Archive for splatterpictures

Ode to the Unsung Slashers (Laid to Rest)

Posted in Horror Showcase, Ode to the Unsung Slasher, Updates with tags , , , , , , , , , on June 24, 2011 by splatterpictures

Horror comes in a lot of different varieties and it’s easy to know a lot about one and not a lot about another, especially for casual viewers. I have a lot of conversations with people about horror; either films, literature or the culture in general. Most people who are not exactly fans of the genre as a whole always are ready to dismiss them as throw away movies. Of course when they make their arguments they by and large are referring to the slasher-genre.

It’s funny but I find myself defending slasher flicks a lot more than any other kind of horror out there. I think it’s just because that particular genre is littered with iconic figures and ridiculous clichés. A lot of horror takes itself seriously but not really slashers. Slashers exist to give the audience; bodies, boobs and if we’re lucky an Iconic killer with a flair for the dramatic.

It’s not really a profound revelation to say that the killers are really the stars of the movie. Nobody cares about the teenagers getting killed. Everybody cheers for Jason, Freddy, Michael Myers or Chucky. Tonnes of slasher films have made household names of their killers. However, we all know that here at Splatterpictures we don’t talk about the ones that are Iconic. No no, I am going to talk about slashers that are nowhere near as famous but are pretty badass in their own right.

Recently sat down to watch a particular slasher called Laid to Rest. I just couldn’t resist the box art. Yeah I’m one of those people. Anybody who’s read my “about” section knows that a lot of times I would be sent to wonder the horror section of my local video store. More often than not I never got one of the movies but I sure liked looking at the box art.

Laid to rest was released direct to DVD in 2009 and was distributed by Anchor Bay (big surprise). The film was directed by Robert Hall. This was definitely one of those pet projects of Hall; he had been doing the make-up artist thing in the industry for awhile with some great success. The films Stars his wife Bobbi Sue Luther (Who looks different every single time I see her). I’d like to take a minute and say how sweet it was for Hall to make a movie and put his wife in it, considering how hard it is for a big breasted woman to make it in Hollywood.

So what’s it even about? Well, basically a girl wakes up in a coffin with no memory or inclination about how she got there. The coffin is in a funeral home and she isn’t alone. A chrome-skulled killer with a video camera mounted on his shoulder is stalking her. It’s about at this point where I start to notice that this girl is dumb even by slasher movie standards. One scene I have to mention is she actually calls the police from the funeral home. Then, she sees a dead body in the morgue and walks towards it while the woman on the phone tells her that in 30 seconds they’ll have traced her call. She actually walks so far that she pulls the phone cord out of the phone. I’m not fucking kidding, Bravo; the Darwin award goes to the lady with the huge rack.

The killer shows up and gives chase. He’s one of those silent slashers but seems to actually communicate with recorded voice of one of his previous victims off of his cellphone. It’s actually kinda refreshing to see a killer who uses modern technology. He also actually has a car.
It’s not long before the girl runs into a kindly man named Tucker, (Kevin Gage) who picks her up and brings her home after she can’t remember what has happened to her, or seem to remember the proper words for things. He has a wife (Lena Headey) and it’s all very typical set up. Of course, they have no phone, no land line or cell. Nothing. Also their truck is pretty much out of gas. The killer catches up with them and the case is on.

The girl that Tucker has named Princess at this point escape to this random computer nerd named Steven (Sean Whalen) That’s pretty much your trio of people running away from the killer and trying to figure out how to stop him and get help. More characters come and go but they’re really only there to get murdered. Watching this one I kept being reminded about why a lot of people hate slashers.

I am all for dumb people in horror movies but they are the biggest bunch of lame-ducks I’ve ever seen. I swear they all could have saved themselves a lot of trouble if they just walked off a cliff to spare themselves a gruesome death. How dumb? Well they fall down, the split up, nobody has a cell, nobody has gas, they can’t shoot straight, they can’t load their guns fast enough, they throw away their weapons, they draw attention to themselves while the killer is around, they don’t listen, and finally they stand around watching while other people get killed when they could easily overpower Chrome-skull with numbers. Oh well. Oh wait they also keep going back to the killer instead of just driving away.

Something I would have liked to have scene would be more information about the killer himself. He has a habit of going into cities, kidnapping girls and bringing them back to this funeral home where he tortures and kills them while videotaping. Not much else is learned about him, other than dude can get shot a whole lot.

The most surprising thing about this whole movie was how well it was acted. Even if some of the reasoning was pretty dumb, the characters really reacted to others being killed. It wasn’t just run “oh my friend died”, run, “oh my friend died; no time to care keep running.” Characters have powerful scenes of grief that you would expect when someone you love dies in front of you. The total indifference to others being killed in slashers has always been on of the things that bugged me the most.

So what about the deaths? They’re pretty good. One of them where this guy gets his head partially cut off from the jaw up was great. It was a blend of CGI and traditional effects, which was really effective. Everything frankly looked pretty great considering this was a direct to DVD venture and the first horror directed by Hall.

The ending was pretty weird. Not because of what happens to the killer or most of the characters but without giving too much away I was surprised about who survives and who doesn’t and the final decisions made by some characters. It seemed kinda rushed and not very well thought out. Also the big revelation about the character of princess was kinda cliché.

See you next time!

Based on a True Story

Posted in Horror History, Horror Showcase, Updates with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on June 7, 2011 by splatterpictures

Every time we sit down to watch a horror movie it requires us to suspend our belief. I would hope any logical person could realize that humans don’t rise from the grave to enact revenge or that demons from hell don’t lie and trick their way into our world to murder and violate us. The problem with enjoying many movies; is a logical mind that knows that what we are watching is a work of fiction. Despite this, these movies (by definition) should instil horror in us. Writers and directors go to great lengths to try every trick in the book to accomplish this, so their techniques over the last hundred years of film have amassed into a giant book of clichés.

The one method that has always fascinated me the most is when you see these words flash before your eyes in a trailer or on a poster: Based on a True Story or Inspired by True Events. It’s a genius method really. What is more horrific than the truth? I am always giving me and my fellow horror-hounds the benefit of the doubt. While blood and guts may entertain us in film, true acts of violence are repulsive, shocking, and distributing.

Telling us that what we are watching was based on a true story conjures images of how horrible it must have been for the people we are watching. We are no longer looking at actors playing roles, rather we feel are witnessing history told to us through film. It allows us to logically fear the maniac killers or perhaps open our minds to the paranormal.

The one question I always have is… just how much of this is real? How much of what I am watching was supposed to have happened and how much of it was spiced up for film? Well, I’m going to put on my investigators hat and shed a little light on the truth behind these true stories in regards to three select films.

First up, let’s tackle the Amityville Horror. The film was released in 1979 and, while the forefront of the movie was never the advertising campaign that it was real, the novel that the film was based on basically depended on this gimmick.

The story surrounds the Lutz family who claims they had bought a house on 112 Oceans Ave in Amityville a year after a brutal mass murder had occurred. It isn’t long before the family begins to experience paranormal activity from some dark entities. It also carries with it the slow mental breakdown of James Bolin’s character as the dark presence of the house starts to creep into his psyche. It’s implied that this could have been the cause of the murders that happened a year earlier. There is also a famous role given to Rod Steiger as the priest who attempts to get the so-called demons out of the house. For his efforts, he suffers boils and a barrage of flies. The film itself is decent (I found it pretty slow in parts) and had a string of sequels. In 2005 it was even remade starring Ryan Reynolds. So after all of that (demons, poltergeists possession and the biblical plagues set forth on an unsuspecting couple), just how much of it was real?

Well first let’s discuss the mass murder that occurred in Amityville. These murders unfortunately are true. In the 1970’s the house at 112 Oceans Ave became the scene of a bloody and shocking murder. The Defero family were killed in their sleep by Ronald “Butch” Defero Jr, the eldest son. In the night around 2 AM, he systematically shot his father, mother, two brothers and two sisters. After cleaning himself up and getting rid of the evidence, he hatched a long plan about how he was going to pin the murders on the mafia and play the role of the lucky sole survivor. His plan might have worked had he not foolishly left the boxes for the guns he used to kill his family in his room.

A year later his case went to trial and he attempted to get off as legally insane and unfit to stand trial. That plan also thankfully failed and he is currently serving 25 years to life on six counts of second degree murder.

Now since the murders did occur, we can move on to the matter of the Lutz family and the supposed haunting of the house. Well it is true that the George and Kathy Lutz purchased the house and they did claim that there were demons there. It’s largely considered to be a hoax which I’ll explain.

It all started shortly after the Lutz family “fled” the house after only a month of living there. They claimed that the evil goings-on were just too much for them to handle. George Lutz made a call to Dr. Kaplan who was a well known and respected parapsychologist and claimed that demons had terrorized them until forcing them to leave although he couldn’t describe exactly what happened. He also claimed that he had only just started researching the paranormal but Dr. Kaplan quickly started poking holes in his stories that basically revealed that Lutz had been researching this long before he even moved into the house and had mixed and matched behaviours of demons, poltergeists and all sorts of things.

Dr. Kaplan determined that all of these symptoms of a haunting were far too vast and that logically one house couldn’t possible hold that many demons and spirits.

After the book was released and became a best seller, the rights to making the film were sold and then interest in that true story of the Amityville horror really started to take off. The more questions people asked, the more inconsistencies were found. For example, the role of the priest was only legitimate in a way. For what it’s worth, it is true that a priest whose name was Father Pecoraro did have contact with the family. That being said, he first claimed that he never even visited the house and only talked to the Lutz family by phone. Later on he said that he has gone there but nothing unusual happened. One of his last interviews he did revealed that he did at least bless the house and then left. No boils, no flies, nothing. So who knows really what happened there.

The final nail in the coffin was the new owners of the house Jim and Barbara Cromarty. The couple claimed that they had lived in the house with not a single suspicious thing happening. In an amusing turn of events, they sued the Lutz family because of the constant parade of tourists that would come to the house. The courts ruled in their favour and the judge had even stated that the Lutz family had concocted the whole story for the purpose of selling a novel.

Next up we’re going with a more recent film, The Haunting in Connecticut. The film was released in 2009 and was based upon the so-called true events of a family named the Campbells in the 1980’s. The events happen while they are living in an old funeral home that was refurbished into a house. The family moves out there because their eldest son is sick with cancer and the hospital to get his treatment done is simply closer to this house as oppose to their one in the city.

When they move into the house, subtle paranormal events start to take place. They mostly affect the eldest son, Matt, who opts to live in the basement which turns out was the mortuary. He has disturbing visions that become more and more frequent. Everyone, of course, believes he is being affected by his cancer treatment but with this help of Reverend Popescu, he uncovers that the funeral home was used to hold séances. A particularly powerful child medium named Jonah had his powers enhanced by the bodies of the recently dead, so bodies were stolen and mutilated by the man who ran the funeral home. In one instance, the spirits that enveloped the house killed Jonah and his mad doctor along with all of their guests. The movie ends with the discovery that the walls of the funeral home are filled with mummified bodies and Matt has to burn the place down to free them all. Doing this also miraculously cures Matt’s cancer.

But how much of this story is actually real?

The family in question wasn’t the Campbells, they were the Snedekers. They really did move to the house in 1986 to be closer to the UCONN hospital where their son’s special treatments were occurring. The house was, in fact, a funeral home before it was turned into a house. The funeral home in question was the Hallahan Funeral Home. It operated for decades in the area before it was bought in the 1980’s.

In the film, the family discovers numerous death photos that were taken along with the severed eyelids of many of the bodies but in real life there were only a few death photos that were found, no eyelids though. Apparently the mother also found numerous toe-tags and even a head-tag.

In the film there are numerous paranormal activaties that occur. According to the family, there actually was an incident where the mother was mopping the floor and the water turned blood red. Another incident that they claim was true were the dishes putting themselves away. The most fantastic of all was the shower scene. In the movie the niece, played by Amanda Crew, gets suffocated by a shower curtain. The family claims that this did happen although it happened to the mother and not the niece.

The biggest discrepancies are the existence of Jonah, the bodies in the walls, and the climax where Matt burns the house to the ground. None of these things occurred in real life. All were created to explain the haunting and to add more excitement to the film. The family does say, however, that Matt did become darker and more distant like the film portrays.

One of the happier portions that are true is that Matt’s cancer was cured although it probably had more to do with his treatment than spirits. Of course when I say these things are “true,” I mean to say that the family claims they are true. I would like to point out that they did publish a book titled “In a Dark Place: The Story of a True Haunting.” So much like the Amityville horror, there is a lot of controversy surrounding this one but, unlike Amityville, this one isn’t totally debunked yet.

Lastly, we are going to go a little further back and hit up one of the stranger inclusions in the list of “true story” horror: The Texas Chainsaw Massacre.

Texas Chainsaw Massacre was released in 1974 and is one of those heavy hitter films that horror fans love. It has had ridiculous sequels and terrible remakes, but it was one of the first slasher films. In fact, it just missed the number one spot by a few months (Black Christmas is the first true slasher film from a technical standpoint).

However, it did give us the iconic slasher character of Leatherface, the semi-retarded member of a psycho family of hillbillies that murder, torture and terrorize a group of teenagers. Honestly, there isn’t much I can say about this film that hasn’t been said a million times. I really am only including it because it fits the subject at hand.

It really is one of those films that I find hard to watch even as a fan of the genre. I’ve never been totally in to the kind of things that this movie has because it already seems possible enough to me. When I kept hearing that it was inspired by true events, I went nuts. I just had to know what part of this could be real.

Well, not much is real about it actually. The crazy family and all of the events in the film are works of fiction. So why do they say it’s a true story? Well that is the tricky part they don’t say true story they say the ugly step-son of true story; “Inspired by true events”.

For all intents and purposes, the character of Leatherface was based on the serial killer Ed Gein who had murdered and mutilated his victims not unlike Leatherface, skinning them and using their body parts to decorate his home. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre wouldn’t be the only film to use Ed Gein as a reference; Buffalo Bill from Silence of the Lambs was based on him aswell as Norman Bates from Psycho.

So there you have it. Although there are usually some elements of truth behind these so called true stories, the most fantastic elements are fiction for the sake of the audience. Even things that do occur or claimed to be real are debatable.

Thanks for taking this little journey with me, see you next time!

History of the Zombie Genre (Part 6: The Video Dead)

Posted in Horror Showcase, Updates with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 23, 2011 by splatterpictures

Holy shit, if there is one thing I love, it’s doing these horror showcases. If there is one thing I hate, it’s getting a horrible virus because of them. It seems that while searching for images for the latest (and final) entry into the History of the Zombie Genre, I came across the fucking apocalypse of viruses and my old computer is down for the count. Fear not loyal readers, I have returned with the help some friends and am ready to re-write our final stop of this magical journey!

I’d like to take a minute and talk about the 80’s. What a weird and wonderful time. Business was booming and, as such, a lot more risks were being taken. Not to mention the fact that studios like New Line Cinema and things of that ilk basically built their companies off the backs of horror movies. The 80’s in horror saw the slasher boom and everybody was trying to create a mascot akin to Freddy Krueger or Jason Vorhees. Some where pretty good… most were pretty bad. A very rare few are so bad it becomes good.

Horror movies of this era saw a lot of distribution through minor labels of much larger film studios that existed to provide low risk, low cost, and decent reward to the studios. Universal, MGM and the suddenly-relevant New Line Cinema were all pretty big on this practice and released all kinds of stuff direct to VHS. Yeah, that’s right, VHS! Some rare studios managed to remain independent for the most part, but a lot of them were swallowed up in the 80’s by big business. On the other hand, there are select studios that flourished because of this new fangled direct to video market.

The 80’s saw a lot of great stuff for the Zombie Genre too. My original plan was to review the 1980’s classic Return of the Living Dead seeing as there are few films that encompass the decade in the genre so perfectly. It has everything; the music, the comedy, the origin of the Zombie battle cry “Braaaains”. It really is great example. That being said, I feel like we can do better. I think that it’s time to dig deep, and I mean –really- deep and talk about something that isn’t so “classic”. I’m talking about a film that, to this date, has never been released officially on DVD. Today we’re going to talk a little bit about The Video Dead.

The Video Dead was released in 1987 and distributed through Embassy Home Entertainment, which was the direct to video portion of Embassy Pictures. Don’t worry if you never heard of it. Basically, it was an independent studio that was eaten alive by larger studios in the late 80’s. If memory serves me (and even if it doesn’t we live in the information age), it was taken over by MGM, or New Line Entertainment. Embassy Pictures had a decent run, but eventually went the way of a lot of studios from the old days of movie making.

It was written, directed, and produced by Robert Scott. You know this sort of hat trick happens a lot in films, especially from new directors. When a director really goes all in, they have nothing really to fall back on when things go bad. Without a doubt, and despite –anything- Robert Scott could ever say, the Video Dead was his baby. I’m sure once that baby came out of the delivery room, Scott was tugging at his shirt collar wondering just what the fuck happened.

So what’s it about? Well let’s see here. Basically, the film starts out with this writer who mysteriously gets delivered a television. He’s cranky and wants to be left alone, but he reluctantly takes the TV and goes back to his writing. Things get weird when the TV magically turns on by itself and it only seems to play one thing: A zombie movie called “Zombie Blood Nightmare”. Unknown to him, the zombies actually are aware that they are in a TV and know the way out. He goes to bed and is none the wiser that a dazzling array of 80’s blue lighting effects enable the Zombies to escape and march upstairs.

The next day the deliverymen return and discover the writer’s body. Here’s the weird part: He’s sitting in a chair when the door opens with his throat slit and wearing a party hat. I remember seeing that and saying “okay weird. Why did the zombies dress him up festively?” They didn’t eat him clearly, but they slit his throat? I was pretty confused. Here’s the deal: The zombies aren’t really the zombies people are familiar with. In keeping with the spirit of the 80’s they basically say “Fuck you” to all the typical rules.

Most films had used the basic idea that if you destroy the brain you kill the zombie. I don’t know if it was because everyone in the 80’s had a desire to move forward, that this became a trend in film. For the most part if you ask someone how to kill a zombie they’ll say “Shoot em in the head!” Well that won’t really work with these, and here’s why. Some loose narrative in the story tells us that these zombies want to be alive and hate to be reminded that they are dead. A big symptom of this is a fear of mirrors. So if you want them to leave you alone, show them a reflection of themselves. Also, forget head shots. That won’t work unless you can somehow convince them that –they- are dead which you do by inflicting enough damage to their bodies. Perhaps the most ridiculous method is if you trap them in a place where they can’t possible get out, they’ll eat themselves. Lastly I’ll mention that if you show even the slightest fear, they’ll attack you. In other words, if you are nice to them and treat them as if they are alive, they’ll like you.

There you have it, the weirdest rules I’ve ever heard. Not only are they weird, they also don’t work. After the writer is killed, a brother and sister move in and start preparing the house for their parents who are away on business. They find out too late that the television that was left behind is haunted and there are still zombies out there. An old Texan comes along who knows all about the TV and the zombies. He tells them these rules and then takes the boy to go hunting for them. Well… I just don’t even know what to say. None of the rules even work and it makes me wonder what the point was in bringing them up at all.

Oh, and I normally don’t give spoilers about the ending but (SPOILER ALERT) do you want to know how to trap them from a place where no escape is possible? Just take a minute and think about a place like that. Bottom of the ocean? Stuck in a cave with a huge boulder at the entrance? How about shoving them in a bank vault? All pretty good ways, right? Well you don’t need that, just lock em in the basement for five minutes. That’s right, the basement. Nothing special about it; just a wooden door with a lock and it works.


One scene that I found pretty funny was when these two random people get killed, this old lady goes to check on her laundry and one of the undead somehow got into her washing machine. Next thing you know the old woman’s legs are just sticking out of the washer while it does a spin cycle. Good stuff.

The acting in this movie is hilarious and the writing is pretty bad. The special effects are decent enough but I can’t help and wonder just what all of the actors were thinking. Actually forget the actors. What was the director/writer/producer thinking?

This movie is a straight up horror comedy but the parts that made me laugh weren’t any of the gags but more so the silly plot and ridiculously bad acting. I recommend it to anybody who has a sense of humour about horror films in general. Like I said before, it’s never been released on DVD but for some reason Netflix has it. Check it out.

Well that finally does it for our little look back through the history of the Zombie sub-genre of horror. Also, I know you’re thinking “But what about the 90’s or the 2,000’s? Well you have a valid point, there were a lot of them in that 20 year span. Those two decades saw the birth of the “Fast Zombie” as well as a boom in the zombie culture in general. Especially the last ten years, thanks in no small part to some great authors. Not only that but it saw a few remakes of Romero’s work as well. Right now the word Zombie has a lot of marketability again which is both good and bad for fans. It’s good because it means a lot more content coming from different sources. It’s bad because a lot of that content is god awful.

I’ve decided to cut it off at the 80’s to allow myself some breathing room because, frankly, a lot has happened in those years and I’m a little zombied-out. Don’t worry too much; this topic will be resurrected again very shortly. Until next time, happy hunting!

History of the Zombie Genre (Part 5: Zombie)

Posted in Horror Showcase, Updates with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 14, 2011 by splatterpictures

It goes without saying that people watch movies to be entertained… escapism and all of that business. When it comes to horror films, people have many individual reasons to like them. A lot of people like to be scared when they watch a movie, others just find them to be easy to digest in terms of cinema. As an adult, I don’t find a lot of horror movies scary anymore. When I was a kid, though, I was disturbed more times than I wanted to admit. These days I still can get freaked out by some pretty unassuming movies, but that is probably because of my over-active imagination.

There is always something I want to recapture as an adult when I watch these films, but it’s hard to put my finger on exactly what it is. Well, loyal readers, we can thank our trip through the history of the Zombie genre on a little self discovery. Today while we’re visiting the 1970’s, I’d like to stop by and say hello to Zombie.

I remember so vividly the first time I ever saw this film. I had been invited over to a friend’s house, who had in turn invited others over (one of those situations where every seat on the couch is full with a few people sitting on the floor). One of my chums owned a video store and always had something with her. To this day, I have no idea if it was planned to watch that movie the entire time or not, but they suggested we watch this movie called “Zombie”. I was down; I’m always down. I had no idea that that this movie would end up being my favourite zombie movie by a wide margin and is still one of my favourite films of all time.

Before I get too anecdotal, I’ll try to lay down some of those facts people are usually looking for. Zombie was released in 1979 in Italy under the title Zombi 2. Yes it’s a sequel. To what movie you ask? Well it’s a sequel to George A. Romero’s Dawn of the Dead, which was just a sequel of Night of the Living Dead. Yeah, you heard me right; it’s a sequel to a sequel. A sequel that I might add has nothing to do with Romero’s “Dead” series. When Romero’s Dawn of the Dead hit Europe in 1978, it was edited and had the title changed to Zombie (don’t ask me why, I have no idea). So in 1979 an Italian made sequel called Zombi 2 was made. (Let’s not forget that fact that in the U.K. it’s called Zombie Flesh Eaters!)

The film was directed by Lucio Fulci who had a somewhat lackluster career up until this point, but that all changed when Zombi 2 hit the market and blew up. The film was well-received by audiences and made a ton of money, so it eventually was released in 1980 over in the west (with the new title of just Zombie).

Well what’s it about? Basically some harbour Patrol in New York City finds a drifting yacht with big fat zombie in it. After the zombie is killed, an investigation follows and it turns out the boat belongs to the father of a woman called Anne Bowel (Tisa Farrow). He left behind a note that says he was at the island of Matool that is cursed with a strange disease. Following this lead, the Bowels and a news reporter head to the island to investigate. They meet more characters along the way to fill out the cast and presto! You have zombies on a tropical island.

Now, everyone who knows this film knows that there are certain scenes that are nothing short of iconic. This is where everything ties together with watching Zombie with my with friends all those years ago. First, there is a zombie fighting a shark. No I’m not kidding, and it’s a real tiger shark. A man named Ramon Bravo was a shark trainer and Lucio had him dress up like a zombie and battle the creature under the water while they filmed. The zombie bites the shark the shark rips off the zombies arm. It’s truly an epic battle of legendary proportion. I will say this the first time my mind was officially blown. I had –never- seen anything close to that in a zombie movie. I remember one of my friends yelling “zombie shark” and the prospect of a shark being undead blew my mind further!

Another iconic scene is pretty nasty. A character named Paola (Olga Karlatos) experiences a slow and gruesome death where her eye is slowly run through with a broken sliver of wood. Honestly, her eyeball gets closer and closer and when the wood finally punctures it, I remember every one of my friends cringed and yelled “Oh man!”Such a great reaction.

The last thing I’ll mention, just as an aside, is the music.
There is something about the theme of this movie that I just love. The creepy synthesizer that builds and builds while the zombies start to march, whenever there was more zombies the music matches the intensity and when the music is at it’s height you’re fucked; they’re everywhere. I remember walking home from watching this and trying to desperately remember the theme because I thought it was so cool.

This movie is seriously all about being cool. It has a lot of great moments that were enhanced when I watched it with a large group of people. It really reminded me why we watch scary movies. It’s all about that moment that everyone can share together. When I first saw the zombie fight the shark, or the woman get her eye poked in, I had no idea I was witnessing some of the most iconic moments in a horror film; I just knew they were great. A lot of times I’ve heard people wonder “Oh god who’s idea was it to do that?” Or “Oh that’s sick, why would they do it?”

Maybe if I first saw this film by myself I wouldn’t have remembered it as much…or maybe wouldn’t have even liked it as much. In short, loyal readers, horror movies are best shared. Writers and directors of horror films (the good ones) try to recreate these moments that everyone can collectively say “Oh my god, I’ve never seen that before.” Those of us who get it, will get it, those of us who don’t, are excited for Transformers 3.

There’s one more stop on our look back at the history of the Zombie sub-genre. Stay tuned!