Tag: USA

Directed by Brandon Tobatto [Other horror films: Hacked Up for Barbecue (2009), Loons (2016), Cottontail (2017), Sugarplum (2017), Madhouse (2020)]

For a lower budget film, Loon is okay. It’s not great, and it’s possible calling it good is a stretch, but there’s a somewhat interesting story here, and though I don’t think I’d go back to it, I can appreciate what they were going for.

Truth be told, I expected most of the film to deal with the group of friends going to explore an old carnival attraction – something like a lower budget version of Haunt. You can soon see that’s not where the film’s going, as it switches gears to focus on a police detective (Ryan Gray) and his attempts to go after the killer stalking the woods around the carnival attraction, which is at least different.

Obviously, being a film of this budget, some of the acting is not great. I do think that Tara Moates and Trevor Moates worked as siblings, and given the last names, it’s quite possible that’s the case. During the opening flashback, Kerissa Porter and Randy Porter were good also, and I thought it was sort of a shame that opening scene was all they got. Otherwise, no one really did that well – Ryan Gray had some okay moments, as did both Anne Tuck and John Nieman, but everything else was just ehh.

What’s more was some of the dialogue felt iffy, and the delivery especially stood out as lower quality. I don’t think that really hurt the movie as a whole – God knows I’ve seen worse in other films – but it was noticeable at times.

Also noticeable was the fact that, save for a kill toward the end of the film, there weren’t many kills here worth seeing. The killer primarily used a bat to beat people to death, which is good and all, but after a while, I can’t say it’s not a little repetitive.

Even so, from my understanding, the budget of Loon was around $100, and I know that they probably got more out of the money than I could have. I don’t think the movie’s good, but I do think they did well with what they had, and though there were aspects of the story I wasn’t a fan of (I would have liked it if Tara Moates and Trevor Moates had a bit more to do in the second half of the movie), it’s not a terrible film if you know what you’re going into.

5.5/10

Directed by Jeff Crook [Other horror films: N/A] & Josh Crook [Other horror films: Demon Hole (2017)]

In many ways, Salvage is a tragic film. It’s a movie that has potential, but despite some good ideas, I just don’t know if it’s worth it, and I definitely think the finale could have been done better.

Ambitious in some ways, especially with the twist to the story, I can appreciate Salvage for what it’s attempting to go for. It’s perhaps the type of movie that, after you’re finished watching it, you might want to read some theories online and try to make sense of it. In truth, it’s not that complicated, but it is somewhat confusing, because I just felt there wasn’t a clear enough answer given at the conclusion.

I think Lauren Currie Lewis did well with the role, especially for an individual who doesn’t have that much acting experience. Chris Ferry’s (Rise of the Dead) character never really got that much character, but he looked threatening when he was peeling faces off, so that’s not such a bad thing. Cody Darbe was occasionally amusing, but boy, was he a bad boyfriend.

Really, having seen this film once before (though I admit, it has been at least eight years, if not longer), I was hoping that the time away would allow me to come into this one fresh, and enjoy it just a bit more, or at least enough to see the uniqueness of the film’s answers. And I do sort of like what the film’s finale was going for, but I just don’t think it was executed as well as it could have been.

Salvage isn’t an easy movie for me to dislike, because I keep wanting to give credit to the film’s explanation of a Groundhog Day-esque situation, but so much of the film feels disjointed and dream-like (for the last third of the film, I was assuming all of it was a dream, which isn’t correct, but it’s also not incorrect, because that’s how we roll brahs) that it’s hard to really enjoy. 

Look, Salvage isn’t terrible. I don’t think it’s necessarily good, but it’s not terrible. I think it’s a movie that had more ambitions than they could really succeed in, but maybe if I watch this a third time, with the ending in mind going in, maybe it’ll do more for me.

5.5/10

Directed by Laurence Harvey [Other horror films: N/A]

I didn’t really know anything about what to expect going into Welcome to Arrow Beach, and now that I’ve seen it, I’m having somewhat of a difficult time deciding how I feel. On the one hand, the film is a bit slow, and I don’t know if the three-minute finale makes up for the sluggish nature of the first hour and a half. On the other, I did sort of dig the story and what they were going for.

Honestly, it reminded me a bit of two other films from the first half of the 1970’s, being Terror House and Warlock Moon. Both were a bit slow, both possessed a very 70’s free vibe, and both dealt with young women getting into a situation that’s not easy to escape from, if escape even is possible. Welcome to Arrow Beach fits that perfectly.

The story is simple enough – a hitch-hiking young woman stays over at someone’s beachside house, and finds out that the owner isn’t the most pleasant individual. But when she escapes and tells the police, because she’s a free-love hippie type, credibility isn’t her high point (it doesn’t help that drugs are planted on her). And after a few more things happen, and she decides to go back to the house to get some proof.

Really, for as much time is spent on somewhat tedious scenes (for instance, Stuart Whitman as the deputy is beginning to believe the hippie girl’s story, but that subplot never goes anywhere), I shouldn’t feel as defensive as I do about the film. There’s only three action-packed sequences, and while they’re all good, I don’t know if it’s enough.

Meg Foster did a great job as the main character. Foster (The Legend of Sleepy Hollow, The Wind, They Live, Stepfather II, and The Lords of Salem) really has that free-love spirit I associate with the hippie subculture, and her referring to her breasts as “secondary sexual characteristics” pegged her for an amusing sort. This film is pretty early in her career, and I think for a younger actress she did really well here.

Laurence Harvey (who died in late 1973, and also appeared in Night Watch) played a cool cat out to make a killing (for any fans of the DC comic book series The Atom, specifically the 1960’s series, #27, you might catch that highly obscure reference), and Harvey did a good job, though I wish we got a bit more backstory on him. Ditto Joanna Pettet (The Evil and Double Exposure), who played Harvey’s sister.

I like the two main cops – John Ireland and Stuart Whitman. Ireland (I Saw What You Did, Miami Golem, Satan’s Cheerleaders, Day of the Nightmare, Terror Night, The House of Seven Corpses, and The Graveyard Story) was fun with his rugged, conservative cop route (in fact, he’s running for re-election as sheriff, and gets asked by a student paper his political beliefs – anti-porn, anti-abortion, anti-fun), and with more humanity, there’s Whitman (Revenge!, Vultures, Eaten Alive, and Night of the Lepus), who does pretty well, but again, his story doesn’t really go anywhere. Two others, being Janear Hines and David Macklin, stood out as well.

Welcome to Arrow Beach did do a few interesting things. One of the kills was during a photo shoot, and in little flashes, it goes from a woman being photographed to being chopped apart (we don’t see the extent of the damage, but there is definitely dismemberment involved). Another character opens a refrigerator, and seeing a bag of hamburger, has a flashback-type thing – this flashback isn’t the whole screen, though, it’s superimposed on the hamburger. It’s not amazing, but it did give this film a few unique portions.

This is a really hard film to get a grasp on. I liked a decent amount about it, and it was mostly engaging, but at the same time, I really think there should have been more meat to the story, Some background on Harvey’s character would have been nice (all we get were a few disjointed flashbacks), but even so, if you liked the vibe of films like Warlock Moon and Terror House, this is worth seeing.

7/10

Directed by Hernan Cardenas [Other horror films: N/A]

There are some movies that I just wish were better, either because I think the concept is pretty cool or the film has a lot of potential. Island Claws is one of them. While it could have been a nice little treat from the early 80’s, instead it’s just mostly slow and really doesn’t have much in the way of reward.

A small part of this perception may be the print I watch, which was likely a VHS rip, and as such, was quite low in quality. Specifically, sequences that took place at night were quite difficult to decipher, and though I doubt my rating would change much had it been Blu-ray quality, that is worth taking note of.

Either way, it’s no doubt a slow movie, with it’s plot just crawling along and rarely doing much to pull the audience back in. There were a few good sequences – a man who lived in an old bus (not typical living quarters, but it looked comfortable) gets attacked by crabs, and the bus catches fire and blows up. And now that I think about it, that might be the only sequence I think of as actually good.

There were only five performances of note, and that’s being generous. Robert Lansing (Empire of the Ants, 4D Man, and The Nest) was pretty decent as one of the leads, working well with Steve Hanks (12/12/12) and Jo McDonnell. Barry Nelson (who some may recognize from The Shining) was good also, though he didn’t stand out as much as I’d have liked. Tony Rigo (who reminded me a little of Dick Miller) had his moments also.

Even so, the story here was just so slow, and even the occasionally interesting elements thrown in (such as some racism toward Haitians who are hiding out on the island) just didn’t amount to much in the end, especially when the final battle against the sole giant crab was so damn luckluster. I mean, I guess the crab looked okay, but when you have a choice between a film like this and Corman’s Attack of the Crab Monsters, and you’re leaning Corman, you know the movie has a problem.

Certainly there is a little charm to be had here. I personally liked the small-town feel, especially a scene early on in a rambunctious bar where everyone knew everyone. It was nice and homey. That doesn’t make the film worth seeing though, and despite hoping that I could like this (and I gave it two chances – I first saw this one some years back), it’s just really not that good.

5.5/10

Directed by William Bindley [Other horror films: N/A]

In the late 1990’s and early 2000’s, religiously-themed horror films were all the rage, as the Millennium was upon us, and religious people are scared of even numbers, and as such, films such as Stigmata, End of Days, Lost Souls, The Ninth Gate, The Calling, and Bless the Child were borne into the world. Few of these are good, and while The Eighteenth Angel isn’t without merits, it still struggles to really stand out.

I will admit it was sort of funny seeing Christopher McDonald take the lead here. While McDonald has done a little horror in the past (1990’s Playroom), I know him almost solely from one of my favorite comedies, being Happy Gilmore (Shooter McGavin), but despite being unable to take him seriously at first, he did a really good job. Playing his daughter was Rachael Leigh Cook, and while her agency was limited toward the last third of the film, she had a strong start.

Not too many others here are all that memorable. Stanley Tucci has a few good scenes, most of those coming in the last thirty minutes or so. Wendy Crewson (Skullduggery of all places) didn’t have much to do past the first five minutes, but she was okay. Maximilian Schnell (Vampires) was a bit generic, but I guess John Crowther’s flowing hair was nice.

Actually, the story here was decent. It dealt with an Etruscian cult who, while buying into the framework of Christianity, instead dedicated their works to Satan, and by binding science and religion, hoped to fulfill some prophecy from the Etruscian Book of the Dead by using genetics, modeling, horses, and beauty. Yeah, being prophecy, not much is clear, but hey, that’s religion for you.

As it was, the conclusion to this film isn’t one that I’d personally call satisfactory, but I will give it points for being a bit different than I’d have expected. It was sort of ridiculous in some ways, but still, it was different.

To the film’s credit, there were some amusing kills in the film. One character is attacked and maimed by a bunch of cats, and another befalls a painful-looking spike-thingy. Even another is almost strangled by a pair of horses, which was a scene that was probably a lot more amusing to me than it should have been, given the emotional punch it did almost pack.

While The Eighteenth Angel did take a little bit to really become something I’d consider engaging, I will also say that the finale as a whole was pretty thrilling. I still think the film’s a bit below average, but The Eighteenth Angel did pick up nicely, and despite not personally caring for the final scenes, at least it picked up the pace.

Overall, when it comes to end-of-the-century horror, The Eighteenth Angel isn’t terrible. I don’t think there’s enough here for it to be good, but if you’re looking for some religiously-themed horror that is perhaps a bit more obscure, and one that has some occasionally decent scenes of cats attacking people, this may be a movie to look into.

6/10

Directed by Joe May [Other horror films: Hilde Warren und der Tod (1917)]

The Invisible Man is perhaps my favorite of the Universal classics, and so setting out to watch this sequel, it was hard for me to not expect to be let-down. As it is, The Invisible Man Returns is an okay film, probably around average, but I dare say that it pales in comparison to the first movie.

As far as the strong points go, this movie has more than a few. There are some pretty good sequences (the best of which were police in gas masks trying to smoke out the invisible man, as his outline would be noticeable in the smoke), good performances, and a surprisingly decent conclusion. All of this is good, but once everything else is taken into account, the film still feels around average.

The 1933 classic wasted no time – we began with an iconic scene, and every scene thereafter was worth seeing. That doesn’t strike me as being the case here. Sure, this movie is only ten minutes longer than the first one, but some parts don’t feel as engaging, and though the performances work well, not every part of the story does.

Certainly seeing a young Vincent Prince (in his first horror movie role, second if you count 1939’s Tower of London) is great, even if you only see him in the final scene. Just hearing his voice is good enough for me. Cedric Hardwicke’s character was terrible, but Hardwicke (who just filmed The Hunchback of Notre Dame, and did The Ghost of Frankenstein shortly after this) was as fine as he always is. John Sutton (Return of the Fly) and Nan Grey (Dracula’s Daughter) were both solid, Sutton standing out as a nice willing accomplice to Price’s invisible form.

Even so, the film largely feels more of the same. It’s a decent story, what with a background of an innocent man (Price) attempting to prove his innocence, but it’s also not near as charming as the first film, and despite some good scenes here and there, such as Price tormenting another character by pretending to be a ghost, it’s hard to say this is entirely worth seeing.

Still, The Invisible Man Returns is a fine film. It’s not great, and I’d probably say it’s around average, but it’s not shabby. It’s just not near as memorable or iconic, despite Price’s early role, as the classic 1933 movie.

7/10

Directed by Francis D. Lyon [Other horror films: Castle of Evil (1966)]

Cult of the Cobra is a film I’ve known about for a while, and I was lucky enough to notice that TCM was playing it, and given that I’ve never seen it airing on television before, I knew it was one I had to watch. As it is, Cult of the Cobra can be somewhat entertaining, but it’s also a bit on the slow side, and perhaps not as interesting as I would have hoped.

I do think the basic plot is good, though. Six American soldiers in some nondescript Asian country witness a ritual that wasn’t for their eyes, and after being found out (one of the soldiers, who was a bit intoxicated, tried taking a picture of the ritual), have a curse placed on them, and one-by-one, they’ll be killed by snakes. It’s a nice little plot and the set-up was solid, but when the soldiers get back to the USA, things become mildly more middling.

There’s also a mysterious woman who gets involved with one of the soldiers, and is she perhaps a woman who can turn into a snake (or even better, a snake who can pretend to be a woman)? In that way, portions of this feel a bit like Cat People. I probably enjoyed it a bit more than Cat People, if only because cobras are more slithery than cats, but it’s the same basic idea. There is a solid silhouette sequence here toward the end, but there’s nothing near as good as the pool scene from Val Lewton’s classic.

Faith Domergue (It Came from Beneath the Sea, The House of Seven Corpses, This Island Earth, So Evil, My Sister) was okay as the mysterious, potentially snaky woman. She didn’t have a ton of personality, but I guess that was somewhat the point. Of the six soldiers (William Reynolds, Jack Kelly, Marshall Thompson, David Janssen, James Dobson, and Richard Long), only three, being Richard Long (House on Haunted Hill), David Janssen (Moon of the Wolf), and Marshall Thompson (Fiend Without a Face), made anything close to a lasting impression. Kathleen Hughes has one solid scene, but most of the time, her character was forgettable.

Obviously, Cult of the Cobra isn’t without some charm, and I sort of like aspects of the film, but it does drag for a not-inconsiderate portion of the middle section, and given that so few of the kills are great, this one, while competent, may not end up being that memorable, which is not only mildly damning, but also rather disappointing.

6.5/10

Directed by Frank Zagarino [Other horror films: N/A]

The last time I saw this one, which was also the first time, it was on the now-defunct Chiller channel. Occasionally Chiller played decent films, but Spiker shouldn’t be confused with one of those, and is really quite a poor film.

In this film’s defense, the kills aren’t bad. The killer uses railroad spikes (hence being known as the ‘Spiker’), and he stabs people through the throat, in the back, in the head, all that fine stuff. He’s also gifted at spike-throwing, and manages to throw quite well from a good distance and impale people from afar, which would make a quality addition to the Summer Olympics.

As far as positive elements go, if I’m being honest, that’s about it.

The story here just isn’t good. I get the sense that maybe there’s supposed to be a bit more to it (they make a little deal out of the fact one of the girls looks just like her aunt, and I’m guessing that she was supposed to be the daughter of the Spiker, but they just didn’t want to film it or something). The plot is just generic and weak with little going for it.

Of the six main teens (Giselle Rodriguez, Matt Jared, Ginger Kroll, Josh Folan, Elena Tover, and Adam Shonkwiler), the only performance I actually liked was Tover’s. She was sort of the generic spiritual, goth-ish girl, but she at least had personality, which was far better than the lead, Rodriguez, who I admit I thought was actively bad. Frank Zagarino (who also directed this film) looked unique, but I can’t say he’s that memorable, and the groundskeeper, played by David ‘Shark’ Fralick (Uncle Sam) was okay, I guess, if it was his idea to play a character that was functionally pointless.

In fact, the whole ending was somewhat pointless, and if you think you’re watching a movie that’s going to have any type of normal conclusion or closure of any type, boy, are you in for a fun time. Spiker’s ending was somewhat ballsy, as I don’t know many directors who’d want to end a film in such a shitty manner. Maybe if it had been executed differently, it could have worked, but the way they did it here just seemed more than a little lacking.

Spiker isn’t a film I have fond recollections of from the first time I saw it, and seeing it again, I can fairly say this movie isn’t good. At the time of this writing, it sports a 2.4/10 (with 459 votes), and though I don’t think it’s that bad, I get why many do. It’s not a good movie, and I’d not personally recommend it.

4.5/10

Directed by Douglas Cheek [Other horror films: N/A]

Some movies hit the right spots. Some movies do very little wrong, and get as much appreciation as possible. Some movies are Gods among cinema.

And C.H.U.D. is one of them.

Dramatic, to be sure, but true. C.H.U.D. is an almost perfect movie in every way. The story is quite good and possesses a true organic feel. The characters and plotlines are great, and how some characters don’t even meet others when investigating the same mystery is a wonderful touch. Everything fits together nicely, and it’s just a wonder to behold.

There’s so much to enjoy about the story. Four of the bigger characters, being the photographer (John Heard), the soup kitchen guy (Daniel Stern), the freelance reporter (J.C. Quinn), and the police captain (Christopher Curry) all have tangential connections – Curry and Heard don’t even meet up until the final three minutes of the film, and Heard had little idea of who Stern was when he ran into him in the sewers, and I doubt that either Stern or Curry had any idea that it was Quinn’s character who helped get Heard to start investigating it.

The story is just very well done. Heard’s wife (played by Kim Greist) doesn’t have a lot to do to start off with, but by the final thirty minutes of the film, she has her own subplot as she has to deal with some cannibalistic humanoid underground dwellers who are forcing their way into her apartment while her husband is trying to avoid the same things beneath the streets.

I just love this story. The movie doesn’t waste any time. Even the very first scene – which some movies would just use to show a random, unimportant victim, getting killed – is deeply crucial to the film, as that individual is a relation to one of the main characters, and is in fact one of the reasons these disappearances have been taken more seriously by police.

Not to mention the acronym C.H.U.D., which means multiple things (it’s a good thing that waste created what could be described as cannibalistic humanoid underground dwellers, or they would have had to scramble for new matching words), and I just love the sequence where we find out the true meaning, and it shows just how sinister George Martin’s character really is.

Christopher Curry is great, and when he was finally able to punch out the antagonist of the film, that was quality fun. Curry isn’t an actor I know, but he did really well, and I quite liked his emotional scene in the bar. John Heard (Cat People and Locusts) isn’t an actor I generally notice, but he did quite good here, and I just wish his character had more time to work with Curry’s. Playing Heard’s wife was Kim Greist (Manhunter), and when things started going down in her apartment building, she knew how to handle business.

Daniel Stern I know only from Home Alone and Leviathan, but he did fantastic, and I loved his growing working relationship with Curry’s character. J.C. Quinn was used well to move the plot a bit, and George Martin played a horrible, despicable character with great talent. We also get a small appearance from Frankie Faison (The Silence of the Lambs and Hannibal) and a longer appearance by John Goodman (Red State, Arachnophobia, 10 Cloverfield Lane, and the series Roseanne), an actor I love in pretty much anything. The first time I saw this film, I’m guessing Goodman’s appearance went right over my head, so noticing him here out of the blue was a beautiful moment for me.

The design of the cannibalistic hombres is great, particularly the glowing eyes (and at times, they reminded me of The Mole People). I enjoyed how they didn’t show us much of them – just the clawed hands popping out of the sewers every now and again – until late in the film, when we can experience them to our glory. Oh, and the soundtrack is fantastic. It’s subtle, but it’s fantastic, especially during the apartment attack.

Some movies just work. I enjoyed C.H.U.D. when I first saw it, and I enjoyed it immensely with this revisit of it. It’s a great 80’s movie, has a nice New York City vibe (as it was filmed in and under the city), and just works in ways that not too many horror films can. Highly recommended piece of 80’s cinema.

9/10