Brad reviews URBAN LEGEND (1998), starring Alicia Witt!


I’m not always successful, but I spend a fairly large part of my life trying to make my wife happy. One of the ways I do that is I try to find movies for us to watch that she will enjoy, and that I will have at least some interest in. So anytime I can find a movie starring Alicia Witt, most notable in our household for her voluminous work with the Hallmark Channel, I’m definitely heading in the right direction. I was looking through her filmography on IMDB the other day and noticed she was in URBAN LEGEND. I remember the movie coming out in the late 90’s, but I had never seen it, and I had no idea she was the primary lead! It being the spooky season, I thought now was the perfect time for the two of us to cuddle up on the couch with some popcorn and enjoy the show! 

Alicia Witt is Natalie Simon, a student with a dark, secretive past, who begins to suspect that a series of gruesome murders on the campus of Pendleton College are being committed by a killer obsessed with “urban legends.” Each murder seems to take a cue from those scary stories that pretty much all of us grew up hearing, and maybe even believing. As her friends are being picked off one by one, Natalie must do everything to find the killer before she becomes the next victim!

I must admit I had fun with this one. We watched it on a night where we just wanted to relax and see a bunch of obnoxious college students getting whacked in a variety of ways while we try to figure out who the killer is. I remember when SCREAM came out back in 1996 when I was 22 years old. Like so many others, I saw it in the theater and loved it. URBAN LEGEND is in that same tradition. It gives us some suspicious characters and some interesting murders inspired by stories I heard as a kid, and that late-90’s nostalgia kicked right in for me.

It was also fun looking back at the popular young cast whose careers have gone a variety of ways since the movie was made. Along with Witt, our cast of potential killers and victims include Jared Leto, Rebecca Gayheart, Joshua Jackson, and Tara Reid. I really enjoyed seeing veteran genre actors pop up as the movie goes along. The opening scene with Brad Dourif is very effective and lets us know immediately that we can’t trust our normal expectations. Robert Englund is also on hand to provide a creepy and suspicious professor. Heck, Danielle Harris is also in the cast, which was right at the beginning of her extensive career in horror movies.

Until I watched this movie, I didn’t realize just how universal some urban legends really are! A couple of freaky ones I remember as a kid include the story of the gang initiation where potential members drive around with their lights off just waiting for someone to flash their lights at them. Even more disturbing is the one where someone hides under your car ready to slice your Achilles tendon. Each of those stories are represented here. Building a scary movie around those legends, and many more, is a darn clever idea, and I enjoyed seeing what the filmmakers might come up with next.

URBAN LEGEND isn’t a horror masterpiece. It’s not very original, and it’s full of dumb characters making dumb decisions. But I still had a good time with it. For me, it’s a fun little slasher that takes an interesting premise and provides a few cheap scares.  And most importantly, it made my wife happy, and that means a lot!

Mind Ripper (1995, directed by Joe Gayton)


In a base hidden away in the desert, a group of government scientists reanimate the corpse of a recent suicide victim with radiation.  They bring Thor (Dan Blom) back to life but it turns out that Thor just wants to kill all of them.

Mind-numbingly dull, Mind Ripper is the same as a hundred other horror films with the same plot.  Lance Henriksen plays the lead scientist and it’s always a pleasure to see him in even the worst movies but Mind Ripper underutilizes him in favor of Giovanni Ribisi, of all people.

Mind Ripper was executive produced by Wes Craven and sold in some markets as Wes Craven Presents Mind Ripper.  Wes’s son, Jonathan Craven, did write the script and the movie was originally planned as being the third Hills Have Eyes movie.  Wes Craven’s name undoubtedly helped this film get into production but the thing to remember is that Craven may have been the executive producer and his son may have written but Wes Craven did not direct the movie and that makes all the difference.  Maybe Wes Craven could have done something with the limp story and the uninteresting characters.  My guess is that Wes Craven was smart enough not to even try.

Don’t let this movie rip your mind.  It’s not worth it.

The Films of 2020: Natalie Wood: What Remains Behind (dir by Laurent Bouzereau)


It’s a bit frustrating that I have to start this review of a documentary about one of my favorite classic film actresses by discussing the gossip and innuendo that has surrounded her death but, unfortunately, that’s the world that we live in nowadays.

It’s been nearly 40 years since the death of Natalie Wood and the circumstances of her drowning are still debated, largely by people who know nothing about the incident beyond what they’ve read online.  In 2011, when an employee of Wood and her husband, Robert Wagner, suddenly changed the story that he had been telling for 30 years, the Los Angeles Police Department reopened the investigation into Wood’s death.  Suddenly, all over twitter, people were accusing Wagner of having killed Wood, either deliberately or accidentally.  Interestingly enough, Christopher Walken was also on the boat on the night that Wood drowned but very few people accused him of having anything to do with it, largely because Walken is better-known to most twitter users than Wagner.  (It’s easier to accuse someone of murder when he’s not a celebrated cultural icon.)  Things were not helped when the LAPD announced that Wagner a “person of interest” in the case.  Of course, “person of interest” is a vague term that can mean anything.

Also not helping matters was that Lana Wood, Natalie’s sister, publicly accused Wagner of having something to do with Natalie’s death.  I can still remember that bloviating gasbag, Dr. Phil, having Lana on his show and asking her if she thought Wagner murdered Natalie.  Footage from that interview appears in the HBO documentary, Natalie Wood: What Remains Behind.

Fortunately, in the documentary, Robert Wagner is also interviewed about the night that Natalie Wood drowned and there’s a marked contrast between the obviously emotional Wagner who appears in the documentary and the monstrous caricature of Wagner that’s been presented by many Wood conspiracy theorists.  If I didn’t already think that Wagner was innocent and that Wood’s death was a tragic and terrible accident, this documentary would have convinced me.

Natalie Wood: What Remains Behind is a documentary about the life and, sadly, the death of Natalie Wood.  It’s hosted by her daughter, Natasha Gregson Wagner.  The film is tribute to Wood and her career, featuring interviews with the journalists who wrote about her, the photographers who snapped pictures of her, the stars who co-starred with her, and finally, the members of of her family.  There’s also a good deal of archival footage of Wood talking about her life.  One thing you quickly realize, while listening to Wood, is that she knew how to play the PR game.  In her interviews, Wood always said enough to be interesting while, at the same time, keeping up enough wall that she remained somewhat enigmatic.  Natasha, for her part, describes her mother as being a down-to-Earth person who, when she had to, could play the role of the glamorous film star.

The film examines Natalie’s career, from her time as a child actor to stardom in the 50s and 60s.  As the documentary points out, Wood was an actress who literally grew up on scree.  The film also takes a look at her semi-retirement in the 70s.  (She was making a comeback at the time of her death and Wagner, in fact, admits to getting into a rather loud argument with Christopher Walken about whether or not Wood should have been accepting more film roles.)  The documentary candidly discusses her difficult relationship with her mother, along with her occasionally tumultuous private life.  The film provides a look at both what made Wood a star and why her performances continue to resonate with so many of us.

(For the record, my favorite Natalie Wood performance will always be Splendor in the Grass.)

But, sadly to say, Wood’s death and the rumors surrounding it casts a shadow over almost every minute of the documentary.  Again, that’s the world we live in.  It’s a world dominated not only be innuendo and gossip but also a desire to destroy anyone who has ever led a public life.  As a result, there’s no way to make a documentary about Natalie Wood without discussing the conspiracy theories surrounding her death and it’s tragic that a few publicity hungry individuals continue to attempt to capitalize on the tragedy of Wood’s passing.  The film gives Wagner a chance to tell his story and for that, we should be both thankful.  This is film that will inspire viewers to celebrate Wood’s life and to despise those who have exploited her death.

Horror Film Review: Buffy the Vampire Slayer (dir by Fran Rubel Kuzui)


Watching this movie was such a strange experience.

Now, of course, I say that as someone who grew up watching and loving the television version of Buffy the Vampire Slayer.  Back when Buffy was on TV, I was always aware that the character had first been introduced in a movie but every thing I read about Buffy said that the movie wasn’t worth watching.  It was a part of the official Buffy mythology that Joss Whedon was so unhappy with what was done to his original script that he pretty much ignored the film when he created the show.

So, yes, the 1992 movie version of Buffy the Vampire Slayer showed how Buffy first learned that she was a slayer, how she fought a bunch of vampires in Los Angeles, and how her first watcher met his end.  But still, Joss Whedon was always quick to say that the film should not be considered canonical.  Whenever anyone on the TV show mentioned anything from Buffy’s past, they were referencing Joss Whedon’s original script as opposed to the film that was eventually adapted from that script.  (For instance, on the tv series, everyone knew that Buffy’s previous school burned down.  That was from Whedon’s script.  However, 20th Century Fox balked at making a film about a cheerleader who burns down her school so, at the end of the film version, the school is still standing and romance is in the air.)  In short, the film existed but it really didn’t matter.  In fact, to be honest, it almost felt like watching the movie would somehow be a betrayal of everything that made the televisions series special.

Myself, I didn’t bother to watch the film version of Buffy the Vampire Slayer until several years after the television series was canceled and, as I said at the start of the review, it was a strange experience.  The movie is full of hints of what would make the television series so memorable but none of them are really explored.  Yes, Buffy (played here by Kristy Swanson) has to balance being a teenager with being a vampire slayer but, in the film, it turns out to be surprisingly easy to do.  Buffy is just as happy to be a vampire slayer as she is to be a cheerleader.  In fact, one of the strange things about the film is just how quickly and easily Buffy accepts the idea that there are vampires feeding on her classmates and that it’s her duty to destroy them.  Buffy’s watcher is played by Donald Sutherland and the main vampire is played by Rutger Hauer, two veteran actors who could have played these roles in their sleep and who appear to do so for much of the film.  As for Buffy’s love interest, he’s a sensitive rebel named Oliver Pike (Luke Perry).  On the one hand, it’s fun to see the reversal of traditional gender roles, with Oliver frequently helpless and needing to be saved by Buffy.  On the other hand, Perry and Swanson have next to no chemistry so it’s a bit difficult to really get wrapped up in their relationship.

I know I keep coming back to this but watching the movie version of Buffy is a strange experience.  It’s not bad but it’s just not Buffy.  It’s like some sort of weird, mirror universe version of Buffy, where Buffy starts her slaying career as a senior in high school and she never really has to deal with being an outcast or anything like that.  (One gets the feeling that the movie’s Buffy wouldn’t have much to do with the Scooby Gang.  Nor would she have ever have fallen for Angel.)  Kristy Swanson gives a good performance as the film version of Buffy, though the character is not allowed to display any of the nuance or the quick wit that made the television version a role model for us all.  Again it’s not that Buffy the movie is terrible or anything like that.  It’s just not our Buffy!