Indie Horror Films

Text © Richard Gary/Indie Horror Films, 2012

Images from the Internet

The Disco Exorcist

Directed by Richard Griffin

Wild Eye Films, 2011

80 minutes, USD $16.95

wildeyereleasing.com

MVDvisual.com

It seems the whole retro exploitation movement came into full fruition with the Tarantino / Rodriguez double-billed Grindhouse (2007), with fake period pieces added, digital scratches to look old, and “missing scenes” taken out. Just when you thought it was safe to go back into the genre, out comes The Disco Exorcist.

Despite the obvious comparison to the previous film(s) mentioned, The Disco Exorcist is, well, amazingly enjoyable. Director Richard Griffin has a history of making horror films of various genres, occasionally with a retro feel. He has certainly hit the pin on the voodoo doll head with this one.

Taking place in 1979, at the height of the disco era and just as it was starting to thankfully wane (to be replaced by the equally noxious hip hop), there are three main characters around whom the plot revolves, each with less than subtle character names.

First, there is the title fellow, otherwise known as Rex Romanski (i.e., romantic lead). He’s sort of like John Revolta / Tony Monero from Saturday Night Fever(1977), who dances and then subsequently beds all the women, and then moves on to the next one with no thought of hurt feelings. He leaves a string of women who sit at the dance club watching him move while bitterly (and humorously) make snide comments like a rejected Greek chorus. Donning a ‘70s style long-haired wig and full of baby blue eyes and dimples, Michael Reed plays him almost as an innocent, rather than the pig Rex actually acts. Without malice of thought, Romanski just lives his life, which just happens to involve disco, dipping and dumping. His sidekick, Manuel (Brandon Luis Aponte, taking a fun turn), is rarely from his side, even when he’s in a theater – er – touching himself, watching his favorite actress perform.

At the club, he meets the edgy, sometimes beautiful / sometimes scary Rita Marie (a derivative of the name Miriam – Moses’ sister – Marie means “Bitter”… yes, I just knew that off the top of my head; Rita, a derivative of Margarita; is a pearl… that one I looked up). We see from the first scene that there is something wrong with Rita, who has more power than she can use wisely, and rather takes her anger issues out by… well, you’ll have to see the cool period aesthetics. Ruth Sullivan, a consummate actor actually, does just the right amount of scenery chewing for this role, which calls for a lot of hysterics, yearning, burning, and literal finger-pointing.

Lastly, there is Rex’s idol and eventual lover, porn star Amoreena Jones (as in Amore). Beautiful with pouty lips, Sarah Nicklin is fearless in her role as the focus of Rita’s jealous vengeance. This is another part that could have been dismissed by an actor of less caliber, and cheapened by the action, but Nicklin actually comes out the best of the three as far as skills go – and that’s saying a lot considering the amount of talent is actually present despite the budget – not by doing her “Linda Blair” bit of being possessed, but by her comic timing and treating this as a she might, say, The Godfather (yeah, okay, that was a weird comparison, but hopefully I made my point). Oh, as a sidebar, in the real world, the leads Nicklin and Reed are married, so some of the positions they assume were “familiar,” as they state in the commentary.

All three of these actors are part of the New England theater scene (as are most of the secondary and ancillary cast), and Griffin, from the area himself, filmed much of this in Pawtucket, RI, as he does with most of his releases. As such, the three are part of his stable of on-screen (and quite some behind-the-scenes, as well) talent, having all appeared in a number of his flicks.

I must say, that as a retro film that was supposed to look like it was released at the end of the ‘70s, Griffin does take it a bit too far. For example, in that period, you never saw male genitalia, unless it was a rubber dildo. Even then, unless it was someone like Russ Meyer, it was highly unusual, and no theater (other than pornos) would have shown it, unless, of course, it was Meyers, an even rarer exception, and yet only in some major cities. Even with female nudity, it was T&A, but no genital hair for a long time. The one exception I can think of, though, is the actually boring The Harrad Experiment(1973), where we got to see Don Johnson’s – er – johnson.

Going in that direction for a moment, it is interesting to note that part of the this excursion into dat ol’ tyme exploitation horror, there is a set piece involving the filming of a porno film (stolen, in part, by the faaabulous scenester and collector – IMDB refers to his “paranormal artifacts, murderabilia, sideshow exhibits and downright weird stuff” – Babette Bombshell, who also designed the hexilious voodoo doll). I bring this up because recently, I reviewed the re-release of the mostly expunged Gum(1976) [HERE], at the correlation between the two is remarkable, including cheezy sets and lack of acting (although this would become especially true when porn switched from film to video in the ‘80s).

Also, check out the commentary, consisting of director Griffin, actors Nicklin and Reed, and producer Ted Marr. Usually, when you have that many people doing the annotation, it gets muddled and people talk over each other, but here, not only do they respectfully let each other have their say, but what they say is relevant to the film. Plus they still keep it humorous, again indicating that it was an enjoyable shoot for them, which passes on to the viewer.

I gotta say that this was a hell of a hoot (pun intended) to watch, and I recommend it to those who are not offended by body parts, both attached and un-. And, in the meanwhile, I look forward to seeing the sequel, The Brother of the Disco Exorcist, listed as turning its head in 2013.

Text © Richard Gary / Indie Horror Blog, 2012

Images from the Internet

Zombie Undead

Written and directed by Rhys Davies

Hive Films

83 minutes, 2010

Hivefilms.co.uk

Zombieundead.com

MVDvisual.com

May I start by saying that when I saw the title of this film, I thought that it is redundant.

I would have the same comment about something called Undead Vampires. But then I started to think about it a bit…

Generally speaking, there are three major turning points in the modern zombie film: the first is the Night of the Living Dead (1968), where zombies went from Haitian victims to flesh-eating undead. Then there was 28 Days (2000), where the maddened were not really dead, but rather rabid-like, yet it is still considered in the zombie genre (perhaps we need a plague subgenre?). This also started the ongoing and occasionally heated “fast vs. slow zombie” debate. The last was the addition of a comedy / absurd element with Shaun of the Dead (2004).Sure there was some overlap (e.g., Return of the Living Dead [1985] had some comedy elements) and even some borrowing (e.g., it could be argued that 28 Days was more The Crazies [1973] than NotLD, both directed by George A. Romero), but basically they revolutionized how we looked at the creatures.

Of the three, it could be noted that the latter two were British, who have been leading in innovation in the zombie field (though I would arguably say that some American low-budgeters deserve some more focused attention, such as Aaah! Zombies!! [aka Wasting Away, 2007; my evaluation HERE] and the recent Zombie A-Hole [2012], to be reviewed in this blog soon). Zombie Undead is also from the British Isles.

This film, directed by Rhys Davies and written by Kris Tearse, both first-timers, borrows liberally from predecessors, including others not mentioned above, such as Dawn of the Dead (1979; e.g., mostly it takes place in a single building, and there are many debowelings).

What sets it all off – and I won’t give away much, I promise – is a biological terrorist’s bomb in a hub train station. From there, of course, things deteriorate as people who were killed by the blast rise up, and slowly and inevitably, of course, chomp.

We meet the heroine, Sarah (Ruth King), who has brought her father into a hospital after he is injured and bloodied. She passes out at the stress at some point, and wakes up alone in a corridor of the hospital (shades of The Day of the Triffids [1962]). She is quickly rescued by the hulking Jay (played by writer Tearse), with machete in hand, and they are joined by the sympathetic-yet-cowardly cab driver who took Sarah and pop to hospital, Steve (Barry Thomas). From there, they work their way to the top of the building to search for relatives – and to have an excuse to hang around the single structure set – where they meet others who have survived (for now), passed on, and who have returned to join the search for – er – food.

Considering that none of the core actors in the film have any previous experience listed on the IMDB, they do a truly splendid job. Yes, there is the occasional wooden reading (I’m assuming that it is supposed to be them being in shock more than anything else), but each one holds their own both in solo pieces and in a group. I’m hoping if Davies continues, he will have the opportunity to use the cast again, as indie filmmakers tend to use a cadre of talent repeatedly. There is usually a large range of emotion that is needed when these kinds of films go serious, as does this one, so with a novice film crew, it’s ever more impressive, even on a repeated viewing (hey, I hadda show it to my zombie-lovin’ hombres).

As with most British core cities, the one used here, Leicester (a 100-mile drive north-northwest from London), looks like a series of rundown row-houses and brick buildings with some parks (mostly golf courses, according to the maps I’ve seen). Actually, a perfect setting if one wants to do the geographical / cultural analysis of what the zombies mean (you know, how critics talk about Dawn of the Dead being about consumerism, etc.), but I like to take these stories for what they are, rather than find the commies-in-the-pea-pods, if you get my drift.

While I commented before about how there are borrowed elements here and there, it should be strongly noted that there are some really fine touches, as well, such as a tragic case of mistaken identity, which is all I will divulge here, because the film is worth checking out. Yes, there are the occasional holes, but it could easily have been far, far worse. Just know that while this is a compelling film, it is a relentlessly grim story with no respite from beginning to end. It may not always be action-packed (thought it often is), but it will still keep your attention righthere.

Lastly, there is the gore element. The effects are mostly prosthetic, from what I can tell (kudos!), such as said intestines and other assorted body parts, and the blood is among the best in viscosity I’ve seen in a while: not too thick, not too thin, not too light or dark. Really good, considering the sheer abundance of it. And, do I really need to go into the question of a body count considering the subject matter and the aforementioned tone? Didn’t think so.

There are no extras on this DVD, be it commentary, bloopers, deleted scenes or even a coming attraction for this film, never mind others on the brand. Zip. Zero. Zilch. But I won’t disappoint you. Here is the trailer:

Text © Richard Gary/Indie Horror Films, 2012
Images from the Internet

Where the Dead Go to Die
Written, directed and animated by Jimmy Screamerclauz
Unearthed Films
96 minutes, 2011
Unearthedfilms.com
MVDvisual.com

Let me state, right off the top, that this is a great title for a film.

As a culture, we are all becoming more aware of motion capture in films, thanks to the likes of that Tom Hanks Christmas polar crap, and even Lord of the G-Strings…oh, wait, that’s different film… Anyway, my point is, everyone has come to think of it as a timely and expensive project, suitable only for the “big guns” of major studios (or at least a production with a decent budget).

However, with the help of some friends and an Xbox 360 Motion Capture, using Cinema 4D and importing Poser, Screamerclauz filmed and then edited it on Adobe Premiere. He has successfully shown that it is indeed doable with this dark trio of inter-related tales, titled “Tainted Milk,” “Liquid Dreams,” and “The Masks That the Monsters Wear.” Each takes place in a small town, showing a group of friends’ lives at various stages from children to adulthood, but not necessarily in chronological order.

The axis of the story is an evil(?)/godly(?) dog with glowing red eyes that can talk in a whispery, stuttering voice (somewhat like the pooch in Davy and Goliath), named Labby (to remind you of Lassie, though it is not a collie breed). Then there is his “owner” Tommy (Timmy) and something possibly malevolent in the well (as in “Timmy fell in the well!”). Some of the other characters are Johnny and Sophia. They have to deal with Labby, questionable parents (one voiced by the Linnea Quigley), and strange black-clad cyclopeses called “shadow people.”

The film is quite stunning to see, with nudity, sex, blood and gore, and a swirl of tentacles and eyes that appear often. The storylines are quite confusing and, honestly, half the time I didn’t know what the hell was going on, but I enjoyed the ride anyway. I strongly recommend watching the solo commentary by Screamerclauz afterwards. Now, I have to warn you, he is an annoying and whiny pain in the ass (“I didn’t know what I was doing,” “I don’t know what to say,” etc.), but he does help the story along somewhat to explain that this is that person from another story at a different time, for example. Note, though, that there is a lot more technical talk, for those into that, than story explanation. I almost wanted two tracks, one for the story and one for the technical, but Screamerclauz seemed to be having trouble with just the one, even ending it abruptly before the film ends.

Some of the interesting comments include him stating that he thought the film was funny rather than disturbing (actually, he says that more than once), and that “I just like wild things on the screen. I like flies, too.” Personally, I think he was stoned outta his mind when he recorded the track; and do I remember him actually lighting one up, or is that a dream?...

The music that flows nearly throughout is loud speedcore thrash, and most of the time it helps underscore the visuals, though occasionally I thought, okay, enough. Hey, I’m not expecting Peter, Paul and Mary, but it seems like every indie is using some speed metal in their films these days. It’s becoming unimaginative, unlike the rest of the visuals.

Despite all my whining, I think Screamerclauz has a lot to be proud of, since this really does look really great, despite the jerkiness of some of the movement. Truly, I think it would be terrific if he continued doing it, but I would also wish to add the caveat of wanting someone else work with him, to help edit his ideas more coherently.

While I don’t imbibe, myself, and also do not recommend or suggest it for others, I’m guessing this is a stoner’s dream (nightmare?).

Text © Richard Gary / Indie Horror Blog, 2012

Images from the Internet

Zombie A-Hole

Written and directed by Dustin W. Mills

108 minutes, 2012

Facebook.com/zombieahole

MVDvisual.com

Is this one of the best names of a film recently, or what? You really do know exactly what you’re getting, and this certainly won’t disappoint. After a summer of blockbuster films costing in the hundreds of millions of dollar to make, my interest was keenly kept with a central cast of three or four, and a $3,000 budget. Shot on a single Cannon 60D DSLR and made to look like film with wear marks and all, there’s no wimpy vampires, shirtless werewolves or annoyingly monotone women. No, we get a fashionable, mobster-natty zombie.

As is clearly and succinctly explained in the film, there are four kinds of zombie. The last one is the least used, which is an undead – or infected – person possessed by a demon. Hey, it’s posited in the opening scene, so I don’t believe I’m giving much away here; this cause for zombism has been mostly used in foreign films such as the Night of the Demons cycle (1988-1997), the original [*Rec] film franchise (2007-20012), though in the States there is the Evil Dead series (1981-1992). So there aren’t multitudes of flesh eaters crawling through the woods or cities ready to eat your brains. Rather, a serial killer who dies, comes back as said a-hole demon, and goes around killing identical twin women. The undead Pollux is himself a twin, the latter of whom, Castor, is searching for his brother to end the reign of terror.

And why twins? Two reasons (pun not intended). First, in this story, the demon can gain power to unlock the gates of you-know-where if he absorbs the energy from the twins he kills due to their higher psychic abilities to communicate with each other (yeah, I know, it’s kind of weak, but original). But the real reason is explained by Mills himself in the hilarious commentary: half the number of actors and twice the number of kills, as he gets to do in each one twice. Brilliant, in its own way.

One of the seemingly unwritten rules of this film is that the murdered twins are all women, each pair lives together, and one has to be murdered while the other is taking a bath or shower so the audience gets to see some nudity; Roger Corman would certainly be proud. As Dustin also points out, there are many different body shapes here, not just the standard thin with big boobs. Though a large amount of the female cast is apparently multiply tattooed.

Let’s get down to the gritty. First there’s Frank Fulchi (nice nod to the Italian goremeister), played with country-aplomb and religious fervor by Josh Eal. This religiousness is shown when he get angry when women cuss, but doesn’t seem to mind when men do it. Yep, that sounds about right. As we head into the election where the Tea Party rhetoric sounds just as hypocritical, the timing is ideal for this subtle (less than subtle if intended) dig against that mentality (and I use that word loosely), though I don’t believe that was necessarily where Mills was going. Played with a cowboy hat, square jaw, and lots of macho enthusiasm, Eal does a fine job of presenting a type that is familiar to horror films (e.g., Woody Harrelson in Zombieland [2009]). This is Eal’s only listed credit. His acting is kind of one note, but honestly, that is what the character dictates, so good on him for staying the course.

The female lead is Mercy (Jessica Daniels), who, during her first meeting with the title zombie, loses her twin sister Mary, as well as an eye, which we see yanked out very slowly (but not slo-mo), the optic nerve streeeeetching… Mercy doesn’t take crap from anyone, not even Pollux, and even though she loses the peeper (giving her that cool, Thriller: A Cruel Picture (1973) look, she is ready for battle the next time they meet. Daniels is believable because I know she can certainly kick my ass. Of course, to show she’s tough, the film has her smoking stogies like Clint “Empty Chair” Eastwood. The anger she feels is more palpable than the others, but her character is sort of secondary for most of the story, which is a shame. Daniels has one other credit, as the voice of Gwen in Dustin Mills’ first film, the also wonderfully titled The Puppet Monster Massacre (2011) [my review HERE].

As Castor, Brandon Salkil plays him with a mixture of lantern-jaw nerd who is able to read the - I mean, an - ancient book of the Necromicon, and an unsure monster hunter who looks like he’s about to pee his pants some of the time; or at least burst into tears. Salkil has two other film credits, including the character Wilson in the aforementioned The Puppet Monster Massacre.

In a dual role (as I said, twins), Salkil also portrays the title monster like he stepped out of Sin City (2005), full of noir machismo and a good use of body language since his face is a mask and cannot move face muscles much. With the élan of a dancer, Pollux is the exact opposite of Castor, and Salkil does well to separate the two completely in body and spirit. While sometimes his performance feels the most forced, at other times, it seems the most natural.

Essentially, this is a road trip buddy film, with Frank and Castor driving in a car and getting to know one another. The story mostly jumps back and forth between them and Pollux doing is de-twinning. Note that there is plenty of action and gore.

Speaking of blood and guts, lets get to the gristle and talk about (well, I will anyway; not expecting much of a spontaneous dialog, y'know) the SFX. Some of it looks pretty good, though you really can notice the digitization. For example, when someone’s head gets pushed on a spike, you can see the layers, especially if you’re like me and you slo-mo the action. But with an $8,000 budget, what do you expect, Titanic? Some of the effects, honestly, are laughable, and this is part of the enjoyment. For example, when zombie Pollux spews out some The Fly-type sputum to melt flesh, it’s obviously Silly-String. And pulled flesh is pieces of ropey, rubbery goo, apparently called nerdies in the business. The a-hole also has retractable intestines, apparently, that can grab like tentacles (in fact, the subject of Mills’ next film is tentacle related), but looks like ropes (i.e., too stiff and not membraney enough). Then again, there are some moments that are great, such as when the zombie reaches up through a bed and the hand goes through a (twin’s) body, holding up the heart. This looked superb. Similarly, with a very brief moment where a face is ripped in half off the skull. But don’t make me go into the whole Energy Beam Welder thingy.

Now, you may be asking yourself, “This is the director of The Puppet Monster Massacre, are there any puppets? Well, class, to answer that, let me state that by far, the silliest moment is when Pollux pees (red, so I’m assuming blood) in the woods, and a slew of skeletal creatures come out. In actuality, this are a Halloween skeleton you can buy to put on your lawn. Mills fixed it up with pop-out white eyes and a couple of other thingies, and then just replicated it digitally to make it into multitudes. It looks bad and fakey, though Mills rightfully states in the commentary, “You can’t pretend it’s Schindler’s List.”

That being said, the other puppet is some kind of chained wizened creature in a small box that turns on with a skeleton key (side-note: in an early scene, Frank drops the key, but has it moments later without bending down… I’m guessing there is a small part deleted there?), that is one of the more imaginative and interesting ideas in the film (and there are some good ones here). Named Selwyn, after the baby in the classic Dead Alive (1992), it is superbly voiced by Eugene Flynn.

There are only two extras on the disk, one being the trailer, and the other is a noteworthy commentary by director Dustin Mills and the title character actor, Brandon Salkil. Goofy at times, there is also a lot of information about both the production and the plot that makes it worthwhile.

What happens in the story? Well, suffice it to say the film proves Carol Clover’s seminal book, Men, Women and Chainsaws (1992) to be correct. Let’s leave it at that, other than there is supposedly a sequel down the road that I’m looking forward to watching.

Meanwhile, there is an interesting interview with director Dustin Mills on another site HERE.

Text © Richard Gary / Indie Horror Films, 2012

Images from the Internet

The Scar Crow

Written and directed by Andy Thompson and Pete Benson

Gaia Media / Dead on Arrival Digital / Jingai

83 minutes, 2009 / 2012

Gaiamedia.co.uk

MVDvisual.com

Well this is a just-miss Hammer-esk film that is a bit of a mixture of early-1970s and mid-‘80s clichés. The story of three fetching witches (Prim, Proper, and Vanessa Tanner) enacting a bloody plan to escape a curse by their lecherous (and non-warlock?) dad and move on after 300 years could have been right out of the mind of those who wrote the Karnstein Trilogy (look it up HERE) rather than written by co-directors Andy Thompson and Pete Benson).

Let me start with the good stuff, coz that’s the kinda guy/fan I am. The film looks beautiful, is shot well, and edited strongly (if sometimes confusing of the action, especially in dim-lit scenes). People fading in and out are certainly nice touches and the sense of atmosphere works incredibly well; also soundly done is a scene where the audience can see the post-carnage effects in a room, but some of the characters who are enchanted cannot. The British countryside and the farm have just the right feeling of isolation, creepiness and loneliness to show the emotions of the sisters, without needing dialog to explain, though the words and actions are there.

The shimming light of fire rather than electricity, for example, is used without much loss to the image (i.e., too dark to see), and the color saturation is nicely tuned (fire tends to make things too yellow or red).

As the viewer is taken back and forth between the origin story centuries ago that weaves through modern times, it is never confusing, and they tie together in a solid knot that is the center of the story.

Ah, yes, the story. Actually, it is a really decent tale that is poorly told (as you can see, I’m starting on the problem parts now). While the acting is mostly either over- or underdone, which I will get to shortly, it is the co-screenwriting by the directors where is the most troubling.

But first, let us catch up a bit on the story. You got the three enticing witch sisters who cannot leave the farm until the curse is lifted (they are both bodily solid and spatially fluid, depending on the circumstance, which is actually a nice touch), and then there are the four macho insurance salesmen (is that an oxymoron, or are they just trying to mock a cliché?) copping out on a mean-spirited office team-building weekend (I would quit the job before going through this ridiculous and physically rigorous nonsense; most office workers could not do what is expected in the film, and beside, many insurance sellers these days are women, and there is nary a true representation in the group. But, as usual, I digress…). Running out on the exercises (rightfully), they come across the rural farm with the witches, to become fodder, as expected.

Man, I hated these four guys. They are every macho jock moron bar bully you ever met. We are also never given a chance to really feel pity for them, because, with one exception, there is no background story given about them, and absolutely no character development. All they do is drink (excessively), talk about how they’re going to score with the three women (disproportionately), and goad and fight with each other, calling their supposed good buddies “twats” over and over. The dislike I felt for them, including the supposedly sympathetic one who is more than willing to cheat on his girlfriend, was palpable. There were a couple of times there where I just said to the screen, “Oh, c’mon, kill the asshole already.”

There is also no shock value in here. When one of the four twats (as I now will call them) stops for a potty break in a field, there’s no doubt as to what is going to happen. Even the ending is no surprise, if you’ve seen any horror film in the last 30 years.

But the biggest annoyance for me was the questions that went through my mind about the plot holes. For example (and I’ll only give two here), if the witches are planning to use these twats for their great escape, why would they let them go to the town pub and mix with the locals, including the cliché wise-but-not-taken-seriously-by-anyone older guy (bar owner, here) who warns them to leave? And why, when they are seducing one of the twats, who is tied to the bedposts, would two of the sisters undress over him and start kissing each other? I mean, gratuitous lesbian incest, really?

As for the cast, well, most of the acting, as I said, was either too subdued or too scenery chewing. For example, the witches are supposed to be 300 years old and isolated (are you trying to tell me that no one else has been on that farm in all that time for them to do what they need to escape?; obviously, there are more than two questions…), but they sure do seem to know a lot about Twenty-first Century mores for women from the Eighteenth Century, including stripping at the drop of a corset. When they speak, they sound stilted in their language, like a high schooler trying to do Shakespeare, rather than have it flow naturally. This is especially true, sadly, for the most film-credited actor in the cast, redheaded Marysia Kay (as the eldest, Vanessa). Her line reading is atrocious here (I haven’t seen her in anything else, so I don’t know if it’s endemic for her, or she just didn’t care about this mess). The other two sisters, busty and beautiful Gabrielle Douglas (middle child Proper) and the cute and more reticent Anna Tolputt (youngest Prim, short for Primrose), fare a bit better, but are caught in a maelstrom of clunky writing.

As for the twats, well, mostly they seem interchangeable. Their characters were so vacant and transparent, and their portrayers so bland, that half the time I couldn’t remember who was whom. In fact, I’m not even going to bother with them, other than the supposedly sympathetic anti-hero (?) Dez, played by Kevyn (really?) Connett (who looks remarkably like Canadian comedian Shaun Majumder). While his acting probably comes the closest to being best among the troupe (possibly why he is the lead male role), he is also hampered by a ham-fisted script.

Now the all important gore-factor: I read a review that claimed it was not up to par, but actually, I thought the blood-to-kill quotient was quite good, and with one exception of a very obvious prosthetic in a corn field, was pleased with the various body parts strewn about in various scenes. It is amusing to me that a similar gag employed here – a hand reaching through a body to lift out a heart – was also used almost identically in a more recent film, Zombie A-Hole, reviewed recently on this blog by moi. Oh, sidebar here: I actually was annoyed that the character who had his heart removed above, along with other internal organs, was still alive to view all this happening way beyond the point of even suspension of disbelief. Again, poor writing/direction.

I realize this is a first film by Benson and Thompson, so I’m going to cut them some slack. After all, as much as I loved them, the similar could be said about some of the early works of masters like Chronenberg, Waters, Hooper, and yes, even Romero. I’ll keep my fingers crossed, even though they’ve only worked on one film since this was filmed in 2009. Perhaps we can get them to direct something they have not written, or have edited by someone else, where their strengths will all come together, because if they can match their content with their visuals, they may become a force worth noting.

Bonus clip:

Text © Richard Gary/Indie Horror Films, 2012

Images from the Internet

Terror of Dracula

Directed by Anthony DP Mann

World Wide Multi-Media (WWMM)

100 minutes, 2012

wwmm.info/

MVDvisual.com

In the DIY world, if someone won’t do it for you, take it into your own hands. Can’t get a gig? Get some bands, hire a hall and equipment, and put on your own showcase. Can’t get a record deal, even from the indies? Put it out yourself. Fixated on 19^th Century literature and want to make a film about Sherlock Holmes or Count Dracula? Get some likeminded friends together who need some exposure and, as they say in Canada, get ‘er done.

Oh, I may have forgotten to mention that Terror of Dracula is a Canadian film, based in the lovely (seriously) granite-capital of Kingston, Ontario, a “place I know right well” (to quote the song “Leaving of Liverpool”).

So, Anthony DP Mann, along with Bill Bossert, wrote a screenplay supposedly meant to be accurate to the original 1897 Bram Stoker novel, and then Mann added himself to the main role, and also directed the film, such as he had done with his previous two films, Sherlock Holmes and the Shadow Watchers and Canucla (aka Dracula in Canada). I have not seen these others yet, but would be willing.

As the moving picture show begins, we are presented with title cards, explaining that this release predates most the others, including the Hammer Films, and it has been restored. This is a nice touch, as this was obviously shot on digi, and just released this year. Not a complaint though; just the opposite, as it was appreciated.

With the help of the city’s local Theatre Five troupe (whom I had seen perform a few times in the late 1980s). Actually, I got excited when I saw that Dr. Seward, who runs the institution that houses Renfield, and is the father of the Count’s first on-land British victim, Lucy, is played by Dick Miller. However, it was not the Dick Miller. Oh, well, unlife goes on. Apparently, none of the other cast members have any film credits other than either this, or Mann’s previous Sherlock release.

Oh, there’s lots of other unintentionally amusing bits – and again, this is not meant as a dig, just the eye of a viewer of many indie films – such as the cell where Renfield is kept at the institution is obviously the same we Jonathan Harker’s bedroom at Castle D.

A reason I was hot to watch this film is because of its reputed loyalty to the book, one I’ve read a number of times. It really is nearly impossible, as the novel takes place in various forms of correspondence, after the fact (for example, a paraphrase may be something like, “Oh, what a horrible series of events occurred last evening, and here is why…”). Like all other retellings before this one (while Hammer was especially bad for loyalty to the original, they were usually great films), there is – and has to be – quite a bit of original input by Mann and Weil… I mean Bossert, including the unsurprising yet fun ending.

One disappointing aspects of this film is the slow pacing. In a stilted verbal manner or through chewing of scenery to express angst, the cast plays this like a stage drama, with overwrought tones and non-literal handwringing, in part due to way the cast reads the 19^th Century-ish dialog, a trap that most period pieces fall into. This is not helped by the extreme and claustrophobic close-ups that are the core of nearly every scene. It’s sort of like when you watch a filmed concert, and they focus on the strumming hand rather than both that and the one playing the chords. I kept wanting more visual information that just when eyebrows are lifted. I was almost expecting the actors to turn around too fast as hit their nose on the camera (yes, Mel Brooks did perfect that).

Another is how dreadfully serious they seem to be taking the production. Truly, a low budget and a newbie cast is much better serving the audience if there seems to be some sense of camaraderie with those on- and off-screen. Sure, the tale of Dracula and his ilk deals with evil beings out to suck the world dry in high drama fashion, but even in the original novel, one could argue that Renfield and his insistence on entomophagy was a comic thread on some level. The Hammer Films versions also had moments of dark humor. Mix together the dead (pun intended) seriousness and the stilted language and acting, you end up with a product that is self-important and pretentious, even if that is not what was meant as the outcome. I’m just sayin’…

Mann plays the titular character either with static intensity or overdrawn – er – intensity. The beard looks okay, but there is no explanation of why it turns from white in Transylvania to dark in Kingst… I mean England.

While I’m at it, there were a few parts in the book that are terrific, but were left out here, I’m sure due to financial constraints, so I’m not blaming, I’m just noticing. An example is the terror aboard the Demeter, the ship that brings ol’ Drac and his many boxes filled with native soil to theUK. In the book, it is a very palpable set piece, and it is even well done in the original Nosferatu (1922), though I do have to admit it is barely shown in the more famous Lugosi-led Dracula (1930).

The rest of the cast also meanders over stilted language and emotions, as I’ve indicated above, although Angela Scott fares well as Lucy, with minimal ham-foolery. It would have been easy to do the dying character as a Camille, with arms amok, but she stays true. However, the three women who play the “wives” of the Count are jaw-droopingly overdone performances. To be fair, this is actually a hard part to play, because there’s three of them vying for notice always in the same scene, and again, there’s an overwrought level to them; even in the book, as they cower from their “master” and bound after their prey (a baby), so perhaps I’m being too hard on them.

I respect what Mann is trying to do, but perhaps he is doing too much. He needs a cinematographer who knows how to back the hell up, a dialog coach (especially if he continues to film costume dramas), and an AD who will have the balls to tell him that he needs to either ramp a scene up, or clamp it down.

Note that this film has been getting a lot of really good notices, so I may be one of the few who had some difficulty with it. The only extras on the disc are two versions of the trailer, so if you watch the VoD version, you won’t miss much. Perhaps check it out for yourself. See it… for your mother’s sake.

Text © Richard Gary/Indie Horror Films, 2012

Images from the Internet

Zombie Babies

Directed and screenplay by Eamon Hardiman

Independent Entertainment

112 minutes, 2011 / 2012

Zombiebabiesfilm.com

AlternativeCinema.com

MVDvisual.com

Okay, with a name like Zombie Babies, y’just know this is not only going to be a comedy, but one of a broad nature. And yes, there is no subtly here.

I’m not quite sure when the story is supposed to take place, but I’m guessing around the time Roe vs. Wade had just passed in 1973. This sets up the premise where redneck “discount late-term abortionist” ($10 per) Dr. Burt Fleming and his less-than-able-and-not-too-bright assistant Teddy decide to fight against legit docs performing the deed, and decide to have a “Abort-a-Thon” and use the old Jewish vaudeville joke punchline, “Volume!” They send out invites to couples to visit their decrepit building, once a hotel and casino, to have their wombs vacated in a party atmosphere.

Four dysfunctional couples accept the offer. Most of the actors who play the roles have an amazing amount of credit behind them (and upcoming), most in the sexploitation horror genre (the kind of stuff in which the underrated Misty Mundae would appear; if you know who I mean, you know the genre I refer). Needless to say, though I will anyway, there are lots and lots of tats on both genders, and a number of body piercings present. In no particular order the couples are:

There is hooker supreme Capri (Desiree Saetia) and her boyfriend, pimp, and Thurston Howell III wannabe - right down to the cap and accent - Reggie (Ford Austin, who has had quite the career, having been in every genre from Happy Days [1978] and a semi-regular in Night Court [1985], to the likes of Showgirls 2: Penny’s From Heaven [2011] and Aliens vs. A-Holes [2012]), who perhaps is named after Reggie Mantle from the Archie comics. Austin doesn’t seem to take this too – er – seriously, in that he seems like he doesn’t want to be there, and is less memorable for it. Saetia, who also chews the scenery in her role, comes off a bit better, having a nice tour-de-force performance about half-way through the film.

Another is the weighty and sweating Lewis (Shawn Phillips), who somehow managed to knock up knock-out redhead Veronica (Ruby Larocca). Of course, she treats him like a doormat, and he is desperate enough to accept that role. Phillips plays the role with just amount of whine to make him both pitiable and annoying, definite a hard and fine-line to project without delving into one way or another. He actually has a number of credits in the genre, such as Girls Gone Dead (2012) and Blood Orgy at Beaver Lake (2012). As for Larocca, well, she’s actually been in a number of films I’ve already reviewed, such as Bill Zebub’s Zombiechrist (2010), and some of the voices on the animated Where the Dead Go to Die (2012; HERE). She was also in one of my favorite titled films that I’ve seen, The Lord of the G-String:The Femaleship of the String (2003). She is also frequently in films with Mundae. It’s not surprising her credit list is incredibly long, as she seems fearless, as well as tattooed. As with much of the cast, she also has a history of writing, producing, and directing within the genre. This may be a silly film with bizarre characters, but these are some smart-as-whips actors.

The third grouping is manipulative baseball groupie Jami Lynn (Missy Dawn) and professional athlete Jackson (Dean Stark). Perhaps by coincidence, both these paired actors have the least amount of credits to their name: Stark has this as his only listing, and Missy’s menu is three films, all by this director. Stark, despite being a bit diminutive for a pro baseball player, nails the character’s vain and aggressive behavior, even if it’s a bit stereotypical jock (and I have found many jocks in my life have this same attitude, so this is not a criticism). The wonderfully moniker’s Missy is way taller than him, and gives the right edge to someone who expected more than the Jackson character can give. However, she is also the most willing to hit the sack than of the others.

The last, and most central of the ensemble, is loser tee-shirt entrepreneur Kevin (Trent McKelvin, a pseudonym for the director, Eamon Hardiman), and the nagging (don’t really blame her; she just wants someone reliable) yet adorable Leah (Kaylee Williams). Of course Kevin is a bit of a hero while still being a zero – directors can give themselves that role – while Kaylee comes across as the most naturally accomplished and natural actor of the troupe.

And, despite the low budget and genre, this cast is actually quite strong, if goofy as all get out. Even when the occasional scenery chewing occurs, especially by the good doctor (I’ll get to that in a minute), it’s so much freakin’ fun that you just don’t care.

The – er – good Dr. Burt is played waaaaaay over the top with much glee by Brian Gunnoe, who, like most of the cast, has appeared in previous Hardiman films (including the Porkchop slasher franchise). Gunnoe portrays him with southern hillbilly aplomb, dressed in a white tee covered by a red… well, it’s either a robe or smoking jacket, I’m not sure. Though he plays a mean blues acoustic guitar, he’s not necessarily someone you would want to trust with as delicate an operation as this one, especially since he performs the procedure using the cheap type of white hangers dry cleaners give out, not even the more solid, copper-colored ones.

Meanwhile, Roy Cobb plays Teddy rightfully understatedly. Again, it would be easy to make him a complete and annoying moron, but he comes across as more dazed than deranged. That makes the character more dangerous because he’s misleading. Teddy also wears a fez, for some reason, and a white, sleeveless tee-shirt with nothing over it, with his belly hanging out under the shirt.

Oh, and did I mention that Dr. Burt was well over 100 years old (not looking a day over 40), thanks to some mystery moonshiney type of concoction that he mixes in the basement, next to the bloody pile of excavated fetuses? That’s where the story goes… hell, it’s already so joyfully off-the-wall that by the time the formula starts bringing the fetuses to murderous life, you’ve already said goodbye to any sense of levels of credibility. And rightfully so, because, well, I mean, hell, you’re watching a film called Zombie Babies.

When the fetuses become zombified, they’re not necessarily flesh eaters in the (now) classic zombie sense as much as revengeful mutilators out to kill their parents (and others) in revenge. How the parents recognize the fetuses as their own, and vice-versa, of course, is a head scratcher in itself.

The revitalized babies are way too big to be merely fetuses, even late term, and they sometimes look a bit like some of the main characters of Full Moon Studio’s Puppetmaster (1989). Two different types of puppets are obviously used, one with the hand up the back and sticks to move the arms (like most Muppets), and other times marionettes. In true DIY, indie, low budget mode, there are some joyfully sloppy moments, where the strings are digitally edited out, but the scene is also zapped, so you see some white lines where the strings were before. And in one case, you can easily see the shadow of the hands holding the sticks, while the sticks themselves were clumsily taken out. And don’t get me started on the green-screen debacle of when the couples arrive on the grounds of the abortion casino. While in a big budget film this would be terrible, in this film it’s all part of the joyous fun and woo-hoo lets-make-a-movie mode. If this was trying to be a serious film, even indie, I would be annoyed by it. But this is the kind of film you have your friends over for, to watch and yell at the screen, so it becomes part of the fun.

By far the funniest part of the film is actually a semi-serious conversation on white-on-black violence. Part of what makes it a hoot is the out-of-context-ness with the rest of the dialog, which includes the very quotable “We gonna kill us some fuckin’ babies!”

The gore level is pretty high, including garroting and beheading via umbilical cord, a hysterical gauntlet of flying zombie babies/fetuses, and of course, what would this film be without the classic baby in a blender gag?

I can see both sides of the abortion debate using this film, though probably not up there on their attention plane, as proving their point (as was done with Juno). The anti-abortionists can point out that, “See, them baybehs is ahlave. ‘N look how disgustin’ them abortionists aw, y’all! (sorry, I have to do it in a Southern accent. If I may digress, as I am wont, comedian Steve Landesberg [RIP 2010] – aka “Dietrich” on Barney Miller– once said that Southerners aren’t necessarily more racist than those in the North, it just sounds so much better to say, “hayng hym”).

As for the pro-choice, well, in a similar vein, the use of coathangers and the disgusting unlicensed abortionists also can be used as symbols of why the procedure needs to be legal (the side on which I am strongly learning, FYI).

With its high level of amateurishness (if that’s even a word… well Microsoft Word recognizes it so it must be), zany levels of gore and ridiculous plot that seems to be written during a bender, shit, I had a lot of fun from beginning to end. This just flies by between the gore effects, the gross-outs (don’t get me started on how Reggie kicks it), the ample amount of exposed and colored flesh and plot holes that are harder to put together than finding who committed the JonBeney Ramsey murder (sorry, again; I just recently rewatched ThanksKilling). What plot holes? Well, for one of thousands, the fact that just hours after having the abortion, nearly all the couples connubially combine with their significant other.

You can just tell the actors are having fun. Just that so many of them have appeared in a few other films by Hardiman shows that we are viewing a good time that extends beyond the set. Will this offend? Let me repeat slowly for ya: Z-o-m-b-i-e B-a-b-i-e-s. Get some of them buddies together and have fun talking back to the screen.

Text © Richard Gary/Indie Horror Films, 2012

Images from the Internet

Bloody Bloody Bible Camp

Directed by Vito Trabucco

Bosko Group

90 minutes, 2012

Boskogroup.com

Bloodybloodybiblecamp.com

MVDvisual.com

So, you may ask, just how irreverent is this group in the woods slasher spoof? Well, if you need more information than just the title, the assembly visiting the Happy Day Bible Camp are from St. Judas Catholic Church. And if that doesn’t get ya yet, a very snarky Jesus is played by… wait for it… Ron Jeremy.

As the extended opening credits roll by bit by bit, we meet the first set of ill-fated horndogs coming to share the weekend with beer, sex and the savior in 1977. The body count in just this segment, as they meet insane killer (obviously a guy in a nun’s outfit and a mask), Sister Mary Chopper (Tim Sullivan), is larger than most serious films of this nature, but are equally as gruesome, via various sharp objects (my favorite being the crucifix with the knife on the end).

The ’77 scenes are smartly funny, with one oaf commenting how Star Wars is going to bomb, another discusses the death of Elvis, and everyone is wearing loud-colored polyester. But mostly it’s heavenly profane in language and deed. For example, one woman states, “It would be only Christian of us, good girls of us, to have sex with guys who have penises like Jesus.” That is not a misquote. Another, splayed and ready for rear entry, states lustily, “Backdoor’s always open for Jesus, baby.” Oh, and someone with a guitar sings a folk ditty that includes the lyrics, “If the devil don’t like this / he can lick my nutsack.”

I wrote down a whole bunch of the lines from this part, but on second thought, I don’t want to stomp on all of them, better if you see it for yourself. And all this is, remember, just the credits.

As the main story begins in 1984, a new set of fodder heads off (pun intended) in a yellow bus to the Happy Day Bible Camp (filmed in Big Bear, California). They are led by the sexual-orientation questioning Father Cummings (yes, sometimes the puns get that obvious), played by horror film stalwart, Reggie Bannister, who rose to fame in the Phantasm (1979) franchise. He also co-produced the film.

Along with him is the obvious bunch of mid-to-late-twenty-year-old teens, including the punk girl Jessie (Deborah Venegas), the dumb blonde, Britany (Jessie Sonneborn), the fat and mentally challenged Timmy (Christopher Raff), the possibly closeted bully/jock Tad (Matthew Aiden), the horny-yet-inexperienced Vance (Troy Guthrie), and the sole survivor of the ’77 attack, Millie (Ivet Corvea). Also along for the ride is another member of the clergy, Brother Zeke (Jay Fields), who is also not adverse to a jump in the sack).

Of course, before they get to the place, they have to stop off at the store so they can be warned by one of the locals (yep, every cliché), who is annoyed by the “goddamn Christians” (more on this later).

There are some particular moments that stand out for me, such as a… well, I’m not sure if it’s a rip-off or a rip-on Blazing Saddles’ (1974) “Whip this out” moment. And I certainly smiled when one character firmly states, “Someone’s going to H-E-L. That’s Hell.” What made me laugh about this is not the misspelling, but that they explain it to the audience in case they missed it.

It is pretty obvious which character is Sister Mary Chopper; this film obviously does not feel a need for subtly, which is fine by me. I’m not here to watch Monk or The Mentalist, where the viewer tries to work out the mystery, but rather a spoof. While not as slick (i.e., lower budget) as, say, the Scary Movie (2000) satire series, it is successful in its own right that I laughed though a lot of it, while “oh no, they didn’t”-ing in others. The main problem with this film is that it straddles between a satire and a broad comedy, seemly not really sure on which side to focus. But I have to say, on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the most annoying, it is somewhere around a 1.5, so no harm, lots of foul fun.

There are multiple good death effects and blood, with some causes being sharp objects or bricks dropped on heads. My favorite one, though, is when one character is nailed to a door frame exactly like the mom at the end of the film Carrie (1976). Hey, spoofs usually riff off other films, and this one does it well.

I’m sure there will be those who say this release is part of the “War on Catholics / Christianity.” Yes, I will agree that this film slams some of the ills of the modern Church, such as one male character being tapped on the shoulder, to which he joyfully says, “What, Father, again?” The Catholic Church especially has opened itself up to specific cultural ridicule for the way it has handled certain situations (e.g., I remember being in Canada in the late 1980s and there was an article that investigated that a large number of the priests and brothers on Newfoundland were transferred there after hidden scandals involving pedophilia).

But honestly, I believe (pun intended) that this crew was going for shock value, rather than trying to make a point. How I imagine the writing sessions is something like: “Is that offensive? Yeah, throw it in!” Besides, there is always going to be somebody offended about something. I remember nearly getting into a fistfight with some tool because he insisted that the titular character in Monty Python’s The Life of Brian (1979) was supposed to be Jesus; I commented that JC appears in the film so how can Brian be Him? That’s when he threatened to take me outside and deck me. No telling what he thought of Saved! (2004).

While this film does occasionally become a bit too broad for its own good, as a whole, it is definitely a mucho grande fun excursion into, well, one character puts it best: “That’s, like, blasphemy or something!”

There are some enjoyable extras, such as “The Making of a Massacre” (13 minutes), a production photo slide show, and some trailers. Two less successful ones are the dull 12-minute long “Bloody Bloody Special Effects” that shows two talking head guys discussing the SFX in a static manner (go figure), and the feature-length commentary is so overcrowded with director, cast and crew, that there is no coherency, no way to tell who is saying what, and is basically a muddled mess. This film is worth getting on its own, fortunately, so go do that, my child.

Text © Richard Gary/Indie Horror Films, 2013
Images from the Internet

Johnny Dickie’s Slaughter Tales
Directed by Johnny Dickie
Briarwood Entertainment / Libra Verde Media
91 minutes, 2012
Briarwoodentertainment.com
MVDvisual.com

You may not know this, but in the late 1960s to mid-1980s, in the pre-video days when film was expensive, some of the better known directors of the time got their experience and hands-on training by making porno films. Yep, the industry hired students from NYU and UCLA film schools who were inexpensive to use and in need of practice, plus cash to pay for the university. For anyone in their younger years back then, there was always 8mm and Super 8 film, which was incredibly hard to work with, as I found out in the couple of movies I tried to make with a friend.

This changed a bit with video and the camcorder, but tapes were still hard to edit, needing a linear editing bay which was expensive. Of course, now with the digital age and most new computers having relatively advanced editing programs, it is not surprising to find that more and more are making films independently to various successes, such as Bill Zebub, Creep Creepersin, Dustin Mills and Sean Weathers.

Nearly fifteen-year-old Johnny Dick uses a digi-cam to shoot his stories, and then transferred it to VHS to give it a true grainy texture to produce a first-time full-length feature. Is it good? Nah. Is it fun? Oh, yeah, if you can just set your mind to remember that it’s a film by a kid in middle school.

As a framework, Johnny, who also stars in the film, steals a videotape with the same name as this one from a store (one of the only parts outside his house other than a brief rooftop scene). Despite a ghostly warning, he decides to watch the tape anyway. While this is not a new concept, from Ringu (1998) to the new release V/H/S (2012), it’s certainly underused more than, say, the found tape subgenre that is so overdone.

We watch with Johnny as different stories unfold, all of them starring, well, Johnny. There are a couple of other actors here and there, but he’s in the large majority. Between the anthology, the viewer sees Johnny commenting on what a piece of shit the videotape is, and in fact, at one point, he even wears a tee-shirt that says “This movie is terrible.”

Mostly there is nothing drastically original or shocking in the film other than watching a teen constantly cursing and talking repeatedly about “skin mags.” And yet, of the three or four of the other actors, most who also multi-role, Johnny is actually the best one.

Part of the fun is that often for props, he uses severed limbs you buy in a store at Halloween, or just obviously molded clay (not sure if it’s PlayDoh or the real deal). There is also some cool pixilated animation with worm-like creatures that work pretty well. Remember, Raimi did the same thing at the end of Evil Dead (1981). Lest I forget, there’s the old Alka Seltzer as rabid-mouth trick that is always effective.

Oh, and mucho kudos on a very fun cameo by Toxie’s dad at the end! Oh, stay tuned for the scenes through the final credit, if you made it that far.

As a side note, I want to say that I really enjoyed the cramped and sometimes messy space in which the film was recorded (i.e., Johnny’s parents’ place). There is media everywhere, from rows and rows of books and DVDs, and lots of shelves of LPs. Ah, I could nearly smell the vinyl… And then there is the changing length of Johnny’s hair throughout (it took two years to shoot this). At one point towards the end you can actually see the shadow of the camera and tripod. I’m just sayin’.

If I was to make any fatherly advice to Johnny about a change, it would be to get some kind of help with the dialog. For example, if I made a drinking game out of every time he said “Oh my fucking God,” I would be lifeless from alcohol poisoning. Hell, Jerry Lee Lewis would be dead of it. But the second conversation between Johnny and the tape’s spirit in the bathroom is hysterical. More like that, please.

But my biggest piece of suggestion would be to keep going. Continue making films, because this experience will probably prove to be invaluable. One learns through crap and adversity, to partially paraphrase philosopher Johnny Dewey. I would like to add that I also hope that rather than release a flood of films, he will do them carefully one by one, because thinking about the productions are as important as the filming itself.

Extra include 2 trailers for this film (one without the “camcorder effect,” which is truthfully much better, though I understand the idea Johnny was trying to posit. There is also a couple of minutes long behind the scenes called ”Making an American Nightmare” that shows a couple of scenes being filmed, and an 11-minute featurette titled “The Effects of Slaughter Tales.” This is an interesting sort-of how-to for new filmmakers. Yes, there is also a full-length commentary with Johnny and a couple of friends who discuss the filming in surprising detail, despite the goofy tone, so I can suggest a listen.

Listen, this truly is a case of Buyer Beware. It’s a film made by a kid mostly in his living room. If you’re willing to accept that, and know what you’re getting, you may be surprised by how much you laugh. I look forward to seeing more of Johnny’s output as he grows both physically and aesthetically.

Text © Richard Gary/Indie Horror Films, 2012
Images from the Internet

Exit 101: Halloween Party Massacre

Directed by Doug Cole
World Wide Multi-Media (WWMM)
105 minutes, 2011 / 2012
wwmm.info/
MVDvisual.com

Sometimes a thematic cultural trend can get tiresome pretty fast, especially when it seems like it’s everywhere. But for some reason, no matter how corny or commonplace it gets, there’s something still appealing about a zombie movie, be it viral, radiation, braaaains, other fleshy bits, or just walking-and-decomposing corpses.

But the place where it is popping up the most, and is largely and lovingly touted, is in independent cinema. Lots of gore and make-up effects raise the possibility of a happy crew and cast. Whether overrun in the city or deep in the woods, a chompin’ cadaver is always welcome.

This indie film’s title place is real, making it a bit different right off the bat. Down in Cordele (renamed Lakeshear for the film), Georgia, at Exit 101 off highway 75, is the town attraction: a 15-foot Titan 1 missile frame. This is the focal point of the film, the hub where the action emanates.

We meet a group of (too old to really be) high school students whose hangout is at the missile’s site, where apparently in 1969, a failed secret military formula was hidden in the projectile. Of course, our noble drawling clique finds it a few days before Halloween, and on a dare, the green fluid is downed by intrepid Caleb (Joseph Lavender, who also wrote and produced the film).

The bunch of bananas includes the power couple of the cute dumb girl Stacey (Kasey Stewart) and the football player Blake (Dennis Proulx) who is a bit of a bully, the cool goth/punk girl Erica (the smokin’ Raina Ashley Strickland), the weird-nerd Colin (Sebastian Gruber), the hip token black guy Reggie (Devin Ray), the plain girl Sarah (Cassandra Johnson, who is married to Lavender in the real world) who is secretly in love with Caleb (i.e., she’s the heroine), and then there’s Caleb, who’s the slacker.

As Caleb slowly “turns” over the days, between blinding headaches for which he doesn’t think to see a doctor, he starts to eat raw packaged chopped meat and doing in a wayward pizza delivery boy as a bite, for starters.

Did I mention that this is a comedy? Thankfully not on the bad pun level of, say, ThanksKilling(2009), but rather more of a humor flavor throughout. Parts of this film was incredibly effective. There is one great scene, for example, where some rednecks meet pizza boy and things turn nasty. The three actors playing the back woods trailer trash just nail it.

Of course, our likable yet not overly bright group and the growing number of zombies are destined to converge at the big high school costume party in the woods, where blood, gore and humor come to a head.

The mentioned gristle is mostly fine, with an occasionally too thick blood to look real, but it’s excusable considering how much works well.

The extras are a gag reel that’s amusing in some parts (especially the rednecks ad-libing). The making-of doc is occasionally interesting. As for the commentary, it’s director Cole and writer Lavender. They vary from fascinating when they are on topic of the production information to a tad talking over each other. The only real annoyance is that Cole is too close to the mic so you can hear him breathing through his nose, and Lavender is occasionally too far from the mic, so he’s hard to hear.

But it’s the film that the important thing, and luckily that is well done and worthwhile.

Text © Richard Gary/Indie Horror Films, 2012
Images from the Internet

The Color Out of Space

Directed and screenplay by Huan Yu
Brink Vision
86 minutes, 2010 / 2012
Brinkvision.com
Die-Farbe.com
MVDvisual.com

This is hardly the first adaptation of HP Lovecraft’s well-known 1927 short story of a meteorite hitting the earth, and the evil effects it has on a household (or community, depending on the version). Just off the top of my head, there’s Die Monster Die (1965) with Boris Karloff and Nick Adams, The Curse (1987) with Claude Akins and Wil Wheaton, and arguably the Stephen King episode of Creepshow (1982).

This version is also known as Die Farbe, or “The Color,” because this is a German production, though early parts are filmed in English, and the rest, which takes place in the Germany countryside, is in Deutsche with English subtitles.

The previous versions were generally really bad, cheesy horror films (i.e., fun), but this one has an arty-indie feel to it (i.e., not pretentious), to which the number of world-wide festival winning and nominations bend. It’s filmed in black and white, except for when the “color” appears, drenching specific objects in a purplish-pink hue.

It has been way too many years since I’ve read the original story to speak to its accuracy, so I am going to take this film on its own story merits.

In present time, a scientist who was an American soldier stationed in rural Germany at the end of Dubya-Dubya Duce, goes back there and disappears. His son investigates in the small town in which he had been, and is told by a local (and we see in a series of long and detailed flashback) how a meteorite landed in the village even before the war. The stone, however, starts to disappear / evaporate.

Soon, all the fruit in the area start to grow Monsanto size, with a weird aftertaste. Hit the hardest is the farm on which the space rock landed. Everything starts to die, the mom goes mad, everyone gets sick, and slowly the family starts to melt into lavender droplets.

Over time, this effect would have a lasting influence that… well, I’m going to stop there, because the film is worth seeing, and I don’t want to give it all away. The effects, both physical and graphic are worth seeing. The look of the film is astonishingly crisp, thanks to a home-made camera (apparently called the DRAKE) that evidently makes HD looks like 55mm film stock. While the movie is nearly completely humorless (sans a scene where a German native mocks an American’s grammar), it is also uses the contrast of light and dark to its utmost, and the digital effects are sometimes quite understated, and others a bit shocking.

The extras has a couple of the film’s trailers, the availability of subtitles in many languages, a “lost” scene, a 22-minute day-by-day making-of featurette (in German with subtitles), and a fascinating 6-1/2 minute special effects explanation that shows how they used layers of mattes so effectively. The under 7-minute “Science Horror” short is the one to really watch, as it explains a bit of the subtle ending, and tells about how Lovecraft’s story about an alien parasite has some scientific lineage.

There is little gore (certainly no more than an episode of Bones or CSI), and certainly no sex, just a good story that will keep you at attention.

Text © Richard Gary/Indie Horror Films, 2013

Images from the Internet

Mark of the Devil: Yack Pack
Directed by Michael Armstrong
Cheezy Flicks Entertainment
96 minutes, 1970 / 2006 / 2012
Cheezyflicks.com
MVDvisual.com

This German film, originally known as Hexen bis aufs Blut gequält, is a classic in early torture porn. Obviously modeled after the increasingly sexualized Hammer Films of the time, it incorporated the ethos of the graphic violence of likes of Hershell Gordon Lewis.

Taking place in some European country - supposedly England, I believe, considering one of the characters played by Herbert Lom (d. 2012), is named Lord Chamberlain - it takes place around the 17th Century, a time of witch hunters (a role both Vincent Price and Peter Cushing played for Hammer).

Reggie Nalder

The small town that is the focal point of the film is under the thumb of the despotic local hunter, who uses his power to get what he wants, be it money, power, or sex. He needs to keep this control because he is one ugly dude. Named Albino, which strangely he is not, he has a face that was ravaged by fire (in real life) channeled by the underrated Reggie Nalder, (d. 1991), who made a career playing the heavy.

While Albino is supposed to follow Church law and have indictments and trials before the torture and executions, he just takes what he wants, and then burns anyone who he wants out of the way in an auto da fe (look it up). But his power comes under scrutiny with the arrival of said Lord Chamberlain, the governing Church-appointed witch hunter, as well as his student and an underling (who has as much morals as Albino).

Udo Kier

The student and hero of the piece, Christian (of course), is played by now-cult actor, Udo Kier, who would rise to fame just a few short years later as the star of such classics of bad cinema, Andy Warhol’s Frankenstein (1973) and Andy Warhol’s Dracula (1974). He looks much younger in this film; he was quite handsome in the two latter releases, but his blue eyes and baby face are stunningly handsome. I’m not attracted, I’m jealous.

Olivera Katarina

Catching the fancy of Albino and Christian is Vanessa, played by the very heavingly-buxomed, and actually not as pretty as Kier, the Serbian actor Olivera Katarina (last name credited as Vuco here). When Albino can’t have her, she’s declared a witch, and love-interest Christian is out to save her.

The secondary plot, which has some historical truth to it from what I remember, is that the Church gave the landed gentry who opposed the high taxes or balked at oppressive religious laws a choice: turn over their money and land to the Church, or be tortured and condemned to be killed and the Church would get their holdings anyway. That is Chamberlain’s purpose, apparently, which is a turn because at first you are led to believe that he is a savior, rather than an every worse criminal than what we are introduced to in the beginning. Whether he is out for himself or as a direct edict from the Vatican is something unexplained). This is also part of why the US Constitution has a separation of Church and State (the first government to ever do so).

It is sort of like the 1975 James Clavell novel Shogun, where the reader is introduced to the local government which has power of life and death, and then as you work your way through the society with the main occidental character, you find that they were just minuscule in reality to the larger hierarchy. The Church of those times was like that, with those in charge with absolute power (i.e., as Lord John Acton correctly posited in 1887, “…absolute power corrupts absolutely), and yet there were those more powerful above them.

I believe that while this is true, it is especially accurate when embodied by a religious order, who can justify it in their own minds as God makes right. The nastiest person I ever met was a born-again Christian who firmly believe that God wanted her to have what she wanted by any means necessary, even if it meant stabbing co-workers she didn’t like in the back (as she tried and failed with me; I guess God wanted her so bad, He had her join Him in her mid-20s via cancer – note that I believe if there is a God, there is no gender involved, so I’m just using her terminology). The Judeo-Christian West believes that Muslims are alone in their “God is Great” jihads, but Christianity (and Judaism in pre-Roman times) was just as fierce and cruel. There is a lot of injustice in the Bible, for example. Comedian Jackie Mason once stated that according to the Bible, the punishment is the same for adultery and eating non-Kosher food, to which he quipped, “I tried them both and don’t see the comparison.”

There is plenty of torture laid out for the viewer here (which is shown in the trailer, and why it is not included, as I don’t want this to be an “adult” site), including tar and feathering, burning at the stake, various mechanisms designed purely for cruelty (e.g., the thumbscrew), and in the most infamous scene, the removal of a tongue by pincers. The thing rarely talked about is that every one of the implements used is based on reality. The whole Church R&D team of that era was focused on finding ways to help the sinner confess and find God through the most gruesome means. Many are shown here. In college, I did a paper on the Spanish Inquisition, which no one unexpected, and many of the tools shown here are mentioned in detail in books about the period.

And with all this going on, there is an incredulous sappy love story that happens with gooey and tinny music played over and over as a lover’s theme, in typical European films of the time.

This is an absolute benchmark for what would become a genre that includes the likes of Ilsa, She Wolf of the SS (1975), Thriller – A Cruel Picture (1973), the whole Italian giallo (e.g., the zombie films by Fulci, and demon ones by Lamberto Bava), the abovementioned Warhol pix, and even continuing to today with the likes of the Saw and Hostel franchises, and A Serbian Film (2010). If you enjoy the genre, then this is a must for you.

There is one complaint I do have, and that’s more about the company that puts this out. Don’t get me wrong, Cheezy Flicks Entertainment re-releases some amazing period exploitative films, and I have never been sorry to see anything they’ve released. I mean, even this one actually has a replica vomit bag that was distributed when it was first released (kudos to Cheezy). However, I often find that my player had trouble reading the discs, and it tends to skip, much as it does with DVD-R recordings. I’m not sure if they’re going the cheap route or what, but it is annoying to have to keep going back to see the parts that were skipped, or to get the digital noise and stalling as the player tries to make sense of it all.

There are some cool extras here, including some retro-trailers and intermission ads that are on many of the Cheezy releases.

Text © Richard Gary/Indie Horror Films, 2012

Images from the Internet

Bloody Christmas

Directed, produced and written by Michael Shershenovich
Planetworks
90 minutes, 2012
Planetworksent.com
Facebook.com/BloodyChristmas
MVDvisual.com

Christmas horror is not a new genre. It arguably goes back to the kid-friendly likes of Santa Claus Conquers the Martians (1964), The Christmas That Almost Wasn’t (1966) or even possibly How the Grinch Stole Christmas (1966). However, it wasn’t until the 1970s and into slasher craze of the ‘80s that we started to see Tales from the Crypt(1972; the “All Though the House” segment), Black Christmas (1974), Silent Night, Bloody Night (1974), Christmas Evil(1980), To All a Good Night (1980), Silent Night, Deadly Night (1984), Santa Claws (1996), and yes, How the Grinch Stole Christmas (2000). This is a new dip in the Christmas horror pool list, but does it get candy or coal in its dripping stocking?

The main theme of the film is the loss of Christmas spirit, and the result of it. A priest, Father Michael (Robert Youngren, who has played a lot of religious leaders in his career) laments that no one is coming to his church’s Christmas service, including his staff. Rich Tague (Steve Montague, who ironically has played Hitler more than once, including a film called Ultrachrist! [2003]), the film’s main focus, is a down-on-his-luck ex-action film actor who has just been fired as a store Santa (by a character played by the director), the check cashing place won’t touch his last payment, and he’s just received an eviction notice on his trailer for back rent. His anger and frustration slowly builds in him as we see flashes of his fantasies of killing those who offend him or his sensibilities.

Meanwhile, someone is killing people in the area of Binghamton, NY, including the son of Gaylen (Geretta Geretta, who looks a lot like Donna Summers; she was in the 1985 Lamberto Bava classic, Demons, which many feel had been remade as [*Rec] in 2007). Her first scene, which opens the film, is totally out of context and a waste. The police, led by the extremely underused Detective Steinman (Robert Arensen, who has practically made a career playing cops), believes it could be a serial killer.

The killer’s identity is not really a surprise at all, but that’s okay, all things considered, as this is a thriller, not a mystery, after all. The rough edge that runs throughout, though, is that first-time director Michael Shershenovich is still in the growing pains of filmmaking. For example, the digi-camera is nearly always handheld, making for some shaky viewing (though nowhere as bad as, say, Cloverfield). There are also some rough zooms and too many mid-close-ups, rather than alternating between full- and close shots. Also, he doesn’t always get the best out of his actors. It’s as though he rarely reshoots a scene, no matter how much the dialog gets trampled. But the most egregious sin is the total lack of pacing. For a slasher pic, it’s slow and plodding, with very little action and too much pointless dialog that doesn’t really add to the story. And don’t get me started on the weak fight scene that is at the climax of the picture.

The gore level is pretty small and amateurish looking, with the exception of the last gunshot, which looked great. There is no sex, but a nice nude shower scene by the incredibly named (and built) Nova Lox. Like most of the rest of the younger women in the film, she has multiple ink and piercings.

Throughout the entire picture, there is a less-than-subtle pro-Christ in Christmas message, as characters comment about commercialism, the true meaning of the holiday, and the like. Yet characters have paper (Halloween) skeletons on the wall. It’s a bit too all over the place.

Extras include interviews with some cast members, a couple of nothing deleted scenes, and a the film’s trailers.

I don’t believe Shershenovich should take this too much to heart, but use the experience and criticism to make better films. My suggestion is to take on a crew who is more experienced, and can help him along. The best way to learn is to do.

Text © Richard Gary/Indie Horror Films, 2013
Images from the Internet

The Dead Matter

Directed by Edward Douglas
Midnight Syndicate / Precinct 13 Entertainment
89 minutes, 2010 / 2012
Thedeadmatter.com
Midnightsyndicate.com
MVDvisual.com

A modern vampire story with no werewolves? Wow, I am unsarcastically impressed. At least there are zombies. But I get ahead of myself, sorta. The whole film has a really good look, for the $2 mill budget, reminding me of quality fantasy television shows like Supernatural or Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Despite whatever problems I found with the film, it’s an enjoyable viewing exercise, and worth the rent.

The film opens in a small town in Germany with a bunch of zombies stumbling along in the thrall of a vampire, rather than wanting to eat some wet bits. Well, at least they have the mandatory gray shade and blood/gore attached to their faces.

We momentarily meet the main vampire of the story, Vellich, played by Andrew Divoff, who was also in the film Wishmaster (1997) and on television’s Lost. He tends of overact, but it’s good. The odd thing is he wears this long, flowing white wig that is so obvious, and makes no sense whatsoever, and it nothing less than distracting. The director says during the commentary that it is very much along the lines of Hammer Films, so I’ll give him that.

Andrew Divoff on the right

What Vellich and the zombies are in search of is a scarab-shaped amulet, being protected by the bearded Ian (Jason Carter, of Babylon 5) and the muscular Mark (Brian van Camp). They escape and take the necklace to a “mystical nexus,” or as we know it… wait for it… Ohio.

It’s there that the amulet gets hidden before a big fight, and is found by two couples. More about them later. Meanwhile. Vellich runs into a new order of vampires in the Buckeye State, who are under the wing of Sebed (make-up and effects wizard /actor / legend Tom Savini). He envisions an almost mafia-like vampire society with himself as Don, while Vellich is old world / old school. And we all can guess who is going to come on top by the end.

Now, does any of this sound familiar? There are a whole lot of themes from other films here, and I’m not saying this in a negative way, exactly, I’m just noticing the trend. For example, taking the trinket to somewhere else to destroy is right out of Lord of the Rings (2001), modern vs. old zombie clan(s) could be Blade (1998), Underworld (2003), perhaps Twilight (2008). During a séance featuring the aforementioned couples, amorphous shapes come out of the amulet and swirl around and through the participants, straight out of Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981).

But, let’s get back to the aforementioned foursome. Y’got your nerdy scientist dude, Frank, played (sorta) by Christopher Robichaud. This is his only credit. He plays the role like someone in a cheap ‘50s horror film. Actually, he reminded me of the main character of the classic Equinox (1970). His clothes look like that as well (checked yellow-tan shirts, and the such; at least they didn’t give him glasses). The director and producers are solidly behind Christopher, so maybe it’s me? Frank works for a corporation making a diet product.

Next up is his newish girlfriend, Jill, portrayed well by CB Spencer. Where Frank is logical and scientific, she’s more Wiccan closer to the supernatural. She’s pretty solid in the role.

Sean Serino

The hero (does anyone still say heroine) is Gretchen, played by the amazingly cute Sean Serino. Killer smile, dude. Gretchen is in pursuit in finding a way to contact her brother, who died in a car accident while she was the driver. Nearly a Candide figure (look it up), she tends to look at the positive side and be cheerful, even when there’s a zombie at the door and vampire in pursuit.

Her boyfriend is Mike, acted by Tom Nagel. Mike may be the logical one who help keep it real for Gretchen, but he comes across as just a bit of a dick (sort of like the husband on that show The Medium). Truth is, the part is seriously underdeveloped, and you can tell that Nagel is a better actor than as the role is written.

That may be the biggest problem with the film to me – which is actually quite enjoyable, despite all the flaws I’ve mentioned – in that with the exception of Gretchen, there really is little context or character development.

I found it amusing that one of the better characters is a nearly voiceless zombie under Gretchen’s control. Brian van Camp does a spendid job keeping us interested in Mark, even though all he does basically is stare into space while eating, drinking, and other things asked by Gretch, or whoever else touches the purple-glowing amulet.

While not a comedy, there are definitely some fine comic moments. One is Gretchen putting one of those car pine-shaped odor eaters around the zombie’s neck before an amusing montage as she takes Mark for ice cream (relevant to a memory of her brother) and to a merry-go-round. Another is the following dialog (which is included on the IMBD page, so I don’t feel like I’m giving anything away):

Jill: A zombie?
Frank: They prefer to be called Post-Mortem-Americans.

While the story is occasionally incoherent (why does the vampire want the amulet exactly? Okay, it controls the dead, including vampires (who are dead), fingernails and hair, apparently, but why he wants that control is never really explained. And why do the new vampires want to get their cohorts addicted to a drug? Yes, there is a positive side effect explained in the film, but not enough to make them drooling junkies shooting up.

There is a decent if not abundant amount of gore, such as a ripped off head and a yank-removed jaw. There are also some fun surprise moments, especially towards the end that alone make this worth the view.

There are a few extras that are noteworthy including a gag reel and theatrical trailer. There are also a bunch of music videos that are okay in the spooky or death metal way. The longest is a feature-length documentary called “Maximum Dead Matter” in which the screen is broken up into four simultaneous sections. The top left is the film running, and the other three are full of interviews, original art, behind the scene shootings, and make-up. It is the most interesting when they involve the actual scene that’s running at the moment. It gets tiresome at times, but I watched the whole thing and wasn’t sorry.

The best extra is the commentary track with the director, producer and co-writer. Even though it was hard at times to tell who was talking (i.e., three dudes), they explained some of the questions I had, and didn’t veer much from the shoot, which is a lot more interesting to me than joking around (even though they obviously are having fun doing it).

So, yes, I was a bit hard on the film, but now having sat through it three times (original and two extras modes), I still found it enjoyable enough to say it’s worth the Saturday night viewing with the buds.

Profane
Directed by Usama Alshaibi
ArtVamp
78 minutes, 2011
Artvamp.com
profanethemovie.com
MVDvisual.com

This film touches a lot of cultural hot button topics, such as sex workers, and both the assimilation and strength of Muslim culture into the West (in this case Chicago). One of the areas not often breached is the blending of both.

Iranian-born director Usama Alshaibi takes a peek at the mixture of the two in an experimental release that is both explicit and artful. As Usama is male, it is no surprise that it also has a patriarchal perspective. There is a certain level of titillation that may not be as strong a focus if this were directed by a Muslim woman. But I jump ahead.

The story focuses on professional dominatrix Muna, beautifully portrayed by the lovely and full lipped Manal Kara (yes, I am a self-admitting patriarch). Usually accompanied by her Western cohort Mary (Molly Plunk), she moves seamlessly between her work, her life, and her boyfriend (also a Westerner), with the help of drugs, alcohol and attempting to reconcile and reconnect to her faith.

This begins to change, however, with two overlapping events. First, she starts hearing voices that she is convinced may be a djinn (an Arabic demon, pronounced as “gin”) whispering to her in the nights and when she tries to pray. The second is that on the way home one night from a gig, Mura and Mary get picked up by a cab driven by Ali (Dejan Mircea), a religious Muslim who believes it is his mission to save her both from her hedonistic life, and from the djinn (it is he who names what is occurring to Muna). She is confused and conflicted by both these happenings.

While a loosely narrative film in linear time, it is not necessarily undeviating from the story. Played more like a documentary (though not as “found footage” per se), there are many departures from the scope of the story with arty shots that under a less talented tout ledge, would be a mess, but Usama uses the additions to show that life is not all straightforward, and that there is even beauty in the unconventional.

Part of what is uncomfortable (well, for me anyway), are the explicit S&M scenes, as Mura and Mary (among others) stomp on scrotums, use clients as bathrooms, and abuse willing masked men in various ways, all in detail. In real life Kara and Plunk actually are sex workers, and from what I can tell from the credits, these are some of their real-life clients. While I am sure that this is prurient for some of those who will watch this, it is not for me. Sure, I love a horror movie where someone gets their face chewed off in close-up, but I can distinguish in my mind between the appliance/CGI and reality. Here, there is no question that what is happening to those men and their penises are real. In the credits, they are listed with such names as Slave Jeff, Slave Drum and Footpuppy.

When I worked in a movie theater in my youth, I remember that whenever there was a scene where some man was kicked in the nuts, immediately even man in the audience went “oooff,” followed by all the women laughing. I’ve never been sure if they were laughing at the action on screen, or the reaction of their partners. But I digress…

There is some interesting moments, whether intentional or not. For example, each scene with Ali driving the cab must have been done the same night, because it seems to always be snowing. I’m not sure if this means that it does all take place in one ride cut up into out of sequenced snippets, or they just taped it in one night, and it is supposed to be different times. Just part of the enigma of the film, I guess.

There have been some descriptors of the picture as being part of the Cinema of Transgressiongenre, which I can both understand, and yet with which I cannot totally agree, which is in no way indicative of how strong a film it is. Transgression brings to mind the likes of Richard Kern, Nick Zedd and Lydia Lunch. Most of this style is incoherent, played strongly for shock, and totally low-budget DIY. It’s for good reason it was closely associated with the New York punk and No Wave movement when it started. And none of this is meant as any kind of implication questioning its worth. Yes, this release has a lot of its elements, but there is a level of art and professionalism that raises it above Transgression, though it certainly does push some envelopes. Perhaps I am wrong, and ease of technology has redirected Transgression into a higher level. After all, the genre has been around since the late ‘70s, and change gotta come, as the band X-Teensonce posited.

Now, this is a blog about horror films, so what does this piece of artiness about Islam and S&M have to do with horror, you may be asking yourself. It’s in the djinn (hey, I’m a poemist, as Tommy Smother’s said). Apparently, Muna was mistreated by someone in her faith in her youth (school? Clerics? Parents?), and was forced to undergo a traumatic exorcism, a somewhat common, albeit uncomfortable practice in some parts of the world. Perhaps she really was possessed, and the djinn returned? Or is it all in her mind? Perhaps PTSD?

There is a lot of graphic and real sex-related content in the film, nearly all of it literally torturous. This is lingered upon what felt like longer than it needed to be, and while Muna and Mary are supposedly in charge, they are also slaves to their own, well, demons, such as the aforementioned drugs. There are also lingering shots of nudity, some sensual and others not, but it is obviously looking through the male eye. While I don’t think there will be many turned on by this, even with the publicity around 50 Shades of Grey, there are also many solo sensual shots of Muna in various states of undress that feel gratuitous at times. While I am not one to buck at a shower scene or something unjustified in something like Zombie Babies (2011) or The Worst Horror Movie Ever Made: The Re-Make (2008), it feel different here, and perhaps it would be less so with a woman’s perspective?

Anyway, it’s sort of a moot point, because despite the high level of real sadism and masochism present, this is an incredibly beautiful looking film, and if your stomach is up for it, it’s an interesting ride that will at the very least get you talking.

Dropping Evil

Directed by Adam Protextor
Wild Eye Releasing
82 minutes, 2008-2012
Wildeyereleasing.com
MVDvisual.com

The publicity for this indie is proud to state – and does so often – that they had the whole idea of watchers as some kind of overlords to a group of teens who are brought together in seclusion for a reason unknown to the youngsters way before the recent hit, A Cabin in the Woods (2012). And rightfully so. Do I think the makers of Woodsripped off this film? Highly unlikely, even though it took four years to film this one, but Dropping Evil is low budget enough that it probably wouldn’t have been noticed by the big boys.

This piece of cinema is definitely one of the more ambitious indie films I’ve seen in a while, and certainly a brave release. It’s not surprising it took so long to record and let loose. The question I have is as follows: how successful is it in reaching its goal?

Well, certainly, there are problems. Note that any indie film has its issues, no doubt, especially one with this vast a cast and ambition in story. And the sheer filming time frame must bring its own set of issues.

From what I can figure out through some of the story is that there are at least three separate levels going on (how very X Files / Lost). First, there’s the four life-long mid-20s high school students off for a weekend in the woods, including a couple (Tom Taylor, Rachel Howell), and as a possible set-up, a nerdy girl (Cassandra Powell) and a volatile religious fanatic (Zachary Lint; he even gets upset when his bottle of juice is next to a beer can in the cooler). Add a little tripping powder and “Mr. Jesus” (whose name is Nancy, by the way, which is never really explained other than his mother chose it) gets busy with an ax, as is seen on the DVD box artwork.

On the second story level, we view the ValYouCorp organization, who apparently specializes in artificial body parts and robotics (played by actors wearing motorcycle helmets), but who seems to be looking at a (evil?) larger picture than is let on at first. It is run by scheming CEO (played by name character actor Armin Shimerman; you’d know him is you saw him, e.g., as Quark on Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, or Principal Snyder on Buffy the Vampire Slayer). His vision, involving the four friends, could change the fate of the entire world.

The third level is more meta-physical and less clear. From what I can figure out, it involves God, who seems to be missing (shades of Kevin Smith’s 1999 Dogma), a host of other older gods and goddesses from the Classic Greek period, and even older gods than that called the Titans (whom Zeus defeated to become king of the gods in Greek mythology; scarily, I knew that without having to Wikipedia it. That’s right, I used it as a verb, wanna make somethin’ of it?). A new war coming? Again, it is reminiscent of another film, The Prophesy (1995).

This is a mixture of both a dark comedy and an occasional slapstick one, the latter of which is more successful. For example, one of the better moments is handled deftly by the lovely and underused ex-Troma actor and current exploitation queen Tiffany Sephis, who plays the goddess Dionysia (I met her once at a Chiller Theater Con in New Jersey during the 1990s, during her Troma days, and she was very nice).

Honestly, as original as the story is, and credit should certainly be given, it is also exceedingly convoluted. Half the time I didn’t know what anything meant to the storyline, and there isn’t really too much of a conclusion that explains it. I would, however, recommend following the film with the two deleted scenes and especially what is called the “sequels,” three shorts (between 15 and 20 minutes each) that come with the DVD in the extras. My guess is that it was either too much footage for put in the film, or too short amount to make a true, complete sequel. But it will definitely help fill in some of the questions (but not all) that are bound to come up. And besides, this is the only way to see any of the footage of ‘70s action star Fred “The Hammer” Williamson, in a bit of an extended cameo that is not really explained well¸ as is another short bit by Edwin Neal, who plays the POTUS; not bad for someone who started as the insane hitchhiker in the original 1974 The Texas Chain Saw Massacre.

The film has a bit of everything (too much?). For example, when God is missing, people do not die no matter how grievous their injuries, and the dead also arise. This gives way to an amusing social bias between those who died before or after God’s disappearance. This would make an interesting full-length feature in itself, especially in our current zombie-fixated and partisan culture.

With this entire convolution, what actually annoyed me was the shoddy camerawork. It felt like a high school project. Shaky cameras are bad enough, but badly handled shaky cameras are something else. There are also some larger choice questions I had, such as: if ValYouCorp can make a camera that that fit inside someone’s eye without being detected, then why does their hit team need to film their excursion into the woods with a 1980s sized camcorder?

Despite my whining, there are a lot of imaginative uses of the image, such as thoughtful switching between color and black-n-white, stylized imagery (including with the hit team mentioned above), and the occasionally really smart use of contrast and lighting.

There are a few good giggles in there, and at least three times I found myself laughing out loud. It’s a fun film, but it does take some work to watch (i.e., it can’t be put on in the background if you want to make anything of the plot), and whether you think it is or not, could depend on factors such as some history with J.J. Abrams and Chris Carter material, how stoned you are at the time of viewing, and level of patience. Especially the latter. I enjoyed the experience, but felt exhausted.

As a sidebar that has nuthin’ ta do with nuthin’, I find it cool that the actresses of the two couples of youngins have last names that rhyme.

VOD [HERE]

Images from the Internet

Abolition
Directed by Mike Klassen
Abolition films / R-Squared Films
82 minutes, 2010 / 2012
Rsquaredfilms.com
MVDvisual.com

As much as the word “abolition” ( the overthrow of something) sounds similar to “absolution,” so this film jiggles with the line(s) between good and evil.

Even with a somewhat high gross (e.g., vomit) and gore quotient - even though most of it is after the fact, such as brains splattered on the sidewalk after a jump - this is a very story-based project. Unlike the usual Biblical-themed action thrillers like The Seventh Sign (1988), End of Days (1999), Bless the Child (2000) or Constantine (2005), the pace here is more of a build than a burst, as it should be. One of the positive side-effects here of it being done that way is that it definitely makes the viewer work harder on the coming events. With most films, many times I’d say,”Oh, this is going to happen at some point,” and it does, but this more lured me in with bits of info, keeping my attention.

I’m certainly not going to give away much, because it’s rare that a film works this well, especially for a first-time director such as Mike Klassen. There are a couple of moves that felt a bit amateurish, such as the obvious use of a wide-angle lens to indicate things being out of sorts, but that is how one learns. If the viewer sees the film as a whole, it’s quite impressive. Even with the occasional plot hole, it plays out so well. Again, you look at some directors like Cronenberg, Hooper, Craven, Carpenter, and the like, their early films also had questionable moments of mire, sometimes more than here.

One of the things that impressed me the most is that this film has its own feel, that certain vibe and look. There is also a level of subtly that works towards the grand reveal. When dealing with a storyline with no comic relief, all the elements need to work together as not to feel oppressive; this one walks that line successfully.

Klassen should also be acknowledged for some of the talent he has chosen for his leads, especially Andrew Roth as Joshua, an recently unemployed building superintendent who is trying to figure out why whenever he helps people, bad things seem to happen, especially in Sybil (1976)-type blackout moments. Roth is gaunt, intense, and has total movie-star appeal. He’s so much better an actor than many of those making so much more, such as Adam Sandler, the Wilson brothers (Owen and Luke), and Vince Vaughn. It’s not surprising he’s been in over 40 films, though he still needs the right vehicle to get recognized).

The female lead is Mia, played by Elissa Dowling, definitely an indie film demi-goddess). She seems to pick many quirky roles, usually in the horror genre, such as in Creep Creepersin’s Peeping Blog (2011) [Reviewed HERE] or Bloody Bloody Bible Camp (2012) [ReviewedHERE]. Whether a sex comedy or an intense story, she is always fun to watch; plus, she has impeccable timing whatever the genre. Yeah, I’m a fan.

Matthew is a pivotal character, a bitter man who gave up the priesthood for family, only to also lose them (named after the first book of the New Testament, I’m sure), played by Reggie Bannister. Bannister will forever be associated with the Phantasm (1979) series (yes, he still has the ponytail), but over time has proven himself to be more than just that. Matthew takes in the homeless Joshua, a relationship that is bound to change over time and a decisive puzzle piece to the overall story arc. While Bannister does have a tendency to do a bit of curtain biting, he is also extremely effective in this role as he eventually goes all Renfield. Oh, as a side note, Reggie also starred in the aforementioned Bloody Bloody Bible Camp.

As I said, the question here is who good or other, and what acts are positive or perhaps something more sinister? One of the underlying issues in the film that is well handled is the desperation and loneliness of the down-and-out, be it through substance abuse, poverty, physical and verbal abuse, suicide, prostitution, homelessness, or any combination above. While on paper it may sound like this film is trying to achieve too much, it all works together, albeit in a bleak way. But it is that despair that drives home the central theme of the story leading to its… well, check it out. It may not be the feel good movie of the year, but it will certainly keep you guessing and interested.

The only extra is the trailer. For this one, I would have loved a commentary, but as the great stage director Roger De Bris said in 1968, quell dommage...

Text © Richard Gary / Indie Horror Films, 2013
Free link to view complete film below review
Images from the Internet

2 Hours
Directed, shot and cut by Michael Ballif
26 minutes, 2012
2hoursthemovie.com

Apparently, from the time one is bitten by a zombie, it takes two hours for the virus to course through the victims system until succumbing and then becoming one. This is the premise of this totally serious zombie genre short that is nothing short of beautifully done.

While feeling guilty about the death of his girlfriend (Brooke Hemsath, who recurs in guilt- and feverish-flashback fashion) the Survivor (Josh Merrill, who also wrote the piece) goes through forests and ruined cities hoping to find a group of other survivors before becoming zombie feeder fodder. Problem is, he has been bit, and has just two hours to find the group and hope they have a cure.

There are some interesting dual aspects to this film. One is that the zombies are both slow and fast. They stumble around looking for victims, but when one is spotted, man, can they run. They’re a bit clumsy on their feet, but they willrun you down.

Another duality is the fluidity of that sometimes the film is seamlessly shot as third person, and other times in first person, even looking a bit like a shooter video game.

While the Survivor (as he is named in the credits) silently and desperately searches for the others while avoiding marauding flesh eaters (more Romero-esk all organ diners, rather than just the cliché brains), we hear his thoughts as the virus slowly but surely starts nibbling at his rationale.

While his deterioration is what makes the core of the film, the visuals are actually quite impressive, with beautiful as well as ugly landscapes, wonderful make-up and gore effects, and for once hand-held camerawork that doesn’t make you want to barf like the Survivor.

Considering the low-budget, small crew, two-year filming timeframe, and all shot on a $500 Canon T2i DSLR, I’m still not surprised this is sopping up Festival awards left and right. Not only do I recommend this, you can watch it just by clicking on the link below. Scary to think what Ballif could do with an actual budget. Kudos, dude.

And be sure you stick around after the credits...

Masked

Directed, by Alex Williams
25 minutes, 2012
Random Axe Entertainment
randomaxesite.weebly.com
Maskedthemovie.com

More of a thriller than horror, we watch as a wanna-be writer is brought in for questioning regarding a masked intruder to who has been stalking him after someone had used a cudgel on his wife.

Through a series of flashbacks interweaved with the present, Alex Luna (Luis Rodriguez, who is also the co-producer) is first confused when talking to a police therapist (Lisa Armosino-Morris), and we watch as he deteriorates when confronted with the possible truth of evidence that he may be more than he appears. Even the last name, Luna, signifies “loony” or mystery, subtly connoting that there is something more, something hidden.

This is a nicely shot short, with muted tones and minimal movement, except for those involving around the masked man, which leads to chases, fights, and threats. But even in those more static moments, such as Alex talking to the police, his wife Maggie (the lovely Emmy Frevele), his best friend Dylan (Oscar Garza), or his son Julien (Osvalso Garcia), a level of tension is always present, both leaving us to question what is happening, and also leading the action towards its not-so-obvious conclusion. It took me a good minute before the truth is revealed to figure it out, which says a lot for the film, when I can usually figure out most mysteries pretty early on in the story.

Director Williams does well with his low budget and digi-cam, getting some nice performances out of his actors (most with nary other credits listed), and pulls the most he can from the minimalism of the story, making them both work for him. He is also aided with some strong editing, so the story can jump time frames coherently; and this with short of a film, that helps make it that much more compelling. With a mixture of muted lighting of Alex’s darkened house and yard, and the bright florescence of the police station (and yet retaining that industrialized office dankness feel), we watch the story unfold, as Alex begins to question his own sanity.

It’s a strong film with minimal blood (mostly post-action), relying largely on the story and acting to bring the conclusion to fruition. Every second will keep you interested and guessing, and for a relatively new director, that makes for an enjoyable turn.

This film is to be released in April, and the link to the film will be added then. Meanwhile, here is the preview, which is also worth seeing.

Whacked Movies is a label with a double entendre name that specializes in reissuing cheesy, straight-to-VHS indie films from the 1980s and ‘90s. And for that I salute them by reviewing two of them. Other than these films being released a year apart, there are other factors that group them. One is that Wynn Winberg co-directed the first, and produced the second, and both have actor Rocky Patterson. The other is that both were filmed in Texas.

The Dark Dealer
Directed by Tom Alexander and Wynn Winberg
85 minutes, 1995 / 2013
Whacked Movies
www.whackedmovies.com
www.mvdvisual.com

Mostly during the 1970 through 1990s, one of the common themes of horror films was the anthology, perhaps kicked into high gear by the EC Comics-inspired Tales from the Crypt(1972), and continued with the likes of Campfire Tales (1997), and Snoop Dog’s Hood of Horror (2006). Heck, I recently saw a film that uses this device called Johnny Dickie’s Slaughter Tales (2012), directed by a 15-year-old. The way it works is there are some standalone stories that may be connected in some way by an overarching framework. Sometimes it is just someone telling the story, or in this case of this film, there is a link via a mysterious room at the entrance of (death?) (hell?) where one plays a round of poker with, yes, the sarcastic and unsympathetic Dark Dealer (Mark Fickert)

Although this Texas-filmed – er – film was produced in the early-to-mid 1990s, there is a whole lot of ‘80s going on, from the tight dresses to the very, very, very big hair. And much like the direct to VHS of the period, the acting is generally not very good. There are some who shine a bit, like Gordon Fox as a milquetoast basement apartment dweller, and there are some that stand out in their audacity, such as Rocky Patterson as Pete, a collections enforcer for the mob, or Jeff English as Cracker, a wise-cracking drug dealer.

There are three stories. I won’t go into too much and give a lot away, because even though you can see it coming, I still don’t want to ruin it. One story deals with two lower-echelon gangsters hiding out in an apartment, terrorizing the meek occupant. Another focuses on a scummy entertainment lawyer who tries to steal a dead man’s music. The third has some poor young schmuck forced into breaking into a pharmaceutical company to steal drugs with his substance abuser girlfriend and her hyper dealer.

This is everything we used to love about the genre, when scouring the aisles of the local video store before the major chains ran them into the ground (neh, neh, Blockbuster, where are ya stores now?). The stories are outrageous but totally enjoyable, the gore is laughable (though a split body is well done), and the special effects pretty decent for the time period, which are both person-in-rubber suit, and digital. There is a computer in one scene where you can tell they were just starting to get to graphics; gotta love older technology, and appreciate how much has changed in such a short time.

Another aspect of the genre that this film uses extensively is the way it is lit. Dark rooms mean the use of primary color lighting. Creepshow (1982) used this a lot, for example. Splays of green, blue, and especially red fill the screen to indicate emotions, like fear, in the visual paradigm of the way music is often used.

Two of the short films, “KSS-X” (the bookended wraparound) and “Cellar Space,” were directed by Tom Alexander, while the "Blues in the Night” segment was directed by Wynn Winberg (who produced RepliGator [1996], also released on Whacked Films), though the film flows seamlessly. While both Alexander and Winberg have been active in the film business for many years; this is their only listed directing credit.

So, if you want a fun, empty calorie stuffer, this is a perfect way to spend a rainy evening, or just to veg out and have a giggle or a few.

Repligator

Directed by Bret McCormick
Whacked Movies
84 minutes, 1996 / 2013
Whackedmovies.com
MVDvisual.com

“It is a silly place.”
- King Arthur, inMonty Python and the Holy Grail (1975)

Oh, where to even start on this film… Let’s begin with the basic premise. In a secret government laboratory hidden in deep in the desert, a bunch of feuding scientists create a replicator (i.e., transporter) that is combined with a brainwashing software which turns males into luscious females who are programmed with “rampant nymphomania,” but when they have orgasms, they turn into upright human alligators (hence the film title).

Yes, this is a comedy, at the most base level possible, but it doesn’t really try to be anything else, which is why it succeeds, such as it is. For example, some of the characters include Dr. Kildare (played by the original Leatherface, Gunnar Hansen), Dr. Goodbody (scream queen Brinke Stevens, in a later shot scene shown twice!), Dr. Stanley Oliver (get it? Stan and Ollie…), Colonel Sanders, General Mills, Colonel Sergeant, Pvt. Lapdance, and Pvt. Poontang. You see what I’m saying.

Now, this is not to say this is lacking in entertainment. Actually, I found this more enjoyable than most of the output of anything associated with Seth Rogan, the Wilson Brothers (Owen and Luke), or especially Adam Sandler. This film is more like Porky’s(1982) meets The Lord of the G-Strings: The Femaleship of the String (2003): outrageous humor mixed with lots of nudity (though sex is discussed constantly, almost none is shown).

Dr. Oliver, played by Keith Kjomes, who is about the size of Oliver Hardy but with less hair, is also the writer of all this. He wisely wrote himself the best lines, and ends up with the hottest woman.

Speaking of smoldering females, nearly all seem to be in a constant state of being topless, or in provocative clothing, include the stunning TJ Myers, and a few others who are not listed in the credits, such as those who play the female version of West, and Pvt. Bruno. Of course being nearly undressed more often than not is the whole point, ainnit?

Most of the acting is so atrocious the cast seem to be in what I call John Lithgow sit-com mode (I don’t care how many Emmy’s he’s won, he was terrible on 3^rdRock from the Sun). Okay, maybe not always that bad, but everyone seems to acting like a kid in a candy store, having a lot of fun filming this, especially the antagonist, Randy Clower (who plays Dr. Fields). In a 7-minute interview on one of the two extras, the director discusses how he was influenced by Roger Corman. I can see it, as far as low budget goes, but he seems to emulate the Cormen of the 1970s and ‘80s (e.g., Candy Stripe Nurses, Galaxy of Terror) rather than of the early ‘60s. Again, I don’t mean this as a bad thing, just an observation.

This film is so ludicrous, so fun, it’s also a must see if you’re a fan of the genre. You won’t know whether to laugh, groan at the audacity or just say out loud, “What the fuck was that?” Perhaps the right choice is all of the above.

This is definitely a low budget gem in its own weird and twisted way. The digital special effects are laughable now, but at the time were pretty keen, such as laser blasts, people/gators exploding into green digital drops, and machinery that is now laughably antiquated. As for the gators (which are actually closer to crocodiles, with wider and shorter snouts, though I agree that “RepliGator” sound better than “RepliCrock”), it’s obviously rubber masks (it is explained more in the “Making of” second extra feature) and hands that look somewhat cheesy, and yet also cool. People are attacked by the creatures and bitten, but rather than being killed, they turn into stereotypically swishy straight-imagining-of-gay zombies (though one transsexual character is shown in a somewhat gentler light)..

One of the things I like most about the film is, and I repeat, that it never, ever, ever tries to be more than what it is: a six-day shoot of epic lack of proportions, and the audience is all the better for it. No pretending that it’s a James Cameron sci-fi epic, or even a mid-budget Kristin Wiig comedy, this is solid juvenile, masculinist envisioning that culminates in what could be the wit-level of an hour-and-a-half fart joke. You may find it amusing, you may find it irritating, or you may find it highly offensive (and it is from beginning to end), but you will not be bored.

Full movie VOD:

DVD Review: The Disco Exorcist

Review: Zombie Undead

DVD Review: Where the Dead Go to Die

DVD Review: Zombie A-Hole

DVD Review: The Scar Crow

DVD Review: Terror of Dracula

DVD Review: Zombie Babies

Review: Bloody Bloody Bible Camp

DVD Review: Johnny Dickie’s Slaughter Tales

DVD Review: Exit 101: Halloween Party Massacre

DVD Review: The Color Out of Space

DVD Review: Mark of the Devil

DVD Review: Bloody Christmas

DVD Review: The Dead Matter

DVD Review: Profane

DVD Review: Dropping Evil

DVD Review: Abolition

VOD Indie Short Review: 2 Hours

VOD Indie Short Review: Masked

2 DVD Reviews: The Dark Dealer, RepliGator