Pray for Morning (2006)

Pray for Morning

Directed by Cartney Wearn [Other horror films: N/A]

This movie feels a bit longer than it actually is. While clocking in at a normal 90 minutes, Pray for Morning suffers from various problems that seem to drag the movie out.

In it, a group of friends breaks into an old hotel, which has been uninhabited for at least thirty years, and is the scene of brutal deaths that took place years past. Not a bad plot, but not overly creative either. Truth be told, I can’t even describe all the problems this movie has, but believe me, they’re there.

Firstly, it takes a little while for each of the eight main characters to get fleshed out, meaning that before that happens, we’re left with pretty much interchangeable characters. Even toward the ending, though, none of the remaining characters stood out. The constant teleportation got a bit annoying (especially when one of the characters keeps insisting they’re just lost – as if popping up in a room on a floor you weren’t on seconds ago isn’t an indicator of a bigger problem than being lost), but that’s marginalized a bit by the fact that the malevolent spirit they’re facing was a magician in his previous life.

Elements of the movie fall flat, and this is most clearly seen in the final twenty or so minutes, in which a plot twist arises, followed by an explanation of something that doesn’t make much sense. Not to say that answers weren’t provided, but I felt as though I was missing something.

Just to note, the movie isn’t a terrible one – there are some decent scenes, even some more experimental scenes, that stand out, despite the low budget (through most of the film, a bright light represents the spirit of the magician). That said, just like most of the characters in the film, Pray for Morning just comes across as bland. A mostly forgettable experience, all-in-all. Robert F. Lyons and Udo Kier do well in their respective roles, at least.

5/10

The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (2006)

The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde

Directed by John Carl Buechler [Other horror films: Ragewar (1984, segment ‘Demons of the Dead’), Troll (1986), Cellar Dweller (1988), Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood (1988), Ghoulies III: Ghoulies Go to College (1991), Watchers Reborn (1998), Deep Freeze (2002), Curse of the Forty-Niner (2002), Saurian (2006), The Eden Formula (2006)]

This film truly feels like a TV movie. I saw this once before, years and years ago on Chiller, and thought the same thing. But despite how much it really seems to be a TV movie, it’s not, which is utterly mind-boggling, as that would have gone a long way to explaining this.

Starring Tony Todd as Dr. Jekyll, this movie is atrocious in most ways. Mr. Hyde’s endless barrage of bad quips combined with the less than stellar acting of both Tracy Scoggins and Danielle Nicolet, not to mention the utter lack of true mystery or suspense, makes this quite a difficult job to get through. The story, a modern adaptation of Robert Louis Stevenson’s work, leaves much to be desired. Some corny special effects are sprinkled throughout the film, and the gore we do get isn’t all that well done.

The highlight of this movie really is Tony Todd, who, while his acting isn’t amazing, can make you feel for the troubles of Dr. Jekyll. But Scoggins’ performance as a police officer with an aversion to guns was pretty bad, and indeed, most actors and actresses in this film didn’t do that well, though I do think that’s more the fault of what they had to work with as opposed to their own abilities.

The director of this travesty is John Carl Buechler, well known for the special effects of countless 80’s horror films (such as TerrorVision, Troll, Halloween 4, A Nightmare on Elm Street 4, Friday the 13th Part VII, and From Beyond) and directing such films as Troll (1986), Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood (1988), and Curse of the Forty-Niner (2002) (among others, as above shines light on). While it’s not an unimpressive resume, he wasn’t able to make this movie work whatsoever, and as I said, more than anything, it’s a chore to get through. The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is a failure on almost every front, the one shining light being Tony Todd. But that’s not enough to save this. A subpar film in every way – it’s a shame I saw it twice.

4/10

Kuntilanak (2006)

Kuntilanak

Directed by Rizal Mantovani [Other horror films: Jelangkung (2001), Kuntilanak 2 (2007), Kuntilanak 3 (2008), Kesurupan (2008), Mati suri (2009), Air Terjun Pengantin (2009), Taring (2010), Jenglot Pantai Selatan (2011), Air Terjun Pengantin Phuket (2013), Wewe (2015), Firegate (2016), Jailangkung (2017), Bayi Gaib: Bayi Tumbal Bayi Mati (2018), Kuntilanak (2018), Jailangkung 2 (2018), Tembang Lingsir (2019), Kuntilanak 2 (2019), Rumah Kentang: The Beginning (2019), Rasuk 2 (2020), Asih 2 (2020), Kuntilanak 3 (2022)]

Known in English as The Chanting, Kuntilanak has the distinction of being the first Indonesian horror film I’ve seen thus far. How does it hold up? It’s a mixed bag, but overall, while below average, it’s okay.

Now, some of my perceived shortcomings come not from the film itself, but from the quality of the upload I happened to view. The audio had an echoey feel to it, the English subtitles weren’t the best, and the video quality was on the grainy side. As best as possible, I will not let these technical aspects hamper my review.

Julie Estelle plays our main character, and as she moves into a boarding house near a cemetery, the young woman becomes the medium to a pontianak, or kuntilanak, and hell follows with. The beginning and middle portions of the film are a bit dull, as far as I was concerned. The setting was on par with what I’d hope to expect; a spooky boarding house near a cemetery is just what the doctor called for. And our main actress, Estelle, is a very attractive young woman. But it takes 45 minutes or so for the movie to really pick up. And when it does, it’s not exactly amazing.

For every cool, if not dated, jump scene the movie presents, it also brings with them elements I wasn’t fond of, such as the fact our main character herself has (rudimentary) control of the aforementioned kuntilanak. Also, there’s a Satanist element thrown in also, which, even with the ending sequence, didn’t do much for me.

Lastly, as far as negatives go, the last split second of the film was a jump scare, which has always annoyed me. Still, it’s not all bad. Many of the scenes with the kuntilanak were suspenseful, and there were plenty of frightening sequences to keep you happy (past the first 45 minutes, that is). The ending was a decent one, though not wholly unsurprising. Kuntilanak wasn’t an overly spectacular film, but it held up well given its deficits.

If most Indonesian horror films came out like this, even with my rating not being amazing, it’d still indeed be something to applaud. On a quick side note, there are two sequels to this film, 2007 and 2008 respectively, and while I don’t know how they compare to this one, I do know that Estelle appears in those also. As for this one, though, it’s not a great movie, but a decent one, somewhere around average.

6.5/10

Hatchet (2006)

Hatchet

Directed by Adam Green [Other horror films: Frozen (2010), Hatchet II (2010), Chillerama (2011, segment ‘The Diary of Anne Frankenstein’), Digging Up the Marrow (2014), Victor Crowley (2017)]

Hatchet’s not nearly as good a film as I remember it being, but it’s still mostly amusing and a fun romp. I can’t ignore some of the problems Hatchet has, though overall, I think the film’s still enjoyable, if not a bit below average.

My biggest personal gripe is that some of the scenes have a bit too much comedy in them. The character Marcus, played by Dion Richmond, was just too much, and though he had some solid quotes (“You look like you’ve been molested by wolves!”), I could have done without a lot of his antics.

Otherwise, the rest of the cast was okayish. The main character, played by Joel David Moore, was definitely a bit on the awkward side, but he made for an interesting lead. Amara Zaragoza’s Marybeth had a bit of depth to her, but her (understandably) emotional moments toward the end bothered me a bit.

Of course, there’s cameos from both Robert Englund and Tony Todd. I think Todd’s was quite a bit more amusing than Englund’s, but both are fun to see (and add to the retro feeling that Hatchet was going for). Richard Riehle was fun in his role, and Parry Shen too had a decent performance.

It’s the gore here, though, more than the characters, that bring the film attention, and for good reason. Aside from the one off-screen kill (which was suspenseful in it’s own right), you have some really solid and gory kills here, the most spectacular probably being the jaw and head being ripped in half. There’s also someone’s head getting twisted backwards, along with someone’s spine being ripped out, along with someone’s torso halved, along with someone’s arms being ripped off. I mean, this isn’t your grandfather’s horror movie – it came to play.

The budget here is noticeably limited, but Hatchet definitely did well with what they had. In classic slasher fashion, they had a decently tragic origin for Victory Crowley (portions of which reminded me of Pumpkinhead), and I think it really brought his character into a sympathetic light. It doesn’t excuse the wholesale slaughter of anyone who enters the swamp, but there you go.

And on that note, the setting here, a swamp, is definitely appreciated. I always wished there was a classic slasher set in a swamp, because I think there’s a lot of creepy potential with such a setting (and no, I don’t count Eaten Alive). Hatchet may not be from the 1980’s, but hey, I’ll take it.

If there’s one thing along with the comedy that sort of throw me off, it’s the inconclusive cliffhanger of an ending. I sort of see the appeal, but I wanted a bit more than that. Still, Hatchet is a decently fun movie, and though I do find it ever-so-slightly below average, I can still see myself giving it a go every few years.

6.5/10

Hatchet was covered on episode #29 of Fight Evil’s podcast, so if you want to listen to Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I discuss this, give it a go.

In a Dark Place (2006)

Directed by Donato Rotunno [Other horror films: N/A]

This would be the third time I’ve seen this film, and I have the same lukewarm reaction I did the first few times. In a Dark Place, another rendition of The Turn of the Screw (the most famous being 1961’s The Innocents) is not really a bad film. But it fails to really go above and beyond what it could have been.

The ambiguity (is it a ghost movie? are the children possessed? is our main character just losing it?) inherent in the original story certainly remains in this rendition, to the annoyance of some viewers. By the end, nothing is necessarily for certain, though I personally feel clues do lead to one central conclusion.

The acting here isn’t overly stellar, and the lesbian subplot just seems a tad odd, but I appreciate them wanting to add a little something to the story. In some ways, this feels like a slow-burner, though whether it pays off at the end is up for each viewer to decide. I’m not a giant fan of the ending, but then again, I wouldn’t have expected much else. In a Dark Place isn’t a bad movie. It’s just not that memorable.

6.5/10