MY CALL: An intelligent, superbly acted vampire story, serenely-scored and with a more realistic, fresh perspective. MOVIES LIKE Byzantium: Interview with a Vampire (1994) provides a more classical, romantic approach whereas We Are the Night (2010) keeps things totally modern and Euro-sleek.  For gorgeously lethal movies, the beauty of Perfume: The Story of a Murderer (2006) and Hanna (2011) actually by far eclipse this film and are both highly recommended for the unique sensory-driven style.

This finely shot film opens with an elegantly underspoken narration by Eleanor (Saoirse Ronan; Hanna, The Host), a young woman who reveals that her fate is bound to Clara (Gemma Arterton; Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters, Clash of the Titans). As we are cautiously introduced to these strong characters our eyes traverse one scene to the next, and with each we swiftly approach an understanding of their desperate lifestyle spent drifting and suppressing secrets.

The acting is superb. Like Anne Rice’s Lestat, Clara portrays the ruthless, manipulative, survivalist parent whereas Eleanor (much as the resistant Louis) resents her mother’s actions. Director Neil Jordan (The Borgias, In Dreams, The Crying Game, Interview with a Vampire , The Company of Wolves) has an impressive résumé including period piece drama, sexual thriller, classical vampirism and gory non-mainstream fairy tale horror, so we I read he was directing this film let’s just say “you have my attention.” This film moves at a generally slow pace, punctuated with occasionally eventful blood flow. It is far from exciting; more “interesting” really. For even the slow seasons curry my curiosity of what fate will befall Eleanor, Clara, their relationship, their lives.

Through a series of flashbacks we discover a more mysterious vampire origin; one that neither matches folklore nor is completely explained .

Blood waterfalls on mysterious islands.

These vampires walk in daylight, cast reflections and have no fangs, but live forever, crave blood and require invitation. The vampirism is not exactly presented subtly, but the focus is placed on Clara and Eleanor’s struggle to survive and the growing strain on their relationship. To protect this secret Clara would do anything. But it seems Eleanor yearns to share her secret. When she meets a brooding love interest (Caleb Landry Jones; The Last Exorcism, Antiviral) her willingness to suppress her secret wanes.

The score is serene, able to lull a beast to calm before putting it down. It complements the thought-provoking, moody atmosphere so well as we estimate the dubious future of these vampires. The gore is abundant in brevity, but not distasteful, and occasional scenes are brutal, but appropriate. One shot of bloodletting was actually quite beautiful.

I was never swept away by an Anne Rice-esque violent vampiric passion. But I remained engrossed in this story, beautifully told by characters with depth.

MY CALL: All the gore and dumb plot but not of the Divoff’s canny evil cheeky charm of the previous release. A noticeable drop in quality for the franchise, but at least the effects are still fun and cheesy. MOVIES LIKE Wishmaster 3: Wishmaster (1997) and Wishmaster 2: Evil Never Dies (1999) are both much better, largely for Andrew Divoff’s ability to appear credibly pleased with his Djinn’s evil. OTHER TITLES: This movie has two other subtitles. Most commonly listed as Beyond the Gates of Hell, this movie was also released as Sword of Justice and Devil Stone.

First off, bad news guys. Andrew Divoff (Wishmaster, Wishmaster 2: Evil Never Dies) will not be returning to play the Monkey paw, wish-twisting Djinn. If you loved his performance in parts one and two, then maybe this movie isn’t for you.

After an opening montage of museum relics including something akin to Pinhead’s Hellraiser puzzlebox, the camera settles on a nightmare-plagued, semi-attractive college girl (A.J. Cook; Final Destination 2, Wer, Mother’s Day). Diana, having agreed to help her classics/mythology professor with some Iranian exhibit at a museum, snoops around and discovers the foreboding puzzlebox-looking artifact. I’ll give you all one guess at what’s inside? BINGO! A giant blood ruby! As if it made perfect sense to do this, she immediately rubs this ruby (which was already clean and sparkling) with a rag. Aaaaaaaaand GENIE! But just like the previous two movies, the genie never seems to arrive until after the ruby-rubber departs, leaving the genie with the need to find them.

Instead the genie first encounters Diana’s professor, who wishes for a co-ed threesome, sees some boobs, and is killed for some reason.

Then, with no Andrew Divoff lookalike to be found, the Djinn settles for him and takes his face.

So now the Djinn looks like this…

Instead of this.

This box and ruby was shipped to her mythology professor who says the Iranian trinket is inscribed in Aramaic. So he teaches classic mythology, studies Iranian relics and reads Aramaic? Smart guy. I get that some academics have weird combinations of interests, but this is up there with Christopher Lloyd in Piranha 3D (2010) being a fish store owner who is an expert in piranha biology (so he’s into ichthyology), extinct piranhas and their fossils (a dash of paleontology; not too farfetched yet though), and the local subterranean bodies of water (yup, cave lakes) in a region with no piranha species (and now it’s ridiculous that he has a fish store there). Oh, and he owns a piranha fossil. Doesn’t that thing belong in a museum, bro?

Anyway, the genie arrives and two things are very different about this movie compared to its predecessors. One, there is no highly memorable, uber-gory opening in which the genie must eat a soul to become fully constituted into the tentacle-headed monster we’ve come to love. And two, Andrew Divoff’s iconic evil voice has been replaced with some synthesizer-enhanced voice. It’s not good. Worse yet, the franchise’s budget clearly took yet another hit, leaving the Djinn’s skin looking as rubbery as ever.  And what’s with the goofy over-sized ears?

Amazon’s editorial review claims this is “the goriest installment of the hit franchise yet.” That’s a blatant lie to sell DVDs, people! You’ll find more truth in the Djinn’s granted wishes! This is no more gory than previous installments…which is sufficiently, playfully gory. I’d say it’s the least gory, but not by a lot. The gore seems to drop with each subsequent sequel (and budget cut).

It’s far beyond the stabs and blood in a typical slasher movie. Gross, gory scenes include “forced” magical liposuction-to-death and gutsy limb regeneration. Overall, the gore is a little less than part 2 (and way less than part 1) but the effects team made a decent effort with what they had. The classic Wishmaster “face peel” looks a bit lame in this movie and his genie magic is still depicted as cheaply-CGI’d blue electricity.

The real downfall in this third installment–other than an actor who couldn’t fill Divoff’s shoes–was the Djinn’s appearance. If you think I’m being critical take another look at the Djinn’s make-up and prosthetics paint job. Like so many other lower budget horror movies, this sequel relies on nudity to fill the void…not that it needed it to be entertaining. I guess starving actress’ breasts are cheaper than rubber guts these days.

The most totally random thing that happens is when, by Diana’s wish, her boyfriend Greg (Tobias Mehler; Disturbing Behavior, Carrie [2002]) gets transformed into an archangel (i.e., Greg now has blue eyes and a sword) for a painfully bad fight complete with Djinn-flipping, pew-throwing nonsense. This fight is about as bad as the story (which was admittedly about as bad in part 2) and the genie’s attempt at evil humor (which was actually loads of fun in part 2–did I mention how much I miss Andrew Divoff?).

The twisted wishes are as lame as ever, there gore well doesn’t flow as abundantly, and Andrew Divoff’s replacement offers none of the fun personality that fueled the success of the first two installments. So, why watch this one? Honestly, despite the stupid story it’s not bad for a “fun” 2001 horror and it’s rather decent considering its budgetary constraints. The effects are largely biased towards the second half, but once you arrive there they make for an entertaining ride.

  MY CALL: This movie teaches us to Just say “gno” to drugs…and movies with Blood Gnome in the title! MOVIES LIKE Blood Gnome: I think Ghoulies (1985) is what you really wanted when you thought to yourself “how bad could this Blood Gnome movie be?”

Writer/director/editor John Lechago (Bio Slime, Killjoy 3, Killjoy Goes to Hell) has put together a real stinker! This movie has low film quality akin to a WikiLeaked sex video, lousy writing and even worse acting. This comes off as a poor student-made film. Given the present filmmaker’s skills, it should come as no surprise that nudity abounds (including a Julie Strain cameo) to cover up its shortcomings with juvenile entertainment. Lloyd Kaufman’s raunchy, exploitative Tromaville films are more attentively crafted than this crap.

From the start we learn that a drug distributor has some little monsters in a crate. As horrible as this movie clearly is, this actually raised a brow in interest for me at first.

A naked couple engaged in BDSM activities are killed by an invisible force.  Spoiler alert! Blood gnomes did it! A crime scene photographer (Vinnie Bilancio; Witchcraft XI, Bio Slime) is on to something strange when he sees a tiny bloody hand print and starts seeing invisible monstrous gnomes eating victims with his infrared camera setting.

What’s preposterously stupid here is that he sees the gnomes eating the victims right in front of the CSI team! As if they’re being invisible meant that no one would see the masticated flesh or hear the slopping sounds of flesh-eating two feet away from them.

As if it was his job to solve the case, our photographer becomes involved with a dominatrix and his “research” takes the form of BDSM sessions. How this will help a photographer solve a string of evil gnome homicides, I have no idea! As a result, far more than telling a story about carnivorous fairies this movie succeeds at teaching the ABCs of BDSM to anyone completely ignorant to the subject. In fact, that may be the only thing this movie does successfully.

The budget is bare bones low. It’s as if the special effects were paid for with whatever they had in their pockets at the time, which wasn’t much. The blood work is weak and the blood gnomes are less impressive than Muppets. In one scene we see a blood gnome birth and find out the source behind the drug…blood gnome afterbirth from some tentacled abomination. It’s never made clear what these monsters are or where they came from before some drug-dealing dominatrix got a hold of them. But I guess I’m glad I was spared having to endure any more screen time fumbling through a poorly rendered explanation.

The effects are weak, but later in the movie the blood gnome attacks become marginally entertaining and much more frequent.

I’d have to recommend that you skip this one.

MY CALL: A brutally dark, intensely and weirdly and unnervingly erotic, AMAZING art house film brimming with an admixture of visual splendor and vile imagery. This is easily among the most provocatively messed up movies I’ve ever seen. MOVIES LIKE Antichrist: For relentless sexuality go for Nymphomaniac (2013). 127 Hours(2010) for a sensory adventure focusing on a single actor. For general intensity and random “holy shit” factor try A Serbian Film (2010) or Martyrs(2008). SIDEBAR: There are various edits out there. The truly unedited version has a running time of 108 minutes. The unedited 108 minute version is reviewed here.

Lars von Trier (Nymphomaniac, Melancholia) sets a powerful mood in this visually stunning film straight from the opera-scored opening slow-motion sequence of a sex scene complete with pornographic penetration in the first 60 seconds. I know, I just mentioned penetration. But just trust me right out of the gates that this shot, however controversial or shocking, fits the scene perfectly like an artistic puzzle piece that has a significant story to tell. Whereas there is something ominous to be feared for sure, the scene is more a splendor to the eyes than a 1990s French noir perfume commercial–you know, the commercials that are so “out there” that you never knew what they were advertizing until they told you at the end. Some call this high art, others pornographic and provocative.

This film strikes me as a challenge. We only ever see three actors, one of which is the child who dies in the opening sequence. As husband (“He”) and wife (“She”), Willem Dafoe (Nymphomaniac) and Charlotte Gainsbourg (Nymphomaniac, Melancholia, 21 Grams) carry every scene as nameless characters enduring the loss of their child, who died while they were having sex. He is an over-involved psychoanalyst (playing more the role of therapist than husband) attempting to guide her through her grief, which she serially transmutes into sexual fixation. In an effort to force her to properly grieve and face her mounting irrational fears he takes her to a secluded cabin in the woods, where the sexuality, tension and violence escalate…often, in fact, TOGETHER!

Great acting, great film! As past tragedy begets the tragedy of their present, the Biblical symbolism rains down hard on these actors’ positively fearless journey venturing to dark places most actors wouldn’t dare.

“Chaos reigns!”

Strikingly sublime imagery stimulates us as we endure often unsettling profound emotions. The raw visceral nature of their surroundings parallels her ravaged, desperate psyche. The more he tries to deconstruct her mental torment, the more she in turn tries to disarticulate their sexuality.

Gorgeous cinematography.

This is easily among the most provocatively messed up movies I’ve ever seen. Full frontal nudity, masturbation, sexual penetration, animal birth, violent sex scenes, violence against animals, violence against women, torture and genital mutilation are sprinkled about in this controversial (but far from conventionally exploitative) artistic endeavor. So, while I encourage adventurous cinephiles to accept the challenge of seeing this film to its end, let’s just not make a family night of it and DEFINITELY don’t watch it on a first date.

MY CALL: Both creepy and engaging, this time-distorting, psychologically driven ghost story weaves our protagonists’ tortured past into their present with a shockingly smart script. Definitely the best killer mirror movie on the market, and a superior horror film overall as well! MOVIES LIKE Oculus: Although really quite different and of much lower quality, Mirrors (2008) and Mirrors 2 (2010) provide more creepy mirror horror in which evil reflections dare not match the movements of their victims.

POLARIZED REVIEWS: Other reviews’ opinions seem to vary wildly, ranging from calling it poorly acted and carelessly written to praising it as fantastic across the board. I fell on the “pro” side of the argument and feel that those who were disappointed don’t like to think about their horror (during the movie) as much as I do. After all, it is no rollercoaster nor is it really “exciting,” so I see how some may bore of this.

Horror is a genre characterized by one-dimensional characters typified by hardly serviceably acting their way through flat writing to occupy the time until they drink, vandalize, have premarital sex, or do whatever it is that justifies their upcoming death. Despite this, filmmakers press on and we find the occasional pleasant surprise in The Cabin in the Woods (2012), The Conjuring (2013), or other films in which people actually cared about more than simply turning a profit and brought us new spins on classic tropes and even some entirely original ideas. I feel that Oculus is one of those refreshing films. Its scares number low and it’s gore is nothing special, but the acting is phenomenal and the story execution is captivating, although tough to follow at times. More a product of deep and undeniable intrigue than dread, the tension mounts and really never loosens its grip until the closing credits are cast down the screen.

Young Tim and Kaylie.

Tim (Brenton Thwaites; The Signal, Maleficent) and Kaylie (Karen Gillan; Doctor Who) had a seriously messed up childhood. As tweens, they endured a disturbing experience involving their parents’ murder and a demonic mirror which resulted in young Tim being held responsible and placed in a psychiatric care facility until his 21st birthday (ten years later).

Mom and dad are having a tough time.

As a standard rule I never hug reflections.  They’re almost ALWAYS evil.

Not a day after his release to begin his “recovery,” Kaylie makes it readily apparent that everything he has been conditioned to understand as psychosis and repression has remained, much to his surprise, very real to her. Kaylie, in fact, remains absolutely convinced that her parents’ deaths were caused by The Lasser Glass, a centuries old antique mirror housing a malevolent force. Obsessed with proving to the world the evil nature of this supernatural mirror, Kaylie reconstructs the item’s history and creates an evidence-documenting scenario festooned with failsafes to circumvent the antique’s hallucinatory mind-bending wiles. After obtaining this proof, they would destroy it…a task which has proven strangely difficult. Kaylie’s elaborate documentarian approach smacks of Poltergeist 2 (1986), and she leaves little room for error.

Writer/director Mike Flanagan (Absentia) makes frequent and careful use of flashbacks. Kaylie insists that she recalls their terrifying past correctly and Tim resists, contrastingly rationalizing her claims with psychological babble. As Tim and Kaylie’s tortured past unravels before our eyes, that same past seems to slowly take hold of their present as they fight this evil reflective entity.

“Present” Kaylie and Tim.

Any good horror movie pays close attention to lighting as much for mood as for execution. Smart cinematography, deliberately distracting lighting and scene-cut transitions mislead our own sense of time along with our protagonists’. Our notion of the present becomes ever distorted and with every step that Tim comes closer to believing his sister’s claims, their horrific past seems to eerily converge with their perhaps inevitable future as hallucinations distort the present. It’s easy to get lost in it, but I found that to be intentional and engaging.

Everyone did a solid job with their roles. Rory Cochrane and Katee Sackhoff (Riddick, White Noise 2, Battlestar Galactica) play the parents and they really own their mania. I was particularly shocked by the committed performances by Garrett Ryan (Insidious Chapter 2) and Annalise Basso as the younger Tim and Kaylie, who get ample screen time in the flashbacks. If anyone left something to be desired, it would be Brenton Thwaites’ portrayal of the most complicated character Tim.

Oculus is a movie you can’t trust. As the story persists and the timeline is distorted we are as readily confused as the protagonists…and this is a good thing! It’s clever, it keeps us guessing, and there’s nothing like it. You may be left with more questions than answers. But this is a quality of deliberately disorienting mystery rather than plot-holed writing.

This is a must see!

MY CALL: Very entertaining, but it’s not making any “top” lists this year. This film was good-but-mismanaged and found greatness out of reach due to weak story synthesis and character development. However, this movie is rich with charm, jumps and excellent production value. So watch it with a date instead of with a horror snob. MOVIES LIKE The Quiet Ones: Case 39 (2009), The Conjuring (2013) and Oculus (2014) all share some positive elements of this film.

Loosely based on a true experiment that took place in Oxford in 1974, this film delves deep into the notion that what we commonly consider “the supernatural” actually represents telekinetic and “teleplasmic” manifestations of the minds of disturbed believers. Led by Professor Coupland (Jared Harris; Poltergeist, Pompeii, The Ward), graduate students Krissy (Erin Richards; Open Grave, Being Human) and Harry (Rory Fleck-Byrne; Vampire Academy) and videographer Brian (Sam Claflin; Snow White and the Huntsman, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire) band together to investigate the psychic phenomena produced by the suicidal young Jane (Olivia Cooke; Bates Motel) with hopes of “curing” her.

That’s right, Jane.  Put all of your psychic animus into the doll…becas

From Act One to the next weird things happen, Coupland’s methods are called into question as Jane’s health is placed at increasing risk, and Coupland shifts from methodical to manic in his obsession to cure her. Both Coupland and Brian share a competitive interest (almost a sexual fixation) in saving her, but go about doing so by conflicting means. Jared Harris’ psychological descent is impressive and committed whereas Sam Claflin embraces his character’s own brand of emotional fragility.

This film was filled with entertaining moments including shocking effects, gripping jump scares and some long scenes tensed up with a solid creep factor. I’d add that the acting was very good; great, in fact, for a horror film. Olivia Cooke managed to capture crazy, disturbed, scary, dangerous and sympathetic all at once. The style of the film goes from something like a “house” movie, to a demonic possession movie, and then to something altogether different which I don’t want to spoil (not that it’s anything super special).

Jane has her good days (above) and her bad days (below).

However, as the story shifted gears from skeptical science and rational explanations to “what have we gotten ourselves into?” I found myself generally uninvested in the characters and the outcome. Don’t get me wrong, the movie is not without its charm, I enjoyed it and was entertained, and I really “liked” the characters. The thing is, their “development” didn’t lead me anywhere interesting. And whereas the facets of the story (and the scenes behind them) were independently interesting, they failed to find any of that effective and satisfying synthesis that makes us care if the protagonists succeed.

This actress really captures desperate, bewildered loneliness in a sort of Christina Ricci way, doesn’t she? Like a grown up (and psychologically messed up) Wednesday Addams.

Director John Pogue (The Skulls, Quarantine II) may not have wowed us with this film’s story synthesis. But, given his résumé, this represents a good step forward in his professional development and I must admit that it was very entertaining. However, the premise itself is more interesting than its execution. It won’t please gore hounds or story snobs who pine only for unique horror fare–and who, might I add, are almost never 100% happy with what they’re served–but it will please the popcorn “movie night” guys who just want to see good effects, enjoy acting that doesn’t hurt their soul, and laugh at well-placed jump scares. It would probably be a good scary movie on date night as well. Had it only balanced its writing with its quality scares, acting, ideas and filming with a better screenplay, this would have been quite good instead of good-but-mismanaged.

To the less-initiated and perhaps younger horror fan, this PG-13 film may serve as a great introduction to horror. Those who aren’t overly critical or “so tired” of loud-noise induced jump scares should get a real kick out of this. What it lacks in character development and cohesiveness it more than makes up for with jumpy scares, neat effects, minimal gore, great acting, solid production value and a cool premise.

Follow me on TWITTER: @MFFHorrorCorner  https://twitter.com/MFFHorrorCorner  

MY CALL: This fun, monster-driven B-horror movie follows The Thing‘splaybook. It’s entertaining, but I’m not going to suggest you break down doors to see it. MOVIES LIKE Blood Glacier: The Thing (2011). ALTERNATE TITLES: This Austrian film was released by the name Blutgletscher. This was also title The Station. TRAILER:  CLICK HERE to see the TRAILER.

Finally, a film with a message! This film addresses the important questions, like “What will happen to us if the polar ice caps melt?” The answer: we’ll all be starring in a mash-up of National Geographic and The Thing (2011)! I figure this is the inconvenient truth that Al Gore wanted you all to think would happen as a result of global warming if you don’t start investing in more solar panels.

This film opens with blatant over-exposition “explaining away” why each character is important in a color-by-numbers format. Our story takes place at a climate research station in the Alps housing four people and a dog.  Did you just cringe, thinking about the dog kennel scene in the original The Thing? Yeah…me, too.

During some sort of “weather patrol” with the dog (wink, wink) they stumble across a “blood glacier.” They briefly lose track of the dog and everyone somehow gets conveniently cut or bruised. From here, the auspiciously scored “infection sequence” is so obvious there may as well be smoke signals. But it’s not just the researchers we have to worry about. The blood from the thawing glacier infects the local wildlife with some hybridizing single-celled organism that mutates them into hideous monsters. HOORAY!

The effects are not exactly high-tech, but they get the job done and the clumsily-puppeted rubber creatures put a big grin on my face. There’s a beetle-fox mutant (think The Nest), a giant killer roly-poly (think The Bay), giant mosquitoes, evil mountain goats, insectoid birds of prey…see the grin forming yet?

There’s nothing in this movie you haven’t seen before many times over. The scene with examining and explaining the virus/parasite/mutagenic thing, the infected dog scene, watching the clock as infected people become a liability, pulsating parasitic infections housing brooding monsters… I mean, there’s basically even a facehugger scene. Speaking of facehuggers, in the opening scenes the strong female scientist character feels almost as if they were trying to make her reminiscent of Sigourney Weaver in Alien.

Yup…been there, done that.

Is it just me, or does this guy smack of the The Thing’s MacReady? Or Joel Edgerton’s “not Macready” character from the “not remake” prequel?

Yup…narrow eyes and beards across the board.

SO, WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN BETTER? Well, there is the bummer that this was not in English. This isn’t necessarily a “flaw”, but I don’t speak German. I saw it dubbed in English, so I wasn’t distracted from the effects by “reading” the movie or anything. But the dubbing quality was akin to a less-popular Anime and the characters’ mood and enthusiasm rarely seems to match the scene. You also get little appreciative sense of the acting and you can basically hear in the tone of the voice actors that they simply don’t get paid enough to care. I felt this especially detracted from the humor of the opening scene, in which the debilitatingly hungover technician Janek (Gerhard Liebmann) is called to fix a glitch in his underwear.

Director Marvin Kren (ABCs of Death 2, Rammbock: Berlin Undead) successfully delivers a trope-rich, predictable, fun monster movie that should please horror fans and gorehounds. I’d save this for the fanatical, though. Folks who watch “a scary movie” once a month will likely consider this terrible.

Follow  me on Twitter: @MFFHorrorCorner  https://twitter.com/MFFHorrorCorner

MY CALL: A wholesome, cute, spunky, almost Disney-esque horror movie with none of the rated R-ness but just enough evil to take it seriously at times. MOVIES LIKE Odd Thomas: The “adultness” of this matches up well to the first three or four Harry Potter films. However similar in tone, this movie is considerably less wowing and lacks the enchanting world-building elements. The Men in Black franchise feels like a close sci-fi counterpart, despite having no younger actors.

“I see dead people?” Well, it’s been done. But it’s been a while since I cared. So I gave Odd Thomas a shot and I’m glad I did. It offers up something that may not be meant for me, but I appreciated it nonetheless.

So Odd Thomas (Anton Yelchin; Fright Night, Star Trek: Into Darkness), a boyish young man, sees dead people. Playing out with all the carefree background mood and pleasantries of an episode of Desperate Housewives–and all of the almost playful menace as well–Thomas lives in a nice California town surrounded by nice people where he solves crimes using clairvoyance. One day Thomas may be avenging a kind ghost’s wrongful end and the next, stopping a killer from continuing his latest spree. But when things are going to become really bad Thomas sees Bodachs, evil nether creatures which sense the disastrous upcoming events and feed on the death and suffering that ensue. Our story picks up when Thomas starts seeing a disturbing number of Bodachs invisibly lingering about a strange man who clearly has a doomed future and a dark past.

Is it me, or does this guy look like Edgar from Men in Black?  Remember the Edgar suit?

Bodach (above); Dungeons and Dragons Bodak (below)

Thomas has a wholesome girlfriend named Stormy (Addison Timlin; That Awkward Moment, Californication) who has the Disney sitcom dream of owning her own ice cream shop in the mall. She’s spunky, brave and supports Thomas is all his odd dealings with the dead.

Thomas’ main squeeze, Stormy.  Isn’t she just cuter than a puppy made out of kittens?

Another clutch comic book style role is the chief of police (Willem Dafoe; Spider-Man, Antichrist), who is a friend and confidant, and is also aware of Thomas’ secret . Like a crime-stopping kid show, the chief is on speed-dial and he trusts Thomas and Stormy’s word, sending police aid on request.

“Yes, this is the chief…oh, hi Thomas…sure, how many officers should I send to help you…no problem, I trust your dead-people-seeing judgment.  Toodles!”

The special effects are not great, but feel strangely appropriate, if not perfect, considering the “Disney-goes-PG-13″ feel of this film. I’m not making fun of it at all. This feels like Disney’s answer to the old Nickelodeon show Are You Afraid of the Dark (1991-2000).

As for the action, normally my answer would be “absolutely not.” As an adult, I did not find Anton Yelchin’s physical prowess in this movie credible. No matter how well-choreographed the fights may have been, and with all their cool slow-motion bits and chase sequences, I simply don’t buy this little guy as a fighter or athlete. But here’s the thing. It all looked so good and, again, empowering our smaller-statured boyish protagonist just seems to match the wholesome feel of this movie perfectly.

However often I reference Disney in this review, there was at least one scene that shamelessly brandished a common horror trope.

Director Stephen Sommers (The Mummy, Van Helsing) had some fun with this one, which feels like a PG-13 Disney Rom-sitcom horror stretched into a movie. It’s often charming and cute, the story is cohesive, and it all comes to a touching end. Watch it on family movie night if you have some tweens who aren’t ready for real horror just yet.

MY CALL: This semi-art house, semi-perverse film is only for lovers of true indie horror. That said, this was well-done considering its shoestring budget. MOVIES LIKE Night of the Tentacles: Lo (2009) was another bare bones budgeted film that had a lot to say. Dagon (2001) is another tentacular horror love story. The Boogens (1981) and The Kindred (1987) provide some classic 80s tentacle movie monster fun. And Grabbers (2012) offers about as good a time as a ball of tentacles can deliver.

After suffering some serious heart complications, fantasy erotica artist David (Bath Salt Zombies, Easter Casket) strikes a deal with the Devil for a new heart. He didn’t turn to Medicaid or venture to Canada for cheaper solutions…nope. The Devil had just what he needed. And with that David’s heart is replaced by a tentacle monster in a wooden chest. Just one problem: the monster needs to be fed living flesh in order to survive. The monstrous heart is eloquently voiced by an Bill Nighy sound-alike.

So, yeah…this is what the Devil looks like in this film.

Writer/director Dustin Mills (Bath Salt Zombies) clearly made an effort with this script. His writing is far from brilliant, but he definitely deserves credit for delivering far more than I’ve come to expect from the vast majority of direct-to-DVD horror. Theatrical devices like overt melodrama, narration and asides add an irregular flavor to this film. Whereas this flavor may please the art house crowd, some may find it over-the-top and distasteful.

Speaking of distasteful… Is there a lot of sexuality and perversion? Yes. But I see it as being used more as an exploitative “device” than purely as a crutch to cover the film’s shortcomings. There’s masturbation, which seems to reveal our protagonist’s desperation, and nudity, which does not utilize the typical stripper-cast actresses. There are also several sex scenes with little to no nudity.

Some of the acting in this is real crap (sorry, but I’m referring especially to Dustin Mills’ cameo) and the effects are about as cheap as they come. But considering this film had a budget of about $1500, I think I’ll let it slide. If you can make anything that entertains me for that cheap, then you’ve succeeded as a filmmaker. The closing action sequence is awful and fun and, for the few dollars left in the budget, they tried to do a lot with the gore.

I should note that whereas this film is not nearly as deep or art house-ish as Lo (2009), the style is similar enough to warrant comparison.  Those who love true indie horror will likely enjoy this film. But just because you consider yourself an adventurous horror-goer, that doesn’t mean this is for you.

MY CALL: This is truly a “great” bad horror movie and it has more integrity than others of its generation. Although I wouldn’t recommend it to gorehounds, fans of classic 80s slashers will enjoy it.

Remember the days when all horror was rated R? Yeah, I miss the 80s, too. Those were the good old days when everything was either good or “bad” good. I’d call this particular 80s film a “great bad” horror.

Let’s meet this movies spoiled brats… The one on the far right looks like Jeremy Sisto and Sean Pean’s lovechild.

Meet Virginia Wainwright (Melissa Sue Anderson). She’s one of the smartest and most popular kids in school, but she suffers from memory loss and blackouts. Now, in the days leading up to her 18th birthday, her hip clique friends begin dying one by one in strange ways and many of them begin acting strangely.

As her friends become defensive, aggressive and damn near homicidal, Virginia slowly regains traumatic memories from her past. However, she also seems to be seeing some things that her friends aren’t seeing. All the while we are left to wonder just who is killing all these privileged private school brats? After the first kills, all we know for sure is that the victims know their killer. Is the killer the now mentally unhinged Virginia, or one of her snotty privileged friends?

Grin-worthy 80s lameness abounds. From the opening sequence we have a lame strangling which is salvaged by a most spirited struggle by our hysterical coed victim. The deaths range from ho-hum quality to laugh-out-loud hilarity. My favorite kill involves giving a mean spot while someone is doing bench presses, which of course reminded me of Killer Workout (1987; aka Aerobicide) and Death Spa (1989).

And the deliciously macabre birthday scene at the end smacks of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974).

The gore was definitely adequate for its time, but nothing special. This film is clearly more for classically bad 80s slasher fans than sloshy gorehounds, and this lacks the level of zany gore suggested by the DVD cover art. Fans of the 80s will be pleased to see Lisa Langlois (The Nest, Phobia). And by the way, this was directed by J. Lee Thompson (the original Cape Fear, Conquest of the Planet of the Apes)!

Not as sensational as I expected this scene to be.

Maybe what sets this 80s slasher most apart from the rest is that it is filled with red herrings. Virginia’s flashbacks, blackouts and possible hallucinations combined with her friends’ changing behavior offer ample opportunity to misdiagnose the killer. The ending packs such a twisted punch that it would make the plot of a Mexican soap opera seem plausibly reasonable.

This 80s slasher maintains a great deal more integrity than its peers as well. There is no nudity and some effort was clearly placed in constructing the twist-rich plot. I’ll say that again, this is a low budget 80s horror/slasher flick with a thoughtfully made plot. That never happens! That’s reason enough to consider it worth seeing. But, plot aside, this is fun in its own right anyway. I really enjoyed it.

MY CALL: Worst of the franchise. I wouldn’t recommend this. MOVIES LIKE Wishmaster 4: Wishmaster (1997) and Wishmaster 2: Evil Never Dies (1999) are both much better, largely for Andrew Divoff’s ability to appear credibly pleased with his Djinn’s evil. Wishmaster 3: Beyond the Gates of Hell (2001) was nothing special by comparison to the earlier installments.

Director Chris Angel (Wishmaster 3: Beyond the Gates of Hell) returns to bring us the dreaded fourth installment in this series. Some may be shocked that he’d be asked back after seeing part 3. But, much like the Matrix sequels, parts 3 and 4 were filmed back to back with hardly a weekend’s break in between. So don’t be surprised that the make-up for the Djinn looks exactly the same since, well…it is.

Bro: “So you basically had your ruby randomly found and rubbed in part 3, you tried to open the gates of Hell and got defeated, and got banished back to your ruby prison…and THEN, like a day later another girl accidently found and rubbed your ruby AGAIN and released you AGAIN?”

Djinn: “Pretty much, bro.”

Lisa (Tara Spencer-Nairn) is in the middle of a pretty rough patch with her boyfriend, who suffered a crippling motorcycle accident. As with the previous installments she somehow randomly encounters the Djinn’s ruby prison, rubs it (really just touches it) and releases the Djinn (unbeknownst to her). Magically disguised as Lisa’s lawyer, our genie tricks Lisa into making her first two wishes, which include a healthy legal settlement and her husband’s ability to walk again.

This woman is literally orgasmed to death.

If Lisa makes her third wish then all Djinn–oh, yeah, Hell is just brimming with their kind–will be freed and they’ll create Hell on Earth. At this point it should be easy for the Djinn to fool her into making some whimsical wish. No clue why he doesn’t…she still has no idea that he’s actually an evil genie. But wait, there’s a weird twist. When Lisa wishes something the Djinn can’t grant himself, he most dote on her emotions to make her love him…in order to open the gates of Hell…romantic, huh? That’s right! Djinn’s can’t just make someone fall in love with someone else. Evidently the Disney Aladdin genie followed the same rules.

Djinn: “Why won’t you love me?”
Chick: “Dude, you are literally slimy, your hair tentacles look like an STD and you are way too old.”

The execution of the gore is iffy at times. But there are some satisfyingly gross moments like the “face peel” scene typical of the franchise and some genie-wish-induced self-mutilation. We also get to see other Djinn, which was neat I guess.

Overall…meh. I wouldn’t recommend this.

Don’t get mad at me for saying this, but isn’t the Wishmaster franchise about due for a serious remake/reboot? The original isn’t even 20 years old yet and, to this day, is very entertaining and a favorite to gorehounds. But I’d love to see this approached with a real budget (which none of the franchise installments have ever enjoyed) and a far more serious tone. Yes, serious. If it’s not serious then there’s no point in remaking it at all.

MY CALL: This film doesn’t masquerade as anything it isn’t. It’s honest, campy, bad, fun…and breasty. MOVIES LIKE Smothered: While tasteless and much more raunchy, I’d consider films like The Killer Eye (1999), Breeders (1986), Chillerama (2011), Head of the Family (1996) and Hideous! (1997) for a combination of boobs, gore and giggles.

Golden Eye‘sXenia Onatopp gave viewers an unexpected sexual thrill when she killed a man with a leg scissorhold mid-coitus. And that was just PG-13. John Schneider has stepped it up a notch and brought us a big-breasted temptress who commits mammary-assisted murder! That’s right. She smothers people to death with her breasts.

Probably inspired by recent news of the near death of a suffocating German lawyer to his amply-endowed girlfriend and the trailer park murder of a redneck who was “boobed” to death by his plus-sized wife, it seems that fatal breast smothering has become something of a new fad and John Schneider has playfully capitalized on this gimmick in bringing us Smothered.

In this horror comedy, we find Kane Hodder (Chillerama, Hatchet, Wishmaster), R. A. Mihailoff (Hatchet II, Texas Chainsaw Massacre III: Leatherface), Don Shanks (I’ll Always Know What You Did Last Summer, Urban Legends: Bloody Mary) and Bill Mosely (The Devil’s Rejects, Texas Chainsaw 3D) play themselves for the most part at a Louisiana horror convention.

A glimpse into the horror con scene.

The cast is accompanied by a few others including Trixie (Shanna Forrestall; The Last Exorcism, Feral) and the murderess DeeDee (Brea Grant; Halloween II, Dexter, Heroes)…aptly named given her ummmmm virtues.

Embittered with a weak turnout in autograph sales (largely due to a cameo by John Schneider stealing the show), Kane accepts a gig to “haunt” a trailer park as Jason Voorhees. So he recruits his fellow unpopular horror icon friends to help him with this task. Upon arriving to the site of the RV park, they start dying one by one under strange accidental circumstances…and, of course given the title, a few breast smotherings for the sake of comedic T’n’A.

What’s odd is that the title and the opening breasticide set a standard that the rest of the movie doesn’t at all follow. We’d expect several more breasty assaults picking off our victims–making the title and opening scene more of a marketing strategy than a premise. Of course, a bunch of smothering cleavage murders would result in about zero gore and that obviously would leave the audience wanting more. That said, this film remained entertaining in a deliberately goofy way and those femme fatale weapons do enough appearances to rile up randy viewers. I had a lot of fun watching this cheeky horror comedy and the occasional non-breast-based murder turned out to be most welcome.

R. A. Mihailoff awkwardly attempting to be scary and Leatherface-y to scare the locals.

There were some solid efforts in the gore department. Some of the more fun gory scenes involve a razor wire snare trap producing some floppy flesh-rending gore, someone self-mutilating themselves to death basically by accident, and a slapstick “face peel” scene followed by an improvised first aid treatment that had me howling. Another effect I was especially fond of was the CGI ants–they actually looked kind of cute in one of the scenes.

This film was written and directed by John Schneider. Yes, the very same John Schneider you knew as Bo (The Dukes of Hazard) and Jonathan Kent (Smallville)! I guess his more recent work in Snow Beast, Return of the Killer Shrews and Super Shark give him a taste of playfully “bad” horror. I’m glad he’s taken this step in his career. I was certainly entertained.

This film doesn’t masquerade as anything it isn’t. It’s honest, campy, bad and fun.

MY CALL: The utter bonkersness of this movie, by comparison, makes Snakes on a Plane feel like a perfectly reasonable action movie that could totally happen…and that’s a good thing for the adventurous dumb-movie lover who doesn’t mind a zany flick with a low budget and shamefully abundant past-gen CGI. MOVIES LIKE Sharknado 2: Sharknado (2013), Sharknado 3 (2015; upcoming) and Snakes on a Plane (2006). Also try Deep Blue Sea (1999), Shark Night 3D (2011), Piranha (1978), Piranha 3D (2010) and Piranha 3DD (2012).

Now heroes, Tara Reid (Sharknado, The Crow: Wickid Prayer) and Ian Ziering’s (Beverly Hills 90210, Sharknado) returning characters are no strangers to the over-exposition that plagues Scy-Fy’s movies-of-the-week, including Sharknado (“the first one”). But fret not, it’s all in good fun and we don’t get five minutes into the movie before paying homage to William Shatner’s (or John Lithgow’s) Twilight Zone short Terror at 20000 Feet! Even using the famous line “There’s something on the wing!!!!” Only now..there are sharks on the wings of the plane! This is basically how I knew this would be worth a watch….that, and part one was bonkers amaze-balls fun!

Director Anthony C. Ferrante (Boo, Sharknado, Sharknado 3) lays on the stupid fast and heavy…and by stupid I mean stupidly awesome! The utter bonkersness of this movie, by comparison, makes Snakes on a Plane (2006) feel like a perfectly reasonable action movie that could totally happen.

Is this movie fast paced? Well, it has plenty of slow parts where we are forced to watch the cast try to act their way through to the next scene. But when the action is happening all is forgiven, lots of funny dumb stuff happens, and festive CGI gore abounds.

Are the effects good? It’s a ScyFy movie-of-the-week…so NO. No they’re not. But the movie is still fun and there were some choice gore effects and the sharks are fun to watch.

Billy Ray Cyrus, everyone!

Is EVERYONE in this movie? Absolutely! Fantastic cameos include The Today Show‘s Matt Lauer and Al Roker, Kelly Ripa, ex-Sugar Ray singer Mark McGrath, scream queen Tiffany Shepis (The Hazing), Judah Friedlander, Billy Ray Cyrus, Perez Hilton, Vivica Fox (Kill Bill Vol. 1/Vol. 2, Independence Day), Judd Hirsch (Independence Day), Jared the Subway guy, Kelly Osbourne and Andy Dick.

Much to my surprise I must say this movie taught me a few things…

1) Based on more than one scene I can safely say that the best way to fight a shark is with a baseball bat. That, and Ian Ziering has an amazing swing whether wielding a bat, chainsaw, fire axe, sword or that wooden thing they use to get pizzas out of a pizza oven.

2) Sharks hate physics and take every opportunity they can to defy its lame laws. As you watch this movie you’d swear the sharks were “aiming” themselves at their victims harnessing the propulsive force of the tornado.

3) Not only is Ian Ziering tougher than a CGI shark, but his butt is so rock hard that he doesn’t even feel it when a baby shark is biting it! He probably taught The Rock how to be tough.

Tough enough to try to defeat a Sharknado with Vivica Fox and a giant slingshot.

4) Judd Hirsch is actually Jason Voorhees! Bare with me for a second. Whenever you don’t see him he transports unreasonable distances almost instantaneously and he’s always where you least expect him. The only real difference is that there are no drug-using, fornicating teens around to trigger his urge to kill.

This movie is pure, mindless fun. Just watch it and stop being so judgy.

MY CALL: I’d only recommend this to the most adventurous horror-goer with a good sense of humor and low expectations. There’s nothing special here and the tone erratically shifts. But there’s some bonkers humor for those who enjoy such flavor. MOVIES LIKE All Cheerleaders Die: There are far better high school horror movies. Namely Jennifer’s Body (2009), The Craft (1996) and The Faculty (1998).

After the tragic death of the captain of the cheerleading squad, her meek outsider friend Maddy (Caitlin Stasey; Evidence, I Frankenstein)cleans up and goes undercover as an enthusiastic pom-pomer to expose these mean girls for what they really are. Early in her sting operation, during a beer bash Maddy and her close newfound cheerleader friends are wronged by the captain of the football team (resulting in their accidental death) and now she has an entirely new target.

Here’s Maddy. She goes from this….

…to this…

…to THIS!

But wait, Maddy died. So how could she exact her revenge? The answer here is weird little divination stones (or Wicca witch rocks or something, not sure what to call them exactly). A full moon, a little blood and the right cast of the stones seemed to be enough to resurrect three wrongly killed cheer squad members essentially by accident. They basically turn into super strong, zombie succubi and they show up to school the next day with a killer new sexy look and an appetite that is to die for! Cliché.

Co-writer/directors Lucky McKee (The Woods, May, The Woman) and Chris Sivertson (I Know Who Killed Me) don’t really bring us anything special this time around. Their actors are weak and inexperienced (but serviceable, I guess), the effects are mundane, none of the characters develop at all, and the story and execution is weak. Strangest and least consistent is that the tone and direction of the movie change erratically between scenes…shifting from a zombie succubus cheerleader revenge movie to a weird gemstone-eating dude versus a bunch of scared cheer zombies. That sentence probably made no sense–rest assured that neither does the movie

But there were some fun perks. After the resurrection two of the girls accidently switched bodies, there’s a randomly hilarious “cat kill”, we see a lot of girls in their undies, and some bonkers dumb-but-funny things end up happening.

That said, I’ll only recommend this to the adventurous horror goer with a good sense of humor and low expectations.

MY CALL: Although still fun, this was the least impressive flesh-eating virus movie of the franchise. It’s often more than gory and wacky enough to please fans of the franchise though. MOVIES LIKE Cabin Fever: Patient Zero: Cabin Fever (2002), of course it should probably be seen first…okay, it really doesn’t matter. Then Cabin Fever 2: Spring Fever (2009). But true lovers of hilariously gory overkill should also hit Evil Dead (2013), The Cabin in the Woods (2012), Final Destination 5 (2011), Tucker and Dale vs Evil (2010), Drag Me to Hell (2009), and of course Evil Dead 2 (1987) and The Evil Dead (1981).

A group of friends embark on a Caribbean bachelor party cruise and come across a remote island research facility and they are exposed to a deadly, flesh-eating virus during a gore-chummed snorkeling expedition.

Simultaneously we switch back and forth with a parallel plot in which researchers have isolated “patient zero” (Sean Astin; The Strain, The Goonies, Lord of the Rings)–the carrier of the original strain of this horrible virus that blessed us with this franchise–moved him to an island lab (yes, that lab) for study and… we’ll just say things get out of hand inside their research facility as well. So we have two simultaneous infections occurring on this normally sleepy, sunny island.

Is it just me? Or has Mr. Samwise been creating an awful lot of apocalypse-plague shenanigans recently? In The Strain he helps the Nazi vampires spread the Nazi vampire zombiism worm virus. Here, HE is patient zero!

If you’ve seen any of these movies, you’ve sort of seen them all. But let’s be clear here, director Kaare Andrews (The ABCs of Death – V is for Vagitus, Altitude) delivers extravagant levels of gore consistent with the franchise. After exposure our early infected cast members have a rash which quickly shifts to symptoms of blisters and…worse.

More advanced victims practically melt away and projectile vomit liquefied gore into the faces of the yet uninfected. Skin sloughs off of bodies, pus erupts from bloated flesh, and–perhaps the most flawed aspect of this sequel–victims eventually become almost zombie-like. Also, like its predecessors, it uses a sex scene to set the tone of the urgency…because after all, and I can’t speak for everyone here, but when my girlfriend’s body is covered with festering sores the first place y mind goes to is “then we should probably have sex!“

“So while we wait for medical care how should we pass the time?”

“Guess what, bro? Her STD test results just came in…she tested positive!”

Perhaps this is all just to teach younger viewers that sex might just catch you something deadly. Oh, and bonus, there’s also a flesh-ripping zombie girl catfight.

Part one of this franchise succeeded with a rather serious tone, part two was basically slapstick and goretastically hilarious, and this third installment attempts to re-secure a sense of fear and urgency as the infection advances while maintaining some playful silliness (e.g., having your softened, flesh-eaten skull crushed by a giant dildo).

In my opinion the urgency is long missed and, while this movie is entertaining for the sake of the gore and some most welcomed wackiness, the overall Cabin Fever experience doesn’t measure up strongly to the first two and is, in fact, ranking far below either of them in quality.

The nigh-zombiism of the infected left me feeling a bit derailed and the plot (revolving around getting off the island) degenerates down a dumb path. But kudos for not just “redoing” the movie and “calling” it a sequel as we often see in the horror genre. At least a solid effort was made to make this installment feel different from the others. In that respect, the entire franchise is successful.

I must say I was entertained, though. This flick was a lot of fun and any film featuring a bludgeoning death-by-dildo scene deserves some attention from gorehound goofballs.

MY CALL: This lesser-known slasher film was the ultra-violent movie of its time, brandishing more gore and “visible” kills than others of its era. This will please seasoned admirers of 70s and 80s slashers. MOVIES LIKE The Prowler: Happy Birthday to Me (1981), The Burning (1981), The Funhouse (1981). ALTERNATE TITLE: I believe that this is titled Rosemary’s Killer in the UK and Australia.

The year was 1945; it was a time of war. After receiving a “Dear John” letter from his girlfriend Rosemary, a soldier with a wounded heart returns home and goes on a killing spree. 35 years later, a (perhaps new) killer wearing WWII regalia begins slaughtering youngsters on the weekend of their Graduation Dance before he even changes out of his military greens. And, following in the most typical and dated of horror tropes, once the kids spike the punch bowl and start touching each others’ fun parts prior to saying their “I do’s” the killing can commence.

The acting is bad and the story runs way too slowly, but after the dragging lulls of plot we are rewarded with satisfying (for the era) death scenes that should please seasoned lovers of the classics but which may leave youngsters who grew up on the Final Destination films wanting quite a bit more out of their kills.

The gore is “simple” by today’s standards, and representative of Tom Savini’s early work. But hey, make no mistake, it was the 80s and before horror ever had much of an effects budget. For its time this was REALLY GORY! And what’s really impressive is that you can see the penetration of the weapon into the victim during the kill scenes instead of a shot of a knife, a shot of a screaming victim, and a shot of blood spraying on the wall.

For those of you who have seen few movies that came out before the 90s, this was really graphic in 1981!

At the time of its release this was the equivalent of what we now call “ultra-violent.” The style of the kills in this film predates the commonality of “fun” kills in horror, but there’s still some good diversity including a couple getting collectively stabbed by a pitchfork while making out, someone getting stabbed all the way through the skull and then having it wrenched back out, someone’s head is blown to chunky bits before our eyes, and there’s a delightfully drawn out and gory shower kill.

So graphic for 1981!

The clichés abound but…wait a sec, here…as I watch I actually realize that this movie is so old in the history of slasher flicks that at the time things like murderer POV shots, the all-too-cool killer “walking” after his victims who just can’t seem to outrun him because of stumbles and locked doors and dropped keys and jammed doors, the killer suddenly “appears” in places to which he couldn’t possibly have moved in the allowed time and circumstances, and of course (VERY, VERY long) shower scenes weren’t even tired out clichés yet.

So the moral of the story here is, ladies, don’t send any of our troops a “Dear John” letter until your absolutely certain that you’re not in a horror movie! Otherwise, you and the next generation may be in for an unpleasant surprise at your next school dance.

MY CALL:  This film becomes more farcical from beginning to crazy end. If you’re in to that sort of thing, then you might like this. Just don’t watch it simply because you’re a Kevin Smith fan. MOVIES LIKE Tusk:  Body modification horror comes to mind… things like American Mary (2012) and The Human Centipede (2009).

Ever wonder what happened to that kid who saw dead people in The Sixth Sense (1999; Haley Joel Osment)? Well search no more. He’s right here! Sure, he’s been doing some other stuff (Alpha House, A.I., some videogame voice work), but that was the big victory for me here–recognizing him. Otherwise Tusk largely disappointed me over and over again. Why? Because I thought I was buying a ticket to an envelope-pushing, body modification horror laced with torture and festooned with off-putting perversions of human frailty and fixation. That stuff was in there, but I feel that the execution did not do the theme justice.

From crude, hilarious dialogue and interactions with Canadian customs agents to excellently ominous scoring, this film’s tone yoyo’d between serious (with funny introductory themes) to farcical…leaving me most perturbed as to what I was in for as I watched. We start by meeting shock podcaster extraordinaires Teddy (Haley Joel Osment) and Wallace (Justin Long; Drag Me to Hell, After.Life). They tell the dirtiest dick jokes, have fun with ridiculous Youtube clips, and interview internet sensations (often losers). Tusk‘s story finds its unsure flippered footing in one of Wallace’s trips to interview a Canadian Youtube clip star who had cut off his own leg with his clumsily geeky katana skills. Wallace treks to Manitoba, all the way making Americans look like ignorant assholes to our friendly northern counterparts, only to find that his interviewee has killed himself.

Hoping not to return home empty handed, Wallace seeks some other “Canadian weirdo” to interview for his podcast. And in the restroom of a Canadian bar he finds an ad for a living arrangement with an old man who has “many stories to tell.” He has found his man!

Our villain (Michael Parks; Django Unchained, Death Proof) was largely appropriate for an over-the-top horror film. From the moment we meet him things feel weird. He was zany and sometimes twistedly funny, but just plain sick and insane. Only a few times did his character lose his footing and misstep from over-the-top to farcical (e.g., the “walrus fight” scene or the “walrus suit” itself).

I felt that the effects met the gross-out expectations of the audience and that the body modification (or surgery) scenes succeeded at conveying a sense of sick hopelessness, torture, futility and a truly twisted mind. We see Wallace suffer in complete terror and we believe it. We see our villain take sick joy in Wallace’s transformation…and we believe it. Unfortunately, the later in the film we find ourselves, the more frequent and long-lasting are the farcical aspects…to the point that the last 20-30 minutes feels purely farcical while trying to maintain its unsure grip of a very serious concept (i.e., that one can be stripped of his humanity and made into a monster).

Behind the scenes shot of Justin Long in “surgery”

Director Kevin Smith (Zack and Miri Make a Porn, Clerks II) has always been amazing at capturing his northeastern audience (and quickly the rest of the nation) with his well-crafted, oft-off color comedy. And whereas I felt that Clerks II (2006) showed a notable drop in quality in his work, I still loved it and formerly considered his only failure to be his most risky and quite off-genre undertaking of Red State (2011). Red State succeeded at being brutal and intense, but I just didn’t feel that the delivery was there with the characters. But still, kudos for taking the risk. I like dipping my toes into risky movies.

Justin Long did a fantastic job.  His mustache, however, I feel was some totally displaced vestige of Kevin Smith’s separation anxiety from his Clerks films.

This was another big risk on Smith’s part. I consider it a failure, but I appreciate the risk that was taken. The failure came in keeping the tone consistent. I should add that if I walked in expecting something farcical (and was in the right mood for it) I probably would have enjoyed it MUCH MORE. I’d still wish it was “consistently” farcical, though. Whereas expecting something serious and sick, I left annoyed and feeling cheated.

It felt like Smith couldn’t steer clear of his old ways (a la Mallrats and Clerks) as he painted his characters in this film. Wallace’s too-gorgeous-to-be-true girlfriend (Genesis Rodriguez; Identity Thief, The Last Stand) felt a little forced and their relationship issues didn’t really fit in the story. Johnny Depp (Transcendence, Dark Shadows) felt horribly misused and so farcical (compared to his surroundings) that I found his character to be nothing but annoying every minute he spoke or could be seen. And the shift from mostly serious at the story’s inception to entirely cartoon-farcical at its close…well, that’s what broke me. That was where my interest suffered.

This does not at all address my problems with the shift from serious to farcical. But an Amazon reviewer made a good point: “There’s really only one thing you need to know about this movie: It’s about a guy that kidnaps another guy and starts turning him into a walrus. If that sounds interesting to you, then you can stop reading this and go watch the movie. If it doesn’t sound interesting to you, then you can stop reading this and don’t go watch the movie.” I wanted to see it knowing that, and I was disappointed. Just FYI.

Looks easy enough, right?  Not like it would take a medical degree and a lot of surgery experience to pull this one off.

Lots of risks were taken in this off-farcical film. And this is not a slam-review, it’s just a review from a disappointed viewer who can still appreciate a risk-taker even if I don’t like the product. My advice to you…don’t see this until it’s free for you to view and even then think twice. My advice to Kevin Smith…please keep taking risks outside of your comfort zone, but ask for some help (like a co-writer or co-director with experience in the genre but who also appreciates your style).

Hello all. Mark here.

Many people die in horror films. They get tortured, beheaded, chainsawed, stabbed and eaten alive by bugs. The body count is astronomically high and very few make it through.

We here at MFF have decided to write about the survivors of horror. They’ve endured rednecks who wear skin masks and jerky ghosts whom suck your face off. They’ve survived despite immense odds and rough environments. So, in honor of Halloween and these tough individuals John (The Horror Czar) and I will introduce our favorite survivors.

SPOILERS ABOUND! YOU WILL KNOW THE SURVIVORS! 

Here is John’s list

1. Kurt Russell (Escape from New York) and Keith David (They Live) from The Thing (1982).  Those guys faced the toughest of times together in the toughest of places against the toughest “thing” and survived…just so that they could freeze to death together knowing that some alien genetic mimic wouldn’t overtake transform their body into some disastrously goretastic mess of a killing machine.  Yes!  THEY are some serious horror survivors.

SKILL LEVEL: EPIC.  They drank, which kills teenagers by the dozen in horror, and distrusted each other over and over again.  But they survived.  And absolutely NOT Mary Elizabeth Winstead (Final Destination 3, Black Christmas, Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter) from The Thing that should have never been remade (2011).

2. Constance from Just Before Dawn (1981).  What makes this entire movie (and the “heroine” character) worth it is when, while her boyfriend watches and whimpers, Constance goes toe-to-toe with our killer hillbilly mountain man and literally…wait for iiiiiiit…fists him to death!  This was one of the most memorable slasher movie kills EVER!

SKILL LEVEL: DESPERATE.  She was really just surviving her way through the film until she had her moment to shine.

3. Sigourney Weaver – Ripley (Ghostbusters, Galaxy Quest) from Alien (1979).  Ripley was perhaps the strongest female character I can remember excepting perhaps Linda Hamilton as Sarah Conner in T2.  And she saved the cat…and then in Aliens (1986) she saved Newt.  Let’s forget that Newt got parasitized between the second and third movie and just call this a win.

SKILL LEVEL: Straight up Liam Neeson throat-punching amaze-balls!

4. Billy (Zach Galligan; Waxwork, Hatchet III) from Gremlins (1984).  Billy had no idea of the consequences he’d face if he didn’t take special care of his exotic pet.  People with marmosets need to spend thousands of dollars on rare sugar compounds and people with 30′ anacondas shell out cash for livestock meals…it’s not like he was the first kid to get a pet from afar with special needs.  And what were those needs?  1) Don’t get it wet.  This should be no problem.  Every teenager I know neglects giving his dog a bath so often that it basically turns into his dad’s dog…or a filthy dog.  2) Don’t feed it after midnight.  Again, irresponsible teenagers aren’t too good about feeding schedules.  But if Billy is awake after midnight, he’s probably out doing keg stands or trying to get to second base.  3) Don’t expose it to sunlight…or it will die like a vampire?  Whatever.  Despite these simple rules that any other teenager would follow by accident, Billy–on his very first night as a pet owner that came with two very clear and easy to follow rules–let Gizmo become patient zero in a citywide gremlin outbreak.  Parents, don’t buy your kids a mogwai!

SKILL LEVEL: Stupid lucky…he really deserved to die but the movie was rated PG.

5. Daryl Dixon (Norman Reedus; The Walking Dead, Blade II).  Does this one really require any explanation at all?  Daryl is a true survivor.  He does what need to get done and he gets plenty of attention from the ladies.

 Here are my (Mark) top 6 survivors! 

1. Sarah (Shauna MacDonald) – The Descent 

Sarah survives spelunking accidents, claustrophobia and hungry mole creatures. She becomes a one woman murdering machine that immerses herself in blood and comes out an angel of mole creature death. You need to watch The Descent.

 2. Carter and Preacher (Thomas Jane/LL Cool J) – Deep Blue Sea 

I was working in a movie theater when Deep Blue Sea was released. The audience went bananas as LL and Jane survived their way through a sinking laboratory of sea water doom. LL survived a kitchen nightmare  while Jane managed to survive an arrow in the leg and exploding shark. They had zero reason to live and fought their way to survival via cross necklace stabs and sweet swim moves.  Deep Blue Sea is beautiful garbage that is my all time guilty pleasure.

3. Sally (Marilyn Burns) – Texas Chainsaw Massacre

Poor Sally got put through a meat grinder/horror house/death trap/ringer in Chainsaw. She was harassed, poked, prodded, whomped, chased and fed gross stuff. However, she survived and gave us one of the most iconic shots of horror history.

4. Josh and Renai – (Patrick Wilson/Rose Byrne) - Insidious

They survived The Further, red evil demons and a lady ghost so terrifying it left me uber stressed out. They are good parents who protect their family and are smart enough to move when a house gets creepy. They support each other when one of them turns evil and will go to vast lengths to rid themselves of jerky ghosts.

5. Jim – (Cillian Murphy) -28 Days Later 

Jim got dealt a bum hand. He wakes up in a hospital and proceeds to survive fast zombies, old cars and a colonel Kurtz like fellow. Eventually, he becomes a British Terminator/Daryl Dixon hybrid who lays waste to the alive and undead. Danny Boyle is one of my favorite directors and he gave us a horror hero to support.

6. Ernest P. Worrell – (Jim Varney)- Ernest Scared Stupid

Trantor the Troll is the only horror villain to ever give me nightmares. Ernest defeats him. Thus, Ernest is my horror hero. Watch this scene and respect Ernest and his quick thinking.

 .

 Honorable Mentions:

Tucker and Dale

Heather Langenkamp – Nancy Thompson – “A Nightmare On Elm Street”

Shaun of Shaun the Dead

David Drayton (Thomas Jane) – The Mist (2007)

Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg), Zombieland

       MY CALL:  I think evil doll movies practically make themselves. But this is an absolutely incompetent horror film that should disappoint fans of the genre whether they were birthed in the era of serious slashers, classic Hammer releases, or campy 80s slapstick gorefests. The only way this made it to the big screen was by riding the tidal wave of hype created by its link to The Conjuring. I feel genuinely cheated!  MOVIES TO WATCH INSTEAD of Annabelle: There are really soooo many wiser choices you can make for your scare-tastic Saturday night.  Maybe Dead Silence (2007), Dolls (1987), Poltergeist (1982) or The Conjuring (2013).

Let’s start with a little disclaimer here. I absolutely adored The Conjuring (2013)!  I viewed it as an instant classic which also stylistically paid kind homage to the classics while maintaining a more contemporary intensity.  So when I heard they were making a movie about the creepy doll introduced to us in the Warrens’ cursed menagerie, I was giddy like a school girl.

The story is very simple. A young soon-to-be doctor gets his pregnant wife a gift, an antique style doll for her collection.  She adores it.  After some random cultists randomly choose their home to invade the police dispatch the murderous satanic cultist assailants, the blood of a dying cultist coming in contact with the Annabelle doll and presumably completing some ritual opening a gateway for some other-worldly demonic spirit to possess the doll and use it as a conduit on its soul-procuring mission.

From here, we learn the particulars about the cultists, demons and how a soul must be “offered” to them. And then we watch as the twisted, possessed doll manipulates our young family (specifically the mother) in order to get what it wants.  Is it the young couple’s new born child?

At this point I feel the need to say that there are a lot of positive reviews out there about this movie.  THIS IS NOT ONE OF THEM.

I won’t spoil anything, but the movie itself left a spoiled taste in my mouth. I was impressed by nothing, affected by nothing more than cheap jump scares and blaring sound effects, and utterly bored by a story whose end I couldn’t see coming largely because of the disconnected randomness of the events that were meant to build urgency.  Creaky chairs and slamming doors can be scary, and creepy dolls can really make a horror movie work all by themselves, but the mood just wasn’t developed to maturity for me.

Was the doll creepy? TOTALLY…perhaps even in an over-the-top way.  I mean, that doll—would anyone actually make a doll that looked that evil even before it got possessed and dirtied up?  Those cheek bones and thin eyebrows felt reminiscent of the Wicked Witch.  But the doll’s creepiness and a few jump scares are all the good I have to say about this.  The Warrens were mentioned once, but we got nothing more than that little tease of something better…and that something better never came to my aid.

Instead of the Warrens I got mysterious baby carriages in ultra-creepy basements with no explanations.

Some may say it’s not fair to compare Annabelle to The Conjuring.  But I’d respond with the fact that the entire advertising campaign was designed around linking the two movies by the very tagline: “Before The Conjuring, there was Annabelle.”  More like “Before The Conjuring there were lame horror stories that weren’t told well.” The only way this made it to the big screen was by riding the tidal wave of hype created by its link to The Conjuring. I feel genuinely cheated!

Things seldom work out well for the good-intentioned priests in these movies.

Let’s talk about what The Conjuring had that Annabelle did not: a director who had proven himself in horror, experienced writers, and an absolutely legit cast.  What does Annabelle have?  Director John R. Leonetti, whose biggest prior accomplishments were The Butterfly Effect 2 and Mortal Kombat: Annihilation (if we’re considering these “accomplishments” at all), led the project.  He worked with the foundation of an inexperienced writer and an almost completely unrecognizable cast offering forgettable performances and a stale story.  The only thing that haunted me about Annabelle was all of the promising hype that got me to waste my money on it.

In my perhaps overly critical eyes, this is an absolutely incompetent horror that should disappoint fans of the genre whether they were birthed in the era of serious slashers, classic Hammer releases, or campy 80s slapstick gorefests.

MY CALL: I wasn’t sold, scared, or really even interested in this possession film whose scenes lacked any sense of synthesis and whose story never maturely developed. MOVIES LIKE Deliver Us From Evil: A mainstream crime-mystery-horror that I loved was Fallen (1998), another meta-genre possession movie with a great cast and excellent execution.  BETTER POSSESSION MOVIES: The Unborn (2009), The Last Exorcism (2010), The Quiet Ones (2014)…and even The Possession (2012), which I described as the “diet coke of possession movies,” was better than this.

New York police officer Ralph Sarchie (Eric Bana; Deadfall, Hanna) has recently started getting some strange cases. A woman in a drug-induced manic craze, a call of “strange sounds” coming from the basement in a “possessed” house, a crucified cat, some self-mutilated crazies in animal enclosures at the zoo…but that’s New York, right? As Sarchie investigates further, these strange incidents appear to be darkly connected.

You are charged with one count of trespassing in the lion’s enclosure and eight counts of being creepy.

During his investigations Sarchie is approached by a drinking, smoking, edgy Jesuit priest named Mendoza (Édgar Ramírez; Wrath of the Titans, Zero Dark Thirty) who offers his help, but is met only with skepticism. No clue why. I often solicit the advice of leather jacket-wearing Jesuit priests who wander into my place of work unannounced and offer assistance. There’s nothing weird about that.

As we slowly accumulate clues Sarchie starts hearing things, seeing things, weird things are happening in his home, and everything gets really… “satanic.” Scratching sounds abound, lights burn out as if extinguished by evil, chiseled bloody fingernails on perps, insane Latin babble, and dark etchings on walls set an abyssal tone and it is effective for the most part. Realizing the darkness that has befallen him, Sarchie chooses to work with Mendoza, who is (of course!) well-studied in demonology and exorcism.

Not really sure where the cat fits in to all this, but whatever.

I really like writer/director Scott Derrickson’s (Sinister, The Exorcism of Emily Rose) past work and I admire his ability to recruit mainstream actors into his horror casts (e.g., Olivia Munn of Magic Mike, The Newsroom playing Sarchie’s wife and Joel McHale of Community). Olivia Munn handles her very minor role well and Joel McHale brings some often out of place yet totally welcome humor.

But despite the cast and all this cool “evil satany” stuff I just never found myself caring about this movie…like, at all. There was just something–something big–about the whole story, the characters and composition that didn’t work for me. I wasn’t sold or scared and, not to sound mean but, I was never really even interested. I mean, some individual scenes were sort of working for me. They just didn’t have anything close to the kind of synthesis I needed to suspend my belief and immerse myself in the movie.

Ultimately, I found this film boring. Even during the exorcism scene, which I’m sure was meant to be intense and climactic, I was legitimately bored and waiting for the movie to end.

I won’t say don’t see this movie. A lot of Amazon reviewers loved it. I’m just clearly not one of them. And on a totally random note, this movie made me hate Jim Morrison. Watch it and you’ll learn why.