The TSL’s Horror Grindhouse: Attack of the Giant Leeches (dir by Bernard Kowalski)

Posted on October 13, 2022 by Lisa Marie Bowman

It’s time for nonstop drama in the bayous!

Shopkeeper Dave Walker (Bruno VeSota) knows that his wife, Liz (Yvette Vickers), is cheating on him with his best friend, Cal (Michael Emmett)! Dave is determined to catch them in the act and force them to walk out into the middle of the swamp at the end of his shotgun. That would be bad enough but what makes the swamp even more dangerous is the fact that there are two giant leeches living in the water, grabbing whoever they can get and dragging them back to their underground cave! Agck! While Dave plots to get revenge on his cheating wife, game warden Steve Benton (Ken Clark) tries to convince everyone that something really needs to be done about those giant leeches.

Filmed and released in 1959 and produced by Roger Corman, Attack of the Giant Leeches is not a particularly complicated film. The leeches live in the swamp. For various reasons, people keep wandering into the swamp. The leeches keep feeding until eventually, the authorities decide to do something about it. The simplicity of it all is why the film works. Why are there giant leeches in the swamp? How did the leeches become giants in the first place? Who cares? What’s important is that they’re there and they’re hungry for blood. At this point, why doesn’t matter. What matter is what is going to be done about them.

Clocking in at barely an hour and filmed by TV director Bernard L. Kowalski, Attack of the Giant Leeches is an enjoyably overhearted slice of Southern melodrama, full of humid atmosphere and sultry dialogue. The film does a wonderful job of capturing the overheated feeling of being stuck in the country and not having anything better to do than cause some trouble. I mean, it’s very easy for people to say what other should or shouldn’t do in their spare time. But, when you’re actually living in a swamp, you do what you have to do in order to pass the time. At its best, Attack of the Giant Leeches is like Roger Corman meets Tennessee Williams. It’s Southern Gothic, with even bigger leeches than usual. Flannery O’Connor would have been proud.

Yvette Vickers plays the role of Liz with a wonderfully defiant attitude. She’s going to do what she wants when she wants to and if that means running the risk of being forced to walk into the swamp, so be it. If she’s stuck in the bayous, she might as well have a good time. Liz may be frustrated but can you blame her? Meanwhile, VeSota turns Dave into a rather tragic buffoon. Even when he finally thinks that he’s about get his revenge, it turns out that the universe has other plans in store for him. In the end, Dave is fortune’s fool. No wonder stiff but earnest Ken Clark really can’t compete with either of them when it comes to capturing the audience’s attention.

Attack of the Giant Leeches is short but enjoyable and, because the copyright wasn’t renewed, it’s in the public domain and it’s very easy to watch for free. Watch it this Halloween and definitely stay out of the swamp!

Horror Scenes That I Love: The Hospital Battle from Zombi 2

Posted on October 13, 2022 by Lisa Marie Bowman

In this scene from 1979’s Zombi 2, a group of humans try to destroy the zombies that are invading a small hospital on an isolated island. Director Lucio Fulci later pointed out, in many interviews, that he used the same clips of Al Cliver throwing a Molotov cocktail and firing a shotgun multiple times in the scene.

Two things to note about this scene:

First off, it captures what is truly scary about zombies. They are relentless. They do not stop coming. No matter how many you destroy, there’s always another one following behind it.

Secondly, Italian zombies actually looked like decaying walking corpses that are on the verge of falling apart. That was one huge difference between the Italian zombie films and many of the ones that were made in America.

6 Shots From 6 Horror Films: 1979

Posted on October 13, 2022 by Lisa Marie Bowman

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!

This October, I’m going to be doing something a little bit different with my contribution to 4 (or more) Shots From 4 (or more) Films. I’m going to be taking a little chronological tour of the history of horror cinema, moving from decade to decade.

Today, we take a look at a very important year: 1979.

6 Shots From 6 Horror Films: 1979

Fascination (1979, dir by Jean Rollin)

The Brood (1979, dir by David Cronenberg, DP: Mark Irwin)

Alien (1979, dir by Ridley Scott, DP: Derek Vanlint)

Beyond the Darkness (1979, dir by Joe D’Amato, DP: Joe D’Amato)

Nosferatu The Vampyre (1979, dir by Werner Herzog, DP: Jörg Schmidt-Reitwein)

Zombi 2 (1979, dir. Lucio Fulci, DP: Sergio Salvati)

Horror Film Review: The Little Girl Who Lives Down The Lane (dir by Nicolas Gessner)

Posted on October 13, 2022 by Lisa Marie Bowman

First released in 1976, The Little Girl Who Lives Down The Lane tells the story of Ryann Jacobs (played by Jodie Foster, who was thirteen years old when she made this film).

Rynn lives in a small New England town, in a house that her father has leased for three years. It’s been a while since anyone has seen Rynn’s father. Rynn always tells everyone that he’s either out of town or that he’s busy in his study and can’t be disturbed. When the friendly local policeman (Mort Schuman) expresses some doubt about Rynn’s claim that her father is working, Rynn says that her father is a drug addict, like all of the great poets.

Rynn’s main problem is with the Halletts. Cora Hallett (Alexis Smith) owns the house in which Rynn is living. Cora drops by regularly, haughtily demanding to see Rynn’s father. Her creepy son, Frank (Martin Sheen), also makes a habit of visiting. He’s not interested in Cora’s father. Instead, he’s interested in Cora. Everyone in the town knows that Frank is a perv but no one is willing to do anything about it. He’s protected by his mother’s money.

One day, when Cora drops by, she insists on going into the basement. She says she has something down there that she needs to retrieve. Rynn tells her not to go down there but Cora refuses to listen, which turns out to be a huge mistake. Cora screams at what she sees down there and then falls to her death. With the help of her only friend, Mario (Scott Jacoby) an aspiring magician who walks with a limp, Rynn covers up the murder.

Mario turns out to be a very good friend, indeed. Not only does he tell people that he’s seen Rynn’s father but he even stands up to Frank when he shows up at the house, searching for his mother. However, as it soon becomes clear, Frank isn’t one to give up so easily….

The Little Girl Who Lives Down The Lane is an interesting hybrid of a film. It definitely does have elements of horror. The running theme throughout the film is that Rynn might kill people but it’s all the adults in her life who are truly monstrous. Frank is truly a monster and Martin Sheen gives a remarkably intense and creepy performance in the role. Frank is the type who will say that worst things imaginable and then smirk afterward, confident that he’ll never have to face any sort of justice for his crimes.

At the same time, the film is also a coming-of-age-story and a teen romance. Rynn and Mario are two outsiders who find each other. You like both of them and you want things to work out for them, even though you spend almost the entire film worried that Rynn might end up poisoning Mario. Foster and Jacoby share some genuinely sweet scenes. Things would be just fine, the film seems to be saying, if all of these stupid adults would just mind their own business.

The Little Girl Who Lives Down The Lane is an effectively creepy and sometimes even sweet little film about a girl who occasionally has to kill people. Keep an eye out for it!

Horror on the Lens: Bride of the Gorilla (dir by Curt Siodmak)

Posted on October 13, 2022 by Lisa Marie Bowman

In the 1951 film, Bride of the Gorilla, Raymond Burr plays a plantation manager who commits a murder. Unfortunately, for him, the murder is observed by a witch who promptly puts a curse of Burr. Now, every time the sun goes down, Burr transforms into a gorilla and goes wild in the jungle.

Basically, it’s kind of like The Wolf Man, just with a less sympathetic protagonist and a gorilla instead of a werewolf. Just in case we missed the similarities, Lon Chaney, Jr. plays the film’s nominal hero, a police commissioner who suspects that something weird might be happening with Burr. Apparently, the plan was originally for Chaney to play the gorilla and for Burr to play the policeman but, because Chaney was dealing with a serious alcohol problem at the time, the roles were reversed.

Also in the cast, playing the role of Dina, is Barbara Payton, the tragic actress who is best known for being at the center of a love triangle involving actors Tom Neal and Franchot Tone. In 195000, Neal attacked Tone and beat him so severely that Tone spent 18 hours in a coma. Tone was notably shaky onscreen for the rest of his film career while Neal spent a few years in prison. After the incident between Tone and Neal, Payton could only get roles in B-movies like this one. Tragically, she would pass away, in 1967, of heart and live failure. She was only 39 years old.

October Positivity: Time Changer (dir by Rich Christiano)

Posted on October 12, 2022 by Lisa Marie Bowman

The 2002 movie, Time Changer, tells the story of Russell Carlisle (D. David Morin). Russell is a bible professor who has written a book called The Changing Times. The Changing Times encourages everyone to live a good, moral life but it doesn’t specifically state that they should live a good, moral life because Jesus says so. Dr. Norris Anderson (Gavin MacLeod) argues that the book will actually not lead people to become better but will instead lead them away from Christianity by convincing them that all they have to do is be nice. Carlisle disagrees.

Luckily, Anderson just happens to have a time machine in his basement! When Russell comes over to discuss the book, Anderson suggests that Russell go into the future and see just how changed the world has become. Mostly to humor Anderson, Russell agrees and steps into the machine.

And suddenly, Russell Calirlise is in the year 2002!

What does Russell discover? He learns that even movies about good people still feature things that he finds objectionable. He discovers that even people who go to church don’t always live a perfect life. In 1890, Russell was shocked to learn that the divorce rate was 5% so you can only imagine how he reacts when he goes to 2002 and continually runs into people who talk about their ex-wives. Russell also gets upset when he hears some teenage girls talking about sneaking out of the house and going on an unchaperoned date. The horrors!

To be honest, there’s been a lot of movies that have told similar stories to Time Changer. Someone from the past comes to the “present,” and is shocked to discover how much the world has changed. Time Changer is unique that it’s totally on Russell’s side and essentially argues that we would all be better off if we still embraced the culture of the 1890s. If that sounds a bit preachy, that’s because it is a bit preachy. Interestingly enough, the film has no trouble having Russell explain how he, as someone from 1890, feels about dating, entertainment, and honesty but it leaves out how an 1890 man like Russell would have viewed women or people of color. Russell is shocked by the casual use of bad language but, conveniently for the film’s efforts to make him a sympathetic character, he doesn’t raise an eyebrow at suddenly finding himself in a multiracial society. It’s easy to argue for a return to 1890 morality when you ignore everything that was bad about the 1890s.

That said, the film has a few intentionally amusing moments, even if they’re exactly the type of moments that you would expect to see in a film about time travel. (For example, Russell finds himself fascinated by a light switch.) D. David Morin gives a likable performance Russell and the scene where Anderson hurriedly explains how time travel works as a nice little satire of the genre. It’s far too preachy to really be effective but Time Changer is not a total waste of time. That said, I would far rather live in 2022 than 1890.

The TSL’s Horror Grindhouse: Revealer (dir by Luke Boyce)

Posted on October 12, 2022 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Taking place in 1980s Chicago, Revealer tells the story of two seemingly different women.

Angie (Caito Aase) is a stripper who spend most of her day in an incredibly sleazy peep show booth. The men that she dances for are a collection of grotesque pervs. (Keep an eye out and you’ll notice a sign warning that “wet dollar bills” will not be accepted. Ewww!) Angie is under no illusions about where she’s working or who is paying to watch her but she needs the money. She’s putting up with a lot of crap in order to giver her nephew the type of stable life that she’s never had and, understandably, she doesn’t have much patience for anyone who would judge her for it.

Sally (Shaina Schrooten) is someone who spends almost all of her time judging. For weeks, she has been leading protests in front of Angie’s place of employment. As soon as Angie shows up for an extra shift, she is confronted by Sally. Sally claims that Angie is “a harlot” who is leading people down the path of sin and damnation. Angie says that Sally is just jealous because she’s never truly live her life.

Together …. they solve crimes!

No, actually, they don’t. Instead, they find themselves forced to deal with some theological issues when a horned demon unleashes an army of snakes on the world. Angie is trapped in her peep show booth, with no way to get out. Sally, fleeing from the demons, ends up outside the same booth. Sally is convinced that the apocalypse has begun. Angie just wants to get back to her nephew. Despite their differing views and their initially antagonistic relationship, Angie and Sally are going to have to work together in order to survive. Along the way, hidden truths are revealed. Angie and Sally learn that they’re not so different and they even start to become friends. But does that matter, considering that the world apparently ended in 1987?

I had a mixed reaction to Revealer. On the one hand, there’s something wonderfully subversive about setting a film about the end of the world in the distant past. If nothing else, it keeps the viewer off-balance. (I was reminded a bit of how 2001’s Donnie Darko predicted that the world would end in 1988.) As well, the two leads both did a good job with their characters, adding depth and nuance to two roles that could have easily become clichés. In the role of Sally, Shaina Schrooten gave an especially good performance. I wasn’t particularly shocked when Sally revealed her big secret but Schrooten’s performance still made the scene effective.

On the negative side, the snakes were frightening but the demon who controlled them obviously fell prey to the film’s low budget and looked a bit less impressive. As well, the script itself was often overwritten. Sally and Angie’s constant debate over religion felt more than a little heavy-handed. (I mean, it’s easy to win an argument when the screenwriter is on your side.) Even more importantly, they tended to disrupt the flow of the film. Too many scenes stopped dead in their tracks so that Sally could quote the Bible and Angie could get upset about it. Since neither had anything to say about their beliefs that hadn’t already been said in a hundred other movies, their arguments were occasionally a bit dull, despite the best efforts of Caito Aase and Shaina Schrooten.

Revealer was uneven, though the ending was certainly effective and both of the lead actresses did a good job bringing their characters to life. Watching the film, I wondered if maybe the world did end in 1987 and the rest of us just haven’t noticed yet.

Horror Scenes I Love: The End of The Original Dawn of the Dead

Posted on October 12, 2022 by Lisa Marie Bowman

The original Dawn of the Dead, which was released in 1978 and directed by George Romero, is not only one of the most influential horror films of all time. (Even more so than Night of the Living Dead, Dawn was responsible for inspiring the Italian zombie boom.) It’s also a rather dark satire of humanity and commercialism. With the world ending, both humans and zombies head to the mall. Briefly, the humans manage to form their own peaceful society but, inevitably, they end up screwing it all up. The Dead may be slow and not particularly intelligent but, as poor old Steve discovered in that elevator, they’re absolutely determined to get what they want.

Dawn of the Dead ends with an apocalytpic combination of bikers, zombies, and one helicopter that has next to no fuel. Our two remaining survivors head off in search of some place safe but we all know that helicopter isn’t going to stay in the sky for long. In its way, the ending of Dawn of the Dead is even more bleak than the end of Night of the Living Dead. The characters in Night of the Living Dead were dealing with a menace no one understood and their inability to work together was largely the result of shock and panic. In Dawn of the Dead, everyone knows that the Dead are returning to life and everyone knows how to stop them but people still cannot set aside their differences long enough to do so. Even with the world ending, Peter gets some joy out of shooting one of the (living) bikers. His smirk suggests that one doesn’t need to be a zombie in order to sacrifice their humanity.

With the end of this film, Romero’s message is clear. Society gets what it deserves.

International Film Review: Revenge in the House of Usher (dir by Jess Franco)

Posted on October 12, 2022 by Lisa Marie Bowman

In the 1982 Spanish horror film, Revenge in the House of Usher, Antonio Mayans plays Dr. Alan Harker. Harker receives an invitation to visit the estate of his former mentor, Prof. Eric Usher (Howard Vernon). Usher is elderly and in poor health. He’s attended to by several mysterious servants, including his physician, Dr. Seward (Daniel White). While trying to figure out what has led to Prof. Usher’s current state, Harker discovers that….

Well, here’s where it gets confusing, as things tend to do whenever one tries to discuss the later films of director Jess Franco. There are actually three different versions of Revenge In the House of Usher and each one of them tells a totally different story. In the first version, Usher is revealed to have been a decadent, Giles de Rais-style serial killer who has murdered hundreds of women through the years and who is now being haunted by their vengeful ghosts. Apparently, that version didn’t go over well when it made its debut at the 1983 Festival Internacional de Madrid de Cine Imaginario y de Ciencia-ficción. The audience booed and laughed and Franco couldn’t convince any distributors to purchase the film from him.

So, Franco filmed thee more scenes that established that Usher wasn’t just a serial killer but that he was also a vampire! (This explains why two characters in this Edgar Allan Poe adaptation were suddenly given names from Dracula.) This reception of this version was not considered to be much of an improvement on the reception of the version where Vernon was just a serial killer.

With the backing of Eurocine, Franco then put together a third version of the film. This time, he turned it into another Dr. Orlof film, though Howard Vernon’s character was still referred to as being Prof. Usher. In this version, Harker discovers that Usher and his elderly servant Morpho (Olivier Mathot) have spent years abducting women from the village and using their blood to keep Usher’s daughter alive. This leads to a solid 15 minutes of flashbacks to Usher’s past activities, all of which are taken directly from The Awful Dr. Orlof. Just as in the other two version of the film, Usher is haunted by the ghosts of his victims. As his mental state deteriorates, so does his castle.

As far as I know, the third version of the film is the only one that currently exists. The first version is now considered to be lost. For his part, Franco claimed that the first version was a misunderstood masterpiece but he was still willing to turn it into another Orlof film so that he could at least make some money off of it. Franco may have been an often frustrated artist but he was also a pragmatist.

Considering its production history, it’s not surprising that Revenge in the House of the Usher is a bit of a disjointed film. It’s only 91 minutes long (and 15 of those minutes is taken up with black-and-white footage from The Awful Dr. Orlof) but this film still feels like it has several false endings. There were so many times that I thought the film had to be over, just for it to keep going. Watching the film, one can sense that Franco is willing to try almost anything to finally wrap the film’s somewhat incoherent story up. That said, Howard Vernon brings the right amount of haughty decadence to the role of the decaying Usher and Franco’s decision to film in an actual castle (and to largely utilize natural light) does give the film perhaps a bit more atmosphere than one would expect. This is a lesser Franco film but it does do a good job of capturing the bizarre logic of dreams. The film is, at times, so incoherent that it’s actually rather fascinating.

Following this film, Vernon would play Dr. Orloff one final time, in Franco’s surprisingly entertaining Faceless.