vanessa Redgrave), a hunchback who is also the abbess of the local convent. Having become sexually obsessed with Grandier, Agnes requests that he become the confessor of the convent. When Grandier refuses, it sets off a chain reaction that eventually leads to Grandier being accused of worshipping the Devil and “bewitching” Sister Agnes and several other nuns. With the arrival of Father Barre (Michael Gothard), a fanatical witch hunter, the city of Loudon descends into darkness and decadence.

Directed by the infamous (and, let’s just admit it, brilliant) Ken Russell and first released in 1971, The Devils is not an easy film to see. When the film was originally released in Britain, it was controversial for its uncompromising depiction of 17th century torture and its combination of religion and sexual imagery. (This, of course, was a recurring theme in almost all of Russell’s work.) The British censors demanded a few minor cuts before agreeing to approve the film for release. While the British censors focused on the scenes of violence, Warner Bros. also removed several sexually explicit scenes, the most infamous of which was a sequence in which a group of naked nuns sexually defiled a statue of Christ. Also removed was a scene of a priest masturbating while watching the nuns and finally, a scene in which Sister Jeanne masturbated with a charred femur bone. Russell was not happy with the changes and, needless to say, he was even more upset when Warner Bros. removed an additional three minutes before releasing the film in the United States.

In the U.S., The Devils was even more controversial than it had been in the United Kingdom and, while many critics praised it as being a powerful attack on hypocrisy, others described it as merely being pornographic. Despite the cuts that were made, the American version of The Devils was slapped with an X rating and Warner Bros. attempted to distance itself from the controversy that had developed around the film. As of this writing, The Devils has never been given a proper Region 1 DVD or Blu-ray release. It’s rare that ever shows up on any streaming platforms. Even YouTube has only a handful of scenes. If you want to watch The Devils in America, you’re going to have to track down a VCR player and watch it on VHS. And, even then, you’ll only be seeing the version that was cut for the U.S.

Will Ken Russell’s original, uncut version ever be seen in America? It’s a question that many film students have asked themselves. In 2002, a 117-minute edition of The Devils played in London, featuring some of the footage that was cut from the film’s original release. However, that version is still considered to be incomplete and it’s certainly not available here in the United States. The Devils does occasionally show up on Shudder, which is how I saw it earlier this year. Of course, the Shudder version was the cut American version, which Russell repeatedly disowned.

Watching the film, I could understand Russell’s anger. It wasn’t just that scenes had been cut out of the film. It was that the scenes were often edited out with such a lack of finesse that it made the film seem disjointed. Russell was a director known for his hallucinatory and deliberately over-the-top style. When the film abruptly cuts away from showing us its most shocking images, it feels antethical to everything that Russell was about as a filmmaker. On the one hand, it’s easy to say, “Who cares if a scene of Vanessa Redgrave masturbating with a charred femur bone has been removed from the film? Who wants to see that?” But if you watch The Devils, it becomes apparent that it’s not about what would be pleasant to see. Indeed, in many ways, The Devils is meant as a deliberate attack on the senses, one in which shocking imagery is used to awaken the audience from their complacency. As such, the controversy about how the film was cut is not about what’s acceptable. Instead, it’s about the fact that Russell has created a world where it somehow makes total sense that Sister Jeanne would pick up the femur and make use of it. By editing the scene so that it abruptly ends with Jeanne merely looking at the bone, Warner Bros. forced The Devils to not be true to itself.

And yet, despite all of that, The Devils remains a powerful and disturbing film, a hallucinatory collection of nightmarish images and haunting scenes. The excessive stylization that was Ken Russell’s trademark is perfect for this story of an entire community caught up in a frenzy of paranoia and repression. Though a period film (and based on a true story), Russell’s Loudon resembles an alien landscape, an almost expressionistic city of pristine walls and dirty streets. Vanessa Redgrave’s twisted nun stalks through the film like an ominous spirit, both wanting and hating Grandier at the same time. When the “possessions” begin, the possessed finally have the excuse to do what they truly want and to live just as wantonly as the men who previously controlled their lives. Because they’ve come to believe that they’re no longer responsible for their own actions, they can indulge in every depravity. But with Louis XIII casually murdering protestants for sport at his estate and Richelieu manipulating church policy to his own ends, the film asks why the people’s actions are more worthy of condemnation than the actions of the people who rule them.

The Devils has reputation for being blasphemous. It is, of course, nothing of the sort. After I watched the film, I did a little research and I was not surprised to discover that Ken Russell was a practicing Catholic because only a Catholic could make a film that both celebrated what the Church could be while also condemning it for so often falling short. While Richelieu represents the people who use religion as a vehicle for their own drive for power and Sister Jeanne and the witch-hunter Father Barre represents the fanatics who use church doctrine to justify their own madness, it is the sinner Father Grandier who represents what the Church should be. It is Grandier who is ultimately forced to put his own life at risk to protect the people of Loudon.

Is The Devils are horror film? Some would probably argue with my claim that it is. They would probably claim that it’s a historical drama with a heavy political subtext, However, for me, the imagery itself is disturbing enough to justify calling The Devils a horror film. The possessed of Loudon eventually prove themselves to be as mad as any of the infected people from George Romero’s The Crazies and the torture that Grandier suffers is frightening specifically because it’s all based on fact. There really was a town named Loudon that had walls. There really was a priest named Grandier who was accused of practicing witchcraft and who suffered the most vile torture as a result.. The Devils is a film about people driven made by a combination of repression and fanaticsm. It’s a horror film because it’s true and, needless to say, the madness that possessed Loudon didn’t die out in the 17th Century. It’s continued into the present day.

Oliver Reed may seem like an odd choice to play a priest but he gives one of his best performances as the charismatic but foolishly cocky Grandier. Vanessa Redgrave is frightening as the disturbed Sister Jeanne and British actor Murray Melvin is alternatively sympathetic and pathetic as a priest who comes to believe in Grandier’s innocence. For me, though, the film is stolen by Michael Gothard, who plays the fanatical witch hunter, Father Barre. With his long hair and his glasses, Father Barre bears a definite resemblance to John Lennon and the film portrays him as being the 17th century equivalent of a rock star, an arrogant and sensual man who encourages people to indulge in their most secret desires so that he can then declare them to be possessed and in need of an exorcism. Gothard had a magnetic screen presence, allowing him to steal scenes from even formidable talents like Oliver Reed and Vanessa Redgrave. Gothard would go on to play the silent assassin in the James Bond film, For Your Eyes Only and was, again, memorably threatening. Sadly, Gothard took his own life in 1992.

Someday, perhaps the full unedited version of The Devils will be available. Until then, even the edited version retains its power to shock, disturb, and make you think. Today, more than ever, its portrait of hypocrisy and mass madness feels relevant. The modern age is still ruled by hysteria and paranoia and our leaders are still looking for any excuse to take down any walls that might protect us from having to submit to their will. How different is Sister Jeanne from the people who are currently hurling accusations on social media? How different is Father Barre from the the people who were are currently told have all the answers? We may no longer burn people at the stake but we’ve found new ways to silence voices of dissent. The film may have been set in 17th Century France and first released in 1971 but Ken Russell’s masterpiece is all about the modern age. The Devils in not an easy film to watch or find but it is more than worth the effort to track down.

 

 

 

 

“9 Minutes” (Dir. P.J. Wolff) Short-Film Review


Why do aliens always molest people in trailer parks/rural areas? Is it a slumming thing? I get that they’d wanna send the big guns to take over everything like a gigantic bomber, but the lure of the trailer park and its inhabitants aren’t really interesting to me and haven’t gotten into interstellar travel or even bent a wormhole. Also, if you’re an alien, why wait? I get it if you’re sending semi-autonomous drones like we do to Mars, but again our drones would be WAY more interested in a Martian city rather than fatty Martians drinking Pabst Blue Ribbon.

There’s the whole lost time thing. First, if you were to lose time because they’re going at the speed of light, you’d come back thousands of years later. Why would it be great for the aliens? By the time the Greys got back here, we humans would be 10000 years in the future and we’d all be dead or extremely advanced or maybe even beyond these particular aliens. In fact, their alien homeland might be extinct when they return home because of their fancy-pants super-luminal travel and nonchalant disregard of basic relativity. Go ahead and visit alien varmints, you’d come back and we’d have our own flyin’ saucers you little smug alien bitches! Teach you to probe us and bother people in the Berkshires!

This short on Dust answers the question: what happens when you get abducted and have your memory wiped. John, the quasi-protagonist, more like creepy hermit is building his very own personal trailer park. John always reachin for the stars with his feet on the ground! John has no one, but his trusty dog Jet who is much more interesting than John.

John sees a cloud in the sky that looks kinda weird and he takes a photo. Later that night, it’s aliens!!!! He does the floaty thing, but hits record on his phone. All could think was I really don’t wanna see this guy probed; my YouTube algorithms will never be the same.

He wakes up and his hands are burned and his phone shows a recording of 9 Minutes. It’s mostly him running around a lot. His dog, Jet, appears dead and they left John this……

Damn Weird Aliens! The dog comes back to life as a robo-dog?

The short had a couple of quick thrills and it’s fun to see the take on the alien abduction genre. Maybe, he’ll paint with acrylic? Please let it be so!!!!

,

Horror on the Lens: Robot Monster (dir by Phil Tucker)


Hi there and welcome to October!  This is our favorite time of the year here at the Shattered Lens because October is our annual horrorthon!  For the past several years (seriously, we’ve been doing this for a while), we have celebrated every October by reviewing and showing some of our favorite horror movies, shows, books, and music.  That’s a tradition that I’m looking forward to helping to continue this year.

Today’s horror film is a true classic of its kind, the 1953 science fiction epic Robot Monster.

Now, I should admit that this is not the first time that I’ve shared Robot Monster in October.  I share it every year and, every year, YouTube seems to pull the video down in November.  That sucks because Robot Monster is one of those weird films that everyone should see.  So, I’m going to share it again.  And, hopefully, YouTube will let the video stay up for a while.

As for what Robot Monster is about…

What happens with the Earth is attacked by aliens?  Well, first off, dinosaurs come back to life.  All of humanity is killed, except for one annoying family.  Finally, the fearsome Ro-Man is sent down to the planet to make sure that it’s ready for colonization.  (Or something like that.  To be honest, Ro-Man’s exact goal remains a bit vague.)

Why is Ro-Man so fearsome?  Well, he lives in a cave for one thing.  He also owns a bubble machine.  And finally, perhaps most horrifically, he’s a gorilla wearing a diver’s helmet.  However, Ro-Man is not just a one-dimensional bad guy.  No, he actually gets to have a monologue about halfway through the film in which he considers the existential issues inherent in being a gorilla wearing a diver’s helmet.

Can humanity defeat Ro-Man?  Will Ro-Man ever get his intergalactic supervisor to appreciate him?  And finally, why are the dinosaurs there?

Despite the film’s reputation for being borderline incoherent, most of those above questions actually are answered if you pay attention to the first few scenes of Robot Monster.  In fact, one could even argue that Robot Monster is maybe a little bit more clever than it’s often given credit for.  Of course, it’s still a zero-budget mess of a film but it’s also undeniably fun and, in some sections, unexpectedly dark.  If you’ve never seen it before, you owe it to yourself to set aside an hour and two minutes in order to watch it.  You’ve never see anything like it before.

Finally, I should note that Robot Monster’s hero was played by George Nader, who actually did go on to appear in several mainstream films.  Despite his good looks and talent (which may not be obvious in this film but which he did have), George Nader struggled to get starring roles in Hollywood, where he was often dismissed as just being a member of Rock Hudson’s entourage.  (It’s been theorized that Nader struggled because the studios feared that giving him too big of a role would lead to the gossip magazines writing about Nader’s relationship with Hudson, though the two were just friends.  Nader was in a relationship with Hudson’s private secretary, Mark Miller, from 1947 until Nader’s death in 2001.)  Nader finally left Hollywood and went on to have a pretty successful career in Europe.  He was perhaps best known for playing secret agent Jerry Cotton in a series of films in the 60s.

Happy October and enjoy Robot Monster!

(On another note, this movie was a favorite of TSL Contributor Gary Loggins.  Gary passed away a year ago today so this showing is dedicated to his memory.  We miss you, Gary!)

Horror TV Review: The Walking Dead 11.6 “On the Inside” (dir by Greg Nicotero)


Who is Connie?

I have to admit that, when I started watching the latest episode of The Walking Dead a few days ago, I had absolutely no idea who Connie was.  As I’ve stated before, I actually stopped watching the show after Carl Grimes shot himself during season 8.  With Carl dead, it really didn’t seem like it was going to be worth following the show to whatever bleak destination it was heading towards.  So, I sat out two and a half seasons.  I missed the final appearance of characters like Rick Grimes and Michonne.  I missed the death of Jesus during season 9, which was unfortunate since that was one character who really got on my nerves.  And, most importantly, as far as this week’s show was concerned, I missed the introduction of Connie.

And yet, despite not really knowing who she was, I was enthralled by her storyline.  Connie (played by Lauren Ridloff) and Virgil (Kevin Carroll) spent the majority of this week’s episode trapped in a house.  On the outside of the house, there were Walkers.  On the inside was something even more frightening, a group of feral human beings who, though still living, had reverted to mindless cannibalism.  For the first time in a long time, The Walking Dead was genuinely scary.  The Walkers, who are far too often treated as an afterthought on this show, were a legitimate threat and the feral people made me jump every time they emerged from the shadows.  I was frightened for Connie and Virgil, despite not being totally sure who they were.  For once, I cared about whether or not the film’s human characters would survive and it’s been a while since I’ve been able to say that about The Walking Dead or, for that matter, any other zombie-themed show or movie.

Director Greg Nicotero deserves a lot of credit for this episode.  He did a wonderful job maintaining suspense and an atmosphere of impending doom.  The scenes of Connie and Virgil in the house felt a bit like an homage to the Dead films of George Romero.  Beyond the location, the twin threats of the Walkers and the Ferals brought to mind one of the main themes of Romero’s work — i.e., there’s not that big of a difference between the dead and the living.  One could argue that the Ferals are just getting an early start on their eventual fate.

The Connie/Virgil storyline was so intense that I was actually happy for the somewhat more subdued scenes involving Darryl and the Reapers.  They have me a chance to catch my breath, even if the Reapers themselves still haven’t really established themselves as anything more than just this season’s group of misdirected bad guys.  Naturally, I felt bad for Frost but, at this point, I can’t really say that I’m surprised by his fate.  There’s been many Frosts over the past few years of The Walking Dead.

On The Inside was definitely a triumph.  It reminded me of why, way back in 2010, people were so excited about this show in the first place.  Hopefully, this will bode well for the rest of season 11.