19 – Moving Pictures (Sinister)

Dodging to the side as the mummified figure’s attention is squarely on the late Mr Banner, you dash through the jagged glass opening and into the dim foyer of the abandoned cinema. Turning this way and that you flee down a long corridor with sets of double doors set along its length. Choosing one you burst through the doors and into an ornate looking Auditorium.

Crouching low you slip into a row of plush red velvet seats, a musty smell assaulting your senses, the place has seen better days. Listening intently you hear the slight swish swish as the doors you burst through moments ago slowly stop swinging, then…silence.

With a screech that threatens to send you once again into a sprint you realise it’s the sound of the projector starting up. A bright beam of light slices through the darkness and onto the screen at the front of the room.

Mesmerised you watch as black and white footage appears. A grisly scene, a first person view, looking down at bandaged, bloody hands emerging from the body of a man. The view lingers for a moment before the camera, or the eyes of the killer, turn sharply to the left and the familiar broken glass opening into the cinema comes into view.

The shot moves through the opening, the view bobbing up and down, matching the measured yet relentless pace of the creature. Now the shot is in the corridor…it stops. Moving again, left, then right, finally settling on a set of double doors…but which ones?

A familiar voice, the man from the phone call, cuts through the air.

“I think you should be going now.”

I feel like I’m on pretty firm ground with this particular film. It’s one I’ve watched on several occasions and my first watch was in ideal circumstances, alone, at night, when the scares are so much more effective. I tend to hear fairly mixed comments about this film though generally not too extreme either way, but neither is it really middle of the road, does that make sense? Well either way, let’s find out. This time, it’s 2012’s Sinister.

I came into this film when I first saw it, with no prior knowledge, I didn’t even know what it was about really, bar the short Synopsis on whichever streaming service I was watching it through. I was watching it in the way that I’m sure most people consume horror films, alone, at night, on a cross-trainer…I was on a bit of a health kick at the time. It turns out that it’s not just the first two which helped to enhance the fear factor. Being in the middle of the room, with plenty of room for someone or something to be behind you, and with the added…benefit…of the vooom, vooom, vooom of the cross trainer potentially masking the sound of an approach, quite frankly this film scared the shit out of me.

Now I don’t really think I scare too easily. I mean this would be an odd endeavour if I did, but honestly, this film has some moments in it which put me very on edge and I’m sure that even if I hadn’t had the perfect storm of how I was watching it I would have found them scary. That isn’t to say that the whole film succeeds in this way, it has it’s fair share of cheesy, stereotypical moments and as with many horror films it loses much of its potency towards the end, but the moments it does have, really stuck with me.

The film follows the Oswalt family who have just moved into a new home. A home where a murder recently took place. The father, Ellison, is the only family member aware of this fact and unbeknownst to his wife and children, moved them there so he could write his next true crime novel about the incident at the house. Shortly after moving in he finds an old home movie camera in the attic along with some labelled reels of film. Ellison watches the horrific home movies and gets drawn further and further into a disturbing mystery.

The home movies are really what gives this film a step up in my opinion. I’m a big fan of the found footage genre as a whole as to my mind it provides the most scares. They feel real and are often unpredictable, the rules aren’t the same when it comes to found footage. Now the movies in this do follow a formula so really…ignore what I said about unpredictability, but they’re short and you know that something bad is coming in each of them so they have you on edge. They’re generally dingy and disorientating with little or no sound and you’re just there as a voyeur, a waking witness to a nightmare.

It’s not all good though. Personally, I think the ‘villain’ is the least scary part of the film, and as horror films tend towards, becomes less and less scary as it goes on. I’ll go into this in a bit more detail in the spoilers section but essentially the film would be better with some things remaining a mystery.

The acting is solid. Ellison, who we see much more than any other character, is played by Ethan Hawke, an actor I have a lot of time for particularly in films like Gattaca and Training Day where he is excellent. I wouldn’t say that Sinister is a stand out performance for him but then he’s playing a fairly regular guy and is very believable in the part which frankly is what horror films like this need, we need to relate to him and we need it to feel real, I think he succeeds at that.

Score time. I really like this film, I’m not going to argue that it’s a masterpiece, but it’s a good horror film, it’s scary, the premise is different and there’s a mystery aspect to it which for me adds depth. I’m going to give Sinister 4 lawnmowers out of 5, watch this one alone, in the dark…just try and avoid watching it on a cross trainer.

**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 is one particular scene in the film which instantly comes to mind whenever Sinister comes up in conversation, the lawnmower scene. Of all the grim little home movies we see throughout the film, this is the most disturbing to my mind and the one which makes me involuntarily tense up. As with the other films it starts innocuously enough, viewing a family through a window. We then cut to an almost top down view of a lawnmower on a patio in the rain. The lighting here, presumably from a light on the camera, gives a vignette quality to the scene with the edges of the shot shrouded in darkness. The person holding the camera starts to push the mower along the patio then onto the lawn, picking up speed, when suddenly a face comes into view, one of the victims tied up on the floor and we cut away just as the mower hits their head and a horrible shrieking noise cuts through the quiet scene. Even now, viewing the scene again as I write this paragraph, part of me wanted to just remember it as best I could rather than watch it again. On a slightly lighter note, my friend Jenny and I were watching this a while back and somebody rang the doorbell just as the mower was making its way across the grass and we pretty much shit ourselves.

I mentioned earlier that the ‘Villain’ is one of the more disappointing aspects of the film. His name is Bughuul, a Babylonian God who takes one child from a family, killing the rest. He does this through the child themselves who he gets to kill their own family. It’s a great premise, but we don’t need to see Bughuul, especially when he just looks like some dude going to a Slipknot gig, I think it would have been far more effective if we just knew that the children were being coerced by a demonic presence, and left it at that. Murderous children are far scarier.

I really enjoyed the mystery aspect to the film. Ellison, the Deputy…seriously we don’t get a name for him…and Professor Jonas unearthing new details as we feel time running out for the Oswalt family. The final kick being the revelation that, having just moved house, all of the previous murders occurred after the families moved out of house the previous crime happened in. It’s little additions like this that I think, along with the home movies themselves, lift the film up above potential mediocrity.

That’s honestly all I can think of for the spoilers section. I could talk about each of the home movies but really I’ve talked about the one I had the most to say about and this isn’t supposed to be a round up of everything that happens, just those bits I felt like I wanted to bring up. There isn’t much more too outstanding, good or bad, that’s the nature of a 4 out of 5 lawnmowers film.

Now, what shall I watch next, perhaps I should check the attic…

18 – What time do you call this? (The Mummy’s Tomb)

Looking up from the now silent phone you are surprised to see something normal…people.

Since leaving the relative normality of the town of Summerisle you’ve not seen anything that could really be described as normal. I mean, you’re fairly sure that the people weren’t there before the phonecall, but right now you’re just happy to see anybody.

You approach a young couple who look like they’re dressed for a formal occasion, the man in a suit with a hat and the lady in a vintage dress, perhaps a 40’s themed event.

“This? Well this is Ubiquity, premiere seaside resort on Summerisle and proud of it! You’re staying in Summerisle itself you say? Well yes it IS the capital I suppose, but not half as big or grand as this place.”

After a short conversation in which you learn that Ubiquity is the second largest settlement on the island, you follow the couple’s directions to the recently opened Elm Street Cineplex. On the way you pass various people of all ages and all…styles. There really must be some kind of event on, so far you’ve passed a punk rocker, a Victorian lady and a group of children looking like they’d come straight out of a medieval fair.

Reaching Elm Street you are confronted by a Cinema that looks far from new. The neon sign has more letters missing than on and graffiti adorns the façade. A man is stood in front of the cinema, he looks familiar…it’s Steven Banner, from The Green Man back in Summerisle.

“I asked you to come soon! It’s been…oh never mind, this must be fate. I started without you, I was right, they did bring the princess here! I was making good progress but then strange things started happening, the men I hired, not locals mind, started to go missing. It was then that I received a note, telling me to come to this location…was that you? Did you…”

There’s a loud crash as a heavily bandaged figure smashes through the paint daubed glass of the cinema’s façade, his hands clasping about Steven’s neck, embedded shards of broken glass slicing the flesh of his throat even as the bandaged man’s horrific strength crushes the flesh to pulp.

Hello again, welcome to another review, I’m afraid it’s not as good as the first, but then sequels rarely are…

This time we have our first sequel to review! It was bound to happen at some point, and to be honest with the way the films are picked then the more sequels a film has, the more likely it is to come up. It’s another one from the 1940’s, Kharis the Mummy is back for some sweet, sweet revenge, it’s 1942’s The Mummy’s Tomb.

Set 30 years after the events of The Mummy’s Hand, the film continues the story of Steve and Babe and their run in with the Priests of Karnak. This time however we’ve moved from Egypt to the US and the two friends have to contend with a Mummy on their home soil.

Something I want to get out of the way first is the time setting of the film. As I said it’s set 30 years after the previous film, but when was that set? If we’re being very generous we could say that the film was set in 1920, so this film takes place in 1950, ok, believable, 1942 and 1950 aren’t a world away in how they looked. That however is being extremely generous, as there’s nothing in the previous film to imply that it’s set in anything other than the year it was made, 1940. Now THAT would make this film set in 1970! It absolutely doesn’t look like 1970, I mean why would it, that would be amazing guesswork on the film maker’s part, but there’s no effort made to make the film look like 30 years has passed, other than the age of some characters. To be fair, they may have just assumed 1970 wouldn’t look all that different to 1942, the pace of change really ramped up a little time after this. There is a scene where a reporter mentions the ‘Russian Front’ which would again imply that this is the 1940’s…or maybe a future war…either way the timeline is all sorts of confusing.

This film marks the first of Lon Chaney Jr’s three appearances as a Mummy in Universal’s 1940’s Mummy movies and you really don’t get anything from it being him in the role. Unlike the Wolfman films where he plays Larry Talbot, here he mostly shambles around and gets very little to do, and nothing to say, he seems to be in it mostly so his name can appear on the poster. That’s not to say he does a bad job at the role, it just seems a little pointless him being cast in it.

The Mummy itself isn’t as creepy as in the previous outing, we’re missing those dead black eyes of the Tom Tyler version. It IS a 1940’s film so I’m not expecting anything that’s going to scare me but what would be nice is some creepy atmosphere and that’s absent here. Whether that’s intentional so as to make the film appeal to the widest audience or just the nature of churning out films as quickly as Universal were in the 40’s I’m not sure but the end result is the same.

Moving the location of the film from the tombs of Egypt to small town USA seems like something that would switch things up a bit and add interest, but it really doesn’t. At least when we were roaming through the Bazaars and uncovering ancient tombs it felt like an adventure, this is anything but, it’s slow paced, incredibly short (Especially when the first 15 minutes is a re-cap of the previous film) and honestly dull.

Ultimately The Mummy’s Tomb is a step down from its predecessor. The setting isn’t as exciting, the characters aren’t as engaging, the story isn’t as intriguing and even the Mummy isn’t as scary. There’s very little to recommend in this unless you’re a Mummy fanatic, in which case you’ve likely seen it already. I’m going to give The Mummy’s Tomb 2 flaming torches out of 5, it’s not the absolute worst thing you’ll ever watch but at best this is something you might just decide to leave on while channel surfing on a lazy Sunday afternoon.

**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 mean…what WOULD I like to talk more about? There really isn’t a huge amount to this film. Sure I gave it a low score, but mostly because it’s bland, not because it’s committed any heinous crimes or has any stand out bad moments, and I’ve already talked about the oddity of the time it’s set in.

OK, let’s look at our two returning protagonists from The Mummy’s Hand, Steve and Babe. Well they at least look as though it’s some number of years later and to be honest it’s done fairly well, unlike the super old man thing happening with George Zucco as the surprisingly alive high priest Andoheb who was shot by Babe in the previous film and then fell down ALL of the stairs. So yes Steve and Babe are still our main guys and…oh wait no, they’re dead. Steve spends about 15 minutes at the start of the film recapping the entire previous entry before getting killed by Kharis 10 minutes later. We don’t see Babe till a little later on but he only lasts about 10 minutes as well from first to last appearance.

It’s a shame because these two don’t even get any screen time together, the film is intent on passing the torch over to Steve’s son and we don’t get any of the chemistry that the two of them had in The Mummy’s Hand, in fact there’s no chemistry at all in this film, unless you count brewing tana leaves.

The deaths in the film are mundane affairs, with the one armed, shuffling Kharis somehow able to grab people, two of whom could see him coming for them, and then strangle them or whatever is happening, he looks a bit like he’s performing Spock’s Vulcan nerve pinch, but either way, they’re dead.

By the way, what is it with these horny priests of Karnak? Again we have a situation where the priest, this time Andoheb’s protégé Mehemet Bey, can’t help but order Kharis to kidnap the film’s leading lady. Honestly they can’t control themselves!

That’s all I can think of to talk about! Time for me to shuffle off myself!

17 – Cold Caller (Scream)

Backing away from the mysterious staring organist you turn and wander further into the fog, still travelling North, you think…

Another sound pierces the air and draws you like a moth to a flame, a telephone, an old fashioned ring with an odd flat sound like it’s being played through a speaker. Eventually the mist begins to clear and a deep blue colour fills the horizon, the sea.

A rusting white ironwork barrier borders the promenade above the sandy beach below, with slatted wooden benches spaced at 50 meter intervals receding into the distance. The ringing is coming from a mobile phone discarded on the bench closest to you.

Wandering over you slowly reach down and pick up the phone. Unknown number. You answer.

“Hello. You answered…you must be new here…”

The voice on the phone is odd, strangely grating, like each word is the first uttered after a long sleep. The speaker sounds calm, relaxed, as though speaking to an old friend.

“What brings you to our fair isle? Adventure? Escape? It doesn’t matter I suppose, the end result is always the same, one way or another…perhaps you could be different though, come and meet me at the cinema on Elm Street. I hope you like scary movies”

Well here we go, another review and another massive heavyweight. There’s not many films which get to say they changed the face of horror, but this is likely one of them. A film that came along in the mid 90’s at a point where horror was beginning to get a little stale, a little samey, at least for the most part. A film that somewhat poked fun at the genre whilst simultaneously kick starting a new wave of horror during the late 90’s and on.

What’s your favourite scary movie? Well it just might be this one, 1996’s Scream.

If you’re reading a horror review site and it’s now 2023 or later, chances are you’ve already seen Scream. At the very least you’ve heard of it…right?

Set in the town of Woodsboro, California. Scream follows a group of high school students as they deal with a string of murders perpetrated by a masked killer who likes to taunt his victims on the phone and really that’s all I’m going to say. The film is a combination slasher and murder mystery where the identity of the killer is unknown to us, something that works particularly well as we find ourselves unsure who to trust and we never truly relax.

Probably the most important aspect of Scream is that it’s self-aware. The characters discuss horror films…in a horror film, particularly the character of Randy, a horror geek, who at one point lists what you should and shouldn’t do to stay alive in a horror film. This doesn’t stretch as far as the characters knowing they are in a film it just allows them to acknowledge everything that we at home are thinking.

I’ve not mentioned his name yet and it’s his first appearance on my site but you all know the director of this film. His name is legend in the world of Horror. Wes Craven. Last House on the Left, The Hills Have Eyes and of course A Nightmare on Elm Street are just a few of the films he’s directed and despite those big names, other than probably Nightmare, it’s Scream he’s most known for. This film really had a huge impact, it feels like it made horror films something to take seriously again as a genre. Despite shining a discerning spotlight on the horror movie industry as a whole, this clever film did more to revive and breathe new life into the genre than anything since The Exorcist. It showed that horror didn’t have to just be a bunch of teens being picked off one by one…though…that’s essentially the plot of the film…but it’s the WAY it’s done, there’s so much more to it and you find you’re not just waiting to see what inventive way somebody dies next, there’s actually a plot.

Now take what I’ve said above with a pinch of salt. Obviously not all horror films were mindless slashers or rubber monster pics. Plenty were, and that’s great, I LOVE those kind of films, I have a time and a place for almost all horror. There were other clever, fun, brilliantly directed horror films being produced. Scream though, Scream managed to cross over into the mainstream. Everybody was aware of it, you couldn’t not be, it was a phenomenon. It increased the number of cinema goers who would be willing to watch a horror film and that was brilliant for the industry.

This wasn’t horror lite though, this film is gory, this film is scary at times, especially if you live on your own, this film takes itself seriously. Despite the level of violence none of it seems over the top, and that’s what makes it worse. You believe the deaths in this film could happen and that makes them hit harder. Maybe it’s a personal thing but I find more mundane injuries or deaths in films much harder to watch than ridiculous kills, I find myself more likely to imagine it could happen to me if it doesn’t involve suspension of disbelief or for me to be in a very specific situation. Hey, you watch horror films…probably…think of it as the difference between the opening scenes of Final Destination 2 vs 3. Hey, both of those events could happen, but one is far more likely. Having said that I’m probably not going to watch Final Destination 3 before going to a theme park.

The acting in the film is good. I wouldn’t say there’s a standout figure, though I do enjoy Matthew Lillard. There’s no super high highs, or super low lows and that’s perfect for a film like this. We want to feel like the characters are the boy or girl next door, regular people like you and me, that’s what makes the characters believable and relatable, not actors in a film.

Believe it or not this was another film where I struggled a bit with my final score. It’s an important film, a hugely successful film and a film that, should you ask them to name 5 horror films, many people would include. Is it a good film though? Is it a great film? Well if you’d asked me to score it on the spot based on my memory of the last time I’d watched it many years ago, I would have scored it lower than I have. My memory of the film was cheesier than it is, more comedic than it is, my memory, I realised after my re-watch, was some strange agglomeration of the real Scream and 2000’s Scary Movie, a film which parodies it. Scream is clever, Scream is dark, Scream is brutal, Scream is a 5 kernel out of 5 film.

**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.

“What’s your favourite scary movie?” Let’s talk about that opening scene. It’s iconic, it’s maybe one of the most iconic scenes in all of horror. Girl alone in a house with a stranger on the phone isn’t something new but the fact they’re discussing horror films in a horror film is the first sign that the film is a little different. I know in 2023, or whenever you’re reading this that we almost expect our films to do something clever or have an angle, but in 1996 this wasn’t really the case, we expected jump scares and some gore.

The scene also pulls a Psycho on us. Drew Barrymore is one of the more famous people in the film and her character Casey dies roughly 10 minutes into it. The scene has been parodied many times but the real scene is pretty brutal, Casey’s boyfriend is disembowelled on the patio and minutes later Casey herself is stabbed, strung up to a tree and gutted like her boyfriend.

This is the case for most of the film, as I said earlier, I think a lot of what I recalled had been ‘tainted’ by all the times the film has been referenced in other films or TV shows and the reality is that the deaths don’t feel like the common slasher victim fare, we’re not just gleefully waiting for the next ridiculous kill. Even the most over the top death, Tatum’s death by garage door, feels brutally real. Ghostface doesn’t make a one liner, the shot isn’t hugely gratuitous, her head isn’t chopped off to roll down the driveway, she’s just dead.

The reveal that there’s 2 killers is a brilliant device which makes it very hard to guess their identity, as one or the other can be present when Ghostface is sighted, making the viewer discount them as a suspect. Billy and Stu make an interesting pairing, Stu in particular is not one of the characters you would expect to be a killer, he in fact fits a common victim archetype, the Joker. Again I think I need to emphasise that in 1996 we weren’t all expecting twists like we do now and the internet was in its infancy so the ending of Scream was truly a surprise for most people.

That’s it for this review, but don’t worry…I’ll be right back!

16 – Organ Failure (The Abominable Dr Phibes)

Stumbling about in the featureless mist you soon lose your sense of direction, even the ground seems to have become smooth, like marble, or glass.

Just then you think you can hear a faint sound in the distance, something vaudevillian, something from those old seaside towns in their heyday, is that an organ?

You must have turned north in the mist and reached the northern coastline of the island, perhaps there’s a resort town here. Not for the first time you wish you’d done some research before coming to this nightmare of an island.

Following the sound a pink glow soon appears in the distance and then you can make out the silhouette of a man, sat at a gaudy magenta pipe organ, the instrument giving off an ethereal glow.

You call out to the man but he doesn’t seem to hear you, the music is very loud now as you approach still calling out ineffectually over the tremendous volume. Reaching out you place a hand on the man’s shoulder. Cold, hard, like metal.

The music stops and the metal man’s head rotates towards you. His head is spherical, his features simplistic like a child’s drawing, something both infantile and terrifying at the same time.

The lifeless eyes stare at you, stare through you, and without turning back to the organ, he begins to play.

A pretty interesting film this time. Certainly not one I was aware of until fairly recently, but staring the legend that is Vincent Price and quite likely an influence on a certain James Wan and his Saw franchise.

Don’t expect extreme levels of violence or grit from this campy early 70s movie though, it’s ridiculous over the top madness all the way through.

Nine Killed You! Nine Shall Die! This time I’m reviewing 1971’s The Abominable Dr Phibes

I feel like this is going to be another one of those films where the spoiler section outweighs the initial review. There are so many parts to this film where I want to say “How crazy was it when…” or “What was (Insert strange event) all about?” but I’m going to have to hold off and give you something more general first.

The events of the film follow the Titular character Dr Anton Phibes who is plotting and performing elaborate revenge on the doctors who couldn’t save his wife. He himself was badly injured and presumed dead after a car crash which claimed his voice, leaving him to speak using some kind of phonograph attached to his neck by a cord. Yeah you kind of have to see it.

So basically, we watch on as Dr Phibes kills off his Wife’s Doctors in a series of ever more ridiculous events. It’s brilliant and I’ll certainly go through them in the spoilers section. He’s ably assisted by the beautiful, but mute Vulnavia and of course his mechanical band, oh did I not mention he’s a Dr of Music…and Theology…there’s a reason I medically had to watch this film once I saw the trailer.

Dr Phibes is played by horror legend Vincent Price in what must have been a pretty odd acting experience. It is technically a speaking part but Phibes speaks through the phonograph so doesn’t move his mouth at all while speaking and Price’s voice is dubbed over the top. This results in a wonderful example of physical acting as Price compensates by exaggerating the character’s gestures, it’s very effective.

This film is strange…very strange. There is a coherent storyline, the aforementioned revenge spree, but in between Dr Phibes is just doing bizarre stuff, mostly involving dancing, organ playing, and clockwork musicians. If I had to describe this film as being at all like any other film (Other than the sequel) I would have to say Barbarella, it’s certainly that level of camp.

The deaths in the film are all very varied, I won’t go into detail here, I certainly do that later, but masks, ice and a menagerie of creatures all play a role. There’s plenty of ingenuity on show and it leaves you clamouring for the next crazy contraption or scenario. I guess it’s slightly reminiscent of how I felt watching Seven only a lot less horrific.

This is not a scary film, its far more of a black comedy than anything else, with a few bits here and there which would be fairly nasty without the over the top silliness slathered on top of it all. This is the kind of horror film you can watch multiple times and still be happy to watch it again just to show other people how ridiculous it is. I doubt this film is going to have many hailing it as a masterpiece but there really is something to be said about a film that’s pure entertainment rather than hugely affecting like many horror films can be.

Scoring this one was particularly difficult. It was great fun, and Vincent Price is excellent as always, I don’t really have all that much bad to say about it, but I also can’t bring myself to put it up there with the likes of Alien or The Orphanage. That’s not to say that a campy film can’t be a 5, this just wasn’t quite there, for me it would have benefitted from a little more structure at times, yes its surreal nature is part of its charm but there’s definitely parts where it feels like a lot of scenes playing out in no particular order and we consequently don’t feel like we’re watching a coherent film. In that respect it has some similarity to The Wizard of Gore from a year earlier but it’s SO much more fun, so I’m giving The Abominable Dr Phibes 4 Locusts 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.

A lot of very odd things happen in this film. Dr Phibes is using, roughly at least, the G’Tach, the 10 Plagues of Egypt as a basis for his revenge spree, I’m actually just going to go through them all rather than cherry picking. The order is different to the Biblical account.

The first plague, Boils, occurs offscreen and is only mentioned by a detective. The victim was stung to death by bees and he comments that they looked like boils.

The second is Bats where the Doctor is mauled to death by some very cute looking bats.

The third, and probably my favourite, is frogs. This one seems to provide a clear influence to the Saw films and is one of the stranger but actually quite nasty deaths. The victim is at a masked ball and is given a metal Frog mask. Phibes helps him to fasten it at the back and a ratcheting system slowly tightens the mask until presumably the man’s head is crushed. It’s all fairly silly until he starts screaming and blood squirts from the frog’s mouth.

Fourth is Blood. After a hilarious scene where our horny doctor is furiously cranking a projector to watch 1920’s porn, Phibes and Vulnavia tie him down and draw out all of his blood whilst for whatever reason he never cries out or puts up much of a struggle, he’s been drinking fairly heavily beforehand but he looks fairly aware of what’s happening and certainly doesn’t seem to be into it.

Fifth is Hail. After knocking out the victim’s driver a fairly preposterous machine is used to lower the temperature in the Doctor’s car to 100 degrees below zero. Freezing him to death.

Sixth is Rats. Our man is having a jolly good time flying his plane, dressed like Biggles when suddenly his plane is full of rats which attack him and cause him to crash. Meanwhile Phibes is watching through a telescope whilst Vulnavia plays the violin, standard.

Seventh is Beasts. A short one this and pretty normal really. A brass Unicorn is launched from a catapult and impales the victim…

Eighth is Locusts and is ridiculous. Dr Phibes cooks up a batch of green goo, which seems to be made of Brussel sprouts. He then sneaks into the hospital where victim number 7 is under police guard, but obviously completely alone in a room where they can’t see her. Using an oddly detailed outline of a woman’s body to work out where her head is in the room below, he then then pours the Sprout goo all over her head through a hole he cuts in the ceiling. Oh yes I forgot, she’s taken sleeping pills so she doesn’t wake up when the goo goes on her face…and then the locusts Phibes release eat her entire head down to the bone! Seems plausible…

OK, here we go, number nine. If you felt the frog mask was too tenuous a link to Saw then how’s this. Number 9 is ‘Death of the Firstborn’ so the victim is actually the head surgeon’s son. Phibes kidnaps him and tells the father to come to his home where he has the boy. By the way, bit of a side note but the boy comes across as far older than he’s supposed to be. Either he is, or they dubbed his voice or something, either way he just seems a bit odd. So anyway, the Father arrives at Phibes’ home and discovers that his son has been locked onto a table under a shower head contraption that will cover him in acid if the Father doesn’t get the key in time. A key which has been surgically implanted next to the Boy’s heart. That’s Saw as fuck! Or really, Saw is Dr Phibes as fuck!

Oh yes, there’s ten plagues. Number ten is Darkness and the victim is Phibes himself. Having completed his task (Well the boy survived but Phibes has already left by this point) he lays down next to his dead wife in a secret chamber, swaps his blood for embalming fluid and seals them in.

I think covering the plagues will about do for the spoilers, it really is a film where mere descriptions of the weirdness will not do it justice.

Is that furious cranking I hear? Time for another film…

15 – Imagined Fears (Forbidden Planet)

As the tape comes to a stop the room falls silent. You sit a while, listening, listening for the sound of a footstep, for the sound of a door opening, for anything.

Several minutes pass, still nothing. Slowly you stand, turning, scanning the room…nothing.

Perhaps the creature on the tape has moved on, maybe it was a prank, stories like that can’t be real. It all sounds like the work of somebody’s over-active imagination. You’re guilty of it yourself, sitting here in this old house, imagining monsters laying in wait, monsters in some dark cellar, monsters climbing the creaking stairs…

Creak…

You run, bolting for the front door as you hear wood splinter behind you as the monster bursts out from the cellar staircase and into the hall. Throwing the front door aside you think you feel the creature swipe the air where your head was moments before, its razor sharp talons cutting the air instead of your scalp.

You know it has those talons, you just know. Just like you know that it’s huge, big enough to get jammed in the door frame, the momentum that carried it through the cellar door having ebbed away. You know that it won’t stay stuck there forever though, even now it’s probably searching for another way out, perhaps a French window.

Crash!

Your lungs burning, you know it’s gaining on you…so of course, it is. You think you can make it into the mist up ahead, so of course…you do.

The mist surrounds you, and all is white.

Another classic this time, but perhaps not one which everyone would think of as horror, especially if they haven’t actually seen it. I certainly feel it belongs in the genre. The 1950s was when many of the horror films that had been so prevalent in the 30s and 40s began to give way to Science Fiction, or really in many cases disguised themselves in a futuristic chrome carapace, but the horror was still there.

Our film this time expertly combines both Science Fiction, and Horror, it’s 1956’s Forbidden Planet.

I first saw this film many years ago, back in the early 90s when it was already close to 40 years old. Despite its age, and despite its PG, or is it U rating? The BBFC website sates U but the Blu-Ray is PG, perhaps it’s because of the extras? But then it would normally say? Arghh, OK so I got side tracked, my point will still be valid. DESPITE its age, and DESPITE being suitable for those of all ages, I found it quite frightening when I was 10 and it still has that power.

The story follows Commander Adams and the crew of the excitingly named starship C-57D as they travel to the planet Altair IV to determine the fate of an expedition which travelled there 20 years prior. There they meet Dr Morbius, his daughter Altaira and the real star of the show Robby the Robot. The crew soon find that things aren’t all they seem on this peaceful looking planet as an unknown horror stalks them.

I’ll leave it at that for the story, not a lot I know but if you’ve not seen it then I don’t want to spoil anything. If you have seen it, then you don’t need me to tell you what happens, and we can discuss specifics in the spoiler section.

What I will say about the plot is that it’s not a simple, predictable 50s monster movie by any means. There’s mystery to it and certainly more than meets the eye, not only that but there’s tension. I mentioned being scared by the film when I was younger and I think it’s the fear of the unknown which is prevalent here, it successfully has you on edge.

The Atmosphere in Forbidden Planet is phenomenal. The beautiful sets, special effects and the sound, oh the sound. If there’s one thing which can be put on a pedestal above everything else in this film it’s the sound. The haunting electronic tones give an alien, mystical feeling to the whole film. If ever a film transported the viewer away from their sofa to another place it’s this one. I’m listening to the soundtrack as I write this and it honestly gives me the chills.

The film does have it’s more light-hearted moments, mostly the interactions between Robby the Robot and the cook, but they’re fairly infrequent and don’t detract from the more serious tone of the rest of the film.

Talking of Robby the Robot, he really is a work of art. One of the most expensive film props ever made at the time, costing somewhere around $100,000, 7% of the film’s entire budget, and equivalent to over a million in today’s money. He’s an iconic character and probably the aspect of the film that’s most recognisable to modern audiences. Robby is the creation of Robert Kinoshita, who also created the robots from the Lost in Space TV Series in the 60s and the earlier film Tobor the Great.

It’s fascinating to me to see Leslie Nielsen in a film where he doesn’t already have grey hair. I think Airplane is the next oldest thing I’ve seen him in and he was already 54 then. Here he’s a youthful 30 (Maybe even 29 when it was being filmed) and not only that, this isn’t a comedy. Later on he certainly became typecast as the king of ridiculous comedies but here he plays the straight man and he’s good!

There is one aspect where the film hasn’t aged well and that’s Morbius’s daughter Altaria. There’s a lot of “Hey a broad!” type stuff from the all male crew and she mostly seems to be there as the naïve love interest of more than one crewmember. This is pretty standard 50s fare to be honest and probably what society and therefore the audience of the time would be expecting so I’m not going to be too harsh on it.

Not harsh at all in fact, this is a straight up 5 Star Sapphires out of 5. An exemplary sci-fi horror, one which still holds up today. Sure the social side of things has dated, it’s very 1950s, but it can hardly be marked down for being a product of its time. If you’re looking for an eerie, beautiful film with a more cerebral plot than your run of the mill 50s sci-fi horror then look no further!

**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 as there’s not a lot of bad, and even then it’s more of a case of this film being made in the 1950s, let’s start with that.

I mentioned before about the way Altaira is used in the film. Being more specific there’s a scene where one of the crew is explaining to her about kissing and demonstrating it, trying to explain it as something all high societies do etc… so it starts off bad, but then Commander Adams catches them at it, dismisses the crew member and the berates Altaira for dressing provocatively in front of his horny men. So yes that side of the film has aged badly.

Moving on to more positive things. The monster, or at least the manifestation of Dr Morbius’s subconscious that is the Monster from the ID. The effects for this creature are fantastic, from the footprints in the sand and bending metal steps of the ship, to the red crackling outline of the monster as the crew fruitlessly pour fire from their guns and energy batteries into it.

I said before about how this isn’t your one dimensional monster movie. The idea that the Monster that killed the other colonists and attacks Adams’ crew is a creation of Morbius’ mind and the very same thing which destroyed the Krell civilization really adds more intrigue and awe than one might expect from a science fiction film of this era.

The plot of Forbidden Planet is often compared with that of Shakespeare’s The Tempest, with Morbius playing the part of Prospero, Altaira as Miranda and Adams as Ferdinand. I won’t go greatly into detail, there’s a good article on it here, but if we ignore the futuristic setting then there are a great many similarities.

There’s honestly not a huge amount of specifics that I’d like to discuss. When it comes to films that I enjoy as a whole package like this it’s harder to pinpoint stand out moments. It’s an experience, an atmospheric piece which makes you forget the present for a while and live in the future.

I think it’s time for little drink, 60 gallons ought to do it…

14 – Fairy Story (Troll)

Once Upon a Time there was a little Girl. One day she was playing in the woods out the back of the family home, playing all alone. What fun she was having, she didn’t need friends, just the wind through the trees, the light flickering through the branches above, and a voice calling to her…a voice? But who could be out here? Nobody came here but her.

Curious, she followed the sound until she came to a rotten, hollow, old tree. The voice came from inside. Come closer it said, look inside my tree it said. So she did, she peaked inside, the voice sounded friendly after all, and it knew her name, Wendy, maybe she did want a friend, but then, she was dead.

What a silly little girl, wandering off all on her own, following strange voices in the woods. Her poor parents will be devastated, oh deary me, whatever can be done?

I know! I look like her now, I have all of her traits all of her memories. I can take her place, just as I took her life.

So off I went, laughing and skipping through the trees, for that’s what little girls do, and soon I was splashing my way through the swampy ground around the big white house with the shutters and there were my Mother and Father smiling and waving at me from the back porch.

They’re not waving anymore. They’re laying very still on the floor. That’s going to have to be it for my tale I’m afraid. I’m running out of tape…

The film this time is somewhat overshadowed by its infamous…sequel? If it can be called that. Well no it can’t, that film was supposed to be called ‘Goblins’ but we’ll forever know it as Troll 2. Most people are aware that Troll 2 is bad, but entertaining, but we’re not here to talk about that film, not yet at least. We’re talking about Troll, the 1986 Fantasy/Horror that proved successful enough to have an unrelated film marketed as it’s sequel. But is it any good?

From the opening scenes Troll put me in mind of other Fantasy/Science Fiction films of the period, such as The NeverEnding Story, or Batteries Not Included, at least in terms of their present day, normal life setting mixed with fantastical goings on. We meet our main characters, Harry Potter (Yes really), Anne Potter, his wife, and their two children Harry Jr. and Wendy. They are moving into a new apartment and Wendy, the youngest member of the family, encounters the titular Troll, named Torok, in the building’s basement who captures her and takes on her appearance. He then begins to take over the building and its residents all whilst disguised as an innocent young girl.

Let’s start with something positive. The fantasy sets, the creatures and the practical effects are a welcome sight. This is still in the era where model work and puppetry is used instead of CGI. Though not on the level of something like Gremlins or Labyrinth there’s clearly a lot of love and care gone into the fantasy world and the creatures within it, a big bonus in my book.

So, is there anything else good? Honestly, it’s very entertaining, this is a film to watch with a few friends as you move from one bizarre character or situation to the next, that’s how I watched it. I’m not sure how it would hold up in that regard if watched alone. It certainly isn’t scary, but I would say it’s disgusting at times, mostly the look of some of the creatures, they often look very…damp.

The human characters are all just that, characters, everybody is so over the top, from the sex hound to the ex-marine, who’s room looks like a set from Jumanji, to probably the best character Eunice St. Clair played by the wonderful June Lockhart. Best known for her roles in the classic TV Series Lassie and Lost in Space, this veteran Actor feels a little out of place in a film like this but honestly she’s very welcome and adds a little gravitas when she’s on screen.

I’m not sure that this film knew what it wanted to be. The general feel of the film is akin to the previously mentioned Labyrinth or The NeverEnding Story. It comes across as a Children’s film in a lot of ways, but it earned a 15 rating on release and was only ‘downgraded’ to a 12 in the early 2000s. I’m not entirely sure it deserved the 15, it’s not particularly violent, or lewd, but it would likely be scary for younger children, but then so would Labyrinth to be honest and that received a ‘U’ rating. Let’s not get started on ratings and their inconsistencies, let’s just say this film seems to sit between a Children’s film and a full Horror without really being either.

This non-spoiler part of the review is relatively short this time, because honestly there’s not a huge amount I can talk about without going into more detail than I’d like to. Maybe a lot of people wouldn’t consider some of the parts below spoilers but I’d rather err on the side of caution.

I was torn between 2 different scores here, but ultimately decided on 3 Pod People out of 5. It’s ridiculous, the acting is a very mixed bag and the story feels a bit nonsensical, but ultimately it’s fun to watch, I enjoyed it, and in the end that’s what you want from a film. It’s no masterpiece, and even a 4 is out of the question but it’s not a 2 either, a 2 or less needs to lose my interest, and this didn’t.

**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! Specifics! This film has some very odd scenes.

Firstly the part where the menagerie of forest creatures start to perform a song together, whilst another character, Malcom, recites an old story for the Potters in another room, a weird penis/mushroom sings an aria of sorts and finally Eunice St. Clair blows an old hunting horn to silence everyone. It’s quite something.

Going back to Malcom. I did him a bit of a disservice earlier saying that Eunice was probably the best character. She’s fun yes, but it’s Malcom, played by Phil Fondacaro an actor who’s appeared in several films including as an Ewok in Return of the Jedi and alongside Warwick Davis again in Willow, it’s Malcom who brings a more serious side to the film. Most of the time everything is pretty silly but then he revels to Wendy/Torok that he’s dying, referring to recessive genes and it’s actually a very sad scene. Torok the Troll, incidentally, is also played by Phil Fondacaro.

Going into detail more and re-watching a few parts I realise there are actually a few decent bits of acting in the film. Jenny Beck, who plays Wendy, is great in her dual role of normal little girl and Troll in disguise, in fact she was nominated by the Youth in Film Association, for ‘Exceptional Performance by a Young Actress’.

Some of the other acting in the film is not quite so good. Now this isn’t always the fault of the actors, though sometimes it is, but for example there’s a scene where Harry Potter senior puts on some music and starts to dance to it. Now it’s hard to describe exactly but he starts strutting around the lounge, getting really really into it, I guess how you and I might if we found ourselves dancing alone, but it’s honestly so over the top, he’s flailing around, rolling his eyes, and the music is so loud it’s making the dishes fall over in the next room. The Potters would be awful neighbours. I’m going to assume that Michael Moriarty, Emmy, Golden Globe and Tony winning actor might I add, who plays Harry Potter senior was directed to act this way, because as those accolades show, it’s not due to a lack of talent.

I mentioned the creature work in the film earlier, essentially Torok is going around converting the building into a fairy forest full of fairy folk, but these aren’t the pretty fairies you’re probably thinking of, they’re closer to what you might call goblins. Personally I love how they look, they’re varied and as I said clearly somebody put some love into them. It kind of makes me want to visit this forest realm, but then, I’m weird. Torok turns Malcom into one of these creatures, though he refers to him as an ‘elf’, I would think a better description would be ‘Wet moustachioed baby’ which looks very odd. Probably the weirdest creature of them all is the aforementioned penis mushroom called Galwyn, who used to be a man, and Eunice’s teacher, before his current fungal form. But either way, he’s a wet meaty looking mushroom.

The ending of the film is actually a bit of a surprise, and not as generic as you might expect. Harry Jr. finds the real Wendy but when trying to escape Torok’s realm they are attacked by a huge bat winged monster, which honestly I thought looked great, a genuine threat. Torok though decides to save them because he doesn’t want Wendy to be killed and so he destroys his own world, returning ever…oh only returning Eunice to herself. Wait…what happened to all those people who got turned into plants or fairy creatures, or whatever actually happened to them? Are they dead? Is Malcom dead? I often talk about how I find myself not caring about characters in these films, but I care about Malcom! That sucks, at least acknowledge it rather than have Eunice tell Harry Jr. that he did a good job. Oh of course Torok is ok as well, so wait, it didn’t destroy his world, oh I don’t know, the ending is a bit odd as all of the fairy creatures seem to have gone but Torok is able to just start over…

…damn I miss Malcom.

13 – Audio Drama (Interview with The Vampire)

After walking for some time, the road winding its way out of the valley, you crest the top of the rise. The sun is high in the sky and you get your first real look a the Island from anything approaching a vantage point.

Trees and swampland stretch away before you to the north, with a glimmer of blue in the distance hinting at the deep waters of the surrounding sea. South, back the way you have come you see the deep valley and the imposing cliff of the valley’s southern edge, taller than this side, impenetrable.

To the west is thick woodland, stretching both north and south. The southerly section presumably containing Tavernmaw with the port town of Summerisle itself beyond.

To the east, a strange mist blocks your view, strange because all else is clear in the bright sun.

Looking north again you see a large house in the swamp, the road you are on passes close to it before disappearing into the mists to the east. Perhaps they have a phone, the Inn back in town would be wondering where you are.

You pass no vehicles or people on your walk to the house. A potholed driveway leads to front door and as you approach you see the building is in the Georgian style, a mansion, something the aristocracy of earlier days would call home. It also appears somewhat neglected, the white paint is peeling and several of the window shutters hang askew.

After knocking on the door for several minutes you try the handle and find the place unlocked. The door swings inwards with surprising smoothness and a waft of stale air greets you. You call out but again meet with no response. You search the entrance hall and adjoining rooms, all lavishly appointed, but terribly neglected. You do not find a phone, but you do find a tape recorder on the floor of a plush sitting room. A tape recorder in the middle of a dark red stain.

You press play.

We’re on firmer ground this time, with a film that definitely fits in the horror genre. It’s vampires, what more’s to be said. What is perhaps unusual though is that it stars big name actors, when they’re already famous, well OK, Tom Cruise was already a big name. Brad Pitt, not so much, this was really one of his breakthrough films. Christian Slater plays a minor role but was fairly established by this point and Antonio Banderas had come into the spotlight a year earlier in Philadelphia alongside Tom Hanks. This was also Kirsten Dunst’s breakthrough film.

So OK, one big star, some known actors and some future stars, either way Tom Cruise’s inclusion alone makes this a film that people outside the horror genre would take note of.

So with that out of the way, let’s review Interview with The Vampire.

I first read the Anne Rice novel around 2001 when I was at University. Nothing to do with what I was studying but something which intrigued me. Everybody had heard of the book, it was pretty much up there with Dracula as far as vampire literature went. It was different, these were sexy vampires, long before the likes of Twilight (Caveat, I’ve not seen Twilight, they seem like they’re probably sexy vampires). What I don’t recall is whether I’d seen the film before I read the book, or vice versa. Certainly my memory of the book has faded entirely, especially if you were to ask me what is different between the two, so sadly I’ll not be making any “Well this was different in the book” statements. All I can say is, I enjoyed it enough to move on to ‘The Vampire Lestat’ and ‘Queen of the Damned’, I’m pretty sure I was listening to HIM at the time as well.

Basically I was very into it at the time so there may be some rose, or blood tinted glasses present however I’ll try not to let that influence me.

The film follows the exploits of our main protagonist, Louis, the titular vampire. He is being interviewed by Christian Slater’s character and narrating the events of his life, from 18^th Century pre-USA New Orleans to the present day. Along the way we meet his maker, Lestat, and his daughter of sorts, Claudia.

These vampires are social creatures, living among the people they feed on, more socialite than monster, at least on the surface. This allows us to spend time with them in their everyday lives, not just when they’re committing atrocities, allows us to get to know them…and like them…perhaps?

Going back to that cast, let’s talk about Tom Cruise. People love him, or hate him, or both! His personal life is one thing but it’s hard to deny the energy he puts in. This is far from a standard Cruise role, he’s not the hero, not even the main character of the film, but he really makes it. Take Tom Cruise out of the film and it loses so much. His character Lestat is the passion of the film, he is all of the energy, at least until Kirsten Dunst’s Claudia is introduced. I’ll admit to being a Tom Cruise fan when it comes to his acting. He’s that rare big big star who I manage to see as their character and not themselves. He’s no Denzel Washington as Denzel Washington (Sorry Denzel, love you x).

Kirsten Dunst is excellent in what is her first major role playing what equates to two parts, an innocent young girl and a homicidal vampire, but more on that later, she really is superb.

Weakest of the three main characters is Brad Pitt’s Louis. This is early in his career, and Pitt is not a bad actor by any means, but this role doesn’t suit him. It’s hard to see him as a melancholy gentleman full of ennui. Louis’ lack of enthusiasm as a character comes across more as stilted and a little wooden. Don’t get me wrong, he isn’t awful and Pitt would go on to be excellent in a number of films, this just isn’t one of them.

The visuals of the film are beautiful. The initial New Orleans setting gives a fun slant to the usual 18^th Century Europe we see, invoking a Voodoo quality to the death and undeath. Be it foggy swamps or beautiful Georgian interiors it all looks great, as do the costumes. A lot of care and attention went into the making of this film, it never looks cheap, it feels solid and real and authentic. Having never been in 18^th Century North America it could be entirely wrong in its portrayal, but it looks fantastic, and it has vampires in it anyway so frankly who cares!

This isn’t a scary film. I would say that vampire films generally aren’t, especially when, as in this instance, we are following the vampires as the protagonists. If you enjoy horror for the fear factor then this won’t give you that, but if you love the lore and a general spooky vibe then…well again maybe not even that, it’s an unusual film. It’s more like we are following around a family of psychopaths where one of them feels bad about what they’re doing and they’re all fabulously well dressed, like American Psycho meets Pride and Prejudice. If it wasn’t for the high level of gore this would probably come under period drama.

Score time. I enjoy this film, it’s one that’s easy to watch, nothing too complicated, fun costumes, great moody atmosphere, Tom Cruise giving it his usual energy, same for Kirsten Dunst. It’s let down a little by Brad Pitt, and a rather weak final act, but still, a fun film with lots to enjoy. 4 Scythes out of 5. If you’re looking for a well made, fun vampire film with some twists on the usual lore it won’t disappoint.

**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.

Going back to Kirsten Dunst, her role as Claudia is really the most varied of the three main characters. She has to play an innocent human orphan, a young vampire and then ultimately a grown vampire trapped in the body of a child. She switches seamlessly between sweetness itself and a psychopath. More so than even Lestat she seems to revel in the killing, and though it’s ultimately Louis who she gravitates towards, it’s Lestat who she is most like.

The film is surprisingly funny, in a macabre way. Stand out scenes include Lestat dancing with Claudia’s Mother’s plague ridden corpse and Claudia killing her music teacher. OK so they don’t SOUND funny when I write them down, but trust me.

Blood. It’s a vampire film, of course there’s blood, but oh they don’t skimp here. We see a character cut in half with a scythe and in particular the scene where Claudia cuts Lestat’s throat has an enormous pool of blood spreading across the floor beneath him. Yet…it never feels excessive, it’s well done and though we have these moments of extreme violence they’re balanced out by the more subtle moments.

Forgive me another moment of Tom Cruise praise but he isn’t afraid to be ugly here. Most of the time he is his usual self, but at various points of the film he slides towards dishevelled and gaunt all the way to a living decaying corpse. It’s no fault of the film, it is based on the book after all, but when we essentially lose Lestat in last third of the film we feel the poorer for it.

So about that last third. On paper this should be the most exciting part of the film, it has the most action, the most death, and a new location, Paris. Unfortunately…and I feel like I say this a lot, I just don’t really care enough. I don’t care about the adventures of Louis and Claudia. The death of our youngest vampire is well done but I don’t feel sad about it, you feel she deserves it. Who I do feel bad for is the lady who we’ve only just met who shares her fate, it just seems very unfair! Louis never seems in danger, after all he’s telling the story so we know he’s alright, and his rampage of revenge through the catacombs feels impersonal, and again I find myself not really caring.

The thing is I do care about this film, I like it very much, it just loses something for me towards the end.

I must go. I think I see the first tendrils of dawn approaching…

12 – Creature Feature (Gremlins)

You reach the point where the grassy slope meets the edge of the road. The trail you were following ends, whatever had caused the grass to wilt and die had no effect on the unyielding tarmac it seems. Checking both ways for vehicles, which side of the road do they drive on here anyway, you make your way across and see another strip of deceased foliage plunging down towards the edge of the gorge itself. Cautiously you make your way to the edge.

Peering over into the shadow strewn depths you see the rushing torrent below, imperceptivity carving its way down through the rock. The water seems to be pooling up slightly against some trapped debris, or a dam perhaps. No…not a dam. Dams don’t move like that. Dams don’t pulsate, and dams certainly don’t eject rough, scaly looking objects like fossilised popcorn from a pan. Popcorn with arms and legs…hands…eyes…

Panting, you step back from the edge. Did it see you? What was that thing? Something from the sphere? Deciding that you don’t really want to know you turn around and look down the road, first left, then right, but which way? Left looks as though it could head back towards town, but it might pass through Tavernmaw and after the experience by the church you’re not sure you trust the place.

Turning right and keeping as far from the gorge as possible you make your way along the side of the road as it winds its way up the edge of the valley. Looking back you think you see movement in the shadows of the trees below, small shapes flickering in the dark areas, never emerging into the light.

Turning away again you double your pace. Who knows, on this island, it could be night soon…

Another big one this time, and perhaps slightly controversial. I’m sure lots of people wouldn’t include this in the horror genre but I certainly would, and it’s far from being the most debatable film in my collection. They’re cute, but don’t feed them after midnight. Joe Dante’s ‘Gremlins’, from 1984.

In case you’re unfamiliar, ‘Gremlins’ follows our teenage (I think, it’s never quite clear hold old he is) protagonist Billy Peltzer, played by Zach Galligan, as he struggles to look after a mysterious pet called a Mogwai, named Gizmo, which his father obtained for him in Chinatown. There are three rules. Don’t expose the Mogwai to sunlight, don’t get him wet, and never feed him after midnight. What could go wrong? Of course, a lot does go wrong and the little town of Kingston Falls soon finds itself overrun with monsters.

‘Gremlins’ was a very successful film, coming 4^th at the Box office for 1984, a year which pitted it against heavy hitters ‘Beverly Hills Cop’, ‘Ghostbusters’, and ‘Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom’. As far as horror films go it was number 1.

The creature effects are excellent and were designed by Chris Walas who created the makeup for David Cronenberg’s ‘The Fly‘ and also had a hand in the melting faces in ‘Raiders of the Lost Ark’. Gizmo is incredibly cute and the Gremlins suitably evil looking, though not too scary, this is a family film after…well, is it? ‘Gremlins’ sits in an odd place. 90% of the time it’s wacky, or heart warming, or funny, but then it hits you with a level of violence you’re not expecting from something that has the feel of a festive family film.

One of its claims to fame was, along with the aforementioned ‘Temple of Doom’, it prompted Stephen Spielberg, executive producer of one and director of the other, to suggest the US rating system introduce a new rating between PG and R due to the complaints that the 2 films were too frightening and violent for young children. And so PG-13 was born. Here in the UK the film was classified 15, though I’m sure I remember seeing it as a child with my parents. There’s fear, destruction, all manner of creature deaths and some human ones too, and one disturbing scene which will always stick in my memory and not because of anything visual. More on that later.

Jerry Goldsmith’s musical score is iconic. Almost everybody of a certain generation would recognise the main theme, I’ve even included it on this year’s Halloween party playlist. The rest of the music is just as good, from the beautiful ‘First Aid’ to the haunting whale song of ‘The Pool’. So good in fact that Jerry Goldsmith won a Saturn Award for best music.

I haven’t mentioned it yet but ‘Gremlins’ is a Christmas film, and not just a film that happens to take place at Christmas, a la ‘Die Hard’, but one where it’s front and centre, there’s plenty of festive carnage, gremlins posing as carollers and a young Corey Feldman dressed as a Christmas tree, it’s on the same level as something like ‘Home Alone’.

Speaking of Corey Feldman this was the same year he starred in ‘Friday the 13^th Part 4′ and a few years before ‘Lost Boys’, so I doubt this is the last time we’ll be seeing him. He’s great in this film and it’s a strong performance all round really from the whole cast. If I had to criticise something it would be the stereotypical nature of the old Chinese man and his shop but it’s very of it’s time and ultimately it’s American consumerism which is taught a lesson by that same man, not as a punishment but due to its own hubris.

Score time. ‘Gremlins’ is one of my all time favourite films. It fantastically balances humour and horror, managing to be not too silly, not too scary but sit somewhere in the middle, somewhere just right. 5 Stair Lifts out of 5. Maybe it’s rose tinted glasses viewing a classic film from my childhood, but no, I think it’s just a great film. It’s almost a shame it’s as scary and violent in places as it is because honestly, most kids would love it, I certainly did.

**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 the first specific part of the film I want to bring up is the disturbing scene I alluded to earlier. This isn’t gory, or violent or anything like that, it’s psychological. Mostly the film is fairly light hearted, but suddenly we’re hit with Kate’s story about how her father went missing one Christmas and after several days, on a particularly cold night she goes to light the fire and notices a smell. The fire brigade come to find what’s inside the chimney, and it turns out to be her dead father who’d tried to surprise them by climbing down the chimney, fallen and broken his neck. This whole scene feels so out of place injecting some true horror into the film, I like the scene but still, what a change of pace.

Another example of something that pushes this film into non kid friendly territory, but in a much more amusing way, is the fate of Mrs Deagle. Now we’ve already established by this point of the film that she’s a bit of a bitch and it’s hilarious and satisfying to see the Gremlins sabotage her Stair Lift so that she shoots up her (Impossibly long by the way) staircase and smashes through an upstairs window into the snow. Now this is the point where a family film has her looking all woozy or screaming her head off, but no Mrs Deagle is straight up dead, these Gremlins aren’t messing around.

We mentioned the special effects earlier but one scene in particular is a fantastic example of practical effects. At the end of the film when Spike is at the fountain and gets hit by the ray of sunlight his body starts to melt, the skin bubbling and dripping off his body, it’s gruesome stuff and it’s not over yet, after his body falls into the water and we think he’s finished his skeleton leaps out onto the floor and begins to dissolve whilst still apparently trying to breathe. The whole sequence looks amazing and is something that CGI has sadly, and generally for the worst, almost eliminated from modern films.

One more scene I’d like to mention is the swimming pool. Billy has tracked Spike to the local YMCA but before Billy can stop him he jumps into the pool. As Spike sinks into the water the pool begins to smoke, and bubble like the water is boiling, and eerie green light glowing from inside and all the while the music swells with whale song which Gerry Goldsmith masterfully turns into something sinister and foreboding. This is probably the scene I think of first when I think of Gremlins and every re-watch reminds me why.

That’s it from me. Time for a midnight snack…

11 – A Sound Decision (Dead Silence)

You awake. The red glow seems diminished, the sound has stopped but your head feels thick and heavy…congested. As your sleep wracked eyes adjust you see why the glow is reduced, a bright shaft of sunlight spears from an opening in the upper side of the cavern. Tumbled rocks from the opening suggest whatever made the hole came from outside, the black object perhaps?

Making your way towards the…sphere, it’s a sphere, you stumble and throw out a hand to break your fall, grazing your palm in the process. You cry out! In…silence. You make no sound, not your voice, not your feet on the rocks. Nothing. Did that sound deafen you. Is this temporary…or…

You scramble away from the object, turning towards the opening, towards the sunlight, eager to get away from the sound which you can no longer hear. The scattered rocks and scree form a treacherous slope up to the exit hole and you scrabble your way up and out into a brilliant blue skied day.

As soon as you exit the cavern the sound of rushing water fills your ears. It’s the most beautiful thing you’ve ever heard. Before you a narrow gorge splits a valley not much wider. A road twists and turns up either side, joined by a simple metal bridge spanning the turbulent crevasse, the rushing river that formed it the source of the sound.

Looking down you see a clear path down the grassy slope to the edge of the road. The grass of the path is not just trampled though, in fact it barely looks disturbed. Except for the fact that it’s dead. Wilted and brown next to the bright green either side, you don’t like the look of it.

Keeping to one side, you follow it down.

A somewhat more silly entry this time. James Wan’s 2007 film ‘Dead Silence’.

This is essentially a haunted doll film but using a ventriloquist dummy and a dark history surrounding it’s operator to give the film it’s own flavour. We follow the film’s protagonist Jamie Ashen, played by Ryan Kwanten as he searches for the truth behind the loss of his wife, all whilst being shadowed by a Police Detective played by Donnie Wahlberg, who I hadn’t really heard of, but he’s the brother of Mark Wahlberg, who I definitely have heard of.

This film has a very late 90s early 2000s ‘Dark Castle’ look to it, which I certainly don’t see as a bad thing, which you’ll see when I get round to reviewing ‘House on Haunted Hill’ or ’13 Ghosts’…‘Ghost Ship’, not so much. But essentially it’s a bit campy, but still creepy, and characters are somewhat caricatures. It’s very different in tone to Wan’s later supernatural work like ‘Insidious’ or ‘The Conjuring’ which are much more serious.

The film does manage to be creepy, but it’s short lived and only lasts so long as the source, mostly the dummy, or lack thereof is happening. This isn’t a film that’s going to leave you on edge after it’s over. Mostly the film relies on jump scares, which as I just mentioned have a short shelf life in our minds.

What I will say is that the film is fun. It’s an entertaining horror film, one to watch with friends, quite likely to laugh at or share in the gross out moments and go “Oooooh” at the reveals. Fun. Nothing special though.

One of the effects which is used in the film is the silence aspect. When something supernatural is about to happen the sound of various objects reduces, then stops. Or at least that what I think it should do, in fact what seems to happen is they slow down or at the very least get deeper before they stop. This leaves me unclear if sound is just ceasing or if time is actually stopping as well, though if it is then nothing else is implying that. It’s a minor quibble but something that bugged me since it’s one of the more interesting ‘gimmicks’ in the film.

The dummy design is good and it sticks to a classic look which is good to see. No attempt has been made to make the dummy extra creepy, it’s a dummy they’re creepy how they are. Despite other parts of this film being a bit over the top the use of the dummy is actually well done and subtle, for the most part.

As I said earlier the look of the film is a little larger than life and this means it has some fun sets. The old town of Raven’s Fair has that New England gothic look to it and of particular mention is the town’s Theatre which is a full on fog bound evil villain’s castle of a building mixed with the nostalgia of somewhere once full of life. If there’s one area where this film does well it’s with the sets.

The use of special effects if the film is limited mostly to the supernatural aspects but they honestly detract from the practical stuff which is great.

What about the plot, does it hold up? Well the main story is pretty one dimensional, we essentially follow the same character for 90% of the film but the pacing is good and I never found it dragged, even when watching it second time. It tries to make things overly complicated towards the end and I wouldn’t say any of the characters really grab you. What did grab me though was the flashback story about half way through introducing us to the character Mary Shaw, more on that in the spoiler section but it stood out to me and helped to break up the otherwise linear style.

Score time. Quite an easy one to score this one, It’s decidedly middle of the road, as is my scoring system. 3 Tongues out of 5. Looking for a group film that’s got some creep factor without causing you a sleepless night, something not too cerebral, then this probably won’t disappoint, but it won’t do anything else either.

**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 there’s a twist in the film. I avoided mentioning it in the main review, well I mentioned reveals, because if you say a film has a twist then people end up trying to work that out rather than watching it as they should. The twist is actually pretty fun, well half of it is, the other half I felt wasn’t explained well enough. Part way into the film we meet Jamie’s father, played by Bob Gunton of ‘Shawshank Redemption’ fame! Now wheelchair bound after a supposed stroke and never without the helping hand of his young wife, played by Amber Valletta.

It turns out the reason we never see them apart is because Jamie’s poor father has been hollowed out as is in fact a corpse dummy being controlled by his wife who has been vocalising for him as well. Great, that’s quite fun, and sick, we see some of Wan’s penchant for macabre contraptions come through here. Now what wasn’t that obvious to me, but maybe I’m a dummy…hah…is that the wife is a doll, the perfect doll in fact and possessed by Mary Shaw. Initially that went right over my head as a lot is revealed at the point in the film and I figured she was a relative or something, even though it never says that, oh I don’t know! It just didn’t come through for me.

Now I actually watched this film twice, as I’d seen it a few months back but felt that wasn’t recent enough to give it a proper review, so knowing the twist actually made it fairly watchable the 2^nd time and I noticed the wife’s hand position and the twitchy movements of the dad, it really does deserve some kudos for that.

The method of killing in the film puts me in mind of ‘Saw’ and the reverse bear trap. It’s suitably gruesome though not as viscerally graphic as what we see in the ‘Saw’ films, again this is more fantasy than reality. It was an interesting idea to make it so that if you scream you die but ultimately it makes it more cheesy and you start getting worked up about what counts as a scream…well at least I did.

So about that flashback story. One of the characters reminisces about going to Mary Shaw’s show back in the 40s and we get a great scene where a kid says he can see Mary’s lips moving and she then has an argument with Billy, the Dummy, with the two talking over each other. This shuts the kid up. But then what really shuts the kid up is going missing a couple of weeks later and never being seen again. Not that is until much later in the film where Jamie and the detective discover his corpse has been made into a puppet. This is probably the most disturbing story within the film and it’s then totally ruined when they’re like “Wow we solved a 70 year old missing persons case” they seem so unfazed and blasé about finding a fucking puppet made out of a child’s corpse!

It could make me scre…

10 – Look to the Heavens (Brightburn)

Moving quickly but cautiously you descend the spiral staircase, down into the coolness of the earth, down into the unknown, down into a dead end? Why would there be an exit down here, all you’ve done is trap yourself, but what other option is there?

You continue down, the string of bulbs lighting your way as the stair spirals ever onwards. Deeper, deeper, dee…you falter as the floor levels out, your foot coming down hard.

You peer out into a large rectangular room, stone pews are arranged in two lines facing a stone altar, just like up above. This room is a duplicate, but unlike the dusty neglected chamber in the church this place has seen plenty of use. The altar has a richly embroidered, deep red cloth neatly arranged on its top. A pair of ornate gilded chalices sit either side of a stone tablet which on closer inspection is covered with a strange symbol carved over and over into the surface, like two Carets either side of a capital T, or an M over a T, it isn’t clear. Whatever the symbol’s meaning, it certainly isn’t something you’d expect to find in a church.

Behind the altar you see a faint red glow, a passage leading further into the crypt, a way out?

As you head along the passage the red glow becomes stronger and a low humming noise begins to resonate all around you, inside you, pulsing, like a heartbeat. All of a sudden the passage opens up into a large cavern bathed in a red glow, the light emanating from an otherwise black metallic looking object at its centre. The humming is louder now, growing in volume with every passing second the pulsing getting faster, overwhelming your senses, a drumbeat against your skull, THOOM-THOOM-THOOM-THOOM-THOOM!

Everything goes black.

Another one from 2019, this time I’m reviewing David Yarovesky’s Superhero gone awry film ’Brightburn’.

This was one of those films I remember seeing trailers for and thinking “Huh, that looks interesting” so of course I promptly forgot about it till I eventually saw it a couple of years later on one streaming service or another. I remember enjoying it quite a bit, enough to justify buying it on Blu-Ray, putting it in the crosshairs of the random number generator. Which brings us here, to this review.

If you’ve seen Superman, and I imagine a fair few of you have, then you know how this film starts. A baby crash lands on earth in an alien capsule, on a farm, and is raised by the couple who live there. Everything’s pretty normal until one day the capsule activates and Brandon, the child, starts to exhibit superpowers and his personality changes, for the worst. For the spoiler free section that’s all you’re getting of the plot. It’s a horror film, something had to go wrong…right?

The first thing I wanted to discuss regarding this film is a subject close to my heart. Violence, gore and film classification. At university, whilst doing an entirely unrelated subject (Illustration) I wrote my dissertation on violence in film and television and the ups and downs of this interest me to this day. In the UK, since the new millennium, there’s been a big reduction all round in the harshness that films are rated. So when you see that copy of ‘The Terminator’ in a shop and it’s a 15 and you say to yourself “Wasn’t that an 18?” Yes. Yes it was, until the year 2000.

Getting to the point of all this. I was going to say ‘Brightburn’ should be an 18. But it turns out the uncut version (Exclusive to 4k, wtf film studios!) IS an 18 and the 15 version I have on Blu Ray has a couple of cuts. Having said that, my point still stands. Despite these 2 cuts (and an altered scene) the film still felt veeeerry gory for a 15 with some graphic injury detail and a lot of the red stuff. Studios, stop cutting films to get yourself a lower classification, it annoys us over 18s and really does nothing to protect those the ratings are designed to protect, especially when the cuts are so minor!

Rant over, and in case you wondered what a lover of horror is doing saying something negative about gore, it’s not the gore that bothers me, in fact it was pointed out to me that I was grinning while some of the particularly nasty stuff was happening, I love that shit, give me more of it, but don’t try and shoehorn it into a 15, give it the respect it deserves.

The film’s premise and story are fairly interesting, though everything happens pretty fast. It’s rare that this is the case, but I think the film could have done with being half an hour longer or at least spent its time more wisely. We don’t really get to know Brandon enough for us to view him in anything other than a negative light, similar to my feelings in ‘Us’ but this time it’s one of the main characters. ‘Descent into…’ films work best when we get to see who we’re losing and I didn’t get that here.

Brandon’s parents are a bit of a saving grace in this regard. It’s them who we get to see bear the brunt of Brandon’s changes, emotionally at least. They love him, that much is clear, and though their reactions are different we can see the pain being caused to them both. In a way they’re the main characters, they’re the ones we care about. Brandon himself is just a threat to move the story along, but he could have been more.

The sound design was well done, some cool ominous alien voices and effects with great use of bass, it was very effective in making Brandon seem even more threatening and gave the film an epic feel where relevant.

Score time. Another tough one, the score actually came down as I was writing this review and I decided upon 3 Notepads out of 5. There was a lot to like here. The premise was interesting and a fairly popular ‘What if…’ scenario, at least in my mind. Most of the acting is good, particularly Brandon’s parents played by Elizabeth Banks and David Denman, who you really feel are losing everything, and it’s got some great set pieces. Ultimately though it’s Brandon himself and our lack of compassion for him which lets down the film the most. This wasn’t ever going to be a 5, but it should have been a 4. It had all of the ingredients but the end result was a little bland.

**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.

Let’s talk cuts. I made such a big deal about this in the main review that I felt I should expand upon it now that I can talk specifics.

Firstly we see a lady get a shard of glass into the centre of her eye. These are the two cuts, in the 15 version we’re missing a close up of the shard in the eye with a trickle of blood, yet we still get to see her slowly pull said shard out of her eye accompanied by a stream of blood, it’s just shorter, because, you know, that’s fine.

The altered scene is when Brandon kills his uncle. He picks up his truck and lets it fall front first into the floor, the steering wheel smashing the Uncle’s jaw off. In the unaltered scene we see his jaw fall mostly off before he grabs it with his hand and holds it back on whereas in the 15 version we cut to a view of the broken window. OK fine that make sense. But then 30 seconds later he dies, his hand falls away and his jaw again falls mostly off, but this time it’s a close up and we see everything. It’s so bizarre to me, the cuts honestly don’t make much of a difference as far as I’m concerned.

I’d like to expand a bit on what I felt was missing with Brandon. The idea is that Brandon was a great kid who suddenly started acting off and aggressive and we see him become what he was presumably sent to the planet to be, an exterminator once activated. Think ‘Dragonball Z’s’ Goku meets order 66 from ‘Revenge of the Sith’. The thing is we barely get to see him being a good kid, it’s essentially covered by showing us 1 minute of home video footage during the opening sequence of the film. This is where some extra time would have been most effective, we need to really get to Know Brandon and most importantly like and emphasise with Brandon before his fall into darkness can truly be effective. We just get to see a slightly odd kid become very odd, very aggressive then full on psychopath with little in the way of development. OK so perhaps the signal from the space ship instantly flips a switch but it would have been good too see more conflict within him and some genuine remorse to make the fall all the more effective.

As I stated in the main review it’s the parents who you feel for the most and the tragedy of being killed by their own adopted son. To be fair the Dad was an idiot who tried to shoot his son in the back of the head so his death was somewhat inevitable and also pretty silly, laser eyes through the eyes and all. The Mum though, she spends the whole film trying to see the good in Brandon and her death is entirely…oh no wait she also tries to kill him, never mind.

Right! Think I’ll end it there. I’ve got a plane to catch…