V/H/S (2012)

NIGHT 13

HAPPY HALLOWEEN!

       "He said I'd know which tape it was..."

V/H/S (2012) is the first in a new series of anthology horror film made up of five found footage stories all from different up and coming horror directors.

The framing story involves some very shady teens who are sneaking into a house to try and find a specific VHS tape, when they get inside what they find is a corpse and a whole collection of weird VHS tapes.

Over all I liked each of the stories in V/H/S, though they're filled with what I affectionately call "logic holes," they're all very enjoyable, and clever in their own right.

The bad thing about this film is most of the stories are trying so hard to be clever that they don't make sense if you step back and think about the story. This ties into the problem I have with most found footage films, that they don't make a lot of logical sense as far as why someone would record each instance. I think the second story "Second Honey" is a perfect example of this, there's no reason the girl would record any of the events of the story especially since (SPOILER FOLLOWS) she's the one doing all the weird stuff. And they try to make up for it with one line at the end, "did you erase the tape?" but that doesn't explain why she would record it in the first place. This is a fine example of what most of these stories do is put the clever twist above the actual story in the films.


And I really dislike the framing story, its simple sure but it's poorly shot (on purpose) it makes the mistakes mentioned above (suddenly switching to multiple camera's with no explanation?), it's uncomfortable (the amateur porn angle) and it's just kind of bland and super horror movie-esque, it's not creepy and it's not new or interesting. So it basically steps in all of the wholes the film was trying to avoid.

I absolutely love the first short. I'm sad it's the first one, cause then everything else seems downhill from there, but at least the whole thing starts with a bang. It's a new spin on horror, something you don't see hardly ever and it's sexy, it's scary and it's just really cool too!

Also throughout this whole film the effects are great, it's mostly old school (practical/don't show too much) with only the slightest amount of CG for little things and touch-ups.

V/H/S (2012), is a return to the anthology horror format. I like how it's success suddenly has more people talking about the older films, and while I don't exactly love this one, its really not bad at all!


3.5/5 Stars.

 Happy watching!




This is the last review of my 2014 run of 13 Nights of Macabre Movies! Be safe out there tonight, and see you next year!

Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film through these fine links:

The ABCs of Death (2012)

NIGHT 12

       "It's not my fault you got the letter 'Q.'"

The ABCs of Death (2012) is an international horror anthology film produced by The Alamo Drafthouse containing 26 separate segments from different directors all involving involving death and a letter of the alphabet.

I really like the concept of this film. It's a good idea, and it's an idea that make you go, "yeah that's cool, I think I'd like to check that out!" Unfortunately the end result isn't as good as it is on paper but It's still interesting, and I don't regret watching it at all.

There's no host or framing convention to this film, but instead at the end of each short they tell you the title of the film and the letter of the alphabet it represents. I thought this was a really clever way to present the films. And while I think some filmmakers used this better than others it gives the viewer something to focus on a look forward to as they're watching these strange, weird short films.

Some of the solidly good stories I liked include, H is for Hydro-Electric Diffusion, K is for Klutz, L is for Libido, T is for Toilet and X is for XXL.

Sadly because all the films are so uneven as a result this film is uneven. I think the only way to fix that would be to filter the films or give the flimmakers more of a specific prompt, but I can understand why they wouldn't want to do that in order to keep the filmmakers' product very pure, so the film is uneven.

The thing I didn't like about this film most was as a result of all of the films being about "death" the majority ended up being either really gross or really weird (or both!) which aren't exactly the types of horror films I enjoy watching. I felt these films over all were lacking any real good narratives and characters. Most of them are either just very basic (person kills another person) or so freaking strange that I have no idea what the meaning was. And a couple of the films are so freaking dark I almost wish I hadn't watched them. But if you like watching people (and things) die, this is definitely the film for you.

The stories I didn't care for the most were: R is for Removed, P is for Pressure, W is for WTF!, Y is for Young Buck.

The thing with asking 26 directors to make films is you're bound to get a couple good ones out of it. So at least there's that.

And a good thing about the film is the mix of stories, no two in it are that incredibly similar. And most of them are vastly different from each other. The amount of creativity you will witness in two hours is really something to marvel at.

The stories I really liked best in this film are, J is for Jidai-geki, N is for Nupitals and S is for Speed.

The ABCs of Death (2012), is cool concept. But it's kind of a hard watch. I found it kind of feels like spending all day at a short film festival. The films are that all over the place, try watching it in parts if possible!

3/5 Stars.

  Happy watching!




This review is part of my 2014 run of 13 Nights of Macabre Movies! Tune in tomorrow as I review the final film of my series this season, V/H/S (2012).

Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film through these fine links:

Peur(s) du noir (2007)

NIGHT 10

       "You have to see your dream through to the end, if you want to be cured."

Peur(s) du noir (2007) [Fear(s) of the Dark] is a French, animated, horror anthology film.

This film contains four animated stories all written and directed by noted comic book and graphic designers and presented in high contrast black and white.

One thing I like about this film is the stories are all very solid stories, each playing with the concept and representing different takes on fear. Even if you don't like one short the others are varied enough that you're bound to find something you like in this film.

I'm not sure I understand the layout and framework of this film, to be truthful. The true framing story is just an old woman talking about her fears, which kind of ties into the short that follows? But then there's a second framing story that is simple, it's just a man unleashing each of his dogs on different victims (not seeming to care much). But the weird thing is that both of these frame stories not only continue throughout the film, they interrupt the other three stories in the film for little or no reason? Honestly there might be a reason to it, but the way it seemed to me was the "walking the dog" story didn't have enough actual content on it's own so they decided to spread it out through out the rest of the film?

I also think too much of this film instead of trying to be scary just ends up trying to be as weird as possible. Not that this is a bad thing, but having worked with animators quite a bit I know this is actually just because animators are the weirdest people you will ever meet and more often than not, their shorts seem to reflect that. I would have preferred to see at least one short try to be as terrifying as possible.

And like most anthology films, despite this film's unique take on the concept, it still ends up being really uneven. Some stories actually have a really good story, while others are just a small concept and others are so bat-shit weird that they'll leave you scratching your head.

I think the most interesting thing about this film is the concept. I loved the idea of this film when I heard about it, and I think they pulled off the concept very well. I really love how the film uses a variety of different animation mediums with each film. It's a unique take on the anthology horror film, it just seems to fall victim to the problems with animated shorts and anthology films at the same time.

The best thing about this film over all is the design work in it. Even if you watch this film on mute you'll be blown away by how good the designs are. This film contains some of the best design work I've seen in a film (animated or otherwise) in years! It's really a thing to marvel at. These guys are graphic artists and they certainly can prove it.

I also really liked the 3rd story (or is it 4th?) directed byh Lorenzo Mattotti, about the mysterious beast mauling people in the French countryside. This short was my favorite by far. It's wonderfully animated, it has a very interesting story and it is very cinematic too.

Fear(s) of the Dark (2007), is a very interesting film, it's a mixed bag but you're bound to find something you like in it. And the design work through out makes the whole experience worth it.

4/5 Stars.

Happy watching!




This review is part of my 2014 run of 13 Nights of Macabre Movies! Tune in tomorrow as I review a Canadian anthology horror film from the same year, Trick 'r Treat (2007).

Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film through these fine links:

Creepshow (1982)

NIGHT 5

       "You can't shoot us dead, Richard... "

Creepshow (1982), is a horror anthology film written by Stephen King and directed by George A. Romero. The film contains five stories that are inspired by the EC Comics horror publications.

The film is connected by a brightly animated sequences and bookended by a an additional story about a young boy who is not allowed to read a horror comic called Creepshow.

Nearly the first thing you will notice about Creepshow is that it contains these flashy comic book style animated sequences and transitions. All of this stuff works, it's a bit over the top, I'm not sure these brightly color animated sequences best represent the black and white horror comics this film is trying to pay tribute to? It can just be a little over the top is all I'm saying, 'we get it.... it's a comic book.'

The stories in Creepshow aren't bad, like the rest of the film they're over-the-top and sadly they kind of fall into the problem of being very bland because they're trying to represent all-too familiar horror tropes, without adding anything new. Honestly this film would have been better if they just stuck to actual EC Comics stories either literally [much like Tales from the Crypt (1972)] or just adapted them from the seed of a comic story. What's weird is the dialogue throughout is very what I would call 'young slang,' this is far different than the tone of the original comics so I have to wonder what Mr. King was trying to do? Was he trying to attract a young audience for the film with silly dialogue? "Meteor shit!"

I like George Romero's direction in this film. It's very simple, nothing is really that complicated or unique but its all very straight forward and effective. He does one really interesting that you may not even notice on the first watch, every time he's showing something supernatural he adds an unnatural light to the characters and the scene much like what Mario Bava did on Black Sabbath (1964) over twenty years before. I'm not sure Romero was copying Bava because they both use it differently, but the end result really does help link the film together with it's brightly colored animated sequences.

The worst and most over-the-top thing about this film is the zany acting. All of the characters don't act like humans, which is not only distracting but it makes it hard to relate to them. As a viewer you end up laughing more, which I'm not sure was the original intention, but I think this is why the film is such a cult classic among horror fans.

My favorite things about the film are makeup special effects and props. I'm not sure if it's because this is the first film on my list that was created in the 80s or if its because a young Tom Savini was in charge of them? Either way its definitely a good reason to check out the film and makes me sad that they don't belong in a more 'serious' horror film, rather than the madcap film that is Creepshow.

Creepshow (1982) folds under any kind of a critical eye, but it makes up for a lot of that by being a whole bunch of fun.

3/5 Stars.

Happy watching!




This review is part of my 2014 run of 13 Nights of Macabre Movies! Tune in tomorrow as I review the film version of The Twilight Zone produced by Stephen Spielberg and John Landis, Twilight Zone: The Movie (1983).

Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film through these fine links:

The Vault of Horror (1973)

NIGHT 4

       "Do you think that our fears, could be some kind of warning?"

The Vault of Horror (1973), also known as Vault of Horror, Further Tales from the Crypt and Tales from the Crypt II, is a British anthology film directed by Roy Ward Baker and produced by Amicus Productions. This is the sequel to Amicus' Tales from the Crypt (1972), and like that film The Vault of Horror contains five stories almost entirely taken from the pages of the long-running Tales from the Crypt EC Comics anthology.

Five men walk into an elevator, which then goes directly to the basement floor despite no one pressing it. When it opens they find a gentleman's club, and they find themselves 'trapped' there. Making the most of it they sit down and have a drink and start to talk, each man starts to talk about strange dreams they've been having recently.

The stories in Vault of Horror are all quite good, much like Tales from the Crypt they picked stories that translate well on screen. The direction in them is less good than that of the previous movie, but it is effective. I think my favorite story is the second one, "Midnight Mess" it's simple and silly and very amusing.

The acting here is not bad over all, if anything it leans on the bland if nothing else it starts to blend together but that's more to do with the casting, but more on that in a second. Sadly this is the only Amicus Horror anthology that doesn't have Peter Cushing, and it could have probably benefited from his consistently strong performances. Instead, here we have Tom Baker, (Yes, Whovians the fourth Doctor!), and while he's about as diverse as the cast gets (because his hair isn't gray?) his acting saves a story that I probably wouldn't have like otherwise!

One of the things I can't not see about this film is how it seems mildly sexist. At the very least this film should be an argument for diversity in casting, because I can't imagine a film with a cast made up of a bunch of old white men really getting that diverse of a following. I'm even a (soon to be old) white man and I felt dirty watching this!

The framing story of this movie is quite boring if you've seen Tales from the Crypt, which okay yes I did watch them back to back but the films came out a year apart in their original release, so I can't imagine many people saw these movies farther apart than that! It's the SAME exact formula only done worse because there's no Crypt Keeper! It's like they set out to do something different but in the end just looked at the original and copied it point by point.

The Greatest thing about The Vault of Horror is the way the stories ramp up and with each one they get more peculiar and strange as they go on. This works super well so much so that I wasn't really feeling this movie from the beginning (you'll realize it's a rehash of Tales from the Crypt, pretty darn quickly) but as the movie went on my interest was raised with each story!

The Vault of Horror (1973) is not terrible, but I'd probably always pick watching Tales of the Crypt over it. It ends up less as a sequel and more like a rehash.

3/5 Stars.

Happy watching!



This is part of my 2014 run of 13 Nights of Macabre Movies! Tune in tomorrow as I review a different take on a tribute to the EC Comics with the original Creepshow (1982).

Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film through these fine links:

Tales from the Crypt (1972)

NIGHT 3

       "Who's next?"

Tales from the Crypt (1972), is an British anthology horror film directed by Freddie Francis and produced by Amicus Productions. It contains five stories all detailing the strange occurrences of someones death. The stories are also lifted from the EC Comics publications: Tales from the Crypt, The Vault of Horror and The Haunt of Fear. 

Five strangers get seperated from their tourist group as they are visiting old catacombs. They encounter a hooded, old Crypt Keeper who tells each of them a story.

The acting overall in the film ranges from bland to good, that's kind of what you get with these kind of movies with such large casts. I think my favorite acting coincides with the darkest stories of the film the third story, "Poetic Justice" and the final "Blind Alleys," these are both really messed up and dark stories but they both wouldn't have been as effective without the strong acting preformances.

I would say the film is a little dated. It's definitely not as flashy and fun or exciting as some of the other ones on the list I'm reviewing this season, but there's plenty of other reasons to watch it.

And the effects are one of the places it's most evident, some of the makeup and props hold up but all of the 70s special effects look very tacky today.

Easily my favorite thing about Tales from the Crypt is the framing story. I love how the viewer is just as confused as the main characters at the beginning and if you're paying attention you start to realize the stories all involve death. Then you notice the characters who die are the ones represented in the cave and by the time you realize what's actually going on the film ends. It's everything I liked about the framing device in The House that Dripped Blood (1970) but pulled off much more successfully!

And (as if that wasn't enough) the stories themselves are really good too. It's hard for me to pick a favorite because I enjoyed them all! There's lots of films now that are tributes to EC Comics but this film is the first one that actually makes me feel the same way reading the comics do. These are very dark stories, really not intended for kids at all and nothing is held back. I absolutely love them, honestly all horror films should really strive to be as good as the stories featured here in Tales from the Crypt.

Tales from the Crypt (1972) is a great example of what an anthology films should be and the stories, all taken directly from old horror comics, still work beautifully to this day.

3.5/5 Stars.

 Happy watching!




This review is part of my 2014 run of 13 Nights of Macabre Movies! Tune in tomorrow as I review this film's sequel The Vault of Horror (1973).

Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film through these fine links:

The House That Dripped Blood (1970)

NIGHT 2

       "That's what's wrong with the present day horror films. There's no realism."

The House That Dripped Blood (1970), is an British anthology horror film produced by Amicus Productions. It contains four stories all involving previous tenants of a large house in the countryside who met their demise in a strange way, and the stories are connected by a framing story about a couple of police officers who are investigating the most recent death of a tenant.

Although it takes a while to understand what they're trying to do, one of the best things about this film is the interesting way it connects the stories. I have to say its definitely one of the most interesting ways I've ever seen to connect an anthology film, despite not being pulled off as good as it could have been. But there's also something to be said about a framing story that doesn't just lay its cards out in the first scene too. I do appreciate films like this where you have to get to the end to understand what is really going on.

The worst thing about this film is the stories. They're not written particularly badly, but they're almost all just so dull and uninteresting. They're all very reliant on each stories twist and almost all of them contain what we call a "Double-Shyamalan," which in its self isn't inherently bad and fits the genre well, but to see a double twist 4 times in a row gets really, really repetitive.

I also think the selection of stories is weird. Not to spoil, but the first two stories are non supernatural of nature, and the second two are. Which is weird to me because when I'm watching an anthology film I'm thinking about the common themes and tropes of the stories selected and put together. So when I watch two stories that end up being non-supernatural of nature, I'm really thrown off when the next two are? The least they could have done was switch them up so they were non-supernatural, supernatural, non... etc.

The acting in this film is also pretty terrible or dull at best. There's a couple exceptions I'll get to in a minute but otherwise they really just weigh down the already dull material. Even Christopher Lee seems like he's phoning in his acting, to the point where I couldn't figure out how his character was supposed to be feeling toward his daughter, which happens to be a major part of that story! Pretty un-excusable.

The two best things about this film are Peter Cushing and Jon Pertwee, and for two completely different reasons. Peter Cushing is the perfect counter weight to Christopher Lee. Where you can tell how much Chris Lee liked the source material based on his performance in the film, you'd never know with Peter Cushing because he really gives his all in every film I've ever seen him in! And even though I've seen him play a variety of roles, his acting in this movie is new to me, I've never seen him play a role like this and he really nails it.

Jon Pertwee on the other hand (yes Whovians, the third Doctor,) is really hamming up his role here and while I'm less familiar with his career so I'm not sure if this is intentional for this role or not, but he really sells his segment of the film. And it's also very ironic that he's playing an aging Christopher Lee-type role in a film that also stars Christopher Lee! So it's no surprise that these two actors really made the film for me and the second and fouth stories are my favorite of the bunch, easily.

The House that Dripped Blood (1970) isn't a great film, but it's probably a good stand alone example of the many Amicus Productions Horror anthologies.

3/5 Stars.

 Happy watching!




This review is part of my 2014 run of 13 Nights of Macabre Movies! Tune in tomorrow as I review one of Amicus Productions' most well know horror anthologies, Tales from the Crypt (1972).

Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film through these fine links:

Black Sabbath (1964)

Welcome again to my favorite time of year! Unlike the last two years I will be reviewing only 13 horror films rather than the 31 I did the previous years as part of my 31 Nights of Macabre Movies. There's a few reasons I'm switching this up this year but the main reason is two years ago when I started this I was unemployed and its a lot easier to take on a commitment like that when you don't have a full time job!

But this will also allow me to focus on one topic or sub-genre of horror film so I think in the end it will make it a more focused countdown than it used to be. This year I'm reviewing 13 Anthology Horror films, but enough blabbing lets get on with it...

NIGHT 1

       "You have no reason to be afraid."

Black Sabbath (1964), also known as I tre volti della paura (literally: The Three Faces of Fear), is an Itallian-French anthology horror film directed by Mario Bava. Black Sabbath contains 3 stories: "The Drop of Water," "The Telephone", and "The Wurdalak" with introductions by Boris Karloff.

The stories although written by Bava, Alberto Bevilaccqua, and Marcello Fondato are all based on and heavily influenced by horror literature and ghost stories. All three stories deal with the theme of a loved one returning from beyond the grave in a different way.

[This review will focus on the English version of the film]

I love Boris Karloff, and I think having him introduce the stories in this film was actually a genius way to get a wider International audience but he's really just blabbing spooky gibberish most of the time here. So my love for Boris Karloff and spooky stuff lets me enjoy these sequences but they really could have put some effort into tying what he's saying into the films more. I've read that some of these scenes were actually filmed for the American release on a Hollywood set with an unknown director, so that really makes me want to see the original release just to see if it's improved.

Like lots of other films I've reviewed from the 60s and 70s the production design always stands out to me. There was obviously an added level of care put into the sets of these films and this is another example of it really working. "The Telephone," for example was set in a (then) contemporary setting and the production design throughout is so good that the jump in time wont even be noticed by the viewer!

The English dub here is predictably quite terrible. It's amusing to me actually because I can tell the International actors are really quite good, they're just dubbed over terribly, which is common with foreign films of this era.

The clunky dub might not have been as noticeable except that these stories have a LOT of dialogue, all of these stories work very well and are quite creepy but they are very unnecessarily 'talky' that it holds back the film in my opinion. Just let the scenes play out, no need to fill the silence by having characters ramble what's going through their heads!

Hands down, the greatest thing about this film is Mario Bava's outstanding direction. Much like Black Sunday (1960) Mario Bava really knows how to move a camera and frame a shot to maximize the amount of terror and suspense. This film is a different experience entirely from Black Sunday though solely because it's in color. Bava takes the time to really think about the color in a scene and has a very unique approach to it also. He often places strange unnatural colored lights (like purple and yellow green) and often has them moving or flashing across or on and off in a shot to add a subconsciously surreal and suspenseful effect that often times as a viewer you won't really notice upfront.

I really enjoyed each of the stories in Black Sabbath. The way they're layed out is a bit weird because the first two are (arguably) ghost stories and the final story is not and is about as long as the two previous combined. But beyond that they're each great unique stories that had me on the edge of my seat! I think "The Drop of Water" is my favorite of the three because it's simplicity and how just plain creepy the whole premise is, but "The Wurdalak" is quite good and not far behind for much different reasons. There's something really admirable about how dark and bleak the story is.

As I mentioned above Boris Karloff's introductions as a framing story are quite entertaining, but when he appears in the final story "The Wurdalak," that's when you will really recall how good of an actor Boris is. His performance here as the returned father Gorca, is (in my opinion) as good as his early work in the Universal Frankenstein films!

Black Sabbath (1964) is a surprisingly terrifying film that holds up very well for its age, this is due mostly to the great stories and Mario Bava's great storytelling an camera movement. AND it has Boris Karloff!

4.5/5 Stars.

 Happy watching!



This is the first review of my 2014 run of 13 Nights of Macabre Movies! Tune in tomorrow as I review Amicus Productions' The House That Dripped Blood (1970) starring Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing!

Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film through these fine links: