Unseen Terror 2024: Post-Mortem Thoughts & Rejects

Ah, it sure was nice to take a small break after dealing with this year’s marathon.......wish I had gone into a full-blown hibernation though after these past couple of days though. Ugh. If I can be perfectly honest, 2024’s Unseen Terror was kind of a pain to put together for a myriad of reasons. I almost scrapped the entire thing because of stress and depression (as well as some condescension from outside forces. I’m not getting into that for personal reasons). I’ve always done this for fun, and if ever there were a time to be noticed by more “noteworthy” publications or anyone outside of people from my personal life, it would have been before the rise of A.I., which I do feel is unfortunately slowly creeping its way into the creative process for both writers and content creators (as much as I enjoyed Late Night with the Devil, the stink of the filmmakers using A.I. will forever tarnish it). I am considering hopping over to the likes of say, TikTok or YouTube or even just promoting Letterboxd (where I’m more active anyway) for future reviews. Hell, I even just signed up for Bluesky the other day (a.k.a. the new alternative to twitter that ISN'T owned by a giant man-child who makes ugly vehicles that frequently catch fire). When it comes to the former two, I’d need better equipment or a phone that isn’t five years old and doesn’t overheat when you try to do anything outside of making a simple phone call. But I digress.

 

Enough of that though, let's talk about the movies. If I had to summarize this year's listing and overall thoughts it would be "fun, but messy." I'd say that Manhunter, Terrifier 3, Eyes of Fire, V/H/S/Beyond, and Hard Candy were the best of the bunch (I would've said The Substance takes top prize, but it was a technically a re-watch so that'd be cheating). I'd also say that Children of the Corn 2009, Cannibal Ferox, FearDotCom, Stuff Stephanie in the Incinerator, and Imaginary were the stinkiest of this year's batch of movies.

Speaking of that, every year there are several flicks that don’t quite make it onto my list but could turn up in future installments. For 2024, these included the following:

 

-Tarot, Longlegs, and Immaculate. While all three have received WILDLY different reactions from audiences and critics alike, I felt as though I had far too many current releases included this time around.

-Stir of Echoes (1999). Considered by many to be one of Kevin Bacon’s most underrated films, I had a surprising amount of difficulty finding it available for streaming…until the marathon concluded, and it was recently added to Amazon Prime. Just my luck.

-Species 1-4 (1995-2007). If there ever were a franchise to go through in its entirety, Species would not be at the top of my list, especially since I’ve already seen the first two films during my teenage years (spoilers: the first Species is dumb fun with a cool monster design by H.R. Giger; the second is just dumb and low key pretty misogynistic). Maybe for some Science Fiction-themed month?

-Tarantula (1955). Another one from the “Fantastic Dinosaurs of the Movies” VHS tape that I’ve talked about several times in the past. I legitimately couldn’t remember if I had already watched it as a kid, so it got cut. Come to think of it, maybe I should just do an entire month’s worth of movies related to that tape. Would Goodtimes Home Video somehow come back from the grave in an attempt to prevent it? Maybe I’m just tired.

-Bed Rest (2022). Dropped at the last minute because I realized that for as much as I love and respect Melissa Barrera, I can’t use her presence as the sole reason for sitting through a film.

-Faces of Death (1978). More of a collection of random death scenes from home-made ‘B’ movies and TV material. Extremely gimmicky and would’ve likely made this list should it have started when I was in high school.

-Jeepers Creepers 1-4 (2001-2022).  I've received requests from a few folks asking me to cover this series, but it's never going to happen. Sorry. The first one is an adequate slasher (until it becomes a monster movie in its third act). The second film is awful. I do not wish to give Victor Salva any further attention because he is a convicted child molester, and I felt like I needed to bathe in Clorox after watching Clownhouse knowing what was happening behind the scenes. Moving on.

-Megan is Missing (2011). Perhaps the most “infamous” horror movie recommended by TikTokers with reception that has ranged from “you know this isn’t a documentary but a fictional film, right?” to “this generation is fucking doomed.” I was not in the mood to sit through this one.

-Slaughter High (1986) and Final Exam (1981), Too many slashers already.

-The Haunted World of El Superbeasto (2009). An animated horror-comedy written and directed by Rob Zombie; I’ve lost count with how many times I’ve tried to finish this in its entirety. I made a swift decision to watch the far superior and decidedly creepy Pet Shop of Horrors instead.

-Subspecies 1-6 (1991-2023). Nah, I’m good.

-Exorcist II: The Heretic. This was dangerously close to becoming the final movie of the marathon, but I was met with more than a few replies of “seriously, don’t watch that” from people in my personal life. It’s regarded as one of the worst movies of all time (directed by someone who didn’t even LIKE the first Exorcist no less). Maybe I’ll watch it one day if I’m in the mood to torture myself or if I'm on my death bed and wish to accelerate the dying process. I wonder if sitting through this film or overdrinking would be more hazardous to my health…

Anyways, that's it. As Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert used to say, "the balcony is closed."

Or at least, for a little while. Peep me over on Letterboxd as Woodshatter1985.

Please take care of one another. Give anyone who is heartbroken and feeling downtrodden a hug. This is a horrible world we live in, but to ensure a better future for younger generations (especially for women, people of color, the LGBTQ+ community, and so many more), don't stop fighting to make it a better one.

Unseen Terror 2024: Penultimate Meddling (Day 30)

Junji Ito’s seminal work Uzumaki (which is essentially a tale of a town being cursed by supernatural spirals that drive them to do very strange and often morbid things) is one of the most respected and influential works ever published in the world of horror manga. The absurd and twisted ideas that come from within that man’s head are unlike anything you’ll ever read, and his artwork is the stuff of nightmares. Surprisingly, there haven’t been a huge number of attempts at adapting his stories to either the live-action or animation realms. There was the Tomie series of films in Japan, the animated Gyo: Tokyo Fish Attack in 2012, and a prior adaptation of Uzumaki in 2000 (among others). Nearly all of them have polarized fans and critics alike, but once a high budget animated adaptation of this was announced in 2019, many people were elated (me included). There were tons of noteworthy names attached to it, including composer Colin Stetson, award-winning director Hiroshi Nagahama, and even noted animation heads Adult Swim (of whom would be directly involved with helping bring it to life). The hype was real…….and then the pandemic happened. Due to an assortment of reasons, Uzumaki wouldn’t see completion and final release until this October. While it was nice to see it finally come to fruition, I almost wish that it hadn’t. Simply put, this is one of the most colossally disappointing pieces of animation that I have EVER seen. For starters, this is only four episodes long. While I don’t have a problem with them condensing some of the story, that discovery had me raising an eyebrow. Then I looked up and saw that Nagahama was only attached as director for the first episode, with another person taking over for episodes 2 & 3 (it should be noted that there is no director listed for episode 4. Is there an “Alan Smithee” for Japan?).

 

It should be noted though that the first episode of Uzumaki is EXCELLENT. It looks beautiful (sticking with the original black and white style from the manga was a great idea), the voice acting is solid, and the whole thing flows so incredibly well. Best of all, it’s legitimately creepy and has an ending that packs a wallop. If you were to air that as a “proof of concept” show and shop it around, I know that someone would’ve picked it up immediately. Unfortunately, the good times end rather quickly, because the drop in animation quality in the rest of the miniseries is SHOCKINGLY bad. It feels static, lifeless, and worst of all lazy. If I can use a “Western” comparison, it feels akin to what happened after the first six issues of The Walking Dead comic book switched artists or when Frank Darabont left after the live-action adaptation’s first season had been completed. You don’t need to be familiar with the medium to know that something is terribly off. Worst of all, it just kind of falls apart by trying to do too much too soon. It felt disjointed and I kept checking the remote control to see how much time was left in the final episode. Saddened (and a little mad), I decided to do some digging around to see what the hell exactly happened. In layman’s terms, it sounds like not only did Covid do a number on the production team’s aspirations and schedule, but that production costs were so high after the first episode that the new management in charge (which may or may not include noted asshole and animation hater David Zaslav) didn’t have any interest in giving them the necessary budget to make anything beyond its first episode look remotely decent. Thus, we’re stuck with this. Creative director Jason Demarco even took to bluesky (aka the twitter alternative not owned by a giant manbaby nazi sympathizer who makes ugly vehicles that catch fire) to express his frustrations with everything that happened (screenshot below courtesy of one Ms. Rain Howard). And I honestly can’t say that I blame him.

 

This is such a complicated mess. As I mentioned before, the first episode of Uzumaki is a real piece of art and a masterclass on how to do Junji Ito correctly. Everything else that comes afterwards, however, is heartbreakingly bad. I’m hoping that those who put in so much hard work when this first got off the ground aren’t completely discouraged by this series’ mixed-to-negative reception and can wrestle themselves away from the likes of Warner Bros. & Zaslav and head to another studio that appreciates the artform and can give them more creative freedom and trust.

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

Unseen Terror 2024: Stream Wars (Days 24-25)

This isn’t exactly a mind-blowing revelation, but streaming services are everywhere these days. I’ve lost count with how many there are now, and every time that I finish typing a sentence, a new one pops up like you just spilled water on a mogwai. Whatever the case, here are three movies (and a television show) that are exclusive to their streaming homes. Of course, I’m sure you could find these via “other” means, but I digress.

 

 

Hulu’s Mr. Crocket came onto my radar recently and much like has happened before, the poster immediately caught my attention. It’s a strange, if not uneven mixture of The Ring and Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood (with some elements of Wes Craven’s New Nightmare thrown in for good measure), where a children’s TV show host is kidnapping kids via a strange VHS tape that makes its way into the homes of fractured families. The biggest praise I can give to this one is that the practical effects and gore are surprisingly very good, and the opening of the film is great, with American Crime actor Elvis Nolasco delivering an amusing performance as the titular villain. As time goes by, however, the movie starts to lose steam because it can’t seem to make up its mind about what tone it wants to stick with. Does it want to be a dark horror-comedy, or a serious story about recovering from trauma and the hardships of being a single parent? The third act in particular is kind of a mess and includes a ludicrous revelation involving a supporting character that feels like an excuse to increase the body count. Still, I’m looking forward to seeing whatever writer/director Brandon Espy comes up with after the dust on this has settled. The talent is there in Mr. Crocket, but I so, so wish the consistency was as well. Maybe see if the guy is down to do a V/H/S segment sometime sooner than later!

 

Up next was Amazon’s horror-themed dessert competition show Killer Cakes. If you’re familiar with any of the more popular cooking television programs like The Great British Bake Off, then you’ll know what to expect here. It’s a miniseries where four teams of two bakers craft and serve cakes that fit the morbid themes assigned to them by host Matthew Lillard (whose status is at the point where his presence can brighten nearly any project he’s in), while hoping that judges Danielle Harris (The Wild Thornberrys, Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers) and Nikk Alcaraz (a YouTuber and cookbook author who I’ll admit I had no familiarity with) will approve of the final products. Honestly, the biggest complaint I have about this was the entire show consists of two episodes. The creativity and fun that went into some of these bakes was quite charming, but I really wish we could’ve seen more. Plus, the more Matthew Lillard the merrier. Anyways, if you miss the fun weirdness of gone-too-soon gems like The Curious Creations of McConnell, this is an amusing watch. 

Unlike…..

 

 

 

Honestly…………………I don’t really feel like reviewing this one. Not because it brought any feelings to the surface that I didn’t already have. Not because it terrified me immensely (calling it a horror-comedy is pushing it). Not because I was left speechless. Not even because I held my head in my hands asking, “why did I choose this of all things to watch?” I don’t feel like discussing this one because I’ve seen a lot of people say it’s a new “comfort” watch for them and I don’t want to hurt any feelings or bum anyone out. I haven’t been an Adam Sandler fan since the early 2000s (save for his roles in the likes of Punch-Drunk Love and Uncut Gems) and I feel like his performance in Funny People was his attempt at breaking the fourth wall by speaking to the audience and saying that he really wanted to stop making dumb comedies…only to follow that up with another decade’s worth of crass, juvenile films made for audiences that really wish they could say that one slur for mentally challenged people again without getting ugly stares from people with a conscience. I’ve gotten tired of the “talk in a funny voice throughout the entire picture” schtick. I’m tired of the cliched “he’s a dumbass but gets the hottest women” trope. All that being said, I’m not in the mood to be terribly negative and ragging on modern-day “Happy Madison Productions” releases isn’t worth the effort. If you get enjoyment out of Sandler’s entire catalog and want something to watch with your preteen kids, then go right ahead and check out Hubie Halloween on Netflix. I am not part of his audience anymore, but I hope you have fun.

 

It's infinitely better than Jack and Jill or I Know Pronounce You Chuck & Larry though. And there is a clever gag about every female news anchor dressing like Harley Quinn.

 

 

 

In terms of who wins this unofficial contest of “best original film” among the three feature-length flicks discussed in this entry, Tubi (surprisingly) comes away as the winner. The horror-comedy Clickbait: Unfollowed is essentially what would happen if you took Squid Game or Battle Royale but made the contestants “influencer” stereotypes. You’ve got the new age girl, the crypto bro, the beauty advisor, and a few more that I won’t fully mention so as not to spoil some of the surprises. They’re invited to a nice house where they discover that they’ve been given a series of tasks where whoever comes in last, is…well, let’s just say “taken offline.” Writers/directors/co-stars Melanie Scrofano & Katherine Barrell (the former you may recognize from the awesome Ready or Not) bring just enough humanity to each of these characters to make them not completely aggravating to be around for ninety minutes, with Roberto Kyle and Ashleigh van der Hoven standing out among the cast (though everyone here is doing a solid job and clearly having fun). I do wish it had been a little gorier, but maybe that’s the sicko in me talking. Perhaps spending too much time with Terrifier 3 and In a Violent Nature corrupted me. Anyways, this is completely free to watch (as is everything on Tubi) and for a “Tubi Original,” it’s a lot of fun!

 

We’ve got less than a week’s worth of movies to watch and discuss now. Time to break out some big guns soon…………to be so eloquent, "È ora di fare un viaggio in Italia e guardare alcune cose inquietanti dei primi anni '80."

 

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

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

 

(poster by Thomas Walker)

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

 

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

 

 

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

 

 

 

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

 

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

 

 

 

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

 

 

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

Unseen Terror 2024: Deceitful Art (Day 18)

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

 

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

 

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

 

 

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

 

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

 

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

Unseen Terror 2024: 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 2024: I'd Like to Stop Coughing Please (Days 12-15)

I’m still sick. I’m so tired of dry coughing (with the occasional bit o’ mucus). That type of stuff tends to suck your energy out. Anyways, let’s get these over with.

 

When assembling this year’s list, adding 2024’s Imaginary was more out of morbid curiosity than anything else. It’s reportedly maintained a firm position on many fans’ “worst of 2024” lists, even though we still have 2.5 months left in the year. After sitting through it myself, I can absolutely see why. The movie centers around a women returning to a childhood home  and her stepdaughter forms a bond with a stuffed bear named “Chauncey” that she finds in the house, and it becomes her close imaginary friend. Shockingly, things don’t go well, and it turns out maybe there’s some nefarious stuff going on with and/or around the bear. Imaginary is a Blumhouse “FUCK YOU, IT’S JANUARY” movie (only this came out in March instead). The dialogue feels like something out of a first draft script, and nobody bothered to tweak anything to make it remotely scary or create any likeable characters (side note: stop writing kids as idiots in horror movies. Save that for when they become delirious teenagers, because it’s slightly more realistic). There is a twist around the midway point that had me groaning through my coughing (along with perhaps the most hilariously stupid line ever uttered by a fictional child therapist) and turned it from a poor man’s Child’s Play rip-off to a poor man’s “every supernatural-based movie” rip-off. The worst sin of them all is that the whole experience is shockingly boring, but given writer/director Jeff Wadlow’s track record, perhaps my faith was misguided.

 

I just want to end that mini-review by stating that I don’t hate Blumhouse Productions at all. When they manage to hit a home run, it’s goddamn great. But when they misfire? Well, it’s uuuuuugggglllyyy. I would like an explanation as to why they chose to have this released to theaters, but previously chose to dump another one of their flicks (the more audience-friendly and joyous Totally Killer) straight-to-streaming instead. Come on guys, what are we doing here?

 

 

Spirit Halloween: The Movie is exactly what I thought it would be: preteens trapped inside of a haunted retail store that basically serves as a gigantic advertisement for the seasonal store chain that seems to pop up in the darnedest places every September. Look, I’m definitely not the target audience for this, but I suppose that if you have young kids who refuse to watch any other “family friendly” horror films pre-2000 (which c’mon, at least try Hocus Pocus or even The Monster Squad if you’re feeling gutsy), then you could throw this on. Otherwise, you’re better off just walking into an actual Spirit store and exploring the products yourself. Very cheeky (if not kind of sad) that this “kids stuck in a haunted house” take is filmed inside of what appeared to be a defunct Toys R Us though. Also, Christopher Lloyd is here. Good to see him still working after the catastrophic picture that was Foodfight!

 

I was a little surprised (and disappointed) to find that 2013’s horror anthology All Hallows Eve is mostly just repurposed and reused footage from director Damien Leone’s shorts that originally introduced modern day slasher Art the Clown to the world of mainstream horror. I also didn’t realize that Art was never portrayed by the same performer for every on-screen appearance he’s had. From what I understand, the original actor Mike Giannelli just wasn’t a fan of the lengthy makeup process that it takes to create the villain, so he chose not to return and has essentially all but retired from acting (though reportedly remains on good terms with Leone & co.). Anyways, the story focuses on a babysitter and two kids who have returned from trick-or-treating with an unmarked VHS tape in their bag. The babysitter puts it on, and we’re subjected to three stories (all of which involve Art the Clown in some way). The first segment is a nonsensical mess that includes a woman being sexually assaulted by a person in a bad-looking Satan costume and another one having their unborn child cut out of their stomach by witches. Sounds nastier than it is, but it’s mostly clunky. The second is a home invasion story with a new homeowner being terrorized by an alien that likely got its entire wardrobe from Party City. The third (and arguably the best) of the segments is the closest one you’re going to get to an actual Terrifier story because it literally IS the original Terrifier short from 2011. It has some nice gore and makeup, but that’s about it. This short’s version of Art seems to be more of an incel too. The whole flick wraps up with a cute “fourth wall break” of a finale, but I’d say that this is only for Leone and/or Art completists.

 

Day 15’s film is technically cheating but considering that you can log the entire shebang on letterboxd (and it ultimately amounts to around 85-90 minutes), I’m throwing it on here anyway. Plus, any chance that I get to finally track down something that eluded me as a teenager is always a pleasure. 1999’s Pet Shop of Horrors is a 4-episode adaptation of the cult favorite manga from the mid-1990s.  It’s specifically what is classified as a “Josei” manga, which essentially means its target audience is adult women (though not exclusively). The stories tend to be a bit more mature, with romance and even horror taking a nice seat up front. Enter Pet Shop of Horrors, a horror anthology that I became aware of upon its initial release date in the U.S. but was never able to obtain for assorted reasons. (a.k.a. I didn’t have enough friends at the time who were also into horror). It’s an anthology story focusing on an eccentric proprietor named “Count D,” and his strange pet shop located in Chinatown, California. Sure, the stylish and soft-spoken D sells your normal birds, cats, and dogs, but for anyone with more “pressing needs” who desires an animal, there are special exceptions. Some of these pets may even appear human, but any interested parties MUST follow the very strict rules applied to said acquisitions. After all, if any are broken, the shop and its owner are not responsible for what happens. The stories range from deranged to tragic, and every episode has involvement by esteemed veterans in the anime field (Ninja Scroll creator Yoshiaki Kawajiri does the storyboard for standout segment “Despair”). Though there is some bloodshed here and there, there’s no over-the-top gore or anything of that nature. It’s just a lot of supernatural weirdness coated with sins and desires. It’s like Tales from the Crypt with a dash of The Twilight Zone and “hosted” by an androgynous shop owner with a sweet tooth for human curiosities (and chocolate!). There’s a fun overlapping story with a cop named Leon who’s been paying close attention to all the strange deaths across the city and his relationship with Count D almost recalls something from the likes of Thomas Harris novels (though in that case we know Harris’ antagonists are killers, whereas D is just…well, a person who sells animals). I haven’t read the Pet Shop of Horrors manga, but I’m quite curious to see how this would have developed over time.

 

If you have an open mind and a taste for horror anime, go watch this however you can. Be forewarned though: the dub for PSoH is TERRIBLE. I’ve defended the usage of dubbing when it comes to anime, but the misunderstanding of this source material means that we get a lot of oafish and loud deliveries, and it changes the eerie nature of the whole thing into something resembling a ‘B’ movie. Just baffling. Maybe just shill out a few bucks for the dual-language DVD or Blu-Ray instead. Or, if we're lucky enough, perhaps we'll see a new, updated remake like we've seen for old anime/manga like Ranma 1/2.

Unseen Terror 2024: Quack You Ryhan (Day 11)

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

 

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

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

 

 

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

Unseen Terror 2024: Online Heebie Jeebies (Days 8-10)

You’ll have to forgive me for getting this batch of films out so late. I suspect that after my trashing of the last “Treehouse of Horror” segment, someone from Fox may have placed a curse on me because I’ve been quite sick over the past few days. Anyways, let’s get this out of the way. The theme over these last 72 hours has been one fear that I’m sure will never fully dissipate: the fear of the internet. What good comes from the world wide web also brings about some heinous stuff. For every compilation of cute cat videos or “bad lip readings” you’ll find, you stumble upon people spewing forth evil and dangerous viewpoints and worshipping the most depraved people on the planet. Of course, there’s also the vile cesspool that is social media, but that’s almost too easy of a target these days.

 

Anyways, this trio of films are all centered around dangerous discoveries found throughout places such as chatrooms and websites that your browser should know better than to let you navigate.

 

 

1998’s Strangeland is a pet project of Twisted Sister frontman Dee Snider (and inspired by a song from their breakthrough album “Stay Hungry”). It centers around a detective searching for a man nicknamed “Captain Howdy,” who lures people into a world of extreme body modification and torture through the power of chatrooms (remember those?). As you could no doubt guess, Snider himself plays Captain Howdy, and he is certainly doing what he can to make this as memorable of a performance as possible. I’m not sure it fully works in the way that he wants considering that a lot of the dialogue is super silly, with Howdy speaking like he’s been lifted out of the wing at Arkham Asylum for “Overly Dramatic Villains.”  Weirdly enough, there’s also a part in the middle of Strangeland where our villain gets rehabilitated, but quickly turns back to his old lifestyle. I’m sure that this was supposed to be a commentary on the idea that society just can’t forgive and forget what someone has done in the past so easily (or maybe so that they could cast Robert Englund as the leader of an angry mob who wishes to exact justice of their own. Ha!), but it felt like wasted film reel.

My criticisms aside, I didn’t really hate Strangeland at all. Yes, it is a “passion” project (which can be very hit or miss) and Snider’s character does look like he’d fit in more on an episode of “Ink Master” than a world that’s trying to ape the likes of Hellraiser or Se7en, but it’s never boring and I thought the look of the film overall wasn’t too shabby. It also breezes by at a relatively good pace. Ultimately a tossup for me, but the more I thought about it, the more I thought it was perfectly adequate. Plus, Howdy’s world seems to be less toxic than Twitter these days!

 

 

You’re going to have to bear with me here. This particular review may contain some very harsh language because this was the first movie for this year’s Unseen Terror to truly make me angry. Then again, considering that FeardotCom currently sits at a whopping 3% on review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes and is one of only a handful of pictures (regardless of genre) to receive an overall score of ‘F’ on Cinemascore, I should have seen this coming and braced for a truly wretched piece of shit.

 

There are two good things about FeardotCom: the ten-or-so seconds of hearing Rammstein’s “Sonne” during a kidnapping scene, and that it will inspire you to re-watch one of the many films it’s attempting to ape to help you forget about what you’ve just watched here. As for the plot itself? Well, an NYPD detective and a Department of Health employee investigate a series of strange murders that may or may not be connected to a website called “feardotcom…. dotcom.” And no, that is NOT a typo. From what I understand, the producers initially wanted to call the website in the film “fear dot com,” but didn’t realize that there was already a website using that name. The original owners refused to sell the rights to the website, and so the flick’s spooky website’s url was changed to “feardotcomdotcom.” Idiots. Fucking idiots.

 

The mistake of not diving deeper into the trademarking of the website in the picture itself is the least of this excrement resembling a movie’s worries though. For starters, they have the AUDACITY to waste esteemed and beloved character actors such as Jeffrey Combs (Re-Animator, From Beyond) and Udo Kier (Shadow of the Vampire, Suspiria) by giving them fuck-all to do. Hell, the latter is basically relegated to a glorified cameo by appearing in its opening three minutes and then dying. I’d also say that they waste Stephen Dorff (Blade, The Gate), but seeing as how he’d go on the star in all-time turd Alone in the Dark several years later, maybe this isn’t so bad for him after all. It’s also lacking in anything resembling originality or real tension. It acts as an ugly, dumbed down hybrid of Videodrome, Se7en, and assorted ‘J’ horror pictures. There’s also some awful ADR in its final act, which considering that it cost $40 million to make, is just baffling.

I know that there have been a lot of “revisionist” pieces for late 90s/early 00’s horror films over the past several years. Films that were unfairly maligned have been rediscovered or reappraised by younger generations or those who are not afraid to defend their favorites (even with noticeable flaws). Heck, sometimes I agree with those! I’ll wait with crossed arms and gritted teeth to see who comes out of the woodworks to defend such a goddamn awful film like FeardotCom though. You better have a compelling argument, because this immediately entered the conversation for worst films I’ve ever watched over the course of doing this marathon.

 

 

 

 

Before you say “hey, this is more psychological thriller than horror,” I want to say that it’s my marathon and I’ll do what I want to do. Plus, those two are best friends whether you realize it or not.

 

How it took me this long to watch 2005’s infamous Hard Candy I have no idea. This was one of THE movies to “make” both Elliot (billed here as “Ellen”) Page and Patrick Wilson. The story is a pretty simple one: Page plays a teenager who meets the significantly older Wilson via an online chat, and they set a time to finally meet in person. After some more small talk and exchanging of interests, they go back to his house, where Page’s character drugs, traps, and tortures him on the grounds that he is strongly/rightfully suspected of being a child predator. After sitting through two mixed bags of the exaggerated notion of “the internet is scary,” this one finally seemed to get something right and packed genuine tension. Page’s character of Hayley is the ultimate spirit of vengeance, and Wilson’s Jeff almost inspires sympathy as time goes by (until you remember that he’s, well, a pederast and potentially even worse). For ninety percent of Hard Candy’s running time, it’s just the two of them (save for a cameo from Sandra Oh of Grey’s Anatomy and Killing Eve fame) fucking with one another. You’re locked inside of their twisted world and it’s fascinating. It’s a treat. Sometimes I love watching movies with casts that are so small you could count the number of featured performers seen in them on one hand. Tragically, while I was writing this review, I discovered that Page was assaulted himself after the wrap party for Hard Candy, which makes watching his equally more uncomfortable, but God I can only hope that the member of the production crew who did it gets what’s coming to them sooner than later.

 

Not sure what else I can add to this review (that and I want to get some rest). It’s on Tubi and I believe Amazon Prime as well. It’s a well-respected film and a great “revenge” flick. Check it out!

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

Unseen Terror 2023: Wrap it Up Ryhan (Days 29-31)

Well, I hope everyone had the greatest of times during Halloween. No clever title for this final entry folks. Let's get these last three flicks knocked out while I'm still somewhat awake though.

Writer/director Brian de Palma is definitely no stranger to the marathon, but somehow his rock opera/horror-comedy hybrid Phantom of the Paradise had only been on my radar for about six years or so, as I would often confuse it with other similarly titled pictures or different projects outright. Still, once I took a glimpse at the Blu-Ray from the reliable Shout! Factory (specifically thanks to the managers at Rockville's Barnes & Noble location which I worked at for six years), I officially became determined to track this sucker down at some point while I was still breathing without having to spend an absurd amount of money. Hey, sometimes I'm just a cheapskate folks. *shrugs*

The plot to this oddball of a flick reads like a mixture of Phanom of the Opera and classic German tale Faust, and it follows a young naive singer-songwriter named Winslow (played by the late William Finley of Sisters fame) who is fooled by well-known music producer Swan (Paul Williams) into surrendering his works over to the far more established figure. Framed, jailed, and scarred (both mentally and physically), Winslow dons a new menacing persona that proceeds to terrorize Swan's newly opened concert hall, all the newly masked madman insists that his stolen music be performed by a younger, adored singer (Jessica Harper). The two come to an agreement of sorts but suffice to say things don't turn out how Winslow wants them to. I don't want to get too much further into plot details, because I believe approaching any motion picture as blind as possible is vital to enjoying it as much as you can.

I feel like it's been quite some time since I've been so unapologetically upfront about any flick that I've watched during an "Unseen Terror" marathon, but if there were ever such a thing as an instant buy, Phantom of the Paradise absolutely fits that description. I had such an unbelievably fun time with this, and I'm kicking myself for having slept on it for so bloody long. The cast is all fantastic, with Williams in particular proving why he's such a respected talent in the entertainment industry by not only playing a real arrogant jerk of a villain, but also scoring its undeniably catchy soundtrack. I've yet to explore much of actress Jessica Harper's non-Suspiria film roles (mostly due to laziness), but I had no earthly idea she was also a GREAT singer. Had the whole acting thing not worked out at all, she could have made a killing in the music industry. Finally, there's reliable Gerrit Graham (The Critic, Child's Play 2, TerrorVision) who plays a fabulously flamboyant glam rocker simply known as "Beef." He arguably steals the show every time he's on screen, and his inclusion not only exists to help move the story along, but to also serve as part of another great aspect of Phantom: its subtle takedown of the music industry and its shameless attempt at jumping on board of trends. Hell, look no further than the inclusion of Swan's own pet project known as "The Juicy Fruits," who undergo more than one genre transformation throughout its running time. Now that I think about it, perhaps that's the only minor complaint I have about this eccentric project: I wish it was longer.

I don't have much more to offer when it comes to gushing over Phantom of the Paradise. It's audacious, stylistic, loud, and very colorful. Most of all though, it's fun! This is the kind of movie that I wish Rocky Horror could have been (no disrespect to that crowd though), and it's a shame that people still sleep on it. Go find it however you can (I viewed mine on an on-demand cable TV channel) and just kick back.... for the hell out of it.

........Uh, you'll understand that if you've seen it. Sorry.

Before I type out the review for this bad boy, I'll just preface it by saying that I've only played the first Five Nights at Freddy's video game and while I don't think it's a bad game per se and it certainly has some nice atmosphere, it was a little too reliant on jump scares and too repetitive for my taste. Call me a boomer, but I'm more of a sucker for stuff like Resident Evil or the first-person Alien games. So, I'm approaching this mostly blind and with no great attachment to the source material. After the whole picture had wrapped up and the credits began to roll, I came to the realization that this was very much the definition of "not for me."

If you're unfamiliar with the Five Nights at Freddy's franchise, the core concept (at least in the first game) is that it's a first-person, point-and-click video game where you play a security guard who has taken on an overnight job at a rundown pizzeria. The main problem arises from having to survive each of those evenings while the homicidal animatronic creatures that roam the restaurant during afterhours try to murder you. Some gig huh? To be honest, with how expensive things have been getting as of late, I can't say that I wouldn't try for some sort of similar gig to pay my own bills. I mean, Dollar Tree is now $1.25 tree? Twenty dollars barely gets you half a tank of gas? But I digress.

Off the bat, I could tell that this was likely going to appeal almost exclusively to diehard fans and unlikely to sway casual, unfamiliar viewers over to its side. Plus, it wasn't too long ago that we got the eerily similar Willy's Wonderland with (a mostly silent) Nicolas Cage, which didn't exactly set the world on fire. Unlike that film though, there are a number of more recognizable faces this time around. The movie adaptation focuses primarily on Josh Hutcherson (The Hunger Games), who takes the aforementioned overnight job from a career counselor (Matthew Lillard of Scream and Scooby-Doo fame) to prevent social services from taking away his younger sister and placing her in the hands of her negligent, asshole aunt (Mary Stuart Masterson from Fried Green Tomatoes). Honestly, that's about the best description I can give considering how this is actually a bit messier than I expected it to be, and most of these characters are as interesting as dried milk. Yes, Hutcherson's character is sympathetic, but there are times where I feel like someone should've provided the poor fella with a cup of coffee. Aside from him, everyone just seems to be going through the motions or has very little to work with. I'll always treasure seeing Matthew Lillard on screen, but he's barely present until the very end (taking part in what was one of the silliest twists I've seen in quite some time). Whereas the human presence in the film is lacking, I did appreciate the work that Jim Henson's Creature Shop put into making some very accurate-looking animatronics. It's just too bad that they chose to spend so much of this film's running time on Hutcherson's frequent dream sequences instead, rather than the impressive practical effects. Oh well.

Five Nights at Freddy's is a little too boring and depends far too often on suffocating the viewers with a quick "boo!" gag as much as it can (so I guess it IS game accurate then). It gets to be very tiresome towards the end and I just didn't see anything that would be able to convince someone other than perhaps little kids to make a return to this universe. Then again, kids/preteens are the primary target audience here, and this could be a nice gateway to bigger and more established horror films for some of them (maybe their parents could lend them a VHS player with some fine gems from the 80s/90s for starters). Ultimately my opinion is just that of a small percentage of people who weren't wholly interested in watching this anyway, but I do see the appeal and do hope that it inspires a new generation to seek out some genuinely creepy stuff. As I said several paragraphs ago, it just wasn't my cup of tea, but I hope it makes its fans happy. Currently, it's streaming on Peacock and playing in whatever cinemas are left closest to you.

Ah, but what better way to finish October than with a motion picture where a VHS player is pivotal to its plot? Somehow, I had never seen Japan's highly influential Ring (or Ringu if you're going to be a real weeb) back when I was trying to seek out as many bizarre Japanese horror films as possible. Perhaps it was never available at the Suncoast Video stores I frequented. Perhaps it was because I favored the gorier side of things (a.k.a. the Takashi Miike stuff) rather than the slower, more atmospheric efforts. Regardless, I decided to finally take the plunge and check out Ring on Shudder and though I do wish I could have closed out October with something more in line with Halloween, I feel like this was a damn fine way to conclude this iteration of Unseen Terror.

I feel as though the concept of Ring and/or its American remake The Ring (also good in its own right) is fairly well known, but I'll give a CliffsNotes version anyway: a reporter investigates the mystery behind a supposedly cursed video tape which causes those who view it to die within seven days. The tales of this tape reach our protagonist Reiko, who takes a particular interest to this rumor when she hears of her niece mysteriously passing away after watching it. Teaming with her ex-husband Ryuji, the two dig around to discover its origins and to find out if there's a way to break this purported curse. Though only a mere twenty-five years old, it's still pretty astonishing to see how much of Ring has been lifted or copied by other motion pictures over the decades (for better or worse). Few could hope to reach this level of creepiness though.

There is so much to appreciate here. The film establishes what it is right out of the gate, yet after its initial, shocking opening, it turns into a very slow burn more akin to that of a mystery than an outright horror film (I understand that this is also the case with the book it's based on). It eases you into its bleak universe, which despite being set in the real world, still feels distinctly "alien." Our protagonists are written very well and are quite sympathetic, which adds to the sense of fear whenever you see the flick's "time clock" pop up on screen every now and then. Ring's most impressive aspect is arguably its atmosphere. It looks far dirtier than I expected it to be, and much smaller in scope. When we finally get a glimpse of the film's most notorious...erm, aspect (a.k.a. one of the first images you're likely to see when Googling Ringu), it's no surprise they turned out the way that they are. It's a terribly depressing world, and only adds to the creepy vibe scattered throughout. I also noticed quite a bit of double meaning in its title and dialogue, but that would be giving away some major plot spoilers so I will only address that with people who are indifferent to reveals.

Honestly, what can I say about Ring/Ringu that assorted video essayists haven't already said themselves? It's a tense, slow burn whose impact is still being felt in the horror genre to this day, and I'm hoping that despite its age, it will still garner some new viewers as often as it can. I'm very happy to put one more stamp on my "J-Horror" card that was long overdue, and perhaps I'll finally be able to seek out Ju-On: The Grudge now as well. Ring is streaming on services such as Shudder and Tubi, with a loaded Blu-Ray from Arrow Video out there for purchase as well.

And with that..........we are done. Sort of. Come back in a couple of days or so if you're interested, because I may have some quick notes and extra tidbits about what didn't make the list (and why), what to expect in the future (if anything), and more. Stay spooky.