Come Play with Us, Danny...

Uzumaki/Spiral

2011-10-18T12:19:00.003-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Spirals (or uzumaki) are everywhere. So it perhaps comes as no surprise that they begin to haunt and obsess a small Japanese town.

Scariness factor: It has the scariness of the original Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, where it mostly just feels like you’re trying to wait out a really bad acid trip.

Gross-Out Factor: Hmmm. A bit of ear-stabbery and someone getting twisted up in a washing machine. I think you’ll be ok.

Complaints: I really really like the idea of this. But the execution of it wasn’t quite so great. It felt just really silly in parts. Other than that, I don’t really have a ton of complaints, other than to say in a general sort of way that it just didn’t quite do it for me.

High Points: The idea of this movie is fucked up and interesting: a town haunted by spirals. And it would probably be way enjoyable to watch when really really high. Either that or terrifying.

Overall: I feel kind of indifferent towards this flick. Some of the images are awesome, like the chick walking down the hallway with insane spiral hair. But nonetheless, it just didn’t blow my mind like I’d hoped.

Grade: B-

Pulse (2001)

2011-10-18T12:04:00.001-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: This is how IMDB describes it, but to be honest with you, I had a hard time figuring out that this WAS actually the plot: “Japanese university students investigate a series of suicides linked to an Internet Web cam that promises visitors the chance to interact with the dead.”

Scariness factor: Japanese and Korean horror flicks always seem to freak me out at least a little. So it’s definitely creepy, but in a subtle way.

Gross-Out Factor: No hacking off of heads or ripping out intestines. Just some after-images of hangings and people jumping to their death.

Complaints: I was really tired while watching this, so it seemed excruciatingly long to me. But I’m not sure whether that’s the fault of the movie or just a fault of my tired ass. It also seemed very confusing to me, plot-wise. Like, I got the jist of it, but I was confused as to the specificities. Also, this movie made me feel like a total racist ‘cause I had a hard time keeping track of who was who in it which made the plotline slightly confusing to me. Then again, watching American flicks where all the characters are generic young people kind of causes the same problem, so maybe I’m not racist against Asian folks after all.

High Points: I like the concept of the film which was very dark and philosophical. I can’t imagine an American film even attempting to handle the same ideas (and yes, I know they remade this into an American flick, but I don’t remember it being quite so philosophical about loneliness and such).

Overall: I need to rewatch ‘cause I feel like, had I not been so sleepy, I may have enjoyed this more. As is though, I felt like it was a bit long-winded and slow with some good creepy moments here and there, but not enough to make me fall in love.

Grade: B-

Piranha (2010)

2011-10-17T01:08:00.007-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: It is spring break. There are piranhas in the lake. Really, you don't need to know much more than that.

Scariness factor: This movie is delightfully campy, so don't go in expecting to be scared. Go in expecting boobs, boobs, and more boobs.

Gross-Out Factor: Oh my god, gross-out factor is high high high in this. They really enjoy upping each piranha attack with a newer and grosser one. Definitely not for the faint of heart.

Complaints: This movie is so fricking misogynistic. I mean, it is T & A like a horror movie's never been T'ed and A'ed before. The feminist in me has to bitch about that just a little. Thankfully though, all the horribly douchey males in this movie meet their ends in horrific ways, especially Jerry O'Connell's character, and thank god for that 'cause THAT DUDE IS SO GROSS. He definitely has one of the best one-liners in the movie though.

High Points: Ok. So I really really really wanna hate this movie, 'cause it's so T & A in a way that no other horror movie I've seen has been. So understand: the fact that I LOVE IT SO FREAKING MUCH DESPITE THAT FACT really is a testament to how entertaining this movie is. When I first saw it last year, I saw it in 3D at the theater, and I was the ONLY PERSON IN THE THEATER and I remember feeling like a super dirty old man because it was like nonstop boobs. And not only just boobs but nonstop 3D boobs. And I was just sitting there in a completely empty theater, hunched in a seat with my 3D glasses on, staring at boobs for 90 minutes. But even despite that fact: totally dug it. And rewatching it this Halloween season solidified that fact. And because I do dig it so surprisingly much, we're gonna bullet the shit out of its high points:

Boobs. I know I just went off on how creeped out I am about how many boobs there are in this movie, but seriously: it's impressive, the sheer quantity of boobs in this movie. And seriously: I have seen a lot of movies, and I'm pretty certain I've never seen another movie that has had even half as many boobs as this one. And if you had the pleasure of seeing it in 3D, YOU GOT TO SEE 3D BOOBS, and 3D boobs: not in the slightest bit overrated. Also, you get to see a lady whose boobs got eaten by piranhas. And as much as I hate to admit it: totally funny.

The opening sequence. I was in a theater by myself when I first saw this movie, and I seriously giggled with glee at the opening sequence. It was worth sitting through this movie for the opening sequence alone, it's that adorable. For those of you who haven't seen it, I'm not gonna tell you what it is 'cause it'll ruin it, so stop reading. **SPOILER ALERT** For those of you who HAVE seen it: how brilliant was it to have Richard Dreyfuss fishing and singing the song he sings in Jaws??? Fucking loved it.**END SPOILER ALERT**

The fact that this movie exploits boobs boobs and more boobs but really, all the super-douchey male characters really do meet horrible demises. And very specifically so, with Jerry O'Connell's being the most enjoyable (and deal with the lack of spoiler alert on that one 'cause it's not ruining anything).

The special fx. If you've been reading this blog for more than 5 minutes, you know how very very very very very much I hate CGI. And that's mostly 'cause it looks horribly cheesy on a regular basis. So you also know what a big deal it is for me to say that the CGI kicks ass in this. The piranhas are creepy as fuck. The moments where it's very obviously CGI are cheesy enough to make it enjoyable rather than annoying. And I honestly am not sure how much of the gruesome parts were CGI and how much were not. Which also says something. The special fx definitely have a very old-school Tom Savini feel to them. And I'm not a gore person, but the gore is so over the top that I found it really entertaining in this. In fact, if you talk about the movie with your friends, almost everyone has their favorite death moments. The whole massacre scene in the water really is quite fantastic and impressive and absolutely disgusting.

The fact that the movie does not take itself seriously at all and--in a way reminiscent of old school horror flicks of the 80's where it's abundantly clear how much love and care folks like Tom Savini put into the gore--you can really tell that everyone who was involved in making this just had a fucking blast with it, and the gory scenes were--to me--one of the rare moments in modern horror in the past ten years or so where it really felt like the folks involved in the special fx were just having a goddamn blast goring that shit up. It's weird to put it this way, but there's just a loving care to the special fx that's absent in a lot of newer horror flicks that're just CGIed the fuck up.

Adam Scott. I dig the dude in pretty much everything 'cause he really is funny. But normally I don't go for the skinny dude with a really big head look. And for some reason Adam Scott's face always makes me think of Fievel from An American Tail. So I don't know if maybe it's just the manliness that comes with fighting off man-eating piranhas, but Adam Scott is a fucking hottie in this. He's all scruffy and stubbly and adorable and his reactions to everything just cracked me the hell up. So what I'm saying is: Adam Scott, you, me, and a few man-eating piranhas. How 'bout it?

Overall: Love. It is over-the-top and delightful and cheesy and fun and gory as hell and really, just a goddamn blast. See it if you haven't. You won't regret it. Unless you absolutely hate boobs.

Grade: A

The Last Exorcism

2011-10-12T00:30:00.005-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: An evangelical minister who thinks the practice of exorcisms is being misused allows a video crew to film his last exorcism. It's supposed to be a fake exorcism (everyone is aware of this except for the family of the possessed girl) but degrades into something horribly real.

Scariness factor: I don't know if I've just been watching too many horror movies lately and my scariness gauge has been dampened as a result of sheer glut, but I didn't find this as creepy as I thought I would. And I watched it out on my roof, which makes EVERYTHING creepier. And yet still: meh.

Gross-Out Factor: Breaking of fingers, aftermath of knife-slashing. Nothing too horrible.

Complaints: I find myself wanting to use bullets again because there were so many, but I'll see if I can do without. I finally caved and got this dvd at the library because of the cover (which you can see above). I'd seen it there about 337 times but always passed it up because even though the cover looked creepy I'd never heard of it. Really: I should've just trusted my first instinct. The highlight of this movie's creepiness is shown ON the cover. It's all downhill after that. The pacing is terrible. The first half of the movie is boringness and more boringness about the damned minister and what a douchebag he is. Could've easily been condensed down to half its time with just as much effectiveness. The moments of the actual possession are fleeting and really, not all that interesting. There's a creepy moment here or there, but for the amount of non-creepy shit you sit through to get there, it's definitely not worth it. **SPOILER ALERT** The ending is terrible. It's like if Blair Witch Project and Rosemary's Baby had a baby together and the baby ended up NOT being a devil baby and you were kind of just like hey that was disappointing because I thought this was gonna be a devil baby but it's just a regular old baby and I can see one of those anywhere. Also: the ending got ludicrous immediately. Why did they throw their demon baby in the fire? I don't get it. Is the fire supposed to empower demon baby? And don't get me started on the whole handheld camera bullshit. Ok. I love it when it's done well. I really do. I'll even suspend my disbelief when it's done well. But **DOUBLE SPOILER ALERT** when you have a bunch of devil-worshippers chasing you through a forest while you're running with your video camera in hand and then they kill you, don't you think they'd be like, Hey, we just killed some people and shit, and we ripped a devil baby out of a chick's vag, and all of it got caught on camera, so maybe, I mean--just a thought--but MAYBE WE SHOULDN'T LEAVE THE VIDEO CAMERA HERE FOR SOMEONE TO FIND?? In other words: there is no way in hell this supposedly "real" video footage would've ever made it to us--at least in Blair Witch Project and [REC] they make an effort to explain why it would. **END SPOILER AND INCESSANT FURIOUS RAMBLING** Oh wait. One more: why is there suddenly a sparse score midway through the movie with violins trilling creepily and all that? Isn't this supposed to be handheld? COME ON.

High Points: The possessed girl ends up with sweet boots. Really. That's all I can think of.

Overall: Boo hiss. Super lame. Rent The Exorcist. And if you've already seen it, rent it again.

Grade: D-

Devil (2010)

2011-10-10T23:14:00.005-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Five people are trapped in an elevator. One of them is a douchey mattress salesman. But the other just might be... THE DEVIL.

Scariness factor: It wanted really badly to be scary and moody. In fact, the music was so obnoxiously moody with its swells and crescendoes that it almost SEEMED to be scary and moody. But really, when it comes down to it, it somehow managed to miss the boat.

Gross-Out Factor: Mostly just aftermath images. Nothing you'd want your 4-year old to be staring at, but stuff that most adults could handle.

Complaints: Well, I started off with just a couple, but then they multiplied, so let's bullet:

Really, I didn't give a shit about any of the characters. And when the majority of your movie consists of five people in an elevator, this seems kind of important. Otherwise you end up not giving a shit about whether they live or die. Which was definitely the case here.

The acting was pretty terrible.

The premise really lent itself to something that could've been creepy as fuck. And yet, it was surprisingly unscary.

The score was obnoxious and forced. In moments where it was trying to lend tension and drama to the scene, it was so overwhelmingly forced that it actually just ended up making you very aware that there WASN'T enough tension or drama in the scene to warrant the over-the-top music.

And finally, SPOILER ALERT!!!! the ending had a twist way too reminiscent of Saw. I will admit, I didn't see it coming, and it creeped me out for a second, but then I was like: "SAW!!!" /END SPOILER ALERT

High Points: It was mildly creepy. In a "hey let's put this on in the background while we play Scrabble or surf the internet" kind of way.

Overall: Yeah, I was horribly underwhelmed. Like I said, the premise of this is good enough that it could've been creepy as hell. And yet, it never really is.

Grade: D+

Paranormal Activity 2

2011-10-10T09:53:00.004-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: I guess you could call this the prequel to Paranormal Activity. The sister of Katie (the main character in the original) recently had a baby, and shortly thereafter, creepy, supernatural events start to transpire in the family’s house. This movie also attempts to explain the haunting of Katie in the original.

Scariness factor: Ok. I was pleasantly surprised in a big way. I watched it home alone, and it creeped me out in a big way. It’s definitely a jump in your seat-type flick.

Gross-Out Factor: The only real stomach-turning events happen at the end, and they’re relatively mild in comparison to most movies nowadays.

Complaints: I’m not sure how I felt about the ending. I kind of liked it, but then I also kind of thought, hey: if this actually happened, then wouldn’t it have also been mentioned in the original?? I also had mixed feelings about the storyline they use to connect this movie to the original. In some ways it works, but in other ways, it’s kind of hammy. The logic is also a bit creaky in parts—there seemed to be many more instances in which most normal people would check their security footage to see what actually happened (the dog incident, for example), and yet: they don’t. Also: baby over the crib-bars was kind of a lame moment.

High Points: I really was pleasantly surprised by this movie. Minus the ending, which got a bit hammy, it’s really quite spooky. They mix it up by using security surveillance cameras to provide the shots and suspense, and they use them well. The first 2/3 of the movie creeped me the hell out. AND I think what surprised me even more is that it also was cute and funny in moments, in a way that helped it seem even MORE real. I actually laughed out loud a couple times. And the acting was actually not bad either.

Overall: I wasn’t expecting much from this flick, but I actually thought it was a surprisingly good creepfest. Granted, it doesn’t offer much originality since most of what you get was in some way or another done in the original. But still: if you want to freak yourself out by watching something when you’re home alone, this would definitely be a good choice.

Grade: B+

The Mothman Prophecies

2011-10-06T13:22:00.003-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: After his wife dies, John Klein, a reporter for the Washington Post, is drawn towards a town in West Virginia where he begins to unravel a strange web of supernatural sightings involving a "mothman" who seems to be unleashing prophecies of deaths upon the town's population.

Scariness factor: Meh. It has its moments, and my cat managed to freak me out after because I was clearly a LITTLE bit jumpy, but overall, it won't blow your mind.

Gross-Out Factor: PG.

Complaints: The interspersing of mothman imagery throughout got tedious. Not EVERY goddamn red light looks like creepy eyes, people. Other than that, I just am kind of underwhelmed by this movie. The ideas are creepy, especially the end of the film, but the way they're handled is as generic as possible. There's no unique style to the directing, no creative element to the creepiness, no mind-blowing acting, nothing.

High Points: The end scene is pretty good, though again, not mind-blowing. And knowing that this is supposedly based on true events lends an element of creepiness to the whole tale.

Overall: I saw this in the theater when it first came out, and I remember being underwhelmed by it then. But I figured I'd give it a second chance since it's been close to 10 years. But nope: still underwhelmed.

Grade: C

Diary (2006)

2011-10-06T13:09:00.004-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Winnie's boyfriend recently broke up with her, and she doesn't seem to be coping with it well. Then she meets Ray, a new love-interest. Or is he? Is she going mad? Or wtf is going on?

Scariness factor: It's psychologically creepy more than scary.

Gross-Out Factor: There's one moment of throat-slittery grossness, but minus that, not bad at all.

Complaints: The slow unraveling delve into her madness gets a little bit tedious after awhile. The method of going back and revisiting events only to reveal the "reality" of them, and then to revisit them a third time to reveal the "real reality" was a bit long-winded and could've been cut down a bit.

High Points: The imagery and the madness were harrowing at moments. Also, the fragmentation lends well to the unveiling of her madness.

Overall: I love The Eye which is by the same director and creepy as hell. In comparison, this was a little bit too cerebral and slow-moving. But if you're into the psychological horror-flicks, you'd likely enjoy.

Grade: B-

Red Riding Hood

2011-10-06T12:55:00.005-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Little Red Riding Hood is in love with a childhood Twilightesque sweetheart but is going to be betrothed to another. In the meantime, a vicious werewolf is killing off villagers. Love and werewolfiness intersect.

Scariness factor: It takes energy to be scared of a shittily CGI-ed werewolf.

Gross-Out Factor: Someone's hand gets severed. And the werewolf bites people. Also, the movie's PG-13. So: fairly low.

Complaints: Oh, where to start. 1) This should've been called Twilight 4: The Werewolfy version. 2) Amanda Seyfried, does your mouth EVER shut all the way?? 3) World's shittiest CGI-ed werewolf. 4) Why, Gary Oldman, why??? 5) Boring. 6) Why do all the boy villagers have such modern hairstyles? You KNOW that they necessitate gel or pomade or SOMETHING, but where do they manufacture the gel or pomade in such a tiny village???

High Points: Julie Christie is a HOTTIE. Sweet jesus. I never thought I'd be willing to make out with a grandma, but: TOTALLY DOWN. Other than that, there are a few lovely shots. That's about it though.

Overall: So. Boring. Omg. Catherine Hardwicke, how old are you and why are you so obsessed with tales of girls wooing boys who can rip out the girls' throats with their teeth? Dear readers, if you're looking for an awesome feminist werewolf horror flick, then check out Ginger Snaps instead.

Grade: D

[Rec]2

2011-10-02T10:48:00.006-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: The plot is the direct continuation of [Rec]. It begins where the original left off and continues with a group of armed officers being sent in on a secret mission to recover something that I will not divulge here. A young group of teens sneaks in as well to get in on the action, only to quickly regret their decision.

Scariness factor: Love love love the infected in both [Rec] and [Rec]2. They move freakishly fast and are scary as fuck. The handheld camera method of filming the action also lends amazingly to the creepiness of the film. In one of the high-intensity zombie-attack scenes, for example, the sound goes out, and there is something startlingly creepy and disorienting about seeing a zombie attack and not being able to hear it. The director/creator really conceived a great thing in using the handheld camera trope. Leaps and bounds more successful than, say, Cloverfield.

Gross-Out Factor: Lots of blood and spewing of blood and head explosions of blood. If you're squeamish about blood, you'll likely want to steer clear.

Complaints: I'm not sure how enthused I was about the "twist" they decided to put on the origin of the infection. In some ways, I thought it was interesting and worked well, but in others, it kind of lent a weird supernatural dynamic to it that didn't bowl me over a whole ton.

High Points: [Rec] is definitely the better of the two films, but if you liked [Rec], you'll definitely like the sequel. It is intense and will leave you clutching your seat. The filming is awesome, the zombies are scary as hell, and the twist at the end isn't too bad, though you're likely to see it coming. The best part of the movies though is definitely the handheld camera-style. It is handled so cleverly and effectively that it makes the movie leaps and bounds scarier than it would otherwise be.

Overall: If you liked [Rec], the sequel definitely won't disappoint. And if you haven't seen [Rec], well, goddammit: get on it. 'Cause it's one of the best horror movies in recent years, without a doubt.

Grade: A-

Camp Hell

2011-10-01T15:11:00.003-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Pre-emptory Note to the Creators of Camp Hell: Jesse Eisenberg was in this movie for LESS THAN FIVE MINUTES. You are douchebags for putting him on the cover of your dvd and tricking me into watching. DOUCHEBAGS, I SAY.

Plotline: Jesus-freak children gather at their Bible-camp for the summer. One of the sinners attracts the attention of the devil. He also gets his dry-hump on with a girl-camper. Some more jesus-freaky stuff. Jesse Eisenberg for 5 minutes worth of boring. And: the end.

Scariness factor: The only thing scary about this movie was a) Jesse Eisenberg's acting in his five minutes on screen, and b) the fact that there really ARE bible-camps out there in the world that are likely similar to this one, minus the demon-sightings.

Gross-Out Factor: Pool of blood. Twitchy demon face. Another pool of blood. Dead doves.

Complaints: So. Boring. It's sad when the highlight of the film is two teenagers dry-humping in the woods. Also, the film is populated by a lot of grinding/crunchy noises. Because apparently Satan sounds like he's perpetually chewing on Gobstoppers.

High Points:Well let's take a look at the two pics I've posted above. That should explain it for you: boring & more boring. So much jesus-camp, so little demon-scariness.

Overall: Snoozer. Rent Friday the 13th or something if you're looking for delicious camping horror.

Grade: D

Night of the Comet

2011-10-01T14:55:00.003-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A meteor-shower appears to have incinerated everyone on the planet except for a select few who happened to be protected by steel-walls. The survivors gather to flirt, dance to Cyndi Lauper, fight a few sunglassed zombies, and ward off the government who is draining their blood to try to find some sort of cure.

Scariness factor: If 80's mall-hair makes you scream in terror, this movie will SCARE THE SHIT OUT OF YOU.

Gross-Out Factor: Someone gets hit in the head with a large wrench. That's pretty much the extent of it.

Complaints: Not quite enough 80's music. (Oh snark.)

High Points:The 80's mall-hair. The gloriously hideous 80's soundtrack. The obligatory 80's dance/dress-up/mall sequence where the sisters, despite dealing with a) zombies and b) most everyone in the world having been incinerated, find time to try on different clothes with each other at the mall while dancing to "Girls Just Wanna Have Fun." The fact that the blond younger sister looks uncannily like a 1980's version of Michelle Williams:

Overall: If you're looking for a campy 80's gem, this will definitely satisfy.

Grade: A- (camp)

Tormented (1960)

2009-10-15T09:46:00.001-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A man who is soon to be married stands idly by as his mistress tosses threats at him and then falls to her death from a lighthouse. But this mistress just can't let it go and returns as a ghost, threatening his marriage with her hauntings.

Scariness factor: A ha ha ha ha ha hahahahahaha cough choke hahaha.

Gross-Out Factor: Horrifying and gruesome scenes such as "plastic head being held in man's hand" and "footprints appearing in carpet" and "woman plummets from lighthouse."

Complaints: All the complaints are precisely what makes this movie such a campy gem. First off: voice-over/narration. Apparently it was the "hip thing" in 1960s horror flicks to have THE most retarded voice-over/narrations EVER. The Haunting (1963) which is one of my favorite horror movies of all-time suffers from the same problem. The characters think A LOT to themselves and VERY LOUDLY. Second: the sound effects. I swear to god, the sound of a seagull squawking overhead is SERIOUSLY a dude shouting CAW CAW CAW. Not even shitting you. Third: the logic. Apparently people in the 1960s were RIDICULOUSLY stupid all the time. You have a head in a blanket? Definitely throw it out in the sand where people will surely find it. Fourthly: Oh my god the dude that tries to blackmail the male lead has THE funniest dialogue ever, Dad. I think he's supposed to be a hipster, Dad, so he seriously calls the dude Dad like 37 times in the course of 10 minutes, Dad. Fifth: The special fx. Seriously, there is a scene with a plastic head that we're supposed to believe is the head of the woman haunting him. Sixthly: The acting. Worst. Acting. Ever.

High Points: See all the complaints.

Overall: This is high-camp, so don't go in expecting to have your socks scared off, Dad. But DO figure out how to turn this into a drinking game because next Halloween I AM SO SHOWING THIS AT MY PLACE.

Grade: A (but only in camp)

Jaws

2009-10-15T08:44:00.001-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A great-white is viciously attacking and killing people in the waters of Amity. The local chief of police gangs up with a marine biologist and a delightfully grizzled shark-hunter to end the rampage.

Scariness factor: Holy crap so delicious.

Gross-Out Factor: At the time, it was probably super-gruesome, but by today's Rob Zombie-standards, pretty mild. Still: it provides some delighful ewwwwwwwws.

Complaints: None nada zilch.

High Points: Jaws might actually be my favorite movie of all time, so it seems kind of silly reviewing it as I'm pretty much gonna gush. But gush I shall.
Why I love Jaws:

It is a true blockbuster from a time when being a blockbuster actually meant something. It's huge and well-done but also meticulously well-written and nuanced in every way.

The acting: the trio of Roy Scheider, Robert Shaw, and Richard Dreyfuss makes this movie. They are all wonderful, Dreyfuss is funny as hell (and a total 1970's babe, growr), and I so want to have a daughter so I can name her Quint 'cause Shaw rocks that character OUT.

The characters are wonderfully developed and actually fleshed out. You will fall in love with all of them for different reasons.

The dialogue is fantastic. Which also lends to the well-developed characters. It's also wonderfully timed--there are many moments where a character squeaks in a one-liner under his breath or amidst the ramblings of other characters, and it will make you laugh out loud. And it's got that 70's realism thing working for it.

That first scene where the skinny-dipper goes down: Oh my god so scary!!!!

The score is (again) a blockbuster gem, tricking us into getting tense in moments that don't actually warrant it and going silent to trick us again into jumping when Jaws unexpectedly leaps out.

The timing. This is something I rarely think about when watching a film, but this film is TIGHT and has a MAGNIFICENT sense of timing. From comedic moments to scary moments, they are timed SO BEAUTIFULLY that it's hard not to want to hug Spielberg for being so damn anal retentive as to get it THAT right.

The special fx are old-school and awesome. Fuck CGI! I am all about a giant hinged shark interspersed with real-footage of an entirely different and tinier shark! Seriously: love it. Gruesome and delightful and PLEASE DEAR GOD let them never want to remake this because I seriously will BREAK PEOPLE'S KNEES.

I seriously could go on and on some more, but I will stop here.

Overall: I've seen this movie so many times that I can't even keep track anymore. It seriously may be my favorite movie of all time, so if you've not seen it, DEAR GOD WHAT IS THE MATTER WITH YOU GO GO GO NOW AND WATCH IT I DON'T CARE IF YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE AT WORK DO IT.

Grade: A+++

Reincarnation (Rinne)

2009-10-15T08:06:00.000-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A young actress gets a role in a movie about a real-life murder-spree in a local hotel. As she steps into the role, the line between past and present begins to blur in scary ways.

Scariness factor: It's pretty spooky. Eerie is perhaps a better word.

Gross-Out Factor: Nothing too horrible.

Complaints: No major complaints.

High Points: The premise of this, although perhaps a bit convoluted, was a lot of fun. And it made for a delightfully weird and creepy climax. The movie is visually spooky, and the acting is not bad. It kind of feels like THE SHINING meets AUDREY ROSE meets THE EYE.

Overall: Again, I enjoyed myself with this one as well. If you're a fan of Asian horror (like The Grudge which I think was made by the same dude), you'll dig it.

Grade: B

The Serpent & the Rainbow

2009-10-15T08:03:00.001-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: An American (doctor? anthropologist?) travels to Haiti to investigate rumors of a drug that can bring people back from the dead.

Scariness factor: It's mildly spooky. And claustrophobic at times. But nothing TOO bone-rattlingly terrifying.

Gross-Out Factor: 80's gross-out, which means pretty lite.

Complaints: Very 80's. And--of course--an obligatory lame sex-scene between the male and female leads 'cause we all know when a) we're being hunted, and b) there's zombies on the loose, the first thing on our minds is sex. (Okay, it probably WOULD be, but still: kind of lame.) Also, there wasn't enough zombie action. Granted, the zombies aren't like 28 Days Later zombies or even Night of the Living Dead zombies, but I still would've liked to see a bit more of 'em.

High Points: It has its moments. It's kind of got a surreal trippy little thing going on, and Wes Craven has some of his usual fun little tricks up his sleeve. And it's moody and fun.

Overall: I enjoyed this. It's not my favorite Wes Craven, but it definitely was a nice moody little October flick.

Grade: B

Oldboy (Oldeuboi)

2009-10-15T07:45:00.004-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A man is kidnapped for reasons unknown and imprisoned in a hotel room for 15 years. When finally released, he makes it his mission to hunt down his kidnappers and find out the reason for his imprisonment.

Scariness factor: I'm not even sure this is technically considered a horror flick, but I include it anyways. Nonetheless, it's not so much scary as it is intense and suspenseful.

Gross-Out Factor: Lots of teeth getting pulled out. A few other grotesqueries, but nothing TOO horrible.

Complaints: I really like this movie, so I can't so much think of any.

High Points: This movie is just really kind of awesome. The plotline will have you plunging forward with curiosity, and, just like Oh Dae-Su, you'll find yourself wanting to know what the fuck is going on. It's well-acted. It's got some really horrible and mischievous twists. And it's got style out the ass and is beautifully shot. And actually funny at times as well. Plus, the two male leads are HOT. I mean, purr:

Overall: I'm not sure if this is technically horror. But since one of you recommended it as a horror film I should watch this season, I'm reviewing it anyways. I've seen it twice, and I really really dig it. So go check it out.

Grade: A

(And yes, I missed THIRST in the theaters but am counting down the days 'til it comes out on dvd.)

Inside (A L'interieur)

2009-10-15T07:15:00.004-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A pregnant woman is involved in a car crash that kills her husband. She is spending her Christmas Eve alone with plans to for a medically-induced birth the next day when a crazy woman breaks into her house with plans to steal her baby by any means necessary.

Scariness factor: Damn. This movie is all sorts of claustrophobic and freaky. I noticed my body all tensed up several times throughout the movie and with clenched knuckles etc.

Gross-Out Factor: This was one of the goriest movies I've ever seen. I normally wouldn't sit through something so gory, but it was filmed so well and it was so fricking scary that I toughed it out. But jesus: definitely not for the faint of heart. The faint of heart shouldn't even be IN THE SAME HOUSE as this movie.

Complaints: The gore. While it was almost magnificent in how over the top it was, I'm still not quite sure it was necessary. I'll give them the final shot, because that one was FANTASTIC and horrible. But much of it seemed over-the-top. And the shots of the baby in utero were a bit cheese-tastic

High Points: This movie just had a lot of style to it. It was gruesome but oftentimes beautifully shot in its gruesomeness. And it seriously was scary as fuck. You know those movies where you find yourself leaning forward in your seat, muttering under your breath to the characters, willing with your body for the main character to make it out safely? This is DEFINITELY one of those gems.

Overall: The more and more I think about this movie, the more and more I liked it, despite the intense gore. It really was spooky as fuck. So if you can HANDLE the gore, I definitely recommend.

Grade: A-

(Thanks, Kimberly, for the recommendation!)

Already on Order at the Library for Horror Movie Month

2009-09-28T09:06:00.002-04:00

Oldboy

Zombie holocaust

The return of the living dead

The serpent and the rainbow

Inside (Bustillo, Alexandre)

Inside (D'Agosto, Nicholas)

Splinter

Drag me to Hell

Red eye

Martyrs

A tale of two sisters

Reincarnation (Shimizu, Takashi)

Let's scare Jessica to death

Tormented

Calling All Recommendations for Horror Movies for Me to Order for the Month of October

2009-09-16T15:57:00.003-04:00

My comments are all yours for fiendish listings.

Bring it.

Two Exciting New Horror Flicks Out This October + an Added Zombie Bonus

2009-08-03T06:35:00.007-04:00

Yes yes yes, I continue to be lax in posting. I think this site is gonna end up getting updated once in a while when I see something good from now on. But I hope it continues to be of use to people.

I DO, however, have some good news. Two amazing-looking horror flicks coming out IN THE SAME WEEK!!! October, I love thee:

Scorsese does horror????

Holy shit, I'm on this as soon as it's out:

Shutter Island

Release date: October 2, 2009

And on the zombie-front:

Zombieland

Release date: October 9, 2009

And finally, Nazi zombies (so wrong, but looks so fun):

Dead Snow

Release date: Looks like it already was?

It's been a while...

2009-07-09T13:38:00.002-04:00

But join me in a ramble about "cultural appropriation" in horror flicks right over HERE. Feel free to put in your two cents!

Woohoo!

2009-02-11T11:30:00.001-05:00

Finally caught up!

Let the Right One In (Låt den rätte komma in)

2009-02-11T11:08:00.004-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Oscar is a young boy picked on by his classmates. He entertains himself with his knife and fantasties of stabbing things. Eli is a young girl who moves into his apartment building. They take a shine to each other, but will Eli's secret come between their friendship and love?

Scariness factor: It's not a jump in your seat type movie. So though I'm going to say it's low on the scariness scale, that's not a bad thing.

Gross-Out Factor: Nothing overwhelmingly horrid. Some throat-slittings and a few attacks.

Complaints: Honestly, this movie is amazing. So I'm more than willing to overlook this singular complaint. Nonetheless, it needs to be said, as the movie would've been flawless if they hadn't kept this one scene in: The cat scene. CGI out the ass. And terrible. I like the idea. And it could've been done subtly. But instead, they jerked out a bit of CGI and just made it look silly and incongruous in comparison to the realistic cinematography in the rest of the movie.

High Points: Jesus. Where to even begin?

This is THE best vampire movie I've seen. Hands down. It perfectly captures what's so haunting about the folklore of the vampire and doesn't vamp it up (no pun intended) with the sexy-vampire twist that seems to be all the rage nowadays.

The acting is amazing. The young boy is wonderful, and the young girl: Jesus. She will knock your socks off.

It's a love story, and a beautiful love story at that. The funny thing is that this came out at about the same time as Twilight, and yet, this flick is what Twilight only WISHES it could be. I haven't seen a love story this great (horror or no) in a long long time.

It's delicate and tender, which is all the more strange given that it's a horror flick.

It's haunting. The story itself is haunting. And some of the scenes will just blow your mind with how haunting and strange and surreal and spooky they are.

I could go on and on. Really, it's an amazing film, horror or no. N/A and I saw it in the theater, and it was funny because it seemed like every 10 minutes or so, I'd find him just looking at me with this look like "I cannot even believe what I am seeing and how good this is." And during the car-ride home, he called at least three people JUST to tell them to go see the film. And he remarked to me, "I think that movie is in my top 6 films OF ALL TIME."

Overall: I had high hopes for this film since the trailers were so promising. And normally, I end up disappointed when that happens. But not with Let the Right One In. This movie is amazing, and not even just as a horror flick. It's a love story like none you've ever seen. It's beautiful. It's haunting. It's spooky. It's fantastic. I'd have to agree with N/A: This is definitely high on my list of Favorite Movies of All Time.

Grade: A+

From Hell

2009-02-11T11:04:00.002-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Someone is killing prostitutes in London, and his name is Jack the Ripper.

Scariness factor: Moody. But not scary.

Gross-Out Factor: I think some throats are slit. And you might see innards. But other than that, nothing is really strongly standing out to me.

Complaints: Two words: Heather. Graham. No wait. Six words: Heather. Graham. With. A. Cockney. Accent. *shuddering* I don't like Heather Graham. She's cute. But she plays Rollergirl in like EVERY movie she's in. She doesn't exactly have range. I think the only roles I've ever really liked her in are Boogie Nights and when she was on Scrubs. Other than that, UGH. So yeah: #1 complaint. #2 complaint: This movie just leaves me pretty much indifferent in every which way. I don't hate it. But I don't love it. There's nothing particularly noteworthy or remarkable about it. And the big reveal at the end? Wah wah wahhhhh. Lame.

High Points: Johnny Depp's good in pretty much everything. And the mood is nice at times.

Overall: Meh. Don't love it. Don't hate it. Could live without ever having seen it.

Grade: C

The Signal (2007)

2009-02-11T10:51:00.002-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: What appears to be bad tv reception is apparently much more sinister--a transmission that, filtered through tvs, cell phones, and the like--is turning people insane and causing them to kill one another.

Scariness factor: There were some good tense moments. And the idea--as it played out--was spooky (though not terribly original).

Gross-Out Factor: Pretty gross. It's definitely not left up to the imagination.

Complaints: There was a jarring change in mood about midway through the movie--it went from really kind of intense to weirdly funny. And although the funny parts WERE actually funny, it felt kind of inconsistent in comparison to the beginning. Also, it was a bit TOO cloyingly artsy fartsy at times. (It had moments where it felt like it was really trying too hard to be indie.)

High Points: There seriously are a couple really good white-knuckled, OMGTHEY'REGONNAGETHER scenes, and I was impressed by those. There are also some haunting scenes--the way the transmission takes over people is blunt and disturbing. And spooky.

Overall: I enjoyed this. N/A (my dude) said it was terrible, but I was actually pleasantly surprised. It's no classic, but it's definitely tons better than a lot of the garbage coming out (*COUseriouslydowereallyneedanotherremakeofaclassicGH* *SNEFridaythe13thEZE*), and thinking back, I'd recommend it.

Grade: B/B+

Pitch Black

2008-11-13T09:26:00.001-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A space transport-vessel crash-lands on a seemingly deserted planet. The survivors (one of which is an escaped convict with eyes that just happen to be able to conveniently see in the dark) are forced to fight for their lives as the planet slides into darkness and its predators awaken.

Scariness factor: Should've been. But wasn't.

Gross-Out Factor: Ugh--I can't even remember. I don't think it was anything TOO nasty though.

Complaints: SO. BORING. Really. I just didn't find this movie interesting. At all. I mean, the interesting part of the premise (having to fend off predators in the dark) doesn't even begin until halfway through the movie. And Vin Diesel is annoying as FUCK.

High Points: There was like ONE scene where you see the people moving through the pitch black, and when one of them waves a light-source around them, we see the RIDICULOUS number of predators just waiting for them in the dark. THAT was cool. The rest: boo.

Overall: Quite frankly, I thought this was boring and sucked. It could've been an interesting premise. But it wasn't.

Grade: D-

Night of the Living Dead (1990)

2008-11-12T07:48:00.002-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Something strange is going on and the dead are coming back to life.

Scariness factor: Nothing too special.

Gross-Out Factor: Nothing TOO terrible.

Complaints: I didn't really have any overriding complaints--I mean, it's a zombie flick, and I heart zombie flicks. And it's a pretty good zombie flick at that. Then again, it's a remake of a DAMN good zombie flick, so that taints it just a TINY bit for me.

High Points: The special effects are great in this. And it was enjoyable cataloguing the differences between this version and the original--for example, in this version, the female lead is actual a strong character with agency, which was nice to see, as that's something that's always bothered me a bit about the original. It's also a bit more high-paced than the original. But at the same time, it kind of foregoes the interesting character development of the original to make way for this high pacedness. The difference in endings also makes this a lot less interesting as a social commentary. Nonetheless: it WAS a fun movie. I won't discount that fact. Oh, and the zombies are cool.

Overall: This is a fun flick, especially for a remake. What makes it decent as a remake is that it doesn't try to maintain the intense seriousness of the original--it has a sense of humor about itself, and in a remake of such a good movie, that kind of fends off bitter comparisons between the two.

Grade: B

The Feast

2008-11-12T07:34:00.003-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: It's a typical weeknight at the local dive bar, that is until a man busts in with tall tales of vicious, man-eating creatures headed their way.

Scariness factor: It's got some high-tension moments, though the humor saps out a lot of the build-up of tension (though not in a bad way)

Gross-Out Factor: Pretty damn high. A dude gets an eyeball pulled out, in full-on, graphic grossness. And that's just one example.

Complaints: Really, I'm hard-pressed to think of any.

High Points: I'd seen this movie at the library dozens of times and thought nothing of it because it looked like a shitty straight-to-video flick. And then I saw it on someone's TOP 100 HORROR MOVIES list. And then I saw it on someone else's TOP 100 HORROR MOVIES list. So I decided perhaps I really needed to check it out. And there's a reason that it made it onto these people's list: It's is a goddamn fun and funny horror flick. I rarely enjoy new horror flicks, but this movie was seriously a blast. It doesn't take itself too seriously, and it also doesn't take the horror genre too seriously, so it's an enjoyable self-deprecating ride. It's high-paced throughout, never a slow moment. The 90 minutes will breeze by with action-packed momentum. It's got strong female characters--in fact, they're the only ones who really seem to have their heads on their shoulders throughout. And they kick ass and explode the "helpless female" horror movie trope. But most importantly, this movie is funny as HELL. I found myself laughing out loud in parts. It sets you up to expect certain things out of it, and then it very cleverly undercuts all of your expectations.

Overall: I really really enjoyed this movie. It is funny, fast-paced, has great special fx, and is surprisingly underhyped. Go check it out. You won't be disappointed.

Grade: A

I KNOW I KNOW I KNOW...

2008-11-10T14:33:00.000-05:00

I owe you all like five reviews.

They're coming. Promise.

Hopefully sometime this week if all goes well.

The Fog (1980)

2008-10-27T13:53:00.003-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A fog rolls into a small fishing town, but it's no normal fog: something lives within it, and it's killing people.

Scariness factor: *fart*

Gross-Out Factor: *fart*

Complaints: I'm sure I'll get yelled at for saying this, but I have NO clue why this gets such rave reviews from folks. It was incredibly boring. And when I realized within the first fifteen minutes of the movie that [kind of spoiler alert] the spooky things within the fog were vengeful pirates, all I kept saying to myself and N-A the whole rest of the movie was: I cannot believe they expect me to be afraid of ghost pirates. =P [/end spoiler alert] This movie was SO slow, and nothing interesting or spooky ever happens.

High Points: Boo.

(Oooh, glowy-eyed pirates,
so scary! *FART*)

Overall: Again: I'm not sure why this movie is held in such favorable regard by horror fans. It is boring and unscary. I don't recommend. However, I will note that my friend Patrick gave it a much more favorable review when he reviewed this movie for this blog years ago, so go check it out if you want a second opinion.

Grade: D

The Strangers (2008)

2008-10-27T13:37:00.002-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A couple returns to the cabin they've rented for the weekend, only to have some young woman scare them in the middle of the night by knocking on the door in search of some unknown friend. This is only the beginning. Soon three different masked figures begin to torment the couple from outside (and inside) their cabin.

Scariness factor: The first 30 minutes of this movie (all "boring back-story" aside) were some of the tensest moments I've seen in a new horror film in a LONG time. And the first time you see one of the masked figures SCARED THE LIVING SHIT OUT OF ME, no lie. It was so well-done and subtle and goddamn fricking spooky.

Gross-Out Factor: There are only two major gross-out scenes, and honestly--they don't show all that much. I can't speak for the unrated version though.

Complaints: My big big big complaint with this movie are the shots of the spooky masked figures where the action of the figures seems to benefit no one other than the viewer. If you don't quite get what I mean, I'm speaking of the moments where one of the victims is unaware that one of the masked figures has walked into view somewhere behind them and yet the masked figure never follows through with any actions that would REQUIRE them walking into the scene in such a way, other than to spook the viewer out. I mean, why would a masked figure, who is trying to torment one of the victims, take the time appear behind them about 50 feet away without ever making their appearance known to the victim and without ever DOING anything else that really EXPLAINS why (outside of the fact that it spooks the viewer out) the masked figure even took the time to walk over there? Also disappointing was the ending. [spoiler alert] The movie would have been infinitely more interesting if they would've ended it MY way, which would've been that the masked tormenters vanish without a trace in the morning, never killing the two victims, and leaving the victims haunted with the knowledge that they killed their own friend when it wasn't necessary since their tormenters just wanted to scare the shit out of them and had no plans to kill them in the first place. [/end spoiler alert]

High Points: Holy crap, the first time they show a masked figure: I swear to god my heart skipped a beat. It was so damn subtle and spooky. The beginning of this movie houses most of the high points. The spookiness of this movie is not from any of the actual violence or chase-scenes that take place. It's from all the moments leading up to these things: the pounding on the doors and the anticipation and the not-knowing what's going on. Once the victims and the masked tormenters meet, it's not quite as scary anymore. But the first 30 minutes or so: good good stuff.

Overall: I'm torn. I thought it was fantastically creepy at the beginning, but the rest was kind of meh. Well-worth sitting through the first 30 minutes though. And although N-A insisted afterwards that the movie was dumb and unscary, he apparently forgot that he spent the first 30 minutes muttering threats at me for making him watch such a freaky movie and hiding his face behind a blanket.

Grade: First 30 minutes: A, Rest of the movie: B

Shivers

2008-10-27T13:19:00.001-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A scientist working at an isolated luxury apartment complex has developed some sort of parasite that reduces human hosts to a primal, orgiastic state of being. When he realizes the horror he has created, he attempts to kill the hosts it has taken root in, but he is just a little bit too late, as the parasite is spreading from person to person like an STD, inducing sex-crazed mania in them all.

Scariness factor: It's not really anything white-knuckle inducing. No sneaky scares.

Gross-Out Factor: It has its moments, but they're very 1970s.

Complaints: The movie was a bit slow. But I mostly think my major complaint was my own fault--I've been wanting to see this since forever, and I only this past week realized it was at a nearby videostore. I'd overhyped it for so long in my head that there's no way it could've ever lived up to the hype.

High Points: Cronenberg's early horror flicks are great fun to watch, and this one--with its overwhelmingly 1970s feel--fits the bill as well. It's creepy at times. Gross at times. Has a parasite that looks disgustingly phallic. And is--like all Cronenberg's horror--infused with a bit of social commentary. The acting is both good and terrible. And the special fx are fun.

Overall: If you like Cronenberg, it's a definite must-see. And if you like 1970s movies, again: a must-see.

Grade: B+

The House on Haunted Hill (1959)

2008-10-22T16:45:00.001-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A husband and wife arrange for a handful of guests to come to a party they are throwing at a haunted house. Any of the guests that make it through the night--alive--will win $10,000.

Scariness factor: I actually must admit--I was pleasantly surprised. I'm not a big fan of older horror movies as they usually are kind of slow and not scary at all. But this definitely had some creepy moments. Some lame moments too. But some creepy moments.

Gross-Out Factor: Minimal and 1950s.

Complaints: The screaming. Dear god. The screaming. Let's just say that I am happy that our female horror victims have finally developed some agency within horror flicks in the past couple decades instead of just standing around helplessly screaming. Over. And over. And over. Without ever running away.

High Points: First off, I've got to mention that the skeleton-attack featured in the picture below CRACKED my shit up because it is SO precisely what The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra was making fun of, and that movie is funny as HELL. All that aside, Vincent Price is in this movie, and he is a creepy weirdo. This movie is also surprisingly shocking at times--at least for the time it was made. It also has some damn creepy moments, again--surprising for the time it was made. Granted, it's dated. But as old horror flicks go, it's definitely a fun one to watch.

Overall: I dug it. It's definitely 1950s, and it may occasionally suffer from slow pacing. But at worst, it'll give you and your friends a good 75 minutes worth of laughter.

Grade: A

Gin Gwai/The Eye (2002)

2008-10-22T16:29:00.002-04:00

Friday the 13, Part 2

2008-10-22T16:17:00.001-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A new camp, adjacent to Camp Crystal Lake of the original Friday the 13th, is prepping to open. Will THESE camp counselors make it out alive?

Scariness factor: I dunno. It's a sequel. I think that may be my response to pretty much everything about this movie actually.

Gross-Out Factor: Nasty, but fun/1980s nasty.

Complaints: It's a sequel. So basically it's just a rehash of the original. And I basically don't make it a habit to watch sequels for that very reason. But Friday the 13th is one of the few series where the actual infamous horror villain isn't the antagonist in the original. So I wanted to finally meet the hockey-masked villain. And yet: still no hockey mask, dammit.

High Points: The special fx were fun in that 1980s-type way.

Overall: Meh. Take it or leave it.

Grade: C

Friday the 13th

2008-10-16T09:01:00.004-04:00

As I am apparently your horror-movie-reviewing bitch ; ), I watched Friday the 13th last night, as requested...

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Camp Crystal Lake is prepping to open again, 20 years after a series of horrific murders. Will the camp counselors make it out alive this time?

Scariness factor: All I have to say is CHI CHI CHI CHI HA HA HA HA CHI CHI CHI CHI HA HA HA HA.

Gross-Out Factor: Pretty high, in that 1980's campy slasher-film-type way.

Complaints: This movie's fun, so I really don't have any. Oh wait! No. The one thing that DROVE me nuts was when the one girl takes elaborate measures to fend off her attacker by stacking and dragging various different objects in front of a door THAT OPENS OUT IN THE OTHER DIRECTION, essentially making all her effort not worth JACK SHIT.

High Points: This movie is great classic 80's slasher film camp. It's creepy and yet funny. It's got bad acting. It's got over-the-top death-scenes that essentially just show off gloriously old-school special fx. It's got a creepy-ass ending. It's gonna a funny as shit ending. *SPOILER: It has one of THE funniest horror movie villains in it: a nearly-elderly woman whose bones you can almost hear creaking whenever she moves and who does a FANTASTICALLY hysterical job of looking crazy while slapping around the Final Girl. Because she of COURSE has to be a slapper, seeing as she is a woman. /END SPOILER* It also has a very young Kevin Bacon in it who looks like he's had every square inch of hair Naired from his body. Seriously: way too much fun.

Overall: A great slasher classic, perfect for the Halloween season.

Grade: A

Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer

2008-10-15T12:38:00.001-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Henry is a serial murderer. There's not any real elaborate plot other than that. He murders. Serially. That is what the plotline is about. So there.

Scariness factor: It's creepy. And disturbing. Not jump-in-your-seat scary, but disturbing scary.

Gross-Out Factor: Pretty high, actually. There was actually a scene in here that kind of turned my stomach, between the sound and the events taking place. Definitely not for the squeamish.

Complaints: It was a well-done movie, so I don't have many. Other than that I don't really know that I enjoy sitting through 90 minutes of serially murdering when it SEEMS realistic. Call me a hypocrite, but I'd take a slightly campy, 1980s slasher film over this one any day. Fun horror rather than disturbing horror.

High Points: This MUST'VE been shocking when it came out. It's very graphic. It's very realistic. It doesn't mince words. The acting (at least by the lead) is well-done. And it has a lot of grittily-filmed and well-done moments. Also, the murder scenes are HORRIFIC. And it has a great final-scene. That was probably my favorite part about this movie. Would I watch it again though? Hell no. It's really quite good for what it is, but what it is is a bit too realistic for my horror tastebuds.

Overall: Gritty and realistic. Also horrific. I can understand in some ways why it's high on people's "Favorite Horror Movies" Lists. But I prefer something a little bit less intense and disgusting and disturbing when I want to entertain myself with horror movies. So I dunno: mixed opinions. I think I'd like to hear what YOU think if you've seen it, so feel free to leave your two cents.

Grade: C? B? Can't decide actually.

Movies I've Rewatched So Far This Season

2008-10-15T12:24:00.000-04:00

Despite the fact that it may not seem like I've been watching that many horror flicks so far this season, I assure you: I have. It's just that several of them I've reviewed before. But I figured it won't do any harm to link back. So these are some of the second-timers I've dabbled in over the past couple weeks...

The Thing

Cursed

Carnival of Souls

So anyone decide yet what they're going as for Halloween? I'm struggling. My impulse is to go as zombie all the time (I mean, who DOESN'T want to dress up as a zombie without the least excuse?). So please: easy suggestions are always welcome.

The Eye (2008)

2008-10-09T06:52:00.010-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A woman, blinded in her youth, becomes the recipient of an eye transplant. As her eyes adjust and she begins to see strange things, she must call into question whether they are just a matter of her brain rewiring itself to understand sight or something to be very very afraid of.

Scariness factor: The original: creepy as hell. (Perhaps I will rewatch this season since it looks like I have yet to review it here). This one: not so much.

Gross-Out Factor: Fairly minimal.

Complaints: We get it, Jessica Alba. You are hot. I am not one of those girls who is so insecure that I'm gonna waste my time snarking about you when really, I'm just secretly jealous of your hotness. I don't even LIKE girls in that way, but I will freely admit that if you came onto me on the subway, I would take you back to my place. In a second. You are luscious and divine. Every boy in the world wants to do you. Most girls probably do too, if they'd just be honest with themselves. All that being said and done, this movie read more like a new "Jessica Alba is Hot" sitcom than it did a good creepy horror flick. Oh, look at how cute Jessica Alba is being so extremely normal! There she is, eating ice cream out of a tub, just like a Regular Girl! So endearing! Oh, look at Jessica Alba as THE world's most HOTTEST blind chick you've EVER seen! Oh, look at Jessica Alba in THE most RIDICULOUS gratuitous shower scene you've ever seen! I must pause here, as this one warrants a bit more commentary. I'm an advocate of the gratuitous shower-scene. It is a fun and silly trope of slasher films, the inexplicable and unnecessary footage of some hot chick showering in the middle of the movie. It always makes me grin. BUT THIS IS NOT A SLASHER FILM. This is a film that was TRYING to be all intense and serious. So good god, people: 90 seconds of a) Alba, muted out by the shower door, her curves and flesh still ABUNDANTLY apparent, and then b) Alba toweling herself off and dressing, WITH INEXPLICABLE CLOSE-UPS ON HER TAUT STOMACH AND OTHER SEXY FLESHY PARTS--unnecessary! Honest to god--there was NO REASON to have this scene in there. None. If there were an award for "THE Most Unnecessary and Gratuitous Shower Scene EVER," this would be taking that baby home IMMEDIATELY. Enough about Alba (though clearly this movie is just a vehicle to show her off for 90 minutes). Moving on to OTHER qualities that make this movie one of the most RIDICULOUS remakes of a truly fantastic film... The special fx blow. The creepy shadow people BLOW (I mean, they fricking look like dark versions of those stupid alien designs that were popular in the '90s):

The therapist: WTF?! He is like THE worst therapist EVER. He basically yells at Alba all through the film--good therapy work, buddy! The scary moments weren't scary at all. The credits have some horribly lame 1980s-esque lame-ass song playing over them. OH! And Alba--of course--saves some dude from getting hit by a fricking bus in the first 2 minutes of the movie. Apparently this is to demonstrate how fine-tuned all her other senses are, but COME ON. Seriously??? SERIOUSLY??? OH! SO ANGRY!

High Points: Getting to watch Jessica Alba look hot. And look absolutely amazing in a really pretty yellow dress at the end of the movie. And that's pretty much it.

Overall: Wow. So so so so bad. If I was like the Incredible Hulk of horror films, I would right now be turning green and bulging out of my shirt with furious anger at having my time wasted like this. GO RENT THE ORIGINAL. Really. THAT is a good and creepy flick that will scare your SOCKS off.

Grade: D

Oh, and PS: Just because you're blind doesn't automatically mean you have cloudy eyes, especially when your eyes were functional and not cloudy before. Fucktards.

The Bad Seed (1956)

2008-10-07T07:45:00.002-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Rhoda is the most perfect little girl in every which way. She likes to wear dresses. She is courteous to adults. She says please and thank you and curtsies when appropriate. Yet, why is it that the people who cross her keep showing up dead?

Scariness factor: This is a 1950s flick, and the scariness is uber-subtle. But it's there. And it's good in the moments it seeps through. But if you're someone who is into horror films for the slasher-flicks, you won't like it.

Gross-Out Factor: Nada.

Complaints: It's slow-moving. It actually didn't bother me too much, but I think for folks looking for fast-paced, slasher-momentum type flicks, this won't please you.

High Points: The little girl in this movie is creepy as hell--you will want to push her down the stairs. The mom is both a terrible actress and a good one. Yet, she is the crux of the movie, along with the little girl. And she does well. This movie, for the time period, is also strangely uncomfortable, especially the last 15 minutes or so, moments which I suspect The Omen no doubt took cues from. There are also many scenes in this movie that seem ahead of its time--like the way the fire and the groundskeeper scene goes down. They very brilliantly choose not to show a minute of the actual groundskeeper but instead keep the camera focused on the mother and her response as the horrific noises of the events taking place fill the soundtrack. This wouldn't be anything surprising in a newer film, but it seems wickedly smart for one from the 1950s. I guess I was just impressed with the subtle nuances of this movie. It is slow-moving, but I can see why it is on many Top 50 Horror Flicks lists, as there IS something really kind of unsettling about it.

Overall: The more and more I think about it, the more and more I like this film. Slow-paced, but unique and clever for the time it was made, and this lends it a scariness above and beyond the typical 1950s horror flick.

Grade: A

Homicidal (1961)

2008-10-07T07:28:00.003-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Emily is a pretty, blond caretaker for Helga, the childhood nanny of Warren, the man Emily is apparently married to. Which is all well and good except that Emily also has an inexplicable penchant FOR STABBING PEOPLE.

Scariness factor: Not so much. Though the stabbing scene is pretty crazy. I *LOVE* that they have a 60 second "Fright Break" though at the climax of the movie, so that you have the option to leave the theater if you're too scared to see the ending. Ha ha ha.

Gross-Out Factor: Very 1960s-ish violence.

Complaints: Just the general complaints of some of these older horror flicks, which is that they can seem more silly than scary. It has its moments though. And it's good camp. I mostly just found myself uninterested in the plot of the movie though--other than to figure out why the hell the lead was so stabby. Oh, also, Warren is the ugliest man EVER. And I couldn't help fixating on it through the whole movie. He also talked like a fool. I am also stupid.

High Points: This movie plot was so weird at times that it was entertaining and creepy. The female lead: also entertaining and creepy. It also reminded me a bit of Repulsion which is far creepier. I feel like I kind of liked it, but then also that it was kind of boring. And I can't so much decide.

Overall: My mom recommended this to me--she said it was ridiculous and silly and her and her brother used to LOVE it when they were little. I agree on most counts--it was entertaining, and campy, and had its moments. But overall, I think I could've gone through life without seeing it and not have felt any enormous loss.

Grade: B-

Salem's Lot (1979)

2008-10-07T07:13:00.001-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: I guess it's something about vampires invading a small New England town, but I hadn't quite gotten to the point invasion.

Scariness factor: Well, seeing as I apparently hadn't gotten to any real scary moments when the dvd crapped out, hard to say. The part with the boy floating by the window was pretty creeps though.

Gross-Out Factor: See scariness factor.

Complaints: That I made it about an hour and 20 minutes into the movie and then the dvd stopped working.

High Points: Boy floating in Window.

Overall: Right now, I can't really give this a fair review since I didn't get to see the whole thing. So perhaps one day I can let you know.

PS. Check out Stephen King in this pic--ha ha ha.

Grade: TBA

The Orphanage (El Orfanato)

2008-09-23T07:30:00.006-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: As a little girl, Laura grew up in an orphanage--as an adult, she returns with her family to the very same orphanage to live. When her child vanishes one day, without even a single clue as to his disappearance, she begins to unearth horrific truths about the orphanage, and about her son's whereabouts.

Scariness factor: Wow. In all honesty: This is the CREEPIEST movie I've seen in YEARS. It's old-school, haunted house, goddamn spooky, jump-in-your-seat-and-turn-all-your-lights-on scary.

Gross-Out Factor: There is only one scene that is sticking out in my head, and it's moreso creeps than gross.

Complaints: None nada nil.

High Points: Spookiest movie I've seen in years. Hand's down. It's so nice to stumble across a horror flick every once in a while where the writer/director just 100% GET it--they understand what makes a horror film spooky. And this is one such film. The acting is FANTASTIC. The story is wonderfully-written. It reminds me of when I used to read the Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark series when I was little--there's that recognition that what is so damn scary about a story is so often that it is unapologetic in the twists and turns it takes, and in the dark ways that it ends itself. There are scenes in here that will TERRIFY the SHIT out of you. And so MANY of them. The scene with the medium is one such example--flawless. And there are a couple other scenes too--which I won't delve into, lest I give them away--where you will be all white-knuckled and realize you're holding your breath. The cinematography is GORGEOUS in here. And the film is subtle--it doesn't overdo ANYthing. It takes tiny steps, and it takes them carefully, and in doing so, it builds up some killer suspense and spookiness. Seriously a fantastic ghost story, one reminiscent of such greats as the original The Haunting.

Overall: How you know a horror film has truly succeeded--later in the night, when you find yourself walking through your apartment with your lights out, you feel that nervous horribleness creep up on you to the point of suffocation, causing you to scurry over and turn your lights on. Truly the best ghost story I've seen in years. I highly highly recommend. Yesterday, I said to add Infection to your list--today, I say: If you can only watch one horror film this Halloween season, fuck Infection. Let it be this one.

Grade: A+

Infection (Kansen)

2008-09-22T11:50:00.005-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: In a small Japanese hospital that is going bankrupt, a horribly understaffed set of doctors and nurses accidentally kill a patient. Simultaneously, another patient that's suffering a horrifying infection is left at the hospital despite the staff insisting he be removed. His infection is an airborne infection and quickly begins to spread among the staff.

Scariness factor: Holy crap. This movie is creepy as FUCK.

Gross-Out Factor: Pretty nasty in parts--think "liquefying bodies" and "nurses attacking themselves with hypodermic needles."

Complaints: Nada. Ok--maybe I didn't 100% understand the end, but the movie was so good that I didn't so much care.

High Points: There is something to be said about Japanese horror films. Right now, Japan and China are putting out some of the best horror films on the market--American horror films pale in comparison. Infection is a case in point. The mood of this movie is creepier than any other I've seen in quite some time. The acting isn't fantastic (a bit over the top at times), but it takes nothing away from the rest of the movie. The music is BEYOND spooky. The old lady seriously SERIOUSLY freaked me the fuck out. The concept of it is not startlingly original, but they MAKE it so with the quality of their movie. The scenes are filmed real spooky. The lighting is real creeps. I could go on and on.

Overall: This movie CREEPED me the hell out. Those of you currently putting together must-see movie-lists for the month of October MUST add this on. You will not be disappointed.

Grade: A

October is Creeping Up...

2008-09-16T12:31:00.001-04:00

How nerdy am I that I've already started prepping my October horror-movie viewing-list?

Nonetheless, you can check it out in my sidebar.

And as always, suggestions are welcome!

Misery

2008-09-03T10:27:00.002-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: The author of the super-popular Misery series has just finished his newest book and is on his way to deliver it for publication when he finds himself in the middle of the blizzard and ends up getting in a car accident. Near death, he just happens to be rescued by a townie who declares herself "his biggest fan." What begins as a seemingly innocent attempt to nurse him back to health evolves into her crazily keeping him captive and forcing him to rewrite a new Misery novel that raises the character back from the dead.

Scariness factor: It's mind-fuck, stalker-type scariness. No ghosts or zombies, this is just about the scariness of people and reality.

Gross-Out Factor: Wow. The one scene: good god my feet. Other than that, I think it's relatively minimal. But for that one scene: watch out!

Complaints: I dunno: I'm one of the few people who's never really had their chin drop over this movie. It's a good movie, but it doesn't blow me away the way it apparently does some people. Even as I'm sitting here now, writing this, I'm thinking to myself: "But why? I mean, all the stuff that's popping into your head about it is GOOD stuff. And you're having a hard time thinking of anything truly unfavorable about it." But really, something about it just bores me a little. Granted though, I rewatched it so that I could perhaps change my opinion on it. And I did. But still: it's not something I'd gushingly recommend. Plus, I think James Caan kind of sucks in it frequently. I mean, mother of god, there were a couple of scenes where watching him made me think, "Dude, did you go to the Soap Opera School of Acting??"

High Points: Kathy Bates. I mean, good god, isn't that why ANYone recommends this movie? The woman is fricking fantastic playing an absolute loon. And convincing. The mood is well done. The timing is well-done. (Again, this is a movie whose success relies on those heavy, nerve-wracking moments of anticipation.) But really, it all comes back to Kathy Bates. She is the reason this movie is so successful.

Overall: It's not my favoritest of movies, but it definitely is good for the type of horror flick it is. And again: see it for Kathy Bates. You've never seen her in a role like this.

Grade: B/B+

Jaws 2

2008-09-03T10:10:00.002-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A new, big ol' man-eating shark has appeared in the town of Amity. What will Chief Brody do this time?

Scariness factor: Anticipation is where the scariness rests in this movie (and the original). However, the tense moments are a mere shadow to those in the original Jaws.

Gross-Out Factor: Rather minimal.

Complaints: Okay. So granted, I watched this as aired on television (which included 8 billion shitty commercials for things like a magic sham which I actually thought was bad-ass sweet but is only sold overseas). Anyways, that's typically not the best environment by which to view a movie. However, it's fricking Jaws 2. Which is presumably not the utmost in fine cinema. So I figured it'd be ok. And I don't think it affected it TOO much. Nonetheless: this movie was lame. The first half was boring as three-day-old pisswater. The second half was at least campy and goofybally (think hand-drawn lightning bolts for the electrocution scene). But even then, I was just like, Um, eat them, Jaws. Do it. It'd spice the movie up some. Again: much of this is probably just due to the general failure of sequels. Especially for a sequel to something as fantastic as the original Jaws (which is actually one of my all-time favorite movies--so it's hard not to be uber-critical about the sequel). There's no way you're even gonna come CLOSE to comparing. Plus, they didn't even have Richard Dreyfuss in it. And the rest of the folks in this sequel are fairly personality-less.

High Points: Campy 1980s-ness. But nothing to write home about.

Overall: I don't know--even as a lover of the camp, I was disappointed. Just rent the original. And if you've already seen it, just rent it again.

Grade: D

Shutter

2008-08-13T08:25:00.004-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A recently married couple is on their honeymoon when they get in a car accident, seemingly running down a woman in the street. The husband is a photographer, and after this series of events, ghost-images start inexplicably showing up on all the pics he and his wife take. Who is the spirit and why is she bothering them?

Scariness factor: Not mind-blowing, but there IS a creepy-ass scene where the husband is trapped in a dark room with the camera-flash going off over and over, only to illuminate someone moving around the room and advancing on him.

Gross-Out Factor: Really quite minimal. Hence the PG-13 rating.

Complaints: This movie had a LOT of gaps in logic. Small things, but things that DROVE ME NUTS nonetheless. And right now I can't think of even one of them, go figure. And yet throughout the whole movie I was like, What?? WHAT??! One example, (which isn't so much an example of gaps in logic as it is of just dumb writing) was *SPOILER ALERT: after the husband endures the trauma of having two of his friends die, one right in front of him, he and his wife are sleeping in bed, and he wakes up from what appears to be a horrible nightmare. His wife's response: (paraphrased) "What? What is it, honey? What's the matter?" My response watching it: "Jesus, you dumb broad. He just had two friends die, and you both are being haunted by a ghost. Um, what do you THINK might be causing him to have nightmares??? How have you even managed to fall asleep in the FIRST place?????" /END SPOILER Also, the ending was a little bit anticlimactic.

High Points: I enjoyed it more than I thought I would (not meaning to imply that you would recommend something shitty Bijoux--I mostly just am not a fan of slick modern Hollywood horror flicks and/or flicks with folks from things like Dawson's Creek in them, heh heh). The scene I mentioned above. Well-done and creepy. I also really like the notion of spirit photography. It always fascinated me when I was little, so it had THAT going for it as well. I also was impressed by the resolve of the wife at the end of the movie--I'm glad they didn't let her slip into a weak, wishy-washy female character.

Overall: Although I wasn't blown away, it DID have a few creepy moments in it. If nothing else, it's good fluff for a rainy afternoon.

Grade: C+

The Toxic Avenger

2008-07-21T08:32:00.002-04:00

I have been remiss with regard to posting recent horror movie reviews. I've been busy, and though I've been watching movies, I haven't felt compelled to review. Today though, I hope to play a wee bit of catch-up. Otherwise I fear that Bijoux will kick my ass. =)

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A nerdy mop-boy at the local health-club has a prank pulled on him by obnoxious jocks that causes him to fall into a nearby vat of toxic waste. He mutates into the Toxic Avenger, taking on the bullies of the town as payback. And when he has a few minutes to spare amidst all the avenging, he romances himself a blind woman.

Scariness factor:Camp, folks. So nil.

Gross-Out Factor: There's a lot of scenes of skulls and stuff getting crushed. But they're moreso fun and campy than gross.

Complaints: This movie has ridiculously over-the-top acting, annoying characters, and complete silliness in it. I mean, it's camp. So that's to be expected. But I found myself fluctuating between finding it really quite funny and finding it really FUCKING ANNOYING. It kinda felt like it was trying too hard. So yeah. That'd be my major complaint. I've never called a movie out for being TOO campy, but if I was going to, this'd be the one. That and I SERIOUSLY could not handle the mop-boy prior to his morph into the Toxic Avenger. I know he was SUPPOSED to be annoying, but MOTHER OF GOD was he annoying.

High Points: This movie is pretty fun and silly. The acting is ridiculously over-the-top. And it's horribly 1980's, from hairdos, to clothing, to music. It's also built itself up a huge cult-following, so there's something to be said for that.

Overall: I dunno. I heart campy films, but I found myself thinking that my life wouldn't be any less fulfilling had I not ever seen this one.

Grade: C+

Ganja & Hess

2008-07-21T08:20:00.003-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: This movie's success doesn't hinge quite so much on a plot-line, but I will give you a brief synopsis anyways. Hess is an archeologist who is stabbed by an infected knife and develops a vampiric need for blood. Struggling to deal with this, he meets his late assistant's wife, and they fall in love. Soon she will learn of his insatiable bloodlust and must figure out what to do.

Scariness factor: This movie is not about the scare. But it is DEFINITELY haunting.

Gross-Out Factor: Minimal. And very 1970s. The blood is crayola red, for example.

Complaints: None. But I *CAN* tell you what some of you who rent this on my recommendation may complain about, and it's that 1) it's slow-moving and not plot-driven at all... it's moreso reliant on the power of the (sometimes disconnected) images rather than any real story, and 2) it's not jump-in-your-seat scary. But that's also not the point of it.

High Points: The back of the dvd declares that Ganja & Hess, "Hailed as one of the great artistic achievements of modern American cinema, [] was the only American film screened during Critics’ Week at the 1973 Cannes Film Festival--where it won a standing ovation. It was literally ahead of its time--so audacious and unique it was all but buried." And it's true: Ganja & Hess is a piece of cinematic history. It's a strange blend of blaxpoitation 1970's films, horror, and gothic themes. There's no horror film that I've seen that's quite like it. As I mentioned, it is not at all plot-driven. Its success is moreso contingent upon the power of its images. The movie uses the vehicle of "vampirism" to comment on addiction, fitting for the drug-soaked time-period. And it's got Duane Jones in it (the lead in Night of the Living Dead who pretty much MAKES that movie) and the woman from Night of the Cobra Woman who, if nothing else, is GORGEOUS to look at. You won't like it if you go in expecting something high-paced and horror/actiony. But if you rent it expecting to see something cinematically unique and strangely haunting, you may enjoy.

Overall: I thought it was quite haunting (and terrifying in moments). Again: it's like nothing you've ever seen. But rent it only if you're in the mood for slow, disorienting, imagistic, commentary-like horror.

Grade: A

The Invasion

2008-07-21T07:52:00.002-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: In Washington, a strange epidemic seems to be spreading--perfectly sane people are becoming convinced that their friends/lovers are no longer themselves. What is happening to them? And can it be stopped?

Scariness factor: So-so.

Gross-Out Factor: Crap--I can't remember. I don't think so though. I mean, it's PG-13.

Complaints: How many more times can they remake Invasion of the Body Snatchers without it just seeming kind of ridiculous? I mean, this movie wasn't BAD. But it wasn't particularly GOOD. And, I'm sorry to say, nothing beats the creepy screams and RIDICULOUSLY creepy ending of the 1978 version (see youtube clip below--warning though: it does ruin the end of the film, so only watch if you've already seen it).

High Points: I can't really think of any. I mean, it was creepy. And white-knuckle-inducing on OCCASION. But not consistently.

Overall: Take it or leave it. Squeaky-clean Hollywood horror.

This is the end of the movie, so don't watch it if you
don't want the biggest spoiler of them all

Grade: C

Shuang Tong (Double Vision)

2008-05-29T12:16:00.001-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: People are being killed in ways that seem impossible: a man drowns in his office with not a drop of water nearby, a woman perishes from horrific burns, despite there not being a flame in sight. When investigators begin to delve deeper into the murders, they discover that perhaps someone with a desire for immortality is behind these strange events.

Scariness factor: Not so much.

Gross-Out Factor: There's some knife-slitting going on during a few sections of the movie.

Complaints: Ack. Two movies in a row with David Morse in them. Why is it that just LOOKING at him irritates me SO VERY VERY MUCH? Again: as with Disturbia, he was perfectly fine in this movie. So I don't know why I loathe him so much. Other than that, I was mostly just indifferent to this movie. It wasn't anything special, but it wasn't anything terrible either. It was just ok.

High Points: The double-pupil eyeball effect was really pretty creeps. I dug it. Other than that: indifference.

Overall: Yeah, I wouldn't go out of my way to recommend it. But then again, I wouldn't discourage you from seeing it either. It was tepid. That's the long and short of it.

Grade: C

Disturbia

2008-05-20T13:12:00.003-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: After punching his Spanish teacher in the mouth, our teenage lead finds himself stuck in his house for three months on house arrest. To cope with boredom, he starts spying on his neighbors, particularly (and of course) a super-hot neighbor who just moved in. When he notices one of his neighbors pulling a car into his garage that matches a car involved in a kidnapping, he begins to suspect him of murder.

Scariness factor: I've gotta admit, as teeny-boppery as this film was, it had good pacing and its tense moments were really quite tense.

Gross-Out Factor: Very minimal.

Complaints: This was uber-teeny-boppery. I'm not even sure whether to complain about that really, because it was clear from the get-go that this is the audience the movie was marketed towards. And you know what? I'm totally cool with that. (But yeah, if you're NOT a teeny-bopper, some of the style may grate on your nerves rather quickly. Particularly some of the annoyingly-emo music choices.) The acting is fairly generic. The characters are fairly generic. And, do not ask me why, but I have an inexplicable hatred of the dude who played the bad guy. (Though I will say, he wasn't too bad in this.) It was also a bit too pretty and squeaky-clean for my horror movie tastes.

High Points: Normally it irritates me when they modernize good classic suspense/horror films. Especially fricking Hitchcock of all people. (I mean, seriously--what WAS the deal with that Psycho remake??) BUT I actually think that, if you're gonna try modernizing a classic, Rear Window is actually a pretty smart choice. Thematically, the focus on voyeurism and paranoia is bumped up a notch in intensity and meaning when you factor in all the technological advances since the original film was made. I mean, you've got fricking KIDS with their own computers, cell phones, video cameras, etc. All this easy access to information, all this easy access to pinning things down on camera, all this easy access to posting whatever you want on-line, well, it kind of DOES lend to a scary voyeurism and paranoia. And in that regard, I think a remake of Rear Window was not too bad a choice. *HOWEVER* (and there's always a however), I'm conflicted about whether it could've been done tons better. I'm a fan of grittier, less slick horror films, and I wish this film would've had more of that kind of feel to it. *BUT* then again, the style of the movie was actually kind of fitting for the subject matter--sleek and shiny and pretty and modern and, well, teeny-bopperish. So yeah, I'm torn. The one other thing I liked about this movie was its pacing. I was surprised at how tense it left me. And it was pretty fast-moving throughout--it rarely dragged.

Overall: I'm torn. This isn't necessarily the type of movie to write home about (not that you would ANYWAYS, because who the hell writes home about movies??), but I must admit, I enjoyed it for what it was worth. 90 minutes of enjoyable, suspenseful fluff.

Grade: B-

The Mist

2008-05-12T07:43:00.001-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: After a tremendous storm, a strange and inexplicable mist rolls in on a small town. A group of folks find themselves trapped in the local grocery store, fighting for their lives against the strange things inhabiting the mist.

Scariness factor: I jumped really hard in one scene. So yay for that.

Gross-Out Factor: Again, medium...

Complaints: We all knew this was coming, but my major complaint, of course, is the CGI. I was actually pleasantly surprised that I liked this movie so much, especially since I knew it was going to be heavy with CGI. But yeah: the CGI was lame in parts. I mean: do you really need to CGI mist rolling in?? I mean, is it really necessary? Especially if someone can fricking TELL it's CGI-ed? I also sort of wish they would've kept the "creatures" in the mist a little bit more mysterious. Granted, the Stephen King novella doesn't really do so. But I guess I would've still preferred it over lame CGI. Plus, some of the beings they CGI-ed I was kind of like, what? WTF kind of creature IS this? I mean, we've got spiders. Which are spiders. But then we've got weird pincer-creatures that don't seem to be a part of nature. So what's the deal? Also, I was a bit irritated that they explained away the mist so lamely. I mean, I think in the novella (it's been awhile since I've read it but) they MENTION that it could be related to goverment-stuff, but they never concretize it. I think that's what always kind of creeped me out: that you never really KNEW why the hell the mist rolled in or what it was due to.

High Points: Marcia Gay Harden was actually quite creepy and good in this. I loved to hate her character, and she added a bit of maniacal credibility to the film with her performance. I also really kind of liked the ending, despite the fact that it strayed dramatically from the ending of the novella. It really quite caught me off-guard, and it was terrible and horrifying and shocking and kind of interesting in that regard. I was actually, overall, surprised that I enjoyed this film as much as I did. I was extremely skeptical since "The Mist" has been one of my favorite Stephen King stories since I was little. So I figured there was no way in hell I was going to like it. But they did a pretty decent job with it and the sense of impending doom. I also knew that the CGI was gonna irritate the piss out of me, but it didn't bother me quite so much as I expected (probably because I went in prepared for it).

Overall: I was pleasantly surprised by this film. Much creepier (and with a strangely unsettling and kind of ballsy ending) than expected. Thanks for the recommendation, Bijoux!

Grade: B

Diary of the Dead

2008-05-12T07:27:00.003-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A bunch of college students are making a film out in the woods when news comes through that the dead are returning back to life. The filmmaker involved in the student film can't resist taking advantage of the strange events by documenting them with his camera.

Scariness factor: Eh. Nothing special.

Gross-Out Factor: Medium. Either that or I'm just finally getting immune to it.

Complaints: Ok yeah. The whole "happening to be filming something when bad horror-movie shit goes down that you catch, coincidentally, on film" motif has gotten old old old. Mostly because NOBODY manages to do it well. Diary of the Dead was, alas, no exception. Here's my problem: I hate the self-consciousness of it. Just fucking do it. Don't keep having characters explain why it is that the stupid idiot supposedly "filming" continues to film through the whole course of the events that take place. Just do it. Otherwise I end up wanting to punch you in the throat every five minutes. Now granted, Romero's movie was a commentary ON media, so I understand that these weren't just the average "justification of why the main character would be filming instead of helping a friend who's getting killed"-type moments. But even so, the commentary in this movie was RIDICULOUSLY heavy-handed, especially for Romero. I mean, sweet jesus, the characters explain like 1500 times throughout the movie that it all IS a commentary on the media. And to me, well, don't keep TELLING me that. Just SHOW me for god's sake. Let the events speak to it instead of getting paranoid that no one's gonna get it and inserting in a bunch of characters and narration to heavy-handedly explain it to me.

High Points: It's got zombies in it.

Overall: Yeah, I dunno. It was too clumsy of a commentary on the media, and the self-consciousness of the documentary-style got old really quickly. (I mean, who REALLY REALLY would choose to keep filming instead of helping out a friend getting attacked. I mean, REALLY??) Chalk it up as a take-it-or-leave-it film.

Grade: C

Teeth

2008-04-11T07:25:00.004-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Dawn believes in purity and saving herself for marriage. But something's not quite right down below, and when a cute boy gets a little bit too friendly with her one day, all hell breaks loose.

Scariness factor: Wow. I mean, it's not jump in your seat scary. But your genitals will definitely definitely tremble with horror.

Gross-Out Factor: I'm not generally too squeamish of a person. But my stomach did flip-flops once or twice. Definitely definitely high. But delightfully so.

Complaints: Not a one.

High Points: Where to even begin? This movie is one of the best horror flicks I've seen in a while. Unlike Rob Zombie, the filmmaker really gets horror movies, and because of this, is able to turn every little aspect of the teen horror film on its head. The trailer itself is its own little piece of brilliance. (You can watch it above.) And the movie lives up to the expectations. Perhaps even goes BEYOND them. It's well-written. It's got good actors. And, above all else, it is really goddamn funny. But the kind of funny where you're moaning through the laughter because you know you SHOULDN'T be laughing but you just. can't. help. it. It's also wickedly smart because, right when you figure out where it's going with a scene and start thinking to yourself, Oh no--there's no way they're gonna do that because that's just so so so very disturb--OH NO THEY JUST WENT AHEAD AND DID IT! Right when you think it's not gonna go there, it does. 100%. And unapologetically. And it's WONDERFUL in that regard. It also will have all you female horror movie fiends completely geeked out because it inverts most every gender-expectation in a horror film. Instead of rampant female nudity, it's guys guys guys. We get to see WAY more of them then we probably would ever want to see. And, well, given the subject matter, the female lead DEFINITELY has agency.

Overall: Vag-clenchingly good. In every which way, this movie is fresh and delightful. It is clever and hysterically funny. And it's that wonderful kind of funny where you know it's just so wrong to be laughing but YOU JUST CAN'T HELP IT.

Grade: A+... Get thee to the video store

30 Days of Night

2008-03-25T16:06:00.002-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A small Alaskan town, cut off from from the rest of the state, battens down for the upcoming 30 days of night that strikes Alaska every year. A gang of vampires takes advantage of the lack of sunlight and terrorizes the town.

Scariness factor: Admittedly, it's spooky in a part or two.

Gross-Out Factor: Pretty high in parts, but it's a vampire flick, for pete's sake. So you've gotta expect blood.

Complaints: Where to begin. Why are the vampires there? Where do they come from? Why are they bilingual? Why do they appear to be unable to close their mouths? Why do they eat everybody up so quickly instead of pacing themselves better? Why fear leaving survivors because "people might find out that you really exist" when there's already people that believe in you, and really, how would that knowledge be threatening to the vampire race anyways? Why do they talk so slowly? Seriously. Do you know how long I've been waiting to see this stupid movie because the previews made it look kind of understated and creepy and didn't really SHOW that much of the actual vampires? Quite some time, let me tell you. Needless to say, I was really kind of disappointed. I'm willing to suspend my disbelief about no vampire back-story explaining why they're there IF the movie was creepy enough that it distracted me from this hole in the plot. But it wasn't. (And don't even give me the whole "Well, it explains it in the graphic novel, so you just need to read that first" crappola because A MOVIE SHOULD WORK ON ITS OWN, even if based on a book.) I'm not a fan of Josh Hartnett. I like Ugly-Tooth Outsider in Six Feet Under a whole lot, but his character was *LAME* in here. The lead vampire I found to be alternately very creepy and very annoying. And the acting was no good. And THE FRICKING SNOW looked CGI-ed, for christ's sake.

High Points: The vampires look visually creepy. I kind of liked their weird faces. And I like the PREMISE of the movie: the oddity of Alaska's 30 days of night is worth creating a decent movie around. It's strange and lovely. And definitely vampire worthy. But they most DEFINITELY didn't take advantage of it as much as they could've.

Overall: *Pouting*

Grade: D

The Strangers

2008-03-12T16:51:00.003-04:00

Ooh yay! Creepy-looking upcoming movie alert. Due out on May 30, 2008.

I'm not a fan of Liv Tyler, but it DOES get bonus points for somehow managing to make a Joanna Newsom song sound super-creepy.

The Hitcher (2007)

2008-03-11T12:24:00.001-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A couple of college kids head out on a road-trip for spring break. Along the way they make the mistake of offering a ride to a man whose car has broken down. When they realize that he is psychotic, they manage to get rid of him. But not for long.

Scariness factor: It's a bit white-knuckly in parts.

Gross-Out Factor: One of the more climactic scenes is pretty nasty. Other than that, it's mostly just shoot 'em ups and neck-slittings.

Complaints: Too slick. Like all the remakes of today, they just aren't quite so rough around the edges as the originals. They're a bit more glossied up (including the shitty music). And they just don't feel quite so gritty. The original was definitely better, though it wasn't one of my absolute favorite movies either really. And I prefer Rutger Hauer to the dude who plays the bad guy here. He's not BAD, and creepy in his own respect. But not QUITE so creepy. That and there weren't as many good car-chase scenes.

High Points: There's a good cop-car chase-scene midway through that sucked me into it. But that was about it. And the climactic/shocking moment towards the end of the movie was pretty sweet and caught me off guard. (Apparently I am senile because I don't remember this scene ending the same way at all in the original, which maybe was a good thing since it DID shock me.) It did keep my attention though for the 90 minutes. And I didn't want to go on a stabbing-spree like after I saw the Halloween remake.

Overall: Not particularly good. Not particularly bad.

Grade: C

Halloween (2007)

2008-03-05T16:09:00.005-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: We get the same plot-line as the original, infinitely better version of this movie, 'cept with a) a lot more back-story, and b) a lot of minor, unnecessary changes.

Scariness factor: Infuriating. Because the original scares my f-ing pants off. But this one I found myself ho-humming through. Not once was I white-knuckled like in the original.

Gross-Out Factor: Way more violent than necessary.

Complaints: Oof. Where to even begin? If you're gonna remake a classic movie, a movie that is in the f-ing CANON of most-worshipped horror flicks, then you better do a GOOD stinking job. And this was most definitely not the case. As I've said on several prior occasions, I *WANT* to like Rob Zombie, but dude: for someone who loves horror movies so much, HOW DO YOU NOT GET WHAT MAKES THE GOOD ONES SO VERY VERY GOOD? I mean, this remake seems to have misunderstood EVERY aspect of the first one that makes it scary. For example: Mike Myers wasn't ENORMOUS in the original. He was average-sized. And that's part of what made him scary. He was just like any one of us and yet seemingly INVINCIBLE in his destructive capabilities. Also, the very minor "backstory" we get in the original is also what lends to Mike Myer's spookiness. In the original, we are met with a stereotypical, squeaky-clean type suburban family, so when Mike Myers walks out of the house with a bloody knife in his hand and raises his mask to reveal an adorable little boy, we are SHOCKED and HORRIFIED. The disparity between the quiet, squeaky-clean perfection of suburbia/the picturesque boy, and the horrific events that just transpired is what gives that moment so much punch. In the remake, Mike Myers comes from a home where anyone in their right mind would feel the urge to stab up most of their family. (And a sidenote with regard to that: is it just me, or does anyone else, upon watching a Rob Zombie flick, just feel RIDICULOUSLY bad for the man? I mean, every time I see one, I think to myself, if THIS is how you see families in the real world, you must've had SUCH a terrible childhood. His films (and families) are just so completely inundated with the ugliness of humanity. And that's something that completely turns me off from them as well.) And of course, this movie didn't have ANY scariness propelling it forward. I didn't feel tense the whole time like I do with the original. Also infuriating is that Laurie Strode has been reduced down from a strong female character in the original film, one who is able to take on Mike Myers, rescue the kids she is baby-sitting for, etc., to a screaming, sniveling, helpless female who is barely able to take care of herself. I know at some point someone's gonna read this and think, "You need to just judge the movie as it stands and stop comparing it to the original." But I'm sorry: if you're gonna have the balls to try to take something already near-perfect and think you can make it better, then you DESERVE to be burdened with comparisons.

High Points: Really not much, other than I thought Malcolm McDowell was a good choice to play Sam Loomis, and there were a couple nice shots nuzzled in there. But even with that, I think I'm just grasping at straws.

Overall: SOOOOOO very much not worth your while.

Grade: F

Dracula (1992)

2008-02-19T15:06:00.005-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Jonathan Harker is a lawyer sent to Europe to take over the job of a previous lawyer who has gone mad. Upon arriving in Europe, he quickly finds out why. He is imprisoned by Dracula, the man whose services he is under. Dracula in turn realizes that Harker's wife is his own lost-love returned and begins to take steps to get her back.

Scariness factor: It has its spooky moments.

Gross-Out Factor: Chopped off heads. Many of them.

Complaints: I *adored* this movie in high school. I was a bit smitten with the whole vampire-mystique, and I still find it tremendously sexy. However, watching this again, it seems so very DATED to me. Perhaps this is because Keanu Reeves and Winona Ryder are in it, and it makes me feel like I'm back in the days of Bill & Ted and Reality Bites, but I'm not quite sure. Nonetheless, it just seemed a bit silly to me at points. Presumably Francis Ford Coppola was trying to capture some of the mood of older Dracula/vampire movies with silly things like eyes in the sky or shadows moving around unaccompanied by their masters. But it just felt SILLY most of the time. Which was disappointing to me. Plus: seriously: Winona Ryder and Keanu Reeves are just SO not good in this movie. Watching Keanu Reeves is like watching a cardboard cut-out of himself PLAYING himself. And Winona Ryder is like watching every other character she's played, but this time wearing big floofy dresses and talking with a weird accent. I *will* say that I may be a bit harder on this movie than I normally would be, simply because I held this movie so close to my heart in high school and it just didn't live up to what I remember, so take that as you will. (I still suspect I will have some of you yell at me for rating it so low.)

High Points: Gary Oldman. Bless his heart. I adore the man, and with good reason. He is one of the only actors in this movie that makes it believable. He is sexy. And creepy. And hideous. And he's actually able to pull off the "aging face-makeup" that they used on him to make him look ancient. (On the other hand, they thought, for some reason, that just putting some wholly artificial gray in Keanu Reeves' hair would age him--instead it just makes him look like an even BIGGER jack-ass.) Oldman also manages to pull off a fake Transylvanian accent, which kept making me think, "Yeah, I buy it." He is the only thing in this movie that feels like it's aged well and hasn't become representative of the '90s. Oh, and there ARE some sexy vampiric moments, so that was nice. But I don't know if it made up for Keanu Reeves and Winona Ryder.

Overall: Watch it. Don't watch it. Do as you will.

Grade: C+

Horror Movie Night at Visible Voice Books...

2008-02-14T13:41:00.001-05:00

This past weekend, Visible Voice Books, the bookstore down the street from me, showed a bug-related horror-movie double-feature in their screening room, and I went to check it out. They ended up with a little over half a dozen people and, thankfully, the perfect crowd: folks who like to make snide comments throughout the film but thankfully were FUNNY. (I've run into some viewings where the folks making comments weren't funny. At all. And that can really make or break a campy movie.)

For more information about the movies we watched, read on...

Squirm

2008-02-14T13:39:00.002-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: When a "city-slicker" comes to town to visit his girl, he finds out he may have bitten off more than he can chew. He immediately makes enemies with the sheriff, only to find out that, even worse, all the worms in town have become electrified and are now killing people, and he and his girl have no one to turn to for help.

Scariness factor: Glorious glorious campy scariness.

Gross-Out Factor: Worms. Burrowing into flesh. That's about the extent of it.

Complaints: None.

High Points: This was the most glorious, campy horror-movie gem I've seen in quite sometime. The main characters are terrible actors. The characters themselves are ridiculously silly but awesome. Every tense worm-related attack-scene involves stock footage of close-ups of worms, accompanied by shrill screaming noises. The movie makes little to no sense (just like most gloriously wonderful campy films). The special fx are SO ridiculous. The scenes with mass-quantities of attacking worms will have you laughing out loud. And since worms are like the LEAST threatening thing that could possibly attack a person, you KNOW it's got to be a good film.

Overall: If you can find it, rent it with a group of friends, and laugh your asses off.

Grade: A (camp)

Kingdom of the Spiders

2008-02-14T13:35:00.004-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Livestock starts turning up dead in a small town, with no indication of what's killing them. After some scientific investigations, it's concluded that spider venom is the cause of their deaths. As Shatner and his goons look further into the puzzling source, they stumble across hundreds of enormous spider-hills. Shortly after, the spiders begin to attack humans. Shatner must save them all.

Scariness factor: *snark*

Gross-Out Factor: You DO get to see a hand blown off with a gun which was pretty sweet. But other than that, fairly low-key.

Complaints: Even campy movies can be bad. In this case, Kingdom of the Spiders was a bit too slow for its own good. Even if the point of watching the movie is to make fun of it, you still want it to move quickly. This film did not. Also a bit disconcerting about this movie was the fact that I think it may have been filmed before animal-protection laws, so I think a lot of the spiders (which appeared to be tarantulas) were actually getting smashed. All of us watching it were a bit appalled by that fact.

High Points: It had William Shatner as the lead, so I of course expected some juicy campy goodness. And Shatner thankfully lived up to his name, swaggering around the screen and making passes at lady doctors. The movie also had lots of pretty damn funny moments, from a woman shooting off her hand to get a spider off her, to Shatner being attacked by hundreds of spiders. Good stuff. It also was COMPLETELY devoid of any sort of logic, which was enjoyable as well. And Shatner's a total slut. But again: unfortunately it was kind of slow-moving, otherwise this would've been another gem.

Overall: If you like to make fun of Shatner, definitely check it out. Otherwise, you could take it or leave it.

Grade: C (camp)

Joshua

2008-02-14T12:59:00.003-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Joshua is a little boy who just doesn't fit in with the rest of the kids. When his mom has a new baby, Joshua's habits seem to get stranger. And then the baby won't stop crying, and Joshua's mom becomes a bit unraveled. What will happen to the family?

Scariness factor: It's definitely not jump-in-your-seat scary, but it leaves you in a constant state of uneasiness, wondering what's going to happen next.

Gross-Out Factor: Nil.

Complaints: Honestly, I really quite liked this movie except for the very final scene (which was probably the last three minutes of the movie). The final scene I thought kind of took the punch out of the crescendo of the rest of the movie. Like I wanted something MORE, or something DIFFERENT, or SOMETHING. I was sort of just left wondering what the hell.

High Points: As I mentioned, I really enjoyed this movie quite a bit (thanks, Bijoux, for recommending it). I was a bit concerned because immediately, when it's a movie about a little dark-haired child, it's hard not to think The Omen (which is a lot to live up to), but the movie set my mind at ease about that--it doesn't feel like it's trying to cling to the same sort of themes that are in the other film. What was so chilling about this movie was how understated everything is. And how you're never quite sure what's happening. I didn't read anything about the movie before seeing it, so I was never quite sure what direction it was about to head off in: "Is the mom insane?" "Is there something wrong with Joshua?" Etc. And when things finally start to fall apart, even THAT becomes chilling because you're NEVER QUITE SURE until the very end. And the second to last scene is AWESOME and HARROWING and CHILLING, again, all in a strange and understated sort of way: you don't know whether to be horrified by Joshua or horrified by his dad. (Sam Rockwell plays the dad, btw, and he's awesome in it--but I tend to like him anything--which makes the movie feel that much more believable.) I mean seriously, all in all, if it weren't for the last three minutes of the movie, I think I would've been rather impressed. But unfortunately the last three minutes exist, but what can you do?

Overall: Boo the ending, but rent it for the rest of the film. Just don't expect high-paced action or scares. It's very quiet and understated, but that's what's so chilling about it.

Grade: B+

We All Scream for Ice Cream

2008-02-05T09:34:00.000-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A man returns to his home-town with his family, only to find that the town (and his childhood gang of friends) are being haunted by a creepy-clown ice-cream man that they'd done wrong to. If the child of one of the aforementioned men bites into the "special ice cream" that the creepy clown ice-cream man is selling, their father melts into a puddle of ice cream.

Scariness factor: Not so much. I just kept thinking, seriously: that little ice cream jingle? Moreso irritating than scary.

Gross-Out Factor: The people die by melting into ice cream, so for the most part, not too gross. Though there IS one inexplicable slow-melting-of-flesh scene that could make one a bit squeamish.

Complaints: The movie wasn't terrible, it just wasn't anything amazingly impressive. The acting is fairly cardboard. The plot-line is a little bit weird and farfetched: Did the boys never get punished for killing somebody? Why does no one else seem to notice the ice cream truck that comes in the night accompanied by billowing clouds of smoke? And it just really wasn't that spooky. I tend to think that if YOU as the viewer wouldn't be threatened by the situation if placed in the movie (which, in this case, we wouldn't, since we weren't a member of the boy-gang that killed the ice cream man), it's hard to feel quite so threatened by the events taking place. The worst part, however, of the whole movie was the stupid repetition of the trying-to-be-creepy "I scream, You scream, We all scream for ice cream" jingle.

High Points: The first scene where you realize that the people die by melting into a pool of ice cream was pretty damn sweet--I dug the special fx in it. There were also a few decent campy moments, though pretty few and far between.

Overall: It's a short flick--only 60 minutes--so if you're intrigued by the notion of death-by-ice-cream, then you should check it out. Otherwise, if you don't ever end up seeing it, it won't be too big a loss.

Grade: C

Black Sheep (2006)

2008-02-05T09:07:00.000-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A young man with a sheep-phobia returns to New Zealand to sell-out his half of the family farm to his brother. However, while he's home, something strange goes wrong with the country sheep and they begin to brutally attack and kill people.

Scariness factor: Impressively tense at moments--who'da thunk that sheep could be so damn creepy?

Gross-Out Factor: Pretty violent in parts, but sometimes a bit campily so.

Complaints: Nil.

High Points: I actually really enjoyed this movie much more than I was expecting. Not only did it somehow manage to make sheep really damn spooky, it also managed to balance this spookiness with a really damn enjoyable sense of humor. Even just the picture below makes me laugh out loud remembering the scene from which it's been cut. Little jabs at environmentalism and vegetarianism also popped up occasionally and actually had me laughing out loud because of the timing. And the sight of hundreds of killer sheeps barrelling down a hill towards unsuspecting victims also had me cracking up because it was so absurd and funny-looking and yet somehow rather terrifying. The special fx were also BRILLIANT and old-school which really impressed me quite a bit. There was probably some CGI snuck in there, but if there was, it was very skilled CGI because I wasn't able to pick any moments of it out. Otherwise, the transformation scenes of people into sheep as well as the attack scenes were awesomely old-school and VERY masterfully done. Think of some of the classic werewolf-transformation scenes, and you've got Black Sheep, except this time with sheep instead of werewolf shape-shifting. The acting was also the exact perfect combination of good and yet slightly over-the-top.

Overall: I really thought this movie rocked. It was both scary and yet had me laughing really hard at the absurdity of the sheep-plot as well as at the fact that they somehow managed to do such a good job at making sheep scary. If you can get your hands on it, do so. One of the better horror flicks I've seen in a while.

Grade: A

When a Stranger Calls (1979)

2008-01-30T07:05:00.000-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A young woman is babysitting two children when she starts receiving phone calls from an anonymous man. When she realizes that he can see her and what she's doing, she calls the police. If you've ever heard the babysitter urban-legend before, you'll know where it goes from there. Seven years later, the crazy man who delivered all the phone calls has escaped from the mental institution. A PI is hired out by the father of the previously mentioned children to track him down.

Scariness factor: The first 10 minutes were great. I even knew what was coming, but they still did a good job. The rest of the movie was hit or miss.

Gross-Out Factor: Absolutely nil.

Complaints: I could never quite decide whether I thought the villain was creepy and spooky or just plain lame. And although the first 10 minutes of the movie were damn good, it sort of winded itself after that and never quite managed to achieve that nerve-wracking pace again.

High Points: The first 10 minutes. Also, the 1970s-ish quality of the movie is fun as well, but then again, I'm a sucker for 1970s movies.

Overall: I am at a loss as to whether or not to recommend. It was no means bad, but it also didn't leave me with any huge voracious desire to ever see it again. So I guess, if you're bored one day, it wouldn't be a waste of your time. But then again, if you never ever see it, your life won't be meaningless.

Grade: B-

Blade

2008-01-30T06:54:00.001-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Blade is half-man, half-vampire, and his goal is to eradicate the vampire race.

Scariness factor: It has some fast-paced tense moments. If I didn't hate Stephen Dorff and think him the epitome of lameness, that would've probably helped in this regard as well.

Gross-Out Factor: Most of the grossness is CGI, and thus, not so gross, in my opinion.

Complaints: I really liked it until the end decided to gunk itself up with a whole bunch of lousy CGI. Remember how when you were little and watched the bad Nazi-guys die in Indiana Jones in that whole "melting like a candle"-type way, and it scared you to your very core and you couldn't stop thinking about it for like days? Well, there's a reason for that: you can do lots of creepy stuff without CGI. And it looks better. Because it actually LOOKS kind of realistic instead of looking clearly computer-animated. Case-in-point is the demise of one of the vampires at the end which, since it's integral and climactic to the movie, should've been bad-ass and terrible but really just ended up being laughable because it was so obviously computer-animated (not to mention that it was just sorta SILLY how he died). Other complaint: Stephen Dorff. What is that boy's deal? Seriously? He irritates the sin out of me. An obligatory aside to Stephen Dorff: You are not hot. Neither are you bad-ass. You are a pasty, skinny, Casper-ish white-boy, who doesn't have enough body-hair or muscle (or the general unaffected bad-assness of, say, Johnny Depp) to pull off all the cock and swagger you're toting around. If *I* were a vampire hunter, I could easily pin you to the ground and flick your ears until you started crying like a little girl and begging to be staked. Just because you suck on a cigarette and fail to button up your shirts does not make you cool.

High Points: I really kind of liked the first half of the movie. The blood stuff was sexy. The Blade-sucking-on-hot-doctor scene was beyond overtly sexual. The dancing-in-blood was fun. The action was decent (if far-fetched, but that's to be expected for an action movie). Some of the death-scenes were fun. I kind of liked Kris Kristofferson's character. And Blade was bad-ass.

Overall: The ending really kind of made me mad because it sucked dry all the goodness and excitement of the beginning half. CGI BE DAMNED! Nonetheless, it made for an entertaining 90 minutes, and obviously, if you're a fan of vampire-flicks, it's a definite must.

Grade: B-

Cloverfield

2008-01-22T07:39:00.001-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Something is happening in NYC, and no one's quite sure what to make of it. A group of friends happen to catch the events on film as they take place.

Scariness factor: It has a few tense moments, but they are fewer and farther between than one might think.

Gross-Out Factor: Minimal.

Complaints: The characters were a bit irritating in the way that characters from The Blair Witch Project also got complained about--I think a lot of it's just the nature of setting up the story as though the characters are the ones filming it. The logic of the movie doesn't make sense at times, at least for a film that's trying to be a fake-documentary-style movie. For example, when four of the characters retreat into a subway station for safety, THEY ARE THE ONLY PEOPLE IN THE STATION. Which is *really* goddamn difficult to buy in a city so packed-full of folks: That station would be JAMPACKED with people trying to take cover. So fah on that. The movie's not as high-paced and tense as I'd expected. It sort of is, but sort of isn't. The mystery behind what's going on in the city isn't all that interesting, especially since it's never explained (I couldn't decide whether I *liked* this fact or whether it was a too easy cop-out on the part of the film's writers). And I really had a hard time buying the fact that the video-camera lasted as long as it did, especially through the end of the movie. (I also had a hard time believing that the folks with the video camera would continue to make such a concerted effort to film everything the whole time.) Oh, and the camera-work will easily get you feeling seasick, you may want to take some dramamine before watching.

High Points: The video-camera usage *was* sort of interesting. It lent to the excitement of not seeing EXACTLY what was going on when it was going on, which lent the movie a LITTLE bit of spookiness at least. And I actually liked the framing of the ending of the film. Perhaps it wasn't unexpected, but it was kind of nice.

Overall: I could take or leave this movie. If you *DO* have some urge to see it, it's definitely something you'd want to catch in the theaters though, because I don't think it'll be quite so visually interesting on dvd.

I have also been urged to note that my friend MC (whom I went to see the movie with and who had been looking forward to seeing the movie for weeks) hated the movie to the point of anger, so much so that he very emphatically (and repeatedly) told me that I need to make sure I quote him in all his hatred of the film while reviewing it, that way people can understand what a horrible film it was and avoid it--so I quote:

"My hatred for the movie Cloverfield burns with the passion of a 1,000 suns." -- MC

So there you have it. Two reviews for the price of one.

Grade: C

Evil Dead II

2008-01-15T08:28:00.000-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Ash (lone survivor of the original Evil Dead) is back in the cabin where all the demonic craziness went down, and finds himself battling demons yet again, this time with the professor's daughter.

Scariness factor: It's spooky, in a going-crazy-type way (with a little peppering of campiness thrown in for good measure).

Gross-Out Factor: Not quite so much pus as in the original, but it still has its campy gross-out moments.

Complaints: The ONLY thing that bothers me about this movie is why Ash is back at the cabin. I mean, you had a REALLY bad time the first time around. All your friends got killed off. You battled demons. So why the hell go back again?

High Points: This Evil Dead film marks the dawning of the Ash we all know and love. We get to see the transformation from the meek Ashely to the bad-ass, chainsaw-arm, shotgun-wielding, one-lining Ash, and boy is it fun. Seriously: this film is all Bruce Campbell. I mean, I'd say 80% of the movie consists of shots focused on his crazed slapstick, and the boy is BAD-ASS funny. His pratfalls, his hamminess, his chin: all of these are what make all us Evil Dead geeks love him so much. He's just so much fun to watch. And granted, the premise is basically the premise of the first movie, but this time it's directed in such a way that you feel as though you're just watching Ash's mental breakdown from the inside-out, and it's crazy-ass wild. The special fx are still a delightful combination of claymation, green-pus, and talking deer-heads, and you can't beat that either for Friday-night entertainment. Good stuff.

Overall: Bruce Campbell is bad-ass cool. And this movie is all Bruce-Campbell, all the time. Good good stuff. If you've not hit up the Evil Dead trilogy, get your ass to the video store.

Grade: A

Bug

2008-01-14T07:55:00.000-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: An abused woman whose ex-husband has just gotten out of the joint finds solace in a kind drifter. Unfortunately, he begins to inflict his own paranoid madness on her--what starts out as a passing mention of bugs turns into a full-blown obsession.

Scariness factor: *Snort*

Gross-Out Factor: Teeth get pulled out. That's about the worst of it.

Complaints: Wow. Seriously. I've not seen such a bad movie in quite some time. The plotline was just plain old boring. Bugs infesting your body, sent by the government? Surprisingly uncreative. The acting was equally bad: Harry Connick, Jr, you need to stick to singing and/or Will & Grace, because you just can't pull off a bad-ass, friend. Harry Connick aside, the manic moments in the film were just BEYOND laughable. I felt like I was watching little kids put on a movie, and watching their interpretation of "craziness" unravel into goofbally over-the-top horribleness, which is excusable in children, but not so much in a film.

Conversation between lead actors:

Ashley Judd: How can we pull off "crazy?"
Michael Shannon: Let's throw ourselves onto the bed and writhe around a whole bunch.
Ashley Judd: Cool! And maybe then we can jump up and down on the bed wildly and scream?
Michael Shannon: Ooh! Good call!
Ashley Judd: And then I can shout "I am the super bug mother!" really loud a few times!
Michael Shannon: OMG! Seriously: brilliant. It is hard to believe you've never won an Oscar, Ashley Judd.
Ashley Judd: I know. I AM THE SUPER BUG MOTHER!!!!!

There was just *nothing* interesting about this movie. You never really develop a sense of caring about the characters. Their relationships with one another aren't convincing at all. The movie's really not all that suspenseful or interesting. I think it was *trying* to be deep, but it just failed miserably.

High Points: That it ended.

Overall: Wow. So bad. If you want to make fun of a movie, then rent it. Otherwise, stear clear.

Grade: F

Santa Claus (1959)

2007-12-18T07:17:00.000-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: I'm not precisely sure. I think the gist of it is this: Santa Claus is trying to deliver presents. Pitch (a minion of the devil) is trying to get kids to be bad and also trying to thwart Santa's deliveries.

Scariness factor: This isn't a horror movie, and yet it's the creepiest damn thing I've seen in a long time. It feels like a really really really really really bad acid trip.

High Points: Wow. This isn't a horror flick, so technically I shouldn't be reviewing it here. And yet, when up against some of my other favorite creepy X-mas gems (Jack Frost, Santa Conquers the Martians, Silent Night, Bloody Night), it definitely is a worthy opponent. Somehow the movie is 94 minutes long, and CLEARLY they're milking many of the scenes to achieve that length. Much of it is filler, particularly a lengthy sequence at the beginning where Santa plays a creepy organ while introducing his child slave-labor from all over the world that he apparently utilizes instead of elves to make X-mas presents. (Let the creepiness begin.) Somehow a minion of the devil enters the picture, and he prances and ballets his way through the movie, committing bad deeds. The main little girl in the movie looks SINCERELY scared throughout the whole movie, probably because she has to endure sequences in which large two-faced dolls swarm around her, dancing, nightmares of Pitch (the devil) telling her she won't get anything for X-mas because she's poor, etc. Merlin (yes, you heard me correctly--Merlin the Wizard) is one of Santa's helpers and is featured in the film several times. Santa is contestably one of the creepiest Santas I've seen, laughing maniacally throughout. (He also looks weirdly like Leslie Nielsen.) Santa's reindeer are equally creepy--they are wind-up robotic reindeer, and one of them has a briefly terrifying scene during which he neighs/winnies/robotically whines/chew/moans in such a way that I got shivers up my very spine. Pretty much the whole movie feels like a really long and really really really bad acid trip. And for that reason, it is priceless, and you need to get your hands on it. Keep your eye out at (I hate to say it but) Walmart apparently--I guess you can get your hands on it there for the low low price of $1.

Overall: An X-mas miracle.

Grade: A

The Hills Have Eyes 2

2007-12-05T08:30:00.000-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Well, since they already sent a family into the middle of the desert to get picked off by folks mutated by nuclear-testing, this time they decide to send the army in. There's not much more to it than that really.

Scariness factor: I dunno--I think it was TRYING to be suspenseful, but it wasn't really.

Gross-Out Factor: Like the first one, it's pretty high in the gore-department.

Complaints: Visually, this movie was very monochromatic. You can tell just from the pictures. And plot-wise, it obviously served no other purpose than to give the filmmakers an excuse to have mutants pick-off people one by one in extremely violent and "innovative" ways. Also, the whole female-soldier deal was lame--not only did we have to sit through the obligatory "female character happens to be the ONLY soldier who strips down to a tank-top and then of course later falls into water so that we get to have wet-t-shirt erotica"-type crap, we also had to sit through one of them getting raped,

High Points: Making fun of this movie. As always, all logic was COMPLETELY absent in this movie, so if nothing else, it was fun to shout at, boo, and make fun of. If you're gonna watch it, definitely watch it with someone else.

Overall: Lame. But perhaps worth watching just to make fun of.

Grade: D+

Blood Car

2007-12-05T08:12:00.000-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Flash-forward into the future. Gas prices are at $30+ a gallon. No one drives anymore because they can't afford to. Enter a vegan with the desire to change the world through wheatgrass. One day while Archie is experimenting with wheatgrass as an alternative fuel-source, he accidentally cuts himself, bleeding into the wheatgrass. Suddenly, the motor begans to feverishly run, and he realizes (horrifyingly) that he has found the key to making his fuel work. Will his desire to impress a crazy-in-the-sack meat-eating chick coupled with his desire to be the innovator of this new fuel lead him down the wrong (and very bloody) path?

Scariness factor: The movie declares that it's not actually a horror flick. And (though it seems to me to be a horror flick) it's mostly just camp, so this is fairly low.

Gross-Out Factor: For what I'm assuming was a low-budget movie, it has some pretty sweet gross fx. Mostly just blood-stuff though. Nothing TOO terrible.

Complaints: The movie's not perfect. And although I can't pin down precise things that I didn't like about it, I nonetheless wasn't 100% blown away by it. And I was a bit torn about how I felt about the vegan stuff. In one respect I found myself laughing. But in another respect, I found it irritating once or twice.

High Points: The dialogue--I laughed out loud quite a bit throughout. It's just so silly sometimes. Especially the interrogation-scene at the end. Worth watching simply for that. The special fx are surprisingly good for what I'm again assuming was a low-budget film. The premise of the movie is fun and corny. The acting is sufficiently lousy and yet decent, almost deliberately so. The logic behind a car driving on blood is wonderfully ludicrous and incomprehensible. And it's also chockfull of quotable moments that will make you laugh: "You know that saying, 'If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen?' Well, people still say that. But they don't drive cars."

Overall: It was entertaining and campy. If you see it, nab it. It's worth the watch.

Grade: B+

Love. And Fear.

2007-11-28T15:41:00.000-05:00

I am charmed by how seriously die-hard horror movie fans take their horror flicks, but sometimes you guys scare me and I expect to return home to unidentifiable body parts strewn on my doorstep.

Case in point (the "fear" portion):

Anonymous, who commented on my review of The Changeling by having the following mild freak-out:

Whoever it is that graded this movie can't be more than 18 to 20 years old. Only someone that young and naive would think 'The Haunting' could be better than 'The Changeling.' Catherine Zeta Jones hasn't had a worthy acting role in her miserable career, and don't get me started with that warped nosed drugged out Wilson fella! 'The Haunting' is a modern day special effects, crappy plot movie. 'The Changeling' stars the late thespian, George C. Scott. If your not familiar with him, might I suggest you see 'Patton' or 'Taps.' This movie relies on acting and plot to tell its story, not cheap, over the top special effects. If you trust this persons blogs, I suggest you get your brain scanned!

Hee hee hee. <--This is laughter borne both out of humor and fear. Intense intense fear.

Seriously though... Anon, if you ever stop back, just for the record: perhaps you are not as big a horror lover as you thought, seeing as there IS more than one version of The Haunting--I even *linked* to the original in the review you slammed. And I'd bet that nearly every single person who reads this blog and is a connoisseur of horror flicks would choose the original The Haunting over The Changeling any day.

Second case in point (the "charmed" portion):

Matt who commented on my review of Fido, and my enchantment with the lead zombie, by stating that

I disagree. While I have not seen this movie yet I can not believe that any zombie could be as loved as Bub has become.

I mention you here, Matt, not to make fun, but because it warms my cockles to see folks that, like me, love a good zombie-flick enough that they'll actually DEFEND a zombie's honor.

So thank you, Matt.

And Bub appreciates the mention as well. Though truth be told, he mentioned to me that even HE thinks Fido is more charming. (Ah, but I kid.)

Fido

2007-11-14T09:02:00.000-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Set back in the 1950s (I think?), the world is squeaky clean and chirpy, now that the zombies have been turned into constructive citizens thanks to a collar that keeps their zombie-urges in check. Unfortunately, the collar of Timmy's pet zombie Fido keeps malfunctioning, which leads to him gnawing the neck off of an old-lady neighbor. Fido has become a member of the family though, and a best friend to Timmy, so Timmy tries to cover the mess up, fearing that Fido will be sent away. The results are hilariously disastrous.

Scariness factor: It's moreso a comedy than a horror movie, but since it is a zombie flick, I nonetheless include it here.

Gross-Out Factor: Again: more comedic than scary and gross.

Complaints: Hmmm. Can't really think of any.

High Points: I thought this movie was cute and delightful, spoofy like Sean of the Dead but moreso with a focus on the silly squeaky clean movies and tv shows of the 1950s. Bill Connelly is delightful, and his zombie character seriously has to be the most adorable and endearing zombie ever to grace the screen. I found myself rooting for him throughout, and I loved that the filmmakers were actually fun enough to develop the sexual chemistry between the mom and the zombie. Cracked my shit up. Fido is actually a well-developed zombie-character, as zombies go, and that was kind of fun to see as well, especially since you kind of ended up feeling really warm and squishy towards him. It was also amusing watching a film where the presence of zombies was treated with such normalcy, especially within a 1950s-type setting. Even more fun was the soundtrack and the discordancy of its cheerfulness in comparison to the zombie activities that are taking place--fun fun.

Overall: I enjoyed this quite a bit. It was funny, and somehow weirdly cute and able to tug at your heartstrings a bit, even with the bizarre subject matter. And if you are a lover of zombie-flicks, it's definitely a must see.

Grade: A-

Creepshow

2007-11-05T11:25:00.001-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A variety of short tales about meteors and their effects, a monster in a box, a man who seeks revenge by burying people in the sand, a father returned from the dead, and cockroaches.

Scariness factor: Man, I loved this comic book when I was little--I found it delightfully horrific. And man, do I love Romero. But MAN was this movie TOTALLY not scary AT ALL.

Gross-Out Factor: Hee hee. Ah. Hee hee.

Complaints: So very very SLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW, which is even MORE dastardly since they were short pieces, so that alone should've kept the pacing up. Also--Stephen King is the WORST actor in the world. Sweet jesus. And really, none of it was scary.

High Points: Hrm. It made me laugh a few times, it was that lame and slow. And ok--the cockroaches exploding out of the guy and filling the room: that was pretty sweet. That's about it.

Overall: I don't think I care to ever see this again. In fact, if I could go back in time a few days so that I could watch something else in its place, I'd do so. I know it's supposed to be a classic, but hell with that.

(Go check out The Moon is a Dead World for an alternate review later this week)

Grade: D+

28 Weeks Later

2007-11-05T09:42:00.000-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: It's 28 weeks later than the 28 days that started it all, and the virus has apparently wiped itself out, with the help of a governmental quarantine of London. As the military struggles to carefully maintain this quarantine, one slip up takes place, wiping all precautions out, and starting a rampage again.

Scariness factor: Not nearly as scary as the original, mostly because there weren't as many intense zombie scenes that left you with your heart in your throat.

Gross-Out Factor: About the same as the original--lots of zombies, people being shot up, gruesome deaths, etc.

Complaints: This movie was really just kind of boring. I *WANTED* to like it, if only for the premise of the dad returning after having left his wife to the zombies without trying to help her escape and then later becoming infected himself and hunting down his own children, but even *that* didn't spice it up enough. Slow-moving and not enough zombies--that's the long and short of it.

High Points: The point at which the virus sweeps through an enclosed place where many survivors have been locked in for quarantine was fairly spooky, but mostly because it just got you thinking how terrible it would be to have nowhere to go to escape it all. Other than that, it was mostly just sort of ho hum. I still don't quite get how some people think this was better than the first--this is a lot more processed and squeaky Hollywoodish.

Overall: Eh. Rent the original, skip the sequel.

Grade: C

Death Proof

2007-11-05T09:19:00.000-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Stuntman Mike is a stuntman who owns a death-proof stunt car, death-proof for him at least. He derives great pleasure from killing foxy young chicks IN his car or WITH his car, either/or. But when he crosses paths with a few bad-ass female stunt-drivers, he'll come to find that it ain't as easy to fuck with the ladies as he thinks.

Scariness factor: Kurt Russell is pretty damn spooky, at least in the first half.

Gross-Out Factor: Holy crap. I haven't a clue how Tarantino filmed the first major car-crash scene, but MOTHER OF GOD is it violent. So seriously: A big no-no for the squeamish. At least close your eyes.

Complaints: Again: loved loved loved it.

High Points: I dig Tarantino--always have, always will. He shares the same geeky appreciation of camp and 1970s films and the pomp and circumstance of huge overdone chase-scenes and characters and everything that I adore myself. He also writes some AMAZINGLY bad-ass female characters, and I love him for it. And all this comes shining through yet again in Death Proof. Kurt Russell is awesomely slimey and yet scary. The girls in it are all f-ing smoking hot and yet horribly and awesomely bad-ass. The gruesome first car crash will FLOOR you with how realistic it looks. Rosario Dawson needs to come over and makeout with me already. And the car-chase scene that is the focus of the whole movie was just SO goddamn good that I actually shouted, YEAH HA HA HA HA! and cheered at the end. Despite watching it by myself. I must admit, I've been a fan of a good car-chase scene ever since my dad forced us to watch the very excellent car chase scene in Bullit when I was like 12, extolling it as the best car-chase scene ever filmed, and then when he forced us to watch Duel within a year or two... And this one is a DAMN good one, especially since it's manned (or should I say WOMANNED) by a car full of bad-ass female leads.

Overall: Go. Now. Rent this *AND* Planet Terror and have one HELLUVAN evening.

Grade: A

Planet Terror

2007-11-05T09:02:00.000-05:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A military base accidentally lets loose some sort of bio-weapon that turns the living into gruesome, mutated, flesh-eating zombie-esque creatures. The end result is that a group of survivors, including a foxy one-legged woman who'll eventually find her leg-problem corrected with a machine-gun, must battle them to survive.

Scariness factor: Rodriguez has a really good sense of 1970s camp, and this is moreso campy and fun then it is truly scary.

Gross-Out Factor: Oh, man. High in this department. Especially with zombies being splattered left and right with cars and whatnot.

Complaints: I loved it. Can't think of a one.

High Points: This was so much fun! Rodriguez is clearly a lover of 1970s horror movies and exploitation films, and he mimics the genre wonderfully here, even down to the scratchy-film quality. I've never enjoyed watching zombies get splattered as much as I did in this movie. Also, McGowan is UBER-sexy and bad-ass in it. I never thought a one-legged woman with a replacement machine-gun leg could be so goddamn erotic. *growr* Also, the short lead who I've always loved in the Six Feet Under series is bad-ass sexy in here as well. There's lots of explosion, lots of juicy '70's-esque camp moments, lots of great one-liners, some gruesome transformations, some wicked bad-ass female leads, and just lots and lots of zombie fun. Good stuff.

Overall: Go rent it. It's a blast.

Grade: A

1408

2007-11-01T07:34:00.000-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Enslin is a writer of books about hauntings. He travels the countryside, spending the night in haunted places and then reviewing them afterwards. When a postcard appears that tells him not to go into room 1408 of the Dolphin hotel, he immediately makes plans to spend the night there. He is warned multiple times by the manager not to do so, yet he ends up in the room. He doesn't actually believe in ghosts, but the events in this room quickly change his mind.

Scariness factor: The first 45 minutes were WONDERFULLY scary, mostly because they were very subtle. The second half was moreso overwhelming than it was scary, though it had some weird mind-fuck type moments.

Gross-Out Factor: Pretty much non-existent if I remember correctly. Mostly just old-school hauntings.

Complaints: The second half of this movie. I couldn't quite decide whether I liked it or really vehemently disliked it. It was a bit overwhelming, but I really enjoyed that at points. I *definitely*, however, did not like the last 10 minutes or so of the movie. Shmaltzy.

High Points: I must admit, I hate John Cusack. I know that, as an American, apparently I am supposed to love the man and everything he's ever been in. But I don't. I think he needs to get a new hairstyle already, seeing as he's had that same shapeless mop since Say Anything. And I rarely watch anything with him in it, just because I can't stand to stare at him for extended periods of time. Needless to say, I wasn't really looking forward to this movie all that match. All that being said, he actually wasn't bad in it. And the movie actually was a lot better than I'd expected. The first 30-45 minutes were really goddamn good, in my opinion. They were spooky as shit, mostly because they were also subtle as shit. To me, subtlety is a lot scarier than over the top special fx. So small moments like him turning around to find mints suddenly on his bed pillow CREEPED ME THE HELL OUT. There's also a scene in it where he climbs out on a ledge 14-stories above NYC, and THAT I was seriously holding my breath during--I have a fear of heights, and I've never had such a visceral reaction to a height-related movie scene as I did during that one. However, after that scene, the subtleties vanished, and it was full-out Crazy Room activity. At that point, the movie started to not be as impressive to me, though I really DID love the scene in the post-office later--I'd say more, but it'd give things away too much. THAT I thought was wonderfully done, and weirdly psychologically disturbing. Samuel L. Jackson is also bad ass (but subtle for once) in it as well--and much hotter than his normal bad-ass hot self. So despite the fact that he's not in it for too long, that's also definitely a plus.

Overall: I think this film is worth watching for the first 45 minutes or so. The second half has its moments, some of them wonderful, some of them just ho-hum. So don't expect much there. But the first half--fun fun fun.

Grade: B

Well Worth the Read...

2007-10-30T16:37:00.000-04:00

The Onion's "Night of the Killer Lamp:
23 Ridiculous Horror-Movie Adversaries"

Burnt Offerings

2007-10-30T10:09:00.000-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A family decides to rent out a gorgeous house in the middle of the country from a couple of crazy old siblings. They get the rent really cheap, and in turn, they just have to feed the old lady who lives up in the attic. Sounds simple enough. But of course, as soon as they move in, strange things start to take place--the father tries to drown the son, the mom becomes obsessed with the pictures in the house, etc.

Scariness factor: It's very 1970s, and the horror is all very subtle.

Gross-Out Factor: Very low. I think the worst scene is when someone flies out a window.

Complaints: Karen Black. Seriously, for some reason it pains me and disturbs me to stare at her face for more than 2 minutes because her eyes are just WAY too close-set. Case in point:

Truly: it makes me feel dizzy very quickly and then I just want to kick her in the shin. Other than that, I thought the movie was too slow-paced. The first hour or so, nothing really interesting happens. Except maybe the near-drowning. You're just kind of like, um, what am I supposed to be frightened of right now? Oh, and Karen Black. Seriously. Oh, and it seemed like a bit of a rip-off of The Shining (though I just realized that it was made 4 years prior, so I guess it couldn't've been after all)--nonetheless, The Shining is much more well-worth seeing.

High Points: Bette Davis is in it, and she rocks as a bad-ass elderly aunt. She was probably my favorite part of the movie. Other than her, I really thought this movie was kind of boring until about the last 20 minutes or so. The ending is pretty damn creeptastic, though very very 1970s, especially with the freeze-frame moment. The end ALMOST redeemed the rest of it, but seriously: it was really kind of sluggish.

Overall: I could take it or leave it. If you can handle not watching any of a movie except the last 20 minutes, it may be more worth your while.

Grade: C+

Dead and Breakfast

2007-10-30T08:22:00.000-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A group of young folks are headed across the country to a friend's wedding. When they get lost on the way, they decide to spend the night at a bed & breakfast in the middle of some hick-town. When they wake up in the middle of the night to find their hosts dead, they immediately come under suspicion by the local law. Toss in a shady drifter, a strange country-music band, a box that allows its owner to put people under his mind-control (sort of like zombies, but they don't have to be dead first) and you've got yourself Dead and Breakfast.

Scariness factor: It's in the spoofy vein of Shaun of the Dead so not so much.

Gross-Out Factor: HIGH HIGH HIGH. Way over-the-top with massive amounts of blood, eye-gougings, slit throats, etc.

Complaints: For some reason, they decided to structure the film by having a country-western singer pop onto the screen every once in a while to sing a little song that narrated what was going on in the movie. I *wanted* to like it, but really, it was just kind of irritating and pointless.

High Points: This movie has some really good black-comedic moments in it that will make you laugh out loud, my favorite being the one shown in the pic below, where one of the main characters is indulging in a late-night snack in the dark kitchen of the b&b when his girlfriend comes to find him and flicks on the light, only to reveal their cook hanging in the corner with a slit-throat, blood all over the floor and walls. The male lead freaks out and stands up to run out of the kitchen, only to spend a GRATUITOUSLY (and riotously) long time slipping, sliding, and falling in the blood on the floor since he can't get any traction because of its slipperiness. Great moment. This movie is also HORRIBLY over the top with its gore, kind of akin to Dead Alive where occasionally you just find yourself laughing because it is SO ridiculously gorey that it's funny.

Overall: All in all, I thought this was a fun movie. It has a lame ending, and it's structured a little bit irritating, but it will make you laugh and then be horrified that you're laughing.

Grade: B+

Let's Scare Jessica to Death

2007-10-30T08:01:00.000-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Jessica has been recently institutionalized but has since been released. She heads out with her husband and a friend to move into an old farmhouse to further recuperate. Upon moving in, she begins to see things that make her question whether she might be losing her mind again.

Scariness factor: Seriously high-class psychological horror.

Gross-Out Factor: Campy 1970s bloodiness. Nothing too terrible.

Complaints: None. Honest to god.

High Points: Seriously, I think this may be the best movie I've watched all Halloween season, and I wasn't expecting ANYTHING out of it, to be honest. It is ridiculously haunting. It'll spook you to your very core. It gives The Shining competition in how it plays with the question of whether the lead character is losing her mind or whether there's some sort of haunting going on. It was very 1970s, but it was also really well-acted. What seriously carried the movie was the lead actress. She gave a very subtle and sympathetic performance--she was so convincing that your heart went out to her, which made all the escalating events that more terrifying. The spooky moments were horrifyingly spooky and yet completely understated. And the ending was gorgeous and beautiful and haunting.

Overall: Seriously: my favorite movie I've watched this holiday season. If you can get your hands on it, do so immediately. Totally worth your while.

Grade: A+

Going to Pieces: The Rise and Fall of the Slasher Film

2007-10-25T09:32:00.000-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: This isn't an actual horror movie, so it doesn't have a plot. Instead, it documents the "rise and fall of the slasher film" from its beginnings (which they mark as the creation of Halloween) to its resurgence in popularity over the past few years.

Gross-Out Factor: There's a lot of special-fx discussion, so not only will you be watching lots of heads getting chopped off, throats getting sliced, etc., you'll also be watching some of them IN SLOW-MOTION. So yeah: pretty high for the squeamish.

High Points: You get to hear horror-movie legends like Wes Craven, John Carpenter, fx-master Tom Savini, etc. get geeked up about their horror movies and others as well. It also dips into discussion of the genre as anti-feminist (which they all argue vehemently against), the tropes of the slasher film, and the resurgence of its popularity with Scream. All in all, a fascinating romp through the genre, and particularly good for getting ideas for movies you need to rent.

Overall: I like watching documentaries about horror-films, what can I say? It makes my heart squishy to listen to grown men get all smiley and geeked up about how they finally figured out how to get a head to chop off perfectly and fly through the air for the perfect shot. And this documentary delights in that arena. Plus, it is chock full of movie clips for the horror movie geeks in all of us.

Grade: A

Zombi Holocaust

2007-10-23T06:46:00.000-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Things start off with the innocent theft of several cadaver body parts from a hospital's anatomy lab but soon escalate to an anthropologist and several doctors heading off to an island of zombies in order to make sense of what is happening back home.

Scariness factor: It's a mix of camp and creepiness. What with the music and the voice-overs, it's a bit difficult to give someone truly hardcore chills...

Gross-Out Factor: Wow, yeah. This is high high high. Eyes getting poked out. Hands getting sawed off. Skulls being removed. You name it, this movie's got it.

Complaints: This has a terrible and wandering plot with no real worthy explanation as to why the hell these people would actually travel all the way out to an island of zombie cannibals. Then again, that seems to be the case with ANY zombie cannibal movie, really, no?

High Points: Wow. This movie was great. The promotional tag-line on the front of the dvd pretty much says it all:

"3 skulls! 10 on the splatter scale! A frothing, heady stew of kick-ass gore, cannibles, zombies, nekkid babes, brain transplants and mad doctors. What's not to like here, 'pard? True art of the highest order."

It's one of the gorier movies I've seen, but in a crazy-assed, fun, groaning kind of way. It's terribly acted, and it makes really no sense. For example, during climactic scenes at the end of the movie, the blond female lead is suddenly butt-nekkid and getting giant hippie-flowers painted on her by the island's natives while her male counterpart is lying on a table, his skull about to be sawed off. The music is also horribly terrible, starting and stopping abruptly and sounding all sorts of 1970's throughout. There is gratuitous nudity, for really no other reason than to show gratuitous nudity (and this in itself is funny as well since the blond female lead, being lead to a sacrificial altar presumably to be sacrificed, appears to be butt-nekkid except for a pair of high heels--which apparently the natives (or the director) felt were ok since they made her nekkid body look all that more svelte and sexy). And my ultimate favorite moment of the movie is when, within the first 10 minutes or so, a man jumps from the 5+ floor of the hospital and, upon hitting the ground (having clearly been substituted in with a dummy), we see the dummy's arm fly off on impact, only to reappear just seconds later on a closeup of the bloodied man. I have not laughed so hard, and I actually rewound the movie to make sure that I'd really just seen that. Apparently the filmmakers figured, eh, wtf, why do a retake when there are more important scenes to move onto, like eye-gouging and body-spiking.

Overall: This movie was great campy fun, and horribly horribly gory. The latter usually makes me squeamish and bumps the movie rating down for me, but in this case, it was kind of the piece de resistance of the film. Seeing someone's eyes get gouged out has never looked so good.

Grade: B+

The Man With the Screaming Brain

2007-10-22T15:06:00.000-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Industrialist William Cole happens to be in Bulgaria with his wife on business. She shacks up with a Bulgarian cab driver. He makes eyes with a gypsy. He gets killed by said gypsy, as does the cab driver, and some mad Bulgarian scientists bring him back to life by replacing the damaged portion of his brain with a piece of the cab driver's. His wife is killed by this same bastardy gypsy. She is brought back in the body of a creepy cyborg-esque robot. They both head off to get revenge.

Scariness factor: In the vein of mock B-horror-movie flicks, it's not supposed to be.

Gross-Out Factor: A few knives in stomachs, that's about it.

Complaints: I wasn't as entirely bowled over by this film as I thought I would be. I can't pinpoint precisely why that is, but I think I was just expecting more Campbelly goodness. When he was on, he was on. But most of the time, he wasn't so much. And honestly, if he wasn't in the movie, I probably wouldn't've given it much more than a D.

High Points: I *DO* love Bruce Campbell. He plays such a good asshole. So I'll pretty much watch anything with him in it. And if you like slapsticky, goofbally, B-movie-ish fun, this'll probably do it for ya. But, in all honesty, if you're looking for a newer movie full of campy B-movie goodness, I recommend The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra. It is infinitely funnier, and it's kind of what I was expecting when I tossed on The Man With the Screaming Brain.

Overall: Honestly, unless you're a big Bruce Campbell fan or you're just a big dork about slapstick comedy, I doubt that this movie will do much for you.

Grade: C+

(You can also read Patrick's review of The Man With the Screaming Brain HERE)

Magic (1978)

2007-10-22T14:47:00.000-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Corky is a guy with a magic act that fails to impress, until, that is, he incorporates a new twist into his act in the form of his ventriloquist dummy, Fats. When he sneaks off to hide away from his newfound celebrity in the cabin of an old classmate (who quickly becomes a lover), it becomes clear that there's something not quite right with the relationship between Corky and Fats.

Scariness factor: Chucky in Child's Play for some reason never creeped me out. (Probably because he's moreso obnoxious and irritating than creepy.) But damn if ventriloquist dummies aren't intrinsically creepy, and Fats does not disappoint.

Gross-Out Factor: 1970s slasher-esque moments.

Complaints: It's a bit sluggish at times.

High Points: I was actually surprised that I liked this as much as I did. It is a serious testament to Anthony Hopkins' acting abilities, because this could've easily easily been a total crap film. But he is *fantastic* in it, down to the littlest of nuances, like his "ventriloquism" wherein (since I'm assuming he's not ACTUALLY throwing his voice in the film) he actually manages to come across as a convincing ventriloquist, his lips just BARELY moving every once in a while as Fats yammers away. He really is what makes this movie so damn good and so strangely believable. It also is quite interesting how it plays with madness--Is perhaps the dummy actually alive? Is Corky just insane? Is it not insanity at all? Fats, the dummy, is damn creepy as well. And although the movie is pretty dated, it's not dated enough to render it silly.

Overall: I was impressed, mostly by Anthony Hopkins' ability to make this movie as good as he made it. It's by no means perfect. Many of you might find it boring. But I actually liked it quite a bit and recommend, particularly if you're a fan of Anthony Hopkins.

Grade: B/B+

Eaten Alive

2007-10-16T07:57:00.000-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A crazy guy with a hatred for whores owns a hotel with an equally blood-thirsty croc that seems to enjoy helping pick off the folks who check in.

Scariness factor: A distant shadow of the creepiness of The Texas Chain Saw Massacre.

Gross-Out Factor: Very 1970s-ish, but yes, you will see a few gross scenes of blades in throats and whatnot.

Complaints: It's hard to watch a Tobe Hooper film without automatically comparing it to The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, but seriously: though this movie tried really hard to capture the creepy realism of The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, it never succeeds. The whole movie is clearly filmed on a set (unlike The Texas Chain Saw Massacre which seems so startlingly real because of all the outdoor scenes). The acting is TERRIBLE--the bad guy seems like the jittery hyperactive brother of the Hitchhiker from The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (he has the exact same mannerisms). And although it has some really tense scenes, it doesn't really have anything propelling it forward the way that The Texas Chain Saw Massacre did. No driving force or anything. You're sort of just like, yeah, this is happening, and I am watching it. But do I care? Not so much. I really wanted to like this movie more since it involved an alligator, which seemed kind of fun, but it wasn't really as fun as it seemed.

High Points: The gator scenes will crack your shit up. Marilyn Burns is still perhaps my favorite scream queen. Then again, I may just be partial to her since I met her in real life. *Nostalgic sigh* You get to see Robert Englund (aka. Freddy Krueger) in underpants. And most of all: the score. If nothing else, Tobe Hooper is a master of the creepy horror movie score. There's nothing that even comes close to the music in his movies, all discordant and eerie. Good stuff.

Overall: I was easily distractable throughout this whole movie, which is typically a sign that it's not sucking me in at all. So yeah: If you're a Tobe Hooper fan, of course rent it, just so you can say you saw it. But if you're not, it's not really something to lose sleep over.

Grade: C

They Live

2007-10-15T08:55:00.000-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A construction worker who's just trying to make some bucks stumbles across a strange church group whose intentions he is leery of. When the church is raided, he happens upon a secret box of sunglasses that is hidden in the wall. When he puts them on, he begins to see that all commercial marketing is now reading subversive messages. And he begins to see many of the people around him for what they REALLY are.

Scariness factor: It's got fricking Rowdy Roddy Piper in it. You guess. =)

Gross-Out Factor: Just people getting thrown out of windows, shot (in that awesome Arnold Schwarzenegger type way).

Complaints: This is the best worst movie EVER. It has so many crappy glitches in it that it is great, most notably the fact that whenever Rowdy Roddy Piper gets absolutely brutalized (in one scene his face is HORRIBLY swollen from a fist fight), within five minutes he is completely back to normal again.

High Points: I seriously was almost just tempted to list out my favorite quotes from the movie and leave it at that, since they pretty much say it all. But I figure I'll expound upon the joys of this movie a little before doing so. First: It has Rowdy Roddy Piper in it. And he is THE WORST. And by that, I mean: Awesome. There seriously is a gratuitously long fight-scene plopped in the middle of the movie where RRP and another main character show off RRP'S WWF moves by putting each other in half nelsons and throwing each other to the ground and stuff. The movie is INCREDIBLY INCREDIBLY 1980s. And it also is trying to be all social-commentary-like but pretty much beats you over the head with it in all its obviousness. And most importantly, Piper *almost* (and I say almost because no one else can beat out the man in one-liners) puts Bruce Campbell's Ash to the test with his plethora of shitty-ass (but f-ing funny) one-liners that will make you groan and giggle. Enjoy:

Brother, life's a bitch... and she's back in heat.

The Golden Rule: He who has the gold, makes the rules.

Mama don't like tattletales.

I got news for 'em. There's gonna be hell to pay. 'Cause I ain't Daddy's little boy no more.

I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass... and I'm all out of bubblegum.

Overall: This is the worst funniest thing I've watched in a while. Thank you, Rowdy Roddy Piper.

Grade: A (camp-wise), D (otherwise)

Freaks

2007-10-15T08:34:00.000-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A trapeze artist begins to woo an already-hitched dwarf at the circus, not out of love but just because she wants his money. In secret, she makes fun of him and fools around with the strong man. The dwarf's woman (also a dwarf) recognizes that the trapeze artist is no good, as does most of the circus, but he is blinded by love and doesn't realize it until it's already too late.

Scariness factor: This is not a jump-in-your-seat type movie, it's just a mildly unsettling one.

Gross-Out Factor: Not. Unless you're grossed out by real-life freaks.

Complaints: This isn't any sort of typical horror flick. It won't scare you. It doesn't offer up frights. But it is understatedly strange and creepy at times, especially given when it was made.

High Points: It's hard not to be fascinated by the fact that this movie is packed with actual real-life "freaks," from a man with no extremities, to pinheads, to a bearded woman, etc. And the ending will make your hair stand on end, just a little bit. It *was* made in the 1930s though, so it's not gonna offer you any major frights. But given when it was made, it's pretty damn unsettling.

Overall: This is not anything you'll want to rent when you're in a wanting-to-be-too-scared-to-turn-your-lights-out kind of mood. But it's something worth checking out, just for the novelty of it, if nothing else.

Grade: B+

Just Before Dawn

2007-10-15T08:25:00.000-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A group of twenty-somethings heads up in the mountains to go camping. On their way, they run into a forest ranger that urges them to turn back and a crazy man who claims there's a murderer after him. Needless to say, they are foolish and don't heed the warnings (otherwise we wouldn't have a movie), and they quickly realize that there's someone lurking in the woods, out for blood.

Scariness factor: I actually was surprised by this film. I thought it did a pretty damn good job of giving you that creepy feeling you have when you go camping in the woods with nothing or no one around, engulfed in darkness, jumping at every little noise.

Gross-Out Factor: Mostly just campy 1980s knife to the stomach kind of stuff.

Complaints: I really can't think of anything major.

High Points: I first "saw" part of this film at a bar with no sound on. I got totally sucked in and have wanted to track it down for the past couple years (with no luck). Thankfully Netflix had it so I was finally able to get my hands on it. And man, did I enjoy it. The acting is actually pretty decent (albeit over the top at times). It has kind of that gritty realism that the Texas Chain Saw Massacre had. It's damn creepy in spots--the filmmakers play up on the creepiness of being totally alone in a wide open forest very well. There are a lot of spooky moments. The mood and atmosphere is damn creeps. The score is original, striking, and spooky. And I just overall liked how this movie played out. It's part realism, part camp. And I dug that. And it has a bad-ass ending, one of the female leads coming to the rescue.

Overall: This will probably be difficult to locate at a video store, but if you can get your hands on it, do so. It's totally worth checking out.

Grade: A-

Dead Ringers

2007-10-15T08:11:00.000-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: Identical twin brothers both spend their time as gynecological researchers and practitioners. As an added perk, they sleep with their patients when they can. One is mild-mannered and gentle, the other a bit more forward and crass. When the mild-mannered brother falls in love with a patient that both he and his brother have "shared," the screws start to come lose from the creepy twin mechanism.

Scariness factor: The only creepy thing really in this movie are the gynecological tools the brother creates. I could feel my bajingo clench up when it saw them.

Gross-Out Factor: I don't remember any real gross-out scenes.

Complaints: Slow slow slow. I am sort of surprised that this is considered a horror movie since nothing really all that horrory ever happens. If you go in expecting something to creep you to you core, or scare you crazy, you'll be sorely disappointed.

High Points: Jeremy Irons is a fricking good actor. Like most Cronenberg films, this *is* interesting, moreso in thought than actual conception. But it just wasn't all that AWESOME, looking at it through a horror perspective.

Overall: I really think this is moreso a suspense movie than horror, but I'm sure there are many who will argue. Just don't go in expecting too many scares otherwise you'll be sorely sorely disappointed.

Grade: C

Pet Sematary

2007-10-09T08:27:00.000-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A young doctor moves into a new rural town with his family. When his daughter's cat is killed by a truck, a local neighbor takes him to an old Indian burial ground to bury the cat. A few days later, it shows up alive, but with a clearly altered disposition. When the doctor's little boy is also struck and killed by a truck, well, you can see where this is going.

Scariness factor: It's got its moments, though mostly in a very 1980s-ish kind of way.

Gross-Out Factor: Razor into Achilles tendon. That's about the worst of it.

Complaints: I was actually surprised that I liked this a lot more than I remembered. It's slow-moving. It's not my favorite movie of all time. The acting's not all that great. And it has a lot of things that don't make sense in it. But overall, it's not too bad.

High Points: Much better than I remembered. It won't keep you on the edge of your seat--it's a bit slow-moving in that regard. But the end is good and entertaining. And the little boy back from the dead is the creepiest. Seriously though: Who in god's name thought it would be a good idea to get their little little kid a part where he has to fake-stab people and bite people and scrunch up your face evilly?

Overall: Slow-paced. But entertaining. In a 1980's kind of way.

Grade: B-

The Grudge 2

2007-10-09T08:11:00.000-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: The sister of the heroine from the original movie is sent to Japan to bring back said heroine. Shortly after her arrival, the original heroine plummets to her death from a hospital roof. Her sister, wracked with grief, decides to get to the bottom of things and figure out why her sister's life ended this way. In the meantime, a group of girls who venture into "Japan's most haunted house" brings the curse upon themselves and begin to vanish one by one.

Scariness factor: It's spooky and will make you jump in your seat once in a while.

Gross-Out Factor: Not so gross. Mostly just seeks to spook you out.

Complaints: This is basically the same plot as the first one, with different characters. Dullsville. I'm not a big fan of the first one either, unfortunately. They're too slick and commercial. And, though they have their moments, they're not all that awesome in the scariness department.

High Points: It will creep you out once or twice. And I actually enjoyed it more than the original movie. Maybe I was just in a better mood upon seeing it or something, but I found it to be spookier and more entertaining.

Overall: Not a fan of The Grudge series. So I'd say it's no big loss if you never catch them.

Grade: C

The Evil Dead

2007-10-09T07:58:00.000-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A group of friends heads off to spend some time at a cabin in the woods. They uncover the mysterious tapes and journal of a professor who used to own the cabin. Upon listening to the tapes, they unleash some mysterious force in the woods which slowly begins to take over each person, one by one.

Scariness factor: It's spooky. It's got a lot of incidental campy moments in it, but it definitely has some damn creepy moments.

Gross-Out Factor: Blood. Pus. Pus-y blood. Bloody pus. It's got it all. Definitely not for the squeamish. And definitely not to be watched while eating.

Complaints: Seriously: what can you really complain about when it comes to this movie? It's got gratuitous stop-animation transformation scenes. It's got blood AND pus. It's got Bruce Campbell. It's got some moments that will surprise you in how well they can creep you out. And it's got camp.

High Points: This is one of those flicks that's on most horror-movie-lovers' Top 10 lists. And with good reason. It is the movie that brings us the dawning of Ash. And despite the extreme campiness and fun silliness of the two sequels, this one is genuinely scary at times, definitely creepy, and lots of fun. Bruce Campbell is awesome, as always. It's gross and goofbally. The acting is terrible. And yet, it still manages to be spooky and creepy, with an attempted rape committed by trees, exploding demonically-possessed people, and the maniacal and kid-like laughter of Ash's girlfriend. Sam Raimi also enjoys his special fx WAY too much, making it that much more entertaining to watch.

Overall: This is a classic. If you haven't already seen this, you deserve to get your ass kicked.

Grade: A

Severance

2007-10-09T07:44:00.000-04:00

--Reviewed by Lindy Loo

Plotline: A group of employees heads out to the middle of nowhere for the weekend and some team-building exercises. When they discover that the "resort" is actually a shithole in the middle of the woods, employee morale begins to wane. Even moreso when people start dying.

Scariness factor: Intense with quite a few jump-in-your-seat type moments.

Gross-Out Factor: Pretty violent and bloody. Not for the squeamish.

Complaints: It's not the most brilliant and original of movies, but it was entertaining. You never *quite* get why it is these folks are getting attacked though, which was a bit irritating.

High Points: Definitely the black humor. It has some really really good moments of it--especially the bear trap scene--where you feel just horrible for laughing but can't help it. The acting's not bad either. And it's got good pacing and is pretty intense. I was white-knuckled through several parts of it.

Overall: I'd definitely recommend. Was entertaining, fast-paced, scary, and yet it also made you laugh (and not in the dumbass Wayans-Brothers kind of way). Check it out.

Grade: A-/B+