Unseen Terror 2018: Day 2

A crew of mercenaries head out across the South China Sea in hopes of robbing a prominent cruise ship called the Argonautica, which is owned by millionaire Simon Canton. As soon as the barge is set for sail, it suddenly comes into contact with a large, unknown object in the water. Shortly afterwards, the crew of hijackers approach the Argonautica, preparing to sink the large vessel as soon as their job is done. Upon arrival, however, there seems to be no sign of the passengers and discover nothing but blood on board. Those who have survived band together with these intruders to combat something out of the ordinary that has surfaced from deep within the waters: hideous, tentacled worm-like monstrosities with an appetite for human flesh.



Prior to my first time viewing, I had very few memories of Deep Rising's mere existence. It seemed lost in the shuffle with other "natural horror" films from around the time such as Lake Placid and Anaconda. Those of you who know me are well aware of my love for most things related to this subgenre, be they from the states or from overseas. There's something so utterly fun about watching humanity constantly struggle with (un)earthly creatures that are hellbent on either eating us or smashing all of our cities beneath their feet. Unfortunately, I wish that Deep Rising could be held in the highest regards with other heavyweights in these categories, but there is just so much working against this film that I came out rather frustrated.


Unlike a lot of natural horror from throughout the decades, Deep Rising doesn't seem completely aware that it's a B movie. It fails to take full advantage of the very silly concept by making the audience think that everything uttered by our protagonists seemed important. Even the goofiest moments of flicks like Anaconda seemed self-aware that they weren't exactly making a motion picture of high quality and ultimately told those in attendance "okay, let's just go with it. Go grab a pint." Here, most of this movie is taking the material so seriously and notable director Stephen Sommers fails to recognize most of the horror aspects. Nothing really feels scary, and the hideous late 90s CGI prevents the audience from being able to enjoy what practical effects and props that there are.


Deep Rising's biggest weakness comes in the form of the "characters." I have to use quotes there, because most of the cast barely constitute as those. Treat Williams (Dead Heat, Hair), Famke Janssen (X-Men, Goldeneye), Cliff Curtis (Fear the Walking Dead), Not-Nick Nolte (Anthony Heald of Silence of the Lambs fame), and nearly everyone here that you can find on IMDB are undoubtedly talented performers, but with the combination of a weak script and very little time spent getting to know or sympathize with them, you just don't find anybody worth rooting or caring for. There's admittedly a good chunk of people who will say that such a thing isn't a big problem for a movie about something beneath the sea slaughtering people, but I will always look to Jaws as an argument for why strong characters matter in flicks like these. There is however one memorable character among the bunch, and he ends up being the very worst component of this film. Director Stephen Sommers has a tendency to cast Kevin J. O'Connor in most of his projects, including follow-up pictures such as The Mummy and Van Helsing. Similar to those efforts, O'Connor's "Joey" is beyond irritating, but unlike his roles in those two releases, they want the audience to root for him during its entire duration. He's like Private Hudson of Aliens fame, only without any moments of being able to delve into badassery, which just results in him being a whiney nuisance. Speaking of the James Cameron classic, the similarities between this property and that one are surprisingly more abundant than any newcomer will expect. I won't go into every little aspect since it would take up too much of this review, but let's just say that the only thing missing was a little girl to accompany the crew.


There is potential hidden within Deep Rising to be a truly fun cheesy action/horror hybrid. I did fail to mention some above average bloodshed and some fairly decent makeup work courtesy of Rob Bottin (The Thing, Robocop), but I just couldn't fully get on board with it. It feels like a precursor to all of those awful SyFy channel movies from the mid-2000s and beyond (its mediocrity may be the reason as to why this never received any sequels). Unless you're a completist of all things 90s, then I wouldn't strongly recommend this one. As of this moment, there is a packed Blu-ray available from Kino Lorber, and as of now, you can also view it on streaming services such as HBO Go.



Or you can just go watch 1977's Tentacles instead.


Wait, that one is worse.


Erm....maybe you should just watch a BBC documentary.



Tomorrow, the monster parade continues with an obscure release from Toho !

Unseen Terror 2017: Day 6

With the first weekend of October having arrived, I figured that there would be no better time than now to knock a few smaller flicks out of the way. After all, just because a film costs an insignificant amount of money to purchase doesn't mean that it can't be entertaining, right?

Prior to organizing the list for this year's Unseen Terror, I contemplated doing nothing but Stephen King adaptations for every single day of the month. True, this idea has been floating around inside of that empty space of mine that used to contain a brain, but perhaps in time, all of them will be viewed over the course of several years anyway. Desperation, which is based on the 1996 bestselling novel of the same name, premiered on ABC television eleven years ago. Having never read the book, my only familiarity with the film came from knowing that it starred actor Ron Perlman as a demented sheriff who kidnaps people and drags them into a seemingly deserted town named "Desperation."


Sadly, Perlman's presence ends up being the only truly memorable aspect of Desperation. It is truly criminal that before the movie hits the halfway mark, he disappears and save for one small flashback, doesn't return. It's a damn shame too, since he's in full-on "Raging Ron" mode, and seems to be having the time of his life playing the character. Nobody else, including Alien alum Tom Skerritt and Wings lead Steven Weber, are given the most distinctive of personalities, and for what traits do shine through, ultimately make them feel like inadequate versions of other King creations.


On the plus side, I didn't thoroughly dislike Desperation as a whole, as it does contain a fairly interesting twist surrounding the evil antagonist that while suspected, does throw a wrench in the works. It's also a far quicker watch than other, far worse adaptations such as The Langoliers. But unless you feel like spending money on YouTube or Amazon to watch it, it isn't required viewing. If you must watch everything affiliated with the man who gave us Maximum Overdrive though, then go right ahead.

The plot of 2017's Gremlin (come on guys) concerns a family who is gifted a mysterious box that contains a little, maniacal monster who comes out whenever it feels like, kills someone, and retreats back into its cubed container. More of a surprise comes to our heroes when they discover that there is no traditional way to kill the bugger, and the only way that you can seem to defeat or rid yourself of it is by passing the box along to someone else that you truly love.


See that poster above? It is, to be as blunt as I possibly can, a complete lie and utter bullshit. The titular beast only grows in size towards the end of the picture, with a small group of police officers and nobodies being left to fight against it. No helicopters. No planes. No Zach Galligan. Worse yet, that battle lasts less than two minutes and doesn't necessarily conclude, but rather just...stops. During Gremlin's running time, I just kept wondering why I wasn't watching a number of superior motion pictures. These include the likes of Gremlins, Gremlins 2: The New Batch, Krampus, Thinner, Hellraiser, The Adventures of Ford Fairlane, and Hellboy II: the Golden Army. The latter in particular was permanently stuck in my mind, as the design of the monster bears a striking resemblance to the "tooth fairies" from that picture. The group of actors and actresses in here aren't doing too terrible of a job considering the pretty awful dialogue that they have to work with, but if we were supposed to feel sorry for our lead's (who resembled a distant cousin of Sharlto Copley) predicaments and poor decisions that he had made, then they failed miserably. We might be early into this year's marathon, but he could take the cake for the worst protagonist of any movie that I've watched so far.


It seems like the filmmakers behind Gremlin had good intentions and ambitions. Had they possibly been given a larger budget or better studio backing, I feel like a more well-rounded motion picture could have been churned out to the general public. Instead, it has far too many flaws that are difficult to ignore for me to recommend. I suppose that you could do worse though, especially if you decide to rent this from a local Redbox station like I did.

We conclude the sixth day with the lone (DVD) purchase that I made from last weekend's trip to Monster Mania in Hunt Valley, MD. I knew diddly squat about 1988's The Rejuvenator (alternately titled Rejuvenatrix) other than the description on the back said that fans of From Beyond and Re-Animator should flock to this. I was extremely indecisive on the day that I finally purchased the disc, but I buckled under pressure since I didn't want to come home with nothing but signed pictures or photographs. Plus, considering that the bootleg copy that I snagged cost a mere five dollars, I decided to take the risk and try it out.


I am beyond happy that I took such a chance, as The Rejuvenator is a pleasantly surprising trip. The movie's plot surrounds a scientist named Dr. Gregory Ashton, who has been working on a formula that would help people attain eternal youth and beauty. Behind the scenes, his primary backer has been an aging actress named Elizabeth Warren (yes, really), who fears that because she is getting older, she will fade away into obscurity and receive no work in the future. Eventually, he perfects his serum, and Ms. Warren offers herself as his first human test subject. To the surprise of many, the aging reversal is successful. Also to the surprise of everyone is the fact that Dr. Ashton has been using brains to make his formula, and unless one is constantly injected, they may deteriorate and turn into a hideous, murderous shell of their former selves.


Despite sporting a limited budget and a cast of relative unknowns, The Rejuvenator wears its influence on its sleeve, and we are all the more thankful for it. The movie liberally shows its love for older pictures such as The Wasp Woman, The Fly, and more recent (at the time) efforts such as the aforementioned Re-Animator. But it never feels shameless or as if it were pandering, and does its damnedest to try and tell a good story with fun characters. Vivian Lanko is a hoot to watch as the younger version of Elizabeth, as she channels some the most over-the-top actresses from the 1940s and 1950s while adding some delightfully sinister urges that continuously grow the longer that the flick goes on. I find it rather sad that she never appeared in any other pictures, be they horror or not, after 1992. Hopefully she's doing well these days. John MacKay as the troubled scientist who creates these age-defying injections is fun too, if not slightly overshadowed by his costar. Other individuals pop up here and there, although it does feel as if they should just be wearing red shirts for the audience to see (save for a hardened, British detective who is a dead ringer for an Earth-2 version of Julian Sands).


When you take into consideration the fact that The Rejuvenator was made for less than a quarter of a million dollars, it's quite surprising that the effects work is as good as it is. Beginning at around the forty minute mark, the decaying and transformations of Warren's physical being is delightfully gross to observe. There were times where it felt like I was revisiting the sleazy world of Street Trash again, but nobody is melting into a pile of blue and green goo while stuck inside of a toilet seat this time around. The designs of the beast(s) is adequate as well, if not slightly familiar. I've noticed that most bootlegs of the movie come with a quote on the cover from Variety magazine, stating that it boasts "elaborate make-up effects," and I can't disagree.


Far from a masterpiece, but definitely not a turd, The Rejuvenator makes for a fun watch and is a nice movie to show off to your friends who are looking for something new to try (ex: "Yeah you've seen that. *pull out copy* But have you seen THIS?"). As I stated above, it isn't legally available to purchase on DVD or Blu-ray yet, though perhaps if someone reliable such as Vestron Video, Arrow Video, or even Shout! Factory would be willing to dig up this hidden gem and give it the proper release that it deserves, then that would be wonderful. I can only imagine the behind the scenes stories that must be attached to this trippy experience.



Tomorrow, we take a trip to Japan and say hello to Toho! However, this time, their usual kaiju visitors won't be coming along for the ride...

Unseen Terror 2017: Day 2

After spending the day with his girlfriend Sarah, promising schoolteacher Johnny Smith heads home for the evening. Due to stormy weather, however, he is involved in a car accident that leaves him in a coma. Five years pass, and Johnny is awoken by the hospital's neurologist, and he is informed that during this lengthy state of unconsciousness, Sarah has not only married but also bore a child. More surprising, however, is that the now-former educator has the ability to see a person's thoughts and visions through physical contact. While recovering, he attempts to rebuild his life, though the residents of his hometown all seem to have varying opinions on this man who claims that he can read your mind and potentially even see things that you cannot. In fact, there are some who feel as if his newfound ability can come in handy, be it for solving crimes, or preventing far worse ones from occurring in the near future.



This year officially marks the earliest time that Stephen King has made an appearance during my marathon (2013 had Brian De Palma's Carrie as my third entry). What happens to be more surprising is the fact that this was the very first time that I sat down to watch 1983's The Dead Zone, which as of this writing, is the only collaborative effort between the Maine author and well-respected filmmaker David Cronenberg (Videodrome, The Fly, The Brood). It also stands as one of actor Christopher Walken's most well-known movie efforts, and along with The Deer Hunter and True Romance, can be considered an essential viewing for fans of the quite kooky performer. One can make a very strong argument that this is one of the aforementioned director's most accessible pieces of work, but more on that later.


Walken does indeed deserve all of the praise for his portrayal of Johnny Smith (King sure could have picked a better name), as he keeps the character grounded and feeling human throughout its very brisk running time. For someone who has been gifted/cursed with the ability of second sight, he makes the former schoolteacher feel as if you could know a person like this in your daily life. The science fiction aspect of his powers and entire scenario is also perhaps the most realistic that I've seen in a motion picture in quite some time, as he doesn't overuse his abilities and we focus on the variety of people throughout; our protagonist may not even be the most fascinating human being stuck in this bizarre interpretation of Castle Rock, Maine. Martin Sheen is also splendid to watch as a slimy, overconfident local politician with delusions of grandeur and dreams of ascending to the oval office. He does have moments where he hams it up, but it's all in good fun and works to help give you the feeling that this is not as kind of a world as one would imagine it to be.


The actors' portions aside, I feel as though we have to go back to David Cronenberg. Many fans such as myself tend to affiliate the Canadian director with the fear of losing control of one's own physical being. In nearly every effort of his that I've seen, there is this inherent and all-too-real sense of dread that we are not in control of our bodies, and in fact will deteriorate in more ways than we can imagine once something very basic has been altered. The decaying and transformation themes found in The Fly are a perfect example of this, and though The Dead Zone is a largely normal motion picture compared to his more grotesque and....well, icky releases (save for one moment involving a pair of scissors that can make even the most hardened person shudder), there is still this sort of morbidity that permeates from Johnny every time that he shakes the hand of another individual. He directs Walken and his co-stars in such a way that they truly feel remorseful and often frightened (a fine example is when Sheen first shakes hands with Walken) that this can not be prevented after his accident. Cronenberg understands that just because you've inherited a unique power doesn't mean that you will see everything that you want to see.


It goes without saying, but David Cronenberg's ninth entry into his very impressive filmography is absolutely worth adding to your watch list this year. It's filled with some solid, creepy suspense, and chocked full of enough emotionally-driven performances to help it stay above the rest of the (admittedly) hit-or-miss Stephen King adaptations out there. Much like yesterday's entry, the influence of The Dead Zone can clearly be seen on pictures from through the following decades, including Frailty and the Final Destination series. Unlike those gems, the classification of this as a "horror" movie is up for debate, but it's a damn fine flick regardless. The Dead Zone is available for purchase on DVD in most retail outlets that still carry physical media, and was even re-released on home video recently for about the same amount that you would pay for a happy meal at McDonald's.



But heck, perhaps if you had Johnny's second sight, you could ensure that you receive the correct toy that you were searching for.



Tomorrow, we make the decision to stick around in the 1980s, and pay a second visit to an old friend with a shiny, silver sphere...

It (2017) Movie Review

It truly does feel like a millennium has passed since I last wrote a review on here. Alas, when focusing on your personal life and its assorted ups and downs manages to overtake crafting new reviews, then perhaps it isn't entirely surprising. Thankfully, the opportunity to breathe new life into this blog was something that was going to occur sooner than later, as the month of October is right around the corner. If you have ever taken even the briefest of glimpses here over the past seven years, then you know what that means. Of course, if this is your first visit, then be prepared for a month-long foray into the realm of horror films.


So, how does one pregame for thirty-one days of cinematic terror and scares? If you answered "by watching another damn horror film," then you win about twenty Pennywise bucks my friend.



Don't worry, they can be redeemed in any work connected to the Stephen King macroverse. Plus, they float!

It's a rainy day in Derry, Maine, and young George Denbrough is out racing a paper sailboat down the street that his older brother Bill has crafted for him. Unfortunately, Bill is under the weather, and his decision to stay in bed while his sibling sets off to have fun, would prove to be a tragic one, as "Georgie" never returns. Approximately one year later, Bill and his group of friends and cohorts begin to experience visions and find themselves in grave danger that seem all too real to anybody but themselves, and most seem to involve a malevolent, bloodthirsty spirit that commonly takes the appearance of a clown. Putting the pieces together and digging through decades' worth of Derry's history, the children determine that something is out there killing the younger generation of the town's residents, and that if nobody else can see or bother to stop this menace, then they will.



When it comes to the works of famed Maine writer Richard Bach-......er, Stephen King, none have disturbed or frightened me any more than his infamous 1986 novel It. Despite sporting a simple, if not incredibly effective title, the book clocks in at over eleven hundred pages, making the piece his second-longest work to date (The Stand holds the top spot). When you have finally managed to make it through the entire ordeal, it isn't uncommon to feel emotionally and physically wiped out, though not without some sense of satisfaction over the sheer enjoyment of its demented content and caring for our small band of protagonists. Naturally, someone in the realm of Hollywood (specifically ABC) was hoping to capture these same feelings on the big or small screen. Four years later, fans were treated to a miniseries that would condense the lengthy piece of fiction into what was, at the end of the day, basically a stretched out three-hour-long feature film. Numerous memories of 1990's It are forever planted in my mind, including being on vacation in Ocean City, Maryland with family and seeing Tim Curry's portrayal of Pennywise scare the absolute hell out of me during a random moment or two of free time. Sadly, that aspect about the previous iteration of It is one of the very few things that doesn't age like moldy cheese, and first time viewers of the Tommy Lee Wallace effort from twenty-seven years ago (talk about a warped take on life imitating art) will likely find themselves more unintentionally amused than aghast.


Perhaps what is more debatably horrifying than anything found in the adaptation that gave us THIS piece of cinematic gold is the near ten-year-long mess of a background that 2017's It had trying to get off the ground. Initially, Cary Fukunaga (True Detective, Beasts of No Nation) was attached as not just director, but as a co-writer on the screenplay as well. Despite still receiving a writing credit, for 2017's It, the dreaded "creative differences" excuse spelled the end for the guy staying on board and in the big man's chair, though Warner Bros and New Line Cinema did not take very long to find a replacement in the form of Argentinian director Andres Muschietti, whose 2013 picture Mama grossed at least nine and a half times its smaller budget to make it one of that year's most surprising successes. It is a shame that Fukunaga's full vision of It will never see the light of day, though if one is to dig deep enough on the internet, you can see that multiple elements of his script did manage to creep their way into the final product.


And how is the aforementioned finished print of the motion picture that has sold more presale tickets than any other scary movie in history (yes, this includes Sex in the City 2)? As a whole, this big screen release may go down in history as one of the more triumphant efforts in the realm of King-related adaptations. It does take a few detours from the source material, though the parts that are omitted will draw the ire of only the most pure of devotees. Beloved works of fiction such as these, be they ones sent to theaters or to television (AMC's Preacher comes to mind), should primarily be about capturing enough of the vibe and spirit that made them runaway successes. This is what has helped The Walking Dead stay afloat for so many years, despite taking several detours from Robert Kirkman own ideas and arcs. After all, the 1990 miniseries lifted a large chunk of its dialogue and sequences from the book that was released beforehand, and is chastised by a lot of the newer generation and viewers who were never lucky enough to catch it on ABC. Memorable moments such as the death of George Denbrough and Beverly Marsh (played excellently by relative newcomer and Amy Adams lookalike Sophia Ellis) bearing witness to a rather horrific sequence in her bathroom, are handled infinitely better than anyone could have expected. If you are not a fan of violence against children, or even seeing them in frequent moments of seemingly inescapable peril, this can make for an uncomfortable watch.


On the topic of the aforementioned kids, the chemistry between the seven of them is nothing short of phenomenal. I sincerely hope that someone must reward casting director Rich Delia with either a bonus on his paycheck, or at the very least a pint or two at the local pub. Every memorable character, from smart-assed Richie Tozier (portrayed by Stranger Things' Finn Wolfhard) to the abusive, eerily-protective Alvin Marsh, is handled rather exceptionally. The finished draft a large chunk of time helping the audience get to know and care for these youngsters, and the argument can be made that this iteration of It gets the subtlety of the novel also serving as a coming-of-age story down better than even the printed work did. There is a selective amount from the antagonists' side that I wished had received more screen time (seriously, can someone give Patrick Hockstetter the love that his deranged self deserves?), but it amounts to a very small complaint in the grand scheme of things. Kudos to Fukunaga and other screenplay writers Gary Dauberman and Chase Palmer for crafting a script that manages to make purists forgive the fact that this iteration of the story is set in the 1980s instead of three decades prior. They not only keep the references/love letters feeling genuine, but also realize that most children over the past several decades were unapologetically foul-mouthed and had far more problems besides having the courage to ask a girl out.



Now, before one passes judgement and says that I seem to be doing nothing but heaping endless praise upon this picture, I do have several complaints that I feel are necessary to point out. While Bill Skarsgard is exceptional as Pennywise, his moments of terrorizing are brought down a tiny bit by an unfortunate amount of CGI. The designs are grand, but what's wrong with going the Greg Nicotero or Tom Savini route these days? It's also worth pointing out that there are a LOT of jump scares in this, and even if theirs are more well-crafted than most other flicks out there (the segment involving the kids watching a projector managed to get a legitimate "JESUS!" out of me), they still do feel a bit excessive. And I'm sorry, but as oddly entertaining as someone like Henry Bowers is, Stephen King does tend to write a lot of his younger antagonists the same way.


While It is not the most faithful of adaptations (and the faults, though not major, are very noticeable), the second page-to-screen version of Stephen King's beloved novel does ultimately shine rather brightly, even in the darkest of corridors. Perhaps this could sound rather morbid, but I greatly look forward to children between the ages of seven and twelve catching this in some way shape or form and being scared absolutely shitless like I was when I first caught the miniseries back in the day. It's a darn good movie that serves as a good precursor to arguably the most exhilarating and fabulously fun month of the year, and along with wide releases such as Get Out and The Witch, helps further prove my point that mainstream horror is the furthest thing from dead and can still elicit some emotions from audiences who have long missed those feelings of being scared.



After all, don't you want that?



Don't you want it?

Well, now that I am back, stay tuned for this year's Unseen Terror marathon, which is coming sooner than you think...

Unseen Terror 2016: Day 15

Four young boys save a mentally handicapped child from humiliation and harm by shooing his bullies away. Immediately afterwards, they befriend the mistreated soul, nicknamed "Duddits," and through other circumstances, manage to acquire telepathic powers for themselves. Many years go by, and save for Duddits, the childhood chums have gathered together at a remote cabin for an annual hunting trip and excuses to catch up with one another. One evening, they take in a random, seemingly ill stranger named Rick, who says he was lost in the woods before they found him. After two members of the group venture out for help, the others stick around to watch over the new visitor, but soon realize that something is amiss with the environment around them. Worse yet, our foreign houseguest seems to be harboring something far more sinister than an upset, bloated stomach.



As I have done on more than a couple of occasions this year, let me regale you with a story from my younger days. During my senior year at Montgomery Blair High School, we were given a rather unique, though fun-sounding assignment to complete within a week's time: pick up a novel of your choosing, read it, and then view its big/small screen adaptation in order to make comparisons between the two sources. The best aspect came from being told that save for pornographic material, there would be nothing in the way of restrictions. Being the gigantic nerd and weirdo that I am, opting to choose a work from author Stephen King seemed like a surefire way to ensure a decent grade. However, I soon hit a snag when I realized that the theatrical release for the horror icon's (then) most recent effort Dreamcatcher was set to premiere two days after the deadline of said project. Thankfully, our teacher granted me an exception so that I may properly view the picture without any interference or risk of failure. That, and she was just a very nice person in general.


So, if I did in fact, make my way to the cinema to see Dreamcatcher before, why am I writing about it this time around? Well, there are multiple reasons. The first is that I have virtually no memory of the book, film, or anything in between related to it. The second, though clichéd as it may sound, is due to recent discussions on a number of (social) media outlets and sources, including the excellent How Did This Get Made? podcast, about how atrocious the flick actually is. The idea is that it's one of Stephen King's most ridiculous, messy, awful, and just plain silly handlings to date. After seeing it again for the first time in thirteen years, I came to one simple conclusion in regards to those collective opinions.


They are one hundred and ten percent correct.


To call Dreamcatcher a catastrophe is rather harsh, but calling it anything other than a small train wreck would be wholly immoral. On paper, there is absolutely no chance in hell that it should turn out the way that it does. Your four leads are comprised of Thomas Jane (Boogie Nights, The Punisher), Jason Lee (Chasing Amy, My Name is Earl), Damian Lewis (Homeland, Band of Brothers), and Timothy Olyphant (Deadwood, Justified). Other supporting characters are portrayed by Tom Sizemore (Natural Born Killers, Saving Private Ryan) and MORGAN GODDAMN FREEMAN. Add to that the screenwriters of esteemed releases like The Empire Strikes Back and Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, and any human being with capable brain power or respectable taste should tell you that Dreamcatcher is too big to fail. Shockingly, and quite surprisingly, none of this seems to matter and is ultimately irrelevant. There is negative chemistry between any and all of our protagonists, with Lee in particular seeming like he just wants to get off the set as quickly as he possibly can and our beloved Shawshank Redemption veteran turning in a wacky performance that is worthy of winning a Razzie or three. When the audience considers what they're working with, be it dialogue, themes, or characters seemingly plagiarized from the creator's own previous compositions (take a shot for every similarity to It and Stand by Me, or for when Freeman's eyebrows seemingly grow larger), the aforementioned factor of bewilderment is more miniscule than we initially thought.


Though pointed out above, I do want to acknowledge the tremendous talent of Mr. William Goldman and Mr. Lawrence Kasdan. Their filmographies, be it as screenplay authors or directors (the latter is in the chair this time around), are truly the stuff of legend. So much so, that I believe Dreamcatcher's story was just too difficult to make into anything but a goofy picture. There are only so many ways that any number of folks can rewrite or reimagine an important plot point that revolves around giant, teethed leeches who crawl out of your posterior in order to attack nearby prey and threats (and are preceded by many instances of flatulence and belching from the host), or a man whose alien parasite sounds like an amusingly stupid impersonation of a British countryman after he has inhabited the body it has chosen (think of when one purposely imitates their boss at a drunken Halloween gathering). Considering that King was recovering from a nasty car accident which almost sent him into retirement, it would not have shocked me to hear of him watching 1986's cult classic Night of the Creeps while he was hopped up on OxyContin. One of the film's more memorable moments involves a creature being confined to a toilet while Lee sits atop in an attempt to prevent its escape. The Maine author said that he wished for this scene to do for bathrooms what Psycho did for showers, which while fine in theory, is immediately shot down when you hear Freeman's character officially refer to them as "Shit Weasels" later on. As someone who unashamedly loves another movie involving rectal-based monsters, I can say that when you bring up the colon as a significant element to take note of, then your serious factor goes into an irrecoverable nosedive.


In the end, despite some interesting ideas such as one's own mind acting as a private library, Dreamcatcher is far too idiotic for anyone to consider it frightening or suspenseful, yet is played too seriously to be properly, unintentionally hilarious. In fact, had this been retooled or marketed as a proper horror-comedy, there is a chance that the experience as whole would have been far more enjoyable, and its legacy left even an ounce stronger than it is. Instead, what you're left with is a giant, smelly turd made up of unoriginality whose source of inspiration is even disowned by the author himself. And if that's coming from the guy who directed Maximum Overdrive, then you know that he means what he says. As a fair warning, I should inform you that the movie is available for streaming via Amazon Prime, and can purchased as either a singular DVD or Blu-Ray from nearly every retail establishment out there (don't be shocked if this is also floating around somewhere at your local supermarket in the side-cap areas). Even better, it is also packaged together with other releases from the early 2000s that also rightfully washed out into the sewer, so you can torture yourself for an entire day if that is your thing.



To the film's credit though, it is still far more coherent and viewable than The Langoliers.



Then again, so is watching snails fuck.




Tomorrow, we dive right in and tackle our yearly anthology pick! And as luck would have it, this choice has far more in common with not just this month's celebratory holiday, but many more to follow...

Unseen Terror 2015: Day 2.5

No, that headliner is not a grammatical or numerical mistake. During this year's blog-o-thon, my free time and schedule in which I work around to watch these films that I've selected is going to be very erratic. Therefore, my sleeping schedule will sometimes affect my ability to actually post full reviews for every single picture that I finish. So, before I post my final draft for something such as, say, The Monster Squad (shit, there goes my spoiler for tonight's entry), I'll be publishing the occasional quick summary of my thoughts for something that I may have either forgotten to talk about or was just too lethargic to muster up a review for before bedtime.


Anyways, enough of all that. Here's (to once again quote a favorite podcast of mine) a Brucie Bonus flick for you folks!

For eight days, the earth passes through the tail of a comet. During this time, assorted inanimate objects begin to come to life, harming and maiming anyone foolish enough to get close to them. Drawbridges raise during traffic, steamrollers run over children after a little league game, and various monster trucks spring to life without a driver behind the wheel. Chaos ensues, and a small band of southerners find themselves trapped in a truck stop at the mercy of a gaggle of tractor trailers and large vehicles, unsure of how to escape from this nightmare.



When you think of motion pictures filmed or set in the Wilmington and Cape Fear areas of North Carolina, what's the first thing that comes to mind?

Nope, sorry.

Nice try, but you're clearly incorrect.

...............why would you even?.........



Anyways, the answer is obviously 1986's Maximum Overdrive, a film that for fellow Wilmingtonians, is either something that they've viewed far too many times in their youth, or even better, have starred in. It is infamous for following an absurdly stupid concept from an author who, despite many great works of the past, has been known to dabble in the realm of idiocy from time to time. The man in question is horror legend Stephen King, who not only wrote the script for this one, but also sat down in the director's chair in what turned out to be his one and only time before most likely realizing that this was not for him.


When I'm concocting my reviews for Unseen Terror, I tend to write crude notes and collect random facts during the project's running time, in the hopes that it will help me to the best of my ability. When I wasn't being blown away for the sheer awfulness of Maximum Overdrive, I was penning the following:


-Stephen King was apparently coked out of his mind during the entire filming experience (this is made all the more apparent when you consider how frequently plot holes pop up for its entire ninety seven minute running time).
-He cameos as a disgruntled man at an ATM, wherein said device calls him an "asshole" repeatedly. Probably not too far from the truth if you were one of the unfortunate souls working on the production.
-There's Lisa Simpson's voice actor! Oh god, in comparison to being the genius of that family, she's making the cartoon character seem so much more likable and less whiney.


Mind you, I didn't even need to make a note on how drastically different the acting is from every single performer cast by Mary Colquhoun. Thankfully, Emilio Estevez (The Breakfast Club, The Mighty Ducks) has done worse than this (I think), but he's the least of this flick's problems. Everyone else is either overacting or underperforming, with no middle ground whatsoever. It may seem unfair to place the blame on King himself for this, but this was HIS project, wherein he maintained complete control over the piece and had to be the one to make the decision to have Ellen McElduff repeatedly scream "WE MADE YOU!" at tractor trailers.


If Stephen King had set out to make an entertaining, schlocky B-movie extravaganza with classic hard rock/metal band AC/DC serving as its entire soundtrack (yes, I am 100% serious), then he succeeded. If he made this in earnest, with his intentions being to terrify audiences and moviegoers, then he failed on a level that makes you wonder what kind of miracle occurred that didn't result in his career being completely ruined. Still, if you know the right people and have the right amount of booze nearby, Maximum Overdrive can provide you with a good amount of unintended laughs and cheap kills to satiate you for at least a short amount of time.


And if you also know the right people, you can ask about all of the assorted accidents that occurred on set, one of which was prevented from being fatal by the father of my band's bassist.


Don't believe me? Well, go search for @Dresdenbombing on twitter and challenge his claim. You will lose.


Come back later today for....well, The Monster Squad. No use beating around the bush or trying to hide it....

Unseen Terror 2013: Day 18

The product of a fundamentalist household, shy & quiet Carrie White discovers that she may nest telekinetic powers. While researching these suspicions, she is soon asked to the prom by a fellow classmate. Initially reluctant and suspicious of trickery, she agrees. What follows, however, is a night that nobody at Carrie's school of Bates High will ever forget...should they live to tell about it.


So Stephen King, we meet again. We've taken a brief intermission so that I may take a break and deal with some killer women and killer animals, but you inevitably found your way back into my countdown. True, your invention of the troubled teenager Carrie White is indeed a "killer woman," but only after having her period in the shower. Guess I have to write about her all over again then.


Oh! You're asking why I decided to copy and paste my synopsis for the review that I posted of Brian De Palma's adaptation of Carrie. Well, as late as it might be over here, I figured I'd give in to laziness, as the filmmakers behind 2013's version of Carrie decided to seemingly do the same by essentially remaking his version of the film, but of course, with minor adjustments in order to satiate the modern horror movie fan. Some aspects are understandable, like the addition of more modern music into the big prom night scene, but others, like Carrie's mother driving a car with a Jesus fish on the back and the infamous "plug it up!" scene being filmed on a camera phone by other students just felt ridiculous and lead to nothing down the line (more on those particular characters in the second paragraph). There's also a heavy abundance of CGI in Carrie's notorious prom bloodbath and its aftermath, which of course, is a poor exchange for practical work. After seeing the great practical work done in something like American Mary recently, or even the reboot of The Evil Dead, it baffles me that some creators still can't get the simplest of things right and make them look convincing.


Early critics, for what ones were able to gather the information they could, made the argument that this was supposed to be the breakout role for Chloe Moretz, though she's already arguably a star. Though she doesn't have the same haunting, awkward innocence that Sissy Spacek had, she does a more than commendable job as the title character, even if she doesn't physically look like the character. I know that I said my piece about Spacek's appearance in the original film, but Moretz before prom night and day of prom night look nearly identical, and it just isn't very convincing. These minor flaws are especially apparent when she goes on her "massacre," which just didn't make you fear her, but gave you the feeling that she was like a kid in a candy store, or worse yet, a member of the X-men, whereas Spacek's ghostly appearance is now one of the most recognized in all of cinema. Okay, I'll stop with the comparisons, or at least try my best to.


Gabriella Wilde plays a fairly decent Sue Snell, the only high schooler to ever show Carrie an ounce of sympathy throughout the story, but I couldn't say the same for the rest of her classmates, who are fairly flat or just plain forgettable for the roles they are playing (whoever they cast as Billy Nolan was absolutely abysmal). This brings me to the one thing I truly regret having to talk bad about: Julianne Moore. Have you ever witnessed a performance that just feels like someone is trying too hard to go for "crazy" when it should just come naturally? That is Julianne Moore's Margaret White, and it breaks my heart to see her turn in something so mediocre when you know she is a much more capable actress than this. I do love this woman, I truly do. She is rarely bad in anything she chooses (notice that I said rarely), and I know she was taking this role originally from Jodie Foster, which is ironically the second time she's done this from the woman in the horror field (the first being Hannibal). No matter the amount of times it has been done though, she borders on comical at points in Carrie and is a poor substitution for Piper Laurie, which is all the more bizarre when a considerably large amount of her behavior and mannerisms seems lifted from Laurie's own portrayal of the character.


After all is said and done, I think this will end up going into the pile of remakes or re-imaginings that muster mostly "meh"s from its viewers. While I can still give it small points for having things that are more faithful to the original source material, such as naming the gym teacher Miss Desjardin (something De Palma didn't do in his movie) and keeping a more faithful ending, there just isn't a large rhyme or reason for its existence, save for Moretz to have another starring vehicle under her belt, and you're much better off revisiting the more brilliant De Palma classic (unless you hate watching horror films made prior to the 1980s). Like the remakes of A Nightmare On Elm Street, Black Christmas, or Halloween, you can just pretend that this one doesn't exist. In fact, it would be for the best that we all just let the story of the Whites be laid to rest, and work on fixing and readapting some other Stephen King works for the big screen.



Tomorrow, we're taking a trip back to the 80s and into the CLOWNHOUSE!

Unseen Terror 2013: Day 4

A reporter for the tabloid newspaper "Inside View," Richard Dees has been a bit down on his luck lately, and is in desperate need of a new hit story to save his floundering career. When his boss informs him of a new report making the rounds, however, of a figure that travels by personalized aircraft that commits gruesome murders wherein the victims are mutilated and drained of their blood, Richard sees a good opportunity to get to the front page once more, and prove to the skeptics that this "night flier" isn't anything more than just a lunatic, and certainly not a "vampire" like some have been led to believe.


They say that you can't get blood from a stone, and I suppose that the same can be said when it comes to adapting short stories of Stephen King's. There's only so much that one individual can do, and I'll admit to not having read the short story this was based on in quite a few years (nor have I read anything from Nightmares & Dreamscapes in some time), but my memory was still fairly vivid when it came to this particular tale. The idea of a vampire that travels via a skymaster? That one seems to be pretty obviously pulled from the mind of a horror author, and most likely one on a lot of illegal drugs.


Original story writer Stephen King and director Mark Pavia weren't exactly subtle when it came to expressing their disdain and flat-out hatred for the press with this story. Richard Dees is probably one of the more loathsome "protagonists" I'm likely to encounter any time this year on the countdown, as he is cynical, sexist, obsessed with the macabre to the point where you might ask for him to politely just quit it, and seemingly begging for a death wish. His rivalry with new reporter Katherine Blair, a subplot invented just for the film, doesn't help make him any more human either. That particular subplot doesn't seem to go anywhere either to be perfectly honest, and really seemed to only set up a potential tagline for future use in "who said it?" quoting games with your friends. Thankfully, performance-wise, they're both fine for what they've been given, save for their boss who feels he's channeling his best evil Vince McMahon at times.


While the film does delve into the absurd throughout its time spent investigating the murders, it does sneak in some connections to other Stephen King novels and works as well. The character of Dees previously appeared in The Dead Zone, and headlines seen at "Inside View" make reference to Children of the Corn, Thinner, Needful Things, and many more. A nice distraction and nod, though it doesn't necessarily do anything to enhance the story obviously. There's also a character that Dees interviews while on a trip to Maine (take a shot!) who could have been the cousin of Jud Crandall of Pet Sematary fame for all I know. Perhaps this was a bad stereotype on my part, but darn it, I'm sticking with it.


Despite being one of, if not the lowest-grossing Stephen King adaptations to date, and containing a fairly lukewarm first hour, I think The Night Flier does turn on the gas in its final thirty minutes. With a showdown at Wilmington International Airport (in story and on set), it suddenly turns into a surprisingly satisfying little picture. When the title creature does reveal itself (don't complain about spoilers. Did you SEE the poster above?), it does look pretty darn cool, especially considering the rushed shooting time (one month) and budget. But is it too little, too late? Well, I....guess? If you don't mind sitting through all of the below-average cliches like alcoholism, trips to Maine, and an old man explaining things via flashbacks (see Pet Sematary fella), stick around for the adequate conclusion.



Alas, we bid farewell to Mr. King for now, but tomorrow we take a trip to the BLOOD DINER!

Unseen Terror 2013: Day 3

On a flight from Los Angeles to Boston, a small group of passengers awake to find that everyone on board, including the flight's own very pilots, have mysteriously vanished. After introducing themselves to one another, and rerouting the aircraft to a new destination, they land in a deserted airport in an attempt to discover the meaning behind why the flight, and seemingly the entire world, is now suddenly desolate.


Three hours. This movie took me THREE HOURS to finish. Mind you, this isn't the fault of the actual quality of The Langoliers, since this adaptation of the Stephen King novella of the same name was originally a miniseries that aired on ABC back in 1995, so I should have expected it to drag for the most part. But my goodness, this does indeed drag quite a bit. During my review of Carrie yesterday, I discussed about how Brian De Palma and company cut out a lot of the fluff from the source material and made a very good product that won nearly universal acclaim. When it comes to this however, well, I'd implore you to read on.


Admittedly, The Langoliers does do a fairly good job at keeping your attention, despite a story that isn't exactly stimulating by any means. I'd attribute that the performances of Dean Stockwell and Bronson Pinchot more than anything else. In another life, I think Stockwell could have played or voiced a fairly fun version of DC Comics' The Question, given his character's penchant for deduction and borderline paranoid delusions and theories. True, a large portion of those do end up coming true, but I digress. Pinchot is another case entirely though. I suspect he seemed to know that he was cast in a made-for-TV miniseries, as he is playing this as over the top as he possibly could, and in the end, he steals nearly every scene that he is in. Hell, even WITH the ridiculous running time this "film" has, he may be enough of a reason for a viewing (example below).

The characters are supposed to be what you take away from this film, be they good or bad, and what most people remember besides Pinchot's disturbed Craig Toomey (whose own tortured psyche was like a dumbed down version of Henry Bowers from It meets Carrie White), is the character of Dinah, played by Kate Maberly. There is no way to not sound like a bully when talking about child actors, so I'll just have to just come out and say it: she is god damn awful here. The only credible thing I can give to her is that she has a good scream. The revelation of her having a special "gift" to make up for her being blind (or is it BECAUSE she is so?) felt like a subplot to another work King was working on that he couldn't quite finish, so he just crowbarred it in here. If he was trying to pay homage to a secret love of Daredevil, this may have worked, but it just seemed ridiculously silly. Others are given a decent amount of time for us to know them, such as British guy, black guy, nerdy guy, and pretty white girl. It almost feels like a Stephen King version of the Breakfast Club, except nowhere near as interesting.


And that brings me to the inevitable final hour of The Langoliers. I suppose that I should expect these type of things given my recent revisit with the 1990 adaptation of It and the ridiculously terrible ending that gave the audience, but there isn't a doubt in my mind that this trumps it six ways from Sunday. I'm not going to spoil it unless you directly ask me, but let's just say that it involves horrendous CGI, Bronson Pinchot screaming horribly, a final thirty minutes that drag on for what feels like an extra hour, and a fairly nice puke-worthy freeze frame shot. From what I gather, they were taking literally every detail from the novella and putting it in this work, but after the revelation of what caused this catastrophe, you just kind of sit around wondering "so can we end this already?" Alas, it doesn't, which brings about that aforementioned final thirty minutes. I expect a little better out of director Tom Holland (Child's Play, Fright Night), but you're also working with a much smaller budget than you would have for cinema and a fairly bland cast. Maybe down the road a "re-imagining" wouldn't hurt. But for now? A recommendation isn't going to come my way unless you're a diehard Stephen King completist.



Tomorrow, Stephen King takes us back in the air with THE NIGHT FLIER!

Unseen Terror 2013: Day 2

The product of a fundamentalist household, shy & quiet Carrie White discovers that she may nest telekinetic powers. While researching these suspicions, she is soon asked to the prom by a fellow classmate. Initially reluctant and suspicious of trickery, she agrees. What follows, however, is a night that nobody at Carrie's school of Bates High will ever forget...should they live to tell about it.


Holy jumped up jesus, had I never really seen Carrie until this year? Seriously? Well, yes, I never had. I am also currently in the process of reading the novel of the same name, which I hope to finish by the end of the month if I'm lucky. I would have been finished sooner had I not been occupied with finalizing this very list and with, again, dealing with hospital bills. If you happen to have eight thousand dollars to spare, you will be my best friend until the day that I die. And that is a promise.

Unlike Ms. Carrie White though, who seems to have no friends whatsoever (save for one or two highly debatable ones), and is one of the more fascinating and tragic figures of horror cinema. I can see why Sissy Spacek has become so synonymous with the title character. She may not have the look of Ms. White down (according to the novel, she's a bit more slovenly and chunky), but she has absolutely nailed the characteristics and personality. She's naive, stupidly earnest, likable, and creepy when the time is right. I wish I could say the same for her mother, played by the devilish Piper Laurie. She's a complete psychopath for most of her screen time, and her character is the first in many of Stephen King's long obsession and hatred for all things religious-related. I always have to blame one Doug Walker for ruining/enhancing my love for Mr. King by introducing the Stephen King Drinking Game, though admittedly that may only work for tales such as It and the like. But yes, Laurie is great as Carrie's mother, reciting bible verses in an attempt to keep her daughter as clean and pure as possible, striking her down, throwing water on her. You know, the usual fun stuff.


I would argue that Carrie also really helped make director Brian De Palma into a decently well known somebody, as the guy had a handful of well received pictures prior to the release of this King adaptation, but I doubt he would have been able to make a film like Scarface years later had this film been a critical or financial failure. Even more shocking considering that the original novel that this was based upon was thrown out by Stephen King himself, but urged to be finished by his wife. Truth be told, the chemistry and direction he's able to get out of everyone here is just fantastic, and I'm disappointed that Spacek herself didn't win the Academy Award she was nominated for here. Pino Donaggio's score deserves some sort of extra praise as well. I recall liking his work on last year's Unseen Terror entry, the rather well done Don't Look Now, and wish this very talented man had more work on his resume outside of a few select works. The violin, when utilized properly, is just as effective as a piano could ever be.


As it stands, I'd place Brian De Palma's adaptation of Carrie in the top five of best adaptations of a Stephen King novel to date, up there with films like Stand By Me. It cuts out a lot of the fluff I've been trudging through in the novel so far that feels wholly unnecessary and just cuts to the chase, leaving you with a largely more satisfying product and never forgetting to develop the characters into interesting people. Even if you know the whole concept and infamous conclusion to Carrie, but have never seen any version of the story, go watch this. It really is a great film. I'm curious as to how the upcoming remake with Chloe Moretz and Julianne Moore will turn out, as this version is forever fresh in the minds of the horror public, and even the public at large. They will have very big shoes to fill, despite their instantly recognizable names and attachment to a respectable director as well (Kimberly Peirce of Boys Don't Cry fame). Perhaps you'll see a review pop up sometime this month?



Come back tomorrow as we'll fly in for another Stephen King work with THE LANGOLIERS!

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.