Tag: Canada

Directed by William Fruet [Other horror films: Death Weekend (1976), Cries in the Night (1980), Spasms (1983), Blue Monkey (1987)]

I have to admit that I came out of this one feeling misled. I’m not blaming anyone, but I was under the impression this was a slasher, and while there are slasher aspects, it primarily feels more like a precursor to Night of the Demons, and that’s when it’s not feeling like a mess.

Apparently this movie was edited to hell by the MPAA, and you can tell, because the kills in this movie, while they have potential, are pretty weak. The movie is strongest for that perhaps ten minute period when the slasher feel is at it’s peak, but even so, most of the kills are weak, and honestly, the whole of the movie is the same.

Look, I hate sororities and fraternities. I refer to this in my reviews of Pledge Night, Final Exam, and American Horror House, and in Killer Party, pledges are told to recite sexually suggestive phrases in class (getting one girl thrown out), frat boys assault women (big shock) as they throw bees at them while in a hot tub, and film them as they frantically try to get in the house, in towels or nude, so quality sexual harrasment. That alone should have sent them to jail, I felt.

I hate fraternities and sororities. I can’t stand them. Abusing and humiliating people, and then acting like brothers and sisters for life afterwards strikes me as utterly ridiculous and dehumanizing. And unfortunately, we have to deal with abusive sorority aspects for the first 50 or so minutes of the movie.

Once we get past that, we have what seems to be demonic possession, and I just didn’t care at that point. The slasher portions – with a killer wearing an old-fashioned diving suit – had potential, but the supernatural aspects don’t do anything but repel me. It’s also worth mentioning there’s a few comedic elements thrown in, and I didn’t care for those either.

None of the leads really moved me. Joanna Johnson was fine, Sherry Willis-Burch and Elaine Wilkes were also okay, and Martin Hewitt (Alien Predator) had no character. Ralph Seymour (Just Before Dawn) does have character, but I don’t care for it, and Paul Bartel (Eating Raoul, Piranha) was at least amusing, but gets little focus, given he’s a professor of a university.

Maybe I just wasn’t feeling this. I didn’t care for any of the characters (and to be clear, it’s not like they gave us many reasons to care for any of them), the kills were weak, the supernatural aspects disappointing. Night of the Demons isn’t a favorite of mine, but it’s at least fun, and I just didn’t have that much fun here. Perhaps that will change if I see this in the future, but at the moment, I find it quite below average.

5/10

Directed by K.C. Bascombe [Other horror films: N/A]

A nostalgic favorite of mine, I first saw Fear of the Dark when I was a kid. I remember being home from school, likely sick, and catching this on television. It’s a movie aimed at a younger audience, but as I was a younger audience (if I was older than 12, I’d be surprised), it worked out well, and even since then, I’ve been a fan of this movie.

It’s a pretty simple story with a limited cast – a young boy deals with the dark thing (shadows that come to life, as they oft do) while he and his older brother are home alone. And that’s pretty much it – there are only five relevant characters, and if you discount the parents, just three. It’s a small cast, made with what I’d imagine to be a lower budget, but it works out beautifully.

Part of this is because, as a kid, I grew up on Goosebumps. I watched Goosebump after school all the time, and I’ve seen most of the episodes (along with owning all the ones released on VHS). Fear of the Dark feels like an hour-and-a-half long episode of Goosebumps, albeit mildly more mature (in regards to language). It feels like what got me into horror, in other words, and seeing it at a young age, during my early exploration into the genre, really cements this in my mind.

To be fair, one could say it’s a bit slow. The final 15 minutes have a ton of action, but there’s only a handful leading up to the finale. Honestly, this doesn’t bother me, as it just increases the tension, which is made even better by the ongoing lightning storm throughout the film.

Jesse James (The Amityville Horror, Dead Souls) does great as a young kid dealing with an intense, and justifiable, fear of the dark, and his interactions with Kevin Zegers (Shadow Builder, Vampire, The Hollow, Komodo, Wrong Turn), who plays his older brother, strike me as very genuine. In fact, playing their parents are Linda Purl (Visiting Hours) and Charles Edwin Powell (Screamers), and they also strike me as genuine, so the family in the movie feels like a real family.

The only other cast member worth mentioning is Rachel Skarsten (Jack Brooks: Monster Slayer), and while it’s true most of her scenes aren’t until the final 25 minutes or so, she did pretty well, especially with some more emotional material (such as the loss of her brother, along with her fear of dogs).

The night things, or shadow people, do look a little silly. The main one wears what seems to be a cowboy hat, and there’s another one who wears a top hat. Honestly, they don’t look too bad, but it’s more that they pop up in a dark hallway to some raucous rock music, and while it’s not ineffective, it does look a little goofy.

Many of the other scares are decent, though, such as a figure in someone’s closet, or one of the brothers being stuck in the attic with overactive shadows, or faces and hands pushing the wall out, as Freddy famously did in A Nightmare on Elm Street. Actually, aside from some really hideous CGI cockroaches/beetles toward the finale, most of the action-orientated horrors are decent.

Honestly, though, Fear of the Dark is more than just the night things and the scary events the two brothers face during a stormy night – it’s about a strained relationship between an older brother who thinks his younger brother is too old to be scared of the dark, and a younger brother who doesn’t believe he can confide in his older brother, even when he’s being physically harmed by the dark. It’s a good movie showcasing the two of them growing closer, and I think that’s another big draw I feel toward it.

It can’t go without saying that another important aspect is that it’s from this movie that I first heard the song ‘Ski Bum’ by Les Megatones, which is pretty catchy and never fails to amuse me. It pops up during the opening credits, along with playing during the end credits. It doesn’t really seem like the type of song to be in a movie like this – it’s the opposite of anything I consider ‘dark’ – but it’s a fun song, and has graced my iTunes for years.

Naturally, a lot of the stuff in this movie isn’t likely to impress those who don’t already enjoy the 90’s, kid-style horror of Goosebumps and Are You Afraid of the Dark?, but as I grew up on both of those shows, this movie hits the right spots, and though it’s flawed in some aspects, I’ve never seen this movie and not had a good time with it. Honestly, I doubt I ever could.

Fear of the Dark isn’t going to be a movie that every horror fan loves, but it’s one of the movies that got me into the genre, and I personally love it.

8.5/10

Directed by David Cronenberg [Other horror films: Shivers (1975), Rabid (1977), The Brood (1979), Videodrome (1983), The Dead Zone (1983), The Fly (1986), Dead Ringers (1988), Naked Lunch (1991), eXistenZ (1999), Crimes of the Future (2022), The Shrouds (2024)]

David Cronenberg has always been a director I’ve had a bit of a mixed record with. While it’s true I enjoyed films such as Shivers and Rabid, others, such as The Brood and Videodrome, are ones I found it difficult to dig into. Scanners is a classic I’ve never had the urge to see, partially due to that mixed record, but after having seen it, I do think it’s one of his better films.

By no means, though, do I find it fantastic – it’s a pretty solid story with a wide scope (not dissimilar to Videodrome, albeit infinitely more sensible), quality action sequences, an interesting idea, and, of course, very solid special effects.

I knew the basics of the story going in, and I have to admit to being pleased that I could actually follow everything along. Some of Cronenberg’s films can veer toward the complex, such as Videodrome and The Brood, and while this one does deal with large topics, pretty much everything makes sense, which is a relief (as it was a worry of mine, and one of the reasons I put off watching this for so long).

Admittedly, the horror aspects here are couched heavily in science fiction, which probably isn’t a surprise, but it is worth mentioning. Many of the more action-packed sequences feel like, well, an action movie, or perhaps a thriller, as opposed to horror, and in fact, I think it’s by the quality special effects alone that allow this entry into the genre.

Everyone, and I mean everyone, knows about the scene in which someone’s head explodes. Even before I was born, I knew about the scene, and I think it’s fair to say that even if people don’t realize what movie it’s from, or recognize the name ‘Cronenberg,’ they know the scene too. And it’s a good scene, but what’s great about Scanners is that it’s not even the most gruesome scene – the telepathic duel, of sorts, during the finale was some grisly stuff, and led to a final moment that I rather liked, so there’s some good stuff here.

To be fair, much of the other action tended to be more generic and tame, even scenes that you might expect a bit more from (such as the shotgun massacre). Again, it feels like it’s an action movie at times, which is fine, because it works with the story, but disappointing even so. However, I did really enjoy the computer sequence, in which Stephen Lack’s character scans ConSec’s computers – that was some enjoyable, explosive action.

Somewhat amusingly, I don’t think Stephen Lack is the stand-out here. His performance was decent, but by the nature of his character, he sort of lacked many expressive capabilities. Patrick McGoohan, on the other hand, played a pretty complex character, and while it wasn’t easy to get a read on him, I loved his performance.

As for the other performances worth mentioning, Michael Ironside (Hello Mary Lou: Prom Night II, Visiting Hours, The Next Karate Kid) was solid, though not as in-focus as you might think, Jennifer O’Neill (The Psychic, The Reincarnation of Peter Proud) seemed almost pointless, but otherwise did fine, and Lawrence Dane (Of Unknown Origin, Rituals, The Clown Murders, Happy Birthday to Me) made for a solid character with an exciting end.

I’m surprised that I enjoyed Scanners as much as I did, but it’s certainly a pleasant surprise. It’s not exactly the type of movie I’d generally go out of my way to see, but it was pretty enjoyable at the time, and from the action to the special effects, it’s definitely a movie worth seeing for a nice mix of genres.

7.5/10

Directed by Christopher MacBride [Other horror films: N/A]

The Conspiracy isn’t an easy movie to rate, the reason being that while some portions are taut and compelling, as an overall experience, it feels, at least to me, just a bit of a let-down.

When I first saw the film some years back, I didn’t hold an altogether different opinion, as I found it average. I mostly still feel the same way – the movie does get some things right, and I think it’s a clever idea and a good usage of found footage – but I can’t help but feel that I wanted a bit more from the finale. I wouldn’t go as far as to call the ending unsatisfactory, but I definitely feel that it lacks that punch I was looking for.

Now, I’m not a conspiracy theorist, or, at least I don’t consider myself one. Even so, much of what Terrance’s character (A.C. Peterson) said was stuff I can understand. The Gulf of Tonkin was most certainly a ploy by the US government to get us stuck in the Vietnam War, which was an utter atrocity. That’s not a conspiracy, but fact. I have friends who have dabbled in some conspiracies about 9/11, some of which can even be compelling at times, but ultimately, the idea that Islamic extremists attacked the USA seems logical to me.

I want to be clear, though, that if it comes out that the US did indeed orchestrate 9/11, I wouldn’t be surprised – my feelings toward the USA aren’t positive whatsoever (look at how many leaders we’ve overthrown – Mohammed Mossadegh in Iran, João Goulart in Brazil, Salvador Allende in Chile, Maurice Bishop in Grenada, and Jacobo Árbenz in Guatemala). It’s just that, in this case, I don’t necessarily think it’s the US’s doing (in the normal sense; certainly the way we’ve treated the Middle East throughout history personally leads me to seeing 9/11 as potential self-defense on their parts).

This, however, is not meant to be a political blog. I am a socialist, I do despise the USA, I do despise capitalism, and I encourage voting for third parties, but for the most part, none of this matters when it comes to movies. In The Conspiracy’s case, I think it’s important to point out that while I don’t consider myself a conspiracy theorist, I also don’t think that they’re without warrant in many cases. I’ll grant you that the FEMA camps and New World Order sorts can be a bit much, but I honestly feel that people who gravitate toward conspiracy theories are mostly good people trying to understand the world.

I rather loved the idea of the Tarsus Club, which really does sound like Bohemian Club (an all-men’s private club) and the Council of Foreign Relations (a US think tank), and the addition of the worship of Mithras, along with the pageantry and rituals, makes it feel like it could be a real organization out there. The movie does feel realistic, which is true to the very conclusion, which may partially explain why it has a somewhat anticlimactic feel.

There’s really only three performances I wanted to mention. Aaron Poole (not to be confused with Aaron Paul, though he looks remarkably similar to him) and James Gilbert made for good leads, Poole (The Void) having a bit more character than Gilbert (The Corridor), but both giving a realistic performance. Bruce Clayton was also decent, though we almost never saw his face. Such is the life of those who research secret societies.

The ending of the film is pretty intense, at least for a bit. There are some good scenes, some frantic scenes, and while few scenes were scary, certainly some were suspenseful. And to be fair, though I don’t personally love the way the film ends, it sort of makes sense in context, especially after we see more editing being done to the pre-existing film.

Overall, I don’t dislike The Conspiracy. I also don’t particularly like it. It just exists, as if it were a rain cloud on a day with no breeze. It’s there. It’s nice to look at if you want a balm to this pointless existence, but it’s little more than that. All of this is to say I think the movie is fine. It’s not good, it’s not bad, and while it definitely had potential to be great, it simply just is, and for that, I have to rate it around average.

7/10

Directed by Paul Ziller [Other horror films: Pledge Night (1988), Snakehead Terror (2004), Beyond Loch Ness (2008), Yeti: Curse of the Snow Demon (2008), Troglodyte (2008), Ba’al (2008), Iron Invader (2011), Ghost Storm (2011)]

Swarmed is one of those films that I think will be largely forgettable. I have this on somewhat good authority, given I’ve seen it before, and most of the movie still felt new to me. It’s not an overly poor TV movie, though – it’s entertaining at times, and some performances are fine – but it’s not a film that I’m likely to ever watch again, either.

I can’t say when I first saw this movie. I know I watched it back on SyFy when they were still Sci-Fi, and I wasn’t any older than 14. Given I’m 28 at the time of this writing, it has been quite a long time. I’ll say that, in defense of the film, it’s a more enjoyable film than many post-2010 Syfy movies, which counts for something.

The story isn’t anything particularly interesting. Dealing with a pesticide that inadvertently improves the surviving wasps’ strength and venom accidentally unleashed on a small town, it’s the average fair when it comes to these types of films. There’s even a coroner who is exactly like Roy Brocksmith’s coroner from Arachnophobia – eating nonchalantly while dealing with corpses. So much of the film is stereotypical, and the ending is also exactly what you’d expect.

One thing I have to give the film minor props for, though, is the fact it takes place in southern Indiana. No doubt the town is fictional, and the movie is filmed in Canada, but an Indiana setting does warm my Hoosier heart, so though it doesn’t add much, it’s sort of fun seeing my state representin’.

None of the performances here are great, but I think some of the central performances were admirable enough. Michael Shanks (who is likely most recognizable as Dr. Daniel Jackson from Stargate SG-1, but also starred in Mega Snake) was decent. Richard Chevolleau’s character, despite his errors, ended up being pretty decent. Tim Thomerson (Unseen Evil and Fade to Black) was sort of funny (“How about them apples?”) in a generic way, and Carol Alt (Snakehead Terror) was serviceable.

On the flip-side, there was Ellen Dubin. I don’t blame the actress, but boy, her character went downhill quickly. Her boss is killed by a wasp, and she basically loses it. She attempts to kill the wasp with a shotgun, and even after she does that, she begins thinking that there are more wasps around, and drowns in paranoia. These portions weren’t particularly fun to me, and while they don’t last long, the performance was just painful.

As you might be able to imagine, the special effects here aren’t what people would generally describe as ‘stellar.’ Don’t get me wrong – they’re leagues above the atrocities you might see in films like Sharknado and 2-Headed Shark Attack – but they’re not great. There was a decent scene of a wasp stinging someone’s eye, and another had a wasp winding up in someone’s mouth, so there are occasional glimpses of something interesting, but for the most part, Swarmed doesn’t have a lot to boast about.

It’s not a movie that I had a terrible time with. It’s below average, of course, but it’s not nearly as bad as many other horror films can be, and though Swarmed isn’t going to be a movie that I’ll likely watch again, for some classic Sci-Fi, it’s not the worst time.

6/10

Directed by Robert Bouvier [Other horror films: N/A]

So this film has a bit of a negative perception for some obvious reasons, but I think it’s a decent film. It’s not great – aspects are certainly amateurish and I think the killer’s identity could have been hidden better – but it’s a decently entertaining slasher, and I’ve enjoyed it both times I’ve seen it.

Let’s talk the controversy first, though – many of the victims in the film are gay men, many of whom have AIDS. AIDS plays a somewhat large part in the film, and obviously that was a heated topic in the 1980’s. It’s not really dealt with in all that sensitive a manner, but it’s also accurate that the gay people in the film aren’t all sterotypical, and there is a character who berates a homophobic cop, so it’s not all negative in it’s portrayal, for whatever that might be worth.

In a way, while insensitive, it’s at least different. In most slashers, women get the brunt of violence, but in the first scene of City in Panic, we see a man getting killed in a shower (quite reminiscent of Psycho), which is a nice change of pace. It’s not a great kill, but seeing a different group being targeted at least keeps things fresh, and leads to a few kills that actually are good.

The best one, of course, would be a castration after one poor man attempts to use a gloryhole. There’s decent blood splatter, and while it’s not overly graphic, it does look quite painful. Another kill took place in a gym – a man doing some upside-down exercises gets attacked, which is at least a unique death. Not all the kills are good, as some are a bit dry (one individual gets run over by a car), but when they get them right, it’s enjoyable.

It’s also worth mentioning that the killer here has a good giallo look to them. A long trench coat, a fedora, black gloves – this killer could have been in any number of Italian movies back in the 70’s, and while I think they perhaps mishandled the identity of the killer here, I do rather appreciate the retro look they have.

David Christopher Adamson didn’t do bad as a lead, but as with many characters in the film, I don’t think we really get a great handle on him. He’s a radio host who seems moderately liberal (supports gun control, and also supports ‘law & order’), but we just don’t learn all that much that makes us care for him. Edward Chester’s attitude toward homophobic cops was one I appreciated, and as a homophobic cop, Derrick Emery did well. I’m mixed on Lee Ann Nestegard, but I did love Ron Rynka’s dancing (as the male stripper named He-Man, he was quite a hoot).

City in Panic isn’t the best slasher from Canada, and it’s sometimes problematic in it’s approach on a rather sensitive topic, but I’ve seen this one twice, and I keep having a good time with it. It can be a bit slow, but it’s engaging throughout, and City of Panic is worth seeing, at the very least, if you’re a fan of 80’s slashers, or if you want to see what a Canadian giallo might feel like.

7.5/10

Directed by Sheldon Wilson [Other horror films: Shallow Ground (2004), Kaw (2007), Screamers: The Hunting (2009), Carny (2009), Mothman (2010), Red: Werewolf Hunter (2010), Killer Mountain (2011), Scarecrow (2013), Shark Killer (2015), The Unspoken (2015), The Hollow (2015), The Night Before Halloween (2016), Stickman (2017), Dead in the Water (2018)]

While I wouldn’t call Neverknock an excessively great movie, I would definitely put forward the film as being one of the better Syfy originals in the last ten years, with a decent amount going for it.

The film revolves around the town of Autumn Ridge and mysterious deaths that took place back in 1986 on Halloween. Some teenagers knock on the same door as those who died did, as is a Halloween tradition in the town, and soon thereafter, an entity is after them, forcing them to either face their fears or die.

As it is, I didn’t care for the entity’s design. It was sort of an oily black humanoid thing, and it just didn’t look that great. I don’t think it looked quite as bad as other Syfy films, but even Stickman looked better, so that wasn’t ideal. Also, it’s fair to say that few of the kills are really that memorable, but honestly, that doesn’t matter as much to me in this case, as I still love the Halloween vibe of the film.

And that’s something that really works for me – it has that small town Halloween vibe. There’s a hay bale maze, which looked quite impressive and folksy. There’s a House of Horrors, which was pretty dope – I loved the room with a bunch of body bags hanging from the ceiling, and what was funniest of all was that as the characters were going through the house, the teenagers were all scared at various points, but the youngest character there (played by Lola Flanery) looked more bored than anything else.

Somewhat amusingly, I didn’t really care that much about the lead of the film, being Dominique Provost-Chalkley (Buckout Road). She didn’t do poorly, but she was overshadowed by more impressive names, especially Jodelle Ferland. I’ve been a fan of Ferland ever since I saw her in The Unspoken, and I thought she did a really solid job here also. Also, as a win for retroactive recognition, we have Kiana Madeira (the Fear Street trilogy), who was fun. Others, such as Varun Saranga (Killer High), Eliana Jones, and Nicholas Campbell, tended to be less noteworthy.

Along with this film, Syfy also aired three other originals during October 2017, being Truth or Dare, House of the Witch, and The Sandman. Two of these (House of the Witch and this one) were moderately decent, whereas the other two were less impressive (The Sandman just sucked brah), and I remember watching all four back in 2017. I was impressed with Neverknock then, and I still think it’s quite a solid film.

Obviously, it’s not a movie that will be to everyone’s taste. I was already probably going to like it simply for the fact it had Jodelle Ferland in it. Even without her, though, it’s a fine movie, and I personally find it a movie worth seeing, even if it’s not exactly special.

7.5/10

Directed by William Fruet [Other horror films: Death Weekend (1976), Spasms (1983), Killer Party (1986), Blue Monkey (1987)]

Though the print I possess is of dubious quality, I’ve consistently found this Canadian movie pretty decent. Sure, the print is rough, but the atmosphere is on point, and while elements may not be the most original, Cries in the Night is worth seeing.

Of course, you probably won’t see it under the name Cries in the Night, as it was retitled Funeral Home (which I tend to think is a better name). The print I own (from Mill Creeks 50-disc set Creepy Classics) is rough – the audio is occasionally a bit garbled, and visually, some scenes can be dim, others blurry. In a way, it’s a testament of my feelings on the film that despite this, I’ve watched the film twice, and had fun each time.

It’s largely the story, revolving around a young woman staying at her grandmother’s bed-and-breakfast inn (which was previously – you guessed it – a funeral home), that helps the film out. Guests seem to disappear without warning, voices tend to come from the cellar (which is kept locked), and the mystery around her grandfather’s departure is still unsolved. Funeral Home can be quite atmospheric, and the big old house helps with that vibe.

Another thing I rather liked is the use of flashbacks – three different flackbacks pop up throughout the film, all of which add a little something (one that involved two boys sneaking around the funeral home was pretty solid stuff). The movie isn’t really that emotionally-charged, and I sometimes wonder if they were going for a more somber vibe, but it’s still quite nice.

All of the central performances, I thought, were solid. Lesleh Donaldson (Curtains) felt a little weak as the lead at times, but I enjoyed her character well enough. Kay Hawtrey did quite well as a grandmother potentially hiding some secrets. Stephen E. Miller impressed me, Alf Humphreys (Howard from My Bloody Valentine) amused me, Barry Morse intrigued me, and Harvey Atkin also amused me. Dean Garbett was decent, and for extra points, we got Jack Van Evera in a flashback (who played Happy the bartender in My Bloody Valentine).

There’s no gore here, at least not in the version I’ve seen. Someone gets stabbed in the back with some funeral home implement, and a couple had their car shoved into a lake, but for the most part, the film’s not overly violent. In fact, some people may feel the movie is slow, as the body count is quite low. Even so, I can say that while that’s true, I personally never reached the point where the story disengaged me.

I wouldn’t mind seeing a higher quality print of Funeral Home, but even if the only print I see is the one I own, that’s fine, because the movie is still pretty solid. It has a great atmosphere, and though I don’t think it’s an unsung classic, I’ve always personally enjoyed it.

7.5/10