Unseen Terror 2012: Day 31 & Post-Marathon Thoughts

Shortly after his wife Katherine loses their own child, Robert is coerced by a priest into switching the deceased child with one whose own mother died at nearly the exact same moment, without telling his wife of the change that has transpired. The boy is named Damien, and for several years, he grows up rather normally, until one day at his fifth birthday party, Damien's nanny commits suicide in his name. Things begin to unravel about the origin of Robert and Katherine's "son," and there exists a strong possibility that the young lad is more "devilish" than his parents thought.

Before you say it, yes, prior to today, I had never seen the original 1976 The Omen. I'm uncertain as to why it took so long, given that it's had a profound impact on the genre, and historians remember it as a great film, regardless of classifications. Hell, Iced Earth even wrote a song about it.

This was one of the last notable and big roles Gregory Peck had in a motion picture, but I thought his sort of "old style" acting wasn't the best fit for this character. It's that super stern style of acting which, while I admire, is something that can only be seen in the past. The character of Robert felt more like Kathy's father rather than her husband (this isn't necessarily a knock on Peck's age either). Lee Remick is pretty good, and it's quite interesting to see her character breaking down with the more that keeps happening. Billy Whitelaw however, is delightfully devilish as Damien's new nanny following his previous caretaker's suicide, like Mary Poppins if she was the devil's right hand (wo)man. Speaking of Damien, the choice to mostly keep him silent was smart, and I'm surprised nobody bothered to cast the kid playing him in anything else. Perhaps casting directors were too frightened to do so.

David Warner has a pretty interesting performance as a photographer who begins to examine and connect all of the accidents following (and including) the nanny's suicide, but he's pretty much just playing David Warner. There are some good suspenseful moments too, like a scene at the zoo involving the local animals' reaction to the "Unholy One"'s presence. Some moments do tend to drag on for a bit, such as Peck and Warner's trip to Rome. That particular segment, while important, lacked a tremendous amount of light in certain scenes, making it a tad bit difficult to tell what exactly what was going on.

Despite a few moments that don't age well, I still like The Omen and can recognize its importance. I'm not sure what the 2006 remake offered audiences (other than an admittedly amusing release date of 06/06/06), but I can almost be certain that it lacked the memorable score (kudos to Jerry Goldsmith) and the standout performances involved with Richard Donner's original movie. 

Maybe I'll save that for next year. That and the three sequels that followed.

Tomorrow, we review...nothing! We've reached the inevitable conclusion of this year's blog, and I can safely say that like last year, I've had a hell of a fun time doing this. There were some bumps along the way, and I personally would've liked to have reviewed even more, but we're entering holiday hours at my store, so time is valuable.

As with last year's iteration, there were quite a few films that didn't make the list for various reasons. Blood and Donuts, Sometimes They Come Back, and The Langoliers were all possible entries, but were mostly "alternate" titles in case something was hard to obtain or removed from Netflix's Instant Streaming. There was actually quite a mixup with the video service "Crackle" as well, as [REC] 2, Idle Hands, and Bats were all originally scheduled for viewings, but were taken off without warning (though two of the three have since been put back up. Figures). I was even considering breaking from home video and checking out Sinister, but I don't wish to spend $10 to watch a horror film in a theater. If I haven't voiced my frustrations with horror audiences before, perhaps I'll save it for a later date. I was considering making a Top and Bottom 5 for this year's list, but felt it would be too frustrating to choose just 5 for each category. So you'll just have to read my thoughts (like originally intended).

Until then, enjoy your Halloween folks. Eat plenty of candy, drink plenty of drinks (alcoholic and non-alcoholic alike), and enjoy the company of others.

Unseen Terror 2012: Day 30

Henry, an emotionally distant man, spends his spare time killing innocent people for seemingly no reason. He also trains his protege and best friend Otis in his ways, though with restrictions that the simpleton often seems to forget. Soon, Otis' sister Becky arrives in town, and while she tries to earn money to support her daughter, she begins to fall for the mysterious and cold Henry...



Before he was making a younger generation incredibly nervous on The Walking Dead, Michael Rooker was making audiences feel unsettled and disturbed with this highly praised piece of cinema, based somewhat loosely on the life of serial killer Henry Lee Lucas. Henry has been on my "To Watch" list for what seems like an eternity, and like Thirst, I regret waiting this long to view it.

Let's get this out of the way right now: if you find yourself easily upset by violence against women, or don't like murderers with zero emotion (i.e. no smartass quips), this will most likely turn your stomach. Henry (the film and the title character) make no mistake with being brutally honest with the handling of its subject matter, and casting Michael Rooker was the best choice they could have made. He is downright chilling, with near hints of humanity poking through his cold exterior and demeanor. His protege Otis (Tom Towles) is just as reprehensible, if not more so. He's what most folks would consider the "archetype" of the crazy murderer: stupid, bloodthirsty, potentially incest-inclined, and just downright ugly. The film's just as much about him as it is the title character. A rape scene involving both of the men managed to disturb even myself, and I have a pretty iron stomach these days.

The only real complaint with the film involves a subplot with the character of Becky (Tracy Arnold). Don't get me wrong, she's fantastic, and the character itself is well written, but the film seemed to forget her potential romantic entanglement with Henry until the very end. When they bring it up again though, its handled fittingly. I was almost ready to ask why in the world there seemed to be no law enforcement in sight, but we're given a reasonably understandable explanation as to why that is (that and sometimes cops are just dumb).


This is an excellent piece of work, despite (or perhaps even because) of its low budget. As I mentioned above, there is some off-putting material for those who don't frequently watch horror films, but otherwise, this is nearly essential stuff. Bravo.


Alas, tomorrow is Halloween. This year's "Unseen Terror" will come to a close, and it'll close with a bang. What is this classic film I've never seen that I'll be reviewing? Stay tuned!

Unseen Terror 2012: Day 29

After a tree in the backyard of his house is demolished, young Glen and his best friend Terry dig in the remaining hole, and unearth a strange geode. Accidentally pricking himself, Glen spills blood in the hole, and they both return home. Shortly thereafter, a series of strange events begin to occur, and the origin of the hole in Glen's backyard is discovered to be more demonic than initially realized...


Wow. For the first time in this year's iteration of the blog, I found a movie that I have virtually nothing to complain about. This is...unusual. Hell, even some of the entries I enjoyed immensely (Thirst, Pontypool) had some problems that slightly brought them down from being perfect, but The Gate is pretty darn awesome.

I've always been fascinated by horror films that are clearly aimed at younger audiences, but can also be immensely entertaining for adults as well. This is the reason why flicks like Stephen King's It are so fondly remembered. The kids in The Gate are all very easy to like, and are the furthest things from morons or bothersome. This was Stephen Dorff's film debut, and I'm starting to think this might be the pinnacle of his career. There's also his heavy metal-loving friend Terry (Louis Tripp), and Glen's teenage sister Al (Christa Denton). They're all doing fine jobs here, and in addition to spouting off some rather amusing lines, can pull off looking scared or shocked rather well.

It is undeniable that this has a very distinct "80s" charm and feel to it, with a real sense of wonder and the feeling that you could be stuck in the ultimate nightmare when the gate itself is opened and it unleashes all sorts of hellish trouble. Speaking of the gate, the effects work in here is pretty solid, and the monstrosities that emerge felt like an old tribute to Ray Harryhausen's old stop motion techniques. I also found it to be a little coincidental/funny that I've now watched two films in the past two days that both featured graphic facial destruction. If that pops up at all again in the last entries, I'll be convinced that something is amiss.

This is great fun. Is it perfect? No, but if you are between the ages of eight and fourteen, this could be the holy grail of hidden horror gems for sure. Even if you're not, this is still a very fun, creepy, and almost Lovecraftian horror film that I can only hope earns more fans over time. I know there are plans to remake this very soon (with friggin' Bill from Bill & Ted as the director!), but I'm not convinced this needs an update of any sort, minus the Blu-ray that was recently released.









I could've done without the somewhat forced happy ending and the clear advertisement for Canadian metal band Sacrifice though.


Oh damn it, I just complained! Curses.



Tomorrow, we're winding down to the very end, and tackle the often discussed HENRY: PORTRAIT OF A SERIAL KILLER.

Unseen Terror 2012: Day 28

A nervous fashion model moves into a surprisingly cheaply-priced hotel in New York. She meets her neighbors, an eccentric bunch to say the least, and around the same time, she starts experiencing strange problems, including fainting spells, insomnia, and bizarre flashbacks. She and her boyfriend decide to do some digging around, and may uncover a shocking truth about the blind and deaf priest who lives upstairs, secluded from society...


Well, that was a strange one. I'm not sure you could call The Sentinel a pure horror film, or just a satanic mystery/thriller. Wait, that can qualify as a horror film, can't it? Oh well, let's carry on with it.

This film certainly isn't shy about wearing its' influences on its sleeves, and it has a very decidedly un-American feel to it. The makeup and religious tones/backstory feel lifted out of assorted European flicks (mainly the Italians), and they choose to build tension rather than immediately jump right into the realm of insanity. I counted quite a few times where the film seemed to make you feel like you could be hallucinating or possibly even dreaming, made all the more peculiar by the twists towards the film's third act. I was quite shocked to see how large the cast list for this as well, spouting Chris Sarandon, Beverly D'Angelo, Ava Gardner, Burgess Meredith (awesome job here), Jerry Orbach, and Jeff Goldblum, just to name a few. The plot can be a bit of a handful for those who have short attention spans (raising my own hand now), but piecing it all together can be quite fun.

I did have a minor grip with the acting, which delved into the realm of overacting once in a while. Christina Raines is okay as our poor, crazy (or is she?) heroine, but it seemed like she was playing the part of a model who's trying to act rather than just act like a model. If that sounds confusing, then I'm sorry. What I'm trying to say is that she was just incredibly mediocre. There's also a subplot involving some detectives (with one played by a very young Christopher Walken) that seemed to go absolutely nowhere and didn't serve much of a point. But, my biggest gripe lies with the score, which was more pulverizing and distracting than chilling. Originally John Williams was set to compose the film's music, but backed out to do a little flick called Star Wars instead. It's a shame, since I feel he would have been able to add a much more fitting tone than what we got.

The Sentinel isn't what I'd call a great film, but I'd still recommend it.  A concept that gets progressively more interesting over time, coupled with a pretty haunting ending and some disturbing (by 1977 standards) imagery makes this worth a watch. Fans of religious-based horror films will be able to find a great deal to enjoy, but others may find it to be a bit of a chore.

Tomorrow, we jump forward by ten years and take a gander at THE GATE.

Unseen Terror 2012: Day 27

The spooky host known as "The Creep" presents three more chilling tales from Stephen King and George Romero. First, a Native American statue comes to life in order to exact revenge on some hoodlums. Second, four people find themselves stranded on a raft in the middle of a lake, with a strange, black blob surrounding them. Third, the victim of a hit and run will not rest, and continuously harasses his murderer...


Controversial statement time: I think Creepshow is the best horror anthology film ever made. Every segment is distinctive, the acting is fine, and overall, it's just a blast to watch. Given the surprise success of the film, I can't say I was surprised when many years ago I was told of this film's existence. Unfortunately, what we get isn't up to par with its predecessor. For starters, I was bummed out to discover that there are only three stories in Creepshow 2, as opposed to the original's five. I'm not saying that more is better, but it would have offered more substance.

The first segment, "Old Chief Wood'nhead," was probably my favorite, even if it was the most predictable of the bunch. It feels closer to a supernatural tale of revenge than a horror film, but it does have some wonderfully silly performances from everyone involved. I thought we could have saved the potential twist of the statue coming to life for a little later, as we see it on a couple of occasions before the bloodshed where it is clearly alive. There's a hell of a lot of exposition towards the middle, but we are dealing with a short after all, so there isn't much time to spend on filming an entire backstory. Fun.

"The Raft" is arguably the most memorable of these tales, and it isn't hard to see why. The deaths are fairly cool, and the monster itself reminded me of a mixture of Hedorah's vomit and the title creature from The Blob. The makeup work here excels too, with some great work from the usually reliable Greg Nicotero. If the acting would've been stronger, and the characters a tad bit more relatable, I think this would've been my favorite. As it turns out, it just ends up being decent.

My biggest complaints lie with the final segment, "The Hitchhiker." The concept is amusing, and there is an always fun cameo from Stephen King himself, but it is brought down by some one of the worst choices for a segment that I've ever seen: having the main character speak in "thought bubbles." As it was evidenced in 2009's Watchmen, this idea doesn't always work, and some lines of dialogue are best left printed and not read. Like the first segment, this is also entirely too predictable, but it does have breasts, so there you go.

In the end, Creepshow 2 is just kind of...there. I didn't find anything offensively terrible, but there was nothing terribly great to enjoy. If you're curious about wanting to watch this, I can't fault you for wanting to do so.

Now if it's Creepshow 3 you're interested in watching, then we may have to talk.


Tomorrow, we're taking a trip back to the 70s (and away from Sequelville) with THE SENTINEL.

Unseen Terror 2012: Day 26

After some bizarre events have left their friends dead at the hands of the monsters inside of an evil wax museum, Mark and Sarah make their way home, hoping to forget about everything they've witnessed. Within a few hours, a disembodied hand from one of the figures kills Sarah's stepfather, and despite getting rid of the evil hand afterwards, she is blamed for the murder. Soon, Sarah and Mark discover a compass that belonged to Mark's grandfather, which can help them traverse different dimensions, and will hopefully be able to help clear Sarah's name.


Last year I reviewed 1988's Waxwork, a pretty decent little horror/comedy with some good imagination to help make up for its weak start. Naturally, a sequel (and in this case, a DIRECT sequel) was released four years after the original's theatrical run, and so Waxwork II: Lost In Time, has come to be. If "Sequely" was an actual word, this would be it to a tee.

Director Anthony Hickox and star Zach Galligan are back, but unfortunately co-star Deborah Foreman turned down the offer to return as love interest Sarah Brightman (how in the hell did I miss making a joke about that last year?!), so she's replaced by a woman who looks absolutely nothing like her. Shockingly, I think I actually preferred newcomer Monika Schnarre though, who tries to bring a level of spunk and humor to a character that I thought was flat and irritating in the first. We're also treated to bit parts from David Carradine (R.I.P.) and Bruce Campbell, who naturally, are awesome for the little amount of time they have.

For the first two thirds of the movie, the idea of time hopping through what were essentially the same type of absurd and nonrealistic segments from the first film, confused me quite a bit, but one segment with an unhealthy amount of exposition later, any and all questions we have are answered. Almost immediately, the comedy starts to overtake the horror, and while I love both genres near and dear, I personally prefer a proper balance of the two, since I feel it wields the best results. The first Waxwork wasn't shy or subtle with its homages to a plethora of films from all across the board, but they turn it up to 11 this time around. I don't even have the time to list all of the parodies and homages I was able to spot, and some are even vital to the film's plot (including the ending). There is some pretty cheesy effects work going on as well, though it may been intentionally so. Also, better utterance of the phrase "Kill the bitch" EVER.

This film's kind of a mess, and way too silly at times, but it's the type of mess that you can have an enjoyable time with. I think a proper comparison would be that this is to Army of Darkness what Waxwork was to Evil Dead II. There seems to be a subliminal message to the audience, telling us "Don't take this too seriously," and that's the same advice I can give out. Watching it back to back with the original is the best route one can take.

Tomorrow, we're still sick with sequelitis, and I can hope that CREEPSHOW 2 is the cure.

Unseen Terror 2012: Day 25

On the way to work one morning during a terrible blizzard, radio host Grant Mazzy encounters an incomprehensible and seemingly deranged woman. She seems to be doing nothing but uttering nonsense and repeating Grant's own words back at him, so he continues on his way to work. After some time on the air though, Grant, his station manager Sydney, and technical assistant Laurel-Ann, start receiving a series of strange calls from listeners and fellow reporters alike, describing strange scenes of chaos around their small town of Pontypool.


Not to disrespect this fine country of ours, but a film like Pontypool could have only come out of a place like Canada (and not just because it has that strange camera filter you see in almost every Canadian horror film). We horror fans like to complain about the state of the genre nowadays, but this is one of the more unique and original films I've seen in some time. It borrows elements from The Fog, 28 Days Later, and Stephen King's The End of the Whole Mess, but definitely with its own ideas and twists.

The performances from everyone in Pontypool are considerably strong, and Stephen McHattie is particularly excellent as Grant, bringing a very real presence and humor to a character that could have been disposable if it were portrayed by most others. Personally, it only gave a person like me even more encouragement to get into voiceover work, whether it is in the radio business or not. The look of concern and intrigue on his and Sydney's (Lisa Houle) faces while everything is seemingly falling apart around them feels exactly the same as the audience's. True, they also slip into a state of confusion, which again, we as the audience may share as well, but most questions can be answered if we put our brains to work.

Pontypool's twist is a very strange one though, one that gave me fear they were going into late-era M. Night Shymalan territory. Through the writing of Tony Burgess, it digs itself out of that hole within a few minutes, and makes one wonder about the impact of speech and certain words (hope that isn't spoiling too much) in today's society. Without a doubt, the one thing that most audiences will take away from Pontypool is that the film doesn't exactly feature a whole lot of "show," in that nearly the entire film takes place within the radio station itself, and the horrific occurrences going on outside are only described to us, not actually seen. I know I'm repeating myself here, but more bloodthirsty fans will likely be annoyed.

I'm glad I checked this one out. After several days of being either disappointed or flat out aggravated with my selections, it was refreshing to see a creepy, original, and flat out intelligent film make an appearance on this countdown again. This will require a second viewing at some point, and I more than welcome it.


Tomorrow, we're experiencing a blast from the past (specifically last year's blog) with WAXWORK 2.

Unseen Terror 2012: Day 24

While cutting class one day, high school friends Rickie and J.T. make their way to an abandoned mental hospital. After some digging around, they discover a naked woman chained to a table in the basement. Rickie suggests they get the poor woman out, but J.T., through some "experiences" with the woman now nicknamed "Deadgirl," discovers that she is also incapable of dying, and has other plans in mind.


A quick message to my friends reading this: If I ever get this desperate for pussy, please lock me up and throw away the key.

You know how some movie posters immediately catch your attention and can never quite leave your mind? Deadgirl's has always stuck with me since I first saw the image while working at Hollywood Video. Unfortunately, our only copies at the time were rented and never returned, so I had to wait for some time to finally get around for a viewing. And the final verdict? S'alright.

The two leads...actually, scratch that, damn near every character, aren't particularly well written, and I never got the feeling that these two were ever friends to begin with, even if some forced expositional dialogue in the final twenty minutes tries to tell you otherwise. Jenny Spain is our title "creature," and even through she's speaking in nothing but grunts and the occasional scream, easily steals the show from everyone around her. She's probably the only living being (using that term loosely) worth rooting for here, as this doesn't really have too many likable characters to speak of. Even Rickie, our hero, comes across as a bit too weird to identify with, and Shiloh Fernandez's flat acting certainly isn't helping him. Makes you nervous for how he's going to do in the Evil Dead remake, doesn't it?

It is very likely that Deadgirl's ending will divide a lot of folks, seeing as how it does contain a complete 180 from what was previously established, but I'd say it made perfect sense considering some of the last words that are uttered by a certain character. It's one of those "Fuck You!" conclusions, but with an additional "No, Fuck YOU!" towards the very end. A bit confusing, but satisfying in a sick sort of way.

Deadgirl is an absolutely flawed film, and I think it could have been handled extremely well in the hands of a more experienced director, but the final product really isn't all that bad. If you're sensitive about rape in horror films, this could get under your skin. Doing back-to-back screenings of this and the previously reviewed The Woman will probably leave you hating the human race for the remainder of your day.

Tomorrow, we're still stuck in 2008, and this time make a trip to Canada with PONTYPOOL.

Unseen Terror 2012: Day 23

I'm actually going to do today's reviews a little differently. Instead of typing a separate review for each film, I've decided to do a comparison piece, since they're essentially the same, shitty, waste of time.

The plot for Blood Surf revolves around a group of people who travel to the Island of Never Specified for a new sport known as "Blood Surfing." This sport revolves around surfers throwing chum in the water to attract sharks, and surf around them accordingly while people film it for television. Our group stops by another island while doing this nonsense, and soon find that they're being pursued by a large Salt Water Crocodile. On the other side of things, Shark Night's plot revolves around a cast of students who decide to vacation at a Louisiana lake, where one of them used to frequent when she was younger. Almost immediately, they're subject to a variety of different shark attacks.

If you think the plots for those sound stupid, you'd be wrong. They're AMAZINGLY stupid. For one thing, Shark Night's plot shouldn't even make sense when you consider that most sharks survive in SALT water, not fresh. True, they offer a very brief explanation as to how these ones can and how they got there to begin with, but it still reeks of laziness. At least they explain from the get go in Blood Surf that the animal is indeed a "Salty," so nobody can nitpick them to death.

I was tempted to say that Shark Night had the advantage with its casting choices. Nobody in either film is good mind you, but at least you can recognize Sara Paxton (The Innkeepers), Katherine McPhee (American Idol), Joel David Moore (Dodgeball), and Donal Logue (Grounded For Life). Blood Surf's acting reminded me of something from an early WCW skit. Like White Castle of Fear-level stuff. The characters are cardboard cutouts or painfully cliched (this could apply to either movie to be honest), and the Australian lead actress was the equivalent to X-Men's Mimc when it came to accents. But after thinking about it for approximately ten seconds, I chose to say that it's a draw, and for one reason only: Blood Surf has nudity. Seeing as how it didn't receive a theatrical release, they most likely figured they could get their starlets to do whatever they wanted. Meanwhile, Shark Night is rated PG-13, so of course, we'll get a brief shot of sideboobs and nothing else. Those might be the holy grail for a twelve year old who hasn't discovered that the object downstairs is more fun to use than you realize, but it will annoy everyone else.

On the monsters and gore front, Shark Night can be described as no guts and no glory, since the blood and kills here are flat out lame. Every kill essentially amounts to pools of blood in the water while herky jerky camerawork frustrates you and robs you of anything potentially "cool." Blood Surf's kills are rather disappointing too, save for one scene with a human shish kabob. Shark Night loves its CGI, and naturally, it looks terrible. Would it have been too much to get the folks who worked on Deep Blue Sea to show you how to do a computer-generated shark properly? As for Blood Surf,  even though it was filmed during the "transition" period in movies (a.k.a. when CGI overtook practical effects and animatronics), the CGI looks ATROCIOUS, but we do see some shots of an actual animatronic crocodile! It also looks pretty silly, and I'm convinced they could only afford to make a head, but it was appreciated. Advantage, crocs.

However, both films are guilty of ripping off one vastly superior product: Jaws. I know we can't deny its impact on the horror genre, but for the love of god, they aren't even subtle about it. Blood Surf steals the Quint character, while Shark Night steals the opening sequence and several other key moments from that classic. Utterly shameful. I know Shark Night was also released in 3D, but even that cheap gimmick wouldn't have been able to mask its flaws.

This is like choosing which end of a double headed dildo covered in broken glass you want forcefully shoved up your anus. Neither is pleasant, neither is fun, and ultimately, you'll feel hurt having gone through either one. My advise is to just stay away if you know what's good for you.


Tomorrow, we're (hopefully) back to the good bunch with the much discussed DEADGIRL.

Unseen Terror 2012: Day 22

In a small area in Providence, Rhode Island, a young girl named Sally has been sent by her mother to stay with her father and his new girlfriend in their newly restored home. Initially depressed, and thoroughly unsatisfied, Sally despises her new home, but things start to get interesting when she wanders and discovers a sealed fireplace in the skylight of the manor's basement. She begins to hear multiple voices coming from not just the fireplace, but from various areas of the manor, and they all seem to be calling for her...


I've never seen the original Don't Be Afraid of the Dark, but outside of some role reversals, I've heard this doesn't deviate too much from the original source material. I'm admittedly going to have to track that film down now, just to see exactly how much was changed, and to see if it has the same faults and/or strengths as this film had.

For strengths, praise should go to actress Bailee Madison, who plays our young hero Sally pretty well. Come to think of it, everyone else around her was pretty mediocre. Katie Holmes seemed to be miscast in the role as the kind girlfriend of her father, and Guy Pearce just sounded disinterested throughout the entire film. Admittedly, it is a little difficult at first to even care about Sally, who just appears to be grumpy and frumpy for the first third of the movie (though I can't say I blamed her given some circumstances). The creatures themselves are also pretty scary-looking for the most part, though I'm sure they would have left a more lasting impact had they not been CGI. There is a particularly good jump scare involving them invading Sally's room.

Speaking of the creatures, yes, they're designed rather well. Yes, they're scary. But writer/producer Guillermo Del Toro, who I do rather enjoy, has already worked with the old legend of the "Tooth Fairies" before with Hellboy 2. Again, I know this is a remake, but it felt like he was recycling ideas with the decision to include them as the primary monsters. The film also boasts a running time of ninety nine minutes, and you do feel like a decent amount may have been left on the cutting room floor or was edited out of the script. Exactly what, I can't quite explain as of this writing, but I can almost guarantee that you'll feel the same way.

Underneath its occasional lapse into honest-to-god good creepiness and the somewhat formulaic "ancient evil reawakened" plot that we've seen countless times before (which preceded even the original), this is in essence a haunted house movie mixed with a fairy tale. That actually might be why I can say I enjoyed it. If you have some younger kids who don't mind an occasional scene of violence (I'm shocked this received an "R" rating considering there isn't any swearing or nudity), this could be a nice scary movie to watch with them one night. If you're uncertain about it though, just stick with an 80s or early 90s classic instead, and save this for a later date.


Tomorrow, we're going for a double dose of creature features, with BLOOD SURF and SHARK NIGHT.

Unseen Terror 2012: Day 21

On the evening of its final hours before being closed and demolished, two hotel workers find themselves determined to uncover the haunted past of their place of employment.


I'm almost certain that Ti West is destined to appear on this list every year from now on, solely due to timing. Last year, I reviewed his acclaimed House of the Devil, which I damn near loved to death. Since then, he's gone on to write and direct this followup, and like that film, it shares a lot of things to like, but some that I think prevent it from being a truly GREAT movie.

Judging by his casting choices for the aforementioned Devil, West has a good eye for female leads. For me, Sara Paxton's Claire was very easy to identify with. Awkward, a bit nerdy, and pretty much dissatisfied with her position in life. Hell, that's me in a nutshell! But anyway, she's very mousey here too, and Pat Healy's Luke has some similarities personality-wise, but just enough of a difference that he doesn't feel like Claire with different genitalia. West loves to make this feel like an old time ghost story, with a heavy emphasis on slow build ups and even "chapter stops" riddled throughout its running time. This might make or break the film for a lot of people, since slowness with payoff in the final act was also prevalent throughout House of the Devil.

The film also contains a good sense of humor, which I was completely unaware of, but it helps keep it grounded and prevents the audience from drifting off. I wasn't aware that there would be such a heavy focus on jump scares though, and while I don't mind those in certain scenarios or pictures, I was hoping we'd see less of them from a ghost story of this nature. Without giving too much away, there is also a revelation of one of the guests being a medium, which seemed a little too coincidental and a tad bit silly, but I suppose there are only so many ways with which to deal with subject matter like this.

Was I blown away by this film as I was with West's previous work? Well, no. But it is worth a watch, so long as you don't set your expectations too high. I'd still say House of the Devil is the superior product, but then again, Ti West's career in horror is still relatively young, so we've only seen just the beginning of this potential future master of the craft.


Tomorrow, we stick around in modern times with DON'T BE AFRAID OF THE DARK.

Unseen Terror 2012: Day 20

A man arrives at his ex-girlfriend's apartment to drop off her keys, but finds she isn't home. Almost immediately, a zombie virus starts to spread around Berlin, and he finds himself holed up in his ex's apartment along with a teenage plumber working next door. Together, they must find a way to survive and the man must also ensure that his ex can and WILL be found, safe and sound.


You know, outside of Nosferatu, The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, Anatomy, and Nekromantik, I can't recall the last time I've even HEARD of a horror film coming out of Germany. The country's views/laws on violence in the media has certainly been reflected in the outright banning of several flicks like Braindead and Evil Dead, and in specific metal band CDs from Cannibal Corpse and the like. So it is a rarity for something like this to even get off the ground.

Rammbock (subtitle Berlin Undead) isn't going to blow viewers away, but there really isn't anything to hate here either. The casting is fine, even if the acting ranges a bit from "fully awake" to "just going into college." It has an underlying sense of humor that doesn't feel too out of place, and it's always nice to see folks utilize what they have in order to survive, even if they aren't weapons of any sort. Outside of those ordinary belongings and staples of the genre, writer Benjamin Kressler does play with a few unique ideas. The fact that the zombies here were susceptible and sensitive to flash photography is a bit interesting, though it also made me wonder if these were the remnants of Euro Itchy and Scratchy Land. Someone who recalls specifics of Zombies 101, please let me know if this is something new or something that just isn't brought up in discussion.

I think it is unfortunate that this film's biggest flaws were something it probably couldn't help. For one thing, the film's only an hour long, and for a zombie movie, that is criminally short. We could have spent more time developing characters outside of one or two, or even helped set up better scares and kills. Speaking of kills, this is a surprisingly tame zombie movie. Perhaps the budget or Germany's censors are to blame, but outside of a couple of slightly graphic shots, you could have rated this PG-13 and nobody would have complained.

Overall, Rammbock is.....just okay. What, were you expecting me to say anything more? Well, I can't. The film's only an hour long after all.

A young couple, Lucas and Clementine, live in a serene and quiet countryside. One night, after Clementine comes home from work, they both settle in for the evening. Several hours later, they soon find themselves being harassed and terrorized throughout the night by mysterious, hooded assailants, for apparently no reason whatsoever.



I'm coming to the conclusion that I just don't like modern French horror. While I applaud the creativity involved, and can appreciate the makeup and gore in certain instances (Inside, Martyrs), I just ultimately come away feeling disappointed EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.

I remember seeing the DVD cover to this back in my days of working at Hollywood Video, and at first glance, I dismissed it, thinking it was some forgettable, supernatural-inspired dreck. Au contraire, since the terror in this film comes from the complete opposite of that subject. I've always felt that the best modern horror comes from fear of the living, not the dead. Our couple/victims in Them feel very real, something that I have to give the casting director a lot of props for. This is something that I'm willing to bet was a major fault about its American remake. I don't necessarily think that unknown casts work best all the time, but it does here. They feel like they could be any couple possible, which adds to its overall feeling of dread and could drive more anxious viewers to paranoia.

Now of course comes the part where I become a nitpicking asshole. First off, this is by far the slowest film I've encountered on the list, and possibly the slowest of the "French Horror" flicks I've seen to date. I honestly almost nodded off during certain points that were supposed to be integral to the plot (or whatever resembles it). Another major complaint I have revolves around the couple themselves. I know that we as human beings can act pretty dumb when we're scared, but never this stupid. There are two different scenes where we witness the couple using a cell phone and utensils, neither of which they figure to use during the horror portion of the film. It is utterly absurd, and their complete cowardice at times isn't helping break the old stereotype about the French being "pussies." It drove me nuts.

Well yes, yes I have. And it still didn't help, especially when you consider that this is supposed to be based off of true events. Hell, there are films out there involving the "home invaders" plot device that I enjoy, like Single White Female, Black Christmas, and Funny Games. Whatever the case, I can respect certain parts of Them, but I don't think I'm going to be revisiting this one any time soon. C'est la vie.


Tomorrow, I FINALLY get around to reviewing Ti West's THE INNKEEPERS.

Unseen Terror 2012: Day 19

I'd like to apologize for yesterday's post, since I WON'T be reviewing Ti West's The Innkeepers. Not today at least. Schedule conflicts and heading to the awesome Wilmington Panic Attack prevented it (though Panic Attack was pretty awesome), but I'll review the flick at a later date.

Well, now that we've gotten that out of the way...

A very dysfunctional and damaged family is met with a surprise one day, as the father has drugged and chained up a feral and violent woman found in the forest. He aims to civilize and rehabilitate her, much to his wife and daughter's disapproval. Over time, this new addition to the "family" may tear them apart, and in more ways than one...



It was inevitable that I'd run into a film this year that was almost too cruel to recommend, and Lucky Mckee's The Woman holds that distinct honor. I was actually pretty shocked to discover that this is a sequel to the Ghost House-released project Offspring (by author Jack Ketchum), but I don't believe you need to see the previous film to understand anything here. Sharing a lot in common with last year's The Girl Next Door (also by Ketchum), but nowhere near as infuriating as that film was, this really is the definition of a "love it or hate it" film.

Judging by his work on May, Mckee's always had a keen eye for casting (nice to see the supremely underrated Angela Bettis work with him again), and everyone in here seems based in reality rather than fiction, save for Carlee Baker, who I thought was a tad bit too "pretty" for her role as the older daughter's concerned teacher. I would love to see Pollyanna McIntosh in more work. She owns a face you won't soon forget and she's instantly memorable as the title character, and there are so many more layers to her character than we may first realize. Sean Bridgers' performance as Chris Creek is the very definition of a piece of shit, but in a good way. His son is also a near clone of him and could be the most evil little bastard I'll encounter until the very end of my list (crap, spoiler?).

Like May, the film doesn't particularly scream out at you, even with some incredibly tense and sadistic moments intact. Its choice of score is also very odd, choosing to focus on adult alternative songs for the most part. The film's not shy about its very pro-feminist message, though that could certainly turn some viewers off (it almost did me in with certain scenes). And I'm sorry to repeat myself, but man was this hard to watch at times. The last fifteen minutes had me feeling rather ill, to the point where I wasn't sure if I even wanted to give this a proper review.

So yeah, I like this one. I probably shouldn't have, given its very tough-to-watch final act, and the very real, cruel feeling you get from watching, but sometimes we want that from our horror films. I'm interested to hear what others thought about this, so if you're reading and have seen The Woman, please let me know your thoughts.


Tomorrow, we get a double dose of foreign flicks yet again with THEM and RAMMBOCK.

Unseen Terror 2012: Day 18

After a horrible accident turns him into a quadriplegic, a man receives a helper monkey named Ella to assist him around the house. At first, things are going splendidly, and Ella starts to even show signs of attachment. Over time though, the monkey also begins to show signs of anger towards those who would do its master wrong.


If I don't make this pun, I'm doing a disservice to myself.



Monkey See, Monkey Kill.



Whew. Now that I've gotten that horrendous bit out of the way, Monkey Shines was one of George Romero's few attempts to break into the mainstream. Critics were split over their opinions of the flick, and it didn't exactly do gangbusters at the box office. Its poor performance and the studio's tampering forced Romero to essentially go back "underground" and stay away from those who meddle with his works. Kind of a shame though, as I found this to be very fun.

The film feels a bit similar to the 1971 gem Willard, but outside of the whole "my unusual pet is my only friend" angle, they don't have a great deal in common. The cast is relatively strong here, and their characters equally so. The real star is obviously the monkey Ella herself, and you gain a great deal of respect for those that trained her to be so expressive and in all of her various tasks she performs. Yes, we're all aware that they're remarkably intelligent creatures, but this is a shining example of such. The film's also a lot funnier than initially advertised, and the interactions (grim and non-grim alike) between Ella and her co-stars could bring a smile to your face even when you're in the foulest of moods.

Monkey Shines definitely isn't shy about it's feelings on animal testing either, judging by the numerous times it tries to get you to sympathize with the villain, even after we've clearly come to realize that it is most certainly NOT a sympathetic creature. The body count is also remarkably light, as is the use of blood, which might disappoint Romero fans who want gratuitous bloodshed, but I think that actually worked to its advantage. We can save the "Monkey with a Chainsaw" story for another day.

While there are some pretty strange plot twists and character changes that receive no explanation, and the film itself might be scientifically impossible, on the whole I really enjoyed this one. Delightfully entertaining, and a real nice change of pace from the Godfather of zombie flicks. Did I also mention that it has Stephen Root (Office Space) and Stanley Tucci in it? Because it totally does.



Tomorrow, we're back to current times with THE WOMAN and THE INNKEEPERS.

Unseen Terror 2012: Day 17

Troubled teen and prankster Jim is forced to see local celebrity Dr. Blakely, a man who runs a self-help television show and program known as "Independent Thinkers." Unknown to Jim, at least at first, Blakely actually uses a grotesque alien, known simply as "The Brain," to brainwash and control the minds of those in the audience and at home. While Jim tries to convince those around him of the doctor's true intentions, "The Brain" grows hungrier.



There isn't much that I can say about The Brain that James Rolfe a.k.a. The Angry Video Game Nerd didn't already say in his review. I'm still going to give it a shot though. The first thing I noticed was that this low-budget picture was from the same director as Bloody Birthday, which honestly almost tempted me to press "stop" and quit just based on track record. But if I can sit through five shitty Hellraiser sequels, then I can sit through two Ed Hunt films.

The cast is a real mixed bag of random faces. Fans of Re-Animator will immediately recognize the late David Gale (first of you to make a crack about the Kevin Spacey film gets a swift headbutt to the stomach) as the Brain's "master." There's also George Buza, who if you don't recognize by voice (Beast from X-Men!), you've probably seen in bit parts here and there for the last 30+ years. Even Princess Zelda herself (Cynthia Preston) plays the love interest of our hero. None of them seem to have taken proper acting classes prior to signing on, but this is classified as B-horror for a reason.

The pace at which this goes is very awkward and a bit slow, and while it tries to play with segments of the main character losing his mind due to control from the creature itself, they just aren't very scary or effective. There's also one of the strangest setups to a love scene that I've seen in a while, though we don't get much in the way of nudity (or bloodshed now that I think about it) here. The soundtrack and the effects work are appropriately silly too and only add to the schlock factor. The film's low budget is very noticeable, but I did like the design of the Brain itself, even if it did look like a meatball fucked the Madball logo and its growls sounded like my old man snoring.

Make no mistake, this isn't a good film. The acting is awful, it lacks genuine scares, the monster looks pretty bad, and there are continuity errors galore, but it rightfully deserves a spot in the much sought after "so bad that it's good" category. Much like the vastly underrated Terrorvision, the film is unfortunately not available on DVD and as of this review, can only be seen on VHS or, surprisingly enough, on Youtube! This could make a nice companion piece to some other ridiculous 80s treats like Razorback or C.H.U.D. 


Tomorrow, George Romero makes his first appearance on this year's list, and hopefully I won't throw my own shit at MONKEY SHINES.

Unseen Terror 2012: Day 16

The night that their cars break down during a bad storm, two groups of strangers find refuge in a mansion run by an elderly couple. The couple themselves are doll makers, and the house is adjourned with them. After turning in for the night though, young Judy discovers that the dolls are alive, and they may have a larger mean streak in them than initially realized.


I've been excited about this one for some time. A killer doll film directed by Stuart Gordon (Re-Animator)? Sign me up! Alas.......any hopes I had for Dolls being a good piece of work were immediately cast aside when I saw the name "Charles Band" pop up in the opening credits. For those of you unfamiliar with Mr. Band, he has a serious affinity for small and wonderful creatures, preferably the murderous type, and he's the head of Full Moon Features, the company who distributes the Puppet Master films. I'll admit to liking the first three films in that franchise, but they're closer to being guilty pleasure films rather than actual good movies.

As far as the acting goes, Dolls could contain some of the very worst I've seen for this year's blog. While I get that most of the cast was trying to go for the "asshole" feel, they're either too over the top, or just plain stiff. Our heroes are essentially mirror images of Mara Wilson and Adam Richman, but boy are they bad here. I've stated before how much I hate bashing kid actors, but seriously, Jake Lloyd-level shit here from the girl who plays Judy. You get the feeling that Stuart Gordon must've been on cruise control when he came to work on this. "Just act and shit, I'm too busy writing From Beyond!" (Note: this was actually completed almost a full year before that film came out). Guy Rolfe and Hilary Mason, who play the elderly toymakers, are probably the only ones who seem to give any effort, and they do manage to find a nice balance between kindly old people and creepy mysterious figures. There's also quite a few goofs that those with keen eyes will be able to spot, including someone jumping through a window that was already visibly cracked, and certain dolls melting from fire while others don't.

This might sound controversial to some, but I think Dolls could benefit from a remake. Its fine final act isn't enough to make up for the rest of the film being utter garbage, and I think the fact that it only runs 77 minutes really hurts it as well. Give it a slightly bigger budget, take it away from Charles Band's hands, and properly mix the fairy tale and horror aspects. You might just surprise a few folks. This version is pretty disposable though.

Tomorrow, we stick with another familiar face from Re-Animator, this time the late David Gale, and tackle THE BRAIN.

Unseen Terror 2012: Day 15

One night at an Indian burial ground, Arby and Wendy, high school sweethearts, make a promise that even after they depart for college, they shall always remain faithful to one another. One semester later, Arby returns to find out that not only has the burial ground been replaced by a fast food restaurant, but his girlfriend is a lesbian, and is protesting the chain's existence. He takes a job at the restaurant out of despair, but soon the patrons start acting strange after consuming the product inside, and start returning as zombies, albeit with a more "fowl" edge!


God bless Troma. They're one of the longest standing independent movie promotions and always seem to know what their fanbase wants (violence, more violence, silly humor, nudity, lesbians, and even more violence). Poultrygeist has had a rather long, if not somewhat troubled history. First conceived in 2002, shot and completed in 2006 after numerous rewrites and production problems, and finally released to DVD in 2008, the film's a bit of an oddball, even by their standards.

I forgot that this film was part musical, in addition to the horror-comedy that I've come to expect from Troma. The songs themselves really did seem crowbarred in, and though they're certainly sang well, I didn't find any of them to be particularly memorable. The film also seems to run out of gas a bit towards its conclusion, and even the characters break the 4th wall by admitting that the end is a bit anticlimactic.

That'll do it for the complaints though! As I pointed out above, Troma adores blood and guts. They certainly don't spare any expenses here, and there is one scene in particular that lasts for about five minutes in the restaurant that was just beautiful. Well, beautiful in a very disgusting, macabre, blood-soaked kind of way. It was very reminiscent of the party scene in Peter Jackson's Braindead, at least in terms of how many different ways you can come up with killing fast food fanatics. Like all Troma films of the past, there are also tons of nods to their previous films, but you should be expecting that by now. The film's also got a pretty lowbrow sense of humor, but again, it comes with the territory, and there'll be quite a few times you'll feel guilty (for approximately three seconds) for laughing at certain jokes.

I think the horror world would be a lot more empty and less fun without a company like Troma around. I can understand why they have their fair share of "haters" in the community (though why you'd bash something like this or Terror Firmer and give praise to Thankskilling I have no idea why), but I've always had a soft spot for the sickos. Poultrygeist isn't their strongest title to date, but it certainly is a damn good time. Plus you get to see the classic "Troma car flip" and Lloyd Kaufman wielding an assault rifle while mowing down chicken-zombies. Even if the rest of the film was boring, those alone could make it worth it.


Tomorrow, I see if Stuart Gordon can make me fear part of my job with DOLLS.

Unseen Terror 2012: Day 14

On the eve of its one hundredth birthday, a town is overtaken by a mysterious fog that envelops nearly the entire area, and endangers all citizens in its path.


How the hell did it take me this long to see this one?! The Fog was director John Carpenter's first theatrical release following the surprise success of Halloween two years prior. Both films share some aspects with one another, including the casting of Jamie Lee Curtis and a seemingly unstoppable evil out to kill everyone in its path. That seems to be where the similarities end though.

I was surprised to see just how many familiar faces of 80s horror were present throughout its ninety minute running time (though this might be the quickest ninety minutes I've ever sat through). We've got Adrienne Barbeau (Creepshow, Swamp Thing), Tom Atkins (Maniac Cop, Nights of the Creeps), the aforementioned Curtis, Hal Holbrook (Creepshow, Wall Street), and Janet Leigh (Psycho) in the cast, so either Carpenter did his homework or just has a knack for good casting.

The film also certainly FEELS like a John Carpenter flick, with JC composing the score himself, building tension at just the right time, and making it feel almost like a classic mystery rather than a horror film. I'm aware that JC has gone on the record about his displeasure with the film's budget and reshoots, but I don't see why. Like Halloween, the budget for The Fog was considerably low, but that's never seemed to stop the man from doing what he can with what he has. The lighting effects on the fog itself is pretty chilling, and the kills, though rather bloodless, are gruesome and horrific.

I've heard for years that this was one of the more underrated horror films from the early 80s, and I would definitely agree. Good tension, good atmosphere, good use of its budget, and just a pretty good time overall.

A priest invites an old friend of his, a professor, to an abandoned church in Los Angeles. The professor brings along multiple colleagues, who discover a mysterious cylinder containing moving, green liquid. What the liquid embodies though, is far beyond that of what science can understand, and this liquid could very well bring about the end times.


This is John Carpenter's second entry in what he calls his "Apocalypse Trilogy," which also includes the rightly beloved The Thing and the vastly underrated In the Mouth of Madness. One of several questions entered my mind upon starting Prince of Darkness: does it deserve the flack that it so often gets? In my opinion, well, yes. Does that make it a bad film though? I would have to say that it doesn't.

For one thing, the film has way too many characters to keep track of, to the point where there's even a scene where the other characters forget who one certain person is. The ones that we are assigned to pay the closest attention to are decently well-rounded, but certainly not perfect. It was nice to see Victor Wong (Tremors, 3 Ninjas) play someone who you could constitute as noble and remarkably intelligent.  Though he received top billing, I kind of wish they had done a little bit more with Donald Pleasence, who just felt like a typical worried priest. There's also a comedic relief character played by Dennis Dun, and even though I did find him to be a bit annoying, he did provide a bit of heart that was sorely needed at times.

Like almost all of Carpenter's horror works, this was is also fairly quiet in nature, and the heavy emphasis on scientific conversations might also lull some less patient viewers to sleep. And like Carpenter's work on The Thing, there are quite a few visual spots that will stick with you for some time (one particular scene involving beetles was quite the sight to behold). The ending is also deliberately ambiguous, opening up a whole new can of worms for the viewer.

Those who are interested in "satanic horror" will have some fun with this one, but it can be a chore to sit through until about the half way point. I'd personally recommend it, but with some hesitation.


Tomorrow, we take a trip to Tromaville with the much delayed POULTRYGEIST.

Unseen Terror 2012: Day 13

Two women arrive at a small town in Colorado for a skiing trip, only to find the town deserted and empty. After making some grim discoveries of individual townsfolk, they're joined by a sheriff and his deputies in the investigation. Not long afterwards, the revelation of what has eliminated everyone comes to light: an ancient evil said to be as old as prehistoric man itself.


You know, come to think of it, the late 90s produced some pretty underrated gems in the horror field. Phantoms is a 1998 scifi-horror flick based on the novel of the same name by Dean Koontz. The film's cast consists of Peter O'Toole and a moderate-sized cast of twenty-somethings who were the rage then (Ben Affleck before he ventured into directing, Rose McGowan before she aged by about twenty years in the span of only seven) and is directed by Joe Chappelle, who coincidentally (kind of) directed the last Hellraiser film I was able to stomach.

Admittedly, the film's first twenty minutes almost lost me, with its insistency on jumping right into the action rather than build up interesting characters, or even develop them whatsoever. Thankfully this is somewhat rectified with the introduction of O'Toole's character and a revelation about Affleck's own one. I couldn't feel a single thing for the sisters though. It felt like they only wanted you to root for them to stay alive because they're pretty. They also seem to love abusing the supporting cast with an overuse of "fake scare" moments. You know those moments in horror flicks when the music builds, stops, and the character realizes that whatever was potentially wrong actually isn't? But then suddenly, BAM! Yeah, Phantoms really seems to have a hard-on for that at times.

The effects work here is pretty solid, save for some typical average-looking 90s CGI, but they were in a feeling out process of sorts back then. There's a particularly awesome scene involving cannon fodder army soldiers and scientists who try to combat the creature, and we see some pretty gnarly creature work throughout it. The "phantoms" themselves are pretty darn creepy too, though like John Carpenter's The Thing, we never really see a true form it takes until the end, and even then we must question as to whether what we're seeing is the "original" monster.

Though it certainly isn't shy about wearing its influences on its sleeves, Phantoms is still a pretty good time. Think of it as a weird mix of The Blob (remake), The Thing, and Invasion of the Body Snatchers.   There's good tension, decent acting, and a delightfully silly performance from Liev Schreiber to boot.

Oh yeah, and Affleck is the bomb in it yo.


Speaking of John Carpenter, tomorrow, we get a double dose of the man with PRINCE OF DARKNESS and THE FOG.

Unseen Terror 2012: Day 12

When a ship arrives in the Illinois river, carrying multiple cargo and missing its entire crew, two detectives are assigned to investigate and after searching, uncover a gruesome scene. Meanwhile, a biologist at Chicago's Museum of Natural History receives two crates from a fellow colleague, one with a statue inside, and the other with seemingly nothing. Soon, a security guard at the museum is murdered, and everyone slowly realizes that something may have been harbored in that ship that was best left undiscovered...something not entirely human.



When I was younger, I would often confuse 1997's The Relic and 1998's Mimic with one another. Perhaps because both films came out within six months from one another, or because both have an emphasis on science to explain its monsters, or maybe because both films end with "ic"s and have two syllable titles. Knowing the younger, stupider me, it was probably the latter.

The film stars Penelope Ann Miller (before she essentially disappeared from mainstream cinema) and Tom Sizemore (before he was filming cameos in ICP films...seriously) as our resident scientist and hero  cop respectively. They both deliver solid performances, and it makes me sad that Miller hasn't gotten more work in the horror field. She's like a more competent Mira Sorvino, or like a more lively Gillian Anderson, though maybe not as appealing on the eyes for the male demographic. The exchanges between them and the rest of the cast are delivered with some actual conviction, despite a lot of the dialogue being VERY exposition-heavy.

Two more distinguishable traits for the film are Gale Ann Hurd (Aliens, The Terminator) producing and Stan Winston's crew providing makeup and creature effects throughout its almost two hour running time. The monster itself isn't revealed until around the eighty minute mark, playing out similar to what was done in Alien with showing the audience only glimpses until the big payoff. The monster itself certainly looks menacing, if not average in terms of actual thought put behind the design, but it is a bit hard to make out considering how damn dark the film is. It didn't reach the same level of annoyance as a film like AVP: Requiem did, but it can be frustrating for those viewing it in a room with little to no way of blocking light from entering.

I was pleasantly surprised with this one. While I certainly wasn't expecting total garbage (despite what some of the later choices on my list will tell you), I didn't expect to have this much fun. It's fairly underrated and its surprisingly smart script (based originally on a novel by Douglas Preston and Lincoln Child) could hold your attention. The blood and gore, for what there is, is also well done. Give it a whirl.


Tomorrow, I hold Kevin Smith's words near and dear and decide to check out PHANTOMS.

Unseen Terror 2012: Day 11

Three youths born on the night of an eclipse grow up with a sweet tooth for murder. As everyone around them starts dying, one of the group's classmates grows suspicious and comes to the realization that his "friends" may be more bloodthirsty than expected.


To call Bloody Birthday an ugly hybrid of Village of the Damned and Halloween is like saying that Nickelback is a bad band: it is disgustingly obvious and those that enjoy it may be mentally unstable.

From the get go, we know we're in trouble. One of the first names that pops up in the opening credits is Michael Dudikoff, he of the oh so atrocious American Ninja movies. True, he isn't in the film for long, but his presence alone is enough of a warning. I can't pick on him too much though, everyone sucks in this. I've seen better child actors come out of George Lucas films. Despite the film's title, it also isn't particularly bloody, nor does a birthday play much part in the film, unless you count the actual birth of the evil children themselves and one "party" scene which features no deaths whatsoever.

As stated above though, it is so glaringly obvious that this was rushed into production to capitalize on the success of assorted, better films. I lost count with how many films this wanted to be, but was able to spot Porky's, Halloween, Psycho, The Omen, and Jaws (the score desperately wanted to be a throwback to it, despite the fact that the film was only seven years old at the time). True, the revelation of astrology being to blame for the kids' behaviors was a bit of a surprise, but I still think it reeks of STUPID. And speaking of stupid, nobody over the age of ten in this film seems to have a fully developed and functioning brain. Again, slasher movie logic, but COME THE FUCK ON.

Even by slasher movie standards, this is very stupid stuff. Honestly, that might be my biggest complaint about that sub-genre. The good films that exist are very good, but for every good one, there are at least half a dozen that are insultingly dumb and lack creativity. Perhaps a six pack and company could fix Bloody Birthday's biggest faults, but I don't expect it to.

Tomorrow, we find out whatever the hell happened to Penelope Ann Miller with THE RELIC.

Unseen Terror 2012: Day 10

Mrs. Lee, an aging ex-TV star, schedules an appointment with a chef known for her dumpling recipes. She overhears that these dumplings have the powers of rejuvenation, and hopes to regain her youthful looks and win back her husband's affections. The dumplings, however, hold a very controversial secret ingredient...


Yeesh.

Dumplings is a film that is an expanded version of a short that first appeared in the horror anthology Three...Extremes, which was essentially a showcase for assorted Asian directors and their talents. The story for both the short and the full-length feature film are nearly the same, though with some very notable differences that I'll get into. As always, I will try my best to avoid spoilers.

It might sound cliched to say "This won't be for everyone," but I really do have to emphasize that this WON'T be for everyone, and will probably repulse those who are sensitive about a certain court decision made in the last fifty years. I was already feeling quite queasy after the first fifteen minutes, and nothing horribly graphic had occurred outside of food preparation, consumption, and dialogue. The film certainly wants you to pay attention, even if the story isn't too terribly complex.

Don't let the fact that Bai Ling is in this scare you away either, she isn't too bad as chef Aunt Mei (save your Spider-man jokes please), though she certainly reverts back to annoying form when she's drunk in a pool at the film's halfway point. The film's subplots range in terms of creativity, with some feeling like important contributions to helping the movie go forward, and others feeling like they existed solely to fill time. I was also disappointed with the ending, since it felt a little more easy to digest (ugh, that pun almost made me cringe) than the original short's was.

If you've previously seen the short that Dumplings is based off of, it isn't absolutely necessary to seek this out. If you're new to Fruit Chan's work though (which I admittedly am), or haven't seen the previously mentioned anthology, this disturbing little tale is well worth watching. It is well made, competently directed, unsettling at all the right moments, and might just turn you off of eating Chinese food for quite a long time.



Tomorrow, I turn 27. So no review.


Nah just kidding, it'll be all about BLOODY BIRTHDAY.

Unseen Terror 2012: Day 9

A group of asbestos workers go to work on an abandoned mental hospital. Over time, multiple things start getting in the way of their work. Tension and personal matters among the group begin to arise, but the real factor involves the hospital's troubled, awful past, which may or may not be returning to haunt them.



Quick show of hands: who here has previously seen this clip of David Caruso cursing?

Now, another show of hands: how many of you have seen the film from where this clip was taken? Session 9 is a psychological horror tale that at first glance might seem like standard fare or a ripoff of The Shining, but eventually turns into something a little more interesting. And for those wondering, that clip above is probably the most out-of-place moment in the entire film.

I don't think David Caruso's career in movies has been nearly as successful as he'd have liked it to be, but he's fairly entertaining here, albeit still suited better for television. The rest of the cast does well enough, though I personally couldn't understand about half of Peter Mullan's dialogue. Whether that was due to audio mixing or his mumbling Scottish accent I'm not quite certain. I was personally offended by the choice for the "young metal guy" on the team, but that's USA Films for you I suppose. The film moves pretty slow for the most part, choosing to focus on building these characters into the furthest things from paper thin stereotypes. Don't get me wrong, that certainly isn't a bad thing, but my own interest was waning here and there until around the fifty minute mark, when things started to take a turn for the better.

For a film that has almost nothing in the way of budget (and no, I don't think they spent their money on signing Caruso considering that, well, it IS David Caruso), it doesn't look entirely cheap. Tension in horror can work well whether there's hundreds, thousands, or millions of dollars behind it. Putting together the end twist(s) may take a bit of time, but it did make a little more sense than I initially thought it did, even if it was the furthest thing from original.

Session 9 almost lost me a few times throughout its running time, but kept winning me back. This is one of those flicks that will most likely end up receiving a second viewing, NOT to take in more that you may have missed, but to appreciate the art of making a pretty decent little film with not much in the way of backup support.


Tomorrow, we head to China for a serving of DUMPLINGS.

Unseen Terror 2012: Day 8

So we've survived week one of this year's horror marathon/blogging, and we're definitely not slowing down. Today, we've got a triple dose of Stephen King. Even throughout his moments and years of mediocrity and laziness, I've still remained a fan of the kooky Maine author. Adaptations of his works have always varied in terms of quality. Some are fondly remembered as cinematic works of art (The Green Mile, The Shawshank Redemption, Carrie, The Shining), some are guilty pleasures (It, Pet Sematary), and some are just flat out embarrassing (The Mangler, Dreamcatcher, 1408). What do today's entries fall under? Well, read on if you want to find out.

A young paraplegic tries to convince his sister and his uncle that the series of murders that have been occurring in town are NOT the work of a madman, but that of a lycanthrope.

I'm shocked that I had never seen Silver Bullet until this year. I'm always fond of well made werewolf movies, particularly ones made in the 80s, and Gary Busey is always worth watching, even in something wretchedly bad. This ISN'T wretchedly bad though, mind you. In fact, it makes for an entertaining time.

There's a lot to like here. For one, Gary Busey ad libs a good amount of his dialogue, though it is pretty hard to tell considering just how much we've seen him descend into madness over the years. I've never been a huge fan of either of the "Coreys" from the 80s, mainly due to being a child of the decade afterwards, but Mr. Haim is very convincing and looks like's having a fun time with the script. The film is also a lot funnier than I expected it to be and our werewolf acts like a killer in a slasher movie, so you know he certainly isn't messing around. My only complaint about the werewolf is that we discover who it is far too early in the film, and it kind of ruins the "guessing game" angle of who it could possibly be. 

Silver Bullet has a pretty suspenseful third act that earns props as well, with some good practical effects and costume designs that I'm surprised earned ire from people who worked on the film. Regardless, this is a very enjoyable werewolf film that will please SK fans and non-fans alike. Strongly recommended.

On the way through Nebraska, Burt and Vicky stop in the seemingly deserted town of Gatlin. The town strikes them as odd, as there are no adults in sight, and the children run the town under the orders of a strange, child preacher named Isaac and his enforcer, Malachai. They worship "He Who Walks Behind the Rows," and "He" doesn't take kindly to adults passing through town...

Before it was drowned in a sea of crappy sequels (and what are the odds that I review them next year?), Stephen King's Children of the Corn actually had a respectable reputation among horror fans, despite taking liberties with its original script and the story it was based off of.

For one, King decided NOT to set the story in Derry, Maine, which automatically earns it brownie points. The acting isn't too terrible either, with the possible exception of Courtney Gains' Malachai, who coincidentally has to be one of the least attractive-looking people I've seen in recent memory. I hate to kid bash considering that it makes me look like Perez Hilton, but good lord was that an ugly child. I was ready to give props to John Franklin as Isaac, the leader of the group, until I found out he was portrayed by a full grown adult. To me, that seems to be a bit of a copout. Speaking of kids, I will never not feel a little weirded out by scores comprised of children singing. The most memorable to me was in Gojira, but this works well too.

The film also forsakes supernatural elements until about the last twenty minutes, when it decides to go into full blown crazy territory. I know the Stephen King of old certainly wasn't subtle about his disdain for all things religious, but I felt disappointed that they even bothered to venture there. Would it have been too much trouble to say these children were just genuinely insane?

Complaints aside, this one's relatively fun too. It makes one wonder about the importance of adults in the roles of a child's life, and also makes you realize that maybe kids aren't stupid as we think they are. I'm not sure how it compares to the updated TV movie that was released three years ago, though it is supposedly more faithful to the original short story than this was. This version's alright in my book though.

Bill, an arrogant, overweight lawyer, accidentally hits an elderly Gypsy woman with his car, but is soon acquitted of all charges. After the trial, the woman's father approaches Bill, and touches his face while uttering a single word: "Thinner." Within no time at all, he begins to lose weight at an alarming rate. While it may sound like a good thing to Bill at first, he later begins to worry that he may be on the way to early grave if the weight loss doesn't come to an end.

Thinner could be the ultimate nightmare for a person who is incredibly self-conscious about their weight (that or THIS classic commercial from the 1990s), but it isn't particularly scary, just a tad bit creepy when it needs to be and a lot more entertaining than you'd expect.

Robert John Burke (a.k.a. Fauxbocop) is appropriately slimy, and not exactly a sympathetic figure. Truth be told, it can be difficult to root for any individual in this film, which may turn some off. He handles the initial suspicion about his "curse" decently well, though there's a point in the film that involves potential infidelity that just felt kind of forced, and I don't think RJB seemed to even care about that portion or subplot until near the end. Joe Mantegna plays a crime lord who Billy has gotten off the hook for a crime we're never told much about to begin with, and he's probably the sole reason to give this a watch. He's delightfully wicked and seems to enjoy playing a character of this nature a little too much (not surprising considering he IS Fat Tony on The Simpsons). 

The film does get to be a bit silly involving other potentially cursed victims though. Those scenes just feel like filler for the most part, or excuses to rack up the body count. I also don't care that Kari Wuhrer is a babe and a half, she can NOT pull off a proper accent without sounding forced. It was kind of a shame that this film performed so poorly, and that the film's ending deviates from the pretty dark (but fitting) one from the original novel, but Thinner isn't as bad as its reputation might be.

Tomorrow, David Caruso makes an appearance on our list (YEAHHHHHHHH) with the much talked about SESSION 9.