Horror Song Of The Day: Gangster Rock by Felony


There are several reasons why I love 1981’s Graduation Day.  The lengthy roller rink scene in which Linnea Quigley is chased by the killer and a band named Felony enthusiastically performs Gangster Rock is a huge one.

Scenes that I Love: John Grant Meet Doc Tydon in Wake In Fright


107 years ago today, the great actor Donald Pleasence was born.

Pleasence is, of course, best-known for playing Dr. Loomis in Halloween. He’s so identified with that franchise that it’s always seemed appropriate that he celebrated his birthday in October. And usually, to celebrate his birthday, we would share a scene of Dr. Loomis yelling at or shooting Michael Myers.

This year, though, I’m going to do something a little different and share a scene from a different type of horror movie, 1971’s Wake in Fright. In this Australian film, Donald Pleasence plays Doc Tydon, an alcoholic doctor who lives in the Australian outback and who befriends John Grant (Gary Bond), a naïve school teacher who has become stranded in a town full of people who don’t have much respect for Grant’s intellectual pursuits. Actually, befriends is perhaps the wrong word. Tydon allows Grant to stay with him but it soon become apparent that Tydon, like almost everyone else in this movie, might have a less-than-friendly agenda of his own.

Wake In Fright features what may be Pleasence’s best performance. In the scene below, Tydon and Grant meet for the first time and Pleasence shows that he was capable of far more than just playing Blofeld and Dr. Loomis.

4 Shots From 4 Films: Special Ti West Edition


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

Today, the Shattered Lens wishes a happy birthday to director Ti West!

It’s time for….

4 Shots From 4 Ti West Films

The House of the Devil (2009, dir by Ti West)

X (2022, dir by Ti West)

Pearl (2022, dir by Ti West)

MaXXXine (2024, dir by Ti West)

Horror Film Review: The Evil Dead (dir. by Sam Raimi)


“I fear that the only way to stop those possessed by the spirits of the book is through the act of… bodily dismemberment.” — Professor Knowby

The Evil Dead is the kind of movie that feels like it should not have become a classic, at least not by conventional standards. It was made cheaply, filmed under brutal conditions, packed with unknown actors, and built around an extremely simple premise: five college friends head to an isolated cabin in the woods, unwittingly awaken an ancient evil, and spend the rest of the night being torn apart by demonic forces. Yet more than four decades later, Sam Raimi’s 1981 horror debut remains one of the most energetic, inventive, and genuinely nasty independent films ever made. It is rough around the edges in ways that are impossible to ignore, but those rough edges are a major part of its appeal. The Evil Dead feels handmade, hungry, and a little bit unhinged.

The story starts with Ash Williams, his girlfriend Linda, Ash’s sister Cheryl, and their friends Scotty and Shelly arriving at a remote Tennessee cabin for what is supposed to be a relaxing getaway. It is one of the most familiar setups in horror history now, but Raimi and his collaborators made it feel threatening before the real violence even begins. The cabin is decrepit, damp, and isolated to an almost absurd degree. There is no real sense of civilization nearby. The forest itself seems hostile, with tangled trees, strange sounds, and an atmosphere that makes the woods feel less like a location and more like a living organism surrounding the characters.

The group soon discovers a cellar beneath the cabin, where they find an ancient book bound in flesh, a dagger, and a tape recording left by an archaeologist. The recording describes the Necronomicon, a book of demonic incantations, and naturally the characters make the worst possible decision by playing the tape aloud. That act releases the evil presence that has been lurking in the forest, and the movie moves quickly from creepy cabin story to all-out supernatural nightmare. The concept is simple, but it gives Raimi room to focus on mood, visual invention, and escalation rather than complicated mythology.

What makes The Evil Dead special is how aggressively Raimi directs it. Even in his first feature, he had a style that was impossible to mistake for anyone else’s. The camera is constantly moving, lunging through the woods, creeping around corners, tilting at unnatural angles, and racing toward people as if the audience has become the demon’s point of view. The famous “demon-cam” shots are still startling because of how physical they feel. The camera does not glide elegantly. It charges. It crashes through the environment. It feels like something has broken loose and is hunting the characters.

That restless filmmaking gives the movie a personality far larger than its budget. Raimi turns limitations into an advantage. The cabin becomes a maze of shadows, floorboards, trap doors, windows, and hidden spaces. A cheap-looking hallway can suddenly become terrifying because the editing, sound design, and camera movement make it feel unstable. Raimi understands that horror does not always come from seeing a monster clearly. Sometimes it comes from the sense that the camera itself has stopped behaving normally, that the space around the characters is warping, and that even the trees outside are watching them.

The special effects are another major reason the film still has such a devoted following. They are obviously practical, often messy, and occasionally so exaggerated that they cross into dark comedy, but they have a tactile quality that modern digital effects often lack. The possessed characters look genuinely diseased and wrong: pale skin, dead eyes, rotting makeup, distorted faces, and unnatural movements. When the deadites attack, they do not simply become generic zombies. They taunt their friends, laugh at them, imitate their voices, and enjoy causing emotional pain. That cruel playfulness makes them more disturbing than ordinary monsters.

The makeup work on the possessed Cheryl, Shelly, and Linda remains especially effective because it turns familiar faces into grotesque masks. Ellen Sandweiss, Betsy Baker, and Theresa Tilly bring an unsettling intensity to those transformations, switching from frightened victims to shrieking, mocking demons. The performances are broad and theatrical, but that is exactly what the material needs. Nothing in The Evil Dead is subtle for very long. The film keeps pushing the characters past the point of normal human behavior until they are laughing, screaming, convulsing, and bleeding all over the cabin.

Bruce Campbell’s Ash is interesting because he is not yet the wisecracking, chainsaw-handed cult hero he would become in the sequels. In The Evil Dead, Ash is mostly an ordinary young man who slowly realizes he is trapped in a situation beyond comprehension. Campbell is still charismatic, and there are flashes of the physical comedy and wild-eyed determination that would define the character later, but this version of Ash is more vulnerable. He panics, hesitates, and suffers. By the end, he looks exhausted in a way that feels earned, covered in sweat, dirt, blood, and trauma.

That difference gives the original movie its own identity within the larger Evil Dead series. Evil Dead II would remake and expand many of the first film’s ideas with more money, more comedy, and a much more overtly cartoonish sensibility. Army of Darkness would take Ash into full fantasy-adventure mode. Those later films are arguably more polished and more immediately entertaining, especially for viewers who love Campbell’s comedic performance. But The Evil Dead has a rawness that the sequels never tried to reproduce. It is a horror movie first, even when its excesses become funny.

The film’s tonal shifts are one of its most fascinating qualities. Raimi clearly understands that grotesque violence can become absurd if it is pushed far enough, and the movie occasionally seems aware of its own madness. A possessed hand reaches through a window. A character gets stabbed with a pencil in one of the film’s most infamous scenes. Bodies erupt in streams of colored goo rather than realistic blood. The final destruction of the deadites is so elaborate that it feels like Raimi and his effects team were determined to empty every container of slime they had available. It is disgusting, but it is also gleefully imaginative.

At the same time, The Evil Dead can be more unpleasant than people remember. Its treatment of Cheryl in the woods is difficult to watch and remains one of the film’s most controversial moments. The scene is meant to establish the cruelty and violation associated with the demonic force, but it is not necessary to enjoy the movie, and it has aged badly compared with the more comic-book brutality of later entries. Raimi himself would move away from that kind of material in the sequels. It is worth acknowledging because the scene changes the tone of the film and may be a deal-breaker for some viewers.

The sound design helps make the movie feel more oppressive than its modest production would suggest. The woods groan, doors bang, voices echo from impossible places, and the demonic chants on the tape recording create a sense that something ancient has been invited into the cabin. Joseph LoDuca’s score adds another layer of unease, using shrill strings and harsh musical stabs to make even quiet scenes feel unstable. The soundtrack is not trying to be elegant. It is trying to make the viewer tense up, and it succeeds.

There is also something inspiring about the movie’s independent spirit. Raimi, Campbell, producer Robert Tapert, and their crew famously made the film through determination, ingenuity, and a willingness to endure conditions that sound miserable in retrospect. You can feel that effort on screen. Every strange camera angle, handmade prop, and splattering effect carries the energy of filmmakers trying to prove they can do something bigger than their resources should allow. The Evil Dead does not hide its budget. It turns that budget into part of its legend.

For horror fans, the movie is essential not because it is flawless, but because it is so alive. It captures the feeling of discovering a forbidden VHS tape or stumbling into a midnight screening where the audience is laughing, cringing, and yelling at the screen. It is scary in places, silly in others, and relentlessly committed to its own bizarre nightmare logic. Raimi would go on to make superhero movies, westerns, thrillers, and studio blockbusters, but the wild visual imagination that defined his career is already fully visible here.

The Evil Dead is a scrappy, blood-soaked supernatural horror movie that earns its reputation through pure filmmaking nerve. Its story may be basic, its acting may be uneven, and some of its material has not aged gracefully, but the movie’s pace, practical effects, demonic imagery, and manic camerawork remain unforgettable. It feels less like a carefully manufactured horror product than a curse someone managed to put on film. That is why it still works: Raimi and his team did not just make a movie about evil invading a cabin. They made the entire movie feel possessed.

October Positivity: Operation Unite (dir by Donald James Parker)


2024’s Operation Unite opens with a man standing at the front of a church and announcing that God has told him that one of the members, a blank-faced young man named Brent (Greg Carnes), is going to be a very important person in the future.  Everyone in the church is really excited, despite the fact that Brent comes across as being a little goony.

Meanwhile, at another church, Pastor Friar (Brian Scott Gilmore), peaches against “charismatic” churches.  His daughter, Kaitlyn (Kaylee Keller), feels somewhat dissatisfied with her father’s sermon but she can’t really put it into words.  Kaitlyn is 20 and she knows that she should be free to pick her own church to attend but, since she’s living at home, she has to do what her father wants.  Her father wants her to attend his mainstream Protestant church.  So be it.

When Brent sees Kaitlyn in a coffeeshop, he tells his friend that God has just told him that he’s meant to be with Kaitlyn.  Normally, I’d say “Yikes!” but this film presents this as being a positive development.  Kaitlyn leaves without talking to Brent but Brent says it doesn’t matter.  If God wants them to be together, he’ll run into Kaitlyn again.  Double yikes!

And Brent does run into Kaitlyn again.  Soon, they’re dating!  But how will Pastor Friar react when he discovers that his daughter is dating the newly-appointed youth minister of a charismatic church?

This film is about the conflict between different branches of Protestantism.  That’s actually kind of an interesting idea and that’s certainly something you would never expect to see a mainstream film attempt to tackle.  Most movies just tend to assume that all protestants are a part of the same generic church.  In this film, Friar views the charismatics as being heretics and the charismatics view Pastor Friar and his congregation as being not in touch with God.  Myself, I’m a Catholic so, as far as I’m concerned, they’re all heretics.

Interesting premise aside, this has all of the problems that one usually finds with low-budget religious films.  The pace is deadly slow, the acting is amateurish, and the script is full of little character moments that ring as being either forced or hollow.  I’ve seen a few Donald James Parker films and this definitely is one.  Conversations tend to go on forever.  It’s obvious that the filmmakers had no idea how to use something editing to create narrative momentum.  Nearly every shot is static and uninteresting.  It’s honestly difficult to watch.

Like a lot of Parker’s film, there are moments in the film when a surprising and rather disagreeable hostility bubbles up.  When Brent’s youth group singing a hymn, Brent responds by scolding them for not sounding properly enthusiastic and it really does seem to go on forever.  When Brent and Pastor Friar debate their beliefs, Brent comes across as if he’s about to take a swing at the man who he wants to be his future father-in-law.  Self-righteous, perpetually angry, and kind of dull to look at, Brent is simply not a likable character.  Not even taking into account their religious differences, I felt like Kaitlyn needed to get as far away from Brent as possible.

This movie is all about building a bridge across denominations.  I just hope they eventually found a more reliable engineer than Brent.

Horror on TV: Fear Itself 1.3 “Family Man” (dir by Ronny Yu)


On tonight’s episode of Fear Itself, a family man (Colin Ferguson) and a serial killer (Clifton Collins, Jr) both have near-death experiences and end up switching bodies.  Before you can say “I’m going to take his …. face …. off,” the family man finds himself in prison and the serial killer finds himself living with a family!  Why, it would be almost be funny if not for the fact that the killer specializes in killing families.

This episode aired on June 19th, 2008.  Ronny Yu also directed Freddy vs Jason.

 

October Hacks: Sorority House Guillotine (dir by Gregory Hatanaka)


2026’s Sorority House Guillotine does not feature a guillotine or a sorority house. It does, however, feature a lot of footage from Bikini Guillotine and a monologue about John Cassavetes.

The majority of the film features a group of young women in bikinis hanging out at the pool. One of the women announces that she owns the house and that she’ll be having a party every weekend. Everyone says, “Whooo!” and raises their red Solo cups. Most of the footage is lifted directly from Bikini Guillotine, but it’s also obvious that a lot of it was taken from outtakes that weren’t included in that film. There are a lot of scenes where the women clearly aren’t acting, but are instead just sitting around waiting for the next shot to be set up. Members of the crew appear in the background. The shadow of the director is visible more than a few times. The camera rig is sometimes visible. There are also quite a few scenes where the women aren’t filmed from the best possible angle, and that feels rather unfair to them.

(Everyone, regardless of how attractive, has at least one unflattering angle. I’m usually pretty happy with how I photograph, but I know that if someone snaps a picture while my head is turned a certain way, all anyone is going to notice is my nose. A good director — especially one who is directing a movie in which the entire cast is half-naked for the entire running time — doesn’t include unflattering angles in the finished film.)

Because Bikini Guillotine had a nearly incoherent soundtrack, this film handles things by just featuring voice-overs over the scenes of the girls hanging out by the pool. We hear about how, when you’re young, you don’t worry about anything. “Someone says fried chicken and everyone laughs.” We’re also told that, “Gina asks Tina, ‘Why is everything so blue?’ Tina says, ‘Because you’re looking at it too long.’ ‘No, why is everyone blue?’” Wow, that’s deep. It’s the type of weed-fueled nonsense that I thought was profound during my senior year of high school.

When the voice-over isn’t talking about life, it’s talking about the movies. We’re told that the girls are talking about Charlie Chaplin and Josef von Sternberg. Eventually, they start to talk about how much they love Deep Red and the scene where David Hemmings sees his reflection in a pool of blood. Then we’re told that one of the girls is talking about how much she loves the work of John Cassavetes because Cassavetes just captured life without any studio-imposed drama. These are not the type of things that a bunch of 20-year-old girls are going to be talking about while hanging out at the pool. When I was 20, I loved movies, but I still didn’t talk about them while I was rocking a bikini next to a swimming pool. I was usually too busy trying to make sure I was giving everyone my most flattering angle.

The killer eventually shows up about 55 minutes into this 77-minute film. As opposed to the killer in Bikini Guillotine, he just wears a medical mask and carries a knife in this one. At first, I wondered if maybe the girls had been called back to shoot all-new death scenes, but as I watched, it became obvious that the scenes were actually either filmed auditions or rehearsals for the first film. The kills are once again bloodless.

What an odd movie! For all of its flaws, I do have to admit that the out-of-place voice-overs did add a bit of a surreal edge to the action. With the frequent appearances from the film crew and the cameras, one gets the feeling that Hatanaka was either trying to say something about the filmmaking process or, even more likely, he was trying to fool people into thinking he was saying something about the filmmaking process.

This film mostly just made me want to go hang out by the pool on a nice sunny day. Maybe I’ll even talk about Argento.

SOV Horror Review: City of the Vampires (dir by Ron Bonk)


The city of Braddock has a problem.

1993’s City of the Vampires opens with a news report about Braddock. The city appears to be dying, and no one is sure why. The population numbers have plunged. People are scared to go out at night. Most of the people interviewed for the news story talk about how they can’t wait to get out of Braddock. As I watched, I found myself wondering if this was the same Braddock that would later elect John Fetterman as mayor and appear in those Levi’s commercials. The commercials aired around 2009–2010 and were all about how important it was to save the city of Braddock. I remember watching them and thinking, “Why is some Yankee city more worthy of a commercial than the cities that are struggling in the South?”

(Fetterman, at the time, was branded “America’s coolest mayor” by The Guardian. People forget just how much the media loved Fetterman when he was just another predictable liberal.)

As for the movie, it follows Sam Helling (Matthew Jason Walsh) as he explores the city of Braddock at night. He’s looking for his girlfriend Christine (Anne-Marie O’Keefe), but instead he finds himself in a city that has been taken over by vampires. I should mention that some online sites insist the character is named Sam Helsing, which would seem to be a callback to Dracula’s Dr. Van Helsing. Watching the movie, though, it’s made clear that Sam’s last name is indeed Helling. Leave the Van Helsings out of this.

City of the Vampires is a shot-on-video horror film, and it definitely deserves some credit for its ambition. Whereas most SOV horror films were content to just rip off the latest slasher and zombie pictures, City of the Vampires was obviously meant to be a low-budget action epic. There are a few interesting camera angles. There’s a deliberate echo effect on some of the dialogue, the better to give it a supernatural, dreamlike feel. There are several fairly convincing shots of melting faces. Despite the low budget, the filmmakers were obviously trying to make something memorable. One could easily imagine an alternate universe where City of the Vampires launched a whole franchise about vampires taking over American cities in decline. Look out, Gary, Indiana. The bloodsuckers are coming.

That said, it’s still a shot-on-video horror film, and the low budget really does show in more than a few scenes. The film takes place largely at night, it appears to have been shot at night, and there are several scenes so darkly lit that it’s a struggle to make out what’s happening. As cool as the echo effects were, the soundtrack is generally not that clear, and I sometimes found myself straining to hear what people were talking about. Proper lighting and sound recording have been the downfall of many SOV films. They’re the kind of thing people take for granted until they’re gone.

Still, I’ll give this film credit for its ambition. I always appreciate the effort, even if it’s not fully successful.

The TSL Horror Grindhouse: Amityville La Llorna (dir by Jamie Grefe)


In 2025’s Amityville La Llorona, a couple (played by director Jamie Grefe and Sloane Tower) move into a house and spend the entire time arguing about every little thing.  Eventually, the husband has visions of a mysterious woman (Skya Theobold) and a strange figure who keeps shouting, “Mama!  Mama!”  The film is only 63 minutes.  Unfortunately, the dialogue is largely improvised and it takes forever for anything to actually happen in the movie.  I felt every one of those 63 minutes.

Since there’s really not a helluva lot to say about the film, let’s talk about La Llorona.

The legend of La Llorona is a well-known one in Mexico and the southwestern half of the United States.  It’s a story that I was told by both my mom and my aunts and, as a result, I never went off with a stranger while I was growing up.  Of course, I also had some pretty intense nightmares but that’s kind of the point.  If someone tells you the story of La Llorona and you don’t end up having a nightmare about being drowned by a weeping woman, they didn’t tell the story correctly.

La Llorona was originally named Maria.  She lived, in a rural village, with her family and she was famous for both her beauty and her virtue.  When a wealthy nobleman saw her and immediately proposed to her, Maria accepted.  However, the nobleman’s father was upset that his son was marrying into a poor family and he refused to accept Maria as his daughter-in-law.  Maria and her husband ended up having two sons and living in a house by the river.  Maria’s husband doted on their sons but he ignored her and eventually, Maria learned that he was having an affair.

In a fit of blind rage, Maria drowned her children in the river.  After realizing what she had done, Maria died of grief.  However, when she arrived at the gates of Heaven, she was asked why her children were not with her.  When Maria explained that she had lost them, she was told that she would not be allowed to enter Heaven until she found them.  Now, known as La Llorona (or “the weeping woman”), she wanders the Earth, crying and looking for her children.

Where does one find La Llorona?  It depends on who is telling the story.  Some stories say that you’ll only see her near a body of water.  My mom used to tell me that La Llorona could be anywhere, including under my bed or in the bedroom closet.  Regardless of where you might find her, La Llorona is always wearing her wedding dress and she’s always sobbing.  Approach her and she’ll grab you and either kidnap you or drown you, all the while begging for forgiveness.  Many have seen La Llorona but few have survived to tell the story.

“And that is why we do not talk to strangers,” my mother would say while I looked out the bedroom window, searching for the sight of La Llorona walking through the Texas night.

Though Skya Theobold’s character is credited as being La Llorona in Amityville La Llorana, she doesn’t have much in common with the true La Llorona.  Then again, this film also has nothing to do with any of the previous Amityville films.  Amityville, as either a town or franchise, is never mentioned in this film.  Normally, I’m willing to cut an exploitation film a little bit of slack when it comes to having a misleading title.  Usually, that’s just a part of the game.  In this case, though, it just serves to remind me of how cool a film about the real La Llorona visiting the real Amityville house would have been.

As I mentioned earlier, the dialogue in this film appears to have been improvised.  One of the unfortunate things about improv is that everyone thinks that can they do it.  They think that as long as they’re given a scene to play, they’ll be able to come up with appropriately compelling dialogue.  This film proves that is not always the case.  As I watched Amityville La Llorona, I found myself hoping that Michael Scott would kick open a door and shout, “MICHAEL SCARN, FBI!”

Michael Scarn in Amityville.  Now that would be a movie!

Previous TSL Amityville Reviews:

  1. The Amityville Horror (1979)
  2. Amityville II: The Possession (1981)
  3. The Amityville Cure (1990)
  4. The Amityville Haunting (2011)
  5. Amityville Death House (2015)
  6. Amityville Toolbox (2016)
  7. Amityville: The Awakening (2017)
  8. The Amityville Murders (2018)
  9. Amityville Cop (2021)
  10. Amityville Emanuelle (2023)
  11. Amityville A.I. (2024)

Man-Thing (2005, directed by Brett Leonard)


Kyle Williams (Matthew Le Nevez), the newly appointed sheriff of a Louisiana parish, wants to know why so many people have disappeared in the swamp. Oilman Frederick Schist (Jack Thompson) puts the blame on activist Rene LaRoque (Steve Bastoni), who lives in the swamp and has been vandalizing Schist’s oil rigs. Indigenous shaman Horn (Rawiri Paratene) suggests that the culprit is actually a legendary spirit that lives in and protects the swamp and is angry because Schist cheated the local Seminole chief out of his land.

Loosely based on one of Marvel’s most endearingly weird characters, Man-Thing had a modest budget, decent special effects, and an insanely detailed swamp. It also had a lot more gore and nudity than the usual comic-book adaptation. What it didn’t have was a decent script or a cast that could do much with what they were given. (The great Australian actor Jack Thompson is ludicrous in the role of Frederick Schist.) Considering how simple the plot is, Man-Thing has a lot of head-scratching moments. If the Man-Thing has been summoned to protect the swamp from the oil companies and the rednecks, why does it also kill a Native shaman? In the comic books, at least, the Man-Thing had once been a man before he was transformed into a swamp monster. In this one, there’s no real origin for the creature. This movie could just as easily have been called Plant-Thing.

Man-Thing was actually one of the most interesting characters introduced when Marvel started publishing horror comics in the 1970s. Formerly a biochemist named Ted Sallis, Man-Thing lived in the Everglades and could detect emotions. His touch could burn, but only if the person being touched was afraid of him. With no memory of his former life as a human, Man-Thing was the guardian of the Nexus of All Realities. When Man-Thing got his own series, writer Steve Gerber gave him an eccentric and colorful supporting cast, including Howard the Duck and teenage sorceress Jennifer Kale. The comic-book Man-Thing provided a lot of good material for a potential film, so it’s too bad that this version turned him into just another swamp monster.

Man-Thing was originally meant to be a theatrical release but was dumped onto the Sci Fi Channel instead. (It did get a brief theatrical release in a few international markets, including Spain, where it bombed.) In the later Marvel Cinematic Universe, the character played a supporting role in 2022’s Werewolf by Night, so who knows? Maybe he’ll get the film he deserves someday.