Archive for the VIOLENCE! Category

« Older Entries

Suburban Grindhouse Memories: DEATHSTALKER (1984)

Posted in "So Bad They're Good" Movies, 2012, Bad Acting, Barbarian Movies, Grindhouse, Nick Cato Reviews, Suburban Grindhouse Memories, Sword & Sorcery, VIOLENCE!, Warriors with tags , , , , , on January 26, 2012 by knifefighter

SUBURBAN GRINDHOUSE MEMORIES PRESENTS:
DEATHSTALKER: Conan…Without Class!
By Nick Cato

I spent most of the time during the second half of my sophomore year in high school daydreaming about movies.  While horror preoccupied 90% of my mind, other exploitation films took about 8%, and the final 2% was dedicated to all things CONAN.  From the early Marvel comics to the 1982 Ah-Nuld film version, I was always a big fan of the sword & sorcery genre.  And while the success of CONAN THE BARBARIAN (1982) spawned several rip-offs, none were as memorable as the 1984 schlock-fest DEATHSTALKER, which happened to be released as I trudged through the tenth grade.

Picture—if you will—a group of fifteen year-old male teenagers managing to get into an R-rated action film with no problem.  Now picture—if you will—that same group of ecstatic fifteen year-old teenagers giggling with glee as the sword & sorcery epic unreeling before them turned out to feature some of the worst acting, fakest-looking creatures, and massive amounts of jiggling boobs this side of a PORKY’S film.  Even one-time sex symbol Barbi Benton appears as a princess, although she was better off taking another cruise on THE LOVE BOAT than accepting whatever peanuts she was offered for her forgettable role here.

Besides the gratuitous boobs and brutal fight sequences, what truly made DEATHSTALKER such a joy to watch was the title character himself.  Deathstalker was played by stuntman/actor Rick Hill, and is far less noble a warrior than Conan: he’s a conscience-less murderer and rapist, taking any woman who even looks at him as he walks by with his bulging biceps.  And in what tries to pass for a plot, a king asks Deathstalker to try and redeem himself by rescuing his kidnapped princess daughter from a tattoo-headed tyrant.  Like any social misfit, Deathstalker basically tells the king where to go, then proceeds to eat (yes, EAT) half of the king’s poor dog!  At this point, you either buckled your seatbelt and prepared to enjoy the trash that followed, or you left the theater and spared your brain any further damage.

I stayed.

There was mumbling around the theater wondering  just why this king asked a known, savage rapist to rescue his daughter, and why he even cared if the guy redeemed himself.  But such are the mysteries of rip-off, grindhouse cinema.

In one scene that drove the audience wild, a brawl goes down where one burly man (with his gigantic mallet) smashes his opponent into a bloody pancake.  Popcorn flew around the (now defunct) Fox Twin Theatre in appreciation, and at one point I started to hope some of the older guys in attendance didn’t get any ideas after the film, out in the parking lot.

Between more bouncing boobs and heads getting lobbed off, there was talk of Deathstalker also having to find three objects that were allegedly part of the world’s creation (I remember one being a sword, which he finds, but can’t recall what the other two were…and you probably wouldn’t, either).  Deathstalker eventually rescues the princess (who actually looks like an old sea hag) and takes the sword of creation from the clutches of Munkar, the aforementioned tattoo-headed tyrant (and MAN did his head-tattoo look fake!).  Just WHY Deathstalker went ahead and did what the king asked —after saying he wasn’t interested—is anyone’s guess.

The remainder of DEATHSTALKER features our anti-hero joining a tournament where warriors battle other warriors to the death—sort-of like a sword & sorcery tribute to the Bruce Lee classic ENTER THE DRAGON (1973).  Here the blood flows deeper than your standard slasher film, as arms, legs, and heads fly, bodies are impaled; all the while Munkar looks on with a smirk, thinking everyone who stands in his way will eventually kill themselves off, leaving him to rule the world.  MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

But as fate would have it, Deathstalker manages to kill the final opponent, a goofy-looking pig-faced warrior beast, and eventually destroys Munkar and the mystical objects of creation.

Unlike CONAN THE BARBARIAN, or better rip-offs such as THE BEASTMASTER (1982), DEATHSTALKER’s sloppy script and countless plot holes will cause even the most jaded fan of grindhouse cinema to shake their head in disbelief.  But, if you’re looking for a real GUY/party flick, full of hot babes, endless bloodshed, and acting so bad you can’t help but yell back at the screen (even if you’re watching it at home), DEATHSTALKER is a prime example of a so-bad-it’s-amazing film.  Most mind-boggling: this cinematic abortion was followed by three sequels, with Rick Hill returning in the title role for the fourth installment.  None were half as good (or bad) as the original.

Deathstalker (Rick Hill) battles a pig-faced beast during the exciting conclusion of DEATHSTALKER (1984)

© Copyright 2012 by Nick Cato

6 Comments »

Cinema Knife Fight: THE UH-OH SHOW! (2009)

Posted in 2011, Campy Movies, Cinema Knife Fights, Dark Comedies, Gore!, Herschell Gordon Lewis Films, Horror DVDs, TV Shows, VIOLENCE! with tags , , , , , , , , on November 23, 2011 by knifefighter

CINEMA KNIFE FIGHT: THE UH-OH SHOW (2009)
By L.L. Soares and Nick Cato

(THE SCENE: The set of a game show, with a live studio audience. People are screaming and shouting in their seats as NICK CATO comes out from behind a curtain and stands before the crowd)

NICK CATO: Today’s movie deserves a little background. Hit it, Billy Cyclops!

(The lights dim down and a projection screen lights up with images from old horror movies)

NC: Herschell Gordon Lewis is the epitome of “Love Him or Hate Him.” He is responsible for the world’s first gore film (1963’s BLOOD FEAST) and directed over forty other exploitation and horror films from the late 1950s through the early 70s. He took a break after his last film of that period, THE GORE-GORE GIRLS (1972), to become a successful author of books for the advertising world (to date he has written over thirty-five). A much-requested speaker at motivational business conferences, Lewis once again gained fame for his exploitation films during the 1980s video revolution. His fan base became so large that in 2002, he got back together with old friend/producer (the late) David Friedman and made BLOOD FEAST 2: ALL U CAN EAT, the long-awaited sequel to his notorious classic.

(The audience “oohs” and “aahhs” as scenes of laughable gore effects splash across the screen)

NC: And now, Lewis has unleashed his latest celluloid atrocity, THE UH-OH SHOW. Released in 2009, the film played the festival and convention circuits for two years before finally coming to home video just this past August.

(The lights come back on to reveal that L.L. SOARES is now also on the stage, wearing a cowboy hat and clown make-up. The audience hoots and boos at him)

L.L. SOARES: Aw shut up, you ingrates! How much did you pay for the ticket to get in here? Nothing! So stop your belly-aching!

(NC shows the crowd his WIZARD OF GORE tattoo as LS drinks from a large glass of Guinness)

LS: Okay, okay, we get it. You’re a huge fan of Herschell Gordon Lewis. So am I. Which is why we’re doing this one together. Let’s see if the old master still has what it takes.

NC: I’ve been fascinated with Herschell Gordon Lewis since reading about him in the fourth issue of FANGORIA magazine. My old man even saw BLOOD FEAST down in Georgia in 1963, a couple of weeks before he went to Korea with the Army. I guess you can say Lewis’s films have been hereditarily handed down to me.

LS: Yeah, BLOOD FEAST is a real classic of its kind. No argument there.

NC: I was happy to see BLOOD FEAST 2 when it was released, although it was on a DVD. I had asked David Friedman at a Chiller convention in New Jersey how Herschell managed to make all the girls look like it was still the 1960s, to which he answered, “Beats me!” I thought it was a fun enough sequel, packed with plenty of classic Lewis-splatter and goofiness, although I thought Jackie Kong’s unofficial 1987 sequel, BLOOD DINER, was a much better film.

LS: I dunno, I’m on the fence about BLOOD DINER. Sure, it’s a homage to Herschell, but it’s a little too silly for my tastes. One thing about Herschell’s best, early films are that they took themselves totally seriously, which is why they were so cool. It was the effects and the bad acting that made them kind of funny, but it wasn’t until later in his career that he started to serve the gore with a wink, and that wink turned into a spasmatic eyeball! If only he’d stuck with the serious approach!

(Audience “boos” LS again)

LS: Aw shuttup, you pack of mangy dogs!

NC: I had been reading for years that Lewis’s next film was going to be titled GRIM FAIRY TALES, a collection of short, gory films based on Grimm’s classic stories. So when I heard he had changed the premise to a violent game show, I had no idea what the ‘ol Wiz was up to. When the title THE UH-OH SHOW was announced, my initial reaction was Lewis must be going for an all-out comedy. How about you?

LS: I’d heard the rumors about GRIM FAIRY TALES, too, and I have to admit, I wasn’t that excited. Sure, it would be cool to see another new movie by the Wizard of Gore himself, but something about fairy tales didn’t really grab me. When I heard the movie’s title was changed and it was about a violent game show instead, this actually sounded better to me. I couldn’t wait to see it. Of course, it took two whole years for it to finally get a decent DVD release.

NC: THE UH-OH SHOW deals with a televised game show (on a basic cable channel) that gains popularity due to its unusual angle: contestants who answer their questions wrong are forced to spin the “Wheel of Misfortune,” and whatever body part the spinner lands on is then cut off. In classic 2,000 MANIACS (1964) style, the first contestant loses her arm, then one guy is decapitated, all by THE UH-OH SHOW’s evil henchman, “Radial Saw Rex,” a scary-looking black guy with a huge portable chop saw. More bloody mayhem ensues, although most of it is as unconvincing as most of Lewis’s classic films.

The best scenes of the movie take place on a super gory game show called THE UH-OH SHOW.

LS: Yeah, but back in those classic films, Herschell was trying to make real horror flicks. Now he’s making pure camp. The thing is, however, I really liked the concept of THE UH-OH SHOW. A game show where contestants lose their limbs and other body parts is actually a brilliant idea. Even though it was a more comedic film right from the get-go, I bought this one right away and was really digging the game show scenes. Unfortunately, there’s a lot more going on in this movie, and it’s not all good.

NC: You bet! Lead bad guy Fred Finagler (played by Joel D. Wyknoop) says most of his lines obnoxiously loud, making him neither funny or frightening, but just plain laughable (and not in a good way). The majority of the cast are Florida locals, including star/UH-OH SHOW host Brooke McCarter, who does an okay job here, although the Oscars won’t be calling him anytime soon. Female lead Nevada Caldwell hands in a decent performance as reporter Jill Burton, and there are a few local model/strippers as the show’s VannaWhite-ish co-hosts. A cameo is even made by Floridian horror authors Jeff Strand and Lynne Hansen, but you’d better keep your eyes peeled or you’ll miss ‘em!

LS: See, I liked Brooke McCarter as the show’s host, Jackie, a lot. I thought he was suitably smarmy and pretty good in the role. I liked his sexy cohorts as well, especially Krista Grotte as “Champagne.” It was when the movie veered away from the game show that I started to get disappointed. The game show was so cool – why ruin it? Once that annoying Fred Finagler took center stage, I thought the movie went downhill, which is too bad. That said, I also liked Nevada Caldwell as reporter Jill Burton, too. She reminded me a lot of H.G. Lewis’s strong female characters from his 70s films like Nancy Weston (Amy Farrell) from 1972’s THE GORE GORE GIRLS and reporter Sherry Carson (Judy Cler) from 1970’s THE WIZARD OF GORE. The way she looked, the way she acted, Caldwell was another in a long line of Lewis’s classic heroines.

And I have to admit, it was kind of fun to see Jeff Strand and Lynne Hansen in this one. They’re friends of ours and it must have been a real thrill for them to appear in a Herschell Gordon Lewis film, even if it’s not one of his better efforts.

NC: The film takes a turn when a major network requests a spin-off. The show ends up being called GRIM FAIRY TALES, hence tying in what us Lewis geeks had been reading about for so long. And while these quick fairy tale clips are entertaining, they lack the humor that could’ve been expanded on THE UH-OH SHOW itself.

LS: This plot twist makes absolutely NO SENSE. They’ve got a hit game show. So they go on another network and instead of doing another violent game show, which is what people obviously want, they do a fairy tale show where that annoying corporate slimebag,Fred Finagler, with his sidekick Coco (Lauren Schmier), reads from a book while horror versions of fairy tales are reenacted. What do fairy tales have to do with a game show? Looks to me like Herschell might have started making GRIM FAIRY TALES, stopped half-way through, and then combined that story with THE UH-OH SHOW for some bizarre reason. The two plots have absolutely nothing in common except for Fred and Coco. And if there was a real UH-OH SHOW, and I was a fan (which I probably would be), I’d be pretty annoyed if my show went off the air and was replaced by a lame fairy tale show!

(Audience cheers)

LS: It’s about time you people got smart! You know I’m right about this!

NC: You’re theory isn’t that far-fetched. For those new to Lewis, several of his films feature pieced-together segments from other films, admitted filler, and all kinds of stuff that scare mainstream audiences away. But those were a product of the time, minimal budgets, and Lewis’s gung-ho attitude to get a film produced and out for public consumption as quickly as possible.

With the UH-OH SHOW, it’s apparent Lewis flung things together as quickly as he always has, although there’s far less thought put into things this time around. And there’s a patronizing aura throughout (especially when Herschell himself appears, telling stories to a group of young kids) that mocks the intended audience (I’m hoping this wasn’t intentional). If I hadn’t met Lewis a few times and can honestly say that he’s a GREAT guy, I would have been quite aggravated about this. But I’m guessing Lewis did this for fun AND for his legion of fans. I just wish it wasn’t so painfully . . . unfunny.

LS: I don’t know, I kind of liked the beginning of the film where “Uncle Herschell” tells stories to the kids. Sure, it was hokey, but I was just happy to see one of my favorite directors onscreen, and it was a lot more entertaining than the GRIM FAIRY TALES show-within-the-movie later on. If you want to talk about unfunny, how about Troma Head Honcho Lloyd Kaufman’s totally unfunny cameo in the middle of the film as a pimp. While I like some Troma films, it’s that wink-wink sensibility that Troma is famous for that is the downfall of movies like THE UH-OH SHOW.

NC: And despite THE UH-OH SHOW’s wild premise, the whole thing is just soooooo boring.

LS: I hate to say it, but I kind of agree with you there. Like I said before, when they lose interest in the game show concept and go on to other things, that’s when I kind of lost interest in the movie.

NC: I guess we can’t explain what it is about Herschell Gordon Lewis that so many of us low-budget film freaks love so much. But THE UH-OH SHOW isn’t a good example of why we do. The gruesome nature of BLOOD FEAST (1963) and THE GORE-GORE GIRLS (1972), the surreal experimentation of SOMETHING WEIRD (1967), and the combo of gruesome and surreal found in THE WIZARD OF GORE (1970), are much better places to start if anyone is interested in seeing what all the fuss is about. Or better yet, check out Frank Henenlotter’s recent documentary, HERSCHELL GORDON LEWIS: THE GODFATHER OF GORE (2010) for a concise, comprehensive view of the director’s entire career.

LS: Considering how old Herschell is, it’s a wonder he’s still making films at all. So I find myself not wanting to be too hard on this one.

NC: I don’t know. While it’s always exciting to hear about a new Lewis film, the disappointing UH-OH SHOW only made me yearn for the glory days of the Godfather of Gore. It saddens me, but I give it half a knife.

LS: I swear, if they’d stuck with the game show premise, I might have really enjoyed this one. But this movie is all over the place, and when it turns completely silly half-way through, I found myself getting bummed out. When you like a director as much as Nick and I like Herschell, you want the guy to hit a home run every time he makes a movie. But no such luck. It saddens me as well. I give it one knife.

But if you’re a hardcore Herschell fan, you might want to check it out anyway, just because the man just doesn’t make movies very often anymore. At least there were some scenes I liked about this one. I just wish it had stayed focused and stuck to one plot.

NC: Oh well, it looks like we’re done.

(RADIAL SAW REX suddenly bursts onto the stage, chasing NC and LS with his giant power saw. The audience shouts and screams as a spray of blood shoots out at them, and the curtain goes down.)

THE END

© Copyright 2011 by L.L. Soares and Nick Cato

L.L. Soares gives THE UH-OH SHOW! ~ one knife

Nick Cato gives THE UH-OH SHOW! ~ half a knife

1 Comment »

THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE II: FULL SEQUENCE (2011)

Posted in 2011, CKF On the Edge, Controverisal Films, Extreme Movies, Gore!, Indie Horror, Madness, Nick Cato Reviews, Psychos, Sequels, VIOLENCE! with tags , , , , on October 11, 2011 by knifefighter

THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2: FULL SEQUENCE (2011)
A Bigger, Grosser Centipede…
Movie Review by Nick Cato

Let’s get one thing straight: THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE (2009) was made for one reason…to shock its audience. Despite its nearly non-existent plot, its scenes of torture and alternative surgery run amuck have gained a loyal cult following. So, naturally, director Tom Six had his work cut out for him when he set out to top his original with THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2: FULL SEQUENCE.

Did he succeed?

By the boat load! (“Load” being the key word here).

New York City’s IFC Center held late night screenings this weekend (at both midnight and 12:15). According to a review in a popular magazine, this version of the film is two-minutes shorter than the one previewed by a London film board before they banned it from theaters and even DVD. I don’t think I need to see what could have possibly been edited. Both theaters were sold out, and one of the film’s publicists told the audience the film had sold out its midnight screenings in all eighteen cities across the country. At least I now know there are people out there as deranged as we New Yorkers. After a horror film trivia contest and the handing out of HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2 barf bags and staple removers (!), the lights dimmed and the crowd screamed as if about to try out a new roller coaster.

And in a way, we did.

Mute, mentally-challenged parking garage attendant Martin (Laurence R. Harvey) spends his work hours scanning a wall of security cameras while simultaneously re-watching THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE on his laptop. The film has consumed him to the point he decides he needs to create his own bigger & better ‘pede . His bible is a scrapbook of pictures and articles about the film, and it also has his own crudely-sketched blueprints for his own twelve-person abomination. He’s also quite fond of star Ashlynn Yennie, who had the unfortunate roll of being the middle person in the original’s centipede.

Without wasting much time, Martin begins to kidnap his victims by shooting their calves and bonking them unconscious with a crowbar . He gets most of his subjects from the parking garage, causing me to wonder how slow business must be, as no one besides the victims are ever around at one time. And he’s an equal opportunity employer: victims range from prostitutes to housewives, Asian, black, white…no one is denied for any reason (although one child is left in a car, possibly showing Martin has some type of a conscience? The post-ending segment leaves this in debate).

After “renting” a filthy, isolated warehouse, Martin stores his screaming victims on the floor and begins to prep each one for their position on the hellish conga-line. I couldn’t help but think of Pasolini’s SALO, THE 120 DAYS OF SODOM (1975) whenever our writhing captives were shown in long shots across the room (and I’m pretty sure the director did, too).

What I found more disturbing than the coming surgery and gore scenes were the depictions of Martin’s home life . He still lives with his elderly mother in a small London flat . A skinhead neighbor upstairs drives them crazy with his loud music, and a visiting doctor delivers a couple of truly bizarre sequences. Martin even keeps a large pet centipede in a glass cage in the living room, which is eventually put to gruesome use. The scenes around Martin’s apartment bring ERASERHEAD (1977) to mind, and not just due to the film being shot in black and white. If nothing else, director Tom Six managed to shoot this thing in a genuinely artistic manner, making me curious to see what else he’ll come up with when this grim trilogy is completed.

Martin, as played by the scary and hideous-looking Harvey, is a different kind of psycho. Besides his stunted mental growth, he suffers from a bad case of asthma and needs to take a hit off his pocket inhaler after subduing each victim. He moves slower than an old-school zombie and doesn’t seem like much of a threat, but he has a sinister way about him that makes him even more frightening than Dr. Heiter (Dieter Laser) from the first film. I’d love to know where Six discovered this guy.

The most clever idea comes when Ashlynn Yennie shows up in London thinking she has landed an audition for a new Quentin Tarantino film. But, of course, it’s just a ploy set up by Martin to make her the lead centipede.

The second half of the film is destined to become a holy grail for splatter and exploitation film aficionados: Martin pieces his twelve-person ‘pede together using duct tape and a staple gun…and NO anesthesia! While one person dies during the prepping process and a pregnant victim seemingly dies and is tossed aside, Martin soon has a ten-person ‘pede and begins to boss them around the dimly-lit warehouse (but don’t worry…you get to see EVERYTHING quite clearly).

THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2:FULL SEQUENCE is vile, disgusting, and at times truly terrifying…but it’s also SO over the top I actually found myself laughing at most of the proceedings (when Martin injects all ten people with 500mg of laxatives, you KNOW the director had to be trying to bring some kind of dark, twisted humor into the mix). This is one of those films most horror fans will hate to admit they enjoyed…but I dare you NOT to.

If there’s one thing I’m truly afraid of, it’s what Tom Six has planned in his demented little mind for the third installment, titled THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE: FINAL SEQUENCE. Get your barf bags ready now…

Gore/Disturbing Sequences: 4 knives

 Story: 2 knives

© Copyright 2011 by Nick Cato

 

(Editor’s Note: Warning: If it isn’t clear already, this movie is not for everyone. Certainly not for the squeamish or easily offended.)

Martin (Laurence R. Harvey) stops lead centipede Ashlynn Yennie from escaping in THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2: FULL SEQUENCE, currently at midnight screenings in 18 U.S. cities. Coming to cable "OnDemand" October 12

3 Comments »

STRAW DOGS (2011)

Posted in 2011, Crime Films, Lame Remakes, LL Soares Reviews, VIOLENCE! with tags , , , , , , on September 20, 2011 by knifefighter

STRAW DOGS (2011)
Movie Review by L.L. Soares

Back in 1971, Sam Peckinpah made the movie STRAW DOGS, starring Dustin Hoffman and Susan George. Like a lot of Peckinpah’s films, it was immediately controversial. The infamously “macho” director had made a film where a civilized, sensitive man reaches the breaking point when confronted with strangers who want to kill him, and fights back. Hoffman actually gives a terrific performance as David Sumner in it. While it’s not my favorite of Peckinpah’s films (I prefer THE WILD BUNCH (1969) and  1974’s BRING ME THE HEAD OF ALFREDO GARCIA), it’s an intense, well-made film with a lot to recommend it.

So why remake it?

That’s what I found myself thinking several times while watching director Rod Lurie’s new version of STRAW DOGS. I had a lot of problems with the new version, but my number one problem is why it needed to be remade at all. And did Rod Lurie really believe he was going to make a movie that was in any way superior to Peckinpah’s original?

In the original, a mathematician named David (Hoffman) and his English wife, Amy (Susan George), go to a house in rural England that she has inherited from her deceased father. He is working on a book and wants to get away from their normal lives so he can concentrate on it. She grew up there, and while she doesn’t seem particularly overjoyed to be going back, she doesn’t have a strong aversion to the place, either. But things get rocky when some hostile locals don’t like strangers coming to their little community.

In Rod Lurie’s remake (he directed and also wrote the script, based on the original film’s script by David Goodman and Peckinpah, and based on the novel “The Siege of Trencher’s Farm” by Gordon Williams), rural England has been replaced with the modern South. This time, David Sumner (James Marsden, who you might remember as Cyclops from the X-MEN movies) is a Hollywood screenwriter with money to burn, a Jaguar convertible that  he likes to drive fast, and a pretty actress wife, Amy (Kate Bosworth, who was Lois Lane in 2006’s SUPERMAN RETURNS, which also co-starred Marsden). Amy grew up in Blackwater, the town they’ve temporarily moved to. David is working on a screenplay about the Battle of Stalindgrad (where the Russians were surrounded by the Nazis, yet defeated them – can you say “foreshadowing?”).

Amy has a past with local boy Charlie (Alexander Skarsgard), that he wants to rekindle, but she clearly doesn’t. David hires Charlie and his buddies to fix the roof on their barn using FEMA money. Right off the bat, Charlie and the boys have a real problem with city boy David, who they despise for his money and his education (they think he’s condescending, when he’s really just clueless). And things go from uncomfortable to extremely violent as the movie progresses.

Yes, the new version of STRAW DOGS is yet another in a long line of movies where the South is populated by dangerous rednecks who can’t wait to cause bodily harm to Northerners. This wouldn’t bother me if it was as good as John Boorman’s DELIVERANCE (1972) or Tobe Hooper’s TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE (1974). But the remake of STRAW DOGS isn’t even close to being in the same league as those, so it’s just irritating.

But that’s hardly the only flaw that the new movie has.

Another big problem for me was the casting. Marsden isn’t completely horrible in the role of David, but he’s no Dustin Hoffman either. Where Hoffman played the character as more internalized and neurotic, like a lot of his characters in the 70s, Marsden’s version is just bland. Susan George played Amy as more playful and flirty in the original, until things go sour and she becomes just plain scared. Kate Bosworth is actually good as Amy, but she seems to go out of her way to keep her husband in the dark about what’s going on until it’s more than obvious– something that worked better in the original.

One of my biggest casting problems, however, is with Alexander Skarsgard as the villain, Charlie. This came as a complete surprise to me, since I think Skarsgard is terrific as the villainous Eric Northman on the HBO series TRUE BLOOD. Skarsgard has real charisma and knows how to be evil. But in STRAW DOGS, he just seems confused most of the time. He just isn’t mean enough. Even in scenes where he is doing awful things, there’s a sense of pleading in his eyes. Like he doesn’t want to be there.

I felt much the same.

I don’t know if Skarsgard played it this way purposely. That he intended to show Charlie as a man torn apart by his impulses, but it didn’t work for me.

Another casting problem I had was with James Woods as Tom Heddon. Tom used to be coach of the high school football team but now seems to spend all his time drinking  at the bar Blackey’s, where the bad guys all  hang out. Woods plays Coach Heddon so over the top that it’s hard to take him seriously. He’s a violent drunk who seems always on the verge of exploding. I normally like Woods, too, but had a hard time believing him in this role.

By the time Charlie and the boys take David out hunting (David doesn’t want to seem unmanly – a major plot point in both movies) and abandon him in the woods, things get violent quickly. Charlie heads back to Amy’s house – since he knows she’s alone – and rapes her. And his buddy Norman (Rhys Coiro) comes along and decides he wants in on the action too, much to Amy’s horror.

Then there’s a whole subplot with Jeremy Niles (Dominic Purcell from the former Fox series PRISON BREAK)—in the original film the character’s name was Henry Niles and was played by David Warner. Niles is a mentally disabled man who has gotten into trouble previously for “interacting” with local girls, and who is attracted to the coach’s daughter. It doesn’t help that the daughter is constantly talking to him and teasing him. When things finally go too far, Jeremy ends up back at the Sumners’ house, after David accidentally hits the man while he is fleeing across the road from something bad he’s done. The coach, Charlie, and the boys all show up demanding to see Niles, and David refuses. When they try to force their way in, that’s when the worm finally turns and David fights back after enduring humiliation for the previous hour of the movie.

His change of heart takes the form of everything from using a nail gun to nail one guy’s hands to a window sill, to boiling pots of water, to a particularly gruesome finale involving a very large bear trap. As Sumner uses all these things to protect his home from the intruders, things finally reach a level of intensity the rest of the movie lacks.  (Just a note that most of this stuff, especially the trap, were also in Peckinpah’s original).

When I’d seen the trailer for this new version of STRAW DOGS, I had mixed feelings. I didn’t understand the need for a remake, but at the same time, the trailer looked interesting to me. There was some potential there. Unfortunately, the movie never really delivers on that potential.

Just for the hell of it, I sat down and watched Peckinpah’s original afterwards. I hadn’t seen it in a long time, and wanted to see just how much the two movies had in common. Like I said earlier, there are a lot of scenes in the new movie that are pretty faithful to the original, but the tone was completely different.

Peckinpah’s version seemed more intense, moved at a much brisker pace, and by the end, just seemed more menacing. Dustin Hoffman was a more believable hero than Marsden, and the cast of the original (mostly British actors who weren’t very well known to American audiences) was more effective.

Critics had a lot of problems with Peckinpah’s original. Its tale of a civilized man reduced to the instincts of a killer animal didn’t sit well with a lot of them. Despite its flaws, however, I thought it worked well. By the time Peckinpah made the film, later in his career, he was a bonafide master of the medium.

The new movie explores much of the same territory, but the results aren’t the same. I left Rod Lurie’s version of STRAW DOGS feeling annoyed and disappointed.

Save yourself some time and just rent the original version instead.

I give the new version of STRAW DOGS – one knife.

© Copyright 2011 by L.L. Soares



1 Comment »

NIGHTMARE! Finally On DVD!

Posted in 1980s Horror, 2011, Drive-in Movies, DVD Review, Gore!, Grindhouse, Italian Horror, Nick Cato Reviews, Psychos, Slasher Movies, Suburban Grindhouse Memories, VIOLENCE! with tags , , , , , on August 11, 2011 by knifefighter

SUBURBAN GRINDHOUSE MEMORIES
FINALLY!  The Wait is OVER…
By Nick Cato

Most (if not all) of my faithful readers are sick and tired of hearing me go on about the 1981 slasher film NIGHTMARE (a.k.a. NIGHTMARES IN A DAMAGED BRAIN).  I’ve been telling people about it since 1982, when I first saw it on a double bill with MOTHER’S DAY (1980), and I’ve had countless family members and friends sit through my well-worn VHS copy over the years.  And yet despite the digital video uprising, a proper DVD had not been released in America (those with turbo-DVD players had the option to buy a British DVD that has been on the market for several years).  Enter CODE RED DVD, a specialty DVD company who release deluxe editions of rare and seldom-seen horror, action, and comedy films.  Since 2007, CODE RED had been promising a DVD of NIGHTMARE, and due to too many factors to discuss here, it was continually placed on their back burner.  We die-hard fans visited CODE RED’s blog nearly every day, awaiting word, and were occasionally teased with pictures and info of the coming DVD extras.

AT LONG LAST: on July 26th of this year, NIGHTMARE was finally released in a 2-disc package that has already become as controversial as the film itself (sorry about the plug, but for a full review of the film, see my chapter in the book BUTCHER KNIVES AND BODY COUNTS— to be released shortly from Dark Scribe Press).

Before I get to the DVD review, newcomers should know that NIGHTMARE is a generic slasher film.  It’s low budget, features some less than stellar acting, and has a sequence or two of gabbing and walking around that the editors should’ve cut in half.  But what set NIGHTMARE apart from other “psycho-leaves-nuthouse-too-early” films is its grueling tone, its over-the-top splatter scenes (how this was released with an R rating is anyone’s guess), and an amazing performance by star Baird Stafford, who portrays George Tatum, a killer haunted by a vicious murder he committed at a young age.

NIGHTMARE instantly made the UK’s “Video Nasty” list, and there was much controversy over who was responsible for the disgusting special effects (there’s a few extras on this DVD that deal with the Tom Savini-issue…if you haven’t heard about this, Google it— or better yet, get the DVD).

Before I sat down to review this DVD, I read what some fans were saying about it and was surprised to see so much arguing.  Some praised the three (yep—three!) transfers of the film included here, while others claim CODE RED did a sloppy job with all of them.  I watched the entire film in its newest transfer (a 2011 telecine), which looked fine to me.  I then scanned through certain scenes on the 2008 high definition transfer and the 2005 “corrected telecine transfer approved by director Romano Scavolini.”  To be honest, there are differences, but I’m not one of those “VIDEO WATCHDOG” anal-retentive film inspectors who spends countless hours deciding if someone’s toe made it into a certain frame or not: to me they ALL look good, and I’m just happy to have this film preserved on a digital edition (hence, if YOU’RE an anal-retentive DVD freak, go check out the arguments happening on Amazon.com and various message boards.  Life’s too short for this nonsense, in my opinion).

The DVD itself is a lot of fun: the main menu boards feature moving scenes from the film (although I thought it was a bit too spoiler-ish to show the intense finale on one of these) and each board is easy to navigate (as far as I know there are no “Easter Eggs” here).  Among the extras is a VERY informative audio commentary with star Baird Stafford and make-up effects man Cleve Hall.  There’s a very nice “Making Of” feature with more from Stafford and Hall, as well as ex-distributor Tom Ward.  But perhaps the most sought-after extra here is an interview with special effects maestro Ed French,  who gives his side of the Tom Savini story (again, Google this if you’re interested).  It’s a bit short, but good.  There are also two NIGHTMARE trailers, one that I hadn’t seen before.

NOW, where CODE RED has annoyed some fans: While it’s true that we NIGHTMAREians have haunted Code Red to release this film for years, one of the main reasons (besides financial) was the inability to have a 90-minute interview with the director translated and/or subtitled.  Yet the interview is included here in Italian–I’m assuming CODE RED did this to break our chops (and after you see the sarcastic blurbs and synopsis they’ve placed on the front and back of the DVD case, you just might agree).  I’m guessing those who aren’t die-hard fans of the film might get pissed off over this…personally, I found it funny.  TRUE, I’d like to hear what Romano Scavolini has to say about his only horror film, I guess I’ll have to wait until I can convince my grandmother to come over and translate for me…

Was the wait for this DVD worth it?  For me, while someone could’ve released it without all the extras and I’d still be happy, having the aforementioned commentaries and especially the Making Of feature was WELL worth the wait.  And although I actually spoke to Tom Savini at a 1985 FANGORIA convention about his involvement with the film, it was nice to hear two other sides of the story (and all three basically mesh).

If you have a cast iron stomach and want to see a gore film that’s actually spooky at times, give NIGHTMARE a shot; aside from the first EVIL DEAD (1982), it’s the one horror film where the splatter actually ADDED to the chills and caused a disturbing atmosphere.  I also believe any serious horror film DVD collector should have this seldom-seen gem in their collection (while they still can).

Now let me see what grandma is up to…

© Copyright 2011 by Nick Cato

George Tatum (Baird Stafford) dons a creepy old man mask, then checks to see if anyone's home in NIGHTMARE (1981).

5 Comments »

BLACK SHAMPOO!

Posted in 1970s Movies, 2011, Blaxploitation, Chainsaws!, Exploitation Films, Grindhouse, Soft-core, Suburban Grindhouse Memories, The Mob, VIOLENCE! with tags , , , , , , , on June 9, 2011 by knifefighter

SUBURBAN GRINDHOUSE MEMORIES: Modern Memories
Hair Salons and Chainsaws!
By Nick Cato

Brooklyn’s “reRun Gastropub Theater” was the setting on Wednesday, June 1st for a screening of the 1976 blaxploitation classic, BLACK SHAMPOO. The reRun Theater is a fun little indie cinema, located in the back of a trendy restaurant. Its stadium-styled seating is made up of 60 seats ripped from mini vans (!), and a full bar with snacks are located right alongside them. A 12-foot screen features digitally projected, locally made films as well as independent features from around the world (so, if you’re ever in NYC I strongly suggest a visit). Back in January, I had the pleasure of viewing Alejandro Jodorowsky’s SANTA SANGRE (1989) here, and the picture and sound were phenomenal.

The BLACK SHAMPOO screening was actually part of author Mike White’s book tour (his collection of pieces from his long-running fanzine, “Cashiers du Cinemart,” has been compiled in a hefty volume titled IMPOSSIBLY FUNKY [2010 Bear Manor Media]—and although I’m only halfway through it I can HIGHLY recommend it to any serious film geek). Mike has a large section dedicated to the film BLACK SHAMPOO (his all-time favorite movie), featuring commentary and interviews with a few of the films’ stars, as well as director Greydon Clark (who is responsible for countless 70s/80s exploitation classics, such as SATAN’S CHEERLEADERS (1977), WITHOUT WARNING (1980) and the infamous arcade sex comedy, JOY STICKS (1983)). While Mike did a brief intro for the film and a reading/book signing afterwards, it was the film that was the highlight of the evening.

This was my first screening of BLACK SHAMPOO, and as a life-long fan of the blaxploitation genre, I can safely say you’ll be hard pressed to find a more entertaining, funny, violent and downright FUNKY film. While the first 20 minutes play out like a really bad 70s porn film (complete with some of the coolest music ever to grace this type of feature), BLACK SHAMPOO soon turns into a hybrid love/gangster/revenge story complete with everything we psychotronic film fans love about these types of films: stereotypical black men and women and stereotypical gay hairdressers that would probably cause a protest were they done this way today; a party sequence that’s so out of place it almost gives the film a surreal edge; insane violence that includes chainsaw mayhem, pool cue mayhem and a mob-orchestrated curling-iron anal rape shakedown (you read that correctly); deplorable acting; and so much more, it’s hard to remember half of what went down after just one viewing.

The film centers around Mr. Jonathan, the owner of “Mr. Jonathan’s” hair salon on the Sunset Strip. His reputation as the ultimate ladies man has caused an endless line of women to book appointments for his “services.” And while he’s in the private back room “shampooing” his clients, the front of the place features women having their hair done by Mr. Jonathan’s staff, which includes Artie and Richard, two gay hairdressers who are done so over the top you can’t help but laugh every second they’re on the screen (fans of “classic dialogue” would do well to keep a pad and pen on hand during the entire film).

Mr. Jonathan gets so much action he actually begins to find shagging a real chore (even when two seemingly underage rich white girls seduce him during a house call…only to get their butts whipped by their mom’s belt for stealing her appointment [in a sequence that brings the “roughie” films of the early 70s to mind]. The mother then goes on to shag Mr. Jonathan as the two girls watch from the pool!).

After all this opening soft-core madness, BLACK SHAMPOO gets down to business. It seems the new black secretary at the salon has actually run away from her white mob “boyfriend,” who has kept her in his mansion as a modern day sex slave. When Mr. Jonathan catches wind of this, he takes his new receptionist, Brenda, out on a date and the two quickly fall in love. When the mob finds out Brenda’s whereabouts, they come down to the salon and trash the place (after kicking Artie’s poor little white ass in one of the most unconvincing “fight” scenes ever filmed). Brenda’s ex-boyfriend turns out to be underworld kingpin Mr. Wilson (an amazingly non-stereotypical name for a gangster), who is now on a mission to get Brenda back. He employs three of the goofiest goons ever to grace a trash film (Maddux, appropriately nick-named “Schumck;” an unnamed, tall black guy who looks like he played for the Knicks in the mid-70s; and a hysterical chauffer who has a few scene-stealing lines and actions).

Feeling guilty over the beating Artie took (which left him in a neck brace) and the trashing of the salon, Brenda goes back to the mob’s mansion. Mr. Jonathan—by way of a mob “invite”—takes a trip to the mansion so Mr. Wilson can explain that Brenda’s now back where she belongs—and Brenda seems happy about it. Confused and pissed off, Mr. Jonathan heads out to his cabin in the woods to get his head together—and Brenda eventually meets him there with Mr. Wilson’s top secret book of money laundering information. Before long, the mob catches wind of this, and we’re all set for a bloody-good showdown in the woods.

BLACK SHAMPOO is unlike any blaxploitation film out there, mainly due to the character of Mr. Jonathan. He’s not a cop or pimp ala SHAFT (1971) and DOLEMITE (1975), just a heterosexual hairdresser who happens to be quite handy with a chainsaw and pool cue. And while his onscreen persona is actually quite boring (John Daniels has the acting skills of a parking meter), for some strange reason the audience revels in his booty-shaggin, belly-slashing schtick.

I mean, come on folks: what other film features a chainsaw-wielding black hairdresser dishing it out to the mob after laying pipe on half of Hollywood? Mr. Jonathan just may be the COOLEST blaxploitation character of all time (I’ll let you all know if this holds up to repeated viewings as good as DOLEMITE, the granddaddy of all blaxploitation films). Also, major kudos for a sonically-funky soundtrack that will stay in your head long after the film concludes.

I also recommend watching BLACK SHAMPOO with an audience of like-minded fans: while I’m sure I would have loved this had I watched it alone on DVD, I’m not sure how many non-fans of this subgenre will be won over by it.

But I still say give it a shot. Until next time, I’m off to the salon . . .

© Copyright 2011 by Nick Cato

NOTE: For more about Mike White and his book IMPOSSIBLY FUNKY, check out his site: http://impossiblefunky.blogspot.com/

 

Mr. Jonathan (John Daniels) is seduced by two rich white girls, Meg (Kelly Beau) and Peg (Marl Pero) in BLACK SHAMPOO.

1 Comment »

Suburban Grindhouse Memories: THE MUTILIATOR (1985)

Posted in 1980s Horror, 2011, 80s Horror, Gore!, Grindhouse, Nick Cato Reviews, Psychos, Serial Killer flicks, Slasher Movies, Sleaze, VIOLENCE! with tags , , , , , , on May 26, 2011 by knifefighter

Suburban Grindhouse Memories Presents:
By Sword, By Pick, By Axe, BYE BYE!
By Nick Cato

When you were a sophomore in high school, and a horror fan, sophomoric horror films were always a sure-fire hit.  The bluntly titled THE MUTILATOR (1985) was no exception.

The audience didn’t know what to make of the opening sequence, where a young kid accidentally shoots his mother (through the kitchen wall) while he polishes his dad’s hunting rifles as part of a birthday present.  Despite his good intentions, his father comes home to find his wife bleeding to death and his son standing there with a rifle.  The kid manages to run away after his old man lays a beating on him, but the kid sneaks back and spies his father having a birthday drink with the mother’s corpse.  Call me sick, but I laughed so loud at the absurdity of this scene a friend of mine elbowed my side, causing half of my valuable popcorn to fall onto the sticky floor.

Shot under the working title FALL BREAK, I’m assuming director Buddy Cooper changed the title when he realized his generic slasher film sounded too much like a generic teenage T&A beach movie.  Either way, THE MUTILATOR’s “plot” jumps ahead to the aforementioned kid now grown up, hanging with his friends, when he gets a phone call from his father.  Seems his old man wants his son (who he hasn’t spoken to in years) to help him shut down his isolated condo for the winter…and of course his son’s bored friends egg him on to do it (figuring they’ll use the place to party while they’re there).

It doesn’t take long for the body count to begin, and being we know who the killer is three minutes into the film, there are no surprises, no tension, and absolutely NO scares.

But what THE MUTILATOR does have going for it (if you’re a slasher film completist, anyway) are classic 80s gore sequences, including a guy gutted via outboard motor, some poor girl having a fishing gaff shoved into her crotch, plus various decapitations and amputations via axe, pick, and nearly anything else this kid’s crazed old man could get his hands on.

While I don’t know how this holds up on home video (I’ve only seen it once upon it’s initial 1985 theatrical release), THE MUTILATOR—for a film with such little suspense—managed to have the crowd screaming and cheering for more inventive (and graphic) kill scenes.  Thinking back on it now, I’m sure if there were any psychiatrists in the audience they must’ve thought we had all flipped our lids.  But at the time, this was a bloody good time for any high school horror fan.

(SPOILER ALERT!) ***

If any film had an ending that’s nearly as silly, twisted, and ridiculous as PIECES (1982), it’s the conclusion to THE MUTILATOR.  After our slasher is cut in half at the waist (!), he manages to hack a policeman’s leg off with his handy axe, even though his guts are strewn all over the dirt floor.  We all laughed.  Some booed.  But in 1985, the blood-hungry crowd still left my local suburban grindhouse oddly satisfied.

Director Buddy Cooper (who I met at a 1989 Fangoria convention in NYC) didn’t set out to break any new ground, and in fact his directing is nothing to write home about (the film also suffers from some horrendous lighting and acting).  But what Buddy did was create a fun, gory slasher film that audiences were craving at the time…and while THE MUTILATOR is forgettable (except for the ending), I’m glad to have seen it in it’s prime.  (There’s an “extreme uncut version” DVD available…but without a cheering, shouting, giggling audience, a home viewing can’t be half as fun…)

-END-

© Copyright 2011 by Nick Cato

 

It’s hard keeping your head on straight (or at all!) in THE MUTILATOR (1985)

4 Comments »

CKF on the Edge: HOBO WITH A SHOTGUN

Posted in 2011, CKF On the Edge, Dark Comedies, Extreme Movies, Gore!, Grindhouse, LL Soares Reviews, Vigilantes, VIOLENCE! with tags , , , , , , , on May 24, 2011 by knifefighter

HOBO WITH A SHOTGUN (2011)
Movie review by L.L. Soares

When Rutger Hauer first appears, riding a train car into town, in HOBO WITH A SHOTGUN, you have no idea how much of a wild ride you’re in for. Unless you know the movie’s backstory. Back in 2007, the Quentin Tarantino/Robert Rodriguez team-up flick GRINDHOUSE was making the rounds, bringing back the movie double-feature and the spirit of the 1970s grindhouses. Part of the package was a bunch of fake trailers for totally insane movies. The funny thing is, some of these have been made into actual films. The first was Rodriguez’s MACHETE (2010). Now, we’ve got HOBO WITH A SHOTGUN. If you don’t remember seeing that particular trailer when you saw GRINDHOUSE, it’s because the trailer only played in the Canadian version. But it’s been a Youtube  sensation since.

The beginning has a real 1970s vibe, from the music to the time-worn weariness of Hauer’s face in that boxcar. But that changes fast. I was kind of hoping for a homage to 70s vigilante flicks like DEATH WISH (1974) and WALKING TALL (1973), but HOBO WITH A SHOTGUN has more in common with those over-the-top Troma films of the 80s. In a way, I was sad to see it get so bizarre and unreal so quickly, in another way, it never stopped being a fun flick. And a big part of that is Hauer’s performance. You can tell this is a man who used to be an A-list actor, since fallen on hard times, just like that Hobo.

So Rutger Hauer walks into town, and finds himself in the middle of hell. The first person he sees is a guy filming bum fights, offering Hauer a ten dollar bill to join in. People openly brutalize other people in the streets, and the proceedings are lorded over by the town kingpin, Drake, who turns all this carnage into a kind of reality show. When someone crosses him, he puts a manhole cover around their necks, drops them into an open sewer, and then decapitates them using a barbed wire noose and the fender of a speeding car or motorcycle. His thug sons hold guns on the onlookers, demanding they applaud  the goings-on.

This sounds awful grim on paper (or on a computer screen), but it’s played so over-the-top that it’s downright cartoony (is that Troma honcho Lloyd Kaufman I see among the bystanders?), and that’s kind of what saves this film from being a complete downer.

The Hobo is one of the witnesses to “The Drake Show” and he is horrified by the utter anarchy that surrounds him. This is even worse than the Wild West. Anyone can die at any time, and many do. The majority of the populace are so horrified, they don’t lift a finger to stop things, and most of the police force are on Drake’s payroll.

The Hobo has a dream. He is going to buy a lawnmower at a local pawn shop. He is going to start his own business and stop traveling the rails. He is going to settle down and make a home for himself. What the hell is this guy thinking? This is not the kind of place where you settle down!

After being brutalized himself, and saving the life of a prostitute, who almost becomes another casualty at the hands of Drake’s son Slick (the other son, Ivan, is a complete idiot muscleboy who gets high on hurting people), the Hobo decides to fight back. Instead of that lawn-mower, he buys a shotgun on the wall for the same price. And then he goes about using it.

He starts to make news. He’s single-handedly starting to clean up this hellhole. One man begins to make a difference. Drake is so infuriated he first declares it open season on homeless people, hoping to get rid of the Hobo, then he hires a couple of metal-clad killers who call themselves The Plague to finish things (they look like two low-rent Iron Man wannabes).

The performances are actually pretty good for this kind of thing. I already sang the praises of Hauer, who is pretty much the main reason HOBO exists. Throughout this movie, I found myself wondering why we don’t see him more in big budget Hollywood pictures. He’s certainly good enough.

Brian Downey as the evil Drake is a force of nature. This is a role that is pretty one-dimensionally evil, and could be annoying, but Downey is just terrific. He pretty much steals every scene he’s in, and is a lot of fun, in his own psychotic way. A movie villain can make or break a movie like this, and Downey does his part to make HOBO work.

Molly Dunsworth, as the hooker Abby, is also pretty good. She’s the one Hauer’s hobo decides to protect, and while their relationship isn’t really a romantic one, she makes you believe that Hauer would be so concerned about her welfare. And when the going gets tough, she’s not afraid to help with the fighting.

Director Jason Eisener (with a script he wrote with John Davies and Rob Cotterill), took a simple concept, originally meant to be a joke, and turned it into an entertaining feature film. It’s not a great work of art, but it’s not meant to be. It’s a lot of gore and violence and vengeance, and we’ve seen this kind of thing before, but somehow, it works, in the same way that over-the-top gore cartoons that have been coming out of Japan lately, like TOKYO GORE POLICE and MACHINE GIRL (both from 2008) work. Live-action cartoons where anything can happen, and the camera lens gets splashed with blood a few times along the way.

If you’re into this kind of thing, then you’ll dig HOBO WITH A SHOTGUN. It’s like eating your dessert before dinner, but don’t expect it to have much in the way of nutrients. If this sounds pretty awful to you, then just avoid it. It’s not meant for you, anyway.

Me, I give it three knives.

© Copyright 2011 by L.L. Soares

Note: HOBO WITH A SHOTGUN has been playing some film festivals around the country and is currently available on cable OnDemand in some cities. I’m not sure if it will get an actual theatrical release or if it will go straight to DVD.


Rutger Hauer is mad as hell in HOBO WITH A SHOTGUN.

LL Soares gives HOBO WITH A SHOTGUN – 3 knives

5 Comments »

HELLDRIVER

Posted in 2011, Asian Horror, Colleen Wanglund Reviews, Geisha of Gore Reviews, Japanese Horror, VIOLENCE!, Zombies with tags , , , , , on May 18, 2011 by knifefighter

HELLDRIVER (2010)
Movie Review by Colleen Wanglund, the Geisha of Gore


Yoshihiro Nishimura has done it again folks! In his first solo directorial outing since TOKYO GORE POLICE (2008), Nishimura has delivered another blood-soaked splatterific gore fest courtesy of Sushi Typhoon. For those who don’t know, Sushi Typhoon is the brainchild of Yoshinori Chiba for Nikkatsu Studios. On April 28 my daughter and I attended the New York premiere of HELLDRIVER (2010) at the Japan Society. The version we got to see was the Director’s Cut…..sixteen extra minutes that won’t be in the general release. The event, co-sponsored by Subway Cinema, was for charity with proceeds going to the Japan Earthquake Relief Fund which was established in the wake of the earthquake/tsunami/nuclear disaster that occurred in March. Following the screening, there was a Q & A with guests Nishimura and Eihi Shiina (AUDITION {1999}, TOKYO GORE POLICE {2008})—the movie’s Zombie Queen—along with a party that featured the Brooklyn death metal band Vaura, some delicious food, and plenty of Sapporo….and I got one as soon as I could to get to the bar.

Okay, now on to the movie!

Kika (Yumiko Hara) is a teenage girl viciously abused by her psychotic mother Rikka (Eihi Shiina) and Uncle Yasushi (Kentaro Kishi). Kika storms off after witnessing Rikka and Uncle feasting on her father’s legs. Yes, Rikka and Uncle are cannibals….this is one seriously twisted family. Rikka goes after Kika and during the mother/daughter showdown a meteor strikes Rikka dead center in the chest, leaving quite a hole in her anatomy. Enraged, Rikka rips the still-beating heart out of Kika’s chest and sticks it in the hole, where it attaches itself. Rikka is then taken over by a starfish-shaped creature and the newly born zombie spews an ash-like substance into the air, infecting the inhabitants of the surrounding area and creating more zombies.

Miraculously, Kika survives and is taken to a hospital where even the doctor (Marc Walkow doing his best not to butcher his Japanese) is amazed at the girl’s survival. Cut to scenes of Tokyo—chaos ensues in the wake of the encroaching apocalypse. Refugees have flooded the city and food and shelter are at a premium. People are eating all manner of things and one particular gaijin is aggravated to all hell (Norman England). A militarized wall has been erected separating the human south from the zombie north and politicians and regular folk alike are debating the status of the zombie population.

Some time has passed and Kika has been dumped at the wall that splits Japan in two. She is discovered by Taku (Yurei Yanagi) and his companion No Name, or Nanashi (Mizuki Kusuki). Kika is now equipped with a mechanical heart that also powers one of the most badass weapons I’ve ever seen in a movie, a chainsaw samurai sword! Seriously, I want one of my own. Taku takes Kika back to the orphanage, explaining that money is tight so he does what he can. This includes sneaking into the zombie territory to acquire something that the Yakuza will pay top dollar for. Swept up in a raid, the three companions are given a choice—“volunteer” to go on a mission to destroy the Zombie Queen or….well, die.

Our “volunteers” are dropped into the zombie zone and are immediately attacked by zombies. A former cop decked out like a cowboy (Kazuki Namioka) comes to their aid driving a truck that’s ready for battle. He takes the group to what looks like a bizarre club. Seems they’re trying to establish their own society behind that wall. There are human survivors that the zombies have rounded up and among them is No Name’s sister. And who runs this zombie establishment, you might ask? None other than zombie Uncle. Fights break out and the blood spray is plentiful. I mean, that IS what you see a Nishimura film for, right? There’s even a chase scene involving a very imaginative vehicle. When our little band of misfits finally reaches their destination they’re in for a big surprise….and I mean BIG! The only complaint I have is that the opening scenes of Kika rescuing some poor sap from the zombies after he falls off the wall don’t fit with the rest of the movie once it’s run all of the way through. It’s still a really fun sequence, though.

HELLDRIVER is one heck of a good movie. It’s just what I expect from Nishimura’s movies—gore, comedy, and plenty of carnage to go around. The characters are just as outrageous as the makeup effects, which are phenomenal. Yumiko Hara is beautiful as the damaged teenage protagonist Kika, displaying a believable strength and tenacity in the character. The gore-geous Eihi Shiina plays Rikka, both before and after her transformation into the Zombie Queen, with wicked glee. And I can’t say enough about Kentaro Kishi who seems to relish playing the very demented Uncle Yasushi. There are also appearances by Nishimura regulars Cay Izumi as a pregnant zombie (and as Yumiko Hara’s stand-in for some bizarre pole-dancing), Asami as a wall guard and director Takashi Shimizu (JU-ON series, MAREBITO [2004], REINCARNATION [2005]) as a man looking for his zombified wife. Director Iguchi Noboru also makes a brief appearance but I won’t spoil it by telling you what it is.

In addition to being the director of HELLDRIVER, Yoshihiro Nishimura is the screenwriter (along with Daichi Nagisa), editor, character designer and special makeup effects supervisor. Even with all of those jobs on his plate he managed to film the movie in only two weeks! Along with special effects makeup artist Taiga Ishino and visual effects artist Tsuyoshi Kazuno, Nishimura created some beautiful and unique zombies. Unlike the usual shamblers of Western zombie fare, Nishimura’s zombies have distinct expressions and facial features, as well as markedly colorful and psychedelic costumes. The “horns” on the zombies’ heads are a nod to the annual Yubari Fantastic Fest which is where HELLDRIVER had its first screening. The small town of Yubari in Hokkaido is known for its expensive melons—I’m talking fruit, people—and the horns are identical to the stems of the melons. There’s also a giant melon marking the Yubari Fantastic Fest in the movie.

HELLDRIVER is a revenge road movie and it’s chock full of social and political satire. The zombies aren’t just swarming the northern part of Japan looking for food, they are establishing their own culture with the Zombie Queen as their monarch. The humans in the southern part of the country are arguing over and protesting for or against “zombie rights”. We see a Catholic priest advocating for inclusion of the zombies—they were human once—even hiding a few in Tokyo. There is a sub-plot involving a government coup with Prime Minister Hatoda (Minoru Torihada) going so far as holding a press conference in front of the wall (which doesn’t go very well) while his potential successor Osawa (Guadalcanal Taka) is pushing for the outright annihilation of the zombies. I loved the public service announcement about the dangers of the zombies and the laws put in place by the government…it was hilarious!

The Geisha of Gore and director Yoshihiro Nishimura ham it up at the New York premiere of HELLDRIVER.

What I also saw in HELLDRIVER is the subtext of family—both those related to us by blood and those people who come into our lives by chance and become family. Rikka, Uncle and Kika are a family—as messed up as they are. No Name is searching for his sister, and there are a brother (Takumi Saito) and sister (Asami) among the wall guards. People are searching for their family members even though they might be zombies and Kika becomes part of another family when Taku takes her into the orphanage, no questions asked. Yosihiro Nishimura even has his daughter playing a zombie!

The special effects are, as usual, over-the-top and fantastic to see. Nishimura took great care in his character design and it shows. While most of the gore acts as a comedic device, there were a few times where it felt, to me at least, a bit darker than Nishimura tends to go. In a scene where Uncle has No-name’s sister tied to a chair in a room of the club, Nishimura takes a stab at the phenomenon of cutting among young Japanese women. While he’s done this in all of his movies, it was always intentional in-your-face satire whereas in HELLDRIVER he seemed to employ a more subtle and seemingly more serious jab with just a lingering shot of the girl’s arm covered in red scars. I also felt the manner in which the sister is attacked by Uncle has a darker and more sinister feel than what I’m used to.

There’s another scene where the priest going on about “zombie rights” brings someone to a room where he’s been hiding zombies. The door opens and a group of zombies in a darkened room turn to face the humans and something that may be food is thrown in to distract them. While the placards the zombies wear with their names on them are funny this is another case where I felt the humor was overshadowed by a more serious quality. I’ve always loved the comedic aspect of Nishimura’s horror, but I liked the more serious and sinister aspects. It adds a new depth to his splatter-comedy style and I hope it continues. It throws an uncomfortable curve at the viewer…and horror should have some measure of discomfort for its viewers.

As I’ve said I took my daughter with me and she’s not the biggest fan of this type of film. She thought character development was lacking, with some characters just being flat. Darlene is mixed on the special effects with some of it looking good and some of it cheesy, but she did like the originality Nishimura employed for the zombies. She also thought the story was thin and some of the scenes went on too long. She gives it two stars out of five….she liked MUTANT GIRLS SQUAD (2009) better. Other than that she had a good time. Darlene isn’t the fan girl geek that I am. And she insisted I add her opinion of HELLDRIVER and she usually gets what she wants out of me.

(from l to r) Yoshihiro Nishimura, Colleen's daughter Darlene and Eihi Shiina

Prior to the film, announcements were made regarding the lineup for the New York Asian Film Festival and the overlapping Japan Cuts series in July…and I can’t wait to go! HELLDRIVER was then introduced by Marc Walkow of Subway Cinema, Nishimura and the film’s star Eihi Shiina. In the intro Nishimura stressed that HELLDRIVER was made almost a year ago and in no way was any kind of statement about the disaster in Japan. It was a bit bizarre to see that some aspects of the movie’s storyline mirror the aftermath of the earthquake….location and destruction, mostly, but some of the politics as well. There was a Q & A session after the movie, which began with Nishimura wearing his trademark fundoshi (that’s a traditional Japanese undergarment for men) making his way along a row of seats while swinging a zombie baby over his head by its umbilical cord. I can’t make this stuff up, people. He was joined on-stage by Marc Walkow, also in a fundoshi, and Eihi Shiina, who remained fully clothed—much to the chagrin of most of the men in attendance, I imagine. There were questions about HELLDRIVER but quite a few fans wanted to ask Ms. Shiina about AUDITION and many held up DVD copies of the Takashi Miike masterpiece. She even gave a quick re-enactment of sorts of the famous “kiri, kiri, kiri” from AUDITION’s torture scene.

Afterward the theater emptied out into the lobby where there was plenty of food and Sapporo. Autographs were signed and pictures were taken. I was thrilled to finally get to meet Eihi Shiina, and she signed my DVD of AUDITION! This was her first trip to New York and to the United States. It was very cool to meet Nishimura again and see Marc, and of course I enjoyed a nice night hanging out with my daughter Darlene.

I must thank my friend Norman England, who did the English subtitling for HELLDRIVER, and Marc Walkow for their help….and huge thanks to Norman for the use of one of his set photos.

© Copyright 2011 by Colleen Wanglund

HELLDRIVER behind-the-scenes set photo © copyright - Sushi Typhoon/Nikkatsu Studios


1 Comment »

SUPER!

Posted in 2011, Campy Movies, Dark Comedies, Superheroes, VIOLENCE! with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 19, 2011 by knifefighter

SUPER (2011)
Movie Review by L.L. Soares

On first glance, SUPER, the new movie by director James Gunn, might seem like a low-rent version of the other recent superhero-with-no-powers film, KICK-ASS (2010), but that would be selling it short. Not only did Gunn write the screenplay for this project years ago (it took him until now to finally get it made), but it takes the whole “average guy who becomes a superhero” concept to an even more depressing level. That might turn some people off, but personally, I enjoyed the hell out of it.

Frank Darbo (the great Rainn Wilson, who most people will know as Dwight Schrute from the NBC comedy series, THE OFFICE), is a down-on-his-luck short order cook, who really has nothing going on in his life until he meets Sarah (Liv Tyler), a waitress at the diner where he works. Somehow, his quirkiness appeals to her and they get married, but it doesn’t last long. One day, Sarah just leaves and takes all her clothes with her, to move in with the drug dealer, Jacques (Kevin Bacon). It turns out Sarah was a former addict and has gone back to her old ways, and Jacques is more than happy to supply the drugs. Poor Frank.

A broken man, Frank has no idea what to do with his life. Was he put here for any purpose at all, besides flipping burgers? And then it comes to him in a vision (oh yeah, Frank also has religious visions sometimes), that he should devote himself to fighting crime, after he sees a Christian superhero program on TV called “The Holy Avenger.” In the show, the Holy Avenger (Nathan Fillion), fights the villainous devil, Demonswill (played by James Gunn himself!) for the souls of a bunch of high school kids. Frank takes this show (and a sequence where his brain appears to be touched by the finger of God), as a sign of what direction his life should be going.

He makes a costume which was shown to him in his vision, and takes on the moniker “The Crimson Bolt” (his costume is long red underwear and a mask). And he goes to a local comic book store to do research on how he should tackle his new profession. There, he meets Libby (Ellen Page, who most people know from 2007′s JUNO), who works there. Libby is more than happy to point him in the right direction when he asks about superheroes who don’t have powers, and he loads up on comic books.

Armed with a monkey wrench, The Crimson Bolt stalks the streets looking to stomp out criminals, with a hearty shout of “Shut Up, Crime!” He becomes something of a local celebrity, attacking drug dealers and various low-level criminals. But when he attacks someone at a movie theater for cutting in line, it appears that he might be taking his zealousness a bit too far.

Frank struggles with his sanity, wanting to give up his secret identity as Crimson Bolt and going back to a normal life, but he’s already gone beyond the point of turning back. He decides that his main mission will be to confront Jacques and his goons and get Sarah back.

However, he doesn’t really plan on what to do when someone shoots guns at him.

After getting shot, Frank goes to Libby’s apartment for help, (he doesn’t know who else to turn to) and she desperately tries to convince him to take her on as his sidekick. She even has a costume all made and a list of names for her heroine (she decides on “Boltie”).

Frank, meanwhile, appears to sink even deeper into madness and is determined to attack Jacques at his fenced off estate. Boltie damands to go along. And so they head off to free Sarah.

SUPER is a very dark comedy, with some very funny scenes, as well as some gory ones. Somehow, the movie does a good job of balancing the comedy and the violence. Part of this is the great script and direction by James Gunn. He wrote the screenplays for TROMEO AND JULIET (1996), the movie version of SCOOBY DOO (2002) and the remake of DAWN OF THE DEAD (2004), however, it’s his last movie as writer and director, SLITHER (2006), that you should really check out. SLITHER also had a mix of comedy and horror that worked quite well.

The cast is another big plus here. Rainn Wilson is pretty much perfect as sad sack Frank. You actually believe that this misfit would don a superhero costume and believe he could make a difference in the world. Liv Tyler is believable as Sarah – you can see her innocence shining beneath the bottoming-out drug addict. Kevin Bacon as the villainous Jacques and Michael Rooker as his main thug, Abe, also turn in great performances, and Bacon especially seems to be having a lot of fun with the role.

My favorite character, aside from Frank, would easily be Ellen Page as Boltie. She just has a kind of goofy joy in her scenes. She has a very quirky sense of humor, but also a manic glee when they’re fighting criminals. In one scene she literally jumps up and down and laughs uncontrollably at the fact that she is actually a costumed superhero. Her enthusiasm is hilarious, and contagious.

There’s also a strange sexual tension between Frank and Libby. She is obviously attracted to him, but he is very repressed and religious and asserts that he is still a married man, despite the fact that Sarah left him without a second thought. The scenes where this tension manifests are awkward and uncomfortable – but for that reason seem completely believable.

There are some pretty grim moments in the film, but I thought they worked quite well. And overall, the movie really won me over. I really had no idea what to expect from SUPER, and I was pleasantly surprised.

SUPER had a brief run in theaters (mostly arthouse joints), but is currently available on OnDemand on Comcast (and may be available on your cable system as well). If so, it’s definitely worth checking out!

If I had to rate this one, I’d probably give it three and a half knives.

© Copyright 2011 by L.L. Soares


1 Comment »

« Older Entries
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 28 other followers