Archive for genre

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Christmas Evil (You’d Better Watch out!)

Posted in Horror Showcase, Ode to the Unsung Slasher, Updates with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on December 12, 2011 by splatterpictures

Time to jump into the Holiday season with a properly themed horror review. Christmas has always been a fun time of year, for horror. Everyone sort of gets off on the Macabre concept of this special time of year being ruined by killer Santas or evil snowmen. A lot of the time it’s just utterly ridiculous. Sometimes though, it can be a pretty effective and chilling tale of home invasion during a time when we would hope that kind of evil would take a holiday with everyone else. Somewhere in between the super serious and utterly ridiculous there is Christmas Evil.

Christmas Evil was released in 1980, by good old Pan American Pictures, it was written directed by Lewis Jackson, it tells the story of a lonely man (Brandon Maggart) obsessed with Christmas and the concept of Santa Claus.

The movie starts off with a family watching Santa delivering presents to their home, of course this is just the father of the family pretending. It’s a cute little holiday memory that I don’t actually know for sure happens in real life. It certainly happens a lot in movies and television though.

I remember reading about this film before I saw it and it was said that the main character experiences a traumatic event as a child regarding Santa and it grows up all twisted. Well, the trauma in question is when he comes back downstairs later and sees his father (dressed as Santa) have some PG-13 sexy time with his mother. It’s honestly a pretty weird thing to be traumatized over. He runs up stars and smashes a snow globe then proceeds to cut himself deliberately with a piece of glass. That’s pretty much it.

It cuts to him as a grown man. He isn’t married and has no kids of his own; he lives in a small house by himself and works at the Jolly Dream toy factory. He gets pushed around and talked down too by his co-workers even though he technically has a higher position than they do.

It starts off quickly letting you know that Harry isn’t quite right. He watches the children in his neighbourhood and decides who is naughty and nice, he then writes it down. In books marked rather professionally as Good Boys and Girls 1980 and Bad Boys and Girls 1980. (I really want to know how he found those books or got them made.) You can see how important he considers this “work” and how frantically he makes sure it’s up to date.

As it gets closer to Christmas Harry starts making himself a Santa Suit and getting ready for something. What I like is that he never tells anyone what he’s doing and as an audience you’re not even sure yourself. I knew I was watching a horror movie but aside from a few musical cues here and there you never get a sense that Harry really wants to do anything “wrong”.

It becomes obvious that Harry really just wants to be the Santa Claus he always wished was real. He wants children to believe and know that if they are good, good things will happen to them but, if they are bad, bad things will happen. This in itself is pretty deranged and after he starts breaking into peoples houses you wonder just how far he’s going to take it.

As a horror movie some people might find this one a little slow, but I feel it’s effective.

There are great moments where you see the intensity behind Harry’s eyes and actions the character has moments where he looks like he is just about to snap, but then gets into his Santa character and seems completely harmless. These moments work fantastically because as an audience we know that these people mocking him or being greedy on Christmas are going to get it. There is one scene where he is talking to a group of kids at a Christmas party and telling them to be good. Nothing he’s saying is bad but since you know how screwed up he is, it just made my skin crawl.

I found myself rooting for Harry, I wanted him to get revenge on his bosses who were more concerned about their pockets than children in need. Or his co-worker that was trying to just take advantage of him. Even his brother who was hard on Harry because in his opinion he was a loser. In the end I wanted him to get away with it.

The deaths aren’t that numerous but they are well done with great use of the “holiday themes” A guy getting his throat sliced open with a Christmas star is just damn good film-making if you ask me. There isn’t a huge body count and it isn’t really gory but the deaths have resonance.

There is also the matter of this being considered somewhat of a comedy. I think the moments that are funny are actually some of the more realistic aspects of it. Harry isn’t a smooth, cold calculating killer who has it all worked out. He seems like a man who has been thinking about this for awhile but this is his first outing as old Saint Nick and he’s bound to make a few mistakes. A long scene of him trying to go down the chimney is a good example. As well as struggling to kill someone not realizing how difficult it might actually be. He’s defiantly doing a lot of this on the fly. He stumbles and falls and goes the wrong way, just like any killer getting his feet wet I guess.

The parts that didn’t work for me were mostly around the end, when the parents of the neighbourhood are chasing him around. They had actual torches. Really? It’s like something out of a Universal horror, which isn’t a bad thing but kinda hard to believe modern people (in this case the modern age of 1980) would actually go and cobble together torches.  The other thing that I think could have been worked out better was the reasoning for Harry’s bizarre fascination with Christmas and his desire to –be- Santa Claus. When he goes on to blame his younger brother for never believing in Santa, it seemed way too trivial to explain his mental state. Now that I am writing this though, I do admit that it goes along well with Harry’s delusions that he would take a single incident that his brother did when he was 6 as justification for robbery, breaking and entering and murder. His own brother screams about how ridiculous it is.

The ending is also a little off-beat but overall I think it was a fine farewell to one of the more complicated characters I’ve ever seen in a horror movie.

This is regarded as one of the best Christmas horror movies ever made. That is a pretty bold statement considering how varied peoples tastes are. I think this is a very good character piece that defiantly deserves to be viewed at least once. Brandon Maggart’s acting goes a long way to help this film, that otherwise might be pretty forgettable. He gives us a character that is selfish and selfless at the same time. A character who garners a lot more sympathy than the people he is killing. I say check it out!

"On the first day of Christmas my true love gave to me, a much needed tracheotomy!"

1 Comment »

Splatterpictures VS Remakes! (horror rant)

Posted in Horor Rant, Updates with tags , , , , , , , , on December 9, 2011 by splatterpictures

“No movie executive has ever been fired for greenlighting a sequel”. – Roger Ebert

 

"Award shows, where award shows win awards?"

I get asked a lot about my opinions on remakes and or sequels. I am usually hesitant to even comment because I have always believed that there is room enough in the world for everyone’s favourite movie. (be it original  or remake) That being said, a recent conversation with a good friend of mine has made me decide to throw my two cents in on the subject of sequels and remakes.

Hollywood is in the business of making money and while that is pretty obvious to most people, what isn’t obvious is their perspective on how to make that money. You’re never going to convince a studio that if they have the opportunity to make money they should opt to deny that opportunity for the sake of creative integrity. For example, when you have a film that makes a huge profit when compared to the cost of production, any savvy media head will know that is a near automatic greenlight for a sequel, or even worst a franchise. So many films these days suffer because of this thought process. The first movie is a set up. It’s slower, and clunky, and we as an audience expect it. We apologize for inferior films and say “The sequel will be better, have more action, or have better characters or a better ending” How bankrupt of a concept is that? We’re making excuses for a movie that let us down, and keep hope that it will get better. It sounds like an abusive relationship, and it is.

The most puzzling thing is the sheer laziness and  desperation of Hollywood. They have no lack of talent for going to the pop culture graveyard and digging up some dead franchise in hopes of cashing in on brand recognition. Since this a horror site, I’m going to keep things in the realm of horror.

First let’s realize one thing: Horror movies are profitable. They make studios huge amounts of money compared to the cost of their productions.

In the last few years we’ve seen remakes of Halloween, Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday the 13th, Night of the Demons, Black Christmas. Fright Night. Down the pipeline there is Evil Dead, Hellraiser, The Ring, American Psycho and I just heard Suspira. (Oh and the Munsters coming back to TV as a serious horror drama?) Sequels are also coming. More Saw, more Paranormal Activity, more Human Centipede. Countless other films that I could just list on and on, the crazy thing is it seems every day this week, I have been hearing more and more.

Is that to say that we as horror fans dislike sequels and remakes? That can’t be true because they make money. Frankly, if nobody liked them and they didn’t make a profit, they wouldn’t be made. The casual audience has a lot to do with that, but so do we. Some of us are so grateful for a movie featuring our favourite icons that we’ll swallow just about anything they give us (myself included)

I think that Hollywood will do what it’s doing until something else catches its eye. It’s funny to me when I hear certain buzz-words about updating things for a new generation, or “giving the fans what they want” I promise you, Hollywood if you’re reading this (and I know you are) You’re not doing me any favours. The economy is down and nobody is taking risks and it’s extremely obvious when you look at the film industry. They want sure things, they want brand recognition and they want to relaunch series into dependable cash-cows. There is something to be said for thinking outside the box though.

I’ll take a step away from, horror for a second and mention that James Cameron made Avatar, and it wasn’t perfect but at least it was something new and interesting. Number one grossing movie in history and all Hollywood took away from that was “movies need to be in 3D now” and once again, people swallow it.

My friend pointed out to me that this generation has very little to call its own. Every big franchise, (in horror and out of horror) has been some dug up property from the 70’s-90’s. what does Hollywood have to show for itself?  Jigsaw? That’s it? One iconic character, that breached genre films and became mainstream?

We shouldn’t have to look this hard for new ideas. See yah next time and thanks for reading!

Leave a comment »

Top Ten Weirdest Moments in J-Grindhouse

Posted in Updates with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on December 7, 2011 by splatterpictures

One of the biggest guilty pleasures for me is Japanese Grindhouse. In the last decade or so, there has been something of a cottage industry surrounding a few special effects artists/ directors coming out of Japan in what is now known as Sushi Typhoon. Anyone who’s seen these splatterfests, know that if you want screwball comedy and countless buckets of gore, these are defiantly your best bet. That being said, they are weird. They are some of the weirdest movies I’ve ever seen. A lot of it is due to a cultural difference but really there is just no explaining some things. I’ve taken some of these films and put together my top ten of the weirdest moments. Here we go!

10 – Tempura Arm (The Machine Girl)

This one was always one of my favourites. In order to protect their child’s reputation a married couple attempt to kill the sister of a boy their son murdered. The mother dips her hand in a boiling pot and it comes out covered in Tempura. The weirdest thing to me is after this scene the girl’s hand looks completely fine.

9 – Helicopter Head (Vampire Girl vs. Frankenstein Girl)

During the films climax we learn that the Frankenstein girl has the power of flight, all she has to do is attach her severed limbs to the top of her head so they can spin around. Of course it all makes perfect sense!

8 – Boob Weapons (Samurai Princess)

 

This wouldn’t be the only film to do something weird with breasts. In fact pretty much every movie I mention has at least one scene that has something to do with weird breast weapons. Samurai Princess (yeah that’s her name) is a Mecha and naturally her breasts are detachable…weapons of some kind. I honestly have no idea how they are even supposed to work but they make a guys head explode, so bravo.

7 – Kamikaze gang (Psycho Gothic Lolita)

This movie overall was pretty light on the horror elements and heavy on the ridiculous anime elements. That being said it’s as exploitative as anything else. We are treated to a random fight between the psycho gothic chick and a bunch of guys who do flippy-trick martial arts and have silly poses. It plays out like it’s from a totally different movie.

6 – Guy eats bugs.  (Tokyo Gore Police)

 

This scene is so strange. There is just some guy on a subway eating bugs.  Complete with extreme close ups and speeding up the camera. The scene seems to go on forever. The character has nothing to do with anything, unless I don’t understand some deep meaning behind it. I have a habit of fast forwarding through this part.

5 – Penis Weapons (Tokyo Gore Police)

This happens in a lot of these Tokyo Shock films, the most well done (as if I am saying that) is probably Tokyo Gore Police. A lot of practical special effects and *cough* elephant sounds make this just too fucking weird.

4 – Nose Guns (Mutant Girls Squad)

So you decide to have a samurai police force in the not too distant future and you’re asking yourself. “How can I have the benefits of a gun without the hassle of carrying it?” Well the answer my friend is nose guns. Yeah, just have a ridiculous nose gun on all of your officers.

3 – Butt sword fight (Robo-Geisha)

Robo-Geisha is one of those movies than can’t slow down for a second or you’ll start to notice what an ungodly mess it is. That being said, it has a three-way butt sword fight that is just something you have to see to believe. The characters themselves acknowledge how embarrassing the entire thing is.

2 – Giant Kabuki Frankenstein (Vampire Girl vs Frankenstein Girl)

So just about ready to pack it in after watching VGvsFG and all of a sudden, a four story abomination that seems to be a sewn together mess of the movies two main antagonists shows up. I guess a vampire school-girls work is never done.

1 – The peeing chair (Tokyo Gore Police)

I honestly don’t even know what to say. I felt my brain fall apart the first time I ever saw it and it’s never gotten any less weird. It’s some kind of strip club or brothel where women who are “engineers” go on parade for a crowd of screaming fans. One looks like a skinned woman attached to a chair. She then pees on the crowd….the crowd goes wild. It’s hands down the most ridiculous thing I’ve seen.

Well there you have it. My personal top ten of weird J-Grindhouse moments. There are tonnes of these movies out there and I know I probably have missed some of your favourites. Leave comments below and let me know what I should subject my brain to next.

3 Comments »

Vampyr 1932 (re-visited)

Posted in Horror Showcase, Updates with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on November 12, 2011 by splatterpictures

One of the first posts I ever did was actually much older pieces I did just for facebook. I discussed vampire movies before 1935. I touched on the films Vampyr, which to this day is one of my favourites. I didn’t really give it the credit it deserved because I was still new at this. So if you’ll indulge me I give you Vampyr re-visited. This was posted on HM.ca awhile ago but I wanted you guys to have it too.

 

 

 

When seeking source material in the early days of horror film, vampires seemed as logical a choice then as they are today. Whether it was Universal’s Dracula or F.W. Murnau’s Nosferatu, vampires have been the subject of many great stories that shock and awe audiences. The mentioned films, of course, are a more obvious and a less obvious interpretation of Bram Stoker’s work. Unfortunately, the problem with movies based off of Bram Stoker’s Dracula is that, no matter what, it has been interpreted and re-interpreted so many times that it’s hard to watch them without feeling like you’ve seen it all before.

 

Bram Stoker was greatly influenced by Sheridan Le Fanu’s short story, Carmilla. Carmilla would not only influence Stoker, but also inspire a number of films such as 1932’s German film, Vampyr.

 

Vampyr was directed by Carl Dryer who also co-wrote the script with Christen Jul and, while they do borrow from Le Fanu’s work, it’s largely an original story. The film stars Nicolas de Gunzburg who also co-produced the film and provided its main source of income. The rest of the cast (due to cost) is rounded out by unknowns or others who weren’t professional actors.

 

The story revolves around Allan Gray (Gunzburg) who is a paranormal researcher that wanders around the countryside studying things related to the occult. His travels take him to the village of Countempierre which is cursed by a vampire named Marguerite Chopin. Marguerite has been a plague on the village for a long time now, having taken control of most of the villagers who now act as her minions. The leader of these underlings is the town doctor who does most of Marguerite’s dirty work.

 

The vampire has targeted a lone Chateau in the village that is run by an old lord with his two young daughters, Léon and Giséle. During Gray’s stay at this creepy hotel, which seems to be the bastion of the vampire and her servants, the old lord of the manor comes to him in the night and begs for his help, but then quickly leaves. Gray follows the vampire’s minions and witnesses them shoot the old man in the back.

 

It soon becomes pretty clear that, while the people in the manor are aware that something is going on, only the lord seemed to know it was the curse of a vampire. When he visited Gray in the night, he left behind a book that was to be opened upon his death, a book that tells the story of Vampires and Marguerite Chopin.

 

In this world, vampires are servants of the devil that prey on children and young adults. Once bitten, they are cursed and will be driven to kill themselves so that their souls will go to the devil and, though Allan wants to help them, none seem to have much drive to do anything. The eldest daughter, Léon, is eventually taken over by Marguerite’s spell and is bitten, opening her up to the evil of the curse. In probably one of the creepiest scenes in the entire movie, she grins manically and looks about the room.

 

Her younger sister Giséle and even Allan seem totally aloof through the entire film, just blankly walking from one scene to the next, unable to figure out what to do. It’s not until the lord’s head servant reads the book that he discovers the curse can be ended if they find Marguerite Chopin’s grave and drive an iron stake (yeah iron none of that wood crap) into her heart.

 

Eventually the servant locates the grave and ,with Allan`s help (and by help I mean he moves some wood planks that are handed to him), they put an end to the curse once and for all. After the spell is broken, the bulk of the villagers and Léon are freed from the vampires spell. The worst of the henchman, though, are taken out by the spirit of the old lord of the manor in probably the most confusing death scene I’ve ever seen. Seriously, the evil doctor is chased into a flour mill by the superimposed face of the deceased lord, causing him to get smothered and die in the flour.

 

Sounds like a pretty straight forward plot doesn’t it? Let me tell you, Dryer was well known as an eccentric filmmaker and it shows throughout this entire movie from the strange collection of characters that pass from one scene into the next. Through shots of the farmers digging in reverse, disembodied shadows acting on their own along walls, and the purposeful blurring of the camera lens, Dryer relentlessly tries to disorient you. Allan is supposed to be someone lost in his own world and whose reality blurs with fantasy, something Dryer conveys through many different scenes that are, without a doubt, the most confusing but brilliant moments of the film.

 

One scene, in particular, was taken from Allan’s point of view in which he is locked in a casket with a convenient viewing window and carried off. When watching it for the first time, I remember not understanding if what I was seeing was real or something that Allan was just imagining. And that’s the point! To leave the audience uncertain, even confused… and it works! By the time the film ends, you aren’t really sure if what you just watched was supposed to be accepted as real or not.

 

Since this was Dryer’s first sound picture, there are strong indications of his background in silent movies. It showcases fantastic shadow use and minimal dialogue, but that was really more about the cost of sound editing. Ultimately, though, it serves to enhance the bizarre dreamlike mood of the entire film.

 

Anyone who is curious should absolutely check this movie out. I will, however, warn that you should go into it understanding that you will probably be confused and maybe even frustrated at times. But really, with a 73 minute runtime you can’t go wrong.

 

I’ll see you next time and thanks for reading!

 

Now to see what all the fuss is about this "Twilight"

 

 

1 Comment »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »