Tag Archives: review

Horror on the Lens: The Little Shop of Horrors (dir by Roger Corman)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

(It’s tradition here at the Lens that, every October, we watch the original Little Shop of Horrors.  And always, I start things off by telling this story…)

Enter singing.

Little Shop…Little Shop of Horrors…Little Shop…Little Shop of Terrors…

Hi!  Good morning and Happy October the 2nd!  For today’s plunge into the world of public domain horror films, I’d like to present you with a true classic.  From 1960, it’s the original Little Shop of Horrors!

When I was 19 years old, I was in a community theater production of the musical Little Shop of Horrors.  Though I think I would have made the perfect Audrey, everybody always snickered whenever I sang so I ended up as a part of “the ensemble.”  Being in the ensemble basically meant that I spent a lot of time dancing and showing off lots of cleavage.  And you know what?  The girl who did play Audrey was screechy, off-key, and annoying and after every show, all the old people in the audience always came back stage and ignored her and went straight over to me.  So there.

Anyway, during rehearsals, our director thought it would be so funny if we all watched the original film.  Now, I’m sorry to say, much like just about everyone else in the cast, this was my first exposure to the original and I even had to be told that the masochistic dentist patient was being played by Jack Nicholson.  However, I’m also very proud to say that — out of that entire cast — I’m the only one who understood that the zero-budget film I was watching was actually better than the big spectacle we were attempting to perform on stage.  Certainly, I understood the film better than that screechy little thing that was playing Audrey.

The first Little Shop of Horrors certainly isn’t scary and there’s nobody singing about somewhere that’s green (I always tear up when I hear that song, by the way).  However, it is a very, very funny film with the just the right amount of a dark streak to make it perfect Halloween viewing.

So, if you have 72 minutes to kill, check out the original and the best Little Shop of Horrors…

What Lisa Watched Last Night #213: Is There A Killer On My Street? (dir by Jake Helgren)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

Last night, I watched the latest “premiere” on the Lifetime Movie Network, Is There A Killer On My Street?

Why Was I Watching It?

I have to admit that Lifetime fooled me.  I thought this was a brand new movie, largely because it was listed as having been released in 2020.  When I saw that, I was like, “Well, there’s no way I’m going to miss a new Lifetime movie!  Especially one that isn’t a sentimental Christmas film!”

Well, it turns out that Is There A Killer On My Street has been around for at least two years.  It was originally released under the title The Neighborhood Nightmare, way back in 2018.  When Lifetime aired the movie, they changed the title and apparently, that was enough for this movie to reclassified as a 2020 release.

That said, I’m not angry at Lifetime.  The COVID-19 outbreak shut down a lot of productions and I can only imagine how many Lifetime movies were put on indefinite hold earlier this year.  So, Lifetime picked up an old movie and changed the title.  Big deal.  It was still new to the network, right?

Don’t worry, Lifetime.  I’ve got your back.

What Was It About?

It’s time for another round of sex and sin in the suburbs!  Having escaped from an abusive marriage, Lindsay Porter (Julie McNiven) and her teenage daughter have settled down in a beautiful house in a beautiful neighborhood.  (Seriously, there’s never been an ugly house in a Lifetime movie.)  Lindsay even starts to date her new neighbor, Dr. Stephen Lane (Trevor Donovan).  However, when strange things start to happen and eventually someone shows up dead, Lindsay is forced to consider how much she knows about not just Stephen but her neighbors as well!

What Worked?

I always love a good Lifetime sin-in-the-suburbs film and Is There A Killer In My Street had all the right ingredients.  Melodrama, murder, yoga, swimming pools, a good-looking cast, and a director who was willing to let everyone go just a little overboard.  This was an entertainingly sordid movie and that’s exactly what I was looking for on Friday night.

I will say that the film also did a surprisingly good job of keeping you guessing.  I thought I had figured out who the murderer would be just to then discover that I was totally wrong.  I’m usually really good at predicting who the murderer is going to be in a Lifetime whodunit so I have to give this film a lot of credit for keeping me on my toes.  I’ve seen a lot of these films and it’s always nice to discover that I can still be surprised.

What Did Not Work?

I could nitpick but screw that.  This movie was too much fun for nitpicking.  I mean, let’s be honest.  We’re all pretty much going to be stuck in our current bizarre situation for the forseesable future.  Films like Is There A Killer On My Street are going to be essential for keeping us entertained.

“Oh my God!  Just like me!” Moments

I appreciated that Lindsay and I both have red hair.  I share her struggle.

Lessons Learned

If you even have to ask whether or not there’s a killer on your street, you’re already in trouble.

The TSL’s Horror Grindhouse: Shriek of the Mutilated (dir by Michael Findlay)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

“The shriek of the mutilated!”

Listen, if there’s noting else that can be said about this 1974 film, Shriek of the Mutilated is a brilliant title.  I mean, it’s not only catchy but it’s honest.  The mutilated do tend to shriek.  You see a title like that and how can you look away?  How can you not watch just to see if the film itself lives up to the title?  That’s the genius of the grindhouse right there.  Promise a lot in the title.  Even if the film fails to deliver, people will remember the title.  Let’s be honest — I could say right now, “Shriek of the Mutilated is the worst movie ever made,” and the only thing you would hear me say is “Shriek of the Mutilated.”

Anyway, as for the film itself, it’s an Abominable Snowman film.  There’s a lot of bigfoot films but Shriek of the Mutilated is one of the few films that I’ve ever seen about the Abominable Snowman.  I’ve always wondered what makes the Snowman so abominable.  I mean, did he just choose that name or was it forced upon him?  Abominable doesn’t sound like a compliment so I’m going to guess that the Snowman was named that by someone who he owed money to.  I imagine if the Snowman had his say, he’d prefer to be known as the “The Wonderful Snowman” or maybe “The Triumphant Snowman” but, because he must live his days in hiding, he’s been given no choice.  It just doesn’t seem fair to me.

If it seems like I’m padding out this review, that’s because there’s more to Shriek of the Mutilated than just the Abominable Snowman but if I tell you too much about the plot, I’ll be spoiling the film.  And before you say that there’s no way you’d ever watch this film in the first place so it doesn’t matter if I spoil it, allow me to point out that not only is Shriek of the Mutilated available on Prime but it’s also been included in a quite a few of those cheap Mill Creek box sets.  So, chances are, you will be watching Shriek of the Mutilated at some point in your life.  And I don’t want to spoil it for you.  I want you to watch this film and shake your head and say, “What the Hell was that all about?”

Basically, a professor recruits four of his students to come search for the Snowman with him.  The students agree, despite the fact that one of the professor’s former students warns them against it.  As he explains it, he had a bright future until he joined the professor on one of his quests.  Now, he’s the school janitor and he’s a drunk!  That’s why the Snowman is abominable by the way.  He ruins lives!

Anyway, the Snowman does kind of make an appearance but, far more important than the Snowman, is a plot twist that’s so silly and so stupid and so out-of-nowhere that it simply has to be seen to be believed.  The entire film has a kind of “make it up as you go along” feel to it and it wouldn’t surprise me if someone just randomly thought up the twist in the middle of filming.  And listen — the film looks incredibly cheap and the acting is terrible but that twist is such a “WTF” moment that I recommend watching the film just to experience it.

I also recommend the film just because of the Snowman.  Check him out:

Shriek of the Mutilated was directed by Michael Findlay, who was one of the pioneers of the grindhouse cicruit.  His best films — like the Flesh trilogy — achieve a sort of dream-like intensity.  Even his worst films, like this one, are entertainingly weird.  He also directed a film called Slaughter which achieved a certain infamy when the producer (without Findlay’s input) filmed some extra scenes, renamed the movie Snuff, and then advertised it as being an actual snuff film.  Tragically, Findlay was killed in a helicopter accident in 1978 but his wife, Roberta, continued to direct movies through the 80s.

Shriek of the Mutilated is a frequently inept movie but it’s also strange enough that everyone should watch it at least once.

 

Horror Book Review: Whisper of Death by Christopher Pike

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

The 1991 YA horror novel, Whisper of Death, tells the story of Roxanne and …. Pepper.

That’s right, Roxanne’s boyfriend is named Pepper.  Actually, Pepper is just a nickname but still.  Personally, I don’t think I could have ever dated anyone with an nickname that bad.  I did once dated a frat boy who was nicknamed Smiley and my sisters have never let me live that down.  I will say that I steadfastly refused to call him “Smiley” which is one reason why we broke up.  (The other reason was that he was a member of a frat.  Drinking beer and smiling all the time is not a substitute for a personality.)

Anyway, Roxanne and Pepper are two teenagers in love.  Pepper’s a rebel.  Roxanne’s a hard-working seamstress who only has one night a week free.  When Roxanne loses her virginity to Pepper, she gets pregnant because this is a YA novel from the early 90s and no one loses their virginity without either getting pregnant and being stalked by a judgmental madman or both.  Though Roxanne wants to keep the baby, Pepper wants her to get an abortion.  In fact, he’s pretty adamant about her getting an abortion.  Reluctantly, Roxanne agrees.  Pepper and Roxanne drive out to another town and then, on the way back, refuse to pick up a redhead hitchhiker.  (Booo!  Anyone who would leave a redhead stranded in the desert deserves whatever karma does to them.)   When Roxanne and Pepper return to their hometown, they discover that the entire place is deserted!

Well, actually, it’s not totally deserted.  They search around the town for a while and they discover that a few of their classmates have apparently been left behind.  There’s the nerdy guy who may not be as good-looking as Pepper but who, at the very least, doesn’t have as stupid of a nickname.  And then there’s the beautiful quirky girl who rebellious Roxanne can’t help but like despite the fact that she shouldn’t because Roxanne is poor and has to work as a seamstress 6 night as week.  And finally, there’s a delinquent who has an even worse nickname than Pepper.  His name is …. seriously, I’m not making this up …. Helter Skater.

Anyway, it’s all connected to yet another classmate, Betty Sue.  Betty Sue killed herself at the gas station and it turns out that her diary is conveniently available for anyone who wants to read it.  Is it possible that the strange disappearance of the world is somehow connected to Betty Sue’s suicide?  And is it also possible that maybe Pepper has more of a connection to Betty Sue than he’s willing to admit?

Of course, it is!

Whisper of Death is an odd little book.  Since the entire plot, more or less, is set in motion by Roxanne getting an abortion, it’s interesting to witness the amount of effort that Pike puts into not coming down on either side of the issue.  Roxanne makes the point of saying that both the hardcore pro-lifers and the hardcore pro-choicers are too extreme for her tastes.  I actually agree with Roxanne but, as the story progresses, it feels more and more like Pike is trying too hard to keep both sides happy.  And, as we all know, that’s an impossible task.  Suggest that women have a right to choose and you get accused of being a baby killer.  Suggest that partial birth abortion is barbaric and you get accused of being Serena Joy Waterford.

That said, the story itself was effectively creepy and the fact that it featured a shadowy force of evil called Fat Freddy is definitely a point in the book’s favor.  Most of the characters were petty annoying but, then again, the majority of them were dead by the end of the book so it’s all good.  Whisper of Death held my attention and it made me think about issues of life, death, hitchhikers, and terrible nicknames.

Horror Film Review: American Nightmares (dir by Darin Scott and Rusty Cundieff)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

I’m always a little bit cautious about anthology films.  There’s been a few that I’ve liked.  (I recently enjoyed Tales From Parts Unknown, for instance.)  But most of the time, horror anthology films tend to leave me feeling rather disappointed.  The good segments always seem as if they’re too short while the bad segments seem to go on forever and it’s hard not to feel that the only reason the film was made was because the filmmakers couldn’t be bothered to come up with a full-length story.  Plus, there’s always some wrap-around segment and, more often than not, it’s usually kind of stupid and it leaves you feeling as if the film wasted the talents of whoever it was they hired to host the film.

And that brings us to American Nightmares.

In American Nightmares, two dorky guys who might as well have millennial tattooed on their foreheads, find their perusal of internet porn interrupted by the appearance of Mr. Malevolent (Danny Trejo), who proceeds to introduce not one, not two, not three, but SEVEN stories about terrible Americans getting their just deserts.  The two dorky guys are rather blase about it all, being more concerned with watching twerking videos than really considering Mr. Malevolent’s stories about hypocritical people getting what they deserve.

Some of the stories are okay but there’s seven of them so it’s hard not to feel that the film is overstuffed.  Plus, when you’ve got seven stories in one film, it just takes one or two clunkers to make the whole thing feel pointless.  For instance, the first story — which deals with the perfect man and what he turns out to be — is okay and the second story — about a D.A. getting bitten by karma — is cartoonish but crudely effective.  But then you hit the third story — which is about racists going to a fantasy world where “no blacks” are allowed — and the story is so heavy-handed, poorly acted, and slow that you kind of tune out.  You end up ignoring several of the stories that come after because that third one was so dumb and poorly executed.

Danny Trejo is not a bad choice to play the host of a horror anthology.  As is always the case with Danny Trejo, he brings a lot of energy to the role and he seems to be having a great time.  His co-host is Nicelle Nichols, of Star Trek fame.  She doesn’t get to do much other than nod approvingly as Trejo introduces each story.  The stories themselves are full of familiar faces, though the film could hardly be called “all-star.”  Instead, it’s more like, “Here’s a bunch of people who you might recognize and who needed the money.”  In other words, the film is full of people like Jay Mohr, Chris Kattan, Vivica A. Fox, and Brendan Sexton III.  Most of them give rather broad performances, as if they want to make sure you know that they’re just appearing in this movie as a favor to someone and not because they were desperate for work.  It’s a bit like Movie 43, just with a less prestigious cast and more dead babies.

Anyway. American Nightmares is not particularly good.  It’s overstuffed with stories and none of the stories are really as clever as the film seems to think that they are.  Danny Trejo, though, is a badass.

 

Horror On The Lens: The Phantom of the Opera (dir by Rupert Julian)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

Today’s horror movie on the Shattered Lens is both a classic of silent era and one of the most influential horror films ever made.  It’s one that I previously shared in 2013, 2015, 2016, 2108, and 2019 but it’s such a classic that I feel that it is worth sharing a second (or fifth or even a sixth) time.

First released in 1925, The Phantom of the Opera is today best known for both Lon Chaney’s theatrical but empathetic performance as the Phantom and the iconic scene where Mary Philbin unmasks him. However, the film is also a perfect example of early screen spectacle. The Phantom of the Opera was released during that period of time, between Birth of the Nation and the introduction of sound, when audiences expected films to provide a visual feast and Phantom of the Opera certainly accomplishes that. Indeed, after watching this film and reading Gaston Leroux’s original novel, it’s obvious that the musical was inspired more by the opulence of this film than by the book.

This film is also historically significant in that it was one of the first films to be massively reworked as the result of a poor test screening. The film’s ending was originally faithful to the end of the novel. However, audiences demanded something a little more dramatic and that’s what they got.

Horror on TV: Baywatch Nights 2.15 “Mobius” (dir by David Livingston)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

On tonight’s episode of Baywatch Nights, David Hasselhoff and Angie Harmon get zapped into a parallel universe, one where lifeguards regularly battle the denzieins of Hell.  Oh wait a minutes …. that’s this universe!

This episode originally aired on March 2nd, 1997!

Horror on the Lens: The Brain Wouldn’t Die (dir by Joseph Green)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

I hate to say it but it’s getting more and more difficult to find public domain horror films on YouTube that we have yet to share on this site.  I mean, the fact of the matter is that we’ve been doing these horrorthons for ten years now and there’s definitely a limited supply of films to choose from.  (For the most part, I try to pick films that I know aren’t going to get yanked down because of a copyright claim.  For instance, you might be able to find something like Hereditary or Midsommar on YouTube but I can guarantee you that it won’t be there long.)

Last night, I was really happy when I came across The Brain That Wouldn’t Die on YouTube.  “Finally!” I said, “A film were haven’t used yet!”  Then I did some research and I discovered that we did share it, way back in 2011.

Well, guess what.  We’re sharing it again.  After all, it’s always a good time to watch a movie about a disembodied head, a monster in a closet, and a man losing his arm in a scene that’s surprisingly graphic for 1962.  To me, the best thing about this film is just how pissed off that head is at being brought back to life.

So, for a second time, enjoy The Brain That Wouldn’t Die!

Horror on TV: Baywatch Nights 2.14 “Ascension” (dir by Jon Cassar)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

Tonight’s episode of Baywatch Nights is an odd one.  Mitch gets kidnapped.  Ryan dreams about it happening.  There’s a lot of weird torture devices.  Somehow, the Knights Templar are involved.  It always comes down to the Knights Templar, doesn’t it?

Seriously, how does one go back to being a lifeguard after all of this?

This episode originally aired on February 23rd, 1997.

Enjoy!

The TSL’s Horror Grindhouse: Disconnected (dir by Gorman Bechard)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

Disconnected, an independent and low-budget horror film from 1984, is an odd one.

Actually, odd might be too mild of a description of this film.  It’s about Alicia (Frances Raines, niece of Claude) who works in a video store and who keeps getting strange phone calls.  Alicia has a boyfriend named Mike (Carl Koch) and a twin sister named Barbra Ann (Raines, again) and, one night, she answers her landline phone and suddenly hears Mike and Barbara Ann talking about the affair that they’re having!  She then starts having nightmares in which Mike and Barbara Ann team up to kill her.

At the same time that Alicia is dreaming about being murdered, Franklin (Mark Walter) actually is murdering women all over town.  Franklin also keeps asking Alicia for a date and, after she discovers that Mike has been cheating on her, Alicia finally says yes.  One morning, Franklin wakes up in bed, grabs a knife, and attempts to stab Alicia, just to discover that she’s already left for the day.  Franklin just ends up stabbing a pillow, which is unfortunate because it was a nice pillow.

Meanwhile, Detective Tremaglio (Carmine Capobianco) is trying to figure out the identity of the serial killer.  For some reason, Detective Tremaglio spends a good deal of the film talking directly to the camera, as if he’s being interviewed.  Tremaglio is quick to point out how cheap the police station looks and he also says, at one point, that he feels like he’s in a low-budget horror film.

It creates a rather odd atmosphere.  On the one hand, you’ve got Franklin wandering around town, hitting the bars and searching for new victims.  On the other hand, you’ve got Alicia isolated in her apartment, dealing with the phone constantly ringing and basically having a Repulsion moment.  Who is calling Alicia?  It’s hard to say.  It’s definitely not Franklin.  Is Alicia imagining the phone calls?  Or is it some sort of a supernatural force?  And how is it connected to the mysterious old man who keeps wandering through the film at certain points, popping up like a red herring from the 2nd season of Twin Peaks?

Disconnected raises a lot of questions but it doesn’t answer many of them.  And while it’s tempting to suggest that this is just a case of sloppy storytelling, there’s enough intentionally arty moments in the film that I actually think that Disconnected was intentionally designed to be a riddle wrapped in an enigma.  For instance, there’s a scene where Alicia answers the phone.  For some reason, the camera is placed directly in front of a window.  The sun is streaming in through the window, which leads to an almost blinding lens flare.  The viewer is vaguely aware of Alicia moving around the room and answering the phone but, due to that lens flare, it’s impossible to actually make out any real details.  It sounds like an error in camera placement and yet the scene goes on for so long that there’s no way it wasn’t intentional.  (It should also be noted that the scene itself wasn’t particularly important so, if that lens flare was an honest mistake, there’s no reason why the scene couldn’t have been left on the cutting room floor.)  Obviously, the director liked the effect and just decided to go with it.  And yes, it’s kind of annoying but it’s kind of fascinating too.

The entire plot of Disconnected has a kind of “let’s make this up as we go along” feel to it and it’s hard not to appreciate the film’s enthusiastic incoherence.  At its best the film achieves a sort of dream-like intensity.  In the end, it all means nothing and yet, thanks to Frances Raines’s better-than-average performance, you are invested in what happens to Alicia.  You want to know what it all means, even if it only adds up to the ringing of that cursed phone.

So, does that means I’m recommending Disconnected?  Kinda.  As I’ve said many times in the past, I have a weakness for low-budget, amateur films.  This one was filmed out in the middle of Connecticut and most of the actors were obviously not professionals.  There’s something oddly likable about a film like this, one that makes no sense but, at the very least, was still made and — 36 years later — is still being watched and reviewed.  So …. yeah, I am kind of recommending this film.  It’s weird enough to be worth at least one viewing.