Category: Reviews

Damien: Omen II (1978)

Directed by Don Taylor [Other horror films: The Island of Dr. Moreau (1977)] & Mike Hodges [Other horror films: The Terminal Man (1974), Black Rainbow (1989)]

Much like the first movie, Damien: Omen II is a film I saw bits and pieces of quite often in my childhood. I can’t swear I sat through the whole thing, and if I did, I doubt I understood some of the subplots, but it’s a movie I always enjoyed, and actually tend to like more than the first movie.

A large part of that is because of the pacing. The first movie was a bit slow at times, which is amazing, as this movie, at an hour and 47 minutes, is only a little shorter than the first movie’s hour and 51 minute run-time, and yet, this one just seems to move quicker. There’s also the fact Damien is 12 years old, and has a decent amount more agency than he did in the first movie, including control of his awesome abilities.

I also love a lot of the deaths in this movie. I don’t think any match the glass plate decapitation in the first film, but there’s a lot of memorable sequences here. I think the most striking may be the elevator scene, in which someone’s body gets severed in half. A woman gets her eyes slashed at by a raven, and blindly runs into the road, getting hit by a semi. Some people drown in falling sand – an opening scene which I’ve never forgotten. And though not at all gory, someone gets impaled by a train. Even the guy drowning beneath the ice was A+ material. Plenty of quality scenes in this one.

Performances are solid too. Even smaller roles, such as those by Elizabeth Shepherd (The Tomb of Ligeia), Sylvia Sidney (God Told Me To, Death at Love House, Snowbeast, Beetlejuice), Meshach Taylor (Hyenas), Leo McKern (X the Unknown, along with being the only returning face from the first movie), Lew Ayres (She Waits, Donovan’s Brain, Salem’s Lot), and Nicholas Pryor (Brain Dead), all did reasonably well, and though some didn’t have much time to make an impression, I think most were able to do so.

At times, Jonathan Scott-Taylor seemed a little melodramatic as Damien, and Lucas Donat occasionally had the same problem, but for younger actors, I thought they worked well together. Lance Henriksen (Mansion of the Doomed, In the Spider’s Web, The Invitation, The Pit and the Pendulum, The Mangler 2) wasn’t really in the spotlight, but he was quality when he popped up. Robert Foxworth (It Happened at Lakewood Manor, Prophecy, Deathmoon, The Devil’s Daughter) had a good, dark aura to him.

William Holden made for an engaging character, and I could buy him as Gregory Peck’s brother. Especially toward the end, as he was learning more and more about Damien’s backstory, he really had time to shine. Likewise, while Lee Grant (The Spell, Visiting Hours) doesn’t make much of an impression until the finale, she really does make an impression come the finale, and even has a somewhat surprising story arc.

Again, I really liked the performances in this movie. It’s a fun story with plenty of interesting deaths and a solid finale, all with quality performances and moving at a quick pace. Admittedly, I’m probably one of the few who enjoys it more than the first movie, but I do, and though I don’t think it’s a significantly better film, it is one that I’ll never have a problem revisiting.

8/10

Night Watch (1973)

Directed by Brian G. Hutton [Other horror films: N/A]

A nice take on what could have been a rather unoriginal story, Night Watch is a movie with a lot going for it. You have an interesting mystery, some stand-out performances, a killer finale, and the joys of British weather. It’s not an amazing movie, but I’ve always liked it.

And when I say ‘always,’ I mean I’ve just seen it twice, but I found it a decent watch. I think I liked it a bit more this time around, perhaps because, while I’ve seen it before, I actually forgot how the film ended, and seeing the movie with more mature eyes probably led to a deeper enjoyment.

Even so, I don’t think the movie’s perfect, by any means. The film does well at building up the tension Elizabeth Taylor’s character faces after witnessing a murder, yet having no one – her husband, her friend, the police – believe her. It’s good, slow tension. The movie is about an hour and 40 minutes, though, and while it shines during the finale, getting there can be a bit of a drag.

Elizabeth Taylor (Doctor Faustus, Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?) did pretty well in her role. There are a few moments when I’m not sure her acting entirely nails it, but overall, she does quite well. Laurence Harvey (Welcome to Arrow Beach, House of Darkness) had a suave, debonair aura to him, and he was quite fun.

Billie Whitelaw (The Omen, The Flesh and the Fiends, Murder Elite) was never quite trustworthy, but a solid character nonetheless. Others who warrant a brief mention include Bill Dean, Tony Britton, and Robert Lang.

Most of this movie is mystery and build-up, but during the finale, there is a solid murder or two by stabbing, which I appreciated. It’s a short scene, and a small part of what is a very solid finale, but certainly worth it.

All of this said, I don’t think that Night Watch is a movie I’d consider that great. It’s still above average, but because of how long the film sometimes feels, it’s not one I imagine I’d revisit all that often, especially when other movies of a similar nature, such as Endless Night, are a bit more enjoyable.

It’s a good movie, worth a watch or two, but it’s not a movie I personally consider too special.

7.5/10

The Boogie Man Will Get You (1942)

Directed by Lew Landers [Other horror films: The Raven (1935), The Return of the Vampire (1943), The Mask of Diijon (1946), Inner Sanctum (1948), Terrified (1962)]

Despite the encouraging title, this horror-comedy mix doesn’t really do a whole lot to stand out. Sure, it has some good performances, and some occasionally wacky moments, but I don’t think it’s enough to solidify this as any type of classic. It’s serviceable, but little more than that.

The plot follows a young woman (Jeff Donnell) as she buys an old house, with the intention to convert it into an inn, all while dealing with a doctor doing experiments in the basement, mysterious disappearances, a town official who gets a bit nosy, and plenty of traveling salesmen. Oh, and what seemed to be an Italian fascist toward the end, which was an interesting addition.

Actually, it’s on that note that I should say much of the film’s plot revolves around the then-ongoing World War II – the scientist’s experiments are designed to create a super-soldier, someone seems as though they could be a spy, and there’s even a munitions factory in town, causing a delay when the police are finally called to the hopeful inn.

The central cast – and by central, I mean two – are great, being Boris Karloff and Peter Lorre. Karloff (The Strange Door, The Mummy, Frankenstein 1970, The Man They Could Not Hang) does amusingly as a somewhat absent-minded scientist type of good intentions, and Lorre (You’ll Find Out, Mad Love, The Comedy of Terrors, The Beast with Five Fingers) was even better playing a sheriff/mayor/investor/loan shark. I think Lorre probably brought more to the film than Karloff did, but it was great to see the two of them.

Technically, Jeff Donnell (The Unknown) and Larry Parks might be more the central characters, or at least the primary protagonists, but I didn’t really care for either one’s character. Maxie Rosenbloom and Maude Eburne (The Vampire Bat, The Bat Whispers) provided some of the comedy here, but it mostly fell flat to me. Frank Puglia’s character felt like a random add-on, but I will admit that Don Beddoe’s character did interest me.

Certainly a couple of lines were amusing, my favorite being when Karloff was showing Lorre five bodies of failed experiments, and explaining that there were traveling salesmen, pointing one out as selling encyclopedias, to which Lorre replied “I’m sure he didn’t mind.” There were a few other laughs to be had, but like I said, I personally think a lot of the comedy fell somewhat flat.

It’s not a bad movie, though. Sure, The Boogie Man Will Get You isn’t likely to stand out aside from the fact it has both Karloff and Lorre in it, but it’s still serviceable as a horror-comedy mix. It’s digestible too, at only an hour and seven minutes.

If you enjoy the classics of the genre, and are looking for something you’ve perhaps not seen, this might be worth a look, but I don’t really think it’ll end up being that memorable, all things considered.

6/10

Howling III (1987)

Directed by Philippe Mora [Other horror films: The Beast Within (1982), Howling II: Stirba – Werewolf Bitch (1985), Communion (1989), I was a Communist Werewolf (2021)]

For the first ten minutes or so, I found Howling III a mess. Not that portions past the first ten minutes weren’t messy, but things did stabilize a bit. Even so, while this movie certainly had some interesting ideas, along with a couple of strong elements, I can’t say that I necessarily found it all that enjoyable.

It’s such a wild story, though. You have werewolves in Australia, a Russian werewolf ballerina defecting to Australia, a young woman wanting to escape her life in her Australian werewolf tribe, and falling in love with a human, all while an American is coming over to Australia to find evidence of the existence of werewolves.

First off, this has nothing to do with the first two movies of the series. There is a reference made by one of the werewolves of a possible group of Lycanthropes in California, but that’s as close as this movie gets to making a connection. Thematically, the final scene is quite similar to how the first movie ended, so there’s that, but for this most part, this is very much a stand alone sequel.

As stated, the story is wild enough, but what’s really interesting is the approach they take to the werewolves in the film. At first, as expected, they’re generally an antagonistic force, but as the main character (Barry Otto) is an anthropologist, he’s interested in purely studying these creatures as opposed to causing them harm, putting him in conflict with the military. It doesn’t help matters that he falls in love with a half-human/half-werewolf, and that’s when things get more fascinating.

Obviously, I don’t want to divulge the end of this one, but it’s just odd. The final 15 minutes took me on a trip I really didn’t expect, and, save a single scene, it’s almost entirely void of what people would generally call ‘horror.’ We follow the lives of four characters, and their offspring, as they live for 15+ years in the wilderness, eventually being found out and brought back into the modern world. It was such an odd, and oddly wholesome, finale, and that final scene in Otto’s classroom was almost emotional.

I don’t know Barry Otto, but I pretty much liked his character from beginning to end. Imogen Annesley was solid, reminding me personality-wise of Louise Jameson’s Leela from Doctor Who. Though his character had his ups and downs, Ralph Cotterill (The Survivor) turned out a solid performance also. Lee Biolos was an oddly decent, upstanding character, and Frank Thring was the MVP. He didn’t get a lot of screen-time, and he wasn’t important to the plot, but I loved his fun character.

Burnham Burnham (Dark Age) was decent, though I wish his character had a bit more to do. Max Fairchild’s character has an interesting route – you sort of expect him to be the main antagonist, especially toward the finale, but that never really happens. His character arc just strikes me as odd. The only main performance to not really leave an impression on me was Dagmar Bláhová’s, though toward the end, I could at least appreciate her.

Though the movie is almost an hour and 40 minutes long, I don’t know if I’d go as far as to say it ever dragged. It’s not a conventional werewolf movie, in many aspects, plus it’s Australian, so it does have an odd vibe to it, but boring isn’t one of the sins Howling III commits.

I do think I could have done without some of the more humorous portions. There’s not a lot, but toward the end, for instance, with the three werewolf nuns watching the television program – that’s something I didn’t need. I also could have done without some of the body-horror elements, such as that kangaroo-like pouch. I get the point, but I didn’t enjoy those portions at all.

In the end, though, Howling III is a very flawed film. I do think it’s better than the atrocious second movie, though – it may be low praise, but it’s what I’ve got. Certainly the finale of this one did carry with it some decent emotion, save the final scene, and if they had been able to expand that to the rest of the film, perhaps the final product would have been better. It might not have been horror – more a wholesome day-in-the-life of a werewolf community – but at least more consistent.

Really, it’s an odd movie. It can be entertaining, and it does have some strong portions, but I still find Howling III a decent bit below average. That said, this is one that I’ll ruminate on, as it does have the potential to move up, I think.

5.5/10

Orca (1977)

Directed by Michael Anderson [Other horror films: Dominique (1979), Murder by Phone (1982)]

I’ve seen Orca once before, and found it a pretty solid experience. Seeing it again confirms that. While I wouldn’t call the movie great, I would argue it possesses a pretty solid story, and even more, a primal example of man versus nature.

Naturally, I have to applaud Richard Harris (Silent Tongue), who starts off as a rough, unlikable character, only to grow into a man accepting of his own fate. It’s a very solid transformation, and Harris does a great job with it. Doing some scant narration is Charlotte Rampling’s (Angel Heart, Asylum) character, which provides a good atmosphere for this. While admittedly a stereotypical portrayal of a Native American, Will Sampson (Poltergeist II: The Other Side) does well too, though I was somewhat surprised by his character near the end.

Smaller roles are provided by Peter Hooten (Night Killer), Robert Carradine (I Saw What You Did, Slumber Party Slaughter, 1996’s Humanoids from the Deep, Attack of the Sabretooth, Massacre at Central High), Bo Derek, and Keenan Wynn (The Devil’s Rain, Piranha, The Dark). Hooten probably stands out most among all of these performances, and he does become an intense character come the finale.

The story is one of pure revenge – off the coast of a small village in Nova Scotia, Harris’ character accidentally slaughters an orca’s mate and child, and because orcas have an intelligence near that of humans, it seeks it’s revenge. I don’t know the science behind that, but I do know the revenge was solid – the orca destroys other ships in the small, coastal town this takes place in, blows up what looks to be some type of power plant, even decimates Harris’ house and eats the leg off one of his subboardanants. It’s a quality time.

Actually, I forgot how long it took to get to the finale that I remembered – Harris’ character sailing north, following the Orca to the end of the earth (well, perhaps not that far, but there were plenty of icebergs in the water, and it sure looked mighty cold) – not that I’m complaining. The build-up was a bit slow, but all of it was fun. At least to watch, that is, as the movie had (as many 70’s movies do), a rather somber feel to it.

More than that, though, I was fascinated by the finale. I was when I first saw the movie, and I still am. Seemingly giving into the killer whale, Harris and his crew follow the whale as its leads them further and further north. Even the sequence they begin sailing out is great, as the townspeople are crowded on the docks, watching his boat sail off.

It has a really inevitable feeling to it. Ever since Harris truly understood the atrocity of his actions, I think he knew that he didn’t really have much of a choice but pit himself against the whale, especially given what we learn about his character’s background. In some ways, it’s a good character study, and though I’ve only seen this movie twice now, I doubt that I’ll ever forget the finale to this one.

Most of the violence is what you might expect from aquatic horror. A couple of people get consumed by a killer whale, a character gets one of their legs torn off, someone dies due to being buried by falling ice. Well, that last one might not be the first thing that comes to mind, but you get my drift. Sure, some people call this one of the many rip-offs following Jaws, but as I enjoy this more, and find it far more digestible, I can only say that the action here is all pretty top-notch.

I enjoyed Orca when I first saw it, and I enjoy it still. It’s not an overly special movie, but it is a very solid movie, and despite the reputation this has in some people’s minds, I personally think it has a lot to offer.

8/10

Bring It On: Cheer or Die (2022)

Directed by Karen Lam [Other horror films: Evangeline (2013), 7 from Etheria (2017), Shevenge (2019, segment ‘Doll Parts’), The Curse of Willow Song (2020)]

Being the first horror film I’ve seen from 2022, Bring It On: Cheer or Die had a lot to live up to, and while this Syfy original has some problems, I can’t say that I didn’t have fun.

In part, likely a large part, I imagine this has to do with the film being a slasher. Syfy have made some decent originals before, such as Killer High, Neverknock, and They Found Hell, but I can’t think of many original slashers of theirs, and luckily, this one was decent.

To be fair, I don’t think they stuck the landing (see, I tried to use cheerleading terms and nailed it, amiright?), and the finale isn’t great. The identity of the killer, and the reason behind the killing, struck me as a bit ridiculous (and by ‘a bit,’ I actually mean ‘a lot’).

Also, some of the humor, such as the Cheer or Die portion (basically, the insane killer revealed themselves, and is now forcing those still alive to perform cheer moves; if they mess up, they die), or how sometimes by performing a cheer move, someone can dodge being struck by an arrow, but it’s overall not as bad as you might think.

I should now mention that I don’t know a thing about Bring It On, which is apparently a cheerleading movie series that started in 2000. I have no idea if this is supposed to be a spin-off, or completely unrelated, but to be honest, as I will never watch a Bring It On movie in my life, I doubt it matters. It’s certainly an interesting use of an idea that some people already know – to be honest, I’ve possibly never once thought about cheerleaders in the last ten years, so this was different.

Also, it’s modern, and by modern, I mean I feel like an old fogey watching it. There’s one scene in which it shows people on their phones, and the texts they’re writing pop up on the screen (like Non-Stop, an action movie I saw once). It only happens once, but reeks of the modern age. There was a joke made about eggplants and tacos – I still use a flip phone, but I was able to follow along with the intended joke well enough.

Like I said, not all the humor hits.

When it comes to performances, I was expecting a little more from Gino Anania and Samuel Braun, but that’s more where the story takes them. I don’t think that Makena Zimmerman’s character was fleshed out that well, and Tiera Skovbye (Summer of 84, Forever 16, Even Lambs Have Teeth) didn’t appear as much as I was hoping.

Even so, much of the central cast of nine is good – Kerri Medders, Alexandra Beaton, Alten Wilmot, Sierra Holder, Rudy Borgonia, Sam Robert Muik, Marlowe Zimmerman, Madison MacIsaac, and Erika Prevost mostly all brought something to the movie. Not all were necessarily memorable – Erika Prevost, Marlowe Zimmerman, and Rudy Borgonia didn’t get a lot of good characterization – but all were at least manageable.

I do think Kerri Medders (Do Not Reply) made for a solid lead. She wasn’t notable insofar as personality goes, but she did well as the main character. For comedic relief, Alten Wilmot was great – his line ‘Oh my God, were the chains on sale?’ cracked me up quite a bit – and I did dig his character. I wasn’t moved by Sierra Holder at first, but then she had a scene with Alexandra Beaton that I thought was awkwardly cute.

See, Beaton’s character finds a notebook with a list in it of the nine characters – not by name, but by stereotype (stoner, slut, jock, badass, klutzy nerd, ditz, sexy blonde, basic bitch, and final girl). Beaton, who sprained her ankle early on in the film, was complaining to Holder that she didn’t find it fair to be labeled the ‘klutzy nerd,’ to which Holder replies, ‘Well, you could be the sexy blonde.’ It wasn’t clear to me if this was intentional flirting or not (as it turns out, it was), but I found it awkwardly cute, and I shipped it immediately.

Sam Robert Muik (A.M.I.) only got one scene to really shine; being a stoner doesn’t usually grant much in the way of staying power in horror movies, unless you’re in The Cabin in the Woods. Even so, he was fun for his moments on air. Lastly, Madison MacIsaac did pretty well as a ditzy blonde. At times, she felt a bit too airheaded, but she was still reasonably fun.

And actually, maybe she wasn’t too airheaded. I remember, back in high school, a teacher was discussing nuclear power plants, and there was a girl in my class who was confused about how plants could be dangerous. She was thinking about plants that grow in the ground, as opposed to power plants. It’s small moments like that which lend credibility to some silly airheaded moments MacIsaac’s character has on-screen.

Unfortunately for a slasher, none of the kills were particularly good. That can’t be a big surprise, given this is a Syfy original and, as such, made-for-TV, but even so, it’s a disappointment. Someone got suffocated with a pom pom, another got their head bashed in, someone else took an ax to the back, but nothing here is at all gory. Also, while the killer’s design is okay – simply the mascot of the school these girls are cheering for – it’s nothing that really stands out much.

Bring It On: Cheer or Die isn’t a good movie, but I can’t say that I didn’t have a decent amount of fun with it. The finale doesn’t do the rest of the film justice, and I could have done without a couple of the sillier moments, but honestly, I had an okay time with this one, and could easily see myself giving it another watch, if only because some of the characters and dialogue were solid. Below average, sure, but not a bad time at all.

6.5/10

Dead Still (2014)

Directed by Philip Adrian Booth [Other horror films: Death Tunnel (2005), ShadowBox (2005), DarkPlace (2007), Children of the Grave (2007), Ghouls Gone Wild (2008), The Possessed (2009), The Haunted Boy: The Secret Diary of the Exorcist (2010), Soul Catcher (2011), Children of the Grave 2 (2012), The Exorcist File (2014), The Attached (2023)]

Dead Still isn’t a movie I want to spend a lot of time on. I found it absolutely abysmal the first time I saw it, and time hasn’t been overly kind to it. It’s one of those movies in which it’s hard to put into words exactly why I despise it, but the dislike is indeed real, and based on how terrible this movie is, I imagine the feeling is mutual.

The basic plot – a camera used for death photography (taking pictures of dead bodies, apparently a thing back in the olden days) is discovered by a descendant, and things happen – could have been okay, but it wasn’t because the movie sucked.

To elaborate, I just didn’t get it – the souls of spirits are caught in the Negative World, and have been since they were originally photographed, but apparently mean no harm toward the person who trapped them there, one Wenton Davis (played by Ray Wise), but once a live kid (not the only live person, because a little girl who died is also alive apparently) gets there, things happen.

If someone is photographed by this old camera, they die a couple of days later. But that’s not all – even if someone has been nowhere near the camera, the ghost trapped in the camera can leave the camera to possess someone to self-mutilate themselves, and there’s a cult watching a house but the cult only has one member and that member has an ancestor who is dead but also alive and cameras and sacrifice and the worst ending I’ve seen in my life.

Dead Still is shit.

And even after I watched it the first time, I was curious as to why. I’ve not touched on the meta reasons it’s shit – I will, don’t worry – but this film was directed by Philip Adrian Booth. I didn’t know at the time I first watched Dead Still that Booth was the same director behind Death Tunnel, which was another amazingly bad film that I couldn’t believe was as atrocious as it was. After I found out that the same guy behind Death Tunnel was behind Dead Still, everything fell into place.

See, as terrible as the story is, the technique is worse. I’m not a behind-the-scenes guy. I can’t describe filming techniques or properly use filming terminology. What I can say is that many of the scenes here feel like they’re from a ‘scary’ music video – they quickly flash on the screen with no context, and the editing too is shit, also in a way I can’t describe. Actually, if you’re a director, or editor, or have some movie-making ambitions, watch this movie and tell me what went wrong – even if I never find it, it’s worth seeing how not to make a movie.

Ben Browder (Bad Kids Go to Hell, Hoax) isn’t a good lead. Ray Wise (Dead End, Jeepers Creepers 2, The Butterfly Room) was hammy, so at least he was having fun. Eric Ruff was terrible. Elle LaMont (Mercy Black, The Devil’s Gravestone) was sort of hot, but also not great. I felt quite bad for Gavin Casalegno, as he was only a kid, and he didn’t deserve this.

The performances don’t matter. No performance in the history of mankind could make a movie with this story and this editing worth watching. I’ll give Dead Still props for it’s gore, but I’ll take them all away for two reasons:

  1. The finale was about 15 seconds long. It showed that, despite destroying the evil, that the evil wasn’t destroyed, and was still able to possess people.
  2. Apparently, this was ‘based on a true story.’ Show me one piece of evidence that a ghost/spirit was trapped in a camera and was able to possess and kill people and I will give this movie a 10/10 and publically apologize for giving it the rating it deserves. Cameras do exist, but that’s as true as this movie gets.

I was going to give this points for a scene toward the end – not exactly a twist, or at least not a good twist, but an almost okay scene – but this movie just pisses me off. It gets nothing. It loses. GOOD DAY, SIR!

0/10

Chakushin ari (2003)

Directed by Takashi Miike [Other horror films: Ôdishon (1999), Tennen shôjo Man next: Yokohama hyaku-ya hen (1999), Tajuu jinkaku tantei saiko – Amamiya Kazuhiko no kikan (2000), Bijitâ Q (2001), Koroshiya 1 (2001), Katakuri-ke no kôfuku (2001), Gokudô kyôfu dai-gekijô: Gozu (2003), Sam gang 2 (2004, segment ‘Box’), Aku no kyôten (2012), Kuime (2014), Kamisama no iu tôri (2014), Gokudô daisensô (2015), Terra Formars (2016)]

Honestly, I have to say I’m a bit surprised by this one, and in this particular case, it’s not a positive surprise. This Japanese movie, despite the plenty of decent things I’ve heard about it over the years, just strikes me as a rather average film. It’s okay, it’s certainly watchable, but is it special? I don’t see it.

Chakushin ari, perhaps better known as One Missed Call, feels like Japanese ghost movie 101. It’s based on a novel by Yasushi Akimoto, and has plenty of what you’d expect from a Japanese ghost movie, such as a long-haired child spirit, some mystery behind the spirit and why the spirit is wreaking havoc, and the same jump scares you’ve likely seen before.

None of this makes this movie bad, but it does feel a little generic. It is true, also, that I’m not a big J-horror fan – honestly, I could probably count the modern Japanese horror films I’ve seen on two hands, and that’s after a finger or two gets lost in the garbage disposal. To be fair, I do rather love Dark Water, but this is directed by Takashi Miike of all people, so I sort of expected a little more.

I was mostly able to follow this story along though – sometimes Asian horror films confuse the hell out of me (such as A Tale of Two Sisters or Ju-on), but this one seemed pretty simple. I didn’t really care for the ending, but still, at least the story was okay. It even added spices of dark subject matter such as parental abuse into the mix, which of course is always good fun.

Only two performances really mattered here, and that’d be Kô Shibasaki (Battle Royale, Kakashi / Scarecrow, and Kuime / Over Your Dead Body) and Shin’ichi Tsutsumi. The amusing thing is, I wasn’t sure of the name of Tsutsumi’s character until the final twenty minutes or so. Shibasaki does solid with the role she has, and Tsutsumi is a comforting character at times, but neither one is particularly note-worthy.

What is sort of odd is that I got the sense I knew where this film was going – we open with a group of six friends eating together at a restaurant, and I was expecting a Final Destination-type thing in which each of these six friends would have to deal with the cell phone curse, but after it passes through three of them, the other two just disappear, and we’re left with Ko Shibasaki’s character, which felt sort of odd.

Actually, on the whole idea of the curse, in which someone gets a call from themselves in the future, sort of foretelling of when they’ll die, this movie does have an aged technological feel to it, as everyone is carrying around flip phones. What’s amusing about this, in my perspective, is that I’m an old-fashioned guy, and in fact, I still use a flip phone to this day, so that added an extra element to the movie, and at least personalized it.

Even so, One Missed Call just felt on the generic side to me. There wasn’t much of an emotional impact toward the end – I mean, they tried, but it just didn’t hit me in the same way the end of either Black Rat or Dark Water hits me – and while I can appreciate the song during the credits, I still think the movie comes out to about average. Not bad, just average.

Like I said, though, I’m not the biggest fan of J-horror, so it’s quite possible that it will do more for those who are than it ever would have for me.

7/10

Blood Slaves of the Vampire Wolf (1996)

Directed by Conrad Brooks [Other horror films: Jan-Gel, the Beast from the East (1999), Jan-Gel 2: The Beast Returns (2001), Jan-Gel 3: Hillbilly Monster (2003), Gypsy Vampire (2005), Gypsy Vampires Revenge (2008), Gypsy Vampire: The Final Bloodlust (2009), Zombie on the Loose (2010)]

Despite the wild title this film has, this straight-to-video film really isn’t as fun as you might hope. It’s not dreary or lifeless – certainly the people involved in this movie had some fun – but Blood Slaves of the Vampire Wolf does tend to be a bit repetitive, overlong, and generally, not my type of film.

The budget is quite low here, but you have to give director Conrad Brooks credit for doing what he was able to. The film opens up with a ‘This film is dedicated to the memory of Ed Wood,’ which is then followed by the fakest bat I’ve ever seen as it flies around. If you can’t get into low-budget horror, I can promise you that this is not the movie for you.

I can get into some low-budget horror films, though I generally gravitate toward slashers (such as The Horrible 4 and You’re Not Getting Out Alive). The problems I have with this movie have little at all to do with how cheap everything looks. Well, I guess one problem is related – the audio, while mostly audible, wasn’t particularly great. I don’t think I ever lost track of a conversation, but I don’t think they had much in the way of audio equipment when they made this one.

Otherwise, though, the problem is that the movie is an hour and 44 minutes long, and it’s just dull most of the time. A vampire lady makes a slave of a big horror movie fan, and uses both him and a mute servant to send out and collect blood for her. It’s not until the final 40 minutes that things get mildly interesting, as a British police officer (apparently here in Hollywood because he and another cop traded places for training or something) works with a woman to investigate some mysterious murders.

And that doesn’t mean that the final forty minutes are good, either; just that they had more going for them then the previous material, and I suspect that’s largely to do with Michael Hooker’s character, who I sort of liked.

To be fair, I thought that Don Miller did okay with his role, but it’s hard to stand out when you spend most of your screen-time as as a soulless blood slave of a vampire queen. Before that upgrade, though, he seemed like a pretty fun guy. I can’t say that Jennifer Knight’s portrayal of a hundred year old vampire did much for me, and Annette Perez didn’t add much either, but like I said, at least Michael Hooker was fun.

There’s not really much in the way of gore here. Early on, we do have a guy who’s stabbed multiple times with a hatchet (we get that classy ‘blood-running-down-the-camera-lens’ thing going on with it), and that was a decent scene, but otherwise, I’d say most of the kills are entirely ineffective, and wouldn’t be a drawing point to this movie.

What really should be the drawing point is the heart they put into this. I may not have enjoyed it, but it’s good to see people put hard work into cheap movies – case in point, I despised The Stripper Ripper, but I never once doubted that they had fun making it. The problem is that this movie is an hour and 44 minutes, which is way too long to warrant, and I just don’t think there was enough meat in the story to keep it that engaging.

If you enjoy the occasional lower-budget vampire movie, Blood Slaves of the Vampire Wolf may be worth a visit. Personally, it’s not the type of movie that I really cared much for, but on the other hand, I’ve definitely seen worse in my time.

3.5/10

Killer Party (1986)

Directed by William Fruet [Other horror films: Death Weekend (1976), Cries in the Night (1980), Spasms (1983), Blue Monkey (1987)]

I have to admit that I came out of this one feeling misled. I’m not blaming anyone, but I was under the impression this was a slasher, and while there are slasher aspects, it primarily feels more like a precursor to Night of the Demons, and that’s when it’s not feeling like a mess.

Apparently this movie was edited to hell by the MPAA, and you can tell, because the kills in this movie, while they have potential, are pretty weak. The movie is strongest for that perhaps ten minute period when the slasher feel is at it’s peak, but even so, most of the kills are weak, and honestly, the whole of the movie is the same.

Look, I hate sororities and fraternities. I refer to this in my reviews of Pledge Night, Final Exam, and American Horror House, and in Killer Party, pledges are told to recite sexually suggestive phrases in class (getting one girl thrown out), frat boys assault women (big shock) as they throw bees at them while in a hot tub, and film them as they frantically try to get in the house, in towels or nude, so quality sexual harrasment. That alone should have sent them to jail, I felt.

I hate fraternities and sororities. I can’t stand them. Abusing and humiliating people, and then acting like brothers and sisters for life afterwards strikes me as utterly ridiculous and dehumanizing. And unfortunately, we have to deal with abusive sorority aspects for the first 50 or so minutes of the movie.

Once we get past that, we have what seems to be demonic possession, and I just didn’t care at that point. The slasher portions – with a killer wearing an old-fashioned diving suit – had potential, but the supernatural aspects don’t do anything but repel me. It’s also worth mentioning there’s a few comedic elements thrown in, and I didn’t care for those either.

None of the leads really moved me. Joanna Johnson was fine, Sherry Willis-Burch and Elaine Wilkes were also okay, and Martin Hewitt (Alien Predator) had no character. Ralph Seymour (Just Before Dawn) does have character, but I don’t care for it, and Paul Bartel (Eating Raoul, Piranha) was at least amusing, but gets little focus, given he’s a professor of a university.

Maybe I just wasn’t feeling this. I didn’t care for any of the characters (and to be clear, it’s not like they gave us many reasons to care for any of them), the kills were weak, the supernatural aspects disappointing. Night of the Demons isn’t a favorite of mine, but it’s at least fun, and I just didn’t have that much fun here. Perhaps that will change if I see this in the future, but at the moment, I find it quite below average.

5/10