For today’s Horror on the Lens offering, we present you with The Night Flier, a 1997 adaptation of a Stephen King short story. Miguel Ferrer plays a sleazy tabloid reporter, named Richard Dees, who is pursuing a serial killer who could very well be a vampire.
I have to admit that I’m not quite as big a Stephen King fan as some of my fellow writers here at the Shattered Lens. In fact, I’ve been meaning to write a “10 Reasons Stephen King Is Overrated” article for a while. Far too often, it seems like Stephen King adaptations manage to capture all of King’s weaknesses without making use of any of his strengths. However, The Night Flier is one of the more effective King adaptations. It’s no Shining but it’s still better than The Shawshank Redemption. Plus, it features a great lead performance from Miguel Ferrer.
In many ways, 2014 was the year of Hercules. Or, at the very least, it could have been the year of Hercules. Neither one of the two Hercules film released this year exactly managed to set the American box office on fire. Of the two, The Legend of Hercules was memorable largely for being forgettable while the Dwayne Johnson-starring Herculeswas far better than any film directed by Brett Ratner has any right to be.
Neither one of them, however, can really hold a candle to the 1961 film, Hercules In The Haunted World. In this Italian film, Hercules (Reg Park) discovers that his lover Princess Deianira has gone insane so he goes to Hades in order to get the Stone of Forgetfulness, so he can use it to cure her. The story’s really not that important. What is important is that this visually stunning film was the first color film to be directed by Mario Bava and that the film’s villain is played by Christopher Lee.
Remember Annabelle, the tres creepy doll from The Conjuring?
Well, she’s back and she’s starring in a film of her very own! Annabelle is the first horror film to be given a wide release this October and, judging from the commercials, New Line Cinema and Warner Bros. are really hoping that you’ll remember just how scary and effective The Conjuring was when it comes time to decide whether you want to see Annabelle or Gone Girl this weekend.
Of course, Annabelle actually have very little do with The Conjuring. Though Father Perez, the token concerned priest played by Tony Amendola, mentions Ed and Lorraine Warren, neither one of them actually appears in the film. Neither do any of the other characters or ghosts from The Conjuring. The only link between the two films is that doll.
Taking place in 1969, Annabelle is an origin story of sorts. Doctor John Gordon (Ward Horton) buys a doll for his pregnant wife, Mia (Annabelle Wallis). The doll looks evil from the minute that Mia unwraps it but, according to the film, it was actually harmless until a psychotic hippie girl (Tree O’Toole) bled on it. That blood seeped into the doll’s eye and the next thing you know…
No, I’m not going to spoil it for you. In fact, it’s really not necessary for me to spoil it for you because I imagine you can probably guess everything that’s going to happen. If you’ve ever seen a haunted house film, you know exactly what’s going to happen when John goes to work and Mia gets left in the house alone. If you’ve ever seen a demonic possession film, you can guess what’s going to happen when Mia happens to stumble across the occult book store next door. And, if you’ve ever seen any film, you can guess that the book store is managed by a sassy mystic played by Alfre Woodard.
That’s right! There’s nothing surprising about Annabelle!
But that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Horror films are unique in that they often times actually benefit from being so predictable. You watch in dread because you know that something terrible is going to happen even though the characters in the film do not. You know enough to yell, “Don’t open that door!” but the characters in the film don’t. That’s exactly what makes a film like Annabelle scary.
The Conjuring, I thought, was not only a great horror film but it was also one of the best films of 2013. That’s because, along with being a scary movie, The Conjuring also dealt quite intelligently with very real issues of faith and family. The Conjuring was fun to watch because it was scary but it stayed with you because it was full of subtext. Annabelle, on the other hand, is a film without subtext. Everything important about Annabelle can be found right on the surface.
Annabelle is a film that exists solely to scare you and how much you enjoy it will probably depend on how much you enjoy horror films to begin with. The shock scenes are handled well, with an emphasis on sudden noise on the soundtrack and intimidating shadows appearing in the background. Everything that distinguished The Conjuring — the attention to detail, the lively performances, and the imaginative plotting — has been pushed to the side to make room for the next scare.
As a result, Annabelle is one of those films that makes you jump while you’re watching it but doesn’t stick around in your head afterwards. If you’re a fan of the horror genre and like a good scare, you’ll probably find something to enjoy in Annabelle. (It’s no Devil’s Due but it’s still better than the latest Paranormal Activity film.) If you’re not a horror fan — well, then you probably weren’t planning on seeing Annabelle in the first place.
So, I think it may be fair to say that of most of the posters on this great site, I am probably the one who least enjoys the horror genre…or at least is never as excited about it as everyone else. It isn’t that I do not like horror films – there are quite a few I really love – but I just expect a lot from them. Probably – unfairly – more than I expect from other films. Why? Because I honestly think that when done right, horror films can be some of the most emotionally affecting films from any genre. But when done wrong – as I think far too many of them are – it just feels cheap and manipulative – and as someone who loves film, who loves how they can generate empathy and tell interesting stories, it always just feels like a slap to the face.
This love/hate relationship usually makes me hesitant to watch most horror films, which of course is an issue come October. This month is wall to wall horror from 12:01AM on the 1st – to midnight on Halloween. With this comes the pressure to watch a ton of horror films, and although in the past I have watched a few, I’ve never taken part in any sort of marathon that so many bloggers partake in this time of year…until now. This is part one – of what I hope will be a month long series – of quick reviews for horror films I watch this month. I hope to watch at least one a day.
October 1st: ‘Thale’ (dir. Aleksander Nordaas)
A very low budget Norwegian fantasy/horror film, with a lot of interesting ideas, that sadly doesn’t execute on enough of them to reach any level of greatness…which I think was possible.
‘Thale’ is about two friends, working in a crime scene cleaning service, who stumble upon a hidden basement at one of the locations they have been hired to clean. Within they find a lab of sorts, and a beautiful young woman who is unable to speak – and is most certainly more than she appears to be. The result is a rather unique horror film with fantasy elements; one that thrives on atmosphere for the first hour or so, building a genuine level of suspense and mystery. It is an intriguing story, one that is slow to build but never boring. There is certainly a lot under the surface.
The only real issue I had was that there is narration throughout that tries a bit too hard to add depth to the story, both narratively and thematically, without much success. Mainly because the exposition within would benefit more from a ‘show don’t tell’ approach – and also because the actual narrative comes off as so simple that many of the themes expressed through the narration have nothing to do with what we have actually been shown.
This isn’t too big of an issue really, and I can’t fault it for trying to give more meaning to the story, but had it executed on some of the ideas it alludes to under the surface than maybe this wouldn’t have been an issue at all – especially if it had been a half hour longer, and explored the fantasy element in more detail.
Still, the performances are very good and – given its very low budget – so are the effects and overall production. It certainly has its flaws, but it still warrants a recommendation.
Oct. 2nd: ‘Pontypool’ (dir. Bruce McDonald)
‘Pontypool’ is a mostly lean – though often convoluted – and creative horror film that builds slowly and contains just the right dash of humor. It is at times essentially ‘Welcome to Night Vale’ in film form.
It stars Stephen McHattie as an ex-shock jock who has reached a point in his career where he is stuck doing an early morning radio gig in a small Canadian town. He is quick to try to cause a stir, but his producer reminds him that the listeners just want to know the weather. As the morning slowly passes by the station begins to get weird reports of people, herds of people, swarming the streets. Whats seems to them to initially be a joke begins to turn into a life or death emergency situation where a virus is infecting the town, keeping the workers at the studio locked indoors, trying to figure out how it all started.
This isn’t the scariest horror film you will ever see, neither is it the most suspenseful – yet the development of the story, the unraveling mystery and the urgency of the performances make it an absorbing viewing experience. Things do start to get a little convoluted as we begin to better understand how the “virus” infecting people is being spread. The film seems to be making it up as it goes, and ironically it can’t seem to think of the rights words to explain what is actually happening.
But it does managed to create an interesting subtext on how language has been simplified and diminished by gossip, social websites and the media. It would also probably benefit from multiple viewings. But for now, I recommend you at least watch it once.
Oct. 3rd: ‘Pumpkinhead’ (dir. Stan Winston)
‘Pumpkinhead’ is a creepy, cliche and cheesy as hell horror film about revenge, that manages to overcome all its faults with its brilliant creature design, a great central performance, and an emotional core that gives all the supernatural violence some resonance. The result isn’t a masterpiece – by any stretch – but it is a damn near perfect horror film for Halloween/October – especially with its eerie supernatural aesthetics.
The film stars Lance Henriksen as Ed Harley, a single father raising his son on a farm in the south. One day a group of teens (including a few blondes and a douchey “bad boy”) arrive in town. Their destination? A cabin in the woods…of course. On their way they encounter Harley at a local store he owns, which accidentally results in his son being killed by one of the teens in a dirt bike accident. The group heads for the cabin, fearing the repercussions, while Harley tracks down a creepy old lady who, according to local legend, can summon a demon-like creature to avenge the wrong doing done to a man.
From there we get a rather unoriginal creature feature – as the demon, called Pumpkinhead, hunts down the group of teens one by one. What kept this interesting, for me, was the structure of the events of the film and the development of Henriksen’s character. Henriksen is a great actor, and the bond that is built between him and his son, and the emotions he displays as he struggles with his son’s death and the revenge he seeks, manages to ground the film and gives it enough of an emotional relevancy to excuse the cheesiness of the supernatural horror elements – and some truly shitty dialogue.
On top of that are the great spooky horror aesthetics and atmosphere – moody lighting, fog…pumpkins – as well as the awesome design of the Pumpkinhead by special effects legend Stan Winston (‘Aliens’, ‘Terminator’) – who actually directed the film. It all adds up to an above average horror flick that I recommend everyone watch this October.
For today’s horror on the lens, we offer up 1965’s The Beach Girls and the Monster. In this one, a monster that might be a mutated barracuda is hiding out on the beach and killing teenagers. Can Dr. Otto Lindsay (played by the film’s director, Jon Hall) figure out how to defeat the monster? Will Otto’s son Richard (Arnold Lessing) ever stop surfing long enough to get back to studying science? Will Otto’s much younger wife Vicky (Sue Casey) seduce the troubled and crippled sculptor Mark (Walker Edmiston)? And will it ever occur to anyone to just go to a different beach?
Complete with a ludicrous monster, a great soundtrack, tons of dancing, melodramatic acting, and a twist ending that will surprise no one, The Beach Girls and the Monster is low-budget favorite of mine. It’s also, I think, a perfect movie to watch on the 3rd of October.
All Souls Day was part of the wave of zombie films that continues to flood the direct-to-video (and at times straight to cable) market. This particular zombie movie was written by Mark A. Altman who also wrote the campy and very B-movie-like House of the Dead 2. This was a zombie flick which actually improved on Uwe Boll’s own House of the Dead that doesn’t really come as a surprise. All Souls Day was Altman’s second try at another zombie movie and while this second attempt wasn’t as fun as his previous one it still managed to be a watchable and interesting zombie movie.
The film’s set in a dusty Mexican town that hides a dark secret from its past. A young couple (played by Marisa Ramirez and Travis Wester) happen upon what seems like an abandoned town. They soon come across a funeral procession and when they inadvertently interrupt the ritual all hell literally breaks loose. It doesn’t help the couple that the only person who seems to be real in this town was the sheriff whose own past ties in with the secret of the town. It was very good to see genre veteran David Keith in the role of the town sheriff. His limited time in the movie was pretty good.
When the town’s people (who by now have shown themselves to be zombies) begin to lay siege on the young couple in the town’s only hotel the rest of the movie gradually shows more of what made this particular Mexican town a death trap for any passerby who happen to come across it on All Souls Day. Soon enough help comes in the form of the young couple’s two friends who arrive in town only to get themselves stuck in the same dire situation the original couple find themselves in.
The resolution of the movie was handled well and it brought a nice supernatural origin and reason as to why the town’s population has turned into flesh-eating zombies. The performances in the film could be seen as being mixed. The more veteran performers like Jeffrey Combs, David Keith, Danny Trejo (as the town’s manipulative patriarch) and Laura Herring perform their roles well without being too over-the-top. The actors playing the pair of young couples on the other hand go from very good to awful in the span of moments in some of the scenes. It’s really this mixed bag in the cast’s performance which keeps All Souls Day from turning into one of those hidden gems in a hill of crap that most zombie flicks turn out to be.
The gore effects in this film was pretty good in the small amount of sequences where the zombies end up doing what they do best once they get a hold of someone. While I was hoping for more of the grue in this particular zombie movie I wasn’t too surprised why it didn’t have more. Other than the pair of young couple there really wasn’t much living people for these zombies to munch on. The film itself show’s it’s low-budget origins in that it looks like something one would see premiere on a random Saturday night on the SyFy Channel. The film actually did premiere on that channel when it was still called SciFi. It’s a look that says TV instead of film, but despite that little nitpick it doesn’t distract much from the experience.
Now, most zombie films of the low-budget variety tend to just have badly done make-up effects. With All Souls Day the filmmakers seem to have done an end-around that budgetary problem by taking a page out of the classic Italian zombie flicks of the 1980’s by making these undead dry, decayed creatures. It’s something that worked well for the Fulci zombies and here it works as well.
All Souls Day was not a great zombie film by any stretch of the imagination, but it had enough entertaining moments and some genuine scary sequences to make it an enjoyable hour and a half of horror viewing on any October night.
Today’s horror film is a true classic of its kind, the 1953 science fiction epic Robot Monster.
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?
All of those questions, and more, are cheerfully left unanswered but that’s a large part of this odd, zero-budget film’s considerable charm. 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.
Hi there and welcome to October! This is our favorite time of the year here at the Shattered Lens because October is horror month. For the past three years, 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.
So, let’s start things off with the 1959 cult classic The Hideous Sun Demon. In The Hideous Sun Demon, a scientist named Gil (played by Robert Clarke, who also wrote and directed) is exposed to radiation. Perhaps not surprisingly, this does not turn out well for Gil. Now, whenever Gil is exposed to direct sunlight, he turns into a scaly and murderous monster. Struggling to control his new monstrous side and slowly losing his grip on his own sanity, Gil retreats to a seaside town where he spends most of his time sitting in the dark. He only emerges from his house at night and then only so he can go down to a bar and listen to the sultry Trudy sing a song. However, the sun always rises…
The Hideous Sun Demon may not be a great film but it’s perfect for a little Halloween fun. Robert Clarke is sympathetic in the lead role and, while the Sun Demon might just be a man in a rubber suit, that’s all just a part of the film’s charm.
So, let’s start October by pulling down the shades, blocking out the sun, and enjoying The Hideous Sun Demon!
Hi there and greetings from beautiful Lake Texoma. Having recently completed both 3 months of covering Big Brother for the Big Brother Blog and my series of Back to School reviews for this site, I am currently on a much-needed vacation with my wonderful boyfriend. However, you all know that I would never let a little thing like being on vacation keep me from watching and then reviewing whatever is currently playing down at the closest available theater.
For instance, last night, we saw The Maze Runner at the Cinemark 14 in Denton, Texas. The Cinemark is a really nice theater. The seats are comfortable. The people working there were nice and polite. The movie sounded great. Even the audience was surprisingly polite. Only a few people came in late and, for the most part, everyone refrained from talking during the film. Good for them and good for you, Cinemark 14!
As for the movie itself…
The Maze Runner tells the story of Thomas (Dylan O’Brien), a teenager who wakes up one day in a grassy clearing that is encircled by gigantic, gray walls. Thomas finds himself surrounded by several other teenage boys. Unable to remember anything about his past (but haunted by chaotic dreams that suggest that he is the part of some sort of lab experiment), Thomas initially reacts by trying to run. However, he is quickly tackled and introduced to his new home.
The grassy area is known as the Glade and the boys who live there are known as Gladers. Their leader is Alby (Aml Ameen) and, as he quickly explains to Thomas, he has created a tediously collectivist society where everyone has his assigned place and his assigned duty. (And yes, that is the correct pronoun. There are no girls among the Gladers.) Alby explains that, behind the walls, there lies a maze that is patrolled by terrifying creatures known as Grievers. The most athletic and intelligent of the Gladers are allowed to become Runners. Everyday, the Runners run through the maze and memorize every twist and turn.
Thomas, needless to say, wants to be a runner. And it’s good that he does because otherwise, the film would be kind of boring.
Anyway, along the way to becoming a runner, Thomas has more visions of an autocratic woman (Patricia Clarkson) and he also manages to make an enemy out of Gally (Will Poulter), a Glader who never wants to leave Glade. Eventually, a girl named Teresa (Kaya Scodelario) shows up, along with a note saying that she’s the last one and no one else will be showing up in the Glade.
Now, at this point, you may be tempted to ask, “What’s going on?”
Well, you’ll have to wait a few years to find out because The Maze Runner is just part one of a trilogy. Much like The Hobbit, Divergent, and The Hunger Games, it answers just enough questions to keep the audience satisfied while still ending with a cliffhanger. So, if you do see The Maze Runner, be sure to pay attention because you don’t want to forget everything that happened before the sequel comes out sometime next year.
There’s a lot of good things that can be said about The Maze Runner. For the most part, the actors did a good job. The grievers were scary. The maze looked impressive, though it’s hard not to feel that the film did not take full narrative advantage of it.
However, to be honest, I have seen so many recent adaptations of dystopian YA books that, with the exception of The Hunger Games and Catching Fire, they’re all starting to blend together. The Maze Runner was well made but there really wasn’t anything about it that distinguished it from the pack. Without the presence of a star like Jennifer Lawrence or the satirical subtext that distinguished The Hunger Games, The Maze Runner ultimately just felt like your typical franchise starter, not so much a story but instead just an extended prologue.
Again, it’s not necessarily a bad film. It’s based on a book and, undoubtedly, a lot of details did not make it from the page to the screen but there’s still enough there that even people who haven’t read the book will probably be able to follow the story. Me, I’m a Texas girl and, therefore, it’s a part of my heritage to appreciate any film that features an individual taking on an elitist dystopia. But, in the end, the film is never quite as memorable as you want it to be.
Perhaps we’ve all just been spoiled by The Hunger Games…
Well, it’s here! This is my 80th and final Back to School review! As I’ve mentioned before, I originally thought I’d be able to do all of these reviews in just one week. Instead, it’s taken me five weeks but you know what? I’ve had fun doing these reviews and I hope that you’ve enjoyed reading them. It’s been interesting to see how teen films have progressed and changed over the decades. We started this series with 1946’s I Accuse My Parentsand now, we end it with a film from 2014 that might as well be called I Accuse Screech.
Technically, it’s called The Unauthorized Saved By The Bell Story but that’s kind of an unwieldy name, isn’t it? I can’t really see myself typing that title over and over again. So, for the purposes of this review, this movie is called I Accuse Screech.
First off, some background. When I was a kid, I used to watch Saved By The Bell: The New Class. What’s weird is that, when I look back at it, I think even then I knew that the show wasn’t very good. I knew that the jokes were frequently not funny. I knew that the story lines were predictable. I think I was even aware that it was strange how frequently actors were either dropped from or added to the cast. Don’t get me wrong. The show was (and still is) oddly watchable but it was never any good and I am pretty sure I knew that. Then again, maybe that’s just way I want to remember it. Being a fan of Saved By The Bell: The New Class isn’t exactly something that you brag about. However, one thing that I can be sure of is that, even when I was young, I knew that Screech Powers sucked.
As played by Dustin Diamond, Screech was the principal’s assistant at Bayside High. He was also probably the most annoying character ever to be unleashed onto the psyches of impressionable children and tweens. Screech spoke in a high, squeaky voice and could usually be relied upon to do something incredibly stupid. Whenever he fucked things up (and he managed to do this several times in each episode), he would say something like, “Zoinks!” Everybody hated Screech.
Now, I have to admit that I never actually saw an episode of the classic original Saved By The Bell until after the New Class was already off the air. And that’s when I discovered the adventures of Zack Morris, A.C. Slater, Kelly Kapowski, Jessie Spano, and … Screech. That’s right, you can’t escape Screech!
And here’s the thing — the original Saved By The Bell is one of those shows that really is kind of terrible and yet you can’t stop watching. It’s addictively bad, the type of show that you watch with a combination of shock, horror, and amusement. The original Saved By The Bell is the television equivalent of The Room or Troll 2. It’s terrible but it’s fun.
So, you would think that a made-for-tv movie about what went on behind-the-scenes of Saved By The Bell would also be terrible yet fun. That’s certainly the way that it was advertised by Lifetime. Lifetime appeared to be hoping that their version of the story behind Saved By The Bell would give them a Sharknado of their very own.
And hey, it should have been great. There’s an interesting story there. How would a bunch of teens handle suddenly becoming famous? How would they handle the pressure of being famous while also appearing on a show so bad that it would essentially run the risk of ruining their lives, not to mention their careers? How would they handle having to grow up both on TV and in real life?
Those are the questions that we expected to have answered by this movie but instead…
Well, let’s just say that I Accuse Screech!
In 2009, Dustin Diamond published a “memoir” called Behind The Bell and oh my God, it is literally the worst fucking book ever written. Words escape me to describe just how terrible this book is. Essentially, the book is full of Diamond either complaining that his co-stars didn’t like him or bragging about the fact that he used to have sex with 12 year-olds at Disneyland. Diamond accuses his castmates of smoking weed. (Wow, teenagers smoking weed. MY GOD, THE SCANDAL!) Diamoned accuses his castmates of having sex. (OH MY GOD, TEENAGERS HAVING SEX!) In other words, the book is pretty much Dustin Diamond complaining about the fact that everyone but him was having fun on the set of Saved By The Bell.
So, of course, if you’re going to make a movie about Saved By The Bell, where would you go for your source material? Well, you can’t go to any of the stars because, with the exception of Dustin Diamond, they all have successful careers outside of Saved By The Bell. And you can’t go to Dennis Haskins because, seriously, who cares what Mr. Belding thought?
Lifetime decided to use Behind the Bell as their source material. Unfortunately, Diamond himself has admitted that the book was a pack of lies. As a result, most of the more salacious (and therefore entertaining) material could not actually be used in the movie. The Lifetime film is full of hints of bad behavior but no direct evidence. At one point, we see the actor playing Mario Lopez flirting with an extra in a deserted classroom. In another scene, the girls get snarky with each other because they all like Mark-Paul Gosselaar. But, beyond those hints, we don’t get to see any of the book’s more sordid accusations. Instead, all we get are a lot of scenes of the actor playing Dustin Diamond looking annoyed with his castmates.
(Because, literally, the only verifiable, non-slanderous thing to be found in the book is that apparently Dustin Diamond was whiny, bitter, and jealous…)
As a result, the film seems to be suggesting that Saved By The Bell was put together and performed by the most boring people on Earth. The end result is not only the worst film to have appeared on Lifetime but perhaps one of the worst films of all time.
Why is it so bad?
I accuse Screech!
(Incidentally, if you want to learn more about Saved By The Bell, I suggest checking out the best Saved By The Bell review site around, The Summer of Morris!)
And, on that note of failure, we conclude this series of 80 Back to School reviews! Thank you, everyone, for your indulgence and your patience! I hope everyone enjoyed reading them as much as I enjoyed writing them.
