Duke Tries A Halloween Marathon…Part Two.


This is part two of my attempt at partaking in a October horror marathon. The first part of which can be found here.

October 5th (Watched two because I didn’t have time on the 4th): ‘Frankenstein’s Army’ (dir. Richard Raaphorst)

MV5BMjA1NDE0MzcyMF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwNTU2MzA3OQ@@._V1_SX640_SY720_

‘Frankenstein’s Army’ is a WWII found footage film with a weirdness and creativity that makes for one fun, goofy and clever experience…if you can get past the headache inducing sound design.

The film is about a small squad of Russian soldiers, behind enemy lines, who stumble upon an eerily abandoned church. What they find inside is a lab of a decedent of Victor Frankenstein, who has been experimenting with the bodies of soldiers (friend and foe) and turning them into mindless monsters mixed with machinery of all sorts.

The film is shot in a found footage style and it actually works. The explanation behind it is essentially they are trying to make a propaganda film. There is the usual question as to why they are still filming during certain scenes, but I actually think the film as a whole would not have worked as well had it been filmed conventionally.

The best thing about the film is easily the production, at least visually. There are some really well done long takes, often with characters in the background doing things that one might miss if they aren’t paying attention. The costume/monster designs are wonderfully weird and creative. They definitely had fun with the concept, and it shows.

The only issue I had was the sound design, which was mindbogglingly annoying. I mean really bad. So screechy, scratchy and just plain irritating. I understand that because of the nature of some of the monsters and their machine parts that it would require these sorts of sounds, but ultimately they add nothing to the experience except a headache. However, this might only be me. Others might not have the same response, so I won’t really hold it against the film – I just probably will never watch it again.

Overall this is a fun, if hollow, film worthy of at least one viewing. The performances aren’t great, and the dialogue is exactly what you’d expect from this sort of film. There is no subtext and no real scares. Still, it is so creative and so bat-shit crazy at times that it would be a shame to pass it up if given the opportunity. Especially when it is a lean 84 minutes.

‘The Midnight Meat Train’ (dir. Ryûhei Kitamura)

midnight_meat_train_poster_01

‘The Midnight Meat Train’ is a brutal and violent horror film, that is unfortunately dragged down by some scripting and pacing issues.

The film stars Bradley Cooper as a photographer who, after being told to be a bit riskier in his search for great photos, finds himself face to face with Vinnie Jones, a butcher who is brutally murdering people on a train. Cooper begins to follow Jones in an attempt to gather evidence of the murders, all the while the darkness of the situation taking its tool emotionally on him.

The biggest issue I had was the pacing of the story as well as the characters. It is a weird situation in which I simultaneously wished it would slow down in terms of character development, while also picking up the pacing for the horror. There is such a rapid shift in the emotions of the characters that – although valid – happen way to abruptly. What is worse is that it isn’t like they don’t have enough time to draw this out. Because they do…almost too much so, to the point that I was also wishing they’d hurry up with the horror elements.

This wouldn’t have been too big of an issue if not for the fact that it made me lose interest in a lot of what was happening. I wasn’t invested in the characters or the horror because of it, and so any attempts at creating suspense were lost of me – leaving me with only the graphic and brutal kills on the train, which just aren’t my thing. I can handle gore, but find it utterly pointless – and distasteful – when there is little to no meaning behind it.

It wasn’t all bad though, with the stand out being the direction. There is some really great camerawork, especially in a scene set in an apartment. I also liked the visual contrasts between the surface and train scenes; and Vinnie Jones was cool, calm and terrifying. The ending was also great, where there is a reveal of a mythical plot line that is alluded to throughout most of the film. It is a very weird tonal shift, and goes a long way towards adding meaning to a lot of what came before it…sadly it is a case of too little too late.

Overall I didn’t hate it, but an hour in I was just ready for it to finally be over…and imagine my dismay when I realized there was another 40 minutes or so left. It is the sort of horror film in which its failings are harder for me to ignore, as I might in another film, given the content. If you are looking for just a gory horror film in which the shock value is simply the brutal violence, then this might be for you. If you are looking for something with a bit more substance, than you may want to look elsewhere.

October 6th: ‘Black Christmas’ (dir. Bob Clark)

blackchristmasonesheet_1

‘Black Christmas’, considered to be one of the first ever slasher films, is an efficient, effective and highly enjoyable horror film – one I will definitely revisit often.

The film is set during Christmas at a sorority, the members of which are being harassed by someone making creepy prank calls. As many of them leave for the holiday break, one goes missing, setting off a search for her and the person calling the house. As the remaining sorority sisters try to deal with this, they begin to be killed off one by one by a killer who may potentially be someone very close to them.

The only issue I had was with a particular mannerism of the killer. The film took on a first person perspective whenever he appeared – which was effectively spooky- but there was quite a lot of moaning and weird grunts coming from him at the same time. They were meant to be eerie, and in the end worked because of the nature of his mania and the calls to the house – but it was ultimately more annoying than unsettling.

But I can easily overlook this minor issue because of just how well made the film is. There is a genuine feeling of suspense here, partly because of the whodunit nature of the murders; and also because of the closeness of the killer throughout the events of the film. You never know who it is, what will set him off, or who will be killed next – but you do know he is there, waiting.

That said, it isn’t necessarily a scary film per se, but an unsettling and bleak one. The sort that gets under your skin and sticks with you. However, with that, it has to be said that through all the bleakness, there is also a great sense of humor to the story. There is also actually a maturity and depth to the script that I wasn’t expecting. This might be set in a sorority, but it isn’t about partying and dim witted topless girls, like so many slashers that came after it. The women here are smart and mature, dealing with important family and relationship issues. This added a lot to my investment in the characters, and so made the fear of their potential demise all the more suspenseful.

The direction is great – Christmas makes for a perfect setting, at least visually. There is solid pacing and an effective slow build throughout. I was surprised how well the mystery it creates in its first few scenes holds up so well even when things slow down a bit halfway through. I think this has a lot to do with the fact that even when it might not be focused on its creepier slasher elements, it instead is focused on those previously mentioned characters – again making the suspense as the killer stalks them all the more effective. There is no real resolution to the story, but the film is less focused on the actual killer and more focused on building an atmosphere and a story that is almost mythical.

Lastly, as someone who isn’t too knowledgeable in regards to the genre, it was easy to initially think that a lot of the tropes in play were cliche…but once I took into consideration the fact that ‘Black Christmas’ came out in 1974, and was really the start of most of these, they actually added a level of admiration to my already high level of enjoyment. It might not be as good as something like ‘Halloween’, which clearly drew some influence from this, but it deserves to be considered just as much of a classic. This is easily the best film I’ve watched so far for this horror series, and one that I’d add to my list of favorite horror films of all time.

*Side note, it is absolutely hilarious that director Bob Clark also directed ‘A Christmas Story’.

Horror on the Lens: Frankenstein Meets The Space Monster (dir by Robert Gaffney)


Frankenstein_Meets_the_Space_Monster

For today’s selection of horror on the lens, we offer up the odd 1965 horror/sci-fi/beach movie hybrid, Frankenstein Meets The Space Monster.  Despite the movie’s title, it’s not about Frankenstein.  Instead, it’s about an astronaut named Frank who is actually an android.  When his latest mission into space goes wrong, Frank ends up crashing in Puerto Rico.  Now malfunctioning, Frank causes some major chaos.  Can his creator, Dr. Adam Steele (played by character actor James Karen, who years later would appear in Return of the Living Dead), track Frank down and put an end to his reign of terror?

And what about the Martians?  Android Frank isn’t the only threat in Puerto Rico.  A group of Martians have landed and are determined to kidnap any girl wearing a bikini so that they can use them to repopulate their race.  We’re told that every woman on Mars — with the apparent exception of Princess Marcuzan, played with evil haughtiness by Marilyn Hanold — has been killed as the result of an atomic war.  Assisting Princess Marcuzan is Dr. Nadir (Lou Cutell), a short, bald Martian with pointy ears.

One of the oddest things about Frankenstein Meets The Space Monster is that, despite being a standard — if wonderfully nonsensical — low-budget B-movie, it features a great soundtrack!

Enjoy!

Horror on TV: Beyond Belief: Fact or Fiction Episode 3.13


Beyond Belief: Fact or Fiction aired off-and-on for about five years on the Fox network.  A sign of just how randomly this show was scheduled can be found in the fact that season 3 started in 2000 while season 4 didn’t start until 2002.  Reruns of the show currently air on the Chiller Network which is where I recently discovered it.

Hosted by Jonathan Frakes, each episode would present the viewers with five different stories.  Each story would appear to defy logic and then, at the end of the episode, Frakes would reveal which of the stories were fact and which were fiction.  The show was often incredibly silly and yet, it occasionally had an odd charm to it.  A lot of this was due to Jonathan Frakes, who always seemed to be rather amused with it all.

Even more importantly, as bad as this show often was, it’s the perfect type of show to watch in October.  It’s the television equivalent of a scary story being told around a campfire.

Below, you’ll find the final episode of the third season.  Can you guess what’s fact and what’s fiction?

Horror Artist Profile: Bernie Wrightson (1948- )


BerniWrightson01

Horror fans know who Bernie Wrightson is even if not by name, but by the work he has done in the horror field.

Born in October 27, 1948, Bernie Wrightson has made his name creating some of the more recognizable horror illustrations since the 1970’s. Wrightson would have his break out work in conjunction with Len Wein in co-creating the character Swamp Thing for DC Comics in 1971. In time, Wrightson would move on from DC Comics and the character he created for Warren Publishing that were well-known for producing black-and-white horror titles.

Throughout the years, Wrightson would end up producing some classic images for horror stories ranging from Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein right up to several Stephen King novels (The Stand, Cycle of the Werewolf and Wolves of the Calla).

Here’s to hoping that Wrightson has many more years of horror work ready to fire up the imaginations of horror fans everywhere.

BernieWrightson02

BernieWrightson03

BernieWrightson05

BernieWrightson06

BernieWrightson07

BernieWrightson08

BernieWrightson09

BernieWrightson04

Horror On The Lens: The Night Flier (dir by Mark Pavia)


Cover_of_The_Night_Flier

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.

Enjoy!

Horror On TV: That 70s Show 2.5 “Halloween”


Okay, so technically, this really isn’t horror.  But who cares?  It deals with Halloween traditions and, even more importantly,  I loved That 70s Show.

This episode was originally broadcast on October 26th, 1999.

Horror Scenes I Love: Dawn of the Dead (1978)


outbreak-of-chaos-original

Anyone who have gotten to know me throughout the years (decades even) know one indisputable fact and that’s one of my favorite films of all-time is George A. Romero’s classic horror masterpiece, Dawn of the Dead.

This film is not just a great horror film, but just a great film. Sure, some have said that it hasn’t aged well, but those detractors only see the era it was filmed in. If one looks part that then they can see that Dawn of the Dead works just as well now as it did when it premiered in 1978.

One of my favorite scenes in the film is actually the beginning of the film. It’s rare that a film can fully capture and explain an overriding theme in the film’s narrative right from the beginning, but Romero did it and did it well.

The scene I’m talking about is the film’s intro that’s set in a chaotic Pittsburgh TV station. It’s a scene of chaos because the zombie apocalypse is already in full swing and people have begun to lose their trust in the fourth estate. In times of crisis the people depend on the news to bring to them answers or, at the very least, the correct information to survive said crisis. In Dawn of the Dead, the fourth estate has failed as in that they’ve become just as unreliable as the rest of the mechanisms which make civilization operate.

Even when the right information was being relayed by the the guest scientist in the scene, the audience reaction (the tv station crew themselves) was one of exasperation and disbelief. This scene would influence future zombie apocalypse stories both in film, tv and print in that the people would lose faith and trust in the very institution who were supposed to be trusted to be objective and informative.

This is just one of several scenes from Dawn of the Dead which I consider a favorite, but then the entire film I would consider a favorite scene as a whole in a story that hasn’t ended.

Horror Film Review: Annabelle (dir by John R. Leonetti)


Annabelle

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…

Annabelle2

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.

1408696589_annabelle-oo4

Horror on TV: The Twilight Zone 5.26 “Living Doll”


Talky Tina
Today’s televised horror is the Living Doll episode of The Twilight Zone. This memorably creepy episode takes a look at what happens when a suburban jerk of a father (played by Telly Savalas) gets into a fight with his daughter’s doll, Talky Tina (voiced by June Foray). Things do not end well for one of them.

Seriously, don’t mess with Talky Tina.

This episode was directed by Richard Sarafain, written by Charles Beaumont, and originally broadcast on November 1st, 1963.

 

Duke Tries A Halloween Marathon…Part One.


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)

tumblr_m490fyx40y1ruxqt3o1_1280

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_xlg

‘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-poster

‘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.