Robin-97 Reviews

Reindeer Games (2000)

The reindeer should have done a rewrite...

[7/10 · 11 September 2000]

As an aspiring screenwriter myself, there is no element of a screenplay that bugs me more than a plot twist that exists for the sole purpose of being a twist. Ehren Kruger is a screenwriter who is currently one of the hottest commodities on the market right now, but his work seems to rely on an approach that may have been successful in his initial efforts, but nearly leads to the self-destruction of "Reindeer Games". His "Arlington Road" was a solid, underrated little thriller and contained a twist ending so jarring and effective that one could easily overlook how contrived it really was due to its reliance on one character predicting EXACTLY what another character would do. "Scream 3" was another Kruger-penned script that contained a villain whose master plan hinged on their ability to predict the characters' actions. Alas, Kruger takes this approach to ludicrous lengths in "Reindeer Games". The story may revolve around the robbery of a casino, but it soon becomes apparent that the villains would be better off just abandoning their task and making twice as much money by starting up their own psychic network.

Not that the script's deficiencies make "Reindeer Games" unwatchable. Overall, the film is a fairly passable way to kill 100 minutes and would probably have come across better as a direct-to-video quickie. The entire project just seems rather lackluster, considering the talent involved, as the first-rate cast fails to rise above the material and John Frankenheimer's direction is unspectacular at best. The action fails to generate much in the way of excitement, due mainly to the contrived fashion through which much of it is set up (Ben Affleck's hero pours alcohol into a water pistol because he just KNOWS that the bad guy will stop to light up a cigarette before shooting him). Indeed, most of the fun comes from trying to pick apart the absurdities in Kruger's script.

One of the liabilities of loading a story with many surprise twists is that they have to be adequately explained in order for them to make sense. Unfortunately, this has a negative effect on the film's pacing as the characters are constantly forced to stop and talk about the twist that has just occurred so that everything will hold together. Its reminiscent of the classic James Bond moment where the villain explains his grand scheme to the audience, except that it is repeated FIVE OR SIX TIMES throughout "Reindeer Games". This all leads us to our twist ending, which like Kruger's previous works, relies on a psychic villain predicting exactly what the hero will do. However, it doesn't take much to realize that the villain's whole scheme is ridiculously convoluted and more trouble than it's worth, especially since the hero's participation is not exactly vital to its success. It does not evolve out of the logic of the plot or the characters. As stated in the opening paragraph, it is twist that exists for the sole purpose of being a twist. However, it is a twist that succeeds at giving yours truly a rather "twisted" viewpoint. While "Reindeer Games" is strictly a mediocre piece of work, it can still be fun viewing for those of us who love sitting back and poking fun at the lunacy of screenplays such as this. You know that's an activity that I find that hard to resist...

Torso (1973)

Don't be ashamed, just watch it...

[6/10 · 11 September 2000]

I don't think I'll ever be able to explain the appeal of Italian slasher/giallo films. I often enjoy the hell out of them, but it's safe to say that I don't have a prayer in hell of ever getting anyone I know to ever share my sentiments. Their negative reactions often stem from the bad acting, laughable writing and slow pacing that plague these works and the scary part is that I have a hard time disagreeing with any of their complaints. Sergio Martino's "Torso" is definitely a film for which all these negative detractors apply to, but I'd be lying if I said it didn't provide its fair share of entertainment.

It would be best to classify "Torso" as a middle-of-the-road entry in the popular slasher/giallo genre. It is certainly watchable, but is not particularly invigorating and pales in comparison to the best works of Dario Argento. While Argento's films were often plagued with more than their fair share of deficiencies when it came to script and pacing, the director had a gift for drawing one so deeply into his visual nightmares that any need to apply logic to the proceedings was non-existent. Films of this genre have to deliver truly startling sequences in order for the viewer to look past their shortcomings. While "Torso" does contain a few sequences like that (the last third's cat-and-mouse game between the heroine and the killer is especially effective), its pacing is too slack for it to be truly involving and certain elements of the film are just plain laughable. In particular, a flashback sequence to a traumatic childhood event makes for the silliest, most ludicrously funny explanation for a serial killer's behaviour that I have ever seen. But as I stated, hilarious moments like that can also be contributing factors to my enjoyment of these films. So when all is said and done, "Torso" is worthy viewing for fans of the Italian slasher genre. Enjoy it if you can, but do not worry too much if neither you nor anyone else you know understands why.

Moonraker (1979)

Double 0h-Please!

[5/10 · 30 November 1999]

"Moonraker" is far from a boring film, but I can think of few action pictures that have ever been more frustrating. What we have here is the opportunity for a tight, exciting, gloriously spectacular 007 adventure, but due to the filmmakers' decision to substitute juvenile humour for thrills at every opportunity, the final result is sporadically enjoyable at best, placing this overblown entry on the very bottom rung of the Bond ladder (well, the official Bond ladder anyway - at least it's still miles ahead of "Never Say Never Again"). Keen observers may notice that the end credits of "The Spy Who Loved Me" stated "James Bond Will Return in 'For Your Eyes Only'". And if you'll pardon the pun, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out the success of a little film called "Star Wars" inspired the producers to send 007 to outer space instead.

Needless to say, that decision was a far cry from Ian Fleming's original vision. His original novelization of "Moonraker" was a solid page-turner about an megalomaniacal villain's scheme to fire a nuclear rocket into the heart of London and even contained a scene where Bond almost makes the shocking decision to sacrifice his own life to save the city. This time, the villain wants to wipe out all life on earth and start his own utopia of perfect human specimens. Of course, ludicrous storylines like this are what make the Bond franchise what it is, but this is probably the only entry in the series that actually manages to be MORE silly than the "Austin Powers" films that spoof it. The first half hour gives an indication of how much better the film might have been had it played things more straight. Things start off dynamically with a breathtaking sky-diving sequence that is undoubtedly one of the best teasers in the series and also earns high marks later on for a scene in which Bond is trapped helplessly on a G-force simulator. It is one of the very few instances in the series where 007 is left too shaken up to even utter a one-liner, but unfortunately, this is the ONLY moment in the film where an action setpiece is not completely obliterated by an overuse of low, cornball humour and juvenile sight gags.

By the time "Moonraker" has reached its outer space finale, all suspense has been drained away and the flashy battle sequence, while undoubtedly expensive, is pretty underwhelming, especially when compared to the climactic setpieces in "The Spy Who Loved Me". The supporting cast also does little to enhance the proceedings. Lois Chiles is awfully wooden as the aptly-named heroine, Dr. Holly Goodhead, and Michel Lonsdale, despite having a great deal of witty dialogue ("Take good care of Mr. Bond. See that some harm comes to him"), is one of the more dull Bond villains, mainly because he speaks in monotone throughout the entire film and doesn't even seem to truly relish his evil schemes. And then there's the character of Jaws, who was arguably the most memorable Bond villain of them all in "TSWLM", but has his credibility completely shattered here. The character is now portrayed as an inane buffoon who could never stop 007 if his life depended on it, and a scene midway through in which he suddenly falls head-over-heels in love has got to be the most embarrasing moment in the entire series, bar none! As you can imagine, I didn't much care about anything that happened in the film after that, which pretty much sums why "Moonraker" is so frustrating. 007 has always held a license to be as he silly as he wants, but this particular entry demonstrates that boundaries DO have to be drawn somewhere. You know you're in the trouble when it gets to the point where the appearance of Mini-Me would lend more credibility to the proceedings!

A View to a Kill (1985)

The most underrated Bond

[24 November 1999]

Most 007 fans and non-fans alike consider this final hurrah for Roger Moore to be near the bottom of the barrel as far as the long-running series goes, but this Bond fanatic has never understood why. It certainly doesn't do much to distinguish itself from its counterparts and borrows a tad too much from "Goldfinger" (the villain's obsession with gold is replaced with microchips, which is obviously a harder obsession for the viewer to identify with), but it's slick and entertaining, and also functions as a fairly good send-off for Mr. Moore. "A View to a Kill" somehow manages to incorporate the campy, over-the-top elements that characterizes Moore's earlier entries in the series and still take itself seriously enough to still function fairly well as an exciting action-thriller, on the level of Moore's more straightforward works, like "For Your Eyes Only".

Of course, the fact that Christopher Walken delivers one of the first of his many, many delightful villainous performances helps take things up a notch. Walken's portrayal of the evil Zorin was heavily criticized by Bond fans when the film first came out, but as the years have gone by, it has earned more appreciation and respect as it helped establish Walken as the best psychopath in Hollywood. The scene in which he double-crosses his own workers by machine-gunning them all is classic Walken. Grace Jones also makes a memorable villainess as the muscular May Day, though the film is heavily weakened by Tanya Roberts' truly awful portrayal of the heroine, which puts her in the "Hall of Shame" ranks alongside Jill St. John ("Diamonds Are Forever") and Britt Ekland ("The Man With the Golden Gun")as the dumbest, most poorly acted bimbos of the Bond universe. Her standout moment is near the end when she excitedly rushes to embrace Bond, and somehow fails to notice that a giant blimp is sneaking up from behind to kidnap her.

But, like all Bond films, it is the technical elements that determine whether it will succeed, and "View to a Kill" more than passes the test. John Barry's score here is one of his best, and even though you'd think that a Duran Duran title song would become quite dated today, their theme still remains one of the most exciting in the series. While there are some rather slow stretches in the story (especially a long, rather pointless stretch near the beginning where Bond is a guest Zorin's estate), "View" really delivers the goods with its action setpieces. The standouts are a spectacular opening ski sequence, a fun chase through Paris, and a wonderfully over-the-top finale in which Bond and Zorin have a fight to the death on top of the Golden Gate Bridge. However, the fire truck chase sequence that takes place two-thirds of the way through, involving a bunch of dumb cops who mistakenly think Bond is the bad guy, is more suited to a "Smokey and the Bandit" sequel and does as much to advance the plot as Sheriff Pepper's role in "Live and Let Die". It seems to be in the movie for the express purpose of stretching it out to its 130-minute running length (this is from the period when all Bond films had to run EXACTLY that long). But all flaws asides, "View to a Kill" still functions as one of the better entries of the Moore era and is arguably the most unfairly criticized of all the Bonds. After all, we don't exactly WANT 007 to deliver anything earth-shattering, do we?

The Vanishing (1988)

Stunning suspense without sensationalism

[17 November 1999]

"The Vanishing" is a thriller that is completely devoid of blood, gore or cheap shocks, and if one looks close enough, they'll also happen to notice that it doesn't contain any actual VIOLENCE either. But it is also scary as hell. Directed by George Sluizer, this foreign effort was completed in 1988, but never found a North American release until 1991 because it was feared that our audiences would never be to able handle the film's relentlessly grim and nihilistic tone. Indeed, Sluizer tried to gain more exposure for this highly acclaimed piece of work by directing a remake of it in 1993, but the film was a cliched, Hollywoodized disaster that angered fans of the original by changing its ending - which was one of the most shocking ever put into a movie. But while this grave artistic mistake effectively put an end to Sluizer's promising career, the bright side of it all is that it only upped the realization that the original "Vanishing" was one-of-a-kind masterpiece.

All traditional genre cliches are chucked right out the window in this film. The story involves a Dutchman named Rex, who goes on vacation in France with his girlfriend, Saskia. The opening scenes establish how happy this couple is, but things suddenly take a turn for the worst, when they stop off at a gas station and Saskia disappears. We soon come to realize how big a nightmare a situation like this can be as Rex searches around for her in panic, and learns the horrifying news that she was seen leaving with another man. Three years pass by and Rex is still searching for her. His obsession takes over his life and sidetracks his relationship with another woman. During the opening scenes, we catch a brief glimpse of Raymond Lemorne, the man responsible for Saskia's disappearance, and soon after, the story switches to his perspective. It is here that "The Vanishing" establishes itself as a thriller that will be unlike all the rest, as Lemorne is presented as one of the most frightening but complex villains ever put on film. A successful and seemingly ordinary teacher with a loving wife and two daughters, his villainous actions is only provoked by that the fact that there is, quite simply, nothing that can technically stop him from doing so. He is very smart, but not exactly perfect at what he does. There are scenes in this movie that manage to be both funny and chilling at the same time as Lemorne practices his kidnapping routine, and then pathetically tries to lure young women into his car without any success. His scheme fails many times until he meets Saskia.

This may sound like pretty nihilistic stuff, but as stated in the opening paragraph, it is all done with a complete absence of violence and gore. Much of "The Vanishing"'s impact is produced from what we imagine rather than what we can see. The film may not seem that suspenseful at first glance, but the tension builds up so subtly that by the time the film is over, one is surprised at how drained they actually are. Sluizer's storytelling genius stems from the fact that the audience is so anxious to find out what happened to Saskia, yet when the truth finally arrives, we are almost wishing he hadn't told us. Even Rex, who has had his life completely taken over by his obsession about Saskia's fate, ends up realizing that he would have been better off not knowing either. I will not go into the specifics about the ending of the film, only to say that it is one of the most shocking you will ever see - and therefore, one of the best. Unlike most twist endings, it manages to pull off the supremely difficult feat of seeming both surprising and inevitable at the same time. Even if you can't stand the concept of subtitles, all fans of the thriller genre are urged to check the original "Vanishing" out at all costs. It will make you think twice before ever making contact with a stranger again.

A Better Tomorrow II (1987)

Better moments make a better sequel

[9/10 · 17 November 1999]

The original "A Better Tomorrow" changed the face of action films forever. A shoot-em-up gangster melodrama from a then-little-known filmmaker named John Woo, "Tomorrow"'s rampant violence and stylish action scenes instantly established Woo as one of the greatest action directors in the world, and the result was one of Hong Kong's highest grossers ever. After the trend-setting scene where Chow Yun-Fat burst into a room and gunned down a group of bad guys in all sorts of stylish and inventive fashions, everybody in Hong Kong had to go out and buy a trench coat like the one he wore, which guaranteed the actor instant stardom as well. Naturally, a sequel had to be made right away, and in 1987 came "A Better Tomorrow II". You can tell it was rushed into production because it's a little rough around the edges (which probably explains why John Woo has never made another sequel since). And, unfortunately, most of the copies you are likely find of this movie will be marred by atrocious subtitles, which are hard to read, chopped off at the sides of the screen, and are fraught with spelling errors. You're not even two minutes into the movie before you see "hopefully" spelled "hope_lully". But bad subtitles do not ruin a film where what you see on the screen is too explosive to be described with words.

This was the film where John Woo demonstrated that he could just go all-out, and two of his works that followed this, "The Killer" and "Hard Boiled", are placed by many among the ranks of the greatest action films of all time. While "A Better Tomorrow II" is certainly a dynamic piece of work by Woo, it will never be looked upon as a strong example of action movie storytelling. The plot is often confusing and lazily constructed, and commits the ultimate "sin of sequels" when Chow Yun-Fat is introduced into the story. You may recall that his character, Mark, was killed at the end of the original "Better Tomorrow", so how can he return for the sequel? Why, by saying that Mark had a twin brother, of course. Normally, absurd contrivances like that are enough to destroy the credibility of an entire movie, but all is instantly forgiven in Chow's introductory scene when he responds to a mafioso kingpin's bullying by forcing him to eat his rice. It's a delightful, hilarious sequence, and NO other action star could've pulled it off. After watching it, I was quite happy that Mark had a twin brother.

It's the individual moments like that which make "A Better Tomorrow II" an action classic. On an overall scale, it may not be as good as its predecessor, but the moments that do work turn it into a much more exciting film. And boy, when this film works, it WORKS! The final twenty minutes may be the best you see in ANY action film! A very powerful death scene is immediately followed by an absolutely incredible finale in which the heroes barge into the home of the villain and deliver carnage like you've never seen it before. The heroes use guns, grenades and even a samurai sword to mow down the opposition and, by the end, there are more bodies than one can count. This is the first action set piece in which John Woo just decided to go completely berserk, though it would certainly not be the last. Of course, everything in "Better Tomorrow II" is over-the-top melodrama and would probably seem laughable if seen in an American action picture, but what sets the Hong Kong genre apart from all others is that the sheer energy and passion in the filmmaking can make even the hokiest of situations work wonders. And at its best, "Better Tomorrow II" does work wonders. It is so easy to overlook a film's flaws when it makes the can't-miss decision to deliver the goods in the most electrifying ways possible.

Swamp Thing (1982)

Horror directors + the "PG" rating = Boredom

[17 November 1999]

With the monstrous success of his wonderful "Scream" films, Wes Craven was finally given the opportunity to do something he's been itching to do for the past 25 years: venture outside the horror genre. He finally got the opportunity to direct some "lighter" material for once, and the final result was "Music of the Heart", a "feel good" movie starring Meryl Streep as a woman who teaches the violin to underprivileged schoolchildren (!). Despite my attitude towards this subject matter, I shall reserve judgement on Craven's latest career choice since I have not yet seen the film (and have very little desire to do). I will just wish Mr. Craven success in his new genre and hope that his venture into "lighter" material is much more successful than his previous attempt in 1982, which gave us a lackluster film called "Swamp Thing".

Prior to "Music of the Heart", this was the only "PG"-rated film Craven ever did, and was his attempt to appeal to younger audiences. Unfortunately, the end result is a very cheap and sloppy picture. Now, Craven is a director who can actually use cheapness and sloppiness to enhance the effectiveness of his films (see "Last House on the Left", an all-time fave), but here, his shortcomings leave you frustrated and often bored. The film is marred by a very lame and corny screenplay, and (as you might've guessed) unconvincing makeup effects. Of course, any film involving a guy running around in a rubber suit can be fun, but Craven makes the fatal mistake of taking his material way too seriously. Shooting this film in the swamp was reportedly a real nightmare for him, thanks to poor planning by the studio, and when he realized that the conditions would make it impossible to make a movie that was convincing enough for one to take seriously, there should have been some major re-writes to the script. Still, despite the flaws at the production level, the actors are still fun to watch. Louis Jourdan is wonderfully campy as the mad villain, Dr. Arcane, and who wouldn't enjoy the sight of the bouncy heroine, Adrienne Barbeau, running around for half the picture? And, of course, the film also earns a few merit points for the most welcome presence of David Hess, as Arcane's main henchman, though the "PG" rating prevents him from doing what he does best. Overall, "Swamp Thing" is a film that young kids may enjoy, but those who have sat through and loved "Last House" or "The Hills Have Eyes" are going to be in for a huge letdown.

Cannibal Holocaust (1980)

If you thought "Blair Witch" was disturbing...

[10 November 1999]

A small group of filmmakers vanish in the wilderness while in the midst of making a documentary and the only evidence of what happened to them is seen through their recovered film footage. Sound familiar? "The Blair Witch Project" may have been a well-deserving smash hit, but what few people failed to realize was that its so-called "revolutionary" story device of terror-through-recovered-film-footage had been utilized twenty years before in a notorious Italian cannibal film. Directed by Ruggero Deodato, "Cannibal Holocaust" is arguably the king of its sub-genre and may well be the most disturbing film ever made. While "Blair Witch" left such an unsettling effect by showing nothing, "Holocaust" does so by showing EVERYTHING. There is no act of depravity that it is not displayed at some point in this film. However, direct comparison to the "Blair Witch Project" is unfair as these are both drastically different films. "Holocaust" actually contains a sizable back story about the search for the film crew with the actual recovered footage taking up less than half the running time. Deodato uses this story as a catalyst for a commentary on the media's manipulation of the truth for the purposes of sensationalism, and while some would argue that the final result is nothing but pure exploitation, there's no denying the film's power.

Former porn star Robert Kerman plays the film's protagonist, Professor Monroe, who leads the expedition to recover the missing footage, and is actually quite good in the role. His performance is vital to providing at least some comfort within the audience since the character provides the sole voice of reason in the film. When ratings-hungry TV producers try to use the footage as the basis for a prime time special, he declares that it would be inhumane since the actions that the film crew have pulled to get that footage are nothing short of heinous. Indeed, when all the footage is finally shown, the foursome does nothing to inspire any sympathy for what has happened to them. When the natives prove to be less interesting than they had hoped for their documentary, the crew decides to destroy their village and burn some of them alive in hopes of inspiring a war with a rival tribe, which in turn, would provide them with some much better footage. Eventually, they go too far, and the natives end up resorting to cannibalism ONLY as a response to the barbaric actions of the white man. Professor Monroe sums it all up at the end when he states "I wonder who the real cannibals are". One of the main criticisms of "The Blair Witch Project" was that it seemed very unlikely that the characters would still keep the camera rolling in the midst of their terrifying plight. In "Holocaust", the film crew is so obsessed with gaining fame and notoriety that we can believe it when they stand by in the background and film their friends being raped and butchered. They may not make it out of the jungle alive, but at least they'll leave some very memorable footage behind.

With all this talk about the story, I have yet to even get into what the film is long remembered for and that's the extreme violence and gore. And they are indeed quite shocking and horrifying. Granted, the "recovered footage" gimmick provides the filmmakers with the opportunity for some shaky camera work and an excuse to cover up the fact that many of their effects may not be technically proficient. Yet the viewer is still provided with plenty of moments that are sure to make one squirm, such as rape with a sharp rock, a foetus being prematurely ripped from a native woman's womb and buried in mud, amputation and dismemberment, and the only direct on-camera castration that I can ever recall seeing. The most controversial element of the movie, however, is undoubtedly its abundant amount of violence to animals - which is 100 % unfaked! While the early scenes of humans butchering live animals provide a very interesting parallel to the climactic footage of the cannibals butchering the humans, the fact that Deodato actually murdered some real wildlife in order to get this footage cannot be justified. However, despite "Holocaust"'s rather exploitive elements, one cannot overlook how truly effective the final result is. The film's direction and storytelling are simply top-notch, and I've never seen a movie convey the tension and uneasy atmosphere of the jungle better than this one. "Holocaust" is also blessed with a truly haunting and memorable musical score, which will stay with you long after the film is over. While I wouldn't urge casual viewers to run out and find a copy of this near-masterpiece, I'd highly recommend it to all horror and exploitation fans to see it as this film will surely test their limits like never before. If nothing else, it makes me relieved that the camera got turned off before we could see what the Blair Witch did to those kids...

From Dusk Till Dawn 2: Texas Blood Money (1999 Video)

For a DTV, it's PDF!

[5 October 1999]

I obviously didn't have high hopes for "From Dusk Till Dawn 2" after its opening reel. Like the infamous "Congo", it makes the grave mistake of killing off the multi-talented Bruce Campbell in the first five minutes, and also does the same thing to Tiffani-Amber Thiessen, despite the fact that all the ads for the movie had mislead one into believing that she has a sizable role in it. The fact that their death scene has absolutely NOTHING to do with the main storyline doesn't help much either, but amazingly, "FDTD 2" eventually makes up for these miscalculations and becomes a surprisingly fun direct-to-video quickie. Whatever flaws it possesses are redeemed by the enthusiasm of the cast and the filmmakers, who probably realized that they were making an inconsequential film, but seemed to have had a ball doing so nonetheless. It's directed by Scott Spiegel, who co-wrote "Evil Dead 2" and has been a long-time associate of Sam Raimi's, and he gets help on the script from Duane Whitaker, who has a major role in the film and is probably best known for playing the bizarre pawn shop owner, Maynard, in "Pulp Fiction". The two of them may not have the same polish as a Quentin Tarantino-Robert Rodriguez combination, but they both have an obvious love for the genre and at the occasional moment in the film, some fresh new ideas to add to it.

The original "From Dusk Till Dawn" was one of the most enjoyable genre efforts of the 90s, which unfortunately, received a lot of criticism from non-horror fans who thought that Tarantino's screenplay started off as a potentially interesting drama that sold out midway through, opting instead to become a over-the-top gorefest in the second half. Of course, most genre aficionados found those horror elements so entertaining that they didn't care at all about the detour in Tarantino's script. Of course, "FDTD 2" doesn't near measure up to its predecessor, but if there's one thing that it does to improve upon it, it's that it doesn't even try to pretend that it has the potential to be anything else, and just presents itself as a good ol' horror outing, mixed in with a fairly standard heist story. It also helps, however, that the characters are more sharply written and the dialogue is more witty than you'd expect for a flick of this kind. The fine B-movie cast somehow makes you care in spite of yourself, and by the time the movie reached its climactic bloodbath at the bank, I was surprised by how much I was into the film. But when all is said and done, what really matters is if the horror elements deliver, and Spiegel does just that, providing some very inventive death scenes and some show-off Raimi-esque camera work (including a neat point-of-view shot of a key going into a keyhole). Sure, the gore and the F/X aren't exactly up to the "Saving Private Ryan" level of realism, but it's not like they were that great in the original either. It's not the slickness of the production, but the enthusiasm and spirit of it all that matters. And since "From Dusk Till Dawn 2" has that kind of spirit and delivers what it promises, it comes across as a direct-to-video production that's pretty-damn-fun!

Wild Man (1989)

For those who watch porn for the laughs

[1/10 · 28 September 1999]

"Wild Man" is a porn flick that's trapped in an action picture's body. It doesn't contain enough graphic sex to qualify as a genuine X-rated feature, but the quality of the filmmaking makes you feel like you are watching one. It's probably the closest thing to pornography that you will ever find on the shelf of a Blockbuster store, which, incidentally, is where I discovered the film. As you probably have already guessed, "Wild Man" is directed by a veteran adult film director, Fred Lincoln, who has hundreds of titles to his, er... credit. While I know absolutely nothing about his X-rated work (and the entire business in general), I decided to check out this title for curiousity's sake, since I had admired Lincoln's performance in the Wes Craven classic, "Last House on the Left". Why he decided to stray from his genre and make a genuine action movie is beyond me. He certainly pours all his directorial energies into the sex scenes in the picture, but doesn't seem to have the slightest idea about how to do anything else.

Of course, since "Wild Man" is completely inept in all respects, it is the source of much entertainment value. Those who like to watch X-rated films just to poke fun at the production values will find much to laugh at here and won't have to be worry about being turned off by any hardcore sex. Predictably, the title character, Eric Wilde, turns out to be the stiffest, most boring secret agent in the history of cinema, though you'll be hard-pressed to ever find a movie character more hyperactive than Tommy Lee, the over-the-top villain whose scenery-chewing makes a typical Ric Flair interview from World Championship Wrestling look like a model of subtlety. The action scenes in this film are so badly staged that at one point, when a stuntman falls off a roof, you can actually see a crew member's hands tossing a mattress right in front of the camera for him to land on!! Lincoln himself even has a brief cameo as a wise old INDIAN (!) who gives the hero a special ring that makes him invincible. After hearing the description of that scene, I kinda doubt you're very anxious for me go into the mechanics of the plot. I'd love to give "Wild Man" a hearty recommendation to all "bad film" lovers out there, but they should be warned that it somehow manage to stretch its feeble storyline out to 110 MINUTES, which is quite a long time to have to endure a film of its calibre. The reason that Ed Wood's films have always had such lasting appeal is because most of them run barely over an hour long, which doesn't allow them the chance to become tedious, which "Wild Man" certainly does. But when all is said and done, it's pretty damn hard to resist a movie with a cover box that says, "He's a pistol that's always cocked" - especially when the film itself is so half-cocked.

The Rage: Carrie 2 (1999)

Better than expected, but nothing more

[14 September 1999]

"The Rage: Carrie 2" is much better than it has any right to be. The film is well-acted, expertly crafted, and does a remarkably good job at getting the viewer involved in its derivative story. The decision to make a belated sequel to a 23-year old horror classic could have met with disaster, and I was initially shocked that Hollywood would even want to try it, considering the financial hardship Broadway met with after they tried to create a musical stage version (!) of Stephen King's story a few years after the original film came out. But the final result is surprisingly watchable, and it's certainly a cut above the many half-assed horror sequels that have wasted valuable screen space over the past year, such as "Species II" and "I Still Know What You Did Last Summer". There is, however, one crucial element that "Carrie 2" sorely lacks: a reason for even existing in the first place.

Basically, the film just rehashes the standard plotline of the original, and adds very few new elements of its own to the proceedings. The only difference this time is that the lead character is named Rachel, not Carrie (which renders the title completely meaningless, but never mind). Rachel is a teenage outcast (but, as usual, is far more attractive than most of the outcasts we know in real life), who inadvertently ends up getting the more popular kids at her school into trouble. They decide to play a very cruel practical joke on her in retaliation, which relies on Jesse, the school's most likable jock, asking her out. He ends up really falling in love with her, however, and just as Rachel begins to feel accepted for the first time in her life, the bad kids go through with their prank. But having just recently found out that she is Carrie's illegitimate sister and has inherited her power of telekinesis, Rachel decides to utilize that gift to ensure that they will not live to see college. The only survivor of this ordeal ends up receiving the jolt of their life in the epilogue. Sounds a little familiar, doesn't it? The only real surprise in the film evolves from the subplot involving Rachel's abusive foster family. After the drunken father smacks her around a bit, one's expecting a rehash of the riveting finale in the original where Carrie vented all her rage against her religiously hysterical mother, but the character completely disappears from the picture!

Most of the picture's energy is devoted to the climactic sequence when Rachel finally vents her rage against her peers. It's actually quite entertaining since the filmmakers come up with some delightfully over-the-top ways for the kids to perish. Yet it doesn't pack near the same emotional wallop as the prom set piece from the original since it doesn't add anything new to the formula. And that's a shame because newcomer Emily Bergl is terrific in the lead, and does an impressive job at measuring up to Sissy Spacek's remarkable performance in the original. It is because of her that the film is as involving as it is, and the love story between her and Jesse is surprisingly sweet. It is actually more interesting than the relationships we see in most straight teen romance films these days. There are many elements of "Carrie 2" that work quite well and since the basic story is one that we can all identify with, the film is able to hold one's interest from beginning to end. It's just too bad the picture as a whole is so routine. Just because a horror sequel is watchable does not mean that it is particularly invigorating.

The Hills Have Eyes Part II (1984)

The worst sequel ever!

[14 September 1999]

I'm sure some would say that you'd have a better chance of picking the winning lottery numbers every week than picking out the worst horror sequel of all time. Hell, when a film like "Silent Night, Deadly Night" can spawn no less than four follow-ups, there is obviously a LOT for one to choose from. But those who think that this is truly an impossible task have never seen the "Hills Have Eyes Part II". And boy, I sure envy them because they won't have to go to their graves pondering what else they could've done with their life during the 90 minutes they used up to watch this film. "Hills Have Eyes II" is not even gracious enough to provide one with 90 minutes of bad laughs. It is just plain DEAD! I mean, this must have had the most unenthusiastic film shoot in history. The direction, the script and the acting are so flat that it doesn't look anyone involved in the project gives a damn at all. You'd never think that Wes Craven himself, whose 1977 original was a genuine horror masterpiece, could be responsible for such an utterly lifeless piece of celluloid, but as he's stated many times before, this came at a time when he'd do ANYTHING to scratch out a living in the film biz (though I'd personally have chosen to find work at a sweat shop than have my name attached to something like this). Thankfully, his next project was the hugely successful "Nightmare on Elm Street", which helped the otherwise talented filmmaker go on to bigger things, though ironically, "Hills II" was held back for release until a year afterwards and would probably still be sitting on a shelf somewhere if "Elm Street" were not such a success.

Anyway, there's no sense dwelling on where this sequel goes wrong, because it does so in EVERY department, but there are definitely a great deal of things that stick out. Despite being such a lifeless piece of work, "The Hills Have Eyes Part II" is, and always will be, remembered among horror fans for one reason and one reason only: the dog's flashback. That's right, in the annals of horror movie stupidity, there has never been a moment to top the lunacy of the Carter family dog having a flashback to some of the events he witnessed in the original film! Hell, there are so many damn flashback sequences in this film that it actually makes for a reason to watch it: if one has trouble finding a copy of the original "Hills Have Eyes", they can just rent the sequel since it shows just about every scene from the original anyway. Of course, those who fondly remember the original are gonna be shaking their heads at the absurd contrivances in this sequel. The only returning member of the mutant family this time around is Pluto, who is now living in the desert with "The Reaper", who is supposed to be the brother of Papa Jupiter, the original leader of the clan. Think about this for a second. Remember the chilling scene in the original "Hills" where the old man at the gas station tells the story about his wife giving birth to Jupiter, and how the kid developed into a monster that eventually murdered their daughter? Strange that he makes no mention of Jupiter having a brother. Even stranger is how he says that giving birth to Jupiter almost tore his poor wife apart - yet she still finds the strength to deliver another kid that's even bigger. But not to worry about the plot holes since Craven doesn't give any more regard to his direction or editing either, especially near the end, when one of the major characters just disappears completely from the picture! I'd just love to ramble on endlessly about all the laughable blunders in this film, but I realize that taking the time to complain about it is just another set of minutes that I'll end up wishing I'd spent on better things when I go to my grave.

The Hills Have Eyes (1977)

They don't make 'em like this anymore!

[9/10 · 14 September 1999]

Wes Craven is a director who did a lot to revive interest in the horror genre, but he also did a lot to ensure that we were unlikely to get our horror the way we used to. While I personally have nothing against his mega-successful "Scream" franchise and have enjoyed both films immensely, I feel sad knowing that Craven will never be able to recapture the awesome low-budget effectiveness of his earlier works. He has developed his directorial skills a LOT since then, but any horror fan will tell you that slicker does not necessarily mean scarier. Now that Craven has successfully broken free from the genre that has provided him with a living for over a quarter century (and has moved on to directing inspirational films with Meryl Steep!), we will never see another film like his "The Hills Have Eyes", which is raw, intense horror at its best. The film doesn't quite have the same impact as Craven's earlier "Last House on the Left", but it is a more skilful piece of work, and is still one of the most frightening genre flicks ever made.

Like all great horror films, the plot requires very little description. The upper-class, white-bread Carter family are on a road trip to California and decide to take a detour through the desert to check out a silver mine that the parents received as a silver wedding anniversary gift. They ignore the warnings of a crazy old man they encounter at a gas station who warns them to stay on the main road, and end up wishing they'd listened to him after their trailer becomes trapped in the middle of nowhere with a broken axle on the car. It soon becomes apparent that they've stumbled into an area that is populated by a family whom the Carters would never have to worry about encountering back home in Cleveland. The members of this family are named after planets in the solar system (Jupiter, Mars, Pluto etc.) and are able to survive life in the desert by praying on unsuspecting travellers like the Carters. After a night of unbearable hell, the Carter family has lost some of their members and most of their supplies and decide to take revenge once daylight hits. They end up acting more violent and psychotic than the villains.

Not even David Lean has used the desert to better effect. Craven's direction here is top-notch, and does a terrific job at conveying the isolation of his location and the helplessness of the whole situation. He takes his sweet time building up the mutant family's attack on the Carters, so that the tension almost becomes unbearable. By the last act, the film is less concerned about the heroes finding their way out of the desert, but about whether or not they are going to end up stooping to the level of their enemies. Of course, these themes of vengeance and family were covered by Craven before in "Last House on the Left", but this time around, he ensures that they will reach a wider audience by presenting them within the confines of a more straightforward genre film. The main factor that prevents this film from being superior to "Last House" are the villains, who are somewhat cartoonish and not quite as memorable as Krug & Company. However, they still do provide plenty of menace, and like the "Last House" gang, exude a certain likability when they're not acting vicious, especially Michael Berryman, who steals every scene he's in as the dim-witted Pluto. All in all, "The Hills Have Eyes" is an unforgettable experience and one of the best films of its kind. Even though videotape copies of "Hills" have been in the darkest depths of moratorium hell for years, every horror fan should go out of their way to check it out. Especially since we just don't get them like this any more...

I Still Know What You Did Last Summer (1998)

I wish he'd forgotten what they did...

[7 September 1999]

"Scream" certainly did an awful lot to revive interest in the slasher genre, so that we now seem to get at least one film per month that supplies us with a story about some teen heartthrob being threatened by a mad psycho. None of these films could be considered horror masterpieces, but a lot of them are good fun, and almost all of them have their merits. "I Know What You Did Last Summer" is a perfect example. It may not have been a classic, but it was a slick, entertaining effort that was a significant cut above the average teen slasher flick we would have received 10 or 15 years ago. But, alas, we now have a sequel to it that is now officially the first entry in the new slasher boom that is completely devoid of merit.

With one of the dumbest titles of recent years (I could go into the logistics of explaining that what they did last summer actually occurred two summers ago, but why bother?), "I Still Know What You Did Last Summer" commits the worst possible offense for a slasher flick: it's boring. Unlike the slasher flicks of the 80s, the filmmaking isn't inept enough to provide a good laugh, but not skillful enough to make the film exciting. The violence isn't cheesy enough to be funny, but not frightening enough to be scary. The acting here isn't laughably bad, just uninteresting. And since this new slasher boom seems to be against the concept of gratuitous nudity (despite the attractive casts), there's very little to keep one engaged while watching. What the film does do is constantly remind us how many cliches it contains, but without a sly wink about it. The characters repeatedly mention that they're trapped on a tropical island during a rainstorm with no transportation to the mainland and no way of calling for help, but we never get the impression that the film is poking fun at these standard contrivances since it's inconceivable that the filmmakers would respect the audience's intelligence that much. It is easy to guess LONG before the characters do that the radio trivia contest that sends them to that tropical island is a phoney ploy by the killer (since most of us know that the capital of Brazil is not Rio), and the "surprising" twist that comes three-quarters of the way through the film can be predicted right away (just pay close attention to the characters' names). The major low point is the predictable final scene, which runs forever and doesn't even bother to reward the audience for enduring the previous 90 minutes by at least ATTEMPTING something new.

Is there anything good I can say about this film? Well, the wonderful Jeffrey Combs ("Re-Animator", "The Frighteners") has a role in it as the hotel manager and is as delightfully offbeat as usual, but in typical slasher form, he has to bite the big one early while the most annoying characters get to survive to the bitter end. Hopefully, the poor response to this film will kill off the chance for another entry in the series though I'd be mighty curious to see what kind of title they would come up with for that one...

Halloween H20: 20 Years Later (1998)

Well, at least there ain't no Druids...

[4/10 · 7 September 1999]

The fact that this latest sequel stars Jamie Lee Curtis and is willing to disregard the dreadful "Halloween" sequels that have preceded it does not necessarily guarantee that it will be a satisfying film. Despite the fact that it has abandoned the inept plotting and filmmaking which occupied its joke of a predecessor, "The Curse of Michael Myers" (as I stated above, you can take comfort in knowing that there are no Druids in this time around), it has not gone the extra mile to actually be something special, and as a result, it comes across as a disappointingly mundane, forgettable slasher film. The film is loaded with plenty of nice in-jokes that could make this a potentially memorable finale to the "Halloween" saga (I especially loved seeing Nancy Stephens reprise her role as Nurse Marion from the first two "Halloween" films), but alas, the director of this material is Steve Miner ("House", "Friday the 13th Part 3"), who is competent enough, but hardly in John Carpenter's league when it comes to pumping up the adrenaline of an audience. His murder scenes are presented in such a humdrum fashion that you end up saying to yourself, "is that it?". What's most sorely missed in "H20", however, is the presence of the late Donald Pleasance. Without his wonderfully campy scenes of him describing the pure evil of Michael Myers, the film feels undernourished, so we end up with many overlong stalk-and-slash scenes that barely push the film up to its scant 85 minutes.

However, while on an overall scale, "H20" is hardly a satisfying conclusion to the saga, it does come up with an ending that would be the ideal way to close off the series. Without giving anything away, I'll just say that it perfectly sums up everything that the entire "Halloween" saga has been about, and for the first time, makes one finally think that yet another sequel would be impossible. If the 80 minutes that preceded this conclusion had been just as strong, we might have had a really special motion picture to close off the past 20 years of slasher mayhem.

Nightwatch (1997)

A necessary remake

[8/10 · 7 September 1999]

Now that Gus Van Sant's version of "Psycho" has been considered an embarrassment by all, people question what merits there could be in a director doing a shot-by-shot reworking of an earlier film. However, Ole Bornedal's American remake of his own European thriller, "Nattevagten", does manage to demonstrate that there is a good reason for doing such a thing. I have unfortunately never seen Bornedal's original film, and to do so would probably require a visit to the bootleggers for me. Those who have had the privilege of seeing it have labelled it a real masterpiece, and the report from them is that the American remake is almost the exact same movie, as Bornedal practically copies his original film shot-by-shot. He has taken the opposite approach that Georges Sluizer took with his disastrous "Vanishing" remake and ensured that his new version comes as close as possible to capturing what made the original so effective.

Some may call Bornedal's decision a lazy one, but it works well for me. It's one thing to copy a film like "Psycho", which virtually everyone in the Western world has seen, but when an acclaimed film like "Nattevagten" is so inaccessible to North American audiences, a shot-by-shot remake is the next best thing. I really enjoyed "Nightwatch" and take comfort in knowing that Bornedal has done his very best to make his remake work as well as his original. He has done a successful job of translating his talent to audiences over here, and turns "Nightwatch" into one of the most creepy and atmospheric American horror films of the 90s. The plot, involving a law student named Martin who takes a job as a night watchman at a morgue where the victims of a vicious serial killer are always turning up, has a number of holes, with a couple of scenes that don't hold up in the overall scheme of things, but Bornedal makes up for that by providing a number of eerie moments (the way the killer plays "This Old Man" while performing his deeds is especially effective) and gets solid work from his cast (though, being that he made this film before any of his other American efforts, Ewan MacGregor has trouble maintaining his new accent). There's also a surprisingly effective undercurrent of black humour throughout the story, most of it coming from the always-reliable Brad Dourif as a duty doctor who thinks that Martin's reports of corpses suddenly appearing in the morgues are complete lunacy (he cynically tells Martin that a nice visit with the "zeen family" might help calm him down). The identity of the plot's "mystery killer" is not impossible to guess, but Bornedal keeps you hooked all the way to the hair-raising climax that contains a moment involving handcuffs that's one of the most startling things I've seen in any recent horror film.

When all is said and done, I probably won't have any need to acknowledge this film's existence if I ever score a copy of "Nattevagten". Those who have seen Bornedal's original are unlikely to find much here to justify the need for a remake. However, considering how little attention this film received when it was released, I doubt that there will be much push to get "Nattevagten" an official video release. Until that actually does occur, "Nightwatch" will more than do just fine.

Day of the Dead (1985)

A long-time sufferer of the "Alien 3 Syndrome"

[7 September 1999]

"Day of the Dead" is a film that is an unfortunate sufferer of the "Alien 3 Syndrome". And, no, I don't classify those that are affected by the syndrome to be disappointing final entries in a trilogy. To suffer from "Alien 3 Syndrome", you must follow two exceptional films, and the entry that has preceded you must be so exciting and action-packed that when you dare take a grimmer, more deliberately paced approach to your material, you will become universally reviled, with many people failing to notice that you have more than your fair share of merits on your own. In fact, "Day of the Dead" has a LOT of merits - even more than the film that its syndrome is based on. While it doesn't quite approach the greatness of "Dawn of the Dead", it is still an intelligent, first-rate horror effort and stands as one of the best genre films of the 80s.

In this final entry of George Romero's "Living Dead" trilogy, the walking dead supposedly outnumber the humans by a ratio of 400,000 to 1. Twelve people who have devoted themselves to studying and wiping out the zombies hole up together in an underground missile silo, and for all we know, these could be the last twelve living humans on the face of the planet. Most of these people don't capture our sympathy like the foursome who holed up in the shopping mall in "Dawn". Half of them are gung-ho soldiers who seem to take great pleasure in threatening the scientific team, and Romero spends much of the first half focusing on the bickering and intense conflicts between these people. In fact, for over an hour, the hordes of living dead get very little screen time, as the story focuses on the tension between the characters, and the efforts of an off-the-wall scientist to train a captured zombie named Bub to act human. Compared to its predecessors, this long section of the film may seem slow and talky, but it is always interesting and, for the most part, effectively performed by its unknown cast. Besides, it all eventually leads up to a corker of finale when the zombies finally invade the compound, and most of the humans become showcases for the brilliance of Tom Savini, who outdoes even himself in the gore F/X department.

While most of this material is very grim, "Day" ironically has the most hopeful, upbeat conclusion in the trilogy - which, alas, is its only major shortcoming. The quick transition to the final scene is so abrupt and unexpected that the audience feels cheated, leaving the impression that the production ran out of money before the whole climax could be filmed. Indeed, Romero has often expressed his unhappiness about being underfunded for this project, which prevented him from creating a truly definitive final chapter for the trilogy. But while "Day of the Dead" may not quite be the ultimate finish to one of the greatest trilogies of all time, it is still a very satisfying conclusion (at least until Romero gets funding for his long-rumoured "Twilight of the Dead"). It may not be popular among everyone, due to many unfair comparisons to its superior predecessors, but on its own, it is about as good as horror films get.

Cannibal Ferox (1981)

If only they'd died quicker...

[7 September 1999]

Before this film starts, there is a disclaimer that mentions that there are more than two dozen scenes of torture and brutality to follow and warns "If the presentation of violent and repulsive subject matter upsets you, please do not view this film" (as if anyone who feels the need to check out a film called "Make Them Die Slowly" would fall into that category in the first place). It takes less than five minutes for the film to shatter its credibility, however, by playing an hilariously cheesy and out-of-place Euro-disco tune over the opening credits and then giving us a scene involving two laughable mob guys who seem to use more profanities in a minute-and-a-half than Joe Pesci did in the entire length of "Goodfellas". You can instantly sense that Umberto Lenzi's film will not have provide the same disturbing effect as Ruggero Deodato's "Cannibal Holocaust".

And it doesn't, though it functions fairly well on its own terms. Its basic plot is similar to its predecessor, as three students travel to South America in hopes of proving that cannibalism is just a myth - and find out that this is not the case after meeting up with a drug dealer (exuberantly played by the Italian horror icon John Morghen) that has wronged the local natives, who are not hesitant to punish the whites for their deeds. The story takes FAR too long to get where its going and tends to undermine its tension at the wrong times by cutting away to New York for a completely unnecessary subplot involving "Holocaust" star Robert Kerman as a cop who is searching for Morghen. The film's attempts at moralizing, by trying to tell us that the cannibalism is only a response by the natives to the wrongdoings of the white man, doesn't quite work either since the white savagery occupies about one-eighth the screen time (in other words, a mere four-minute flashback sequence) devoted to the brutal torture by the natives.

Still, despite the hokey nature of the script and the acting, the story does manage to grab you and stay in your head long after its over. Lenzi creates a genuinely taut and uneasy jungle atmosphere and when the gore sequences finally arrive, they do provide plenty of bite. The most shocking scene is a disturbingly realistic impaling of a woman's breasts on a pair of hooks, which, like all the gore in the film, manages to shock because Lenzi presents it in such a straightforward, uncompromising fashion that would make the makeup effects in Romero's "Living Dead" trilogy seem as cartoonish as the gore in "Monty Python and the Holy Grail". Despite its many flaws, "Make Them Die Slowly" is one of those films that provides such an unforgettable viewing experience that it's worth a watch, no matter what.

House on the Edge of the Park (1980)

Watch this mess for Hess!

[6/10 · 7 September 1999]

If the name David Hess means nothing to you at all, then there's little reason for you to watch "House on the Edge of the Park". Hell, if you don't know who David Hess is, then why are you even reading this review? However, if you're like me, and thought that his performance as Krug Stillo in Wes Craven's classic "Last House on the Left" was one of the most amazing villainous portrayals in cinematic history, then this film is definitely worth a look.

The plot has many similarities to "Last House", and Hess is essentially playing the same role. His character, Krug, er, Alex, and his dim-witted sidekick, Ricky (played by Italian horror fave John Morghen, billed here as Giovanni Lombardo Radice) are picked up by a small group of yuppies and invited to a party, but when it becomes apparent that the two of them are there only to be mocked and humiliated, Alex decides to make things turn ugly. The film is sometimes a trial to sit through, due largely to the extremely unlikable yuppie characters (some of whom you're really glad to see Hess abuse), and the surprisingly flat direction of Ruggero Deodato, though he does manage to stage an impressive scene where Hess runs a straight razor along a woman's bare torso that's as squirm-inducing as anything he staged in "Cannibal Holocaust". However, when Hess' psychotic tendencies kick into full gear, he is a true joy to watch and makes the film a lot more interesting than it has any right to be. Without him, "House on the Edge of the Park" would probably be unwatchable.

If the main purpose "House on the Edge of the Park" is to make you feel dirty, then it certainly succeeds on that level. Unlike "Last House", which tried very hard not to titillate with its scenes of degradation, Deodato is not above lingering the camera on a woman's nude body while she is being raped, and that makes a lot of its sexual violence actually seem more unpleasant than it did in Craven's film. What's quite amazing is how quickly the film can switch from being disturbing to laughable, especially during the protracted finale, which throws a silly twist into the story that will leave you picking out the holes in the plot for days, and gives Hess an opportunity to do a Jim Carrey-esque facial contortion that's one of the funniest sights I've EVER seen. The soundtrack is also one of the most bizarre that you are likely to find in a film as the music will go from a mellow (though undeniably creepy) love ballad playing over a rape scene to a gut-busting Euro-disco song called "Do It To Me Once More". However, while this review may seem overwhelmingly negative, a lot of the sleazy qualities that I have just described are what make "House on the Edge of the Park" more distinctive than your average rape-revenge flick, which is why fans of the genre will want to check it out. But, when all is said and done, the thing that makes this film a "must-see" is the opportunity to watch the amazing Mr. Hess at work.

Dawn of the Dead (1978)

The best sequel ever made!

[10/10 · 7 September 1999]

Those who suggest that "Empire Strikes Back" or "Godfather II" is the greatest sequel of all time just have that opinion shrugged off by me. "Dawn of the Dead" is not a title that pops up that often when people bring up the subject of superior sequels (I was disappointed not to hear its name mentioned in the endless sequel discussions during "Scream 2"), but it gets my vote as the film that best continues the story of and improves upon its predecessor. George Romero has given his "Night of the Living Dead" sequel a new backdrop and a whole new set of characters, but has maintained the central theme of his original, and uses his higher budget to further examine it to great effect. And he also creates one hell of a horror film while he's at it.

The zombie epidemic has spread mightily since "NOTLD", and four characters, traffic reporter Steven (David Emge), his fiancee Fran (Gaylen Ross), and SWAT team members Roger (Scott Reiniger) and Peter (Ken Foree), decide to barricade themselves from the troubles of the outside world in an abandoned but fully functional shopping mall. Many will argue that "Dawn of the Dead" isn't as scary or intense as its predecessor, but that would be missing the point. While "Night" told a tight, minimalist, claustrophobic story that only took place over the course of one night, "Dawn" is practically a horror epic. The full-length director's cut runs 140 minutes, which is almost an unheard-of running time for a horror film. Romero wishes to show us how his characters develop and handle their situation over the course of many months. Two-thirds of the way through, after the characters have worked hard to successfully clear the mall of zombies and build up a perfect utopia for themselves, the living dead are forgotten about for an extended period of time as the film focuses on the intense boredom that develops within these people, who can't come to grips with their new trouble-free existence. It is almost a relief to them when a large biker gang stops by to loot the mall, and the climax is not so much about the threat the zombies provide, but about the threat the humans provide to each other.

Using his shopping mall setting to sprinkle his tale with many touches of satire and dark humour (love that Muzak score from The Goblins!), Romero tells this story brilliantly, so that watching these characters develop becomes an unforgettable experience. After letting us care deeply about what happens to these people, Romero's offbeat conclusion to the story comes across wonderfully since it goes completely against what we'd be expecting after "NOTLD". The unknown cast inhabit their roles so well that's its a shame that they didn't move on to bigger things. While Foree has found lots of steady work throughout the past twenty years (he even got to do an "X-Files" episode!), hardly a peep has been heard from his co-stars ever since. But of course, the real stars of the show are the zombies, vividly brought to life by the make-up maestro, Tom Savini (who also has a memorable role as the leader of the biker gang). His gory make-up effects were very shocking for their time and still pack quite a punch today. Not only is this the best sequel ever made, but I'd rank it among the greatest of ALL films. The film offers so much more to an audience than most non-genre films, but the fact that it just happens to contain a lot of disembowelments and fatal head wounds no doubt blinds many people to its merits. If I ran the "AFI 100" list, you can bet that this would be among the top ten. Oh yeah... and it's also one hell of a horror flick.

The Last House on the Left (1972)

The most flawed masterpiece of all time

[10/10 · 7 September 1999]

"Night of the Living Dead" and "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" are two films that received a unanimous critical bashing when they were first released, but are now looked upon as ground-breaking horror masterpieces. That is also a classification that could be used to describe Wes Craven's "Last House on the Left", but after 27 years, the film still hasn't quite gotten the respect it deserves, and its greatness only seems to be recognized primarily among horror fans. While it is certainly not Craven's most polished film, I still consider it to be his best, and indeed, Craven has acknowledged many times that he doesn't even want to ATTEMPT to equal it. "Last House" was the first movie that aimed to show an audience what the REAL effects of violence were and the low-budget, documentary-like realism that Craven brought to the proceedings allows it to pack a bigger punch than a thousand professional studio films ever could. Yes, the movie has more than its fair share of flaws, but it is a measure of the film's power that one can easily overlook them. The most flawed masterpiece of all time may be a strange way to describe a film, but that would be an accurate way to describe "Last House on the Left".

As virtually everyone knows, the basic plotline is a reworking of Ingmar Bergman's "Virgin Spring", but Craven does a superb job of translating the story's details to a 1970s setting. Two teenage girls, Mari (Sandra Cassel) and Phyllis (Lucy Grantham) go into the big city for a rock concert, only to encounter three of the most memorable villiains in film history: Krug (David Hess), Weasel (Fred Lincoln) and Sadie (Jeramie Rain), who are also accompanied by Krug's heroin-addicted, guilt-ridden son, Junior (Marc Sheffler). The gang of escaped convicts kidnap the girls and proceed to rape and murder them, but when they seek shelter at the nearest house, they are stunned to find that their hosts just happen to be Mari's parents - who unleash violent tendencies that they would have never thought possible once they discover that they are housing their daughter's killers.

The long, painful section of the film where the killers torture and murder the girls is where "Last House on the Left" impresses the most. Before these scenes, the villains have been presented as normal, funny, almost likable individuals, which makes their despicable actions all the more shocking. Craven shoots the scenes of degradation with the raw feel of a documentary, and while this is mostly due to his minuscule budget and lack of filmmaking experience, it lends an uncomfortable air of authenticity to the events. He also demonstrates his ability to toy with the audience's emotions by intercutting the horror with slapstick scenes involving two inept cops who run into all sorts of misadventures while searching for Krug and his gang. While the idea of mixing the violence with humour is an effective one (and works well during some of his climactic scenes), the cop scenes are done in such broad, over-the-top fashion that they provide way too much of a contrast with the film's disturbing moments. However, when the girls' death scenes do occur, they are protracted and extremely intense, and during the rape and murder of Mari, the killers actually give off expressions of shock and remorse for what they have done. Back in 1972, this approach to screen violence was unheard-of.

The outstanding work of the unknown cast is what makes the film as effective as it is. Cassel and Grantham make extremely believable and sympathetic victims, though the real acting honours go to the villains. Hess (who also composed the film's dated but often effective score) is truly remarkable in his role, making Krug into one of the most unforgettable screen psychopaths, and he is almost matched by veteran porn director Lincoln's surprisingly effective turn as Weasel, presenting him as a humorous, laid-back character that is capable of shocking, cold-blooded violence. But while the film is often quite disturbing, it also has plenty of entertainment value. When the violence is not being displayed, the tone is very tongue-in-cheek, as Craven provides plenty of sharp dialogue and effective bits of black humour. In particular, the infamous scene where Weasel meets his painful revenge from Mari's mother, and the dynamite dream sequence that precedes it, manage to be both shocking and oddly entertaining at the same time. But it is the film's anti-violence statement that makes "Last House" so memorable, as Craven does not allow his characters to feel any satisfaction for their vicious actions. This is easily one of the ten most important horror films of all time, and a real personal favourite of mine. It demands to finally be recognized as the true groundbreaking achievement that it is.