Horror Movies

[returnofjakedog]

The Terror (1963)-

A young Jack Nicholson plays a French soldier who gets seperated from his unit and stumbles into a castle inhabited by a Baron (Boris Karloff) in this Roger Corman directed gothic horror tale.
Jack keeps bumping into a beautiful, yet mysterious lady (played by Jack's wife at the time), who spouts cryptic dialogue and kinda seduces him, but always disappears. Jack tries to investigate the situation but Baron Boris and his manservant (played by famous character actor Dick Miller) impede him as much as they can. Eventually more and more details of the Baron's tragic story comes to light, people are attacked and/or die, and witchy curses are exposed.

The synopsis doesn't sound like much but it is actually a solid story and a well crafted production.

The good-
*The story and contained mystery are both good. It brings you along at a solid pace and keeps you interested as details are exposed.
*Jack and Boris are both good (as always), and most of the other actors do a decent job.
*The sets and cinematography are both good. The castle and is pretty cool.

The bad-
*The story moves is a bit convoluted. Also, the general consensus from reviewers is that it moved too slowly. I don't necessarily agree with that but K understand where they are coming from.
Note that Corman barely had a script when they started and his stated goal was to make an "Edgar Allen Poe movie" that wasn't based on any Poe story. Considering this I thought they pulled it off pretty well.
*The big "twist". A stupid idea with no real necessity except to have a twist.

The imdb and RT scores put this one right in the middle in the 5 outta 10 area. I disagree and would go 6.5 to 7 outta 10, and that is after a half point deduction for the lame twist.

 

[DJ Fieri]

 

[returnofjakedog]

View attachment 291113

View attachment 289478

Ummmmm.........2 weeks ago man!! Lol!

 

[returnofjakedog]

Deep Red (1975)-

......yet another Italian giallo film, this time from the (dare I say) great Dario Argento.

During a paranormal conference a psychic taps into the conciousness of a crazed murder that she perceives is in the audience of hundreds. Later, our protagonist, musician dude Marcus, sees the psychic being shoved through a window (shoving her neck through the glass!) while being stabbed to death.
Marcus decides to investigate this himself, and also gets outed as a witness by a local newspaper, which leads to the killer stalking him.
A bunch of other stuff happens but I don't want to spoil any more as this movie should be seen.

The good-
*Great story!
*Great editing.
*Beautiful cinematography.
*Cool gory special fxs.
Of the Italian giallo "Big 3", Argento is my personal favorite and this one is among his best.

The bad-
The typical criticisms of giallo and foreign films.
*The acting seems generally decent but it is hard to pin down the quality because of the dubbing. The dubbing itself isn't bad by comparison to many others but even the best dubbing can easily be problematic.

I'll go about 8.5 outta 10!

I don't know if it is better or worse than the original Susperia (I need to rewatch that one) but it is above the likes of Inferno (which I really liked), Opera (highly rated but slightly less so by myself), etc amongst Argento's films.
If you like well made mystery-horror films do yourself a favor and check it out!

 

[DJ Fieri]

 

[Nasty_Magician]

View attachment 291390

This was quite the marketing job by Netflix. Ok movie but nothing a seasoned horror fan hasn't seen 500 times. Lackluster but not terrible.

 

[DJ Fieri]

 

[DJ Fieri]

They are remaking Stephen King's Salems Lot?

Interesting.

 

[DJ Fieri]

 

[returnofjakedog]

They are remaking Stephen King's Salems Lot?

Interesting.

There is the Chapelwaite series with Adrian Brody from last year based on the original Stephen King short story Jerusalem's Lot:

Chapelwaite (2020)-


A widowed seacaptain with 3 children returns to a small town in Maine to inherit the family estate. However he finds the local residents of a nearby village are under some sort of epidemic that is slowly killing people, and they openly blame his family for it. To add to the issues, his 3 children are of mixed race (South Pacific), which is problematic in rural 1840-50 timeframe. Eventually they become aware of a deserted settlement nearby that is now occupied by a scary cult who may be vampires!

This is based on Stephen King's short story Jerusalem's Lot (not the book Salem's Lot which is the same lore but set much later), and stars Adrian Brody and the actress who played Stevie on Schitt's Creek.
It is a well executed series. The acting, direction, cinematography, fxs, are all solid. However the story drags a bit as it is 10 episodes/hours. It works as a slow burn but they probably could have trimmed it a bit and told the story as effectively in 7 or even 6 hours.

Adrian Brody does a good job. His character generally makes solid decisions (except for not fleeing the area) and looks perpetually worried and beaten down by life. The rest of the cast is good, but the kids got just a little bit annoying at times. The townsfolk are, as always in these types of "stranger goes to small town" horror genre, generally horrible, unhelpful assholes to the family. The main antagonists in the cult are distrubing and violent but don't get enough screen time until late in the series. The main vampire guy is rather nasty. However when things do come to a head it is pretty wild and has some really good fxs.

Recommended for fans of King, vampire and/or well-told slow burn horror. If you want lots of action, and things to move quickly you might struggle to get through it.

I give it a solid 7 to 7.5 outta 10 range. It isn't perfect, for example: I wanted more comeuppance for a few of the asswipe townies, and there was a big battle with a possible redemptive arch that they just did offscreen for no apparent good reason, but generally quite well done in all aspects, and, as noted, they drug it out for too long to reach the series' 10 hour mark. Also the very end was a bit strange.

Not sure if there is going to be a season 2 or whether this is a stand alone but there are several directions the story could go with or without the current actors. Regardless of which path they took I would watch another season.

........but I'm assuming you are referring to a remake of the novel Salem's Lot?

 

[DJ Fieri]

Pass.

 

[Chef99]

They are remaking Stephen King's Salems Lot?

Interesting.

Maybe they'll finally do it justice.

 

[Nasty_Magician]

Finally got around to Archive 81 on Netflix. Very meh. I thought it would have benefited from being 3 or 4 episodes shorter. If they had cut out a bunch of the red herrings and really focused on specifically what was happening it would have been more intriguing. Not terrible but definitely a missed opportunity. The payoff was not worth the ultra slow burn.

 

[returnofjakedog]

Nosferatu the Vampyre (1979)-

A retelling of the 1922 classic silent film Nosferatu.

The story is well known enough that everyone knows the generalities: Jonathon Harker travels to Transylvania to finalize a real estate deal with Count Dracula. Harker is then essentially held captive there. The Count travels to London to try to enthrall Harker's fiancee Lucy but he also brings a plague down upon the city. Harker escapes and tries to stop Dracula.

As a big fan of director Warner Herzog's Aquirre the Wrath of God, and the infamous "legend" of brilliant actor but crazed and horrible human being Klaus Kinski, this one has been on my list for some time.

The good:
*Good direction. Many artistic and/or beautiful shots.
*Mostly good acting. Kinski is great as the vampyre.
*A weird, kinda creepy feeling permeates the film.
*The ending was pretty cool (well, not the very ending but the epilog reveal).

The bad:
*The flow is a bit slow. The story is rather compacted with not a lot of critical events happening.
*Some of the details and character actions don't come across very well, such as Harker's seeming acceptance of Dracula's feral appearance (I would have immediately ran away as fast as possible upon seeing him), and the weird citizen's partying during the plague.
*The acting was done in both German and English, and then the dubbing done in both versions. The dubbing was decent enough but it always detracts a little even in the best of circumstances.

So Herzog, as already stated, wanted to recreate the 1922 Nosferatu, which he considered the greatest German film of all time. He largely succeeded in this but there were some things I took issue with (for example: changing Harker's fiancee from Mini to Lucy because..........???). Still, a very well done film.

I'll go 6.5 to 7 outta 10 area. Just remember that this is a more artistic vision, so recommended for historians and people that appreciate the film making aspects. If you want a fast paced, fxs and gore driven horror film, then look elsewhere.

 

[returnofjakedog]

Next dump of reviews:
Dr. Terror's Gallery of Horrors (1967)-

A 5 tale anthology featuring John Carradine as the host. Lon Chaney Jr also shows up in it.
I'm not going to waste my time breaking it down much. Some of the stories are good (the first couple of segments are ok) but there is little else to recommend here. Generally most everything else is poorly done.
Oh, even the title is a ripoff as it tries to take advantage of the better film Dr. Terror's House of Horrors from 2 years previous. I don't know how they weren't sued for that.
3 to 3.5 outta 10 area for me. Avoid.

House 3: The Horror Show (1989)-
First off, this movie has zero relation to the other House movies, and doesn't even center on a house at all. In fact this movie is extremely similar to Wes Craven's Shocker, which came out later that same year!
Anyways, one of my personal favs Lance Henriksen is a cop who captured a notoriously violent serial killer played by the always great Brion James. After his execution James returns from the dead to terrorize Lance and his family and friends.
The similarities to Shocker are really weird considering both movies were in production at the same time and seemingly unaware of the details of each other. The hunt and capture scene, the electric chair scene, the killer coming back, being able to posess people, and manipulate electricity (to a certain extent, though much less than Shocker), right down to a similar finale. Bizarre.

The biggest issue imo is that the film takes itself way too seriously. Shocker isn't a great movie but it is better just because of the campy schlock in it. This movie just had too many issues to come together. The director was replaced partway through production, and the writer changed it to an Alan Smithee credit.
5 to 5.5 outta 10 range. Watch for Lance, Brion, and some decent bloody gore.

The Unseen (1980)-

Three hot female reporters stay in an old mansion while covering a small town festival. But the home owner's family has a weird secret in the basement.
Not a ton of story, but what they do have is rather slow until a 20 some minute over the top finale. Frankly they could have cut a ton of time, extended the finale, and it would have been better.
Another middle of the road entry. 5 outta 10 area.

Vamps (2012)-
Ok, I was looking for the 1980s horror movie but instead watched this comedy-horror about 2 airheaded vampire chicks living in modern NYC.
Not much to say. It was written and directed by Amy Heckerling who made the likes Fast Times at Ridgemont High, and, more importantly here, Clueless. This is basically Clueless with vampires. It even stars Alicia Silverstone! Sigourney Weaver hams it up as the main vampire antagonist, and there are a few decent fxs moments.
4.5 outta 10 from me. A comedy first and foremost but not particularly interesting or well executed.

Vamp (1986)-
'80s underdog icon Christopher Makepeace (Meatballs, My Bodyguard) and his cool buddy AJ (one of the antagonists from Weird Science) play college students who go into the bad part of the city to get a stripper for their frat party. They bring along a rich nerd (the Long Duk Dong actor from 16 Candles) for even more comic relief.
A bit disjointed execution and a weird flow. But there is some good stuff in it. Grace Jones does ok as the ancient vampire lady, and the underrated Billy Drago makes a few appearances as a gang leader. The fxs are pretty good overall But the "love interest" is forced and unnecessary. Also, the Grace Jones ridiculous artsy strip scene pales in comparison to Dusk Til Dawn.
This is basically trying to make a Fright Night style movie and it does succeed on some levels. But the goofy kinda randomness does detract a bit.

5.5 to 6 range imo. Not as good as the original Fright Night, or even Fright Night 2, but worth a watch if you enjoy pure '80s slightly cheesy horror-comedies..

It takes a lot for me to turn off a horror movie but there were 2 recent ones that fell into that catagory:
Stranger in Our House (1978)-

Summer of Fear (1978) Trailer | 'Stranger in Our House' | Linda Blair | Lee Purcell

Summer of Fear (1978) A teenage girl's life is turned upside down after her cousin moves into her house, and as time goes by, she begins to suspect that she ...

m.youtube.com

Ok, it looked low budget but it had Wes Craven directing and Linda Blair starring so I figured I'd give it a shot. But I figured out the twist immediately and they spent the next 20 minutes Linda's brother ince$t drooling over their cousin, and with Linda riding horses with her boyfriend and I couldn't take the boredom anymore (I have a dislike of horses with reason) so I shut it down.
Maybe it heats up, but I'm going 3 outta 10 from what I saw. Just plain boring.

Vampirella (1996)-

VAMPIRELLA (1996) Official Trailer

Roger Corman Presents!

m.youtube.com

I give a lot for respect to Roger Corman anf what he has done for low budget film making but I need to acknowledge he does put out mostly crap in the midst of some good. This one sadly is one of the worst I've seen from his production.

Jim Wynorski directed, and he makes nothing but horrible crap. But even he says this is the one movie he regrets, which is quite a statement considering the list of absolute shit he has been associated with.
The only decent part I saw in the 20 some minutes I watched was Roger Daltry, lead singer of The Who, hamming it up as Vlad but even he didn't seem to really have his heart in it.
2.5 outta 10 in the short time I watched it. Avoid.

 

[returnofjakedog]

Next round, regardless if anyone is reading them at this point!

Starting with a couple of "classic" '80s slashers.......

The Burning (1981)-
A camp counselor is horribly burned during a prank, and returns some years later to extract revenge on one of the perpetrators.........by killing everyone not involved in his injuries (I guess the "He's just crazy" explanation is in play?).
Anyways, typical story in the copy Friday the 13th era. Campers frolic, the killer kills 'em, until the big finale hits. From that aspect there isn't anything very interesting but the characters are well defined and the generally likable when meant to be. It does feature a young Jason Alexander (George Costanza from Seinfeld), as well as Brian Baker (Mark Ratner from Fast Times at Ridgemont High).
The story flow is a bit choppy. It kinda comes off as Meatballs with a killer. It keeps it light until the gore opens up.
The big drawing point for me is the special fxs which were done by the legendary Tom Savini! Some great kills and cool fxs. Also Rick Wakeman from Yes does the score.

About a 6 outta 10 from me. That is with extra point added for Savini fxs!

Sleepaway Camp (1983)-

Well, if The Burning is now considered a cult classic, then this one must be an ultra cult classic as nearly every youtube horror reviewer out there has tackled it at one point or another.

A kid watches her father and sibling get killed in a boating accident. She is then sent to live with her crazy aunt and cousin. Some years later she heads off to summer camp where a killer is plying his trade.

I liked this one more than expected. Yes it is cheesy and over the top, but there is a sense of some realism underneath the goofy exteriors of the main characters. It seems weird to say that since the characters are generally stereotypes but maybe the use of actual kids helped with that? The acting was mostly not good, so......?

Some cool kills. The story is bizarre but it generally flows well and is certainly not a generic tale like The Burning. But there are certainly some cringy parts. Of course anyone who knows anything about the movie knows that the big selling point is the infamous ending twist!

A tough one to grade. I'll go about 6.5 to 7 outta 10 range. It is basically a kinda bad movie with some cringy elements, and a unique story and an interesting killer.

Black Roses (1988)-

Another infamous '80s schlock B flick and this one wholly deserves it's reputation.

A very '80s heavy metal band turns into ugly demons during their shows and posesses their audiences. When they travel to a small town for a week of tour "warm up" gigs, an actor who appears to be in his mid to late 30s playing a very angsty high school kid (seriously, he is laughably annoying) rebels against the local leaders but gets dragged into a web of death and satanism. But the lead protagonist is actually a teacher sporting an epic mustache

Just about everything is wrong with this movie. The story is a convulted mess, the acting ranges from questionable to bad, some of the fxs are interesting and ok but others are openly laughable. But surprisingly it still fun to watch for the most part.
If you enjoy '80s metal it does feature the legendary drummer Carmine Appice (Ozzy, Dio, Vanilla Fudge, etc) in the band with some other pro musicians, and the soundtrack features bands like King Kobra, Bang Tango, Lizzy Borden, Hallows Eve, etc.

As a straight movie? About a 3 to 3.5 range. But as a "so bad, it's good" feature? A solid 8 outta 10!

Frankenstein Unbound (1990)-

Roger Corman stepped into the director's chair for this tale about a scientist who is thrust back in time with his computer car where he works with/against Dr. Frankenstein to create and attempt to create/destroy the Monster and Bride.

A solid cast has John Hurt and Raul Julia leading the way, with some lesser roles from the likes of Jason Patric, Bridget Fonda, and Michael Hutchence (the lead singer of INXS!).

A cool story with questionable execution. The car is basically a 'roided out version of KIT from Night Rider, which can be a little annoying. The cast tries but can't really generate the necessary energy and excitement (I like John Hurt but I don't think he is prime main protagonist hero type).
The Monster is imposing but his strange makeup job isn't great, and he doesn't elicit any sympathy of the original Frankenstein's Monster as in this he is basically just an big asshole who kills people.
The movie just kinda meanders along with not a ton happening but interspersed Monster killing. But it does pick it up down the stretch when Hurt, Julia, and the Monster are in back and forth direct conflict that leads to the conclusion.

5 to 5.5 outta 10 range for me.

 

[R.J. MacReady]

The Vast of Night.

You just can't believe how riveting this movie is with barley any action or special effects.
It's more Sci-Fi than horror but the creep factor puts it in the horror cat, no problem.

It's based in the 50's which is another reason this movie flys under the radar.

Go into it cold ...I guarantee you will enjoy it. (starts out slow but gets there & than some)


8.0 in my book. it shows you what great writing & casting can do. The music in this is the best special effect.

.

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

The Vast of Night.

You just can't believe how riveting this movie is with barley any action or special effects.
It's more Sci-Fi than horror but the creep factor puts it in the horror cat, no problem.

It's based in the 50's which is another reason this movie flys under the radar.

Go into it cold ...I guarantee you will enjoy it. (starts out slow but gets there & than some)


8.0 in my book. it shows you what great writing & casting can do. The music in this is the best special effect.

.

I believe I saw this a couple years ago, I liked it as well. It has a pretty good and long tracking shot too if I remember.

 

[Chef99]

The Terror (1963)-

A young Jack Nicholson plays a French soldier who gets seperated from his unit and stumbles into a castle inhabited by a Baron (Boris Karloff) in this Roger Corman directed gothic horror tale.
Jack keeps bumping into a beautiful, yet mysterious lady (played by Jack's wife at the time), who spouts cryptic dialogue and kinda seduces him, but always disappears. Jack tries to investigate the situation but Baron Boris and his manservant (played by famous character actor Dick Miller) impede him as much as they can. Eventually more and more details of the Baron's tragic story comes to light, people are attacked and/or die, and witchy curses are exposed.

The synopsis doesn't sound like much but it is actually a solid story and a well crafted production.

The good-
*The story and contained mystery are both good. It brings you along at a solid pace and keeps you interested as details are exposed.
*Jack and Boris are both good (as always), and most of the other actors do a decent job.
*The sets and cinematography are both good. The castle and is pretty cool.

The bad-
*The story moves is a bit convoluted. Also, the general consensus from reviewers is that it moved too slowly. I don't necessarily agree with that but K understand where they are coming from.
Note that Corman barely had a script when they started and his stated goal was to make an "Edgar Allen Poe movie" that wasn't based on any Poe story. Considering this I thought they pulled it off pretty well.
*The big "twist". A stupid idea with no real necessity except to have a twist.

The imdb and RT scores put this one right in the middle in the 5 outta 10 area. I disagree and would go 6.5 to 7 outta 10, and that is after a half point deduction for the lame twist.

It actually is a solid story, but I was so psyched by the idea of Boris and Jack together, I was just so disappointed.

 

[DJ Fieri]