Tag: 2004

Directed by Matthew Leutwyler [Other horror films: Unearthed (2007), Uncanny (2015)]

This zombie comedy is a film that I’ve not seen in quite some time, and by “quite some time,” I mean at least 12 years. I saw this one when I was between the ages of 11 and 15, if I had to guess, and I’ve only seen it once, so I was interested in revisiting it and seeing if I liked it any more than I did back then.

Unfortunately, my reasons for not really caring for it back then are still applicable to today – I find the film too silly to really get into, and while I sort of like some aspects (such as the special effects and idea of the lyrical segues and recaps), overall, there are far better zombie comedies out there, such as Shaun of the Dead, Last of the Living, and Doghouse (and of course, you could argue that this isn’t even a zombie movie, as these are more people being possessed by an evil spirit, but given the film is called Dead & Breakfast, I don’t personally feel all that guilty labeling it as such).

For a lower budget movie, the special effects are decent. It comes with its downsides, such as a scene in which blood splatters onto the camera (which is something I have always hated when it pops up in horror films), but from a purely technical standpoint, the gore effects here are impressive.

Even elements of the cast are decent. Jeremy Sisto (Wrong Turn, May, Population 436) was okay, though wasn’t that important. In a similar vein, Erik Palladino (Return to House on Haunted Hill) was fine, but I never really cared for his character. I liked both Gina Philips (Jeepers Creepers) and Ever Carradine (who I recognized from Runaways), but I admit I’m sort of sick seeing David Carradine (who is Ever’s uncle, as it turns out) pop up in small roles. It just gets old.

For the most part, though, the central cast is stable, or at least unobtrusive enough as to not cause any problems. What bothered me more than a couple of uninteresting characters was the humor here. There might be a few funny lines, or an amusing scene, but overall, I thought a lot of the jokes here sort of fell flat. I also didn’t care, on a side-note, for the zombies dancing. Again, that felt more ridiculous than anything.

What was more grating than cute was those musical segments that recap the story (“But the only way to truly stop these drones is to dig up Mr. Wise’s bones / So that’s why the sheriff, drifter, and Melody took Doc down to the cemetery / To carve the bones into sharp stakes, one thrust to the heart is all it takes / Can’t kill them with guns and no strangulation, just good, old-fashioned decapitation”), and though maybe a couple of these peppered in would be okay, I just felt they popped in too often, especially given a whole song is sung during the credits which covered the whole of the movie.

Dead & Breakfast isn’t a terrible movie, and though I don’t often hear people talk about it, it does sport a perfectly decent rating on IMDb (5.8/10 with 5,784 votes as of this writing). It’s not my type of comedy, though, and overall, I just found the movie somewhat sluggish and wholly lackluster. I don’t think this is one that I’ll be looking to watch again anytime in the next twenty years, but some people out there will enjoy it just fine.

5/10

Directed by Eli B. Despres [Other horror films: N/A] & Kim Roberts [Other horror films: N/A]

After years of wanting to see this, I really didn’t expect something this atypical. Not that Wilderness Survival for Girls is a bad movie or anything, but it’s not really the type of movie I was expecting, and I think that some people, if they go in with the wrong preconceptions, may walk away from this rather disappointed.

I didn’t expect the film to be anywhere near as low-budget as it was, for one thing. This doesn’t hurt the movie, because, as you all may know, I enjoy quite a few low-to-no budget films, but I was just somewhat taken aback by exactly how amateur this film came across.

What is more important, and definitely far more crucial, to my final verdict is the plot, and I’ll say that I was expecting something significantly different, but it’s also worth saying that this movie did have some feeling and heart which helped it break past what could have been a somewhat dull affair.

And to be clear, I guess I should briefly discuss my expectations – I thought this was a slasher. Why? I don’t know – I guess that, to me, it sounded like one. Some teens go to a cabin and get stalked and killed off by some mysterious figure? Typical slasher stuff, I thought.

Boy, was I wrong. Instead, we follow these three young women who go to this cabin and just hang out for forty minutes or so. They joke around, show off some skin, give the audience a clear view of their varying personalities, and show the small cracks in the friendship, and also sprinkle in a few small, implied character traits that pop up later. They also get high, because these three know how to have a good time.

There’s nothing horror about any of this so far, to be clear. I guess at one point, the three think they see some mysterious guy watching them, but at best, it’s mildly suspenseful, and doesn’t lead anywhere at that time. What it lacks in horror, though, this first half of the film makes up for in giving us three very fleshed out characters, and I love that. These aren’t your average women of horror – these three have a lot of character and personality, and I dig it.

It helps that the performances are great. We have Clea DuVall, Natasha Lyonne, and Velma. Okay, that’s my attempt at a joke, but Jeanette Brox reminded me throughout of Clea DuVall (circa How to Make a Monster) with her somewhat dorky, timid character. Megan Henning, with her glasses and attitude, got me thinking Velma. And the carefree, lower-class character played by Ali Humiston had Natasha Lyonne’s look and attitude from American Pie down beautifully. The three work great together, and the friendship felt authentic.

In many ways, a lot of this film feels more liking a coming-of-age drama with the three teens, unsure of their futures (two of them are going to college while one isn’t), unsure of their sexualities, unsure of love, just hanging out and candidly talking about things such as drugs, sex, masturbation, and their problems. It might be dull to some, but like I said, I think it gives a lot of character to consider, and it all plays in once the action starts ratcheting up.

Not that the movie is ever really inundated with action; once a mysterious man comes to the cabin and the girls, afraid and also high, tie him up believing him to not be cut of clean cloth, the movie certainly becomes more suspenseful, but there’s really only a few distinct moments of actual action. We got a lot of character from the girls, and now we examine this random guy who may or may not be a threat, and based on what the girls have to work with, it could definitely go either way.

If you’re going into this movie expecting some run-of-the-mill slasher plot, like I was, you will definitely be surprised. For some, the movie may not be their cup of tea. Once I got past my slight confusion, though, I was drawn into the characters and the dilemma they faced, and I felt for the characters when they talked about feeling unloved, or when they go for the person they love and are knocked down, or when they bite back and forth over personalities (Debbie telling Ruth’s character that Kate has called her stupid was a heart-breaking, yet very real, very real conversation).

Do I think that the movie is a masterpiece? No, not really. And like I said, I think it has the potential to turn some horror fans off. For me, though, Wilderness Survival for Girls was a pleasant surprise, and what it lacked in the slasher feel I was expecting, it more than made up for in fully-formed characters and great, real dialogue. This is definitely a movie that, while I didn’t love, I won’t be forgetting.

7.5/10

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

So it should come as no surprise that, to me, Saw is a very special movie. I don’t deny it’s dated in some aspects, nor do I deny that some of the performances aren’t quite up to snuff, but even with those issues, I can’t help but see this as an almost perfect movie.

A big part of this, to be sure, is nostalgia. When I first saw this film on Showtime or HBO, I had absolutely zero idea where it was going or how it’d end. I’m sure I had heard vaguely about the film, but I didn’t really know going in exactly what it was even about. And then, come the conclusion, I was blown away, and how.

To this day, that’s one of my favorite finales. Sure, the quick recap, giving us seemingly hundreds of short clips, is a bit much, and one of those dated aspects I mentioned, but despite that, it possesses such a depressing and hopeless aura to it, what with the screaming for mercy while the door is being slid shut. It’s just beautiful.

What’s also beautiful is the whole concept of Jigsaw. Throwing people he deems unworthy of the gift of life into torturous, yet beatable traps (in theory – that broken glass trap with the safe looked pretty close to impossible) is a fun concept to mess around with, and I thought they did a good job here, especially since, unlike later movies, this one doesn’t rely too much on the carnage and gore of the traps, but of the mystery surrounding the situation Adam and Lawrence find themselves in.

I think most people can see that Leigh Whannell’s performance is a bit off. He certainly cracked me up at times, and of all the characters in the film, he’s probably the most sympathetic, but the acting isn’t great. Luckily, it doesn’t really make a big negative impact in my mind, because most everyone else does decent. I mean, hell, the cast is actually pretty solid, with such names as Cary Elwes, Danny Glover (Lethal Weapon series), Michael Emerson, Tobin Bell, and Ken Leung (who randomly popped up over ten years later in the ill-fated MCU series Inhumans). All of them bring something to the table, and it makes the story work beautifully.

Personally, there are some films that aren’t easy to put into words just the amount of impact they make on me, and Saw is a good example of that. On almost any horror forum I’ve joined, my user name’s always been some variation of ‘Jigsaw,’ and though I can certainly see some flaws with additional viewings of the film, none of that can change the fact this movie as a big reason why I became such a dedicated fan of the genre, and I don’t really hesitate to give it the highest props possible.

10/10

This is one of the films covered by Fight Evil’s podcast. Listen below as I defend Saw against Chucky’s (@ChuckyFE) slanderous words.

Directed by Jeff Lieberman [Other horror films: Squirm (1976), Blue Sunshine (1977), Doctor Franken (1980), Just Before Dawn (1981)]

A mostly enjoyable addition to the genre, I will admit to being surprised by just how much I enjoyed a decent amount of this film. I do tend to think the movie runs on longer than it really needs to (there’s about an hour before we really get to the meat and potatoes of the story), but it still something I’d generally recommend regardless.

There’s not many performances in this film, so it’s a good thing that those involved did a pretty solid job. While it’s true that Alexander Brickel’s naive-kid act gets sort of old, he’s also quite young, so I won’t hold that against him. Stronger are Amanda Plummer and Katheryn Winnick, both of whom are really enjoyable to behold.

I really liked Plummer’s character of the mother, who was offbeat and always fun. Every other line she came up with was at least partially funny, and overall, were it not for Winnick, I’d say she was the best here. Winnick, though, stole my heart, as she put in a fantastic performance as well as showed the goods while still maintaining some modesty. In her Renaissance maid costume, she was a cool customer, and a very attractive lady.

Satan’s Little Helper wasn’t focused on gore or creative kills, but occasionally some would pop up, such as a somewhat surprising scene toward the end of the movie. We did see some entrails ripped out, so while they looked quite, quite fake, that’s still something, right?

Another thing I wanted to bring up was the design of the killer. He changes costumes a few times, but the main design he had was fun. It was obviously a costume, but at the same time, it made sense in the context of the story, and despite being somewhat silly-looking at times, I really did think it was effective.

Two small notes before I get to the main issue I had with Satan’s Little Helper. One, that game that sort of started this whole thing looked like perhaps the worst game ever made (intentionally, I’m sure), and two, that cat death was almost needlessly brutal, but then again, this is Satan we’re talking about.

Like I said at the beginning of this, I think the main flaw this film has is that it runs on a bit long. I can’t say for sure what should have been cut, but at an hour and forty minutes, I think they could have found something. I just know that while I was engaged through the end, there were times when I was wondering just how much longer the movie had.

That’s a small criticism in the scheme of things, though. Satan’s Little Helper isn’t my favorite comedy/horror mix from even 2004 (Broken Lizard’s Club Dread, along with the classic Shaun of the Dead, both came out the same year), but it is a fun movie that may be worth throwing into your Halloween collection.

7.5/10

This is one of the films that has been covered on Fight Evil’s podcast. Listen below as Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I cover this one.

Directed by Stevan Mena [Other horror films: Brutal Massacre: A Comedy (2007), Bereavement (2010), Malevolence 3: Killer (2018)]

Like many of the movies I’ve been watching in recent times, Malevolence is a film I first saw a long while back, and though I had positive feelings about it, I honestly, if asked, wouldn’t have been able to explain why that is. Seeing it again with fresh eyes, I’ll admit the movie isn’t amazing, but I do think it’s very solid in spite of the fact it really does seem to rip off Halloween at times.

I mean, come on. That little chime/sound that pops up every now and again, or the design of the antagonist (though the hood is definitely more The Town That Dreaded Sundown), it just feels really familiar. I don’t fault the movie for that (though I can see why some do), because I still think that Malevolence has solid tension.

Admittedly, though, it takes a while to get there. The first thirty or so minutes, if not forty, are almost void of interest. I guess getting to know the bank robbers is something, but really, it’s slow-going in the beginning, and while I like the final effect (in which the finale seems a lot more action-packed), it’s not always the most exciting content.

Worth mentioning also, Malevolence is pretty low-budget, made for around $200,000, and it does sometimes show, but I definitely don’t find that to be detrimental to it, because, as I said, it can possess a solid lease on suspense when it wants to. Personally, for a lower-budget flick, I though some of the camera angles were pretty interesting, and I certainly like the low-key, yet effective, setting.

Jay Cohen, who played the antagonist here, really did a solid job, and seemed to have much the same feel as Michael Myers (though he did seem to move a bit quicker). Samantha Dark, who played an abducted mother (her daughter was played by Courtney Bertolone) was decent here, though she didn’t have that much opportunity to get into the action save the finale. I was more engaged with Heather Magee, who had one of the more interesting characters, but she barely went anywhere. R. Brandon Johnson made for a unique hero, but really, I have to say the best performance here is by Gurdy, who played a scary tree.

From all I’ve read, Malevolence seems to be a somewhat divisive film (which is backed up by it’s IMDb rating, right now at a 5.1/10), and I obviously lean more toward the ‘It’s a good movie, get off it’s back’ side, but I can see why it wouldn’t work for everyone. Personally, I like the suspenseful nature of the film once the movie gets there, and the footnote investigation at the end too. It’s not a perfect movie, no, but I did find it quite worthwhile.

8/10

This is one of the films covered on Fight Evil’s podcast. If interested, listen below as Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I discuss this movie.

Directed by Ric White [Other horror films: Nightmares from the Mind of Poe (2006)]

Before An American Haunting came onto the scene, the low-budget Bell Witch Haunting was released, which covered the same supposed supernatural event. A very low-budget film, Bell Witch Haunting isn’t entirely without merit, but it still really strains your patience, as it clocks in at just over two hours long, which is utterly unacceptable, especially given the content.

I have more than a few problems I have with the movie, and I really struggled to finish this one: among these problems, as I alluded to, is the ridiculously lengthy run-time, as Bell Witch Haunting is two hours and two minutes. If the story here had been perhaps more interesting or better written, that might well be excusable, but with the product we got, I don’t think it was at all necessary.

Another thing that really grated on me – there are little ‘section titles’ that pop up throughout the movie constantly, and none of them did the least bit to make the film better. The ghost of the entity really grated also, as she sounds like a bratty young teen girl. Not really my idea of spooky. Oh, and another thing – while the movie mostly takes the subject matter seriously, there are occasional smatterings of comedic scenes thrown in (including some 1820’s toilet humor), and I thought the movie could have done without that.

The aforementioned entity starts off innocently enough here, pulling sheets off beds, banging on the walls, pinching people when they’re trying to sleep, or telling people embarrassing secret information (like I said before, the voice of this entity is so damn annoying, but it did lead to the somewhat funny line ‘I will not allow this thing to question my character!’), but it gets worse as the movie goes on, with a few deaths and a rather sad scene at the end.

I’ll say this one positive thing about the movie – the death of Doug Moore’s character was pretty depressing. I didn’t care an ounce for most of these characters (partially because the Bell family is so big, it’s so hard to keep up with who’s who – seriously, I think there’s at least six children running around), but seeing the head of the family slowly lose his grip on life, and his final conversation with a long-time friend (played by director Ric White) was rather emotional, all my other issues with the movie aside.

Otherwise, the only other performance I cared for one way or the other was Amber Bland, who played the oldest daughter. She sort of loses prominence at different points throughout the movie, but she is one of the characters paid the most attention to (in fact, her birthday party, almost aborted due to the father’s recent excommunication from the church, was one of the more heartwarming scenes). Daniel Cooper, though, was more on the annoying side, playing an obnoxious, overweight younger brother, who’s catchphrase ‘Aw, ma’ got old after the second time. At least he provided us with one of the few solid scenes, involving quite a few tarantulas.

One thing I’ve neglected to touch much on is the low budget, and I want to be clear on this: yes, Bell Witch Haunting has a very low budget, but that is not at all reflective of my problems with it. Plenty of great low-budget horror movies exist, but they generally don’t have an overlong story that’s often none-to-exciting. Bell Witch Haunting was difficult to trudge through, and I suspect that most people who come across this one will leave with much the same opinion.

4/10