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.

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)

October Hacks: Bikini Guillotine (dir by Jamie Grefe)


2025’s Bikini Guillotine is a slasher film that features plenty of bikinis but not one guillotine. The motiveless killer is a man who wears a mask that was put together with duct tape. He’s definitely a bad guy, but the true villain of this film is whoever was responsible for recording the dialogue.

The first half of this 65-minute movie is made up of footage of several bikini-clad girls hanging out in a pool. They’re all carrying red Solo cups, which they pretend to drink from despite the fact that they’re obviously empty. Every few minutes, they all hold up their Solo cups and go, “Whoo!” The majority of the dialogue is incoherent. Either you can’t hear a word that they’re saying, or you can hear the sound of their voices but you still can’t make out what they’re actually saying. Occasionally, there’s a strange echo effect that does nothing to make the dialogue any more legible. Strangely, we can hear the Solo cups. One girl taps a finger against her Solo cup and it’s suddenly the loudest thing in the movie. Whenever anyone puts their Solo cup down, the sound of the cup hitting the tile reverberates. The weird soundtrack gives certain moments a dreamlike feel, but for the most part, it just feels incredibly shoddy.

(On a personal note, it was impossible for me to look at all of these Solo cups without thinking about the Flipadelphia episode of It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia. Flip! Flip! Flipadelphia!)

A coherent, non-muddy soundtrack is something that filmgoers tend to take for granted. It’s not until you watch a film like this that you really appreciate just how important sound actually is. I sat through this entire film, but I couldn’t tell you the names of any of the characters or how they even knew each other. Maybe that was revealed in the dialogue. Maybe it wasn’t. I’m not sure what anyone was actually talking about.

As for the killer, who knows why he was even there or why the word “guillotine” is even in the title. The killer does not carry a guillotine. Instead, he carries what appears to be a chakram with a bunch of rubber worms attached to it. A chakram is a flying disc that is supposed to have sharp edges. Traditionally, one uses a chakram by throwing it. Our killer uses his chakram like a knife. Or at least, I think he does. There are many scenes in which he’s seen plunging the chakram down, but apparently there wasn’t any money in the budget for fake blood, so who knows what he’s actually supposed to be doing with it.

The killer also has the power to hypnotize his victims just by looking at them. As such, every victim simply stops moving as soon as he looks at them. Not only does it rob the victims of their agency, but it also makes for a pretty boring slasher film. It’s just one victim after another, with no personality or variety. That said, at least we can actually understand the dialogue inside the house. “Hello?” “Are you guys here?” Spellbinding stuff, as I’m sure you can tell.

Whatever else one might say about it, this film does offer two important lessons to the aspiring filmmaker. Don’t promise a guillotine if you can’t deliver. Hire someone who knows how to record sound.