30 – Fetch! (Dog Soldiers)

“We’re going after the bastard, are you with us?”

Roland, leader of the local militia and your saviour that day in the clearing, before the festival, before the explosion.

How could you refuse this man. You nod your assent, and in response you get a grim smile and rifle.

It’s a rag tag group of men and women who file out of Carpenter’s Meadow that morning. Some are experienced men like Roland, others are new recruits to take the place of those too injured…or worse.

“He’s got a good few hours on us, and one man is hard to find, if this is a bloody man, but there’s more of us and we’ve got revenge in our hearts. Let’s move!

The day had been a seemingly endless slog through the wilderness, a day which ended, as they all do, with the setting of the sun and the encroaching of the darkness. Looking around you it’s endless black, with the vertical lines of the trees somehow darker still.

But no…not all black, in the distance, faint, a blue glow, coming from the windows of an old house. Roland swears it’s abandoned…but that glow…

Prey.

Wow, OK so I apologise for the big wait this time, I’ve really been slowing down with these reviews as of late, 4 reviews in the whole of last year, bad form, totally bone.

Oh yes, so that brings me to today’s review, a film which I have a fair bit of nostalgia for, having watched it at the cinema with a group of ‘friends’ way back when it came out. It feels strange to refer to the early 2000’s as ‘way back’ but hey it is, that’s life. Well my ‘friends’ and I had a particular interest in this film, we were British, we liked horror, we…

OK we were fucking furries. It’s 2002’s Dog Soldiers!

So what’s it about?

Dog Soldiers is a British Werewolf film which follows a group of Soldiers out on a training exercise in a remote area of Scotland. They’re supposed to be facing a group of special forces, the SAS, which you may or may not have heard of, I believe the US equivalent is Delta Force if that helps. So anyway it turns out they’re actually going to have to deal with a pack of werewolves and as a spoiler free synopses that’s about what you get.

In my experience, werewolf films, especially good werewolf films seem to be a little thin on the ground. There are of course some excellent ones out there, An American Werewolf in London particularly stands out as an excellent film (Spoilers for if that ever comes up for review). Lots of people ride hard for Universal’s classic The Wolfman, and Ginger Snaps is also fun. I believe The Howling is well regarded but I’ve yet to see it. I may of course just be ignorant of a ton of excellent ones but I would hazard a guess that were you to ask people to name their 5 favourite werewolf films, the ones I’ve just mentioned would show up a lot more than any others…except for this one. Perhaps I’m viewing it through a British lens but if we’re talking top 5 I feel this is in there.

I feel it’s somewhat of a ‘Cult’ film. It’s one of those, if you’ve seen it you champion it kinda films. So maybe my statement above doesn’t hold if we’re talking the average person on the street. You can probably take Ginger Snaps out at that point as well. Anyway I’m getting a bit bogged down in this and front loading my feelings so let’s talk some specifics.

I love practical effects. CGI has been the bane of many a film, particularly in its early days when everyone thought it could replace everything and it tended to look extremely out of place. That’s not to say it can never work but if it can be done practically it will almost always look better. The werewolves in this film are practical and fairly unique looking. Other than their head and paws they are extremely humanoid, tall and relatively lithe giving them more of an uncanny valley type feel than some of the more traditional bulky style (The werewolf in Universal’s The Wolfman is extremely human looking but so far towards human that it doesn’t have the same ‘creep’ factor that these do.) Actually speaking of creep factor, Peach Fuzz in the film Creep gave me massive Dog Soldiers werewolf vibes.

The gore levels are fairly high, as you would hope from a film where people are being attacked by werewolves, and the realism is there as well. The film has a 15 rating here, because, err, I guess werewolves aren’t real so therefore the blood and guts is fine? Put this amount of gore in a gangster film and it would certainly get an 18. But hey, I’m not the BBFC, what do I know.

The characters in the film are very fun. We get that over the top ‘Squadie’ banter between them. I’m not sure how well that translates outside of a British audience but the sarcasm is all over this script and the fatherly feeling of the sergeant to his men makes him particularly endearing, even if he does have a mouth like a sewer. Sergeant Wells is played by Sean Pertwee, a man who I love in any film I’ve seen him in. If you need someone to play a potty mouth military or military adjacent character then Mr Pertwee is your man. Liam Cunningham is always excellent as well. In fact the whole cast does a great job of portraying their respective characters.

Speaking of the script, this film is pretty funny at times, at least in a dark humour way, whether it’s a character seeing their intestines hanging out and saying “Sausages” or a character about to die saying “I hope I give you the shits, you fucking wimp.” It certainly has its serious moments but as mentioned before the banter is strong here and had it taken itself more seriously overall it would have made for a weaker film.

Despite the humor it manages to have some more poignant moments which I go into more in the spoilers and there is a real sense of danger to the film. These aren’t a group of invincible action stars, yes they’re soldiers, but they’re vulnerable, human. Something their enemies are not. I wouldn’t say it’s a ‘scary’ movie, think something like Aliens, it’s a battle for survival with a fair amount of firepower. I’m not sure why but even when fairly ineffective or even useless, the presence of guns in the hands of the ‘good guys’ tends to reduce the fear factor.

Yet another film where I find myself drawn between a couple of scores. As with Hellraiser, I have some similar feelings whereby my own love for the film is somewhat over the film’s true merits. In this case I feel it’s not quite got the same draw to me as that other film, here I feel that this is a fun romp, but no true masterpiece, it’s certainly above average though, so I’m giving Dog Soldiers 4 cows out of 5. It’s not my favourite film, not even my favourite werewolf film, but I still love it.

**WARNING** SPOILERS BELOW **WARNING**

Welcome to the spoiler section. This is the part where I can bring up some specific parts of the film which I’d like to talk about more, whether they be good, or bad.

Earlier I mentioned the use of practical effects, there’s a fantastic scene right near the end of the film where the house they’re hiding out in is blown to pieces in a huge gas explosion. We see this in great detail as they built a scale model of the house and blew it up for real. The scene looks amazing, the roof blowing off before the walls explode into pieces. It’s not one of those scenes where the fact it’s a model is really obvious, the lighting and the attention to detail makes this pretty seamless.

One of my favourite scenes doesn’t involve any werewolves at all. Fairly early in the film the group of soldiers we’re following settles down for their first night. They all start talking about what scares them the most, and it’s silly things like spiders, women, spider-women, penalty shootouts etc… and then Sergeant Wells starts telling a story about him and his friend and fellow soldier getting tattoos during the Gulf War. His tale ends with his friend’s death after stepping on a landmine. It completely changes the mood, it’s a real ‘Gremlins Santa Story’ sequence, and it’s moments like that which raise this up from being an average film.

We do get a fun twist in the film in a scene which I have some mixed feelings about. After being told by Megan, the sole female major character in the film, that she lives nearby the farmhouse they’re trapped in, it’s revealed that she’s actually part of the werewolf family. It’s a nice twist and one which isn’t overly telegraphed or on the other hand impossible to guess. It is however a fairly misogynistic scene, with Cooper claiming that women are always the same and then Megan making a joke about it being that time of the month. I mean maybe it fits in with the blokes blokes blokes general theme of the film, and to be honest considering the director, Neil Marshall, made The Descent not too long after this I’ll give him a bit of the benefit of the doubt, but still it was a little jarring.

Also, fuck Captain Ryan! I’ve seen this film many times and I always forget he shoots the dog dead in a scene arly on in the film. Every time my brain tells me it’s a test and there’s blanks or no bullets in the gun, but no, he fucking kills the dog, fuck you Captain Ryan!

Oh honourable mention to a sword point grinding against Cooper’s teeth, that made me cringe, nice work!

Right I’ve rambled on long enough I think, it’s dinner time.

29 – A Puzzling Development (Hellraiser)

The man stares at you for a long time, his eyes piercing in their intensity. Then, turning his attention once more to the prone figure before him he lowers his head. A loud, sucking, squelching noise fills your ears and you see rivulets of gore flowing up and onto the man’s body, reforming sinew and tendon, muscle and fat.

The sight is appalling, a hideous un-melting of a human body but you cannot look away, transfixed like the deer in the headlights.

A bell tolls. The reforming man looks up. An eerie blue light flickers through the trees.

No! Not yet, I cannot go back. His rasping voice cries through his still lipless mouth.

Staggering to his feet the cadaver of a man looks once more in your direction before loping off into the trees away from the pulsing blue light. The bell tolls again, this time in the direction the man left, the light too shifts in pursuit.

You don’t know how much time has passed but eventually you can no longer hear the bell, or see the light. All about you those who can are standing, helping those who cannot and weeping over those who never will. You turn to Donald and find him flat on his back, eyes closed. Fearing the worst you grasp him by the shoulder and shake him. A rattling cough emerges from his dust caked mouth and rubbing his eyes he looks up at you.

What happened?

You describe to him what you saw, the explosion, the reformed man, the blue light, none of it draws any flicker of recognition from the physician.

A puzzle indeed…

Looks like I get to review another of my all time favourites, spoiler alert. A film from acclaimed British Author and Director Clive Barker, the man whom Stephen King called the future of horror. If you are aware of Barker’s work it tends to be strong on the body horror with a generous amount of perversion. His Books of Blood series of short stories are a favourite of mine, today’s film being based on one of Barker’s slightly longer tales, the novella The Hellbound Heart.

Jesus wept. It’s Clive Barker’s 1987 directorial debut, Hellraiser.

This is one of those films that’s mentioned in the same breath as…well ok maybe a couple of breaths after…the likes of Halloween, Friday the 13^th and A Nightmare on Elm Street. It’s a household name, though probably more so if we return to the 80s and 90s, and certainly here in Britain.

The plot of Hellraiser is fairly unique. A man, Frank, acquires a mysterious puzzle box. An ornately patterned cube which gives access to a hellish realm of pleasure and pain. Sometime later Frank’s brother and his family move into Frank’s now deserted house, only it isn’t really deserted and soon Frank is vying to return from his torment at the hands of those unleashed by the box, by any means necessary.

The late 80’s was a time when many of the big horror franchises were becoming a little tired or at the very least had reached their peak. A Nightmare on Elm Street had just had it’s 3^rd entry and arguably it’s last great one, the entries would become sillier and sillier from here, at least until Mr Craven re-took the helm with The New Nightmare. Friday the 13^th had pumped out 6 films. Halloween had taken a hiatus but was about to embark on the, unofficially named, ‘Thorn’ trilogy and it would be tough to call any of those classics, well ok, 4 maybe…maybe.

Another trend at this point was for horror films to lose a bit of that grit that we saw in the late 70s to mid 80s. Studios were trying to appeal to the widest audience possible and we had to look to new projects rather than sequels to find films which put the horror back. Hellraiser is one such film.

In a world of wisecracks and one liners Hellraiser wasn’t afraid to tear our souls apart…ok fine so that IS a one liner, but it’s badass ok!

The violence and gore, though pretty over the top at times, also feels visceral and mean. Whether it’s Rats nailed to a wall, a beating with a hammer or hooks tearing into flesh. Hellraiser does not pull any punches in this regard.

On a sidenote, I do tend to feel that British horror in general tends towards a darker, grittier tone, even when it’s being a bit sillier, it always has an edge to it. I wonder though if this is just, being British myself, that I can relate more, especially when the settings and characters are also British. Anyway I’ve typed the word British too many times now and it feels like I’m going to accidentally summon Winston Churchill or something. Back to Hellraiser.

Is Hellraiser a scary film? Disturbing, grotesque, ominous, gritty but probably not scary. The circumstances behind the situation are too specific for you to feel you’d ever be in the same boat, though to be fair that’s the case in a lot of horror films. I don’t personally find that I have any issue watching this alone at night, perhaps I’m desensitised but there’s certainly films out there that do scare me, though this isn’t one of them. You may feel differently.

The real standouts in this film for me are the creature designs. The Cenobites, the aforementioned beings unleashed by the box, are iconic. Show anybody a picture of the unofficially named ‘Pinhead’ and they will likely recognise him, but his cohorts are equally fascinating and repulsive to look at. Each is unique and each is terrifying in their own way. Unsettling is the word, much of what we see in this film is unsettling. A sticky gloss of perversion coats everything we see from this other realm and seeps onto everything it touches.

The box itself, the Lament Configuration is a masterpiece of design. The intricately embellished cube moves and reconfigures itself at the user’s touch, forming itself into different shapes in a beautifully mechanical, practical way. I even have a replica proudly displayed in my living room. It’s a beautiful piece, elegant and subtle…and hopefully inert.

The only ‘pure’ aspect of this film is Frank’s niece Kirsty, the heroine of the movie who fights against both Frank and the Cenobites. Played by Ashley Laurence she does a fine job but doesn’t stand out as overall the acting in the film is…believable I would say. If anybody is going above and beyond it’s Clare Higgins as Julia, Frank’s Sister-in-Law, one time lover and now accomplice. She switches between cold and detached to passionate yet terrified, she always seems to have an undercurrent of fear about her which puts you on edge whenever she is on screen.

Also shout out to Doug Bradley as the Lead Cenobite or Pinhead as he’s often known. A true icon of the horror scene. He doesn’t really have a lot to do in this film but what he does do is delivered with gravitas. It would have been easy for the Cenobites to come across as cheesy villains but the calm, ominous tones employed imbue them with a cold intelligence which makes them truly threatening.

If I do have anything bad to say about the film it’s probably that it all gets a but rushed and weird at the very end. A lot happens and I feel that a simpler ending, specifically cutting out the very end scene, though cool, would have suited the film better. It’s only a minor gripe though.

So as usual I’ve found myself furiously debating between 2 scores. Is it a perfect film? Well no, not perfect, but there are very few films I would describe as that. A 5 for me doesn’t have to be perfect, it just has to stand out, to be that film which I point to and say “Love that film!” so with that in mind I’m giving Hellraiser 5 exposed nails out of 5. Maybe ask me on a different day and I’d give it a 4…maybe. This film was a breath of fresh yet perverse air to a genre well on it’s way to a period of toned down mass produced horror fare.

**WARNING** SPOILERS BELOW **WARNING**

Welcome to the spoiler section. This is the part where I can bring up some specific parts of the film which I’d like to talk about more, whether they be good, or bad.

I have to mention, and this is often the case for me, a part of the film which most stood out to me was something relatively minor, but oh so much more relatable. You probably know what this is already from my scoring system, but there’s a scene where Frank’s brother Larry, and some tradesmen, are moving some furniture up some stairs. We see that there’s an exposed nail sticking out of the banister, we see Larry’s hand unknowingly getting closer and closer till the nail gouges a bloody furrow into the back of his hand. It makes me wince every time! I struggle far more with something like that than hooks tearing someone to pieces.

I discussed the Cenobites earlier in the review when talking about creature design but who can forget the absolute horror that chases Kirsty down the corridor which opens in her hospital room. According to sources it’s known as The Engineer but in the film we have no idea what it is, only that we need to get the fuck away from it. It’s hard to describe but it almost looks like a dangling phallus with a creepy face, arms and a stinger like tail. I just love how disturbing it looks.

Another fantastic bit of effects work is where Frank is reforming having been revived by his brother’s blood dripping on the attic floorboards. The use of reverse photography and puppetry here is The Thing levels of practical effects, it’s an absolute masterpiece. It savours the scene as well as we slowly see Frank’s brain and bones emerge from a gooey mess to form the beginnings of a man.

Anyway, look at me chattering away, goodbye for now…

28 – Resurrection (The Mummy)

As the woman begins to speak, a wind begins to whip about the crowd. There are a few murmurs and the narrator’s voice falters slightly, but she continues.

The last word of the sentence is spoken, the wind dies, the murmurs cease…

The stage explodes. Splinters of wood whip past your face and those nearest the front are thrown to the floor, the narrator lays slumped at the foot of a tree several feet from the remains of the stage.

As the dust kicked up by the detonation begins to clear, an arm reaches up out of the pile of blasted wood. The arm is ragged, all sinew and bone. Tatters of cloth are wrapped about it in places and you feel your heart begin to race.

Could it be? Is this the creature from the cinema? No…it’s different…similar yes…but different.

Slowly, ever so slowly, the figure of a man pulls himself out of the wreckage. The head is more skull than anything else, the empty eye sockets, horrid pits.

Groping about, the man…the thing…finds the still breathing body of one of the unfortunate people who had stood in the front row. The grasping fingers find what they seek, there is a terrible scream.

The thing looks up. The sockets are no longer empty.

So here we are, my third review of a mummy film, perhaps the random number generator likes the mummy sub genre…or maybe it’s just that about 20 of the 300 or so candidates are mummy films…OK it’s me, I like mummies! The question is, do I like this mummy film?

Let’s find out, this time I’m reviewing what is probably the most watched film featuring the classic monster, it’s Stephen Sommer’s 1999 epic, The Mummy.

Let’s get something out of the way. Is this actually a horror film? Well, it’s primarily an action adventure, but the fact it contains a mummy and is essentially a reboot of Universal’s mummy franchise means that I’m quite happy including it. Also, it has some pretty horrific things which happen in it, this is not quite child friendly. From a certificate point of view this was an odd one as it was cut slightly to get a 12 in the cinema then the uncut home version was a 15.

So the premise of the film concerns various adventurers, treasure hunters and archaeologists searching for a lost city in the deserts of Egypt and encountering an ancient malevolent mummy. I referred to the film as an epic, and that’s just how it feels, it’s honestly more like an Indiana Jones film than anything else, the soaring music, the action, the quippy dialogue, the genuine creepy moments, it’s all there.

Our main trio of characters are Rick O’Connell (Brendan Fraser), American, former member of the French Foreign Legion. Evelyn Carnahan, a British Egyptologist (Rachel Weisz), and her brother Jonathan Carnahan (John Hannah)…who seems to be a bit of a playboy more than anything else.

The Chemistry between Brendan Fraser and and Rachel Weisz’s characters is fantastic. I know I mentioned it already but this is like the true 4^th Indy film, more so than The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull ever was. Arnold Vosloo plays the titular creature with gravitas, as with Universal’s original 1932 film, this mummy is no simple shambling brute but a powerful, intelligent being more akin to a sorcerer. Whilst we’re talking actors I can’t forget that this film has it’s moments of hilarity, most notably when Kevin J. O’Connor or Omid Djalili are on screen. Honestly the whole cast is fantastic.

The locations are equally good. Sweeping desert vistas, dark foreboding tombs, opulent villas and all set in 1920’s colonial Egypt. This is all enhanced further by Jerry Goldsmith’s grand musical score which puts you in mind of the epics of earlier decades, totally suited to scale of this film.

Even the CGI effects manage to stand the test of time and mostly hold up, even by today’s standards, at the time they looked incredible. If I had to be nit picky I’d say the lighting looks a little off when we are seeing the animated mummy for the first time, but honestly for 1999 I should just shut the hell up, especially if we look at the Scorpion King from this film’s sequel which reeeeeallly doesn’t hold up…maybe we’ll get to that sometime.

From a horror point of view, what’s here to justify that label? Well as I mentioned this is part of Universal’s horror legacy, with The Mummy being one of the original ‘Universal Monsters’. There are plenty of creepy parts to this film, far more than in the 1932 original. We see animated corpses, flesh eating bugs, and one poor character has parts of his body removed. Under the action and romance, this film doesn’t forget its horror roots.

Having said this the film can get pretty goofy at times. This can somewhat take the sense of danger away at times, we don’t really feel that any of our main group are going to die. Plenty of characters do die in the film, but it’s certainly not going to be a surprise. If the film lacks anything it’s subtlety. It’s grand, it’s dramatic, but it’s not clever.

So is it any good? The truth is, I’ve watched this film more times than most in my collection, it’s a film that I can watch over and over without getting bored, it’s a special film to me and is a big reason why I have a love for Mummies. Universal knew what they were doing with this reboot, but I’m giving The Mummy 4 scarabs out of 5. I did debate giving this a 5, my enjoyment of the film ultimately carries the most weight here, I absolutely love it…but it really isn’t a 5. You could argue that if it had that subtlety and a greater sense of true danger then maybe it would ultimately be less enjoyable. Perhaps…perhaps it’s difficult for a film like this to attain such heights, is it trying to be too many things? This is still a very good film and one I’ll no doubt watch again and again in the future.

**WARNING** SPOILERS BELOW **WARNING**

Welcome to the spoiler section. This is the part where I can bring up some specific parts of the film which I’d like to talk about more, whether they be good, or bad.

So I mentioned that the film has its creepy moments. For me the best of these is after the group we are following has survived their initial encounter with the resurrected mummy. They have returned to Cairo and one of the American trio who had his eyes and tongue removed by the mummy, which is already pretty nasty, is sat in a room with a mysterious masked figure and Beni. Beni tells him that Prince Imhotep thanks him for his hospitality…and his eyes…and his tongue… It’s a deliciously macabre way of revealing to the poor man that the figure before him, who he cannot even see, is the same mummy who took his body parts from him…and now more is needed. It’s the scenes like this which remind you of the film’s horror roots.

I could really pick any of the moments that O’Connell and Beni (Yes I know I used a surname and a first name but that’s how they’re generally referred to) are on screen together. The one me and my friend Josh seem to quote occasionally is just after the boat they are all travelling on has sunk and they wade to opposite shores of the river. The two of them are in a race to reach Hamunaptra, the hidden city of the dead, first. Beni looks across at O’Connell and shouts “Hey O’Connell, it looks to me like I’ve got all the horses!” and O’Connell quips back, “Hey Beni, looks to me like you’re on the wrong side of the river!” hey it doesn’t sound like much but once you’ve experienced the relationship these two have this scene is absolute gold.

Time to put this review to rest.

27 – Storytime (The Evil Dead)

Standing beside Donald on the village green you cast your eye about at the fantastical costumes people are wearing. The event feels similar to Halloween back home but only if everyone put 110% into their costumes and took things very seriously.

Mentioning this to Donald he smiles and explains.

The Festival of The Dead is a local tradition going back centuries, though it shares the costumes with Halloween we’ve kept our own festivities strictly traditional. Some of those costumes you see are passed down through the generations, you won’t find any shop bought examples here.

Every year we don these ancient outfits and this year’s narrator reads from The Book of The Dead. Every year a single sentence is read, no more, no less. Then we proceed through the woods in a great procession, each villager with a lantern and we sing to the dead so they know we haven’t forgotten them.

Ah see, this year’s narrator is stepping up.

A small wooden stage has been set up and you see a young woman open an ancient looking book. She runs a finger down the page, pauses briefly and then begins to speak.

Wow, we’re 3 for 3 with big names, though today’s is not as known outside of the horror scene as Halloween is and is not as historically significant as Nosferatu it did however spawn its own franchise and helped launch the career of a director probably best known by ‘the man on the street’ for directing the Tobey Maguire Spiderman films, Sam Raimi.

You know what it is, today we review 1981’s The Evil Dead.

The Evil Dead follows five friends who are visiting a remote cabin in the woods of Tennessee. The place is fairly run down looking and full of hunting trophies and the usual old fashioned country style furniture. Later they find the cabin has a basement full of unusual items, including a disturbing book and accompanying audio notes by an archaeologist who had been studying it. Soon all Hell breaks loose and they’re fighting for their lives.

My own experience with The Evil Dead was watching it on DVD while at University. At the time I was picking up films which I’d heard (According to the blurb on the boxes at least) were controversial or extreme, at least by the standards of the day. This one I’d even heard of already so it was an easy choice.

Slight spoiler for my overall feelings but I was not disappointed. The Evil Dead really has everything you could be looking for from a film like this…well almost everything.

Firstly let’s get my negative feelings out of the way because I really do want to mostly be praising this film. The acting and characterisation is where the film suffers I feel. Perhaps it’s because of watching the later two films of the original trilogy but the mighty Bruce Campbell, who plays Ash, in particular feels very odd, like he’s just woken up and needs his morning coffee, he barely reacts to a lot of the crazy stuff that’s happening around him, at least until the finale where he does get more involved. Maybe he’s just a quiet guy and to be fair this is pretty early in his acting career.

The other acting varies from decent to over the top, I hope you like screaming because there’s lots of it. The characters are pretty forgettable, in fact it wasn’t that long ago I watched it and other than Ash the only name I remember is Linda as I seem to recall Ash always has a Linda as a girlfriend.

So on to more positive things. The general look of the film is fantastic. It is the archetypal cabin in the woods movie with a spooky dilapidated cabin, foggy woods, a dank basement and all in a remote location.

The camera work is excellent, with Raimi making certain shots his own, particularly the camera as a character, moving through the woods like the eyes of a creature we never see. This more than anything I feel makes the film stand apart from its peers, something you can point to today and say ‘That’s an Evil Dead thing’.

Is this a scary film? As with most things that’s fairly subjective, for me I wouldn’t say it’s scary, it’s a special effects film, and though it has plenty of atmosphere it soon becomes more of a fight for survival than something that has you peeking through your fingers. Something I personally feel is that this film has a good level of threat to it, you do feel that the characters are in danger and though like I say it isn’t scary, it does take itself quite seriously most of the time. The sequels are often lauded over the original but for me this is preferable. The first two sequels are straight up comedy horror, the third one in particular, but I like my horror less silly…mostly.

The effects work is fantastic (for the most part) and varied, we have some great gore effects, some brilliant make-up, and then to top it all off we have stop motion effects towards the end of the film.

Speaking of gore, this film is loaded with it, and it’s pretty graphic for 1981, in fact, it’s time for an ‘Emma talks about film certificates’ section, or in this case ratings, because for a change I’m going to talk about the US rating. Normally I don’t take much notice of this, being UK based, but this is an unusual case. Most films like this get an ‘R’ rating in the US, but The Evil Dead actually received, and still has, an NC-17 rating. This is pretty unusual as these are normally saved for films with a very adult theme, be that sexual, or drug use or very extreme violence. There is one scene I’ll mention in the spoiler section which may have contributed to this but I’m pretty sure it’s a case of an over-reaction at the time that has never been adjusted. It IS a violent film but by today’s standards, not really. The sort of sequel sort of reboot from 2013 is significantly more graphic and that has an ‘R’ rating.

So what about my personal rating? Well I really debated on this, to the point where this is me re-writing this section. I would give it a 4 ½ if I was doing halves, but honestly, I absolutely love this film. It may not be as polished as something like Alien but it’s one of the titans of the genre and another example of a low budget film defying the odds. It deserves to be up there with Halloween in that regard and for my money this is more fun, so I’m giving The Evil Dead 5 pencils out of 5.

**WARNING** SPOILERS BELOW **WARNING**

Welcome to the spoiler section. This is the part where I can bring up some specific parts of the film which I’d like to talk about more, whether they be good, or bad.

OK so the part of the film which may have garnered the NC-17 rating, at least from how I look at it would be the part where Cheryl is assaulted and raped by the tree branches. Though it’s not overly graphic, the content is perhaps the sort of thing the MPAA would come down harder on, and that combined with the general level of gore and violence is maybe what pushed it over the edge. These sort of scenes always up the discomfort level of films for me. I can watch extreme violence (To a degree, I struggle when it gets too realistic like in something like Hostel) but as soon as there’s sexual violence I find it a lot more uncomfortable to watch.

I alluded earlier that not all of the effects are great and the scene which stood out to me was when Cheryl has turned to a Deadite and Scott is hitting her in the face as she tries to escape from the basement. She goes from mostly looking like Cheryl to clearly fake model in an instant. It was abrupt enough that I found it a bit jarring and considering how good most of the rest of the effects look it was a bit strange to see.

What is great though is the whole last 10-15 minutes or so of the film where Ash actually wakes up and starts dealing with the rest of the cast. This part is loaded with fantastic effects, camera work, stop motion and physical acting. Faces melt, blood spurts, skulls shatter and another Raimi staple of gore and bodily fluids going all over somebody’s face. Ash comes into his own in this over the top bloodbath and we start to see him show glimpses of the character he will become in later incarnations.

Right, I’m going to go read a book.

26 – That Time of Year (Halloween)

It seems an age since that day in the clearing. The day the darkness tried to take you. The day you were saved.

The good people of Carpenter’s Meadow pulled you away from the creature and chased it into the trees. They brought you back to their sleepy forest town and nursed your body and mind back to health.

The experiences over the days preceding…was it even days? How long had it been since you left the town of Solstice and your bed at the Green Man. The whole thing has felt like a dream, or more likely a nightmare.

I must say you’re looking a good 20 years younger than the day I first saw you in that clearing.

The voice belongs to Donald, the town physician and the man who truly brought you back to yourself again.

The island is a dangerous place. Most people stick to the towns and villages and rarely travel alone, and that goes for island folk. Being an outsider I’m frankly amazed you made it this far, you’re something special it seems, or lucky…

Come. I think it’s time you joined the land of the living again. Ironic really, you’re just in time for the festival of the dead.

Ok so it’s definitely throwing some big names at me recently. I’d say it’s because my collection is so full of classics but really there’s a lot of crap, I just seem to have lucked out so far. Technically this film is the most likely one to come up because it has the most sequels, but still, we’re due something more obscure.

In the meantime I’ll be reviewing John Carpenter’s 1978 classic, Halloween.

So where do I start with a film that’s often credited with being the first Slasher film. I mean probably by pointing out that Black Christmas and about a billion Giallo films came before it. You could even say the 40s Mummy films from Universal fit the bill, but honestly you could get away with saying that Halloween popularised the sub genre.

To summarise, Halloween follows Laurie Strode and her high school friends on Halloween night in the town of Haddonfield, as they are stalked by escaped killer Michael Myers. Alongside this, Michael’s doctor from the Asylum, Dr Loomis, tries to convince the police of the danger his escaped patient poses.

Chances are if you think about Slasher films then it’s all about the crazy kills, gore, and dumb teenagers. Well Halloween has one of those, it certainly has dumb teenagers, or should that be it ‘totally’ does, one of the girls is endlessly saying that word. So yes, dumb teenagers, check, but crazy kills and gore, no. It surprises me a bit that this film is an 18 if I’m honest, it’s probably more a case of them not updating the rating to reflect modern sensibilities. The kills, though effective, are pretty gore free, it wasn’t until Friday the 13^th came along a couple of years later that gore became the norm for slashers.

From an acting point of view I wouldn’t say that anybody in the film is amazing. Donald Pleasence and Jamie Lee Curtis put in the best performances but I wouldn’t say that either are Oscar worthy. I do very much enjoy how intense Donald Pleasence’s Dr Loomis is though, he puts me in mind of Robert Shaw’s Quint in Jaws. It’s especially amusing because he’s often talking to people who you can tell think he’s exaggerating about the threat of Michael Myers.

If the acting isn’t stand out then the directing certainly is, Halloween has some truly great choices when it comes to visuals. We see first person views fairly regularly, putting us in the Killer’s shoes as we stalk our victims. Then at the other end of the scale we’re made to feel like we have no idea where the killer is, or to feel like he can disappear into thin air. John Carpenter does a great job of creating suspense and a feeling of unease. We know it’s coming, we know he’s coming, but we don’t know when.

A big part of the atmosphere the film provokes is thanks to the score. Again we have John Carpenter to thank for this. His iconic main theme is one of the most recognisable film pieces out there today, so in a way it’s difficult to judge it on it’s own merits outside of “Oh shit, it’s the Halloween theme!” but the fact that it is so recognised speaks volumes. It’s a simple series of piano notes but it elicits a sense that something is coming, and that’s all you need. If you hear that theme song, you’d better get out!

The use of a masked killer, though not unique, goes a long way to give this film a creep factor. The scariest threats are ones where you cannot reason with them, cannot appeal to their humanity. Michael’s mask with its blank expression and black eye sockets takes away any hope that this is a person to be reasoned with, he is a blank, soulless killer. In the credits he is referred to only as, ‘The Shape’, which feels very appropriate.

It’s hard to ignore how much of a big deal this film was when it comes to low budget films making it in the industry. The film made over 70 million dollars with a budget of significantly less than half a million. It opened the floodgates to small independent films coming out of the shadows and becoming household names. Of course this often resulted in them spawning endless increasingly diluted sequels, but the fact that Hollywood gave a shit about them at all was a win for Horror as whole.

Rating time, and this wasn’t as cut and dry as you might think. A bit like with the last film, Nosferatu, despite this being hailed as one of the horror masterpieces I also have to take into account how much I like the film personally. Now this isn’t my favourite Halloween film, it’s not even my 2^nd favourite Halloween film. A 5 for me is a film which I think is both well made, which this undoubtedly is, and one which really pushes all the right buttons for me, and ultimately it’s not one of the films that I will choose to watch that often. Therefore I’m going to give Halloween 4 bedsheets out of 5. I’d tell you that you should watch it, but chances are if you’re on a horror review site, you already have. If you asked a random person on the street to name a horror film, there’s a high chance this would be their answer.

**WARNING** SPOILERS BELOW **WARNING**

Welcome to the spoiler section. This is the part where I can bring up some specific parts of the film which I’d like to talk about more, whether they be good, or bad.

A part of the film which never made much sense to me was in the opening sequence when Michael’s sister and her boyfriend go upstairs together. Michael watches them go through the window, then, in the amount of time it takes Michael to go round the back of the house and get the knife from the kitchen, the boyfriend is already leaving. Wow. I feel bad for her, not only does she get stabbed to death by her little brother, but it lasts longer than her boyfriend.

Actually I don’t feel too bad for her, I mentioned before about the acting not being particularly stand out. Well, hers does because it’s pretty lacklustre, I don’t get much of an impression that she’s being stabbed, more that she’s mildly irritated by the knife.

Something else which stood out to me was a scene where Michael is following Tommy Doyle outside the school and for whatever reason we’re not viewing it from Michale’s perspective, instead we’re viewing it from the back seat of the car. At first I thought this was a mistake and it’s supposed to be from the front, but then we see Michael sitting in the front, so maybe it’s more like we, the viewer, are a passenger, along for the ride. I’m pretty sure everything visually in this film is done that way for a reason.

I referenced it earlier but something which you can never unhear is the amount of times the character Lynda uses the word ‘Totally’. She says it all…the…time, 11 times in…total, at least according to the Halloween wiki.

As a last point I should talk about Michael’s seemingly unlimited stamina and resilience. He’s stabbed in the neck, the eye, the chest and then shot 6 times and still manages to get away. Now, as far as we know Michel is just a regular guy. You could put some of it down to adrenaline, particularly the stabbings, but being shot 6 times in the chest and falling from an upstairs window you think would incapacitate him at least longer than the few seconds it takes Dr Loomis to look out of the window. This raises the question, is he really just a man? It’s often theorised that he’s the walking embodiment of evil and so cannot truly be killed, or that he won’t rest until he’s fulfilled some agenda. Personally I like the idea that he represents evil itself, evil that has to steal a car…but still evil…

Odd, I thought I saw somebody staring at me from across the street. It’s probably nothing.

25 – Seen and Not Heard (Nosferatu)

As you approach the injured child you find yourself distracted by the glowing object. The boy is saying something to you but his voice seems to fade away the closer you get, the colour bleaches from the clearing and your hand reaches out, not to the boy, but to the object.

The boy appears to be shouting now, though his voice is barely audible, a faint whisper in the monochrome shroud. Your fingers brush the object.

A grip like iron fastens itself around your wrist…the boy. You turn, the world is silent now and the child has changed. Beneath a smooth bald scalp his face seems to have elongated, rat-like, his teeth likewise longer now.

You cry out, a silent cry and the boy creature bores into you with a beady intense stare, it draws you in, soothing and terrifying all at once.

Suddenly the rat thing jerks it’s head to the side, it releases it’s grip and you find yourself pulled backwards by strong hands, pulled back into a world of sound, and shouting, and colour.

Wow. OK. This is one of the true milestones of Horror cinema. It’s certainly not the first horror film, not even the first feature length horror film, but it’s probably the one that the most people will have heard of if you mention the silent era of horror. It’s going to be quite a different film to review as well, many of the things we associate with film are either not present here or are in their infancy and I’m going to take all of that into account as I review Nosferatu: A Symphony of Horror, the 1922 original.

First, since there are a bunch of different prints of this, the version I watched was the Eureka Masters of Cinema Blu-Ray featuring the 2006 restoration. Essentially this just means the colour tints for various parts are a certain way and the musical score is the Berndt Heller re-imagining. For a more in depth look I urge you to read this article by Brent Reid.

So what’s it about? Well, if you’ve read Dracula then…its kind of like that…sort of. It’s an adaptation of Bram Stoker’s novel though it’s certainly not that true to the book. There was in fact a legal dispute at the time with Stoker’s widow who was very much still alive at the time and hadn’t given permission for the material to be used. She won that battle and all copies of the film were ordered to be handed over to be destroyed. Thankfully some copies survived allowing us to view this piece of cinema history over 100 years later. So yeah…it’s Dracula.

Alright, that’s a bit flippant of me. The story is about a young man, Thomas Hutter, who is sent to Transylvania to meet a client of the company he works for. This client, Count Orlok is looking to move to Hutter’s own town of Wisborg in Germany. Hutter soon discovers that the count hides a terrible secret. So yeah…it’s Dracula.

How does one judge the acting in a piece like this? The age of silent cinema is very different, it’s almost a different medium entirely. The actors use exaggerated facial expressions and body movements to portray emotion and action and the results are far more effective than you might think. When combined with the title cards I never found myself lost as to what was happening or how a character was feeling. There is of course the caveat that I have read the book and have seen at least 3 other sound adaptations of the story, but still, the experience did not feel as far removed from a regular sound film as you might expect.

This film is beautiful. The locations we visit, be it rural countryside, gothic castle or industrial town work together is way which feels believable. Interestingly it is set in the early 19^th century and not the late 19^th almost turn of the century period of the book itself, a period which would have been only about 25 years before this film was made. Perhaps this was done to give it more of an old world mysterious feel, a bit like setting a film made today in the 1930s rather than 1999, both would technically be a period piece but a lot more people remember the later date.

OK I went a bit off track there, but yes, everything looks great, the use of shadow in particular is fantastic, the shot which sticks out in my mind is the iconic shadow of Count Orlok on the stairs where we see only his shadow ascending, clawed hands reaching out, it’s effectively creepy and probably had audiences in 1922 peeking through their fingers. Though not actually scary, certainly not for modern audiences, the film has a fantastic gothic atmosphere and could certainly be described as spooky at the very least. The count himself does vary somewhat though. At times he looks positively goofy whilst at others he appears a true and ominous threat.

The film uses at least a couple of fun special effects that you wouldn’t expect in a film from this era. Firstly we have a scene of Count Orlok rising straight backed from a coffin, an effect apparently combining both mechanical manipulation with a back board and stage hands, and an element of stop motion. The other interesting effect was a character fading out of existence, a fairly simple effect, even at the time but not necessarily one that a filmmaker would think to use. Horror as genre, like sci-fi, really gives great scope for experimentation, for example why would a character fade out in a drama, it’s one of the reasons I find older horror so fascinating to watch.

Rating time, no pressure or anything. So…this is quite difficult. As a piece of cinema history Nosferatu is undoubtedly a 5, however these ratings aren’t really about that though, they’re more about how much I enjoyed them as well as how ‘good’ they are. With that in mind I’m going to give Nosferatu 4 unfortunate scarecrows out of 5. It’s difficult to really judge this film in the same way that sound films are judged, it’s almost a different medium. It’s a beautiful piece of art, but as a movie I found myself at times engaged more due to the necessity of reading the cards or by the novelty of watching something more than a century old, rather than the film’s merits. Having given it that rating though, everybody should see this film at least once. It’s probably not a film you’ll come back to again and again, but it’s a true piece of cinema history.

**WARNING** SPOILERS BELOW **WARNING**

Welcome to the spoiler section. This is the part where I can bring up some specific parts of the film which I’d like to talk about more, whether they be good, or bad.

There were some stand out scenes in the film, for various reasons.

I already mentioned the scene of count Orlok’s shadow ascending the stairs. This is the one that’s often shown in stills of the film, but actually it’s the shots after that which really stood out to me. Count Orlok extends his arm and his hand and fingers appear to elongate and stretch through the doorway. Then as Thomas’s wife Ellen backs away onto the bed the shadow of Orlok’s hand slides onto her body and grasps her heart, it’s a fantastic sequence.

Something else I enjoyed, for entirely different reasons was when an angry crowd, upset by the deaths of so many townsfolk since the Count’s arrival in town, are chasing the madman ‘Knock’, Thomas’s former employer. They are searching for him when one of them sees a scarecrow in a field and they run up to it, cast it down and then proceed to fling it about all over the place. It’s a fun and somewhat unexpected bit of comedy and it made me smile.

Another fun sequence is when Count Orlok disguised as a coach drive picks up Hutter to transport him to the castle. The scenes of the coach driving through the countryside are sped up to give a sense of speed. A common enough effect, often used to make car chases seem more dramatic but for whatever reason I wasn’t expecting to see it here. What it actually did was put me in mind of the fact that old film footage often appears sped up due to the different frame rate, though this isn’t the case here, the film having been adjusted so it appears at amore natural speed.

The other interesting part of the coach scene is that one shot is a negative, though that’s not the whole story. In the shot the coach is travelling through the forest which appears to be glowing white with a black smoke or fog in the foreground. The thing is the coach should appear white here as the ‘colours’ are inverted, but in fact it’s still black, so the shot must have been adjusted somehow to retain the black of the coach. There really are lots of interesting techniques being used.

I’ve talked long enough, darkness draws in, the shadows lengthen, it’s time to go…

24 – Distress Call (Supernova)

Wandering through the woods, moving towards this new town of Llort, you begin to wonder what you’ve got yourself into on this island of horrors. As soon as you make it back to your room you’re packing your bags and getting the hell out of here.

“Help me!”

You stop in your tracks, a voice, asking for help…ordinarily you’d call back, try to find them, but your experiences so far have taught you to be…cautious…

Fuck it they’ve taught you to stay as far away as possible from, well, anything.

“Please…”

Telling yourself that you’re making a big mistake you creep cautiously towards the voice. You see a faint glow through the trees and eventually make out a clearing. A young boy is laying prone, a small tree lays fallen across his legs, beside him is brightly glowing object, an eerie, yet enticing aura surrounds it.

“Is somebody there? Please…my leg…”

Never taking your eyes off the object, you step from the trees.

A pleasant surprise this time, I get to review a film which I haven’t seen for so long it felt almost new…almost. One of the films I owned before I started collecting films for this project and one which, as far as I’m aware, is fairly unknown, or at the very least forgotten.

It’s a Sci-fi horror where a ship responds to a distress call, it’s not Alien, it’s not Event Horizon, it’s 2000’s Supernova, directed by Walter Hill…or is that Thomas Lee? Either way, it’s time to review it.

The film follows the crew of the Nightingale, a medical ship with a complement of 6. After a brief introduction to the ship and crew they receive a distress call from a distant star system and go to investigate. As you would expect things don’t go well and the crew find themselves fighting for their lives. So yeah, sounds a bit like Event Horizon…

I should point out now that the pleasant surprise was for seeing a film that felt new, not at the quality of the film. This film was handled very badly. The director himself, Walter Hill, didn’t even want to put his name to it so the pseudonym Thomas Lee was used. Hill’s work was screened to test audiences without special effects, which Hill said would go very badly, and it was badly received. MGM got a second director in to change things, this also didn’t go well and ultimately they asked Francis Ford Coppola of all people to edit the film. So yeah it was all a bit of a shit show. Apparently Hill wanted to do something that sounded more akin to Event Horizon with grim effects and creature makeup whilst MGM wanted it to be sexy and fun. I’d love to have seen Hill’s original vision for the film but instead we got this mishmash.

Talking of sexy and fun it’s certainly quite a horny film. Most of the cast get it on at some point, in fact everyone except for the captain and the Navigator and he’s constantly flirting with the ship’s computer called ‘Sweetie’. It’s not super graphic but it’s prominent enough that it feels a bit Red Shoe Diaries. It’s very of its time and something that would probably have been less of a focus 10 years earlier or later.

The story, as we’ve already noted, is fairly generic, the space mission gone wrong, mysterious alien artefacts, explosions and time limits. There’s very little to make this stand out from a myriad of other films of this sub-genre. I didn’t find myself being too invested in what was going on with the plot, its sort of a film of two halves, the first half being a pure science fiction film, albeit a fairly grim one, whilst the second half it becomes a slasher film…wait…isn’t that Alien? You see?

I have to say, with how badly this film did and how much it seemingly disappeared into the ether, I had some fun with it. I think maybe something is wired in me where a sci fi horror is always enjoyable to me on some level even if it’s not that great. Just the fact that I’m taken to another place, and in this other place is also a horror film. I love films that take me out of my own reality and this film does do that.

Something else I love in my Sci fi is James Spader, ever since watching Stargate at the cinema back in 1994 and more recently hearing him as Ultron in Avengers: Age of Ultron. He’s good in this film and so is everyone else, as far as the actors go they did a good job, they just got put into a sub-par film.

The effects in the film are pretty good, you can tell that they had a decent budget, we are unfortunately at a CGI heavy era but at DVD quality at least they hold up pretty well having been done by Digital Domain, a company responsible for the special effects in an enormous number of films including many of the recent Marvel films. In terms of more contemporary films they handled the effects in Titanic, Armageddon and Lake Placid.

As is often the case I’ve really found myself torn between a couple of scores for this on. Let’s start by saying I easily took a 4 or 5 out of the equation, it’s also not a 1 so that leaves a 2 or a 3. It’s very middle of the road, but it should have been more than that, there’s a better film in here, it was…disappointing and disappointing films get 2 Pears out of 5. If this happens to be on TV sometime, or pops up on your streaming service, it’s got some entertainment value, but I wouldn’t go out of your way to see it.

**WARNING** SPOILERS BELOW **WARNING**

Welcome to the spoiler section. This is the part where I can bring up some specific parts of the film which I’d like to talk about more, whether they be good, or bad.

As I watched this film there was at least one scene where I was like “Oh yeah, I remember this scene” so the film obviously had some stand out moments, but only stand out enough to bury themselves in my subconscious. The one where I really got that sudden recollection was when the crew wake up from their naked warp sleep thing, they had to be naked, it was very important to the plot…but yes they wake up and the captain’s pod has malfunctioned. This was one of the cooler scenes in the film, the captain has become fused to his pod, like the warp jump tried to combine the two of them. The effects and the tension in this scene are great and it really shows how much potential the film had, we really needed more of this. Body horror and sci-fi go so well together and we really don’t get any more of it in the rest of the film unless you count the character Karl Larson’s ‘Vampire from an episode of Buffy’ face later in the film.

Another scene which stood out, and again one that I remembered once I’d seen it again was when Ben, the aforementioned Navigator, is trapped in a room, dying, whilst a mutated Karl tries to break his way in. Ben tries to get Sweetie to remove all of the oxygen from the room, his override code being “I Love You”, to which Sweetie responds “I’ve always known that Benjamin” and her subsequent tone of loss when Ben dies and she can no longer hear him. It’s a surprisingly moving moment between Man and Computer.

Honestly this is a struggle, there is VERY little that really stood out to me in this film or worth talking about in any great detail. These two examples make me sad more than anything, sad at what this could have been.

In the words of Dr Evers…it’s a bomb.

23 – On The Menu (Troll 2)

The wolves are real, you turn and fling open the door behind you which presents you with a long and dimly lit corridor.

As you rush down it’s length you see a stairwell on your right, but the bandaged foot you see descending from the floor above eliminates that option and you sprint straight ahead. The corridor seems endless and the sound of the wolves is still there, the echoing making the distance impossible to judge, waiting any second for claws on your back or teeth at your ankles.

Another door! Hoping that it opens outward, heedless of what is on the other side…hoping that it isn’t locked…you push down on the handle as you slam against it.

It opens, you fly through and crash painfully into a metal railing, almost tumbling over it. Winded you manage to turn and slam the door closed, wolves can’t open doors right? Mummies can though…

Looking around you it seems this door has come out away from the town of Ubiquity, a path leads into some nearby woods, a sign reads ‘Llort – 2 Miles’.

You plunge onwards.

Another sequel! This time it’s probably one of the most famous sequels in horror, or is that infamous? This is one of those rare occasions where the second film is more well known than the first.

Wait…this isn’t a sequel, it’s an imposter, a film posing as the sequel to…a fairly average predecessor, what a strange decision, but it’s not the only thing that’s strange here.

You’ve all seen the clip.

Oh my Gooooooood! It’s Troll 2.

What’s with all these well known films, I definitely have more obscure stuff in the collection! OK so this is one of those films that comes up on lists of films that are so bad that they’re good, in fact it has a whole documentary about it called Best Worst Movie. Is it though? I really think that whole so bad it’s good only works in a couple of ways. Either, it’s not actually bad, it just designed to come across ridiculous but there’s actually a lot of interesting stuff happening, I point you to films like The Toxic Avenger or Hobo with a Shotgun, OR it is actually bad but you’re watching it with friends so you can laugh about it. I can tell you right now, that first part need not apply, there is no saving grace to this film, but it is…entertaining, just more so with friends.

Before I get to the plot the thing I’m not entirely sure about, and neither is the internet it seems, is how seriously it was being made. There’s a statement that it was “always intended to be a comic film” and I get that, it’s certainly a comedy at times, but for example was the acting intentionally bad? Or just bad? Either way I’m going to judge it on what I see, if you intentionally make a film bad, it still needs those special bits to make it work, Films like Naked Gun for example are funny because it’s ridiculous but well done.

Anyway, the plot follows the Waits family as they go on some strange holiday where they swap homes with another family, like an exchange program of sorts. Our main character of sorts is Joshua Waits who seems to be haunted by the ghost of his dead grandfather, though in a benevolent sort of way, well kind of, he’s pretty intense and creepy. They head to the town of Nilbog where everyone is acting very strangely and soon they’ll learn the townsfolk aren’t quite as they first seem and it’s up to Joshua to keep his family safe.

OK let’s get it out of the way, the acting is abysmal, especially the minor parts who sound like they’ve never spoken words before let alone acted. Honestly though, the grandfather is probably the best of the bunch, he actually seems like he might be hamming it up rather than just being bad. Intentional or not, the bad acting is amusing to watch but it takes away from any suspense or intrigue that the plot may be trying to convey.

My review watch of Troll 2 was the 2^nd time I’ve seen it, and I watched it on my own. The first time I watched it was with a couple of friends and that’s definitely the way to go with a film like this. If you watch it on your own, you won’t be bored by it but you also won’t get to shout incredulities at other people about how terrible X is or what Y is doing. It really is missing something if you watch it alone…well it’s missing a lot of things, like a plot.

The plot. I’ve done my little plot synopsis above but honestly this plot goes all over the place. I probably made it sound almost intriguing above but that’s because I kept it vague, In both manages to telegraph things which might have been intriguing had they been better hidden and also throw in completely unexpected stuff which makes very little sense, like they were bolted on. Again, I know it’s not taking itself completely seriously, well hopefully anyway, but even comedies need something to follow. There are some truly bizarre scenes which I’ll definitely go into in the spoiler free section but here I’ll just say, plot is all over the place.

Surely it has some good effect right? Nope, but then this is a low budget film and honestly, it’s not terrible, well except for some of the costumes, but I guess that’s separate. The effects are just, there, they’re practical at least, it’s not low budget AND attempting to use CGI, that’s where things can really get bad.

Going back to the costumes, the regular people in the film, that’s all fine, but the antagonists, oh boy, we’re talking burlap sack onesies and Halloween masks, Troll this is not when it comes to creatures.

Is there anything redeeming about the film? Well, I hate to say it but the ‘So bad it’s good’ thing does have some merit, but I wouldn’t go that far, rather it’s ‘So bad it’s not dull’ there’s always something happening for you to find ridiculous and that really is it’s only saving grace. Being bad can only ever bring a film up from total mediocrity, it cannot make it good.

So…the score. You would think that with all the bad stuff I’ve been saying about the film that it would be my first to score a 1, but the thing is, it’s entertaining. It may be badly made, have a weak plot, and have terrible acting, but it isn’t boring. For a film to get the lowest possible score it needs to be a film I forget 5 minutes later, and this film isn’t that. It is still bad though, I’m giving Troll 2, 2 Corn on the Cobs out of 5. This isn’t a film that you should definitely watch, but if you do then my recommendation is to get a group of friends together, have a few drinks or whatever, and do a group watch.

**WARNING** SPOILERS BELOW **WARNING**

Welcome to the spoiler section. This is the part where I can bring up some specific parts of the film which I’d like to talk about more, whether they be good, or bad.

Ok what to talk about…there’s so much but I’ll keep it fairly brief.

Regarding what I said earlier about the plot being telegraphed. At the beginning of the film Joshua’s grandfather, in ghost form it turns out, is reading him a story about goblins. It’s fairly standard fairy-tale stuff but in it we learn that the goblins are vegetarian, can change their appearance and feed people a substance to turn them into plant matter they can digest. I mean sure, tease the goblins but don’t tell us everything about them. As soon as we get to Nilbog we’re sure that the townsfolk are just goblins in disguise, there’s no ambiguity about whether it’s all of them, or some of them. I guess we’re supposed to know but a bit of intrigue would have given this some much needed depth.

I think the part which I always remember the most is when Joshua decides the only way to stop his family from eating the food that will turn them into Goblins. He pisses over it. Honestly I didn’t see it coming and it had me laughing, then straight after this Joshua’s dad utters the great line “You can’t piss on hospitality, I won’t allow it!” See bits like this were great fun, there’s a few stand out scenes that are truly funny, but the way they’re acted and the mediocrity of the surrounding parts of the film, many of which are just bad, rather than amusing and bad stops scenes like this from lifting this any higher than the 2 it received.

The best character in the film is probably Creedence Leonore Gielgud, the Queen of the goblins who is outrageously over the top and throughout the course of the film, turns a boy into a tree, chops him up with a chainsaw, gets her hand chopped off with an axe and seduces another character with a corn on the cob. She’s absolutely ridiculous.

Talking about these specific scenes and characters I realise I’m making it sound fun, and it is, it is fun, its just also very bad.

Won rof eyb.

22 – Freeze Frame (Frozen)

The darkness is shattered by a glare of white light as the tape begins to play, static again? No, this time it’s actual snow, a blizzard, it swirls about the screen, the camera is fixed on something blue- grey, is that? The picture spins, a dizzying whirl, the sound of howling wind and…other howling.

The spinning abruptly stops and the camera focuses on a snow boot, the top of the foot, we’re looking down, did somebody drop the camera? The picture slides slowly to the right, blurry dark shapes move about against the fuzzy grey-white snow below, out of focus.

The camera jerks into motion again, the ground rushes up to the meet it, with a loud screech the picture turns black again but the howling continues, the wind and the…other. You’ve had enough, you reach to eject the tape but the tape is already out.

The howling…continues…

Phew, no anthologies this time, in fact this is a fairly short one, but a bit of a different genre to we’ve had before. That’s right it’s Disney’s…OK obligatory joke out of the way, the actual film I’m reviewing came first, it’s Adam Green’s 2010 film Frozen.

I say it’s a different genre, I mean it’s the ‘People trapped in/on X’ genre, which we kind of had with Devil, but this is real life stuff, no supernatural stuff here, and that, is what makes these kind of films special. This is something that could feasibly happen to you, and that, for me, is scary.

So what’s the premise, and is this actually a horror film?

The film follows 3 friends, Dan, Parker and Joe as they spend the day on the slopes, skiing and snowboarding. Dan and Parker are a couple, with Joe being Dan’s best friend. Everything’s going well till the three of them become stranded on the chairlift, the operator having shut it down thinking everyone was off. The place is shutting down for a few days so no help is coming any time soon. So that’s our set up and it takes it’s time getting there, but honestly, we’re going to be spending a large portion of this film in one place, so it’s nice to have the long build up.

So is it horror? Well I think so, it’s a horrific situation to be in and more importantly it feels like one. It doesn’t feel like we’re going to cut to potential rescuers, it’s not some epic disaster movie. It’s 3 people in terrifying situation trying to survive. We also concentrate on the darker side of things such as injury detail.

Now I’m pretty sure I’ve talked about this before. I am generally fine with gore, I can watch it no problem…mostly, it all depends on how real it is, the more realistic it becomes the harder it is to watch. Like I’m fine with something like Braindead where there’s ridiculous gore all over the place, but something like Hostel is hard to watch. Now I’m not saying this is a Hostel, but it has realistic injury so consider that a warning if you struggle with that.

OK, let’s talk about how I felt watching this film. You would think it would be boring, and yes, a lot of the time it is, but the rest of the time the way I felt was on edge, I found myself thinking stuff like “Oh no, that’s a bad idea” or just generally stressing out, which is exactly what a film like this should be doing to you. The problem is, these moments are interspersed with dull, boring dialogue where we ultimately find ourselves waiting for the next thing to happen rather than engaging with the characters.

Characters is a strong word. I get that this isn’t some slasher film where we get the archetypal characters, these are supposed to be regular people. The problem is, they’re too regular and the parts where we’re not watching them actually doing stuff really drag. They’re not terrible and I think a lot of the criticism the film got for poor acting is a bit overblown, ultimately it’s an interesting idea that ended up fairly middle of the road.

That brings us to the score. Reflecting the middle of the road status I’m giving Frozen 3 frostbitten fingers out of 5. I did enjoy watching the film, but it’s not hugely memorable, in fact when I came to do the review I’d already watched it not too long before, maybe a year or so but I quickly found myself trying to remember what happened in between those parts that had stuck with me. If you’re a fan of this genre of horror, then chances are you’ve already seen this anyway, but if not then it’s very competent if ultimately a little dull.

**WARNING** SPOILERS BELOW **WARNING**

Welcome to the spoiler section. This is the part where I can bring up some specific parts of the film which I’d like to talk about more, whether they be good, or bad.

So in regards to injury detail we have a couple of main examples. The more gory and objectively grosser one would be when we see Joe’s gutted body after the wolves have partially eaten him. Yes, it’s fairly graphic but to me it’s happened in the past by the time we see it so I didn’t find it hard to watch. It’s actually much worse earlier in the film when we hear Dan being attacked, killed and eaten by those same wolves, and that’s just audio, but it’s happening there and then.

The other example and the one I actually flinched away from was when Dan decides he’s going to try and jump down to the slope bellow. This is where the aforementioned “Oh no, that’s a bad idea” popped into my head. We can tell from the camera angles that this is too high to be jumping down onto compacted snow. It doesn’t go well. I just watched it again to refresh my memory and I had to look sideways at the screen. So he lands, straight legged and breaks both of his legs, the bones sticking through the skin, and THAT is the kind of thing that scares me, I can imagine it, and it reminds me of how ultimately fragile my body is.

You know, I thought I might have more to say in this section but really there’s so few specifically interesting things that happen. It kind of highlights what I said earlier that much of the film is fairly dull, interspersed with exciting moments, though having said that, other than the jumping down and maybe Joe and Parker’s individual more successful attempts to get down, there’s really not a lot I’m excited to talk about.

OK, I’m going to attempt to get off this review, wish me luck…

21 – Cut Short (V/H/S)

Seemingly as soon as you begin to fall you’re brought to a crashing stop as the dumb waiter slams into the base of the shaft. Above you the Mummy’s hand grasps at the empty air before disappearing from view.

Where are you? More importantly is there a way out for you…or a way in for…

Stumbling to your feet you look about you, dim light filters through a high dusty window and all about you are racks of circular metal tins…film reels, this must be some kind of store room in the cinema’s basement.

Searching the room for an exit you hear the sound of static and see a flickering light filtering through the racks of tapes. Mercifully as you round one of the stacks you see a door illuminated by the static fog emanating from a TV on a wheeled trolley. An old V/H/S tape player is stacked on top of the TV but there’s no time for that now, you head for the door.

As you reach for the handle you hear soft whirring and clicking sounds, the sound of a tape being pushed into the machine.

The static stops, and so does the light…

Here’s something we haven’t done before, something a bit different, an anthology film! I’m going to go right out and say that I love an anthology film, a bit like how I love short stories, it’s nice to be able to see a few different stories in one sitting, or if you really like, and this is more when it comes to the short stories, consume them over multiple sittings.

Not to say I don’t also like a super long individual film and the same when it comes to books, IT for example being my favourite, and that’s long as shit.

Anyway, we’re getting off topic. The film this time is the…multiple people directed, 2012 anthology film, V/H/S.

Oh! Not only is this our first anthology film, it’s also the first pure found footage film we’ve got to, if you don’t include the video sections of Sinister. I’m repeating myself here but I should also say that I love a found footage film, for me they’re probably the scariest subgenre of horror, along with ghost/haunting films, combine those two and you’re generally on to a winner, at least as far as scares go.

So how to review this. The film is made up of 5 short films, linked together by a 6^th overarching piece. I considered giving each film it’s own score but it’s a little unfair on Adam Wingard’s Tape 56 which ties everything together as it has to serve a purpose and cannot stand on its own, so I decided I’m going to just score it as a singular piece of cinema, after all, that’s how it was presented. I will however break the review down.

Tape 56

As I mentioned the film is held together by Adam Wingard’s Tape 56, where we follow a gang of petty criminals who’ve been hired to steal a VHS tape from a house. It’s whilst searching for this tape that we are introduced to the individual short films.

The guys are a bunch of assholes who make money selling videos of them exposing women’s breasts in between making videos of them trashing abandoned buildings or secretly filming unsuspecting dates. It really sets them up as a group we’d like to see come to a bad end.

The main focus is a room full of CRT televisions and VHS machines which acts as a hub and is where the group view the various short films.

We keep returning to this group between each of the films as the situation becomes more and more concerning, at least if we cared about these guys. Let’s say for them…it becomes more and more concerning for them.

It’s really quite difficult to discuss this in much detail, especially in the spoiler free section but essentially it does a good job of both giving a reason for us watching the various films and keeping us on edge and interested in between.

Amateur Night

The first short film is directed by David Bruckner and follows 3 guys trying to pick up girls to take back to their hotel room. One of them is wearing glasses with a hidden camera in, which explains how we’re seeing everything.

The trio manage to bring a couple of girls back to their room and things progress from there. This being a horror film, they don’t progress well…

By the way as an upstanding British woman, what the hell is up with the amount of drink driving in US films. People are constantly getting wrecked and then driving cars, it happens in this and it just seems like something nobody I know would do, or have done even in their 20s. Maybe the people I know are super sensible, but I think maybe it’s a cultural difference.

Watching it this time I noticed some bits that hadn’t stood out to me before, namely how graphic it is, both in terms of nudity and of gore. V/H/S has an 18 rating and I feel like this particular part of it has a lot to do with that.

Some of the acting in this one is really good, a highlight for me was Joe Sykes as a high and giggling Patrick, but overall it was great and helped to sell this being real found footage.

I enjoyed this one, it goes in a direction I wasn’t expecting and was a lot more fantastical than most found footage films I’ve seen. The effects are good and the whole things feels like a believable night out, at least the realistic parts.

Second Honeymoon

The second short film is directed by Ti West and follows a couple, Sam and Stephanie, who are on their honeymoon. They’re recording everything so they have a record of it which again makes sense, especially as we skip about a bit, they’re not filming everything, which would be weird.

As the film goes on we are introduced to a 3^rd party and the film really starts to put you on edge. Honestly I probably found this the most troubling of the films, pretty much all of the others have a paranormal aspect to them, this one does not. I’ve always found real life to be scarier than fantasy, like how I find for example Hostel to be more disturbing than Saw, because it feels more believable and less ridiculous. Here, in our ‘normal’ yet disturbing situation I found myself feeling most vulnerable and relating to the characters the most.

This is the sort of film that really takes advantage of the found footage style, it’s short but that works in its favour, it manages to keep you in suspense as well as shock you, all in about 12 minutes.

Tuesday the 17^th

The third film is directed by Glen McQuaid and follows four young people, two guys, two girls as they’re driving to a lake in the woods. One of the group, Wendy, says that she goes there every year. The trip starts off like a fairly normal wilderness ramble but soon it seems that Wendy’s trip isn’t quite what the others expected.

This one started off fairly promising, but goes down hill very quickly. Unlike the previous film, this is one which could definitely have done with being longer. We have our classic, not much is happening, part of a found footage film, which is effective in making us suspicious, but then suddenly everything is happening so quickly that we don’t really have time for any one event to affect us too much.

The acting is a mixed bag with the two guys being fairly good, and the two women pretty bad. The gore in this one, though extensive also feels pretty silly and unaffecting.

On the plus side it has some interesting ideas which utilise the camera in interesting ways, but ultimately it’s the most forgettable of the short films and the only film which I felt actively hurt the collection as a whole.

The Sick thing that Happened to Emily when She was Younger

Wow, long title! The fourth film is directed by Joe Swanberg and takes place across a series of video chats between a girl, Emily, and her boyfriend James. Emily’s arm is bothering her and she also keeps hearing things in her apartment at night.

Having recently watched Host, I think the video call format works well for a horror film. We get to see one party react to things they’re seeing at the other character’s location, including things they can’t see themselves, for example if it’s happening behind them.

The acting is a little hard to judge in this one, Emily, played by Helen Rogers, is good. Her reactions feel genuine even if she is a little strange, though considering her experiences it doesn’t seem off. James on the other hand, played by Daniel Kaufman, well I’ll just say it seems bad, but then it really isn’t, is that vague enough for you? There’s really only two characters of any consequence and they do a good job of selling the scene.

This one is a lot more interesting than it seems at first glance, but honestly I wasn’t really sure what the deal was with some of what happens till reading up on it after the fact, this can sometimes be the case with found footage type films where we’re not getting an overview but are in fact inside the events ourselves. Good ideas, some good scares but it didn’t quite get everything right for me.

10/31/98

The final film is directed by the group collectively known as Radio Silence.

Here we follow a group of four guys heading to a Halloween party, one is dressed as teddy bear with a camera embedded in it, which explains, if a little strangely, why all of this is being filmed.

The guys seem a bit unsure of the address of the party and ultimately end up at a seemingly empty house where strange things start to happen.

Something that really stood out to me with this one were the special effects, which are great, especially for a short film and for something in this sub-genre. I actually had a lot of fun with this one, love me a creepy house film and I found myself swept along as the guys explored the place. There was a bit more to this one as well, it successfully combines a few tropes into something that makes sense…well mostly at least.

So that’s it. I’ve given a general overview of the 6 films the best I can without spoiling them. The question is, what did I think of the film as a whole presentation? It’s a mixed bag, there’s some good stuff here, some great ideas, but there’s also some bad. Tuesday the 17^th alone brings this down a whole point for me and there’s nothing here warranting anything higher than a 4 in the first place. I said I was going to review this as a whole so we have to look at it as a singular experience, therefore I’m going to give V/H/S 3 Meat Forks out of 5. As a platform for filmmakers I think it’s an excellent premise, but of course that means our experience may be inconsistent and it doesn’t take much to bring the overall experience down, there’s definitely some good stuff in here though.

OK fine, if I HAD to put them in some kind of order of how much I liked them, and not including Tape 56, it would be:

Amateur Night
10/31/98
Second Honeymoon
The Sick thing that Happened to Emily when She was Younger
Tuesday the 17^th

1, 2 and 3 are pretty good, 4 is OK and 5 is bad, at least in my humble opinion.

**WARNING** SPOILERS BELOW **WARNING**

Welcome to the spoiler section. This is the part where I can bring up some specific parts of the film which I’d like to talk about more, whether they be good, or bad.

Tape 56

Having the guys slowly picked off one by one whilst they watch the other films in the anthology works well, I particularly like how they just disappear during the other films so we have no idea what happened to them.

The ending in quite fun with our final guy finding his decapitated friend and then being attacked and killed by the old man they thought was dead. The close up of the zombie’s face at the end is pretty gross looking and one of the creepier shots in the whole anthology.

Again it’s hard for this one to really stand out as it’s there to do a job. It does that job well though and is much more interesting that just watching the other films back to back.

Amateur Night

I mentioned before about this one being quite graphic, well the bit that really stood out to me was when Lilly, the creature, rips one of the guy’s genitals completely off and they land in the corner of the shot! I have no idea how I forgot about this happening, you’d think I’d remember something like that! Male genitals are fairly rare to see in films, let alone fairly intact, but detached from the body.

The ending reminded me of Jeepers Creepers with Clint being carried off by Lilly. This is what I was talking about regarding it being fantastical, it’s great to see a creature feature found footage piece, the extent to which they took it taking me by surprise. This definitely came across as the ‘Main’ film in the anthology.

Second Honeymoon

OK so I didn’t mention about the gore in this one earlier, because in this case I felt like it was quite spoilery, but damn, it fakes you out as well.

So earlier in the film we are introduced to a 3^rd party who has Sam in particular on edge, we then have a scene of that person filming the couple asleep in their beds, holding a knife out, so we know they are armed, but then nothing come of it. The second time they’re filming the sleeping couple we don’t see the knife, till suddenly it’s in Sam’s neck and we get a ton of blood, it feels very much like something that could happen, and reminded me a bit of the home movie scenes in Sinister.

Tuesday the 17^th

So what I did like was using the glitching camera to have footage of the previous murders flash up on screen, that worked well and really took advantage of the format.

The ‘Glitch’ killer themselves, I’m split on. It’s an interesting idea but as a threat the fact that he could be injured, if only temporarily turned him into a less visible slasher villain like a Jason (Unsurprisingly considering the film’s title) but what makes those films work is that we’re very aware of the killer, here the killer is a bit of a half way house and I found myself not really scared of them because I couldn’t focus on them. For me…visible killer yes, invisible killer also yes, blurry/distorted killer…eh. I’m sure some people find it even more scary like that, it just didn’t work for me.

The Sick thing that Happened to Emily when She was Younger

When I mentioned about James’ acting in the earlier section, I couldn’t really explain it without spoiling things. He seems like he’s not great at acting as he often seems like he’s reacting strangely to Emily, but then when we find out that he in fact IS acting, inside the film, then it’s actually a great performance, it’s no wonder he comes across the way he does.

I like the twist that he’s helping, somewhat under duress it seems, some aliens to use human women as incubators, that’s an interesting idea. What doesn’t really seem to make sense, and seemed to be there just to throw you off and make you think it’s a paranormal situation, was the Alien kids. They’re just there occasionally, being weird and hanging out in Emily’s apartment. This is the bit that I don’t think works, at least as far as having them interact with Emily, maybe just have glimpses of them, like they’re spying on her, but hey, maybe they just want to play?

10/31/98

The special effects in this one were really fun, particularly as the group are escaping from the house and all sorts of things are happening, it actually put me in mind of the Blumhouse intro which plays on some films with the floating chair etc… The hand prints on the wall were particularly great.

It did feel a bit unfair to me at the end that these guys rescued the girl but she kills them all, that’s gratitude for you! I guess she’s supposed to be evil but honestly I didn’t want these guys to die. There is in fact a great alternative ending where they make it out and laugh about the crazy night they had, it’s brilliant!

Time to eject this tape.