Unseen Terror 2024: King of the Castle Rock (Days 16 & 17)

 

Riding the Bullet is based on one of Stephen King’s lesser-known works, and it was released as the author’s first “online only” publication, available exclusively as an e-book for the low price of $2.50. Thankfully those who don’t wish to stare at a bright screen all day were able to read the novel in a full two years when it was included in his “Everything’s Eventual” collection. It’s one of two stories featured in that release that made its way to the big screen (the other being 2007’s 1408, which I think I’ve seen?). The story is set in the late 60s with a young man (Jonathan Jackson of soap opera mainstay General Hospital) hitchhiking his way to a hospital to see his dying mother, only to be picked up by an eccentric, almost otherworldly figure (David Arquette of Scream fame and former WCW world champion). For most of its running time, Riding the Bullet is edited in such a way that it legitimately started giving me a headache. The amount of cutaway and/or flashback sequences makes you wonder if you’ve accidentally been sucked into a Seth MacFarlane program. I’m also starting to realize that despite my respect for director Mick Garris and his appreciation for horror history and the art of the genre itself, he has a WILDLY inconsistent body of work (at least when he’s sitting in the big chair). I appreciate the little nod to Christine though with the appearances of the infamous Plymouth Fury car. I don’t believe that was present in the source material, but it’s still a cute wink to the audience. It takes about 50 minutes for the flick to get remotely interesting, but that’s only because we finally to get see Arquette pop up as our real antagonist. His wonderfully weird performance alone makes me want to put this into the “tossup” category, because prior to his introduction, it’s just a very mediocre flick.

 

At the end of the day, that’s what Riding the Bullet is: an average, if not slightly dull Stephen King adaptation of a book that nobody seems to talk about anymore. It’s miles ahead of efforts such as Dreamcatcher or The Langoliers, but it’s nowhere near as solid as previously reviewed entries like Gerald’s Game or The Dead Zone. If you’ve got ninety minutes to kill, you could find worse ways to spend your time.

 

Alright, let’s wrap up this round of Stephen King works with…..oh no.

 

 

I’m never going to escape this franchise, am I?

 

If you recall, for last year’s Unseen Terror marathon, I delved into the world of “He Who Walks Behind the Rows” (a.k.a. the Children of the Corn series). In layman’s terms, I truly believe it is the very worst horror movie franchise out there, and that’s because I don’t think I’ve ever seen a single good film during its 40-year-long run (The Final Sacrifice is dumb fun, but that’s a faint compliment). I managed to avoid the 2009 “SyFy Channel premiere” remake from 2009 because it seemed almost impossible to find unless you had a region-free Blu-Ray player and an exorbitant amount of money to spend. Crisis (temporarily) averted. Unfortunately, I discovered that some poor soul made the mistake of uploading this to YouTube of all places less than a year ago, so I guess I MUST finally finish this franchise before it finishes me.

 

You should know the basis for Children of the Corn at this point, so I’m not going over the synopsis again. I will say that from a storyline standpoint, this is the most faithful to Stephen King’s original short story (save for Disciples of the Crow from 1983, but that’s considered a short film). That, however, is also its biggest weakness because oh dear lord these are THE most unlikeable protagonists I’ve seen in this entire franchise. When this young couple aren’t spending time bickering with one another, they’re constantly reminding the audience that the husband used to be in the marines or they’re even smacking the wife. While I’m not a screenwriter, I don’t think the series has ever set out to make you root more for the evil kids than anyone intended to be a hero. This is incompetence at its very finest. It doesn’t help that the lead performers (David Anders of iZombie fame and Kandyse McClure from Battlestar Galactica) just don’t seem to vibe well with each other. Did I mention the NAGGING and bickering by the way? Yeah? Well, that’s too bad because it drags this movie down into a hole that it can’t get out of. Also, making fun of someone for serving in Vietnam and likely having PTSD is just fucking gross, especially when the person doing the bullying is supposed to be someone you’re rooting for. There’s also a really mortifying scene involving the members of the congregation watching teenagers fornicate in front of everyone. How classy, how necessary. Ick.

 

2009’s Corn remake sports a sepia tone all throughout its running time that is intended to make this feel creepy, but just makes it look cheap and gaudy. Speaking of “creepy,” I almost miss the over-the-top performances of the original film’s Isaac and Malakai because the new cast of youngins’ just aren’t very good. I hate criticizing the acting of kids, but I feel like everyone looks either disinterested or is just so flat. It’s like the entire cast took their classes from the same guy from the “Shooter’s gonna choke” scene in Happy Gilmore. There’s a cheap bit of nostalgia bait by playing snippets of the original film’s theme, but all it’ll make the audience want to do is revisit that picture instead. I mean, that original film is awful too, but at least it’s memorable.

 

It's very rare for me to genuinely hate a movie when I watch it for this marathon, but I LOATHED nearly every second of 2009’s Children of the Corn. For all the annoyance and anger that came to the surface, there was a moment of respite seeing the annoying wife get blown up in a car (though her corpse is shown later to be in fairly decent-looking condition after she’s crucified on corn stalks). Other than that? It’s pure torture from beginning to end. Fuck this movie, fuck this franchise, fuck the people involved (seriously, how did Vamp screenwriter Donald P. Borchers find himself writing and directing this?), and fuck YouTube for not taking it down immediately. But on the plus side? I’m done with it all now. There are no more movies to watch. No more in development (that I know of). Stephen King has yet to revisit the fictional town of Gatlin, Nebraska. It’s over.

 

Finally.

 

I’m free.

Unseen Terror 2023: Destroy the King's Crops (Days 20-23)

Work sucks. Sorry y'all.

I feel like I owe whoever reads these posts an apology: despite my (not actual) best efforts, I will NOT be able to finish the entire Children of the Corn franchise this year. As it turns out, there seems to be some unseen forces at work because the second adaptation (if we're talking about full-length films) of Stephen King's short story, which premiered on the SyFy Channel back in 2009, is unavailable to stream ANYWHERE. Hell, even the reliable archive.org doesn't seem to have any link to the darn thing. The only way to obtain a physical copy is to purchase a Region 2 Blu-Ray...for SIXTY DOLLARS. I'm unsure as to how much money went into making the picture itself but given the downward spiral of this godawful franchise, I'd bet money that you make your own Children of the Corn film for that same amount. So, perhaps another day.

Nah, probably not. Anyways, let's move on to....

.........Children of the Corn. The 2020 adaptation.

*sigh*

I did approach the newest entry in this exhaustingly long franchise (filmed in 2020 but delayed for three years thanks to various reasons and/or Covid-19) with an open mind. After all, this was being promoted as a soft reboot and you've got a decent writer/director this time around in the form of Kurt Wimmer. Wimmer's body of work is a fascinating one. He only has four directing credits to his name (his best film arguably being Equilibrium), but a LOT more when it comes to writing. Heck, just glancing at his Wikipedia page shows he has three remakes under his belt (Point Break, Total Recall, The Thomas Crown Affair), and even though those weren't all warmly received, there's always a chance this could be a hit.

Then again, sometimes there are just properties that are beyond help, and no matter what fancy coat of paint you try to use on Children of the Corn, it just seems destined to be a putrid mess. The plot of this is more akin to that of a pre-make (ala the 2011 version of The Thing) than a straight-up remake. The only things this feature shares with all preceding entries in this series are corn, creepy kids killing adults, and being set in Nebraska. Oddly enough, the film doesn't seem to offer much in the way of religious fanaticism this time around, and seemingly wants to focus on how small towns can sell out to bigger companies by receiving a crop subsidy. Or something like that. Though I'm open to new ideas, the manner in which this is executed is pretty laughable. The film seems intent on making the adults look like the evil ones this time around, so when the killings begin, suddenly you (and lead actress Elena Kampouris) are supposed to do an immediate 180 and side with them again. It's just kind of a mess.

I'll give credit where it is due though: in terms of casting, this features some folks who I hope will go on to star in bigger and better pictures. The aforementioned Kampouris has the makings of a good scream queen if she chooses to pursue it, and lead villainess Eden (Kate Moyer) is the best baddie we've had in these movies since The Final Sacrifice. Yes, she can occasionally chew the scenery, but she seems fully aware of what this is. Everyone else is fairly forgettable though, and that's the worst thing you can be in a bad Children of the Corn flick. For what is unforgettable (and unforgivable) this time around is the laughably bad CGI and decision to finally give us a "real" look at He Who Walks Behind the Rows. Without going into too many spoilers, I'll just assume that someone in the creative department snuck into 'B' movie company the Asylum's offices late at night and stole their concept art for "that one tree guy from Marvel but made of stalks." Bafflingly terrible, and I can't imagine how much worse it looked on a big screen when it received a very brief theatrical run this year (the first entry to go to cinemas since Part II).

My viewings of films released during this year have been very limited, but I'll go on record in saying that I doubt I'll see a worse flick than this in the horror genre for 2023. It isn't the very worst Children of the Corn picture, but even by its lower-than-low standards it's VERY bad. Currently, it's streaming as an "exclusive" for Shudder, but please watch literally anything else on there. They're very nice people over there with an excellent catalog of movies to choose from, but not everything warrants a watch.

Remember when I briefly alluded to the 2009 Children of the Corn film being (technically) the second FULL-LENGTH adaptation of King's short story? Well, that's because I made the very strange discovery while assembling this year's list that there was a short film that preceded 1984's Children of the Corn by a whole year, but due to the name rights being snatched up so soon, wasn't legally allowed to call itself that. 1983's Disciples of the Crow is a fairly straightforward handling of the source material, though with a microbudget and some slight alterations. For example, this is set in Oklahoma rather than Nebraska, and the characters of Malachai and Isaac are nowhere to be found. The lead characters are also far more irritating, which if memory serves me correctly was also the case in King's short story. Points for authenticity?

Anyways, it runs for about twenty minutes and isn't that bad. Not required viewing, but it's up on YouTube for those who are curious.

And since we're speaking of YouTube...

Three years ago, I watched and reviewed the rather infamous fan favorite film Phallus in Wonderland, starring everyone's most feared and beloved interplanetary conquerors GWAR. The Antarctica-based madmen are truly one of a kind in the world of musical entertainment, and it's easy to forget just how much stuff they've delved into besides releasing full-length albums and murdering every living being with a Wikipedia page. For example, I wasn't aware that there wasn't just one picture Gwar produced and starred in, but several. Skulhedface was released around the same time that Gwar's fourth album hit the shelves (the brilliantly titled "This Toilet Earth") and was reportedly considered for a theatrical release. However, the MPAA deemed that it could never be released as anything other than NC-17 and since it was far too graphic to edit down to an 'R' rated film, it just went straight to VHS instead.

The plot is...well, how do you go into anything Gwar-related without making yourself giggle just a bit when typing it out? Our beloved "Scumdogs" are hosting a telethon wherein people are being offed and fed to appease the creature known as the "World Maggot." If they offer enough sacrifices to the beast, there is a chance that Gwar would finally be able to leave this godforsaken dumpster fire of a planet. Elsewhere, an evil media corporation known as "GlomCo" has taken notice of these events and decide to bribe Gwar's manager (Sleazy P. Martini) into selling the group out to make Saturday morning cartoons. To nobody's surprise, this doesn't go well, and soon the band comes face to face with a dastardly being known simply as Skulhedface.

Still with me?

Look, this is exactly what you think it is. It's debaucherous, immature, gross, and loud. So, in other words, if you're a fan of Gwar (like me) you'll be quite content for the entirety of its hour-long running time. Also, getting Sebastian Bach of Skid Row and Jello Biafra of The Dead Kennedys for small parts is brilliant casting. It's currently streaming on YouTube.

Thought we were done with Stephen King, eh? Well, it turns out I had completely forgotten that 2017's Gerald's Game had been sitting in my Netflix queue for several years with no reason as to why it never left. Hell, damn near everyone and their mother had been discussing it and I just kept replying with stuff along the lines of "yeah, I'll get to eventually." Well, what better time than after I've been beaten over the head with cornstalks and soaked with alien fluids?

...erm, anyway.

The plot for Gerald's Game is centered on married couple Jessie and Gerald (played by Carla Gugino and Bruce Greenwood respectively), who rent an isolated lake house for a romantic getaway. In an attempt at spicing things up in their love life, Jessie agrees to take part in some "kinky" roleplaying, which leaves her handcuffed to the bedposts. Initially Jessie plays along with her husband's idea, but then grows uncomfortable with this "fantasy" that Gerald seems to have, and after a heated argument, her husband suddenly drops dead from a heart attack. Trapped to two bedposts and with seemingly no way to free herself, Jessie has to devise a way to escape all while battling not just dehydration, but inner demons and hidden trauma.

Like a lot of King's best works, Gerald's Game can take something so simple (though not without potential of terrible consequences) and make it the most nightmarish scenario possible. Being stuck in an area and environment that she's unfamiliar with (and which is surprisingly claustrophobic), you truly feel scared for Jessie. I've long been a champion of Carla Gugino (Sin City, Spy Kids, The Haunting of Hill House) as an incredibly underrated actress, and she might be giving the performance of her life here. Bruce Greenwood (Thirteen Days, Star Trek) also plays an equally good part of what makes this work so well, delivering a slimier performance than expected considering that the "real" Gerald (not a spoiler!) dies quite early in the film. Truth be told, there isn't a single bad performance in here whatsoever, but it really is Gugino's time to shine here, and she knocks it out of the damn stadium. Give the woman her damn flowers. Perhaps if there was one complaint I have about Gerald's Game, it would be the very odd and jarring final ten minutes or so, which unfortunately adds fuel to the fire of King's critics who say that he can't quite write a proper ending without something preposterous occurring. I can't say that I disagree with that statement either, and the more I thought about it, the more it does hurt this film's potential as a future "re-watch."

The final few minutes aside, Gerald's Game is absolutely stellar. Great acting, great tension, and a very faithful adaptation of a very underrated (and often thought unfilmable) book. As stated above, it's streaming as a Netflix exclusive.

Did I mention that it's also the first film this month to make me actively wince and elicit a genuine "oh good lord no?" 

No? Well, it did.

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: Rotting Crops (Days 9-10)

 *sigh*

I didn't fully anticipate returning to this fucking franchise so soon, but I'm going to be rather busy over the next couple of days. Thus, these have been bumped up in the watching order for the marathon. Seeing as how these films aren't exactly setting the world on fire, it's easier to just get these out of the way now rather than later.

Regarding the seventh entry in this franchise, Children of the Corn: Revelation's core plot is nearly identical to that of the previous picture. Swap out a missing mother for a missing grandmother, place a majority of the film inside of a dingy apartment building, and reduce the budget to something that looks like it would be easier to make on an iPhone.........an ORIGINAL iPhone. On the plus side, there is a scene wherein our heroine (who is thankfully nowhere near as idiotic as Part 6's was) runs into two of the atypical, mute creepy children at a convenience store and shows them how to play The House of the Dead. Why you'd be encouraging kids who already have murderous looks on their faces and who never speak to learn how to hold and wield weapons properly is beyond me, but it did make me nostalgic for that Arcade classic. Heck, watching a playthrough of that video game on YouTube would likely produce more excitement than the entirety of this flick. Also, we have Michael Ironside popping in for approximately five minutes as a priest and his presence is always appreciated (he's also the best Darkseid across all media depictions of the fictional villain. Do not argue with this).

I suspect that the "revelation" in Children of the Corn: Revelation is that apparently this is the first film in the franchise to feature nudity but seeing as how I'm not a prepubescent kid anymore, this ultimately means nothing in the long run. Oddly enough, the actress who bares most of everything (Crystal Lowe) has a weird connection to yesterday's entry: both her and Carrie (2002) co-star Chelan Simmons played ditzy best friends in 2006's Final Destination 3 and are both burned alive in tanning beds. Far from a perfect flick, but infinitely more watchable and competent than this pile of garbage.

Children of the Corn: Revelation is bad, cheap-looking (we're talking PlayStation 1-levels of bad computer graphics/CGI) , and dull as shit. Heck, it doesn't even have an overly boisterous, adolescent preacher as is seemingly customary for this series until its third act, and even then, he's overdubbed beyond belief. It's junk. Let's move on.

Over ten years had passed since the release of the dismal Children of the Corn: Revelation and Dimension Films were close to losing the rights to the franchise. Therefore, Part 8 of the series (subtitled Genesis) was rushed into production and spat out from the depths of hell to torment any individual who has yet to consider self-immolation as a way to avoid covering these movies. They also released it under their "Dimension Extreme" line in hopes that it would garner further attention. Said line covered multiple genres, including animal-related horror (Rogue, Black Sheep), horror-comedies (Teeth, Feast II & III), absolute nightmare fuel (Inside), sex comedies starring actors who should have known better (Extreme Movie), and infamous misfires (DOA: Dead or Alive, Hellraiser: Revelations). I could be here all night recanting tales of how many of these studios employed this tactic around this time period, but suffice to say most of those flicks are either collectors' items now or buried somewhere in a Big Lots warehouse. This is all to say that the 8th entry in this franchise (save for a remake/new adaptation of the short story released on SyFy two years prior), despite featuring leads that seem to have decent chemistry, a smaller scale, and a mercifully short running time, is ultimately a waste.

Perhaps the greatest of sin of Genesis is how badly rushed it feels. If you were to tell me that this script was laying around Dimension's offices and it was picked out for a slight retooling, it'd be hard not to believe you. The same thing was prevalent with another Dimension-owned property: Hellraiser. A large chunk of that franchise's sequels were never originally written as Hellraiser films, but with a couple of tweaks here and there, they were dumped onto home video just so they wouldn't run the risk of losing the cenobites to someone who genuinely wanted to make a great movie again (I still haven't seen the 2022 update, though I imagine it can't be as catastrophically bad as Hellworld). Because of that, so little time is dedicated to what even makes the prior entries...well, I suppose I'd say "popular" with its fans. For starters, no kid preachers. Hell, this film barely features any children whatsoever. A majority of its running time is spent watching our heroes (a young couple who seek shelter after their car breaks down) argue with one another, with the late Billy Drago and Hostel's Barbara Nedeljakova chewing the scenery like it's fresh tobacco. Perhaps more baffling is the lack of actual cornfields to be found (unless you count the one seen in actress Kelen Coleman's dream). As lowbrow as this series can be, those are two staples of the series that have to be present. It's like having Jason Voorhees battling campers outside of Camp Crystal Lake or Freddy Krueger without the sweater and dream sequences.

God help me I just lectured these filmmakers about how they're doing the Children of the Corn series incorrectly.

Not much else to say. I'm fairly disappointed in myself that this is the final film I've watched as a 37-year old sad sack who spends too much time on the internet (though it is somewhat fitting). Let's hope better things are on the horizon for this marathon and for the next 365 days in general.

Unseen Terror 2023: Dirtier Pillows (Day 8)

 

While assembling this year's list, I was at a bit of a crossroads when it came to including the necessary Stephen King pick. Yes, I did cover the first six Children of the Corn flicks, but only one of those is an actual adaptation of printed material. Ultimately, I landed on a film that I keep forgetting exists: 2002's made-for-TV adaptation of Carrie. His first full novel was previously turned into a full-length feature courtesy of famed director Brian De Palma, but as is the usual case with the Maine mad man, he disliked the movie. Nearly 30 years later, the tragic story of tormented, bullied, and (eventually) murderous Carrie White would come to life again thanks to writer Bryan Fuller and director David Carson, whose works on television programs (mostly Star Trek-related) were met with mostly praise.

Unfortunately, 2002's Carrie is a bizarre misfire and is arguably a little worse than the next adaptation that would follow eleven years later (previously reviewed here). This is mostly because it both equally tries too hard to stay faithful to its source material and also takes the kind of risks that will end up pleasing nobody in the end. Oddly enough, there are aspects in this version that never made their way into either of the other adaptations. We have the police interviewing survivors of the infamous prom night massacre and Carrie summoning what seems to be small meteors while arguing with her mother (does this make her a contender for "Death Battle" on YouTube?), which were excluded from both the De Palma film and the Kimberly Peirce version starring Chloe Moretz. Faithfulness to the source material is always appreciated, but sometimes there is a reason small parts are excluded from theatrical interpretations: they don't translate well to film. Take another Stephen King project as an example: It. Whichever adaptation of that you prefer is fine, but there are scenes from that book that did not (and SHOULD not) make it into a film because they are either too goofy or just a little too gross.

Cast-wise though? It's perfectly acceptable. I'm a bit of an Angela Bettis fanboy going back to her time in the criminally underrated May, and despite her being nearly thirty at the time of filming, she still does a commendable job as our lead character (though she has been more vocal over the years about disliking the movie itself). There are a few other recognizable performers scattered throughout like Katharine Isabelle (Ginger Snaps, American Mary) and Emilie de Ravin (Lost, Once Upon a Time), but I'm sure the performer that will catch your attention the most is Patricia Clarkson (of The Untouchables and The Green Mile fame), who portrays Carrie's fanatical, abusive mother Margaret. She's also doing perfectly fine, but if I'm being brutally honest, nobody can touch Piper Laurie. The script seems intent on letting the viewer know that she's crazy solely because of hearing others talk about her, whereas in De Palma's adaptation, all one has to do is just look at her and observe even the smallest of mannerisms. Perhaps the biggest complaint about this motion picture comes from the utterly insane twist the filmmakers decided to come up with during the final ten minutes. Spoiler alert at the end of this review for those who care.

I just can't see any real reason to watch 2002's Carrie unless if you're say, the type that has to watch EVERYTHING with Stephen King's name attached to it. Sure, the 1976 feature is a little dated, but it feels timeless in terms of execution and the filmmaking process that went into it being completed and released. This is littered with some terribly dated dialogue, a final act that borders on insulting, and some VERY bad CGI. Plus, it's made-for-tv, so the bloodshed and kills aren't even impressive. It isn't timeless, but just a time capsule that's best left buried. If you still wish to seek out this shockingly long flick, it's currently streaming on Tubi, and there is a Blu-Ray from Scream! Factory out there to purchase (though it's a possibility it may be out of print).

Ah yeah, so that spoiler, eh? Well, when I discussed changes that will leave you scratching your head, how about this one? Carrie White, after killing hundreds, survives her mother's attempt at trying to kill her. Like in the novel and other adaptations, Margaret White dies, but unlike in the book, Carrie is then rescued by a surviving Sue Snell. They manage to fake Carrie's death and then drive away from town in an attempt to give Carrie a new start in life by moving to Florida. This would have supposedly led to a Carrie TV series where she would help others with telekinetic powers similar to hers. Not only is that just an utterly insane and moronic idea, but it turns the story of Carrie White from a horrifying tragedy into a poor man's version of assembling an X-Men team. Main star Angela Bettis, herself a rather large fan of the source material and the De Palma picture, admitted years later that she only signed onto this film in hopes that the aforementioned series would be made, because regardless of quality, she would have a steady flow of income while still focusing on independent cinema. It did not. Seriously, can someone please give this woman her flowers?

Unseen Terror 2023: Corn on the Crap (Days 4-5)

 To answer yesterday's question proposed towards the end of the reviews:

Children of the Corn IV: The Gathering (woop woop?) is a first in this series, as it shares no history or connections with prior installments in this franchise. This time, it focuses on a young woman returning to her small-town home in Grand Island, Nebraska to watch over her agoraphobic mother (genre veteran Karen Black). The kids all over town suddenly start getting sick and people have dreams of an adolescent preacher with a burned face harassing them and...man I'm tired of this already. Supposedly, there is a deleted scene on physical releases of the film which does allude to "He Who Walks Behind the Rows," but it was cut for reasons that I'm still uncertain of. Whether that scene remained intact or not, it is highly doubtful that it would have improved the quality of Part IV. I mean, when your movie opens on a goddamn dream sequence, you are usually asking for trouble. What's worse is how MANY are scattered throughout its entirety (one scene contains a nightmare within a nightmare). It's a scare tactic that drives me absolutely bonkers, and more often than not works only if your film steers more towards the comedic side of things. Funny this movie is not though.

Something I forgot to mention in my prior review for Urban Harvest was the (very) brief film debut of Charlize Theron. She's uncredited and in the film for approximately ten seconds or so, but it counts. The reason why I'm bringing that up this time around is because this also serves as a first for another respected actress: it's the first time that celebrated performer Naomi Watts receives top billing in a film. She is doing the best that she can to make this work, but unfortunately the bland script (seems to be a common problem with these sequels) just feels like a dumbed down version of A Nightmare on Elm Street mixed with elements from Village of the Damned. There is a small chance such a concept as that could have worked were people allowed time to tweak and rewrite some parts, but it just kind of crumbles underneath the weight of so many stupider elements.

This entry in the Children of the Corn series really wishes it could stand alongside with unfairly maligned "sequels" like Halloween III: Season of the Witch, but it just can't seem to do anything right. Yes, there are two good kills to be found (corn scythe through the head and bisection via hospital gurney), but it is such a slog to get through. If you pass by this on MAX, Hulu, or Amazon Prime Video, just keep on moving.

Don't stop on this one though. It's arguably just as foul as Part IV.

Unlike its predecessor, Children of the Corn V: Fields of Terror IS connected to the first three films, as a group of not-teenagers come across an eccentric small town and run afoul of a crazed little asshole (this time Adam Wylie of Picket Fences and Hey Arnold! fame) who worships He Whose Name I'm Tired of Typing Out. Weird shit and bad acting commence.

Oddly enough, this is the first sequel I've seen to date where I recognized WAY too many of the on-screen performers. We've got Alexis Arquette (Bride of Chucky, Pulp Fiction), Fred Williamson (Black Caesar, From Dusk till Dawn), David Carradine (Kung Fu, Kill Bill), and Kane Hodder (Friday the 13th Parts 7-10, Hatchet). There's also a more prominent actress that I'll address further down. Everyone is doing their best to pretend that they're not just teenagers, but likeable (spoilers: neither works). Fields of Terror is also the first Children of the Corn sequel released during the post-Scream slasher/horror revival that swept the nation, but it lacks any of the substance or fun that made even any of those movies so respected (I doubt you could have paid Kevin Williamson enough to write this). If Scream or I Know What You Did Last Summer were Nirvana and Soundgarden, this is Puddle of Mudd. Or Lifehouse.

Fun (albeit sad) fact about Children of the Corn V: Fields of Terror: this marks the film debut of yet another prolific actress (this time Eva Mendes), and she was so appalled by her performance in this that she hired an acting coach almost immediately afterwards. Say what you will about her choice in projects after this dropped, but even the smelliest of cinematic trash piles like The Spirit or Ghost Rider are FAR superior to this piece of junk. I can't really be terribly angry about her performance though, as every single character in this is either a douchebag, boring, or utterly moronic. Thankfully the film's running time is only about eighty minutes, so you don't have to spend an exorbitant amount of time with them.

I'm not sure what else I can say about these flicks. They're getting progressively stupider and duller. I'm kind of stunned that this was written and directed by Ethan Wiley, who also wrote & directed the superbly underrated House II: The Second Story (still waiting on a Dogapillar plush guys!). Just go seek that out instead and let this burn in the fields.

While we're still on the topic of surprisingly competent names being attached to these cinematic abortions, let's jump right into Children of the Corn 666: Isaac's Return. This time we're right back in Gatlin, as we follow young woman Hannah (played by Get Real's Natalie Ramsey) and her decision to go back to the town she was smuggled out of when she was an infant before the murders began. Despite her repeatedly running into unwelcoming individuals EVERYWHERE in this town, she still insists that she must find her birth mother. Soon, we see the return of Isaac from the very first Corn flick (played by a returning John Franklin), an embarrassing waste of Nancy Allen, and a whole lot of nonsense involving evil sheriffs, Stacy Keach, and cheap jump scares.

This was perhaps the most frustrating and boring of these films to date, as there are a multitude of things that could have been fixed in order to make this mildly watchable. For starters, please don't make your main character this idiotic. I know that it's an unspoken rule of horror cinema that your protagonist will make the occasional baffling decision, but from the very beginning, the character of Hannah is irrationally stupid and ignores literally EVERY warning sign before her (this includes every single person she comes into contact with being either a creep or crazed). I'm fairly certain that the cast of Scary Movie were more intelligent. As for her insistence of wanting to desperately discover who her mom was or what she did? Well, I would like to propose that both Ancestry.com and Google Search were founded prior to the canonical events in this. Plus, the Gatlin murders and whatnot are still out there for the world to read about. Christ on a kernel.

Perhaps the biggest waste of potential in this comes from what would most likely catch the attention of experienced genre fans: the return of Isaac, who despite being enveloped by the same stuff that messed up William Hurt during the end of Altered States, was apparently in a coma after the events in Part 1. John Franklin was debatably the best part of the first Children of the Corn, and he also co-writes the script for Part 6. Unfortunately, he is barely utilized during its short running time (this is one of those cases where I would've welcomed a performer inserting themselves into the movie as often as they could) and the inclusion of the character ultimately just adds to the pointless nature of the whole shebang. It's a similar problem I had with 2018's The Predator, wherein they introduce a character that is supposed to be the offspring of Gary Busey's character from Predator 2 (he's even played by Jake, Gary's actual son). It adds nothing to the film. Also, there's the sudden revelation that Isaac has a child now. Admittedly, I know very little about what can be done with a body while its comatose, but I'm fairly certain that.... hold up, wasn't he still a kid when?...And his own child is a teenager now? I'm so perplexed and angry and grossed out. Just.....no. No. No. No. No.

*sigh* Okay, I'm vetoing the decision to finish this series (at least for now). These are starting to kill whatever brain cells I have left.

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 2020: Days 13-15

My apologies. This has been one hell of a stressful week, so I've been behind a bit on writing reviews this time around. If I could receive some tips from people about potentially switching over to do video reviews from now on, I may just do that for future entries.

Anyway, it's pretty late where I am so let's just get these over with.

 

When Thirteen Ghosts (a.k.a. Thir13en Ghosts) was released in theaters, I distinctly remembering just rolling my eyes at the trailer and outright dismissing it. Similar views were shared by seemingly every film critic across the country, because god DAMN did this thing get torn to shreds worse than even the most idiotic of films to come from the horror genre. Over time it seems as though the movie has garnered a bit of a cult following, and a lot of modern horror critics champion the flick for being what amounts to essentially a bloody funhouse ride (it IS a loose remake of a William Castle work after all). And you know what? They're absolutely right, and I'm willing to eat a big bowl of crow in regards to my initial, unfair disdain for a picture that I hadn't even bothered to sit down and watch.

Thirteen Ghosts' fairly basic concept revolves around Arthur (Tony Shalhoub) inheriting a rather large fortune (and most importantly a house) from his deceased uncle. When he, his kids, and their nanny decide to settle in at the new place, they soon discover that it is infested with a number of malevolent spirits. They're joined by a psychic (Matthew Lillard) with connections to Arthur's uncle, and they begin to look for a way to escape the wrath of these violent souls. I gotta tell you right off the bat: the story is pretty damn dumb and very predictable if you've ever watched even one paranormal horror film. The acting is also insanely over the top, with Lillard and antagonist F. Murray Abraham competing to see who can chew the scenery better (though their on screen interactions are sadly kept to a minimum). Lillard in particular seems like he is trying to channel his best Nicholas Cage and Aliens-era Bill Paxton. Without him, I don't know if the film would be nearly as enjoyable as it is. Unfortunately, a lot of the other cast members are just kind of.....there. Shalhoub is doing a perfectly fine job, but his daughter (played by American Pie's Shannon Elizabeth) feels like an afterthought and ultimately turns into nothing more than a damsel in distress. I'll give props where they're due though: the titular ghosts themselves make for some unique-looking monsters.

Far from a masterpiece, but definitely nowhere near the turd that would make Roger Ebert's "Most Hated" list just four years after its release, Thir13en Ghosts is worth a quick watch if you are searching for some entertaining early-2000s schlock. Heck Lillard's performance alone is worth the rental price!

My familiarity with 1982's Madman came from only ever seeing its poster at both video stores and assorted message boards. It's a simple, yet effective design that stands out even amongst the sea of seemingly endless slasher movies that would be dumped into theaters during the decade of excess that everyone loves to romanticize these days.

I wish I could say that I liked the actual finished product itself though. As far as expectations for this year's Unseen Terror marathon go, this is the first real disappointment I've experienced (those later Texas Chainsaw movies don't count because I had no expectations for them). Madman boasts a recognizable lead performer in the form of Gaylen Ross of Dawn of the Dead and Creepshow fame (albeit under a different name), but outside of her presence and a couple of admittedly nasty kills, it's a very standard "summer camp killer" motion picture. There are far too many moments where it just slows to a crawl, and while I'm normally content with slow burns in the realm of horror, this was starting to put me to sleep and make me wish that I was watching The Burning instead.

In fact, unless you're a slasher completist, go do that instead before wasting your time with this one.

I was fully prepared to review the yearly episode of Treehouse of Horror from The Simpsons, until I realized that I had actually jumped the gun a bit: that doesn't air until this upcoming Sunday. Much to my surprise, I discovered that I never got around to viewing LAST YEAR'S episode though, so the day was saved. And it's....fine. If you know me, I've never been shy with expressing my adoration for Matt Groening's most famous creation(s), though after the tenth or eleventh season, my interest starts to wane. Despite the dip in writing quality and the show's insistency that it be even more "pop culture friendly" these days (seriously, an ENTIRE episode based around Lady Gaga coming to Springfield?), these anthology episodes are something that I try my damnedest to stick with. The episode opens with a surprisingly funny parody of The Omen that also reminds us that this is the 666th episode of The Simpsons. Best. Coincidence. Ever? The first full segment is a Stranger Things parody that centers around Milhouse disappearing and feels like more of an excuse to shit on the character's repeated attempts to win Lisa's heart. It does have an amusing ending gag though. The second story is essentially what would happen if Homer died, went to heaven, was sent back to Earth due to a botched deal with Google, but couldn't return in his own body. It provides a few chuckles here and there, but save for seeing how many bodies Homer can "take over," it's probably the weakest of the lot. The third and final piece of last year's Treehouse of Horror is a parody of The Shape of Water with Selma Bouvier falling in love with a captive Kang. It's fairly cute with an ending that recalls one of Futurama's more bizarre plot twists and episodes, but something struck me as being very depressing while watching it (plus the aforementioned opening): Julie Kavner really needs to just settle down and retire. She sounds like she can barely pull off ANY of these voices anymore, and seeing as how she recently turn 70, I think she's earned a right to just count her money and let them audition a new Marge. I know that might sound blasphemous, but at this point I don't really care. Anyway, this episode as a whole is perfectly cromulent.

That brings us to day fifteen's Arc de Triomphe: the absolutely batshit insane Tobe Hooper-directed creation known as The Mangler. I have VERY specific memories of this Stephen King adaptation: while I never saw the film in its entirety as a kid, I do recall seeing its opening sequence and being absolutely flabbergasted at the sight of a middle-aged woman being pulled into a giant laundry press and being turned into a bloody pile of mangled (hardy har har) flesh. Anyway, after that very memorable moment, we're introduced to office John Hunton (portrayed by a mushmouthed Ted Levine of The Silence of the Lambs fame) who is naturally disgusted by the news of this very unusual death. He reconvenes with his brother-in-law Mark, who just so happens to be an expert demonologist and after several more mishaps around the area involving large appliances and gruesome deaths that are all linked to the blood covered apparatus, is convinced that the press is possessed by an unknown entity.

In the traditional sense of the word, The Mangler is not a good movie. The acting is comically over the top, the concept ludicrous, and the scares mostly muddled in trying to gross you out more than genuinely scare you. It is also insanely fun, which is no doubt due to whoever was in charge of casting. Levine getting the chance to portray a hero for once in his career must not have settled well with him, because he still acts a bit squirrely like he did in the film that made him famous years before this was released. He has nothing on the immortal Robert Englund however, who is designed to look (and seemingly act) like he belongs in a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles comic or television series. Every moment that he appears on screen, the world of The Mangler just gets better and better. Stephen King's original short story that this is loosely based on was a largely humorless one, but with how silly and joyous the final product is here, you might have trouble believing that the two are even affiliated with one another.

I've seen The Mangler get annihilated by some horror historians over the past couple of decades and that makes me very sad. If you can't have the same type of fun with a gloriously wacky, violent, and unusually charming flick that I had, I feel a little sad for you. Much like Thir13en Ghosts, it most certainly won't go down as a classic in any field, but it is provides you with an undeniably entertaining time.

Unseen Terror 2020: Day 10-12

It wouldn't be my silly horror marathon without the occasional hiccup, would it? Sometimes I think that switching over to video reviews is a much better alternative, but I lack the funds to make that happen. Anyway, due to some birthday commitments (which included my own), here are some quick thoughts about the last three pictures I watched over the course of this weekend.

It was on the tenth day of this month that I could declare that I am mercifully done with the Texas Chainsaw Massacre franchise, and after watching the SECOND attempt at a prequel story in this series, I pray to whatever deity will listen that ideas for resurrecting the Sawyer family and their kin remain dormant for a lengthy amount of time. Leatherface is set several years before the events of the original picture and tells the story of how the titular character came to be who he is. There's a story involving him being sent to a mental asylum and escaping with a group of crazies and.....honestly, I can't muster the energy to even give this movie the thorough trashing that it deserves. Though the kills are appropriately nasty and Lili Taylor gives a decent performance as Verna Sawyer, the rest of this movie is just putrid, forced, or downright idiotic. I was aghast when I saw that this came from the same people who made the horrifying and unsettling Inside, which is one of the most uncomfortable and cruel flicks that I've ever seen come from overseas. I'm torn between who I think has the the worse luck when it comes to lousy sequels or retreads: The Texas Chainsaw Massacre or Hellraiser. At this point, this series doesn't need someone to bring integrity back to the franchise: it needs a pillow over the face.

On the plus side, it IS marginally better than Texas Chainsaw 3-D.

1985's Creature was a film that had been on my radar for much longer than I realized. I do like me some Peter Benchley, plus the addition of Craig T. Nelson and Kim Cattrall as lead performers only added to my excite-...wait, this isn't THAT Creature? This is the one directed by the man who gave us Feardotcom? And from the writer of Supernova?

Well then. Creature (also known as Titan Find) is essentially what would happen if you made Alien, splashed in some elements from The Thing, and slashed its budget significantly while also forgetting how to keep your audience interested. I'd love to say that the presence of noted German legend Klaus Kinski lifts this film up even a smidge, but he's barely in the picture as it is and feels incredibly subdued when he does appear on screen. Come to think of it, I can't really come up with anything positive to say about this one. It's shockingly boring, poorly lit, and cheap-looking in the wrong kind of way. You'd be better off watching other Alien "ripoffs" like Contamination or even last year's ridiculously dumb Shocking Dark.

I feel as though whatever the twelfth day brings, I desperately need my mood lifted.

 

Okay, I'm (technically) cheating here. I first saw portions of Cat's Eye as a kid and eventually made my way to watching the film in its entirety during my teenage years. It has been quite a while since I did that though, and through the magic of Plex I was able to revisit this wonderful anthology from the year of my birth. I won't mince words: Cat's Eye holds a very special place in my heart. It was one of my earliest introductions to the world of Stephen King, showed me how great practical effects and green screen can be when in the right hands, and most importantly it solidified my love for tabby cats. Two of the stories found here are based off of previously-published King short stories ("Quitters Inc." comes from Night Shift, "The Ledge" from Penthouse magazine and also Night Shift), with the third ("General") being a wholly original one penned for the flick by the Maine madman himself. Other than every segment involving the same cat in some sort of capacity, the connecting theme throughout all of these appears to be the fear of losing your loved ones. 

"Quitters Inc." revolves around James Woods joining a strange organization that will seemingly cure him of his nicotine addiction, though if he strays from this path even once, they promise that there will be consequences involving his family. I did not remember this one being as goofy as it is, but Woods' near-constant neurotic performance makes this a very entertaining thirty-or-so minutes. Hell it could have gone on for another ten and I still would have been perfectly content. "The Ledge" is eerily similar to "Something to Tide You Over" from Creepshow; Robert Hays plays a man who is forced to circle a VERY narrow exterior of a tall building by the husband of the woman he's been having an affair with. Even those who don't share the same fear of heights that some of my own friends do will likely feel a little queasy, which can be attributed to some great camerawork and trickery. "General" however, is perhaps the most notorious and well-liked story in Cat's Eye. The aforementioned cat, who had acted as more of a background player prior to this while also avoiding other King creations such as Cujo and Christine (not kidding!), finds himself in the home of young Drew Barrymore and runs afoul of her distrustful mother. Because of her apprehension and insistence that he remain an outdoor cat, the feline is initially unable to protect the girl from a benevolent troll who enters her room with the intention of stealing her breath. Eventually the two creatures meet and we bear witness to a wonderful fight which showcases how criminally underrated this film's effects are. I feel as though I've lost count with how many times I've watched this particular segment over the decades, but it never fails to put the biggest smile on my face. It also has a great vocal performance from Frank Welker as the tiny terror whom only Barrymore is convinced exists.

Like I did with the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre, I don't think there's much else that I can add when it comes to heaping praise on Cat's Eye. It's a truly wonderful little movie and was the perfect piece to help erase the memory of the past few flicks from my mind. Go watch it and give your pussy some loving while you're at it.

.................note to self: don't type that again.