Thursday, October 27, 2016

Unseen Terror 2016: Day 26 & Day 27

Well, we're getting down to the nitty gritty of this year's Unseen Terror, and I won't mince words when I say that I am a tad bit drained (both mentally and physically). Still, no rest for the wicked right? Speaking of that, let us venture into the familiar realm of the sadly-departed Wes Craven, shall we?








Day 26 was kicked off by what I would refer to as one of the director's "transitional" projects. Released four years after breakout hit The Hills Have Eyes, but only three years prior to our first interaction with a particular claw-adjourned psycho, 1981's Deadly Blessing is an odd little picture. The plot concerns a widow who is still mourning the loss of her husband, as he was killed under mysterious circumstances via a tractor pinning and crushing him against a wall (happens all the time). At his funeral, she notices the members of his old religious community mourning him from afar. When the woman's friends arrive to check up on her, a series of strange events begin to occur, and they start to wonder if these previously-seen individuals have diabolical plans for the lot of them.


Though it's the furthest thing from a completely original concept, the initial storyline for Deadly Blessing had me intrigued. After all, there is far more to fear when it comes to the influence of organized religion than with any boogeyman or unnatural creature. There's always a good opportunity to craft a movie with a sense of dread, intrigue, and atmosphere. Hell, the masterful gentleman was even smart enough to bring back Eyes character actor Michael Berryman in a small role, and the distinguishable-looking Ernest Borgnine as a memorable, bearded leader of the not-quite-Amish folks who frequently view the widow as an "Incubus." Finally, there's a young Sharon Stone (Basic Instinct, Casino), who at the rather young age of twenty-three, willingly allowed a real spider to be dropped into her open mouth. Hey, it can only go uphill for you from there hon.


So, with all of that working in the film's favor, does it amount to a good experience? Unfortunately, I would have to say that it does not. The ideas of exploring the evils of cults and digging deep within a secluded society of those who adhere to a strict set of rules is fine. As mentioned above, given the time period when this came out, it feels as though Craven was just sort of trying to go for a different approach to horror after being (unfairly) dismissed as a director who dealt exclusively in nasty motion pictures that appealed to only the most sadistic of viewers. But my goodness, does Deadly Blessing drag. A lot. Playing out more like a darker mystery or suspense flick rather than a traditional scary one, it feels disappointingly restrained, mostly uneventful, and quite tame (save for the rather insane final twenty-something minutes).


Deadly Blessing just never really feels like it lives up to its own potential. As blasphemous as this may sound, I think that if the decision were made to remake this, I would be the furthest thing from upset. All of the little flaws scattered throughout and the frequently sluggish pace can be easily fixed if it is put into the hands of competent filmmakers (someone like an Adam Wingard or Ti West could probably knock this out of the park). Still, if you are a Craven collector, and haven't let my negative words discourage your interest, there is a Blu-Ray available from reputable distributor Scream! Factory, and it is available to watch on the Amazon Prime streaming service.



And when you consider that this looks no different from a made-for-TV presentation, I don't see any way that the picture quality or restroration on an actual disc format doesn't look infinitely better in comparison.




Hmm, sounds like I could use a picker-upper though, right? Let's take a gander and see what's out there....
























...............................................................nah.

































To absolutely no one's surprise, I am cheating again (cue Eddie Guerrero jokes) for Day 27's entry. I have watched Wes Craven's return to the essential positions of the franchise he helped spawn (a feat that even he never suspected would, or should have happened) on more than a few occasions. Bluntly and brilliantly-titled Wes Craven's New Nightmare, the movie was a much needed return to form for not just the distinguished writer/director himself, but for the iconic Freddy Krueger as well. Despite my enjoyment of the various sequels that preceded this, there was no arguing that the Nightmare on Elm Street series had degenerated into a bit too much camp and not enough genuine intensity or horror. And yet, considering that the sixth sequel to the 1984 classic has more than a few of its original cast members returning, it is a non-canonical movie.


In an attempt to breathe some new life into the (then) rotting corpse of the maligned slasher genre, studio head Bob Shaye contacted Craven, asking that he return to the big man's chair and somehow find a way to bring Freddy Krueger back to life. Yes, fictional serial killers have escaped death multiple times throughout the years, but film distributors New Line Cinema had said themselves that there would be no continuation in this franchise after a fitting, titular conclusion was released to theaters in 1991. Unsurprisingly, Wes was not interested in concocting some absurd premise behind the dream master's resurrection. Instead, a very ballsy idea was put from pen to screen: we were going to bear witness to what folks would classify as a "meta" picture. True, this type of practice was not completely uncommon (1985's Return of the Living Dead also toyed with the possibilities), but given that previous outings had included sequences wherein victims were transformed into pizza toppings or shoved headfirst into a television, this could be harder to pull off than one would think.


The story for New Nightmare begins with Heather Langenkamp, the star of the original 1984 picture, having graphic, horrific nightmares that deal with mishaps on the set of a new Elm Street flick. Even stranger is the constant harassment that she has been receiving from a fan through the mail and over the phone, who constantly spouts quotes from the series' antagonist (which the actress had dealt with in real life). It also seems to reflect onto her own son Dylan (Pet Sematary's Miko Hughes), as he has been dealing with issues of his own that are related to sleepwalking and traumatizing episodes. Initially dismissing these as just freak occurrences, Heather is soon approached by film studio New Line Cinema, who ask that she reprise her role as Nancy Thompson in a sequel. Reluctantly, she agrees to take the part, but only after discovering that her husband Chase has been working on the project in secret. One evening, Dylan is caught viewing the first film on television, and as Heather awakens him from his night terror, Chase is contacted to immediately return to the house, but falls asleep at the wheel and perishes rather brutally (with his body in the morgue sporting multiple slashes across the chest). Following his funeral, a queer set of events begins to unwind, which sees the truth about Freddy Krueger's entire reason for existing coming to light.


There is certainly more than a few instances of cleverness found throughout New Nightmare's aforementioned synopsis, whether they're in the homages to several iconic scenes from its cinematic forefather, or even just in the way that Craven and crew manage to take a few tiny shots at how absurd the dumbing down of the franchise has become, which includes seeing children in the audience of a talk show where Robert Englund is supposed to appear (in complete costume no less!). Most of the creator's vision is fully realized here, and he smartly brings Krueger back to his origins as a nearly-inescapable evil with malicious intentions and no time to joke around. Freddy also receives an upgrade in the costume and makeup department: he appears to be much closer in appearance to a proper burn victim, with more sinister-looking eyes, a trenchcoat, and a reconstructed glove that is more skeletal and grossly organic in design. Purportedly, this is what was conceived during the first film's pre-production stages, but for whatever reason, it never came to be until now.


At this point, it should be the furthest thing from a shock to hear that the cast of characters in an Elm Street film are pretty fabulous. Tracy Middendorf, who would ironically pop up again down the line in MTV's Scream television series, plays Julie the babysitter. Limited as her screen time may be, the young lady has tons of spunk and personality, and had this iteration in the franchise not existed, I think that writing some variation of her as a potential lead or love interest to another protagonist would have been great to see. We also see the reappearance of series veterans like John Saxon, Lin Shaye, and (naturally) Robert Englund, who I'm certain was fairly excited to be playing a far more serious version of the villain that fourteen-year-olds constantly ask him about at horror conventions. Then again, he's never half-assed it in any of the subsequent follow-ups. But, the highest praise has to be reserved for the wonderful Heather Langenkamp, who is out in full force here. Channeling unbridled rage, frustration, and passion that no doubt came from a myriad of incidents related to/following her initial casting from back in the day, she turns in what I personally consider to be her finest performance to date as an actress. She has grown as a person in so many ways (as has every single soul from film #1) and it reflects here. Miko Hughes plays a good toddler in terror as well, and even if I can be down on kid actors from time to time, I've always felt extremely sympathetic every time that he is being terrorized here. I mean, who wouldn't scream if a horribly deformed man tried to unhinge his jaw like a snake and swallow you whole?


Though any respectable fan of the scarier side of cinema knows well enough by now, New Nightmare is a truly great entry in the Elm Street saga. It stands as a delicacy for longstanding fans, casual newcomers, and those who express interest in the sort of morose, bizarre obsessions with horror's influence on the general populace and the continuous need for milking a cash cow. Furthermore, it is one of the few self-reflective pictures in this subgenre that I firmly believes needs more projects akin to it. Unbeknownst to the audiences who ventured out to see it, New Nightmare would also serve as a prototype of sorts for another Craven-led ditty that would change the game (again). Currently, the film can be purchased in a wonderful Blu-Ray box set with the other entries in this franchise, and is available to stream on Netflix along with another underrated Craven flick in Scream 2.



Which leads me to close off today (and yesterday's) entries with an older tweet that comes courtesy of film critic Kim Newman: "Wes Craven reinvented horror at least four times - most directors don't even manage it once." Despite an occasional hiccup here and there, the man's filmography is the type of resume that most will strive to achieve, though I'll be damned it they can even come close.



Rest in power Wes. I love you and miss you.




Tomorrow, I'm in the mood for some rock and/or roll to go with my cinematic terror. Who's with me?!

No comments: