Category: Reviews

From Dusk Till Dawn 3: The Hangman’s Daughter (1999)

Directed by P.J. Pesce [Other horror films: Lost Boys: The Tribe (2008)]

The second straight-to-video From Dusk Till Dawn was a hard one to go into with anything nearing moderate expectations. I hated the second one, and I really never cared much for the first. Of course, the third time’s the cha- wait, no, this was utter shit too.

I’ll give the movie credit for having interesting characters. Michael Parks was pretty fun in his role. Lennie Loftin was somewhat amusing in his breaking bad scene, and Rebecca Gayheart (Urban Legend) was decently attractive, and her story went an unexpected direction. I didn’t think that we learned enough about Marco Leonardi’s character to make an impression, but Temuera Morrison at least looked threatening. Neither Ara Celi nor Jordana Spiro did anything for me.

Still, overall the cast is decent. It’s a shame that the story is so God-awful. I mean, sure, it connects to the first film far more than the second film ever did (which might make inherent sense, given this is a prequel), but when the story and special effects are as insufferable as was present here, I don’t think an increased attention to continuity really matters. Especially when the exact same final shot from the first film is used here, which I suspect most people saw coming.

Of course, they throw in an awful and pointless post-credits scene, but what you would expect? I mean, it’s awful, but at least it keeps it’s consistency with the rest of the film. And truth be told, the more I think about this one, the more I find it hard to believe that some people like it more than the second. The second was bad, don’t get me wrong, but this just struck me as much worse.

Honestly, it may not really amount to much. Both direct-to-video sequels were awful, and while I found this quite a bit worse, neither one gets anywhere close to the first movie, which, as I said, I wasn’t even that fond of. You get some okay characters here, and maybe an amusing scene or two, but honestly, this really isn’t worth much at all, unless Exorcist references are all you look for in life.

4/10

28 Weeks Later (2007)

Directed by Juan Carlos Fresnadillo [Other horror films: Intruders (2011)]

When I revisited 28 Days Later…, I was surprised by just how much I enjoyed it. Revisiting this one didn’t have the same outcome, alas. Not that 28 Weeks Later is terrible or anything, but I just never found it in me throughout the film to get too excited. Some interesting ideas, and I’ll touch on those, but overall, it’s almost bland in comparison to the first movie.

I’ll give it to the main cast, though, who are all decent (save for perhaps Robert Carlyle). Rose Byrne (Insidious) was decently fine, though I admit that it would have been nice to learn maybe a little more about her. Jeremy Renner (The Avengers) may have made some questionable decisions, but I rather enjoyed his character, and I personally don’t have a problem with him going AWOL. What moral person wouldn’t in his situation? Imogen Poots wasn’t really special, but despite her atrocious decisions, I thought she had more heart than Mackintosh Muggleton, who played her younger brother.

The story, though, was somewhat hard for me to get into. I don’t really mind the asymptomatic idea, but the fact that they (military and scientists both) left her entirely unguarded is utterly laughable. And when they’re gathering up all the civilians into a “safe area,” that “safe area” has more than one exit, and one of the exits isn’t guarded, so, well, infected individuals get in, and all hell breaks loose.

Past that point, it’s entirely on the military what happens to the population, as small as it was, in London. When the snipers get orders to start shooting everyone, infected or otherwise, it may be the logical choice, but you can’t fault anyone getting shot at for attempting to escape in any way possible. At that point, as far as I’m concerned, the military screwed up, and void all right to authority over anyone on the ground.

I mean, really, I’ve never served a day in uniform, and never would, if given the choice, but apparently I’m more intelligent than the commanders in this situation. Collecting all the civilians into one location in order to keep them safe is fine. It’s a good idea. Having multiple exits is, of course, a good idea. But why does only one of the exits have guards? With that easily avoidable mistake, they infected pretty much the world (because there’s no way a second outbreak isn’t reaching mainland Europe).

When there’s a lot of questionable set-up before the primary action, it becomes hard to really get too invested. Sure, I was rooting for Renner’s character when he left his sniping of innocent people and instead went to help them escape, but the whole situation was ridiculous to begin with, and realistically, I don’t think it’d ever happen.

Here’s another thing –  Robert Carlyle’s character is a caretaker of one of the buildings. Pretty much, he keeps things running smoothly. That’s all fine and well. His key-card grants him access to any place in the building, which makes sense. The problem is it also grants him access to purely military installations. Why? Why not just allow him access to his job locations, and restrict access to, you know, parameters outside of his employment?

An asymptomatic woman is found. She’s infected, but is still mostly normal. She’s not crazy, nor does she desire to eat flesh. Carlyle’s character is her husband. Because his key-card was idiotically keyed, and because the woman wasn’t guarded, Carlyle’s character was able to get to her, kiss her, and start the infection up again.

I don’t blame Carlyle’s character at all. If your wife was found, of course you’d want to get to her. Who can blame him for that? It’s entirely possible he didn’t even know she was infected, because I don’t believe he was told. If his key-card hadn’t granted him access to her, none of this would have ever happened.

This is what I’m talking about. It’s not the character’s faults, as far as I’m concerned. Even the military probably weren’t the ones who designed the architecture of the facility, nor the ones who came up with the emergency plans in case of a new outbreak. Because of the foolishness that went into these aspects, though, it just comes across as pretty bad.

28 Weeks Later is still a thrilling and decent zombie film, make no mistake. There’s some pretty cool scenes (though one of the most-talked about sequences, being the helicopter one, was just too much), and of course the budget here came to play. The story itself, though, was faulty, and that can’t just be excused, especially after how spectacular the first movie was.

6.5/10

Sleepy Hollow (1999)

Directed by Tim Burton [Other horror films: Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (2007), Dark Shadows (2012)]

Tim Burton didn’t make that many horror films, but after seeing this, you really wish that he would. I’m not going to go as far as to say this rendition of the classic story is flawless, but Sleepy Hollow is a hell of a lot of fun, with a fantastic cast and a mystery that’s actually quite engaging.

Of course, you have some Burton staples here, such as very artistic scenery (especially during flashbacks and dreams), and there’s admittedly some questionable CGI during the witch scene, but overall, this is 1990’s horror done right, and I can only imagine how fun this was to see in theaters.

That cast, tho…

Johnny Depp (A Nightmare on Elm Street, Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street) is a no-brainer casting choice here. Utterly love his performance, and I like how he’s not as weak as other portrayals of Ichabod Crane tend to be. Christina Ricci (who I best know from the 1990’s Addams Family movies) did great as an innocent young woman with a secret.

No one here, though, did a bad job. Jeffrey Jones (Beetlejuice, Ravenous), Michael Gambon (Dumbledore from the third Harry Potter film onward), Miranda Richardson (Rita Skeeter from Harry Potter), Casper Van Dien (Starship Troopers), Christopher Walken (The Dead Zone, Batman Returns), Michael Gough (Alfred from 1989’s Batman and it’s sequels), and Christopher Lee (don’t get me started) were all great. Seeing a cast of this caliber was more fun than I can say. I mean, I’ve seen this movie before, to be sure, but I forgot just how good it was.

With as good as the cast was, though, let’s not downplay the intriguing mystery playing out. There are multiple red herrings, and a lot of potential suspects, and given that the mystery was actually good, it was a very pleasant ride throughout, especially once we’re shown at the end the various clues to the ultimate solution. Very satisfying story, and I commend it heavily for that.

Crane’s more scientific mindset being at odds with the Headless Horseman was an interesting route to take. I don’t know if it was used to as much effect as it could have been, but I did love his defeated attitude once he actually saw the supernatural being in action. He overcomes his fears, though, and really works hard to figure out the mystery and save the town.

The Headless Horseman (played by Walken) had a pretty fun origin, and overall, I really liked the design of the Horseman. Related, that first tree scene always stuck with me – the blood just spurting from the tree was always a good time, if not a bit gruesome.

Sleepy Hollow isn’t my favorite horror film from the 1990’s, but it’s an enjoyable ride through-and-through. Artistically, it’s quite beautiful, and the setting is stellar. Honestly, I don’t think most would expect anything less from Tim Burton, but Sleepy Hollow is certainly worth a watch, and worth the praise.

8.5/10

Eden Lake (2008)

Directed by James Watkins [Other horror films: The Woman in Black (2012)]

The thing about Eden Lake is that it’s a well-made movie with an interesting premise, but it’s utterly demoralizing. It’s not a happy movie, and it’s not something you walk away from without being partially disturbed. That makes for a good movie, but not necessarily a good time.

Like I said, though, it’s certainly well-made. The rising tension and growing escalation between the main characters and a bunch of thug kids is certainly on point. What makes it slightly more interesting is that it’s a scenario that’s somewhat thought provoking in spite of the brutality. Much of this is due to Kelly Reilly’s character being a teacher, and the situation she and Michael Fassbender find themselves in, and she has to defend herself, going on the offensive, against the kids.

And speaking of which, I want to speak a bit on Fassbender’s character. He didn’t seem to have a problem with the kids bullying another kid early in the film. Why? It’s just ‘boys being boys.’ When it personally impacts him and his enjoyment of the day, though, he takes issue, because of course he does.

I don’t mind him asking the kids to turn the music down. I don’t mind him looking out for the kids in town once they cause one of his tires to deflate. But entering another person’s house without permission in order to confront them? Dawg, let it go. But he didn’t, and after his car was stolen, well, we see what happens. Really, past that point, both he and his girlfriend were screwed.

Eden Lake doesn’t take long to get brutal. There’s a bit of build-up, sure, but once the damn breaks, it breaks hard. Some painful scenes throughout assault the two protagonists, from very painful cuts from a box-cutter to someone’s foot being impaled by a rather sharp stick. When said character is pushing that stick out, I cringed. Likewise, when one badly injured character is struggling to keep consciousness, knowing that they are likely to die no matter how quickly help can be brought, it’s pretty dismal.

As is the movie as a whole, to be fair. Like I said, it’s a well-made film, but this is not an enjoyable romp. It’s dark and depressing, and very often more distressing than not. Seemingly good characters turn out to be a bit more ambiguous, and those who move toward a more positive side are killed in generally terrible ways.

To put it as simply as possible, if you had a Baby Blues and Eden Lake double feature, invest in some therapy afterward in order to get through the depression, as both of these are gloomy as all hell.

Certainly, though, Eden Lake is worth seeing. It’s a simple premise, but it’s done fantastically, and as much as a downer portions can be (such as that ending, which just leaves you a mixture of angry and discontent), it’s a great film, and probably one of the better British films in recent times.

8/10

This is one of the films covered by Fight Evil’s podcast. Listen below as Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I discuss Eden Lake. It’s dope, yo.

There’s Something in the Shadows (2021)

Directed by John Williams [Other horror films: The Mothertown (2014), The Slayers (2015), Crispy’s Curse (2017), Tales of the Creeping Death (2022), Watch Me Sleep (2023)]

I’m not unsympathetic toward the plight of found footage movies. Personally, I feel it’s an issue of oversaturation that makes it hard to really stand out. But there are certain pet peeves I have when it comes to this style of movie-making, and There’s Something in the Shadows pretty much check marks everyone.

First of all, I quote:

“On the 16th of September 2020, amatuer Paranormal investigation team ‘Theres Something in the shadows’ set off to the Scottish highlands to record the third episode of the popular YouTube series. / After a couple of unusual live social media feeds from the group leader Jon Farmer, concerns were raised. This would be the last time any of the group members would be seen alive. / In early December, several cameras were found by a Group of hikers. Despite not being able to contact any of the group, the footage was considered to be a hoax. The group have not been heard of since that last live broadcast.”

Putting aside some confusing grammar choices (‘the group have’, really?), I probably don’t have to point out that this isn’t true. I don’t know why those who make found footage films insist on these inserts. We know it’s fake. Just start the damn movie. I certainly understand how saying things like ‘the police don’t know what to make of the video’ and ‘this was uploaded to the deep web’ might make people feel there’s additional nuance, but it never did much for me, and personally, it comes across as silly.

Related, late in the movie, the police are contacted, and presumably sent out to look for these lost individuals. Certainly the GPS location they were given was wrong, but it strikes me as odd that the search was apparently given up so quickly, and it took a group of hikers two months later to find the footage (but no blood, I guess, which I also find odd).

I also shouldn’t need to point this out, but I will: nothing supernatural has ever been demonstrated scientifically before. No ghosts, no extraterrestrial beings on earth, no Bigfoot, no sasquatch, no God, no demons, no miracles, nothing. I’ve never seen a show along the lines of Ghost Hunters, but I can imagine it’s the closet thing there is to what Hell would theoretically feel like.

There are many things said in this film that are problematic, and I’ll point out a few, because I’m just in that type of mood.

A character suggests that, after hearing an odd whooping, a Bigfoot may be near (he also suggests perhaps it’s the spirits replying to an earlier action). When asked, “Bigfoot?”, he replies, “Yeah, what else could it be?”

I present to you a logical fallacy. Until such evidence is presented that the whooping is indeed caused by Bigfoot, you cannot presume that the whooping is caused by Bigfoot. Once you have that evidence, then you are welcome to your truth claim.

It’s also said later that if skeptics saw a video of aliens landing and chasing the crew around, they wouldn’t believe it, instead insisting it’s something like CGI or puppets. Certainly I would hope so – no one should believe anything by simply seeing a video – and yet, this seems to be presented by this individual negatively. He also says that until skeptics “see it with their own eyes”, they’ll go on not believing.

As a skeptic, that’s not true. If I saw something with my own eyes that I couldn’t explain, I wouldn’t immediately think “Hey, that’s a supernatural event.” I would think “Hey, that’s unexplained, I wonder what that was.” It should also be said that personal experience wouldn’t be enough, as it could be a hallucination or a trip or something along those lines. What I would need is scientific evidence, and then I would be able to accept that evidence, should it be credible.

I’m taking way too long on this. My point is that shows like what There’s Something in the Shadow are mimicking are beyond ridiculous. Is it possible one of those shows could find evidence of ghosts? Sure, if they’re conducted scientifically, it’s possible. Of course, if they could be demonstrated, they wouldn’t be supernatural, but that’s just semantics, I suppose.

When it comes to this actual movie, things don’t really pick up until the final ten minutes. Sure, we hear what could be footsteps outside of someone’s tent. We hear what could be whooping. We hear what could be screaming. Someone goes missing, but as they’ve done so before during previous episode filming (as stated by the characters), that’s nothing immediately relevant either. But things do pick up toward the end.

It’s because of that fact that I didn’t absolutely despise the film. Look at a movie like Wolfwood – it’s another British found footage film, but in that case, it was way too bogged down when it came to a convoluted story. In this movie’s case, while the story isn’t good, at least it keeps things simple. It’s boring a lot of the time, and I don’t buy the chemistry between the actors (unlike The Land of Blue Lakes), but at least it doesn’t try to be more than it is.

To be honest, I don’t even like harping on this film. It has a beautiful setting at times, being filmed in the United Kingdom (and though the credits don’t say, I imagine this was indeed filmed in Scotland, where the movie takes place), but I can’t stand the characters, their complete lack of scientific mindset (the main character stated that he’d been possessed almost 50 times, and was a self-professed cryptozoologist – yeah, like I can get behind this guy), and even the ending, though it was marginally more entertaining, didn’t really do much at all for me.

Maybe people who enjoy found footage as a whole will get more out of There’s Something in the Shadows than I did. I think there are fantastic found footage films (Hell House LLC, Ghostwatch, hell, even The Blair Witch Project), but this one just didn’t cut it at all for me.

2.5/10

Insidious: Chapter 2 (2013)

Directed by James Wan [Other horror films: Stygian (2000), Saw (2004), Dead Silence (2007), Insidious (2010), The Conjuring (2013), The Conjuring 2 (2016), Malignant (2021)]

I wasn’t the biggest fan of the first Insidious whatsoever. Oddly, I find this sequel mildly more enjoyable, though, odd mostly because it feels almost more Hollywood and conventional than the first. I’m not saying it’s even a good movie, but marginally better? I can roll that way.

What struck me as consistently interesting was how the film was peppered with flashbacks, both scenes explaining more of the history of Josh Lambert’s childhood experiences with the supernatural, along with some scenes from the first movie given more detail here. It was all easy enough to follow along with, and an interesting way to expand the story.

As it was, the mystery behind the entity that seems to have taken over Josh was generally engaging. While they may have gone into over-explanation mode, I still found it decent. And to be fair, there were other solid sequences too, such as the can-on-a-string scene, which was suitably creepy, or perhaps the best sequence, Josh Lambert being questioned by Carl near the end, which was unbelievably tense.

Still, like I said, the movie isn’t amazing. The performances are all fine enough, we see a surprise face returning from the first movie, but even so, nothing here really blows me away at all. It’s not a poor watch, by any means, but there’s not enough here to warrant much in the way of a re-watch.

Leigh Whannell and Angus Sampson had a solid chemistry, as always. Steve Coulter (Carl) was a fine additional, and I enjoyed his dice-based mediuminess. Neither Rose Byrne nor Barbara Hershey wowed me, but Patrick Wilson put in a very solid performance, and as always, Lin Shayne was nice to see, in a slightly more background role.

I have to say, though, that the ending here was just terrible. Perhaps it’ll be carried on into the third movie, but even if it is, that ending was just horrid.

Insidious: Chapter 2 is marginally more enjoyable than the first part (I know I may be one of the few who believes this, but there you go), but it’s not that good a movie, and it’s not something I could see going back to that often.

6/10

This is one of the films covered by Fight Evil’s podcast. Listen below as Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I discuss Insidious: Chapter 2.

The Demon’s Waltz (2021)

Directed by Ryan Callaway [Other horror films: Cursed: Sheol (2011), My Origin (2012), The Watchers (2013), The Diabolical (2014), The Girl in the Cornfield (2016), The Watchers: The Beginning of Sorrows (2016), Where Demons Dwell: The Girl in the Cornfield 2 (2017), Messenger of Wrath (2017), Let’s Not Meet (2018), One Winter Night (2019), The Ghost in the Darkness (2019), The Yearly Harvest (2020), Let’s Not Meet in the Woods (2020), The Darkness Outside (2022), King of Terrors (2022), Stay Out of the Basement (2023), The Night of the Harvest (2024)]

I have somewhat mixed feelings over this one. Fundamentally, I think The Demon’s Waltz is a decent movie, but elements, be it some spiritual themes or the length of the film, make it somewhat difficult to get a good handle on my feelings.

Regardless of my feelings, though, the movie is certainly impressive. The cast primarily consists of younger performances, the budget is limited, and there’s not much in the way of special effects – with all of these factors, they still manage to create a somewhat compelling mystery behind a missing TikToker (I’ve never used TikTok in my life, nor watched a video, so if this isn’t the proper term, please accept the apologies of an old fogey) that spans almost two hours.

As it is, though the movie is an hour and 56 minutes, it’s hard to say that it should have been cut anywhere. Personally, it never felt like the movie was dragging at any point, and while I had some personal qualms about some of the religious themes here and elements of the ending, the fact that they managed to keep my interest for the full two hours with what they had is somewhat impressive.

When it comes to the religious themes, my main point of contention is that I find many religious individuals hypocritical. In this film, there is a character who wants to be healed of an ailment – they first go to a church for some faith healing, but when that doesn’t work, they turn to a more unsavory worship. Or so some characters say, because from where I stand, this isn’t really logical.

Here’s the thing – putting aside the fact that faith healing is trash, why would anyone blame this individual for seeking out alternative methods of healing? Logically, if God (Jesus, in this case) had just healed this person, then they never would have potentially caused trouble down the line seeking help from another deity. As far as I can tell, if there’s anyone to blame for the problems that plague a pair of sisters past a certain point, it’s God’s – if He has just healed this individual, what followed wouldn’t have happened.

It doesn’t seem the case that anyone blames God, though. It seems like they blame this individual for the logical search for another way to be healed. I know that logic and theism are sometimes in complete opposition, but it seems so obvious to me. Now, to be fair, a point is made that the faith healing church is a “bad church”, but I find the belief system as a whole negative, and that doesn’t seem to come up at all, which I was troubled by.

It’s at this juncture that I wanted to mention that the director, Ryan Callaway, also made a movie called One Winter Night. Now, I’ve not seen it, but I have been tempted – it apparently deals with an Orthadox Jewish mother and her daughters dealing with malevolent forces. The film is also on the longer side – according to IMDb it’s two hours and ten minutes – and the fact it also deals with characters of strong religious beliefs intrigues me. Based on this film, it may well be worth trying out.

Back to The Demon’s Waltz, though, I want to make clear that while I have some issues with some of the characters’ positive attitudes toward Christianity, I don’t hold that against the movie. Obviously if some of these characters are Christian, they wouldn’t see things the same way I do, as I’ve been an atheist for most of my life. It’s just something that stuck out to me, and I wanted to point it out.

The performances here are all pretty solid. Really, the three most important are Kailee McGuire (The Ghost in the Darkness), Briana Aceti (The Girl in the Cornfield), and Sophia Zalipsky (Let’s Not Meet in the Woods). Aceti amusingly reminds me of a younger A.J. Cook, and though it wasn’t the easiest imagining her as a private investigator, it’s cool. Zalipsky’s character was bratty at times, but given she was playing a teenager, I get it. McGuire was perhaps my personal favorite performance, especially with the final scene, being somewhat emotional. Lastly, while she didn’t get a ton of character, Breanna Engle (Let’s Not Meet, One Winter Night) was solid.

Overall, I found the mystery decent. I appreciated throwing in the idea of the worship of older Gods, a dance going viral which is meant to summon them, and all that. It’s nothing exactly amazing, but I did think that it worked decently well, so kudos there.

I don’t think The Demon’s Waltz is going to amaze many people, but I do think it might surprise some. For the length of the film, it’s rather competent, and despite the lower-budget nature of the film, I was fully engaged. In truth, I’m actually somewhat interested in checking out more from the director – as you can see above, he has a decently-sized filmography, and if they’re around this same quality, I can imagine some are quite good.

As far as this one goes, I don’t think it’s a movie that I’d really watch again anytime soon, but I do think it’s decent. Perhaps still below average, but like Venom Coast, it’s close, which is an accomplishment in itself.

6.5/10

The Dead Next Door (1989)

Directed by J.R. Bookwalter [Other horror films: Robot Ninja (1989), Zombie Cop (1991), Kingdom of the Vampire (1991), Shock Cinema Vol. 3 (1991), Shock Cinema Vol. 4 (1991), Ozone (1993), The Sandman (1995), Polymorph (1996), Witchouse II: Blood Coven (2000), Witchouse 3: Demon Fire (2001), Deadly Stingers (2003)]

This is one of those movies that I’ve wanted to see for quite a long while, but didn’t honestly know that much about. Virtually all I knew about this before going in was that it was a lower-budget zombie movie. I didn’t know, though, how inept it was.

Which is interesting, actually, as I’ve generally heard okay things about The Dead Next Door. I never really heard that many people praise it, but the few times it’s been brought up, people seemed to enjoy it. I can admit that the special effects are somewhat impressive, and the gore is pretty good for a movie of this budget, but everything else is rather lackluster.

It’s a bit of a shame, because the story had potential. It wasn’t amazingly creative or anything, but there were inklings of interest strewn across the plot. Due to a combination of unremarkable characters and some terrible acting, though, even the short run-time of 80 minutes is more a struggle than anything to get through.

Obviously, the lower budget on it’s own didn’t bother me too much. We’re talking Redneck Zombies-level budget here, and it really showed at times (such as some truly awful shots, and they even threw some blood on the camera, which is something I thought only newer bad movies did), but that wasn’t the main concern at all. A low budget, I can deal with. But the stilted and sometimes laughably atrocious acting? It’s a bit harder to swallow.

It’s possible that Bogdan Pecic was the worst, but it’s hard to pinpoint for certain when Robert Kokai (who wore sunglasses during night scenes, which tells you all you need to know about his character) and Roger Graham were also terrible. To be fair, I thought that Jolie Jackunas was almost okay, but overall, we’re talking some really ridiculous acting here. The one-liners were bad enough, but when half the characters are named after famous horror directors/writers (such as Romero, King, Carpenter, and Raimi), it was a hard sell.

Jennifer Mullen and Maria Markovic were both okay, but Markovic’s subplot was entirely wasted. I mean, toward the end, things were falling apart anyway, but even so, they didn’t have a better way to conclude her character’s story? And speaking of which, the one guy who becomes a zombie, with the quote “I’m a zombie now, man” – yeah, I could have done without that exchange. Or really, that whole unnecessary ending, which was just ridiculous.

None of this is to say the movie can’t be amusing in the right setting, because when a movie is this inept, it most certainly can. I mean, these people have been living in a world with zombies for years, now, and they still leave themselves easily open to getting bit? For being a squad of zombie hunters, we’re talking truly inept soldiers, which I guess is a common theme here.

To be sure, the special effects are still mostly solid. I can’t say too much really stands out, but there was a guy getting ripped apart which was pretty satisfying to watch, given the character in question was a major asshole. Still, if you’re watching for just the special effects, may God be with you.

Kudos to the delivery of this line (it’s just as ridiculous as it sounds): “No, it’s not true! It is my religion that is right!” Brought to us by Jon Killough, with the most tepid outburst imaginable.

The Dead Next Door wasn’t really what I was expecting, and while I don’t regret watching it, I can easily say that it wasn’t a movie I could imagine wanting to see again without copious amounts of weed and alcohol accessible nearby. It’s amusing, in it’s own way, but boy, it’s not necessarily an easy movie to get through.

4/10

This is one of the films covered by Fight Evil’s podcast. If you want to hear Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I discuss The Dead Next Door, here you go, brahs.

Venom Coast (2021)

Directed by Michael Fredianelli [Other horror films: Xenobites (2008), The Minstrel Killer (2009), Apocrypha (2011), Coin (2012), The Devil in White (2014), The Enemy of My Enemy (2015), Strange Rituals (2017), The Woods of Purgatory (2018), A Killer Rising (2020)]

I will admit to being surprised by this one. Truthfully, I didn’t have high expectations going into the movie, and while Venom Coast didn’t turn out to be amazing, it definitely exceeded my personal expectations, and to an extent, sort of impressed me.

On the surface, it’s a pretty simple movie, which follows six friends being killed on an old ship by a demented family while on their way to Cabo (which I had to look up – it’s likely Cabo San Lucas, a popular city in Mexico for tourists). Mostly, these six friends are just horribly self-centered and wealthy, their only concern getting crunk. Because of that, a lot of the first half of the film can be quite a bit challenging.

I think that’s the biggest problem with the film. Of the six friends (names being Chaz, Perry, Elle, Eve, Emma, and Grace), only Grace is particularly sympathetic. Hell, Emma’s character isn’t even wealthy, but she has to be one of the most annoying characters I’ve seen in a movie in the last month. Because there were so few likable characters, there’s not much suspense, as we’re looking forward to them being hunted down rather eagerly.

The killers in question are one of the reasons I didn’t really think I’d care for this. Any movie that has a family killing together has it’s work cut out, and in many cases, such as The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 and Tokyo Home Stay Massacre, it entirely takes me out of the experience. Luckily, in Venom Coast’s case, while there are some stereotypical elements (such as a bulky, disfigured guy whom the mother consistently dotes on), I can sort of buy that they’re a functional unit.

The movie does take a turn about 45 minutes in. It’s not a negative or positive turn, really – at first, I had my doubts – but it was different, in that it introduced a five-member Coast Guard unit who noticed the ship and boarded it, weapons drawn, as the area is rife with piracy. Some of these individuals don’t last long, but others survive to the final scenes, some of which were oddly poignant.

Of the notable cast, I did want to mention the four young women, being Allie Coupe (Emma), Areyla Faeron (Elle), Kelly Ann Dunn (Eve), and Kylie Brady (Grace). Obviously, Coupe’s character annoyed the hell out of me, but she gave a good performance, and both Brady and Ann Dunn have some strong moments. Carolyn Ford Compton had some charm to her, as did Anthony Jan Potter. Serena Starks, while not popping up until later into the film, had some strong scenes toward the end.

Certainly Venom Coast is a lower-budget film, but as far as the kills went, I thought everything was pretty serviceable. Someone had their head bashed in with a hammer, another was killed with a golf club. A lot of stabbing went on, along with a neck that got twisted like zat, as my Beauxbatons homegirl said in Chapter 23 of Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. Oh, and another person killed themselves by slamming their head into a sharp, metal corner. None of the kills were overly gruesome or anything, but I definitely didn’t think any were bad.

There are times when the budget shows, and I think it’s most evident toward the end, which features a decent amount of gunfire, little of which actually looks good. I don’t hold it too much against the movie, but it needs to be said that at times, it’s not hard to tell this is a lower-budget film, which I know can turn some people off.

Another element I wanted to mention was the theme of economic disparity. Those six friends were all in a tech company that they started, a self-declared hook-up app for “influential people”, or, as one of the killers rightly described it, “an app for rich people.” These killers are poor, killing to bring some balance into the world. The reason is pretty shit, but seeing rich post-grads with rich parents trotting carelessly around someone else’s ship doesn’t endear me at all to them, and I sort of dug the addition of that theme, which is clear from the very first scene of the movie.

Overall, there aren’t really that many good horror films that take place largely on a ship, especially since I’m not a fan of Death Ship, Triangle, or Ghost Ship, so Venom Coast, while not a great movie, did sort of fulfill my needs. I tend to think it’s just a little below average, but as far as recommendations go, I’d certainly throw this one out there. Perhaps some would be just as pleased and surprised as I was.

6.5/10

Tales from the Hood 2 (2018)

Directed by Rusty Cundieff [Other horror films: Tales from the Hood (1995), Mr. Malevolent (2018), Tales from the Hood 3 (2020)] & Darin Scott [Other horror films: Dark House (2009), American Horror House (2012), Something Wicked (2014), Deep Blue Sea 2 (2018), Mr. Malevolent (2018), Tales from the Hood 3 (2020)]

I rather liked the first Tales from the Hood, and in fact, I think it’s probably one of the best horror anthologies of the 1990’s (in truth, competition isn’t that strong). This, though, is rather laughable, and has almost no redeeming attributes. At almost an hour and 50 minutes long, with a pitiful framing sequence, this is just hard to get through.

Comprising of four stories (‘Good Golly’, ‘The Medium’, ‘Date Night’, and ‘The Sacrifice’) and the aforementioned atrocious framing (‘Robo Hell’), only one of these is possibly worth watching, being ‘The Sacrifice’ which is easily the most political and also most reminiscence of the first movie (taking an element or two from ‘KKK Comeuppance’). It’s a bit heavy-handed, what with a black Republican being forced to change his ways by the ghosts of Emmett Till, Medgar Evers, Chanay, Goodman, Schwerner, and, of course, Martin Luther King Jr., but at least it was somewhat interesting, especially with the brief alternate history had those listed not made the sacrifices for the Civil Rights movement they had.

I’m not saying ‘The Sacrifice’ is great, but it is leagues above anything else in this movie. ‘Good Golly’ honestly started out fine, but really quickly went down an utterly idiotic and regrettable route. ‘The Medium’ was entirely generic, and ‘Date Night’ was actively bad.

As a matter of fact, not only was ‘Date Night’ bad (though not near as poor as ‘Good Golly’), it had, what seemed to be, a rather glaring error in it. Two men drug some women with the intent to rape them, and of course, they plan to record it. However, when looking through the viewfinder, they can’t see the women – they’re vampires. All fine so far, but then the women make a video for the men, and – – – the women appear just fine on camera now?

What?

Yeah, it didn’t make any sense. It didn’t make the story worse, as it was already terribly generic, but it was beyond pathetic, which can be said of ‘Robo Hell’, the framing story, in which a racist law-and-order guy wants a story-teller to tell stories to a Robocop-esque robot, so it can properly track down ‘criminals’ and take them out. It’s very fascist, very obviously wrong (I despise conservatives and what they stand for, but very few are as obviously terrible as this guy is), and when the ending comes, it would amaze me if anyone was surprised.

I’m not going to bother about harping on the performances. Some people were fine, such as Lou Beatty Jr.. Others were somewhat pathetic, such as Alexandria DeBerry and Bill Martin Williams. Keith David was no Clarence Williams III. The problem here wasn’t the performances, though, as bad as some of them were – it was the piss-poor stories.

And it’s not like they didn’t have potential. It’s pretty clear from the final product that they had some money and the ability to get some really good camerawork here. I mean, you can’t tell from the opening graphics (which looked utterly terrible, and I can’t even begin to describe how much it made me laugh), and the fact that they briefly showed House on Haunted Hill (public domain for the win, right?) in one of the segments, which never bodes well, but the movie wasn’t near as cheap as other poor horror films.

Which is the most damning thing of all. I’m not going to say this was as bad as Late Fee, which is probably one of the worst anthology horror movies I’ve seen. I will say, though, that it’s a worse movie than Slices, because at least Slices was dealing with a next-to-nothing budget, and it showed. Here, there was clearly a crisp and solid-looking production. It suffered, though, due to the terribly shitty stories, and overall, this just feels like a mockery of the first Tales from the Hood as opposed to a good-faith continuation, which, given the director of the original also worked with this one, is just amazing.

3/10