Scary Movie (1991)

Directed by Daniel Erickson [Other horror films: N/A]

I definitely didn’t know what I was getting into going into this movie. I know that IMDb labels it a horror/comedy, which I guess is a fair description, but what I didn’t anticipate is just how much fun I would find much of the film.

If there’s one main drawback, it’s that I think Scary Movie runs on a bit longer than it needs to. I think they probably could have cut out ten minutes, maybe 15, and made it a quicker experience, because there were a few times when I felt my focus wander off. Otherwise, though, I think that it’s a movie with a lot of spirit and a lovely and charming encapsulation of Halloween.

For the first thirty minutes of the movie, a group of four friends are standing in line to get into a Haunted house attraction. During this time, an insane killer breaks loose. Most of the film, though, follows the friends, specifically the nervous wreck that is Warren (played by John Hawkes).

On a side-note, one of my favorite things in the film was, when the group of friends played jokes and pranks on Warren, this guy standing behind the group in line – not a part of the group, and in fact never actually talks to anyone in the group – laughs along with the others. The camera often puts him in focus as he cackles at Warren, and in fact he’s credited on IMDb as ‘Laughing Man’ (Ernie Taliaferro in his sole role, if anyone’s wondering). That happened multiple times throughout the movie, and it never got old.

What also never got old were the hokey yet charming set pieces in the haunted house, and really, the whole movie reeked of the spirit of Halloween in a way that, to me, few movies have (such as Trick ‘r Treat, Halloween III: Season of the Witch and, of course, Halloween), and for that alone, I had a really good time.

John Hawkes (who later popped up in Identity, which must be where I recognize him from) was an interesting lead character, and throughout the film we see him consistently surviving the horrors he’s facing. He’s a jumpy guy, though, so the amount of horrors he’s actually facing are sometimes in question. Ev Lunning is decent as a sheriff running for re-election, and Zeke Mills (‘You wonder where the yeller went when you brush your teeth with Pepperdent’) has some funny lines. The best actor, though, is probably Taliaferro and his laughing.

I don’t know if the end of the movie is entirely satisfying, but I think it works with the story, and feels oddly dramatic given the rest of the film’s somewhat light-hearted nature. This is definitely a movie that surprised me, though, and Scary Movie is a movie I’d recommend to fans of early 90’s slashers if they want something a little atypical.

7.5/10

Ghost Mother (2007)

Directed by Theeratorn Siriphunvaraporn [Other horror films: N/A]

I’ve not seen an over-abundance of Thai horror films. In fact, interested, I checked out on IMDb the Thai films I have seen, and I came up with just six total (ranging from the great like 303 Fear Faith Revenge and The Dorm to the mediocre such as The Victim to the terrible such as Sick Nurses). Ghost Mother now makes that seven films from Thailand.

Sadly, though, I’d probably rank this closer to The Victim than I would The Dorm or 303 Fear Faith Revenge. That said, it’s no doubt better and more cohesive than The Victim, but ultimately, Ghost Mother probably falls around average.

Pachrapa Chaichua was decent as a main character, but I didn’t get a ton of expression from her. Better was Focus Jirakul and Thana ‘Oil’ Suthikamorn. I also enjoyed the woman who played the sister of Chaichua’s character, but I’m not sure what her name was (this foreign film isn’t particularly well-indexed). I’m thinking it was perhaps Sudarat Wongkrut (which is apparently another name for Chotika Wongwilas), or maybe Thiti Rhumorn (I have no idea if Thiti is a male or female name in Thailand, but I also didn’t know that Chotika was a female name in Thailand either until today, so cut me a break), but whoever played that character, good for her.

It’s true that in some ways, the story of a ghost getting revenge on those who killed her is somewhat simple, and though this movie does play around a little with narrative structure (such as showing a flashback to a scene the audience hadn’t seen before), it’s a pretty easy story to follow, which is something I’m actually happy about. Too often I can get lost watching Asian horror (good examples of this would be Ju-on and A Tale of Two Sisters, not to again mention The Victim), so it’s nice to be able to sit down and get the salient points across.

Worth mentioning, while the version I watched was subtitled, they weren’t the best subtitles I’ve ever seen. Sentences were phrased oddly and incorrect syntax was often used. None of this led to any conversation going above my head, and it was probably more funny than annoying, but I thought it worth pointing out.

Ghost Mother was okay, which isn’t really what I was expecting when I first found out I’d be watching it. It’s not a great movie, and I doubt it’s special in many ways (most of the kills themselves are just okay, but there are occasionally creepy visions, such as a character seeing a hanged woman on a bus that was passing by), but for Thai horror, at least the little I’ve seen, it’s a movie that might be worth watching just for a taste of something different.

6.5/10

The Attic Expeditions (2001)

Directed by Jeremy Kasten [Other horror films: All Souls Day: Dia de los Muertos (2005), The Thirst (2006), The Wizard of Gore (2007), The Theatre Bizarre (2011, ‘Framing Segments’), The Exorcist Files (2011), My Haunted Vacation (2013), The Profane Exhibit (2013), The Dead Ones (2019)]

This is a movie that I wish I liked more. The first time I saw The Attic Expeditions, I was probably too confused to form any opinion other than that I found it a disjointed mess, but seeing it again, I really wanted to appreciate what it was going for. In part, I think I do, but I still found it a movie that leads to far more unsatisfying scenes than satisfying ones, and that ain’t good, as the kids say.

It’s hard to critique the story because it’s difficult to tell what the story here really is. Certainly that’s part of what makes this film memorable, but even so, being as jumbled up as it was, with various different solutions that may be partially or fully true, it makes the film occasionally seem as though it was over-reaching and rather too ambitious.

I don’t really have a complaint about the performances, though. Andras Jones is perhaps the most unremarkable, but for a lead character in a movie like this, he does fine. I hated that haircut, though. Jeffrey Combs (Re-Animator, From Beyond, and most importantly, the voice of The Question from Justice League Unlimited) obviously brings some quality here – I mean, who doesn’t like a doctor who smokes joints while talking to his patients?

Seth Green (who I mainly know from Without a Paddle, The Italian Job, Rat Race, and, atypically, It) is really fun here, and I enjoy pretty much any time he talks. His line, “Well, that’s awkward for you” cracked me up, and his on-screen presence was on point. Ted Raimi looked really familiar to me, and to be sure, I’ve seen him in a few movies (Wishmaster, The Midnight Meat Train, and Candyman), but none of those roles seem to warrant my immediate recognition of his face, so that’s bothersome. Also, one of the nurses looked really familiar too, but after scanning all applicable characters in IMDb, no dice.

To be sure, there are some interesting ideas and elements here, such as the fact that after Green’s character caught the doctor with the blank book, she uses another patient who writes to supplement the material she can’t read from the book anymore (it’s explained marginally better in the movie). That’s some good paranoia, which is a lot of what this movie’s based around. It doesn’t make for a necessarily coherent story, though.

[This is the paragraph where I was going to compare this movie to other asylum-based horror films from the time period, such as 1997’s Asylum and 2004’s Madhouse, but despite seeing both of those films, I literally don’t remember a single thing about either, so I’ll just use this paragraph instead to insult my weak memory and note that I need to get to revisiting the both of those.]

I wish I liked the Attic Expeditions more. Even though I don’t care that much for it, though, I do admit that it has an atmosphere about it that makes the film unique, and the story, whatever the real story may be, is interesting enough to at least keep the movie moving along at a good pace. It’s something that I’d probably recommend for the experience, but it’s not something that I’d call a good movie at all, I regret to say.

5.5/10

This is one of the films covered by Fight Evil, and if you’d like to hear Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I discuss this oddity, by all means, give us a listen.

Shark Week (2012)

Directed by Christopher Ray [Other horror films: Reptisaurus (2009), Megaconda (2010), Mega Shark vs. Crocosaurus (2010), 2-Headed Shark Attack (2012), Mega Shark vs. Kolossus (2015), 3-Headed Shark Attack (2015), A House Is Not a Home (2015), Circus Kane (2017), Minutes to Midnight (2018)]

I’m not playing around with this one, brahs.

I recorded this off Syfy for some unexplainable reason (well, I guess the reason was that, at the time, I recorded almost any horror movie I hadn’t previously seen, so there’s that), and so I got what I expected, and it’s just another God-awful shark movie by the Asylum, void of almost anything enjoyable.

So a crazy guy captures eight people and puts them on his island, where he’ll make them fight sharks and go through traps because he’s angry about the death of his son (all of these people have a connection with that death in some way). It’s basically Saw: With Sharks, only nothing like that, because as bad as the worst Saw movie was, this was worse.

Acting was horrible throughout. Patrick Bergin and Yancy Butler were the worst offenders, but literally no one did well. Frankie Cullen almost looked like David Arquette, so there’s that, and Joshua Michael Allen was almost a hero worth rooting for, but I didn’t care for a single one of these characters at any time, and even if the acting was atrocious intentionally, it didn’t make it ‘fun.’

Obviously the plot is stupid, and special effects were more like not-special effects (see, this film drained away my clever way with words), and were just horrible throughout. Look at the land-mine scene for a good example. Oh, and speaking of which, whoever did the cinematography should be drawn and quartered. Listen, I don’t have the vocabulary to explain exactly the techniques they use – it was like instead of showing a whole scene, they just cut a second out every other second – it’s jarring, annoying, and entirely unnecessary.

A good example, again, is the landmine scene. A guy steps on a landmine. Another guy comes over. And we get a few quick cuts to his foot, then to guy A’s face, then to guy B’s face. It just looks like amateur hour.

Oh, and the dialogue was horrible too, but there was one joke I laughed at, though, so I’ll give it a point for that.

Also known under the title of Shark Assault (not that a retitling is like to change anyone’s mind about this film), Shark Week is horrible, and I don’t know why I bother.

1.5/10

The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms (1953)

Directed by Eugène Lourié [Other horror films: The Colossus of New York (1958), Behemoth the Sea Monster (1959), Gorgo (1961)]

Giant monster movies aren’t really my go-to, even if they are classic. Sure, I enjoyed The Black Scorpion well enough, and Them! is a classic I grew up with, but in general, giant monsters running amok isn’t really my cup of tea, and as decent as this movie is, especially for being one of the earliest movies of it’s genre, I don’t personally know if I consider it that special.

Certainly the special effects are pretty good for the time (the stop motion can look a little janky, but it has it’s charm), and most of the destruction and chaos are fun to watch (such as that cop getting eaten – I could play that on loop for the rest of my life and count myself a lucky man), and I even like how they sort of build things up to the final confrontation, but despite all that, it’s not a movie I’d really find myself in the position to watch often.

Part of it may be the generic cast. Aside from Cecil Kellaway, who I loved pretty much every minute while on screen, the cast just had a been-there-done-that feel to them, and though I guess the main protagonist was interesting in that he was a foreigner (Paul Hubschmid, who was born in Switzerland), he still didn’t jibe with me, nor did anyone else.

More than anything, though, it’s the story here that just makes me pull away. I don’t want to give off the wrong impression, though – the movie’s perfectly fine, and I’ll be giving it a solid average rating. It’s just that it doesn’t amaze me the way I wish it would, and it also doesn’t have near as much an anti-atomic weapon moral that you’d perhaps expect from movies of this time.

No one can doubt that, in it’s own way, The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms is a classic movie, and there are some great scenes (aside from the aforementioned police officer scene, don’t forget that lighthouse being taken down), but it’s not a movie I’ve ever happened to love either time I’ve seen it, for whatever that might be worth.

7/10

Magic (1978)

Directed by Richard Attenborough [Other horror films: N/A]

Certainly a well-known film, and for good reason, Magic is a fantastic psychological horror film with some solid actors, a good story, and great tense scenes.

Obviously, Anthony Hopkins here is just amazing. When it comes to high-caliber actors, he’s not really at the top of my list (though I’ve loved him in plenty of movies, from the action-adventure The Edge to the court-based thriller Fracture), but he does fantastic here, and his tense character is both uncomfortable to watch yet almost impossible to look away from. Burgess Meredith (here two years following a small appearance in Burnt Offerings) is great too, in his chummy agent way.

The scene the two share in which Meredith’s character confronts Hopkins’ about his mental problems is pretty fantastic from beginning to end, and within possesses one of the tensest scenes in the film, where Meredith challenges Hopkins’ to shut up the dummy, Fats, for five minutes. We pretty much know he’s going to break at some point, but even so, it’s a great scene, and Meredith looks like his heart breaks when he sees just how far gone Hopkins is.

Ann-Margret is good here too, of course, and I’ll even give some kudos to Ed Lauter, but really, Burgess Meredith and especially Anthony Hopkins steal the show.

Because the film is based more around the mental decline of a character than anything else, there’s not a whole lot of gore here, but the few murders we get are all decently solid (though I don’t think any of them are really all that memorable, as little as that really means). Certainly the highlight of the film works out great, and even the conclusion is oddly emotional given the situation.

I don’t think that Magic will ever top my list of the 1970’s, because there were so many fantastic and enjoyable films from the decade, but this is definitely a film that’s worth seeing, especially if you want a little something different in your horror, and more so, if you’re a fan of Hopkins.

8/10

This is one of the films covered by Fight Evil’s podcast. Listen below as Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I find the magic in Magic, brahs.

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1941)

Directed by Victor Fleming [Other horror films: N/A]

When I revisited the 1931 version of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, I was pleasantly surprised with how much I enjoyed it. I didn’t really have the same hopes for this, one, though, and unfortunately I was probably right in that.

Part of the lack of high hopes was that lightning can often only strike once (which obviously isn’t true, but #fuckitbrahs), and given that I enjoyed the 1931 version quite a bit, I thought it unlikely that I’d enjoy another one, especially one so close in time period, quite as much. Even with the cast, Spencer Tracy being the most impressive, I think this feels more drawn-out than necessary, and it just wasn’t near as much fun to watch.

Certainly seeing Spencer Tracy in his only horror role was interesting. He’s not necessarily an actor I’ve seen a lot from, but he was in some movies I really enjoy, such as the fantastically underrated comedy It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World and the solid Bad Day at Black Rock, and seeing him playing Dr. Jekyll was fun (though he looked older than I’d really expect his character to look).

No one else in the cast really adds that much, but Ingrid Bergman, Lana Turner, Donald Crisp, Ian Hunter (of one of the best movies of all time, 1938’s The Adventures of Robin Hood), and Peter Godfrey all put in perfectly acceptable performances. In fact, I think the scene where Turner’s character is going to Dr. Jekyll for help against the abuse she faces from Mr. Hyde is one of the strongest in the movie, certainly one of the most emotional, so many kudos to Lana Turner for that.

Also, while speaking of Turner, I think that song will be stuck in my head for at least the next few days. When the band commences playing, my feet begin to go. For a rollicking, romping Polka is the jolliest fun I know!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Despite that fun, though, I wouldn’t call this a fun rollick, partially because it unnecessarily almost clocks in at two hours. I didn’t feel that much dragging in the 1931 version (though that’s not to say the film was without flaws), but boy, I certainly felt some here, and it also felt a bit more melodramatic than it really needed to be.

I won’t say that this was a waste of time to watch, because it wasn’t, and I won’t say it’s a bad movie, but I think I will say that the 1931 version is one that I’m more likely to stick to, Spencer Tracy or not.

6/10

Rabid (1977)

Directed by David Cronenberg [Other horror films: Shivers (1975), The Brood (1979), Scanners (1981), Videodrome (1983), The Dead Zone (1983), The Fly (1986), Dead Ringers (1988), Naked Lunch (1991), eXistenZ (1999), Crimes of the Future (2022), The Shrouds (2024)]

Given this was a David Cronenberg film, I went in with mild apprehension. I’ve not seen a ton of his films, but out of the ones I have seen (Videodrome, The Brood, The Fly, and Shivers), I’ve only really liked Shivers. Rabid isn’t quite as enjoyable as Shivers is, but I did find it a pretty satisfying and almost time-relevant film.

It took a little while to get going, and at first I thought that most of the mayhem would be centered around the plastic surgery clinic in a localized fashion, but as the movie went on, the battleground against a mysterious virus became the whole of the city of Montreal, which I thought led to some pretty tense scenes. Just seeing multiple scenes of a city under martial law in order to combat the growing virus was great, and gave a great sense of urgency, and it was all so natural in the film.

Perhaps one of my favorite scenes is earlier on, though, right after one of the characters goes crazy at the plastic surgery clinic, and police are investigating the crime. There’s something about it that seems real, organic, with a lot of moving people and some characters walking in and out without even being stopped by police, getting separated and seeing the extent of the craziness.

I have to admit that the two main performances, those of Frank Moore and Marilyn Chambers, left something to be desired. Certainly toward the end, Chambers had some good moments, but neither of the two really did that much for me. Joe Silver (who was also in Shivers, but I forget to what extent) played a fantastically nice guy, and we got our eye candy with Susan Roman (most people would think that Chambers, who has a handful of nude scenes was more attractive, but Roman and the glasses she wears does something to me). No one else in the cast stands out one way or the other.

Like I said, Rabid started out a bit slow to begin with, and it does deal with body horror which is a sub-genre I’ve never much cared for, but during the second half of the film, the larger focus seems to be on the pandemic spreading across Montreal, and the horrors it brings (armed guards standing around the mall, innumerable garbage trucks to pick up dead bodies, people forced to wear Ids identifying them as getting a preventative vaccine), and it just hits harder given that I’m writing this in October of 2020, with COVID still very much a concern to most people.

This movie isn’t at all perfect, but for a Cronernberg movie, I enjoyed it far more than I’d have expected, and it’s definitely worth checking out if you’ve not already.

7.5/10

The Mummy (1959)

Directed by Terence Fisher [Other horror films: Three’s Company (1953, episodes ‘The Surgeon’ & ‘ Take a Number’), The Curse of Frankenstein (1957), Dracula (1958), The Revenge of Frankenstein (1958), The Hound of the Baskervilles (1959), The Man Who Could Cheat Death (1959), The Stranglers of Bombay (1959), The Brides of Dracula (1960), The Two Faces of Dr. Jekyll (1960), The Curse of the Werewolf (1961), The Phantom of the Opera (1962), The Horror of It All (1964), The Gorgon (1964), The Earth Dies Screaming (1964), Dracula: Prince of Darkness (1966), Island of Terror (1966), Frankenstein Created Woman (1967), Night of the Big Heat (1967), The Devil Rides Out (1968), Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed (1969), Frankenstein and the Monster from Hell (1974)]

Confession time – I’m a big fan of Universal horror films, and in fact, it’s probably the fact that I was largely raised on movies like Dracula, Frankenstein, Creature from the Black Lagoon, and The Invisible Man that I’m a horror fan today, and a lover still of the Universal classics.

I never could get into The Mummy, though, and to this day, I don’t know if I can honestly say I’ve sat through the whole thing without losing either my focus or consciousness.

Luckily, Hammer came around 20-some years later and gave us a new version, and it’s one I’ve seen a couple of times now and find quite a bit more palatable. Now, to be fair to the 1932 version, I don’t think there are any scenes in Hammer’s rendition that are near as classic or memorable as the opening to Universal’s story (the ‘he went for a little walk’ scene, with that slow, dragging hand, always kicked things into gears that just couldn’t be sustained), but overall, I find the Hammer version an easier movie to get into and enjoy.

Definitely the cast has to do with that. Peter Cushing is one of my favorite classic horror actors (Vincent Price is preferred, but Cushing is a close second), having starred in some damn fantastic movies such as Horror Express, Dracula (1958), The Flesh and the Fiends, The Curse of Frankenstein, The Hound of the Baskervilles, and The Abominable Snowman, and he’s no less great here. I love how, despite his character’s leg injury, he’s able to get some decent action in toward the end, and his back-and-forth with George Pastell’s character near the conclusion was top-notch stuff.

Pastell isn’t an actor I’m widely familiar with, but I really liked him here. Obviously, Christopher Lee played the titular Mummy (doing so much like how Karloff played Frankenstein’s Monster in the 1931 classic), and while his more muscular design wasn’t quite as good, or as classic, as the original version, I loved how he just burst through doors and went to town on people. Definitely a quicker-moving and more action-packed mummy, and I can’t complain about that.

Some aspects, or perhaps better said, the only aspect of Yvonne Furneaux’s character seemed to come in a bit late into the story, and it felt somewhat cliché (and in fact, it was done before in previous Universal Mummy movies), but it still led to some quality scenes. Eddie Byrne was solid too as an inspector who was actually open to the possibility of a mummy walking around and committing murders, so kudos to him.

There is a 13-minute flashback about halfway through the film that does drag a little (most of this is the history of the mummy and Egyptian stuff that you can find in every mummy horror film), mostly during the funeral procession lineup, but it’s the only time in the film we can really see Christopher Lee outside the decaying bandages, so it comes with it’s pros.

Being a Hammer film, the color here does help bring the film more to life, and the film, at least to me, rarely feels as dry as my experiences with the 1932 version. After seeing this twice, I still enjoy it, and while it’s not quite as good as Hammer’s Curse of Frankenstein or Horror of Dracula, it is perhaps one of the few Hammer films that, to me, outdoes the original Universal counterpart.

7.5/10

Lost Souls (2000)

Directed by Janusz Kaminski [Other horror films: N/A]

I wasn’t really expecting too much out of this, given what little I knew about the plot (an atheist journalist finds out he’s the Antichrist, essentially), and also given this came out a year after End of Days, another Antichrist-based horror film, so after finishing it, Lost Souls basically went how I thought it would.

Certainly I’ll admit that it’s nice to see Winona Ryder (Beetle Juice and Alien: Resurrection) and John Hurt (Doctor Who and Whistle and I’ll Come to You), both of whom did an okay job, and I didn’t mind the other performances, though Ben Chaplin, despite being most of the focus of the film, never really resonated with me.

That said, the story, while occasionally interesting (the most enjoyable portions being the short time spent with Ryder and Chaplin investigating Chaplin’s origins), felt really rushed at times. I mean, that ending just came and went like zat, as my homegirl Fleur would say (that’s a random Harry Potter reference for all my wizard friends out there). There were some aspects in the story worth delving into (though no matter how hard this tried, it couldn’t beat Damien: Omen II in the Antichrist learning his origins), but that didn’t really happen here, even with the pointless twists thrown in.

Also, I just don’t buy for a second that all of those people at the end knew Chaplin’s character was the Antichrist his whole life and were able to keep it a secret. With that many random people, I don’t care how secure the cult, word would get out.

I feel like this movie was trying to cash in on the whole End of Days and Stigmata trend (Stigmata is a film I started once, but never got around to finishing, on a dull side-note I can pass off as interesting), and while I did like this marginally more than End of Days, maybe solely for Ryder’s presence and maybe that assassination attempt (which was almost tense), it’s not a hell of a lot more than below average.

5.5/10