Tag: USA

Directed by Larry Cohen [Other horror films: It’s Alive (1974), God Told Me To (1976), It Lives Again (1978), Full Moon High (1981), Q (1982), Special Effects (1984), It’s Alive III: Island of the Alive (1987), A Return to Salem’s Lot (1987), Wicked Stepmother (1989), The Ambulance (1990)]

This is a goofy, generally pretty silly, movie, but even so, I do think the Stuff has enough going for it to counter that, and now that I’ve seen it twice, I can definitely say it has it’s place in 1980’s classics.

Going after the consumerism in the U.S. is an interesting direction for a horror flick to take, but this one does it well. I really like the occasional commercials that pop up (and that catchy jingle ensures that we can’t get enough of The Stuff), and it lends the movie a slightly more realistic feel. A company selling a dangerous product is the basis of capitalism, so the fact that the main character here, Mo, is an industrial saboteur, makes it all the more fun.

As Mo, Michael Moriarty is a lot of fun. His ridiculously funny Southern accent really gives the character more feeling, and he certainly seems skilled in his job, as we see throughout the film. I don’t really know Moriarty from anything (Troll being the exception, and I barely recall him in that), so it’s nice to see an actor unknown to me do this well.

The others here are mostly solid, but I don’t think anyone’s really special. Paul Sorvino’s caricature of a right-wing (and racist) nutbag was sort of funny, but he was a bit too over-the-top for my liking. Better was Garrett Morris, but he didn’t really appear near as much as I would’ve liked. As for Andrea Marcovicci, well, I appreciate how they left out much of the romantic angle between her and Moriarty’s character, but I wanted more from her than what we got.

Regardless, it’s the silly story here that keeps us entertained more than anything. The story goes all over the place, literally, as the group travels to different locations in order to learn more about and battle The Stuff. Speaking of which, is there anything catchier than The Stuff’s jingle? Can’t get enough of the Stuff indeed.

The Stuff isn’t an amazing movie, but I’ve seen it a couple of times and it’s fun enough. I liked the special effects here, and the message against consumerism was welcomed also. It’s not a movie that’s necessarily a stand-out of the 1980’s, but I do think it’s worth at least a watch, and probably multiple.

7.5/10

The Stuff was covered on Fight Evil’s podcast, so if you can’t get enough of the Stuff, listen as Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I discuss the film.

Directed by Michael Davis [Other horror films: N/A]

This is a movie that I saw once or twice back when I was a kid, quite early in my horror viewing, and so there’s a slight nostalgic value to the film, which is probably a good thing, as without it, I suspect I’d like this even less than I do now.

It’s not a bad film, necessarily, if the comedy within is your type of thing, but the somewhat immature humor here didn’t really wow me. That’s not even one of my biggest issues with Monster Man, though it certainly didn’t help (especially the stupid fight scenes and somewhat whimsical music used throughout the film).

One of the two main issues I had with the movie was that I felt it ran on way too long. The movie has an average running time of an hour and a half, but I struggled during a lot of it, especially after the introduction of Aimee Brooks’ character. Cue the other problem – maybe it’s because I’ve seen this before (many, many years back), but the red herring behind her character seemed extraordinarily obvious, and that sort of lessened much of the impact of what happened toward the end.

I do think Monster Man has great gore at times, and the special effects overall are decent. That chili certainly stood out positively as gut-wrenchingly sickening. Also, I liked how everything sort of tied in well at the end, though I really hated the more comedic portions of the conclusion (such as Joe Goodrich’s character).

Worth mentioning, I think there are even some solidly suspenseful sequences in the film, such as the monster truck chase near the beginning, along with the restroom sequence. Even the design of the Monster Man is really solid, from his mask to the way he walks. A lot of this movie felt like a cheap comedic rip-off of both Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Jeepers Creepers, and they definitely loved their inspirations, I felt.

If Monster Man had been played in a more serious manner, I tend to think I would have liked it quite a bit more, because the humor here really turned me off. Quite likely, Monster Man would have been a lot more forgettable, but even now, I don’t know if the movie’s overly memorable, despite the solid gore toward the second half.

Aimee Brooks was hot, so kudos there, but neither of the main actors (Eric Jungmann and Justin Urich) positively stood out. Playing the Monster Man, I thought Michael Bailey Smith was appropriately creepy despite the comedic feel of the film.

Overall, if you’re more into comedy-horror, I’d recommend giving Monster Man a go, and I certainly like some elements, but it’s not one I think I’d watch that often, and I definitely wouldn’t say the film’s even able to reach average. Might be worth a watch, still.

5.5/10

This was covered on Fight Evil’s podcast, so if at all intrigued, you can listen to Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I discuss this film.

Directed by William Lustig [Other horror films: Maniac (1980), Maniac Cop (1988), Maniac Cop 3: Badge of Silence (1992), Uncle Sam (1996)]

Having not seen this sequel before, I wasn’t overly sure what to expect. I’d mostly heard positive comparisons to the first movie, and I wasn’t disappointed, as it’s a solid sequel and an enjoyable film, though I believe the first is a bit better.

The cast was decently solid. I truthfully didn’t care much for Robert Davi’s character, but the performance, as a lead, was pretty solid. Claudia Christian was decent, and gave a great performance at times, such as that rather thrilling handcuffed-to-a-car scene. I was somewhat taken aback by the route Bruce Campbell’s character took, but in retrospect, while disappointing, it made sense. A few interesting faces pop up, including Clarence Williams III (who I know best from Tales from the Hood) and a small cameo from Danny Trejo.

If there’s one acting misfire here, it’s from Leo Rossi, who played a talkative serial killer who just got on my nerves, and seemed to add a somewhat lighter feel to the film (at least in his scenes) than I would have hoped for, and overall, I really didn’t care for the addition of his character. It didn’t particularly seem necessary, and didn’t do the atmosphere any wonders.

Otherwise, the movie’s pretty solid, with a good plot, great massacres (I really liked both the police station and prison scene), and a couple of memorable kills, including a quick neck-snap that I really appreciated. Perhaps one of the best scenes takes place in a shooting range, but there were plenty of great scenes throughout the film.

I don’t think Maniac Cop 2 is quite as good as the first movie (a lot of it has to do with Rossi’s character), but I do think it’s a pretty solid film, and well worth the watch. If you enjoyed the first one, I’d guess this one would come across as rather palatable also.

7.5/10

This was covered on Fight Evil’s podcast. If interested, listen to Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I discuss this one below.

Directed by John Carpenter [Other horror films: Halloween (1978), Someone’s Watching Me! (1978), The Fog (1980), The Thing (1982), Prince of Darkness (1987), They Live (1988), Body Bags (1993, segments ‘The Gas Station’ & ‘Hair’), In the Mouth of Madness (1994), Village of the Damned (1995), Vampires (1998), Ghosts of Mars (2001), The Ward (2010)]

One of the more well-known horror films I haven’t seen until just now, Christine was a decent movie with a bit going for it, but I can’t pretend that I thought it was great or, even more so, that it really needed to be an hour and 50 minutes.

I’ve never read all of the Stephen King novel this movie’s based on – I got very, very close to the ending once, but for some reason, I didn’t seal the deal. That was many years ago, so the characters here, not to mention most of the scenes, all seem new to me, which I guess is a positive going into a movie that has as many fans as this one does.

Keith Gordon was decent as one of the central characters. I pretty much felt for him throughout most of the film (and I should also say that never once did I feel bad for his parents, who drove me up the wall), and seeing him change as the movie goes on was sort of fun to see. I think John Stockwell was marginally more interesting, though not exactly memorable, and Alexandra Paul somewhat inconsequential.

It was nice to see Harry Dean Stanton (Alien) for a bit, and even nicer to randomly see Stuart Charno (I didn’t know the name beforehand, but he’s Ted from Friday the 13th Part 2), though neither one really got enough screen-time to make much of a difference. Robert Prosky was solid, and William Ostrander made for a quality bully (who had an amazingly high level of aggression).

Another thing that I have to mention is the quality soundtrack. Not just the miscellaneous 50’s songs either, but the solid 80’s vibe this film has, at times reminding me of Halloween III: Season of the Witch and other classics from the same era. Definitely found myself digging it.

Problematically, though, while I like most of the story, I really don’t think this needed to be as long as it was. I think it probably would have been perfectly acceptable to trim out fifteen, maybe twenty minutes, and all would have been well. I don’t necessarily think the movie drags a substantial amount, but I did find myself losing focus once or twice.

Of course, there are scenes here that make it worth it, such as the first car chase sequence, but then you get to the conclusion, which I personally felt was all hat and no cattle. I mean, it was okay for some of the action, but I just found it somewhat underwhelming. Admittedly, I don’t know what else they could have done to an evil car, but there you go.

Christine isn’t a movie that I had a deep interest in seeing beforehand, and ultimately, I don’t think it’s anywhere near a great film, but it’s decent, and I think that people have a good reason for enjoying it. I find it somewhat below average, if only because I don’t think the length of the film awarded the content any, but I didn’t have a bad time with it, and perhaps with another viewing down the line, I’ll appreciate it more.

6.5/10

Directed by Fraser C. Heston [Other horror films: N/A]

Some Stephen King movies are hard to talk about because they may be competently-made for the time, and possess different stories, but the source novels are far superior. Needful Things is one of my favorite Stephen King books, and as such, this adaptation is one of the least enjoyable versions of a good story I’ve seen.

When watching this, my brother said that it was like the creators of the film read the dust-jacket plot and set out to make the film without reading the full book, and that seems apt. There are so, so many things left out or minimized, and some of it was just terrible to leave out, such as:

Pangborn’s wife and child having died, Brian’s suicide while his brother (completely omitted from the film) watched, Polly’s life in San Francisco, Norris Ridgewick’s fishing pole and helping defeat Gaunt, Ace and his assistance of Gaunt (again, entirely omitted), the majority of Cora Rusk’s story, Lester Pratt and Sally Radcliffe, toning down the Catholic vs. Baptist conflict, leaving out most of Frank Jewett and George Nelson’s conflict, the same with Sonny Jackett and Eddie Warburton, and entirely messing up the ending.

The book is a gourmet feast of characters and information, whereas the film is an unfulfilling cup of Ramen soup.

Leaving out Pangborn’s bout with depression following the death of his wife and child really strips the character of feeling, and taking out his amateur magician hobby strips him of life. In the movie, Pangborn (who was played by Ed Harris here, despite the fact that in the very same year, The Dark Half came out, which also had Pangborn, only played by Michael Rooker) just didn’t feel like the Pangborn I know at all. And in the novel, he didn’t meet Gaunt until the final 15 pages, whereas in the movie, he meets him something like twenty minutes in. It’s utterly ridiculous. Also, Pangborn doesn’t even defeat Gaunt here, that’s given to Buster Keeton, which is just terrible.

Now, before I go further, I do know that a three-hour version of this exists, a TV extension done by TNT. However, that’s never been put on DVD, and is somewhat difficult to find outside of torrents, so I watched the two-hour theatrical version. The extended version does, to its credit, add in Brian’s mother, Cora Rusk, and her own dealings with Gaunt, and likely some other stuff, but given that version is not commonly available, I can only go off what I saw.

There’s a whole point in the book about Polly’s past in San Francisco and the death of a young child, which later comes up as Gaunt’s messing with people’s relationships. In the movie, all of this is removed, and instead we get Polly thinking that Pangborn is involved in an embezzlement scheme with Keeton. They also left out the spider from the amulet, but of course they did.

Ace is a character that was used in the coming-of-age movie Stand By Me from 1986 (based off King’s novella The Body), and reappeared in a significant role in the novel Needful Things. Here, he’s not even on the radar, and the plan to blow up Castle Rock entirely abandoned.

One of my favorite portions in the book is the conflict between the Baptists and the Catholics, led by Reverend William Rose and Father Brigham. This involved twenty or so named characters, and ends in a massive and bloody brawl in the streets of Castle Rock during a rainstorm. The movie’s version in pitiful. Instead of a massive fight, William Rose and Father Meehan (he was renamed in the movie for God knows what reason) themselves punch each other out for a minute, and that’s it. Also worth noting, Nettie in the movie was apparently Baptist, when she had literally nothing to do with the conflict in the novel, nor would she have had been capable of dealing with such tension, so it was idiotic of the movie-makers to throw that in.

I will give the movie some credit for showing Frank Jewett, but for leaving out his story-line, along with the interesting triangle that was Sally Radcliffe, Lester Pratt, and John LaPointe (one of the officers), I condemn the lot of them. At least they kept in the conflict between Hugh Priest and Henry Beaufort, which was a surprise.

Brian’s story follows the novel decently well until the end. In the movie, after some cringe-worthy dialogue (‘I gotta go to Hell now’), he attempts suicide in front of Pangborn. In the book, he commits suicide in front of his little brother Sean. It’s when Pangborn interviews Sean in the novel that Pangborn finally pieces everything together, but who needs that when you eliminate Sean’s character? Also worth noting, the fight between Nettie and Wilma (which, in part, Brian was responsible for initiating) didn’t happen at Wilma’s house as in the movie, but in the streets, causing quite the scene and made for a memorable moment.

One last thing before I rate this abomination, what they do with Danforth ‘Buster’ Keeton’s character is despicable. In the movie, they make him out to be a hero, blowing himself and Gaunt up, finally killing him (it doesn’t work, but of course it doesn’t). Keeton’s no hero – he’s a paranoid and corrupt town selectman who, just hours before, killed his wife. His story in the book is a lot more fitting, and more so, the fact that they gave Keeton the final act of heroism against Gaunt as opposed to Pangborn (who just made a ridiculous speech in front of the town) was a kick in the face to fans of the novel.

Max von Sydow did decent as Gaunt. Not amazing by any means, but decent. I sort of like how they throw in an ability for him to see years in the future, but it doesn’t really add much aside from some cool lines at the end of the film.

If you’ve not read the novel, Needful Things might be a decent movie. If you have read the novel, though, and make it one of the books you read about once a year, this film feels utterly hollow and an insult to the source material. I didn’t like it much when I first saw it, and I’m bitter in my old age of 25 (at the time of this writing), so I hate it more now.

3/10

This is one of the films reviewed on Fight Evil’s podcast, so if at all interested, give a listen as Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I discuss Needful Things.

Directed by Donald Farmer [Other horror films: Cannibal Hookers (1987), Demon Queen (1987), Scream Dream (1989), Invasion of the Scream Queens (1992), Savage Vengeance (1993), Red Lips (1995), Red Lips II (1996), An Erotic Vampire in Paris (2002), Red Lips: Eat the Living (2005), Chainsaw Cheerleaders (2008), Body Shop (2008), Hi-8 (Horror Independent 8) (2013, segment ‘Thicker than Water’), Shark Exorcist (2014), Grindsploitation (2016, segment ‘Dirty Cop: Simon Says!’), Cannibal Cop (2017), Vampire Cop (2017), Hooker with a Hacksaw (2017), Cannibal Hookers (2019), Catnado (2022), Visit to the Grave (2022), Debbie Does Demons (2023), Nundead (2023), Shark Exorcist 2: Unholy Waters (2024), Bigfoot Exorcist (2024)]

This movie is terrible in ways that few movies can compete with. It’s low-budget, sure, but the story is quite poor, the acting is laughable, and the amateurish nature of the film is overbearing. Even so, giving this one a second watch, I have to admit that it does possess just enough charm to ensure the movie’s not a complete waste (though make no mistake, it’s a close call).

No one in the cast does great, or even good (though certainly, some of the young women who get topless are rather scrumptious). However, I did derive some enjoyment from the main performances of Ciara Richards and Adrianna Eder. Both Richards and Eder are attractive in their own way, but I think Eder is the winner. Regardless, neither gives a great performance, but again, they bring some amusement to the film.

Jacky Hall, though, who played a bitchy Southern bully (she was born in Arkansas, and it shows) is the surprise star. Her performance is almost as terrible as the script (and that’s a hell of an accomplishment), and she brings some quotable lines to the forefront (‘Sit and spin, bitches’). Only two others are worth mentioning, including the science professor who had a vial of real Haitian zombie blood (Christopher Slade) and Kimberly L. Cole (‘Oh my God, is that a mouse? Oh, I think it’s a gerbil. Gerbils are so cute…’), who had a short, yet memorable, little scene.

By no means would I want to give off the impression that Dorm of the Dead is all sunshine and daisies, as some of this movie is really painful. The first ten minutes or so are focused purely on pointless characters who are all eventually killed by zombies. There’s a lesbian scene thrown in, so you get a bit more nudity, but neither of the women are at all important. After some credits, we’re gifted with what might be one of the worst scenes in cinematic history that I regret having watched (six, perhaps seven minutes of a guy telling a girl sexual innuendos and her being completely oblivious, only to be attacked by zombies at the end).

Also, the music here is terrible. It’s just random generic hard rock, none of it noteworthy in any way. As for the zombies? One randomly did a backflip early on, which didn’t much endear me to them. The effects, too, were poor, but given what had to be a very low budget, I’m guessing they did what they could. Also, while I’m grateful the movie ended (more than can be known), it was a very sudden conclusion.

The director of this movie, Donald Farmer, is somewhat a known quantity. Truth be told, I’ve not actually seen any of his movies beside this one (am I a lucky guy or what?), but I don’t think this was necessarily terrible. The script was, as I said, pretty atrocious – I really didn’t like the route this one took (one of the main characters got zombie blood poured down her throat, and is slowly beginning to crave human flesh, and eventually goes on a uber-scary rampage), which is probably the biggest issue I had with this one.

The thing is, as poor as many aspects of Dorm of the Dead are, the really terrible performances had me laughing, and while that by no means makes the movie a good one, having seen this one twice now, I admit that I could see myself giving this even another view in the future, for whatever that’s worth.

5.5/10

This film was discussed on Fight Evil’s podcast, so if interested, listen to Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I talk this one over.

Directed by Jackie Kong [Other horror films: The Being (1983)]

I wouldn’t go as far as to say this is the worst horror movie of the late 80’s (as there’s certainly competition, looking at films such as The Brainsucker, Slumber Party Massacre II, Hellgate, Things, The Stay Awake, and Nightmare Sisters), but it was a thoroughly unenjoyable time from start to finish.

Blood Diner’s over-the-top comedic style wasn’t my jam at all. Were a few lines and scenes here and there funny? Sure, but overall, the comedy was way too silly and stupid for me to ever be okay with, and what doesn’t help at all was that the story (which seems to be inspired partially by the far better film Blood Feast), which didn’t captivate nor interest me whatsoever.

Carl Crew and Rick Burks did okay playing brothers, though boy, did Crew’s behavior really get on my nerves. Burks was decent, though it didn’t really amount to much as the rest of the cast, not to mention movie as a whole, was poor.

If there’s one kind word I’ll throw to Blood Diner, it’s that the gore, while obviously low budget, was appreciated. Seeing multiple dismembered body parts does my heart well, and even though the scene in which a character gets both an arm and the opposite hand cut off was cheap, I still sort of liked that.

All things said, Blood Diner isn’t a movie I found myself enjoying whatsoever. I’ve actually seen it once before, but apparently I forgot just how much I didn’t care for this, or perhaps it’s just soured on me. I do like aspects of the special effects in the finale, but again, the final product doesn’t seem to be something I’d brag about.

4/10

This is one of the movies covered on Fight Evil’s podcast. If interested, listen below as Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I discuss this.

Directed by Frank Darabont [Other horror films: Buried Alive (1990), Nightshift Collection (1994, segment ‘The Woman in the Room’)]

Very much a modern-day classic of the genre, The Mist is a rather solidly-made film with little in it too objectionable. You have a pretty good and, at times, claustrophobic story, a great cast with memorable characters, and enough monstery goodness to keep everyone happy, along with showing the dangers of religion, which is always a good touch.

There’s a lot of actors and actresses here I liked, such as William Sadler (The Shawshank Redemption), Marcia Gay Harden, Jeffrey DeMunn (Storm of the Century), Toby Jones (from an episode of Doctor Who and Berberian Sound Studio), Andre Braugher (of the emotional crime/fantasy flick Frequency from 2000), Thomas Jane, Frances Sternhagen, Robert C. Treveiler, and Buck Taylor.

Of these names, DeMunn, Jones, and Harden were perhaps the best in the film. DeMunn has always been a consistently fun actor, while Jones is another individual I like in pretty much anything I see him in. Harden isn’t a name I know, but she does a great job playing the dangerous Mrs. Carmody, a religious nutbag, in the film. I hated every second she was babbling on-screen, so her performance was on point.

The CGI was a little spotty at times, but honestly, it didn’t bother me here near as much as one might think. The special effects in general were pretty solid, and the creature design was great too (hard to choose a favorite, but the tall, tentacled one, along with the spiders, who dominated in the pharmacy scene, would be my top two picks).

A lot of the hate that I see coming to this film deals with the end, and I don’t personally get it. Is the end darker? Sure, but the situation was dark also, and there’s nothing about the conclusion that I dislike at all. I think it’s a perfectly acceptable ending, perfectly realistic, and I applaud a more mainstream horror film going out the way this one did.

Tackling the dangers of religion was a nice touch also. In a situation like this, people like Mrs. Carmody need to be shut up as soon as possible, or otherwise you have an illogical mob out for blood because they’ve been duped into believing in an unverifiable deity. Her character was utterly despicable, and I’m glad that Ollie took care of her the way he did. In many ways, what’s scarier in The Mist than the creatures is the religious mumbo-jumbo, which unfortunately isn’t something modern-day Americans are immune from.

The Mist pretty much hits the right spots. I’ve not read the novella this movie was based on, but for a Stephen King adaptation, The Mist is damn solid. Like I said, the cast is great, with a lot of familiar faces, the story is quite tense, and there’s a lot going for this flick.

9/10

This is one of the films discussed on Fight Evil’s podcast. If interested, listen to Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I talk this one over below.

Directed by Robert Hiltzik [Other horror films: Return to Sleepaway Camp (2008)]

Of the classic slashers of the early 80’s, Sleepaway Camp has never been a favorite of mine. In my view, both Friday the 13th and The Burning are more enjoyable, and while this certainly stands out in some ways (including, of course, the finale), I still can’t bring myself to overly adore it.

Not that Sleepaway Camp is a bad movie. It’s, for lack of a better word, interesting, and some parts are really hard to take seriously, such as Desiree Gould’s Aunt Martha or Owen Hughes’ possibly pedophilic Artie (who had a solid almost-death scene, on a side-note). The tongue-in-cheek style isn’t too overbearing, but it certainly is noticeable at times (Mike Kellin as Mel is another somewhat over-the-top character), which gives the film a unique feeling, but doesn’t endear me too much to it.

As far as deaths go, though, the movie’s golden. The hair curler scene was solid, but even better (at least for me, being allergic) was the beehive in the bathroom, which was perhaps one of my favorite scenes in the movie. As aforementioned, Hughes’ character gets his head pushed into boiling water (think My Bloody Valentine, although arguably more violent), and that too stood out.

Acting’s a bit of a mixed bag (in part due to the fact that many of the extras were actually played by younger kids as opposed to established actors and actresses), but for a slasher, it’s not particularly noticeable. Felissa Rose was solid as Angela, and had that quiet, somewhat awkward teen style down. Jonathan Tiersten wasn’t great, but his exuberance was welcomed. Both Karen Fields and Katherine Kamhi (who popped up a year later in the forgotten slasher Silent Madness) did great as the bitchy girls you just want to see die, and Christopher Collet does okay as one of Angela’s anchors to happiness.

Overall, though, while the film is enjoyable enough, like I said, both Friday the 13th and The Burning come to mind first when thinking of solid camp-based slashers. Sleepaway Camp is certainly still worth a watch (if for anything, for the unexpected but solidly built-up conclusion), but I don’t know if it’s a movie that would otherwise blow you away. At least, it never did me.

7/10

This is one of the films discussed on Fight Evil’s podcast, so if you want to hear myself and Chucky (@ChuckyFE) talk about Sleepaway Camp, listen below.