Unseen Terror 2024: Spooky Title of Your Choosing (Day 31)

Well, it’s the end of the month. Time for the final batch of flicks. Hope everyone’s Halloween has been fun. Maybe next year I'll actually venture out into the world again.

I wasn’t planning on having 1984’s Don’t Open Till Christmas as the closer for 2024’s iteration of Unseen Terror, but I figured it could be a fitting note to end on considering that when the clock strikes midnight, the slumbering beast known as Mariah Carey will emerge and terrorize the world for the next couple of months. Plus, I don’t really have a strong desire to end my marathon with an Eli Roth flick like Thanksgiving. Anyways, this is the first "traditional" slasher movie that I’ve seen in recent memory to NOT take place in or come from North America. It’s a simple story of authorities pursuing a mysterious figure who’s been killing off Santa impersonators in London during Christmastime. The first thing that must be noted about Don’t Open Till Christmas is how much of a nightmare it was behind the scenes to complete and release the movie. First, its main actor/director Edmund Purdom quit after constant conflicts with producers (which led to delays and rescheduling while shooting). Afterwards, the movie’s co-writer Derek Ford was hired to take over and complete the picture…only to be relieved after two measly days on the job. After THAT, editor Ray Selfie was hired to direct, and they demanded that most of the script be rewritten by another individual. Because of the previously mentioned Purdom leaving the production, they also asked that much of the movie be re-shot. Many characters had to be recast as well due to some of the original performers being unavailable to return at the time. Eventually, Purdom came back to finish directing and complete his on-screen scenes.

 

You got all of that?

 

The result is a slasher flick that feels extremely awkward, though still admittedly entertaining. The influence from the Italian giallo scene is very noticeable in some of its color palette (very bright red blood for example) and there are some very sudden outbursts of extreme violence that feel slightly like the material seen in Pieces (both coincidentally produced by Dick Randall). That’s another hyperviolent release from the mid-80s that I’ve previously reviewed, but Pieces is a lot more competent and unapologetic for what it is. Also, Pieces wouldn’t have wasted casting genre favorite Caroline Munro (famously known for roles in Maniac, The Golden Voyage of Sinbad, The Spy Who Loved Me, and MANY hammer horror flicks) in a two-minute-long cameo that ultimately serves no purpose other than to make her scream at the sight of a dead body. At least Munro understood the assignment given out here though; most of this cast is eerily calm about seeing horrific murders committed in front of their eyes. Hell, one of the picture’s first slayings is seeing someone get a spear shot through their head IN FRONT OF PEOPLE AT A PARTY, and only one person seems genuinely shocked or horrified. Maybe this is a British thing? Maybe I’m just being too anal about these kinds of flicks.

 

Don’t Open Till Christmas is like that person you randomly see at a bar who can’t quite hit the bullseye on the dart board, but still manages to elicit an “ah, at least you tried man” from the patrons. It’s just too clumsy to warrant a strong recommendation but compared to some of the other material I’ve viewed this month, it’s far from a complete disaster. If you aren’t in the mood to rewatch the vastly superior “holiday horror” pictures such as Christmas Evil, Silent Night, Deadly Night, or even Gremlins for the umpteenth time, then I suppose you could fire this up.

 

 

 And now we move on to…………. something else.

 

The nicest thing I can say about A Haunted House, a 2013 parody of the “found footage” genre, is that it could’ve been far worse than it is. At this point I don’t think it’s controversial to say that any of the Wayans Brothers’ best days are behind them and that post-Scary Movie, the parody genre has more-or-less become the “reference” genre. Yes, we get lucky with gems like Pop Star, Hot Fuzz, Weird: The Al Yankovic Story, and Black Dynamite from time to time, but for the most part it has become dreadful. The funniest part of A Haunted House had to do with an audio review from the now defunct spill.com (which I’ll link to right here. I'd advise starting at the 9-minute mark). I breathed a short sigh of relief when J.B. Smoove and David Koechner showed up because lord knows once I saw Nick Swardson on screen, I almost instantly knew that this movie was doomed. Hard pass on this one. I am not looking forward to Scary Movie 6.

 

To quote the immortal Cypress Hill, however, “I ain’t going out like that.” I had to end on a high note.

 

So, I re-watched Tremors. Again.

 

Hey, there’s nothing wrong with a “comfort” watch. Plus, I’d rather have October end on an exciting note about giant, underground worms battling Kevin Bacon & Fred Ward than one where Marlon Wayans takes a dump on his wife’s father’s ashes.

 

Not sure what I can say about Tremors that I already haven’t said either online or in person. It’s a perfect monster movie. It’s a perfect horror-comedy. It’s the right kind of exhilaration packed with memorable characters, endlessly quotable lines, and practical effects that could put most things from modern day “monster” movies to shame. It’s….perfection.

 

Nevada.

 

 

…………………I’m not apologizing for that joke.

 

Anyways, stay tuned because I may be back in the next couple of days to talk about what the future holds for this yearly blog-o-thon thing that I do for fun.

Unseen Terror 2024: Coming Down to the Wire (Day 29)

 

If there ever was a definition of a “cult” film, it would be 1983’s folk horror oddity known as Eyes of Fire. Admittedly I had never even heard of this until last year but given that this was previously unreleased on anything outside of VHS since 1987, it isn’t surprising that it sat in obscurity for anyone who didn’t live in the backroom of their local video store. That, or people who were willing to shill out an entire paycheck for a copy on eBay. Seriously folks, just wait. Eventually everything becomes available to the public for purchase (unless it’s literally a lost film like the original Korean cut of Yongarry, Monster from the Deep or Alfred Hitchcock’s The Mountain Eagle).

 

Timeline-wise, this is one of the oldest films I’ve reviewed for Unseen Terror in quite some time. Eyes of Fire takes place in 1750 during colonial times (and before the United States declared independence) and is told through the viewpoints of two young women who have been discovered by French military officers. Along with a handful of others from their settlement, they were forced to flee after the new, Christian preacher was accused of adultery. They make their way downriver to establish a new colony but find themselves on land that may harbor vengeful spirits rarely seen by man nor beast. Before I get into any further discussion about this, I have to say that we really do need to respect and treasure physical media, because I doubt that anyone save for film connoisseurs such as Arrow Video, Vinegar Syndrome, or Severin Films (the latter of whom were able to get this out on 4K Blu-Ray in 2021) would ever be able to put enough care into making something this old look at least ten years younger than it actually is. From what I understand, Severin ended up going directly to writer/director Avery Crounse for a proper print, and not only was he willing to assist, but he even provided them with the original, lengthier cut (titled Crying Blue Sky) to touch up and release as well should they like. I have to say, I’d be more than willing to watch a longer version of this picture, because I’m almost certain that the additional lost twenty-something minutes could make things a bit more coherent than what we have here. Mind you, what we get here is pretty damn great though.

 

As expected with a lot of entries in the “folk horror” genre, there is some trippy and surreal imagery found throughout Eyes of Fire, especially in its second half. There wasn’t a single time when I saw faces seemingly engraved in trees that I didn’t get a slightly weird vibe. The film as a whole is very photogenic, which makes sense when you consider that Crounse’s background was primarily in the photography field. Its slow, sometimes quiet nature almost feels like it’s out of place (in a good way!) for something released during one of the most decadent and “outrageous” decades of cinema. If you were to feature this at a showcase for obscure horror movies at your local cineplex, I think people would be genuinely surprised that this wasn’t released in the late 70s. As for the quality of the film beyond its striking visuals? Well, I’d say that the acting is mostly very solid, with the striking Karlene Crockett standing out as a mostly mute and very peculiar ally whose past could unexpectedly help shape everyone’s future. There’s also the previously mentioned preacher played by the late Dennis Lipscomb, whose foolish hopes and faith are constantly put to the test as we see him slowly descend into madness. Everyone else feels slightly underdeveloped (including a young Rob Paulsen…. yes,THAT Rob Paulsen for all of you voiceover geeks reading this), but I’d attribute that more to studio interference and forced cuttings than anything else.

 

I don’t really give out unofficial “awards” for these kinds of marathons that I do (despite some people saying that I should), but I’d say that Eyes of Fire would win for best hidden gem of this year’s Unseen Terror. I think that if you’re a fan of more renown entries in the folk horror field (i.e. The Wicker Man, The Witch, Midsommar), this is worth tracking down. It’s currently streaming on Shudder and is available to purchase on Blu-Ray from Severin Films.

Unseen Terror 2024: I Went to Italy Last Year (Days 26-28)

Did I mention that I went to (most of) Italy last year? If I did not, it’s because I’m relatively quiet on most social media sites. I swear I will upload the photos and videos from the whole trip sooner than later. Anyways, why am I mentioning this? Well, when we visited Rome, I was lucky enough to strongarm several family members into visiting “Profondo Rosso,” which is a hidden gem of a memorabilia store owned by famed Italian director Dario Argento. It’s an extremely cool place to peruse if you’re even remotely into horror, science fiction, or just popular culture that’s a bit too “odd” for most people. Plus, the basement contains a number of props from Argento’s pictures! Anyways, I just wanted to gush for a bit before we talk about a few films that I’ve never seen until this year (all of which hail from, well, Italy).

 

Inferno is a thematic and spiritual successor to Dario’s breakthrough masterpiece Suspiria, and it seems to have always been stuck in a weird spot between that flick and 1982’s impressive bloodbath known as Tenebre. It is the second installment in what the director has dubbed his “Three Mothers” trilogy (1977’s Suspiria is the first, 2007’s Mother of Tears is the third). Each one deals with a titular “mother” determined to rule the world while using powerful dark magic to eliminate anyone who would stand in their way. The plot has us following several characters, two of whom have taken interest in a strange book titled The Three Mothers, which tells of three evil sisters who would conquer all with sadness, tears, and darkness. When one of the main characters goes missing, their brother comes to New York City to investigate. That is about the easiest way to describe the plot to Inferno, because while I did find it to be an overall very enjoyable watch, it is a messier product than most of Argento’s other works from the 1970s and beyond. There is a strong insistence on killing newly introduced characters WAY too quickly (including longtime Argento collaborator Daria Nicolodi), and the final act feels a bit silly in spots. Still, much like most releases in the giallo genre, it is a beautiful film to look at and has style oozing out of every pore. There are some legitimately spooky moments throughout (in particular, an underwater swimming scene that I suspect must have been incredibly stressful to film) and some expectedly wicked and dastardly kills that while not as extravagant as those seen in the likes of Tenebre, Opera, or Deep Red, are still quite the sight to behold (cat lovers beware of one scene though). Surprisingly, longtime Argento collaborators and music composers Goblin are absent from Inferno’s soundtrack, with the director choosing noteworthy progressive rock musician Keith Emerson (of Emerson, Lake & Palmer) to compose the score. Reportedly, he wanted something different this time around so as to keep this feeling separate from Suspiria. I must admit that the bombastic and proto-symphonic metal “Mater Tenebrarum” is undeniably AWESOME, but the rest of the score is a real mixed bag or too chaotic for something that’s considerably toned down compared to this director’s other efforts.

 

It's far from Dario Argento’s best work, but despite it being a bit messy, Inferno is still a wonderfully weird 80s gem that should do quite well with fans of more supernatural-based horror flicks and with those looking to get into horror pictures from across the pond. I don’t plan on finishing the “Three Mothers” trilogy this year, but perhaps it could make the list next time. Unless we’re all dead by this time next year. That’s always a possibility.

 

 

 

 

 

When it comes to expressing my feelings on 1981’s Italian exploitation flick Cannibal Ferox (known as Make Them Die Slowly in the west), I feel as though Google Translate is the best way to sum it up: “Se ti rende felice, allora sono felice per te.” Nearly every time I’ve been recommended adding a picture from the “cannibal” subgenre of horror to my queue and/or Unseen Terror rough drafts, it usually results in massive disappointment, if not outright frustration. Occasionally I’ll discover a pleasant surprise such as Ravenous or Bone Tomahawk (though the latter’s classification is tenuous at best), but usually it matters not if your project is grimy or glossy; I just don’t vibe with them. I was hoping that perhaps in the wake of the genre’s most notorious release (the prior year’s infamous Cannibal Holocaust), rival filmmakers would have some sense of morality and try not to repeat some of the ghastly acts from years prior. I was an idiot to think such a thing would happen.

 

While a lot more straightforward than director Ruggero Deodado’s Cannibal Holocaust, writer/director Umberto Lenzi’s Cannibal Ferox is also pretty icky in its own right, but also just flatout badly made. For all of the disdain I have for Deodado’s flick, I’ll give it credit for being a better structured picture as a whole and helping to introduce the concept of “found footage” to the general public before most other movies did decades later. Ferox though? Well, its plot is significantly less interesting (a very dumb skeptic drags two friends with her to Colombia to prove that cannibalism is a myth. Things don’t go well) and it has these extremely jarring and quite frankly irritating cuts back to the states while our “heroes” are in peril on another continent. It disrupts the mood and forces you to also watch some horribly sexist and violent scenes towards women. When we’re back to Colombia, we bear witness to something that Ferox has in common with Holocaust, which is a bunch of real, on-screen animal killings. I have now seen two films with live turtle dismemberment, and that is two films too many. I know I might sound like a hypocrite considering that I am an omnivore but filming real animal mauling and killings for the sake of making your movie feel more “intense” or for “art” is scummy behavior. Hell, supporting actor Giovanni Lombardo Radice refused to participate in the killing of a wild pig on camera (with them using a double to complete the scene) and went on record expressing his disgust for even being in the flick itself. There’s also extraordinarily poor dubbing (not completely uncommon in Italian horror), but it is unbelievably bad here. If you were to take a shot for how many times someone calls a woman a “twat,” you would be dead before the halfway mark. Still, I suppose I CAN give Cannibal Ferox credit for two particularly good things: it has a shockingly good score (more pulsating and groovier than the moody, eerie one heard in Cannibal Holocaust), and the special effects & gore are solid. Still, two rights do not make up for several wrongs, and when your wrongs just feel so repugnant, I can’t fully recommend your movie to anyone other than a very niche audience. I don’t expect to be revisiting this one again unless I’m paid to.

 

 

I’ve been meaning to get more into the cinematic works of famed Italian maestro Mario Bava for quite some time. While I’ve only ever seen Black Sunday and Black Sabbath, both of those are quite grand and when I heard that his 1964 effort Blood and Black Lace is one of the earliest entries in the giallo genre (this + Bava’s prior effort The Girl Who Knew Too Much are considered to be the first two flicks in the genre as a whole), I knew I had to watch it before I leave this mortal coil. Besides, after the taste that Cannibal Ferox left in my mouth, something had to be done.

 

The plot concerns a series of brutal murders of a fashion house’s beauty models, all of whom seem to be the victim of a masked killer in search of a diary that contains unknown details and personal stories that the staff most likely don’t want revealed to the public. Mind you, that isn’t giving anything away about Blood and Black Lace’s overall story, but the picture goes into enough weird directions and feels slightly overstuffed with characters that I feel like it’s about as simple of a one that I could come up with. If I could describe this film in two simple words, it would be “visually sinister.” I’m always in amazement with what these kinds of movies back in the day could do with color palettes, as even with a more grounded and far less supernatural-based story, the contrast in visual tones makes the world in which this is set in feel otherworldly. How is it that directors from overseas manage to make you wonder how you see the color red so differently than you’ve seen in your entire life? What I’m trying to say is that Blood and Black Lace, despite being quite an old release, looks beautiful and better than a lot of bigger budget horror releases dumped into theaters by the likes of, say, Blumhouse. It’s also a decidedly nefarious flick; it obviously lacks the over-the-top imagery of future Italian horror filmmakers such as Dario Argento and Lucio Fulci, but this is still one hell of a mean movie. I felt so terrible for the actresses here, as their characters are just dealt the kind of punishment that I’m almost certain inspired future Western filmmakers in the genre and could make some 80s slashers take notes. Even in its quiet moments, Bava can instill a sense of dread in the viewer that leaves you morbidly curious for what could come about next. It’s so good that it almost makes you forget the strangely anticlimactic twist in its third act and how awkward some of the dubbing is (I’d personally love to track this down in its native language). Still, those are minor complaints about what I think is otherwise a solid movie.

 

 

If you have an appreciation for the genre and wish to expand your horizons in horror, give Blood and Black Lace a watch. There’s a reason why so many filmmakers (including Martin Scorsese!) have cited it as one of their absolute favorite pieces of cinema, with some even going so far as to pay homage to it in their own films. I don’t normally encourage this but pour yourself a glass of something classy like wine or McDonald’s Sprite and enjoy the ride. And if you find yourself in Rome, go hit up "Profondo Rosso." Tell them Ryan sent you. They don't know me, but it'll help boost my morale.

Unseen Terror 2024: Generic Serial-Related Pun (Days 19-22)

Movies huh? Anyways, I’d say that if there was any connecting theme between the four films today it would be “notoriety.” I’m basing that off pulling that out of my ass at the last minute because I’ve had bad writer’s block. Anyways, let’s move on.

 

(poster by Thomas Walker)

In terms of longevity, few films have been on the “queue” for Unseen Terror longer than Michael Mann’s Manhunter. I have no legitimate excuse for why it took so long to finally watch it until 2024. Maybe laziness? I mean hell, how did I choose watching every single Hellraiser and Children of the Corn sequel over watching the on-screen debut of infamous fictional serial killer Hannibal Lector? Manhunter stars William Petersen as retired FBI criminal profiler Will Graham, who is dragged out of retirement to assist in the arresting of a new serial killer nicknamed “The Tooth Fairy.” Still mentally scarred following his last case and encounter with a killer (in this case, Brian Cox’s Hannibal Lector), he must confront demons from his past to track down this new, enigmatic force. I’ll admit that it was somewhat difficult to NOT compare this older adaptation of Thomas Harris’ Red Dragon novel to the one that came out in 2002, because in terms of accuracy and faithfulness to the source material, that picture leaves in parts from the book that are absent here. That being said, I’d argue that between the two pieces of film, this is the more stylistically captivating (its use of strong color cues and tinted sceneries are otherworldly), and it’s a more well-made flick in general. The performances from everyone (Petersen and Cox in particular) are triumphant, and with the way that Michael Mann shoots it you feel like you’re just stuck inside some semblance of what once was a more “normal” world. The score of Manhunter is one of its strongest aspects too; Michel Rubini’s sounds are synth-heavy, making the picture feel dated in a good way. Not much can replicate it.

 

Manhunter is a tremendous and superbly underrated flick that I regret not watching sooner. I suspect that there is much more to analyze and take in upon repeated viewings too, which I’ll be more than happy to do over the next few years. It’s currently streaming on Amazon Prime, but if you lack access to that, there are several methods in which you can gain a physical copy of the flick itself.

 

 

I was slightly mistaken when glancing at the poster for 1988’s Jack’s Back, as I was under the impression this would be more like a horror film than what it really turned out to be: a mystery flick with James Spader somehow NOT playing a villain. Hey, I can’t help that I’ve become accustomed to seeing him play a slimeball throughout most of my picture-viewing life. I sure hope he’s a nice fella in real life. The movie stars Spader as one of several people seeking the identity of a person who has begun committing murders on the 100^th anniversary of Jack the Ripper’s first slayings. Without giving too much away, this movie’s biggest twist occurs VERY early on, which while surprising, has been spoiled by nearly every media outlet or movie aggregator (Letterboxd is guilty of this too). I do wish it was a little more “thrilling” or even scary, but there are some moments of intensity and shots of gore that almost made me forget that this is from the same director who’d go on to direct cult favorite Road House a year after this hit cinemas. Overall, it’s a breezy watch, and Spader’s utter weirdness (even as a normal person) and eternal charming nature helps elevate it to the “pretty good” pile.

 

 

 

…. what? Marvel/20^th Century Fox advertised their final X-Men-related piece (or did they? Hyuk Hyuk) as their first foray into the world of horror, so I’m going to say this counts for the list. Besides, I’ve already seen Brightburn, and I’m not in a hurry to revisit that. Anyways, considering the notorious amount of reshoots, delays, edits, and general hell that The New Mutants went through, it’s a miracle that this turned out to be watchable AT ALL. The movie is centered around a group of young mutants (a.k.a. a human that possesses a genetic trait which usually manifests into powers) being held in a secret facility and spending most of their time brooding, squabbling, and acting like less fun versions of the kids from A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors. Something weird comes up and they discover that they’re being held captive to be turned into weapons instead of heroes, and someone seems to be manifesting their darkest fears into reality. As far as characters go, this is a real mixed bag. The cast is full of talented performers like Maisie Williams (Game of Thrones), Charlie Heaton (Stranger Things), and Anya Taylor-Joy (The Witch, Furiosa), but most of the time they’re either trying a bit too hard with tacked-on bad accents (seriously guys, Illyana/Magik is Russian, but she doesn’t talk or act like a racist Yakov Smirnoff) or just saddled with very predictable dialogue. Even if you aren’t a comics purist or X-Men devotee, you can still sense that something doesn’t feel quite right. But how does it fare as a horror film? Well….it has a giant CGI spirit bear that violently mauls some people, and the cast find themselves being terrorized by things called “The Smiling Men,” who look like rejected creature designs from Silent Hill. Also, Maisie Williams can kinda-sorta turn into a Werewolf at will. Sooooooo, there’s that.

 

Honestly, it sounds like I’m being a real cynic but considering that this followed the trainwrecks that were X-Men: Apocalypse and The Dark Phoenix, this is a masterpiece in comparison to those two. I didn’t find myself upset watching this one (though I was occasionally bored), and I’m glad I can finally say that I’ve watched “Marvel’s first horror movie” (the amount of disrespect to Blade by the way…some motherfuckers I swear), but it’s ultimately a big collective shrug.

 

 

 

Seeing as how all the Disney+ Simpsons shorts are the worst thing since the last worst thing ever, I’d rather not talk about this one and just move on. Half a star for Kelsey as Sideshow Bob because I’m a stupid mark.

 

 

The story of Woman of the Hour is perhaps the most “notorious” of the ones I’m reviewing today, and that’s because it’s based on a very real, very odd moment in television that a large chunk of people could have faint memories of; during an episode of old television staple The Dating Game (for you youngins’, imagine a sillier predecessor to Love is Blind), the featured bachelorette unknowingly picked a date with a man who was secretly a serial killer (played by Daniel Zovatto). It also marks the directorial debut of established actress Anna Kendrick, who also stars as an aspiring actress who is coaxed onto the show by her agent because they assume it will lead to television exposure and future projects. There is some loose playing with history here for the sake of crafting a more taut and tense picture, but for the most part it works very well. Zovatto can switch between surprisingly charming and terrifying at the drop of a hat, and I sure hope the guy gets a chance to be cast in some bigger projects. I’d say that the overall message of Woman of the Hour is to please believe women when they say that something seems very “off” about an individual, as you never know how long their creepy tendencies have been prominent and (in this case) how large their body count may be. It’s on Netflix and worth an evening viewing. I’d be very happy to see Anna Kendrick direct a full-fledged horror movie sooner than later now.

Unseen Terror 2024: Deceitful Art (Day 18)

Hey, sometimes I’m a sucker for a catchy title and an alarming poster.

 

Microwave Massacre from 1979 stars comedian Jackie Vernon (best known to people around my age and older as the voice of Frosty the Snowman from the Rankin/Bass specials) as a disgruntled construction worker who comes home one evening and in a drunken rage murders his shrew, nagging wife. When he wakes up the next morning, he has no memory of what occurred at nighttime, but to his horror discovers her corpse stuffed inside of their new, absurdly large microwave oven. After his initial shock wears off, he dismembers her body and stores it in foil wrap in the refrigerator. Not too long after that, he unintentionally takes some bites of his ex-wife’s hand, and yet again, his disgust subsides when he realizes that he quite likes the taste. Maybe there are even tastier morsels out there?

 

So, make no mistake about it; this is a remarkably trashy joint. When your movie opens by focusing on several closeups of a buxom woman walking down the street for no reason whatsoever, you know what you’ve signed up for. The movie’s whole style just screams “just go with it.” A lot of its humor falls flat, with there being a bit too much reliance on Vernon’s character just kind of talking to no one in particular (reportedly Rodney Dangerfield was considered for this role, but his asking price was too high). And despite its title, there really isn’t much in the way of, well, massacring. There’s a decent body count and some gross moments involving Vernon’s character sharing pieces of his “lunch” with co-workers, but the movie’s poster(s) gives the audience hope for something that just doesn’t quite come to fruition. All that being said, I was never bored during Microwave Massacre, and I found it to be a lot of fun. It’s a weirdly charming low budget oddity that could’ve been better in more capable hands, but it’s a short watch and not a terrible way to kill some time. I wouldn’t be upset if a remake was greenlit.

 

 

With all due respect to Microwave Massacre, I think they lost in the contest of “most eye-catching title and poster” here. I first became aware of the alarmingly titled Stuff Stephanie in the Incinerator at the annual Monster Mania convention held in Maryland, but for reasons I can’t quite recall I decided against buying a bootleg DVD of it. But now that I’m essentially a homebody who is mostly done with the “con” stuff, there’s no reason to continue waiting on this one. Plus, it’s distributed by the kings of trash Troma Entertainment. How can you go wrong? I mean guys, that poster is pretty out there.

 

Well, you can go wrong rather quickly when you remember one very simple fact: being distributed by Troma does not mean it was MADE by Troma. So, this movie is a lie. Calling it a horror film (much less a horror-comedy as it is usually tagged) is stretching it. There was more money spent on crafting its poster than there was on concocting a coherent and halfway decent picture. There are no incinerations and technically no deaths. If anything, I’d classify it as a cheap, boring, meta-thriller masquerading as a horror movie. It’s another “bored rich people want to do bad things to pass the time” type of project which we’ve already seen before. There are two or three major twists that take place during its running time that serve more to annoy the audience than to shock them. Its actual ending makes you wonder why in the world you just spent ninety minutes of your life left on this miserable planet watching something that basically trolled you. It’s akin to taking the Rorschach test only for them to just tell you that you’ve been literally staring at a picture of a circle the entire time and that the psychologists are just actors for hire. Worst of all is that it is criminally dull. I legitimately fast forwarded three or four times hoping that this flick would give me SOMETHING to be excited about, but it never happened. And the only time I stop any movie is when I need to use the bathroom or check on dinner.

 

This was legitimately one of the worst movies I’ve ever watched since I started doing this in 2011. I think Children of the Corn and FeatdotCom may have lost the title of “worst of 2024” for this year’s marathon. At least with Corn, you knew what you were getting, and they didn’t really lie to the audience. This though? Junk. Add it to the list of “great posters for terrible pictures” alongside stuff like The Bees, The Phantom Menace and Reptilicus.

Unseen Terror 2024: Quack You Ryhan (Day 11)

It dawned on me while assembling this year’s marathon that for the day when I grew one year older, I had nearly run out of film choices to watch from 1985. I’ve covered nearly all the heavy hitters (most of which I adore). Hell, I could have just cheated and listed off my favorite “Treehouse of Horror” episodes instead, but that would require more time than I expected. So, I decided to go back to the well of a country whose contributions to scary cinema rarely disappoint me: Italy! Specifically, I wanted to watch something that had been in my queue for several years and that would make me squirm a bit. Thankfully Lucio Fulci’s 1982 cult favorite giallo The New York Ripper (originally titled Lo squartatore di New York) was there to welcome me with bloody arms.

 

The plot is your basic “detective looking for a serial killer” trope, but what helps separate this one from the pack is just the all-around weirdness, ugliness, and brutality of it all. When your movie opens with a man playing fetch with his golden retriever, only for his dog to ignorantly bring back a decomposing, severed hand, you know that this isn’t going to be a simple procedural or anything you’d see on CBS evenings. For starters, this movie is super sleazy and grimy. Admittedly, I haven’t been to New York City in more than twenty years, but this movie dives into the darker and more “sensuous” side of the big apple that I’m sure some people reading this may not want to admit exists. There ain’t no Broadway Musical highlighting, but apparently in the world of The New York Ripper, you can attend live sex shows. So, there’s that! The violence is also unrepentantly BRUTAL (as is usually the case with Fulci), with our titular killer brandishing only a switchblade and straight-razors. If you know anything about Lucio Fulci (whose other works include bangers such as The Beyond, Zombie, and City of the Living Dead just to name a few), then you know there is also bound to be some eyeball violence thrown into the mix too, so brace yourself for that. There's also a memorable sequence involving a broken bottle that can be best described as "something you don't see every day."

But while the slayings seen on screen will certainly stick in your mind for a very long time, it’s the very odd (if not slightly jarring) decision to have our titular slasher constantly quacking at their victims while harassing and ultimately eviscerating them. I couldn’t fully tell if that was meant to be genuinely intimidating or if it was meant to be a parody, but I suppose that if you put yourself in the shoes of the people being stalked, it can be a bit disorienting? Even after laying out my rough draft for this, I can’t fully tell whether to put this into my list of “positives” or “negatives,” because it is just so peculiar. One genuine complaint I DO have though is that while the film does manage to do a surprisingly good job at keeping you guessing as to who the killer is (even after a moment that makes it seem SUPER obvious), there is a twist in its final act that comes in from out of NOWHERE that had me audibly asking why that needed to be there. It just kind of blindsides you with unnecessary exposition.

 

 

Lucio Fulci is an “acquired” taste, and The New York Ripper isn’t really an exception to that. It’s gratuitous, mean, and unsavory. I also think you could make an argument that it’s slightly misogynistic too unfortunately (his other contemporaries like Dario Argento tended to write stronger female characters). Still, flaws and all, I really had a ball with this one. If you have the stomach for it and want a nice heap of some blood-soaked cheese, throw this into your queue. As of the time of this review, it’s currently available to stream on Shudder and Tubi!

Unseen Terror 2024: Moore is More Than Enough (Day 2)

Before this review begins, I’ll get it out of the way right now: no, this has nothing to do with 2019’s Academy Award-winning black comedy/thriller of the same name. I trust you folks to come up with better jokes than that. I also have to say that sitting through this was a real chore solely because of how many ads are thrown into Parasite’s running time on Plex (its current location for streaming), which seemed to stretch its 88-minute running time to nearly two hours. I guess I can’t complain TOO much about any motion picture being completely free to watch, but boy did it cut into my sleeping habits. Anyways, let’s get this over with.

 

Initially, 1982’s Parasite was set to appear much later in this year’s Unseen Terror, but through the power of sheer coincidence, it’s getting bumped up to the first week. After all, there’s no better way to follow up (arguably) Demi Moore’s finest hour than with her first major picture debut. Prior to this viewing, my only familiarity with this pseudo-Alien knockoff (set in a post-apocalyptic world and centered around an infected doctor searching for a cure to the “parasite” within his chest) was having seen the poster in the background of a couple of random Youtubers’ videos and seeing it discussed in the awesome In Search of Darkness documentaries (must-watches for horror fans of all generations). Color me surprised when I see that not only was this Moore’s first "proper" foray into the acting field, but it’s directed by Full Moon Productions and Empire Pictures founder Charles Band. It’s even stranger seeing that it costars Ghoulies writer-director Luca Bercovici and has early effects work by the late Stan Winston. So yeah, this is just an odd little blip on most of these peoples’ resumés, isn’t it? To his credit though, Winston’s practical effects are perfectly fine (save for maybe the titular creature, which is brought to life primarily through hand puppetry). That might be the only particular highlight for Parasite though, because this is kind of a slog to get through.

 

Firstly, this thing is sllllloooowwww. Not a slow burn, but more on the sluggish side. Setting anything in a post-nuclear fallout environment, no matter the budget, must be at least mildly interesting, but the pacing offers no reward for your patience (other than seeing a hilariously silly scene where Vivian Blaine of Guys and Dolls fame gets her head turned into one of those puppets from the “Land of Confusion” music video, only for a monster to burst forth). There’s also the problem with the side and stock characters, who feel more like geeks and slasher movie rejects than intimidating bullies or wisemen to our protagonists (bizarre to see a post-Runaways Cherie Currie show up before she’d go bonkers on social media). If you told me that they wandered off the set of a Friday the 13^th knockoff, I would absolutely believe you. Finally, there’s the immensely talented Ms. Moore. She is doing her best, but it also feels like she may have misunderstood the assignment here. I’m not saying you need to ham it up (especially this early in your career), but her complete seriousness amongst a sea of silly shit is oddly jarring. Then again, I’m not sure what I was expecting given the involvement of who is behind the camera. If she had set up and continued a string of ill-fitting performances, who knows where her career would’ve ended up?

 

Demi Moore has gone on record saying that she feels Parasite is the worst film she’s ever starred in. While I certainly respect her opinion, I’d still say that Charlie’s Angels: Full Throttle or Blame it on Rio takes the cake in that department. Some of the practical effects and some silliness involving laser pistols prevent it from being a total dud, but it isn’t something I’d recommend you seek out immediately. I kept thinking that Dan O’Bannon and H.R. Giger could’ve watched this and considered suing, but I don’t think it’d even be worth the effort. I’d say this is for diehard fans of……..erm, something.

 

And no, I did not watch this in 3-D as it was originally released in theaters. If your film can’t stand on its own without the use of gimmicks like that, then that’s your fault.

Unseen Terror 2023: Ich Fühle Mich Unwohl (Day 18)

 

You know, I've been doing this silly little marathon for over a decade, and it takes quite a bit for a film to truly get under my skin. More often than not, most of the pictures on here that end up with recommendations receive such accolades because they could be categorized as "fun." But then you get those flicks that truly make you feel like you need a shower and have you questioning if you really truly do love horror movies. More so, you adore them yet are afraid to actually be scared yourself. It is very rare that something genuinely disturbs me or leaves me at a loss for words. It's happened with stuff like Ken Russell's The Devils, Kim Jee-woon's I Saw the Devil, and the often-overlooked Belgian movie Man Bites Dog. Tonight's viewing, 1983's Austrian "home invasion" movie Angst, is going to be a very hard movie to talk about. The fact that this picture is loosely based on the real-life killings by Werner Kniesek only amplifies its cruelty and vile nature. It's a deeply uncomfortable watch that feels like it's punishing you for staying along for the ride.

Coincidentally, it's also a fan-FUCKING-tastically made feature with one of the best lead performances I've ever seen in a horror movie and some brilliant camera work that despite being forty years old, outshines pictures with astronomically higher budgets. The plot is very simple: we follow an unnamed psychopath (played by Erwin Leder of Das Boot and Underworld fame) as he is released from prison in what feels like "real time." From the very moment we hear his voiceovers, we ARE this character though. Every little moment feels like we have been locked into his mind and aren't sure where the key is. Starting with internal monologues about two women at a diner who he almost immediately decides that he wants to hurt (but doesn't pull the trigger) and eventually leading to him committing unspeakably evil deeds at a random house he decides to break into. It's that very rare examination of a psychotic human being that forces you to experience every awful impulse, every outburst of paranoia, and every impulsive decision of when one decides to take the life of his fellow man.

The camera work by Polish filmmaker and award winner Zbigniew Rybczynski is just in a league of its own. Pulling and twisting in a manner befitting of its very evil main character, it adds to the ice-cold nature of the picture. I truly don't think that this movie works without it. The acting, as hinted above, is perfection as well. Nothing over-the-top whatsoever, with Leder giving a performance that could shake the core of even the most hardened of veterans. None of the supporting cast are officially given names either, but it's irrelevant. After all, we're along for the (horrific) ride, and I doubt he'd even care about what their names were before he'd consider killing them. The on-screen murders, while most likely outshined over the years by the gratuitous nature of slasher pictures, are filmed in such a manner that it hurts far more seeing how they're carried out, not by how "insane" they are.

Earlier today, I wasn't sure I would even feel comfortable writing about Angst. With how awful the world has been as of late and how incredibly depressing it's been on social media, I felt like the energy has been drained from my soul. I had to tough it out though, because I did have to remind myself that this is just a movie after all. It's unlike anything I've seen recently and will likely go down as one of the most deranged, animalistic flicks I've seen in the entire history of "Unseen Terror," but simultaneously one of the best. I'd highly recommend it for those who can resist or tolerate its cruel nature, but don't say I didn't warn you. Currently, it's available for streaming on Tubi and you can even find some good rips of it on YouTube (including a Blu-Ray rip with director Gerald Kargl's commentary, whose career this likely destroyed).

Unseen Terror 2023: Lovejoys and Killjoys (Days 14-15)

Don't worry, we're getting close to finishing this godforsaken series and leaving Gatlin, Nebraska forever. In fact, around the halfway point of Children of the Corn: Runaway (the TENTH entry in this franchise that has somehow spawned more sequels than other horror franchises such as Elm Street), I came to the realization that I had already laid my poor eyes upon this flick once before. Maybe it was a drunken rental from the Redbox, but it may have also been due to morbid curiosity. Most likely it was both. Perhaps a lengthy hiatus between viewings and approaching it with little-to-nothing in terms of memories retained would make for a better re-watch. After all, that's been my experience when revisiting flicks like Martyrs and Dead Heat, which I initially didn't care for but now genuinely enjoy.

Despite being more competently made this time around, the plot (centered around a then-pregnant woman who escaped Gatlin) is a jumbled mess with far too many "creepy vision" sequences and a LOT of nothing going. The plot twist in its third act is ridiculous, the color palette makes you wish you were watching other films from around 2018 and before, and all of the franchise's staples are poorly represented (if not ignored). If you're looking to see what other tricks "He Who Walks Behind the Rows" has up its sleeve or want to see some crazy corn-related crap, you're going to be sorely disappointed. I'm genuinely surprised that this has the name of John Gulager attached to it, as I really enjoyed his first directorial debut Feast and even aspects of that movie's sequels. I wonder if perhaps there was someone in Hollywood whose hands he forgot to shake at a dinner party. Around this time, he also took part in the equally dreadful Hellraiser: Judgement, which much like Children of the Corn: Runaway, was also made so that Dimension wouldn't lose the rights to a series that could potentially fall back into talented hands. Digging around a bit I did discover that both of these films shared a filming location with one another, which could explain why both look so hideous and cheap. Truly there is no better way to kill two birds with one stone...at least in the realm of bottom tier sequels. Toss it in the garbage.

I wasn't overly familiar with 1985's Too Scared to Scream, but many moons ago I recalled hearing Chuck Dowling of the BMFCast (and another "31 Horror Movies in 31 Days" maestro) discuss how this was one of the best surprises he came across while he was still doing his own yearly marathon. All it takes is one glance at the cast list and you'll see why I finally decided to give this one a try. For starters, Ian McShane (Deadwood, Lovejoy, John Wick) is in a 1980s horror film! You've also got Anne Archer (Fatal Attraction), John Heard (Big, Home Alone), and Mike Connors (Mannix) on the lineup, with an extra bonus of actor Tony Lo Bianco (The French Connection, The Honeymoon Killers) sitting in the director's chair. An exceptional list of talents that all ultimately end up producing a pretty okay little picture.

The plot of Too Scared to Scream is nothing flashy. Someone has been murdering the tenants of a plush, high-rise apartment building in New York, and it's up to a couple of officers to discover who the perpetrator is. Their primary suspect is the doorman who works evening shifts (a rather handsome Ian McShane), who seems a tad too polite and has a rather eccentric relationship with his mother. Without diving into spoiler territory, it unfolds exactly how you think it will, yet still packs a few surprises in for good measure. While watching, I kept wondering how much of a nightmare it must have been trying to market this to the "blood and guts" crowd which dominated the box office when it came to scary movies. It values substance and procedural work over style yet was still pushed as a "slasher" film (it's got plenty on the "nekkid" side of things though). The poster seems to be a clear homage to the Italian "Giallo" subgenre, but it lacks a lot of the over-the-top nature that is a mainstay of those films. It's also got a lot of "wacky sitcom" moments (the scene with a police informant outside of a nightclub HAS to be seen to be believed) that can occasionally kill the serious tone. Still, it all mostly works. Unfortunately, just when this film was in my good graces, its ending stretch brings the whole thing to a screeching halt and filled me with that same frustration that I felt when I watched Dressed to Kill for the first time (another Giallo-influenced thriller). To call it problematic is being kind.

Too Scared to Scream is ALMOST a great movie. The acting is solid, the style is just the right mix of American slasher, fun 1970s cop TV program, and Italian Giallo mystery, and it's a pretty quick watch. Still, those final ten minutes are VERY rushed and the killer's reveal/motivations kind of takes the wind out of the picture's sails. I'd still give it a recommendation overall, but I was so saddened by what could have been. Currently, it's unavailable for purchase in the states outside of the VHS market and a rather pricey Blu-Ray released by Ronin Flix, but if you don't want to take that approach, there's always the streaming route. Heck, I watched my copy on YouTube (*cough cough*)

Unseen Terror 2023: He Who Leeches Off the King (aka Days 1-3)

    Man, I didn't realize just how much I missed doing this sort of thing. Without getting into too many details, life outside of this crummy blog (that I need to update far more often instead of relying solely upon Letterboxd) has been fairly crummy throughout most of the year. Hell, I was dangerously close to just calling this whole thing off for good because my spirits have been rotting at the bottom of a trashcan that has been left out in the desert. Still, I find reviewing cinema to be somewhat cathartic and I can't find a reason to fully stop this yearly marathon, so let's hop to it.

Maybe covering this franchise will provide said reason though.

I'd previously reviewed 1984's Children of the Corn (based off the Stephen King short story of the same name) and in retrospect, I think I may have been a tad too kind. While I think it's far from a TERRIBLE movie, I don't think it's particularly very good either, and outside of some fun moments featuring young John Franklin as religious fanatic Isaac Chroner, it fluctuates between shockingly dull and just plain dumb. If you weren't already familiar with the story, it follows a young couple who drive into a small town where all adults have seemingly disappeared, with its only living residents being those under the age of eighteen. Said residents worship an unseen entity called "He Who Walks Behind the Rows," who entices the youngsters to murder all adults, which will ensure a successful harvest. If you're thinking that plot sounds pretty silly, welcome to the world of 1980s drug addled Stephen King. During your stay, you should be prepared for a cavalcade of weird stuff that could only come from the mind of a gentleman who did so much cocaine that he barely remembers writing any of his own material or shooting the entirety of Maximum Overdrive.

Ridiculous concept aside, there are some positive aspects to Children of the Corn I can highlight upon rewatching. The aforementioned Franklin is a hoot, and he never overstays his welcome when he's on screen. There are also some legitimately creepy ideas buried underneath all of the stupidity. The idea of children drinking from the blood of someone who just passed the age of eighteen is a ghastly concept no matter how you try and shape it. Finally, it does have a pretty creepy main theme courtesy of composer Jonathan Elias, who also composed the score to another 80s horror flick that may or may not be appearing on a future entry this month. That's about where the praise ends though, because there are just a few too many flaws that dragged down my personal enjoyment when revisiting this. For starters, if you're going to cast Linda Hamilton as one of your leads, please ensure that you utilize her services as best that you can. A failure to do so means that you need to be beaten with a rolled-up newspaper. Thank goodness The Terminator was released later in the year. Peter Horton on the other hand, just seems to lack all sorts of charisma in this role. Truth be told, there are no discernable personality traits to either of these characters other than "they're adults and they aren't crazy." Speaking of crazy, though this picture establishes that Gatlin, Nebraska isn't exactly a burgeoning area, how do other adults in surrounding areas (or around the country period) not notice when crops stop coming in after a certain amount of time? Do they attribute it to "backordering issues?" Do any of the adults in town have friends from outside of it? Would they not get suspicious and investigate? But, I digress.

Children of the Corn doesn't exactly rank high when it comes to the Stephen King movie tier list, but I suppose it could have been far worse. It has some reasonably okay aspects and promise, but its true potential is wasted for the most part. As of the time of this review, it's available to stream on Amazon Prime, Plex, Tubi, and even YouTube. There's also a Blu-Ray released by the reputable Arrow Video out there for purchase if you're still into physical media and have a soul (like me!).

Not that it's terribly surprising to hear, but much like other horror franchises who promise some sort of closure when they release an entry with the word "Final" in its title, Children of the Corn II: The Final Sacrifice is anything but the end of this shockingly lengthy series. Released eight years after its predecessor, Final Sacrifice sees the town of Gatlin finally investigated after (who we can assume to be) the survivors from the first movie fill in others about the utter insanity that has transpired. The media descends into Gatlin, and the adolescent survivors from the town are adopted by residents from the nearby area of Hemingford. Unbeknownst to everyone, however, is the fact that these creepy kids are still infatuated with the idea of "He Who Walks Behind the Rows," and they still slink off into the night to gather in a cornfield so that they may worship the unseen entity.

The film focuses on a failing investigative reporter (St. Elsewhere's Terence Knox) and his mostly estranged large adult son (a very not-teenager-looking Paul Scherrer) as they travel through Hemingford, with the two deciding to make the very intelligent decision to stay in town for the time being and interact with a smorgasbord of cliched townsfolk. Meanwhile, a new creepy kid emerges spewing forth a lot of the same fanatical gibberish that Isaac did in Part One, and bad things begin to happen. An unsurprising, basic plot sure, but I doubt anyone expects something complex from these flicks. I do advise that you hold onto your butts for one split second though: while extremely dumb, Final Sacrifice is kind of precious. In fact, I'd go so far as to say I genuinely enjoyed my time viewing it.

Do not mistake such a statement as saying that this sequel is "good." It's junk. I'd be lying to you if I didn't say I had a blast with it though. Cast-wise, this is a potpourri of every stereotype you can imagine from a religious-themed horror flick. The character of Micah, who is essentially a louder, older version of Isaac, is played with such fervor by Ryan Bollman that you kind of learn to love the little asshole. He's a Troma villain with some of the ridiculousness of a professional wrestling persona (think a more bloodthirsty version of early "Broken" Matt Hardy), and he's easily the best aspect of this blessed mess. Everyone else is pretty flat however, which I'd say is more the fault of the script that anything else. Hell, they even manage to work a "mystical" Native American character into the film around the halfway mark or so, and the only thing he adds is a truckload of exposition and a laughably silly final shot. There's also some pretty goddamn dumb kills scattered throughout (including a Wizard of Oz homage.....really folks?), which is something that the prior film lacked. Still, it's all forgivable when you're just laughing at how you can clearly tell that the people behind the camera this time around (in this case, Dr. Jekyll and Ms. Hyde director/nepo baby David Price) either wanted to do away with anything resembling atmosphere in favor of lower budget absurdity, or were just unsure about what to do with a sequel that was likely never requested by anyone with a working brain.

I suspect that because my expectations were so incredibly low, that may have been what contributed to my surprising enjoyment of Children of the Corn II: The Final Sacrifice. Look, if you can completely embrace the campiness behind this concept and realize that it isn't trying to take itself seriously, it's kind of an enjoyable hoot. If you want to lessen your suffering, just read a quick summary of the first flick and jump right into this one. It's currently streaming on MAX and Hulu, and I do believe that a Box Set containing the first three films in this series was released by Arrow Video overseas (if you're into the Region-Free disc purchasing thing).

There's a part of me that believes this film's entire existence is a punishment to anyone who remotely enjoyed the film that preceded it. Children of the Corn III: Urban Harvest (ya get it? It's because it's in the city this around!.........GET IT?!) is a disappointing step down in a franchise that had nowhere to go but up. This film is centered on two recently orphaned brothers from Nebraska who are adopted by a kindly couple in Chicago. Joshua, the older of the two, is awkward yet kind. Eli, the younger brother (and played by an actual teenager!), exhibits all of the signs of wannabe religious fanatics that were present in the prior two features. Bad things begin to occur (yet) again, and I feel as though choosing to cover this entire godforsaken franchise may drive me to madness after all.

Before I rip into Urban Harvest with a corn scythe, I will give praise where it is due: the practical effects and makeup are on point here. Genre veteran Screaming Mad George (whose body of work includes Predator, Tales from the Hood, Society, and A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors) is perhaps the only saving grace, as the final fifteen-or-so minutes are yet another nice display of the man's talents. Bodies are pierced and sliced, necks are stretched, and we FINALLY get to see what "He Who Walks Behind the Rows" looks like. It doesn't quite measure up to something as utterly mind-blowing as the "Shunting" from Society, but what the hell can? Seriously, track down any of those aforementioned films in this paragraph and go watch them instead.

Well, the fun part is over now. Let's just cut to the chase: everything else here absolutely stinks. There isn't a single good performance to be found in Urban Harvest. None. Even our main antagonist Eli doesn't have the chops or anything unique to him that you can't find in other, superior pictures. There's a shocking amount of what I can only describe as "go away" heat with the character, and by the time he gets something resembling comeuppance, you're happy not necessarily because "good" has gained an upper hand, but rather because you don't have to see Eli again. After reading up on the later entries in this franchise, I'm relieved that he's seemingly a one-and-done villain, because if future filmmakers tried to pull a "Mark Hoffman from Saw" and force him into anything else, I would have been furious personally. The film also feels (perhaps unintentionally) slightly racist, as most of the noteworthy kills in Urban Harvest's body count are comprised of African American men and women, with two noteworthy deaths following attempts at saving Caucasian youngsters, and a lot of supporting characters playing very outdated racial stereotypes. The final cherry on top of this moldy sundae is how insanely idiotic the script is. Look, I understand that the adults in these movies aren't exactly written to be the smartest of individuals, but after two horrific incidents were made public (and which are seen in scattered, sepia-toned flashbacks), why would you just not quarantine Gatlin and confine any escapees to a mental institution? Or just send them to Outer Space?

That's bound to happen in this series, right? Hell, even Leprechaun did it.

Children of the Corn III: Urban Harvest is bad. If you're that desperate to watch its final, fleeting moments on screen (aka the SMG effects), just go search for that on YouTube. Yes, it is currently streaming on MAX, but please stay away. I'm concerned not for myself, but for everyone else reading this and considering it.

Still, they can't get any worse than this, right?

........right?

Unseen Terror 2022: Catching the Hell Up......Again.

How wonderful it is to talk about slashers and maniacs. For the (unintended) second iteration of my "catching up" postings, we have some distinctly different entities released over the course of forty years. One featuring an all-too familiar face from our childhoods, some feeling like they are pandering to the lowest common denominator, and another features a newer character who is destined to go down as one of the most impactful & infamous (if not divisive) figures in modern horror. Let's get to it.

DAY 19:

.

I'm a little surprised that I had never managed to catch Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare in its entirety until this year. I've spent far too much time over the past twenty-plus years being fixated on and fascinated by horror icon Freddy Krueger's evil deeds, but yet never took the plunge with this one. Perhaps it was due to a fairly bad reputation that it's garnered over the years. Perhaps it was due to the fact that it essentially felt like one of the final nails in the coffin of the slasher genre (until Scream brought it back to the mainstream) by having an awful box office intake. Whatever the case, there was no excuse for missing it now since it popped up on Tubi. Plus, I have to be a Nightmare completist. I don't expect to be reviewing the Freddy's Nightmares TV show this year though.

If the title wasn't a dead giveaway, Freddy's Dead was intended to be the final entry in New Line Cinema's once profitable A Nightmare on Elm Street series. Box office receipts had started to dwindle and the folks at New Line (specifically Bob Shaye) felt like it was time to finally move on with different projects. Stepping into the director's chair for this sixth installment was Rachel Talalay, who had been involved with prior Nightmare projects in various capacities (and also wrote the story this time around). Said story begins with the introduction of the amnesiac John Doe who is seemingly the last survivor of the (now) almost childless town of Springwood, Ohio. Through some screwy means, he is taken into a shelter for troubled kids, where he meets their doctor, Maggie Burroughs (played by future L.A. Law co-star Lisa Zane). Hoping to cure his amnesia, Maggie takes John and a trio of her patients to Springwood for a trip. Of course, ol' Freddy is waiting for them to just fall asleep so he can dispatch of them in gleefully creative ways. But could one of these rapscallions hold the key to truly defeating the man also known as "The Springwood Slasher?" And does one of them hold a stronger connection to Freddy that even they would realize sounds crazy? 

Certainly sounds like I'm hyping this up to be a rather grandiose conclusion to this saga, yes? Well, that idea sounds promising, but Freddy's Dead is unfortunately a colossal misfire and proof that maybe killing Freddy was the absolute best thing you could have done to spare this icon any further embarrassment. Nothing really works here. The script is peppered with some pretty lousy dialogue, with Freddy himself going into full-on Bugs f'n Bunny territory (NOT a compliment) and losing any menace he had retained throughout his prior outings. In terms of our protagonists, going from the excellent Alice Johnson (of parts 4 & 5) to the pretty bland and forgettable Maggie is also a shame, especially when you discover just how vital the latter is to the franchise halfway through this flick's running time. It makes you REALLY wish she was written to be more interesting or that they had hinted at her importance in prior pictures (possible spoiler, sorry). Still, you do have a fairly fun performance from Yaphet Kotto here, who gets to beat Freddy up with a baseball bat. Points for that. Speaking of violent behavior, even the kills this time around just feel tiresome. I'd argue that the most impressive death comes via a hearing aid tampering, but that's only because everything else just kind of stinks (especially when the final kill of the film, originally filmed to be in 3D along with the final ten minutes of the actual movie itself, looks even worse). Seeing a creatively bankrupt Nightmare movie is like going to your favorite restaurant to only discover than the menu has been completely revamped and they're using McDonald's hamburgers to make their patties instead of making them in house. It's serviceable, but not what you paid for and will not likely warrant a return from you.

Freddy's Dead is kind of a necessary evil in the Elm Street franchise though. It's not a good film. AT ALL. You could honestly just skip through all of the fluff and watch one of those "Kill Count" videos on YouTube instead (not hating at all, I really like the Dead Meat folks). However, its failure did ultimately lead New Line Cinema back to Krueger's "father" Wes Craven, and he gave us a fan-fucking-tastic return to form for the character (albeit in a "noncanonical" sense) in Wes Craven's New Nightmare. Go seek that out instead if you haven't already.

DAY 20:

Despite sporting what I think is an undeniably awesome poster and tagline, 1984's The Mutilator (also known by the far more fitting title of Fall Break) is ultimately more of a perplexing entry in the absurdly large slasher subgenre than an outright good or bad one. The plot is pretty standard, with a cluster of coeds going to an island property during a break from school and encountering a psychotic madman who may or may not have connections to said island (and one of the characters). The real standout of The Mutilator comes not from its villain or even its kills, but rather its tone. It's very difficult to tell whether or not this was filmed with sincerity or if they were trying to go for intentionally campy. The movie features both opening and closing credits that are shot akin to that of a silly 80s sitcom (complete with goofy, uplifting music). That is certainly.....a choice. If I'm being brutally honest, this is the perfect kind of low-grade slasher that works best with a group of friends and some sort of recreational assistance. My days of drinking regularly are over though, so I wish I could give this a stronger recommendation.

DAY 21

OOF.

Well, 1982's Nightbeast (a loose remake of Maryland director Don Dohler's own picture The Alien Factor) is this year's reminder that perhaps I SHOULD take up drinking again. I found this one to be a bit difficult to get through, but admittedly I was battling some pretty bad food poisoning that day so my opinions and enjoyment may have been swayed by feeling like my body was housing a chestburster from Alien. Maybe I'll revisit this one again someday when I'm feeling better and have a bit freer time away from work. Fun monster design though.

DAY 22

Interestingly enough, I believe that this is one of the few times where I've revisited a film from a prior year's "Unseen Terror." Once I heard that 1991's criminally underrated Popcorn was getting the "Last Drive-In" treatment via horror streaming service Shudder, I figured that there was no better excuse to revisit it for the first time since I reviewed it back in 2015. Thankfully most of its charm and cleverness still remains intact, and I think it's just such a goddamn shame that Jill Schoelen never became a bigger star. Not really sure that I can add a whole lot more that wasn't covered before seven years ago. If you enjoy movies which feature a love FOR horror movies as a core part of its plot, check it out.

DAY 23:

Oy vey. I know that it isn't some sort of shocking revelation, but man did studios just churn out way too many slasher pictures during the decade of decadence. What caught my eye about 1981's Graduation Day (which is about, brace yourselves here, a mysterious figure killing off horny and gullible teens days before their graduation) however, was its very peculiar cast of somewhat familiar faces. I can't say that seeing fan favorite scream queen Linnea Quigley (Night of the Demons, Return of the Living Dead) pop up here was terribly surprising, but seeing Wheel of Fortune's Vanna White? Michael Pataki of Halloween 4 and Ren & Stimpy fame (where he voiced the quite gruff George Liquor)? Christopher George of City of the Living Dead and Pieces infamy? I most certainly was on board for this train ride.

Unfortunately, Graduation Day is kind of a mixed bag. Its first half is at times brutally slow (bordering on nap-inducing) but once the body count begins, it is a hoot of the highest regard. None of these kills are going to change the game (though pole vaulting onto a bed of steel spikes is undeniably gnarly) but they are serviceable given the visibly lower budget and (what I can assume to be) rushed shooting time. The killer reveal is a bit of a disappointment, but the journey along the way is a fairly fun one. Although I believe that Happy Birthday to Me is likely to take home the silver medal for "Best Slasher" during this year's marathon, this could end up with a shiny medal for third place by the end of the month.

I'm certain that you'd be reading that last sentence and asking what will likely be taking top honors in that category though. Well, here's your blood-soaked, nasty grand prize winner.

DAY 24: 

I have been having the hardest time trying to write about Terrifier 2, and that is for a multitude of reasons. For starters, I have watched this Covid-delayed sequel TWICE now (the first time during its initial theatrical run towards the beginning of October), and I had to refresh my memory a bit before finalizing a published review. The follow-up to 2016's surprise hit Terrifier (both written and directed by Damien Leone) had been sitting in my queue for what felt like an eternity and was an early addition to this year's selection. However, I could have never anticipated that it would receive any sort of release in a cineplex (save for maybe something like the Drafthouse cinemas), as the first film is absolutely the kind of monstrosity that even modern horror audiences might find to be a bit too gross for their liking (need I mention the "hacksaw" scene?). Much to my delight though, this movie has been sticking around past its initial release schedule and has been EXPANDING into even more theaters over the weeks. Whether you count yourself as a fan of Art the Clown or not, the runaway success that it's been having (almost all due to word of mouth) is a pretty outstanding triumph for independent horror cinema.

As for the finished product itself? Well, I don't know if maybe I'm becoming a bit too sensitive in my older age, but Terrifier 2 will likely go down as perhaps the ghastliest, most disgusting, cruelest, and just all-around most brutal picture I'll see all month (if not all year). Leone has managed to take his own creation and turn this sequel up to eleven and then some by adding in some interesting lore surrounding its bad guy and a stronger script than its predecessor. The violence splits its time between being gloriously over-the-top to downright uncomfortable, and it features some of the best practical effects/makeup work you're likely to see in a modern-day horror film. Hell, its centerpiece kill will go down as an all-time classic (actress Casey Hartnett deserves a bonus and full course meal for going through it) and once/if you see the horrific crime committed, the revelation that this flick has been causing some audiences to either walk out, pass out, or feel quite ill will be far more understandable. Art the Clown (played perfectly yet again by David Howard Thornton) continues to earn his place alongside other legendary, silent, stone cold killers from yesteryear. Even as someone who doesn't have coulrophobia, there is just something so unnerving about the character that gets under your skin like few horror antagonists can do these days. Opposite the maniacal Art is a surprisingly solid cast of characters, and ones who I found to be even more memorable than those found in its predecessor. Teenager Jonathan, played by Elliott Fullam (who you can find on the very charming "Little Punk People" channel on YouTube) is a young man fascinated by true crime stories and all things morbid, and his fascination with this "evil clown" that has made a name for himself over the past few years could have some serious consequences if he keeps sticking his nose where it doesn't belong. His strict (if not extremely cautious) mother is played rather well by Sarah Voigt, who despite having a fairly small body of work, portrays her character as if she's been doing this longer than most in her field. I do have to save the most noteworthy performance (well, at least among the new cast) for last though: Lauren. F'n. Lavera. Y'all, we gotta talk about this actress, because she absolutely ROCKS in Terrifier 2. I'm certain that even those who have derided the movie agree that this woman is a goddamn star (and I'd be willing to bet that the character of Sienna could hold her own against anything thrown her way, be it from this world or not). It has been far too long since I've rooted this hard for a "Final Girl" in any horror picture to kick the villain's keester, and she'll stand alongside folks like Sharni Vinson in You're Next, Jessica Rothe in Happy Death Day, and Samara Weaving in Ready or Not as some of the best we've seen over the last decade or so. My apologies if it sounds like I'm gushing: when I enjoy great protagonists in the scarier side of cinema, it is a fabulous feeling.

It isn't all terrific, however. Perhaps the biggest derision that Terrifier 2 seems to be getting from critics (well, besides the violence) has been its incredibly lengthy running time. While I will admit that it didn't necessarily bother me personally because it just adds to the tension, any "slasher" picture that runs for close to 2.5 hours could probably use a bit of editing here and there. Then again, my screenings were presented as the "Uncut" version of the movie (Lemmy help whoever has to edit this into a "Rated" cut), so perhaps that's a bit of a silly complaint. I do also think that despite my enjoyment and sympathy for most of its cast, some of the supporting players feel a bit underwritten. But hey, that's horror for ya sometimes. Finally, without going into spoilers, it does leave the audience with a lot of unanswered questions and certain plot elements are a tad confusing (particularly its mid-credits scene). I assume that those will be answered in the inevitable Terrifier 3 though.

Discussing and giving my final thoughts on Terrifier 2 is a rather difficult task, only because I know that half of the people who read this crummy blog of mine are looking more for genuine scares rather than gore-filled extravaganzas. Hell, I've even said before that though I love a good ol' bloodbath, I'm more frightened of the living than the dead, and chills/dread will often trump body parts flying all over the screen. That being said, I do believe that Damien Leone's follow-up feature can serve as that rare example which can satisfy both crowds. If you have a strong stomach, are searching for a new horror figure to genuinely creep you out or are just in the mood for something that can best be described as "utterly, unabashedly insane," give this one a watch however you can. I'm planning on preordering the Blu-Ray as soon as it becomes available.