30 Day Horror Challenge Strikes Back Day 18: Character you wish you could save from death.

A wise man once said that the first rule of horror movies is that anyone can die at any time. That’s what creates the tension. Therefore if I saved any person from death, it would violate the rules. As much as I would like to save, for example, the Firefly family at the end of Devil’s Rejects so we could have more sequels, it’s against the rules. So if I can’t save a person, I’ll just have to go another route with this one. I’ll have to save something that isn’t human. That’s cool with me. I have a little touch of misanthropy in me. I like animals more than I like most people. That’s not to say I’m antisocial, I’ve just never had an animal stab me in the back.

I love dogs in particular. Me and man’s best friend are pretty tight. A lot of dogs have died in horror movies. Evil or mad dogs, like in Cujo or Man’s Best Friend, I understand. They had to go. The dog in Alien 3 had to go because it was integral to the plot. The plot necessity of offing all of the dogs that have died in the Halloween series is debatable. The one I would save is the rottweiler from Candyman. When Virginia Madsen’s character wakes up in Cabrini Green after her encounter with Candyman in the Parking garage, she finds herself in the apartment of a woman she met earlier holding a meat cleaver. Next to her is a decapitated dog. The woman’s baby is also missing. When the cops show up, she is obviously suspect number one.

You know, just being accused of kidnapping the baby would have sufficed. Killing the dog just wasn’t necessary. Come on Candyman, don’t you think she would have gotten in deep enough trouble without offing the canine? Actually, she did need to be covered in blood for the whole “blood soaked bra” scene to work. Kill a person instead then. I would rather have seen one of the Cabrini hoodrats headless than that dog. Rotts are good dogs. I like that breed. If it had been a chow, no problem. Those suckers are mean. That rott may have looked mean, but he was just protecting his family. I think a person would have been better for the plot too. Most people would have reacted stronger than that. Hell, just have her covered in blood with no explanation. That would have worked too. It could have been a little “whose blood was that” subplot.

Anything, just leave the dog alone. Look at that face Candyman. How can you decapitate that? You heartless bastard! Although, it does lend itself to the hilarious idea of PETA getting shot all to hell while they try to protest at Cabrini Green. Or maybe Candyman could take the hook to Sarah McLachlan in the middle of one of those god awful one-eyed puppy commercials. Wait…that was five times wasn’t it? Oh crap. Hide the dog.

30 Day Horror Challenge Strikes Back Day 17: Character you would want to talk horror movies with.

I guess in this day and age, with ebay, torrents, and deluxe super ultra limited Criterion ultimate directors cut premium special edition 12 disc blu ray releases for every obscure flick you can think of (with a few notable exceptions), the concept of the “holy grail” movie has disappeared. There’s not a movie any more that it could take years to find a copy of. I’m not that old, I’m only 31, but I remember an era when hunting for rare movies took more than googling. Back in the day, I searched for a couple of years before I found an unrated copy of Return of the Living Dead 3. Until it was released on DVD last year by Shout Factory, who has been putting out some amazing stuff by the way, Galaxy of Terror was another one. The character I would want to talk horror with understands the “holy grail” movie, and takes it to a new level.

Cigarette Burns, directed by John Carpenter, was the best episode of Masters of Horror. That’s saying something too, because there were some really good episodes, primarily in season 1. It’s about a man named Kirby, played by Norman Reedus. Bellinger, played by the legendary Udo Kier, hires him to track down a rare film. This film, titled Le Fin Absolue du Monde (The Absolute End of the World) is cursed. It was shown publicly once, at a festival in 1971. Everyone who witnessed the film went violently insane, rioted, slaughtered each other, and the theater burst into flames. Everyone connected with the film in any way is either insane or dead. The flick holds a bizarre dark power. Bellinger explains to Kirby that he has over eight thousand films in his collection, including “the most extreme images created by some of the most obscure filmmakers from around the world,” but has never seen this film. It is his life’s dream and, since he is dying, he must see it before he kicks off. Bellinger offers Kirby two hundred thousand dollars to track down the film for him. You know I don’t like to give spoilers, so I’ll just say that Bellinger’s tale ends in one of the most poetically fitting ways it could for such an extreme cinefile.

That’s hardcore man! Two hundred grand for a movie? I balked at sixty bucks for Galaxy of Terror on ebay. Bellinger is definitely my kind of film nut. I would love to sit down with him and pick his brain. The guy has eight thousand movies in his collection. I thought mine was getting excessive, and I don’t even quite have two thousand. He also shares my fascination with extreme cinema. I love finding films that test the limits of what film can do, show, or mean. I can only imagine the stuff he could show me. What a wealth of knowledge he would be. He’s also not well, and if we hit it off, I might be able to weasel my way into getting that film collection in his will. After watching Cigarette Burns though…two severed thumbs up, Nathan says check it out, yada yada…I think I’d leave Le Fin Absolue du Monde alone. Eh, who the hell am I trying to kid? I wouldn’t be able to resist it either.

30 Day Horror Challenge Strikes Back Day 9: Most offensive character.

I have never been the type to get offended by something fictional. Things go on in movies all the time that I would be VERY offended by if they happened in real life, but I don’t see any point in getting bent out of shape over a movie. A character’s actions may be absolutely reprehensible, but it didn’t actually happen. Real life things are different. In Cannibal Holocaust, Cannibal Ferrox, Calamity of Snakes, and flicks like that, animals are ACTUALLY killed on camera. While that’s not an issue for me as I eat meat and therefore feel it would be hypocritical to get all up in arms over this, I can absolutely understand this offending people. IT’S REAL! Plus, I could never fault anyone for killing snakes. The only good serpent is a dead serpent. On the other hand, take something like the “baby rape” scene from the most controversial film in many years, Serbian Film. I was repulsed. I was disturbed. Offended? No. Why? It didn’t happen. I’m sure someone out there in this sick world of ours has done that. That’s despicable, I would be deeply offended, and that person should die, preferably by my hand. In the film, however, that falls under the banner of artistic freedom. I’m not offended.

That being said, there is one movie that features a character that offends me. Not in a “how could the filmmakers do that?” sort of way. I’m glad this film was made. I’ve only seen it once, I had to force myself to finish it, and I will never watch it again, but I’m not offended that it was made or that this character was portrayed the way she was. This one character that goes beyond repulsive and disturbing and breaks the offense threshold because she is based on a real person who actually committed the acts portrayed in the film.

This is Gertrude Nadine Baniszewski. This isn’t the character, this is the actual person. Look into those eyes folks. That is pure evil. In 1965 she took in Sylvia and Jenny Likens as borders while their parents toured and worked in a carnival. She was severely physically abusive to the girls and, from August until October, presided over the torture and death of Sylvia. She involved her own children and the neighborhood kids in the crime, which involved the repeated burning, beating, starvation, branding, partially skinning alive, genital mutilation, and repeated rape of Sylvia. Gertrude encouraged the children to play “a game” which got them all involved in violating and torturing the 16 year old girl. After months of torment, the girl died. Jenny was rescued and Gertrude was brought to trial a short time later. Thankfully, Gertrude died in 1990.

Jack Ketchum wrote a novelization of these events called The Girl Next Door. That book was a rough ride. I have a couple of hot button issues in real life, and the victimization of children, whether it is physical, psychological, or sexual, is one of them. It is the only one if my real life hot button issues that I sometimes have trouble digesting when it is fictionally portrayed. This book, however, had the backdrop of being based on true events. Knowing that what I was reading wasn’t pure fiction but a fictionalized yet still close to the true story account made it a tough read. It is well written, as are all of Ketchum’s books. The emotional intensity is off the charts. I sped through it in one day both because it was so rivetingly written and to get it over with. That book made my soul hurt.

Then I heard that it was going to be made into a movie. I thought that there was absolutely no way an R rated movie come anywhere close to the intensity and emotional gut punch of the book. I was wrong. The movie was just as harrowing. It managed to portray the horrors of the situation without devolving into kiddie “torture porn.” I despise that term, but this is one time where it actually is applicable. After knowing the true story and reading the book, Blanche Baker’s performance as Aunt Ruth, the Gertrude character, had me clenching my teeth to keep from screaming at the TV. She is so easily despisable, and the sadistic little grin that creeps up slowly throughout the film is alarming. I don’t want to go into a lot of detail about the flick, because honestly I don’t want to relive it. I am offended that this woman ever lived. That’s why the character could offend me, because it is only partially fictional.

As I said before, when a lot of people say a character “offends” them, that mean that they feel that the filmmakers were in the wrong for having that character be the way they were. I am not saying this at all. I applaud the filmmakers, as well as Jack Ketchum, for making her so offensive. While this movie turned my stomach and I will never see it again, I feel that it is an important film. There’s a reason we need films about Hitler. There are reasons we need fact based serial killer movies movies. There is a reason that Justin Beber 3D flick had to come out. Sometimes society has to be reminded that there are real monsters and real evil out there. They need to know that things like this do actually happen. To understand humankind, we need to not just see it at its best, but we have to plumb its depths sometimes. Fiction does not do this. Serbian Film, Salo, August Underground, and any other flick people describe as “offensive” all portray an artist’s vision. The Girl Next Door portrays the depths of real human depravity. Aunt Ruth, as a stand in for Gertrude Baniszewski, is scarier than anything any horror screenwriter has ever cooked up. Her character is offensive on every level, just the way it needed to be. The true story was also the basis of the film "An American Crime," which I have not seen. As for The Girl Next Door, I give it two severed thumbs up, but I would feel wrong telling anyone to check it out. It is a well executed film, and the only one I can think of that I really wish I could “unsee.”

30 Day Horror Challenge Day 30 - Your favorite horror film of all time

So here we are, at the finale of round one of the 30 Day Horror Challenge. I'd like to thank all the new friends and readers I've found during this event, and I hope you'll stick around. Now that we've got that out of the way, I was having a little trouble with how to approach this post. During film school, I wrote extensively about my favorite movie of all time, the original Night of the Living Dead. No less than 10 different papers in fact. While my love for this movie knows no bounds, I had to do something different if I was going to write it again. Well, this is certainly different. The idea for this post came from a combination of my friend Travis and my mother, so if you don’t dig it, blame them. This is my attempt to tell the story of my favorite horror flick in the style of my childhood favorite author, the incomparable Dr. Seuss. So here it is folks, the Seussification of Night of the Living Dead…

“They’re coming to get you Barbara,”

Johnny said with a grin

“They’re coming for you,”

He teased again and again

But his words, they came true

When a zombie attacked.

Smacked his head on a tombstone

And Whack! His head cracked.

Barbara, run for your life!

Barbara, run for the car!

But Johnny’s got the keys,

So you ain’t running far.

Pull the brake! Now the car

Rolls straight into a tree.

And the zombie’s still coming.

Barbara, you’d better flee!

Run to that farmhouse,

That one off in the distance.

There are ghouls, but don’t worry,

You’ll have some assistance

From Ben, who arrives

Tire iron a’ swinging.

He’s pinging, and zinging’

And stinging , and bringing

Down all of the ghouls

With a blow to the head.

‘Cause that’s the only way

To stop the living dead.

Ben starts barricading.

Barbara gets hysterical.

Her ranting and raving,

Is downright unbearable.

She tries opening the door,

And that’s the last straw.

There’s just one thing to do,

Yep, right cross to the jaw!

Thank God she’s out cold.

That girl’s rambling was endless.

With her out of the way

Ben can get down to business.

BANG BANG BANG goes the hammer.

Board this place up tight!

BANG BANG BANG, they won’t

Be munching on us tonight.

But who is this now

Coming up from the cellar?

It’s Cooper, a loudmouthed

Balding ol’ feller.

His daughter Karen’s been bitten

She’s down there with her mom

And a cute teenaged couple

Named Judy and Tom.

Cooper says “To the cellar!”

(turns out he was right)

But Ben disagrees,

And the two start to fight.

“I won’t go in the cellar!

I won’t go, you hear?

You can be boss down there,

But I’m the boss up here.

That cellar’s a deathtrap,

A deathtrap I say.

If those things get in here,

Then we can’t get away.”

Hang on, there’s a TV,

Find out where help is at!

But all they heard was

“It has been established that

The recently deceased

While the body’s still fresh

Are returning to life

And seeking human flesh”

But there are rescue stations!

Our plan is now clear.

‘Cause Willard is just

Seventeen miles from here.

Ben’s got a truck

But the gas tank is dry.

There’s a pump, and it’s locked

But it’s still worth a try.

'Cause if we don’t go now,

Then we just might be stuck,

So Tom, Judy, and Ben

Go to gas up the truck.

Ben shoots the lock off the pump

With a .22

(Don’t try that at home kids,

It’s a dumb thing to do)

But Tom’s spilling the gas.

Now they’re all out of luck.

‘Cause Ben’s torch blazes on

In the back of the truck.

Then the truck goes KABOOM!

And the kids meet their doom

As a barbecue

The living dead will consume.

With his truck now en fuego

Ben runs for the house…

Wait a minute,

Was that zombie eating a mouse?

Ben yells “Let me In Cooper!”

But he won’t, it’s no use,

So then when Ben gets in,

That’s when all hell breaks loose.

Cooper tries for Ben’s gun

And gets shot in the fight,

Zombie Johnny drags Barbara

Off into the night,

Karen munches on Daddy,

Who she’s disemboweled,

And stabs mommy again

And again with a trowel.

The boards start to give

And the zombies flood in.

Bolt yourself in the cellar

Or you’ll get eaten Ben!

Come morning, an army

Of rednecks with guns

Are hunting down zombies,

Shooting every last one.

And I really must say,

It looks like lots of fun.

Ben hears gunshots and thinks

Hooray! Help has arrived!

He comes upstairs, thinking

He actually survived.

But…

Through the window he looks

Just like the living dead

So the redneck takes aim

And shoots Ben in the head.

That’s the end of the story

Ben’s the last to expire

Our hero’s now just

Another one for the fire.

Where do we go from here,

As we watch mankind fall?

If you’re asking me, I say

We go to the mall.

Night of the Living Dead

A masterpiece, there’s no doubt.

Two severed thumbs up.

Nathan says check it out!

30 Day Horror Challenge Day 29 - Your least favorite horror film of all time.

Coincidentally, my friend Nate and I were just talking about why I can’t stand this movie last night at the Murder Junkies concert. After my post about how it was unfair to judge Scream based on the hordes of awful imitators, I can’t rightfully hate on 28 Days Later because of the whole fast zombie thing. These weren’t even zombies, they were infected humans. The whole idiotic notion of running undead zombies that this movie kicked off was the fault of the imitators who missed the point, not the original. What I can hate on it for is the thing I hated about it before it became the standard way to shoot mainstream horror. That abomination is 3^rd person shaky cam.

As I walked out of the movie theater, I said to my friends something to the effect of “why the hell would you spend that much on makeup and effects and then intentionally shoot it to where no one can get a good look at it?” Stills from the movie show some great makeup and set design. Too bad you can’t see it. Little did I know that this would become the predominant way to shoot an action scene in Hollywood. The effect has especially been profound on horror movies, and has nearly obliterated the suspensefully built and well crafted and framed horror sequence.

There is a big difference between first person and third person shaky cam. It makes sense when the shot is supposed to be the subjective view of one of the characters. In a movie like Blair Witch Project, Paranormal Activity, Rec, or any of the “found footage” type of movies dating all the way back to Cannibal Holocaust, I have no problem with it. If it is a POV shot, like Jason watching campers through the trees or the opening sequence of Halloween, I have no problem with it. When the camera is supposed to represent the omniscient eye of the viewer and not a character within the scene, however, it doesn’t make sense.

I know the argument for the style is “it conveys the franticness of the situation.” That can be conveyed more effectively by effective panning, dollying, and other smooth camera movement. Ideally, it would be conveyed through the movement of the action within the frame. The score adds a lot to it also. The problem with this is that these things take more effort and skill. Shaking the camera to try to make a scene more intense is just lazy filmmaking. I’m not saying all shots should be static. Then they look like a stage play. You can look at Tod Browning’s Dracula for an example of that. What I’m saying is that there is a big difference in artfully done camera movement and making your film look like it was shot by a bobblehead doll.

28 Days Later wasn’t the first movie to use third person shaky cam. It’s been used since the early 80’s, primarily in war movies. During battle scenes, the camera would shake to simulate explosions and such. The first instance of it being used in a horror movie that I could find was Jacob’s Ladder, but that was in the war sequences as well. The difference is it was used sparingly. There’s barely a single static shot in 28 Days later. The freakin’ camera can’t hold still on shots of two characters talking for crying out loud!

I have a different theory of why the filmmakers decided to do this. They shot this film with Cannon XL-1 cameras. At the time, the technology of blowing mini DV up to show it on a screen the size of most movie theaters was in its infancy. It looked grainy. I think they shook the damn camera so much to mask the video quality in some places by not letting the audience get a good look at it. The merits of that can be debated, but since then filmmakers have used it to excess just because it’s the current style. It’s taken us all the way to Battlefield LA, which uses it to such overkill that it seems that they are intentionally trying to make their film unwatchable.

The modern fascination with third person shaky cam can arguably be traced back to the opening sequence of Saving Private Ryan. Once again, it is a war movie, but it became the Hollywood standard. 28 Days Later started the horror genre’s use of the technique, so it holds a special place of contempt for me. I’m not blaming 28 Days Later simply for it’s followers, I hated the shooting style in that movie from the moment I saw it and before anyone decided to emulate it. Third person shaky cam is a poor substitute for well directed action and creative use of camera movement. It is a crutch used by those who don’t know how to properly shoot a horror action sequence. It’s a shame too, because 28 Days Later had a lot going for it. The bobblehead cameraman technique ruined it though. Two severed thumbs down. Nathan says don’t check out movies like this, and if you absolutely must, download them. If movies with third person shaky cam don’t make any money, maybe filmmakers will start holding the damn camera steady.

30 Day Horror Challenge Day 28 - Your favorite horror film that no one's ever heard of.

I discovered this twisted little gem while I was working at Hollywood video. I was in the process of working my way through dubbing the entire horror section when I came across this one and fell in love with it. I never saw it at any other video store. Whenever I asked anyone if they’d seen Private Parts, they always thought I was talking about that terrible Howard Stern movie. Either that or they did the Beavis and Butthead laugh. Anyway, I resigned myself to the fact that I was the only person on earth who had heard of, much less appreciated, this flick. Imagine my surprise a few years back when I was doing my customary Wal-Mart 5 dollar DVD bin rummage, and this turned up. It’s since gone out of print again, but this bizarre psycho-sexual thriller is well worth tracking down.

This is the kind of movie that could only have come out of the 70’s. I can think of no other time in American cinema history that a flick like this would have been released by a major studio. It was the feature directing debut of Paul Bartell. He was better known as an actor, but directed Death Race 2000, Lust in the Dust, and Eating Raul. Our main heroine is a young, naïve girl named Cheryl. Cheryl and her friend Judy have run away together. After getting caught spying on Judy and her boyfriend getting it on, Cheryl moves out and takes Judy’s wallet with her. She finds her way to The King Edward Hotel, a residence hotel run by Cheryl’s Aunt Martha. The hotel is populated by a group of weirdoes, sleazeballs, and nutcases, which I’ll get into in a moment. Cheryl can’t resist snooping around the hotel and develops an interest in a couple of the residents. This does not bode well at all for Cheryl.

The best thing about this movie is the cast of oddballs. They are a bunch of interesting characters, and they’re all played very well. Quite a cast was assembled here. First we have Cheryl. Ayn Ruymen strikes a delicate balance between innocent and seductive. The actress was 25 at the time of shooting, but with the way she portrays fascination and curiosity, you think she’s much younger. As a matter of fact, I thought she really was as young as she plays here until she did a nude scene, so I knew she had to be at least 18. Aunt Martha, played by Lucille Benson (Halloween 2), is excellent. Her delivery reminds me a bit of Zelda Rubenstein. We think she’s just a crotchety old matron until she starts talking more and we realize that she’s just as nutty as the rest of them. George is a photographer with a thing for water filled blow up dolls, and that’s not his biggest quirk by a long shot. Loony old Ms. Quigley thinks Cheryl is someone named Alice. Mr. Lovejoy is a raging alcoholic with a penchant for opera singing. Laurie Main is excellent as Reverend Moon, who is jovial enough, but creepy as hell. I’m not 100% sure on this one, but after doing a little research I think he might have been the first gay priest character in a major motion picture. The hotel itself is a character. It’s so seedy yet stately that it adds to the proceedings immeasurably.

This film is more of a character study and a slow burn descent into weirdness than a straight ahead horror flick. There are a couple of gory scenes, but they almost feel tacked on. For the first part of the film, we’re just watching Cheryl enter into this wonderland of insanity. We know this isn’t going to end well for her, and we’re just watching her uncover more and more secrets as we wonder which one of the loonies she will finally run afoul of. Then again, it could be Judy or her boyfriend, who come looking for her, who does Cheryl in. Later, when Cheryl zeroes in on one character, it’s almost agonizing watching the two on a collision course. The final 10 minutes of the movie, containing two major twists, will have you staring slack jawed at the screen until the end of the credits.

One thing I don’t talk about a lot on this blog is technical specifications. I’m not a stickler for high def or audio tracks or any of that stuff. I love my VHS. I can’t stand blu-ray actually. That being said, the transfer on this DVD looks incredible! The color scheme is very deliberate in this movie, almost Argento-like in some parts. The use of darkness in the framing is also. The clarity and depth of the blacks and colors on this DVD are truly impressive for a small release DVD. I can tell by my old VHS copy that MGM really put a lot into the remastering process. Kudos.

Normally, in a situation like this, I would put a trailer for the film in the post. I implore you, however, not to watch the trailer before you watch the film. I’ve said before that these days trailers contain way too many spoilers, but apparently that’s been a problem since the 70’s. The trailer will ruin the whole movie for you. Trust me, this one’s too good to ruin. For that matter, don’t read the back of the DVD. What the hell is wrong with these people giving it all away before hand? I don’t get it. What I do get is this movie, and I hope you get it too, because it deserves a much bigger audience. Oh, by the way, for you fellow VHS collectors, it was also released under the name Blood Relations. Two severed thumbs up. Nathan says check it out.

30 Day Horror Challenge Day 27 - Your favorite guilty pleasure

I was taught by Mistress Amy, a woman I have the utmost respect for, that “In the pursuit of pleasure there is no guilt.” In other words, never feel ashamed of what you’re into. I’ve lived by those words ever since. Since I don’t really believe in “guilty pleasures”, I guess the closest thing for me would be those “so bad they’re good” movies. Nothing epitomizes the “so bad it’s good” aesthetic in modern films like Syfy original films. Not just Syfy originals, but the giant animal/monster/hybrid beastie Syfy originals. Fun stuff like Mansquito, Frankenfish, and Dinocroc. They are a sub-genre of their own. Since I can’t write about a whole sub genre, I’ll have to pick one. That is a daunting task, but there is one movie that stands head and fins above the rest as the ultimate Syfy Original flick, the all mighty Sharktopus.

My love for this movie probably exceeds sane and healthy levels. In fact, it was number 7 on my 2010 top 10. Just look at the team who brought this flick to us. It was written by Mike MacLean, who also wrote Dinocroc vs. Supergator and the upcoming Piranhaconda. It was directed by Declan O’Brian, who also did Rock Monster, Monster Ark, and the impressively bad Cyclops. It was distributed by Syfy/Anchor Bay, who graced us with beautiful crap like Mega Piranha and Mongolian Death Worm. If that’s not enough schlock pedigree for ya, it was produced by the master himself, Roger Corman. Yes, Galaxy of Terror Roger Corman. Piranha Roger Corman. Pit and the Pendulum Roger Corman. Death Race 2000 Roger Corman. 396 producer credits Roger Corman. Lifetime achievement Oscar Roger Corman. Have I made my point?

Basically, the navy has created a new biological weapon. He’s half shark, half octopus, and 100% AWESOME! Would you believe that it breaks free and runs amok? I know, unthinkable! It’s up the scientist who made him, his daughter, and a “bad boy with a heart of gold” rogue ex Navy Seal to stop the tentacled fury.

This movie is nonstop schlock and cheese and makes no bones about it. It’s pure VDOP. For those who just joined us, that’s Vulgar Display of Cheese, meaning one of those movies that revels in its own cheese. That’s the last time I’m gonna explain that term. I may rant and rave elsewhere (a lot) about bad CGI. In these flicks, however, it’s expected. The worse the better. It’s the new millennium equivalent of the bad rubber monster suit in the 50’s creature features. In this one, it’s BAD!

The acting is, well, interesting. It’s no wonder Eric Roberts ended up on Celebrity Rehab. He slurs his way through this flick like he had to be tanked to get through this movie. The audience just might feel the same way. Most of the rest of the main cast is somewhat passable. The extras are the really fun ones though. Watch for the “Oh my God” guy in the fire dance scene and the bearded painter on the scaffold’s death scene for two examples of the most hilariously awful acting since Ed Wood’s angora heyday.

The plot? Yeah right. Nothing in this movie makes any sense at all. Let’s just hit a few highlights. If Sharktopus is bullet proof, why do you shoot at him for half of the movie? Furthermore, why do you freak out when you’re out of ammo? How, pray tell, does a half shark half octopus walk on land? For that matter, how does it roar like a lion? How did you conveniently forget that there’s a computer program to kill it until the final 10 minutes after he’s killed 50 or so people. What the hell was with that ripping off the shirt Rambo move before you went to fight the monster with a stick? Must be the same thing that was behind the classic “shake your fist at the sky and scream ‘Noooooooooooo’” moment.

This movie is a hell of a lot of fun. It has quite a bit of blood for a TV movie. A surprising amount actually. Roger Corman’s cameo is priceless. It has one of the most original B movie monsters ever conceived. It even has a 50’s style surf rock theme song that is about 71 different kinds of bad ass. Check it out…

If you want to see just how much of a cultural impact this movie has had, go Google Sharktopus tattoo. That one in this pic isn’t the only one. Since it premiered last September, I have been on a mission to make all of my friends watch it. At Netherworld, the greatest haunted attraction in the world (where I coincidentally work), it became a joke to tell the new actors “go ask Nathan about Sharktopus” just to see the look on their face when I launched into the “MUTHAF***IN’ SHARKTOPUS BABY!” spiel. Normally, with a “guilty pleasure” movie, …actually, I’m gonna interrupt the article right here. The phone just rang as I was typing. It was Leah. I told her I’m writing about Sharktopus. The laughed that “shaking my head and rolling my eyes” laugh and informed me that I love that movie way too much. See, that’s exactly what I’m talking about. No one else seems to get it, but to me it’s schlock nirvana. Eight severed tentac…I mean two severed thumbs up. Nathan says check it out.

30 Day Horror Challenge Day 26 - Your favorite horror film to watch as a child

I didn’t watch horror movies as a child. I was a brainwashed little holy roller and thought they were evil. When we talk about horror flicks I watched as a “kid,” we’re talking about my teens. I didn’t have a VCR until I was 16, so I couldn’t really rent movies. When I got one, I taped them off of TV. There was one tape in particular that I watched all the time. It had 2 movies on it, both taped off of Monstervision. I know I’ve talked a lot about Monstervision in the last couple of posts, but I’m going to do it one more time. I can’t help it, it figures into a lot of my favorites. One of the flicks on the tape was the remake of Night of the Living Dead, but I already used that for Day 17. The other was Phantasm 2.

Phantasm is one of a handful of series where I like the second one best. We won’t go into the others, because that’s a controversy for another time. I’m not going to even attempt to give you a plot summary for this one. Why? Because it doesn’t make a damn lick of sense! It doesn’t matter though, because as Phantasm fans know, trying to figure out what the hell is going on is half the fun. First of all, one of the leads is recast for this one, Tuesday Knight style. James LeGros is a pretty good actor, but he just wasn’t right for the role of Mike, played in the other 3 films by Michael Baldwin. He was a little too buff and a little too tough. Sorry. The incomparable Reggie Bannister is back though. Since this movie came 8 years after the original, he gets the films “Jamie Lee Curtis in Halloween 2” moment. Reggie and Mike are sitting by the fire. Mike goes upstairs and is grabbed by the Tall Man, thankfully still played by Angus Scrimm. Reggie hears a noise and gets up to investigate, magically looking 10 years older than he did 20 seconds ago. It’s a Phantasm movie though, so we don’t question it. Whatever you say Don.

It seems like Don Coscarelli came up with a bunch of ideas for cool scenes and came up with a way to string them together later. Those cool scenes, though, are cool enough that the incomprehensible plot is forgivable without a second thought. We have Reggie and Mike getting all A-Team in a hardware store; building a giant homemade flame thrower and a four barrel shotgun. I’ll repeat that, A F’N FOUR BARREL SHOTGUN! That flame thrower gets used to light a fireplace by the way. There’s an epic chainsaw duel. I love a good chainsaw duel. There’s a bad ass car. There are cool vast empty graveyards. There’s one of the funniest sex scenes of all time. The demon Jawas are back. The silver balls are back. Ever since I was a young boy...nevermind. This time, though, there’s a gold ball. No, I’m not going to tell you, you have to see for yourself. I mean hell, look at that picture. You definitely don’t want that ball in your mouth. Sorry folks, it’s impossible to write about Phantasm and not make one ball joke. Anyway, it’s got everything you expect from a Phantasm flick, with some 80’s action flick tropes thrown in. Who could ask for anything more?

This tape was made extra cool by the commentary of Joe Bob Briggs. Just ‘cause I’m a nice guy, here’s the intro and commercial break commentaries.

I used to be able to recite both Hemicuda speeches word for word.

I was little schoolgirl level excited when I heard that this was finally coming out on DVD. I already had Phantasm and Phantasm 3, and the discs were loaded with extras. I had read about all the cool stuff on the Region 2 release. They got commentary, convention appearances, TV spots, bios, trailers, photo galleries, the whole 9. Imagine my pissedoffedness (it’s a word ‘cause I say so) when I saw that in the US all we got was a lousy trailer. The DVD release blows, hopefully they’re gonna double dip on this one, ‘cause I’m waiting for a good release to update my VHS. Two severed thumbs up for the movie itself. Nathan says check it out. Or, if you’re like me, check it out again and again and again…

30 Day Horror Challenge Day 25 - A horror film that you used to hate, but now like

This film was an interesting case because I liked it, then hated it, and now like it again. Admittedly, my years of hating on Scream were not fair. I’ve always said that you must judge a film on its merit alone. Scream was actually pretty good. My hatred for the movie wasn’t really based on the film itself, but on people’s reactions to it and the mile long trail of crap that it spawned. It was a bit of hypocrisy on my part. I do recognize it now for what it was; a very astute satire of the slasher genre.

I was 16 when Scream came out. Me and nearly the entire drama department of South Gwinnett High School went to see it one night. I dug it. I liked the way they acknowledged the clichés of the genre and made them key points of the story. I completely identified with Jamie Kennedy’s character, as I was the horror geek/walking encyclopedia of my group of friends. I liked the way it was basically a “who dunnit” mystery with some slasher aspects thrown in. The gore was pretty subdued, but there were a couple of fun messy moments. The cast did a good job, featuring some of the more unique standouts of the late 90’s teen TV crowd. I definitely enjoyed Rose McGowen’s sweater. It even had a pretty good soundtrack. All in all, it was a really fun satire of the horror genre.

Sorry. I had to.

Then, I started to notice something. My classmates were describing Scream as “the scariest movie I’ve ever seen.” They were talking about it like it was a straight up horror flick. This was my first real moment of clarity regarding the mainstream audience’s complete lack of taste when it comes to horror. All the preppie kids that young black trench coat clad Nathan hated were talking about how this was what a good horror movie was. It was so much better than “that old crap.” This did not sit well with me, a young horror fan who already knew his stuff. Not to mention being a high school boy, I was naturally full of piss and vinegar and harder than hardcore about everything. I knew it was a horror/mystery/comedy, but it seemed no one else did. Apparently, only a parody like Scary Movie would register in their minds as comedy. In my view, Scream had poisoned everyone’s mind against the classics that I loved.

Then, the never ending procession of copycats started. I Know What You Did Last Summer. Urban Legend. Valentine. The Faculty. Carrie 2. Soul Survivors. Disturbing Behavior. Scream 2. Scream 3. I Still Know What You Did Last Summer. The so called “late 90’s slasher craze” was in full swing. People would say “aren’t you happy? Horror movies are “in” again. No, teenybopper crap horror is in. Movies that were figuratively and literally gutless. There was no gore, there was no gratuitous nudity, there was no sense of fun, and there was no uniqueness to the plot. In other words, nothing that made the slasher flicks of the 80’s great. All we had was bad acting by cookie cutter WB actors and everyone trying to write like Kevin Williamson. It was like a long episode of Dawson’s Creek, but one of the pretty boys was in a mask. Basically, we were treated to hundreds of Scream clones minus the intelligence. The style even crept into franchises I liked, such as in the case of Halloween H20. I loathe the mainstream horror of the late 90’s and early 2000’s, and in my mind it was Scream’s fault for starting all of that.

Scream was my pariah. It was the film that had ruined horror movies in my generation. It also happened to be the movie everyone bought or got for Christmas in 1997. For the next year, it was on in the background of every party I went to. Any time anyone said they wanted to watch a horror movie, that one was the flick that got popped in the VCR. I probably saw Scream at least 50 times that year. The hatred grew.

Years went past and I tried to put the whole “90’s slasher craze” out of my mind. Scream was an anathema; I never owned it and refused to watch it. When I was collecting the Movie Maniacs figures, Ghostface was the one I refused to buy. Any time a movie lacked substance, I compared it to Scream. Then, a couple of years ago, I was flipping through the channels and ended up stopping on Scream. Before I realized it, I had watched the entire movie. Not only that, but I enjoyed it. After a few years of not seeing it, I was able to look at it with a fresher perspective. It’s a damn good flick. All of its imitators sucked, and a lot of the audience completely missed the point, but Scream can’t be held responsible for that. Scream 2 and 3 both are still awful, but not the original. It still stands up as a good mystery/horror satire. Scream, I apologise for all the years of animosity and harsh words between us. Let’s just let bygones be bygones, ok? I’m still iffy on Scream 4 though. I think I’ll wait for the 1.99 theater for that one. I’m still only giving it one and a half severed thumbs up, ‘cause old grudges die hard. Nathan says check it out.