Category: 2010’s

Directed by Tom DeNucci [Other horror films: Self Storage (2013), Army of the Damned (2013)]

Almost Mercy isn’t your typical horror film. Narrated by our main character Emily, it chronicles her life growing up with her best friend Jackson, the difficulties they’ve both had, and how messed up they become.

It’s an interesting mix of real-world drama and sarcastic, almost manic at points, narration by Emily, as she lets the audience know about how she first meant Jackson, or how, after being raped, the authorities did nothing because the rapists were “important to the community.” While the first forty minutes has Emily focusing on Jackson and what he went through, it turns more toward Emily after an aborted school shooting.

Honestly, there’s not much horror going on for the first fifty minutes of so, save an instance or two of blood spill. It’s more a dramatic comedy, with Emily, while going through a shitty, disconnected life, goes on about Jackson, her screwed up mother, and the creeps who make the town they live in a terrible place. I can imagine that some would call a majority of the film both meandering and boring, not to mention disjointed in tone. One second, a boy is mocked and terrorized by bullies, the next, Emily’s joking about some aspect or another of her life. That said, I rather liked how the film played out.

While at times I thought the narration was a bit too comedic, I thought we really got to learn about and even care about Emily and Jackson. When Jackson is expelled from school, you can feel for him. When Emily’s mother attempts suicide, you can feel her disdain for her father, as he walked out on them. It felt real, in short. The film takes a turn in the final thirty minutes or so, and it was a logical, satisfactory one.

Let’s talk actors and actresses. Young Emily, played by Eva Senerchia, did a really good job, being as young as she is, showing us the dispassionate life that sometimes a young kid can go through. Danielle Guldin, who played grown-up Emily, did a fantastic job in her role and narration. Grown-up Jackson, played by Jesse Dufault, did pretty good also, though more focus was spent on Emily (which makes sense, as the film was through her point-of-view). Kane Hodder and Bill Moseley, playing a high school coach and a church pastor, respectively, are good in their roles.

Though it takes a while to get there, the gore is also quite solid, and the killing spree at the end was on point, if not occasionally riddled with unnecessary comedic commentary. Almost Mercy seems to be the type of film that will turn off some horror fans. It’s not conventional, it’s a bit enthusiastic in it’s presentation, and the “twist” might not do much for some. Personally, though, despite it’s few shortcomings, I thought it was a great quirky film. It’s not for everyone, but it was for me.

8.5/10

Directed by John R. Leonetti [Other horror films: Annabelle (2014), Wish Upon (2017), The Silence (2019)]

The only reason that I sought this movie out was due to Elizabeth Henstridge, who plays one of the main characters in Marvel’s Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D, a show I rather enjoy. And as it turns out, aside from Henstridge, this movie doesn’t have much going for it. Dramatizing the events of the murder of Sharon Tate and company (purely hinted at until the end, for some unknown reason), Wolves at the Door is almost utterly run-of-the-mill. If you’ve seen Ils (2006) or The Strangers (2008), or hell, even The Purge (2013), you’ve seen a more enthralling and tense movie than this one.

Adam Campbell (Wojciech) has some decent scenes, and if you like the ascetic of someone dragging a sledgehammer across the ground, well, Wolves at the Door has that also. But aside from Elizabeth Henstridge, who does a decent job despite the shallow script, the best I can say is that occasionally good 60’s songs play, such as ‘She’s Not There’ by The Zombies and ‘Lil’ Red Riding Hood’ by Sam the Sham and the Pharaohs. There’s nothing else though – this movie is otherwise empty. And while I wasn’t fond of it that first time I saw it, I’m even less fond of it now. Not much here to recommend, folks.

4/10

Directed by Nicholas Ortiz [Other horror films: N/A]

This came as a surprise on a few different levels. Firstly, I was amazed I could find the film at all – on IMDb, it had just seven ratings [Edit: it now has nine, so it hasn’t moved much], which doesn’t generally an easy find make. But seconds later, boom – it’s on YouTube, put up by the production company. Needless to say, I was pleased.

Siodmak is a simple story, but told in a more complex way. A serial killer has been hunting in New York City for decades, and the only one who believes in his existence is a video blogger, Nick LaRosa, whom no one takes seriously. But with the help of NYPD officer Angel Vega, who has had a tragic run-in with the serial killer, they soon discover some things weren’t meant to be pried into. This is interspersed with scenes a day later, after the events that transpired, and focus on a medical examiner’s examination of the killer, and learning about what brought him here. It’s a more unique way to tell the story, and overall, I think it worked.

While the production was low, I think that most scenes were shot pretty well, and some in unique ways (a sequence near the end, with a reddish-auburn tint, comes to mind). As far as actors go, Masha Mendieta (Vega), Kit Lang (LaRosa), Russell Jordan (Dr. Feliz, Vega’s psychiatrist), Krista Chandlee (the medical examiner), Madison Idoate Candelario (Vega’s niece), and Michael Valentine (the killer) all stood out, doing a solid job.

Jordan, as the psychiatrist, had an almost Colin Salmon-feel to him. Mendieta and Lang, despite their short screen time together, really worked well, and had some of those small human elements that sometimes go amiss in bigger budget films. The killer, known as the New York Ripper, had a Michael Myers aura to him, helped by his featureless mask, which I rather enjoyed.

The music present was decent also – near the end, a record player can be heard playing hits such as “I Wanna Be Loved By You” (famously lip synced by Baby in House of 1000 Corpses) and “Hush, Hush, Hush (Here Comes The Boogie Man)” (from the credits of Jeepers Creepers), which was a nice touch.

For as much as I liked it, though, a few problems need be addressed, one being the run-time. Siodmak is one hour and fifty minutes long (or 110 minutes) – it’s not a short movie, easy to digest. Siodmak makes you work for it. Many of the scenes are interesting, but after the third flashback or the finale taking the last thirty-five minutes, it might come across as a bit much.

There were also a few unanswered questions, not to mention what came across to me as a Hollywood ending which I was both disappointed but somewhat unsurprised by. A few audio issues were present, but that wasn’t that much a deterrent. For what gore there was, I thought it was decent, though the focus of Siodmak wasn’t gore, but the story told.

This movie was an interesting find. Was it an amazing movie? Not really. The story, while told in an interesting manner, wasn’t overly original. That said, Siodmak is one lower-budget film that should have gotten more attention. Some surprising kills also stand out, a few I certainly wasn’t expecting. It’s a decent, above-average film, if you can get through the lengthy run-time.

7.5/10

Directed by Anthony Fankhauser [Other horror films: Tsunami Beach Club (2008), 8213: Gacy House (2010), Shadow People (2011)]

This is a very generic film about military men getting trapped in a lost world – a crater in which dinosaurs exist still.

Truth be told, I’ve not much to say about this. The CGI dinosaurs were some of the worst I’ve seen. The CGI blood was even more cringe worthy. Acting and story was nothing worth writing home about whatsoever. Lastly, most of the characters were thoroughly unlikable – in fact, I’m hard-pressed coming up with one I even sort of liked, and there weren’t that many characters in the movie to begin with.

Jurassic Attack can be fun at times – I mean, seeing terribly made CGI dinosaurs chase after terrible actors, how can you not have fun, especially with alcohol and weed? If I had to describe it in a short phrase, though, I’d simply call it overly generic. And seeing it twice was definitely too much.

4/10

Directed by Eric Espejo [Other horror films: N/A]

This surprised me. I’ve not heard of this film before I watched it – it’s one of those post-2005 horror films that slipped through my fingers. Which makes sense, really – supernatural movies, especially ghost films, have never been my favorite. But Ghosts Don’t Exist was a pretty decent, if not a bit generic, movie.

Acting was okay all around – nothing too special. I did rather enjoy Josh Davidson’s character (a rather arrogant skeptic), and the lead, an emotionally-unstable ghost hunter, was also well-played by Phillip Roebuck. The story, like I alluded to earlier, isn’t overly original: it comes across as a ghost story, but some elements certainly make us question if everything is as it seems. About three-fourths into the film, actually, a plot twist rears it’s head, and I have to admit, I rather liked it. It was reminiscent of a 2004 Japanese film I rather enjoy, truth be told.

I liked the movie before the twist came about, but afterwards, it just got better. Problematically, though, the movie runs for an hour and 40 minutes, which, while was mostly okay, still seemed a bit lengthy. Ten to fifteen minutes could have been cut out, and we’d probably still be fine. Regardless, while generic in some ways, the last ten-ish minutes were rather atypical – I certainly didn’t see it coming, especially from a modern horror film. Ghosts Don’t Exist isn’t amazing, but it did surprise me, and I liked it well enough.

7.5/10

Directed by James Nguyen [Other horror films: Birdemic 2: The Resurrection (2013)]

I’ve not seen this film before, but I’ve long heard it was a doozy, and boy, is it ever.

I won’t go into all that’s wrong about this movie. The meandering first half, focusing on a boring individuals’ romantic life for the first 48 minutes. The clearly computer-animated birds, and the fact that they somehow have the ability to dive bomb into buildings and blow up. The stilted acting and atrocious dialogue. The minute-long scene of people clapping. The stock music on repeat. The prolonged ending. About everything that could go wrong in a movie went wrong here.

I’ll say one positive thing about this movie: the actress who played Natalie, Whitney Moore, was pretty attractive. She couldn’t act worth shit, but she did do far better than Alan Bagh, who gave one of the worst performances I’ve seen in a while. And the constant talking about going green, and solar panels, and preventing global warming. Obviously, I’m all for these things, but come on, tone it down. This movie is not helping the case to go green whatsoever.

Aside from the pretty Moore, this movie is an embarrassment. Definitely a movie to watch with a bunch of friends while drunk or high, but that’s about it. Still, as bad as it is, you will definitely be amused, which is why it’s not getting a lower rating.

3/10

Directed by James Cullen Bressack [Other horror films: My Pure Joy (2011), Theatre of the Deranged (2012, segments ‘Andy’s Theatre of Deranged’ & ‘Speak Easy’), 13/13/13 (2013), To Jennifer (2013), Theatre of the Deranged II (2013, segment ‘Unmimely Demise’), Blood Lake: Attack of the Killer Lampreys (2014), Pernicious (2014), Grindsploitation (2016, segment ‘Dr. Suess’s There’s a Wocket in My Pocket’), If Looks Could Kill (2016), Deadly Reunion (2016), Bethany (2017), Welcome to Hell (2018, segment ‘Family Time’), Virus of the Dead (2018, segment ‘Routine Stop’), Blood Craft (2019)]

The plot of this found footage film is simple. A Jewish family (mother, father, and three children) are new to the neighborhood, and are attacked by three brutal Neo-Nazis.

We have some pretty shocking scenery in this film, the two most shocking being the surprising death of a character early on and one of the male children being forced to rape his mother. There’s an eye-gouging in there too, along with a swastika being burned into a boy’s cheek, but the two scenes I mentioned before strike me as far more brutal. Really, there’s not much going on here – the break-in happens literally two minutes into the movie, and from there on out, it’s a bloodbath.

The three perpetrators are despicable people (and on cocaine half the time), and their actors do the job well. The family is sympathetic not because we know much about them, but because of the heinous acts being done toward them (during the credits, though, we’re given a little glimpse into the family via video of them moving to their new house).

My one gripe is the ending – after all of this is done, we’re presented with the “This video was found by someone. Those who committed these crimes were arrested, and are facing multiple life sentences.” Instead of playing it off as the movie it is, they make it out to be a real-life event, which just annoys the hell of out me. If found footage movies stopped using this tactic as much as they seem to, I’d be a much happier guy.

Hate Crime is a shocking film, no doubt. I got very little joy out of watching it. It does what it means to (at the end, it lists some statistics on hate crimes), but it’s not a movie that you’d watch multiple times, I feel. Just once is enough.

6.5/10

Directed by Dustin Mills [Other horror films: The Puppet Monster Massacre (2010), Zombie A-Hole (2012), Night of the Tentacles (2013), Bath Salt Zombies (2013), Easter Casket (2013), Trashtastic Trailers from the Underground (2013), Skinless (2013), Theatre of the Deranged II (2013, segment ‘PlateFace’), Kill That Bitch (2014), Her Name Was Torment (2014), Snuffet (2014), Applecart (2015), Invalid (2015), Halloween Spookies (2016), Her Name Was Torment 2 (2016), The Hornet’s Disciple and the Scars She Left (2018), Slaughterhouse Slumber Party (2019), Ouija Blood Ritual (2020), RIP: Rest in Pieces (2020), Benny and Steve Almost Die (2020)]

At the time I saw this, IMDb didn’t have a plot for this movie, and only 53 people had rated it. More so, it’s only an hour long. So what I was getting into, I had absolutely no idea.

When I started this film, I didn’t even know for sure I was watching the right thing. The title screen doesn’t pop up until 13 minutes in, and before that, you have an amateur actress being interviewed and then stripped nude and tied up at gunpoint. In fact, for about 50 minutes of this hour-long movie, nudity is present. And I do mean full nudity. Both males and females, though admittedly focusing on females.

The story is simple, once you get past the opening 13 minutes – a photographer named Rose abducts women and men, sexually abuses and tortures them, and sells the photos she takes to clients of hers. Now, that said, while scenes can sometimes be grueling to get through, outright violence is, generally speaking, low. A woman forced to use a pair of scissors to cut into one side of her cheek was about the worst we got (which was filmed in a way to make me cringe, I admit).

This movie isn’t all nudity and sexual abuse, though – there are some cleverly filmed scenes, and in fact, good usage of animation about half-way through the movie. Dustin Mills, the director, certainly has an artistic streak, and while it popped up only a handful of times, they were definitely noticeable. One note, the nudity, while constant, was very rarely titillating, which in a movie like this, I can say is only a positive thing.

The story here isn’t that strong, and delving into our characters, the few there are, isn’t really done, so it’s sort of hard to get a good feel for them. It’s for that reason why the ending could come across as slightly controversial (in a movie filled of sexual abuse and torture, it’s the ending I find controversial – ironic, I know). For an extremely low budget film, I think that this did what it was trying to do, but it’s just not my type of thing. Artistic scenes really helped out out though.

6/10