Halloween Ends

Directed by: David Gordon Green
Starring: Jamie Lee Curtis, Andi Matichak, Rohan Campbell
Released: 2022
Trailer

Let’s get these Halloween reviews started with a more divisive film: Halloween Ends, the supposed final entry in the Halloween canon. Rather than centering on Michael Myers’ killing sprees this time around, the film focuses on how Laurie Strode and her granddaughter Alyson are trying to piece their lives together after the traumatic events of Halloween (2018) and Halloween Kills. Michael has disappeared after the events of the last film, and in those interim years the town has understandably become more paranoid, with horrific and often violent results. We get a new character named Corey Cunningham, who, due to an unfortunate series of events involving the death of a child under his watch, ends up a pariah in Haddonfield. Laurie and Alyson try to help and support him, but after a particularly traumatic night, Corey ends up face to face with Michael Myers himself and begins to go down a dark path. Because after all, if Haddonfield thinks he is a monster, perhaps Corey should live up to the name.

From the synopsis alone, one can understand why this final entry in the series is so divisive among filmgoers and critics. The only other film in the series that didn’t focus so much on Myers was Halloween III: Season of the Witch, which also was divisive. I will admit, I was very harsh in a past review, but my feelings on it have softened with time. Despite its flaws, I appreciate Halloween III for trying to do something different. It doesn’t necessarily work as a whole, but its components are interesting and creative. And while it is silly and boring at times, the film still has that Halloween atmosphere. And honestly, it is far from the worst Halloween film that I have seen, what with Rob Zombie’s first Halloween film with its messy script and baffling choices regarding Myers’ past, the boring and tedious Halloween 5 with the focus on pranksters and annoying characters, the disastrous and incoherent Halloween 6, and the ridiculous Halloween Resurrection.

The same goes for this one. Is it messy in its storytelling? Yes. It lacks the tight script of the original Halloween and Halloween (2018), and at times feels like a combination of It and Friday the 13th Part V: A New Beginning rather than a Halloween movie. But I still enjoyed the story being told, and it does a better job of exploring the themes of evil being like a virus that Halloween Kills, while an enjoyable slasher romp, fumbled the ball on.

I enjoyed Rohan Campbell’s performance as Corey Cunningham, and was invested in his character’s fall into darkness. Jamie Lee Curtis is of course great as Laurie, playing her not as a survivalist/Sarah Conner-type this time around, but as a traumatized woman finally acknowledging her trauma and simply trying to move on and give her granddaughter the happy and supportive life she failed to give her daughter. Andi Matichak does fine as Alyson, though her character is not given much to do this time around other than have a rather rushed romance with Corey and serve as a pawn for Michael and Corey’s mind games against Laurie.

Ah, yes, the romantic subplot. While I enjoy this film, the romance itself is lacking. While I found myself invested in the idea of of it–two people traumatized by Michael Myers’ legacy find comfort in each other’s arms–in practice it feels very rushed and melodramatic.

The kills are quite good in this one. It balances the restraint of the original and Halloween (2018) with the malicious gore of Halloween Kills very well, with some particularly nasty deaths involving scissors in one shocking scene and a blowtorch in another. 

The score is, of course, fantastic. With John Carpenter at the lead, how could it not be? And the licensed music, particularly a reprise of “(Don’t Fear) The Reaper” by Blue Öyster Cult, were used very well.

Halloween Ends is going to be divisive, but I think it is one of the more entertaining entries in the series, and an overall satisfying send-off for Laurie Strode. It isn’t perfect, it’s messy, but I appreciate what it is trying to do. This is one Halloween film that I look forward to seeing again.

Halloween Film Month: 31 in 31 (or Less) #30: Sleepy Hollow

 

Director: Tim Burton

Starring: Johnny Depp, Christina Ricci, Miranda Richardson, Christopher Walken

Released: 1999

Trailer

Synopsis: There’s murder afoot in Sleepy Hollow, and it’s up to Ichabod Crane to solve it before it is too late. But what could be killing people? Could it be the Headless Horseman of legend?

 

Despite my criticism of Dark Shadows during last year’s review series, I do have to admit that overall, I love Tim Burton’s work. Well…mostly, anyway. It seems that at some point in his career (perhaps around the time he did the remake of Alice in Wonderland), his work has taken a huge consistent dip in quality compared to his past films. Dark Shadows was disappointing, as was Frankenweenie. Even films promising to be like his older films—Corpse Bride, being an earlier example—were a letdown. So, where does that leave Sleepy Hollow in the scheme of things?

Visually, the film is impressive. The grotesque and creepy nature of Washington Irving’s original story seemed to be practically calling for Burton’s creative viewpoint to retell it in a refreshing and interesting way. And the dark and dingy atmosphere of the village and the gnarled and twisted trees of the surrounding wood in this version of the story help to augment the creepiness of the story. This is also one of those Burton films that does not hold back on its grotesque imagery, and is certainly far more bloody than most of Burton’s previous films up until that point.

But other than the setting, the film does some impressive special effects work for the Headless Horseman. Using CG, the filmmakers do excellent work to wipe away the head of the actor playing the Horseman to make him look truly headless. There are no points where it’s obvious that CG was used to bring the Horseman to life, and even the non-head-related additions made to the Horseman’s attire by CG work are difficult to spot. Yes, there are moments where the CG is obvious and dated, particularly during a scene where the Horseman’s original head begins to appear as a skull, but the overall digital effects (including one that gives the illusion of the Horseman urging his bounding horse out of a tree trunk) are still fine by today’s standards.

Tonally, the story is a black comedy, borrowing a lot stylistically (particularly in the gore department) from Hammer Horror films. For some, the humor may be off-putting and take away from the tension that the story is trying to build, the portrayal of the Horseman as a man with razor sharp teeth that communicates only in growls and shouts being a potentially huge sticking point. But for myself, these humorous moments provide some levity and self-awareness to a film that could have easily been a dark and depressing slog.

The fact that the film completely changes the story from the source material to basically be a proto-Guy Ritchie-Sherlock Holmes action adventure mystery may also turn away Irving purists. The addition of actual witchcraft rather than making the magical elements ambiguous as to whether they are really magical or an illusion may also push away those who liked the ambiguity of the original short story. In this film, the Horseman definitely exists and isn’t potentially a practical joke orchestrated by town bully Bram Bones.

As for me, Sleepy Hollow is a weird and enjoyable ride that, despite its sometimes inappropriate goofiness, is still a worthwhile watch for Burton fans. At the very least, it is certainly more enjoyable than Dark Shadows.

---

For more reviews, be sure to like this page as well as the Facebook page. For previous reviews, be sure to check out the full directory of reviews. As always, thank you for reading!

Halloween Film Month: 31 in 31 (or Less) #27: A Christmas Horror Story

 

Directors: Grant Harvey, Steven Hoban, Brett Sullivan

Starring: William Shatner, Zoé De Grand Maison, Adrian Holmes, Amy Forsyth

Released: 2015

Trailer

Synopsis: An anthology of Christmas-themed horror films, including a killer Krampus, changelings, murderous ghosts in darkened school hallways, Santa Claus fighting zombie elves, and William Shatner as a radio DJ to tie it all together.

 

What is it about Christmas and horror that seems to go well together? Or, if not “well” together, at least tempt screenwriters and filmmakers to combine the two over and over again to varying outcomes in quality? Also, Netflix always seems to carry some of the more interesting films, doesn’t it? Not necessarily “good” films, but at the very least films that seem to actually be trying despite having low budgets or poorly written scripts. That is A Christmas Horror Story in a nutshell.

The writing is not fantastic, and is certainly standard B-movie faire as far as the quality goes. This is certainly not a script that’s going to win awards. In addition to barely passable dialogue, none of the characters are well written in a way that makes them interesting on paper, let alone onscreen. This is a shame, as there are some legitimately creepy and disturbing moments that crop up on occasion and entire sequences, such as the Santa and Changeling stories, work very well on their own and could be their own feature-length productions.

This poor writing might explain why much of the acting is barely average from many of the actors, particularly from the younger ones. The only characters that stand out in the film are Santa and William Shatner’s DJ character, mostly because the actors seem to embrace the cheesiness of the story.

The effects (at least the computer generated ones) are nothing to write home about. They aren’t the worst effects that this reviewer has seen by a long shot, but they are noticeably fake, mostly because of budgetary concerns. Which once again is a shame, because the filmmakers seem to have wild imaginations and clearly have an over-the-top vision that is limited only by the animation budget. This is clearly illustrated by the whole Santa versus zombies sequence as well as the Krampus effects which, despite looking more like a costume than a real creature, looks far more like the many pieces of art depicting it than whatever the monster was supposed to be in the 2015 film Krampus.

A Christmas Horror Story is a mixed bag, to say the least. While by no means a great film, there are plenty of good things in it to make it worth at least a look.

---

For more reviews, be sure to like this page as well as the Facebook page. For previous reviews, be sure to check out the full directory of reviews. As always, thank you for reading!

Halloween Film Month: 31 in 31 (or Less) #26: Rec 4: Apocalypse

Director: Jaume Balagueró

Starring: Manuela Velasco, Paco Manzanedo, Hector Colome, Ismael Fritschi

Released: 2014

Trailer

Synopsis: Taking place immediately after Rec 2, this film completely disposes of the found footage element and moves the action to a ship, where yet another outbreak occurs and those who are on the ship must fight for their survival.

 

Attention: I am skipping Rec 3 (at least for this year) because other than a brief reference to the events that take place in the third film, this installment has almost no bearing on the story.

 

So, for those who came in late, I thought that the first Rec film was fantastic and the second one was not as good as the first, but still entertaining for what it was.

It is with a heavy heart that I must report that Rec 4: Apocalypse is easily the worst out of the three films dealing with the reporter Angela and the events surrounding her venture into the apartment complex. Does this mean that it is a terrible film?

Rec 4 does immediately have an advantage over the first two films in that it takes place in a new setting that is actually scarier than being trapped in a quarantined building. At least in a building, those in danger of being infected could potentially sneak out and escape on foot if they are lucky enough to slip by the quarantine. But to have an outbreak in a ship out in the middle of the ocean? There are far fewer ways for one to escape from the vessel. And once escape is achieved, what then? The survivors would still have to find land before their resources (if they brought any with them) run out. This isolation coupled with the claustrophobic hallways with no windows already create a dreadful atmosphere.

It is unfortunate that the film does not seem to want to do anything new with its scares, however, essentially becoming a rehash of the first two installments, even ripping off a twist from the second film, only with a different character. The only scary thing that happens is that at one point, the food on the ship becomes infected and the infection spreads to much of the crew. The rest of the film is ridiculous action that serves only to remind the audience how good the first two films were at creating suspense with subtle scares.

The film is far too reliant on CG to scare the audience. The effects are not the worst I have seen, but they are certainly worse than those used in the first two films. At least in the previous installments, any CG effects were hidden by shadows and chiaroscuro lighting. In this, the effects are clearly CG and not obscured to hide any of the fakeness, particularly when infected monkeys are involved.

And, as variable as the found footage genre can be, I wish that the filmmakers had employed first-person camerawork like in the previous two films, not only to maintain consistency of cinematography but also to create some semblance that this film takes place in the same universe as the other two. The grittiness of the camera picture could have potentially hidden the imperfect aspects of the CG and made the effects seem less fake.

As-is, Rec 4: Apocalypse, in abandoning all of what made the series so distinct, appears to be generic zombie faire that barely resembles its predecessors. For those wanting to continue to original story, I suppose this will sate this wanting. But for those wanting this story and for this story to actually be well told and interesting, this is one to ignore.

---

For more reviews, be sure to like this page as well as the Facebook page. For previous reviews, be sure to check out the full directory of reviews. As always, thank you for reading!

 

 

 

Halloween Film Month: 31 in 31 (or Less) #21: Antichrist

 

Director: Lars von Trier

Starring: Willem Dafoe, Charlotte Gainsbourg

Released: 2009

Trailer

Synopsis: After the tragic death of their child, a therapist and his wife retreat to a cabin in the woods to heal. But the longer the two stay, the more apparent that it becomes that no healing will come from this hellish retreat.

 

Antichrist is one of those films that is so violent and disturbing that it is difficult to love. But, at the same time, there is so much that the film does phenomenally well that one cannot simply dismiss it as trashy exploitation.

It’s clear that von Trier understands how to craft and film a tense scene while also pacing the film in a way that makes the characters’ steady descents believable for the audience. Even the scenes that don’t utilize a great deal of suspense or tension are still interesting from a writing standpoint, particularly when Dafoe’s character guides Gainsbourg’s character through a sort of guided meditation. Granted, the film’s deliberate pace may turn some off, but the details and memorable moments peppered in the film are enough to keep this reviewer invested in the story.

The cinematography is at times gritty, other times beautiful, and other times a mixture of the two. The opening sequence, despite its disturbing subject matter, is still hauntingly filmed. The scenes where Gainsbourg is guided through a meditation process, with the surreal imagery and richer colors than what the audience has seen prior to this moment, are also very beautifully crafted.

Dafoe and Gainsbourg do very well in their roles as the central couple. While the audience knows next to nothing about either of them, their performances convey enough deeper emotions and personalities to round out the surface-level simplicity of the characters. Gainsbourg as the wife who is slowly mentally unraveling is especially good in this, going from sympathetic and tragic to absolutely horrifying.

The gore effects in this film are effective and very graphic. For the gorehounds, this is a film worth seeing because of how realistic the effects appear. But those who are even remotely squeamish, especially about the idea of genital mutilation, will probably wish to steer clear of the film, as the film does not hold back with showing every excruciating detail of any violent moments.

Yes, Antichrist is one of the most unpleasant films I have watched for this review series. But, at the same time, I’m still glad I saw it. Despite its overly disturbing subject matter and imagery, the film delivers so many good things in its writing, acting, and cinematography that it is very hard not to at least recommend the film.

---

For more reviews, be sure to like this page as well as the Facebook page. For previous reviews, be sure to check out the full directory of reviews. As always, thank you for reading!

Halloween Film Month: 31 in 31 (or Less) #19: Misery

 

Director: Rob Reiner

Starring: Kathy Bates, James Caan, Richard Farnsworth

Released: 1990

Trailer

Synopsis: Paul Sheldon finds himself in a waking nightmare when he winds up crippled and in the clutches of an obsessive fan who has the unfortunate tendency of flying into murderous rages when things don’t go her way.

 

Shockingly enough, I have never in all my years ever seen Misery. I was aware of Kathy Bates’ performance as Annie Wilkes and how creepy she was, and even referenced her in my Play Misty For Me review that I wrote last year. But, I had never actually watched the film from beginning to end, and I suppose now is the time to rectify that.

Misery is one of those films that does so much with such a simple concept in very few locations. Most of the time, the film focuses on Annie’s house as the primary setting, and it’s impressive how the film at times makes the place look rustic and comforting (if a bit claustrophobic), and at other times look and feel like an inescapable prison.

The performances are also very good. James Caan does a decent job as Paul Sheldon, as does Richard Farnsworth as Buster, the sheriff who is investigating Sheldon’s disappearance. But it’s ultimately Kathy Bates who steals the show as Annie. Bates is excellent in this role, and knows how to slip between comforting and absolutely horrifying, sometimes within a short span of time. While this could have easily been a ridiculously cheesy and over the top performance, Bates is convincing in the role and legitimately terrifying at times.

Though the story has a fairly simple conflict and premise and barely leaves the Wilkes residence, it never becomes boring for the audience, mostly because of how well the filmmakers understand suspense and tension. While there is some graphic violence (including a particularly disturbing hobbling scene), the film does not rely solely on that aspect to scare the audience. Most of the time, the fear comes from whether Caan’s character will escape from this psychopath and the emotional and psychological dance these two characters do throughout the film.

The film is definitely not fast-paced and in fact takes its time in building tension and telling its story, which may be offputting for those not into slow-burn films. Also, while the film does deliver on its scares, the final confrontation toward the end veers toward the ridiculous when Annie seems to become a terminator and is able to take blows that would instantly kill a normal human being. It doesn’t sour what came before, but this small part feels like it doesn’t belong in this film.

Overall, Misery delivers on the promised miserable moments well, with great performances and excellent suspense and tension.

---

For more reviews, be sure to like this page as well as the Facebook page. For previous reviews, be sure to check out the full directory of reviews. As always, thank you for reading!

Halloween Film Month: 31 in 31 (or Less) #18: Happy Death Day

 

Director: Christopher B. Landon

Starring: Jessica Rothe, Israel Broussard

Released: 2017

Trailer

Synopsis: Tree keeps reliving her birthday over and over, which wouldn’t be such a bad thing if she weren’t being murdered by a baby-masked killer by the end of the day. It’s up to Tree and a random guy she met partying to figure out what’s going on in this Groundhog Day from hell.

 

Yes, this is essentially the movie Groundhog Day, but mixed with a college slasher film. Now that we have that out of the way, let’s talk about what’s good and not so good about this film.

The acting (for the most part) is not bad, at least for a low-budget slasher film. Jessica Rothe as Tree (probably one of the more ridiculous names I’ve heard in a film, but I digress) is easily one of the best elements of the film. Without Rothe, this film would have completely fallen apart. Despite the ridiculousness of the script (we’ll get to that), Rothe does a fine job selling the material and investing the audience in the character’s (albeit predictable) arc, even though Tree is almost completely unlikeable at the beginning of the film. Israel Broussard as Carter is also a standout. He makes the character so likeable and engaging despite the fact that any arcs to his character are often undone by the time loop concept. But it’s Rothe and Broussard’s chemistry together that really sells this admittedly flawed story. The budding romance between Tree and Carter is surprisingly believable and cute, and helps invest the audience in the perils that these two go through.

The death scenes, while not spectacular gore fests or overly creative (save the explosion death), are effective enough without showing all the grisly details. This is something I can respect, as a good deal of slashers rely on the gore to sell tickets rather than trying to craft something of substance around it. However, it would have been nice to have seen more creativity in Tree’s death scenes other than essentially getting stabbed over and over again. Though, there is a cool montage scene where, while Tree is dying repeatedly, she is trying to deduct who it is who’s killing her. The way she treats her deaths as an inconvenience or an annoyance is actually quite amusing and something not often shown in the average slasher film.

The comedy is often hit and miss. Some jokes work well (like the aforementioned montage), while others fall flat. The story, however, is easily the weakest part of the film. Already, the film is at a disadvantage because this is a story the audience has seen before, just decked out in horror attire. From the beginning, the audience knows Tree’s character arc and how things will end up by the conclusion of the film, just from absorbing the story elements from other films that have done this type of story as well. As the story goes on, the killer’s ability to appear almost anywhere verges on the absolutely ridiculous. At some points, it does not make sense how the killer would be able to orchestrate such elaborate murders without having super powers of some kind.

That said, the story does throw in some interesting ideas. Instead of coming back unscathed, Tree realizes that constantly dying and reliving the same day can take its toll on the body. There is also a cool semi-final showdown toward the end of the film where Tree utilizes set events that she has memorized to ultimately fight against the antagonist. This is such a cool sequence that almost makes up for the okay story. But then there’s the final confrontation that is so over-the-top ridiculous that it makes the film hard to take seriously. Perhaps that was the point, but sometimes it feels like that with such contradictory sequences the film is unsure of what it’s trying to be: a straightforward slasher, a slasher-comedy, or straight-up comedy.

That said, Happy Death Day is still enjoyable. For what it is, the film is entertaining. Just don’t expect the film to elevate the primary concept beyond just being a storytelling gimmick.

---

For more reviews, be sure to like this page as well as the Facebook page. For previous reviews, be sure to check out the full directory of reviews. As always, thank you for reading!

 

Halloween Film Month: 31 in 31 (or Less) #17: Happy Birthday to Me

 

Director: J. Lee Thompson

Starring: Melissa Sue Anderson, Glenn Ford, Lawrence Dane, Sharon Acker

Released: 1981

Trailer

Synopsis: Ginny’s friends are being murdered one by one in gruesome and terrifying ways. Who is doing it, and why? And will Ginny be the next victim?

 

Those of you who have been reading this series from the beginning: first off, thank you! It means so much to know people are enjoying my review series and the new format (I hope). Second, those of you who read my Life review will remember the question I posed at the beginning: have you ever sat through a film that was almost good? Unfortunately, Life has not been the only film that falls in this category, nor will it be the last. This is mostly because Happy Birthday to Me also falls into this category. And, like Life, the point where the film falters is also at the very end.

This is especially disappointing because if it had ended just after the second-to-last murder, this could have been a great addition to the slasher genre. But, like usual, I am getting ahead of myself.

This is a surprisingly well-crafted film. This may be hard to believe, but there are many scenes of vehicular stunt work, including a race over a steadily raising bridge as well as a motorcycle race. And both are well filmed and exciting to watch, especially for someone like myself who doesn’t usually enjoy those types of stunts. The bridge scene is especially well done because there’s a point where one of the cars ramps off the rising bridge and onto the other side, and with how far down the nose of the car is pointed, it looks like it will not stick the landing. That scene alone made this reviewer unintentionally gasp.

The death scenes have variety and are well executed (how many more times must I use this pun, intentionally or otherwise?). Shish kebabs, pruners, weights, straight razors, and even a scarf are used for delightfully gruesome payoffs. There’s even a moment at the end where all the deaths are put on display to not just remind the audience who died, but also to showcase the gore effects.

This ending scene reminded this reviewer of a similar scene in Stage Fright/Aquarius, but not to the point where it felt like a plagiarism. As a matter of fact, this film feels like an Americanized version of Giallo horror like Stage Fright/Aquarius and Suspiria. It utilizes a lot of the same tropes: mystery, psychological horror, slasher violence, and a mysterious, black-gloved psycho killer that isn’t revealed until the end of the film.

The characters other than Ginny and David (a thankless role played by Glenn Ford, who deserves a far better script than what he is given) are mostly unlikeable jerks, so it is difficult to really feel bad for any of them when they die so horrifically. This does help throw some uncertainty into who the killer is, because it is quite clear that all of the victims recognize the killer as a friend before they realize that they are horribly, horribly wrong. But for those looking for something similar to My Bloody Valentine or The Cabin in the Woods as far as likeable characters goes, this is not that kind of film.

But as a slasher film like Friday the 13^th or even a standard Giallo horror film, Happy Birthday to Me would have been great if it didn’t have the ridiculous Scooby-Doo unmasking scene toward the end. We are about to enter spoiler territory here, so move on to the last paragraph if you don’t want this spoiled… The audience is led to believe that Ginny is the killer, until it’s revealed that her best friend actually did it, chloroformed Ginny during opportune moments, and wore a latex mask to look like Ginny and throw everyone off before she killed them, even though the film establishes that this was absolutely unnecessary as she was able to kill a good portion of the friend group as herself. And, most importantly, why would it be important that these victims thought Ginny was killing them? They’re going to be dead, anyway! Other than to trick the audience (a motivation which would require Deadpool-levels of fourth wall breaking powers), there is no purpose! And, to make this even worse, the film could have ended right before this big reveal and could have at least been a passable slasher horror flick!

While this ridiculous conclusion nearly ruins what good came before, there is still so much good here for slasher and Giallo fans that it would be a shame to skip out on a promising film just because of a tacked on conclusion. Happy Birthday to Me is fortunately still worth watching as long as one stops right after the penultimate murder and skips right to the end credits.

---

For more reviews, be sure to like this page as well as the Facebook page. For previous reviews, be sure to check out the full directory of reviews. As always, thank you for reading!

 

Halloween Film Month: 31 in 31 (or Less) #15: Eraserhead

Director: David Lynch

Starring: Jack Nance, Charlotte Stewart, Allen Joseph, Jeanne Bates

Released: 1977

Trailer

Synopsis: Ha…HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Okay, seriously… the story is about Henry Spencer and the strange child that is born to him and his girlfriend. To try to decipher any more of the story is pure madness at this point.

 

I have seen some bizarre films in my time, including films like Jodorowsky’s El Topo. I’ve even seen some of David Lynch’s other work, including his famous television show, Twin Peaks. But nothing prepared me for the strangeness that is Eraserhead. And yet, I loved it.

Yes, the film has its problems, especially for those like myself who look for a compelling story and equally compelling characters to lead the audience through the film. The characters, while interestingly acted and distinguishable from one another, are very flat here, mostly because of how detached the film seems to be from these characters. And the story…as previously stated in the synopsis, the story is all over the place and very cryptic. This does not seem to be an allegorical film like Mother, so there is the strong possibility that the strange occurrences in the film have no meaning other than David Lynch wanted those things to be there. It does not help that Lynch often refuses to elaborate on certain aspects of his films, particularly what the films mean, which might drive those looking for answers completely bonkers.

But why do I still love this movie despite these issues that would make any other film an open target for criticism?

The story, while cryptic, is still interesting from a visual standpoint, and even delivers some bizarre and memorable imagery. The industrial setting is an interesting touch and gives the world of the film a darker edge while also grounding it in a world not too different from our own. The Lady in the Radiator, with her chipmunk-like cheeks, makes a very strong impression on the audience, particularly during her musical number. And the baby…without spoiling the nightmare fuel, the baby is one of the weirdest and horrific-looking creatures ever put to film. Why? Perhaps it’s because this is a baby, something rarely shown as this horrifically ugly and disgusting (which Lynch is by no means afraid of showing in this film).

The effects vary in quality, but are overall effective in creating a surreal nightmarish atmosphere. The Lady in the Radiator’s cheeks, for example, look more like papier mache rather than actual skin, but the actress’ performance of the character in the film is engrossing enough to partially distract from that. Another point one could make is that this fakeness could unintentionally (or intentionally, if one believes that this is a design choice rather than the limitations of the prosthetics Lynch had to work with at the time) reinforce the uneasiness of the audience as to whether what is going on is real or fabrication (within the context of the film, at least). The effects on the baby are easily the best, as the poor creature does look alive and real. This is both a credit to the puppetry team for their work as well as Lynch for never revealing (at the time of this review) what materials were used to create this pathetic creature.

There is not much else that this reviewer can say about Eraserhead except that is a visually impressive work of cinematography that is necessary viewing for horror and film aficionados alike. Is it a fantastic film, story-wise? No, but on the same token, it does not seem like having a cohesive workman narrative is Lynch’s intent. And the effects as well as the consistent random weirdness make this film at the very least an interesting trip into a nightmare.

---

For more reviews, be sure to like this page as well as the Facebook page. For previous reviews, be sure to check out the full directory of reviews. As always, thank you for reading!

Halloween Film Month: 31 in 31 (or Less) #14: Salo, or the 120 Days of Sodom

 

Director: Pier Paolo Pasolini

Starring: Paolo Bonacelli, Giorgio Cataldi, Umberto Paolo Quintavalle

Released: 1975

Trailer

Synopsis: Corrupt libertines kidnap eighteen teenagers and subject them to horrific and disturbing torments. And that’s about it.

 

I suppose four years is a long enough time to wait before tackling another controversial film. Yes, during my second year of reviewing Halloween films, I reviewed two very brutal and disturbing horror films: Martyrs and A Serbian Film. And now, because apparently I’m a glutton for punishment, I’ve finally watched Salo, or the 120 Days of Sodom, a film of which Roger Ebert himself once said, “I’ve owned that movie since it came out on laser disc and still haven’t viewed it, because time and time again I was told it was completely revolting. Not ‘horror movie revolting,’ but really revolting (Roger Ebert’s Movie Yearbook 2011).” Doesn’t that just instill confidence upon a first viewing?

The rumors some of you may have heard are true: this is truly a disgusting and disturbing film that actually made this reviewer physically ill on a constant basis. Disgusting, deplorable acts of molestation, rape, and violence, some of which including various bodily wastes pervade this film in graphic detail. Complete with an ending that makes the audience feel as though it has just watched a snuff film. But why did I continue watching this film if it was so deplorable?

Besides morbid curiosity and the fact that I am stubborn to a ridiculous degree when it comes to sitting through films, the cinematography and the “director’s eye” fascinated me, even as the events unfolding became harder and harder to watch. The locations utilized in the film are beautiful and beautifully filmed, despite the fact increasingly heinous acts are occurring within these locations.

And as disgusting as the film is, I have to give kudos to a film that can provide some horrifically realistic special effects. Not once did I question whether or not certain things were just props cooked up by the special effects department. For all I know (and for all I knew at the time), I was watching people actually being tortured by these awful “masters,” being forced to eat things that were actually produced by people. And I definitely don’t mean by a special effects crew. Even the death scenes toward the end of the film look shockingly realistic.

With this observation in mind, the acting in this film is superb as well. Perhaps it helps that I am not familiar with any of the actors in the film, but while I was watching the film, these felt like real people—even some of the ones who were, looking back, over-the-top villainous with their behaviors at times. But the antagonists’ often jovial behaviors—one of whom actually cracks jokes during the worst possible times—help to disorient and disturb the audience even further. This confusion helps the audience further sympathize with the youths being tortured, even as these characters become more and more dehumanized.

The pacing of the film helps put the audience in the same mindset as the victims. The whole film feels like a long, drawn out nightmare that no one has any hope of escaping, at least not alive. And while for most films this would not work and would bore the audience, this creeping pace works well, perhaps too well, here. And there’s certainly enough torture and misery to fill that time without ever feeling repetitive. I don’t know or want to know if this is a compliment or not.

Salo, or the 120 Days of Sodom is certainly not a film for everyone, nor is it one that I want to check out ever again. Does that make it a good movie? Technically-speaking, I would say yes. The cinematography is fantastic, the acting is great, the effects are realistic to a disturbing degree. As a film that is supposed to disturb its audience, Salo does this perfectly. But this does not mean I recommend seeking it out, as it is disturbing and disgusting, as well as not rewarding on an entertainment level, at least not for this reviewer.

---

For more reviews, be sure to like this page as well as the Facebook page. For previous reviews, be sure to check out the full directory of reviews. As always, thank you for reading!