Jeepers Creepers (2001)

Directed by Victor Salva [Other horror films: Clownhouse (1989), The Nature of the Beast (1995), Jeepers Creepers 2 (2003), Rosewood Lane (2011), Haunted (2014), Jeepers Creepers 3 (2017)]

I’m not quite sure what it is about Jeepers Creepers that consistently works for me, I just know that it consistently does.

Certainly the first forty minutes or so are insanely tense, and that scene in which Trish (Gina Philips) and Darry (Justin Long) are driving past the Creeper as he’s throwing a body down a pipe is perfection. There’s a lot of suspense in the first half of the film, and they did a great job with it.

When the film moves to a more fantastic creature-feature type route, I still think the movie keeps things moderately decent, though it’s also fair to say that the latter half of the film isn’t always as interesting as the first half. The good thing, though, is that the movie is well-paced, and it really feels like it flies by, making the movie all the more digestible.

It’s also a decently original plot. The idea of some inhuman creature stalking people in order to eat parts of their body isn’t something you hear about every Sunday. The whole “every 23rd spring in every 23 years” thing could be a reference to Pennywise from It (and hey, the main lead even has the name “Darry,” which is close to “Derry”), and I imagine many would compare the beginning of the film with Duel, but for the most part, Jeepers Creepers tends to have an original feeling.

I also think that is was a great idea to feature siblings as the main characters. I can’t begin to tell you how utterly sick I am of every other movie having some romantic stuff thrown in, sometimes under the most ridiculous circumstances, so focusing instead on a brother and sister was great, and I really buy that relationship insofar as their performances go.

Justin Long (Drag Me to Hell, Barbarian) was pretty good here. Again, I bought his relationship with Gina Philips. Philips (The Sickhouse, Deadly Invasion: The Killer Bee Nightmare, Ring Around the Rosie, Jennifer’s Shadow) herself had a lot of emotional material to contend with, and she did well too. I wish we learned a bit more about Patricia Belcher’s character, but she was fun, and Jonathan Breck’s portrayal of the Creeper was the stuff of dreams.

There are a few grisly moments in the movie, but this is all really pretty tame. The suspense is what keeps things going throughout, and though there is some violence at times, that’s never really the point. Late in the film, we even have a somewhat action-packed showdown at a police station, which was a nice sequence.

Worth mentioning also are those fade-to-black cuts. They happened throughout the movie, and felt out of place. Honestly, I thought it felt like something you’d see in a TV movie, and not a feature film like this one. It didn’t hurt the movie or anything so drastic, but it was notable, and just seemed odd to me.

Naturally, I’ve seen Jeepers Creepers before, though I admit it’s been a hell of a long time. It’s a movie that I’ve enjoyed plenty of times in the past, and I imagine I’ll enjoy plenty more times in the future. It’s not a perfect movie, nor is it really a game-changer, but it does feel unique, and I can see why it’s largely lauded as a quality film in the horror community.

8/10

Dead Air (2009)

Directed by Corbin Bernsen [Other horror films: N/A]

Dead Air is a movie I’ve seen once or twice before, and though it’s been many years since I’ve last seen it, I remember it being a pretty decent zombie movie. Nothing overly special, but decent. And generally speaking, I think that holds true – Dead Air’s not necessarily a great movie, but I do think that it trends toward solid.

Being someone who has been long interested in politics, I appreciated the political elements they threw into this movie. To be sure, it’s not that surprising they did, as this zombie outbreak was caused by terrorist attacks, but they went further and added elements of a virus that was created by the US government and the potential of the attacks being done by Muslims, obviously topical for the anti-Muslim hysteria following 9/11.

Naturally, a movie that focuses largely on a radio host during an ongoing zombie uprising like this one can’t resist being compared to Pontypool. Pontypool’s a movie I need to revisit, but even with what I remember of it, I can say that this felt far less philosophical in nature. The two may make a decent double-showing, but it’s also fair to say that there are people out there who believe this to be little more than a Pontypool rip-off, which I don’t think is fair.

I do wish that we got a few more concrete answers toward the end, but I also know that in a situation like they were in, actual answers could very much be an unrealistic expectation. I was invested throughout, though, in the backstory of these multiple attacks (the film is set in Los Angeles, but we find out later that a total of 16 cities were attacked), and I found that focus generally more interesting than the zombies themselves.

The movie does feel cheap at times, and I think that somewhat shows with the zombies. We occasionally see large groups, but more often, the movie takes a more personal and focused touch. There’s not really a ton of action, at least zombie-related, which doesn’t hurt, but I think it backs up the idea that this didn’t have the highest budget behind it.

Bill Moseley (House of 1000 Corpses, Exit Humanity, The Horde, Big Top Evil) is solid as the lead. Not all of his dialogue delivery is stellar, but I always dug him as the focal point. David Moscow (Vacancy 2: The First Cut) starts off a bit rough, but he ends up a pretty good character. Something about Joshua Feinman’s personality amuses me, so he stood out also. Of the four main characters, Patricia Tallman (Night of the Living Dead) made the least impact, but that flower pot scene was golden.

Navid Negahban (The Fallen Ones) made for a decent human antagonistic force, though I’d have liked more backstory on him. I have to admit, though, that I thought he made plenty of good points in the latter half of the film. We didn’t see a whole lot of Lakshmi Manchu or Anthony Ray Parker here, but I liked the little that we got.

I think it’s fair to say that Dead Air has gotten somewhat mixed reception – I personally enjoy it, but I know there’s plenty of people out there who rather think otherwise. If you’re into zombie movies, it may be worth checking out, but I can’t honestly say that this would appeal to a much larger audience.

7.5/10

Saw VI (2009)

Directed by Kevin Greutert [Other horror films: Saw 3D (2010), Jessabelle (2014), Visions (2015), Jackals (2017), Saw X (2023)]

In my review for the film, I said that Saw V felt largely like set-up for the following film, and while I didn’t hate it, it wasn’t quite up to the Saw standard I look for. I have to say, though, after revisiting this one, if that is indeed accurate, then perhaps some sins can be forgiven, as I found Saw VI a wholly delightful experience.

Before touching on character motivations or the politics clearly on display here, I wanted to talk about the gore. I thought the fifth film largely felt lacking insofar as the gore and traps went. To be clear, the gore itself isn’t necessary – the first film took a far more psychological approach to the story, and it remains my favorite of the franchise – but the fact that the traps in the previous film felt weak was distasteful, to me.

That’s not the case here. An insurance executive (Peter Outerbridge) is forced through a series of traps because of the fact he’s a piece of shit, and he’s forced again and again to make difficult choices and face pain that, if he attempted to get insurance, would be classified as a pre-existing condition. And the traps, and effects, are great here.

Many of the traps are themed around his atrocious existence – at first, he’s pitted against someone, and whoever takes the most breaths gets their sides crushed in. It wasn’t pleasant. He then has to choose whether or not an older woman or younger man live – based on his company’s policy, he should go with the healthy young man. The steamy feelings he has toward his company’s lawyer (Caroline Cave) get personified by the steam of a boiler room, in a painful-looking time.

The carousel, which is perhaps one of the more memorable ideas in the film, isn’t overly gory, but it’s a great concept. Six employees are spinning around, and he has to choose two that live. Enter all the arguing and bickering that’d you’d expect. By this point, Outerbridge’s character is beyond broken, and it’s great to see him get a taste of his own medicine (medicine that he doesn’t have to worry about being denied coverage on).

Oh, and the opening is one of the strongest in the series – two predatory lenders are forced to give their pound of flesh. Whichever one of them gives the most flesh survives. It’s a bloody, painful sequence, as a more robust man begins carving off his stomach while a petite woman attempts to hack her arm off. It was a delightfully gory opening.

As you can tell by the targets in this film – predatory lenders and those who work in the sickening insurance industry – the politics of Mr. Kramer aren’t hard to see. In fact, we get some more flashbacks of John’s life, as he’s denied coverage on an experimental treatment that could have helped him, and was warned that going out-of-system would cause the company to drop him entirely. That, in fact, leads to this great line: “You think it’s the living who will have ultimate judgment over you because the dead will have no claim over your soul. But you may be mistaken.”

As someone who despises the American healthcare industry and people who get rich by giving people loans they can never possibly repay, it was great to see victims of these traps who legitimately deserved it. And given that the traps here were some of the bloodiest, it makes it all the more playful.

Lastly, on gore, there’s a death toward the end that just has to be seen. It involves a body getting injected with flesh-eating acid, and it – well, just watch it for yourself. That was a damn good sequence, and gooey to boot.

Saw V spent a lot of time on the cat-and-mouse game between Mark Hoffman (Costas Mandylor) and Agent Peter Strahm (Scott Patterson). Throughout that film, Hoffman was attempting to frame Strahm for Hoffman’s actions, and aggravatingly, it seemed to have worked to an extent. Well, this movie gives us some new insight into that, including a surprise return of a character, and leads to some beautifully tense scenes.

See, the FBI has concerns about Strahm being one of John’s successors, and they’re looking deeper into it. They have some old voice recordings they’re trying to unscramble, and at the audio lab, we’re given a hell of a tense scene between Hoffman and two FBI agents who clearly suspect his involvement. It’s a great sequence, and one I remember fondly from when I first saw this in theaters.

Costas Mandylor is great here. His character got some additional depth in the previous film, but this movie really shows how far he’ll go in order to survive. Mark Rolston (Scanner Cop, the ’96 Humanoids from the Deep) annoyed me in the fifth movie, but he comes in clutch here. Tobin Bell is back with some great insights into his philosophy, and I love seeing it.

Betsy Russell (who first appeared as an unnamed vision in Saw III) plays a larger part in this film than she has previously. In the fifth film, we see her get a large box from John’s will, and here, we finally see what’s in it. Oh, speaking of drawn out revelations – remember that scene in Saw III where Amanda’s reading a letter addressed to her and crying? Well, that’s finally explained in this movie, so buckle up, bois.

Otherwise, Peter Outerbridge (Haunter) was great in his role. Despite despising his character and everything he stands for, I do think he brought some good emotion to the role, and I can’t help but feel bad for the guy at times. Samantha Lemole (who first appeared, unnamed, in the fifth movie) had a good scene or two, and Devon Bostick (Dead Before Dawn 3D), despite limited screen time, kinda goes hard though.

There’s a lot in Saw VI to like. A few sequences are odd – such as the brief sequence early on showing a blurry Amanda and Cecil driving (which may only be in the unrated cut) – but overall, the movie is quite strong. The twists here are mostly decent, and the gore is certainly worth it. I really believe this to be among one of the best movies in the first seven of the series.

8/10

Saw V (2008)

Directed by David Hackl [Other horror films: Into the Grizzly Maze (2015)]

Ever since I first saw Saw V, I thought it was noticeably lacking. It’s not a bad movie, but you can very much tell it’s a part of a bigger picture, more so than with any of the previous films. Certainly the gore is okay here, and you could probably watch this stand-alone if you don’t mind being confused, but I do think of the first five movies, it’s the weakest.

I should also say that while I strive to not spoil anything in my reviews, I do have to touch on some major spoilers for the fourth movie, and so I state here: if you’ve not seen the fourth movie, then this review may not be for you.

We find out, at the end of Saw IV, that Detective Mark Hoffman is an accomplice of John’s. Much like how Saw III fleshed out Amanda and John’s working relationship through flashbacks, we’re shown in this film how Hoffman came to be one of John’s underlings. We also follow Hoffman present day, as he finds himself in a dilemma.

For those of you who have seen Saw IV, you know that the finale of that film and the finale of Saw III take place during the same time period and at the same location. Many important figures are there, among them Hoffman, FBI Agent Peter Strahm, John himself, Amanda, SWAT guy Rigg, Detective Eric Matthews, Lynn, and Jeff. It’s a crowded time, brahs. The point is, though, that of all the people there, Hoffman was supposed to be the only one to survive (well, technically, John could have survived, but trusting Amanda to not kill Lynn and set off Jeff to not kill John is madness, brahs).

Hoffman wasn’t the only survivor (and to be clear, I’m discounting Jeff and Lynn’s daughter) – Agent Strahm managed to survive. And following events that shortly follow, he becomes deeply suspicious of Hoffman’s actions. Apparently Hoffman has been involved in the Jigsaw case from the beginning (we, as an audience, don’t see this – Hoffman only pops up in a brief scene in Saw III, and we never hear people like Detective Tapp or Kerry mention him beforehand), and being the last of a dying breed, Hoffman could get away clean.

Much of the film is a game of cat-and-mouse. Strahm all but tells Hoffman that he’s suspicious of him, and because of that, Hoffman tries to cover his tracks and frame Strahm for the crimes he’s committed, all while trying to focus on another game that John had set up before his untimely demise.

The thing with the Saw films is that I can’t review them in my typical way. It’s impossible. There’s too many plot and story elements that need to be delved into, and so, despite the fact I rarely dive into the plots of film as much as I have in the paragraphs above, I don’t really see a choice, because for movies like this, you need that information for the whole picture.

One thing I did want to note – I’m delighted that we saw both a picture of Detective Tapp and Sing (both from the first movie). The first Saw sometimes feels so disconnected from the ones that follow, so it warmed my heart to see Sing and Tapps’ faces. Obviously, we’d seen references to Lawrence Gordon in the previous films, and this movie does show more detail regarding the events of the first three movies vis-à-vis Hoffman’s involvement, but it’s great to see the classics representin’.

I guess a lot of this can be boiled down to the fact that much of this film feels like set-up for future films, not to mention it can feel like filler. There’s traps in the film, and people fighting for their survival, but I’m far more interested in what happens to the main characters than I am the random people we see in traps here.

And honestly, the traps aren’t great. Part of it does work thematically, and the final test for the group, which deals with a saw and a toll of blood, is pretty solid, and rather gruesome to boot. The compressing finale was beast also. The rest, however – well, the pendulum at the beginning was okay, but it’s impact is lessened by the nature of whom built it. Otherwise, we don’t have many interesting pieces of gore here – far more of the film is focusing on filling in backstory and the cat-and-mouse aspects than it is the traps.

To be fair, it probably had to come to a point where the movies took more a focus on the increasingly complex story they’re trying to tie together. In the beginning, it wasn’t that bad – there was a guy named John who wanted to play games. But now, John has friends like Amanda and Mark over, and even John’s plans have plans.

Scott Patterson made a decent focus, though I wish his character would have approached some of these things differently. It’s nice to see Costas Mandylor’s character fleshed out. Tobin Bell, as always, is a pleasure to see. Less plot-relevant individuals I rather enjoyed include Carlo Rota, Julie Benz (Locusts: The 8th Plague, Satan’s School for Girls, Havenhurst), and Greg Bryk (Bloodthirsty, Living Death).

Oh, and I wanted to give props to John for another favorite quote of mine: “Killing is distasteful… to me.” In fact, John’s arguments with Hoffman over the philosophy of rehabilitation was all kinds of fun, so though I do think this is the weakest film of the first five, don’t let that deter you from giving it a go.

Certainly Saw V does move the overall story along, and though I think it could have used some work, it’s not a bad movie at all. Compared to the others, though, it does feel decidedly average to me.

7/10

Saw IV (2007)

Directed by Darren Lynn Bousman [Other horror films: Saw II (2005), Saw III (2006), Repo! The Genetic Opera (2008), Mother’s Day (2010), 11-11-11 (2011), The Devil’s Carnival (2012), The Barrens (2012), Angelus (2014), Tales of Halloween (2015, segment ‘The Night Billy Raised Hell’), Alleluia! The Devil’s Carnival (2016), Abattoir (2016), St. Agatha (2018), Death of Me (2020), Spiral: From the Book of Saw (2021), Cello (2023)]

I think that Saw IV is the first Saw movie which really isn’t up to par. Don’t get me wrong, I still think it’s an above-average film, but both the second and third are better, and naturally, the first is God. Saw IV is still a fun and twisty time, filling in more backstory on John’s character, but it’s not exactly stellar.

Certainly the idea of focusing on Rigg (Lyriq Bent), the SWAT guy who’s appeared in the last two movies, and looking at the aftermath of the second film (much like aspects of the third movie did) was a fun one. It’s also tragic, in that it brought back Eric Matthews (Donnie Wahlberg), who looks like he’s been through Hell following the opening of Saw III. It’s not a bad plot, but the twists here, or at least some of them, have a been-there, done-that feel to them.

In fact, this movie can feel at times like Saw II, which isn’t a bad thing, but while the endings of both the first and second Saw films stunned me, I don’t think the finale of this one has quite the same impact. I don’t mean to say that the ending here isn’t surprising, it’s just that it has more a familiar quality to it, in some aspects.

I’m not someone who spoils movies in my reviews – I try to make them as inclusive as possible, save a few exceptions (A Nightmare on Elm Street); I’ll carry on that trend here, and avoid discussing the finale in detail. What I can say is, though, that one of the twists is really quite good (despite feeling somewhat similar), and puts the film into a whole new perspective. In fact, I saw this one in theaters, and I distinctly remember, waiting in line to see the movie, that the audience in theaters before us came out confused by what they’d seen, and I can understand that. The movie plays with the audience a bit, as a good Saw movie should, and that should only be expected.

The third movie hinted at more backstory from John, and this movie filled us in quite a bit. We learn of a miscarriage suffered by his wife; we learn, in fact, that he had a wife. He wasn’t all flowers and roses before both the cancer diagnosis and the loss of his child, but one could assume he was happier, and after that was stripped away, his life philosophy changed drastically.

We learn a lot of this from Jill (Betsy Russell), who we see briefly in the third movie, as she’s being interrogated. She goes into a lot of John’s history, and we in fact see his first trap, aimed at the man who caused the miscarriage of his wife’s child. We also learn that aside from those we already know, John may have another accomplice in the wings.

Two FBI agents – Agents Peter Strahm (Scott Patterson) and Lindsey Perez (Athena Karkanis) – come to assist the police in the capture of those responsible for these ongoing crimes. By this point, with Matthews missing for some time, and Kerry being out of the picture following the events of the previous film, Officer Hoffman (Costas Mandylor), who first appeared briefly in Saw III, is the last one standing. I appreciate how this film throws more characters into the mix, and though sometimes it takes a while to flesh them out, you can usually trust the series to do so.

Lyriq Bent was one of the focuses here, but I don’t think that quite makes him the star. A lot of focus is given on Scott Patterson also, as he tries to unravel John’s past via Betsy Russell’s character. Russell (Camp Fear, Mandrake, Cheerleader Camp) had some good scenes, but being in an interrogation room for most of them sort of limits what she can bring to the table. I wish we got a little more Athena Karkanis, and thinking of Donnie Wahlberg hurts too much.

Tobin Bell doesn’t get quite as much material here as he did in previous films, but it’s great getting a look into what makes his character tick. We get to learn a bit about Costas Mandylor’s character too – certainly more than we did from his brief appearance in the third film, anyways – and others, like Louis Ferreira (Hello Mary Lou: Prom Night II, The Marsh), all played their roles.

I don’t know if most of the traps here are quite up to par. Toward the beginning, we get a trap that involves two people – one has their mouth sewn shut, the other has their eyes sewn shut – and no tape player to be seen. They just gain consciousness,and without any explanation given, must find a way out of the predicament they find themselves in. It looked cool – I’m not sure where it was filmed, but kudos to the scouting agency – but it also felt somewhat thin.

In fact, many of the traps are dependent on multiple peoples’ participation. This isn’t new – in the first film, Zep’s game was explicitly tied to that of Gordon’s, and the whole point of many of the traps in the third film was to force Jeff’s character to risk his own pain to save others. Still, at some point, I feel like all of this micromanaging may be a bit much, even for someone like John.

The spike trap was decent, in which man and wife were bound together by some painful spikes. The trap toward the end, which involved multiple characters we know, was fun too, and those ice blocks hurt me in ways people aren’t meant to be hurt. Overall, though, the gore here didn’t seem too gnarly, the best example perhaps being the face-blade trap (Cecil’s “I don’t have a fucking soul” is a classic quote). Well, save the opening, that is.

See, this film opens on a scene of an autopsy, and it goes into grisly detail about what goes down in the final surgery of one’s bodily existence. Sure, the body looks a bit rubbery at times, but seeing the skull removed, the brain placed in a pan, the rib cage spread open, the stomach cut into – no one can say that this movie didn’t open with a bang. It might be fair to say that somewhere along the way, the movie lost that bang, but the finale still had elements of fun to it.

I’ve never disliked Saw IV, but I’ve never thought it represented the best of the series. It’s a perfectly solid follow-up, and I enjoyed how they delved more into John’s character, but at least of the first four films, I do think it’s among the weakest, while still holding on to a perfectly respectable score.

7.5/10

Saw III (2006)

Directed by Darren Lynn Bousman [Other horror films: Saw II (2005), Saw IV (2007), Repo! The Genetic Opera (2008), Mother’s Day (2010), 11-11-11 (2011), The Devil’s Carnival (2012), The Barrens (2012), Angelus (2014), Tales of Halloween (2015, segment ‘The Night Billy Raised Hell’), Alleluia! The Devil’s Carnival (2016), Abattoir (2016), St. Agatha (2018), Death of Me (2020), Spiral: From the Book of Saw (2021), Cello (2023)]

Much like the second film in this franchise, Saw III takes a look back, filling in some information relevant to the events of the first film. I don’t think this one is quite as good as the second, but it’s still a solid film, and one that I’ve always enjoyed.

I think part of not caring about it quite as much is the increased focus on Amanda (Shawnee Smith), which does make sense, given that John’s (Tobin Bell) cancer is so bad that he’s practically bed-ridden. Personally, though, Amanda seems almost like Harley Quinn at times – she’s not quite as insane, but boys, she ain’t stable, neither. I get that John doesn’t have a plethora of options (or does he?????), but a man of his patient nature having to work with someone like Amanda saddens me.

Still, the movie and it’s two-pronged focus is fun. On the first prong, you have Amanda abducting a doctor, Lynn (Bahar Soomekh). in order to keep John alive and comfortable, as his health is failing. Meanwhile, you have a random man, Jeff (Angus Macfadyen), who is grieving (poorly) over the loss of his son, forced to go through Jiggy’s traps and face his insatiable thirst for revenge.

It’s a fun plot, and especially once all the pieces are placed together, and you see the whole picture, it becomes even funner. I also appreciate the route they take for the twists – many are simply ways to interpret sentences. John’s time with Lynn and Amanda have plenty of clues to the finale, as do the careful messages that John leaves for Jeff. It’s nothing as bombastic as the twist to the first movie (and honestly, what really could be?), but it’s fun, and the finale here can be quite shocking with your first viewing.

Tobin Bell did great in the second film, and I think he does a stellar job here too, despite the fact (or perhaps because of) his character’s entirely bed-bound. He has a lot of emotion to display, and he does a great job with it, despite his character’s failing health. His anger at doctors (prompting a reference to Lawrence Gordon), and his forceful “Look at me!,” is genuinely delightful.

When it comes to emotional performances, though, Bell’s not alone. By far, this is Shawnee Smith’s best performance in a Saw film. Her character goes through the emotional wringer, and though she’s cuckoo for cocoa puffs, or, as the kids are saying nowadays, cray-cray, you can’t help but feel a little bad for her. True, Bahar Soomekh doesn’t have quite as much emotional material to work with, but playing a grief-stricken father, Angus Macfadyen (She Rises) was the bee’s knees.

We do get some more returning faces here too – both Dina Meyer and Lyriq Bent appear, shaken over the fallout from Saw II, but neither are focused on much (and you have to wait until Saw IV to really see more of Bent). Costas Mandylor, who later becomes quite an important character in the franchise, appears here briefly, but doesn’t do much. We do see, in the opening, some more Donnie Wahlberg, which was nice (albeit painful – those foot scenes, tho).

Also, we get images of a woman that John sees while going toward the light – we don’t know who this woman is to John, but it leads into more exploration of his backstory in future movies. On a side-note, it’s interesting to see what’s revealed when in these films. I’ve seen the first seven Saw movies (still have not seen Jigsaw or Spiral, not to mention Saw X), but it’s been a while for some of them, and seeing when certain connections and revelations are brought to light is interesting. For example, I expected to see John eat that tape he was covering in wax at some point, as I remember that scene so clearly, but I suspect that’s perhaps shown in a future film.

As far as the traps go, well, I can say that the worst would likely be the twisty boi, or the Rack, a personal favorite of John’s. It’s all the worse because the guy in the trap can’t do anything to escape – his fate is entirely in another’s hands. However, personally, I wouldn’t want to drown in liquified rotten pig entrails, and that sequence has always been the toughest for me. That opening with the chains looked hella unfun, and that ribcage trap struck me as unfair.

Oh, and perhaps the magnum opus of the film is the surgery sequence. See, John has cancer, and in it’s advanced stages, his brain is compressing against his skull. To give John some relief, Lynn first cuts John’s scalp open, cleans off his skull, and using both power drills and a bonesaw, cuts a portion of his skull off. This is all shown in pretty good detail, and though it doesn’t sicken me near as much as those awful pig carcasses, it was very well done.

I also appreciated the flashbacks to the events of the first films. Well, technically predating the events of the first film, but it comes to the same. We see the bathroom that Lawrence and Adam are trapped in being set up, and I just love seeing more of that classic time. As someone who really enjoys the story in these films, even when it ends up somewhat complicated, I love the use of flashbacks to flesh things out, and this one does that well.

Lastly, kudos for John’s apology to Lynn regarding Amanda’s aggressive behavior, which goes, “I apologize for her behavior. She swims in my sea.” I forgot how poetic John could be, and I dug that.

Saw III does have a cleaner focus than the second movie did, and unlike the second film, does a decent job giving most of the focal characters some depth, but at the same time, I don’t think it’s quite as strong as the second. To be certain, I don’t think it’s much weaker – both are probably deserving of the same rating, which will be reflected in, well, my rating – but if I had to say which one edges out a victory, I’d lean toward the second. Still, this is a solid entry, and that finale was hella fun brahs.

8/10

Saw II (2005)

Directed by Darren Lynn Bousman [Other horror films: Saw III (2006), Saw IV (2007), Repo! The Genetic Opera (2008), Mother’s Day (2010), 11-11-11 (2011), The Devil’s Carnival (2012), The Barrens (2012), Angelus (2014), Tales of Halloween (2015, segment ‘The Night Billy Raised Hell’), Alleluia! The Devil’s Carnival (2016), Abattoir (2016), St. Agatha (2018), Death of Me (2020), Spiral: From the Book of Saw (2021), Cello (2023)]

It shouldn’t come as a surprise that I enjoy Saw II – I didn’t take the moniker ‘Jigsaw’ for no reason – and watching it again for the first time in at least six years, I can say it’s definitely a fun movie to revisit.

Given I’ve seen it as many as six times, there’s no longer any shocks to be found in the multiple little twists, but that doesn’t make the story any less enjoyable. In fact, seeing the set-up and playful dialogue for these twists may even add a little something, and I can say that I had a blast with this one.

This wasn’t always the case. When I first saw the movie, I didn’t love it. I suspect it’s because I was such an admirer of the first movie, and its more limited scope (focused on only three characters, really), and then this one throws us in a house with a bunch of characters, few of whom really get depth to them. It’s just a bit jarring.

It’s also true that, save a reference or two, the events of the first film aren’t really brought up here. Sure, we saw the flashback with Lawrence Gordon’s name, and naturally, the bathroom from the first movie takes prominence in the finale of this one, but the fact that, for instance, Detectives Tapp and Sing aren’t mentioned at all, even though Detective Kerry (Dina Meyer) appears here, seems odd.

However, I’ve grown to really appreciate this one. I can’t say I enjoy it as much as I do the first movie, but I do love the story here. You combine that with the performances and the gore, and you have a pretty good time.

Donnie Wahlberg (Dead Silence) does beautifully as an aggressive cop who is the perfect picture of police brutality. Shawnee Smith (The Stand, The Blob, I Saw What You Did) returns, and is much more involved here than she was in the first film. Related, Dina Meyer (Starship Troopers, Bats, Crazy Eights) pops up here too, though she doesn’t bring quite as much plot relevance as some may hope. Oh, and Lyriq Bent’s (Acrimony) here also as an aggressive SWAT guy – he doesn’t really do or add a lot, but he becomes important later…

As for many of the people trapped in the house – well, only a handful really get their characters explored. Honestly, Erik Knudsen (Darker Than Night, Stickman) had the most depth, and even he didn’t have a ton. Otherwise, Timothy Burd (The Hexecutioners) was interesting, lurking about but never doing much, Glenn Plummer (Teeth and Blood, The Day After Tomorrow, VooDoo Curse: The Giddeh) seemed to have potential, and Franky G was fine as a generic, aggressive asshole, but others, such as Emmanuelle Vaugier (The Fear: Resurrection, House of the Dead 2) and Beverley Mitchell (Toxin, The Lost Episode) didn’t really make a deep impression.

Of course, Tobin Bell always makes an impression (well, nearly always – he didn’t do a ton to help The Sandman, not that many could have), and he was great here as well. He had some solid dialogue, and we even delved a bit into John Kramer’s past, which I appreciated. As the sequels go on, we delve more and more into his past, along with the backstories of others, and it’s done well here.

As for the best trap, well, I have to admit I’ve always found the syringe pit absolutely horrifying. That scene pisses me off anyway, as it wasn’t meant for Amanda, but that’s beside the point. That pit looked awful (and that whole room striking, given the significantly different color tones), and I wouldn’t care for a dip in it. Otherwise, that furnace looked hella hot, and that safe place that John mentioned was, as the kids say, #trolly.

I also think a special mention can go to that razorblade box – such a simple solution, but a drug-addled mind leads to an unnecessarily gruesome death, so kudos there.

There’s a lot to like in Saw II, and though I may not have appreciated everything with the first viewing, all of the subsequent ones have been of quality. It’s a solid movie, and though it’s different than the first one in some ways, Saw II is a great sequel, too.

8/10

Dagon (2001)

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

Dagon’s a film that’s gotten quite a bit of respect within the horror community, and after revisiting it, it’s not hard to see why. It’s certainly not a perfect movie, but the atmosphere here is top-notch, as are some of the performances, and if you want a dark story based on some H.P. Lovecraft goodness, Dagon’s a movie worth seeing.

I believe I’ve only seen this one once before, perhaps on the Sci-Fi channel (though I can’t swear to that). What I primarily remembered was the people with fishlike attributes and that much of the film seemed to be in Spanish, without subtitles. As I revisited this, my memory was right on both counts. Though I admit the Spanish sans subtitles was annoying, the whole of the film is quite a solid experience.

Despite pulling ideas from the short story Dagon, the movie’s more based on the novella The Shadow over Innsmouth. I’ve read Dagon once before, though have not read The Shadow over Innsmouth (when it comes to classic horror literature, I admit, I’ve not read much), but after seeing this movie, it certainly sounds like a story I’d like to spend time with.

What’s really striking about this film is the atmosphere. There’s a small, coastal village in Spain that the characters find themselves trapped in. The streets are cramped, it’s raining non-stop, and the villagers have fishlike attributes – sometimes just gills or webbed fingers, other times tentacles – and most can merely shuffle at a slow speed. It’s a dark location steeped in hysterics, a great flashback told by Francisco Rabal’s character explaining the reasons the town’s gone fish. The set-up here is stellar, and then it’s actually executed well, which was great to see.

To be honest, I didn’t think much of Ezra Godden (Soul Reaper) as the lead at first. He just seemed like a whiny little bitch. Still, he grew on me pretty quickly (reminding me of Jeffrey Combs at times), and he had some quite amusing dialogue, which was nice, given that the film is tonally dark; getting a bit of humor was welcomed. Francisco Rabal (who died a few months before the film came out; this movie was dedicated to him) made for a solid character too. I don’t know Rabal (Nightmare City, Exorcism’s Daughter, Hotel Fear), but his character added a lot.

Godden and Rabal are the most important characters by far, but others come into play. Raquel Meroño (The Mark) was decent, Macarena Gómez (Shrew’s Nest, The Black Gloves) creepy, Ferran Lahoz (The Lost) also creepy, and, oh, José Lifante (who was a simple hotel receptionist with minimal dialogue) was creepy too. I really liked Alfredo Villa’s character, and he brought a lot to the flashback, which was already quite good.

There are some disturbing things in this film. Sure, the townsfolk are half-fish/half-human, and they have a alarming quality to them (which, again, helps beautifully with the atmosphere), and given this was directed by Stuart Gordon, certainly these elements of body-horror make sense. More so, we see flesh hanging up like a coat, and someone’s face getting removed in a somewhat graphic scene (which made me flash back to Faceless). It’s a creepy movie anyway, and the violence adds to the charm.

If you’ve not seen Dagon, I recommend that you do. It’s a dark movie, it’s a bleak movie, but it’s also a well-made one. Even the CGI doesn’t hurt the film much, and I found most of the finale, which is where movies can easily lose me, quite decent, almost dreamlike. Dagon’s a good movie, and definitely worth a look if you enjoy the sea and what resides within.

8/10

Firestarter: Rekindled (2002)

Directed by Robert Iscove [Other horror films: N/A]

I didn’t have much in the way of positive expectations when it came to Firestarter: Rekindled. Not that I’d heard much about this one, but I knew it was a mini-series that got lukewarm reviews. Admittedly, I didn’t know it was a Sci-Fi mini-series, which gives it a bit more personal spice, but given I didn’t love the first Firestarter, I wasn’t sure how well a sequel would fare.

Well, as a sequel to the 1984 movie, Rekindled fails hard, and for a very specific reason: it’s impossible for this to be a sequel. See, this movie has flashbacks from events that happen in that movie, but they don’t use footage from the film (which is fine, as I sometimes find that type of thing stylistically off-putting), instead re-creating them with new performances.

The problem is, the scenes they recorded for the flashbacks don’t actually match up to what happened in the 1984 movie. For God’s sake, instead of Charlie’s father dying in a barn, he’s killed by Rainbird in a nondescript room with what seems to be a needle. The flashbacks don’t match up, and because of that, I don’t think this can even really be called a sequel. I choose to see it as a new adaptation of material used in the novel, because as a sequel, it doesn’t work.

Viewing it, though, the way I choose to, the mini-series isn’t that bad. Don’t get me wrong, it doesn’t come close to rivaling Storm of the Century or the 1997 The Shining, but it’s not that shabby. The biggest problems, discounting the idea that this is a sequel, would be that the performances are sometimes shaky, the special effects aren’t always that special, and there’s a handful of story elements I didn’t care for, but otherwise, it sort of has some charm to it.

Generally speaking, I liked the cast of this one. Marguerite Moreau (The Uninvited, Queen of the Damned) made a decent adult Charlie. To be honest, I found her budding relationship with Danny Nucci’s character sort of cute, especially that scene in which they’re talking about kryptonite. Nucci is an actor I know from pretty random places (Titanic and an episode of House M.D.), and while he wasn’t amazing here, I dug his character. Oh, and Malcolm McDowell (Silent Night, Class of 1999, Cat People, Halloween) is here too, playing Rainbird, and he’s always a pleasure.

We also have Dennis Hopper (The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2, House of 9, Land of the Dead, Night Tide) playing a somewhat interesting character. Portraying the young Charlie in flashbacks was Skye McCole Bartusiak (who I know as Pippa from Storm of the Century); she doesn’t have the character of Drew Barrymore, but she was nice to see. Also appearing are John Dennis Johnston (Communion), Darnell Williams, Travis Charitan, Dan Byrd (Salem’s Lot, Easy A), Ron Perkins (Storm of the Century, the 2002 Spider-Man), and Jeremy Hoop.

Like some of the performances, the special effects can be a bit touch-and-go. Some of them are decent; I tend to think the finale was mostly okay, aside from a scene involving Rainbird. Other times, well, the fire doesn’t look the greatest. Still, I don’t think the effects are terrible, and it’s certainly not much a hindrance to the story.

Speaking of the story, I have to say I didn’t care for the kids. See, part of this mini-series deals with Rainbird’s continuing Dr. Wanless’ experiments, and so he has a bunch of super-powered kids. One can sort of control people’s actions, another can read minds, one’s an energy sink, another has a sonic shout (similar to Banshee from Marvel Comics). These kids weren’t a big focus, and toward the end, they weren’t quite as prominent as I feared they were going to be, but it was still an element that didn’t do a lot for me when they did pop up.

Generally speaking, though, despite this being a combined 2 hours and 42 minutes, I had an okay time with Rekindled. I don’t think it’s a great mini-series, and it’s probably still weaker than average, but considering that I wasn’t expecting much from this at all, I can admit that this mini-series surprised me. I can also say that if you’re a fan of the 1984 movie, this one may disappoint, but if you can look at this as something other than an intended sequel, you may be in for perfectly fine time.

6.5/10

DeadHouse (2005)

Directed by Pablo Macho Maysonet IV [Other horror films: The Things They Left Behind (2011), The Red Suit (2014), Fear of My Flesh (2015), Await the Dawn (2020), Tales from the Other Side (2022, segment ‘Scary Mary’] & Brian Rivera [Other horror films: N/A]

I’m an individual who’s seen plenty of lower-budget horror, and while I have a high tolerance of occasionally shoddy film-making, that doesn’t mean I’m oblivious to it when it occurs. DeadHouse is a movie with problems, and while it’s certainly not all bad, I can fairly say it’s far from good.

The story is rather basic – two sisters and a friend have car trouble while traveling, and run awry of some killers who live in a decrepit house. And – well, actually, that’s it. We get a bit of background on the killers, and there’s a very choreographed twist toward the end that I suspect would fool very few people, but then again, not all slashers are dripping in creativity.

And actually, I’ve seen DeadHouse before. A long time ago, Blog Talk Radio was a pretty decent site, and the horror forum Horror Movie Fans (a forum I’ve been of member of since 2009) had a show that I called into plenty of times. During one of those shows, we discussed DeadHouse. Now, that was a long time ago – 2010, if I had to guess – so it’s been around 13 years since I’ve seen this one, and as such, remembered very little of it (not that there was much to remember, truth be told).

If I recall, this used to be on YouTube in full, as I’m sure that’s where I watched it. Nowadays, it seems like it’s a mostly forgotten film, but luckily (such as it is), I own a copy on the 50-movie set Catacomb of Creepshows. Though I don’t care for the film overall, I am glad to have access to it, as it seems a rather difficult film to find online nowadays.

In all honesty, there’s not a whole lot to say about this one, though. The story’s rather simple, but it fails due to technical aspects, primarily the audio. The audio here was really bad – there are multiple conversations that I can’t understand at all, because it seems there was no microphone in the vicinity. Other times, the music plays over the dialogue, and little-to-none of the characters’ voices actually stand out. I’ve seen movies with poor audio before, but the consistently poor audio of this film was almost astounding.

Otherwise, you have occasionally decent (though rather low-budget) effects. Someone gets stabbed with a pitchfork, which was probably the best scene. Another gets their head slammed into a wall, causing said head to explode. Someone’s body gets slammed into a tree, causing their spine to crack. None of the deaths are that memorable, but at least they’re here.

I thought the performances were alright. Keep in mind, I couldn’t hear them a fifth of the time, but that’s not their fault. Tracey Dalton and Cara Dalton played believable sisters (and given their shared surnames, I wouldn’t be surprised if they actually were sisters). Pablo Macho Maysonet IV (also the director of this film) had some occasionally amusing dialogue, but was mostly whateves. Brian Rivera had a friendly persona, and Anthony Carvalho (who isn’t even credited on IMDb at the time of this writing) was fine too. None of the performances here did much, but at least they averaged out okay.

The story, though, didn’t feel fresh enough to me. I didn’t care for the twist at the end, and given the garbled and difficult-to-understand dialogue, it was a bit of a rough one to get through, made only marginally easier by the fact I was able to rope my brother into watching this one with me (shout-out James, wherever you are brah). It’s not a good movie, and while there are certainly worse out there, never doubt that there aren’t thousands of better ways to spend your time.

4/10