Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter (1984)

Directed by Joseph Zito [Other horror films: Bloodrage (1980), The Prowler (1981)]

Long-considered one of the best of the series by many, The Final Chapter has the elements you’d come to expect from a Friday the 13th movie, and it puts them together well.

With quality special effects (certainly not something new for the series), some memorable characters (just look at Dead Fuck’s – I mean, Crispin Glover’s – fantastic dance moves), and just an all-around solid story (not that it’s hard to mess up script for Friday the 13th), I think that this one is remembered fondly for a reason.

I love the beginning to this one, a compilation of scenes from the previous three films, and the film picks up immediately following the conclusion of the third film, which is pretty fun to see (we don’t get much of Jason at the hospital, but what we did get was pleasantly reminiscent of Halloween II). Given that the third film and this one take place over the course of just a couple of days really brings forth the slaughter.

Some of the characters weren’t that memorable (Clyde Hayes, Judie Aronson, and Peter Barton being the best examples), but then we get gems such as the cute Carey More and Camilla More, the funky fun Crispin Glover (of Back to the Future fame), the unlucky Lawrence Monoson, the innocent-yet-fun Barbara Howard, and all-around quality Kimberly Beck. I didn’t care much for Erich Anderson’s character, but Joan Freeman was good, and Corey Feldman (Gremlins) really gave a great performance as a younger actor.

Plus, Crispin Glover gave us a great dance.

Either the corkscrew or shower kill is my favorite, but there are plenty of decent kills throughout the movie. I also enjoyed the rain coming back during the finale, as rain always felt like a good way for these movies to end. Tommy Jarvis too was an interesting character to challenge Jason, and I enjoyed his decently intellectual approach, as it reminded me of Ginny (Amy Steel) from Part 2.

Both this movie and Part 2 are pretty close in quality, truth be told. I don’t think either one is significantly better or worse in any real way, which is a good indicator that these are the two strongest films this series has to offer.

Definitely The Final Chapter has been a favorite of mine for years, and it will continue to be.

8.5/10

The Carpenter (1988)

Directed by David Wellington [Other horror films: N/A]

There are some movies that I’ve known about for a long time, but haven’t yet seen. I first heard about The Carpenter back in 2009 (I’m writing this review October 2020, for a frame of reference), and I was captivated as soon as I learned about it. As it was, the movie didn’t turn out anything like I expected (as so often happens), but it was still certainly an enjoyable film.

To be sure, if you could do without melodrama, then maybe The Carpenter isn’t for you, as the horror portions are sandwiched by a lot of drama that isn’t exactly the pinnacle of enjoyable. I didn’t find it that problematic, as I found it hilarious when the titular carpenter did pop up (generally at night, because that’s how ghost carpenters do) with his suave, hard-working man charm, but I can imagine some people finding a good portion of this boring.

And to an extent, maybe they’d not be far off. It does take the film a bit to really get to the point (the first time the carpenter pops up, and actually, most of the times the carpenter pops up, he’s more a guardian angel than anything), but the kills here, when they occur, are still fun, and I didn’t find myself struggling to get through this.

Part of that is because the main actress, Lynne Adams deeply intrigued me. It’s not that her character was overly interesting (though to an extent, she did have a somewhat unique story), but I couldn’t see her for two minutes without thinking of Mary-Louise Parker (who most people might know from the show Weeds, but I’m most familiar with through her role on The West Wing). Adams really looked like Parker to me, and I even double-checked half-way through the film to see if they were sisters or something (they don’t seem to be). So that was fun.

Also, Wings Hauser had a hell of a lot of charm. I mean, he was totally goofy, don’t get me wrong, but I really liked his performance. His delivery was perfect, and who doesn’t like seeing him kill people and then act bashful about it afterward? Pierre Lenoir was solid as an unlikable and often dull prick, so kudos there, I guess.

What I expected with this movie was a more violent Toolbox Murders, with creative kills and all-out onslaught (or maybe that’s more what I was hoping for), but what I got instead was a drama-laden film with this ghostly carpenter popping up to charm the missus and protect her from the evils around her, which was still fine, but not what I pictured.

Regardless of expectations that fell through, this movie had some hokey charm to it, and I did find myself enjoying it. It just wasn’t as fun as I was hoping for.

7/10

Return of the Living Dead: Part II (1988)

Directed by Ken Wiederhorn [Other horror films: Shock Waves (1977), Eyes of a Stranger (1981), Dark Tower (1987)]

Having never seen this sequel before, I could imagine that it’d be a favorite if I had watched it when I was a kid. There might have been a chance for this to possess a lot of nostalgic charm if this had caught me when I was young. As it is, watching it for the first time now, I just found it regrettably more goofy than the first film, and nowhere near as good.

It’s not an utter waste of time, but almost everything that was great about the first film is somewhat muted here. The story itself is okay, and the setting is decent, but the music isn’t as memorable, the characters are nowhere near as good, and the fact that humor is more at the forefront was a choice that I sensed was coming but didn’t care for whatsoever.

For a young actor, Michael Kenworthy gave a pretty good performance, and it made it a bit easier to like his character when he was about the only one who knew what he was doing. This kid was pretty clever, and I appreciated his initiative. Playing his sister, Marsha Dietlein can yell at me anytime she wants, as she was foxy as fuck here. Dana Ashbrook was decent as an action-oriented guy, but he felt somewhat stereotypical come the conclusion.

James Karen and Thom Mathews (who played similar characters in the first film, which is even alluded to here) were okay, but seeing Mathews in the first movie was enough, as half his dialogue here once he falls ill is the same stuff from the first film. And playing his girlfriend, Suzanne Snyder was extraordinarily irksome. She wouldn’t shut up. Snyder played the character well, but what a terrible character.

With it’s focus more on the humor, Return of the Living Dead: Part II wasn’t near as enjoyable and (ironically) fun as the first movie. It has some okay scenes toward the end (even those terrible electrocution effects have their place), but it was an underwhelming experience throughout, and while I know some out there enjoy this one, I just couldn’t get into it.

5.5/10

The Return of the Living Dead (1985)

Directed by Dan O’Bannon [Other horror films: The Resurrected (1991)]

One of the best examples of a movie firmly with it’s feet in the 1980’s, The Return of the Living Dead has long been a favorite of mine. I don’t usually go for zombie comedies, but this one is a classic, and I do rather enjoy it.

It helps that the humor isn’t usually too goofy. There are a few scenes I could have done without, but for the most part, while the film certainly has comedy in it, it’s a lot more tame as opposed to an all-out goof-fest, which I am quite happy about, and personally makes it an easier film for me to get behind.

Also, that music – those funky beats that pop up whenever something goes down are just great. After that body is cremated, and the ashes rise into the air as the rain starts, and that music starts up, it just sounds great. It has a dark vibe to it (which lends the movie great atmosphere at times), and related, you gotta love the movie’s conclusion, from the solution the general has to the rains afterward.

I won’t spend much time on the performances, because most of them are fair in this film. James Karen and Thom Mathews’ (Friday the 13th Part VI: Jason Lives) antics that started the whole thing were sort of funny (“This is completely solid,” slaps it and it breaks open – cracked me up). I didn’t care for Clu Gulager’s (A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 2: Freddy’s Revenge) character at first, but he grew on me a bit throughout the film. Don Calfa played his role pretty straight, which was impressive, and I also liked him.

Most of the teen characters were interchangeable. I don’t know how Beverly Randolph’s Tina started hanging out with that bunch, but whateves. Jewel Shepard was rather attractive at times, but none of that matters when Linnea Quigley strips naked early on in the film and stays in stages of being undressed throughout. Her character was odd anyway (with some really interesting and memorable lines of dialogue), but boy, does she have a cute butt. I could watch her in the graveyard naked for longer than I care to admit.

This is just one of those easy films that you can throw on at almost any point and have a fun time with. There’s nothing too deep here – just pure 80’s fun, with a bitching soundtrack, decent characters through, solid zombie design (need I even mention my homeboi Tarman?), and a great conclusion.

Even if you’re not a typical fan of zombie films, I’d recommend checking this one out, as it really is a ton of fun.

8.5/10

The Hunger (1983)

Directed by Tony Scott [Other horror films: N/A]

After reading the description to this film on my TV, I expected to hate it. No use denying it – I read the plot and immediately grew disinterested. I wasn’t entirely tuned out, though, and I watched the whole film, because I’m not going to ignore a movie simply because it’s not my cup of tea. It’s also a decently-rated film.

Still, I hated this.

The first ten minutes are horrible, the next hour is slow as fuck, brahs, and the rest is also horrible. I mean, sure, you have a few pretty good and emotional scenes (such as Miriam putting John to rest), and there was that almost-sensual lesbian scene (I say almost because I don’t find Catherine Deneuve that attractive), but for the most part, this was not my type of movie at all.

Deneuve (famous for her role in Repulsion) did okay as the vampire woman. I mean, she was obviously a terrible person, so I did enjoy the end (and in fact, that ending was perhaps one of the best parts of the film), but she did a good job in the performance. I don’t know Susan Sarandon that well, aside from the fact she endorsed Jill Stein in 2016, which is who I voted for, so maybe her heart’s in the right place, but here, I thought her character lacked, well, character. She had a nice chest, but a boring character.

Cliff De Young (Dr. Giggles) is only here so I can link Dr. Giggles in the future. Seriously, De Young was okay, but like Sarandon, I didn’t get a great sense of character from him at all. Beth Ehlers didn’t appear much, but she did give us another one of the few high-points in the film when her character meets a somewhat surprising death. Kudos there.

Also, I have to talk a bit about David Bowie. I know some people, when they read this, won’t believe me, but I can’t control what hypothetical people do or do not believe – I cannot think of a single song by David Bowie. I don’t know a thing about him. When I try to think of a Bowie song, I either think of Phil Collins or Elton John. Am I close? I don’t know – I’ve possibly never heard a David Bowie song in my life, and if I have, I definitely didn’t know Bowie was the artist.

All of that is to say that I have only this movie to judge him on, and you know what? His performance was pretty good. It was also easily the most emotional part of the film, and the aforementioned scene in which Deneuve’s character is saying her final goodbyes to Bowies’ an exceptionally strong scene in an otherwise waste of a movie.

Is this stated a bit strongly? I don’t know. This movie, for as long as I’ve known about it, has been rated well on IMDb, and I knew beforehand it might not be my type of movie, so maybe it’s unfair that I went into this one with the intention of rating it at the end. But I did, and I thought it was just awful, probably among one of my least favorite horror films of the 1980’s. Watch it if it sounds like your thing.

4/10

From Beyond (1986)

Directed by Stuart Gordon [Other horror films: Re-Animator (1985), Dolls (1986), Daughter of Darkness (1990), The Pit and the Pendulum (1991), Castle Freak (1995), Dagon (2001), Bunker of Blood: Chapter 5: Psycho Sideshow: Demon Freaks (2018)]

I have to admit that when I saw this film for the first time, it didn’t click. If you were to ask me what I didn’t like about it, I don’t know entirely if I would be able to give a great answer. The truth is I’m pretty sure I watched it on the same day I watch seven or eight other classic horror films, and this just got lost in the sauce, as Howie Hawkins (the presidential candidate I voted for in 2020) would often say.

So seeing it again was a nice surprise. I still can’t admit to loving it, because I don’t. I think the atmosphere is great, the main performances are solid, even the story is decently interesting (with elements of both Videodrome and a sprinkle of Prince of Darkness thrown in), but I lose interest in the last thirty minutes or so (once they leave the house and hit the mental institution). It’s not a bad direction, but I didn’t care much for it.

Of course, Jeffrey Combs (who I recently saw in The Attic Expeditions, and is most well-known for Re-Animator and voicing the Question in Justice League Unlimited) is a treat to see here, and there’s a  decent amount of sympathy felt for his character despite not really knowing much about him. Barbara Crampton (Re-Animator and Chopping Mall) was attractive here, especially in her glasses. Ken Foree (who, in fact, I forgot was in this – I loved him in Dawn of the Dead) was a lot of fun too.

Even with the strong cast and amazing special effects, the atmosphere doesn’t carry over to the mental institution, at least in my view. It’s still a good movie, but I’m rating it around average, and can only hope that I eventually grow to enjoy it as much as many other seem to.

7/10

April Fool’s Day (1986)

Directed by Fred Walton [Other horror films: When a Stranger Calls (1979), I Saw What You Did (1988), Trapped (1989), Homewrecker (1992), When a Stranger Calls Back (1993)]

Though mired somewhat by a mixed reception, April Fool’s Day is a classic that I will never not enjoy.

A large part of this is due to all of the characters. In truth, the kills themselves are somewhat light, but the variety of characters here still add a lot of vitality to the movie, and the opening scenes, while almost overwhelming insofar character introductions (there are quite a few characters thrown at us that we need to keep track of), do a good job of showing us who we’ll be watching for the next hour and a half.

So let’s take an unnecessarily lengthy time and go over each and every cast-member, shall we?

Jay Baker cracks me up here. He plays the Texas boy Harvey, and he’s fun in pretty much every single scene he’s in. It helps that he wants to plow some fields wink wink. Deborah Goodrich (Nikki) never really stuck with me, but she’s in the movie, so she’s fine too. It helps that her name is Mary O’Reilly O’Toole O’Shea, and she fucks on the first date. You know who else is fine? Ken Olandt (Rob, who was also in Leprechaun), as he’s a solid protagonist and there’s little to really dislike him for.

Griffin O’Neil (Skip) is of good quality. No complaints. Leah Pinsent (Nan) is probably my favorite character, especially toward the end when she’s just trying to read her book in peace amidst the celebrations going on. I really find her a lot of fun here, as Nan is totally my type. Clayton Rohner (Chaz) is something else, and of course, in this case, ‘something else’ means a lot of fun. He also wants to hide the sausage with Thomas F. Wilson (Back to the Future, brah), and seeing Rohner and Wilson just goof around like that is a lot of fun.

I don’t know if Amy Steel stands out amidst the characters as much as she did earlier in Friday the 13th Part 2, but she still makes for a pretty solid focal point. It’s Deborah Foreman (my girl Muffy) who really shows talent, though her obviously different personality in the latter half of the film felt almost too telling (which I guess is the point, so I won’t complain). Foreman’s probably best well known for, aside from this one, Destroyer, Waxwork, Lobster Man from Mars, and the ever-classic Valley Girl (this last one is, unfortunately, not horror), and I definitely think she’s a lot of fun here, from beginning to end.

Certainly, it could be said the kills are lacking. Much of the action, such as it is, happens off-screen, and usually that would be at least a mild cause for concern, but it works here due to, one, the nature of the story, and secondly, you’re already having a lot of fun watching these guys hang out, mess around, and get fooled by fake cigars, so the fact that the blood is a bit light isn’t a giant issue.

As for the conclusion, I think it’s pretty suspenseful, and they really get all the juice they possibly could out of the situation (I do love it that when Kit finally figures out what’s going on, Rob is still bellowing in the background). It’s worth mentioning too that, even had I not loved the ending (and I’m not going as far as to say I loved it, but I never had a problem with it), it wouldn’t badly impact the rest of the film – look at Slaughter High. That had perhaps one of the worst endings imaginable, and it still rocks in awesomeness.

From the beautiful island setting to the collection of fun and playful characters (I really can’t get enough of the cast – fantastic job all around getting these performers together), April Fool’s Day has never disappointed me. It’s not the best the 80’s has to offer, but it is pretty damn good, and I’ll stand by that.

8.5/10

This is one of the films covered by Fight Evil’s podcast. Listen below as Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I discuss April Fool’s Day, a true classic.

Spellbinder (1988)

Directed by Janet Greek [Other horror films: N/A]

There are some movies that I really enjoy the first time I see them, but then, upon revisiting them years later, fall a decent amount from my favor. Two good examples of this would be Witchboard and, more dramatically, Nightwatch. My reaction to seeing Spellbinder again isn’t nearly as negative, but I do think I enjoyed this quite a bit more when I first saw it.

It’s still a quality film, don’t get me wrong. The atmosphere is appropriately tense throughout much of the second half of the film, and the whole Satanic cult thing really works out in the movie’s favor. The special effects are great at times, and there’s an element of creepiness too that’s hard to deny. Oh, and there’s Tim Daly as the star, which is fantastic. All of these are great elements, and to be sure, I find the film above average without a doubt, but it’s missing something that I must have seen my first time through.

Tim Daly isn’t a giant name, but he did star in one of my favorite Stephen King works, the 1999 mini-series Storm of the Century. It’s sort of fun seeing a ten-year younger Daly, especially since it flew over my head the first time I saw this that I had previous experience with the actor. The other performances are all decent, such as Kelly Preston, Diana Bellamy (Stripped to Kill), and Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa (Ghost Voyage, of all things), but Daly was, at least to me, the clear stand-out here.

Once we get toward the finale of the film, some potential surprises pop up, and even though I’ve seen the film before, I still found the ending decently satisfying, though I think that past a certain point, many people could correctly surmise where exactly Spellbinder is going. Related, I enjoyed how they tacked on an epilogue of sorts, because it gave the thing a cyclical feel that worked well.

In the end, I didn’t enjoy Spellbinder quite as much as I used to, but I still think it’s a decent movie. It’s just not a movie that blew me away at all. Still, for the late 80’s, Spellbinder is a pretty unique film, and if it’s gone under your radar, it may well worth be checking out at least once.

7.5/10

This is one of the films covered by Fight Evil’s podcast. Listen below as Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I discuss Spellbinder.

Trick or Treats (1982)

Directed by Gary Graver [Other horror films: The Attic (1980), Moon in Scorpio (1987), Evil Spirits (1990)]

I didn’t much care for this one the first time I saw it, primarily because I thought things were happening way, way too slowly. That hasn’t changed with a revisit, and I have to admit that, despite having potential (I mean, it’s a slasher based around Halloween from the early 80’s, how could it go wrong?), this is an entirely lackluster movie.

So how slow is the film? From my viewpoint, we don’t really see any actual dangerous horror situations until about an hour and ten minutes in. Keep in mind that the film overall is just an hour and a half, so we really only get about twenty minutes of horror, and none of it is really worth all that much, including the ending, which was just ridiculous and included only for what I guess would be shock value.

Before that, we get to watch a babysitter become frustrated with the boy she’s babysitting. And – that’s it. Well, we do get to see the deranged Malcolm, played by Peter Jason, break out of a psychiatric hospital, but he was played far too goofy to possess any type of threatening aura. He also dresses up as a woman for half the film, and yet apparently no one, from cops to homeless people, can tell that he’s a man. Certainly it’s possible that, if done well, these more comedic moments might contrast nicely with the chaos that the babysitter is facing, but she’s not facing anything so exciting, just a dick who likes playing pranks.

I can’t lie and say that the kid, played by Chris Graver (who is the son of the director), didn’t annoy me, because he most certainly did throughout the film, but even if the kid had been marginally more likable, Trick or Treats still wouldn’t have been a good movie. Hell, even if the ending was foreshadowed in some way, it still would have felt as dry as it did. Sure, Jacqueline Giroux did okay, and it was sort of nice seeing David Carradine for a few scenes, but none of it amounts to much when most of the story is just filler.

Trick or Treats isn’t a movie without any enjoyment to be had, but it’s far and few between. I didn’t care for this film when I first saw it, and I really don’t think there’s a huge reason to go out of your way to see this one. You might have an okay time with it, but more likely than not, you’ll just wish you watched They Don’t Cut the Grass Anymore again.

5.5/10

This is one of the films covered by Fight Evil’s podcast. Listen below as Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I discuss Trick or Treats.

Crawlspace (1986)

Directed by David Schmoeller [Other horror films: Tourist Trap (1979), Catacombs (1988), Puppet Master (1989), The Arrival (1991), Netherworld (1992), Possessed (2005), Little Monsters (2012), Puppet Master: Blitzkrieg Massacre (2018), Death Heads: Brain Drain (2018), Carnage Collection – Puppet Master: Trunk Full of Terror (2022)]

Honestly, there’s not really a lot to Crawlspace. Oh, sure, it’s short, at only an hour and twenty minutes long, but more to the point, there’s not a whole lot of story here. Girl moves into an apartment building, girl hears strange noises, girl finds out landlord is a Nazi. I mean, we’ve all been there, right?

Well, perhaps not, but it is true that this movie doesn’t really feel that active. It’s not that there’s really a boring moment here, because I don’t think it drags at any point, it’s more that it just felt, for lack of a better adjective, shallow.

Respect where respect is due, Klaus Kinski gives a great performance (apparently he wasn’t that enjoyable off-camera, which was interesting to learn). It’s not that his character is filled with unique backstory or emotion, it’s just that he plays his role in a very creepy, yet subtle, style, and he’s pretty much all you’re watching when on-screen.

Problematically, he’s about one of the only reasons to go out of your way to watch this, though. It’s not that the other performances are bad, or even lacking (I personally enjoyed the main character, played by one Talia Balsam), it’s just that there’s not a lot to this movie, and Kinski’s character is pretty much the focus for a large portion of it.

Hell, most of the kills themselves aren’t exactly that memorable, save for maybe the chair scene, and while I’ll give credit to the ending for being somewhat suspenseful (a chase through air ducts being both claustrophobic and tense), along with the woman trapped in the cage added an additional uneasy vibe, I just couldn’t find it in me to call this an overly memorable movie.

I think I’ve seen this one maybe three times before, perhaps only two. No matter how many times I saw it before this most recent viewing, though, I don’t think I was ever amazed with it. No doubt that Crawlspace is competent, and occasionally compelling, but it’s certainly not much more than that. Not bad with a single watch, but I really don’t think multiple viewings does this one much good.

6.5/10

This is one of the films covered by Fight Evil’s podcast. Listen to the wonderful video below to hear Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I discuss Crawlspace.