Tag: USA

Directed by Maria Lease [Other horror films: N/A]

This is a film that I’ve known about for a long time, and has been on television plenty of times in the past, but I’ve actively avoided, if only because I likely thought it was some type of Child’s Play rip-off. After seeing it, it’s obviously not, but that doesn’t make Dolly Dearest any better of a film.

As far as the story here goes, I think it’s fine. I sort of like the idea of a family uprooting themselves from Los Angeles to Mexico on a business decision, but I don’t know if there was quite enough done with this to really make it a big part of the film. The supernatural aspects weren’t special – a little girl (Candace Hutson) slowly becoming possessed, multiple dolls also becoming possessed – but they were serviceable enough despite occasionally looking quite cheap.

Sam Bottoms (Up from the Depths and Hunter’s Blood) made for a decent, if perhaps uninspired, lead. I was more impressed with Rip Torn (A Stranger Is Watching) and his amusing relationship with Chris Demetral, who plays Bottoms’ intelligent and rather witty son. Lupe Ontiveros (who also had small roles in films such as Candyman: Day of the Dead and Dark Mirror) was good for some cultural flavor, and her religious beliefs clashing with the rationality of Denise Crosby (Pet Sematary). The cast is generally around average, with Torn and Demetral being my personal strong points.

For a cheaper-looking film, I thought a few of the deaths were decent, and the first major one was even decently atmospheric, if not a wee tad clumsy in execution. And while gore isn’t a strong point, there is a painful injury with a sewing machine to look forward to during another decent death sequence.

I do think that the final 15 minutes or so are a bit lacking. The final possessed form of the girl wasn’t particularly great, and while the dolls were never great, they look pretty bad during the conclusion. And speaking of the conclusion, something about it feels awfully rushed in a straight-to-video feel (which, believe it or not, Dolly Dearest isn’t).

Dolly Dearest isn’t a terrible movie, as there’s some solid performances and a little charm here and there, maybe even perhaps a fun plot point or two. It’s definitely unremarkable, though, and I think it’s below average, but I could see how this might have some fans out there. It just wasn’t for me.

6/10

This is one of the films covered on Fight Evil’s podcast. Listen below as Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I discuss Dolly Dearest.

Directed by Tony Maylam [Other horror films: The Sins of Dorian Gray (1983), Split Second (1992)]

For a long time, this has often been one of the first slashers I recommend when asked by someone who doesn’t have a background in 80’s classics, as I’ve always found The Burning a very solid film. I still do, and though it may not be spectacular, it’s very much worth a look.

It has that classic slasher feel that fans of 80’s horror would love – a pretty solid opening origin, memorable special effects (that raft scene is the most referenced sequence in this film for a reason), and a pretty good antagonist in Cropsy (and Cropsy’s choice of weapon – garden shears – was inspired).

To an extent, I do think many performances are of the more forgettable variety. True, Dave (Jason Alexander, known mostly for a long-running role on Seinfeld) was pretty solid, defending both Alfred (Brian Backer) and Woodstock (Fisher Stevens) on multiple occasions. Glazer (Larry Joshua) definitely feels like a dickish bully (I love how he tries to drown Alfred, and flaunts it to the girls on the raft), and Alfred (who amusingly reminds me of a younger David Krumholtz) is okay in his own awkward way, but everyone else is either undercooked or merely average.

Admittedly, I did like Todd (Brian Matthews), but I don’t know if he stands out that well, and it’s the same with a lot of the women, such as Michelle (Leah Ayres) and Karen (Carolyn Houlihan, who graces us with one of the few nude scenes in the film). I wish I could have liked Eddy (Ned Eisenberg) a bit more, and I wish we had more scenes with Tiger (Shelley Bruce) and Sally (Carrick Glenn, who gave us a quick nude shower scene), so there was some room for improvement.

The raft scene in the film is great, with quality tensions and fantastic special effects, with fingers being cut off and the like. It’s easy to see why it stands out – while the other kills are decent, Cropsy’s massacre of five, what with the cinematography, was glorious (and of course, a lot of credit also goes to Tom Savini). This said, the ax to the face at the end is quite good also.

It might also go without saying, but the music – a sort of funky electronic style that wouldn’t feel out of place in an Italian film – is on point, especially during the opening credits.

As far as camp-based slashers, The Burning doesn’t reinvent the wheel by any means. I always enjoyed it more than Madman, but it doesn’t have the same pull as many of the Friday the 13th films. Still, it’s a solidly-made slasher that hits many of the right spots, and is definitely worth a watch if you’re a fan of classic slasher films.

7.5/10

This is one of the films covered on Fight Evil’s podcast. Listen below as Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I discuss this classic slasher.

Directed by Dominique Othenin-Girard [Other horror films: After Darkness (1985), Night Angel (1990), Omen IV: The Awakening (1991), The Hospice (1991)]

For the longest time, I thought of this entry as when the Halloween series started going downhill. Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers is still an okay movie, and due to a combination of performances and nostalgia, I still sort of like it, but it’s nowhere near as good as any of the previous four films.

I’ve never cared for what they did to some of the characters here. How they deal with Loomis, I can understand – desperation can do odd things. It’s more how they deal with Rachel. I think they could have gotten a lot more out of her, but alas, she’s not in the movie that long, and it doesn’t end with much fanfare. Tina is a nice addition (though I probably would have preferred it if they brought back Leslie L. Rohland’s Lindsey), but like Rachel, she’s not given that much plot to really deal with either.

Regardless of that, I do think the movie moves at a decently brisk pace, and most of it is painless. The mental connection that Jamie has with her uncle, Myers, is a bit odd, as is that tattoo that pops up on Michael’s arm out of nowhere, not to mention the guy in a black coat and steel-tipped boots, but all of that is just set-up for the next film, and doesn’t really matter as far as this one is concerned.

Actually, when I was a kid, I remembered always liking the mystery guy in the steel-tipped shoes. I probably didn’t catch back then that he had a matching tattoo with Michael Myers, but I dug how he just popped up a few random times, and then participated in the surprising finale. Given that nothing is explained here – luckily, the word “Thorn” never comes up – I can see it turning people off, but at least it theoretically gets the audience pumped for the following film.

Donald Pleasence as Loomis is great here. He’s a bit controlling at times, and the way he handles Jamie used to bother me, but after seeing this multiple times, I get that he’s really trying hard to finish this whole thing. Danielle Harris is non-verbal for the first portion of the film, but she does just as well as ever, and during the finale at the Myers’ house, her performance was great.

Other returning faces make less of an impact, such as Beau Starr (Sheriff Meeker) and Ellie Cornell (Rachel). It’s nice to see both of them back, but neither one really does all that much, which is disappointing. Wendy Foxworth (Tina) made for a nice new character, and I love how close she is with Jamie, but she doesn’t really last that long. Other performances worth mentioning include Betty Carvalho and Troy Evans.

Being a Halloween movie, none of the kills are particularly gory, but most of them are pretty fun, such as stabbing a guy with a pitchfork or throwing a guy out of a window to hang. I think the best kill was Myers using a gardening tool (I think it’s called a cultivator, or something like that) and just fucking someone up. What was particularly funny about that scene is that he scraped the guy’s car beforehand, just to piss him off. Good times.

The ending being what it is, Halloween 5 has always felt rather mixed to me. I think the movie goes pretty quickly, and it can be fun to watch, but when you compare it to the previous films in the series, it’s definitely nowhere near as strong. I struggled a bit with the rating, and I don’t really know if the film is above average, but I think it’s close enough that I can be generous. It’s not a bad movie, but if you have access to The Return of Michael Myers, I don’t really know why anyone would watch this instead.

7.5/10

Directed by Dwight H. Little [Other horror films: The Phantom of the Opera (1989), Anacondas: The Hunt for the Blood Orchid (2004), Natty Knocks (2023)]

Giving us the first Myers since Halloween II, I always personally found this movie a lot of fun. God knows I watched it a lot when I was a kid on AMC, and it’s not impossible that I even saw this movie before I laid eyes on the first. Because of this nostalgia, let’s just admit that the movie’s almost perfect.

I mean, it’s not perfect, but honestly, what is there to really dislike about this one? I find the atmosphere of the finest quality, a good example being the opening, which showcases Halloween decorations in rural farmland. There’s something quite creepy about it, and it just seems a fantastic way to open the film, and always struck me as somewhat unique.

Another of my favorite portions of the film would be when the group tries to protect Jamie from Myers, and shut themselves in the Sheriff’s house, and so you have Jaime, Rachel, the Sheriff, the Sheriff’s daughter, Loomis, Deputy Logan, and Brady all there. One-by-one, though they’re locked in tight, they get picked off (and that battery-powered radio in the dark of the basement was creepy in of itself) slowly. It’s just a great sequence, and I also loved it.

Though focusing on Myers’ niece, Jamie (played by Danielle Harris) keeps some of that family element, it’s fair to say I think I liked the cast of the first Halloween more. That said, I think most of the central performances here, including Danielle Harris, bring a lot to the table.

I’m not usually fond of most performances from children, but I think Danielle Harris was fantastic. She has a strong emotional range, and it’s just impressive, especially as the movie carries on. Ellie Cornell was strong too, and worked well and believably with Harris. Beau Starr is no Charles Cyphers, but he makes for an okay sheriff. Michael Pataki (who I’ve recently seen in Graduation Day) was nice to see for his scenes, Kathleen Kinmont and Sasha Jenson make for okay side characters, and George Sullivan looked great sitting in a chair in the dark.

Of course, one of my favorite performances is that of Donald Pleasence. It’s in this movie that he gives one of my favorite quotes (calling Myers “evil on two legs”), and I love every time he’s on screen, from his certainty at the ambulance crash site that Michael escaped to the gas station to his conversation with the drunk religious guy to his approaching the Haddonfield police, asking for Brackett. He’s just such an engaging character, no matter what Pataki’s character might have to say about him.

Another thing I rather enjoy about the film are the kills. None of them are particularly gory (save maybe one toward the end when someone gets their throat ripped open), but they’re all well done, from someone being stabbed through the gut with a shotgun to heads being crushed. There’s solid suspense here, such as the opening dream of Jamie’s to the scene in the general store (itself another favorite scene of mine), and that’s to be commended.

Something about Halloween 4 also works in it’s favor, but it’s hard to put into words. The general store scene I mentioned above is part of it, another being Rachel looking for Jamie on the dark empty streets. That is a strong sequence – she briefly sees Myers, but gets away by climbing over fences and cutting through backyards – before she finds Jamie. Then the sheriff and Loomis find the pair before escaping a bunch of fake Myers and the real one.

It’s almost a sense of closeness, which isn’t quite right. I’m reminded of The Prowler, where I got a similar feeling. Some of the action took place only blocks away from a major party, and yet it was a private affair. You know there were people in their houses when Jamie and Rachel were both screaming for each other, and yet it was like they were the only ones in existence. It just gives the film a vibe I can’t quite explain, and I love it.

The ending of this one (and in fact, the main background of the next couple of movies, being the Curse of Thorn) might be a bit atypical, but I personally dug the final scene. It’s foreshadowed a few times, and I never had an issue with it, especially since Loomis loses it and goes for his gun, screaming “NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!” I mean, in my mind, that’s how you end a movie. It’s nowhere near as good as the first movie’s conclusion, but it’s still worth it.

Ever since I was a kid, I’ve loved this movie. I love the vibe, the story, many of the characters, the opening rural Halloween decorations, the gas station sequence (which always reminded me of another favorite from childhood, being Children of the Corn) – this movie is one that I can’t say no to. I always have fun with it, and it’s a solid addition to the series.

9/10

Directed by Tommy Lee Wallace [Other horror films: Fright Night Part 2 (1988), It (1990), Danger Island (1992), Vampires: Los Muertos (2002)]

There seems to primarily be two vocal camps about this film – one camp finds it a pretty enjoyable film, the other camp despises it for multiple reasons (from no Michael Myers to a silly story). Far be it for me to say that film is perfect, as it’s not, but I find myself firmly in the first camp, and Season of the Witch is a definite favorite of mine when it comes to Halloween-themed movies.

Plenty of reasons exist for this. I find the cast pretty solid, the story (though somewhat undercooked at certain parts) intriguing, the mystery and setting pretty fun, and that finale is literally excellent in every way.

Tom Atkins (of The Fog and Night of the Creeps) isn’t the most likable lead I’ve ever seen in a movie, but he does a good job at coming across as your every-day average man. Stacey Nelkin was cute in her role, and sort of fun, but ultimately not all that crucial. I think that Dan O’Herlihy was great, though, in his role of Cochran, and I sort of loved how Santa Mira treated him as a God – it made his character even more fun.

While the special effects were occasionally questionable, I do think the effect of the masks, what with the insects and snakes, is damn terrifying, and that first test sequence is fantastic, and given the conclusion of the film, you can only wonder exactly how many more slithery bois are now exploring their new lands. Also, while sort of hokey, I liked the electrical storm those computer chips caused near the finale.

The detective work that Atkins and Nelkin do isn’t anything special, but it was fun, if not a bit obvious. Their connection was never really the deepest, but watching them sleuth around a company-ran town, complete with over-surveillance and patrols, not to mention a curfew, really possessed a quality aura.

And as I said, I find the ending spectacular. While the whole android thing was 50/50 (I sort of like how it was partially down-played, and not necessarily obvious at first), the final couple of minutes was amazing. I loved the shots of children trick ‘r treating about an hour and ten minutes in (showing just how wide-spread Silver Shamrock’s reach is, along with showing that they even have vans with loudspeakers reminding kids to get home), and in particular, that Phoenix, Arizona shot, with the silhouettes, just looks amazing.

Silver Shamrock’s commercials have an incredibly catchy jingle, even catchier than The Stuff’s (Can’t get enough OF THE STUFF!), and I just love their brand. I’m not so sure of the pagan rituals and ancient Celtic rites, but with a jingle that catchy, how could they be wrong?

I get it – there’s no Michael Myers in the movie, and this is definitely not a slasher. As a huge fan of the first two movies, I can understand the disappointment. Still, I think this movie has a lot going for it, and were it not connected to the Halloween series, a big part of me says that this would be a bit more respected (though I am seeing more positive views nowadays than I did even five years ago, so it’s a start).

Halloween III: Season of the Witch is not flawless, but it is fantastic in many ways, and I utterly adore it and all of it’s Celtic, pagan joy.

8.5/10

Directed by Michael Dougherty [Other horror films: Krampus (2015)]

Perhaps one of my favorite horror anthologies, Trick ‘r Treat is a pure treat every time I see it. I love the way the multiple stories here interweave yet also have their own strong individual feel and engage with different genres (whether it be serial killers, zombie children, killer principals, werewolves, what have you). A very strong film, Trick ‘r Treat sets the bar very high.

Following the jumbled timeline throughout the movie can be fun, though it’s not even necessary in some cases. If you missed the couple from the opening bumping into a young woman looking for safety from a serial killer, you didn’t miss anything important, but it was a nice little scene (and the pair also pop up in a smaller cameo later).

The film has a very comic-book influenced feel (not too dissimilar from Creepshow), which goes well with the style and multiple subgenres the movie deals with. The atmosphere is top-notch (especially during the Halloween School Bus Massacre segment as it takes place in that creepy quarry, and the flashback in that segment had a great mood too), and while the special effects aren’t generally special, I do think the music is quite note-worthy at times (such as during the werewolf transformation), and the whole of the film has a fantastic Halloween vibe that few movies (aside from, of course, Halloween, Halloween III, and Halloween 4) can really match.

It’s hard to pin-point the best performance. I was always partial to Anna Paquin (X-Men, Blue State, and as for horror, Darkness and Scream 4) as I really loved her character, finding her so much more attractive than her sister and friends. Playing her sister is Lauren Lee Smith (who was in the terribly dated show Mutant X that I actually saw a handful of episodes from), who’s character was a bit of an annoyance, but she did share a few good moments with Paquin’s character. Samm Todd and Jean-Luc Bilodeau were solid.

Dylan Baker was a lot of fun in his segment, and while I can’t say if I recognize him from the weaksauce comedy Head of State, the great Spider-Man 2, or even Fido, but I do recognize him, and his role here is great. Britt McKillip was bratty, but fun (and her eye roll after being chastised for using a bad word is totally a mood). Of course Brian Cox (The Autopsy of Jane Doe, The Ring, and most memorably for me, X2) was great here (and his character had some nice depth to him).

As for the best segment, I personally lean toward the Halloween School Bus Massacre, as that back-story behind the massacre was both brutal and interesting, the atmosphere at the quarry is fantastic, and the fact that you can’t at all fault Rhonda (Samm Todd) for her actions. I enjoyed the Surprise Party, though some of the dialogue is a bit on-the-nose (which may not be that noticeable on a first-time watch, but there you go). The Sam-centrict story with the demonic thing fighting Cox was fun, and even more fun was Dylan Baker’s segment (with some quality humor added), but neither one had that oompf Halloween School Bus Massacre did.

Which isn’t to say that those segments bring down the film, because as everything here is interconnected in some way, the whole of the movie is pretty solid. It would have been sort of nice to get a little idea of what Sam actually was (I’m leaning toward a vengeful personification of traditional Halloween), but it definitely wasn’t necessary in order to enjoy the film.

Special effects throughout are great, with the spotlight really going to the zombie kids at the bottom of the quarry. The werewolf transformation sequence (matched with that music) makes for a great time, and the long fight between Sam and Brian Cox had a lot of solid stuff going on. What makes all of this better is how digestible it is, as the story goes for just 78 minutes (with credits, the movie’s listed as 82 minutes), and it’s done so beautifully.

Trick ‘r Treat is a fantastic film. It amazes me just how good it actually is, and for a Halloween night, or any night, it’s a great choice, with fun, interwoven tales that really carry with them the essence of the holiday.

9/10

Directed by John Irvin [Other horror films: Haunted: The Ferryman (1974), Dot.Kill (2005)]

I have to admit that I wish I liked this one more than I do. I’ve seen it once before, but didn’t remember too much about it aside from the general idea and a few scenes. And damn it, just that alone was enough for me to consider the movie good, but after seeing it with fresh eyes and keeping my expectations in check, I need to be honest and admit that I think Ghost Story had potential but ultimately faltered.

The cast is stellar here, my favorites being the old-timers in the Chowder Society, being Fred Astaire, Melvyn Douglas, Douglas Fairbanks Jr., and John Houseman. I don’t particularly know any of these actors well (Melvyn Douglas being the potential exception, as I’ve seen him in The Old Dark House, The Vampire Bat, and The Changeling), but I think they work fantastically off each other. They strike me as life-long friends, and to quote Icona Pop, “I love it.”

Elsewise, we have Craig Wasson and Alice Krige. Wasson, of course, was Neil in Dream Warriors (he looks different enough here that if you didn’t catch on to this fact, I wouldn’t blame you), and he was certainly decent in that film, but here, he doesn’t really make a huge impression (even during his extended flashback). As for Krige, I definitely dug her character in the flashback (along with feeling rather bad for her), but for most of the film, she doesn’t especially overwhelm with personality.

I think many of the film’s better scenes take place during the Chowder Society flashback in the latter half of the film, and much of what came before felt somewhat plodding, especially Wasson’s flashback, little of which really interested me (and there wasn’t much of an ommpf at the end to even make the sequence worth it). I mean, the location was great – a small, New England town enshrouded in snowfall – but the story, while occasionally atmospheric, just fell flat, and the whole subplot with the escaped asylum patients didn’t do a thing for me.

Certainly I respect the way they decided to tell the story here, what with multiple flashbacks with some tense scenes in-between during the present-day, but I can’t help but think that if we had seen a bit more of the younger Chowder Society (Ken Olin, Kurt Johnson, Tim Choate, and Mark Chamberlin), things would have maybe smoothed out a bit (not that any of those four are near as good as their older counterparts, but those sequences were still enjoyable and, near the ending, tragic). That said, it still made for a fine idea, it’s just the execution felt a bit weak.

And alas, I think that could really be said for the whole of the film. I wish I could enjoy the film more than I do, but it just runs on too long with too little content of interest, and ultimately, I think Ghost Story, while it has some strong points, ultimately ends up only of moderate interest.

6/10

Directed by Sidney Lanfield [Other horror films: N/A]

Perhaps one of the most famous versions of the story, the 1939 Hound of the Baskervilles is a fantastic movie that has a great cast, a quality moody atmosphere, and the most well-rounded mystery of the adaptations thus far.

So to put this in context, the same day I watched this version, I also watched the two silent versions (1914 and 1929) along with the 1937 German talkie. All of those had their strong points, of course, but along with the 1959 Hammer adaptation, this version is one of the strongest out there, and it really shows.

The setting, being the British moors, are great in all the movies, but it’s not really until this one when they really start to pop and stand out. That scene in which the butler is signaling from the castle (or, in this movie Baskerville Hall) to a mysterious person across the moors really shows just how eerie (and captivating) the landscape is, even in black-and-white.

And that cast – Basil Rathbone (Son of Frankenstein, The Black Sleep, The Black Cat from 1941, and Queen of Blood) does a fantastic Sherlock Holmes, and though I thought that Bruno Güttner did well in the 1937 version, Rathbone here takes the cake, especially with that impersonation of the salesman on the moors – while he had done a similar thing in multiple versions before (1929 and 1937), this is the first time he’s intentionally ran into Watson in disguise, which leads to a decently amusing scene.

On that note, playing Watson, Nigel Bruce was decent. I will admit to thinking more of Fritz Odemar’s 1937 version, as this one is more of the bumbling side-kick, but he’s still a good character. Morton Lowry isn’t a name I know, but he does pretty swell as Stapleton, and though he lacks some of the most interesting aspects of previous actors who’ve taken the part, his performance at the end was strong. Henry Baskerville was never a character I much cared for, but Richard Greene (The Black Castle) does a great job with him here, and really gives the character more life.

John Carradine played Barryman (a replacement of the previous adaptations’ Barrymore) and did so well, though I don’t feel he’s as distinctive as the character’s been in the past. Lionel Atwill is really the first actor to give prominence to Dr. Mortimer, and him being a big name in the genre (Island of Lost Souls and The Strange Door), he’s nice to see. Playing Frankland (a character who had a small role in the beginning of the 1929 version, but wasn’t really seen in any others), Barlowe Borland was pretty fun, in a cantankerous way.

Of course, being a film from this time, much of the dialogue is pretty pithy and amusing, and while that holds true for the 1937 German version, it’s a bit more memorable here. And likewise, that scene in which Sherlock Holmes is examining the cane, and using deductions to find out about the doctor, was both in this version and the 1937 version. I think it’s a good scene in both, but because this dialogue felt a bit more close to me, I’d give this one the edge.

And that ending reference to Sherlock Holmes’ heroin use – just beautiful.

When it comes to this story, I do believe this is one of the most enjoyable versions out there, and if you’re a fan of classic horror, you should do yourself a favor and check this gem out.

8.5/10