Saw V (2008)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

7/10

Dark Tower (1987)

Directed by Freddie Francis [Other horror films: The Brain (1962), The Day of the Triffids (1963), Paranoiac (1963), Nightmare (1964), The Evil of Frankenstein (1964), Dr. Terror’s House of Horrors (1965), Hysteria (1965), The Skull (1965), The Psychopath (1966), The Deadly Bees (1966), They Came from Beyond Space (1967), Torture Garden (1967), Dracula Has Risen from the Grave (1968), Mumsy, Nanny, Sonny & Girly (1970), Trog (1970), Gebissen wird nur nachts – das Happening der Vampire (1971), Tales from the Crypt (1972), The Creeping Flesh (1973), Son of Dracula (1973), Tales That Witness Madness (1973), Craze (1974), Legend of the Werewolf (1975), The Ghoul (1975), The Doctor and the Devils (1985)] & Ken Wiederhorn [Other horror films: Shock Waves (1977), Eyes of a Stranger (1981), Return of the Living Dead: Part II (1988)]

I’ve wanted to see Dark Tower for some time now. The idea of a haunted high-rise appeals to me, and I thought it might be an interesting idea to play around with. Sadly, though, I don’t think that Dark Tower is the best execution of this idea.

This is likely known by those involved with the movie, too. I’m not someone who delves into behind-the-scenes information, but I did notice that the original director of this one (Ken Wiederhorn) was replaced by well-known Freddie Francis. And yet, when the movie starts playing, we’re told it’s directed by Ken Barnett; apparently Francis wanted his name removed from the film because he was dissatisfied. I should also mention that he never again directed another movie.

It’s not all bad, though – Dark Tower was filmed in Barcelona, Spain, so anytime we see outside shots, we see some beautiful structures and buildings older than the hills. Despite being in English, the film does possess a foreign flavor throughout, which is nice. It doesn’t make the film altogether that much more interesting, but it’s nice all the same

And while many of the deaths here aren’t too memorable there’s always potential. Early on in the film, a window wiper falls from his scaffolding, perhaps pushed by a malevolent spirit. After being possessed by the same spirit, another takes part in a mass shooting, which was at least filmed well. On the other hand, there was a very weak elevator death – I’d personally stick with De lift or Damien: Omen II.

In the finale, we did see someone get electrocuted, and another get impaled. Well, technically, we didn’t see this individual get impaled, but even so. Unfortunately, though, the finale – or, if I’m being honest, the last twenty minutes – seemed a bit of a mess. Here’s just a small example – three characters go to the haunted building (Michael Moriarty, Kevin McCarthy, and Theodore Bikel), and for some forsaken reason, they split up. No reason was given – we see these three characters enter an elevator, and the next we see of them, they’re in completely different rooms (if not floors).

I liked the idea of this movie, but it definitely felt a bit choppy at times. I appreciated aspects of the finale, and while there’s not really a twist, we do learn more about Jenny Agutter’s character. I had thought that it might have gone in the direction it did, and I was happy that they did so. It didn’t really make the ending much better, but it was at least good in concept.

At first, I did think the movie would follow Jenny Agutter (The Survivor, Child’s Play 2, Dominique), but instead we largely followed Michael Moriarty (A Return to Salem’s Lot, Troll, Blood Link, The Stuff, Q). I was surprised, but okay, with this – it’s not that Agutter wasn’t decent, but Moriarty was more interesting to me (though at times, I have to say that his delivery wasn’t stellar).

I think that Theodore Bikel (I Bury the Living) is easily the most enjoyable performance in the film – despite the movie seeming somewhat lifeless, all of his scenes had character. Lastly, Kevin McCarthy (The Sleeping Car, Piranha, Invasion of the Body Snatchers) appeared, but we never really got a great hang on his character.

Dark Tower can be an okay movie to watch, but it’s definitely a far cry from good, and while aspects were at the very least interesting, I can’t say it’s a movie that will really stick out in my mind, at least not with the rather lack-luster execution managed with this movie. Just a shame, in my view.

5.5/10

Saw IV (2007)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

7.5/10

Zipperface (1992)

Directed by Mansour Pourmand [Other horror films: N/A]

I’ll be honest: I wasn’t expecting much from Zipperface. It’s not just the 3.3/10 this currently sports on IMDb – ever since I first heard of this movie back in late 2009/early 2010, I was under the impression it wasn’t good. I’ve still wanted to see it, though, ever since I first heard about it, but I didn’t expect anything particularly great. Like Heavy Metal Massacre, I wanted to see it, but knew, in my heart, it wouldn’t be worth it.

I was wrong – Zipperface is worth it.

True, the movie’s not exactly stellar, but based on what I was thinking coming in, it did way over-exceed my expectations. The plot – about a guy in BDSM leather stalking and killing prostitutes while the police investigate the murders – isn’t exactly Earth-shattering, and the effects could have used some work, but they struck gold with the characters.

Naturally, it’s important to not overstate this, so I want to say that the movie has it’s problems. Some of the dialogue and acting is subpar, and perhaps some of the finale is silly, but I also think it’s important to be honest, and honestly, I had a hell of a lot of fun with this.

You have to understand where I was coming from, though. I knew this was an early 1990’s slasher, but I didn’t know it was a slasher in which the killer was a character known to us. I thought it was going to go the Slumber Party Massacre or Final Exam route, and have a completely random killer. In this movie, however, the identity of the killer is a mystery, and boy howdy, we’re given a lot of suspects.

It could be a police officer (Richard Vidan), side-lined to desk duty after his performance slips. It could be the mayor’s PR assistant (Timothy D. Lechner), who has some surprises up his sleeve. It could be a photographer (Jonathan Mandell) who burned pictures after the police questioned him, or a shifty religious figure (Christopher Dakin), or the mayor’s husband (Bruce Brown), or hell, the mayor herself (Trisha Melynkov), though admittedly, that would have been a stretch.

The point is, we’re given a lot of suspects, and I’ll be honest, while I thought I knew who the killer was, I wasn’t confident, which was wise, as I was incorrect. Naturally, we’re given a lot of red herrings, each of them pointing to a specific person, and just as I love that type of thing in gialli, I loved it here, and they did it well. I know this film had a lower budget, but props to the story.

Props too to the performances. Some were shaky, sure, but like I said, I had a lot of fun watching this one, and I suspect that they had a lot of fun making it. Dona Adams (in her sole role) made for a fair lead. She had some cringy dialogue (“I can’t stand women being referred to as chicks, broads, or babes!”), but she was generally quite good. David Clover was better – at first, I thought he’d be one of those misogynist cops who’d be pissed to be partnered with a woman, but he grows to be a really solid, supportive, and nice guy.

As the mayor, Trisha Melynkov is as aggravating as mayors can be in movies like this, but there’s also more to her. Richard Vidan (Scarecrows, Zombie Infection) cracked me up as an obviously sexist cop with a chip on his shoulder. Timothy D. Lechner had a few funny scenes, Laureen E. Clair and Jillian Ross had some suspenseful moments, and Bruce Brown, who didn’t do that much, made an impression at times too. Oh, and Jonathan Mandell was a sensual brah.

Speaking of which, there was a scene in which Mandell’s character, who happens to be a photographer, was seducing the lead, police detective Ryder (played by Dona Adams) during a photoshoot. And honestly – that scene was great. The photoshoot itself was a lot a fun (it was nice seeing Adams’ character actually having fun), and the music playing was quite nice. I went into that scene cringing, but I ended up appreciating it.

I also appreciated a scene in which two prostitutes go out to a John, only to run amok of the killer. It was played in a way that most people would suspect Zipperface’s arrival, but it still held some quality suspense early on. It ended with a somewhat poor decapitation, but honestly, I’ve seen far worse decapitations in my time, so I don’t think it was a big issue.

Aside from the decapitation, I don’t think many scenes here were necessarily memorable. Someone got stabbed in the back with a machete, someone got strangled, someone got run over by a car, and someone got suffocated with a whip (related, someone got whipped by, well, a whip, and it didn’t draw blood, so I was impressed) – none of these scenes were great, but I think the fact that none were terrible, and none detracted from the film, is good in it’s own way.

I was surprised by Zipperface. Slashers were few and far between in the early 1990’s, and I really wasn’t expecting much from this, but I had a pretty solid time with it. Most people would likely see it as below average (though I have to admit, that average rating of a 3.3/10 on IMDb hurts me physically, nor do I remotely understand it), but I’m not most people. It may be a movie that doesn’t work for many; I can say, however, that it worked its magic on me.

7.5/10

Saw III (2006)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

8/10

Saw II (2005)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

8/10

Playing with Dolls: Havoc (2017)

Directed by Rene Perez [Other horror films: The Dead and the Damned (2011), Demon Hunter (2012), Alien Showdown: The Day the Old West Stood Still (2013), The Snow Queen (2013), The Dead the Damned and the Darkness (2014), The Burning Dead (2015), Playing with Dolls (2015), Playing with Dolls: Bloodlust (2016), Little Red Riding Hood (2016), The Obsidian Curse (2016), From Hell to the Wild West (2017), The Dead and the Damned 3: Ravaged (2018), Cabal (2020), Cry Havoc (2020), Legend of Hawes (2022), The Vampire and the Vigilante (2024)]

I’ve had the misfortune of sitting through both the first and second movies in the Playing with Dolls series. Neither one was something I’d personally call a good time, but I was told that the third is a better film. IMDb ratings back that up – the first has a 2.6/10, the second a 2.5/10, and this one, a 3.7/10. The question then, of course, becomes whether this movie is actually better.

And the answer is: Yes and no.

As far as an engaging story goes, I’d have to admit that they do a better job here. See, a woman and her maid are going up to her husband’s cabin to surprise him, and meet the husband’s mistress; said mistress didn’t even know the guy was married. So because of that emotional material, certainly this portion of the film is at least watchable – some of the acting is just terrible, of course, but the material itself is still entertaining.

On the other hand, absolutely nothing about the horror aspects of the film are better. We still have the killer – apparently called Havoc – who we know next-to-nothing about. He seems to enjoy ripping spines out, as he does that more often. We still have Richard Tyson (in a single scene), who is another character we know next-to-nothing about. I’ll give the movie mild props for changing things up a little – instead of the killer following Tyson’s directives, he breaks out of captivity and hunts on his own. It doesn’t change a damn thing, but at least it’s different?

This movie had pretty much the same problems the previous movies did. Sure, the production value looks nice, and they try insofar as the gore’s concerned, but I can’t describe how disinterested I am in a killer I know nothing about chasing down women and interrupting conversations that I actually find mildly interesting. When I say that the horror aspects of Havoc are the worst parts, I’m not at all lying brahs.

Not that the performances here really bring weight to the aforementioned emotional material. Nicole Stark (Little Red Riding Hood) was generally weak throughout, Wilma Elles little better, and Kyle Clarke largely a non-entity. I did sort of like John Scuderi’s character, but I don’t think he leaves near as much an impact as one would to tilt this film in a positive direction.

As I often say, though, bad performances rarely destroy movies for me. With what these actors and actresses had to work with, I don’t blame them at all for whatever performance they happened to give. You can’t make gold out of toxic sludge; the performances could have been stellar, and it wouldn’t at all have made up for the failures of the plot and dialogue.

I’ll give Havoc one last kudo for the opening of the film. Don’t get me wrong, most of it was absolute shit, the type of thing I’ve come to expect from director Rene Perez. It was, however, filmed in the Lake Shasta Caverns – an underground network of caves in northern California. That was a nice filming location, and though what was actually filmed there was pointless drivel, it did at least look unique.

Is Playing with Dolls: Havoc a better film than it’s predecessors? Sure. There’s some mildly entertaining emotional drama going on, and there’s actually an ending here that didn’t make me want to slit my wrists. Given how much I despised the first few movies, though, that praise can only do so much. So sure, it’s better, but this film is still a long ways from good, and still not a movie I’d recommend even to fans of slashers.

4.5/10

Class of 1999 (1990)

Directed by Mark L. Lester [Other horror films: Firestarter (1984), Blowback (2000), Sacrifice (2000), Pterodactyl (2005), Groupie (2010), Poseidon Rex (2013)]

Class of 1999 is a movie that I’ve long had an interest in. It’s never been a film I knew too much about, but I did have a grasp on the basics (killer robots in a school), and I thought it’d be a fun idea to play around with. While the film could have used a little polish, I found it a decently fun time.

According to director Mark L. Lester, this movie is a sequel to another one of his films, being Class of 1984. I’ve seen Class of 1984, but as I don’t find it a horror film, I don’t cover it here. I don’t know why this film needed to be called a sequel – the themes are somewhat different, and aside from the fact both movies have gangs and schools, there’s not many similarities – but apparently it is, so I wanted to say that Class of 1984 was an often depressing film, but certainly a good one.

This one doesn’t have near as much feeling as that one did, but than again, one was a drama/action/crime film, whereas this one is an action/science fiction/horror hybrid, so we’re talking two different types of films. The story of this one was interesting, as you’d hope a science fiction story would be, so I wanted to tackle that first.

Taking place in, as you can likely guess, 1999 (which is nine years in the future from when this movie was released), apparently the systemic problem with gangs we saw in Class of 1984 has gotten worse, and police don’t even try in some places. There’s a school in Seattle that attempts to stymie their violence problem by bringing in a handful of robot teachers. Things devolve even more from there.

I’m reminded of Battle Royale, actually. I didn’t think the government’s policy in Battle Royale really would have helped with the problems they were having, and while I can definitely say that school should always be a safe place, putting killer robots in charge of kids (both innocent and harmful) isn’t the way to pursue the solution. I get it – desperate times call for desperate measures – but this just wasn’t the way.

As you can expect, the problem is that robots, at least with this programming, don’t differentiate between the wrongs being done. A student starts a fight with another student – yeah, that’s a problem. A student fighting someone who was attempting to rape someone? Instead of going after the attempted rapist, they went after the student defending the young woman, and that’s the exact problem with this type of solution. We’ve seen it time and time again in science fiction and horror films, and it’s no different here.

Stacy Keach (Fear Runs Silent, Roadgames, Mountain of the Cannibal God, The Ninth Configuration) is a big name, and he was fun here. His character didn’t get a whole lot of depth – from his first scene, you could sort of tell what type of guy he’d be – but he had fun. I didn’t know Malcolm McDowell (Silent Night, Firestarter 2: Rekindled, Halloween, Cat People) was in this one, and to be fair, his role isn’t big, but it was nice to see a familiar face.

Technically, I know Traci Lind (Spellcaster, My Boyfriend’s Back, Fright Night Part 2), but she’s not really a face I instantly recognize. Still, she was also solid here, and her budding relationship with Bradley Gregg’s character was decent. Gregg (Phillip from A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors) was an interesting lead. Never loved his character, but it made for an interesting focal point.

Of the three robotic teachers (played by Patrick Kilpatrick, John P. Ryan, and Pam Grier), well, I’d say that Ryan (It’s Alive) was my favorite, as he had a dignified look to him, but Kilpatrick (The Stand) had the best smile. Of course, Pam Grier (Scream Blacula Scream, The Twilight People) is a notable actress herself, but she didn’t make a huge impression on me here.

Despite thinking that the film’s a little rough, the special effects were pretty solid. Until the final 20 minutes or so, they’re not too noticeable, but once they pop up in more effect, there are some good sequences. Related, this isn’t a gory film at all – it’s really more action-oriented much of the time – but there are some good kills, such as someone getting their head drilled into, or a few nice neck snaps, or someone getting lit on fire.

Class of 1999 was a perfectly decent film, and a somewhat fun watch. I guess my issue is that it wasn’t anything more. I had an okay time with it, but I can’t honestly say that I loved it. It was a good way to spend an hour and 36 minutes, but I wasn’t blown away. That said, if you enjoy robots in your horror – something like Chopping Mall, Steel and Lace, Hardware, or Death Machine – then Class of 1999 may be right up your alley.

7/10

Playing with Dolls: Bloodlust (2016)

Directed by Rene Perez [Other horror films: The Dead and the Damned (2011), Demon Hunter (2012), Alien Showdown: The Day the Old West Stood Still (2013), The Snow Queen (2013), The Dead the Damned and the Darkness (2014), The Burning Dead (2015), Playing with Dolls (2015), Little Red Riding Hood (2016), The Obsidian Curse (2016), Playing with Dolls: Havoc (2017), From Hell to the Wild West (2017), The Dead and the Damned 3: Ravaged (2018), Cabal (2020), Cry Havoc (2020), Legend of Hawes (2022), The Vampire and the Vigilante (2024)]

Well, the first Playing with Dolls was utterly abysmal, and I can say that Bloodlust is a better movie. It’s not that much better, though – this is still a far cry from even average – and I wouldn’t think it’d appeal to too many people, regardless.

Unlike the first film, though, there’s something of a plot here – people are lured to an abandoned cabin to be part of a horror reality TV show. I have no idea if these people signed contracts, but if so, they’d have a good lawsuit on their hands, because this is one terrible reality TV show idea.

On a side-note, I’m not sure why most horror films that revolve around reality television tend to be absolutely terrible – I’m thinking movies like Reality Check, Cruel World, and, to a lesser extent, My Little Eye, which certainly wasn’t terrible, but was underwhelming. The only reality show-themed horror film I’ve ever cared for was Wrong Turn 2: Dead End, and that’s not even that great a movie.

Regardless of why this seems to be the case, Bloodlust certainly doesn’t help improve my view any, as it’s legit awful.

Sure, it does have more of a plot, and perhaps more importantly, more than one protagonist, but only one of the performances is decent, and we still don’t have context as to why any of this is happening. The same rich guy (Richard Tyson) is recording the same killer (credited as Prisoner AYO-886, because the movie’s trying to be cute) as he kills people, and apparently it’s because that’s the only truth. It’s that same type of philosophical rambling that makes absolutely no sense, and gives absolutely no insight into his character at all.

These movies just bug me. The gore here is okay – someone gets their head smashed in with a sledgehammer, someone gets their arm cut off, someone gets their leg cut off, someone gets one of their toes cut off (this movie is big into dismemberment apparently) – but gore without proper context doesn’t interest me, and as such, this didn’t do a hell of a lot for me.

I can’t stand Richard Tyson’s character, because, like in the first movie, he doesn’t have much of one. Karin Brauns (who died in 2022 at the age of 32) was pretty poor (her character had an accent, but unlike Natasha Blasick’s character from the first, there’s no in-universe reference to this), Elonda Seawood wasn’t particularly interesting, and Andrew Espinoza Long, despite potential, didn’t bring much to the table. I will admit to liking Colin Bryant here, and Marilyn Robrahn (who was also in the first film) had an okay moment or two, but for the most part, there’s little here to praise.

Oh, and it’s worth mentioning that there’s no ending to this film. Two characters are fighting each other, two other characters are watching, and then the movie ends. The first movie didn’t have much in the way of a conclusion either, but at least that one felt like it could have worked, whereas this was just pathetic in every way, which, honestly, is on point.

I’m sitting here and realizing just how much of a waste of time I found this. The worst part is, I’ll likely be watching the sequels (Playing with Dolls: Havoc and Cry Havoc), so I’ll have ample time to complain in the future. All I’ll say is that Bloodlust was better than the first movie, but not by much, and neither are movies I was glad to have seen.

4/10

Dagon (2001)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

8/10