Horror Film Review: Jaws 3 (dir by Joe Alves)

Posted on October 3, 2018 by Lisa Marie Bowman

So, this is a strange one.

As the title states, this 1983 film is the third sequel to the Jaws. As I pointed out in my reviews of the first film and Jaws 2, the first two films all starred Roy Scheider and took place on Amity Island. In fact, it can be argued that Amity Island was almost as important to the success of the first two films as the shark. When Martin Brody conquered his fears and got out on the water, it wasn’t just to destroy a shark. It was also to protect a community under siege.

Well, there’s no such community like Amity Island in Jaws 3. And there’s no Roy Scheider either. Instead, our hero is Martin Brody’s son, Mike. Mike is all grown up and working as the senior marine biologist at SeaWorld Orlando. Mike is now played by a very young and very bearded Dennis Quaid. This leads to an interesting situation where Mike — who grew up in New England and whose father was a former New York City cop — has a very pronounced Texas accent. That’s not a complaint, of course. I’m from Texas so I’m always happy to see (and hear) a fellow Texan in a movie. Plus, Dennis Quaid’s a likable actor. Still, it somehow seems appropriate that the third installment of the Jaws franchise would feature a New Yorker growing up to be a Texan. I mean, if we’re going to accept that the same outlandish event can keep happening to the members of the same family then I guess anything’s possible.

The other Brody son, Sean, is also featured in the film. Sean is now played by John Putch and, when he first shows up to visit Mike, he’s dressed like he just got off work at the rodeo. You have to kind of wonder if maybe the trauma of nearly getting killed in Jaws 2 led to both of the Brody boys rejecting their New England roots and embracing the ways of the west. Say what you will about Texas and all the states in between El Paso and Los Angeles, we’re pretty much shark free.

Anyway, this is a Jaws films so you can guess what happens. A big shark ends up getting loose in SeaWorld and Mike tries to close the park down, just to be overruled by the park’s manger, Calvin Bouchard (Lou Gossett, Jr.). Meanwhile, a hunter named Philip Fitzroyce (Simon MacCorkindale) announces that he will personally track down and kill the shark. As you might guess just from the fact that his last name is Fitzroyce, Philip is arrogant and speaks with a posh accent. Mike takes an immediate dislike to him but I was happy whenever Philip showed up, mostly because Simon MacCorkindale gave a performance that was so over-the-top that it was fun to watch. Whenever MacCorkindale and Gossett got together in the same scene, the film stopped being about the shark and instead became a contest to see who could overenunciate their dialogue with the most style.

(In the end, MacCorkindale won, but only narrowly. A few years after Jaws 3, Gossett would co-star in The Principal and would go on to secure his spot in the Overenunciation Hall Of Fame by pronouncing the word “drugs” in such a way that I first thought he was talking about druids.)

One of the reasons why Jaws 3 seems odd when watched today is because it was originally released in 3-D. (In fact, the film’s original title was Jaws 3-D.) As a result, there’s a lot of scenes of people either walking towards or pointing directly at the camera. Whenever anyone holds up a pole or a harpoon or anything similar, you know that they’re going to end up pointing the end of it straight at the viewer. At the start of the film, when the shark bites a fish in half, the fish’s head ominously floats closer and closer to the camera. There’s a lot of scenes that were obviously designed to make audiences says, “Oh my God! I feel like I could reach out and touch it!” but, in the non-3D version, those scenes are just weirdly paced and slightly out-of-focus. (At one point during the film, the picture was so blurry that I actually checked to make sure I had my contacts in.)

Add to that, there’s more than few scenes where it’s obvious that the shark has been superimposed into the action. If the first two Jaws films featured big sharks, Jaws 3 often seems to feature a cartoon shark. In short, what may have been impressive in a theater in 1983 to an audience wearing special glasses is far less impressive when you’re watching the movie at 3 in the morning on AMC.

The other weird thing about this film is that it was actually filmed at SeaWorld Orlando. I’m going to guess that the film was supposed to serve as a 99-minute advertisement and a lot of time is devoted to people talking about how much they love SeaWorld. At the same time, this film also features the park’s manager refusing to shut down the park and basically putting everyone’s life in danger. If anything, the film’s main message seems to be, “If you go to SeaWorld, you’ll die.” You have to wonder if some executive lost his job after Jaws 3 came out.

Anyway, Jaws 3 is a silly movie that never quite comes to life in the way that both Jaws and, to a lesser extent, Jaws 2 did. Yes, the shark’s ruthless and we get to hear the familiar music and there’s some cute dolphins but otherwise, the movie itself is just kind of bland. Rumor has it that Jaws 3 was originally going to be a comedy called Jaws 3 People 0. That probably would have made for a more memorable movie but, at the same time, I got some good laughs out of the scene where the tourists in an underwater tunnel realized that a shark was watching them so, in the end, everything worked out for the best.

Horror on the Lens: Plan 9 From Outer Space (dir by Ed Wood, Jr.)

Posted on October 3, 2018 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Plan 9 from Outer Space (1959)

Watching Ed Wood’s infamous Plan 9 From Outer Space is something of an October tradition here at the Shattered Lens! And you know how much I love tradition!

Some people say that this film has a reputation for being the worst film ever made. Personally, I don’t think that it deserves that reputation. Is it bad? By traditional standards of quality, I guess it can be argued that Plan 9 From Outer Space is a bad movie. But it’s also a lot of fun and how can you not smile when you hear Criswell’s opening and closing statements?

Enjoy and be sure to read Gary’s review!

(And also be sure to read Jedadiah Leland’s tribute to Criswell!)

(On another note: Watch this as quickly as you can because, over the least year or so, it seems like all the films of Ed Wood get yanked off YouTube as soon as they are posted. Copyright violations, they say. Personally, I think that’s shameful. First off, Ed Wood is no longer alive. Wood had no children and his widow died in 2006, having never remarried. Whatever money is being made off of his films is not going to support his family. Wherever he is, I think Ed would be more concerned that people see his films than some faceless corporation make money off of them.)

(It seems like, every year, someone threatens to either remake Plan 9 or produce a sequel. Again, the original is all that is needed.)

Horror on TV: One Step Beyond 2.24 “The Mask” (dir by John Newland)

Posted on October 2, 2018 by Lisa Marie Bowman

For today’s televised horror, we have an episode of the 1960s anthology series, One Step Beyond. From what I’ve been able to gather, One Step Beyond was like The Twilight Zone, except that it often claimed that it’s stories were all based on fact.

In The Mask, a World War II-era fighter pilot crashes in the Sahara. Though he’s eventually rescued, he’s forced to wear a mask while recovering from his injuries. When the mask is removed, everyone is shocked to discover that Lt. Harold Wilesnki not only look like an ancient Egyptian prince but he also seems to have the prince’s memories as well!

The Mask originally aired on March 1st, 1960.

Enjoy!

Book Review: 666 by Jay Anson

Posted on October 2, 2018 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Published in 1981, 666 is a book that will make you wonder, “How do people not know what 666 means?”

It’s the story of Keith and Jennifer, an attractive young couple who move into a new home and immediately become fascinated by the empty house across the way. The empty house’s address is 666 Sunset Brooke Lane and no one finds that strange.

Keith decides to explore the house and discovers not only a coin that was minted by the Roman Empire but also a stained glass window that appears to feature someone who looks exactly like him. Keith does find that strange but it still doesn’t occur to him that there might be a clue to be found in the address.

Jennifer friend, David, decided to rent out 666 Sunset Brooke Lane and immediately starts to have visions of not only Christians being tortured during the reign of Nero but also of a naked Jennifer standing on the house’s front porch. And yet, David never associates this with the house’s address.

Keith’s brother is a priest (!) who is investigating a local Satanic cult and yet somehow, it never occurs to him to be concerned about 666 Sunset Brooke Lane.

Anyway, it all ends in (tame) sex, violence, and tragedy, as these things often do. The main lesson that I took away from this book was that you should be concerned if a notorious murder house suddenly appears in your backyard. It’s a lesson that I won’t forget.

666 was written by Jay Anson, who had previously written a “non-fiction” book called The Amityville Horror. 666 is a story about four incredibly dumb people, all of whom inspired me to shout, “Why don’t you just leave the damn house!?” more than a few times. That said, it’s also enjoyably pulpy and the main characters are all so thinly drawn and unlikable that you really don’t mind when they start dying. Though you’ll be shaking your head at many of the book’s implausibilities, the final chapters are crudely effective and, when it’s time to describe the torture techniques of ancient Rome, Anson goes all out.

Plus, the book has a really cool inside cover!

Italian Horror Spotlight: Hatchet for the Honeymoon (dir by Mario Bava)

Posted on October 2, 2018 by Lisa Marie Bowman

“My name is John Harrington. I’m 30 years old. I am a paranoiac.”

So declares John Harrington (Stephen Forsyth) at the start of the 1969’s Hatchet for The Honeymoon. Along with being a paranoiac, John Harrington is also handsome, charming, and apparently quite successful. He owns a bridal dress factory in France, a business that he inherited from his mother after her untimely death. On the outside, everything looks perfect but appearances can often be deceiving.

John’s wife, Mildred (Laura Betti), knows that John is hiding secrets. She regularly taunts John, reminding him that he’s not only impotent but that he’s also has an unhealthy obsession with his memories of his mother. John’s mother died when he was very young. He witnessed her death but he’s repressed the memory of who actually killed her. John is determined to recover those memories.

So, what does John do?

Does he go to a hypnotist? Does he dig through old police files and search for clues? Does he ask someone to analyze his dreams? That’s what you or I might do but John, you must remember, is a paranoiac. Somehow, John has realized that, whenever he commits a murder, he remembers just a little bit more about the night his mother died. So, in order to learn the truth about his mother’s death, John is murdering the models who work at his bridal salon. Apparently, it’s very important that his victims be wearing a wedding dress when they die….

Okay, now you’re probably already thinking that this sounds like a somewhat bizarre movie. Well, believe it or not, things are about to get a lot stranger.

After John meets a new model named Helen (Dagmar Lassander), he decided that he doesn’t need Mildred yelling at him anymore. So, he puts on a wedding veil and murders Mildred. However, even in death, Mildred won’t leave John alone. Mildred’s ghost shows up and announces that everyone will be able to see her but John.

So now, John is having to deal with everyone assuming that his wife is with him, even though he can’t see her. As you might guess, this makes it a bit difficult for John to convince potential victims to come back to the salon with him.

And, from there, it just keeps getting stranger and stranger….

Hatchet For The Honeymoon was written and directed by one of the most important figures in the history of Italian cinema, Mario Bava. A master technician with a wry and occasionally self-mocking sense of humor, Bava worked in every genre, from peplums to spaghetti westerns to poliziotteschis, but he’s best remembered for his work in the horror genre. Bava is often credited with having directed the first giallo film and his often-violent thrillers are still influential to this day.

Hatchet For The Honeymoon is often described as being one of Bava’s lesser films but I don’t agree with that judgment. If nothing else, Hatchet For The Honeymoon is probably one of Bava’s more playful movies. From the increasingly bizarre twists and turns of the film’s plot to John Harrington’s wonderfully overwrought narration, the entire film has an almost improvisational feel to it. One gets the feeling that Bava is poking fun at the conventions of the giallo genre. The usual omnipresent, black glove-wearing killer has been replaced by an impotent wedding dress designer who can’t even escape the ghost of his dead wife.

(Reportedly, Mildred wasn’t originally in the script and was only added because Bava wanted to work with actress Laura Betti. Perhaps that explains why Mildred often seems to be standing outside of the story, mocking not only John but also the mechanics of the thriller plot.)

As one would expect from a Bava film, Hatchet for the Honeymoon is frequently a visual marvel, a pop art-inspired mix of dark shadows and red blood. The wedding dresses are to die for and so is the cinematography. I especially liked the darkly ominous shots of John surrounded by the lifeless mannequins in his salon. Early on, when we get a shot from John’s point of view, the image is slightly blurred and the angle seem just a bit off, a reminder of John’s twisted impression of the world around him. When John walks up stairs to the kill his wife, the sound of his movement seems to echo through his ornate but sterile home.

If Stephen Forsyth sometimes seems to be a bit stiff in the role of John, it’s an appropriate reminder that John is an empty shell and all of his feelings and emotions are manufactured. Laura Betti does a wonderful job nagging him in life and her palpable joy about getting revenge in death is one of the best things about the movie.

Hatchet For The Honeymoon is an exuberantly weird film and definitely one that needs to be seen by anyone seeking to fall in love with Italian horror.

Horror Film Review: Mom and Dad (dir by Brian Taylor)

Posted on October 2, 2018 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Mom and Dad, which was released earlier this year, is the story of many things.

It’s a story of the suburbs, the perfect place to buy a home and raise your family. Nice lawns, big houses, friendly people, and plenty of buried resentment. It’s a place that can either represent a new beginning or the death of all of your childhood dreams. It all depends on how you look at it. Mom and Dad opens with a suburban mom leaving her newborn in a car that has been strategically parked on the railroad tracks.

Mom and Dad is also the story of a family. The Ryans may seem like they have it all but one only needs to look at their morning routine to see that things aren’t as perfect as they may appear. Teenager daughter Carly (Anne Winters) is dating a guy who she knows her parents dislike. Her younger brother, Josh (Zackary Arthur), is something of a brat. Carly’s father, Brent (Nicolas Cage), is stuck in a monotonous job while her mother, Kendall (Selma Blair), had to give up her career to raise two children who don’t seem to appreciate her at all. On top of all that, the grandparents (one of whom is Lance Henriksen) are coming over later for dinner. The Ryans are a family who spend more time looking at their phones that actually talking to each other.

Mom and Dad is also the story of static. It’s not just the metaphorical static that makes it difficult for the Carly to understand her parents. It’s also a very real static, a hissing and popping noise that suddenly comes over radios, pa systems, and televisions and which, for reasons that are never really made clear, fills parents with rage. When a parent hear the static, they suddenly become obsessed with killing their children. Kendall’s sister attempts to smother her newborn while a group of new fathers gather in the hospital, shaking with rage as they stare at their babies. Elsewhere, parents gather outside the high school, waiting for their kids to get out of school so that they can kill them.

As for Carly and Josh, they find themselves locked in their basement while, outside, Brent and Kendall plot their demise. What makes all of this particularly disturbing (and, at times, darkly humorous) is that it’s not like the parents turn into glass-eyed zombies. Instead, their personalities remain largely the same, except for the fact that they’re now obsessed with killing their children. When Brent and Kendall discuss wanting to murder their children, they speak about everyday frustrations. Brent wants to murder Carly because he caught her hanging out with her boyfriend. Kendall wants to kill her son and her daughter because she feels like she’s had to give up her entire life just to be their mother. The static didn’t drive Mom and Dad crazy. Instead, it just really reminded them that sometimes, children can be a real pain in the ass to deal with.

When it was initially released, the film got a lot of attention for a scene in which an enraged Brent sledgehammers a pool table while singing The Hokey Pokey and yes, it is a classic Nicolas Cage scene. That Cage goes totally and gloriously over-the-top as Brent shouldn’t come as a shock to anyone. (For the record, I always enjoy a good Nicolas Cage freakout.) Even better though is Selma Blair, who is as subtle as Cage is wild. When Kendall talks about everything that she’s sacrificed to be a stay-at-home mom, it’s a poignant moment. She may be trying to kill her children but you still feel for her. Cage is, as usual, entertainingly bizarre but Blair actually gives the film some unexpected depth.

It’s a wild and deeply subversive film and definitely not for everyone. It also features a wonderful third act twist and one of my favorite endings of the year. Mom and Dad has its flaws but, for those who like a little satire with their horror, it’s definitely worth seeing.

Horror on the Lens: Equinox (dir by Jack Woods and Dennis Muren)

Posted on October 2, 2018 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Today’s horror on the lens is a film that Gary reviewed a few years ago.

First released in 1970, Equinox is a low-budget film about a bunch of kind of dumb teenagers who find a book and end up getting chased around the woods by a bunch of angry monsters.

Equinox is a fun little movie. The acting may not be the greatest and this is one of those films where everyone always seems to do the stupidest possible thing at the worst possible time but there’s a lot of charm to be found in the monsters. This film is thought, by many, to have inspired the Evil Dead and there are some definite similarities.

Enjoy!

Horror on TV: The Twilight Zone 3.24 “To Serve Man” (dir by Richard L. Bare)

Posted on October 1, 2018 by Lisa Marie Bowman

“It’s a cookbook!”

During the month of October, we like to share classic episodes of horror-themed television. That was easier to do when we first started doing our annual October horrorthon here at the Shattered Lens because every single episode of the original, black-and-white Twilight Zone was available on YouTube. Sadly, that’s no longer the case. In fact, there is exactly one episode of the original Twilight Zone on YouTube.

Fortunately, that episode is a classic. In 1962’s To Serve Man, an alien (Richard Kiel) comes to Earth and invites people to return to his home planet with him. He leaves behind a book. When everyone learns that the title of the book is To Serve Man, they excitedly decide that the book must be an instruction manual on how to help mankind. The truth, as we learn in the episode’s classic finale, is something a little bit different.

Here’s the episode! Watch it before YouTube yanks it down.

(This episode originally aired on October 2nd, 1962. It was directed by Richard L. Bare from a script by Rod Serling. It was based on a short story by Damon Knight.)

Enjoy!

The TSL’s Horror Grindhouse: Hellmaster (dir by Douglas Schulze)

Posted on October 1, 2018 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Welcome to the end of the world.

Or something like that.

To be honest, it’s a bit of a struggle to say what exactly the 1992 film Hellmaster was actually about but I think it definitely had something to do with the end of the world. John Saxon plays Prof. Jones, a sadistic eugenicist who, in the late 60s, developed a drug that he claimed would — I kid you not — “cure homelessness.” Apparently, the drug would make the homeless so strong that they would be able to build a house or something. Anyway, a reporter (David Emge, best known as the helicopter pilot in the original Dawn of the Dead) discovered what Jones was doing and that the drugs were actually turning the homeless into mind-controlled zombies. Jones responded by murdering the reporter’s wife and then vanishing.

Are you following the story so far?

20 years later, the reporter is having nightmares about the homeless so he decides to start hanging out around the Kant Institute for the Gifted. We’re told that the Kant Institute is a college. There only appears to be one professor and a handful of students, the majority of whom appear to be in their early 30s. I’m not really sure what’s being taught at the school. (The only class we see features two white people debating whether or not Malcolm X hated the homeless.) One of the students, Shelley (Amy Raasch), is apparently clairvoyant and she keeps having visions of the school’s chapel bursting into flames.

Meanwhile, there are shots of an old church bus driving down various deserted roads. “Have a nice day” is written across the cross that hangs on the front of the bus. On top of the bus, someone’s painted a smiley face. The bus itself is occupied by four deformed followers of Prof. Jones. Apparently, they’ve spent the last 20 years driving around the country and killing people. One of them is dressed like a nun and carries several hypodermic needles. They come across a stalled motorist and promptly kill him. The man’s daughter (Sarah Barkoff) escapes and flees to the nearby Kant Institute.

It turns out that the bus is also heading to the Kant Institute! Eventually, Prof. Jones pops up and explains that it took God six days to create the world but Jones believes that it will only take him one night to transform the world into Hell. Why does Jones want to do this? That’s not really clear. Actually, it’s not even clear how showing up at the Kant Institute will even help Jones accomplish that goal.

Anyway, the rest of the movie is basically Shelley and the reporter and a handful of friends attempting to not get transformed into zombies by Prof. Jones. This is easier said than done because, as we quickly discover, everyone in this movie is an idiot.

Hellmaster is one of those low-budget horror films that shouldn’t work and yet somehow, it does. Yes, the plot makes absolutely no sense and, with the exception of genre vets Saxon and Emge, the performances are almost all terrible. But no matter! At its best, the film — which is full of dark hallways and deserted roads and twisty camera angles — achieves a dream-like intensity. The zombies, with their hypodermic needles and their joyful savagery, are genuinely creepy and John Saxon is properly menacing as Prof. Jones. It’s a relentless film, one that leaves you feeling as if anyone can die at any time and, when they do die, it’s often in the most macabre ways possible. A crippled student is beaten to death with his own crutch. Another is doused with acid. And you may be asking yourself, “But why was there a big vat of acid just sitting around?” but oddly, it works within the surreal dream logic of the film. It makes no sense and yet, it happens. If anything, the lack of a coherent plot and the low-budget aesthetic help this film create and maintain its nightmarish atmosphere.

For all of its flaws, Hellmaster is a thousand times more effective than you might expect.

Book Review: Carrie by Stephen King

Posted on October 1, 2018 by Lisa Marie Bowman

First published in 1974, Carrie is often cited as being Stephen King’s first novel.

That, of course, isn’t technically true. King had written three novels before Carrie, the majority of which weren’t very good. Carrie is a novel that King says he wrote in a hurry because he was living in a trailer and needed the money. It’s also a novel that King says he had absolutely no faith in because he didn’t feel like he could write from a female perspective. Despite King’s then-low opinion of what he had written, Carrie went on to become his first published novel. Thought the novel wasn’t an immediate success (the hardback edition only sold 13,000 copies), it subsequently became a best seller after it was adapted into Brian DePalma’s 1976 film of the same name.

By now, we all know the story, don’t we? Even if you’ve never read the book or seen any of the film versions, there’s been so many different rip-offs and unofficial remakes of Carrie that I doubt that there’s anyone who doesn’t know the story. Everyone knows that Carrie White was a high school outcast and that her mother was a religious fanatic. We all know what happened the night that Tommy Ross took Carrie White to prom. We all know about the cruel prank that was played on Carrie, about the pig’s blood that was dumped on her right after Tommy and Carrie were crowned king and queen of the prom. And we all know that Carrie’s response was to use her own telekinetic powers to burn down the entire town and to kill the majority of her tormentors.

44 years after it was first published, it’s still interesting to read Carrie. On the one hand, you can definitely see the beginnings of King’s signature style, especially towards the end of the book when Sue Snell comes across a dying Carrie. On the other hand, this book is definitely different from any other King novel. For one thing, it’s only 199 pages long. Living in a trailer and struggling to make ends meet may not have been easy for King but I would say it actually made him a better writer. Carrie contains none of the rambling, self-indulgent filler that’s come to typify much of King’s recent work. One imagines that, if King wrote Carrie today, we’d have to wade through at least 500 pages of people talking about the history of psychic phenomena before the book even got around to Sue asking Tommy to take Carrie to prom. Instead, because King was writing while hungry, there’s a hunger to the book. It doesn’t waste any time.

King structured the novel so that half of it was narrative and half of it was, for lack of a better term, evidence. We get excerpts from police reports, newspaper articles, and books written after the prom disaster. The White Committee offers up their official report. We get to read a little bit of Sue Snell’s book, I Am Sue Snell. I imagine the structure was largely the result of King’s self-confessed insecurity with the book’s subject matter. (For instance, whenever you doubt that Tommy Ross would actually take Carrie to prom, an except from the final report of the White Committee pops up and assures you that he did.) Though borne of insecurity, the structure actually works pretty well. It leaves little doubt that, after Carrie’s prom, the world will never be the same again.

The thing that really struck me while rereading this novel was that Stephen King himself seemed to dislike Carrie White almost as much as her classmates did. King focuses, to an almost uncomfortable degree, on Carrie’s unattractive appearance and, often times, he seems to be keeping his own distance from his main character, as if he was weary about trying to get inside of her head. When Carrie does go on her rampage, she comes across more as an out-of-control monster than someone who has been pushed too far. Our popular conception of Carrie being a tragic victim really has more to do with how Sissy Spacek played her in the original film than in how King wrote about her in his novel.

Instead, the book is far more concerned with Sue Snell and Tommy Ross, who are both portrayed as being everyone’s idealized high school companion. As both a novel and a film, Carrie‘s greatest weakness has always been that the plot hinges on the idea that any teenager, no matter how guilt-ridden, would actually ask their romantic companion to take someone else to prom. The pig’s blood, I believe. The prom, less so.

Carrie has its flaws but, to be honest, I actually think it’s better than some of King’s more recent books. If nothing else, it’s a chance to look into Stephen King’s mind before he became the Stephen King.