Directed by Michael Anderson [Other horror films: Orca (1977), Murder by Phone (1982)]
I think I’ve seen this movie before under the title Les diaboliques, or maybe it was House on Haunted Hill. Or perhaps it was The Screaming Skull. Wait, Lo spettro (or The Ghost, 1963)?
The point is, Dominique’s plot is far from unique. It’s not a bad story, but it’s been done before many times. It helps a little that the movie’s British, which gives it maybe a little more flavor, but at the same time, despite the plot being competent, Dominique feels stuffy.
Cliff Robertson and Simon Ward were both fine as central characters, but they didn’t really add much to the film, and it’s certainly not on them that the movie falls flat. In fact, I did rather like Simon Ward, so without him, it’s possible the film wouldn’t be that engaging, not that it’s overly engaging to begin with.
As it is, the story Dominique boasts is okay. There’s a few suspenseful scenes, though not that many really thrilling scenes (save one), and pretty much all the scenes are okay, but nothing special. The best I can say is that the sequences that take place in the conservatory are solid.
I think that’s the best way to describe this movie, really: okay, but nothing special. It’s a bit stuffy, but it’s competently made. Dominique’s just not really that great, though, and I certainly understand why I’ve never heard about this one until I watched it.
6/10
This is one of the film’s covered on Fight Evil’s podcast. If interested, listen below as Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I discuss this one.
Directed by Joseph Ruben [Other horror films: Dreamscape (1984), The Good Son (1993)]
I might not be surprising anyone when I admit to being a big fan of this movie. Both my my banner here, along with my signature on HorrorMovieFans.com, use a ‘Who am I here?’ image of the movie, and perhaps more than any other movie (aside from maybe Burnt Offerings), I wear the fact that I love this one on my sleeve for all to see.
And I don’t feel a bit ashamed.
I’m not going as far as to say this movie’s perfect, but I will say that Terry O’Quinn’s performance is without flaw. I love the idea of an insane man trying to encapsulate the perfect, Leave It to Beaver family unit, only to undoubtedly become disappointed, kill them, and start over again. He tries his best to create the picture-perfect family, one without discord, one with strong traditional values, but he’s never able to, no matter how wistfully he looks at other seemingly-happy families.
O’Quinn’s performance here is fantastic. He seems a clean-cut guy, whistling and shaving while the bodies of his discarded wife and kid are sprawled on the floor. He can’t take much in the way of criticism (just look at the house showing sequence with Charles Lanyer), and he’s corny as all hell (‘I sell the American Dream’), but he’s also pretty intimidating. When he’s having his mini-breakdown in the basement (unknowingly in front of his shocked step-daughter, Jill Schoelen), he’s obviously furious and mentally unstable (at the mere thought of his happy world crumbling down), and god, that breakdown at the end, resulting in the ‘Who am I here,’ line?
Perfection.
Really, the only character here that didn’t really blow me away was Jim, played by Stephen Shellen, whose main mission in the movie was to find the killer of his sister and bring him to justice. He certainly had a solid motive, but I don’t know if his scenes add all that much to the film (though certainly, without his persistence of getting the story of the murder ran again, there wouldn’t have been a story to begin with). He was still a decent character, and I felt bad for him throughout, but he was the least interesting individual here.
I sort of wished Jeff Schultz was more involved in the story, but after attempting to rape Schoelen’s character, I can see why he stepped out. 😛 Charles Lanyer, playing Schoelen’s therapist, was very solid, and when she said that her step-father scared her, you could tell he was devoted to helping her out, and boy, did he go the extra mile for her (speaking of which, when Jerry’s beating the guy with a four-by-two, talk about a solid sequence). Shelley Hack was decent as the mother, and she shared a touching moment or two with her daughter, but she was far from a crucial player here.
Once we move past O’Quinn, Jill Schoelen is the second-best performance here. She’s a troubled girl in a bad situation with almost no one on her side (her therapist being the one exception, and when she’s told that he died, you can’t help but feel for her), but she finds the strength to fight back, and it’s just solid stuff. It didn’t hurt they threw in a bit of nudity for some reason, but what the hell, it was welcomed. Even without that, she was a stand-out character, and it’s great to see her finally be vindicated come the end.
Related, she has a somewhat solid resume of horror films, such as the somewhat underrated Popcorn, co-starred in the 1989 Phantom of the Opera with Robert Englund, along with appearing in Curse II: The Bite, Cutting Class, Chiller, and When a Stranger Calls Back. She never seemed to reach A-list status, but she certainly had her fans, and though I’ve not yet seen many of her other movies, I suspect this was one of her finest roles.
Personally, I don’t know exactly why I love this one as much as I do. At times, I can’t deny that this feels more like a television movie than one that got theatrical release, because it can be a bit tame, and perhaps sluggish, but I still adore every second of it (and like I said, the ending as a whole is spectacular). The idea of a disappointed father quitting his job, scoping out a new family, then killing his existing family in order to move on was engaging, and I sort of wonder how many times Jerry’s done that before (I suspect the opening to the film was not his first infraction). In fact, much of Jerry’s history is uncovered, which only intensifies the mystery (aside from the fact he had a self-admitted strict upbringing, we’ve got nothing).
The Stepfather is a movie of high value, and certainly a movie that I’ve always enjoyed, and always will. All we need is a little order around here, and this movie brings it.
9/10
This is one of the films covered on Fight Evil’s podcast, so listen to Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I discuss this one below.
Directed by Robert Fuest [Other horror films: And Soon the Darkness (1970), Dr. Phibes Rises Again (1972), The Devil’s Rain (1975), Three Dangerous Ladies (1977, segment ‘The Island’)]
I’ve seen this one something like three or four times before, and I always left with a lukewarm feeling. Seeing it once again, I don’t find the movie bad, or even all that mediocre, but despite the cleverness and amusing pieces of dialogue throughout, this still isn’t a movie I love.
As it is, I really like most of the really random kills (perhaps the death-by-brass-unicorn is my favorite, but the bat kill was great, as were the locusts, snow-blower, and the exsanguination scenes), and the character of Dr. Phibes, played by Vincent Price, was really interesting and moderately tragic. Even so, the movie doesn’t work for me.
Vincent Price was a clear stand-out, but this movie isn’t really as driven by him as many of his other films are (such as House on Haunted Hill or Theater of Blood), possibly because he didn’t speak all that often. Others were pretty solid also, such as Joseph Cotton, Terry-Thomas (who I love in anything I see him in, from The Vault of Horror to my favorite comedy, It’s a Mad Mad Mad Mad World), and Peter Jeffrey.
The movie does possess a bit of a tragic feel, especially toward the somewhat somber conclusion (which also had a solid precursor to a Saw series trap, which was innovative), so that worked out well, but though I enjoyed much of the comedy (which was never too pervasive, luckily), I still find the movie hovering around average, which may change sometime in the future with another viewing.
7/10
This was covered on Fight Evil’s podcast, so if interested, listen as Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I discuss The Abominable Dr. Phibes.
Directed by Paul W.S. Anderson [Other horror films: The Sight (2000), Resident Evil (2002), AVP: Alien vs. Predator (2004), Resident Evil: Afterlife (2010), Resident Evil: Retribution (2012), Resident Evil: The Final Chapter (2016)]
With a cast boasting Sam Neill (The Final Conflict, In the Mouth of Madness, and one of my favorite non-horror films, Jurassic Park), Jason Isaacs (some of the Harry Potter films and A Cure for Wellness), Sean Pertwee (Dog Soldiers, Wilderness, and Gotham), Laurence Fishburne (The Matrix), and Richard T. Jones (long-standing appearances on Judging Amy, a series I rather enjoyed), you would think that Event Horizon could do no wrong. Despite seeing it around three times now, though, I’m still not entirely sold on the film.
I like a lot of what the movie does, especially the psychological torture many of the main characters go through once coming on board the ship. The story is pretty interesting, and while there’s not really that many freaky moments, the ones we get work out decently well.
My biggest problem has always been the split-second glimpse we get of the truly gruesome stuff. Sure, one of the characters has a very Hellraiser-esque death, but much of the brutality passes by the screen way too quickly to get a real hold on what we’re seeing. In some ways, I appreciate that tactic, because while the audience clearly doesn’t see everything, the characters do, allowing their frantic attempts to leave the ship to sort of bolster the feeling of terror the images cause. Even so, especially toward the end, I’d have liked a more clear-cut idea of this other universe, and we never really got that, and instead were teased with images we didn’t get to see in full.
Otherwise, if you can ignore a bit of hideous CGI at times, Event Horizon has a decent amount going for it. Neill’s not always the best actor here, but he is at least fun (“Where we’re going, we won’t need eyes to see”), and the inclusion of Isaacs, Pertwee, Fishburne, and Jones more than make up for that. The story is moderately fresh, and despite my issues, I really like a lot about the film. Because of the fact that there’s still quite a bit left unanswered, though, I’ve never loved Event Horizon, and while it’s not a bad film, I don’t think it’s really above average. Sorry, guys.
Directed by Norman J. Warren [Other horror films: Satan’s Slave (1976), Prey (1977), Terror (1978), Inseminoid (1981)]
This British film was a bit of a mess, and that’s probably being kind.
At times, Bloody New Year felt like a silly version of Poltergeist, only not nearly as enjoyable and generally a lot more pointless. Theoretically, the movie could have had potential, but it’s pretty hard to tell looking at this final product.
Really, Bloody New Year is just odd. There’s a little charm in the various oddball dangers the group of friends face (such as a biting bannister, a killer vacuum, invisible laughing people, etc.), but even when things are tied together at the end, it doesn’t really do much to help.
The cast is pretty much entirely forgettable, which may not be a big surprise, but at the same time, at least one or two cast-members tend to stand out in a movie, so the fact that none did here was somewhat bothersome.
I don’t exactly know who this movie would be best for. Sure, it’s an 80’s obscurity, by-and-large, but it’s by no means a hidden gem, and while there’s some over-the-top scenes here, I don’t think it really gets wild enough to come across as that memorable. Perhaps during certain scenes, in the moment, I enjoyed watching them. But overall, the movie’s pretty poor, and an interesting setting (a deserted island) doesn’t much forgive the other flaws this British flick possesses.
4/10
This is one of the films covered on Fight Evil’s podcast, so if you’re interested in hearing myself and Chucky (@ChuckyFE) discuss this one, give it a listen.
I’ve not seen this one since I was around 13 – 16 years old, and given I was 26 at the time of writing this, I was excited to finally see this one again. Jack Frost isn’t a great movie, and I didn’t think it would be, but I still had a pretty fun time with it, and while it occasionally gets a bit too silly for me, overall, I will admit to enjoying this one.
The killer snowman here reminds me a lot of Chucky from Child’s Play, which I suspect was intention on the part of the movie-makers. Not only is he a serial killer endowed with a new body, but he has consistent quips to go along with every kill, and generally seems a talkative guy. Sometimes, as I said, this gets to be a bit much (especially toward the end), but Scott MacDonald definitely had fun with this.
Personally, that does often make a difference to me. There are some movies in which it’s clear the cast has a blast making it, but that doesn’t always lead to the movie being good (likewise, there are movies that it seems clear the cast wasn’t invested, and that can badly damage a movie). However, when the story is decent enough and the cast is clearly enjoying themselves, it’s a great little feeling, and I think Jack Frost definitely has that.
Christopher Allport isn’t necessarily stellar here, but I do think he’s stable enough to commend. I do wish we had seen Stephen Mendel’s character punched at least once, as he was pretty good at acting the asshole, but to no avail. The same could be said for Rob LaBelle – he got a slight comeuppance, but it wasn’t near enough. Shannon Elizabeth has an early appearance here, two years before her role as Nadia in American Pie and four before Thir13en Ghosts, and it’s probably one of the more well-known scenes in the film. Let’s just say it looks chilly.
What really cracked me up toward the end was when we find out that Allport’s kid (played by Zack Eginton) put antifreeze into a Christmas snack for his father. I was expecting hot sauce or something, but it’s freaking antifreeze. I chuckled at that, because that kid is absolutely going to kill someone someday.
Toward the end, though, I do think things tend to run a bit slower. We’ve already seen what seemed to be the defeat of Jack Frost twice now, and he still comes back. I wish they had trimmed a bit of that (such as the scene where the gaggle of main characters were forcing Jack Frost into the furnace with hair-dryers – that, what with the music and Jack Frost’s dialogue, was just too silly), but it’s not really that detrimental a problem.
I wouldn’t call Jack Frost a great movie, or even a traditionally good one (fantastic introduction, though, that cracked me up), but I do think it’s a decent amount of fun, and though some of it is a bit much, I found myself quite enjoying this rewatch.
7.5/10
This was covered on one of Fight Evil’s podcasts, episode #26. If it tickles your fancy, listen to Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I discuss this one.
Directed by Edgar Wright [Other horror films: Last Night in Soho (2021)]
Often called one of the greatest zombie-comedies, Shaun of the Dead is an undeniably fun film. It never gets too silly (which is one of my personal pet peeves when it comes to comedy-horror films), and is just a good movie to throw in when little else is going on.
Much of the reason this works is because of Simon Pegg, who does great as the unmotivated, titular Shaun. His was a rather enjoyable performance throughout. Much of the time, I didn’t care for Nick Frost’s character, but as an actor, he did well. Most others were enjoyable also, such as Bill Nighy (who had one of the few emotional scenes in the film), Kate Ashfield, Lucy Davis, and Penelope Wilton (who’s cheery ‘Hello’ always cracked me up). Hell, we even got a cameo of Martin Freeman before he became the star he now is.
Of course, the story’s fun, the style is solid (love the quick cuts used constantly), and I do enjoy the scenes of Pegg walking to and from his apartment, as they bring a very localized feel to the film. I don’t have any real big complaints, aside from a few portions that felt a bit much (such as the end, which was a tad more goofy than I’d have hoped for).
Generally, though, there’s a reason that this movie is held to such high regard, and though it’s not perfect, it is an enjoyable, potentially brainless, film that is pretty well worth seeing. There’s even a little gore, as one of the characters gets his legs and arms ripped off by a horde of zombies, so there’s a little something here for many horror fans.
I don’t necessarily love Shaun of the Dead, but I’ve seen it multiple times, and it’s never failed to amuse. Stand-out scene was probably the “Don’t Stop Me Now” Queen sequence in the pub. “Kill the Queen” indeed.
Directed by George King [Other horror films: Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (1936), The Crimes of Stephen Hawke (1936), Sexton Blake and the Hooded Terror (1938), Crimes at the Dark House (1940)]
While certainly not a well-known classic of the genre, The Face at the Window is a rather enjoyable romp from a time when there weren’t many releases in the genre, allowing it to stand out all the more.
The story here is more engaging than the usual old dark house movie (though make no mistake, I love those also), what with a serial killer known as the Wolf murdering people around Paris. After a bank robbery, things get even more involved, and everything ties in nicely at the end, which may not be surprising, given the time this came out.
For a lower-budget movie, The Face at the Window boasts a strong cast. Tod Slaughter (who starred in, among other things, the 1936 adaptation of Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street and 1948’s The Greed of William Hart) does pretty damn well here, with his over-the-top, hammy performance. He was masterful in every scene, and really stood out above all others. John Warwick (who never really appeared in a horror film before or after) did great as the main character, appropriately sympathetic and a solid individual to root for.
Marjorie Taylor was solid, too, in her role, though, as one can guess from the time period, she wasn’t given a whole lot to really do. Robert Adair (who appeared in classics such as The Invisible Man and 1931’s Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, uncredited in both) was good as the police chief, and really helped bring things together during the conclusion.
And what a fun conclusion it is. The ham-fisted way they threw in the mystery behind *cue dramatic voice * the Wolf was no doubt ridiculous, but was it fun? Very much so. And the laughable experiment with electricity, in which a dead body would incriminate his murderer, along with a twist, was rather enjoyable also.
The Face at the Window isn’t aiming to be in the leagues of such classics as Frankenstein, Doctor X, or Mystery of the Wax Museum, but for a cheap addition of late 30’s horror (one of the driest periods of the genre), I think this one is both deeply amusing and pretty fun. I love the whole terrifying face appearing at the window, followed by one getting stabbed in the back. Quality beginning. This movie, in my view, had style, and Slaughter’s performance was fantastic.
Directed by Clive Barker [Other horror films: Hellraiser (1987), Nightbreed (1990), Clive Barker’s Salomé & The Forbidden (1998)]
After wanting to see this for some time, I have to admit I’m a bit underwhelmed. The story was decent, but I felt this sort of missed the mark, and ultimately wasn’t quite what I was looking for.
Portions were certainly enjoyable, though, particularly the detective work in trying to solve the mysteries Harry (Scott Bakula) was facing. I think it was during these sequences where I was most engaged, and I feel the movie did far better with showing us the mystery as opposed to the overly supernatural, more ridiculous parts of the story.
Bakula made for a pretty good main character. I’m not that familiar with him, but I definitely liked him here. Famke Janssen (who I know best as Jean Grey from the X-Men movies) was decent, but I didn’t care that much for her character. Barry Del Sherman shined here, and was perhaps the stand-out performance of the film, as his character seemed almost inhuman every time he was on-screen. I also enjoyed both Joel Swetow and Lorin Stewart. Daniel von Bargen didn’t do it for me, though, and his over-the-top character was pretty meh. Related, Kevin J. O’Connor didn’t wow me either.
Honestly, Lord of Illusions reminded me a lot of Wishmaster, albeit with far worse special effects (seriously, the special effects here, even for the 1990’s, are mostly awful). I had a lot more fun with Wishmaster than I did this one, though, and I can’t put my tongue on exactly why I kept thinking of that flick while watching this.
It’s true that the film ran a bit long (it’s about an hour and 50 minutes), but even if it was cut down a bit, I get the sense it wouldn’t do that much to boost my entertainment. The gore, when it popped up, was decently solid, and again, I thought the story itself was interesting (and the middle portion of the film pretty great), but overall, while I’d probably watch this one again, it wouldn’t be high on the list.
I’ll say this for it, though: Lord of Illusions had some strong ambitions, and it definitely had potential (that spinning sword trick and the resulting suspense was top notch). It just wasn’t what I was hoping for. It may still be worth a watch, though, if you’ve passed it up in the past.
Directed by Tim Burton [Other horror films: Sleepy Hollow (1999), Dark Shadows (2012)]
This Tim Burton movie is pretty much the type of musical you’d expect from him – overly dark and depressing, gory, and pretty damn tragic when the credits begin rolling, which all work to it’s credit.
Since this is a Burton movie, the cast is just as good as you’d hope for. Of course Johnny Depp does an amazing job playing a man who is very quickly losing the little sanity he had to begin with (the whole of the finale was a fantastically gory and manic conclusion), and is a treat to see, as are Alan Rickman and Helena Bonham Carter. Jayne Wisener doesn’t do much, but the story doesn’t really give her much to do, so that’s excusable. Two smaller performances I really liked here were Timothy Spall and Jamie Campbell Bower, as Spall gave that slimy, smarmy performance I liked from his portrayal of Pettigrew, and Bower gave us a fresh, innocent face which contrasted nicely with everything else on screen.
Given that there are so few musicals with horror elements mixed in, it’s hard to compare this one to the ideal horror-musical. I do know I liked the songs better in this one than I did from Repo! The Genetic Opera, but that’s more due to stylistic differences above anything else. That said, I don’t know how memorable most of the songs here are – something that is of mild concern.
Regardless, the story of revenge was well-done, and the splatter of gore, for a mainstream movie like this, was surprisingly good. There wasn’t much variety in the death scenes, which were generally just slit throats, but the blood did flow generously, which was good enough to me.
The tone of this one is just dark, and while the ending isn’t entirely down-hearted, it certainly lives up to it’s somber feel. Also worth noting, while the movie’s almost two hours, it doesn’t feel that long at all, mainly, I suspect, because of the songs. If you’re a fan of Burton, I don’t see why this film would let you down over any of his others, unless you couldn’t stomach the multiple slit throats. It’s an experience that’s not overly surprising if you’re a fan of Burton’s, but it is rewarding despite it’s tragic conclusion, even upon multiple viewings.
Jiggy's Horror Corner 